La Quinta City Council
September 21, 2022

City of La Quinta
CITY COUNCIL MEETING: September 21, 2022

STAFF REPORT
AGENDA TITLE: CONTINUED FROM JULY 5, 2022: ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2019-0010 AND APPROVE SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-0003 (AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2019-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2020-0002, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-0005; INTRODUCE FOR FIRST READING ORDINANCES APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0002; CEQA: CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2021020310); LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60, AND EAST AND WEST OF MADISON STREET

RECOMMENDATION
A. Adopt a resolution making Findings and approving a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Coral Mountain Resort Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2021020310).

B. Adopt a resolution approving Specific Plan (SP) 2019-0003, General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2019-0002, Specific Plan (SP) 2020-0002 and Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 2019-0005 for the Coral Mountain Resort project.

C. (1) Move to take up an ordinance, by title and number only and waive further reading, approving Zone Change (ZC) 2019-0004.

C. (2) Move to introduce an ordinance to approve ZC2019-0004.

D. (1) Move to take up an ordinance, by title and number only and waive further reading, approving Development Agreement (DA) 2021-0002 for the Coral Mountain Resort project.

D. (2) Move to introduce at first reading an ordinance approving DA2021- 0002 for the Coral Mountain Resort project.

PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1
5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Council considered the Coral Mountain Resort project at a duly noticed public hearing on June 7, 2022; the public hearing remained open and Council continued consideration of the item to a Special Meeting on July 5, 2022.
• On June 29, 2022, the applicant requested a 60-day continuance in order to prepare additional materials to address issues of concern from the community. At the July 5 meeting, the Council provided direction to the applicant regarding issues of concern and voted to continue the public hearing, which remained open, to a Special Meeting on September 21, 2022.
• The applicant submitted materials in mid-August for the Council’s consideration.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Council considered the Coral Mountain Resort project at a duly noticed public hearing on June 7, 2022 and a continued meeting on July 5, 2022 and received: 1) complete presentations of the staff report, studies, and findings for the project, 2) presentations from the applicant, and 3) extensive public testimony, both verbal and written comments. The staff reports and all attachments are provided at the following links:
• June 7, 2022
• July 5, 2022
The public hearing has remained open to this Special Meeting on September 21, 2022. The applicant provided additional information on August 15-17, 2022, which was reviewed by staff, and when deemed complete and ready for publication, was posted on the City’s Coral Mountain Resort webpage, on August 25, 2022. An email was sent that day to all those who have requested notices on this project, as well as all those who commented on the Draft EIR, that materials were available, and provided a link.

The materials provided by the applicant are attached (Attachment 1), and an analysis of each component of the submittal is provided below. The analysis is provided in the same order as presented in the applicant’s cover letter.

Please note that wherever a change to the DA is needed in the descriptions below, that change has been made to the Draft DA attached to the DA Ordinance as Exhibit A. Please also note that each of the applicant’s Exhibits are bookmarked in the PDF of Attachment 1 for ease of reference. 6 1. Wave Basin Light Poles
The applicant proposes to reduce the height of all light poles surrounding the wave basin from 80 feet to 40 feet. The reduction causes a concurrent increase in the number of light poles required, from 18 to 55 (Exhibit E of Attachment 1). The reason for the increase to the number of poles is that at a reduced height a single fixture has a smaller area of coverage, requiring additional poles to achieve full light coverage of the wave basin. The fixtures on the light poles have also been reduced from four (4) to two (2) per pole, which reduces the relative brightness from each pole (Attachment 1, Exhibit D). The applicant has made changes to the Specific Plan to assure a limitation of 40 feet height for the light poles within the Project (Attachment 1, Exhibit A) in Planning Area III, and has provided a comparison of the impact of the light poles from off-site locations. Because the poles will be half their previous height, the “glow” above the site will not be directly visible as it was previously from the locations at the Lion’s Gate entrance, the Andalusia entrance, and Avenue 60 (Attachment 1, Exhibit B).

Finally, although this change substantially increases the number of light poles (from 18 to 55), the light spillage on all sides of the wave basin is also reduced because the spread of each light is reduced (Attachment 1, Exhibit C).

2. Off-Site Turf Reduction
The applicant proposes an addition to the DA that would require a series of contributions to a turf reduction program, potentially supplementing CVWD’s existing program. The funds would be used on homes in La Quinta and would offset the annual evapotranspiration resulting from the wave basin annually.

The contributions would be as follows:
a. $500,000 within 30 days of the Vesting Date, which is the date after all potential appeals or lawsuits on the project are concluded. This is likely to occur in 2024 or 2025.
b. $500,000 one year after the Vesting Date.
c. $500,000 two years after the Vesting Date.
d. 0.25% fee on the purchase price of each new Coral Mountain home at the close of escrow of each home. The fees could total $4.5 million at build out, depending on the value of the homes. The estimate is based on the home values estimated in the Cost Revenue Analysis (26 homes at $6 million and 104 resort units at $2.75 million in Phase 1; and 470 homes at $2 million for the balance of the site).

If the funds are used at CVWD’s current rate of $3 per square foot for the replacement of turf, as much as 2 million square feet of turf could be replaced with drought tolerant landscaping. This assumes 500,000 square feet for the 7 $1.5 million in cash contributions, and 1.5 million square feet for the $4.5 million in home sale fees.

The applicant also provided an analysis of the wave basin’s evapotranspiration prepared by Mr. Tom Levy, retired General Manager and Chief Engineer at CVWD. That analysis showed that 77.57 acre feet per year (AFY) evaporates from the wave basin at its reduced size of 12.1 acres of surface area (Attachment 1, Exhibit F). In order to offset that loss, 17.39 acres of turf must be removed. This equates to 757,508 square feet of turf. Therefore, the $1.5 million in cash payments would offset about two-thirds of the annual water loss, while the $6 million total, including the cash payments and the purchase price fee, would offset 2.6 times the water loss (2 million square feet) from evapotranspiration at the wave basin.

It should be noted that the 470 residential units could take 20 to 25 years to build out, and the Phase 1 residential units could take as long as 10 years to build out, per the performance schedule provided in the DA.

3. Removal of East Side Lake
The Specific Plan and Tentative Tract
Map have shown a lake in the northeast
corner of PA III (see blue oval in graphic
at right). The applicant has removed this
from these documents, in order to
reduce water use. The Specific Plan
(Exhibit D of the attached Project
Approval Resolution) and the Tentative
Tract Map (Exhibit E of the same
Resolution), have been amended to
reflect this removal.

The lake on the west side, which is
surrounded by single family estate lots,
functions as part of the drainage
facilities for the project, and therefore
will remain.

4. Water Memoranda
The applicant submitted three additional memoranda relating to water:
a. A memorandum by Mr. Levy in support of the Water Supply Assessment’s calculations regarding evaporation, particularly in comparison to the wave basin proposed in Palm Desert (Attachment 1, Exhibit H).
8 b. A memorandum by Mr. Levy regarding the reliability of Colorado River water, including an explanation of the hierarchy of water rights (Attachment 1, Exhibit I).
c. A memorandum by Mr. John Gamlin countering statements made in previous Council hearing(s) that canal water is potable water. CVWD does not now, and does not plan to treat canal water for potable use, as described in Attachment 1, Exhibit J, and therefore canal water is not potable water.

5. Reduced Building Height
The applicant has proposed that the maximum building height in the Specific Plan for Planning Area III, the Tourist Commercial Area, be reduced from 45 feet and 4 stories, to 40 feet and 3 stories. That change, shown in Attachment 1, Exhibit A, is included in the revised Specific Plan, (Exhibit D of the attached Project Approval Resolution).

6. Noise
The applicant prepared additional information regarding the noise generated at the wave basin in three documents.
a. A technical memorandum from Mr. Bill Lawson, Urban Crossroads, describing the noise levels specifically from speakers at the wave basin.

It is pointed out that the speakers will be low to the water, and not elevated, and that the noise levels will not exceed the City’s outdoor noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL for residential uses (Attachment 1, Exhibit K).
b. A brief memorandum and graphic from Kelly Slater Wave Company, describing the speaker system, with a graphic of speaker locations (Attachment 1, Exhibit L).
c. A larger (11x17) graphic of the placement of the speakers, for legibility (Attachment 1, Exhibit M).

These materials do not change the previous findings found in the Draft or Final EIR regarding noise levels at the project, which will remain below the City’s standards.

7. Moratorium on Special Events
The applicant proposes that the DA be modified to prohibit special events for a period of two years after its opening. During this period, the City and applicant would monitor daily operations to better inform Temporary Use Permit review, when special events would be allowed. No specifics are provided regarding what monitoring would consist of, but if the Council agrees to the provision, staff would recommend the following:
9 a. Off-site 24-hour noise monitoring at a minimum of six (6) locations, twice a year on high-season/high use weekends. Dates and locations to be determined by City staff in consultation with a noise engineer. b. Traffic counts at a minimum of four (4) locations, twice a year on highseason/high use weekends, to be compared to City/CVAG traffic counts on the year prior to opening of the wave basin. Dates and locations to be determined by the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer. c. Cost of both activities to be borne by the applicant.

If the Council so wishes, staff recommends that this program be added to the conditions of approval for the Specific Plan in addition to the DA (Exhibit F of the attached Project Approval Resolution).

8. Park Fees
The applicant is requesting that the DA be modified to require that the park component of the Developer Impact Fee (DIF) for the 104 resort residential units in Planning Area III and the 26 estate lots, all planned as part of the first phase of development, be set aside to fund park and trail improvements at the Desert Recreation District’s Coral Mountain Park.

In addition, although not included in the letter, staff and the applicant have discussed applying the Quimby fees for the same components (104 resort units and 26 estate lots) to these improvements as well. It is therefore recommended that, as reflected in the DA (Exhibit A of DA Ordinance), Quimby fees be applied to Desert Recreation District park improvements at Coral Mountain Park. The City and the District would contract for these improvements separately from this approval.

9. Coral Mountain Surf Foundation
The applicant proposes that the DA be modified to commit the applicant to fund a charitable foundation that would contribute to La Quinta and east Valley non-profit organizations that support health, social justice, food security and homelessness solutions. The foundation would be funded by a 0.25% fee on all resales of all homes within the project. The fee would be part of the CC&Rs for the project, so as to remain enforceable through the life of the project.

Given the potential fluctuations in the real estate market, it is impossible to predict the frequency or monetary value of this commitment. 10 10. Charitable Use of the Wave Basin
The final commitment made by the applicant is that 1,000 hours per year of wave basin time will be donated for charitable or public interest purposes. The form of this donation of time could be through auction prizes at charitable events or an annual surf camp.

CONCLUSION
The applicant has made a number of proposed changes to the project and its program in response to issues raised by the community and the Council at previous hearings. These changes provide for reduced impacts to light and water demand. The changes do not change any of the findings necessary for approval of the project, which are included in the attached Resolutions.

These changes generally reduce the scope of the project, and therefore do not have the potential to increase environmental impacts analyzed in the Draft and Final EIR documents. The changes are not sufficiently substantial, nor would they result in a substantial change of conditions at the project site, to warrant recirculation of the Draft EIR.

The DA has been modified to include the items described above. A redline version, showing the changes made, is provided in Attachment 2. The final draft is attached to the DA Ordinance as Exhibit A.

As of this writing, the City has not received any written materials from community members who requested advance notice of the applicant’s submittal. Should they be provided in advance of the public hearing, they will be forwarded to the Council when they are received.

Finally, the Resolutions and Ordinances that were originally in the June 7, 2022 Council packet have been updated to reflect the continued hearing dates, and are attached to this staff report, should the Council wish to act on the project.

Prepared by: Danny Castro, Design and Development Director Approved by: Jon McMillen, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Letter from James Vaughn, Esq., on behalf of the Applicant, dated August 22, 2022 with attached Exhibits A through M.

2. Redline of Development Agreement amendments.

3. Public Comments received July 6 through September 15, 2022 11 4. Staff reports, resolutions, ordinances and attachments for June 7 and July 5 meetings can be accessed at:
• June 7, 2022
• July 5, 2022

5. Minutes of June 7 and July 5 Council hearings can be accessed at:
• June 7, 2022
• July 5, 2022
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19

CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN
54 3.3.4 Development Standards
The following development standards apply to property in Planning Area III as described within the text of this Specific Plan.

TABLE 3.3B – TOURIST COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

STANDARD

III-A III-B III-C III-D III-E III-F III-G RESORT THE WAVE WAVE CLUB RESORT RESIDENTIAL WEST RESORT RESIDENTIAL EAST THE FARM BACK OF HOUSE Min. Lot Size 20,000 sf 20,000 sf 20,000 sf 3,600 sf 3,600 sf 20,000 sf 20,000 sf Max. Lot Coverage 50% 10% 70% 70% 70% 50% 20%
Min . Lot Frontage 25’ 25’ 25’ 30’ 30’ 25’ 25’
Min. Livable Area 1 NA NA NA 1,400 sf 1,400 sf NA NA
Min. Accessory Building
Area 2 NA NA NA 300 sf 300 sf NA NA
Min. Front Setback 10’ 0’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’
Min. Setback from Walk
Streets or Sidewalks 3
5’ 0’ 5’ 5’ 5’ 5’ NA
Min. Setback from Wave
Basin parcel 0’ NA 0’ 5’4
5’4 NA 0’
Min. Front Facing
Garage/Carport Setback NA NA NA 10’ 10’ NA NA
Min. Side Facing
Garage/Carport Setback NA NA NA 12’ 12’ NA NA
Min. Rear Setback 5 NA NA NA 5’ 5’ NA 25’
Min. Interior/Corner Side
Setback 5,6,7 NA NA NA 3’/3’ 3’/3’ NA NA
Exhibit A
20 CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN
55 Min. Setback from
Planning Area II NA 50’ 15’ NA NA NA 50’
Max. Height 7,8,9 (ft/stories) 40’/43 405’/34 40’/3 30’/3 30’/3 40’/3 30’/2 Min. Bldg. Separation 9 6’ 0’ 15’ 6’ 6’ 6’ 0’
Max. Pole Light Height 25’ 4080’ 25’ NA NA 25’ 25’
Max. Wall / Fence Height 6’10 8’10 6’10 6’10 6’10 6’10 8’10 Min. Parking Provided11, 12 1.1 per
key
1 per full
time
employee
1 per 500
sf 2 per unit 2 per unit 1 per 500 sf
1 per
1,000 sf
Min. Parking Dimension 9’ X 19’ 9’ X 19’ 9’ X 19’ 9’ X 19’ 9’ X 19’ 9’ X 19’ 9’ X 19’ Min. Bicycle Parking Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Min. Golf Cart / NEV
Parking Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Min. Electric Vehicle
Charging Spaces Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Per Code Footnotes:

1. Excluding garages, casitas or carriage units.

2. Detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units.

3. Where walk street occurs at rear or side property line, walk street setback shall govern. 21 AVENUE 60 AVENUE 58 MADISON STREET View "E" View "C" View "D" Wave Andalusia Entry Lion's GateView "B" Basin WAVE BASIN LINE OF SIGHT SECTION VIEW INDEX MAP CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 22 80' MAX. Prop. Wave Basin Light Lion's Gate Ex. Mountain Side Ex. Mountain Peak Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight Line of Sight Line of Sight (View Peak) Entry Avenue 58 (Public Road) 80' MAX.

Prop. Wave Basin Light
Line of Sight
Prop. Wave Basin

11.5' 4,002' TO VIEWING LOCATION
View Line to Top of Light LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "B": VIEW FROM LION'S GATE ENTRY (BEFORE) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT See Detail 'A' N.T.S 23 Prop. Wave Basin Light Lion's Gate Ex. Mountain Side Ex. Mountain Peak Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall Line of Sight (View Peak) Entry Avenue 58 (Public Road) Prop. Wave Basin Light
Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall
Prop. Wave Basin
40' MAX. LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "B": VIEW FROM LION'S GATE ENTRY (REVISED) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT See Detail 'A' N.T.S 24 Madison Street Andalusia Line of Sight Entry Public Road Line of Sight Ex. Mountain Peak Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight (View Peak) Ex. Mountain Side 80' MAX.
3,563' TO VIEWING LOCATION
40'
80' MAX.

21.8'
VIEW LINE TO TOP OF LIGHT LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "C": VIEW FROM ANDALUSIA ENTRY (BEFORE) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 Line of Sight See Detail 'A' DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT N.T.S. Prop. Wave Basin Prop. Hotel Prop. Wave Basin Light 25 Madison Street Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall Public Road Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall Ex. Mountain Peak Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight (View Peak) Ex. Mountain Side 40' MAX. Andalusia Entry
40'
40' MAX. LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "C": VIEW FROM ANDALUSIA ENTRY (REVISED) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall See Detail 'A' DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT N.T.S. Prop. Wave Basin Prop. Hotel Prop. Wave Basin Light 26 Prop. Wave Basin Light
Prop. Hotel
Prop. Wave Basin
40' Avenue 60 Ex. Mountain Side Ex. Mountain Peak Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight Line of Sight (Public Road)
80' MAX.
40'
2,745' TO VIEWING LOCATION LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "D": VIEW FROM MADISON STREET (BEFORE) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT Prop. Wave Basin Prop. Wave Basin Light See Detail 'A' Prop. Hotel Line of Sight N.T.S. 27 Prop. Wave Basin Light
Prop. Hotel
Prop. Wave Basin
40' Avenue 60 Ex. Mountain Side Ex. Mountain Peak Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight (View Peak) Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall (Public Road)
40'
40' MAX. LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "D": VIEW FROM MADISON STREET (REVISED) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT Prop. Wave Basin Prop. Wave Basin Light See Detail 'A' Prop. Hotel Line of Sight Over Perimeter Wall N.T.S.
28 Prop. Wave Basin Light
Prop. Hotel
40'
Prop. Wave Basin Avenue 60 (Public Road)
Line of Sight
Line of Sight
Ex. Boundary & Prop. Wall of Project
80' MAX.

Prop. Wave Basin

28.7'
View Line to Top of Light LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "E": FROM AVENUE 60 (BEFORE) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 Line of Sight DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT Prop. Wave Basin Light See Detail 'A' N.T.S 29 Prop. Wave Basin Light
Prop. Hotel
40'
Prop. Wave Basin Avenue 60 (Public Road)
Line of Sight through Existing Palm Trees
Line of Sight through Existing Palm Trees
Ex. Boundary & Prop. Wall of Project
Prop. Wave Basin
40' MAX. LINE OF SIGHT SECTION N.T.S WAVE BASIN / LIGHT SECTION "E": FROM AVENUE 60 (REVISED) CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2022 Line of Sight through Existing Palm Trees DETAIL 'A' WAVE BASIN / LIGHT Prop. Wave Basin Light See Detail 'A' N.T.S 30 Exhibit C
31 32
Prop. Wave Basin Light
Prop. Wave Basin
40' MAX. Prop. Approximate Photometric Cut-Off Prop. Photometric Center 80' MAX.

Prop. Wave Basin Light
Prop. Wave Basin SCALE: 1" = 30' WAVE BASIN LIGHTING TO ORIGINAL 80-FOOT LIGHTING CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 23, 2022 SCALE: 1" = 30' 40FT POLE HEIGHT 80FT POLE HEIGHT FOUR 1200-WATT LUMINAIRES (POLE 1) (POLE 1) TWO 550-WATT LUMINAIRES CONCEPTUAL ILLUSTRATION COMPARING REVISED 40-FOOT 33 CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com MSA CONSULTING, INC. > PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 23, 2022 40ft Pole Height Specifications 80ft Pole Height Specifications WAVE BASIN LIGHTING TO ORIGINAL 80-FOOT LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS CONCEPTUAL ILLUSTRATION COMPARING REVISED 40-FOOT 34 - LIGHT POLE LOCATION
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 PA II NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL PA I LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PA II RESORT PA III A V E N U E 5 8 A V E N U E 6 0 M A D I S O N S T R E E T OPEN SPACE PA IV III-C III-B III-D III-F III-A III-E III-G CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN Exhibit Date: July 21, 2022 MSA CONSULTING INC. MSACONSULTINGINC.COM, >PLANNING >CIVIL ENGINEERING >LAND SURVEYING CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN Source: MSA Consulting, Inc. FIGURE 8 PAGE 18 N.T.S. N O R T H Legend: Planning Area Sub-Boundary Neighborhood Commercial Low Density Residential Project Boundary Planning Area Boundary Resort Open Space (Recreation) 44 A V E N U E 5 8 A V E N U E 6 0 M A D I S O N S T R E E T CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN Exhibit Date: July 21, 2022 MSA CONSULTING INC. MSACONSULTINGINC.COM, >PLANNING >CIVIL ENGINEERING >LAND SURVEYING CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN Source: MSA Consulting, Inc. FIGURE 18 PAGE 44 N.T.S. N O R T H Legend: Conceptual Drainage Sub-Area Conceptual 100-Year Sub-Area Retention Project Boundary Water Feature / Retention Site Drainage Flows Off-Site Drainage Direction Note: Drainage and retention is conceptual and subject to refinement with final engineering design. 45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
1 CM Wave Development, LLC
To: Nicole Criste, City of La Quinta
From: John Gamlin, President – CM Wave Development, LLC CC: Cheri Flores
James Vaughn
Date: August 15, 2022
Re: Coral Mountain – Potability of All-American Canal Water Hello City Staff:

At the City Council meeting on 6/07/2022, a speaker displayed a PowerPoint presentation during public comments that included the attached slide.

Among the points made on the slide and remarks at the podium was a claim that I “lied” when I stated that water from the All-American Canal is “non-potable water.” This comment was made in reference to an op-ed piece published in the Desert Sun by Coral Mountain on May 7, 2022 (see attached), drafted to address Coral Mountain Wave Development’s reaction to an April 17 Desert Sun editorial board opinion.

Setting aside ad hominem attacks that are defamatory and insulting, let’s focus instead on the technical merits of the statements regarding Canal Water.

It makes sense to start with the definitions of “Potable” and “Non-Potable” water according to recognized governmental regulatory authorities1:

Potable Water: “Potable water means water that meets the standards for drinking purposes of the State or local authority having jurisdiction, or water that meets the quality standards prescribed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (40 CFR 141).”
Non-Potable Water: “Non-potable water is water that does not meet OSHA's Sanitation standard for potable water. OSHA's Sanitation standard, at 29 CFR 1910.141(a)(2), defines Exhibit J
152
2 potable water as Water that meets the standards for drinking purposes of the State or local authority having jurisdiction, or water that meets the quality standards prescribed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.”
1 https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.141 Rather than inject more inexpert opinion about what is considered “Potable” and “NonPotable” water into this discussion, Coral Mountain deferred to qualified expertsto weigh in.

Coral Mountain:
(1) Obtained a Technical Memo from a water quality engineer, and (2) Consulted with Coachella Valley Water District personnel Technical Memo
Coral Mountain engaged AM Consulting Engineers in Fresno, CA to provide a professional opinion about the potability of water obtained from the All-American Canal (see attached).

The memo concludes as follows: “Potable Water, also referred to as drinking water, is water that is safe for human consumption. Colorado River water, as it flows in the AllAmerican Canal, exceeds the turbidity and bacteriological (Total coliform and E. Coli) concentrations that are required for drinking water under Federal and State regulations…Water in the All-American Canal could be a source for potable water, but would not be potable without considerable treatment [emphasis added]. In order for the water to become potable, it needs to undergo treatment that meets requirements of the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.”
On a side note, AM Consulting Engineers was retained to evaluate the suitability of both Canal and private well water for use as source water in the Wave Basin. Data for Canal water was obtained from CVWD, as well as a physical sample that was analyzed by a laboratory. Additionally, data was obtained from CVWD for shallow and deep monitoring and domestic water wells in the vicinity of the site.

Both sources meet the definition of non-potability in their raw state. However, both are suitable as source water after appropriate filtration and disinfection by the Wave Basin’s onsite inline treatment plant.

Coral Mountain and its design team met with the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health (DEH) to discuss the use of non-potable source water for the Wave Basin. The DEH will be a permitting authority for operational and life safety requirements and will review the design of the onsite treatment plant.

Prior to the meeting, DEH staff discussed the treatment protocols in place at the Lemoore Surf Ranch with the Kings County Health Department. On the basis of its discussion with 153
3 Kings County and information provided at our meeting, DEH staff is satisfied at this time and indicated it looks forward to the review and permitting process.

CVWD
In a conversation with the Water Resources Director at CVWD the following was relayed:
• Canal water is not considered potable water by the CVWD. • There are no current uses for Canal water in the Coachella Valley within CVWD’s service area as source water for potable use, nor is this presently contemplated in the CVWD’s long-term planning.
• The use of Canal water for drinking water purposes would require considerable treatment to meet drinking water standards, and this does not make economic sense based on the availability of other, plentiful and more economically sensible sources available for this purpose.
• Minimal treatment is currently required in CVWD’s system for most of its domestic water wells. Typically, treatment consists of the injection of chlorine for disinfection, which occurs at the wellhead before the water is released into the domestic water system.

SUMMARY
Canal water does not meet EPA and OSHA standards for suitability for drinking. In its raw, untreated form it is unfit for human consumption. To disseminate information to the public which represents Canal water is safe to drink is irresponsible and could result in undesirable human health consequences.

Thank you for allowing the record to correct this information. 154
Slide from PPT Presented to the City Council by Alena Callimanis on 6/07/2022 Mr. Gamlin, President Coral Mountain Wave Development,
with his Response to the Desert Sun April 17 Editorial
• "The editorial incorrectly states that wave basins must use "potable" water, meaning drinking water. To the contrary, non-potable water sources are appropriate with filtration and disinfection such that it meets all applicable regulatory requirements safe for recreational contact." • This project does use the same potable water sources that CVWD, MWD and San Diego use, the Colorado River water. Whether it comes from the Canal or the aquifer, it needs to be treated for drinking. Gamlin's statement in not only misleading, it truly is a lie. This project w ill not use non-potable and it only will use potable water.
• Canal water is POTABLE Water. Coral Mountain will use Canal water which is Potable water.
11 155
This piece expresses the views of its author(s), separate from those of this publication.

Guest columnist
Published 5:01 a.m. PT May 7, 2022
Regarding The Desert Sun's April 17 editorial, there are mischaracterizations concerning the Coral Mountain project in La Quinta that should be clarified.

The desert oasis of the Coachella Valley has long attracted visitors who fall in love with the region and decide to make it either a part-time and permanent home, requiring careful planning and responsible development. The proposed Coral Mountain resort fits the bill by adhering to sustainability principles and providing public benefits.

Far from being a “frivolous water-wasting project,” Coral Mountain heralds a shift in thinking regarding how water is used to generate economic activity. The headline should be, “Developer proposes replacing approved 18-hole golf course with water-saving wave basin amenity that delivers higher economic returns to city.” The proposed wave basin would use approximately 10% to 15% of the water used by golf courses annually, but creates substantial public economic benefits.

The editorial incorrectly states that wave basins must use “potable water,” meaning drinking water. To the contrary, non-potable water sources are appropriate with filtration and disinfection such that it meets all applicable regulatory requirements safe for recreational contact.

In fact, Surf Ranch in Lemoore, California, has done so for years, meeting all applicable health and safety regulations.

Coachella Valley Water District recently updated its management plan submitted to the state as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Regarding the Indio Subbasin, the plan states as follows, concluding the groundwater basin is sustainable:

The amount of water stored has increased by 840,000 acre-feet since 2009, including Coral Mountain wave basin's smart water use helps La Quinta | Column https://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/contributors/valley-voice/202... 1 of 3 8/8/2022, 7:32 AM
156
during periods of drought, water restrictions and cutbacks on imported water deliveries.

Between 2020 and 2045, the amount of groundwater is expected to increase further, including the Coral Mountain project and assumptions of climate change and drought built in.

The plan update does not assume that more water will be delivered to California in future years, only slightly increased allocations to CVWD under existing transfer agreements.

A worst-case scenario is assumed where CVWD does not take some of its water from Lake Mead, and less than half of the State Water Project allocation will be delivered. This is more conservative than the State Department of Water Resources’ planning.

The public benefits created by Coral Mountain would include Transit Occupancy Taxes from a hotel and a well-planned and centrally managed short-term vacation rental program, plus sales taxes. These are forecast to generate almost $3.5 million in revenue each year for the city’s General Fund. Additionally, there will be revenue to local businesses that residents and visitors would bring. Hundreds of jobs would be created.

This is important because La Quinta currently receives no property tax revenue from neighbors within the Coral Mountain Specific Plan area to pay for governmental services. The county keeps all Trilogy and Andalusia property tax revenue. Thus, these costs are “red ink” in the city’s annual budget, requiring a General Fund subsidy estimated at $2,100 per home. Coral Mountain is part of the solution to this annual shortfall. “Frivolous water use” is gratuitously grassed street parkways and medians, and expanses of grass areas that do not provide active and passive recreational benefits, or events that generate sales tax. Those days are over, and that’s appropriate.

We hope readers will take time to seek out unbiased facts and form judgments based on critical thought, not false perceptions based on hyperbole and misinformation.

John Gamlin lives in La Quinta and is president of CM Wave Development LLC. Email him at [email protected].

Coral Mountain wave basin's smart water use helps La Quinta | Column https://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/contributors/valley-voice/202... 2 of 3 8/8/2022, 7:32 AM
157
5150 N Sixth Street, Suite 124
Fresno, CA 93710
Phone 559.473.1371
Fax 559.513.8449
June 24, 2022
Mr. John Gamlin
President
Coral Mountain Wave Development, LLC
Re: Professional Opinion about Surface Water Potability Dear John,
This letter is being prepared to provide my professional opinion about the potability of the water obtained from the All-American Canal. I am a Civil Engineer Licensed in the State of California (License No. C63673) since 2002. In my 20+ years of professional experience, I have designed multiple municipal water filtration systems used to supply potable water. I am very familiar with the State of California Regulations related to Drinking Water primarily contained in Title 17 and Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations.

Water in the All- American Canal comes from the Colorado River. The All-American Canal is owned and operated by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The All-American Canal terminates at Lake Cahuilla. From there, a conveyance network, distributes water to users.

Potable Water, also referred to as drinking water, is water that is safe for human consumption.

Colorado River water, as it flows in the All-American Canal, exceeds the turbidity and bacteriological (Total coliform and E. Coli) concentrations that are required for drinking water.

Water in the All-American Canal could be a source for potable water, but would not be potable without considerable treatment. In order for the water to become potable, it needs to undergo treatment that meets requirements of the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.

In general, surface water treatment to produce drinking water includes coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration and disinfection steps that must be followed to produce water that is suitable for drinking. The complexity and costs of the surface water treatment are considerable.

This is the reason why there are no potable water uses of Colorado River Water in the Coachella Valley today. With good quality groundwater available, it is not necessary to embark into surface water treatment to make the Colorado Rivew Water potable.

If you have any questions or require any additional information, please call me at (559) 288-9172.

Sincerely,
Alfonso Manrique, PE
Principal
158
12642-21 Noise Memo
August 16, 2022
Mr. Garrett Simon
CM Wave Development LLC
2440 Junction Place, Suite 200
Boulder, CO 80301
SUBJECT: THE WAVE AT CORAL MOUNTAIN SPEAKER NOISE ASSESSMENT Dear Mr. Garrett Simon:

Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this speaker noise assessment for The Wave at Coral Mountain (“Project”), which is in the City of La Quinta. The purpose of this noise assessment is to evaluate the use of 38 Sonance LS6T SAT outdoor speakers mounted above the water surface facing the wave lagoon. On March 17, 2021, Urban Crossroads, Inc. prepared Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis (NIA). Section 10 of the NIA evaluated the noise impacts resulting from the operation of the proposed Coral Mountain Specific Plan Project. To estimate the Project operational noise impacts, reference noise level measurements were collected from similar types of activities including speakers to represent the noise levels expected with the development of the proposed Project.

SURF RANCH REFERENCE NOISE MEASUREMENTS
To describe the wave basin/wave machine activity, Urban Crossroads, Inc. collected reference noise level measurements at the existing Surf Ranch located at 18556 Jackson Avenue in the City of Lemoore, California. The Surf Ranch is a private facility with a proprietary wave machine technology capable of generating waves every 3 to 4 minutes. To create each wave, a large “sled” is pulled through the water using a cable system. Two buildings at each end of the cable system house the mechanical equipment and cable system. To measure the noise levels associated with the wave machine, Urban Crossroads, Inc. collected reference noise level measurements at eight different locations around the Surf Ranch.

The noise level measurement locations were selected to identify the unique noise characteristics associated with different stages of each wave. Prior to each wave, the control tower announces the event over the public address system. This is followed by the noise generated from the movement of the sled and an increase in noise levels from the mechanical equipment buildings. However, throughout each wave event, the primary noise source is simply the movement of water from each wave in the lagoon.

To describe the worst-case reference noise level conditions, the highest reference noise level describing each peak wave noise event of 75.7 dBA Leq at 12 feet was used to describe the wave basin/wave machine activity for the proposed The Wave at Coral Mountain Project. The wave basin/wave machine activities will be limited to the daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. with no planned nighttime activities. Additional noise level measurements were collected August 15, 2021, at the Surf Ranch to show that improvements to wave machine cable roller system reduced the peak wave event noise levels from 75.7 to 73.5 dBA Leq. These improvements to the to wave machine cable roller system demonstrate that the peak noise levels outlined in the March 17, 2021, Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis conservatively overstate the Project related wave machine by approximately 2.2 dBA Leq.

Exhibit K
159
Mr. Garrett Simon
CM Wave Development LLC
August 16, 2022

12642-21 Noise Memo

THE WAVE AT CORAL MOUNTAIN SPEAKERS
Similar to the Surf Ranch reference noise measurements, The Wave at Coral Mountain may announce the wave event prior to each wave. However, to better control the wave event announcements, the planned speaker system for The Wave at Coral Mountain will include 38 Sonance LS6T SAT directional outdoor speakers mounted above the water surface facing the lagoon. This will place the noise source closer to the wave basin and oriented to the northeast, away from the nearest noise sensitive receiver locations. Exhibit A presents the proposed public address speaker system locations. It is expected that individual wave events and announcements will take place every 3 to 4 minutes during the typical the daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. representing a total of approximately 260 events.

In addition, the speakers will be limited to the center of the lagoon with no speakers planned in the endzone areas as shown on Exhibit A. Since the primary noise source associated with The Wave at Coral Mountain is simply the movement of water from each wave in the lagoon, the speaker audio announcements represent a subset of the overall operational noise source activity associated with the wave basin/wave machine. The NIA evaluated the highest noise levels from the boundary of the wave basin while the speakers are placed within the actual wave basin and oriented away from existing nearby receivers. It is expected that the each of the 38 speakers will generate a noise source level of 70 dBA Leq at 12 feet. The speaker noise source level is less than the 75.7 dBA Leq at 12 feet that was used to describe the wave basin/wave machine activity for the proposed The Wave at Coral Mountain Project. Table 1 presents a summary of the expected speaker noise levels and wave basin/wave machine noise levels presented previously in the NIA.

TABLE 1: OPERATIONAL NOISE SUMMARY
Receiver
Location1
Project Operational Noise Levels (dBA Leq)2
Speakers Wave Basin/
Wave Machine
R1 37.1 44.2
R2 32.5 38.0
R3 32.4 37.4
R4 33.9 38.2
R5 34.8 39.3
R6 41.3 51.4
R7 29.5 45.0
R8 30.0 46.6
R9 25.9 41.1
R10 26.9 38.6
R11 45.5 59.0
1 See Exhibit B for the off-site Receiver locations.
2 CadnaA noise model calculations are included in Appendix A. 160
Mr. Garrett Simon
CM Wave Development LLC
August 16, 2022

12642-21 Noise Memo
As shown on Table 1, the speakers are estimated to generate noise levels ranging from 25.9 to 45.5 dBA Leq. Exhibit B presents the expected noise level contours from the 38 speakers. The wave basin/wave machine noise levels that include the control tower operational speaker announcements from the NIA will range from 37.4 to 59.0 dBA Leq. Table 1 demonstrates that the movement of water from each wave in the lagoon are greater than the speaker announcements noise source activity from the 38 speakers. It is important to recognize that the speaker noise levels will not change the results on Tables 10-2 or 10-3 of the NIA since the speakers represent a subset of the overall operational noise source activity associated with the wave basin/wave machine. The NIA evaluated the highest noise levels from the boundary of the wave basin while the speakers are placed within the actual wave basin and oriented away from existing nearby receivers.

WIND
Consistent with guidance provided in the Caltrans September 2013, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Analysis Protocol, present policies and standards ignore the effects of wind on noise levels. Unless wind conditions are specifically identified, noise levels are always assumed to be for zero wind. In addition, noise analyses are also always made for zero-wind conditions consistent with the City of La Quinta exterior noise standards.

FINDINGS
As discussed in the NIA, sound from a localized source (i.e., a stationary point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source. For example, a noise level of 70 dBA measured at 50 feet from the noise source to the receiver would be reduced to 64 dBA at 100 feet from the source to the receiver and would be further reduced to 58 dBA at 200 feet from the source to the receiver. The way noise reduces with distance depends on type of noise source, the ground absorption, atmospheric effects and shielding. The NIA demonstrates that the operational noise levels associated with The Wave at Coral Mountain Project will satisfy the City of La Quinta daytime exterior noise level standards with no planned nighttime operational noise source activity. This does not suggest that the wave basin/wave machine activity will be inaudible at times, only that the Project will not result in significant noise level increase above the existing ambient noise conditions. Therefore, the Project will contribute a less than significant operational noise level increase to the existing daytime ambient noise environment at all existing off-site receiver locations
Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.

Bill Lawson, P.E., INCE
Principal
161
Mr. Garrett Simon
CM Wave Development LLC
August 16, 2022

12642-21 Noise Memo
EXHIBIT A: SPEAKER LOCATIONS
162
Mr. Garrett Simon
CM Wave Development LLC
August 16, 2022

12642-21 Noise Memo
EXHIBIT B: SPEAKER NOISE CONTOURS
163
Mr. Garrett Simon
CM Wave Development LLC
August 16, 2022

12642-21 Noise Memo
APPENDIX A:

CADNAA NOISE MODEL INPUTS
164
13103
CadnaA Noise Prediction Model: 12642_Speakers05.cna
Date: 03.08.22
Analyst: B. Lawson
Receiver Noise Levels
Name M. ID Level Lr Limit. Value Land Use Height Coordinates Day Night CNEL Day Night CNEL Type Auto Noise Type X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) RECEIVERS R1 37.1 37.1 43.8 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6559701.83 2172082.13 5.00 RECEIVERS R2 32.5 32.5 39.1 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6561160.17 2172103.84 5.00 RECEIVERS R3 32.4 32.4 39.0 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6561607.22 2172116.86 5.00 RECEIVERS R4 33.9 33.9 40.5 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6561919.72 2171422.41 5.00 RECEIVERS R5 34.8 34.8 41.5 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6561963.81 2170753.38 5.00 RECEIVERS R6 41.3 41.3 48.0 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6561014.44 2167755.55 5.00 RECEIVERS R7 29.5 29.5 36.2 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6560134.29 2166770.74 5.00 RECEIVERS R8 30.0 30.0 36.7 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6559827.00 2166505.11 5.00 RECEIVERS R9 25.9 25.9 32.6 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6556013.28 2170127.57 5.00 RECEIVERS R10 26.9 26.9 33.6 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6557185.16 2172188.76 5.00 RECEIVERS R11 45.5 45.5 52.1 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.00 a 6560086.60 2167617.13 5.00 Point Source(s)
Name M. ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time K0 Dir Height Coordinates Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night X Y Z X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) (dB) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) SPEAKER SPEAKER01 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558392.03 2168648.59 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER02 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558415.46 2168621.46 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER03 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558443.82 2168595.56 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER04 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558474.66 2168567.19 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER05 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558500.56 2168541.29 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER06 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558527.69 2168512.93 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER07 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558553.59 2168483.33 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER08 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558580.72 2168456.20 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER09 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558611.55 2168426.60 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER10 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558638.68 2168400.70 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER11 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558664.58 2168373.57 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER12 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558695.42 2168343.97 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER13 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558720.08 2168318.07 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER14 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558747.21 2168286.00 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER15 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558776.81 2168262.57 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER16 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558805.18 2168236.67 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER17 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558833.54 2168205.84 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER18 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558860.68 2168177.47 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER19 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558889.04 2168152.81 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER20 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558912.47 2168125.68 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER21 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558944.54 2168097.31 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER22 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6558969.21 2168071.41 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER23 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559000.04 2168044.28 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER24 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559028.40 2168012.21 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER25 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559054.30 2167985.08 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER26 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559083.90 2167956.71 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER27 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559111.03 2167929.58 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER28 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559138.17 2167901.22 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER29 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559166.53 2167872.85 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER30 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559194.90 2167844.49 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER31 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559220.80 2167822.29 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER32 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559247.93 2167791.45 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER33 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559276.30 2167764.32 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER34 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559304.66 2167737.19 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER35 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559333.03 2167708.82 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER36 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559361.39 2167681.69 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER37 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559388.52 2167652.09 8.00 SPEAKER SPEAKER38 86.0 86.0 86.0 Lw 86 0.0 Directivity 1 1 1 0 8.00 a 6559416.89 2167624.96 8.00 Barrier(s)
Name M. ID Absorption Z-Ext. Cantilever Height Coordinates left right horz. vert. Begin End x y z Ground
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
BARRIERS BARRIERS00001 6.00 a 6556068.34 2169655.74 6.00 0.00 6556072.25 2169787.25 6.00 0.00
6556087.88 2170034.64 6.00 0.00
6556095.69 2170198.70 6.00 0.00
6556095.69 2170295.06 6.00 0.00
6556056.63 2170382.30 6.00 0.00
6555961.57 2170490.37 6.00 0.00
6555886.05 2170543.76 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00002 6.00 a 6557284.27 2172169.91 6.00 0.00 Urban Crossroads, Inc.
165
Name M. ID Absorption Z-Ext. Cantilever Height Coordinates left right horz. vert. Begin End x y z Ground
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
6557254.76 2172131.72 6.00 0.00
6557208.75 2172123.04 6.00 0.00
6557131.50 2172067.48 6.00 0.00
6557060.31 2172050.99 6.00 0.00
6556932.71 2172050.99 6.00 0.00
6556792.95 2172051.86 6.00 0.00
6556711.36 2172079.64 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00003 6.00 a 6557153.20 2172059.67 6.00 0.00 6557222.64 2172046.65 6.00 0.00
6557325.94 2172044.91 6.00 0.00
6557427.50 2172050.12 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00004 6.00 a 6561351.48 2172027.86 6.00 0.00 6561102.87 2172020.92 6.00 0.00
6561104.95 2172050.09 6.00 0.00
6560961.89 2172050.78 6.00 0.00
6560757.73 2172048.00 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00005 6.00 a 6561761.78 2172032.47 6.00 0.00 6561668.72 2172044.27 6.00 0.00
6561565.95 2172042.88 6.00 0.00
6561527.75 2172067.19 6.00 0.00
6561507.61 2172141.49 6.00 0.00
6561504.14 2172241.49 6.00 0.00
6561506.92 2172305.38 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00006 6.00 a 6562036.78 2171815.10 6.00 0.00 6562077.75 2171758.85 6.00 0.00
6561990.25 2171672.05 6.00 0.00
6561978.45 2171678.30 6.00 0.00
6561885.39 2171597.74 6.00 0.00
6561777.06 2171550.52 6.00 0.00
6561777.75 2171540.80 6.00 0.00
6561698.58 2171485.24 6.00 0.00
6561619.42 2171384.55 6.00 0.00
6561618.03 2171366.49 6.00 0.00
6561622.89 2171360.94 6.00 0.00
6561606.92 2171297.74 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00007 6.00 a 6561650.93 2171132.10 6.00 0.00 6561698.67 2171027.94 6.00 0.00
6561730.14 2170950.90 6.00 0.00
6561778.97 2170829.37 6.00 0.00
6561832.14 2170754.50 6.00 0.00
6561854.92 2170726.29 6.00 0.00
6561861.43 2170734.97 6.00 0.00
6561913.52 2170592.82 6.00 0.00
6561937.39 2170571.12 6.00 0.00
6561958.00 2170535.32 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00008 6.00 a 6561606.92 2171297.74 6.00 0.00 6561606.67 2171224.32 6.00 0.00
6561616.63 2171169.23 6.00 0.00
6561631.23 2171167.24 6.00 0.00
6561650.93 2171132.10 6.00 0.00
BARRIERS BARRIERS00009 6.00 a 6560093.69 2166604.65 6.00 0.00 6560092.73 2166983.08 6.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.
166

TECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM!
DATE: August 8, 2022
PROJECT:& Coral Mountain Wave Project
SUBJECT:& Noise Analysis
Coral Mountain Speaker Design
The use of an announcement system in the Coral Mountain Wave Project is necessary for surf operations and safety. Notifications are sent through a series of small speakers located along the safety barrier as shown in Figure 1. These announcements are primarily to alert surfers of upcoming waves and are intended only for main wave surfers. Main wave surfers are posted along the safety barrier very near to the speakers, this allows us to limit the noise level and coverage zones . Because notifications are only critical for main wave surfers, speaker coverage in the endzone areas has been omitted. The current design calls for 38 Sonance LS6T SAT outdoor speakers placed at 40' intervals along the main reef.

Figure 1. Speaker Locations
Exhibit L
167

Surf Ranch Lemoore Noise Study
Urban Crossroads analyzed the noise levels at Kelly Slater Wave Company's facility in Lemoore California, Surf Ranch Lemoore. This study took data regarding the noise produced by the wave machine. Data was collected at eight locations on the site and captured noise produced by the announcement system, wave vehicle and associated mechanisms, and the movement of the water. In 2018 the wave machine cable roller system in Lemoore was updated from metal to nylon. This decreased noise levels of the wave vehicle. This reduction was captured in a later analysis by Urban Crossroads in 2021. In the Coral Mountain Project it is expected that noise levels will be diminished further due to more changes to the cable roller system, in this design the cable will be run underwater. Modification to the announcement system will also decrease noise levels in Coral Mountain. While Lemoore's notification system features an elevated loudspeaker mounted at the control tower, Coral Mountain has eliminated this from their design and placed all speakers at grade closer to the surfers. This updated design significantly limits areas where announcements are audible.
168
12642-19 Noise Memo
EXHIBIT A: SPEAKER LOCATIONS
DIRECTION OF SOUND FROM SPEAKERS THE CORAL MOUNTAIN APPROX. 419' 169

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND

WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Attn: City Clerk
Space Above This Line for Recorder’s Use
(Exempt from Recording Fee per Gov’t Code §6103
and §27383)

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN
THE

CITY OF LA QUINTA
AND

CM WAVE DEVELOPMENT LLC
170
-1-

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into as of the __ day of _______________, 2022 (“Reference Date”), by and between the CITY OF LA QUINTA, a California municipal corporation and charter city organized and existing under the Constitution of the State of the California (“City”), and CM Wave Development LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Developer”), with reference to the following:

RECITALS:

A. Government Code Section 65864 et seq. (“Development Agreement Act”) authorizes City to enter into a binding development agreement for the development of real property within its jurisdiction with persons having legal or equitable interest in such real property.

B. Pursuant to Section 65865 of the Government Code, City has adopted its Development Agreement Ordinance (La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.250.030) establishing procedures and requirements for such development agreements (“Development Agreement Ordinance”).

C. Developer owns certain real property, consisting of approximately 386 acres, located south of Avenue 58, north of Avenue 60, and west of Madison Street, in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and shown on the Site Map attached hereto as Exhibit “B” (the “Site”); and Developer has proposed to develop a resort community consisting of a mix of uses including, up to 600 residential dwelling units, a boutique resort hotel with up to 150 keys and complimentary resort uses and amenities, a recreational surf facility, up to 57,000 square feet of tourist commercial uses, up to 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, and approximately 23.6 acres of additional open space and recreational amenities (collectively, the “Project”). The Project is more fully described in, and subject to (i) this Agreement, (ii) the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, also known as Specific Plan No. SP2020-0002 (“Specific Plan”); (iii) the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project, approved and certified by the City Council on __________, by City Council Resolution No. ________ (the “EIR”); (iv) General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2019- 0002; (v) Zone Change No. ZC 2019-0004; (vi) Specific Plan Amendment to SP 03-067 (to remove the Site from that Specific Plan); (vii) Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 2019-0005; Site Development Permit No. SDP 2021-0001; and (viii) any future discretionary or ministerial approvals and/or permits issued for the Project (collectively, the “Project Site Development Permits”); (ix) any future subdivision maps approved for the Project (collectively, the “Future Tract Maps”); and (x) the conditions of approval associated with each and all of the foregoing approvals (collectively, the “Conditions of Approval”). The documents, permits, approvals, and conditions described in the foregoing clauses (i)-(x) are collectively referred to herein as the “Project Approvals,” and are, or when approved or issued shall be, on file with the City Clerk.

D. Developer owns fee simple title to the Site, and by their execution of this Agreement, City and Developer consent to recordation of this Agreement against the Site.

E. Consistent with Section 9.250.030 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, City and Developer desire to enter into a binding agreement that shall be construed as a development 171
-2-
agreement within the meaning of the Development Agreement Act. This Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning for and secure the orderly development of the Project, ensure a desirable and functional community environment, provide effective and efficient development of public facilities, infrastructure, and services appropriate for the development of the Project, and assure attainment of the maximum effective utilization of resources within the City, by achieving the goals and purposes of the Development Agreement Act. In exchange for these benefits to City, Developer desires to receive the assurance that it may proceed with development of the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Project Approvals, all as more particularly set forth herein.

F. The Planning Commission and the City Council have determined that the Project and this Agreement are consistent with the City’s General Plan and the Specific Plan, including the goals and objectives thereof.

G. All actions taken by City have been duly taken in accordance with all applicable legal requirements, including the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.) (“CEQA”), and all other requirements for notice, public hearings, findings, votes and other procedural matters.

H. On _________, 20212022, the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. ___ approving this Agreement.

AGREEMENT:

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals, which are incorporated herein by this reference, the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and legal sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties do hereby agree as follows:

1. GENERAL

1.1 Definitions

1.1.1 “Administrative Adjustment” shall have the meaning set forth in Section

2.2.10 of this Agreement.

1.1.2 “Affiliated Party” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.8.3 of this Agreement.

1.1.3 “Agreement” means this Development Agreement and all amendments and modifications thereto.

1.1.4 “Annual Mitigation Payment Date” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 3.6.1 of this Agreement.

1.1.5 “Applicable Rules” means the rules, regulations, ordinances and officially adopted policies of the City of La Quinta in full force and effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the 172
-3-
Specific Plan. Additionally, notwithstanding the language of this Section or any other language in this Agreement, all specifications, standards and policies regarding the design and construction of public works facilities, if any, shall be those that are in effect at the time the Project plans are being processed for approval and/or under construction.

1.1.6 “Assignment and Assumption Agreement” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.8.1 of this Agreement.

1.1.7 “CC&Rs” means the Declaration(s) of Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions, recorded against all or a portion of the Site, as set forth in Section 3.8 of this Agreement.

1.1.8 “CDFW” means the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, a state agency.

1.1.9 “CEQA” means the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs., Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.).

1.1.10 “City” means the City of La Quinta, a charter city and municipal corporation, including each and every agency, department, board, commission, authority, employee, and/or official acting under the authority of the City, including without limitation the City Council and the Planning Commission.

1.1.11 “City Council” means the City Council of the City and the legislative body of the City pursuant to California Government Code Section 65867.

1.1.12 “Conditions of Approval” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C.

1.1.13 “Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 3.6.2 of this Agreement. The Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee may also be referred to as the “Coral Mountain Residential Unit Fee”.

1.1.14 “CVMSHCP” means the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Program, as described in the EIR and as approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife with issuance of a Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) Permit on September 9, 2008, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with the issuance of the final permit on October 1, 2008, for the CVMSHCP.

1.1.15 “CVWD” means the Coachella Valley Water District, a public water agency, formed and operating pursuant to state law.

1.1.151.1.16 “Development Director” means the Design and Development Director for the City or designee.

1.1.161.1.17 “Developer” has the same meaning as in the preamble to this Agreement.
173
-4-

1.1.171.1.18 “Development Agreement Act” means Section 65864 et seq., of the California Government Code.

1.1.19 “Development Impact Fees” or “DIF Fees” means any and all fees imposed and authorized pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, Section 66000 et seq. of the California Government Code, and any and all City ordinances, resolutions, and policies implementing the same, including but not limited to the La Quinta Municipal Code.

1.1.181.1.20 “Discretionary Action” means an action which requires the exercise of judgment, deliberation or a decision on the part of City, including any board, commission, committee, or department or any officer or employee thereof, in the process of approving or disapproving a particular activity, as distinguished from an activity which merely requires City, including any board, commission or department or any officer or employee thereof, to determine whether there has been compliance with statutes, ordinances, regulations, or other adopted policies.

1.1.191.1.21 “Discretionary Permits” means any permits, approvals, plans, Future Tract Maps, inspections, certificates, documents, and licenses that require a Discretionary Action, including, without limitation, site development permits, grading permits, stockpile permits, and encroachment permits.

1.1.201.1.22 “Effective Date” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.3 of this Agreement.

1.1.211.1.23 “Environmental Impact Report” or “EIR” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C of this Agreement.

1.1.221.1.24 “Finance District” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.4 of this Agreement.

1.1.231.1.25 “Future Tract Maps” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C.

1.1.241.1.26 “General Plan” means the General Plan of the City.

1.1.251.1.27 “Impact Fees” means impact fees, linkage fees, exactions, assessments or fair share charges or other similar impact fees or charges imposed on and in connection with new development by City., including Development Impact Fees and Quimby Fees. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, none of the following shall constitute Impact Fees: (i) Processing Fees, (ii) impact fees, linkage fees, exactions, assessments or fair share charges or other similar fees or charges imposed by other governmental entities and which City is required to collect or assess pursuant to applicable law, including, without limitation, school district impact fees pursuant to Government Code Section 65995, fees required pursuant to the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, or (c) other City-wide fees or charges of general applicability, provided that such City-wide fees or charges are not imposed as an impact fee on new development.

1.1.261.1.28 “Insubstantial Modification” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.6(a) of this Agreement.
174
-5-

1.1.271.1.29 “Ministerial Permits and Approvals” means the permits, approvals, plans, inspections, certificates, documents, licenses, and all other actions required to be taken by City in order for Developer to implement, develop and construct the Project and the Mitigation Measures, including without limitation, building permits, foundation permits, and other similar permits and approvals which are required by the La Quinta Municipal Code and Project plans and other actions required by the Project Approvals to implement the Project and the Mitigation Measures. Ministerial Permits and Approvals shall not include any Discretionary Actions or Discretionary Permits.

1.1.281.1.30 “Mitigation Measures” means the mitigation measures described in the EIR and in the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved and adopted for the Project.

1.1.291.1.31 “New Laws” means amendments or modifications to the Applicable Rules, and all ordinances, resolutions, initiatives, regulations, rules, laws, plans, policies, and guidelines of the City and its City Council, Planning Commission, and all other City boards, commissions, departments, agencies, and committees enacted or adopted after the Effective Date.

1.1.301.1.32 “Non-Assuming Transferee” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.8.2 of this Agreement.

1.1.311.1.33 “One-Time Mitigation Fee” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 3.6.1 of this Agreement.

1.1.321.1.34 “Operative Year” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 3.6.2 of this Agreement.

1.1.331.1.35 “Parties” means collectively Developer and City. Each shall be referred to in the singular as a “Party”.

1.1.341.1.36 “Planning Area” shall mean an area designated on the Site Map as a planning area.

1.1.351.1.37 “Planning Commission” means the City Planning Commission and the planning agency of the City pursuant to California Government Code Section 65867.

1.1.361.1.38 “Processing Fees” means all processing fees and charges required by City to cover the City’s cost of processing permits and other land use entitlements and conducing the associated inspections, including, but not limited to, fees for filing land use applications, plan check fees, inspection fees, and other processing or administrative fees.

Processing Fees shall not include Impact Fees. The amount of the Processing Fees to be applied in connection with the development of the Project shall be the amount which is in effect on a Citywide basis at the time an application for the City action is made. Notwithstanding the language of this Section or any other language in this Agreement, Developer shall not be exempt from the payment of fees, if any, imposed on a City-wide basis as part of City’s program for storm water pollution abatement mandated by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 and subsequent amendments thereto, unless a waiver of these fees is provided by City in a subsequent agreement. 175
-6-

1.1.371.1.39 “Project” means development of the Site as set forth in more detail in Section 3.1.

1.1.381.1.40 “Project Approvals” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C.

1.1.391.1.41 “Public Facilities” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.4 of this Agreement.

1.1.42 “Quimby Fees” means any and all fees imposed and authorized pursuant to the Quimby Act, Section 66467 of the California Government Code, and any and all City ordinances, resolutions, and policies implementing the same, including but not limited to the La Quinta Municipal Code.

1.1.401.1.43 “Reserved Powers” means the rights and authority excepted from this Agreement’s restrictions on City’s police powers and which are instead reserved to City, its City Council, Planning Commission, and all other City boards, commissions, departments, agencies, and committees. The Reserved Powers include the powers to enact or adopt New Laws or take future Discretionary Actions after the Effective Date of this Agreement that may be in conflict with the Applicable Rules and Project Approvals, except such New Laws which would prevent, or materially impair Developer’s ability to develop the Project in accordance with the Project Approvals; provided, however, that with respect to such New Laws which would conflict with this Agreement or prevent, or materially impair Developer’s ability to develop the Project in accordance with the Project Approvals, such New Laws shall apply to the Project only if such New Laws are: (1) necessary to protect the public health and safety, and are generally applicable on a City-wide basis (except in the event of natural disasters as found by the City Council such as floods, earthquakes and similar acts of God, which shall apply even if not applicable on a Citywide basis); (2) amendments to Uniform Codes, as adopted by City, and/or the La Quinta Municipal Code, as applicable, regarding the construction, engineering and design standards for private and public improvements to be constructed on the Site; (3) required by a non-City governmental entity to be adopted by or applied by the City (or, if adoption is optional, the failure to adopt or apply such non-City law or regulation would cause the City to sustain a significant loss of funds or loss of access to significant funding or other resources), or (4) necessary to comply with state or federal laws and regulations (whether enacted previous or subsequent to the Effective Date of this Agreement).

1.1.411.1.44 “Schedule of Performance” means the schedule for the development of the Project as set forth in Exhibit “H” attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference.

1.1.421.1.45 “Short-Term Vacation Rentals Regulations” means Chapter 3.25 (or successor chapter) of the La Quinta Municipal Code that governs the application, permitting, renewal, use, operation, penalties, and other provisions relating to short-term vacation rentals in the City, in effect at the time during the Term of this Agreement, except to the extent any provision in Chapter 3.25 directly conflicts with the rights vested as set forth in Section 5 of this Agreement.

1.1.431.1.46 “Site” means approximately 386 acres of real property located south of Avenue 58, north of Avenue 60, and west of Madison Street, in the City of La Quinta, County 176
-7-
of Riverside, State of California. The Site is legally described in the Site Legal Description and depicted in the Site Map., attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, respectively.

1.1.441.1.47 “Site Development Plan” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 9.180.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.

1.1.451.1.48 “Site Legal Description” shall mean the legal description of the Site as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

1.1.461.1.49 “Site Map” means the map of the Site and immediately adjacent properties, which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference.

1.1.471.1.50 “Specific Plan” shall have the meaning as set forth in Recital C.

1.1.481.1.51 “Term” means the period of time for which the Agreement shall be effective in accordance with Section 1.2 herein.

1.1.491.1.52 “TOT” means Transient Occupancy Tax levied by the City, in accordance with Chapter 3.24 of the La Quinta Municipal Code and applicable state law, and deposited into the City’s general fund after remittance by all operators (or other entities or individuals) subject to the tax.

1.1.501.1.53 “Transferee” means individually or collectively, Developer’s successors in interest, assignees or transferees of all or any portion of the Site.

1.1.511.1.54 “Uniform Codes” means those building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, fire and other similar regulations of a City-wide scope which are based on recommendations of a multi-state professional organization and become applicable throughout the City, such as, but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Electrical Code, the Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, or the Uniform Fire Code (including those amendments to the promulgated uniform codes which reflect local modification to implement the published recommendations of the multi-state organization and which are applicable City-wide).

1.1.55 “Vesting Date” means the later of (i) the Effective Date of this Agreement, and (ii) the running of all applicable statute of limitations and referendum petition deadlines to challenge the Project Approvals with no legal challenge or petition having been filed or submitted, or if filed or submitted, successfully resolved to the satisfaction of Developer and City.

1.1.56 “Wave Basin” shall have the meaning as set forth in Section 3.1(C) of this Agreement.

1.1.521.1.57 “Zoning Ordinance” means Title 9 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.

1.2 Term.

The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for fifty (50) years thereafter, unless said term is otherwise terminated, modified, or extended by 177
-8-
circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the Parties after the satisfaction of all applicable public hearing and related procedural requirements.

1.3 Effective Date.

This Agreement shall be effective, and the obligations of the Parties hereunder shall be effective, as of __________________ (“Effective Date”), which is the date that Ordinance No. _____ takes effect.

1.4 Statement of Benefits and Consideration.

The Parties have determined that a development agreement is appropriate for the construction and operation of the Project due to the substantial benefits to be derived therefrom.

City finds and determines that the Project is in the best interests of the health, safety and general welfare of City and its residents, and that entering into this Agreement constitutes a valid, present exercise of its police power. City has undertaken the necessary proceedings, has found and determined that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, and has adopted Ordinance No._____ approving this Agreement. As a result of the development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement, City will receive substantial benefits.

In consideration of the substantial benefits, commitments, and consideration to be provided by Developer pursuant to this Agreement, and in order to strengthen the public planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, City hereby provides Developer assurance that Developer can proceed with the construction and operation of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the Applicable Rules and this Agreement. Developer would not enter into this Agreement or agree to provide the public benefits, commitments and consideration described in this Agreement if it were not for the certainty provided by this Agreement that the Project can be constructed and operated during the Term of this Agreement in accordance with the Applicable Rules and this Agreement.

1.5 City CEQA Findings.

City finds that review of the environmental impacts of this Agreement, and the Project as a whole, has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State and local guidelines adopted thereunder, and City has given consideration to such environmental review prior to its approval of this Agreement and the Project, and has undertaken all actions necessary to comply with CEQA.

1.6 Modification or Amendment of this Agreement.

Except as expressly stated to the contrary herein, this Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time, in whole or in part, only by mutual written consent of the Parties or their successors in interest, consistent with Government Code Section 65867-65868, the City’s Development Agreement Ordinance, and the following terms:
(a) Insubstantial Modifications. The Parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that minor changes are appropriate with 178
-9-
respect to the details of the Project development and the performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Project development and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement, and thus desire to provide a streamlined method of approving insubstantial modifications to this Agreement. Therefore, any minor modification to this Agreement which does not modify (i) the Term of this Agreement; (ii) permitted uses of the Site, (iii) maximum density or intensity of use, except as specifically allowed in the Specific Plan, (iv) provisions for the reservation or dedication of land, (v) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, or (vi) monetary obligations of Developer (hereinafter an “Insubstantial Modification”), and that can be processed under CEQA as exempt from CEQA, or with the preparation of an Addendum to the EIR, shall not require a public hearing prior to the parties executing a modification to this Agreement. Either Party may propose an Insubstantial Modification, consent to which shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed by the other Party. Upon the written request of Developer for a modification to this Agreement, the City Manager or designee shall determine, in the City Manager’s sole discretion but not to be unreasonably withheld: (1) whether the requested modification constitutes an “Insubstantial Modification,” as defined herein; (2) whether the requested modification is consistent with Applicable Rules (other than that portion of this Agreement sought to be modified); and (3) whether the requested modification tends to promote the goals of this Agreement. If the City Manager or designee determines that the requested modification is an “Insubstantial Modification” that is consistent with Applicable Rules and tends to promote the goals of this Agreement, the proposed modification will be approved by the City as an Insubstantial Modification, and a written modification will be executed by the Parties and attached to this Agreement. Any such Insubstantial Modification shall not be deemed an “amendment” to this Agreement under Government Code Section 65858.
(b) Substantial Amendments. Except as otherwise described in Section 1.6(a) of this Agreement, amendments to this Agreement shall be “Substantial Amendments” which require notice and a public hearing pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868. (c) Amendment Exemptions. City approval of (1) administrative adjustments to a Project Approval, as defined in Section 2.2.10 of this Agreement, in conformity with Applicable Rules and this Agreement, shall not require a modification or amendment to this Agreement and shall automatically be deemed to be incorporated into the Project and vested under this Agreement. Likewise, City approval of any minor amendments or modifications to any Exhibit to this Agreement shall not require a modification or amendment to this Agreement and shall automatically be deemed to be incorporated into this Agreement and vested hereunder. (d) Parties Required to Amend. Where a portion of Developer’s rights or obligations have been transferred, assigned, and assumed pursuant to Section 1.8 of this Agreement, the signature of the person or entity to whom such rights or obligations have been assigned shall not be required to amend this Agreement unless such amendment would materially alter the rights or obligations of such assignee/transferee hereunder. In no event shall the signature or consent of any Non-Assuming Transferee be required to amend this Agreement. 179
-10-

1.6.1 Effect of Amendment. Any amendment to this Agreement shall be operative only as to those specific portions of this Agreement expressly subject to the amendment, and all other terms and conditions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect without interruption.

1.7 Termination.

Unless terminated earlier, pursuant to the terms hereof, this Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further effect upon the expiration of the Term of this Agreement as set forth in Section 1.2. Termination of this Agreement, for any reason, shall not, by itself, affect any right or duty arising from entitlements or approvals set forth under the Project Approvals. As to any specific lot containing a residential dwelling within the Project, this Agreement shall terminate as to such lot upon the issuance by the City of a certificate of occupancy for the dwelling and the close of escrow of the initial sale of that dwelling.

1.8 Assignment of Interests, Rights and Obligations.

Developer may transfer or assign all or any portion of its interests, rights or obligations under the Project Approvals to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in the Site, or any portion thereof, including, without limitation, purchasers or ground lessee(s) of lots, parcels or facilities, subject to the following:

1.8.1 Assignment and Assumption Agreements.
(a) In connection with the transfer or assignment by Developer of all or any portion of the Site (other than a transfer or assignment by Developer to an affiliated party, a “Mortgagee”, or a “Non-Assuming Transferee” (as defined in Section 1.8.2 below)), Developer and the transferee shall enter into a written agreement (an “Assignment and Assumption Agreement”) regarding the respective interests, rights and obligations of Developer and the transferee in and under the Project Approvals. Such Assignment and Assumption Agreement may:
(i) release Developer from obligations under the Project Approvals (including this Agreement) pertaining to that portion of the Site being transferred, as described in the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, provided that the transferee expressly assumes such obligations; (ii) transfer to the transferee vested rights to improve that portion of the Site being transferred; and (iii) address any other matter deemed by Developer to be necessary or appropriate in connection with the transfer or assignment.
(b) Except as provided in Section 1.8.2 of this Agreement, Developer shall obtain City’s prior written consent to any Assignment and Assumption Agreement, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. City may refuse to give its consent only if, in light of the proposed transferee’s reputation and financial resources, such transferee would not in City’s reasonable opinion be able to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by such transferee. Such determination shall be made by the City Manager in consultation with the City Attorney and is appealable by Developer directly to the City Council. (c) An Assignment and Assumption Agreement shall be binding on Developer, City and the transferee provided (i) Developer is not then in default under this 180
-11-
Agreement, (ii) Developer has provided notice to City of such transfer, and City has approved the transfer, and (iii) the transferee executes and delivers to City a written agreement in which (a) the name and address of the transferee is set forth and (b) the transferee expressly and unconditionally assumes each and every obligation of Developer under this Agreement with respect to the Site, or portion thereof, being transferred (to the extent Developer has not retained a continuing obligation), (c) Developer no longer has any legal or equitable interest in the Site or the portion thereof sold or transferred, as applicable, and (d) City has satisfied itself of transferee’s ability to assume those Developer obligations under this Agreement being assigned. Upon recordation of any Assignment and Assumption Agreement in the Official Records of Riverside County, Developer shall automatically be released from those obligations assumed by the transferee therein.
(d) Developer shall be free from any and all liabilities accruing on or after the date of any assignment or transfer with respect to those obligations assumed by a transferee pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption Agreement. No breach or default hereunder by any person succeeding to any portion of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement shall be attributed to Developer, nor may Developer’s rights hereunder be canceled or diminished in any way by any breach or default by any such person following Developer’s release of obligations under the Project Approvals pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption Agreement assigning Developer’s obligations to that successor.
(e) Provided any assignment is consistent with the Development Agreement Act and Development Agreement Ordinance, the City may assign or transfer any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement with the approval of the Developer, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

1.8.2 Non-Assuming Transferees.

Except as otherwise required by Developer, in Developer’s sole discretion, the burdens, obligations and duties of Developer under this Agreement shall terminate with respect to: (i) any single residential parcel conveyed to a purchaser, or (ii) any property that has been established as one or more separate legal parcels and conveyed for open space, park, or similar nonresidential/noncommercial uses. Neither an Assignment and Assumption Agreement nor City’s consent shall be required in connection with subsections (i) and (ii) above as long as Developer continues to assume obligations with respect to the portion that is transferred, or can otherwise demonstrate bonds and/or other financial security will satisfy these obligations, and in such case the transferee in such a transaction and its successors (“Non-Assuming Transferees”) shall be deemed to have no obligations under this Agreement (except for obligations which extend to the individual units, single residential parcels, and any other parcels or property subject to the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R) provisions which implement this Agreement) but shall continue to benefit from the vested rights provided by this Agreement until this Agreement is terminated with respect to that parcel under Section 1.7 of this Agreement.

Nothing in this section shall exempt any property transferred to a Non-Assuming Transferee from payment of applicable fees and assessments or compliance with applicable conditions of approval. 181
-12-

1.8.3 Transfers to Affiliated Parties.

Developer, or any “Affiliated Party” of Developer, may at any time and without City’s prior written consent, transfer all or any portion of its rights and obligations under this Agreement to any “Affiliated Party” of such Transferor and, in connection with the transfer of any such obligations, be released from such obligations; provided, however, that Developer and the Affiliated Party duly execute (in recordable form) an Assignment and Assumption Agreement in a form approved by the City Manager and City Attorney, and Developer deliver said agreement to the City to ensure, among other terms and conditions, the City has the current address and notice information for any Affiliated Party that assumes all or any portion of Developer’s rights and obligations under this Agreement. As used herein, the term “Affiliated Party” shall mean any entity that owns fifty-one percent (51%) or a controlling interest in Developer. The City shall have the right to request and review any and all articles of incorporation, bylaws, operating agreements, and other related governing documents of any Affiliated Party to confirm compliance with the requirements of this Section 1.8.3.

2. AGREEMENTS AND ASSURANCES

2.1 Agreement and Assurance on the Part of Developer.

In consideration for City entering into this Agreement, and as an inducement for City to obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement, and in order to effectuate the premises, purposes and intentions set forth in the Recitals of this Agreement, Developer hereby agrees that the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including the Project Approvals incorporated herein, shall govern development and operation of the Site for the Term of this Agreement.

2.2 Agreement and Assurances on the Part of the City.

In consideration for Developer entering into this Agreement, and as an inducement for Developer to obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement, and in order to effectuate the premises, purposes and intentions set forth in this Agreement, City hereby agrees as follows:

2.2.1 Vested Entitlement to Develop.

Developer has the vested right to develop the Project subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals and the Reserved Powers. It is the intent of City and Developer that the vesting of development rights of Developer shall include the permitted land uses, densities, and intensities of use of the Site, timing or phasing of development, zoning, provisions for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the location and size of public improvements, as well as those other terms and conditions of development of the Project as set forth in this Agreement and the other Project Approvals. Developer’s vested rights under this Agreement shall also include, without limitation, the right to remodel, renovate, rehabilitate, rebuild or replace all improvements within the Project or any portion thereof throughout the applicable Term for any reason, including, without limitation, in the event of damage, destruction or obsolescence of the existing development or the Project or any portion 182
-13-
thereof, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals and the Reserved Powers. Such vesting shall expire upon the earlier of the following occurrences: (a) termination of this Agreement; (b) an uncured material default by Developer of this Agreement; or (c) as to a particular phase, parcel, or lot comprising a portion of the Site, the earlier of the final approved City inspection of the completed development on such phase, parcel, or lot, or the issuance by the City of a certificate of occupancy for such phase, parcel, or lot. Except for the expiration set forth in clause (a) of the preceding sentence, the expiration of the vesting right set forth in the preceding sentence shall not terminate the obligations of Developer under this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the Project shall remain subject to the following, to the same extent they would apply without this Agreement:
(i) all Applicable Rules;
(ii) all New Laws applied to Developer through the City’s Reserved Powers; (iii) all subsequent development approvals and the conditions of approval associated therewith, including but not limited to any further site development permits, tract maps, and building permits; and (iv) the payment of all applicable fees in effect on the Effective Date in the categories and in the amounts as required at the time such fees are due and payable, which may be at the time of issuance of building permits, or otherwise as specified by applicable law, as existing at the time such fees are due and payable.

2.2.2 Changes in Applicable Rules.
(A) Nonapplication of Changes in Applicable Rules.

Any change in, or addition to, the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, any change in the General Plan or Specific Plan, zoning or building regulation, adopted or becoming effective after the Effective Date, including, without limitation, any such change by means of ordinance, City Charter amendment, initiative, referendum, resolution, motion, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by the City, City Council, Planning Commission or any other board, commission, department or agency of the City, or any officer or employee thereof, or by the electorate, as the case may be, which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Site and/or to the Project and which would conflict in any way with the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals, or this Agreement, or in any way reduce the development rights or assurances provided by this Agreement, shall not be applied to the Site or the Project unless such changes represent an exercise of City’s Reserved Powers, or are otherwise agreed to in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer may, in its sole discretion, consent to the application to the Project of any change in the Applicable Rules. (B) Changes in Uniform Codes.

Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, development of the Project shall be subject to changes which may occur from time to time in the Uniform Codes, as such Codes are adopted by the City of La Quinta.
183
-14-
(C) Changes Mandated by Federal or State Law.

This Agreement shall not preclude the application to the Project of changes in, or additions to, the Applicable Rules, including rules, regulations, ordinances and official policies, to the extent that such changes or additions are mandated to be applied to developments such as this Project by state or federal regulations, pursuant to the Reserved Powers. In the event state or federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, such provisions shall be modified or suspended only to the extent necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations.

2.2.3 Subsequent Development Review.

Nothing set forth herein shall impair or interfere with the right of City to require the processing of building permits as required by law pursuant to the applicable provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code and the provisions of Uniform Codes.

2.2.4 Effective Development Standards.

City agrees that it is bound to permit the uses, intensities of use, and densities of development on the Site which are permitted by this Agreement and the Project Approvals, insofar as this Agreement and the Project Approvals so provide or as otherwise set forth in the Applicable Rules. City hereby agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold or unreasonably condition any approvals and/or permits which must be issued by City in order for the Project to proceed, provided that Developer reasonably and satisfactorily complies with all City-wide standard procedures for processing applications for such approvals and/or permits. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to require the City to issue a permit or approval that is inconsistent with the Applicable Rules.

2.2.5 Moratoria or Interim Control Ordinances.

In the event an ordinance, resolution, policy, or other measure is enacted, whether by action of City, by initiative, or otherwise, which relates directly or indirectly to the Project or to the rate, amount, timing, sequencing, or phasing of the development or construction of the Project on all or any part of the Site, or the use of the Site (or any portion thereof) as authorized by this Agreement, or the implementation of the Mitigation Measures adopted in connection with approval of the Project, City agrees that such ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Site, the Project or this Agreement, unless such changes are lawfully adopted pursuant to the Reserved Powers and do not conflict with any provisions of this Agreement.

2.2.6 Reserved.

2.2.7 Impact Fees.

Notwithstanding any provisions in this Agreement regarding the type, amounts, and rates of Impact Fees to the contrary, the Impact Fees imposed by City with respect to the Project shall be only those Impact Fees in full force and effect as of the Effective Date, in the amounts/rate in effect at the time such fees are paid.
184
-15-

2.2.8 Timeframes and Staffing for Processing and Review.

City agrees that expeditious processing of Ministerial Permits and Approvals and Discretionary Actions, if any, and any other approvals or actions required for the Project are critical to the implementation of the Project. In recognition of the importance of timely processing and review of Ministerial Permits and Approvals and Discretionary Actions, City agrees to reasonably cooperate with Developer to establish time frames for processing and reviewing such Ministerial Permits and Approvals and Discretionary Actions and to comply with any timeframes established in the Project Approvals. City further agrees to timely process and approve all Ministerial Permits and Approvals, so long as they are consistent with the terms of this Agreement, the Applicable Rules, and the Project Approvals, and agrees to exercise its discretion concerning Discretionary Actions in manner that is consistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

2.2.9 Extension of Tentative Maps.

In accordance with Government Code Section 66452.6(a)(1), all tentative subdivision maps and tentative parcel maps, whether vesting or not, which may be approved by the City in connection with the development of the Project, shall be extended for the greater period of (a) twenty (20) years or (b) such maximum total time as is permitted in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Sections 66410 et seq.) or Applicable Rules.

2.2.10 Project Approval Adjustments.

To the extent permitted by state and federal law, any Project Approval may, from time to time, be amended or modified in the following manner:
(a) Administrative Adjustments. Upon the written request of Developer for a modification to a Project Approval (other than this Agreement), the Development Director or designee, in consultation with the City Engineer, shall determine: (i) whether the requested modification is minor when considered in light of the Project as a whole, and (ii) whether the requested modification is consistent with Applicable Rules (other than that portion of the Applicable Rules sought to be amended). If the Development Director or designee, in consultation with the City Engineer, determines, in his/her reasonable judgment, that the proposed modification is both minor and consistent with Applicable Rules (other than that portion of a Project Approval sought to be amended), the modification shall be determined to be an “Administrative Adjustment” and the Development Director or designee, in consultation with the City Engineer, may, except to the extent otherwise required by state or federal law, approve the Administrative Adjustment without notice and public hearing. For the purpose of this Section 2.2.10, and by way of example only, site plan review, architectural review, lotting pattern changes, changes in pedestrian paths, tentative subdivision map amendments (including lotting patterns and street alignments) which are minor and will not have a substantial or material impact on traffic circulation as described for each such area in the Specific Plan, substitutions of comparable landscaping for any landscaping shown on a landscape plan, minor variations in the location of lots or homesites that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, final locations of floating park sites, floating public facility sites, and minor variations in the location or installation of utilities and other infrastructure 185
-16-
connections or facilities that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, may be treated as Administrative Adjustments by the Development Director and the City Engineer.
(b) Non-Administrative Amendments. Any request of Developer for a modification to a Project Approval (other than this Agreement), which is not approved as an Administrative Adjustment as set forth above, shall be subject to review, consideration, and action pursuant to Applicable Rules.

3. DEVELOPER’S OBLIGATIONS

3.1 Development of the Project; Planned Development.

Developer shall construct the Project on the Site only in accordance with the Project Approvals. As depicted in the Project Approvals, as the same may be updated or amended from time to time consistent with the terms hereof, the Project shall consist of a mixed-use resort development with the following components:
(A) Up to 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial development with associated parking, circulation and landscaping improvements on approximately 7.7 acres in “Planning Area I”;
(B) Up to 496 single-family residential dwellings and related recreational and open space amenities and infrastructure improvements on approximately 232.3 acres in “Planning Area II”;
(C) Tourist commercial and resort residential uses on approximately 120.8 acres in “Planning Area III”, consisting of boutique resort hotel with up to 150 keys, 57,000 square feet of tourist commercial resort amenities in a walkable village, up to 104 resort residential dwellings, an approximately 16-acre artificial “Wave Basin,,” a private clubhouse and related amenities adjacent to the Wave Basin, as well as other open space, recreational amenities, and related facilities and infrastructure improvements;
(D) An additional 23.6 acres of natural open space with low-impact active and passive recreational amenities in “Planning Area IV”; and (E) Allowance of short-term vacation rentals pursuant to Article 5 of this Agreement.

Developer shall develop the Project in accordance with the Schedule of Performance, as that schedule may be modified pursuant to mutual written agreement of the parties or extended pursuant to Section 8.2 of this Agreement. If any item of performance is not completed in accordance with the Schedule of Performance, then following the notice and cure periods set forth in Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of this Agreement, the City shall have the right to terminate the Agreement as to the specific portion of the Project that has not been completed in accordance with the Schedule of Performance, subject to the procedures described in Section 6.3 of this Agreement.

Except as set forth in this Section 3.1, Developer is not obligated to affirmatively act to develop all or any portion of the Site, pay any sums of money, dedicate any land, indemnify any party (save 186
-17-
and except Developer’s obligation to indemnify the City for all costs associated with any legal challenge to this Agreement or the Project Approvals), or to otherwise meet or perform any obligation with respect to the Site, except and only as a condition to the development of the Project.

When Developer develops any portion of the Site, Developer shall comply with the terms of this Agreement, the Applicable Rules, and the Project Approvals governing development of the Site or any portion thereof.

3.2 Compliance with Government Code Section 66473.7
Developer shall comply with the provisions of Government Code section 66473.7 with respect to any Tract Maps prepared for the Project.

3.3 Project Design Features Referenced in EIR.

As a condition of development, Developer shall incorporate into the Project all project design features identified in the EIR and included as part of the “project” evaluated in the EIR and its technical studies, as specifically identified in Exhibit “C” attached hereto. Developer’s compliance with this provision is a contractual commitment that is enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

3.4 Mitigation Monitoring Program.

As a condition of development, the Developer shall also comply with the mitigation monitoring program set forth in Exhibit “D” attached hereto (the “Mitigation Monitoring Program”), and Developer’s compliance with this provision is a contractual commitment that is enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

3.5 Conditions of Approval.

As a condition of development, the Developer shall also comply with the conditions of approval attached hereto as Exhibit “E,” and Developer’s compliance with this provision is a contractual commitment that is enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

Developer acknowledges that additional conditions of approval beyond those set forth in Exhibit “E” may be applicable to the Project if and as associated with future Project approvals, to the extent such additional conditions of approval are consistent with the terms of this Agreement.

3.5.1 CVMSHCP Compliance.
(A) Notwithstanding any provisions in this Agreement to the contrary, the following terms and conditions in furtherance of CVMSHCP compliance shall apply: The Project shall comply with all provisions of the CVMSHCP Guidelines for all areas adjacent to Coral Mountain or any other Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) open space as shown on Figure 13 in the Specific Plan;
(B) The development of the Project and use of the Site (and each applicable Planning Area on the Site) shall fully comply with all CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, even though no portion of the Project or the Site is in or adjacent to any CVMSHCP conservation area, as set forth in more detail in Section 2.5 of the Specific Plan. Without limiting 187
-18-
the obligation to comply with the CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, the following terms and conditions apply to the development of the Project and use of the Site: (i) There shall be no planting of invasive, non-native plant species in and adjacent to CVMSHCP conservation areas as shown on Figure 13 of the Specific Plan; and (ii) The Project shall follow the recommended and prohibited species as noted in Tables 4-112 and 4-113 of the CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, as set forth in Table 3 of the Specific Plan (“Plant Material Palette”). (C) To further the CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines requirement for the incorporation of barriers to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, and dumping in a CVMSHCP conservation area, there shall be a protective barrier that complies with the requirements for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep (“PBS”) barriers along the western boundary, covering all areas adjacent to Coral Mountain and other BLM open space property, as set forth in more detail in Section 2.5 of the Specific Plan. The protective sheep barrier shall be at least eight (8) feet high, with the final design and location subject to City approval in consultation with CDFW. All recreational infrastructure and activities, including but not limited to the planned on-site portion of the regional trail connection which Desert Recreation District intends to construct in the vicinity of the Project, shall be located on the development-side and not on the BLM side of the protective sheep barrier.

3.5.2 CC&Rs Incorporating CVMSHCP Compliance.

The CVMSHCP compliance requirements set forth in Section 3.5.1 of this Agreement shall be incorporated into the CC&Rs for the Project and the Site, which shall be recorded against the Site as provided for in Section 3.8 of this Agreement, and shall be enforceable in perpetuity for the life of the Project and use of the Site.

3.6 Payment of Fees.

During the Term of this Agreement, Developer shall timely pay all Processing Fees and Impact Fees with respect to the Project as specified in this Agreement.

3.6.1 Developer’s Payments of One-Time Mitigation Fees.

As a further public benefit of the Project, including to help pay for the City’s public safety and public infrastructure costs, Developer shall pay or cause to be paid to the City, for each of the up to 496 single-family residential units in Planning Area II of the Project, the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per unit, with such payment due upon the first close of escrow for each such unit (the “One-Time Mitigation Fee”).

3.6.2 Annual Mitigation Fee; Potential Cessation of Annual Fee.

To ensure that the Project generates sufficient TOT and sales tax revenues to the City to pay all public safety and other public service costs of the City resulting from the Project, during the term of this Agreement, on each July 1st following the Effective Date (“Annual Mitigation Payment Date”), the Developer or the Developer’s successor shall pay to the City an annual mitigation fee (“Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee”) covering the annual period of the prior July 1 through the June 30 occurring immediately preceding the Annual Mitigation Payment 188
-19-
Date (the “Operative Year”) (provided, however, the first Operative Year shall commence on the Effective Date of this Agreement and end on the next occurring June 30).

The Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee shall be comprised of the following:

The collective sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) for each of the 600 allowed residential units (also referred to as the “Coral Mountain Residential Unit Fee”) in the Project that has received a certificate of occupancy, and that has been sold to a third party purchaser as evidenced by a recorded grant deed for such unit, prior to the applicable Annual Mitigation Payment Date, regardless of when or in which Operative Year the unit was sold.

Notwithstanding the two paragraphs above, if the City has received TOT for rentals from the Project (which includes TOT from both hotel rooms from the boutique resort hotel in Planning Area III and any and all residential units) in excess of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) but less than One Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,700,000.00) (“Level 1 TOT Goal”) for two consecutive Operative Years during the Term of this Agreement, the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee for the next Operative Year (and each Operative Year thereafter) shall be reduced from One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) per residential in the Project to Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) per residential unit in the Project. Furthermore, and notwithstanding the three paragraphs above, if the City has received TOT for rentals from the Project (which includes TOT from both hotel rooms from the boutique resort hotel in Planning Area III and any and all residential units) in excess of One Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,700,000.00) (“Level 2 TOT Goal”) for two consecutive Operative Years during the Term of this Agreement, then the Developer’s (or the Developer’s successor’s) obligation to pay the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee for any Operative Years thereafter shall terminate and shall no longer be of any further force and effect.

Notwithstanding the obligation (or termination of the obligation) by Developer (or Developer’s successors) to pay either the One-Time Mitigation Fee or the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee, all rentals of residential units and hotel units shall remain subject to the City’s TOT requirements.

The CC&Rs for the residential units in the Project shall provide for the assessment and collection of the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee and shall provide for and adequately ensure the collection and payment thereof. As to the collection and payment of the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee, the CC&Rs shall provide the City with enforcement rights against both the Developer or its successor and the individual homeowners.

The City shall be provided with the same rights of collection as to the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee that the Developer or its successor shall have for the collection of other fees and assessments, but the Developer or its successor shall have the obligation for collection and payment of the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee. In any action by the City to collect the Coral Mountain Resort Annual Mitigation Fee, the City shall, in addition to the fee, be entitled to collect all of its costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees in enforcing its rights. The CC&Rs shall be subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Section 3.8 of this Agreement. 189
-20-

3.6.3 Annual Rate Adjustment.

The Coral Mountain Resort Unit Fee, the Level 1 TOT Goal, and the Level 2 TOT Goal shall be adjusted annually, on each July 1
st during the term of this Agreement, commencing on the first Annual Mitigation Payment Date, by an increase of two percent (2%) per year. The CC&Rs as described in the last paragraph of Section 3.6.2 above shall include the annual rate adjustment as provided in this Section 3.6.3 of this Agreement.

3.6.4 Other Fees and Charges.

Except as expressly limited in this Agreement, nothing set forth in this Agreement is intended to or shall be construed to limit or restrict the City’s authority to impose its existing, or any new or increased, Citywide fees, charges, levies, or assessments for the development of the Site, or to impose or increase, subject to the required procedure, any taxes applicable to the Site including but not limited to transient occupancy taxes. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer reserves the right to challenge the application of any fee, charge, levy, assessment, or tax imposed on the Project or Site by the City if Developer contends it violates the terms of this Agreement or the other Project Approvals. Developer shall timely pay all applicable fees, charges, levies, assessments, and special and general taxes validly imposed in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the State of California, including without limitation school impact fees in accordance with Government Code §§ 65995, et seq.

3.7 Dedications and Improvements; Improvement Security.

Developer shall complete and offer dedications to the City or other applicable public agency of those public improvements required in connection with the Project, as specified in the Conditions of Approval. In connection with the recordation of any final subdivision map for the Project, Developer shall, through the execution of a subdivision improvement agreement with the City, provide to the City, in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, improvement security as provided in the City Code to secure the faithful performance of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement to construct the on-site and off-site improvements identified on that map.

The terms, amounts and provisions for release of the improvement security shall be as set forth in the City Code.

3.8 Declaration(s) of Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions.

Developer shall prepare, draft (in a form to be approved by the City Manager and City Attorney), execute, and cause to be recorded in the official records of Riverside County one or more Declaration(s) of Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions (“CC&Rs”) to govern the authorized and required land uses and operations at the Site, and the general maintenance, repair, landscaping, public and private utility usage and ownership (including streets, alleys, sidewalks, water, sewer, gas, electricity, telecommunications, and related infrastructure), and any other terms and conditions as may be necessary or appropriate to maintain the use and operation of the Site, and all common areas, consistent with the terms and conditions of the Project. Developer may have CC&Rs prepared, drafted, executed, and recorded for each of the separate phases (Planning Area I, 190
-21-
Planning Area II, Planning Area III, and Planning Area IV) of the Project, but the CC&Rs shall include at a minimum the terms and conditions governing the payment of fees as required in Section 6.3 of this Agreement, the terms and conditions allowing for the use of short-term vacation rentals as provided in Article 5 of this Agreement for the applicable Planning Areas of the Project, and general maintenance, repair, landscaping, public and private utility usage and ownership (including streets, alleys, sidewalks, water, sewer, gas, electricity, telecommunications, and related infrastructure. The CC&Rs shall be implemented and enforced by a duly established homeowners association (“HOA”) pursuant to state law for a common interest development. The City shall be deemed a third party beneficiary to the CC&Rs with the right, but not the obligation, to enforce any terms and conditions included for the benefit of the City as provided for in this Agreement or the CC&Rs (“City Required Provisions”). The City Required Provisions, once approved by the City Manager and City Attorney, may not be substantively amended or modified without the prior written consent of the City Manager and City Attorney, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed.

3.9 Indemnification.

Developer shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City and City’s officers, officials, members, employees, volunteers, agents, and representatives (any of the foregoing shall be known individually as “Indemnitee” and collectively as “Indemnitees”), and each of them, jointly and severally, against and from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, damages, costs, expenses, losses and liabilities, at law or in equity, of every kind or nature whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees, arising out of or directly relating to construction and development-related activities on the Site by Developer, but excluding those resulting from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of any Indemnitee, but including, without limitation, injury to or death of any person or persons and damage to or destruction of any property, threatened, brought or instituted (“Claims”). In the event of any action, litigation, or other adversarial proceeding in any way involving the Claims specified in this section, City agrees, at no cost to City, to cooperate with Developer. Developer shall have the obligation to provide the defense of City in the action, litigation, or other adversarial proceeding, either by providing for legal counsel or, at City’s option, timely paying the legal costs incurred by City in the defense of litigation, even though negligence or gross negligence of Developer or its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons acting on its behalf has not been established at the time that the defense is provided. In addition, Developer shall be obligated to promptly pay any final judgment or portion thereof rendered against the Indemnitee or Indemnitees.

In the event of any court action or proceeding challenging the validity of this Agreement or the Project Approvals, Developer shall indemnify, hold harmless, pay all costs and provide defense for City in said action or proceeding with counsel chosen by Developer and reasonably approved by City. City shall, at no cost to City, cooperate with Developer in any such defense as Developer may reasonably request. In the event Developer fails or refuses to provide such defense of any challenge to this Agreement or the Project Approvals, or any component thereof, City shall have the right not to defend such challenge, and to resolve such challenge in any manner it chooses in its sole discretion, including terminating this Agreement. In the event of such termination, Developer, upon written request of City, shall immediately execute a termination document or other document reasonably required by a reputable title company to remove this Agreement as a cloud on title.
191
-22-

3.10 Permanent Closure of Wave Basin.

In the event that the Wave Basin is permanently closed during the term of this Development Agreement, Developer shall be required to dismantle and remove the wave making machinery and shall either (i) continue to operate the basin itself as a recreational lake amenity, or (ii) seek City approval for an alternative use, including obtaining a Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Permit, or other applicable entitlement, if required.

3.11 Turf Reduction Program.

3.11.1 Developer Payments.

As a further public benefit of the Project, and to provide additional funds to supplement CVWD’s turf reduction program (currently $3/square foot) specifically for residents of the City, Developer shall make the following payments to the City or its designee: (i) Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) within thirty (30) days following the Vesting Date; (ii) an additional Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) on or before the one-year anniversary of the Vesting Date; and (iii) an additional Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) on or before the two-year anniversary of the Vesting Date. The City shall have the right to receive and the discretion to administer the funds received pursuant to this Section 3.11.1 to further the purposes of the turf reduction program for the benefit of the City’s residents. In the event that CVWD discontinues the turf reduction program in place as of the Vesting Date of this Agreement, the City shall still have the right to receive the payments described in this Section 3.11.1 and 3.11.2 below for purposes consistent with turf reduction goal and objectives, as the City deems appropriate in its discretion.

3.11.2 Transfer Fee on Initial Sales.

In addition to the Developer payments described in Section 3.11.1, Developer shall establish and impose a transfer fee on the initial sale of each home and estate lot in the Project equal to one-quarter of one percent (0.25%) of the total sales price, which shall be paid to the City or its designee within thirty (30) days following the close of escrow on the initial sale to a home or lot buyer, for the purpose of funding the turf reduction program as described in Section 3.11.1 above. Developer shall create and impose this transfer fee for initial sales of each home and estate lot in the CC&Rs recorded pursuant to Section 3.8 of this Agreement.

3.12 Coral Mountain Surf Foundation Obligations.

Developer shall establish and impose a transfer fee on all re-sales of homes within the Project equal to one-quarter of one percent (0.25%) of the total sales price, which shall be distributed by a Coral Mountain nonprofit entity that shall be established by Developer or caused to be established by Developer (with the nonprofit entity, and its charitable purpose(s), approved by the City) to support health and social programs in the City of La Quinta and the eastern Coachella Valley in Riverside County. Such programs may include but are not limited to the funding of bona fide non-profit and community service organizations with missions that address health and social justice issues, such as clean water initiatives in rural underserved communities, community food security, and homeless and impoverished services. Developer shall remit to the City or its designee all funds collected and received as a transfer fee pursuant to this Section 3.12 192
-23-
within thirty (30) days following the close of escrow on the re-sale of a home within the project.

Developer shall create and impose this transfer fee for re-sales of homes in the CC&Rs recorded pursuant to Section 3.8 of this Agreement.

3.13 Coral Mountain Park; Park Component of DIF Fees and Quimby Fees.

As a further public benefit of the Project, the parties agree that, to the maximum extent permitted by law, the park component of the City’s Development Impact Fees and Quimby Fees required to be paid by Developer for the Project’s resort residential units in Planning Area III (specifically Planning Area III-D and III-E) and the estate residential lots in Planning Area II shall be dedicated to providing funding for Desert Recreation District’s planned Coral Mountain Park improvements. Developer agrees to, and hereby does and shall, waive any right to receive the funds as described in this Section 3.13, or to the repayment of said funds or any credit for said funds as described in this Section 3.13, attributable to the park component of the City’s Development Impact Fees and Quimby Fees that otherwise apply due to the Project’s construction and/or dedication of public park improvements.

3.14 Charitable Use of Wave Basin.

Developer shall allocate a minimum of one thousand (1,000) person hours of time in the Wave Basin annually for charitable and public interest purposes, including but not limited to an annual surf camp run by the City or its designee, or donations for fundraising auction prizes for qualified charities.

3.15 Special Event Restriction.

In addition to the mitigation measures applicable to any proposed special events at the Wave Basin, there shall be a prohibition against any special events for the first two years following the commencement of Wave Basin use and operations. Following the expiration of the two-year period, Developer shall cooperate with City in monitoring and providing traffic data, noise date, and other information reasonably requested by City in connection with any temporary use permit requested by Developer for any special events proposed for the Wave Basin.

4. CITY’S OBLIGATIONS

4.1 Scope of Subsequent Review/Confirmation of Compliance Process.

Nothing set forth herein shall impair or interfere with the right of City to require the processing of building permits as required by law pursuant to the applicable provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code and the provisions of City’s Fire Codes and ordinances, Health and Safety Codes and ordinances, and Building, Electrical, Mechanical, and similar building codes.

Prior to each request for a building permit, Developer shall provide City with a Compliance Certificate (“Certificate”), in substantially the same form as that attached hereto as Exhibit “F”, which shall describe how all applicable Conditions of Approval have been fully complied with.

The Certificate shall be distributed to the relevant City departments in order to check the representations made by Developer on the Certificate.
193
-24-

4.2 Project Approvals Independent.

All approvals required for the Project which may be or have been granted, and all land use entitlements or approvals generally which have been issued or will be issued by City with respect to the Project, constitute independent actions and approvals by City. If any provision of this Agreement or the application of any provision of this Agreement to a particular situation is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, or if this Agreement terminates for any reason, then such invalidity, unenforceability or termination of this Agreement or any part hereof shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of any such Project approvals or other land use approvals and entitlements. In such cases, such approvals and entitlements will remain in effect pursuant to their own terms, provisions, and the Conditions of Approval. It is understood by the Parties that pursuant to existing law, if this Agreement terminates or is held invalid or unenforceable as described above, such approvals and entitlements shall not remain valid for the term of this Agreement, but shall remain valid for the term of such approvals and entitlements.

4.3 City Cooperation.

The parties agree that Developer must be able to proceed rapidly with the development of the Property and, accordingly, that expedited City review of tentative maps, final maps, modifications to Project Approvals, building permits and construction inspections, is essential to the successful completion of the Project. Accordingly, to the extent that the applications and submittals are in conformity with the Project Approvals, Applicable Rules, and this Agreement, and adequate funding exists therefor, City agrees to provide adequate City resources to diligently accept, review, and take action on all subsequent applications and submittals made to City by Developer in furtherance of the Project. Similarly, to the extent that adequate funding exists therefor, City shall provide adequate City resources to promptly review and approve improvement plans, conduct construction inspections, and accept completed public facilities. Developer agrees to reimburse the City for all costs associated with providing expedited services, above and beyond those costs covered by the City’s Processing Fees. In the event City does not have adequate resources, City shall authorize the use of “contract labor” for inspection and plan review purposes, which shall be reimbursed by Developer, pursuant to a mutually agreeable reimbursement agreement that also specifies any fee credit to Developer to avoid Developer paying more than once for the same plan check, inspection, or other City service. City shall consult with Developer concerning the selection of the most knowledgeable, efficient and available “contract labor” for purposes of providing inspection and plan review duties for the City and the Project; provided, however, that City shall retain the right to select any “contract labor” it reasonably chooses.

4.4 Final Map and Improvement Plan Procedures.

The City shall complete improvement plan and final map review in accordance with Applicable Rules, in good faith, and in an expeditious manner. If reasonably necessary, City shall have the right to hire outside inspectors and/or consultants, the cost of which shall be reimbursed by Developer. For those improvement plans or other implementing approvals under the jurisdiction of another agency, if any, the City agrees to reasonably cooperate in providing any necessary information or approval in a timely manner, so long as the plans do not substantially conflict with the Project Approvals.
194
-25-

4.5 Building Permits.

City shall complete its review of house plans and issue building permits in a good faith and expeditious manner. Recordation of a final map shall not be required prior to the issuance of building permits for model homes.

4.6 Environmental Review and Mitigation.

The Parties understand and agree that the EIR for the Project considers the whole of the Project, including each of the Project Approvals and all Discretionary Actions and Ministerial Permits and Project Approvals necessary for development of the Project. Accordingly, the City agrees to use the certified EIR for this Project as a program and project EIR to comply with CEQA’s environmental review requirements for all future Discretionary Actions to the maximum extent allowed by law, including applying the CEQA exemptions specified in Government Code § 65457 and CEQA Guidelines 15182 and 15183, which establish an exemption from further environmental review for the processing of tentative tract maps after certification of a Specific Plan EIR for residential development, if the proposed tentative tract maps are consistent with the Specific Plan and meet other applicable requirements. If an exemption or reliance on the EIR as a program and project EIR is not legally permissible, in the City’s sole judgment, then City and Developer agree to meet and confer as to the most appropriate form of environmental review of such approval, provided, however, that City shall retain the authority to determine the most appropriate form of such environmental review.

4.7 Inspections.

Any building or fire inspection request received by City from Developer will be processed as expeditiously as possible, pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and (as applicable) provisions in the La Quinta Municipal Code and City’s standard inspection procedures.

4.8 Review for Compliance.

City shall review Developer’s compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement at least once during every twelve (12) month period following the Effective Date. In accordance with the City’s procedures and standards for such review. During such period review by the City, Developer, upon written request from the City, shall be required to demonstrate, and hereby agrees to furnish, evidence of good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

The failure of the City to conduct or complete the annual review as provided herein shall not impact the validity of this Agreement or the obligations of the Parties to perform pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If, at the conclusion of the annual review provided for herein, Developer has been found in compliance with this Agreement, City shall, at Developer’s request, issue a certificate of compliance to Developer stating that (i) This Agreement remains in full force and effect, and (ii) Developer is in compliance with this Agreement. The certificate of compliance shall be in a form approved by the Parties and, for the City, the City Manager and the City Attorney, and may be in recordable form. Developer may, at its sole cost and expense, record any such certificate of compliance if obtained. If, at the conclusion of the annual review provided for herein, 195
-26-
Developer has been found not to be in compliance with this Agreement, City shall, at is sole and absolute discretion, exercise any and all rights available under this Agreement and otherwise available at law or in equity.

5. SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS/TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES.

5.1 Short Term Vacation Rentals as a Permitted Use.

This Agreement and the Specific Plan for the Project provide that short-term vacation rentals are a permitted use in all Planning Areas within the Project and on the Site that allow residential uses, and the rights to such permitted use are hereby vested pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Except to the extent expressly provided otherwise in this Agreement, the City shall not impose on or apply to the Project (whether by action of the Council, or other legislative body, or by initiative, referendum, or other measure) any ordinance, resolution, standard, directive, condition, or other measure that is in conflict with this provision or that would materially interfere with right to apply for and, with City staff approval, operate short-term vacation rentals in all residential units within the Project. Such short-term vacation rentals shall be subject to the terms of the Short-Term Vacation Rental Regulations set forth in Chapter 3.25 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (or successor provisions) of the La Quinta Municipal Code, including but not limited to violations and penalties for such violations for failing to comply with the City’s ShortTerm Vacation Rental Regulations, as long as Developer has the ability to apply for and obtain a permit and subsequently use and operate short-term vacation rentals in all residential units within the Project that are not otherwise subject to a violation or penalty preventing issuance of such permit and allowing such use for failing to comply with the City’s Short-Term Vacation Rental Regulations... (For reference only, a copy of Chapter 3.25 of the La Quinta Municipal Code in effect as of the Effective Date is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit “G”. In the event Chapter

3.25 is repealed in its entirely, the provisions of Chapter 3.25 as attached to this Agreement shall govern the permitting, operation, and renewal of short-term vacation rental permits in the Project and on the Site.) In order to ensure the timely collection and reporting of the applicable transient occupancy taxes, and compliance with the applicable operational requirements and conditions set forth in Chapter 3.25, the Developer or its successor or assignee shall be the “authorized agent or representative” (as that term is defined in Chapter 3.25 or, if the definition is removed during the Term of this Agreement, as defined as of the Effective Date of this Agreement) for all short-term vacation rentals and short-term vacation rental permits within the Project, including but not limited to applying for and managing all short-term vacation rental permits, making all reservations and payments, and ensuring compliance with all other requirements of Chapter 3.25, and shall do so exclusively through a central rental operator pursuant to Section 5.3.1 of this Agreement, which shall be confirmed at the issuance and renewal of each short-term vacation rental permit; provided, however, that the “owner” (as that term is defined in Chapter 3.25 or, if the definition is removed during the Term of this Agreement, as defined as of the Effective Date of this Agreement) shall remain ultimately obligated as the holder of the short-term vacation rental permit for any and all remedial actions necessary for compliance with Chapter 3.25 and this Agreement, including but not limited to the payment of any fines or recorded liens or any other violations for noncompliance; and, provided further, that the “owner” shall have a process available, through an independent arbitrator or neutral decision-maker designated by the homeowner’s association (“HOA”) of which the short-term vacation rental unit owner is a member, to petition for a change of that owner’s “authorized agent or representative” because the owner demonstrates, with a 196
-27-
preponderance of evidence, that the “authorized agent or representative,” designated by the Developer or its successor or assignee, has failed to perform its duty to ensure compliance with all other requirements of Chapter 3.25 for that owner’s short-term vacation rental unit. The CC&Rs as described in Section 3.8 of this Agreement shall include the terms and conditions, and detailed specifics for process and decision, whenever an owner may petition the HOA for a change in that owner’s “authorized agent or representative” as required by this Section 5.1; the City Manager and City Attorney shall review and approve, in their reasonable discretion and not to be unreasonably delayed or denied, said terms and conditions in the CC&Rs that would apply if an owner were to petition the HOA for a change in that owner’s “authorized agent or representative” as required by this Section 5.1.

Pursuant to the expressed exceptions referenced in the preceding paragraph, the following provisions shall apply to the use and operation of the Property (and each One of the Properties) within the Project:
(A) The operational requirements and restrictions in Section 3.25.070 (or successor section) of the La Quinta Municipal Code shall apply to all short-term vacation rental units, including the limits on the number of daytime and overnight guests in each unit to ensure that occupancy levels are appropriate for the number of bedrooms and compatible with singlefamily residential communities; (B) All short-term vacation rental units in the Project shall be subject to, at a minimum, the noise restrictions in Sections 9.100.210 and 11.08.040 (or successor sections) of the La Quinta Municipal Code, in addition to any noise compliance requirements set forth in Chapter 3.25 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.

5.2 Transient Occupancy Tax.

All short-term vacation rentals in the Project shall be subject to, and comply with, the City’s Transient Occupancy Ordinance as set forth in Chapter 3.24 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. To the extent the City revises its Transient Occupancy Ordinance after the Effective Date of this Agreement, all short-term vacation rentals in the Project will be subject to those revised or amended provisions unless doing so would violate the vested rights set forth in Section 5.1 of this Agreement. It is the intent of this provision to require, at all times, that all short-term vacation rentals in the Project comply with the City’s requirements and procedures for collecting, reporting and paying the applicable transient occupancy tax, including as those requirements and procedures may be modified during the term of this Agreement.

5.3 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions.

All CC&Rs recorded pursuant to Section 3.8 of this Agreement on any property within the Project where residential uses are allowed shall expressly authorize short-term vacation rentals for all residential units. All such CC&Rs shall state the operational requirements and standard conditions applicable to short-term rentals in that tract or planning area of the Project. 197
-28-

5.3.1 Rental Management Program.

Developer shall be responsible for ensuring that for the Term of this Agreement, one or more contract(s) shall be in effect at all times which provide opportunities to the owners of the resort residential units to have the ability to make their units available for short-term rentals permitted by this Agreement and the CC&Rs. The contract or contracts may, but are not required to be, with an on-site rental management agent. Developer may assign this obligation to its successors in accordance with this Agreement.

6. DEFAULT; REMEDIES; DISPUTE RESOLUTION.

6.1 Notice of Default.

In the event of failure by either Party substantially to perform any material term or provision of this Agreement, the non-defaulting Party shall have those rights and remedies provided herein, provided that such non-defaulting Party has first provided to the defaulting Party a written notice of default in the manner required by Section 8.1 hereof identifying with specificity the nature of the alleged default and the manner in which said default may satisfactorily be cured.

6.2 Cure of Default.

Upon the receipt of the notice of default, the alleged defaulting Party shall promptly commence to cure, correct, or remedy the identified default at the earliest reasonable time after receipt of the notice of default and shall complete the cure, correction or remedy of such default not later than thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice of default, or, for such defaults that cannot reasonably be cured, corrected or remedied within thirty (30) days, such Party shall commence to cure, correct, or remedy such default within such thirty (30) day period, shall and continuously and diligently prosecute such cure, correction or remedy to completion.

6.3 City Remedies.

In the event of an uncured default by Developer of the terms of this Agreement, City, at its option, may institute legal action in law or in equity to cure, correct, or remedy such default, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, or enforce the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, that in no event shall City be entitled to consequential damages for any Developer default. For purposes of this Agreement the term “consequential damages” shall include, but not be limited to, potential loss of anticipated tax revenues from the Project or any portion thereof. Furthermore, City, in addition to or as an alternative to exercising the remedies set forth in this Section 6.3, in the event of a material uncured default by Developer, may give notice of its intent to terminate or modify this Agreement pursuant to City’s Development Agreement Ordinance and/or the Development Agreement Act, in which event the matter shall be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council in the manner set forth in the City’s Development Agreement Ordinance or the Development Agreement Act.

6.4 Developer’s Exclusive Remedies.

The parties acknowledge that the City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under, or with respect to, this Agreement or any of the matters referred 198
-29-
to herein including, but not limited to, the Project Approvals, the Applicable Rules or any future amendments or enactments thereto, or the Project, except as provided in this Section. Accordingly, Developer covenants on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, not to sue the City for damages or monetary relief (except for attorneys’ fees as provided for by Section 8.22) for any breach of this Agreement by City or arising out of or connected with any dispute, controversy, or issue between Developer and City regarding this Agreement or any of the matters referred to herein including but not limited to the application, interpretation, or effect of this Agreement, the Project Approvals, the Applicable Rules or any future amendments or enactments thereto, or the Project, or any land use permits or approvals sought in connection with the development of the Project or any component thereof, or use of a parcel or any portion thereof, the parties agreeing that declaratory and injunctive relief, mandate, and specific performance shall be Developer’s sole and exclusive judicial remedies.

7. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION; CERTAIN RIGHTS OF CURE

7.1 Encumbrances on the Project Site.

This Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer from encumbering the Site or any portion thereof or any improvements thereon with any mortgage, deed of trust, sale and leaseback arrangement, or any other form of conveyance in which the Site, or a portion thereof or interest therein, is pledged as security, and contracted for in good faith and fair value (a “Mortgage”) securing financing with respect to the construction, development, use or operation of the Project.

7.2 Mortgage Protection.

This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the lien of any Mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, and any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or interest in or with respect to the Site or any portion thereof by a holder of a beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or any successor or assignee to said holder (a “Mortgagee”) [whether pursuant to foreclosure, trustee’s sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, lease termination or otherwise] shall be subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

7.3 Mortgagee Not Obligated.

No Mortgagee will have any obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform the obligations of the Developer or other affirmative covenants of Developer hereunder, or to guarantee such performance, except that (i) the Mortgagee shall have no right to develop or operate the Site, and (ii) to the extent that any covenant to be performed by the Developer is a condition to the performance of a covenant by the City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to the City’s performance hereunder.

7.4 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure.

With respect to any mortgage or deed of trust granted by Developer, whenever City may deliver any notice or demand to Developer with respect to any breach or default by Developer in completion of construction of the Project or any component of the Project, City shall at the same time deliver a copy of such notice or demand to each holder of record of any mortgage or deed of 199
-30-
trust which has previously requested such notice in writing. Each such holder shall (insofar as the rights granted by City are concerned) have the right, at its option, within sixty (60) days after the receipt of the notice, to cure or remedy or commence to cure or remedy and thereafter to pursue with due diligence the cure or remedy of any such default and to add the cost thereof to the mortgage debt and the lien of its mortgage. It is understood that a holder shall be deemed to have satisfied the sixty (60) day time limit set forth above for commencing to cure or remedy a Developer default which requires title and/or possession of the Site (or portion thereof) if and to the extent any such holder has within such sixty (60) day period commenced proceedings to obtain title and/or possession and thereafter the holder diligently pursues such proceedings to completion and cures or remedies the default.

8. MISCELLANEOUS

8.1 Notices, Demands and Communications Between the Parties.

Any approval, disapproval, demand, document or other notice (“Notice”) which either Party may desire to give to the other Party under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be sufficiently given if (i) delivered by hand, (ii) delivered by reputable same-day or overnight messenger service that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the principal offices of City and Developer at the addresses specified below, or at any other address as that Party may later designate by Notice.

To City: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Attn: Community Development Director
With a copy to: Rutan & Tucker, LLP
611 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1400
Costa Mesa, California 92626
Attn: William H. Ihrke
To Developer: CM Wave Development LLC
_______________________
_______________________
Attn:___________________
With copies to:

Stowell, Zeilenga, Ruth, Vaughn & Treiger,
LLP
4590 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd., Suite 100
Westlake Village, CA 91362
Attn: James D. Vaughn, Esq
200
-31-
Any written notice, demand or communication shall be deemed received immediately if personally delivered or delivered by delivery service, and shall be deemed received on the third day from the date it is postmarked if delivered by registered or certified mail.

8.2 Force Majeure.

In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by either Party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default, and all performance and other dates specified in this Agreement shall be extended, where delays or Defaults are due to causes beyond the control or without the fault of the Party claiming an extension of time to perform, which may include the following (each, a “Force Majeure”): war; insurrection; acts of terrorism; strikes; lockouts; riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; casualties; acts of God; acts of the public enemy; epidemics; quarantine restrictions; freight embargoes; lack of transportation; governmental restrictions or priority imposed or mandated by other governmental entities; unusually severe weather; inability to secure necessary labor, materials or tools; delays of any contractor, subcontractor or supplier; acts or omissions of the other Party; or acts or failures to act of any public or governmental agency or entity (other than the acts or failures to act of City which shall not excuse performance by City), or any other causes beyond the control or without the fault of the party claiming an extension of time to perform. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, an extension of time for any such cause shall only be for the period of the enforced delay and shall commence to run from the time of the commencement of the cause, if notice by the Party claiming such extension is sent to the other Party within thirty (30) days of the commencement of the cause, or shall commence to run from the date such notice is subsequently given. Times of performance under this Agreement may also be extended in writing by the mutual agreement of City and Developer.

Notwithstanding the paragraph above, Developer is not entitled pursuant to this Section

8.2 to an extension of time to perform because of past, present, or future difficulty in obtaining suitable construction or permanent financing for the development of the Site, or because of economic or market conditions.

8.3 Binding Effect.

This Agreement, and all of the terms and conditions hereof, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties, any subsequent owner of all or any portion of the Project or the Site, and their respective assigns, heirs or successors in interest, whether or not any reference to this Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired an interest in the Project or the Site.

8.4 Independent Entity.

The Parties acknowledge that, in entering into and performing this Agreement, each of Developer and City is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of the other in any respect.
201
-32-

8.5 Agreement Not to Benefit Third Parties.

This Agreement is made for the sole benefit of the Parties, and no other person shall be deemed to have any privity of contract under this Agreement nor any right to rely on this Agreement to any extent for any purpose whatsoever, nor have any right of action of any kind on this Agreement nor be deemed to be a third party beneficiary under this Agreement.

8.6 Covenants.

The provisions of this Agreement shall constitute mutual covenants which shall run with the land comprising the Site for the benefit thereof, and for the benefit of City, and the burdens and benefits hereof shall bind and inure to the benefit of each of the Parties hereto and all successors in interest to the Parties hereto for the term of this Agreement.

8.7 Non-liability of City Officers and Employees.

No official, officer, employee, agent or representative of City, acting in his/her official capacity, shall be personally liable to Developer, or any successor or assign, for any loss, costs, damage, claim, liability, or judgment, arising out of or connection to this Agreement, or for any act or omission on the part of City.

8.8 Covenant Against Discrimination.

Developer and City covenant and agree, for themselves and their respective successors and assigns, that there shall be no discrimination against, or segregation of, any person or group or persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin or ancestry, or any other impermissible classification, in the performance of this Agreement. Developer shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq.).

8.9 No Waiver.

No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought and referring expressly to this Section. No delay or omission by either Party in exercising any right or power accruing upon non-compliance or failure to perform by the other Party under any of the provisions of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof, except as expressly provided herein. No waiver by either Party of any of the covenants or conditions to be performed by the other Party shall be construed or deemed a waiver of any succeeding breach or nonperformance of the same or other covenants and conditions hereof.

8.10 Severability.

If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect, to the extent that the invalidity or unenforceability does not impair the application of this Agreement as intended by the Parties. 202
-33-

8.11 Cooperation in Carrying Out Agreement.

Each Party shall take such actions and execute and deliver to the other all such further instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out this Agreement in order to provide and secure to the other Party the full and complete enjoyment of its rights and privileges hereunder.

8.12 Estoppel Certificate.

Either Party may, at any time, deliver written notice to any other Party requesting such Party to certify in writing that, to the best knowledge of the certifying Party, (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, (iii) the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, describing the nature and amount of any such defaults, and (iv) any other reasonable information requested. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within ten (10) days following approval of the proposed estoppel certificate by the City Attorney, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Development Director are each authorized to sign and deliver an estoppel certificate on behalf of City. City acknowledges that a certificate hereunder may be relied upon by transferees and Mortgagees.

8.13 Construction.

The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either Party by reason of the authorship of this Agreement or any other rule of construction that might otherwise apply. As used in this Agreement, and as the context may require, the singular includes the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender includes the feminine and vice versa.

8.14 Recordation.

This Agreement shall be recorded with the County Recorder of Riverside County at Developer’s cost, if any, within the period required by Government Code Section 65868.5.

Amendments approved by the Parties, and any cancellation or termination of this Agreement, shall be similarly recorded.

8.15 Captions and References.

The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Agreement are solely for convenience of reference, and shall be disregarded in the construction and interpretation of this Agreement. Reference herein to a paragraph or exhibit are the paragraphs, subparagraphs and exhibits of this Agreement.

8.16 Time.

Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement and of each and every term and condition hereof as to which time is an element.
203
-34-

8.17 Recitals & Exhibits Incorporated; Entire Agreement.

The Recitals to this Agreement and all of the exhibits and attachments to this Agreement are, by this reference, incorporated into this Agreement and made a part hereof. This Agreement, including all Exhibits attached hereto, constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and this Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussions and agreements between the Parties, and no parole evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof.

8.18 Exhibits.

Exhibits “A”-“H” to which reference is made in this Agreement are deemed incorporated herein in their entirety, whether or not such exhibits are attached hereto in full. Said exhibits are identified as follows:

A Legal Description of Site
B Site Map
C Project Design Features
D. Mitigation Monitoring Program
E. Conditions of Approval
F. Compliance Certificate
G. Chapter 3.25 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (as of Effective Date) H. Schedule of Performance

8.19 Counterpart Signature Pages.

For convenience the Parties may execute and acknowledge this agreement in counterparts and when the separate signature pages are attached hereto, shall constitute one and the same complete Agreement.

8.20 Authority to Execute; Representations and Warranties.

Developer warrants and represents that (i) it is duly organized and existing, (ii) it is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement, (iii) by so executing this Agreement, Developer is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement, and (iv) Developer’s entering into and performance of its obligations set forth in this Agreement do not violate any provision of any other agreement to which Developer is bound, and (v) except for the threat of litigation from individuals and organizations who made comments on the EIR or otherwise exhausted their administrative remedies prior to the close of the public hearings on the Project Approvals, there is no existing or threatened litigation or legal proceeding of which Developer is aware which could prevent Developer from entering into or performing its covenants and obligations set forth in this 204
-35-
Agreement. City warrants and represents that the person or persons executing this Agreement on its behalf have been duly authorized to execute this Agreement and bind the City to all covenants and obligations set forth in this Agreement.

8.21 City Approvals and Actions.

Whenever a reference is made in this Agreement to an action or approval to be undertaken by the City Manager, his or her authorized designee is authorized to act on behalf of the City unless specifically provided otherwise or the law otherwise requires.

8.22 Governing Law; Litigation Matters.

The internal laws of the State of California shall govern the interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement without regard to conflicts of law principles. Any action at law or in equity brought by either Party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing, or interpreting the validity of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be brought in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Riverside, or such other appropriate court in said county, and the Parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for the filing, removal, or change of venue to any other court. Service of process on City shall be made in accordance with California law.

Service of process on Developer shall be made in any manner permitted by California law and shall be effective whether served inside or outside of California. In the event of any action between the Parties hereto seeking enforcement of any of the terms of this Agreement or otherwise arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing Party in such litigation shall be awarded, in addition to such relief to which such Party is entitled, its reasonable attorney’s fees, expert witness fees, and litigation costs and expenses.

8.23 No Brokers.

Each of the City and the Developer represents to the other party that it has not engaged the services of any finder or broker and that it is not liable for any real estate commissions, broker’s fees, or finder’s fees which may accrue by means of this Agreement, and agrees to hold harmless the other party from such commissions or fees as are alleged to be due from the party making such representations.
(signatures on next page)
205
-36-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Developer and City have executed this Agreement as of the Reference Date.
“DEVELOPER”

CM WAVE DEVELOPMENT, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
By:

Its:
“CITY”
CITY OF LA QUINTA, a California municipal
corporation
By: ___________________________
Name: Jon McMillen
Title: City Manager
ATTEST:

Monika Radeva
City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM

RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
William H. Ihrke
City Attorney
206
EXHIBIT “A”
EXHIBIT “A”

LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SITE
(Attached)
[to be inserted]
207
EXHIBIT “B”
EXHIBIT “B”

SITE MAP
(Attached)
[to be inserted]
208
EXHIBIT “C”
EXHIBIT “C”

PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
(Attached)
209

DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
Exhibit C
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 1 March 2022
DRAFT Project Design Features
Air Quality
The project incorporates the following design features and attributes for promoting energy efficiency and sustainability, which shall be enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement.

The following PDFs were accounted for in CalEEMod to reduce emissions associated with each applicable subcategory:
• Pedestrian connections shall be provided to surrounding areas consistent with the City’s General Plan. Providing a pedestrian access network to link areas of the project site encourages people to walk instead of drive. The project would provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site. The project would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. • Having different types of land uses near one another can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non-auto modes of transport. For example, when residential areas are in the same neighborhood as retail and office buildings, a resident does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her trip needs. A description of diverse uses for urban and suburban areas is provided below
• The project will include improved design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity. Improved street network characteristics within a neighborhood include street accessibility, usually measured in terms of average block size, proportion of fourway intersections, or number of intersections per square mile. Design is also measured in terms of sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, pedestrian crossings, presence of street trees, and a host of other physical variables that differentiate pedestrian-oriented environments from auto-oriented environments. • Commute Trip Reduction Program is a multi-strategy program that encompasses a combination of individual measures. It is presented as a means of preventing doublecounting of reductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a maximum level of reductions that should be permitted for a combined set of strategies within a voluntary program.
• Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules reduces the number of commute trips and therefore VMT traveled by employees. Alternative work schedules could take the form of staggered starting times, flexible schedules, or compressed work weeks.
210
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 2 March 2022
• This project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually service employees’ commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program administration, if not more. The driver usually receives personal use of the van, often for a mileage fee. Scheduling is within the employer’s purview, and rider charges are normally set on the basis of vehicle and operating cost. • The project will design building shells and building components, such as windows; roof systems:
• electrical and lighting systems: and heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems to meet 2019 Title 24 Standards which results in 30% less energy for non-residential buildings and 53% less energy for residential use due to lighting upgrades. • The project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445, which prohibits the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in new development.
• Using electricity generated from photovoltaic (PV) systems displaces electricity demand which would ordinarily be supplied by the local utility. Since zero GHG emissions are associated with electricity generation from PV systems, the GHG emissions reductions from this PDF are equivalent to the emissions that would have been produced had electricity been supplied by the local utility. A minimum of 15% of the project’s electricity demand will be generated on-site.
• In order to reduce the amount of waste disposed at landfills, the project would be required to implement a 65% waste diversion as required by AB 939.

The following PDFs are part of the project, but no numeric credit has been taken for their implementation to assure a conservative analysis:
• Increasing the vehicle occupancy by ride sharing will result in fewer cars driving the same trip, and thus a decrease in VMT. The project will include a ride-sharing program as well as a permanent transportation management association membership and funding requirement. The project will promote ride-sharing programs through a multi-faceted approach such as:
• Designating a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride sharing vehicles • Designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride-sharing vehicles
• Providing a web site or message board for coordinating rides • The project will implement marketing strategies to reduce commute trips. Information • sharing and marketing are important components to successful commute trip reduction strategies. Implementing commute trip reduction strategies without a complementary marketing strategy will result in lower VMT reductions. Marketing strategies may include:
211
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 3 March 2022
• New employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options • Event promotions
• Publications
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances.
• Installation of water-efficient plumbing fixtures.
• Installation of tankless water heater systems.
• Installation of light-emitting diode (LED) technology within homes. • Use of recycled water for common area landscape irrigation. • Use of drought-tolerant plants in landscape design.
• Installation of water-efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls. • Lighting sources contribute to GHG emissions indirectly, via the production of the electricity that powers these lights. Public street and area lighting include: streetlights, pedestrian pathway lights, area lighting for parks and parking lots, and outdoor lighting around public buildings. Lighting design should consider the amount of light required for the area intended to be lit. Lumens are the measure of the amount of light perceived by the human eye. Different light fixtures have different efficacies or the amount of lumens produced per watt of power supplied. This is different than efficiency, and it is important that lighting improvements are based on maintaining the appropriate lumens per area when applying this measure. Installing more efficacious lamps will use less electricity while producing the same amount of light, and therefore reduces the associated indirect GHG emissions.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The project incorporates the following design features and attributes for promoting energy efficiency and sustainability, which shall be enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement. The following PDFs were accounted for in CalEEMod to reduce emissions associated with each applicable subcategory:
• Pedestrian connections shall be provided to surrounding areas consistent with the City’s General Plan. Providing a pedestrian access network to link areas of the project site encourages people to walk instead of drive. The project would provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site. The project would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. • Having different types of land uses near one another can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non-auto modes of transport. For example, when residential areas are in the same neighborhood as retail 212
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 4 March 2022
and office buildings, a resident does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her trip needs. A description of diverse uses for urban and suburban areas is provided below
• The project will include improved design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity. Improved street network characteristics within a neighborhood include street accessibility, usually measured in terms of average block size, proportion of fourway intersections, or number of intersections per square mile. Design is also measured in terms of sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, pedestrian crossings, presence of street trees, and a host of other physical variables that differentiate pedestrian-oriented environments from auto-oriented environments. • Voluntary Commute Trip Reduction Program – A multi-strategy program that encompasses a combination of individual measures. It is presented as a means of preventing double-counting of reductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a maximum level of reductions that should be permitted for a combined set of strategies within a voluntary program. • Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules reduces the number of commute trips and therefore VMT traveled by employees. Alternative work schedules could take the form of staggered starting times, flexible schedules, or compressed work weeks.
• This project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually service employees’ commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program administration, if not more. The driver usually receives personal use of the van, often for a mileage fee. Scheduling is within the employer’s purview, and rider charges are normally set on the basis of vehicle and operating cost. • The project will design building shells and building components, such as windows; roof systems:
electrical and lighting systems: and heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems to meet 2019 Title 24 Standards which are expected to result in 30% less energy use for nonresidential buildings and 53% less energy use for residential use due to lighting upgrades. • The project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445, which prohibits the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in new development.
• Using electricity generated from photovoltaic (PV) systems displaces electricity demand which would ordinarily be supplied by the local utility. Since zero GHG emissions are associated with electricity generation from PV systems, the GHG emissions reductions from this PDF are equivalent to the emissions that would have been produced had 213
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 5 March 2022
electricity been supplied by the local utility. A minimum of 15% of the project’s electricity demand will be generated on-site.
• In order to reduce the amount of waste disposed at landfills, the project would be required to implement a 65% waste diversion as required by AB 939.

The following PDFs are part of the project, but no numeric credit has been taken for their implementation to provide a conservative analysis:
• Increasing the vehicle occupancy by ride sharing will result in fewer cars driving the same trip, and thus a decrease in VMT. The project will include a ride-sharing program as well as a permanent transportation management association membership and funding requirement. The project will promote ride-sharing programs through a multi-faceted approach such as:
• Designating a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride sharing vehicles • Designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride-sharing vehicles
• Providing a web site or message board for coordinating rides • The project will implement marketing strategies to reduce commute trips. Information sharing and marketing are important components to successful commute trip reduction strategies. Implementing commute trip reduction strategies without a complementary marketing strategy will result in lower VMT reductions. Marketing strategies may include:
• New employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options • Event promotions
• Publications
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances.
• Installation of water-efficient plumbing fixtures.
• Installation of tankless water heater systems.
• Installation of light-emitting diode (LED) technology within homes. • Use of recycled water for common area landscape irrigation. • Use of drought-tolerant plants in landscape design.
• Installation of water-efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls. • Lighting sources contribute to GHG emissions indirectly, via the production of the electricity that powers these lights. Public street and area lighting includes: streetlights, pedestrian pathway lights, area lighting for parks and parking lots, and outdoor lighting around public buildings. Lighting design should consider the amount of light required for the area intended to be lit. Lumens are the measure of the amount of light perceived by the human eye. Different light fixtures have different efficacies or the amount of lumens produced per watt of power supplied. This is different than efficiency, and it is important 214
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 6 March 2022
that lighting improvements are based on maintaining the appropriate lumens per area when applying this measure. Installing more efficacious lamps will use less electricity while producing the same amount of light, and therefore reduces the associated indirect GHG emissions.

Energy Resources
See PDFs listed under Greenhouse Gas Emissions, above, as they are applicable to energy consumption.

Energy-saving and sustainable design features, as well as operational programs would be incorporated. Because these features/attributes are integral to the project, and/or are regulatory requirements, they are not considered to be mitigation measures. The project will require submittal to the appropriate agencies discussed in this section for review and approval of on-site design for circulation, building standards and utility installation. The following PDFs are part of the project; however, per the GHG Report, no numeric credit has been taken for their implementation in order to produce a conservative analysis:
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances
• Installation of water-efficient plumbing fixtures
• Installation of tankless water heaters
• Installation of light-emitting diode (LED) technology within homes • Use of recycled water (non-potable) for common area landscape irrigation • Use of drought-tolerant plants in landscape design
• Installation of water-efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls • Installation of photovoltaic (PV) systems
Noise
Six-Foot Perimeter Wall to Reduce Arterial Roadway Noise A six-foot perimeter wall will be developed along the northern and eastern property boundaries, adjacent to the proposed Low Density Residential Planning Area (PA II). The six-foot perimeter walls will be located adjacent to PA II in order to protect the proposed onsite residential uses from off-site traffic noise by implementing improvements that diminish noise levels. Perimeter walls will be developed along the southern and western property boundaries as a design requirement of the City. The Noise Study determined that the barriers shall provide a weight of at least four pounds per square foot of face area with no decorative cutouts or line-of-sight openings between shielded areas and the roadways. The barrier must present a solid face from top to bottom. Unnecessary openings or decorative cutouts shall not be made. All gaps (except 215
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 7 March 2022
for weep holes) should be filled with grout or caulking. Because this requirement was assumed in the Noise Study analysis, and to assure effective mitigation of noise from the project, Mitigation Measure NOI-5 is provided in Section 4.11, Noise, in the Draft EIR to assure the proper construction of perimeter walls. This project Development Agreement will ensure that the project design features and mitigation will be enforceable by the City.

Public Services
The proposed project will be required to comply with existing regulations and standards (identified in Section 4.12, Public Services, of the Draft EIR) to ensure that the project’s potential impacts associated with public facilities and services related to fire and police emergency and non-emergency services, as well as impacts to schools, do not result in significant impacts.

Typical for residential communities in the City of La Quinta, the project and residential areas shall be gated, thus increasing community security and minimizing potential crimes, and consistent with standard operations of resort communities, the proposed Hotel and Resort Amenities will incorporate private security services to maximize security of the overall project. Additionally, lighting features throughout the project will enhance security and maximize visibility within the project including streets, intersections, and other crosswalks.

Transportation
Project Design Features (PDF) are incorporated that encourage the use of alternative transportation measures including pedestrian and bicycle travel. The project will include design elements such as sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, pedestrian crossings, presence of street trees, and other physical variables that differentiate pedestrian‐oriented environments from auto-oriented environments. The project will provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site. The project would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. The project includes sidewalk connections, particularly to / from the retail areas interacting with residential and resort uses on-site.

Project Design Features for VMT Reduction
Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies were evaluated for the purpose of reducing VMT impacts determined to be potentially significant. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, (CAPCOA) 2010 provides guidance for evaluating the potential reduction in VMT expected for individual measures.
216
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 8 March 2022
The project setting best reflects what CAPCOA refers to as a suburban place type because it is characterized by dispersed, low-density, single-use automobile dependent land use patterns. The maximum reduction expected when combining multiple mitigation strategies for the suburban place type is 10 percent and requires a project to contain a diverse land use mix, workforce housing, and project‐specific transit, according to CAPCOA.

The project incorporates design features and attributes promoting trip reduction. Because these features/attributes are integral to the project, and/or are regulatory requirements, they are not considered to be mitigation measures. These features are considered after the VMT data is extracted from the traffic model.

Project VMT is reduced by the following project design features/attributes, which are enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement, and are anticipated to collectively reduce project home-based VMT by approximately 6%. • The placement of different types of land uses near one another can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non‐ auto modes of transport. For example, when residential areas are in the same neighborhood as commercial and resort land uses, a resident does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her recreational and retail needs.

The project’s mixed‐use environment could provide for a potential reduction in project residential VMT of 3% according to CAPCOA guidance. • The project includes improved design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity. Recognized improved street network characteristics within the project include sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, pedestrian crossings, presence of street trees, and a host of other physical variables that differentiate pedestrian‐oriented environments from auto-oriented environments. The project provides a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site. The project minimizes barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. The project includes sidewalk connections, particularly to / from the retail areas resulting in interaction with residential and resort uses on‐site. The project’s implementation of this measure is anticipated to result in a potential reduction in project residential VMT of 2% according to CAPCOA guidance.
• The project will implement marketing strategies to optimize on‐site resort and residential uses. Information sharing and marketing are important components to successful trip reduction strategies. Marketing strategies may include:
o Resident member benefits that include use of the resort amenities 217
EXHIBIT C – DRAFT PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
Coral Mountain Resort Exhibit C 9 March 2022
o Event promotions
o Publications
The project’s implementation of this measure could provide for a potential reduction in project residential VMT of 1% according to CAPCOA guidance.

Travel demand modeling of VMT for the project based upon City of La Quinta guidelines indicates a potential impact for residential uses while also indicating the project’s non‐residential uses do not exceed VMT thresholds. Project design features considered after the modeling process reduce residential VMT from 11.64 VMT / resident to 10.94 VMT per resident, which is less than the City’s VMT residential threshold for a significant impact. The unique mixed‐use characteristics of the project, combined with walkability and connectivity design elements, optimize on‐site interaction and result in a lower VMT than standalone uses. Implementation of the previously stated project PDFs will reduce potential impacts to below the City’s established threshold for a significant VMT impact, and therefore, the residential portion of the project would have a less than significant VMT impact. This project Development Agreement will ensure that the mitigation measures and project design features identified in the Draft EIR are enforceable by the City. 218
EXHIBIT “D”
EXHIBIT “D”

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
(Attached)
[to be inserted]
219
EXHIBIT “E”
EXHIBIT “E”

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(Attached)
[to be inserted]
220
EXHIBIT “F”
EXHIBIT “F”

COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
(CM Wave Development LLC, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT)
The undersigned, CM Wave Development LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Developer”), pursuant to that certain Development Agreement dated _______________, 2022, (the “Development Agreement”), by and among Developer and the City of La Quinta, a California municipal corporation and charter city (the “City”) by its signature below hereby certifies to the City, for the City’s reliance that:

1. Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Development Agreement;

2. The undersigned is familiar with the certifications and representations set forth in this Compliance Certificate;

3. Developer has performed and complied with its obligations under the Development Agreement to be performed or complied with by it on or prior to the date hereof.

4. [CITY MAY INSERT ANY ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS UNDER THE

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUING BUILDING PERMIT].

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Compliance Certificate is executed effective the ______ day of _______________, ______, under penalty of perjury under the laws of California.

CM Wave Development LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company
By:

Its:

By:

Its:
221
EXHIBIT “G”
EXHIBIT “G”
CHAPTER 3.25 OF LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE AS OF EFFECTIVE DATE (for reference only)
(Attached)
[to be inserted]
222
EXHIBIT “H”
EXHIBIT “H”

SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
(Attached)
223
CM Wave Development, LLC Performance Schedule – DRAFT – 3/10/2022 Project Component: Start Completion*
Planning Area 1 (Corner Neighborhood Commercial):

Phase 1 (approx. 8,000 sq. ft.) Within 36 months of 3 years after Start Date Vesting Date**
Phase 2 (approx. 11,000 sq. ft.) By 300th Residential C-of-O 3 years after Start Date Phase 3 (approx. 41,000 sq. ft.) By 500th Residential C-of-O 3 years after Start Date Planning Area 2 (Low-density Residential):

Phase 1 (approx. 220 units) Within 3 years of Completion of 7 years after Start Date Wave Basin and Resort Village
Residential Units
Phase 2 (approx. 250 units) Within 3 years of Completion 7 years after Start Date of Phase 1
Planning Area 3 (Tourist Commercial):

Phase 1A (Wave Basin and first phase of Within 3 years of Vesting Date 5 years after Start Date hotel, resort residential, and estate lots)
Phase 1B (Remaining hotel, resort residential) Within 5 years of first C-of-O in 5 years after Start Date Planning Area 3
Planning Area 4 (Open Space): N/A N/A
*Completion defined as 70% of C-of-O’s issued, and are the outside deadlines permissible under this Agreement, subject to the terms of this Agreement.

However, if Developer provides evidence reasonably satisfactory to the City that then existing market conditions do not allow for the development on economically feasible terms and orderly absorption of such product type to the point of completion as specified above, then such period shall be extended for 3 years.
**Vesting Date is defined as the later of (i) the Effective Date of the Development Agreement, and (ii) the running of all applicable statute of limitations and referendum petition deadlines with no legal challenges or petitions having been filed or submitted, or if filed or submitted, successfully resolved to the satisfaction of Developer and City.
224
Written Public
Comment
July 5, 2022 through September 15, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
225
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 4:34 PM
To: Rick Roth; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Proposed surf park: info for City Council
Mr. Roth,
Thank you for your comments. We will include them with public comments when the Council hears the item again in September.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Rick Roth <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 4:08 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed surf park: info for City Council

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Madam Mayor, Council Members, and Staff:

I heard two speakers at your last special meeting refer to John Oliver’s HBO show covering the water issue, but I had not seen it. I recommend it, because I learned several significant and imminent issues that pertain to the proposed La Quinta development. For your convenience, I’m providing the YouTube (safe) link:

Water: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) - YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtxew5XUVbQ
You all expressed a desire to be well informed, so I’m responding.

Rick
226
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 4:33 PM
To: Kathy Weiss; Linda Evans; Danny Castro; John Pena; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; [email protected]
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Desert Sun today-The Coachella Valley is getting hotter. How can cities address heat? Ms. Weiss,
Thank you for your comments. We will include them with public comments when the Council hears the item again in September.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Kathy Weiss <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 2:29 PM
To: Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Desert Sun today-The Coachella Valley is getting hotter. How can cities address heat?

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **

Kathy D. Weiss, Owner/Director
970-309-7037 mobile
[email protected]

Crystal Springs Ranch & Saddlery
1609 County Rd. 112
Carbondale, Co. 81623
(mailing & billing address for both)
For Public record regarding water evaporation rate stats submitted in DEIR for CM Wave.

Thank you,
Kathy Weiss
https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2022/07/03/coachella-valley-getting-hotter-how-can-cities-addressheat/7611570001/?utm_source=desertsunHeadlinesfromCoachella&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=baseline&utm_term=hero&utm_content=PPAS-1082DSE-NLETTER25 227
2 With Coachella Valley summers getting hotter,
how can cities address extreme heat?
With climate change expected to push daily average high temperatures in the Coachella Valley up by 8 to 14 degrees by the end of the century, planners in some Coachella Valley cities are looking for ways to protect residents from extreme heat events.

It's part of a broader shift in local climate planning toward adaptation in addition to mitigation. While mitigation strategies aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to curb climate change, adaptation strategies make communities more resilient to the impacts of climate change.

In the desert, where highs in the triple digits are common for half of the year, that could include prioritizing shade structures and trees, and improving awareness of extreme heat. Low-income people, older adults, infants and children, outdoor workers, and those with chronic health conditions are all particularly vulnerable to extreme heat.

The number of extremely hot days per year is also projected to increase. A map released this week from the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation and Public Health Alliance of Southern California projects that census tracts in the Coachella Valley will have more than 200 days a year above 90 degrees by the middle of this century.

More:Coachella Valley cooling centers open as excessive heat hits Palm Springs’ draft Climate Action Roadmap, crafted in late 2021, notes the recent urgency of adapting to these increased temperatures and other impacts of climate change. 228
3 “One of the areas that the city has not focused attention on in the past is resiliency and climate adaptation," the document states. "With the immediate nature of many climate impacts, this must be moved to the forefront of thinking along with continued efforts to reduce greenhouse gasses that are the source of these impacts.”
Palm Springs Deputy City Manager Flinn Fagg emphasized the importance of mitigation. “The most important thing we can do (on extreme heat) is to mitigate the factors that lead to extreme heat, and that’s the reduction of greenhouse gases. And we’re making progress on that in terms of reducing our greenhouse gases and continuing to do things that will further reduce it to the state target," he said. "Looking beyond that, we’re looking at some of the more practical things we can do relative to extreme heat.”
A recent analysis of municipal planning documents from 50 large U.S. cities found that 78% of climate action plans mentioned heat as a problem, but few included strategies to address it. Just a few years ago, a 2015 study of climate adaptation plans in the U.S. found that only 4% targeted extreme heat, although the more recent study warns that this "may signal that heat is a rising priority, but change over time is difficult to assess with certainty because few studies have examined heat specifically." Some large cities, like Phoenix and Los Angeles, have hired "heat officers" to guide city responses to extreme heat. Phoenix announced its first heat officer last year, who will lead the nation's first publicly funded office of heat response and mitigation. Los Angeles just appointed its first chief heat officer in early June, who is tasked with working across multiple city agencies to create a heat action plan. "I know that not every city, especially not smaller towns, can have a chief heat officer. But having somebody playing a coordinating role, or thinking about how there could be coordination across public health and land use is imperative because the two go hand in hand," said V. Kelly Turner, lead author of the study and co-director of the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation.

While the study found that "invocation of solutions" on heat was scant, cities that did include plans for addressing heat — instead of just mentioning heat in their climate plans — often framed these solutions in two separate strategies. One is planting trees, and the other is providing education or warning systems around heat.
"Those are two separate clusters of things that cities are doing, and they're not doing them together...

Heat is this really integrated problem, but it's being siloed in terms of how it's addressed, if it's addressed at all," said Turner.

How cities can plan for extreme heat
Kristina Dahl, principal climate scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists, said that in addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, there are several recommended strategies to help residents cope with extreme heat, such as strengthening protections for outdoor workers and creating opportunities for members of other vulnerable groups to cool down.
"We need to be looking at how we can best prepare particularly vulnerable communities, like elderly adults, like people of color who disproportionately live in urban areas where there's a lack of shade 229
4 trees, or people with lower incomes who may not be able to afford running their air conditioning or may not have functioning air conditioning," Dahl said.

Improving awareness of extreme heat and providing more opportunities to col down, such as easily accessible cooling centers or distributing fans or air conditioning units to vulnerable residents, could help prevent heat-related illnesses among vulnerable populations, Dahl said.

In the Coachella Valley, where extreme heat is not a new phenomenon, cool centers — free public locations where residents can cool off in air-conditioning — have long been operated by local municipalities and Riverside County.

Cool centers serve as one important "stop gap" for protecting people from extreme heat, Turner said.

But not everyone can drop what they're doing to go to a cool center during an extreme heat event. "The problem with cooling centers is that people have lives. We talk to folks who say, 'I know it's too hot, and I know I'm feeling sick, but I need to go to work, I need to take the bus because I don't have a car,' or they just can't stop their lives and go to a cooling center," she said. "So in addition to cooling centers, we need to think about how we can bring cooling to the people who are most vulnerable and don't have the luxury to go somewhere else."
This could include having a "patchwork" of ways for people to stay cool, including providing air conditioning units or other cooling solutions for individual homes, which Turner said is particularly important in communities like the eastern Coachella Valley where many residents work outdoors and need air conditioning at home to cool their body temperatures down after work.

Due to a lack of affordable housing, many low-income residents of the eastern Coachella Valley live in mobile home parks that often lack air conditioning, and also deal with extended power outages.

How local cities are preparing
In Coachella,the city is nearing completion of the Grapefruit Urban Greening and Connectivity Project, which added shade structures and 288 trees to Grapefruit Boulevard between Leoco Lane and 9th Street. The project is intended to make the thoroughfare more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly by adding sidewalks and bicycle lanes, water fountains, benches, and the trees and shade structures to keep pedestrians and bicyclists cooler.

Coachella’s 2015 Climate Action Plan also outlined several potential strategies for reducing the heat island effect, which occurs in cities when dense concentrations of pavement and buildings absorb and retain heat. In addition to planting more shade trees, strategies in Coachella’s 2015 Climate Action Plan included using light-colored cool pavement or permeable paving, light-colored cool roofs, and rightsized parking requirements, which aim to avoid larger-than-necessary asphalt parking lots.

The city doesn't currently recommend or encourage cool roofs, according to Development Services Director Gabriel Perez, but does encourage developers to use permeable pavement, which has the added bonus of addressing stormwater issues. However, “many times developers or residents do not pursue permeable pavers due to higher construction costs, despite the benefits,” according to Perez. 230
5 Coachella also encourages shade trees in new residential and commercial developments to reduce heat island effects.

City staff encourage the use of shade trees while reviewing landscape plans for development projects, and various design guidelines encourage the use of shade trees. For example, the city's General Plan recommends that in single-family residential developments, "street trees should be planted approximately 30 to 40 feet apart – sometimes in uneven, naturalistic patterns – to provide a picturesque canopy to shade the yards and street while enhancing neighborhood character and identity." But without an ordinance in place requiring these standards, city staff can only "encourage" things like permeable pavement and shade trees by providing comments on a project, rather than mandating that a project includes them, according to Perez.

On the other side of the valley, Palm Springs is also turning to shade trees and other strategies to address extreme heat. Recently, the city has "made progress on overall shading" due to changes to the architectural review criteria for projects, according to Fagg.

Specific changes to the criteria adopted last year include requirements that "the shading for pedestrian facilities on the subject site or abutting public right(s)-of-way is adequate," and that the proposed landscape plan is consistent with the city's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, which could include drought-tolerant shade trees.
“In Palm Springs, we’ve typically used palm trees as street trees, and palm trees just don’t offer the type of shade that we really need,” Fagg said.

Within the next year, the city will consider further changes to landscaping requirements to make sure adequate shade trees are planted along sidewalks, on public stress, and on private property, “to make sure they’re adequately shaded and to add to the pedestrian comfort to make it bearable to walk and do other things, in extreme conditions,” Fagg said.

City staff and the Sustainability Commission are also looking beyond trees, due to drought conditions, to permanent shade structures. Installing solar carports over parking lots has served as a “two-headed hammer,” Fagg says, by both reducing greenhouse gas emissions and providing shade.

Other strategies the city is considering on extreme heat include an improved emergency response plan for extreme heat events and providing opportunities for residents to improve their home insulation.

Still, when cities consider extreme heat, trees are frequently the most cited strategy. The recent report analyzing city planning documents found “plans do not include a wide variety of interventions. Similar to other studies we found that one intervention — trees — was by far the most prevalent.” While some Coachella Valley cities have already begun implementing heat strategies, others are just starting to consider the path forward. Turner said many cities are still considering the best path forward.
"We're a little bit in the infancy in terms of managing heat. Cities are very much are in the experimental phase," she said. "We need to have goals. And we need to have metrics for evaluating how well we're doing on those goals. And then we need to give our decision-makers space to say, 'That didn't work, let's try something else."
231
6 Erin Rode covers the environment for the Desert Sun. Reach her at [email protected] or on Twitter at @RodeErin.

Kathy Weiss
Owner/Director
Crystal Springs Ranch & Saddlery
Carbondale, CO
Crystal Springs West,
Thermal, Ca.
(970) 309-7037
[email protected]

232
1 Tania Flores
From: Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2022 9:52 AM
To: Consulting Planner
Cc: Jon McMillen; Monika Radeva; Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Please VOTE NO to surf insanity
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Thanks!
Kathleen Fitzpatrick | Council Member
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
E: [email protected]
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com

On Jul 10, 2022, at 9:24 AM, Consulting Planner <[email protected]> wrote:

No, I don't think we did. We will get it into the record.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, July 9, 2022 10:05 AM
To: Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Please VOTE NO to surf insanity

Not sure if you rec’d this one.

Kathleen Fitzpatrick | Council Member
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
E: [email protected]
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
233
2 Begin forwarded message:

From: D B <[email protected]>
Date: July 8, 2022 at 11:02:16 PM PDT
To: Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>
Subject: Please VOTE NO to surf insanity
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Kathleen,
The Coral Mountain surf park should not have gotten 10 seconds of consideration/debate. The developers’ wasted time and expenses are not a concern of La Quinta taxpayers.

I live in Cathedral City, but all of us in the Coachella Valley are going to equally pay the price despite invisible municipal lines when the last drop of pristine water is extracted from the aquifer and wasted on over-watering golf courses, lawns, sidewalks, windy days, etc.

PLEASE be a critical-thinking public official and VOTE NO to absolute surf insanity in the desert.

Dave Burd
234
1 Tania Flores
From: Maureen Lunney <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2022 12:37 PM
To: Consulting Planner
Subject: Objections to WAVE development in La Quinta
To: Office of Consulting Planner
From: Maureen E. Lunney B.Sc., D.V.M.
12 Meadowglen Circle
Kemptville, ON, Canada
K0G 1J0
I have stayed in La Quinta in January and February over many years with a good friend who lives in The Quarry. Her property is directly impacted by the proposed WAVE park.

What makes this area so incredibly beautiful and an oasis of calm and healing would be ruined if you permit this development to proceed.

There are many scientific reasons why noise and light pollution are a significant health risk to people and animals. Some citations are attached below. The crisis in mental health disease in adolescents can be linked to nighttime light levels. Noise and light pollution are linked to increases in depression, obesity, diabetes, and cancer in the general population. These same kinds of pollution are an increased stress on endangered species such as the Peninsular Desert Big Horn Sheep which is indigenous to the area around La Quinta.

Then you must consider the drought and water crisis already affecting California. The access to and availability of fresh water is an increasing point of contention in many parts of the world.

This kind of frivolous use of a scarce natural resource is repulsive.

La Quinta is a beautiful and quiet haven for decompressing and relaxing for many people who own homes and for those of us who visit. Please keep it that way in the future.

Sincerely,
M.E. Lunney B.Sc., D.V.M.
https://winapps.umt.edu/winapps/media2/wilderness/toolboxes/documents/sound/radle_effect_ noise_wildlife.pdf
https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_url?url=https://last.hit.bme.hu/download/AOAB/Infrahang_iro dalom/SciTotalEnviron2016_557-
558p163_Review_Infrasound_HealthIssues.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WyLLYo3rM4OTywTIsYroDg&sc isig=AAGBfm1UqQZpTqn9DL9BaJigOPCUDqI1Tw&oi=scholarr
235
2 https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_url?url=https://www.researchgate.net/profile/MajidMotamedzade/publication/325653433_Study_of_the_physiological_and_mental_health_effects_c aused_by_exposure_to_lowfrequency_noise_in_a_simulated_control_room/links/5ba7565c92851ca9ed1f4a29/Study-of-thephysiological-and-mental-health-effects-caused-by-exposure-to-low-frequency-noise-in-asimulated-controlroom.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WyLLYo3rM4OTywTIsYroDg&scisig=AAGBfm16T1AcsItcJmKgJIf9zuHqDdBPw&oi=scholarr https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/outdoor-light-linked-teens-sleep-mentalhealth 236
Monday, July 11, 2022 at 09:56:09 Pacific Daylight Time

Subject: (none)
Date: Sunday, July 10, 2022 at 12:51:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: Maureen Lunney
To: [email protected]
To ConsulBng Planner:

From: Dr. Maureen Lunney
12 Meadowglen Circle
Kemptville, ON, Canada
There are also considerable quesBons about the accuracy of the developers submissions concerning the actual noise and light polluBon that will be produced. As well as the actual water use once filling, cleaning, and evaporaBon are examined.
hRps://acousBcs.asn.au/conference_proceedings/AAS2018/papers/p142.pdf hRps://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/contributors/valley-voice/2021/12/20/coachella-valley-must-endmassive-water-wasBng-surf-and-swim-projects/8928645002/ M.E. Lunney B.Sc., D.V.M.
237
1 Tania Flores
From: Kathy Weiss <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2022 3:42 PM
To: Linda Evans; Robert Radi; John Pena; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; Danny Castro; Consulting Planner; Steve Sanchez; City Clerk Mail; [email protected]; Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Expert study on Wave Park Noise for proposed Australian Wave Park. i ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** La Quinta GovernmentPlease read and submit for public record on CM Wave. https://acoustics.asn.au/conference_proceedings/AAS2018/papers/p142.pdf Thank you,
Kathy Weiss

238
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2022 7:53 AM
To: Kathy Weiss; Cheri Flores; Danny Castro
Cc: Linda Evans; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; Robert Radi; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Tania Flores Subject: Re: Kelly Slater Australia surf wave debacle
Ms. Weiss,
We will add this comment to the materials to be provided to the Council.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Kathy Weiss <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2022 9:37 PM
To: Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Cheri Flores <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>
Cc: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]> Subject: Kelly Slater Australia surf wave debacle

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** https://beachgrit.com/2022/06/council-fires-back-at-developer-of-wsls-billion-dollareco-resort-and-kelly-slater-wavepool-on-queensland-flood-plain-to-say-that-the-proposalshould-be-supported/ Please submit for Public Record regarding CM Wave Park. The government is not buying their claim.

Thank you,
Kathy Weiss
239
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 9:33 AM
To: Karen Thomas; Linda Evans; [email protected]; John Pena; Robert Radi; Steve Sanchez Cc: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Wildfires burn west of San Antonio, aquifer dips toward stage 4 water restrictions Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Ms. Thomas,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the Council when they address the project again in September.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Karen Thomas <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 9:00 AM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]> Cc: Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Cheri Flores <[email protected]> Subject: Fw: Wildfires burn west of San Antonio, aquifer dips toward stage 4 water restrictions

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Good morning Madam Mayor and Councilmembers,
I came upon this article yesterday and wanted to share this with your for your consideration when making your final decision regarding the Water Park.

Something to think about regarding aquifers. Could this happen in La Quinta?? Wildfires burn west of San Antonio, aquifer dips toward stage 4 water restrictions https://www.tpr.org/environment/2022-07-14/wildfires-burn-west-of-san-antonio-aquifer-dips-toward-stage-4-waterrestrictions Respectfully,
Karen Thomas
La Quinta resident
240
1 Tania Flores
From: Monika Radeva
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 1:22 AM
To: Consulting Planner; Tania Flores
Cc: Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva
Subject: Callimanis, Alena 2022-07-19 - Coral Mountain Comments Forwarding the comments below for the project file; although, they were submitted under the Rules of Procedure topic, Ms. Callimanis’ comments reference the Coral Mountain Resort project as well. Thank you.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Alena Callimanis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 11:12 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]> Cc: Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]> Subject: Thank you for the excellent dialogue and a final comment on Revised Procedures ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** I want to thank you so much for the opportunity for the wonderful dialogue on the draft of the Amended and Restated Rules of Procedure. I would like to propose a recommended change in case of unforeseen circumstances or in case an expert cannot be available in person and their expertise is required to answer questions from the Council. I would like to use as a model what is being implemented for the City Council, and that can leverage the same teleconference ability that the auditor used this evening to review the Financial Audit.

For example, a week before the meeting, someone would contact the City Staff or directly the Council copying the staff, to request the expert would be given the opportunity to present remotely. The reasons would be given to the Council and Staff, and the Council would vote, by simple majority, whether, based on the circumstances, the expert would be allowed to present via teleconference.

The dialogue tonight showed me the value of being in person. However, the developer stated on July 5 that they will bring back significant new information that should mitigate neighbor concerns. We may be forced to go out of the area to get an expert to review the applicant’s information. The applicant is working with so many local experts and due to conflict of interest, we may not get a local company who can work with us.

Just as you know I oppose the Wave Park, I know that the staff report will include the recommendation to approve all the measures. So if you truly believe in a level playing field, we may need to have the flexibility to use teleconferencing to present to you the opposing viewpoint.

We must get any new information from the applicant as soon as possible after August 15 or when staff gets the new information. If it is significant new information, and we don’t get the information until the Thursday before the City Council 241
2 meeting, there may not be enough time that we, as lay people, try to digest the new information and act on it. We hope you considere this request.

Respectfully,
Alena
Alena Callimanis
81469 Rustic Canyon Dr.

La Quinta, CA 92253
919 606-6164
242
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 10:30 AM
To: Kathy Weiss
Cc: Sheila Warren; [email protected]; John Pena; [email protected]; Diane Rebryna; Carolyn Winnor ([email protected]); Linda Evans; Danny Castro; Wendy Clarke ; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; Robert Radi; Steve Sanchez; [email protected]; City Clerk Mail; [email protected]; Harvey Reed; [email protected]; Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Desert Sun /23/22-Quote taken from Article on Prop 30 Ms. Weiss,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the Council when they meet in September.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Kathy Weiss <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2022 5:59 PM
Cc: Sheila Warren <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Diane Rebryna <[email protected]>; Carolyn Winnor ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>; Wendy Clarke <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; City Clerk Mail <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Harvey Reed <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Desert Sun /23/22-Quote taken from Article on Prop 30

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** This is 27.5 years away….. almost same timeline Coral Mountain (if approved) should be 20-50% done:
“Combating climate change is both a universal and a generational issue. As Jose’s doctor said, he is not alone: UNICEF predicts that by 2050, air pollution will be the leading cause of child mortality worldwide. In the United States, it’s Californian children who are at greatest risk.

This November, California must vote for Prop. 30, a transformative, lifesaving, equitable investment in a livable environment. “

Kathy D. Weiss
243
2 970-309-7037
[email protected]
Summer Residence
1609 CR 112, Carbondale, CO 81623
Winter Residence:
58617 Quarry Ranch Rd, La Quinta, CA 92253

244
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Monday, August 1, 2022 8:27 AM
To: Kathy Weiss; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Danny Castro; Steve Sanchez; City Clerk Mail; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; [email protected]
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: Re: California official's resignation signals chaos as states grapple with dwindling Colorado River | OutThere Colorado
Ms. Weiss,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the Council when the item goes back to them in September.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Kathy Weiss <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2022 12:34 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; City Clerk Mail <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: California official's resignation signals chaos as states grapple with dwindling Colorado River | OutThere Colorado

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **

Please submit under public comments for the Wave project. 




 






https://www.outtherecolorado.com/content/tncms/live/
California official's resignation signals chaos as
states grapple with dwindling Colorado River
245
246
3 Elk Creek Marina on Blue Mesa Reservoir sits empty early in June. For the second season in a row, the government has ordered the marina to be closed due potential pulls from the reservoir to that would help maintain water levels at Lake Powell.

The longest-serving member of the California State Water Resources Board has resigned his post, but not before noting the "dark and uncertain times" ahead as states, including Colorado, grapple with dramatically dwindling water supply from the Colorado River.

The resignation letter from Max Gomberg, who had served on the California State Water Resources Board since January 2012, sharply points to similar problems in the six other Colorado River Basin states that rely on the river to quench the thirst of their residents and industries.

Notably, Gomberg blamed California Gov. Gavin Newsom and his fellow board members for their reluctance to embrace what he considers to be necessary action to confront the West's water and climate crisis.

Gomberg's remarks on conservation and his state's reluctance to take action reinforce the magnitude of problems facing the seven states of the Colorado River as they try to meet a mid-August requirement to come up with a plan to conserve 2 million to 4 million acre-feet of water in the coming year.

Colorado River basin farms stunted by megadrought, as more sacrifice lies ahead That requirement was announced by Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Camille Touton in a June 14 hearing with the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Touton said if the seven states, which include California, Colorado and Arizona, did not come up with a plan, the bureau would do everything to "protect the system,” which probably means the federal government would impose its own solutions on the states.

Touton's announcement caught some by surprise, and the basin states, which otherwise had cooperated in the past in taking significant and often painful actions to conserve water, appear less inclined to play nice this time around.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Gomberg said he encountered resistance to numerous proposals, such as ways to bolster water conservation, as well as new water agency permit requirements on climate preparedness and climate requirements to "strengthen water regulation and management."
Gomberg also said California has been too slow and cautious in adopting conservation measures, failed to revamp what he deems to be an excessive two-decade time frame on groundwater regulation, and supported the "perpetuation of status quo power structures," arguing that local groundwater agencies are dominated by irrigation districts and agricultural interests, according to the Times.

He also accused Newsom's administration of failing to address inequities in the water rights system.

States mull unpleasant options as feds demand huge cuts on Colorado River “The people in charge of those agencies have the least incentive to move quickly,” Gomberg reportedly said. “They fully intend to run out the clock and fight any state attempt to come in and get into their business.”
The challenges Gomberg highlighted are playing out across the West. 247
4 On July 18, the four Upper Basin states — Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico — sent a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation with a five-point plan for addressing dwindling water levels.

At the same time, Colorado said it had already done its part to conserve and that it is now up to the Lower Basin states — Nevada, Arizona and Southern California — to come up with the water needed to preserve hydropower at both the Glen Canyon Dam, on Lake Powell, and Hoover Dam, on Lake Mead. But even the combined annual water allocation of the Lower Basin states won't be sufficient to allow them to forgo 4 million acre-feet of water.
"I think that at this point, we stand ready to hear what the Lower Basin has in mind," said Amy Ostdiek, a section chief with the Colorado Water Conservation Board.

Colorado tells Lower Basin states: Cut your water use to meet federal demand to conserve Ostdiek, who is head of the Interstate, Federal and Water Information Section, told The Gazette in early July that the Upper Basin states already dramatically reduced their water use in 2021 because of drought conditions. Specifically, they cut 1 million acre-feet in use in 2021 compared to 2020, bringing it down to 3.5 million acre-feet, she said.

But, Ostdiek maintained, total water use in the Lower Basin has not been cut enough to preserve levels in the lakes at the same time.

That 1 million acre-foot savings claim is now being challenged.

Colorado Water Plan gets $17 million boost from state oil and gas revenues Three water experts — John Fleck of the University of New Mexico; Eric Kuhn, formerly the executive director of the Colorado River Conservation District; and Jack Schmidt of Utah State University — recently crunched some of the data, and concluded that claim is dubious.

The trio recently wrote that "as stakeholders negotiate the current crisis on the Colorado River, we believe the representatives of the states of the Upper Basin — our states — are making a dangerous argument."
That argument is simple, they said.
"The Upper Basin states argue that their part of the watershed already routinely suffers water supply shortages in dry years. Without the luxury of large reservoir storage along the rim of the watershed that might store excess runoff in wet years and supplement supplies in dry years, the argument goes, the Upper Basin is limited by the actual mountain snowpack in any given year," they said, adding what that means — allegedly — is using less water.

But that argument is not backed by the Bureau of Reclamation’s Consumptive Uses and Losses reports, they wrote. In fact, in dry years, the Upper Basin states actually use more water than in wet years, based on the data, and much of that additional use is in agriculture:
• In the five driest years (2002, 2012, 2013, 2018, 2020), the average use was 4.06 million acre-feet per year.
• In the five wettest years (2005, 2008, 2011, 2017, 2019), the average use was 4.01 million acre-feet per year.

They warned that Lower Basin interests are perfectly capable of doing the same math.

Colorado River strain casts shadow over recreation
248
5 The Colorado River Compact of 1922 optimistically forecast 15 million acre-feet of water would be available annually, divided equally between the Upper and Lower Basin states. But over the past 20 years, drought and climate change has now reduced that flow to 12.3 million acre-feet annually.

The seven states have largely worked collaboratively in the past decade, coming up with a drought contingency plan in 2019, for example.

Late last year, that plan resulted in drawdowns of water from the Aspinall Unit at Blue Mesa Reservoir in Gunnison County, Navajo Reservoir in southwestern Colorado and the Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Utah in order to keep Lake Powell's water levels high enough to generate hydropower.

It hasn't been enough. Lake Powell now sits at just 48 feet above its most dangerous point, where it would be forced to shut down its hydropower, which could take place as soon as 2024. Hence, the requirement for massive conservation and the fear of cuts in water availability all over the Southwest.

Water experts, such as Kuhn, now question whether that spirit of cooperation, which began with the 1922 compact and has kept the seven states at the negotiating table for 100 years, will hold as states face the deadline outlined by Touton, as well as negotiations over river guidelines that are due to expire in 2026.

Kuhn had suggested during a June 16 conference that the compact is based on a river that "no longer exists."
At the conference, Tanya Trujillo, the assistant secretary for water and science at the Department of Interior, said the department doesn't have a recipe for how to come up with the 2 million to 4 million acre-feet.

Wet July around Colorado Springs highlighted by record rain; is it part of a future change? "We're going to have to be very creative in developing a large list of potential options," Trujillo said. "We're going to be doing things we've never done before." When the University of New Mexico's Fleck asked if the notion of collaborative governance on the river been oversold, Trujillo replied, "I don't know that we can blame the current governance process for the current hydrology."
She added: "I don't want us to be in a chaos category."

Kathy Weiss
Owner/Director
Crystal Springs Ranch & Saddlery
Carbondale, CO
Crystal Springs West,
Thermal, Ca.
(970) 309‐7037
[email protected]

249
1 Tania Flores
From: Cheri Flores
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 12:34 PM
To: Consulting Planner
Cc: Tania Flores; Monika Radeva
Subject: FW: COMMENTS: Proposed Surf Park - JEFF WELSHANS Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Cheri Flores | Planning Manager
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7067
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Teresa Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 12:33 PM
To: Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Cheri Flores <[email protected]> Subject: COMMENTS: Proposed Surf Park ‐ JEFF WELSHANS
Teresa Thompson | Management Specialist
City Manager's Office
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico ◦ La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
www.laquintaca.gov
www.laquintaca.gov/covid19
www.playinlaquinta.com
As always you can find a full list of resources and information by visiting www.laquintaca.gov 250
2 From: Jeff Welshans <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 12:12 PM
To: Council <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Fwd: Proposed Surf Park
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Jeff Welshans <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Aug 3, 2022, 11:55 AM
Subject: Proposed Surf Park
To: <[email protected]>
Dear Comrades, As a forty year resident of the Coachella Valley  I must strongly oppose subject  project I submit the project is unsustainable both environmentally  and  economically

1.)  The massive amounts of H2O & electricity  to operate such a facility  would require more capital expenditure than the projected business model could theoretically  provide

2.)  Therefore the business model is inherently  flawed

3.) The extreme summer heat would require even more power drain on local infrastructure to cool this exceedingly large body of water

4.) The disruption of the local neighbors
quality  of life due to traffic,  noise and 40 ft high light towers are grave concerns as well Please  consider the above testimony
as you deliberate this absurd proposed project.

Best regards,  Jeffery Welshans
San Diego St University
Palm Springs Friends of the  Mountains
Sierra Club Supporter
Sea Shepherd Member #1918
251
252
253
254
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 10:57 AM
To: Deborah Daly
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
Ms. Daly,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the City Council as part of the packet they receive prior to their meeting on the project on September 21, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Deborah Daly <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2022 3:37 PM
To: Consulting Planner <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Coral Mountain Resort DEIR

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:

From: Deborah Daly <[email protected]>
Date: August 15, 2022 at 3:35:49 PM PDT
To: [email protected]
Subject: Coral Mountain Resort DEIR
I have done research about this project and spent Christmas with one of the people working with the city about the surf lagoon.

My conclusions:

1.The only thing that the person I talked to said about it was basically  ‐ “It’ll be awesome, dude.” Not very professional.

2.The only economic benefit La Quinta will get is the tax revenue which will not even make a dent in the increased expenses to the town and county for dealing with this development if and when it is completed.

3. Which leads me to, will this even ever get completed with all the beneficial parts, or will La Quinta get stuck with an amusement park with a giant wave lagoon and a hotel that won’t be a luxury hotel.

Anyone who is willing to pay for luxury facilities to go surfing will go to a real ocean and surf. This is a cheap knock off and laughable.

How many more variations of a hotel does the Coachella Valley need? It’s overbuilt and the people who have to go to a fake ocean will rent cheaper Air BnBs, not a luxury hotel. 255
2 4. Millennials and Gen Z people aren’t stupid, they come to the Desert for food, hiking, drinks and interesting experiences AND Coachella. No one is asking for water activities here, because DUH ‐ they come here because it’s a DESERT.

5.This business plan  is pathetic, it is a problem looking for a solution. How many people at these companies will stay around ‐ not Kelly Slater, they get paid for their lagoon and they are gone.

Meriwether is in CO. Their biggest commitment to SoCal is a rented office space on Wiltshire in Santa Monica!!  Really!?!  They’ll do their Venture Capital thing, skim the upfront profits and book by selling it to who? A hotel chain, and not a luxury hotel chain.

Don’t be a mark, a rube or waste LaQuinta’s resources, both financial and natural, on this circus.

And, where is the city, county and chamber of commerce actually asking Gen Z and Millenials about their interest in this ‐ and when you do, include how much they are going to get gouged to go there.

Then there is Disney’s new development‐ who’s going to spend half a million and up for a home at Coral Mountain with it’s wave machine, when they can get a much better quality place that isn’t 45 minutes to the airport?
Sent from my iPad
256
1 Tania Flores
From: Cheri Flores
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2022 8:47 AM
To: Tania Flores
Subject: FW: Thank you: Callimanis, Alena 2022-08-16 Public Comments Here’s this email chain if you don’t have.

Cheri Flores | Planning Manager
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7067
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Alena Callimanis <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 3:55 PM
To: Consulting Planner <[email protected]> Cc: Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Laurie McGinley <[email protected]>; Cheri Flores <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]> Subject: Thank you: Callimanis, Alena 2022‐08‐16 Public Comments ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Thanks and sorry it was a duplicate request.  I will try not to hold my breath until next week! Alena Callimanis
On Aug 18, 2022, at 11:54 AM, Consulting Planner <[email protected]> wrote:

Ms. Callimanis,
As I wrote to your attorney yesterday, the applicant has submitted materials, which staff is currently reviewing. When we have completed our review, the materials will be posted on the City's website, and we will send an email to all who responded to the Draft EIR. You will be one of those receiving the email. I do not have a date when our review will be complete, but I would expect it to be some time next week.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
257
2 Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Monika Radeva <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 11:49 AM
To: Alena Callimanis <[email protected]>; Jon McMillen <[email protected]> Cc: Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Laurie McGinley <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Cheri Flores <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]> Subject: Callimanis, Alena 2022‐08‐16 Public Comments

Good morning Alena,
Submittal of public comments should follow the City’s established process for such by emailing them [email protected] or dropping off printed copies at La Quinta City Hall.

If emailed, public comments related to the Coral Mountain Resort project should also include a copy to the City’s Planning Division
staff: [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected].

If public comments related to an item scheduled for consideration on the agenda are received timely, prior to the publication of the agenda packet for a public meeting, they will be included in the published agenda packet.

If public comments are not received timely before the agenda packet is published, they will be disseminated to Council and the public as “written comments” prior to the commencement of the public meeting and will be incorporated into the final record of the public meeting.

I am copying the City’s Planning Consultant, Nicole Criste, to this email correspondence, so she can provide direction with regards to the supplemental documents provided by the applicant regarding the Coral Mountain Resort project.

Thank you.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Alena Callimanis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 5:55 PM
To: Jon McMillen <[email protected]>
Cc: Monika Radeva <[email protected]>
Subject: Jon and Monika, any advice, as Council Member Sanchez requested: La Quinta, CA: City Council Meeting

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **

Hi, folks!  I am sorry I am getting anxious!  Any thoughts on my note below? 258
3 I appreciate it!

Alena Callimanis
81469 Rustic Canyon Dr.

La Quinta, CA 92253
919 606‐6164

Begin forwarded message:

From: Alena Callimanis <[email protected]>
Subject: Jon, as Council Member Sanchez requested: La Quinta, CA: City Council Meeting - CANCELLED
Date: August 11, 2022 at 11:33:25 PM PDT
To: Jon McMillen <[email protected]>

Hi, Jon.  In our first discussion with the Council on meeting protocol, Council Member Sanchez asked for us to provide information ahead of time so the Council has the opportunity to see information from our experts so they can determine questions of the developer that might be required.

With the next City Council meeting on September 20, how can we send information to the City Council members ahead of time if they are out?  Do we drop off hard copy information at City Hall?  Will they check emails all along?  Please advise as how we can ensure we get information ahead of time to the Council.  I don’t want them to receive our information in the information packet on Thursday or Friday before the meeting, especially considering there are two City Council meetings in a row.  And I suspect the content for Coral Mountain will again be over a thousand pages.

In addition, in the discussions on level playing field, we did ask that we receive the information that is going from the developer to the Staff on August 15  as soon as possible on or after August 15.  I would appreciate your help to get that to us as soon as possible so we can get qualified experts to review the information.

Thank you.

Respectfully,

Alena Callimanis
81469 Rustic Canyon Dr
La Quinta, CA 92253
919 606‐6164
[email protected]
Begin forwarded message:

From: City of La Quinta, CA
<[email protected]>
Subject: La Quinta, CA: City Council Meeting - CANCELLED Date: August 10, 2022 at 5:45:54 PM PDT
To: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]

City Council Meeting ‐ CANCELLED
259
4  Date: 08/16/2022 3:00 PM
 Location: City Hall
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the La Quinta City Council regular meetings of August 16 and September 6, 2022, have been cancelled.

The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on Tuesday, September 20, 2022,
commencing with closed session at 3:00 p.m. and open session at 4:00 p.m. at the City Hall Council Chamber, 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE CANCELLATION NOTICE IN PDF. FORMAT.

Having trouble viewing this email? View on the website instead.

Change your eNotification preference.

Unsubscribe from all La Quinta, CA eNotifications.
260
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2022 9:29 AM
To: Tania Flores
Cc: Cheri Flores
Subject: Fw: Surf Park.docx
Attachments: Surf Park.docx
Tania,
Also for the record from Councilwoman Fitzpatrick.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2022 9:05 AM
To: Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Surf Park.docx

It doesn’t look as though any of you received this.

Kathleen Fitzpatrick | Council Member
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
E: [email protected]
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com

Begin forwarded message:

From: Ken Jackson <[email protected]>
Date: August 22, 2022 at 8:23:36 PM PDT
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>, Robert Radi <[email protected]>, Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>, John Pena <[email protected]>, Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>
Subject: Surf Park.docx

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** 261
2 An opinion from Kerry Berman;
Thanks for your time,
KG Jackson
53250 Avenida Herrera
La Quinta, Ca.

Sent from my iPad ᎿᏀᏁᏂᏃᏄ
262
Kerry Berman
38982 Narcissus Dr.,
Palm Desert, CA 92211
[email protected]
805-298-4040
July 22, 2022
Re: Surf Park
Dear La Quinta City Council Members,
In the 1970’s I was the youngest real estate broker / owner in the Coachella Valley. Over the past 50 years I can’t tell you how much I respected, admired, and appreciated what the developers and builders have contributed to our beautiful communities. The need for a solid economic foundation (housing, commercial, hotels, etc.) is critical for a healthy and sustainability desert environment.

The Sonoran Desert is the most biologically diverse eco system in the world. A pretty special and unique place to say the least. Without proper stewardship it can easily be destroyed. Many of us are not so concerned for our quality of life here and now, but for our children and our children’s, children.

Nationwide we are all aware of the importance of proper water conservation. Our state in particular has mandated reduction of water use, especially here in the desert. We are some of the largest users of water in California, and drafting from our already over drafted aquifer puts us in serious danger which I will mention later.

We are experiencing the worst mega draught in 1200 years. We have approximately 123 golf courses and about 70 of them draft directly from the aquifer using about one-thousand-acre feet a year. That’s approximately 326,000,000 gallons of water times seventy. We have tens of thousands of pools (approximately 10,000-12,000 gallons per pool). Water features at almost every country club and gate guarded community. Visitors come here and spend billions of dollars to enjoy their vacation and shouldn’t be expected to make water conservation a top priority like those of us who live here do.

Let’s look at some important local facts:
1) We get our water from the Colorado river that helps us maintain the level of our aquifer. (underground water supply)
2) Without the Colorado River we overdraft (take more out then goes in) our aquifer ( approximately 15-30% more then comes from natural sources) which is not sustainable. 3) Lake Mead & Lake Powell are almost at their lowest levels since they were created. 4) Without the Colorado River water we would not be able to exist here. 5) When more water comes out then goes into the aquifer the ground sinks, (subsides) as it has gone down as much Two feet in some areas in the east valley. (you can check with USGS or CVWD) 6) We are on the verge of experiencing the worst ecological disaster in California history at the Salton Sea 7) The three major concerns: Health, Environment, and Economic. 8) In 2018 the water transfer to San Diego has compelled water districts to pay farmers to fallow their land.

Agricultural runoff was the main supplier of water to maintain the Salton Sea since 1907. 9) The sea is evaporating / receding at approximately one-million-acre feet per year, faster than ever before. 10) The water districts are between a rock and hard spot trying to accommodate all current & future users. 11) Without water for necessities (drinking, washing, cleaning, farming) it doesn’t matter how much potential revenue you anticipate, there will be nobody who could live here to contribute. 263
In closing I want to thank you for your time and consideration and acknowledge and appreciate the time, money, and effort both sides have invested in this life changing decision. My last question: Is the surf park a necessity and good for the future of our valley?
Very Truly Yours,
Kerry Berman
Real Estate Broker (License 1662)
Certified Interpretive Guide
Conservation Ambassador
264
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2022 9:26 AM
To: Tania Flores
Cc: Cheri Flores
Subject: Fw: Water use restrictions vs. wave park
Tania,
See below for Coral Mountain public comment.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2022 9:06 AM
To: Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Water use restrictions vs. wave park

For the record
Kathleen Fitzpatrick | Council Member
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
E: [email protected]
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com

Begin forwarded message:

From: Ken Jackson <[email protected]>
Date: August 22, 2022 at 8:13:18 PM PDT
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>, Robert Radi <[email protected]>, Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>, John Pena <[email protected]>, Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>
Subject: Water use restrictions vs. wave park

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** 265
2 Really kind of says it all.
266
267
4 I know you all are very busy but I am sure you’ve seen through the many different sources available to us that it really looks like most of the world is experiencing drought. Climate induced extreme weather incidents are happening all over. Now is not the time, nor will it be for maybe hundreds of years or more, to use our most precious resource of water for frivolous entertainment and corporate profit.

While our state, our country, and the world struggles with an ever worsening shortage of water and rising temperatures do we want our message to the world to be, “Screw all of you. We’re surfing in the desert.”
Do you want your names on that message to the masses? I would not.

Sent from my iPhoneآءؠ
268
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2022 6:41 AM
To: Tania Flores
Subject: Fw: Coral Mountain Resort Project - Applicant-supplied materials for City Council meeting of 9/21/22 Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: George Koenig <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 5:30 PM
To: Consulting Planner <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Coral Mountain Resort Project ‐ Applicant‐supplied materials for City Council meeting of 9/21/22

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Thank you for the enclosure.  It has been a long time since my comments.  If possible, let me add just a few words.

First, it is interesting that the applicant/developer has been able to modify and curtail his plans so markedly.  Obviously the initial plan was a hopeful “shot” and subsequent events make one suspicious.

Second,  however and whatever ‐ this is simply the wrong project in THAT location.  Having it so isolated makes no sense.

Third,  If the project runs into financial problems and is abandoned, bankrupt, severely reduced,  will the City of La Quinta be handed a damaged white elephant?
George Koenig
On Aug 24, 2022, at 2:36 PM, Consulting Planner <[email protected]> wrote:

Good Afternoon,
You are receiving this email because you either have requested to be notified of items relating to the Coral Mountain Resort project, and/or you submitted a comment on the Draft EIR.

At the City Council meeting of July 5, 2022, persons providing comment on the project requested that applicant‐supplied materials be provided to the public in advance of the Council meeting of September 21, 2022, in order to allow time for these individuals and their organizations to review them and prepare responses. The City has posted materials provided by the applicant to the following location on its website:www.laquintaca.gov/cmresort 269
2 As is required by law, the City will post the agenda, the Staff Report, the materials provided by the applicant, and any public comments and/or other materials to the City Council meeting agenda page prior to the hearing. Please contact me if you need assistance in finding the agenda packet on the City's website.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
270
271
1 Tania Flores
From: Monika Radeva
Sent: Friday, September 2, 2022 10:46 AM
To: Consulting Planner
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: Kate Jackson: Coral Mountain Wave Park
Forwarding for the project file.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Teresa Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 7:16 AM
To: Cheri Flores <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Laurie McGinley <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Coral Mountain Wave Park
For your records
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:

From: Kate Jackson <[email protected]>
Date: August 29, 2022 at 8:49:19 PM PDT
To: Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Coral Mountain Wave Park
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Hello,
I am a resident of La Quinta (46415 Roudel Lane, LQ) and I wanted to say that I’m strongly in support of the Coral Mountain Wave Park. I heard to email this address to share that opinion, thanks so much! Kate Homet
Sent from my iPhone
272
1 Tania Flores
From: Cheri Flores
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 10:23 AM
To: Tania Flores; Consulting Planner
Cc: Danny Castro
Subject: FW: Coral Mountain Wave Park
Cheri Flores | Planning Manager
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7067
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Teresa Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 7:16 AM
To: Cheri Flores <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Laurie McGinley <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Coral Mountain Wave Park
For your records
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:

From: Kate Jackson <[email protected]>
Date: August 29, 2022 at 8:49:19 PM PDT
To: Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Coral Mountain Wave Park
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Hello,
I am a resident of La Quinta (46415 Roudel Lane, LQ) and I wanted to say that I’m strongly in support of the Coral Mountain Wave Park. I heard to email this address to share that opinion, thanks so much! Kate Homet
273
2 Sent from my iPhone
274
1 Cheri Flores
From: Tania Flores
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 12:04 PM
To: Cheri Flores
Subject: FW: Coral Mountain Resort
Please print for our records.

Tania Flores | Administrative Technician
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7023
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
City Hall is now open to the public during normal business hours. Please follow all CDC and State recommended guidelines as they pertain to COVID-19 safety and awareness. All public services continue to be available via phone, email or online web portal and the public is encouraged to utilize these services when possible. Thank you.

From: Nicole Criste <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 4:08 PM
To: Martha Karelius <[email protected]>
Cc: Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Tania Flores <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Coral Mountain Resort
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Ms. Karelius,
Thank you for your comments. We will forward them to the City Council when they hear the matter again on September 21, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Martha Karelius <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, August 29, 2022 at 3:14 PM
To: Nicole Criste <[email protected]>
Subject: Coral Mountain Resort
Dear Nicole,
275
2 I am writing to let you know that I think allowing a water park to break ground under such severe drought conditions is irresponsible. I have read the proposals the Coral Mountain Developers have offered to compensate for the water they would use and it doesn't make sense. We all need to conserve until it hurts. Putting in a wave park is simply not water wise no matter how they try to sell it.

The citizens are being penalized and developers should not be rewarded.

Thank you,
Martha Karelius
55730 Pinehurst, La Quinta, CA 92253
Martha Karelius
@VANTAGE Real Estate
949-378-7654
DRE#00632473
Click HERE for information about a career with @VANTAGE Real Estate 276
1 Tania Flores
From: Nicole Criste <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 9:48 AM
To: cotobobbi
Cc: Consulting Planner; Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Wave Park Coral Mountain
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Ms. Mezger,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the City Council when they hear the application on September 21, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: cotobobbi <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 9:37 AM
To: Nicole Criste <[email protected]>
Subject: Wave Park Coral Mountain
To all concerned,
I have multiple concerns about the wave park the developer is proposing. This is neither the time nor place for this ridiculous venture; it is an abuse of our precious water.

Yours truly,
Bobbi Mezger
La Quinta (full‐time) Resident
Ps: I've heard and read all of your justifications for the project, including the new iterations. They add up to, "Score for the developer!" "Too bad for the residents who have to live with it..." It was clever of you to ask for the moon and then "listen to the residents' concerns" and scale back a little to seem reasonable  Ha! Negotiation 101. 277
1 Tania Flores
From: Cheri Flores
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 5:21 PM
To: Consulting Planner; Tania Flores
Subject: FW: Coral Mountain Wave Park - Support
Cheri Flores | Planning Manager
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7067
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Teresa Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 5:21 PM
To: Cheri Flores <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Coral Mountain Wave Park ‐ Support
For your records
Teresa Thompson | Management Specialist
City Manager's Office
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico ◦ La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
www.laquintaca.gov
www.laquintaca.gov/covid19
www.playinlaquinta.com
As always you can find a full list of resources and information by visiting www.laquintaca.gov From: Nimalee Wickremasinghe <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 3:35 PM
278
2 To: Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Coral Mountain Wave Park
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Hello,
I’m a homeowner in La Quinta and I support the Coral Mountain Wave Park. It will be great for the local economy.

Thanks,
Nimalee D. Wickremasinghe‐Kuhn, M.A., APCC
818.571.5947 | [email protected]
279
1 Tania Flores
From: Nicole Criste <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2022 12:36 PM
To: Jan Olson
Cc: Tania Flores; Consulting Planner
Subject: Re: Coral Mt wave park
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Ms. Olson,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the City Council when they hear the item again on September 21st, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Jan Olson <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 4:52 PM
To: Nicole Criste <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Coral Mt wave park
Please see message below.  Thank you.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Jan Olson <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 1:33 PM
Subject: Coral Mt wave park
To: <[email protected]>
I’m a resident in Palm Desert and just recently received notification from the water district regarding water usage and the drought.

I believe that the decision on the water wave park in LaQuinta is still to be determined.  I am strongly encouraging you to not move forward with the planned park!  Development of the park (regardless of the water district you draw from) is not in the best interest of the people in the valley and California.  I believe that it is irresponsible and contrary to the water needs of the state.

I would be very interested in the data regarding amount of water evaporation on a daily basis and how many households that water would provide for.

It is not similar to golf course usage as that water is not for human consumption.

Please do not move forward with the wave park.

Sincerely,
280
2 Jan Olson
77699 Woodhaven Drive S
Palm Desert, ca 92211
Sent from my iPhone
281
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Saturday, September 3, 2022 9:09 AM
To: Bobbie Fleury
Cc: Linda Evans; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; Robert Radi; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Tania Flores Subject: Re: CM Resort Wave Basin
Ms Fleury,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the Council when they consider the matter on September 21, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Bobbie Fleury <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 2, 2022 10:14 AM
To: Consulting Planner <[email protected]> Cc: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]> Subject: Re: CM Resort Wave Basin

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Mayor Evans and City Council Members Fitzpatrick, Radi, Pena, and Sanchez ‐ So much has been written and said in the last 2 1/2 years about the inappropriateness of putting the surf pool, a "for profit, PRIVATE, amusement and entertainment facility," out in the south part of our city.

Surfing in the desert, while sounding like a "cool idea" is in reality something that really doesn't fit with our eco‐system.

But aside from all that, reading the La Quinta General Plan really sums it up as the best reasons of all for not trying to put this round peg in a square hole.

Although some say that the Plan is at least 20 years old, it shouldn't matter if it's 50 years old or more. The principles espoused here, as I've noted below, should apply for development throughout the growth of our city to keep it "The Gem of the Desert."
I hope you will take these few lines to heart and let your conscience be your guide in denying the zoning change from "residential" to "tourist/commercial," a move that will forever alter the cultural landscape out here ‐ and not for the better. Please vote to maintain, protect, and preserve, the existing neighborhoods as this proposed development is definitely NOT compatible with the adjacent communities' character and infrastructure. As you said, Mayor Evans, towards the end of the July City Council meeting, "this may not be a good fit." You are absolutely correct. Everything about the Coral Mountain Resort's wave pool flies in the face of the tenets written in the General Plan.

Thank you for your time and attention ‐
282
2 Bobbie Fleury
81586 Desert Willow Dr.

La Quinta
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ **Many hours and dollars were spent by taxpayers getting the La Quinta General Plan developed. That General Plan states Policy LU‐3.1 "encourage the preservation of neighborhood character and assure a consistent and compatible land use pattern". It also states Policy LU‐4 "maintenance and protection of existing neighborhoods" and LU‐4.1 "encourage compatible development adjacent to existing neighborhoods and infrastructure".** 283
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Saturday, September 3, 2022 9:14 AM
To: Lisa Jeffrey; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Alena Callimanis; Steve Jeffrey; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro; Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Coral Mountain Resort Addresses Community Concerns Ms. Jeffrey,
Thank you for you comments. We will provide them to the Council when they consider the matter on September 21, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Lisa Jeffrey <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 2, 2022 8:25 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Cc: Alena Callimanis <[email protected]>; Steve Jeffrey <[email protected]>; Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>
Subject: Coral Mountain Resort Addresses Community Concerns

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Mr Fishbein and John Gamlin,
This project is a failure from the get go.  It’s a high end private surf resort.  Who is the customer for this project?  How long will there be a demand?
$3.5 million dollars looks pretty enticing for the general fund even if we don’t have water flowing out of our taps in 10 years!  The west is in a severe on going drought and the end isn’t in sight in the near future if ever! According to your facts, a wave park takes less water then a golf course.  Have you factored in evaporation? How about the fact a golf course reduces C02 emissions and a wave park doesn’t!   How about the fact that a golf course provides a safe passage for wildlife!
How about the fact that you can turn off the water on a golf course! This project is a joke!  If you’re listening to the residents of La Quinta the “majority” don’t want it! Chamber of Commerce, where is your article interviewing the opposing people position on this? Shame on you!  See you Sept 21.
284
2 Lisa Jeffrey
285
1 Tania Flores
From: Monika Radeva
Sent: Monday, September 5, 2022 4:16 PM
To: Consulting Planner
Cc: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores
Subject: Neid, Judith - Coral Mountain Comments
Forwarding for the project record. Thank you.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Judith Neid <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 5, 2022 3:35 PM
To: Monika Radeva <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Information for the council
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Judith Neid <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 3:17 PM
Subject: Information for the council
To: <[email protected]>
Please pass this onto the council   for me. their emails do not work. Hope this comes through more clearly.

Thank you
01:04 / 01:35
Austonia, a locals’ only website detailing life in, and around, Austin, has just published a scathing piece titled “Summer Bummer” blaming “the world’s greatest surfer” for their woes and let us read, now, together:

Austin’s surf park made a splash when it opened in 2016, astounding the city’s land-locked surf-lovers with new artificial wave technology. Two years after a company led by the world’s most famous surfer took over, an Austonia drone photo survey shows a desolate site where there once was a thriving attraction that brought surfers from both coasts, and beyond.

Surf pools drained and empty, wave generating equipment apparently dismantled, parking lots empty, surf shop and pub closed. Mud, weeds, and only the sound of prairie wind, where once big waves broke to the sounds of joy from excited surfers.
286
2 Ouch
287
1 Tania Flores
From: Monika Radeva
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 10:53 PM
To: Consulting Planner
Cc: Tania Flores; Cheri Flores
Subject: Nadler, Shay: Coral Mountain Comments - September 21, 2022 meeting Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Forwarding for the project file.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 7:37 AM
To: Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Jon McMillen <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: September 21, 2022 meeting
Just forwarding this in case you didn’t see it.

Kathleen Fitzpatrick | Council Member
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
E: [email protected]
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
Begin forwarded message:

From: Shay Nadler <[email protected]>
Date: September 7, 2022 at 7:04:22 PM PDT
To: Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>, Linda Evans <[email protected]>, Robert Radi <[email protected]>, Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>, John Pena <[email protected]>
Subject: September 21, 2022 meeting
Reply‐To: Shay Nadler <[email protected]>

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Honorable Council Members:
288
2 I wish to strongly encourage the City Council to recommend the Wave Project be rejected. I recently received a post card in the mail regarding mandatory Water-Use Restrictions. A copy of one page is attached. As a private voting citizen of La Quinta I believe strongly in growth with conservation at the forefront of any new project. Our Valley is suffering as is the entire state. Why should i be restricted in on my own property so wasteful developers can pillage the water supply with no concern for the environmental impact?
The developers are bombarding our citizens with false facts about the impact of the Wave Project. The Sound from the Alarm of a new wave alone will disturb neighbors, nature and the entire project. Can you imagine the loud horn every 10 minutes all day and most of the night? Has a Sound Intrusion Inspection been completed by an impartial party? If not, Why?
I will be at the meeting and would like to bring the many post cards from developers who have reported inaccurate information about the impact of the Wave Park. I would like to speak at the meeting and be put on calendar, please.

Shay Nadler
54120 Avenida Ramirez
La Quinta, CA 92253
cell 562-544-9099
[email protected]
289
290
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 1:03 PM
To: Rick Roth; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Oppose the Coral Mountain surf park due to the huge financial risk it poses to the City Mr. Roth,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the Council for their meeting of September 21, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Rick Roth <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 8:12 AM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>
Subject: Oppose the Coral Mountain surf park due to the huge financial risk it poses to the City

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Madam Mayor, Council Members, and Staff:

The proponents plan a 25-year development project, and their proposed benefits would flow to the city over that time period so long as the project remains viable and continues operating. If, for any reason, the project fails, the developers will declare bankruptcy and walk away from their promises and obligations.

If this project fails, it will leave a 13-acre cement lagoon as the worst public nuisance in La Quinta history. What would it cost to remove that wave pool and remediate the land? $10 million, $25 million, $50 million? No one knows, and the cost surely rises with time.

What is the likelihood that this new proposed business will still be operating 20 years from now? Well, if the business was one of the largest most successful companies, one of the S&P500 say, it would have only a 36% chance of still being alive in 20 years. Amazingly, in only 20 years, two-thirds of America’s largest companies will be out of business. Their annual probability of failure is 5%.

What is the likelihood that a small, new business like the proposed surf park, will survive 20 years? Half of all new businesses fail within 5 years, even though nearly all of these businesses serve recognized needs with proven business models. Three-fourths of them are dead within 10 years, and only 5% survive to age 20.

Their probability of failure is 13.5% annually.

Any reasonable business person would see the untested surf-park and hotel with rental units as a newer, less proven, and riskier proposition. If the failure rate of untested new businesses is even modestly higher than for 291
2 new businesses in general, say 20% vs 13.5%, the odds of the business failing within the first 10 years are 9- to-1, with only a 10% chance of continued viability. By year 20, such a new business has only a 1% chance of still being around. That is, within 20 years, the city will have a 99% chance of taking over this failed water park.

Thus, any reasonable person would assume the project will fail at some point before completion, leaving the city holding the bag, with a 13-acre abandoned concrete hole. No one should take on the huge environmental and financial risk implied.

The developers have had months to address this concern, and have not. They have not offered to provide a secured note or collateral to cover the eventual cost of remediating the environment after their risky business fails. Therefore, any claim they make of providing overriding economic benefits is, on its face, empty and disingenuous.

The Planning Commission recognized the need for protecting the City from being left with the cleanup. To date, we have not seen any credible response. If the developer abandons the project, and declares bankruptcy, they won’t be liable. Should you not insist on money to be held, perhaps a minimum of $15 Million, for this purpose?
I ask that you who are responsible for the health and welfare of the city recognize these obvious risks and reject the project. It is a prescription for environmental and financial disaster.

Thank you for your consideration.
—-----------------
References:

S&P 500 companies have a 10 year life expectancy currently

In 2020, the average lifespan of a company on Standard and Poor's 500 Index was just over 21 years, compared with 32 years in 1965. There is a clear long-term trend of declining corporate longevity with regards to companies on the S&P 500 Index, with this expected to fall even further throughout the 2020s.Aug 27, 2021

Average company lifespan 2020 - Statista

Half of new businesses fail within 5 years

https://www.jpmorganchase.com/institute/research/small-business/small-business-dashboard/longevity

This gives an annual death rate of 13.5%

Expected lifetime of a new business is 7.4 years

————————
Rick Roth
58002 Aracena
La Quinta, CA 92253
650‐817‐5009 mobile
[email protected]
292
1 Tania Flores
From: Consulting Planner
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 1:02 PM
To: Rob Wright; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro; City Clerk Mail
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: Re: Coral Mountain Wave Project - Opposition
Mr. Wright,
Thank you for your comments. We will provide them to the Council for their meeting of September 21, 2022.

Nicole Sauviat Criste
Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
From: Rob Wright <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 10:04 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Robert Radi <[email protected]>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Consulting Planner <[email protected]>; Danny Castro <[email protected]>; City Clerk Mail <[email protected]> Subject: Coral Mountain Wave Project ‐ Opposition

** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear City Council,
I am not a resident of your town, but I receive the marketing emails from Coral Mountain and couldn't resist sending you a brief note.

I am a resident of Santa Barbara and a surfer who is very concerned about the wave pool trend.  We have a massive water crisis, an energy shortage and a climate crisis that threatens to upend our world.  Why would we ever consider squandering the water, which belongs to us all, and the energy required to recreate what nature provides us for free every day.

Please do not let this development proceed.  It squanders precious resources upon which we are all dependent.

Sincerely,
William Wright
965 Via Fruteria
Santa Barbara, CA  93110
293
1 Tania Flores
From: Cheri Flores
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 9:17 AM
To: Danny Castro; Consulting Planner
Cc: Tania Flores
Subject: FW: COMMENTS - Berg - Attendance Restrictions on September 21st Special City Council Meeting for Coral Mountain Wave Park Development
Cheri Flores | Planning Manager
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760)777-7067
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Teresa Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2022 4:50 PM
To: Teresa Thompson <[email protected]>
Cc: Jon McMillen <[email protected]>; Cheri Flores <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]>; Jennifer Nelson <[email protected]> Subject: COMMENTS ‐ Berg ‐ Attendance Restrictions on September 21st Special City Council Meeting for Coral Mountain Wave Park Development
Madam Mayor Mayor and Councilmembers
For your information/use
Teresa
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 11, 2022, at 4:32 PM, Carol Berg <[email protected]> wrote:
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** 294
2 To the La Quinta City Council Members,
It has come to the attention of the hundreds & hundreds of La Quinta residents & property owners planning to attend the special City Council meeting on 9/21 to protest the updated Coral Mountain Wave Park proposal, that the developer of said project, is heavily recruiting people & "surfer dudes" from OUTSIDE the area, (such as their Lemoore Wave Park), to try to "fill" the meeting with seemingly lots of local support for their development. LIES.

This is intolerable, & not legal. This is a local issue impacting the quality of life of the La Quinta residents. NOT the residents of Lemoore. NOT the residents of Palm Desert, who will have their own wave park to offer up for use to those who want a wave park. BY THE WAY. NOT the residents of Rancho Mirage. NOT the residents of Indian Wells. NOT the residents of Coachella. And NOT the residents of Indio.

This issue is applicable ONLY, to the quality of life, NOW & in the FUTURE, of the residents of La Quinta.

We should be the ONLY attendees at this meeting. The developer should be notified immediately to stop his duplicitous campaign of recruitment for outside bodies, as with his ongoing media campaign, or we have the right, & WILL, as legal residents, screen people as they arrive based on their address. WE are prepared to show up on the 21st as we were asked to do, honestly, ready to bring ALL the FACTS, FIGURES, ORDINANCES, CODES, etc., that we need. Can the developer at least do the same? Show up honestly in his newest effort to build his amusement park?? And we ask that you all please continue to do the jobs you were elected to do; which is work FOR THE RESIDENTS, & lead our city, (NOT residents OUTSIDE La Quinta), through future difficult times, including the very real, unprecedented drought we are in & will very likely remain in, & increasing temperatures putting extra loads on our antiquated electrical infrastructure every Summer. We're all watching very carefully.

Kindest Regards,
Carol Berg
[email protected]
408-458-0150

295
1 Tania Flores
From: Loydene Lazich <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 6:57 PM
To: Tania Flores
Subject: Zoning change Coral Mountain
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Dear Mayor Evans and Council Members,
We have lived in the community of La Quinta for 18 years. We ask that you deny the request for a zoning change for the Coral Mountain project. The peace and quiet that we have enjoyed and that brought us to La Quinta are in jeopardy because of a very ill conceived project. Please protect our neighborhood by denying this project.

Thank you,
Loydene and Bill Lazich
56905 Mountain View
La Quinta
Sent from my iPad
296
297
1 Tania Flores
From: Monika Radeva
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2022 7:14 PM
To: Danilo Kawasaki; Consulting Planner; Tania Flores
Cc: Graham Culp; Todd Grotstein; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva; Laurie McGinley Subject: Support Letter for Coral Mountain
Attachments: CM - Letter of Support - La Quinta Residents.pdf Good afternoon,
The enclosed written comments in support of the Coral Mountain Resort project have been received, will be included in the project file, distributed to the City Council, and will be included in the public record of the 9/21/22 special meeting.

Thank you.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Danilo Kawasaki <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2022 2:38 PM
To: City Clerk Mail <[email protected]>; Monika Radeva <[email protected]> Cc: Graham Culp <[email protected]>; Todd Grotstein <[email protected]> Subject: Support Letter for Coral Mountain
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Monika,
Please find the attached Letter of Support for Coral Mountain.

The people included in the list of names, including myself, have all read the Letter of Support and have agreed to be part of the public record. We represent 106 separate and confirmed La Quinta households with 159 individuals.

Thank you for your attention to this matter and, if possible, please confirm receipt of this letter and information.

Best Regards,
Danilo Kawasaki
La Quinta, CA 92253
298
Dear City Council and Planning Staff,
We are writing to voice our strong support for the Coral Mountain project! As City of La Quinta residents and homeowners, we feel this unique project brings numerous benefits to our community and serves as a model of sustainability and smart water usage.

This type of thoughtful planning should be encouraged for all new developments moving forward to preserve the special nature and quality of our lives here in La Quinta.

Although many of us love golf, we recognize that golf courses are abundant in the Coachella Valley and rely heavily on water. We understand developers must find ways to add unique amenities to attract potential buyers and guests to their developments. Coral Mountain’s wave facility uses approximately 15% of the water used by an average golf course. A wave basin may appear to be a wasteful use of water; however, the facts and data supplied by the developer, and subsequently confirmed by the CVWD, an independent Environmental Impact Report, and City staff, confirm otherwise.

We welcome the inclusive nature of this project and the public spaces and amenities that we, our families, and friends can enjoy. The farm-to-table market and meeting spaces contemplated on the corner of Madison and 58th will be a huge benefit for us. Also, the ability to access Coral Mountain for lunch or dinner, have our friends stay at the hotel, use the spa, pool and even book time at the wave basin, adds huge value to us here in La Quinta. It will be a refreshing change of pace to have a world-class facility open and available for La Quinta residents to use, rather than cordoned off behind member-only walls. If this necessitates a zoning change to accomplish – we are all for it!
Although we have all purchased property here and choose to either call La Quinta our home or spend a significant portion of time here, we are mindful of the necessity for the City to evolve and offer a more diverse set of experiences. We want La Quinta to be a dynamic city, while still maintaining its original charm and character. After reviewing the plans and looking at the community layout, proposed architecture, amenity set, and focus on active sports, health and wellness, it is our opinion that Coral Mountain is a perfect and unique blend of the authentic character of the desert and new thinking of what a master planned community can be.

Again, we voice our strong support for this wonderful project and reject the Nimbyism and knee-jerk reactions that seem to come with ANY new development here. It has been upsetting to see the number of mischaracterizations and outright falsehoods used against this project and it is our sincere hope that you will see past these and continue to encourage responsible development here in La Quinta - especially projects that are as thoughtful and well-conceived as Coral Mountain.

Sincerely,
Adam Lacey La Quinta CA 92253
Alana & Laule'a Brennan La Quinta CA 92253
Alyssa Phaneuf La Quinta CA 92253
Andy & Ashley Lebowitz La Quinta CA 92253
Anthony Borquez La Quinta CA 92253
Blake & Tracy Knox La Quinta CA 92253
Bob & Jackie Wright La Quinta CA 92253
299
Bob & Saralee Wallis La Quinta CA 92253
Brett & Jean Dedeaux La Quinta CA 92253
Brian & Amy Weitman La Quinta CA 92253
Brian Gargon La Quinta CA 92253
Bruce Kantor La Quinta CA 92253
Bryan Ezralow La Quinta CA 92253
Charles C. & Joni L. Meagher La Quinta CA 92253
Chris & Amanda Lovrien La Quinta CA 92253
Christie & John Mavredakis La Quinta CA 92253
Connie Varelli La Quinta CA 92253
Corey & Kathleen Gulbranson La Quinta CA 92253
Cory Martin & Greg Morgenstein La Quinta CA 92253
Danilo Kawasaki La Quinta CA 92253
Dariann Diaz La Quinta CA 92253
David & Paula Turner La Quinta CA 92253
Dennis & Gail Lingle La Quinta CA 92253
Don & Christi Flanigan La Quinta CA 92253
Donna Black La Quinta CA 92253
Doug & Ellen Weitman La Quinta CA 92253
Drew & Jaime Hoeven La Quinta CA 92253
Esra Sanli La Quinta CA 92253
Esther Nazarov La Quinta CA 92253
Frank & Isabelle Weigel La Quinta CA 92253
Frank & Mary Henry La Quinta CA 92253
Gala Asher La Quinta CA 92253
Gary & Katy Leff La Quinta CA 92253
Gary & Sherri Moore La Quinta CA 92253
Geoff Palmer La Quinta CA 92253
Greg Munks La Quinta CA 92253
Greg Solis La Quinta CA 92253
Greg, Judge, Zack, & Cleo Washer La Quinta CA 92253
Gregory Snider e La Quinta CA 92253
Irene Neuwirth La Quinta CA 92253
Jacinta & Andrew Hewitt La Quinta CA 92253
Jack Mulroe La Quinta CA 92253
James Sprague La Quinta CA 92253
Jason & Kim Hanson La Quinta CA 92253
Jason Weiss La Quinta CA 92253
Jay Head & Ryan Marie Head La Quinta CA 92253
Jeanette Fox La Quinta CA 92253
300
Jed Lassere La Quinta CA 92253
Jeff Greenfield La Quinta CA 92253
Jennifer Buhl La Quinta CA 92253
Jennifer Hermann La Quinta CA 92253
Jim & Tina Jenkins La Quinta CA 92253
Joe & Julia Lovern Guerra La Quinta CA 92253
Joe & Paula Ciaramitaro La Quinta CA 92253
John Knopf La Quinta CA 92253
John Leja La Quinta CA 92253
Jonathan Orenshein La Quinta CA 92253
Joseph Arenson La Quinta CA 92253
Josh & Rachel Frantz La Quinta CA 92253
Julie & Jason Wallace La Quinta CA 92253
Karen Ahaesy La Quinta CA 92253
Krista Coyle La Quinta CA 92253
Kylie Ranger La Quinta CA 92253
Larry & Colette Young La Quinta CA 92253
Larry & Jennifer Kay La Quinta CA 92253
Mallory West La Quinta CA 92253
Marc Ezralow La Quinta CA 92253
Marcel Sassola La Quinta CA 92253
Maria Boire La Quinta CA 92253
Marshall Ezralow La Quinta CA 92253
Matt & Christina Antoun La Quinta CA 92253
Mia Blair La Quinta CA 92253
Michael & Jenny Tatum La Quinta CA 92253
Michael Schwab La Quinta CA 92253
Michelle Patterson La Quinta CA 92253
Mike & Vivian Pohl La Quinta CA 92253
Mitch Rabin La Quinta CA 92253
Natalie Gaglardi La Quinta CA 92253
Nathaniel Christian La Quinta CA 92253
Nick & Marta Blodgett La Quinta CA 92253
Oksana DerDerian La Quinta CA 92253
Peter McWilliams La Quinta CA 92253
Peterson Family La Quinta CA 92253
Regan Scott La Quinta CA 92253
Richard P. Crane Jr. La Quinta CA 92253
Rigo Diaz La Quinta CA 92253
Rob & Jamie Leff La Quinta CA 92253
301
Robert & Alexandra Ahaesy La Quinta CA 92253
Roshan & Melissa Wijerama La Quinta CA 92253
Scott & Carolyn Recknor La Quinta CA 92253
Scott & Jaclyn Moore La Quinta CA 92253
Sean Kono La Quinta CA 92253
Simon & Sue Haley La Quinta CA 92253
Stephen & Catherine Bonswor La Quinta CA 92253
Susan Lowrance La Quinta CA 92253
Tera Dehner La Quinta CA 92253
Tim & Heather Black La Quinta CA 92253
Timothy A. Pappas La Quinta CA 92253
Tom Stephens La Quinta CA 92253
Tony Estrada La Quinta CA 92253
Tony, Cynthia, CeCe, Tony Jr. & Nick Bouza La Quinta CA 92253 Trevor DerDerian La Quinta CA 92253
Victor Coleman La Quinta CA 92253
Victoria Hiraoka La Quinta CA 92253
Yvonne & Steve Cherry La Quinta CA 92253
Zach Siegel La Quinta CA 92253
302
1 Tania Flores
From: Monika Radeva
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 8:08 PM
To: Consulting Planner; Tania Flores
Cc: Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva
Subject: Coral Mtn Support Comments Petition - submitted by Bob & Penny Boehm Attachments: 9.pdf
Forwarding the attached comments in support of the Coral Mountain project received by the City on 9/15/2022 to be included in the project file.

Thank you.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Nadia Fuentes <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 10:36 AM
To: Monika Radeva <[email protected]>
Cc: Laurie McGinley <[email protected]>; Nadia Fuentes <[email protected]> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Special Meeting Hello Monika,
This public comment/petition was just dropped off by Penny Boehm which she requested to be included in the City Council Special Meeting being held on Wednesday, September 21, 2022.

Contact information is below if needed.

I will place the originals on your desk. Thank you!
303
2 Nadia Fuentes| Administrative Assistant
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico| La Quinta, CA 92253
760.777.7091
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
304
305
306
307
308
1 Tania Flores
From: Monika Radeva
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 6:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva
Subject: Francis, Bruce: Proposed Coral Mountain Wavepark Good afternoon,
The written comments provided below in opposition of the Coral Mountain Resort project have been received, will be included in the project file, distributed to the City Council, and will be included in the public record of the 9/21/22 special meeting.

Thank you.

Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
Tel: (760) 777-7035
[email protected]
From: Bruce Francis <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 1:29 PM
To: City Clerk Mail <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed Coral Mountain Wavepark
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Ladies and Gentlemen - In all of the arguments opposing the subject wave park, it seems to me that a MAJOR aspect has barely been addressed or mentioned: the quality of life in the neighborhood if the development goes forward.

The city's "masterplan 2035" very specifically has the southern reaches of our city zoned as low density residential. Many (and I imagine most) of us who live full or part time in the neighborhood, considered the zoning very carefully before making what is, for most of us, a very serious financial decision, i.e,- the purchase of our home in the southern portion of the city. Not in a million years would we have settled in the area if we had thought the desert equivalent of a "Disneyland" was to be built. And to make matters worse, this "Disneyland" will not be completed for another thirteen years.

There are literally thousands of residents who believed they made the best decision in moving to this tranquil and peaceful area of La Quinta, devoid of the hectic nature of tourist commercial areas.

As you vote to approve or disapprove the development of the project, after all of the gnashing of teeth over water use, night lighting, traffic, noise, etc. etc., I ask you to ask yourself one question: to whom do I owe allegiance, local residents and constituents who acted in good faith in purchasing their homes or to an out-of-state commercial developer who proposes to change the area forever? The answer is all too obvious.

Sincerely,
Bruce Francis
81256 Victoria Lane
La Quinta, CA 92253
(442) 300-7701
309
ATTACHMENT 4

STAFF REPORTS, RESOLUTIONS,

ORDINANCES, AND ATTACHMENTS
• JUNE 7, 2022 PUBLIC HEARING
• JULY 5, 2022 PUBLIC HEARING
310
MINUTES Page 1 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

CITY COUNCIL AND

HOUSING AUTHORITY

MINUTES
TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2022

CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council was called to order at 3:00 p.m. by Mayor Evans.

This meeting provided teleconferencing accessibility pursuant to Executive Orders N-60-20 and N-08-21 executed by the Governor of California, and subsequently Assembly Bill 361 ( AB 361, 2021), enacted in response to the state of emergency relating to novel coronavirus disease 2019 ( COVID-19) and enabling teleconferencing accommodations by suspending or waiving specified provisions in the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.).

PRESENT: Councilmembers Fitzpatrick, Peña, Radi, Sanchez, Mayor Evans ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager McMillen, City Attorney Ihrke, City Clerk Radeva, Acting Deputy City Clerk McGinley, Director of Business Unit and Housing Development Villalpando, Community Resources Director Escobedo, Finance Director Martinez, Financial Services Analyst Hallick, Public Works Director/ City Engineer McKinney, Design and Development Director Castro, Planning Manager Flores, Senior Planner Flores, Permit Technician Lorett.

CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
Councilmember Peña said he will recuse himself and will abstain from discussion and vote on Consent Calendar Item No. 18 due to a potential conflict of interest stemming from the proximity of his real property interest to the project location, and asked for this item to be pulled for a separate vote. Council concurred.

PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA – None
CLOSED SESSION – CITY COUNCIL

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION; SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION
311
MINUTES Page 2 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH ( 2) OR ( 3) OF SUBDIVISION ( d) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9
NUMBER OF POTENTIAL CASES: 1)

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION; SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH ( 2) OR ( 3) OF SUBDIVISION ( d) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9
NUMBER OF POTENTIAL CASES: 1)

3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6; CITY DESIGNATED
REPRESENTATIVE: CHRIS ESCOBEDO, COMMUNITY RESOURCES
DIRECTOR; AND EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION: LA QUINTA CITY
EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION

4. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6; CITY DESIGNATED
REPRESENTATIVE: BILL IHRKE, CITY ATTORNEY; AND
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEE: CITY MANAGER
CALL TO ORDER – HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING HELD

JOINTLY WITH THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
A special meeting of the La Quinta Housing Authority was called to order at 3:03 p.m. by Chairperson Sanchez.

ROLL CALL:

Authority Members: Evans, Fitzpatrick, Radi, Peña, and Chairperson Sanchez VERBAL ANNOUNCEMENT – AB 23 [AUTHORITY SECRETARY]
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA – HOUSING AUTHORITY – Confirmed
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA – HOUSING
AUTHORITY – None

CHAIRPERSON SANCHEZ ASKED MAYOR EVANS TO ACT AS PRESIDING

OFFICER FOR THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE

SPECIAL MEETING

COUNCIL RECESSED THE OPEN SESSION PORTION OF THE MEETING AND MOVED INTO CLOSED SESSION AT 3:05 P.M.
312
MINUTES Page 3 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

MAYOR EVANS RECONVENED THE OPEN SESSION PORTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 4:07 P.M. WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT REPORT ON ACTION( S) TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION:

City Attorney Ihrke reported no actions were taken on Closed Session Item Nos. 1, 2, and 3 that require reporting pursuant to Government Code section 54957.1 ( Brown Act); and Council will recess back to Closed Session to continue consideration of Closed Session Item No. 4 after the open portion of the regular City Council meeting.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pro Tem Fitzpatrick led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.

PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA – CITY COUNCIL

AND HOUSING AUTHORITY
PUBLIC SPEAKER IN-PERSON: James Tufo, La Quinta – President of the Parc La Quinta homeowners’ association spoke in opposition of the proposed housing developments at Washington Street and Avenue 50.

ANNOUNCEMENTS, PRESENTATIONS AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AUTHORITY – None
CONSENT CALENDAR – CITY COUNCIL
COUNCILMEMBER PEÑA RECUSED HIMSELF FROM DISCUSSION AND
VOTE ON CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 18 DUE TO A POTENTIAL

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STEMMING FROM THE PROXIMITY OF HIS REAL

PROPERTY INTEREST TO THE PROJECT LOCATION AND ASKED FOR

THIS ITEM TO BE PULLED FOR A SEPARATE VOTE

1. APPROVE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 3, 2022

2. APPROVE SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 9, 2022

3. APPROVE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 17, 2022

4. EXCUSE ABSENCES OF CHAIRPERSON NIETO AND
COMMISSIONER CALDWELL FROM THE MAY 24 AND JUNE 14,
2022, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS, RESPECTIVELY

5. AFFIRM RESOLUTION NO. 2021-035 FINDINGS RELATED TO THE STATE OF EMERGENCY DUE TO COVID-19 AUTHORIZING THE
313
MINUTES Page 4 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

CITY MANAGER TO CONTINUE TO IMPLEMENT TELECONFERENCE

ACCESSIBILITY TO CONDUCT PUBLIC MEETINGS PURSUANT TO
ASSEMBLY BILL 361 (STATS. 2021, CH. 165)

6. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 TO CONTRACT WITH CREATIVE LIGHTING INC. FOR LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT 89-1 CITYWIDE LIGHTING MAINTENANCE SERVICES
PROJECT NO. 2018-31 FOR A ONE-YEAR TERM EXTENSION AND

RELATED COMPENSATION

7. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 TO CONTRACT WITH
PWLC II, INC. FOR CITYWIDE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
SERVICES PROJECT NO. 2018-30 FOR A ONE-YEAR TERM

EXTENSION AND RELATED COMPENSATION

8. ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO 1) APPROVE PRELIMINARY 2022/ 23 ENGINEER’S ANNUAL LEVY REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE AND
LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1, AND 2) DECLARE

INTENT TO LEVY ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE AND
LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1
RESOLUTION NOS. 2022-014 AND 2022-015]

9. ADOPT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLACE

COLLECTION COSTS FOR SOLID WASTE HANDLING SERVICES AT

SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS ON TAX ROLLS
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-016]

10. AUTHORIZE OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL

TECHNICIAN TO ATTEND THE INTERNATIONAL MUNICIPAL

SIGNAL ASSOCIATION TRAINING IN ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA
FROM JUNE 27-30, 2022

11. APPROPRIATE FUNDING IN FISCAL YEAR 2021/ 22 TO UPFIT 10

CITY OWNED VEHICLES

12. APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT
SERVICES WITH GOVOS, INC. ( FORMER MUNIREVS, INC., DBA

LODGINGREVS) FOR SHORT- TERM VACATION RENTAL PROGRAM

SERVICES, TO INCREASE COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR
2021/ 22, AND TO EXTEND THE TERM THROUGH FISCAL YEAR
2023/ 24

13. APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT

SERVICES WITH PALMS TO PINES PRINTING, FOR
314
MINUTES Page 5 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

PROMOTIONAL AND PRINTING SERVICES, TO INCREASE

COMPENSATION AND TO EXTEND THE TERM THROUGH FISCAL
YEAR 2022/ 23

14. RECEIVE AND FILE THIRD QUARTER FISCAL YEAR 2021/ 22 TREASURY REPORTS FOR JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH 2022

15. RECEIVE AND FILE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT DATED MARCH 31, 2022

16. APPROVE DEMAND REGISTERS DATED MAY 13, 20, & 27, 2022

17. ACCEPT WASHINGTON AND FRED WARING TRIPLE LEFT
PROJECT NO. 2017-01, LOCATED AT THE WASHINGTON STREET

AND FRED WARING DRIVE INTERSECTION

18. APPROVE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ENGINEER’S ESTIMATE,

AND ADVERTISE FOR BID THE CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2021-08 LOCATED IN VARIOUS

LOCATIONS

19. APPROVE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ENGINEER’S ESTIMATE,

AND ADVERTISE FOR BID THE SILVERROCK PARK VENUE WIFI

AND CAMERA BACKBONE PROJECT
MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Fitzpatrick/ Radi to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-17 and 19, as recommended, with Item No. 5 reaffirming Resolution No. 2021- 035, Item No. 8 adopting Resolution Nos. 2022-014 and 2022-015, and Item No. 9 adopting Resolution No. 2022-016. Motion passed unanimously.

MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Sanchez/ Radi to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 18 as recommended. Motion passed: ayes – 4, noes – 0, abstain – 1 (Peña), absent – 0.

CONSENT CALENDAR – HOUSING AUTHORITY

20. APPROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 3, 2022
MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Authority Members Peña/ Radi to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended. Motion passed unanimously.
315
MINUTES Page 6 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

BUSINESS SESSION

1. ADOPT RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE CERTIFICATION OF THE

RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS AS TO SUFFICIENCY
OF THE INITIATIVE PETITION ENTITLED “ PHASE- OUT AND

PERMANENT BAN OF NON- HOSTED SHORT- TERM VACATION
RENTALS ( STVRs) IN NON-EXEMPT AREAS OF THE CITY OF LA
QUINTA,” BY DECEMBER 31, 2024 [RESOLUTION NOS. 2022-017] City Clerk Radeva presented the staff report, which is on file at the Clerk’s Office.

The PUBLIC SPEAKERS listed below in the order in which they spoke, provided comments, in-person and via teleconference ( Zoom), as follows:

Kimberly Estrada, La Quinta (Zoom) – school principal – importance of STVR revenue in funding public safety for schools.

George M. Yin, Kaufman Legal Group ( Zoom) – specializes in election law - defects with the initiative petition to phase-out STVR.

Mayor Evans asked City Attorney Ihrke to respond to Mr. Yin’s comments. Mr.

Ihrke said that his office has reviewed letters on this matter received from legal counsel for VRON- LQ and petition proponents, Neighbors for Neighborhoods; that none of the cases cited by VRON- LQ are squarely on point in this matter; that Council has only three options per election Code Section 9215 now that the Riverside County Registrar of Voters ( ROV) has verified the sufficiency of the petition signatures; and that the City Attorney’ s Office recommends that Council proceed with certification of the petition.

Eddy Estrada, La Quinta (in-person) – STVR owner - supports STVRs.

Steven Niederhauser, La Quinta ( in-person) – supports STVRs.

Ruby Rodriguez, La Quinta – was called, but was not present and did not provide comments.

Donald Scott, La Quinta (in-person) – cleaning service owner – supports STVRs.

Alondra Palomino ( Zoom) – Minut Noise Monitoring employee - supports STVRs.

Sarah Gelberd, La Quinta (Zoom) – STVR owner – supports STVRs.

Don Shoffstall, La Quinta ( in-person) [ used additional speaker time donated by 3 residents – Matt Nelson, Marty Butler, and Barbara Lambert] – representative of Neighbors for Neighborhoods ( N4N) and a proponent of the initiative – spoke about issues associated with STVRs and in support of placing the initiative on the ballot.

Paul Spitzer, La Quinta ( in-person) – opposes STVRs.
316
MINUTES Page 7 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING Lynne Daniels, La Quinta ( in-person) – owner of Dupont estate - supports STVRs.

David Dinnel, Los Angeles/ La Quinta ( in-person) – STVR owner - supports STVRs.

Kathleen Dwyer, La Quinta (in-person) – supports STVRs due to revenue it brings to City.

Dean Graves, La Quinta ( in-person) – opposes STVRs and supports placing the initiative on the ballot.

Nilda Lopez ( in-person) [ comments were provided in Spanish and translated by Senior Planner Carlos Flores] - cleaning service owner – supports STVRs due to the work it provides to her and her co-workers.

Roger Monroy, La Quinta (in-person) – STVR owner – supports STVRs.

James Lambert, La Quinta ( in-person) [ used additional speaker time donated by resident Carol Nolte] – opposes STVRs.

Carine Topal, La Quinta ( in-person) – STVR owner – supports STVRs.

Anna Duitruk, La Quinta ( in-person) – VRON- LQ founder - supports STVRs.

Steve Owens, La Quinta (in-person) – STVR owner – supports STVRs.

Kay Wolff, La Quinta - ( in-person) – [ used additional speaker time donated by Jan Storbo] - opposes STVRs.

Joe Lutz, La Quinta (in-person) – opposes STVRs.

Carrie Breeswine, La Quinta (in-person) – opposes STVRs.

Richard Gray, La Quinta ( in-person) – opposes STVRs.

Jeff Smith, La Quinta ( in-person) – opposes STVRs and supports putting the initiative on the ballot.

Katie Barrows, La Quinta (in-person) – supports putting the initiative on the ballot.

Amanda Ryan, La Quinta ( in-person) – supports putting the initiative on the ballot.

Glenn Chapman, La Quinta ( in-person) – supports STVRs if well regulated; and supports putting the initiative on the ballot.

Edward Armendarez, La Quinta ( in-person) – opposes STVRs.

Stephen Libbe, Palm Desert ( in-person) – born in LQ, not a current resident – CEO of several service businesses – supports well-regulated STVRs.

Stephanie Nevels- Yanchar, Renton, WA/ La Quinta ( in-person) – STVR owner - supports STVRs.

Victor Barbosa, La Quinta (Zoom) – restaurant owner - supports STVRs.

Robert Gravina, La Quinta ( Zoom) – STVR owner - supports STVRs.

Ellen Lindberg, La Quinta (Zoom) – supports STVRs.

Melanie Sprague, La Quinta ( Zoom) – opposes banning STVRs due to City revenue loss.

Tom Kendrick, La Quinta ( Zoom) – supports STVRs.
317
MINUTES Page 8 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING The following WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS, listed in alphabetical order, were received, distributed to Council, made available on the City’s website, and included in the record of this meeting:

James Alderson – comments on STVRs
Anonymous – supports STVRs
Edward Armendarez – supports the initiative
Boyd Beghtol – opposes STVRs
Evette Bruesehoff – supports STVRs
Nancy Chiles – supports the initiative
Noreen and Joe Diodatin – support the initiative
Sarah Gelberd – opposes the initiative
Dean and Cathy Graves – support the initiative
Jeff and Nini Hillebrand – support the initiative
Alfredo Izmajtovich – support the initiative
Kaufman Legal Group – Attorney George M. Yin – defects with the initiative petition
Jim and Barbara Lambert – support the initiative and oppose STVRs these comments are also applicable to Business Session Item Nos. 2 and 3 below]
Minut Noise Monitoring – Alondra Palomino – supports STVRs Lisa Moller – supports the initiative
Marde Olson – supports the initiative
Marde and Mark Olson – support the initiative
David Alan Park – supports the initiative
Carolsue Peyton – supports the initiative
Jennifer Porter – opposes the initiative and supports STVRs Terry Pracht – supports the initiative
Marv and Stefanie Segal – oppose STVRs
Mario Sewell – supports the initiative [these comments are also applicable to Business Session Item Nos. 2 and 3 below]
Carine Topal – support STVRs
Visit Greater Palm Springs – support STVRs
Council expressed its support for placing the initiative on the ballot in accordance with the California Election Code.

MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Radi/ Fitzpatrick to adopt Resolution No. 2020-017 accepting the certification of the Riverside County Registrar of Voters as to the sufficiency of the initiative petition entitled “ Phase-Out and Permanent Ban of Non-Hosted Short-Term Vacation Rentals in Non-Exempt Areas in the City of La Quinta,” by December 31, 2024:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,

CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE CERTIFICATION OF THE RIVERSIDE 318
MINUTES Page 9 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS AS TO THE SUFFICIENCY O THE
INITIATIVE PETITION ENTITLED “ PHASE- OUT AND PERMANENT BAN OF

NON-HOSTED SHORT- TERM VACATION RENTALS IN NON-EXEMPT
AREAS OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,” BY DECEMBER 31, 2024
Motion passed unanimously.

MAYOR EVANS CALLED FOR A BRIEF RECESS AT 6:28 P.M.

MAYOR EVANS RECONVENED THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AND
SPECIAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MEETING HELD JOINTLY AT 6:48 P.M.

WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT

2. RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT, PREPARED PURSUANT TO
CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 9212, ASSESSING THE

FISCAL, ECONOMIC, AND RELATED IMPACTS OF THE INITIATIVE MEASURE ENTITLED “ PHASE- OUT AND PERMANENT BAN OF
NON-HOSTED SHORT- TERM VACATION RENTALS IN NONEXEMPT AREAS OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,” BY DECEMBER 31, 2024
City Manager McMillen and City Consultant Jon Hockenyos, President and CEO with TXP Economics presented the staff report, which is on file in the Clerk’s Office.

Council discussed the possibility of property owners and renters using anonymous, untraceable block-chain technology driving STVRs underground; factoring into the report the cost of enforcing a STVR ban; illegal operators, post-ban, are not factored into the report; no available data on revenue changes or house prices from other cities that have banned STVRs; golf revenue is included in the entertainment figures; examining enforcement costs prior to adopting the STVR ordinance; calculating the direct impact to the City’s budget over the next 10 years or more; reminder that Measure G was passed knowing that 65% would be paid by visitors - residents passed it knowing that they wouldn’t have to carry the entire burden; transient occupancy tax rates in other cities; STVRs success in the Cove due to the home renovations made by STVR owners; the effect of inflation on City revenue; spending by vacationers versus residents; Greater Palm Springs Visitors’ Bureau study findings that 1 in 5 residents is in a hospitality-related job, and the average annual increase in taxes to residents would be $4,000 if not for the local hospitality industry; affordability of former STVR homes to low- and mid-income buyers/ renters if ban is enacted; creating a map of current and planned low-income housing properties in the City for resident educational purposes; current average home prices in the City, and current average home prices in the Cove; the effect the ban would have on housing 319
MINUTES Page 10 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING inventory; fluctuations in school enrollment and birth rates; the current freeze on new permits continues the revenue flow while gradually decreasing the number of STVRs as new STVRs in permitted areas are developed – financial analysis of this versus a complete ban on January 1, 2025 is needed; need for 10-year revenue projections should the ban pass, and corresponding list of projects/ services affected; collecting spending pattern data to determine the home zip codes of restaurant goers; permitted STVR areas, exempt from the ban, under development now or planned, will take many years to be built out, replenish the inventory and revenue; and the need to protect all sources of revenue.

Council directed staff to report back on:

Budget revenue projections, and prioritizing expenditures Transition plans
Housing inventory
Property tax implementations
Case studies of STVRs going underground
Changes in STVR enforcement
Block- chain technology – crypto currency and contract execution MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Peña/ Fitzpatrick to receive and file report, prepared pursuant to California Elections Code section 9212, assessing the fiscal, economic, and related impacts of the initiative measure entitled “ Phase- Out and Permanent Ban of Non- Hosted Short-Term Vacation Rentals in Non-Exempt Areas of the City of La Quinta,” by December 31, 2024. Motion passed unanimously.

3. ADOPT RESOLUTIONS:

A) ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS

OF THE CITY AN INITIATIVE ORDINANCE AND BALLOT
MEASURE PROPOSING THE “ PHASE- OUT AND PERMANENT

BAN OF NON-HOSTED SHORT- TERM VACATION RENTALS IN
NON-EXEMPT AREAS OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,” BY
DECEMBER 31, 2024, AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 8, 2022 [RESOLUTION NO. 2022-018]

B) SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING WRITTEN ARGUMENTS

AND PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS

REGARDING THE INITIATIVE ORDINANCE AND BALLOT
MEASURE; AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE

AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF THE SAME
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-019]
320
MINUTES Page 11 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

C) REQUESTING RIVERSIDE COUNTY TO CONSOLIDATE THE

ELECTION FOR THE INITIATIVE ORDINANCE AND BALLOT

MEASURE WITH THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION AND

STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION, TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER
8, 2022 [RESOLUTION NO. 2022-020]
City Clerk Radeva and City Attorney Ihrke presented the staff report, which is on file in the Clerk’s Office.

Council discussed deciding at a subsequent meeting if it wished to take a collective position on the initiative, and if so, who would draft an argument infavor/opposed and any rebuttal; and the need for the additional data requested from staff before the Council takes a position.

MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Peña/ Radi to:

A) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-018:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,

CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED

ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF LA QUINA AN INITIATIVE ORDINANCE AND BALLOT MEASURE PROPOSING THE “ PHASE- OUT AND

PERMANENT BAN OF NON-HOSTED SHORT- TERM VACATION
RENTALS IN NON- EXEMPT AREAS OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA” AT

THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 8, 2022, AS CALLED BY RESOLUTION NO. 2022-009
B) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-019

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,

CALIFORNIA, SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING WRITTEN

ARGUMENTS AND PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL

ARGUMENTS REGARDING AN INITIATIVE ORDINANCE AND BALLOT
MEASURE, PROPOSING THE “ PHASE- OUT AND PERMANENT BAN OF

NON-HOSTED SHORT- TERM VACATION RENTALS IN NON-EXEMPT
AREAS IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,” AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2022, AND

DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL

ANALYSIS
C) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-020

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,

CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR OF

THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA, CONSOLIDATE WITH THE

GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 8, 2022, AND THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO 321
MINUTES Page 12 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING

BE HELD ON THAT DATE, AN INITIATIVE ORDINANCE AND BALLOT

MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA PROPOSING THE “ PHASE- OUT AND PERMANENT BAN ON NON-HOSTED SHORT- TERM VACATION RENTALS IN NONEXEMPT AREAS IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,” BY DECEMBER 31, 2024 Motion passed unanimously.

STUDY SESSION – CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AUTHORITY

1. DISCUSS FISCAL YEAR 2022/ 23 PRELIMINARY PROPOSED
BUDGET
Finance Director Martinez presented the staff report, which is on file in the City Clerk’s Office.

Council discussed the deficit in the Lighting and Landscape Fund; need to protect all sources of revenue; developer reimbursement schedule; and gratitude to staff for a clear and thorough report.

2. DISCUSS FISCAL YEAR 2022/ 23 PROPOSED HOUSING

AUTHORITY BUDGET
Finance Director Martinez presented the staff report, which is on file in the City Clerk’s Office.

Council discussed the Redevelopment Agency ( RDA) Loan Repayment; and Fund 243 RDA Low- Mod Housing budget.

ADJOURNMENT – HOUSING AUTHORITY
There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by Authority Members Radi/ Fitzpatrick to adjourn the Housing Authority special meeting at 8:10 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARINGS – CITY COUNCIL

1. ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 2019-0010 AND APPROVE SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-
0003 (AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN), GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT 2019-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004,
SPECIFIC PLAN 2020-0002, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-
0005; INTRODUCE FOR FIRST READING ORDINANCES
APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004 AND DEVELOPMENT
322
MINUTES Page 13 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING AGREEMENT 2021-0002; CEQA: CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ( SCH # 2021020310);
LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60 AND

EAST AND WEST OF MADISON STREET
RESOLUTION NOS. 2022-021 AND 2022-022; ORDINANCE NOS. 600 AND 601] Consulting Planner Criste and Planning Manager Flores presented the staff report, which is on file at the Clerk’s Office.

Consultant Rosalyn Prickett, Senior Water Resources Planner with civil engineering firm Woodward and Curran provided additional information on water supply assessments ( WSA).

Council discussed greenhouse gas emissions and the visual impact of encompassing walls would exist for any type of development; the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions, visible walls, and construction noise is equal to or less than that of the formally approved residential/ golf course plan being amended; this project may require more grading than the original residential/ golf course project; traffic impact for this project will be less than the original residential/ golf course plan; for historical water demand purposes, the area will be designated as vacant land; the number of intersections to be included in the traffic study; the regional impact of traffic, specifically on Interstate 10; lighting containment on-site; lighting impact study included the 80’ poles, the resort/ commercial, and the residences; the lighting impact from the 80’ poles could be mitigated by reducing the hours they are lit; the timeline for full build out; Andalusia started developing about 20 years ago, and is not yet fully built out; market demand for golf course community housing; reliance on Coachella Valley Water District ( CVWD) experts to review the WSA for accuracy and sufficiency; CVWD experts based their approval on the previous Urban Water Management Plan, not the most currently adopted Plan ( Plans are updated every five years); the source of water proposed, and the means of water discharge; comparison of nearby bodies of water – Lake Cahuilla 133 acres, and combined Trilogy, Quarry, Andalusia 55 acres ( for aesthetics and backup irrigation), versus the pool and two lakes of this project 27.6 acres; the need for expert forecasting of long-term weather patterns in order to evaluate water usage; CVWD’ s long-range Plan incorporates all available water sources as well as conservation; and possibility of requesting an updated WSA based on the current severe drought conditions.

MAYOR EVANS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9: 18 P.M.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: John Gamlin, President, CM Wave Development – provided a detailed presentation of the project.
323
MINUTES Page 14 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING Council discussed incorporating shade structures and trees; use of soft surface materials for walkways and paths as much as possible; the public trail along the base of Coral Mountain and its connection to other existing and planned trails; and public access by reservation to the hotel and dining.

MAYOR EVANS CALLED FOR A BRIEF RECESS AT 9:48 P.M.

MAYOR EVANS RECONVENED THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 10:03 P.M.

WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT
The PUBLIC SPEAKERS listed below in the order in which they spoke, provided comments, in-person and via teleconference ( Zoom), as follows:

Penny Boehm, La Quinta (in-person) – supports the project on behalf of herself, her husband and two adult children
Tracy Bartlett, La Quinta ( in-person) – a UC Palm Desert certified California Naturalist and California Climate Steward; presented a Power Point regarding historic temperature change; opposes the project Katie Barrows, La Quinta – opposes the project
La Quinta Residents for Responsible Development ( LQRRD) – opposing the project:

Derek Wong, La Quinta (in-person) – petition against the project Judy Hovjacky, La Quinta ( in-person) – pool cleanliness, light Bob Lasser, La Quinta ( in-person) – [ used speaker time donated by residents Catherine Smithweiss and Judy Gavigan] – 2035 General Plan
Carolyn Winnor, La Quinta ( in-person) – [ used speaker time donated by resident Richard Harris] – noise
Sheila Warren, La Quinta (in-person) – light
Donna Williams, La Quinta (Zoom) – public safety
Lori Kilburn, La Quinta ( in-person) – basis of zone change to Tourist Commercial
Carol Strop, La Quinta ( in-person) – not in harmony
Phil Novak, La Quinta (in-person) – carbon footprint
Alena Callimanis, La Quinta ( in-person) – [ used speaker time donated by residents Duncan Woodfin, Howard Weiss, and Karen Thomas] – water crisis
Rick Roth, La Quinta (in-person) – [ used speaker time donated by resident Sheryl Weiss] – revenue and costs to City
Brad Anderson, Rancho Mirage ( in-person) – opposes the project Joe Hammer, Indian Wells ( in-person) – [ used speaker time donated by Elizabeth Hammer] - La Quinta landowner, supports the Project Kim Hammer, Indian Wells (in-person) – supports the project 324
MINUTES Page 15 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING Bruce Krider, La Quinta ( in-person) – [ used speaker time donated by resident Dennis McLatcher and Laura Dolata] – opposes the project Tom Jensen, La Quinta (Zoom) – opposes the project
Colin Barrows, La Quinta (Zoom) – opposes the project
Gianna Wright, La Quinta (Zoom) – opposes the project
Jessica Lenz, La Quinta ( Zoom) – opposes the project
Sandy Hernandez, La Quinta ( Zoom) – member Cactus-to-Cloud Institute, opposes the project
Kathy Weiss, La Quinta (Zoom) – opposes the project
Alex De La Cruz, La Quinta (Zoom) – opposes the project Juline Holliday, La Quinta ( Zoom) – opposes the project Elizabeth Erickson, La Quinta ( Zoom) – a UC certified California Naturalist and California Climate Steward; opposes the project The following WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS, in OPPOSITION of the project, listed in alphabetical order, were received, distributed to Council, made available on the City’s website, and included in the record of this meeting:

Edward Armendarez
Sally and Robert Arroyo
Fritz Bachli
Tracy Bartlett and Katie
Barrows
Guy and Barbara Bishop
Alena Callimanis
Eve Castles
Scott Connelly
Richard G. Dale, JD
Patricia Jones
Angie Lafferty
La Quinta Residents for
Responsible Development
Marge Pierce
Susan Rosenberg
Linda Joy Salas
SBEMP – Bruce Bauer, Attorney
Joan Speer
Susan St. Louis
Dorian Whitney
Derek Wong
Gianna Wright
The following WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS, in SUPPORT of the project, listed in alphabetical order, were received, distributed to Council, made available on the City’s website, and included in the record of this meeting:

Karen Ahaesy
Wesley Ahlgren
Tim Albinson
Maria Allgood
Jon Arman
Justin Ayre
Ton7 and Cynthia Bouza
John Caskey
Jito Chadha
Frank Chanault
Come Chantrel
Gerald Chertavian
Mike Courson
Clay DellaCava
Ian deQueiroz
Douglas Durkin
Matt Ginella
Kent Goldman
325
MINUTES Page 16 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING Jeff Gordon
Matthew Gray
Chris Grow
David Henry
Scott Hudgins
Britt Joyce
Davin Kazama
Deborah Kent-Clark
Sid Landolt
David Leff
Rob Leff
Jenny M.

Andrew Mackenzie
Logan Malouf
Cory Martin
Thomas McDaniel
Kai McDonald
Carl J. Montante III
Scott Moore
Breene Murphy
Kevin Murphy
Leah Nappi and Family
Kevin Parra
Garrett Paul
Danica Bujic Perez
Michael Pinto
Mark and Logan Platzer
Carrie Schwab Pomerantz
Marie Radimsky
Lee Redmond
Mike Regan
Chuy Reyna
Keenan Rice and Family
Tatiana Ruvelson
Hunter and Tyson Solomon
Courtney Schwab
Samantha Schwab
Bruce Steel
Dave Stein
Paula Turner
Connie Varelli
Visit Greater Palm Springs
Lee Vosburgh
Jason and Molly Waggoner
Circe Wallace
Greg Washer
Frank Weigel
Doug Weitman
Carter Westfall
Kevin Wright
PUBLIC SPEAKER IN-PERSON: James Vaugh, Esq., CEQA and land use counsel for the project – provided rebuttal comments to the public comments with regards to water usage, evaporation, drought, groundwater replenishment, accuracy of WSA data, lighting, noise, special events, zone change, STVRs, economics, greenhouse gas emissions, and visual and traffic impacts.

PUBLIC SPEAKER IN-PERSON: Alena Callimanis, La Quinta – stated that there are several inaccuracies in the reports.

Council discussed double standards regarding this project and other developments with lakes; opposing interests regarding STVRs; City’s limited control over this private property; being put in the position of having to decide policy for CVWD and IID; and the responsibility of Council to openly and objectively review any development proposal submitted to the City.

THE PUBLIC HEARING REMAINED OPEN
326
MINUTES Page 17 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Radi/ Sanchez to continue this Public Hearing at a special meeting to be held July 5, 2022, at 4:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.

DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS – All reports are on file in the City Clerk’s Office.

MAYOR’S AND COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ITEMS - none

REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
La Quinta’s representative for 2022, Mayor Evans reported on her participation in the following organizations’ meetings:

CVAG COACHELLA VALLEY CONSERVATION COMMISSION

CVAG ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE

CVAG EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
La Quinta’s representative for 2022, Mayor Pro Tem Fitzpatrick reported on her participation in the following organization’ s meeting:

COACHELLA VALLEY MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY
La Quinta’s representative for 2022, Councilmember Peña reported on his participation in the following organizations’ meetings:

IID ENERGY CONSUMERS’ ADVISORY COMMITTEE

SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY
La Quinta’s representative for 2022, Councilmember Radi reported on his participation in the following organization’ s meeting:

CVAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

COUNCIL RECESSED THE OPEN SESSION PORTION OF THE MEETING AND MOVED INTO CLOSED SESSION AT 1:22 A.M.

CLOSED SESSION – CONTINUED

4. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6; CITY DESIGNATED
REPRESENTATIVE: BILL IHRKE, CITY ATTORNEY; AND
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEE: CITY MANAGER

MAYOR EVANS RECONVENED THE OPEN SESSION PORTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 1:31 A.M. WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT 327
MINUTES Page 18 of 18 JUNE 7, 2022

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD JOINTLY WITH HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING REPORT ON ACTION( S) TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION:

City Attorney Ihrke reported no actions were taken on Closed Session Item No. 4 that require reporting pursuant to Government Code section 54957.1 Brown Act).

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Fitzpatrick/ Radi to adjourn at 1:31 a.m. Motion passed unanimously.

Respectfully submitted,
MONIKA RADEVA, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
328
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 1 of 7 JULY 5, 2022

SPECIAL MEETING

CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING

MINUTES
TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2022

CALL TO ORDER
A special meeting of the La Quinta City Council was called to order at 4:02 p.m. by Mayor Evans.

PRESENT: Councilmembers Fitzpatrick, Peña, Radi, Sanchez, Mayor Evans ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager McMillen, City Attorney Ihrke, City Clerk Radeva, Acting Deputy City Clerk McGinley, Director of Business Unit and Housing Development Villalpando, Community Resources Director Escobedo, Public Works Director/ City Engineer McKinney, Finance Director Martinez, Design and Development Director Castro, Planning Manager Flores.

CONSULTANT PRESENT: Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, CEO, Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Sanchez led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.

PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA
PUBLIC SPEAKER: Brad Anderson, Rancho Mirage – opposed the Council’s motion from the June 21, 2022, regular Council meeting, regarding implementing Assembly Bill 361 (Stats. 2021, CH. 165), enacted in response to the state of emergency relating to novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) and enabling teleconferencing accommodations by suspending or waiving specified provisions in the Ralph M. Brown Act ( Government Code § 54950 et seq.). Mr. Anderson said he believes Council’s action was illegal; and asked that Council reconsider its motion.

City Attorney Ihrke explained that AB 361 was enacted to allow an alternative teleconference accessibility for attendance and participation of public meetings of the City’s legislative bodies, which allowed local agencies to continue to meet remotely, following the COVID-19 pandemic. The 329
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 of 7 JULY 5, 2022

SPECIAL MEETING
teleconference provisions under AB 361 permit teleconference accessibility but do not require it.

CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA – Confirmed

PUBLIC HEARING

1. REMAINED OPEN AND CONTINUED FROM JUNE 7, 2022:

CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2019-0010, SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-0003 (AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2019- 0002, ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004, SPECIFIC PLAN 2020-0002, DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT 2021-0002 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-0005, AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST; CEQA: CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ( SCH # 2021020310); LOCATION:

SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60, AND EAST AND WEST

OF MADISON STREET
Mayor Evans said this item was considered for the first time by the Council at the June 21, 2022, during which Council received a presentation of the staff report, the Environmental Impact Report ( EIR), a presentation from the applicant, and verbal and written public testimony; consideration of the item was continued to this July 5, 2022, special Council meeting; and the applicant has requested a continuance of this item.

MAYOR EVANS NOTED THE PUBLIC HEARING REMAINED OPEN AT THE JUNE 7, 2022, MEETING
Mayor Evans requested that the applicant speak regarding the request for continuance; and noted that all public testimony to date, both written and verbal, has been received, and is on file and incorporated into the public record for the project; and public testimony at tonight’ s meeting should not be repetitive of prior comments that are already on file, and should be regarding the applicant’s request for continuance.

Mayor Evans said the City has received numerous comments questioning why this project is being considered and asked City Attorney Ihrke to explain the due process to which every property owner is entitled. City Attorney Ihrke explained that anytime the City receives an application for a land use, approval is rooted in the due process clauses in the Federal and California State constitutions which allow for zoning regulations, land use controls and other property regulations all of which require applicants and cities to follow a review process. California has delegated to cities, authority over land use in their 330
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 of 7 JULY 5, 2022

SPECIAL MEETING
jurisdictions provided cities’ Municipal Code, Zoning Code, General Plan, etc. are not inconsistent with the Federal and State constitutions.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: John Gamlin, President, CM Wave Development – explained the applicant’s request to continue the item by 60 days to allow the company to explore alternatives regarding lighting and neighbor concerns, and to seek guidance and clarity from State agencies regarding water use and noise legislation.

Council’s questions and comments were about water not being the major issue at present but the need to have good reason to amend the zoning code which requires finding solutions to the project’s impacts such as noise, lighting, pool temperatures, pool cleanliness, pool evaporation, rising humidity, long range and regional impacts, quality of life for residents, and the project’s benefit to residents and area housing; no local government or public agency has the authority to deny any land use application without due process; and applicants have the right to due process, a fair and transparent process, and that includes this first request for a continuance.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Richard Gray, La Quinta – requested that Council deny the request for continuance; and opposed the project due to drought conditions.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Scott Connelly, La Quinta – opposed the project; noted that the project is getting national attention on the John Oliver show; and thanked the Council for their thorough consideration and attention to residents’ comments.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Penny Boehm, La Quinta – submitted a Request to Speak form noting she will wait until the next meeting to speak on this project; and provided written comments requesting that no public testimony is received at tonight’s meeting.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Brian Levy, La Quinta [ received speaker donated time by resident Dennis McLatcher] – said he opposes continuing the project; noted everyone is entitled to due process; asked that there be a level playing field in which residents are allowed sufficient time to review and digest the new information that the applicant might provide in September in order to be able to provide comments.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Lisa Jefferey, La Quinta [ received speaker donated time by resident Sandy Lanham] – opposed the project and spoke about the evaporation data in CVWD’s water report; and stated that a golf course uses significantly less water per year.
331
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 of 7 JULY 5, 2022

SPECIAL MEETING
PUBLIC SPEAKER: Louis Zakin, La Quinta [ received speaker donated time by resident Sheila Warren] spoke on behalf of Rick Roth – opposed the project; presented a 13-year financial analysis of the project based on the information attainable which foresees a 91% chance of bankruptcy within 13 years; wave parks are an unproven venture; and any economic advantages of the project do not justify the unmitigated ecological impacts.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Steve Jefferey, La Quinta [ received speaker donated time by resident Rick Owen] – opposed the project and spoke about the new information on noise impacts from wave parks to surrounding communities; and cities’ responsibility to protect its residents from noise, including lowfrequency noise; and requested the EIR be recirculated after a more complete on-site noise study is done using current standards as the current study is flawed.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Alena Callimanis, La Quinta [received speaker donated time by residents Andrea Lawent, Judy Horjacky, and Richard Harris] – opposed the project and spoke about flaws in the noise study; the value of homes in the area on the County tax rolls; the impact of the project’s water use on the aquifer absent availability of Colorado River water; the unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions; and the meeting with Lisa Castro and the letter from the applicant’s legal counsel, who was not in attendance of that meeting.

Ms. Callimanis provided a slide show which was printed and distributed to Council, made publicly available to attendees at the meeting, and included in the public record for this meeting.

Councilmember Radi explained his comment about resident Lisa Castro’s correspondence was not an interpretation of his position on the project, but rather he appreciated that Ms. Castro’s comments were well written, on point, constructive, and respectful.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Kathrine Chevalier, La Quinta [ received speaker donated time by resident Bobbie Fleury] – spoke about Imperial Irrigation District’s IID) energy crisis and its commitment to provide power to only Phase 1 of the project as noted in the EIR which is now invalid; and opposed the project.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Joan Sanka, La Quinta – opposed the project due to the historic natural environment and its destruction by this project; the importance of La Quinta’s hiking trails; and the restriction of access and obstruction to the area trails.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Carol Strop, La Quinta – opposed the project and the applicant’s request for continuance; and suggested alternative uses for the land.
332
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 of 7 JULY 5, 2022

SPECIAL MEETING
PUBLIC SPEAKER: Dorothy Dupree, La Quinta – opposed the project and the applicant’s request for continuance due to water use.

Council discussed the developer’ s right to due process where the developer has an opportunity to make his case, as does the public; and time is needed to read and digest the new information, and to explore the valid points raised during public comment.

City Attorney Ihrke explained that if Council refused to give developers their due process, the developers’ remedy would be to obtain a writ of mandate from the court to compel the Council to comply with state and federal law.

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Brad Anderson, Rancho Mirage – opposed the project; and said the matter needs to be continued because the Council suspended AB 361 for this meeting so those who may have wanted to attend virtually are not able to do so.

City Attorney Ihrke reiterated the AB 361 teleconference accessibility pursuant to the Brown Act is permissive and not required, and Council has the discretion to implement such accommodations. The public hearing notice for this item complied with the content and publication requirements under the Planning and Zoning State law. The teleconference accessibility in effect at the June 7, 2022, Council meeting, were amended by a subsequent Council action on June 21, 2022, which is currently in effect for tonight’s meeting, and teleconference accessibility will be made available in instances when in-person public meetings are not possible, due to health and safety risks due to COVID- 19, and public meetings need to be conducted virtually instead.

Council continued their discussion regarding the importance of public input and the publications and information residents provided to Council; the learning experience during the process; that decisions are made based on facts and fairness, and Council’s motions are not predetermined; appreciation for residents who provide facts, not just demand the Council deny the project; emails received by Council both pro and con, respectful and disrespectful; the technical assessment required of the Planning Commission; the boarder view of the Council in reviewing a project; and the hurdles the applicant has to overcome to design a project that is a benefit to the community and has the support of residents and Council.

City Attorney Ihrke said the Council can request that the developer provide updated, revised information for the Council, staff and residents to review prior to the next Council hearing date on the project.
333
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 of 7 JULY 5, 2022

SPECIAL MEETING
MAYOR EVANS CALLED FOR A BRIEF RECESS AT 5:51 P.M.

MAYRO EVANS RECONVENED THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 5:59 P.M.

WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT
PUBLIC SPEAKER: John Gamlin, President, CM Wave Development agreed that his company and its consultants could do their analysis and submit the bulk of any new information/ alternatives to City staff by August 15, 2022, and the remainder of new information could be submitted no later than 10 days prior to the next hearing date on the project (September 21, 2022).

PUBLIC SPEAKER: Phillip Novak, La Quinta – asked the Council to provide residents with an equal amount of time, i.e., two months, if they request it in order to complete their review and analysis of the new information the developer submits.

THE PUBLIC HEARING REMAINED OPEN UNTIL SEPTEMBER 21, 2022 MOTION – A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Peña/ Radi to continue this Public Hearing at a special meeting to be held on Wednesday, September 21, 2022, 4:00 p.m., at City Hall. Motion passed unanimously.

The following WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS, listed in alphabetical order, were received, distributed to Council, made available on the City’s website, and included in the record of this meeting:

Brad Anderson, Rancho Mirage – opposed the removal of AB 361 Penny Boehm, La Quinta – supports the applicant’s request for continuance, and requested that no public comments be allowed on the project that are not related to the request for continuance Wendy Clarke, La Quinta – opposed the project
Judy and Russell DeCausemaker, La Quinta – opposed the project Christopher Lovrien, La Quinta – supports the project
Shay Nadler, La Quinta – opposed the project
Celeste Varela, La Quinta – opposed the project
Kathy Weiss, La Quinta – provided an article entitled “Water Wars Come to the Suburbs”
MAYOR’S AND COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ITEMS
Councilmember Peña congratulated everyone on the country’s celebration of Independence Day.

Mayor Evans reminded the audience that the Nine Cities Blood Challenge is currently underway and encouraged folks to donate blood; noted Amazon’s 334
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 of 7 JULY 5, 2022

SPECIAL MEETING
new partnership as a donor to the Find Food Bank; and reported on her attendance at the Chamber of Commerce installation awards dinner and the meeting with the Desert Valley Builders’ Association.

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Peña/ Radi to adjourn at 6:10 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.

Respectfully submitted,
MONIKA RADEVA, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
335
DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2022 – XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2021020310)
FOR THE CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT;

ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; AND

ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND

REPORTING PROGRAM
CASE NUMBERS:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2019-0010
APPLICANT:

CM WAVE DEVELOPMENT LLC
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on June 7, July 5 and September 21, 2022, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2019-0010 and its Environmental Impact Report (EIR, SCH #2021020310), as mandated by State law for the Coral Mountain Resort Project consisting of a master planned community on 386 acres of a 929 acre area located south of Avenue 58, north of Avenue 60, and east and west of Madison Street, more particularly described as:

Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs):
764-200-076, 764-210-007, 764-210-028, 764-210-029, 766-070-003, 766-070-006, 766-070-012, 766-070-014, 766-080-001,766-080-002,766- 080-004 & 766-080-005
WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published a public hearing notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on May 27, 2022, as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2022-010 to recommend the City Council certify Environmental Assessment 2019-0010 at a duly noticed Public Hearing on April 26, 2022, following public hearings held on March 22, and April 12; and
336
DRAFT City Council Resolution No. 2022 – XXX
Environmental Assessment 2019-0010
Environmental Impact Report SCH #2021020310
Project: Coral Mountain Resort
Adopted: