CC06 — Rancho Mirage City Council, July 20, 2023 (part 4 of 6)

Case No. 5:12-cv-01152-C
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2014

6-852

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019

In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.

Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014

In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987) Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012

In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division Kyle Cannon, Eugene Donovan, Genaro Ramirez, Carol Sassler, and Harvey Walton, each Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. BP Products North America, Inc., Defendant.

Case 3:10-cv-00622
Rosenfeld Deposition: February 2012
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2013

In the Circuit Court of Baltimore County Maryland
Philip E. Cvach, II et al., Plaintiffs vs. Two Farms, Inc. d/b/a Royal Farms, Defendants Case Number: 03-C-12-012487 OT
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2013

6-853

EXHIBIT C
6-854

1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa
Santa Monica, California 90401
Tel: (949) 887‐9013
Email: [email protected]
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
CEQA Review
Education:

M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.

B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.

Professional Certifications:

California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:

Matt has 25 years of experience in environmental policy, assessment and remediation. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) while also working with permit holders to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.

Matt has worked closely with U.S. EPA legal counsel and the technical staff of several states in the application and enforcement of RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act regulations. Matt has trained the technical staff in the States of California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona and the Territory of Guam in the conduct of investigations, groundwater fundamentals, and sampling techniques.

Positions Matt has held include:
•Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present); •Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2014;
•Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003); 6-855

• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004); • Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989– 1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000); • Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 – 1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995); • Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).

Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:

With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 100 environmental impact reports since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, Valley Fever, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at industrial facilities. • Manager of a project to provide technical assistance to a community adjacent to a former Naval shipyard under a grant from the U.S. EPA.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns. • Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission. • Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S. • Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas stations throughout California.
• Expert witness on two cases involving MTBE litigation. • Expert witness and litigation support on the impact of air toxins and hazards at a school. • Expert witness in litigation at a former plywood plant.

With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel. • Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies. • Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by MTBE in California and New York.
2 6-856

• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi. • Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines. 3 6-857

• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with clients and regulators.

Executive Director:

As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business institutions including the Orange County Business Council.

Hydrogeology:

As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.

At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and County of Maui.

As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned about the impact of designation.
4 6-858

• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments, including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water transfer.

Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste. • Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.

EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.

With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants. • Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA. • Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐ wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks. • Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water Action Plan.

Policy:

Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff. • Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents. 5 6-859

Geology:

With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the city of Medford, Oregon.

As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling. • Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.

Teaching:

From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students. • Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.

Matt taught physical geology (lecture and lab and introductory geology at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California from 2010 to 2014.

Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.

EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.

Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
6 6-860

Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.

Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, Irvine, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.

Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater (and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished report.
7 6-861

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.

Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks. Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential Water Quality Concerns Related to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.

Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.

Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui, October 1996.

Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu, Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.

Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup at Closing Military Bases in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.

Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of Groundwater.

Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐ contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting. 8 6-862

Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.

Other Experience:

Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examination, 2009‐ 2011.
9 6-863

State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Inland Deserts Region
3602 Inland Empire Blvd, Suite C-220
Ontario, CA 91764
www.wildlife.ca.gov

May 23, 2023
Sent via e-mail

Pilar Lopez
Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270

DESERT ISLAND HOTEL (PROJECT)

NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND)
SCH# 2023040562

Dear Ms. Lopez:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received a Notice of Intent to Adopt an ND from the City of Rancho Mirage for the Project pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.1

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.

CDFW ROLE

CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a).) CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. (Id., § 1802.) Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlif e resources.

CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub.

Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381.) CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW’s lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.) Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in “take” as defined by State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), the project proponent may seek related take authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY

Proponent: City of Rancho Mirage

Objective: The objective of the Project is to develop a resort hotel within the Desert Island community. A General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) will change the zoning from “Open Space-Private (OS-PV)” to “Resort Hotel (Rs-H)” for the proposed hotel and residences, and a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA22-0002) will introduce hotel use to the Desert Island Specific Plan. The land (17.2 acres) within the Desert Island community will be repurposed to include a new 34-key hotel comprised of four 1-story buildings totaling 33,940 square feet, 11 private residences totaling 56,844 square feet, hotel

1 CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The “CEQA Guidelines” are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000.

B-1
B-2
B-3
Comment Letter B
6-864

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 2 ends

grounds for guest use with tennis, pool, 852 square foot café, cabana, and 2,572 square feet for yoga amenities, along with additional onsite parking totaling 376 spaces. The proposed hotel and residences will be located west of the existing clubhouse. A new golf training park and 7,818 square foot golf maintenance building will replace the existing driving range and old maintenance building. Secondary access to Frank Sinatra Drive will be accommodated by widening the existing gated entry at the northwest corner of the golf course from 12 feet to 24 feet.

The Project would be constructed in four phases. The first phase would develop a portion of the southerly hotel with outdoor recreation activities, yoga pavilion, maintenance building with parking, and the proposed secondary access to Frank Sinatra Drive. Phase two would develop residences 7 and 8 on the western side of the site. Phase three would develop residences 5, 6, 9, and 10. Phase four would develop the northerly hotel, residences 1, 2, 3, and 4, and the proposed golf training facility. The southern hotel pad would be left or reseeded with live turf until constructed. The Project construction activities are expected to occur in the following stages: site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating.

Location: The Project is located at the southwest corner of Frank Sinatra Drive and Bob Hope Drive, on approximately 17.2 acres within the Desert Island Residential Community and Golf Course in the City of Rancho Mirage, Riverside County, California (33.771990, - 116.412801). The Project encompasses Accessor’s Parcel Numbers 688-040-001, 688- 050-005, 688-060-006, and 688-060-008. Land surrounding the parcels includes residential communities with accompanying golf courses. Lands to the northeast and northwest corners of the property across Frank Sinatra Drive are vacant. The Project is located within the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) boundary. The Project is within the Indio subbasin of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin.

Timeframe: Construction is expected to begin in 2023 with full buildout by 2024.

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CDFW has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (i.e., biological resources). CDFW offers the comments and recommendations below to assist the City of Rancho Mirage in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources. The ND has not adequately identified and disclosed the Project’s impacts (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative) to biological resources and whether those impacts are less than significant.

CDFW’s comments and recommendations on the ND are explained in greater detail below and summarized here. The ND lacks a complete and accurate assessment of biological resources on the Project site. CDFW recommends that additional information and analyses be added to a revised ND, along with avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures that reduce impacts to less than significant.

Existing Environmental Setting

Compliance with CEQA is predicated on a complete and accurate description of the environmental setting that may be affected by the proposed Project. CDFW is concerned that the assessment of the existing environmental setting has not been adequately analyzed in the ND. CDFW is concerned that without a complete and accurate description of the existing environmental setting, the ND may provide an incomplete analysis of Project-related environmental impacts.

CDFW is concerned that no biological field assessment was conducted for the ND. The Project site is currently located with the Desert Island golf course and is adjacent to a 25 - acre lake. Vegetation and water features associated with golf courses frequently attract migratory and nesting birds; graded areas left vacant during pauses in construction can B-3
B-4
6-865

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 3 ends

attract ground squirrels and burrowing owls; and construction noise and artificial light at night can impact wildlife on the Project site and in the surrounding area.

Mitigation Measures

CDFW is concerned that no mitigation measures are proposed in the ND to avoid or reduce impacts to biological resources to below a level of signif icance. To support the City of Rancho Mirage in ensuring that Project impacts to biological resources are reduced to a level that is less than significant, CDFW recommends adding mitigation measures for Coachella Valley MSHCP compliance, burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), nesting birds, construction noise, and artificial nighttime lightning.

I. Project Description and Related Impact Shortcoming

COMMENT #1: Number of Residences

Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) document, Pages #7 & 9

Issue: There is a discrepancy in the IS/ND Project description and phasing timeline regarding the number of private residences to be constructed.

Specific impact: The IS/ND states (p. 7) that the Project will repurpose 17.2 acres of the existing Desert Island community to include 11 private residences. However, the phasing timeline in the IS/ND (p. 9) lists the construction timeline of residences 1 through 10 (10 total). The IS/ND should clarify the correct number of private residences to be constructed and provide an accurate description of the accompanying Project timeline.

Evidence impact would be significant: CEQA is predicated on a complete and accurate description of the proposed Project. Without a complete and accurate project description, the ND likely provides an incomplete assessment of Project-related impacts to biological resources. CDFW has identified gaps in information related to the project description.

CDFW Recommendation: The ND should include the appropriate number of private residences to be constructed. Analysis and appropriate mitigation measures to avoid and reduce impacts to biological resources resulting from construction for the Project should be included in a revised ND.

COMMENT #2: Timing of Construction and Site Inactivity

IS/ND document, Page #9

Issue: The ND does not analyze impacts to biological resources associated with the timing of Project construction.

Specific impact: The IS/ND states (p. 9) that the southern hotel pad will be left or reseeded with live turf until constructed. In the interim period between grading and construction of the hotel, environmental conditions may change. Grading and leaving a site inactive may result in the area becoming occupied by wildlife that utilize disturbed areas (e.g., ground squirrels and burrowing owl).

CDFW Recommendation: The ND should analyze impacts to biological resources resulting from an extended timeline for Project activities and pauses in construction.

The ND should acknowledge that wildlife may move into disturbed or graded sites B-4
B-5
B-6
6-866

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 4 ends

when construction is paused. The ND should acknowledge that preconstruction surveys for biological resources will need to be repeated prior Project activities and after pauses in construction to assess the presence of biological resources and to avoid or reduce impacts to less than significant. Analysis and appropriate mitigation measures to avoid and reduce impacts to biological resources resulting from the tim ing of construction for the Project should be included in a revised ND.

COMMENT #3: Landscaping

IS/ND document, Page #8

Issue: The ND lacks a description of the type of landscaping that will be installed and maintained over the life of the Project.

Specific impact: The IS/ND states (p. 8) that landscaping, including trees, shrubs, and accent plants to complement the desert environment, is planned throughout the Project site. However, no further details are provided.

CDFW Recommendation: To ameliorate the water demands of this Project, CDFW recommends incorporation of water-wise concepts in any Project landscape design plans. In particular, CDFW recommends xeriscaping with locally native California species and installing water-efficient and targeted irrigation systems (such as drip irrigation). Native plants support butterflies, birds, reptiles, amphibi ans, small mammals, bees, and other pollinators that evolved with those plants, more information on native plants suitable for the Project location and nearby nurseries is available at CALSCAPE: https://calscape.org/ . Local water agencies/districts and resource conservation districts in your area may be able to provide information on plant nurseries that carry locally native species, and some facilities display drought -tolerant locally native species demonstration gardens. Information on drought-tolerant landscaping and water-efficient irrigation systems is available on California’s Save our Water website: https://saveourwater.com/ . CDFW also recommends that the ND include recommendations regarding landscaping from Section 4.0 of the CVMSHCP “Table 4-112: Coachella Valley Native Plants Recommended for Landscaping” (pp. 4 - 180 to 4-182; https://cvmshcp.org/plan-documents/) .

II. Environmental Setting and Related Impact Shortcoming

COMMENT #4: Assessment of Biological Resources

IS/ND document, Section #4, Pages #44 & 45

Issue: The ND does not adequately identify or mitigate the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, impacts to biological resources.

Specific impact: The ND lacks a recent general field assessment of biological resources located within the Project footprint and surro unding areas. The Project site is located with the Desert Island golf course and is adjacent to a 25 -acre lake. Vegetation and water features associated with golf courses frequently attract migratory and nesting birds; graded areas left vacant during pause s in construction can attract ground squirrels and burrowing owls; and construction noise and artificial light at night can impact wildlife in the surrounding area.

Evidence impact would be significant: Compliance with CEQA is predicated on a complete and accurate description of the environmental setting that may be affected by the proposed Project. CDFW is concerned that the assessment of the existing B-6
B-7
B-8
6-867

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 5 ends

environmental setting with respect to biological resources has not been adequately analyzed in the ND. CDFW is concerned that without a complete and accurate description of the existing environmental setting, the ND likely provides an incomplete or inaccurate analysis of Project-related environmental impacts and whether those impacts have been mitigated to a level that is less than significant.

CDFW Recommendation: To establish the existing environmental setting with respect to biological resources, CDFW recommends that a revised ND include the results of a complete, recent inventory of rare, threatened, endangered, and other sensitive species (e.g., nesting and migratory birds, bats, and crepuscular and nocturnal wildlife) located within the Project footprint and within off-site areas with the potential to be affected, including California Species of Special Concern (CSSC) and California Fully Protected Species (Fish and Game Code § 3511). Species to be addressed should include all those which meet the CEQA definition (CEQA Guidelines § 15380). The inventory should address seasonal variations in use of the Project area and should not be limited to resident species. CDFW suggests this information, and any necessary mitigation measures, be addressed in a revised ND. Note that CDFW generally considers biological field assessments for wildlife to be valid for a one-year period, and assessments for rare plants may be considered valid for a period of up to three years.

Some aspects of the proposed Project may warrant periodic updated surveys for certain sensitive taxa, particularly if the Project is proposed to oc cur over a protracted time frame, or in phases where construction may be paused.

III. CDFW Proposed Mitigation Measures or Related Impacts

COMMENT #5: Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP)

IS/ND document, Section #4.2f, Page #45

Issue: The Project occurs within the CVMSHCP plan area and is subject to provisions and policies of the CVMSHCP.

Specific impact: The Project does not occur within or share a common boundary with a Conservation Area of the CVMSHCP; however, the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area is 1.7 miles southwest of the Project. To be considered a covered activity, Permittees should demonstrate that proposed actions are consistent with the CVMSHCP and its associated Implementing Agreement. The City of Rancho Mirage is the Lead Agency and a Permittee of the CVMSHCP.

Evidence impact would be significant: Within the Inland Deserts Region, CDFW issued Natural Community Conservation Plan Approval and Take Authorization for the CVMSHCP per Section 2800 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code on September 9, 2008. The CVMSHCP establishes a multiple species conservation program to minimize and mitigate habitat loss and provides for the incidental take of covered species in association with activities covered under the permit. Compliance with approved habitat plans, such as the CVMSHCP, is discussed in CEQA.

Specifically, Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the CEQA document discuss any inconsistencies between a proposed Project an d applicable general plans and regional plans, including habitat conservation plans and natural community conservation plans. An assessment of the impacts to the CVMSHCP as a result of this Project is necessary to address CEQA requirements. To obtain addit ional information regarding the CVMSHCP please go to: http://www.cvmshcp.org/ .

Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)

MM BIO-[A]: CVMSHCP Compliance

Prior to construction and issuance of any grading permit, the City of Rancho Mirage shall ensure compliance with the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) and its associated Implementing B-8
B-9
6-868

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 6 ends

Agreement and shall ensure the collection of payment of the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee.

Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, section 15097(f), CDFW has prepared a draft mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for proposed MM BIO-[A] through [E] (see Attachment 1).

COMMENT #6: Burrowing Owl Surveys

Section #4.2, Pages #44 & 45

Issue: The ND does not analyze potential impacts to burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and includes no mitigation measures to avoid or reduce impacts to a level less than significant.

Specific impact: CDFW is concerned about the potential for burrowing owl to occur on the Project site and to move into disturbed or graded sites when construction is paused between phases of Project construction. Impacts to burrowing owl from the Project could include take of burrowing owls, their nests or eggs, or destroying nesting or foraging habitat; impacting burrowing owl populations through changes in vegetation via the destruction, conversion, or degradation of burrowing owl habitat.

Evidence impact would be significant: Burrowing owl is a California Species of Special Concern. Take of individual burrowing owls and their nests is defined by Fish and Game Code section 86, and prohibited by sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513. Fish and Game Code section 3513 makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. § 703 et seq.). Burrowing owl is a Covered Species under the CVMSHCP, which requires that avoidance and minimization measures be implemented for this species.

Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)

CDFW recommends that prior to commencing Project activities for all phases of Project construction, surveys for burrowing owl be conducted by a qualified biologist in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012 or most recent version). CDFW recommends the revised ND include specific avoidance and minimization measures to ensure that impacts to burrowing owls are reduced to less than significant.

MM BIO-[B]: Burrowing Owl Surveys

No less than 60 days prior to the start of Project-related activities, a burrowing owl habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified biologist according to the specifications of the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Department of Fish and Game, March 2012 or most recent version).

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 7 ends

shall also describe relocation actions that will be implemented. Proposed implementation of burrow exclusion and closure should only be considered as a last resort, after all other options have been evaluated as exclusion is not in itself an avoidance, minimization, or mitigation method and has the possibility to result in take. If impacts to occupied burrows cannot be avoided, information shall be provided regarding adjacent or nearby suitable habitat available to owls along with proposed relocation actions. The Permittee shall implement the Burrowing Owl Plan following CDFW review and approval.

Preconstruction burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days prior to the start of Project-related activities and within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance, in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012 or most recent version). Preconstruction surveys should be performed by a qualified biologist following the recommendations and guidelines provided in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. If the preconstruction surveys confirm occupied burrowing owl habitat, Project activities shall be immediately halted. The qualified biologist shall coordinate with CDFW and prepare a Burrowing Owl Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to commencing Project activities.

COMMENT #7: Nesting Birds

Section #4.2, Pages #44 & 45

Issue: The ND does not analyze potential impacts to nesting birds and includes no mitigation measures to avoid or reduce impacts to a level less than significant.

Specific impact: CDFW is concerned that impacts to nesting birds have not been analyzed in the ND. The golf course includes vegetation and a water feature that may attract nesting and migratory birds. Nesting birds may also utilize trees in the area surrounding the Project and could be impacted by Project construction. Impacts to nesting birds may occur from ground-disturbing activities, vegetation removal, construction noise, and artificial light at night.

Evidence impact would be significant: It is the Project proponent’s responsibility to comply with all applicable laws related to nesting birds and birds of prey. Fish and Game Code sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 afford protective measures as follows:

Fish and Game Code section 3503 states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by Fish and Game Code or any regulation made pursuant thereto. Fish and Game Code section 3503.5 makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by Fish and Game Code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto. Fish and Game Code section 3513 makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. § 703 et seq.).

Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)

CDFW recommends the revised ND include specific avoidance and minimization measures to ensure that impacts to nesting birds do not occur. Project -specific avoidance and minimization measures may include, but are not limited to, Project phasing and timing, monitoring of Project-related noise (where applicable), sound walls, and buffers, where appropriate. CDFW recommends that disturbance of occupied nests of migratory birds and raptors within the Project site be avoided any time birds are nesting on-site. Preconstruction nesting bird surveys shall be performed within 3 days prior to Project activities to determine the presence and location of nesting birds.

MM BIO-[C]: Avoidance of Nesting Birds
B-10
B-11
6-870

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 8 ends

Nesting bird surveys shall be performed by a qualified avian biologist no more than (3) days prior to vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities.

Pre-construction surveys shall focus on both direct and indirect evidence of nesting, including nest locations and nesting behavior. The qualified avian biologist will make every effort to avoid potential nest predation as a result of survey and monitoring efforts. If active nests are found during the pre- construction nesting bird surveys, a qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate nest buffer to be marked on the ground. Nest buffers are species specific and shall be at least 300 feet for passerines and 500 feet for raptors.

A smaller or larger buffer may be determined by the qualified biologist familiar with the nesting phenology of the nesting species and based on nest and buffer monitoring results. Established buffers shall remain on-site until a qualified biologist determines the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. Active nests and adequacy of the established buffer distance shall be monitored daily by the qualified biologist until the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged or the Project has been completed. The qualified biologist has the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit signs of disturbance.

COMMENT #8: Construction Noise

Section #13.2, Pages #98 & 99

Issue: The ND does not analyze impacts to biological resources from construction noise and includes no mitigation measures to avoid or reduce impacts to a level less than significant.

Specific impact: The ND (p. 98) states equipment used during the construction phases is expected generate both steady state and episodic noise increases that would be heard both on and off the Project site, but includes no analysis of the impacts of construction noise on biological resources. The ND indicates noise levels have the potential to reach 46.7 to 60.4 dBA during the hours when construction is permitted.

Exposure levels that may adversely affect wildlife species can occur at55 to 60 dBA.

Because of the potential for construction noise to negatively impact wildlife, CDFW recommends the revised ND include an analysis of impacts to biological resources and specific avoidance and minimization measures to ensure that impacts to wildlife are reduced to less than significant.

Evidence impact would be significant: Construction may result in substantial noise through road use, equipment, and other Project-related activities. This may adversely affect wildlife species in several ways as wildlife responses to noise can occur at exposure levels of only 55 to 60 dB (Barber et al. 2009). Anthropogenic noise can disrupt the communication of many wildlife species including frogs, birds, and bats (Sun and Narins 2005, Patricelli and Blickley 2006, Gillam and McCracken 2007, Slabbekoorn and Ripmeester 2008). Noise can also affect predator-prey relationships as many nocturnal animals such as bats and owls primarily use auditory cures (i.e., hearing) to hunt. Additionally, many prey species increase their vigilance behavior when exposed to noise because they need to rely more on visual detection of predators when auditory cues may be masked by noise (Rabin et al. 2006, Quinn et al. 2017).

Noise has also been shown to reduce the density of nesting birds (Francis et al. 2009) and cause increased stress that results in decreased immune responses (Kight and Swaddle 2011).

Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)

MM BIO-[C]: Construction Noise

During all Project construction, the City of Rancho Mirage shall restrict use of equipment to hours least likely to disrupt wildlife (e.g., not at night or in early morning) and restrict use of generators except for temporary use in B-11
B-12
6-871

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 9 ends

emergencies. Power to sites can be provided by solar PV (photovoltaic) systems, cogeneration systems (natural gas generator), small micro- hydroelectric systems, or small wind turbine systems. The City shall ensure use of noise suppression devices such as mufflers or enclosure for generators. Sounds generated from any means must be below the 55 -60 dB range within 50-feet from the source.

COMMENT #9: Artificial Light

Section #1.2, Page #31

Issue: The ND does not analyze impacts to biological resources from artificial light and includes no mitigation measures to avoid or reduce impacts to a level less than significant.

Specific impact: The ND (p. 31) indicates that the development of the Project will introduce new sources of lighting, including lighting fixtures along pedestrian pathways, and lighting for existing landscape features along Frank Sinatra Drive; however, impacts to biological resources are not analyzed and no mitigation measures are proposed. The direct and indirect impacts of artificial nighttime lighting on biological resources including migratory birds that fly at night, bats, and other nocturnal and crepuscular wildlife should be analyzed, and appropriate avoidance and minimization measures should be included in the revised ND.

Evidence impact would be significant: Artificial nighttime lighting often results in light pollution, which has the potential to significantly and adversely affect fish and wildlife.

Artificial lighting alters ecological processes including, but not limited to, the temporal niches of species; the repair and recovery of physiological function; the measurement of time through interference with the detection of circadian and lunar and seasonal cycles; and the detection of resources and natural enemies and navigation (Gatson et al. 2013). Many species use photoperiod cues for communication (e.g., bird song; Miller 2006), determining when to begin foraging (Stone et al. 2009), behavior thermoregulation (Beiswenger 1977), and migration (Longcore and Rich 2004).

Phototaxis, a phenomenon which results in attraction and movement towards light, can disorient, entrap, and temporarily blind wildlife species that experience it (Longcore and Rich 2004).

Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)

MM BIO-[D]: Artificial Light

During Project construction and operation, the City of Rancho Mirage shall eliminate all nonessential lighting throughout the Project area and avoid or limit the use of artificial light during the hours of dawn and dusk when many wildlife species are most active. The City shall ensure that lighting for Project activities is shielded, cast downward, and does not spill over onto other properties or upward into the night sky (see the International Dark -Sky Association standards at http://darksky.org/) . The City shall ensure use LED lighting with a correlated color temperature of 3,000 Kelvins or less, proper disposal of hazardous waste, and recycling of lighting that contains toxic compounds with a qualified recycler.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA

CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e).) Accordingly, please report any special status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNNDB field survey form can be filled out and submitted online at the following link:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data . The types of information reported to B-12
B-13
B-14
6-872

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 10 ends

CNDDB can be found at the following link: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plants- and-Animals.

ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FILING FEES

The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of environmental document filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the environmental document filing fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal.

Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089.)

CONCLUSION

CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the ND to assist the City of Rancho Mirage in identifying and mitigating Project impacts on biological resources. CDFW concludes that the ND does not adequately identify or mitigate the Project’s significant, or potentially significant impacts on biological resources. The CEQA Guidelines (§ 15073.5) indicate that recirculation is required when a new significant effect is identified and additional mitigation measures are necessary. CDFW recommends that a revised ND with a recent and complete assessment of impacts to biological resources, and mitigation to avoid and reduce those impacts to less than significant, be recirculated for public comment.

CDFW personnel are available for consultation regarding biological resources and strategies to minimize impacts. Questions regarding this letter or further coordination should be directed to Alyssa Hockaday, Senior Environmental Scientist (Specialist) at (760) 920-8252 or [email protected].

Sincerely,

Kim Freeburn
Environmental Program Manager

Attachment 1: MMRP for CDFW -Proposed Mitigation Measures

ec: Heather Brashear, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisor), CDFW [email protected]

Rollie White, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[email protected]

Vincent James, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[email protected]

Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, Sacramento [email protected]

REFERENCES

Barber, J. R., K. R. Crooks, and K. M. Fristrup. 2009. The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25:180-189.

Beiswenger, R. E. 1977. Diet patterns of aggregative behavior in tadpoles of Bufo americanus, in relation to light and temperature. Ecology 58:98–108.

Francis, C. D., C. P. Ortega, and A. Cruz. 2009. Noise pollution changes avian communities and specie s interactions. Current Biology 19:1415–1419.

Gatson, K. J., Bennie, J., Davies, T., Hopkins, J. 2013. The ecological impacts of nighttime light pollution: a mechanistic appraisal. Biological Reviews.

Gillam, E. H., and G. F. McCracken. 2007. Variability in the echolocation of Tadarida brasiliensis: effects of geography and local acoustic environment. Animal Behaviour 74:277–286.

B-15
B-16
B-14
6-873

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 11 ends

Kight, C. R., and J. P. Swaddle. 2011. How and why environmental noise impacts animals: An integrative, mechanistic review. Ecology Letters 14:1052–1061.

Longcore, T., and C. Rich. 2004. Ecological light pollution – Review. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2:191–198.

Miller, M. W. 2006. Apparent effects of light pollution on singing behavior of American robins. The Condor 108:130–139.

Patricelli, G., and J. J. L. Blickley. 2006. Avian communication in urban noise: causes and consequences of vocal adjustment. Auk 123:639–649.

Quinn, J. L., M. J. Whittingham, S. J. Butler, W. Cresswell, J. L. Quinn, M. J. Whittingham, S. J. Butler, W.

Cresswell, and W. Noise. 2017. Noise, predation risk compensation and vigilance in the chaffinch Fringilla coelebs. Journal of Avian Biology 37:601 –608.

Rabin, L. A., R. G. Coss, and D. H. Owings. 2006. The effects of wind turbines on antipredator behavior in California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi). Biological Conservation 131:410–420.

Slabbekoorn, H., and E. A. P. Ripmeester. 2008. Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: Implications and applications for conservation. Molecular Ecology 17:72–83.

Stone, E. L., G. Jones, and S. Harris. 2009. Street lighting disturbs commuting bats. Current Biology 19:1123–1127. Elsevier Ltd.

Sun, J. W. C., and P. M. Narins. 2005. Anthropogenic sounds differentially affect amphibian call rate.

Biological Conservation 121:419–427.

ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)

Biological Resources (BIO)
Mitigation Measure (MM) Description Implementation
Schedule
Responsible
Party
MM BIO-[A]: CVMSHCP Compliance
Prior to construction and issuance of any grading permit, the City of Rancho Mirage shall ensure compliance with
the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) and its associated
Implementing Agreement and shall ensure the collection of payment of the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation
Fee.

Prior to
construction and
issuance of any
grading permit
City of
Rancho
Mirage
MM BIO-[B]: Burrowing Owl Surveys
No less than 60 days prior to the start of Project-related activities, a burrowing owl habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified biologist according to the
specifications of the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl
Mitigation (Department of Fish and Game, March 2012 or
most recent version).

If the habitat assessment demonstrates suitable burrowing owl habitat, then focused burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist according to the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. If burrowing owls are detected during the focused surveys, the qualified biologist and Project Applicant shall prepare a Burrowing Owl Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to commencing Project activities. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall describe proposed avoidance, minimization, and monitoring actions. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall include the number and location of occupied burrow sites, acres of burrowing owl habitat that will be impacted, details of site monitoring, and details on proposed buffers and other
avoidance measures if avoidance is proposed. If impacts to occupied burrowing owl habitat or burrow cannot be
avoided, the Burrowing Owl Plan shall also describe
relocation actions that will be implemented. Proposed
implementation of burrow exclusion and closure should
only be considered as a last resort, after all other options have been evaluated as exclusion is not in itself an
avoidance, minimization, or mitigation method and has the possibility to result in take. If impacts to occupied burrows cannot be avoided, information shall be provided regarding adjacent or nearby suitable habitat available to owls along with proposed relocation actions. The Permittee shall
Habitat
assessment and
focused
surveys: No less
than 60 days prior
to the start of
Project-related
activities.

Pre-construction
surveys: No less
than 14 days prior
to start of Project-
related activities
and within 24
hours prior to
ground
disturbance.

City of
Rancho
Mirage
6-874

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 12 ends

implement the Burrowing Owl Plan following CDFW review
and approval.

Preconstruction burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days prior to the start of Project-related activities and within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance, in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl
Mitigation (2012 or most recent version). Preconstruction surveys should be performed by a qualified biologist
following the recommendations and guidelines provided in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. If the
preconstruction surveys confirm occupied burrowing owl
habitat, Project activities shall be immediately halted. The qualified biologist shall coordinate with CDFW and prepare a Burrowing Owl Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to commencing Project
activities.

MM BIO-[C]: Avoidance of Nesting Birds
Nesting bird surveys shall be performed by a qualified
avian biologist no more than (3) days prior to vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities. Pre-construction surveys shall focus on both direct and indirect evidence of nesting, including nest locations and nesting behavior. The qualified avian biologist will make every effort to avoid potential nest predation as a result of survey and
monitoring efforts. If active nests are found during the pre- construction nesting bird surveys, a qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate nest buffer to be marked on the ground. Nest buffers are species specific and shall be at least 300 feet for passerines and 500 feet for raptors. A smaller or larger buffer may be determined by the qualified biologist familiar with the nesting phenology of the nesting species and based on nest and buffer monitoring results.

Established buffers shall remain on-site until a qualified biologist determines the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. Active nests and adequacy of the
established buffer distance shall be monitored daily by the qualified biologist until the qualified biologist has
determined the young have fledged or the Project has
been completed. The qualified biologist has the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit signs of disturbance.

No more than
three (3) days
prior to vegetation
clearing or
ground-disturbing
activities.

City of
Rancho
Mirage
MM BIO-[D]: Construction Noise
During all Project construction, the City of Rancho Mirage shall restrict use of equipment to hours least likely to disrupt wildlife (e.g., not at night or in early morning) and restrict use of generators except for temporary use in
emergencies. Power to sites can be provided by solar PV (photovoltaic) systems, cogeneration systems (natural gas generator), small micro-hydroelectric systems, or small wind turbine systems. The City shall ensure use of noise suppression devices such as mufflers or enclosure for
generators. Sounds generated from any means must be
below the 55-60 dB range within 50-feet from the source.

During Project
activities.

City of
Rancho
Mirage
MM BIO-[E]: Artificial Light
During Project construction and operation, the City of
Rancho Mirage shall eliminate all nonessential lighting throughout the Project area and avoid or limit the use of artificial light during the hours of dawn and dusk when many wildlife species are most active. The City shall
ensure that lighting for Project activities is shielded, cast downward, and does not spill over onto other properties or upward into the night sky (see the International Dark-Sky Association standards at http://darksky.org/) . The City shall ensure use LED lighting with a correlated color
During Project
construction and
operation.

City of
Rancho
Mirage
6-875

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
May 23, 2023

Page 13 ends

temperature of 3,000 Kelvins or less, proper disposal of hazardous waste, and recycling of lighting that contains toxic compounds with a qualified recycler.

6-876

2 Prepared For:

City of Rancho Mirage
Applicant:

FM 71777 LLC / Desert Island Golf Club
Prepared By:

MSA Consulting, Inc.

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN

HOTEL AMENDMENT
SP22-0002
March 2023
ATTACHMENT 10
6-877

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT
1 1.0 INTRODUCTION
Location The Desert Island Residential Community, Golf and Country Club is located on approximately 160 acres in the City of Rancho Mirage. It is bounded by Frank Sinatra Drive on the north and Bob Hope Drive on the east. Single-family residential development occurs on the south and west.

Purpose The purpose of the Desert Island Hotel Specific Plan Amendment is to facilitate development of a boutique resort hotel and hotel-managed private residences within the Desert Island Golf and Country Club. The SPA includes portions of APN 688-040-001, 688-050-005, 688-060-006 and 688-060-008.

Background The Desert Island project was originally
approved by the County of Riverside in 1971 with multiple residential towers, a 25-acre lake and an 18-hole golf course and 20,000 square foot clubhouse under Conditional Use Permit 1252 and Tract Map 4195. The project was annexed to Rancho Mirage in 1973 when the City incorporated. By 1979, three towers containing 226 units, the golf course, lake, clubhouse and ancillary buildings had all been constructed as per the original County approvals. However, in 1989, reliance on the County approvals for a fourth tower was denied by the City. To address this, the Desert Island Specific Plan was approved in 1991 to allow the construction of two additional residential towers along with tennis and a clubhouse expansion. Based on this, the clubhouse was enlarged to 38,000 square feet in 1994.

Almost 30 years later in 2022, the additional towers have not been built and the Desert Island Community Association has no intention of constructing them.
6-878

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT
2 Vision The project proponent owns the Desert Island Golf Course and Country Club and wishes to add a small hotel adjacent to the existing clubhouse. The proximity of these two facilities will create reciprocal benefits for each, supplying additional clientele and revenues to the clubhouse while allowing hotel guests to access ample pre-existing indoor dining, gathering, meeting and ballroom spaces. Introduction of the hotel will reinforce clubhouse viability for hosting indoor events/activities and providing convenient and elevated dining experiences for golfers, Desert Island residents and the general public.

Overview This Specific Plan Amendment will repurpose
approximately 9.3 acres of the existing golf course with a new 34-key boutique hotel and 11 private residences (under hotel management), along with passive outdoor gathering areas, tennis, pool, cafe and yoga amenities. A new golf training park and new maintenance building will replace the existing driving range and old maintenance building displaced by the new hotel. The proposed site plan is depicted in Section 2.0 with brief descriptions of each component. Permitted uses and
development standards for the new hotel and accessory
buildings are listed in Section 3.0.

Entitlements Approval of the following entitlements will implement this project:
Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002) to the Desert
Island Specific Plan to include hotel use.
General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002)
from “Open Space (OS-PV) to “Resort Hotel” (Rs-H).
Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001) to provide
design detail and ensure quality architecture, landscape, and site design.
Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) to create parcels for the hotel and hotel residences.
Environmental Assessment (EA22-0012) for CEQA
clearances.
Development Agreement (DA22-0003) to allow condo-
hotel units to exceed 10% of the combined total of condo- hotel units and hotel rooms.
6-879

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT
3 2.0 MASTER PLAN

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
6-880

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

4 PA-1A Hotel The centerpiece of the proposed project is a new 34-key boutique hotel. Each hotel key will be designed as a self- sufficient luxury residence with chef’s kitchen, generous floor plan, private garden and exclusive exterior entrance from the central “Grand Aisle” lined with unique, artistically designed canopies that will shade parking stalls with a dappled, filtered lighting effect. The hotel building will be architecturally significant but low in height and surrounded by mounding and generous landscape buffers to create a sense of privacy and screen the buildings from public views to the north and west.

Hotel buildings will line the Grand Aisle on both sides and each room is oriented to maximize panoramic views of the Santa Rosa Mountains south across the golf course. Interior space
accommodates rooms for reception and housekeeping
functions.

PA-1B Hotel Grounds/Gardens The area between the hotel
and the existing lake is planned as an outdoor desert garden for recreation and relaxation. The desert garden landscape will create a tranquil and luxurious setting for guests to enjoy against the backdrop of the lake and spectacular mountain views to the south. Amenities planned for this area include a hotel pool, pool café, tennis court and shaded cabanas.

PA-1C Residences The project also includes 11 private
condominium residences that will be fully managed and
maintained by the hotel operator. These low-slung,
architecturally significant residences will be available for purchase by individuals and will “live” like exclusive single- family luxury homes with private yards and pool. When not in use by the owner, these units can be made available for rental by the hotel operator. Presently, the developer plans to retain one of the residences for personal use.

PA-1D Yoga Pavilion/Golf Green A private yoga pavilion will be constructed on this small island owned by the golf course.

The existing bridge will be widened to 24’ and existing golf green reconfigured. Yoga classes will be available for hotel guests only.

PA-1E Access Drive The existing golf cart path will be realigned and widened to 24’ to provide a gated emergency vehicle access constructed to Fire Department standards.

PA-2A Maintenance Building The existing maintenance
structure will be replaced with a new maintenance building east of the main entry. The maintenance building will
accommodate handling of trash, recycling, food waste, and composting as well as rooms for growing micro-greens and other edible specialties for the clubhouse restaurant as well as a small batch distillery for agave beverages subject to a future Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The building placement allows for separation of maintenance and clubhouse/resort operations.

PA-2B Clubhouse/Parking This planning area contains the Golf Clubhouse and existing parking lots. No new structures are proposed in PA-2B. However, new parking spaces are added voluntarily near the new maintenance building to take
advantage of its extended driveway configuration to augment on-site parking capacity.

PA-2C Golf Practice Area The project reserves area for a golf training park as a replacement for the current driving range that will offer golfers professionally programmed devices/equipment and coaching to improve their game. The area will contain an 18-hole tournament putting green, short game training areas and free-standing virtual golf simulator equipment that provide golfers with digital feedback to improve their golf mechanics. 6-881

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

5 New Facilities Summary
New Facilities Number
Hotel Keys 34
Hotel Residences 11
Golf Maintenance Building 1
Golf Training Area 1
Hotel Gardens/Grounds 1
Hotel Tennis Court/Bathrooms 1
Hotel Pool 1
Hotel Pool Cafe 1
Hotel Yoga Pavilion 1

Circulation
The hotel will take primary access from the existing Desert Island main gate on Frank Sinatra Drive. No physical changes are proposed to the existing entry gatehouse, other than to keep the gates open during operating hours to eliminate any vehicle stacking onto Frank Sinatra Drive. Likewise, the resident gate and turnaround on Island Drive will be retained to restrict non- resident access to the towers.

Secondary access to Frank Sinatra Drive will be
accommodated by widening the existing gated entry at the northwest corner of the golf course from 12-feet to 24-feet to provide gated secondary emergency vehicle access.

Meetings/Gatherings
The new hotel is deliberately situated adjacent to the existing Desert Island clubhouse to leverage pre-existing indoor meeting and dining facilities. While not part of the proposed project, the golf clubhouse has an occupancy rating of 1,534 people, ample capacity to accommodate typical hotel events in the range from 50-300 guests (150-person average). The clubhouse routinely hosts Chamber of Commerce and other public events.

The Hotel’s Desert Gardens will provide scenic outdoor
gathering spaces on the hotel grounds, weather permitting. 6-882

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

6 Parking provision is shown below. New uses occur west of Island Drive and include the new hotel and hotel residences. East of Island Drive is the relocated golf maintenance building. As shown below, sufficient parking is provided in each use area. Dedicated garage and guest parking spaces are provided at each hotel residence. Ample self-parking for the hotel is provided along the “Grand Aisle” distributed evenly for convenient access to each guest room. East of Island Drive, the relocated maintenance building affords an opportunity for additional golf/maintenance and clubhouse parking, independent of the hotel project.

6-883

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

7 Traffic routing for the hotel is shown below. At the entry, southbound golf and hotel traffic will enter the project from Frank Sinatra Drive using the right-hand lane with a free flow right turn where an attendant will greet and direct guests to the appropriate parking area.

Errant vehicles would continue around the port-cochere driveway and exit at the main gate. Hotel traffic will use standard two-way drive aisles to access their room or residence and exit the hotel via the existing clubhouse driveway. Resident traffic will use the left- hand entry lane and proceed straight to the resident gate as they always have. From this point on, only residents and their guests have secure access to the Desert Island residential towers.

6-884

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

8 Vehicle stacking capacity is shown below. The main gate on Frank Sinatra Drive presently allows for stacking of 8 vehicles. However, with the new hotel project, the main gates will remain open during operating hours and no vehicle stopping or stacking will occur near Frank Sinatra Drive. When weather allows, vehicles may stop at a greeting station north of the clubhouse. This is not gated and is shown only as a worst-case stacking scenario., The existing 8 vehicle stacking is accommodated while adding an additional capacity for eight (8) vehicles without backing onto Frank Sinatra Drive or blocking incoming resident traffic. Even resident stacking capacity is greatly increased under this scenario.

6-885

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

9 Pedestrian circulation linking the hotel, hotel residence and hotel garden/pool areas is shown below. It employs a connected network of pedestrian paths and shared use, low-speed, dead-end driveways to safely and conveniently connect all hotel uses. 6-886

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

10 Sewer System Concept
The proposed sewer system is designed in two segments one east and one west of Island Drive. Each will gravity flow to a central lift station where it will be pumped to an existing 8-inch sewer main in Island Drive. As shown below, it will then gravity flow to the south. 6-887

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

11 Water System Concept
The proposed water system consists of a domestic line and a fire service line that connect to existing 12-inch and 18-inch water mains in Frank Sinatra Drive and Island Drive. These systems are designed to provide potable water and fire flow to the hotel facilities, residences and maintenance building as shown below.
6-888

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

12 Phasing Concept
The figure below shows the expected sequence of development for the project. This sequence and timing is subject to adjustment or reordering in response to market conditions so long as adequate infrastructure is provided to each phase. The southern hotel pad in Phase 4 will be left undisturbed or reseeded with live turf until constructed. Construction is expected to begin in early 2023 and be completed by the end of 2024 subject to market and economic factors.

6-889

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

13 3.0 Development Standards
This chapter identifies the development standards applicable to the Desert Island Specific Plan Amendment area. The establishment of the site-specific development standards set forth in this chapter are intended to guide orderly development within the Specific Plan Amendment area, while also maintaining some flexibility to respond to changing conditions which may be a factor in any long-term development.

USES
Development uses allowed within the S pecific P lan A mendment are shown below.

Allowable Uses Use Type
P - Permitted Use, D - Development Plan, C – Conditional Use, A - Accessory Use Hotel (PA-1A, 1B)
Outdoor Recreation P
Studios—Art, Dance, Music, Photography, Spa A
Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) P
Administrative Offices A
Hotels D
Personal Services A
Spa Facilities A
Hotel Accessory Uses 1 A
Residences (PA-1C)
Caretaker/ Employee Housing P
Condo-Hotel Units D
Residential Accessory Uses (RMCC 17.30.190 2 P

Yoga (PA-2D)
Studio – Yoga 3 D
Golf Course P
Maintenance (PA-2A)
Golf maintenance activities P
Indoor vegetable harvesting 4 P
Small batch distilleries 4 C
All
Public/Private Utilities P
Satellite Antennas C
Alternative Fuels and Recharging Facilities A
Notes:

1. Accessory Uses not listed are allowed as per RMCC 17.30.090.

2. Accessory Uses not listed are allowed as per RMCC 17.30.190.

3. For hotel use only.

4. For consumption at Desert Island dining establishments only. Definitions are found in Section 8.0.

6-890

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

14 STANDARDS
Development standards for each Planning Subarea are shown below.

Hotel and Grounds (PA-1A, 1-B)
Max site coverage 45%
Min. bldg. setback from property line 10 ft
Min. bldg. separation 10 ft
Accessory Structures Per RMCC Section 17.30.090
Max. bldg. height 24 ft or 1 story, the lesser
Shade Canopies/Artwork 16 ft
Required parking per guest room 1.1 space

Residences (PA-1C)
Max site coverage 40%
Min. bldg. setback from property line 10 ft
Min. bldg. separation 10 ft
Accessory Structures Per RMCC Section 17.30.190
Max. bldg. height 24 ft or 1 story, the lesser
Required parking per unit 2-car garage plus ½ guest space

6-891

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

15 Yoga Pavilion (PA-1D)
Max site coverage 20%
Min. building setback from property line 10 ft
Max. building height 20 ft or 1 story whichever is less Required parking None, ancillary to hotel

Maintenance Building (PA-2A)
Max site coverage N/A 1
Min. bldg. setback from property line 10 ft
Max. bldg. height 20 ft or 1 story whichever is less
Required parking 2 22 spaces, ancillary to golf course

1. Part of the large golf course parcel and coverage is not relevant.

2. Based on the maintenance building’s usage per Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.26.040 Number of Parking Spaces Required.

Golf Training Area (PA-2C)
Max site coverage N/A 1
Min. bldg. setback from property line 10 ft
Max. bldg. height 20 ft or 1 story whichever is less
Required parking None, ancillary to golf course

1. Part of the large golf course parcel and coverage is not relevant.

6-892

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

16 4.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES

ARCHITECTURE
Design Intent
The goal of the Desert Island Resort Hotel and Residences is to create an exceptional architectural experience that
celebrates the grace and beauty of mid-century modern
design and honors the architectural heritage of the Coachella Valley.

The design relies on simple, lightweight steel frame
structures organized in an elegant, linear fashion to support a broad metal clad gable roof. The minimalistic silhouettes of the buildings are in deliberate contrast to the rugged
ridgeline of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the South and offer an abundance of shade under which the various components of the resort can nestle quietly and modestly into the hotel landscape. This environmentally attuned and forward-
thinking architecture supports passive heating and cooling strategies which minimize energy consumption to reduce
lifecycle and maintenance costs and are intended to make the Desert Island Resort Hotel and Residences an immediate highly-regarded architectural landmark in the community.

Materials
The hotel and project architecture will incorporate natural materials and textures such as wood and stone, concrete, gravel and crushed granite, and painted metal panels and structural steel using a warm palette of earth-tone
colors. Characteristic features will be set against the lush landscape design, creating an atmosphere of earth friendly luxury and privacy for guests. Large expanses of glass doors will maximize the natural light exposure and will create both visual and physical connections with the outdoors. There will be unparalleled views of the surrounding property and
mountains from every room. The over-arching roof structures of all the buildings double as shade elements, extending the outdoor living spaces and protecting guests and the building interiors from the hot desert sun.

Roofs
The low slope gable roofs will be a signature element of the hotel and project architecture. By maintaining a consistent and rigorous design approach for both the main buildings and support buildings, the collective architecture has the feel of a village campus. There will be no rooftop mounted
mechanical systems. Solar panels will be integrated into the roof design, generating sustainable electricity for the property while maintaining a simple and elegant roof profile.

Doors and Windows
Large spans of glass doors and windows will create a visual and physical connection between indoor and outdoor spaces bringing natural light into interior living spaces. Architectural features such as roof overhangs, covered entryways, and shade trellises will enhance the façades and demarcate
entrances as well as provide shade and reduce daytime heat gain.

Design Features
Articulation of the façades using deeply recessed doors and windows, planters, landscaping and architectural demising walls between units, and the colonnade of structural columns add visual interest and depth to the buildings. Architectural emphasis on spaces for outdoor amenities, such as water features and fountains, natural footpaths, and shade trellises, create a seamless blend of natural environments and building structures. The use of columns and trellises as structures to 6-893

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

17 grow plants and vines further enhances the contribution of the natural desert landscaping to the hotel and project architecture.

Color
All materials, accessory structures, signage and wayfinding elements within the campus grounds will maintain a
common, consistent theme and style. Changes in material will be applied purposefully and in a manner that corresponds to variations in the building mass and use. A balanced and respectful relationship between the materials used for the architecture such as steel, glass, wood, stone cladding and concrete, and softer materials such as gravel, crushed granite and landscaping will enhance the overall feeling of serenity and peace throughout the property. The hotel, hotel
residences and supporting facilities will embrace a highly curated relationship with the surrounding landscape.

The Desert Island Resort Hotel and Residences embraces the classic principles developed by the great mid-century
modern architects in their pursuit of designs that unite modern architecture with the natural landscape and
topography of the desert. The hotel and project architecture will seamlessly blend interior and exterior spaces to create a luxurious and serene setting in which guests may enjoy all of the natural beauty available in this unique setting.

LANDSCAPE
The project is nestled within an existing golf course. It will be fully landscaped with an emphasis on desert appropriate plant materials surrounding the proposed buildings and
throughout the hotel grounds. This will transition from the existing, more lushly planted, golf course fairways that surround the hotel campus. Rhythmically placed palms will be planted along the Grand Aisle between the two hotel
buildings.

A screen hedge will be planted inside the existing Frank Sinatra Drive perimeter wall to provide a sense of seclusion and privacy for hotel guests and golfers and to hide buildings within view of the public street.

6-894

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT
18 5.0 ADMINISTRATION
Administrative Changes - Minor modifications that are
consistent with the purpose and intent of the Desert Island Hotel Amendment are allowed at the discretion of the Development Services Director or designee. It is intended that City Staff have the flexibility to interpret the details of project development as well as items described in general terms without requiring a Specific Plan Amendment. Representative examples of such changes may include, but are not limited to:
Changes to infrastructure systems with City approval.
Deviations up to 10% from development standards.
Redistribution/relocation of parking spaces so long as the minimum required number is provided.
Refinement of schematic building and site features.

Formal Amendments - If it is determined that the proposed change is not consistent with the intent of the Hotel Amendment approval, it may be further amended in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 17.54 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code (Municipal Code).

Unique Uses – The project is subject to the City’s standard Temporary Use and Special Event permitting requirements for any large event that falls outside of normal golf, clubhouse, and hotel operations as described herein or that would exceed on- site parking capacity.

Municipal Code – Standards included in this SP will supersede those of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. Standards not included will be subject to the RMCC.

Project Financing – Private financing is proposed for this project.

No public funding is requested.

6.0 RELATION TO GENERAL PLAN
This Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the Rancho Mirage General Plan in accordance with following policies:

LU 2
The project promotes a balanced mix and
functional integration of uses by situating the new
hotel adjacent to an existing, underutilized golf
clubhouse.

LU 2.3 The project promotes infill development.

LU 2.7 The project will bring a new resort hotel to the City.

LU 4
The project will bring added revenues to the City
via Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) paid by the
hotel.

CD 1
The project will promote Rancho Mirage as an
“Oasis in the Desert” by leveraging the
exceptional scenic vistas at the Desert Island to
expose hotel visitors to Rancho Mirage as a tourist
destination.

CD 8.2
The project proposes building materials and
methods that promote resource conservation
and sustainability.

CD 9.5
The project incorporates playful artistic elements
such as textured paving and artistic shade
canopies.

CD 10.4
The project proposes 100% shading of hotel
parking spaces via artistically designed overhead
canopies.

CD 11.1 Project parking is completely screened from
public view.

CD 12.1
The hotel includes attractive, people-friendly
outdoor spaces activated by the hotel pool,
tennis court, cabanas, café and yoga pavilion.
6-895

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT
19 7.0 DEFINITIONS
Indoor Vegetable Harvesting
A room in the maintenance building not exceeding 2,500 SF to be used for harvesting edible vegetables in a controlled growth environment using soil, artificial or natural light, water and organic fertilizer. This is a benign indoor use not requiring special permitting but is identified here as a unique sustainability measure that facilitates the owner’s vision of healthy, fresh “farm to table” dining at on-site restaurants.

Small Batch Distillery
A room in the maintenance building not exceeding 1,200 SF to be used in processing agave plants grown on the golf course on a very small scale. The resulting product would be tequila for consumption on-site at the Desert Island Clubhouse restaurants.

The production of tequila first requires baking and shredding the plant. The juice is then extracted, fermented, distilled, aged and bottled, not unlike what occurs in a winery. Equipment used in the process includes an oven, a mechanical shredder, stainless steel tanks or wooden barrels and distilling equipment. This use would be subject to a Conditional Use Permit if/when it is proposed.
6-896

-1-
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:

City of Rancho Mirage DRAFT 6-22-23
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Attention: City Clerk
APNs: [INSERT]
(SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER’S USE)
(Exempt from Recording Fees Pursuant to Government Code Section 27383 - Benefits City)

STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN

THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE,
AND
FM71777 LLC
This Statutory Development Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into this day of , , by and among the CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, a municipal corporation located in the County of Riverside, State of California ("City"), and FM71777 LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code and Chapter 17.56 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code.

R E C I T A L S:

WHEREAS, the City is a charter city and recognized for certain purposes as a political subdivision of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of that certain property in the City of Rancho Mirage, County of Riverside, State of California, located within the community commonly known as Desert Island, and more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Subject Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is currently improved with a golf course, clubhouse, maintenance building, and related facilities; and
WHEREAS, Developer intends to redevelop a portion of the Subject Property by modifying portions of the golf course and replacing the existing driving range and maintenance ATTACHMENT 11
6-897

-2-
building with a (i) boutique hotel with up to 34 keys, pool, and related amenities, (ii) up to 11 residential condominium (condo-hotel resort) units, (iii) a new golf practice facility, (iv) a new maintenance building, and (v) expanded parking (collectively, the “Project”); and

WHEREAS, on , at a duly noticed public hearing conducted by the City Council, the City Council approved Resolution No. , adopting a mitigated negative declaration (the “MND”), and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (“MMRP”) for the Project, based upon its determination that there is no substantial evidence in the whole record before it that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment, and that has not been mitigated to a level of less than significant, and that the MND reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis of the Project and its potential impacts on the environment consistent with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines; and

WHEREAS, on , a Notice of Determination (“NOD”) regarding the City’s adoption of the MND was filed with the Office of the County Clerk of the County of Riverside and posted for at least 30 days in the Office of the County Clerk; and

WHEREAS, since the Project did not require any discretionary approvals from any state agency, the NOD was not filed with the State’s Office of Planning and Research; and

WHEREAS, no complaints, lawsuits, claims or petitions have been filed against the City on or before (within the requisite 30-day period), or anytime thereafter, challenging the City Council’s adoption of the MND and approval of the Project Entitlements (as defined below); and

WHEREAS, on , at a duly noticed public hearing conducted by the City Council, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. approving Development Agreement Case No. DA22-0003; introduced Ordinance No. approving General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA22-0002; introduced Ordinance No. approving Specific Plan Amendment Case No. SP22-0002; adopted Resolution No. approving Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22-0004; and adopted Resolution No. approving Preliminary Development Plan Case No. PDP22-0001 for the Project (collectively, the “Project Entitlements”); and

WHEREAS, to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted Sections 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code ("Development Agreement Statute") which authorizes cities to enter into property development agreements with any person(s) or entity(ies) having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such real property in order to establish certain development rights in the real property; and

-3-
after project approval in exchange for assurances that the City will receive certain payment of fees, the installation of certain infrastructure, and other benefits the City cannot otherwise unilaterally impose as conditions of approval of the project outside the context of a negotiated development agreement; and

WHEREAS, this Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning for and secure orderly development of the Subject Property and Project (as specifically described in this Agreement below), assure progressive installation of necessary improvements, and ensure attainment of the maximum effective utilization of resources within the City at the least economic cost to its citizens; and

WHEREAS, based on the foregoing recitals, the City has determined that this Agreement is appropriate under the Development Agreement Statute and Chapter 17.56 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, this Agreement is voluntarily entered into in consideration of the benefits to and the rights created in favor of each of the parties hereto and in reliance upon the various representations and warranties contained herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Statute and Chapter 17.56 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code and in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises of the parties contained herein, the parties agree as follows:

A G R E E M E N T:

Incorporation of Recitals

The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference as though fully set forth herein.

Effective Date

This Agreement shall become effective on or after the effective date (“Effective Date”) of the ordinance enacting this Agreement (“Enacting Ordinance”); provided, however, that if a City- wide referendum election is called and the Enacting Ordinance is repealed, this Agreement shall be null and void as of the date of the final declaration by the City Council of the repeal of the Enacting Ordinance.

Subject Property

The “Subject Property” consists of approximately 17.2 acres of real property located within the Desert Island community, located at the corner of Bob Hope Drive and Frank Sinatra Drive, as more particularly described in Exhibit “A,” upon which the Project will be developed in accordance with this Agreement.
6-899

-4-
The Project

The “Project” shall include redeveloping a portion of the Subject Property by modifying portions of the golf course and replacing the existing driving range and maintenance building with (i) a one-story boutique hotel with up to 34 keys, pool, and related amenities, (ii) up to 11 condo- hotel resort units, (iii) a new golf practice facility, (iv) a new maintenance building, and (v) expanded parking. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for any of the condo-hotel resort units until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the boutique hotel and said hotel is fully operational and accepting guests.

Purpose

The purpose of this Agreement is to provide the Developer with the vested right to develop the Project consistent with the Project Entitlements, the applicable conditions of approval adopted by the City Council, and the mitigation measures set forth in the MND, without causing any short or long term negative fiscal impacts on the City.

Term

The parties agree that the Term of this Agreement shall be fifteen (15) years commencing on the Effective Date, subject to any extension and early termination provisions described in this Agreement.

Termination

This Agreement shall be terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events:

(a) Expiration of the fifteen (15) year term;

(b) Completion of construction of the Project in accordance with this Agreement and the Project Entitlements, the City’s approval and/or issuance of all necessary ministerial permits, including without limitation all necessary grading and building permits, and all required certificates of occupancy and final inspections and the City’s formal acceptance of all public right- of-way dedications and off-site public improvements required under this Agreement and the Project Entitlements;
(c) As for any specific lot containing a residential dwelling or other structure situated within the Subject Property, this Agreement shall be terminated as to such lot upon the issuance by City of the necessary certificate of occupancy or final inspections, as the case may be, for the subject residential dwelling unit or other structure constructed thereon; (d) Entry of final judgment or issuance of a final order by a court of competent jurisdiction over the Project or Subject Property directing the City to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the City’s approval of this Agreement or any material component of the Project Entitlements;
6-900

-5-
(e) The effective date of a party’s election to terminate the Agreement in response to an uncured default by the other party, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. (f) In the event of a termination of this Agreement with respect to any portion of the Project or Subject Property, all rights and obligations of the parties with respect to such portion of the Project or Subject Property, shall automatically terminate and be of no further force, effect or operation. However, no termination of this Agreement with respect to any portion of the Project or Subject Property shall affect in any way the parties’ rights and obligations hereunder with respect to any other portion of the Project or Subject Property. (g) In no event shall the termination or expiration of this Agreement result in the automatic termination or expiration of any duly approved or issued Project Entitlement and its related approvals, such as but not limited to, any permits, certificates of occupancy, final inspections and/or licenses or any development right or entitlement, vested or otherwise, duly approved or issued by the City, without further action of City as may be required by this Agreement or any applicable rule, regulation, procedure or law.

Cooperation by Developer

Developer shall, in a timely manner, provide the City with all documents, applications, plans and other information necessary for the City to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and cause its planners, engineers and consultants to do the same. Developer also shall apply in a timely manner for such other permits and approvals from other governmental or quasi- governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the Subject Property and/or Project as may be required for the development of, or provision of services to, the Subject Property and/or Project, as contemplated by this Agreement.

Filing and Processing Fees

Notwithstanding anything else herein, Developer shall pay all applicable filing and processing fees pursuant to Section 17.36.050 “Fees” of the Municipal Code in the amounts set forth in the schedule of fees that is in effect at the time the Project Entitlements and related permits, licenses, certificates are formally reviewed and approved by the City.

Public Benefit Fee; Additional Cost Reimbursement

(a) Public Benefit Fee. As consideration for City’s approval and performance of its obligations set forth herein, in addition to any other fee or charge for which the Project is subject to, to offset the impacts that fractional owners will have on public facilities, the Developer agrees to pay an annual public facilities fee (“Public Benefit Fee”) in the amount of Seventy Thousand dollars ($70,000.00), adjusted annually commencing July 1, 2024, in accordance with the increase in the consumer price index for Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario Area, designed as “All Urban Consumers (Current Series), All Items, December 2017=100”. If such index is discontinued, then such index shall automatically be replaced with a similar index reflecting the CPI change of All Urban Consumers in Riverside County. In no event, however, shall application of the CPI Index 6-901

-6-
reduce the amount of the Public Benefit Fee (or unpaid portion thereof) below the amount in effect prior to any applicable adjustment date. The Public Benefit Fee shall be used by City to offset public safety costs. Developer shall receive dollar-for-dollar credit against the Public Benefit Fee for all transient occupancy tax revenue actually received by the City from the 11 condo-hotel resort units through hotel operations, which revenue shall be reported by the hotel operator separately from the 34 boutique hotel keys. For the avoidance of doubt, if the 11 condo-hotel resort units generate more than $70,000 (as adjusted as provided herein) in a given year, no Public Benefit Fee shall be owed for that year and any excess transient occupancy tax shall be retained by the City without credit toward future years. Without limiting the generality of Section 25 (Nexus Reasonable Relationship Challenges), Developer acknowledges by its approval and execution of this Agreement that it is voluntarily agreeing to pay the Public Benefit Fee, that its obligation is an essential term of this Agreement and is not severable from City’s obligations and Developers rights hereunder, and that Developer expressly waives any constitutional, statutory, or common law right it may have in the absence of this Agreement to protest or challenge the payment of such fee on any ground whatsoever, including without limitation pursuant to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, California Constitution Article I Section 19, the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et seq.), that it is an unlawful tax, or otherwise. In addition to any other remedy set forth herein for Developer’s default, if Developer fails to timely pay any portion of the Public Benefit Fee when due, City shall have the right to withhold issuance of any further building permits, occupancy permits, or other development or building permits for the Project.
(b) Additional Cost Reimbursement. In addition to the payment of the requisite processing fees, Developer shall reimburse the City for the actual costs and expenses incurred by the City for all services provided by the City and its consultants, including legal counsel, for review, preparation and processing of this Agreement and the Project Entitlements, and any research related thereto, which are not factored in the City’s filing and processing fees.

Furthermore, to the extent that the City, on behalf of the Developer, attempts to enter into binding agreements with other entities in order to assure the availability of certain permits and approvals or services necessary for development of the Subject Property and/or the Project as described in this Agreement, Developer shall reimburse City for all costs and expenses incurred in connection with seeking and entering into any such agreements, subject to Developer’s consent to such costs and expenses, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Any fees, assessments or other amounts payable by the City pursuant to any such agreements described herein shall be borne by the Developer except where the Developer has notified the City in writing, prior to the City entering into any such agreement, that it does not desire for City to execute said agreement. Should Developer refuse to provide its consent with respect to the above matters, the City reserves the right to refrain from entering into the respective agreement or paying any fees, assessment, or other amounts on behalf of the Subject Property and/or Project. (c) Perpetuity. This Section shall survive in perpetuity. 6-902

-7-
General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA22-0002

The Project Entitlements include General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No.

GPZMA22-0002, which changes the existing zoning and General Plan Land Use Designation of the Subject Property from OS-PV (Private Open Space) to Rs-H (Resort Hotel). The City Council has found and determined that approval of the General Plan Zoning Map Amendment is in the public interest in that it will allow for the beneficial use of the Subject Property in a manner that (1) is complimentary to the existing residences within the Desert Island Specific Plan community; (2) will allow for the development of a boutique hotel and condo-hotel resort units to enhance the Subject Property and support the overall sustainability of the existing golf course for the benefit of the existing residents as well as the new Project residents, and visitors; and (3) will generate Transit Occupancy Tax (“TOT”) and sales tax to enhance the City’s long-term ability to provide public service to its residents, businesses and visitors. The City further finds approval of General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA22-0002 will be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City’s General Plan; would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City; is a physically suitable land use designation for the Subject Property and ensures development of desirable character which would be harmonious with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood.

Condo-Hotel Resort Unit Owner and Occupancy Restrictions.

Pursuant to Section 17.30.095 of the Municipal Code, the development standards applicable to resort hotels shall apply to the Project’s individually owned condo-hotel resort units projects, unless otherwise provided below:
(a) Number of Condo-Hotel Resort Units. As permitted by Section 17.30.095 C. 1. of the Municipal Code, this Agreement shall permit Developer to construct up to eleven (11) individually owned condo-hotel resort units and thirty-four (34) hotel keys, with the number of condo-hotel resort units not to exceed one-third of the total sum of both condo-hotel resort units and hotel keys planned for the Project.

(b) Owner Occupancy. As permitted by Section 17.30.095 C. 2. of the Municipal Code, this Agreement shall permit owners of condo-hotel resort units to occupy their units on a full-time basis, with no limit as to the number of days of occupancy per calendar year. Owners of condo-hotel resort units may assign occupancy rights to third parties, subject to a maximum of two assignments per calendar year, and all such assignments shall be for periods of at least twenty- eight (28) days or more. Condo-hotel resort units shall not be rented for twenty-seven consecutive days or less unless such rentals are handled exclusively through the Project’s boutique hotel operations as described below in subsection (e). The owner occupancy restrictions set forth herein shall be incorporated as a condition, covenant and restriction in the Project’s CC&Rs, which shall be enforceable against all condo-hotel resort unit owners by the City and the respective owners’ association.

(c) Ownership Limitations. The condo-hotel resort units shall be subject to the ownership limitations set forth in Section 17.90.020, which provide that condo-hotel units in the Rs-H Zone may be wholly owned or owned on a fractional basis, except that the maximum number 6-903

-8-
of fractional shares per condo-hotel resort unit shall be limited to four (4) fractional shares. The owner limitations set forth herein shall be incorporated as a condition, covenant and restriction in the Project’s CC&Rs, which shall be enforceable against all condo-hotel unit owners by the City and the respective owners’ association.

(d) Conversions Prohibited. No hotel rooms or other structures constructed on the Subject Property shall be converted to a condo-hotel resort unit, unless otherwise permitted pursuant to a duly approved amendment to this Agreement.

(e) Securities Exchange Commission Registration. If required under any applicable law or regulation, each condo-hotel resort unit shall be registered with the Securities Exchange Commission in order to extend the necessary investor protection.

(f) Rental of Condo-Hotel Resort Units.

1. As a condition to renting each condo-hotel resort unit, the owner of the condo-hotel resort unit shall enter into an agreement with the Project’s boutique hotel management entity/company which, at a minimum, shall provide that the management entity/company will collect all transient occupancy taxes required on rentals of that owner’s unit, outside the owner occupancy periods and manage all permissible rental operations for periods of twenty-seven consecutive days or less. The boutique hotel management entity/company shall then be responsible for forwarding transient occupancy taxes to the City in accordance with the City’s transient occupancy tax regulations as set forth in the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code and any related procedures and regulations.

2. Any condo-hotel resort units owned, in whole or in part by the boutique hotel or professional management entity/company shall be made available for rent for transient occupancy for no more than twenty-seven consecutive days by any given transient, at all times regardless of whether the hotel or management entity/company would otherwise have occupancy rights as an owner under this section.

3. Developer shall operate the boutique hotel or shall contract with a management company that either (i) has at least five consecutive years of experience operating high-end boutique hotel properties and collecting and reporting transient occupancy taxes to consult on the Project, including but not limited to the collection and remittance of transient occupancy taxes, or (ii) has otherwise been approved by the City in the exercise of its reasonable discretion. Developer shall provide copies of any hotel management contracts upon request of City.

4. In the event either (1) this Development Agreement is assigned in whole or in part in accordance with the terms herein, and/or (2) the obligation to collect transient occupancy taxes is transferred to a third-party; then, any future assignee and/or management entity/company shall be subject to Rancho Mirage Municipal Code section 17.30.095 (Condo-hotel projects), subpart D(2). Moreover, in the event Developer fails to comply with applicable Rancho Mirage 6-904

-9-
Municipal Code provisions regarding collection and remittance of transient occupancy taxes, Developer shall be subject to Rancho Mirage Municipal Code section 17.30.095 (Condo-hotel projects), subpart D(2).

5. Should there be any inconsistency or conflict between the development standards and limitations and restrictions set forth in Section 17.30.095 of the Municipal Code with respect to development, ownership and operation of condo-hotel resort units and the provisions specifically set forth in this Section 12, the provisions set forth hereinabove shall prevail and be applied to the Project.

Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22-0004

The Subject Property includes a “subdivision,” as defined in Government Code Section 66473.7. The Parties agree that Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22-0004 complies with Government Code Section 66473.7 and all other applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Sections 66410 et seq.); and that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements, are consistent with the City’s General Plan, and all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, including without limitation Title 16 “Subdivisions” of the Municipal Code. The Parties further acknowledge and agree that: (a) the Subject Property is physically suitable for the Project; (b) the Subject Property is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; (c) the design of the subdivision and the Project’s proposed improvements, as mitigated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”), are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; (d) the design of the subdivision and type of proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; and (e) the design of the subdivision and the type of proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the Subject Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Developer consents to the application of the conditions of approval specifically set forth in Exhibit “B,” attached hereto.

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 Subject Property, pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Entitlements, shall be extended for the greater period of (a) the term of this Agreement or (b) such maximum total time as is permitted in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Sections 66410 et seq.) or Applicable Law.

Preliminary Development Plan Permit

The Developer has submitted a complete application for a Preliminary Development Plan Permit for the Project. Pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, the Project’s Preliminary Development Plan Permit may adjust or modify, where necessary and justifiable, all applicable development standards (e.g., building envelope [coverage, height, and setbacks], fence and wall heights, landscaping, off street parking [design and ratios], open space, street layout, etc.). The 6-905

-10-
Parties agree that the Project is: (a) allowed within the respective zoning district; (b) generally in compliance with all of the applicable provisions of Title 17 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code, including prescribed development standards and applicable design guidelines; (c) consistent with the General Plan; (d) a comprehensive development incorporating a more enhanced environment and architectural excellence (e.g., appropriate variety of structure placement and orientation opportunities, appropriate mix of structure sizes, high quality architectural design, increased amounts of landscaping and open space, improved solutions to the design and placement of parking facilities, etc.) than would normally be possible under more standard district development requirements. The Parties further agree that: (i) the design, location, shape, size, operating characteristics, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access and public services and utilities (e.g., drainage, fire protection, sewers, water, etc.), would ensure that the proposed development would not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and the respective zoning district; (ii) the design, location, and proposed uses would be compatible with the character of existing development in the surrounding neighborhood; (iii) the Subject Property is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of development being proposed; and (iv) the Project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and, as mitigated by the measures contained within the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”), there would be no potential significant negative effects upon environmental quality and natural resources that would not be properly mitigated and monitored.

Sign Program

Developer shall apply for a Sign Program for the Project, pursuant to Chapter 17.28 of the Municipal Code, and the City shall expeditiously process Developer’s application upon submission thereof.

Grading Plans and Grading Permit

Upon formal acceptance and approval of Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22-0004, Developer shall submit to the City a complete application for a Grading Permit and the requisite Grading Plans for development of each phase of the Project, which the City shall expeditiously process for approval consistent with the terms and conditions of Title 16 Subdivisions of the Municipal Code, the Project Entitlements, and the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”)..

Section 18. Vehicle Stacking and Gate Requirements

(a) Vehicle Stacking. If the Project adversely affects traffic circulation in the immediate area, including but not limited, vehicle stacking on Frank Sinatra Drive, Developer shall (1) be subject to subpart “c” of this Section, and (2) shall take all reasonably necessary steps to conduct a traffic analysis deemed reasonable by the City, at its sole and reasonable discretion, and install any improvements and/or otherwise modify the Project and/or Subject Property to 6-906

-11-
sufficiently mitigate the impact to City’s reasonable satisfaction, subject to approval by the City Engineer, which may include, but not be limited to, installation of a deceleration lane on Frank Sinatra to prevent traffic disturbance.
(b) Gates to Remain Open. To limit the impact of traffic congestion caused by the Project, the main gates located on Island Drive approximately 80 feet south of Frank Sinatra Drive, shall remain open during all operational hours of the boutique hotel, which is currently 24 hours a day, seven days a week, all days of the year.
(d) Parking, Deliveries, Construction and Staging Activity. Without limiting the generality of the forgoing, Developer covenants and agrees that any and all construction staging and related activities, deliveries, employee and public parking shall occur only on the Subject Property and at no time shall any public road(s), including without limitation Frank Sinatra Drive, be used for such purposes. Developer shall be solely responsible for compliance with the same, whether any such activity is performed by a third party, such as but not limited to any employee, agent, affiliate, contractor or subcontractors, delivery driver or independent contractor. (e) Ingress. There shall at all times be at least two lanes of ingress, absent maintenance or other emergency activities requiring a closure; provided, however, Developer shall not be relieved of its other obligations set forth in this Section due to any such closure. Developer shall ensure the easterly ingress lane as depicted on Exhibit “C”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, shall not be used by anyone accessing the Project. At a minimum, the existing gate south of the main entry on Frank Sinatra Drive and/or the proposed new resident gate shall be maintained in such a manner deemed acceptable by the City Engineer that prevents vehicular access from the resort use to the adjacent existing residential use. (f) Violation. In the event Developer, or any approved assignees or successor(s)-in- interest, violate this provision, Developer shall pay to City an amount not to exceed One Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($1,000.00) for each violation of this provision. Such amount shall annually increase by the same percentage as the increase in the Consumer Price Index published by the United States Department of Labor for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario Area, designated as “All Urban Consumers (Current Series), All Items, December 2017=100, or other index which replaces said index for Riverside County. The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that if Developer breaches its obligation as specified in herein, such breach would result in damages to the City in an amount not readily ascertainable by the Parties, and being that it is impracticable and difficult to fix the amount of such damages, the Parties hereby agree that such damage would be approximately equal to amounts incurred by City and that Developer shall pay this amount as liquidated damages for each and every such breach, and that such amount is reasonable and not a penalty. The covenants and obligations herein shall survive in perpetuity.

Expedited Entitlement Processing and Inspections

The City shall use reasonable good faith efforts to conduct all inspections and process all permits, plans and other approvals necessary to implement the Project in an expeditious manner. To facilitate such expedited entitlement processing and inspections, Developer agrees to pay the City’s overtime rates or third-party costs associated with such expediting to the extent 6-907

-12-
requested by Developer.

Commencement of Construction

Upon the City’s approval of Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22-0004, the Developer may submit Improvement Plans to the City pursuant to Chapter 16.20 of the Municipal Code for purposes of processing the proper building and grading plans and permits, and other necessary ministerial approvals to commence grading, acquire easements, install utilities and construct the Project’s public improvements, private and public streets within or outside the Subject Property, perimeter walls and fencing, the Project’s entry features, and other common area improvements, which may occur prior to approval and recordation of any final map; provided, however, that no building permit shall be issued until the City has approved a commercial Final Development Plan Permit for the Project that covers the structure or other improvement that is the subject of that building permit.

Vested Rights and Applicable Rules, Regulations and Policies

Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Developer shall have the vested right to develop the Project pursuant to the rules, regulations, and policies governing the use, density, intensity, design, improvement, construction, building and occupancy standards, in effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement, as set forth in this Agreement, the other Project Entitlements, Title 17 “Zoning” of the Municipal Code, and all other applicable legal requirements in effect as of the Effective Date (collectively, “Applicable Law”). In light of the foregoing, the City shall apply the Applicable Law when considering any actions or decisions pertaining to both discretionary and ministerial permits related to the Project and Subject Property. It is the intent of City and Developer that the vesting of development rights of Developer shall include the permitted land uses, density and intensity of use of the Subject Property, timing or phasing of development, zoning, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the location and size of public improvements and other terms and conditions of development of the Project as set forth in the Project Entitlements and this Agreement.
(a) In accordance with Government Code Section 65866, nothing herein shall be construed to limit the City's authority to apply new rules, regulations and policies to the Project which do not conflict with the Applicable Law, including but not limited to any taxes subsequently enacted or amended by the City, nor to limit the City’s police power to implement, based upon appropriate and adequate findings, specific emergency measures necessary to protect against real and actual threats to the health and safety of City residents.

(b) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, the City may apply to the Project, at any time during the term of this Agreement, the then-current California Building Code, California Fire Code, and other uniform construction codes, provided that any such uniform code shall apply to the Project only to the extent that such code has been adopted by the City, and is in effect on a City-wide basis. 6-908

-13-
(c) As provided in California Government Code Section 65869.5, this Agreement shall not preclude the application to the Project of changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies, to the extent that such changes are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations (“Changes in the Law”). In the event Changes in the Law prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended, or performance thereof delayed, as may be necessary to comply with the Changes in the Law, and City and Developer shall take such action as may be required pursuant to this Agreement.

(d) Unless ordered by a court of law, or to the extent provided by state law, the City shall not impose on the Project (whether by action of the City Council or other local legislative body, or by initiative, referendum or other means) any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, standard, directive, condition or other measure (each, individually, a “City Law”) that is in conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement, or that reduces the development rights or assurances provided by this Agreement. If the City attempts to apply to the Project a City Law that Developer believes to conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement, Developer shall provide to the City a written notice describing the legal and factual basis for Developer's position.

(e) The City shall not adopt or enact any City Law, or take any other action which would violate the express or implied provisions, conditions, or intent of any of the Project Entitlements. Developer reserves the right to challenge in court any City Law that would, in Developer's opinion, conflict with Applicable Law (including this Agreement) or reduce the development rights provided by this Agreement. Should any initiative, referendum, or other measure be enacted, and any failure to apply such measure by City to the Project be legally challenged, Developer agrees to fully defend and indemnify the City against such challenge, including providing all necessary legal services (with counsel reasonably selected by Developer in consultation with the City Attorney), bearing all costs therefor, and otherwise holding the City harmless from all costs and expenses of such legal challenge and litigation.

(f) In the event a City Law is enacted, whether by action of the City Council, or by initiative, referendum (other than a referendum which specifically overturns the City's approval of this Agreement or the Project Entitlements), or otherwise, which relates to the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of new development or construction in the City or, more particularly, development and construction of all or any part of the Project, and that is in conflict with the Applicable Law or this Agreement, such City Law shall not apply to the Project or any portions thereof.

Minor Revisions

Minor revisions to the permits, licenses, certificates and other entitlements related to the Subject Property and/or Project shall not require an amendment to this Agreement, provided that the City finds and determines that the proposed change or modification is consistent with the development standards and guidelines applicable to the Project pursuant to this Agreement, the Project Entitlements, and the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”)..

The City’s community development director (“Director”) may approve a minor modification to allow refinements and adjustments to the entitlements, so long as the proposed modifications are 6-909

-14-
consistent with the intent of the approved entitlements and do not increase the number of lots, units or buildings, nor increase the height of a previously approved building by more than 6 inches beyond that specified in the approved PDP. If, in the opinion of the Director, the amendment is not minor, a Major Modification shall be submitted. The Developer shall have the right to appeal the Director decision under Chapter 17.76 of the RMMC.

City Impact Fees

Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, Developer shall pay the City’s Development Impact Fees in effect as of the Effective Date. A schedule of the applicable City Development Impact Fees is attached as Exhibit ”D”. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, City may impose subsequently enacted development impact fees, provided they are generally applicable to similarly situated projects throughout the City, and not solely this Project.

The Developer shall pay the City’s Development Impact Fees set forth in Chapter 3.29 of the Municipal Code on all new or converted development square footage at the City’s commercial rates in effect as of the Effective Date. A schedule of the applicable City Development Impact Fees is attached as Exhibit D.

Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program

The Developer shall pay the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program (“TUMF”) fee amounts applicable to the Project for all new square footage, the amounts in effect as of the date each building permit is issued for each new expansion project. Developer shall be responsible for compliance with all applicable TUMF requirements of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (“CVAG”).

Existing Exactions

Nothing set forth in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of Developer’s obligation to pay or be subject to any other existing fees, exactions, in-lieu fees or payments, dedication or reservation requirements, obligations for on-site or off-site improvements, construction requirements for public improvements, facilities, or services required of the Project and/or Subject Property under the Applicable Law, whether such requirements constitute subdivision improvements, mitigation, or impositions made under any applicable ordinance or other applicable regulation.

Community Facilities District No. 1

Developer acknowledges the existence of Community Facilities District No. 1 (“CFD No. 1”) which was created pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act, as set forth in Government Code Sections 53311 et seq. (“Mello-Roos CFD Act”) for the purpose of funding certain public safety services, and agrees that if the Project and Subject Property are not currently subject to the assessments of CFD No. 1, that the Subject Property will be annexed into CFD No.

1. Developer voluntarily consents to take whatever affirmative action it needs to take on its part to ensure that the Project and Subject Property are subject to the assessments of the CFD No. 1, which includes without limitation, voting to approve the annexation of the Project and Subject 6-910

-15-
Property to said CFD No.1. In the event CFD No. 1 formally dissolves, Developer shall consent to paying an in-lieu assessment in a manner and form, deemed acceptable by City, as though CFD No. 1 had never dissolved with respect to the Project and Subject Property.

Nexus/Reasonable Relationship Challenges

Developer consents to and waives any rights it may have now or in the future to challenge the legal validity of, the conditions or requirements set forth in this Agreement including, without limitation, any claim that they constitute an abuse of the police power, violate substantive due process, deny equal protection of the laws, effect a taking of property without payment of just compensation, or impose an unlawful tax. Developer reserves the right, however, to challenge in court any future fee, exaction, or other City Law that would, in Developer's opinion, conflict with Applicable Law (including this Agreement) or reduce the development rights provided by this Agreement.

Covenants Running with the Land and Constructive Notice

All of the terms, provisions, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon Developer and its heirs, successors, and assigns, and all other persons or entities acquiring all or any portion of the Subject Property and/or Project, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever, and the rights thereof shall inure to the benefit of the City and its successors and assigns. As such, all of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable law, including but not limited to, Section 1468 of the California Civil Code.

Notwithstanding the above, every person who now or hereafter owns or acquires any right, title or interest in or to any portion of the Subject Property and/or Project shall be deemed to have consented and agreed to every provision contained in this Agreement, whether or not any reference to this Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired an interest in the Subject Property and/or Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the terms, provisions and obligations of this Agreement shall not be binding upon any buyer or owner of an individual home within the Project for which a certificate of occupancy has been issued, save and except Section 11 (Condo-Hotel Owner and Occupancy Restrictions), which will apply to all individually owned residential units for the term of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything set forth in this Agreement to the contrary:

(a) During the term hereof, the Project and the Subject Property shall be subject to this Agreement, and any development of any portion of the Subject Property shall be developed, operated and/or managed pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

(b) Developer is not obligated by the terms of this Agreement to affirmatively act to develop all or any portion of the Subject Property, pay any sums of money (with the exception of any assessment district or other public finance district formed to include the Subject Property), dedicate any land, indemnify any party, or to otherwise meet or perform any obligation with respect to the Subject Property, except and only as a condition to the development of any portion of the Subject Property.
6-911

-16-
Civil Code Section 1542 Waiver

Developer hereby waives any and all rights Developer or its successors and assigns may have under Article XIIIC or Article XIIID of the California Constitution and any and all rights Developer or its successors and assigns may have under any other applicable law to contest the fees, exactions and assessments and/or their amounts payable to the City under this Agreement as follows:

In furtherance of the Parties’ intentions, Developer with and under advice of counsel, hereby expressly waives any and all right and benefit conferred upon Developer by the provisions of Civil Code Section 1542, which provides as follows:
“A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that if known by him or her would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.”
Developer further expressly waives any and all rights and benefits conferred upon Developer by any provision of any other state, federal or local statute, code, ordinance or law similar to Section 1542 of the Civil Code. Developer expressly consents that the waiver of rights contained in the first paragraph shall be given full force and effect, according to the express terms and provisions of the instant waiver, to unknown and unsuspected claims, demands and causes of action, if any, arising out of or relating to the waiver of rights contained in this Agreement.

Initials:

Developer

Periodic Review

The City shall conduct a review of this Agreement as set forth as follows:

(a) Annual Review. The City will review the extent of good faith compliance by Developer with the terms of this Agreement annually commencing on the first anniversary of the Effective Date of this Agreement.

(b) Notice. The City shall notify Developer in writing of the date of review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto.

(c) Good-faith Compliance. During each annual review, Developer is required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

(d) Production of Documents and Other Evidence. Developer agrees to furnish such reasonable evidence and adequate documentation of good faith compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require.
6-912

-17-
(e) Cost of Annual Review. The costs reasonably incurred by City in connection with the annual review shall be borne by Developer.

(f) Failure to Conduct Review. City’s failure to conduct an annual review of this Agreement shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement, and shall constitute a rebuttable presumption that Developer is in good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

(g) Certificate of Compliance. If, at the conclusion of a periodic or special review, Developer is found to be in compliance with this Agreement, the City shall issue a Certificate of Compliance (“Certificate”) to Developer stating that after the most recent periodic or special review and based upon the information known or made known to the City that: (i) this Agreement remains in effect and (ii) Developer is not in default. The City shall not be bound by a Certificate if a default existed at the time of the periodic or special review, but was concealed from or otherwise not known to the City, regardless of whether or not the Certificate is relied upon by assignees or other transferees or Developer.

Mortgagee Protection

(a) In General. The provisions of this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer's right to encumber the Subject Property or any portion thereof, or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to such portion. City acknowledges that lenders providing such financing and other “Mortgagees” (defined below) may require certain modifications or amendments to this Agreement and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Developer and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for modification or amendment. Any modification or amendment requested by a Mortgagee will be processed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Any person holding a mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument on all or any portion of the Subject Property made in good faith and for value (each, a “Mortgagee”), shall be entitled to the rights and privileges set forth in this Section. (b) Impairment of Mortgage or Deed of Trust. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Subject Property, or any portion thereof, including the lien of any mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing and except as otherwise specifically stated in the terms of any security instrument held by a Mortgagee, no default under this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust on the Subject Property made, or their interest in the Subject Property acquired by, any Mortgagee in good faith and for value. In the event the Subject Property is encumbered with a lien (including without limitation a lien held by or in favor of any lenders, lessees and other interested parties) at time of recordation of this Agreement, Developer shall ensure any and all such otherwise superior liens are subordinated to this Agreement, to the reasonable satisfaction of City.

(c) Notice of Default to Mortgagee. If a Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing to City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, City shall exercise its best efforts to provide such Mortgagee written notification from City of any failure or default by Developer in 6-913

-18-
the performance of Developer's obligations under this Agreement, which notification shall be provided to such Mortgagee at such time as such notification is delivered to Developer.

(d) Right of Mortgagee to Cure. Any Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure any failure or default by Developer during the cure period allowed Developer under this Agreement, plus an additional 60 days if, in order to cure such failure or default, it is necessary for the Mortgagee to obtain possession of the Subject Property such as by seeking the appointment of a receiver or other legal process. Any Mortgagee that undertakes to cure or attempt to cure any such failure or default shall provide written notice to City that it is undertaking efforts of such a nature; provided that no initiation of any such efforts by a Mortgagee shall obligate such Mortgagee to complete or succeed in any such curative efforts.

(e) Liability for Past Defaults or Obligations. Subject to the foregoing, any Mortgagee, including the successful bidder at a foreclosure sale, who comes into possession of the Project or the Subject Property or any part thereof pursuant to foreclosure, eviction or otherwise, shall take such property subject to the rights and obligations of this Agreement, and in no event shall any such property be released from any obligations associated with its use and development under the provisions of this Agreement. Nothing in this Section shall prevent City from exercising any remedy it may have for a default under this Agreement; provided, however, that in no event shall such Mortgagee personally be liable for any defaults or monetary obligations of Developer arising prior to acquisition or possession of such property by such Mortgagee.

Relationship of Parties

It is specifically understood and agreed by and among the parties hereto that the Project is a private development and that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder. The City and Developer also hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership among them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and Developer joint venturers or partners.

Third Party Beneficiaries

The only parties to this Agreement are Developer and City. There are no other third-party beneficiaries and this Agreement is not intended, and shall not be construed, to benefit, or be enforceable by any other person whatsoever.

Assignment of Rights

Developer shall have the right to assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement, by giving prior written notice to the City, to any entity in which the Developer, or its principals or owners, retain a majority ownership interest so long as such assignee expressly assumes the obligations of the Developer hereunder. Developer shall also have the right to assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement to any third-party purchasers of the Subject Property (or any portion thereof). Upon full execution of an Assignment and Assumption Agreement, and approval 6-914

-19-
of same by the City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, Developer shall be released from all obligations hereunder as to all portions of the Subject Property transferred to said third party purchaser(s).

Estoppel Certificate

For and in consideration of entering into this Agreement, the parties hereto acknowledge the receipt of good and valuable consideration. This paragraph shall constitute an Estoppel Certificate and shall be an independent agreement among the parties which is intended to and shall survive any subsequent determination that this Agreement is invalid for any reason, by a final court decision, having jurisdiction thereof. The Developer represents to the City that it has no actual knowledge of any Claims, as herein below defined, against the City specifically pertaining to the matters set forth in this Agreement. For purposes of this Section, “Claims” are defined as all known claims, fees, demands, costs, damages, obligations, expenditures, remedies, liens, rights or arbitration, rights of action and/or causes of action, whether compensatory or punitive, legal or equitable. This Estoppel Certificate legally bars the Developer from filing Claims against the City of which it had actual knowledge at the time of the approval by the City of this Agreement.

Severability

If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement is repealed by referendum or is held by a court of competent jurisdiction or an authorized government enforcement agency to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions, if any, of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect, unless enforcement of this Agreement as so invalidated would be unreasonable or grossly inequitable under all the circumstances or would frustrate the purposes of this Agreement.

Singular and Plural; Gender; and Person

Except where the context requires otherwise, the singular of any word shall include the plural and vice versa; and pronouns inferring the masculine gender shall include the feminine gender and neuter, and vice versa, and a reference to “person” shall include, in addition to a natural person, any governmental entity and any partnership, corporation, joint venture or any other form of business entity.

Time Is of the Essence

Time is of the essence of this Agreement and of each and every term and condition hereof.

Waiver

All waivers must be in writing to be effective or binding upon the waiving party, and no waiver shall be implied from any omission by a party to take any action with respect to an Event of Default as defined in this Agreement. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party shall not constitute waiver of such party's right to demand strict compliance and specific performance by the other party in the future. 6-915

-20-
In addition, no express written waiver of any Event of Default shall affect any other Event of Default or cover any period of time other than as specified in such express waiver.

Amendments

This Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent of the original parties or their successors in interest, with the City's costs payable by amendment applicants, in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868 and the City's adopted procedures and requirements for the consideration of amendments to development agreements. Minor revisions, as described above, shall not require an amendment to this Agreement.

Ambiguities or Uncertainties

The parties hereto have mutually negotiated the terms and conditions of this Agreement and each party received independent legal advice from its attorneys with respect to the advisability of executing this Agreement and the meaning of the provisions contained herein. As such, this Agreement is a product of the joint drafting efforts of both parties and neither party shall be deemed to have solely or independently prepared or framed this Agreement. Therefore, any ambiguities or uncertainties are not to be construed against or in favor of either party.

Hold Harmless

Developer hereby agrees to, and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, city council, commissions, boards, subcommittees and the City’s elected and appointed officials, commissioners, board members, officers, agents, consultants and employees (“City Parties”) from, any and all claims, costs and liability for any damages, personal injury or death, which may arise, directly or indirectly, from Developer's or Developer's officers’, agents’, consultants’, employees’, contractors’ or subcontractors’ negligent, willful or reckless conduct performed under this Agreement.

Indemnification

Developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, city council, commissions, boards, subcommittees and the City’s elected and appointed officials, commissioners, board members, officers, agents, consultants and employees (“City Parties”) from and against any and all liabilities, demands, claims, actions or proceedings and costs and expenses incidental thereto (including costs of defense, settlement and reasonable attorneys' fees), which any or all of them may suffer, incur, be responsible for or pay out as a result of or in connection with any challenge to the legality, validity or adequacy of any of the following items: (i) this Agreement and the concurrent and subsequent permits, licenses and entitlements approved by the City; (ii) any environmental determination made by the City in connection with the Subject Property, the Project or this Agreement; and (iii) any proceedings or other actions undertaken by the City in connection with the adoption or approval of any of the above. In the event of any administrative, legal, equitable action or other proceeding instituted by any third party (including without limitation a governmental entity or official) challenging the legality, validity or adequacy of any of the above 6-916

-21-
items or any portion thereof, the Parties shall mutually cooperate with each other in defense of said action or proceeding. Notwithstanding the above, the City, at its sole option, may tender the complete defense of any third-party challenge as described herein. In the event the City elects to contract with special counsel to provide for such a defense, the City shall meet and confer with Developer regarding the selection of counsel, and Developer shall pay all costs related to retention of such counsel by the City.

Delays in Performance

In addition to any other provisions of this Agreement with respect to delay, Developer and the City shall be excused for performance of their obligations hereunder during any period of delay caused by acts of God or civil commotion; major acts of terrorism occurring in the United States of America; pandemics, epidemics, riots, strikes, picketing, or other labor disputes; shortage of materials or supplies; damage to or prevention of work in process by reason of fire, floods, earthquake, or other casualties; litigation, neglect of the other party; restrictions imposed or mandated by governmental or quasi-governmental entities; and/or enactment of conflicting provisions of the Constitution, laws of the United States of America, the State of California, or any codes, statutes, regulations or executive mandates promulgated thereunder. If written notice of such delay is given to either party within thirty (30) days of the commencement of such delay, an extension of time for such cause shall be granted in writing for the period of the delay, or longer as may be mutually agreed upon.

Events of Default

A default under this Agreement shall be deemed to have occurred upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: (i) a warranty, representation, or statement made or furnished by Developer expressly in this Agreement to the City or by the City to Developer is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made, or (ii) a finding by the City made following a periodic review of the Agreement under the procedure provided for in Section 29 (Periodic Review) of this Agreement, based on substantial evidence, that Developer has not complied in good faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, or (iii) a party’s failure to perform any of its material obligations under this Agreement (“Event of Default”). Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default by the Developer or the City, the non- defaulting party shall provide the other party thirty (30) calendar days written notice specifying the nature of the alleged default and the manner in which said default may be satisfactorily cured (“Notice of Default”). Subject to any extensions of time by mutual consent of the parties in writing, and subject to the provisions of Section 43 (Delays in Performance) of this Agreement, the failure or unreasonable delay by either party to perform any material term or provision of this Agreement for a period of thirty (30) days after the dispatch of a written notice of default from the other party, or a determination that a warranty, representation, or statement made or furnished by Developer expressly in this Agreement to City is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made, shall constitute a default under this Agreement. If the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) calendar day period, the commencement of the cure within such time period and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure shall be deemed a cure within such period. Any Notice of Default given hereunder shall specify in detail the nature of the alleged Event of Default and the manner in which 6-917

-22-
such Event of Default may be satisfactorily cured in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. During the time periods herein specified for cure of an Event of Default, the party charged therewith shall not be considered to be in default for purposes of termination of this Agreement, institution of legal proceedings with respect thereto, or whether any further building permits shall be issued with respect to the Project or Subject Property.

General Default Remedies

Subject to Section 49 (No Damage Relief) of this Agreement, after notice and expiration of the thirty (30) calendar day period without cure, the non-defaulting party shall have such rights and remedies against the defaulting party as it may have at law or in equity, including, but not limited to, the right to terminate this Agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868 or seek mandamus, specific performance, injunctive or declaratory relief. Any rights or remedies available to the non-defaulting party under this Agreement and any other rights or remedies that such party may have at law or in equity upon a default by the other party under this Agreement shall be distinct and separate, providing the non-defaulting party with cumulative rights and remedies. None of such rights or remedies, whether or not exercised by the non-defaulting party, shall be deemed to exclude any other rights or remedies available to the non-defaulting party. The non-defaulting party may, in its discretion, exercise any and all of its rights and remedies, at once or in succession, at such time or times as the non-defaulting party considers appropriate.

No Building Permit upon Developer Default

No building permit shall be issued or building permit application accepted for any structure or improvement on the Subject Property after Developer is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be in default of any of the material terms and conditions of this Agreement, until such default thereafter is cured by Developer or is waived by the City. If the City lawfully terminates this Agreement because of Developer's default, then the City shall retain any and all benefits, including without limitation any money, improvements, structures, easements or dedications received by the City pursuant to any term or condition of this Agreement, the Project Entitlements and the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”).

Applicable Law

This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Venue

In the event that suit is brought by either party to this Agreement, the parties agree that venue shall be exclusively vested in the State courts of the County of Riverside, California or where appropriate, in the United States District Court, Southern District of California, Riverside, California.

No Damages Relief
6-918

-23-
Notwithstanding anything else in this Agreement to the contrary, the parties acknowledge that neither would have entered into this Agreement had either been exposed to damage claims for any breach hereof. As such, the parties agree that in no event shall either party be entitled to recover monetary damages of any kind whatsoever (other than the recovery of costs and attorney’s fees pursuant to the terms of this Agreement or applicable law) against the other for breach of this Agreement.

Legal Action; Attorneys’ Fees

Either party may, in addition to any other rights or remedies, institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy a default, enforce any covenant or agreement herein, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof, or enforce by specific performance the obligations and rights of the parties hereto. The prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to be paid by the losing party.

Notices

Any notice or communication required hereunder between the City and the Developer shall be in writing, and may be given either personally or by email with a copy also sent by U.S. mail.

Notice, whether given by email and U.S. mail or by personal delivery, shall be deemed to have been given and received on the actual receipt by any of the addresses designated below as the party to whom notices are to be sent. Any party hereto may at any time, upon written notice to the other party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to the parties at their addresses set forth below:

To City:

City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Attention: City Manager
Email: [email protected]

To Developer:

Mr. Miguel Nelson
Marvimon Productions, Inc.
5419 Hollywood Blvd. #C201
Los Angeles, CA 90027
E-Mail: [email protected]
6-919

-24-
With a copy to:

James D. Vaughn, Esq.

Stowell, Zeilenga, Ruth, Vaughn & Treiger LLP
4590 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd., Suite 100
Westlake Village, CA 91362
E-Mail: [email protected]

Entire Agreement

This Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto contain all the representations and the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto, any prior correspondence, memoranda, warranties, representations, and agreements, unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, are superseded in total by this Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto.

Recordation

In order to comply with Section 65868.5 of the Development Agreement Statute, the City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Agreement to be recorded with the Riverside County Recorder’s Office within ten (10) days after the Enacting Ordinance takes effect.

Counterparts

This Agreement may be executed in duplicate counterpart originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

Consistency Between Project Entitlements and Agreement

The parties hereto acknowledge that it is their intention that all terms, conditions and obligations of all Project Entitlements shall be consistent with, or at minimum, shall not conflict with, the terms, provisions and obligations of this Agreement. To the extent there is any conflict or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and any other provision in the Project Entitlements, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail.

Authority to Execute Agreement

The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Developer and City warrant and represent that they have the authority to execute this Agreement and the authority to bind Developer and City, as applicable, to the performance of their respective obligations hereunder. 6-920

-25-
Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

No party shall do anything which shall have the effect of injuring the right of another party to receive the benefits of this Agreement or do anything which would render its performance under this Agreement impossible. Each party shall perform all acts contemplated by this Agreement to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this Agreement.

Partial Invalidity Due to Governmental Action

In the event state or federal laws or regulations enacted after the effective date of this Agreement, or formal action of any governmental entity other than City, prevent compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by City, the parties agree that the provisions of this Agreement shall be modified, extended or suspended only to the minimum extent necessary to comply with such laws or regulations.

Further Actions and Instruments

The parties agree to provide reasonable assistance to the other and cooperate to carry out the intent and fulfill the provisions of this Agreement. Each of the parties shall promptly execute and deliver all documents and perform all acts as necessary to carry out the matters contemplated by this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the dates written above.

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE
APPROVED:

By:

Richard Kite, Mayor

ATTEST:

By:

Kristie Ramos, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Steven B. Quintanilla, City Attorney

DEVELOPER
APPROVED:

FM71777, LLC

*By:

Miguel Nelson, Manager

*Signatures must be notarized.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

James D. Vaughn, Legal Counsel
6-921

LIST OF EXHIBITS

Exhibit A — Description of Subject Property

Exhibit B — Tentative Parcel Map with Conditions of Approval Exhibit C – Vehicle Stacking Capacity
Exhibit C — City Development Impact Fees
6-922

6-923

EXHIBIT “A”

DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-924

EXHIBIT “B”

TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-925

“EXHIBIT C”

CITY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-926

ATTACHMENT 12
6-927

6-928

6-929

6-930

6-931

6-932

6-933

6-934

6-935

1 RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND

REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION REGARDING THE DESERT ISLAND HOTEL
PROPOSED PROJECT AT 71777 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Mirage is a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California, and recognized as a political subdivision of State of California for certain purpose; and
WHEREAS, FM71777, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), owns approximately 17.2 acres located at 71777 Frank Sinatra Drive, in Rancho Mirage, County of Riverside, State of California (the “Subject Property”),which is currently improved with a golf course and related improvements; and WHEREAS, the “Proposed Project” will repurpose approximately 17.2 acres of the existing Desert Island golf course to a new 34-key boutique hotel comprised of four single story buildings totaling 33,940 square feet, 11 private residences totaling 56,844 square feet, hotel grounds for guest use with tennis courts, a pool, an 852 square foot café, a lounge area and a 2,572 square foot yoga pavilion, along with an additional 376 parking spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project will also include a new golf training park, with a 7,818 square foot golf maintenance building replacing the existing driving range and the old maintenance building being eliminated to make room for the new facilities described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) to change the underlying zoning designation of the Subject Property from Open Space-Private to Resort Hotel for the 10.5 acres where the proposed hotel and residences will be located; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- 0002) to add hotel use to the Desert Island Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Development Agreement (DA22- 0003) by and between the City and the Developer and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and a related Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “B” respectively.

ATTACHMENT 13
6-936

2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. RECITALS AND EXHIBITS
That the foregoing Recitals and attached Exhibits are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 2. EVIDENCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
That the City Council has considered all of the evidence submitted into the administrative record for the Proposed Project, including, but not limited to, the following, which are all hereby incorporated herein by reference:
(a)Rancho Mirage Municipal Code;
(b)Rancho Mirage General Plan and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code and all relevant provisions contained therein; (c)Title 16 (Subdivisions) of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code and all relevant provisions contained therein;
(d)General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002;
(e)Desert Island Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002);
(f)Development Agreement (DA22-0003) by and between the City and the Developer
(g)Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004);
(h)Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001)
(i)Initial Study;
(j)Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; (k)The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the Proposed Project attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit “A”;
(l)Mitigated Negative Declaration (the “MND”), attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit “B”;
(m)Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing scheduled for June 22, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at City Hall at 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California;
(n)Planning Commission Staff Report and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(o)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
6-937

3 (p)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(q)Notice of City Council Public Hearing scheduled for July 20, 2023, at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at City Hall at 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California;
(r)City Council Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing;
(s)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing; and
(t)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing.

SECTION 3. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS
That based on the foregoing Recitals and the Evidence contained in the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project, as set forth and described herein, the City Council acknowledges, accepts, approves, and makes the following Findings and Determinations:
(a)That the City has independently reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan, and the whole record before it (including, the Initial Study and comments received) and, based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds that all environmental impacts of the Proposed Project, with mitigation measures, are below a level of significance and there is no substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the Proposed Project will have a significant effect on the environment.
(b)That the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigation Monitoring Plan have been completed in compliance with CEQA.
(c)That the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program represent the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council acting on behalf of the Lead Agency for the Proposed Project. (d)That the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration are adequate to serve as the required CEQA environmental documentation for the Proposed Project.
6-938

4 SECTION 4. ADOPTION OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND

REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVAL OF MITIGATED

NEGATIVE DECLARATION
That based on the Findings and Determinations set forth herein and the substantial evidence included in the Recitals, Exhibits and Evidence contained in Administrative Record, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration, including the findings set forth therein which support a determination that all potentially significant environmental impacts from implementation of the Proposed Project have been identified and, with the implementation of the mitigation measures defined and set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, will be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

SECTION 5. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
That the City Council authorizes and directs the Planning Division to prepare, execute, and file a Notice of Determination in accordance with Public Resource Code Section 21152.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
That this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY
That if any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of Resolution or any portion of the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words as hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 8. CERTIFICATION.

That the City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause the same to be processed in the manner required by law.

SECTION 9. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.

That all provisions of any resolution in effect prior to the effective date of this Resolution as adopted by the City Council that are in conflict with the provisions of this Resolution, are hereby repealed.

PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 20th day of July, 2023.
6-939

5 _________________________
Richard W. Kite, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Kristie Ramos, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Steven B. Quintanilla, City Attorney
6-940

6 EXHIBIT “A”

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-941

7 EXHIBIT B

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-942

1 RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RANCHO MIRAGE,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN

LAND USE MAP TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR
APPROXIMATELY 17.2 ACRES LOCATED AT 71777 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE FROM OPEN SPACE (OS/PV) TO RESORT HOTEL (Rs-H)
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Mirage is a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California, and recognized as a political subdivision of State of California for certain purpose; and
WHEREAS, FM71777, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), owns approximately 17.2 acres located at 71777 Frank Sinatra Drive, in Rancho Mirage, County of Riverside, State of California, which is currently improved by a golf course and related improvements; and
WHEREAS, the “Proposed Project” will repurpose approximately 17.2 acres of the existing Desert Island golf course to a new 34-key boutique hotel comprised of four single story buildings totaling 33,940 square feet, 11 private residences totaling 56,844 square feet, hotel grounds for guest use with tennis courts, a pool, an 852 square foot café, a lounge area and a 2,572 square foot yoga pavilion, along with an additional 376 parking spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project will also include a new golf training park, with a 7,818 square foot golf maintenance building replacing the existing driving range and the old maintenance building being eliminated to make room for the new facilities described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) to change the underlying zoning designation of the Subject Property from Open Space-Private to Resort Hotel for the 10.5 acres where the proposed hotel and residences will be located; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- 0002) to add hotel use to the Desert Island Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a statutory Development Agreement (DA22-0003) by and between the City and the Developer; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and a related Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing to review and consider the draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002), Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- ATTACHMENT 14
6-943

2 0002), Development Agreement (insert case number), Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22- 0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution _____, recommending that the City Council: (1) Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project; (2) Adopt a Resolution approving General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002); (3) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002); (4) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement (insert csse number); and (5) Adopt a Resolution approving the Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. RECITALS AND EXHIBITS
That the foregoing Recitals and attached Exhibits are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 2. EVIDENCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
That the City Council conducted a noticed Public Hearing on July 20, 2023, and considered all of the evidence submitted into the administrative record for the Proposed Project, including, but not limited to, the following, which are all hereby incorporated herein by reference:
(a)Rancho Mirage Municipal Code;
(b)Rancho Mirage General Plan and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code and all relevant provisions contained therein; (c)General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002);
(d)Desert Island Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002);
(e)Development Agreement (DA22-0003) by and between the City and the Developer;
(f)Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004);
(g)Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001);
(h)Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; (i)Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration;
(j)Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing scheduled for June 22, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at City Hall at 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California;
(k)Notice of City Council Public Hearing scheduled for July 20, 2023, at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at City Hall at 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California;
6-944

3 (l)Planning Commission Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(m)City Council Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing;
(n)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(o)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing; and
(p)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing; and
(q)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing.

SECTION 3. ADOPT GENERAL PLAN ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
That the City Council hereby amends the existing designation on the Subject Property from Open Space (OS/PV) to Resort Hotel (Rs-H), as identified in more detail in Exhibit “A”.

SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE
That this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY
That if any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Resolution be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words as hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 6. CERTIFICATION.

That the City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause the same to be processed in the manner required by law.

SECTION 7. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.
6-945

4 That all provisions of any resolution and/or General Plan Zoning Map, in effect prior to the effective date of this Resolution as adopted by the City Council that are in conflict with the provisions of this Resolution, are hereby repealed.

The foregoing Resolution was approved and adopted at a meeting of the City Council held on ________________ by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE:

__________________________
Richard W. Kite, Mayor

ATTEST:

_______________________________
Kristie Ramos, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_______________________________
Steven B. Quintanilla, City Attorney

6-946

5 EXHIBIT “A”

GENERAL PLAN ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
CASE NO. GPZMA22-0002
[SEE ATTACHED]

6-947

GENERAL PLAN ZONING MAP AMENDMENT CASE NO. GPZMA22-0002 The purpose of the General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (“GPZMA”) is to amend the existing underlying General Plan zoning designations on the project site from Open Space (OS/PV) to Resort Hotel (Rs-H). 10.5 acres of the 17.2-acre project site will be designated as Planning Area 1 Boutique Hotel & Residences and to be converted from the current zoning of Private Open Space (OS-PV) to Resort Hotel (Rs-H). GPZMA area is limited to the Planning Areas 1A, 1B, and 1C which consists of 10.5 acres of the 17.2-acre project site. The Rs-H Zoning District allows for the development of hotels and destination resorts with limited, ancillary commercial uses, such as spas, recreational facilities, restaurants, lounges, and small retail shops that directly support the primary use.

Although the Specific Plan will guide development on the site, changing the underlying zoning designation to Rs-H will provide more consistency between the Specific Plan and the General Plan.

Existing General Plan/Zoning Map:

6-948

Proposed General Plan/Zoning Map Amendment:

6-949

1 ORDINANCE NO. ___________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
CASE NO. SP22-0002
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Mirage is a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California, and recognized as a political subdivision of State of California for certain purpose; and
WHEREAS, FM71777, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), owns approximately 17.2 acres located at 71777 Frank Sinatra Drive, in Rancho Mirage, County of Riverside, State of California (the “Subject Property”), which is currently improved by a golf course and related improvements; and WHEREAS, the “Proposed Project” will repurpose approximately 17.2 acres of the existing Desert Island golf course to a new 34-key boutique hotel comprised of four single story buildings totaling 33,940 square feet, 11 private residences totaling 56,844 square feet, hotel grounds for guest use with tennis courts, a pool, an 852 square foot café, a lounge area and a 2,572 square foot yoga pavilion, along with an additional 376 parking spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project will also include a new golf training park, with a 7,818 square foot golf maintenance building replacing the existing driving range and the old maintenance building being eliminated to make room for the new facilities described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) to change the underlying zoning designation of the Subject Property from Open Space-Private to Resort Hotel for the 10.5 acres where the proposed hotel and residences will be located; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- 0002) to add hotel use to the Desert Island Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a statutory Development Agreement (DA22-0003) by and between the City and the Developer; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and a related Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing to review and consider the draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002), Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- 0002), Development Agreement (DA22-0003) Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and
ATTACHMENT 15
6-950

2 WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution _____, recommending that the City Council: (1) Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project; (2) Adopt a Resolution approving General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002); (3) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002); (4) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement (DA22-0003) and (5) Adopt a Resolution approving the Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. RECITALS AND EXHIBITS

That the foregoing Recitals and attached Exhibits are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 2. EVIDENCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

That the City Council has considered all of the evidence submitted into the administrative record for the Proposed Project, including, but not limited to, the following, which are all hereby incorporated herein by reference:

3 (o)Planning Commission Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(p)City Council Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing;
(q)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(r)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing; and
(s)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing; and
(t)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing.

SECTION 3. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS
That based on the foregoing Recitals and the Evidence contained in the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project, as set forth and described herein, the City Council acknowledges, accepts, and approves, and makes the following Findings and Determinations:
(a)That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002) is consistent with General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002);
(b)That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002) will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City;
(c)That the Subject Property is physically suitable for the requested zoning district and the anticipated land use development;
(d)That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002) will ensure development of a desirable character which will be harmonious with the existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood; and (e)That the Proposed Project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines and there would be no potential significant negative effects upon environmental quality and natural resources as mitigated per the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project.
6-952

4 SECTION 4. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (SP22-0002)

That the City Council hereby approves Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002), amending the Desert Island Specific Plan to allow hotel uses within the Specific Plan area, and establish development standards applicable to the Desert Island Hotel Specific Plan area, as set forth in more detail therein.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE

That this Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.

SECTION 6. CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW

That the City Attorney prepared and framed this ordinance pursuant to Section

1.04.010 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code and finds that the City Council has the authority to adopt this ordinance, that the ordinance is constitutionally valid and that the ordinance is consistent with the general powers and purposes of the City as set forth in Section 1.04.031 of the RMMC.

SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY

That if any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Ordinance or any portion of the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words as hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 8. CERTIFICATION

That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published according to law.

SECTION 9. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS

That all provisions of any ordinance and/or Municipal Code in effect prior to the effective date of this Ordinance as adopted by the City Council that are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, are hereby repealed.

[The remainder of this page intentionally left blank.]

6-953

5 The foregoing Ordinance was approved and adopted at a meeting of the City Council held on ________________ by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE:
__________________________
Richard W. Kite, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Kristie Ramos, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Steven B. Quintanilla, City Attorney
6-954

6 EXHIBIT “A”

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
[SEE ATTACHED]
6-955

2 Prepared For:

City of Rancho Mirage
Applicant:

FM 71777 LLC / Desert Island Golf Club
Prepared By:

MSA Consulting, Inc.

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN

HOTEL AMENDMENT
SP22-0002
March 2023
6-956

Almost 30 years later in 2022, the additional towers have not been built and the Desert Island Community Association has no intention of constructing them.
6-957

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

3 2.0 MASTER PLAN

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
6-959

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

PA-1D Yoga Pavilion/Golf Green A private yoga pavilion will be constructed on this small island owned by the golf course.

The existing bridge will be widened to 24’ and existing golf green reconfigured. Yoga classes will be available for hotel guests only.

PA-1E Access Drive The existing golf cart path will be realigned and widened to 24’ to provide a gated emergency vehicle access constructed to Fire Department standards.

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

The Hotel’s Desert Gardens will provide scenic outdoor
gathering spaces on the hotel grounds, weather permitting. 6-961

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

6-962

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

6-963

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

6-964

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

6-968

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

USES
Development uses allowed within the S pecific P lan A mendment are shown below.

1. Accessory Uses not listed are allowed as per RMCC 17.30.090.

2. Accessory Uses not listed are allowed as per RMCC 17.30.190.

3. For hotel use only.

4. For consumption at Desert Island dining establishments only. Definitions are found in Section 8.0.

6-969

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

14 STANDARDS
Development standards for each Planning Subarea are shown below.

6-970

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

15 Yoga Pavilion (PA-1D)
Max site coverage 20%
Min. building setback from property line 10 ft
Max. building height 20 ft or 1 story whichever is less Required parking None, ancillary to hotel

1. Part of the large golf course parcel and coverage is not relevant.

2. Based on the maintenance building’s usage per Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.26.040 Number of Parking Spaces Required.

Golf Training Area (PA-2C)
Max site coverage N/A 1
Min. bldg. setback from property line 10 ft
Max. bldg. height 20 ft or 1 story whichever is less
Required parking None, ancillary to golf course

1. Part of the large golf course parcel and coverage is not relevant.

6-971

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

16 4.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES

DESERT ISLAND SPECIFIC PLAN : HOTEL AMENDMENT

17 grow plants and vines further enhances the contribution of the natural desert landscaping to the hotel and project architecture.

6-973

Municipal Code – Standards included in this SP will supersede those of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. Standards not included will be subject to the RMCC.

Project Financing – Private financing is proposed for this project.

No public funding is requested.

6.0 RELATION TO GENERAL PLAN
This Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the Rancho Mirage General Plan in accordance with following policies:

LU 2
The project promotes a balanced mix and
functional integration of uses by situating the new
hotel adjacent to an existing, underutilized golf
clubhouse.

LU 2.3 The project promotes infill development.

LU 2.7 The project will bring a new resort hotel to the City.

LU 4
The project will bring added revenues to the City
via Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) paid by the
hotel.

CD 8.2
The project proposes building materials and
methods that promote resource conservation
and sustainability.

CD 9.5
The project incorporates playful artistic elements
such as textured paving and artistic shade
canopies.

CD 10.4
The project proposes 100% shading of hotel
parking spaces via artistically designed overhead
canopies.

CD 11.1 Project parking is completely screened from
public view.

CD 12.1
The hotel includes attractive, people-friendly
outdoor spaces activated by the hotel pool,
tennis court, cabanas, café and yoga pavilion.
6-974

1 ORDINANCE NO. ___________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH FM71777, LLC, REGARDING THE DESERT
ISLAND HOTEL PROPOSED PROJECT AT 71777 FRANK SINATRA
DRIVE
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Mirage is a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California, and recognized as a political subdivision of State of California for certain purpose; and
WHEREAS, FM71777, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), owns approximately 17.2 acres located at 71777 Frank Sinatra Drive, in Rancho Mirage, County of Riverside, State of California (the “Subject Property”), which is currently improved with a golf course and related improvements, as more particularly described and depicted in an exhibit attached to the proposed Development Agreement which is incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, the “Proposed Project” will repurpose approximately 17.2 acres of the existing Desert Island golf course to a new 34-key boutique hotel comprised of four single story buildings totaling 33,940 square feet, 11 private residences totaling 56,844 square feet, hotel grounds for guest use with tennis courts, a pool, an 852 square foot café, a lounge area and a 2,572 square foot yoga pavilion, along with an additional 376 parking spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project will also include a new golf training park, with a 7,818 square foot golf maintenance building replacing the existing driving range and the old maintenance building being eliminated to make room for the new facilities described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) to change the underlying zoning designation of the Subject Property from Open Space-Private to Resort Hotel for the 10.5 acres where the proposed hotel and residences will be located; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- 0002) to add hotel use to the Desert Island Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a statutory Development Agreement (DA22-0003) by and between the City and the Developer; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and a related Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing to review and consider the draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ATTACHMENT 16
6-976

2 and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002), Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- 0002), Development Agreement (DA22-0003), Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution _____, recommending that the City Council: (1) Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project; (2) Adopt a Resolution approving General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002); (3) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002); (4) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement (insert csse number); and (5) Adopt a Resolution approving the Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001).

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.56.010 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code, a development agreement is intended to provide assurances to the developer that an approved project may proceed subject to the policies, rules, regulations, and conditions of approval applicable to the project at the time of approval, regardless of any changes to City policies, rules, and regulations after project approval in exchange for assurances that the City will receive certain payment of fees, the installation of certain infrastructure, and other benefits the City cannot otherwise unilaterally impose as conditions of approval of the project outside the context of a negotiated development agreement; and

WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning for and secure orderly development of the Project Site and Project, assure progressive installation of necessary improvements, and ensure attainment of the maximum effective utilization of resources within the City at the least economic cost to its citizens; and

WHEREAS, based on the foregoing recitals, the City has determined that the proposed Development Agreement is appropriate under the Development Agreement Statute and Chapter 17.56 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement is voluntarily entered into in consideration of the benefits to and the rights created in favor of each of the parties hereto and in reliance upon the various representations and warranties contained herein.

6-977

3 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. RECITALS AND EXHIBITS

That the foregoing Recitals and attached Exhibits are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 2. EVIDENCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

(a) Rancho Mirage Municipal Code;
(b) Rancho Mirage General Plan and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code and all relevant provisions contained therein; (c) Desert Island Specific Plan;
(d) Initial Study;
(e) Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; (f) The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the Proposed Project;
(g) The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Proposed Project; (h) General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002);
(i) Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002);
(j) The proposed Development Agreement (DA22-0003) by and between the City and the Developer;
(k) Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004);
(l) Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001);
(m) Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing scheduled for June 22, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at City Hall at 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California;
(n) Notice of City Council Public Hearing scheduled for July 20, 2023, at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at City Hall at 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California;
(o) Planning Commission Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(p) City Council Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing;
6-978

4 (q)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(r)Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing; and
(s)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing; and
(t)Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing.

SECTION 3. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS
That based on the foregoing Recitals and the Evidence contained in the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project, as set forth and described herein, the City Council acknowledges, accepts, and approves, and makes the following Findings and Determinations:
(a)That the Developer has a legal interest in the Subject Property; (b)That the proposed Development Agreement establishes certain development rights regarding the Proposed Project;
(c)That the proposed Development Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning for and secure orderly development of the Subject Property and Proposed Project, and assures progressive installation of necessary improvements and attainment of the maximum effective utilization of resources within the City at the least economic cost to its citizens; and (d)That the proposed Development Agreement is appropriate under the Development Agreement Statute and Chapter 17.56 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code;
(e)That the proposed Development Agreement has been voluntarily entered into in consideration of the benefits to and the rights created in favor of each of the parties hereto and in reliance upon the various representations and warranties contained herein; and
(f)That the Proposed Project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines and there would be no potential significant negative effects upon environmental quality and natural resources as mitigated per the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project.

SECTION 4. STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
That the City Council hereby approves the proposed Development Agreement by and between the City and the Developer.
6-979

5 SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE

That this Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.

SECTION 6. CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW
That the City Attorney prepared and framed this ordinance pursuant to Section

SECTION 7. RECORDATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

That in accordance with Section 17.56.050 of the City’s Municipal Code, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record the fully executed Statutory Development Agreement with the Riverside County Recorder no later than ten (10) days after its execution.

SECTION 8. SEVERABILITY

SECTION 9. CERTIFICATION

That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published according to law.

SECTION 10. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS

[The remainder of this page intentionally left blank.]

6-980

6 The foregoing Ordinance was approved and adopted at a meeting of the City Council held on ________________ by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE:
__________________________
Richard W. Kite, Mayor

ATTEST:
______________________________
Kristie Ramos, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_______________________________
Steven B. Quintanilla, City Attorney

6-981

7 EXHIBIT “A”

STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
[SEE ATTACHED]

6-982

-1-
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:

City of Rancho Mirage DRAFT 6-22-23
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN

R E C I T A L S:

WHEREAS, since the Project did not require any discretionary approvals from any state agency, the NOD was not filed with the State’s Office of Planning and Research; and

WHEREAS, based on the foregoing recitals, the City has determined that this Agreement is appropriate under the Development Agreement Statute and Chapter 17.56 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code; and

A G R E E M E N T:

Incorporation of Recitals

The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference as though fully set forth herein.

Effective Date

Subject Property

-4-
The Project

Purpose

Term

The parties agree that the Term of this Agreement shall be fifteen (15) years commencing on the Effective Date, subject to any extension and early termination provisions described in this Agreement.

Termination

This Agreement shall be terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events:

(a) Expiration of the fifteen (15) year term;

Cooperation by Developer

Filing and Processing Fees

Public Benefit Fee; Additional Cost Reimbursement

-7-
General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA22-0002

The Project Entitlements include General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No.

Condo-Hotel Resort Unit Owner and Occupancy Restrictions.

(f) Rental of Condo-Hotel Resort Units.

Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22-0004

Extension of Tentative Maps

Preliminary Development Plan Permit

Sign Program

Developer shall apply for a Sign Program for the Project, pursuant to Chapter 17.28 of the Municipal Code, and the City shall expeditiously process Developer’s application upon submission thereof.

Grading Plans and Grading Permit

Section 18. Vehicle Stacking and Gate Requirements

Expedited Entitlement Processing and Inspections

-12-
requested by Developer.

Commencement of Construction

Vested Rights and Applicable Rules, Regulations and Policies

Minor Revisions

The City’s community development director (“Director”) may approve a minor modification to allow refinements and adjustments to the entitlements, so long as the proposed modifications are 6-995

City Impact Fees

Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program

Existing Exactions

Community Facilities District No. 1

Nexus/Reasonable Relationship Challenges

Covenants Running with the Land and Constructive Notice

-16-
Civil Code Section 1542 Waiver

Initials:

Developer

Periodic Review

The City shall conduct a review of this Agreement as set forth as follows:

(b) Notice. The City shall notify Developer in writing of the date of review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto.

(c) Good-faith Compliance. During each annual review, Developer is required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

-17-
(e) Cost of Annual Review. The costs reasonably incurred by City in connection with the annual review shall be borne by Developer.

Mortgagee Protection

-18-
the performance of Developer's obligations under this Agreement, which notification shall be provided to such Mortgagee at such time as such notification is delivered to Developer.

Relationship of Parties

Third Party Beneficiaries

Assignment of Rights

Estoppel Certificate

Severability

Singular and Plural; Gender; and Person

Time Is of the Essence

Time is of the essence of this Agreement and of each and every term and condition hereof.

Waiver

-20-
In addition, no express written waiver of any Event of Default shall affect any other Event of Default or cover any period of time other than as specified in such express waiver.

Amendments

Ambiguities or Uncertainties

Hold Harmless

Indemnification

Delays in Performance

Events of Default

General Default Remedies

No Building Permit upon Developer Default

Applicable Law

This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Venue

No Damages Relief
6-1004

Legal Action; Attorneys’ Fees

Notices

Any notice or communication required hereunder between the City and the Developer shall be in writing, and may be given either personally or by email with a copy also sent by U.S. mail.

To City:

City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Attention: City Manager
Email: [email protected]

To Developer:

Mr. Miguel Nelson
Marvimon Productions, Inc.
5419 Hollywood Blvd. #C201
Los Angeles, CA 90027
E-Mail: [email protected]
6-1005

-24-
With a copy to:

James D. Vaughn, Esq.

Stowell, Zeilenga, Ruth, Vaughn & Treiger LLP
4590 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd., Suite 100
Westlake Village, CA 91362
E-Mail: [email protected]

Entire Agreement

Recordation

Counterparts

This Agreement may be executed in duplicate counterpart originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

Consistency Between Project Entitlements and Agreement

Authority to Execute Agreement

-25-
Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

Partial Invalidity Due to Governmental Action

Further Actions and Instruments

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the dates written above.

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE
APPROVED:

By:

Richard Kite, Mayor

ATTEST:

By:

Kristie Ramos, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Steven B. Quintanilla, City Attorney

DEVELOPER
APPROVED:

FM71777, LLC

*By:

Miguel Nelson, Manager

*Signatures must be notarized.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

James D. Vaughn, Legal Counsel
6-1007

LIST OF EXHIBITS

Exhibit A — Description of Subject Property

Exhibit B — Tentative Parcel Map with Conditions of Approval Exhibit C – Vehicle Stacking Capacity
Exhibit C — City Development Impact Fees
6-1008

6-1009

EXHIBIT “A”

DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-1010

EXHIBIT “B”

TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-1011

“EXHIBIT C”

CITY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
[TO BE ATTACHED]
6-1012

1 RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND

PRELIMINARY DEVELOPENT PLAN FOR DESERT ISLAND HOTEL

PROPOSED PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Mirage is a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California, and recognized as a political subdivision of State of California for certain purpose; and
WHEREAS, FM71777, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), owns approximately 17.2 acres located at 71777 Frank Sinatra Drive, in Rancho Mirage, County of Riverside, State of California (the “Subject Property”), which is currently improved by a golf course and related improvements, as depicted in the Tentative Parcel Map, as defined herein; and
WHEREAS, the “Proposed Project” will repurpose approximately 17.2 acres of the existing Desert Island golf course to a new 34-key boutique hotel comprised of four single story buildings totaling 33,940 square feet, 11 private residences totaling 56,844 square feet, hotel grounds for guest use with tennis courts, a pool, an 852 square foot café, a lounge area and a 2,572 square foot yoga pavilion, along with an additional 376 parking spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project will also include a new golf training park, with a 7,818 square foot golf maintenance building replacing the existing driving range and the old maintenance building being eliminated to make room for the new facilities described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) to change the underlying zoning designation of the Subject Property from Open Space-Private to Resort Hotel for the 10.5 acres where the proposed hotel and residences will be located; and
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- 0002) to add hotel use to the Desert Island Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a statutory Development Agreement (DA22-0003) by and between the City and the Developer; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and a related Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing to review and consider the draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002), Specific Plan Amendment (SP22- ATTACHMENT 17
6-1013

2 0002), Development Agreement (DA22-0003), Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001); and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution _____, recommending that the City Council: (1) Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project; (2) Adopt a Resolution approving General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002); (3) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002); (4) Introduce and adopt an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement (DA22-0003) and (5) Adopt a Resolution approving the Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. RECITALS AND EXHIBITS

That the foregoing Recitals and attached Exhibits are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 2. EVIDENCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

3 (n) Notice of City Council Public Hearing scheduled for July 20, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at City Hall at 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California;
(o) Planning Commission Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(p) City Council Staff Report, attachments and Staff presentation for the Proposed Project, and all public documents, records and references related thereto submitted or provided at or prior to the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing;
(q) Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing;
(r) Testimony and/or comments from Developer and its representatives submitted or provided at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing; and
(s) Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the June 22, 2023, Planning Commission Public Hearing; and
(t) Testimony and/or comments from all persons that were provided in written format or correspondence, at, or prior to, the July 20, 2023, City Council Public Hearing.

SECTION 3. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS

That based on the foregoing Recitals and the Evidence contained in the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project, as set forth and described herein, the City Council acknowledges, accepts, and approves, and makes the following Findings and Determinations:

(a) That Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) is consistent with General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) and Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002);
(b) That the design and improvements related to Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) is consistent with General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) and Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002); (c) That site covered by Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) is physically suitable for the type of development;
(d) That the site covered by Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) is physically suitable for the proposed density of development;
(e) That Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) design and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; (f) That the design and type of improvements related to Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) will not likely cause serious public health problems; 6-1015

4 (g)That the design and type of improvements related to Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004) will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision;
(h)That proposed development under Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22- 0001) is allowed withing the respective zoning district as permitted under General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) and Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002);
(i)That Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001) is generally in compliance with all of the applicable provisions of Title 17 that are necessary to carry out the purpose and requirements of the respective zoning district, including prescribed development standards and applicable design guidelines;
(j)That Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001) is consistent with General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA22-0002) and Specific Plan Amendment (SP22-0002); and
(k)That the Proposed Project which includes Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22- 0004) and Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001) has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines and there would be no potential significant negative effects upon environmental quality and natural resources as mitigated per the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the Proposed Project.

SECTION 4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. TPM22-004
That based on the foregoing Recitals and the Evidence contained in the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project which includes Tentative Parcel Map (TPM22-0004), and the Findings and Determinations set forth herein, the City Council hereby approves Tentative Parcel Map (Case No. TPM22-0004), attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 5. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN PDP22-001
That based on the foregoing Recitals and the Evidence contained in the Administrative Record for the Proposed Project, which includes Preliminary Development Plan (PDP22-0001), and the Findings and Determinations set forth herein, the City Council hereby approves Preliminary Development Plan (Case No.

PDP22-0001), attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and incorporated herein by this reference. .

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
That this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. 6-1016

5 SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY

That if any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of Resolution or any portion of the Administrative Record for the Project be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words as hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 8. CERTIFICATION

That the City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause the same to be processed in the manner required by law.

SECTION 9. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS

PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 20th day of July 2023.

_________________________
Richard W. Kite, Mayor

ATTEST:

_____________________________
Kristie Ramos, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_____________________________
Steven B. Quintanilla, City Attorney

6-1017

6 EXHIBIT “A”

TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
[SEE ATTACHED]

6-1018

75.51'

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
EX. C/L
EX. CURB & GUTTER
EX. CURB & GUTTER
EX. RAISED CURB MEDIAN
EX. R/W & PROJECT BOUNDARY

ISLAND DRIVE
50 '
2 6'
1 PROP. 24' MIN. ACCESS
EASEMENT (TYP.)
PROP. 24' MIN. ACCESS
EASEMENT (TYP.)
N
0 0
°
0 0
'
0 0
"

2 2
4 .
5 0
'
N
0 0
°
0 0
'
0 0
"

2 2
4 .
0 0
'
N 90°00'00" E 301.11'
N 75°
1 1
'
3 2
"

W
N 90°00'00" E

24.00'
N 00°00'00" E

9.02'
N 25°05'18" E

22.17'
∆=43°53'15"
R=45.00' 34.47'
N 68°58'33" E

62.28'
∆=27°56'35"
R=75.00' 36.58'
N 76°51'53" E

79.19'
∆=118°20'48"
R=21.00' 43.38'
∆=26°27'50"
R=110.00'

50.81'
N 07°19'21" E

22.85'
∆=66°57'23"
R=37.00' 43.24'
N 22°20'58" E

50.84'
∆=98°01'00"
R=13.51' 23.11'
∆=37°00'18"
R=37.00' 23.90'
N 59°21'08" E

38.78'
∆=43°58'35"
R=80.00' 61.40'N 76°40'17" W

30.38'
PARCEL 1
52,624 SF

1.21 AC.

PARCEL 2
131,073 SF

3.01 AC.

LOT "B"
19,195 SF / 0.44 AC.

PARCEL 3
187,801 SF

4.31 AC.

LOT "A"
14,585 SF / 0.33 AC.

PROP. PARCEL LINE (TYP.)
PROP. BOUNDARY & PARCEL LINE (TYP.)
PROP. BOUNDARY &
PARCEL LINE (TYP.)
PROP. PARCEL LINE (TYP.)
(N

0 0
°
0 8
'
5 9
"

5 3
1 8
.
9 3
'
)
EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY
24'

PORTIONS TO BE VACATED

AND REALIGNED AS NEEDED
N 66°16'28" E

48.61'∆=38°32'00"
R=85.00' 57.17'

FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES
(SEE INDEX MAP BELOW)
2 6'
SEE NOTE NO. 4
N
0 0
°
0 0
'
0 0
"

3 0
2 .
8 1
'
15 0
'
449'
20 0
'
435'
20 8
'
466'
26'
14 8
'
670'
16 5
'
486'
89 '
467'
10 7
'
3 1'
3 8
'
3 5 '
3 1 '
123'
25'
10 1
'
60 '
31 '
517'
25 '
49 '
19'
N 90°00'00" W 467.00'
N 90°00'00" E 517.00'
NO

PARKING

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

ISLAND DRIVE
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2
LOT "B"
PARCEL 3
LOT "A"
UN
I
T

6 UN
I
T

5 UN
I
T

3 UN
I
T

4 UN
I
T

1 UN
I
T

2 UN
I
T

1 1
UN
I
T

1 0
UN
I
T

9 UN
I
T

7 UN
I
T

8 MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
EAST
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST

CENTERLINE

EASEMENT

EXISTING
(E)
(N)
(S)
(W)
C/L
ESMT.

EX.

ABBREVIATIONS

ACREAGEAC

CURB AND GUTTERC&G

ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERAPN

E/P EDGE OF PAVEMENT
A.C. ASPHALT CONCRETE
MAX. MAXIMUM

BOUNDARYBNDRY
M.B. MAP BOOK

EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE

EXISTING SEWER

EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY

PROPOSED CURB

PROPOSED EASEMENT

EXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARY

EXISTING SEWER FORCE MAIN

EXISTING WATER

PROPOSED PARCEL LINE

PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY

PROPOSED AND EXISTING CENTER LINE

PROPOSED PROJECT BOUNDARY

EXISTING IRRIGATION

EXISTING GAS

EXISTING EASEMENT

EXISTING ELECTRIC

EXISTING IRRIGATION DRAIN LINE

EXISTING CABLE

EXISTING CONTOURS

EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS
LEGEND

EXISTING LOT LINE

EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT
EXISTING TELEPHONE MIN. MINIMUM
NUMBER

PROPOSED

RIGHT OF WAY

TYPICAL
NO.

PROP.

R/W
TYP.

P.U.E. PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT

SF SQUARE FEET

RADIUSR
STANDARDSTD.

P/L PROPERTY LINE
N.T.S. NOT TO SCALE

R-L LOW DENSITY (RESIDENTIAL)

UG UNDERGROUND

OVERHEADO/H

OPEN SPACE / PARKSOS/PP
PAGEPG.

TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 38399

DATA TABLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:688-040-001
EXHIBIT DATE: MAY 25, 2022
SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY:

ADDRESS:

INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS, INC.
7117 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE "A"
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92503
DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY:NOVEMBER 19, 2021
EXHIBIT PREPARER:

ADDRESS:

MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
CONTACT:PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE:(760) 320-9811

REVISIONS
NO. DATE

IN THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

DESCRIPTION
TELEPHONE:(951) 687-4252

APPLICANT /
ADDRESS:

CONTACT:
5419 HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD, SUITE C201
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90027

MIGUEL NELSON

DESERT ISLAND GOLF CLUB, LLC
LAND OWNER:

PUBLIC UTILITY PURVEYORS:

EXISTING ZONING:

PROPOSED ZONING:

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE:

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE:

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (OS-PV)

RESORT HOTEL (RS-H)

RESORT HOTEL (RS-H)
ZONE "X": AREA OF 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD HAZARD
FEMA FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION:

LIQUEFACTION:MODERATE LIQUEFACTION ZONE
NOTES:1.

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (OS-PV)
ELECTRIC:

GAS:

TELEPHONE:

WATER:

CABLE:

SEWER:

USA:

THIS MAP DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP OF THE

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

SPECTRUM

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
(800) 684-8123
(877) 238-0092
(800) 921-8101
(760) 398-2651
(877) 719-3278
(760) 398-2651
(800) 227-2600
SCHOOL DISTRICT:PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED

AS SHOWN ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS, COMMUNITY PANEL MAP NUMBER: 06065C1595G
EFFECTIVE DATE: AUGUST 28, 2008

FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES
PROPOSED NET AREA 9.30 AC.

LAND USE DESCRIPTION:AREA (AC.)
PROPOSED PARCEL NO. 1
PROPOSED PARCEL NO. 2

1.21 AC.

3.01 AC.

LAND DIVIDER.
1 EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES:

RECORDED MARCH 27, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 25706. (PLOTTED HEREON)

AN EASEMENT GRANTED TO CALIFORNIA ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY FOR UTILITIES 2 AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED FEBRUARY 23, 1971 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 17509.

AN EASEMENT GRANTED TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES PORTIONS TO BE VACATED AND REALIGNED AS NEEDED. (PLOTTED HEREON)

CITY OF

RANCHO MIRAGE

GERALD FORD DRIVE BO
B

H
O
P
E
DR
I
V
E
DA

V
A
L
L
DR
I
V
E
N.T.S.

VICINITY MAP

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

COUNTRY
I-
1 0

CITY OF
MO
R
N
I
N
G
S
I
D
E
DR
I
V
E

CLUB DRIVE
MO
N
T
E
R
E
Y
AV
E
N
U
E
PORTION OF:

PARCEL A: (APN: 688-040-001, 688-050-003 AND A PORTION OF 688-050-005) GOVERNMENT LOTS 1 AND 2 IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST,

IN THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN AS SHOWN BY THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONTAINED IN TRACT NO. 4195 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 71, PAGES 23 THROUGH 25, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION IN WONDER PALM ROAD (NOW KNOWN AS FRANK SINATRA DRIVE). ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEEDS RECORDED NOVEMBER 17, 1971 AS INSTRUMENT NOS. 131899 AND 131900, OFFICIAL RECORDS ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 17382 ON FILE IN BOOK 90, PAGE 50 OF PARCEL MAP, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS.

PROPOSED PARCEL NO. 3 4.31 AC.

PROPOSED ACCESS LOT "A"0.33 AC.

PROPOSED ACCESS LOT "B"0.44 AC.

INDEX MAP
SCALE: 1" = 150'
SITE
DESERT
ISLAND

2. PARCELS 1 & 2 ARE FOR HOTELS ONLY. PARCEL 3 WILL CONTAIN CONDOMINIUMS.

3. LOT "A" WILL BE A COMMON LOT OWNED BY THE HOA FOR PARCEL 3.

LOT "B" WILL BE COMMON LOT OWNED BY HOTEL ON PARCELS 1 & 2.

DINAH SHORE DRIVE

RANCHO MIRAGE

CITY OF
PALM
DESERT

4. EXISTING PAVED SURFACES UTILIZED BY GOLF CLUB FOR PARKING, MAINTENANCE AND

ACCESS AISLES, WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR SHARED USE BY THE HOTEL OPERATOR AND

HOTEL RESIDENCES
R:
\
2 7
1 7
\
A
c
a
d
\
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
\
T
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e

M
a
p
\
2 7
1 7

T
P
M

3 8
3 9
9 .
d
w
g
,

5 /
2 5
/
2 0
2 2

2 :
5 2
:
1 6

P
M
,

d
g
a
l
l
e
r
a
n
i
,

M
S
A

C
o
n
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
6-1019

7 EXHIBIT “B”

PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
[SEE ATTACHED]

6-1020

MARCH 20, 2023
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL

PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
ENTITLEMENT CASE NUMBERS:

MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE:

PDP NO.

TPM NO.

SP NO.

GPZMA NO.

EA NO. DA
NO.

PDP22-0001
TPM22-0004
SP22-0002
GPZMA22-0002
EA22-0012
DA22-0003
6-1021

Frank Sinatra Drive
Isl
a
n
d

D
r
i
v
e
PA 2A
PA 2C
PA 1C
PA 1B
PA 1A
PA 1E
PA 2B
PA 1D
N.T.S.

VICINITY MAP

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE
MO
R
N
I
N
G
S
I
D
E
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023

PROJECT CONSULTANTS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
P: (760) 320-9811

TABLE OF CONTENTS & PROJECT DESCRIPTION

CITY OF
PALM
DESERT
JAMES R MEYER INC.
129 SHELDON STREET
EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA 90245
P: (310) 251-3547
SITE
DESERT

ISLANDDR
I
V
E
Hotel
Hotel Grounds/Gardens
Hotel Residences
Yoga Pavillion/Golf Green
Access Drive
Maintenance Building
Existing Clubhouse & Parking
1A
1B
1C
1D
1E
2A
2B
Golf Practice Facility2C
Symbol
SPA Boundary
Planning Area Boundary
Planning Sub-Area
Legend
Description Area

17.2 ac.
-
-
Symbol Description Area
PA 1 Boutique Hotel & Residences
PA 2 Golf Course & Clubhouse

10.5 ac.

6.7 ac.

PA Sub-Area PA Use Area

2.5 ac.

2.2 ac.

4.6 ac.

1.0 ac.

0.2 ac.

0.6 ac.

4.8 ac.

1.3 ac.

New Facilities to be Added
Displaced by New Uses

10.4 ac.

1.9 ac.

Total 17.2 ac.

Replacement Facilities

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PA-1A: HOTEL THE CENTERPIECE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS A NEW 34-KEY BOUTIQUE HOTEL. EACH HOTEL KEY WILL BE DESIGNED AS A SELF-SUFFICIENT LUXURY RESIDENCE WITH CHEF'S KITCHEN, GENEROUS FLOOR PLAN, PRIVATE GARDEN AND EXCLUSIVE EXTERIOR ENTRANCE FROM THE CENTRAL “GRAND AISLE” LINED WITH UNIQUE, ARTISTICALLY DESIGNED CANOPIES THAT WILL SHADE PARKING STALLS WITH A DAPPLED, FILTERED LIGHTING EFFECT. THE HOTEL BUILDING WILL BE ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT BUT LOW IN HEIGHT AND SURROUNDED BY MOUNDING AND GENEROUS LANDSCAPE BUFFERS TO CREATE A SENSE OF PRIVACY AND SCREEN THE BUILDINGS FROM PUBLIC VIEWS TO THE NORTH AND WEST. A 1-STORY BUILDING WILL LINE THE GRAND AISLE ON THE NORTH WITH 1-STORY BUILDINGS ON THE SOUTH SIDE SO ALL HOTEL ROOMS HAVE UNOBSTRUCTED PANORAMIC VIEWS OF THE SANTA ROSA MOUNTAINS SOUTH ACROSS THE GOLF COURSE.

PA-1B: HOTEL GROUNDS/GARDENS THE AREA BETWEEN THE HOTEL AND THE EXISTING LAKE IS PLANNED AS AN OUTDOOR DESERT GARDEN FOR RECREATION AND RELAXATION. THE DESERT GARDEN LANDSCAPE WILL CREATE A TRANQUIL AND LUXURIOUS SETTING FOR GUESTS TO ENJOY AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF THE LAKE AND SPECTACULAR MOUNTAIN VIEWS TO THE SOUTH. AMENITIES PLANNED FOR THIS AREA INCLUDE A HOTEL POOL, POOL CAFÉ, TENNIS COURT AND SHADED FREESTANDING CUSTOM LOUNGE FURNITURE.

PA-1C: RESIDENCES THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES 11 PRIVATE CONDOMINIUM RESIDENCES THAT WILL BE FULLY MANAGED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOTEL OPERATOR. THESE LOW-SLUNG, ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT RESIDENCES WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE BY INDIVIDUALS AND WILL “LIVE” LIKE EXCLUSIVE SINGLE- FAMILY LUXURY HOMES WITH PRIVATE YARDS AND POOL. WHEN NOT IN USE BY THE OWNER, THESE UNITS CAN BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR RENTAL BY THE HOTEL OPERATOR. PRESENTLY, THE DEVELOPER PLANS TO RETAIN ONE OF THE RESIDENCES FOR PERSONAL USE.

PA-1D YOGA PAVILION/GOLF GREEN A PRIVATE YOGA PAVILION WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ON THIS SMALL ISLAND OWNED BY THE GOLF COURSE. THE EXISTING BRIDGE WILL BE WIDENED TO 24' AND EXISTING GOLF GREEN RECONFIGURED. YOGA CLASSES WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR HOTEL GUESTS ONLY.

PA-1E ACCESS DRIVE THE EXISTING GOLF CART PATH WILL BE REALIGNED AND WIDENED TO 24' TO PROVIDE A GATED EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS CONSTRUCTED TO FIRE DEPARTMENT STANDARDS.

PA-2A MAINTENANCE BUILDING THE EXISTING MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE WILL BE REPLACED WITH A NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING EAST OF THE MAIN ENTRY. THE MAINTENANCE BUILDING WILL ACCOMMODATE HANDLING OF TRASH, RECYCLING, FOOD WASTE, AND COMPOSTING AS WELL AS ROOMS FOR GROWING MICRO GREENS AND OTHER EDIBLE SPECIALTIES FOR THE CLUBHOUSE RESTAURANT. THE BUILDING PLACEMENT ALLOWS FOR SEPARATION OF MAINTENANCE AND CLUBHOUSE/RESORT OPERATIONS.

PA-2B CLUBHOUSE/PARKING THIS PLANNING AREA CONTAINS THE GOLF CLUBHOUSE AND EXISTING PARKING LOTS. NO NEW STRUCTURES ARE PROPOSED IN PA-2B. HOWEVER, NEW PARKING SPACES ARE ADDED VOLUNTARILY NEAR THE NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ITS EXTENDED DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION TO AUGMENT ON-SITE PARKING CAPACITY.

PA-2C: GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY THE PROJECT INCLUDES A NEW GOLF TRAINING PARK AS A REPLACEMENT FOR THE CURRENT DRIVING RANGE THAT WILL OFFER GOLFERS A PROFESSIONALLY PROGRAMMED FACILITY TO IMPROVE THEIR GAME. IT WILL CONSIST OF AN 18-HOLE TOURNAMENT PUTTING GREEN, SHORT GAME TRAINING AREAS AND VIRTUAL GOLF SIMULATOR STATIONS THAT PROVIDE GOLFERS WITH DIGITAL FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE THE MECHANICS OF THEIR GOLFING TECHNIQUE.

EXHIBIT LIST
-------------------- ENGINEERING --------------------

MASTER SITE PLAN
·SHEET 1
·SHEET 2

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
·SHEET 1
·SHEET 2
-------------------- ARCHITECTURE --------------------

HOTEL LOCATION KEY MAP
HOTEL RENDERING VIEW 1
HOTEL RENDERING VIEW 2

GRAND AISLE RENDERING

HOTEL FLOOR PLAN

HOTEL ROOF PLAN

HOTEL ENLARGED FLOOR PLAN

HOTEL ELEVATIONS

HOTEL ENLARGED ELEVATION

HOTEL RESIDENCE LOCATION KEY MAP

HOTEL RESIDENCE RENDERING

HOTEL RESIDENCE FLOOR PLAN

HOTEL RESIDENCE ROOF PLAN

HOTEL RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS

HOTEL RESIDENCE BUILDING SECTIONS
PAGE #PAGE #
-
JRM/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
JRM/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
1 2
-
4 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 25
26 27
28 29
30 MAINTENANCE BUILDING LOCATION KEY MAP

MAINTENANCE BUILDING PLANS

MAINTENANCE BUILDING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS

MAINTENANCE BUILDING SECTIONS

POOL CAFE LOCATION KEY MAP

POOL CAFE / WATERFRONT RENDERING

POOL CAFE FLOOR PLAN

POOL CAFE ROOF PLAN

POOL CAFE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS

YOGA PAVILION LOCATION KEY MAP

YOGA PAVILION FLOOR PLAN

YOGA PAVILION EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS

YOGA PAVILION BUILDING SECTIONS
JRM/A
-
-
-
JRM/A
-
-
-
-
JRM/A
-
-
-
36 37
38 39
40 41
42 43
44 46
47 48
49 EXHIBIT LIST (CONTINUED)
ARCHITECTURE: HOTEL
ARCHITECTURE: HOTEL RESIDENCE
ARCHITECTURE: MAINTENANCE BUILDING
ARCHITECTURE: POOL CAFE
ARCHITECTURE: YOGA PAVILION

TENNIS PAVILION LOCATION KEY MAP

TENNIS PAVILION FLOOR PLAN

TENNIS PAVILION ROOF PLAN

TENNIS PAVILION EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
JRM/A
-
-
-
50 51
52 53
ARCHITECTURE: TENNIS PAVILION
TENNIS PAVILION SECTIONS -54
-------------------- LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE -------------------- LANDSCAPE OVERVIEW MSA Consulting, Inc.55
OVERALL HOTEL SITE PLAN -56
HOTEL AREA DETAIL MAP -57
GOLF EDGE DESERT PLANTING (ENLARGEMENT AREA A)-58
HOTEL RESIDENCE COURTYARD (ENLARGEMENT AREA B)-59
POOL GARDENS (ENLARGEMENT AREA C)-60
GRAND AISLE & HOTEL (ENLARGEMENT AREA D)-61
ORNAMENTAL AGAVE GARDEN & YOGA LAWN (ENLARGEMENT AREA E)-62 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE EDGE SCREENING (ENLARGEMENT AREA F)-63 MSA Consulting, Inc.
-
MSA Consulting, Inc.
-
5-
MATERIALS BOARD -12
-------------------- PHOTOMETRIC -------------------- Commercial Lighting Industries 65
-66
EXTERIOR PHOTOMETRIC PLAN: ZONE A
-67EXTERIOR PHOTOMETRIC PLAN: ZONE D
EXTERIOR PHOTOMETRIC PLAN: ZONE B & C
POOL CAFE BUILDING SECTIONS -45
PHASING DIAGRAM JRM/A 3
-------------------- SIGHT ANALYSIS --------------------

SIGHT LINE ANALYSIS

PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW INDEX
MSA Consulting, Inc.

JRM/A
6 7

SIGHT LINE PHOTO SIMULATIONS -

SITE CROSS SECTION LOCATIONS -

SITE SECTIONS -
8 9
10 COMPREHENSIVE PARKING EXHIBIT MSA Consulting, Inc.11 HOTEL SECTIONS -24
HOTEL GRAND AISLE SHADE CANOPIES -23
-68EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN: ZONE A

OWNER'S RESIDENCE LOCATION KEY MAP JRM/A

OWNER'S RESIDENCE FLOOR PLAN

OWNER'S RESIDENCE ROOF PLAN

OWNER'S RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
-
-
-
33 34
ARCHITECTURE: OWNER'S RESIDENCE
OWNER'S RESIDENCE BUILDING SECTIONS -35
OWNER
FM71777, LLC
71777 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
31 32
69EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN: ZONE B & C
-70EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN: ZONE D
-71EXTERIOR LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS
72EXTERIOR LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS
-
-
-64PLANTING LEGEND & IMAGERY
HOTEL NORTH WITH CANOPIES RENDERING -16B
6-1022

DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023

E N G I N E E R I N G
6-1023

PARKING
EV

PARKING

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
POOL
TENNIS

PAVILION
POOL
CAFE
EX.

CLUBHOUSE
HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

9 HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

1 0
HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

7 HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

8 OW
N
E
R

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

2 HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

1 HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

3 HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

4 HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

5 HO
T
E
L

R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E

6 HOTEL
EX.

HOA
OFFICE
PROP. PARKING ATTENDANT
EX.

LAKE
6'
PROP. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP.)
PROP. EMERGENCY ACCESS
24'

SELF PARKING
EX. SECURITY

GUARDHOUSE
EX. LAKE
EX.

LAKE

GOLF TRAINING FACILITY
PROP. PARCEL LINE (TYP.)
PROP. PARCEL LINE (TYP.)
PROP. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP.)

ISLAND DRIVE
13 8
.
5 '
13 8
.
5 '
13 8
.
5 '
11 1
.
3 '
13 8
.
5 '
13 8
.
5 '
42'24'66'84'66'42'24'42'66'42'
21'
21'
20'

60.2'66'84'66'42'
56'56'56'
16 '
16 '
36'11'24'
11'
36'36'22'36'36'11'24'9.8'

10.5'

10.5'
POOL
HOTEL
PROP. WELL / PUMP HOUSE
PROP. PARCEL LINE (TYP.)
PROP. SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT BOUNDARY (TYP.)
18 '
28 '
18 '
6'
32 .
6 '
40 '
12 .
5 '
9'
TYP.

17.2'217.6'20.5'217.6'12.7'
217.5'12.7'13.7'24'7'
EX.

LAKE
16 '
24 '

10.5'

10.5'10.5'
16'
10 '

19.8'
POOL
45 .
5 '
56'56'
16'15'
16 '
24 '
45 .
5 '
16'20'
16'15'16'
24'
16 .
5 '
11 .
4 '
6'
37 .
3 '
PROP.

RESTROOMS
PROP. POOL HOUSE
16 '
5'
6'
5'
6'
5'
PROP. SHADE CANOPY (TYP.)
PROP. SHADE CANOPY (TYP.)PROP. BICYCLE

PARKING
24 '
PROP. FIRE ACCESS TURN-AROUND

41.5'
10'
PROP. A/C UNIT (TYP.)
PROP. A/C UNIT
(TYP.)PROP. A/C UNIT (TYP.)
6'
15 .
3 '
2'
24 '
2'
6'

33.9'
2'150'2'

POOL POOL POOL POOL POOL

POOL POOLPOOLPOOL
36'

21.2'31.7'21.2'21.2'31.6'42.4'31.6'21.2'
20'
16'15'16'20'
16'15'16'20'
16'15'16'

21.2'31.7'42.3'31.6'
16 '
16 '
16 '
16 '
16 '
20 '
36'36'
20 '
36'36'
20 '
20 '
20 '
PROP. A/C
UNIT (TYP.)
PROP. A/C
UNIT (TYP.)
19'8'
12 '

8. 9
'

33.5'
48 '

11.8'
10 1
.
3 '
288.3'
PROP. A/C UNIT (TYP.)

10.1'

5. 2
'
6'
30 .
5 '
1 0
'
2 6
.
9 '

41.9'
217.6'

HOTEL HOTEL
23 8
.
3 '
21 8
.
9 '
164'
188.9'
10 .
2 '
19 '
10'

7. 5
'
6'
14 '
36 .
2 '
15 3
.
9 '

10.5'
5'

7.7'
18 '
5'

5.5'
89 .
6 '
40 .
1 '
6'
6'
10 '

17.2'20.5'
24 .
4 '
41 .
5 '
18 '
15 .
5 '
16 .
3 '
10 .
9 '
18 .
9 '
6'
14 8
.
5 '
YOGA

PAVILION
EX. LAKE
PROP. SPECIFIC PLAN

AMENDMENT

BOUNDARY
& PARCEL LINE

14.9'

22.8'

MASTER SITE PLAN (WEST)
1DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 17, 2023 PAGE

DATA TABLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:

SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY:

ADDRESS:

INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS, INC.
7117 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE "A"
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92503
DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY:NOVEMBER 19, 2021 TELEPHONE:(951) 687-4252

APPLICANT /
ADDRESS:

CONTACT:
71777 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270

MIGUEL NELSON
EXHIBIT PREPARER:

ADDRESS:

MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
CONTACT:PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE:(760) 320-9811
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST, S.B.M.

LAND OWNER:

FM71777, LLC
688-040-001 / 688-050-005 / 688-060-006 & 688-060-008
SH
E
E
T

M
A
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:

S
E
E

S
H
E
E
T

N
O
.

3 VIEW MATCHLINE: SEE LEFT

HOTEL (SOUTH)

USE AREA
--

UNIT(S)
-
LEVEL 1 STUDIO UNIT 9,295 SF11

AREA PER UNIT
-
845 SF
2 BEDROOM UNIT 3,420 SF21,770 SF
16,530 SF14SUB-TOTAL

HOTEL (NORTH)---
LEVEL 1 STUDIO UNIT 16,900 SF20
-
845 SF
ELECTRICAL PANEL ROOM 1 253 SF-253 SF
17,410 SF20SUB-TOTAL
33,940 SF34TOTAL HOTEL AREA

HOTEL RESIDENCE USE AREAUNIT(S)
LEVEL 1 LIVING --

AREA PER UNIT
4,091 SF
GARAGE --600 SF
49,490 SF10TOTAL HOTEL RESIDENCE AREA 4,949 SF

BUILDING DATA

MAINTENANCE BUILDING ---
LEVEL 1

PRODUCTION ROOM
-
-
-

HYDROPONIC
--
7,818 SFTOTAL MAINTENANCE BUILDING AREA
SHOP 1
--
SHOP 2
--
SHOP 3
--
--

OFFICE --
1,243 SF
1,771 SF
682 SF
673 SF
657 SF
700 SF
----
VIEW MATCHLINE: SEE RIGHT
NOTE: PARKING TABULATION, SEE SHEET 2

BUILDING DATA (CONTINUED)
MANAGER/RECEPTION 486 SF-187 SF
ELECTRICAL PANEL ROOM 2 257 SF-257 SF
PATIO --258 SF

OWNER RESIDENCE ---
LEVEL 1 LIVING --
-
5,134 SF
GARAGE --1,228 SF
7,354 SF-TOTAL OWNER RESIDENCE AREA 7,354 SF
STUDIO --992 SF YOGA PAVILION ---
LEVEL 1 HALL -
-
-
2,572 SFTOTAL YOGA PAVILION AREA
2,572 SF

USE AREAUNIT(S)AREA PER UNIT

BUILDING DATA (CONTINUED)

POOL CAFE ---
LEVEL 1 KITCHEN -
-
-

WASH AREA --
852 SFTOTAL POOL CAFE AREA

STORAGE --
TOILET 1 --
TOILET 2 --

CUSTODIAN CLOSET --
410 SF
160 SF
114 SF
71 SF
73 SF
24 SF

TENNIS PAVILION ---
LEVEL 1 CHANGING ROOM 1 -
-
-
214 SFTOTAL TENNIS PAVILION AREA
107 SF
CHANGING ROOM 2 --107 SF
--
-
-
--
--
--
SIGNING & STRIPING DETAIL:

SEE SHEET NO. 3
STORAGE 2,092 SF
3 BEDROOM UNIT 2,268 SF12,268 SF
HOUSEKEEPING 477 SF-185 SF
ELECTRICAL PANEL ROOM 1 232 SF-232 SF
ELECTRICAL PANEL ROOM 2 257 SF-257 SF
BATH 95 SF-95 SF
REVISIONS:

DATE:
2/23/2023
3/15/2023

ADJUSTED OWNER RESIDENCE

HOTEL ADJUSTMENT AND HEIGHT REDUCTION
DESCRIPTION:
6-1024

NO
PA
R
K
I
N
G
NO

PARKING

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
201.9'96'
EX.

HOA
OFFICE

MAINTENANCE BUILDING
(WORKROOMS / STORAGE / OFFICE / INDOOR AGRICULTURE /

PROCESSING)

EXSTING PARKING

SURPLUS PARKING
PROP. EMERGENCY ACCESS
20'
EX. SECURITY

GUARDHOUSE
18 '
26 .
2 '

ISLAND DRIVE
20'

20.5'
24'
BO
B

H
O
P
E

D
R
I
V
E
PROP. SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT BOUNDARY (TYP.)
PROP. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP.)
20 '
20 '
30 '
40 '
18 '
12 .
2 '
25 .
3 '
18 '
6'
35 .
3 '
EX.

GOLF
EX.

LAKE
PROP. TRASH

ENCLOSURE
PROP. COVERED

PARKING

EMPLOYEE PARKING
PROP. A/C UNIT (TYP.)
EX. LOT LINE (TYP.)
524'
22 1
.
9 '
EX. LOT LINE (TYP.)
54 .
5 '
6'
18 '
DG
221'
EX.

LAKE
EX. SECURITY GUARDHOUSE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
PROP. SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT BOUNDARY (TYP.)

ISLAND DRIVESTOP
STOP

TO GOLF &

HOTEL PARKING

TO HOA OFFICE

AND GOLF

MAINTENANCE

TO RESIDENT
TOWERS

TO GOLF

SELF PARKING

TO HOTEL

PARKING
Existing guardhouse will be manned but
gates left open during operating hours
Hotel Exit
Hotel Entry Clubhouse

NOPARKING
EV

PARKING
EV

PARKING
To Resident Towers

MASTER SITE PLAN (EAST)
2DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
SH
E
E
T

M
A
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:

S
E
E

S
H
E
E
T

N
O
.

2 PARKING TABULATION
LAND /

BUILDINGS

USE PER SITE
PLAN

VEHICLE SPACES RATIO

PER SPECIFIC PLAN NEW FACILITIES SPACES

REQUIRED SPACES PROVIDED SURPLUSES
SPACES

EXISTING NEW TOTAL
HOTEL 1 1.1 SPACES FOR

EACH GUEST ROOM
34 GUEST
ROOMS 38 - 93 93 55
HOTEL 1
RESIDENCES 2.5 SPACES PER UNIT 11 UNITS 28 - 49 49 21
GOLF COURSE/ 2
CLUBHOUSE N/A NONE 161 161 41 202 41
H.O.A. OFFICES
2 & 3 N/A NONE 10 10 - 10 -

MAINTENANCE
BUILDING 4
22 SPACES PER
BUILDING 1 BUILDING 22 -22 22 -
TOTAL -259 171 205 376 117

SIGNING AND STRIPING DETAIL
SCALE: 1" = 30'

1.Hotel/Residence Calculation:
·Hotel: 34 rooms X 1.1 space/room = 37.4 spaces
·Residences: 11 units X 2.5 spaces/unit = 27.5 spaces
·Parking requirements as per Desert Island Hotel SPA Development Standards, Page 14

2. Golf Clubhouse/HOA Offices Calculation: 171 combined spaces are required per approved Desert Island SP/EIR, pages II-29, 30. Note that this calculation assumed 6 spaces per golf hole, while current RMMC (17.26.040, Table 3-6) requires 4 spaces per golf hole, resulting in a surplus of 36 parking spaces at the clubhouse by today's standard.

3. Outside SPA Boundary, included for reference.

4. Based on the maintenance building's usage per Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.26.040 Number of Parking Spaces Required.

SIGNING & STRIPING DETAIL:

SEE RIGHT
Note:

No signing and striping is proposed within any other onsite parking lot or drive aisle.

All proposed signing and striping occurs at the entry.

DATA TABLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:

SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY:

ADDRESS:

INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS, INC.
7117 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE "A"
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92503
DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY:NOVEMBER 19, 2021 TELEPHONE:(951) 687-4252

APPLICANT /
ADDRESS:

CONTACT:
71777 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270

MIGUEL NELSON
EXHIBIT PREPARER:

ADDRESS:

MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
CONTACT:PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE:(760) 320-9811
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST, S.B.M.

LAND OWNER:

FM71777, LLC
688-040-001 / 688-050-005 / 688-060-006 & 688-060-008

SITE COVERAGE

LAND / BUILDINGS

USE PER SITE PLAN

PLANNING

SUB-AREA
MAX. BUILDING

COVERAGE PER
SPA (%)

PARCEL PARCEL AREA
(SF)

PROPOSED

BUILDING

AREA (SF)

CALCULATED
PARCEL
COVERAGE (%)

HOTELS AND

GROUNDS
PA-1A 45%PARCEL 1 1 52,624 SF 17,410 SF 33%
PA-1B 45%PARCEL 2 1 131,073 SF 16,530 SF 13%
RESIDENCES PA-1C 40%PARCEL 3 1 187,308 SF 56,844 SF 30% YOGA PAVILION PA-1D 20%688-060-008 39,640 SF 2,572 SF 7%

MAINTENANCE
BUILDING PA-2A N/A 3 688-050-005 987,505 SF 7,818 SF 1%

EXISTING
CLUBHOUSE PA-2B N/A 3 688-040-001 2 188,326 SF N/A N/A

GOLF TRAINING
AREA PA-2C N/A 3 688-040-001 2 188,326 SF N/A N/A

1. Referenced parcel number per Tentative Parcel Map No. 38399.

2. Remainder acreage of parcel after recordation of Tentative Parcel Map No. 38399.

3. Located on Golf course property.

REVISIONS:

DATE:
2/23/2023
3/15/2023

ADJUSTED OWNER RESIDENCE

HOTEL ADJUSTMENT AND HEIGHT REDUCTION
DESCRIPTION:

Existing Resident Traffic
Existing Golf Traffic
Proposed Valet Checkpoint / Greeting Station
Legend
Proposed Hotel Traffic
Existing Residential Gates

EXISTING TURNAROUND TO MAIN GATE
SCALE: 1" = 50'
6-1025

PHASING DIAGRAM
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
3 6-1026

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
4 NO.REVISIONS DATE
ADJUSTED OWNER RESIDENCE 2/23/231
UPDATED HOTEL BUILDINGS 3/15/232
6-1027

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
5 NO.REVISIONS DATE
ADJUSTED OWNER RESIDENCE 2/23/231
UPDATED HOTEL BUILDINGS 3/15/232
6-1028

S I T E A N A L Y S I S
6-1029

NO
PA
R
K
I
N
G
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
EV

PARKING

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

ISLAND DRIVE

BOB HOPE DRIVE
1 1
2 2
3 4
43 Residence
One Story
Hotel
Two Story
Hotel
One Story
Hotel
One Story
Building
One Story
Maintenance
Hotel
Residence
One Story
Hotel
Residence
One Story
Hotel
Residence
One Story
Hotel
Residence
One Story
Hotel
Ex. Annenberg
Property Wall Ex. C/L
Frank Sinatra Drive
West East
Bound Bound
(Public Road)
Ex. 6' Property
Wall
Ex. Sidewalk
Annenberg
Property
Prop. 12ft Hedge
(One Story)
Prop. Maintenance Building
Ex. Perimeter
Hedge
Ex. Surface
Ex. Median Tree
Ex. Lane
PE = 239.03
Ex. C/L
Frank Sinatra Drive
West East
Ex. Sidewalk
Ex. 6' Property
Wall Prop. 12ft HedgeEx. Annenberg
Property Wall
Bound Bound
(Public Road)
Annenberg
Property
(Two Story)
Ex. Median Tree
Ex. Surface
Ex. Lane
Ex. Perimeter
Hedge
Ex. Palm Tree Cluster
Prop. Hotel
PE = 248.83
Ex. C/L
Ex. Sidewalk
Ex. 6' Property
Wall
Frank Sinatra Drive
West East
Bound Bound
(Public Road)
Vacant
Land
Ex. Tree
Ex. Surface
Ex. Lane
(One Story)
Prop. Hotel Residence
Ex. 12ft Hedge
PE = 248.03
Ex. C/L
Frank Sinatra Drive
West East
Ex. 6' Property
Wall
Ex. Lane
Ex. Annenberg
Property Wall
Ex. 12ft Hedge
Ex. Sidewalk
Bound Bound
(Public Road)
Annenberg
Property
Ex. Parking Lot
Ex. Tree
Ex. Tree
Ex. 8ft Hedge
Ex. Perimeter
Hedge
Ex. Surface
Ex. Median Tree
(Two Story)
Prop. Hotel
PE = 248.83
Cross Section Legend
Cross Section Location
Representative Visibility Zone
Solid Visual Barrier
Sight Line Legend
At Existing Wall
At Existing Vegetation or Proposed 12' Hedge
Vehicle Views (Peripheral Vision at 50 MPH)
At Existing Wall
Pedestrian Views (Stationary)
11 CROSS-SECTION LOCATIONS

SIGHT LINES
Notes:

1. Vehicle views are only visible for a matter of seconds as motion creates a constantly changing peripheral scene.

2. For comparative purposes, ignoring intervening hedges and vegetative screening.
2 1
2 DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023

PAGESIGHT LINE ANALYSIS
6 SECTION NO. 3*
SCALE: 1" = 30'
SECTION NO. 1
SCALE: 1" = 30'
SECTION NO. 2*
SCALE: 1" = 30'
SECTION NO. 4
SCALE: 1" = 30'
*(SIGHT LINES REFLECT WORST CASE TWO STORY HOTEL BUILDING.

SINGLE STORY HOTEL BUILDING WOULD BE LOWER AND LESS VISIBLE) 6-1030

PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW INDEX
7DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
6-1031

SIGHT LINE PHOTO SIMULATIONS
8DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
VIEWPOINT NO. 3 *
VIEWPOINT NO. 1 *VIEWPOINT NO. 2
VIEWPOINT NO. 4
*(VIEW POINTS 1 & 3 REFLECT TWO STORY HOTEL BUILDING.

SINGLE STORY HOTEL BUILDING WOULD BE LOWER)
6-1032

SITE CROSS SECTION LOCATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
9 6-1033

SITE SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
10 PE = 248.83
PE = 244.33
PE = 248.03 PE = 247.13 PE = 246.33 PE = 244.33
6-1034

NO
PA
R
K
I
N
G
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
EV

PARKING
Frank Sinatra Drive
Isl
a
n
d

D
r
i
v
e
H.O.A. OFFICES
10 SPACES
HOTEL
93 SPACES

RESIDENCES
49 SPACES

EXISTING GOLF/CLUBHOUSE
75 SPACES EXISTING GOLF/CLUBHOUSE
86 SPACES
2 Garage &
2 Surface Spaces
(Typ.)
3 Garage &
6 Surface
Spaces

PROPOSED MAINTENANCE
22 SPACES

PROPOSED GOLF/CLUBHOUSE
41 SPACES
EVEV
N.T.S.

COMPREHENSIVE PARKING EXHIBIT
10 10 -10 -
161
28 38
Description New Facilities Spaces Required Spaces Provided Surplus Spaces Existing New Total
202 41
-49 49 21
-93 93 55
None
None
11 Units
34 Rooms
Golf/Clubhouse Parking
Residence Parking
Hotel Parking
Use Area
Total 259 171 205 376 117-
H.O.A. Offices
2 1
1 161 41
2 & 3

1. Hotel/Residence Calculation:
·Hotel: 34 rooms X 1.1 space/room = 37.4 spaces
·Residences: 11 units X 2.5 spaces/unit = 27.5 spaces
·Parking requirements as per Desert Island Hotel SPA Development Standards, Page 14

3. Outside SPA Boundary, included for reference.

4. Based on the maintenance building's usage per Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.26.040 Number of Parking Spaces Required. 11 22 -22 22 -1 BuildingMaintenance Building 4
6-1035

A R C H I T E C T U R E
6-1036

MATERIALS BOARD
12DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
NOTE:

COLOR PALETTE WILL APPLY TO ALL BUILDINGS WITHIN THE PROJECT. INCLUDING HOTEL, RESIDENCES, MAINTENANCE, YOGA PAVILION, TENNIS PAVILION, POOL CAFE AND RESTROOMS.

SEE RELEVANT BUILDING ELEVATION FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS. 6-1037

A R C H I T E C T U R E
HOTEL
6-1038

HOTEL LOCATION KEY MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
13 6-1039

HOTEL RENDERING VIEW 1
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
14 6-1040

HOTEL RENDERING VIEW 2
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
15 6-1041

GRAND AISLE RENDERING
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
16 6-1042

HOTEL NORTH WITH CANOPIES RENDERING
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
16B
6-1043

HOTEL FLOOR PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
17 6-1044

HOTEL ROOF PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
18 6-1045

HOTEL ENLARGED FLOOR PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
19 6-1046

HOTEL ELEVATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
20 NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS.

SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE.

NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS.

SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE. 6-1047

HOTEL ENLARGED ELEVATION
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
21 NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR
COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS. SEE MATERIALS BOARD,
PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE.
6-1048

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS.

SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE. 6-1049

PARKING
EV

PARKING
HOTEL
HOTEL
HOTEL

SHADE CANOPY LOCATIONSHADE CANOPY LOCATION
A
A
RENDERING 1 RENDERING 2

PHOTO PHOTO
HOTEL

SHADE CANOPIES
24DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE

DESCRIPTION OF SHADE CANOPY ART STRUCTURES
OVERVIEW: THE DESERT ISLAND HOTEL WILL INCORPORATE A UNIQUE CUSTOM ART PIECE RUNNING THE LENGTH OF THE CENTRAL “GRAND AISLE”. THIS WILL BE A LIGHT WEIGHT, STRUCTURAL SHADE CANOPY USING LIGHT STEEL, AIRCRAFT CABLES AND SUNBRELLA FABRIC OR POWDER COATED STEEL STRIPS TO CREATE A DAPPLED, FILTERED SHADE EFFECT.

ARTIST/DESIGNER: THE WORK IS BEING COMMISSIONED FROM BALL-NOGUES STUDIO, AN AWARD-WINNING DESIGN AND FABRICATION PRACTICE COMBINING THE DISCIPLINES OF ARCHITECTURE, ART AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGN. THE STUDIO APPROACHES THE “DESIGN” OF THE PRODUCTION PROCESS ITSELF AS ESSENTIAL TO EACH PROJECT, WITH THE AIM OF CREATING ENVIRONMENTS THAT ENHANCE SENSATION, GENERATE SPECTACLE AND INVITE PHYSICAL ENGAGEMENT. BENJAMIN BALL, ONE OF THE CO-FOUNDERS, IS A PERSONAL FRIEND OF THE APPLICANT AND INVESTOR IN THE DESERT ISLAND HOTEL PROJECT. FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT BALL-NOGUES STUDIO AND THEIR PORTFOLIO OF COMPLETED ART PIECES GO TO, BALL-NOGUES STUDIO.

DESIGN ASSIGNMENT: TO CREATE A SCULPTURAL, COLORFUL, FLUID CANOPY THAT FILTERS LIGHT AND SHADE ACROSS SIDEWALKS AND PARKING SPACES TO KEEP PEDESTRIANS AND VEHICLES COOLER AND MAKE DRIVING AND WALKING THE “GRAND AISLE” AN ATTRACTIVE AND ARTFUL EXPERIENCE.

MATERIALS: THE MATERIAL PALETTE WILL CONSIST OF SUNBRELLA FABRIC, ALUMINUM, STEEL, AIRCRAFT CABLE. LIGHTWEIGHT STEEL COLUMNS AND FRAMES. AIRCRAFT CABLES SPANNING BETWEEN THE FRAMES WILL HOLD STRIPS OF SUNBRELLA FABRIC OR POWDER COATED ALUMINUM IN COLORFUL PINKS, YELLOWS AND WARMER TONES. BREEZES PASSING THROUGH THESE COLORED STRIPS WILL CREATE MOVEMENT AND DAPPLED, FILTERED LIGHT. CANOPIES WILL COVER THE PARKING SPACES ONLY, LEAVING THE CENTER DRIVE AISLE OPEN. THE ATTACHED CROSS SECTION AND PERSPECTIVE RENDING ILLUSTRATE THE DESIGN CONCEPT.

INSTALLATION: THE STEEL COLUMNS AND FRAME STRUCTURES WILL BE MANUFACTURED OFF SITE, DELIVERED AND BOLTED DOWN TO ENGINEERED PLATES PRE-EMBEDDED IN THE PARKING AISLE AND SIDEWALK.

SHADE CANOPY LOCATION
SCALE: 1" = 30'
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION "A-A"
SCALE: 1" = 20'
ILLUSTRATIVE PHOTO RENDERING 1 ILLUSTRATIVE PHOTO RENDERING 2 PROTOTYPE CONCEPT: DESERT ISLAND HOTEL
NOTES:

1. SHADE CANOPIES ARE ONLY VISIBLE FROM INSIDE DESERT ISLAND. THEY ARE

SCREENED BY THE TWO-STORY HOTEL BUILDING FROM PUBLIC VIEWS ON FRANK SINATRA DRIVE.

2. PROTOTYPE CONCEPT REFLECTS LIKELY APPROACH TO SHADE STRUCTURE

DESIGN, HOWEVER, BALL-NOGUES STUDIOS RESERVES ARTISTIC LICENSE TO

CONTINUE REFINING OR MODIFYING THE SHADE CANOPY MATERIAL ,

COLOR AND SUPPORTS AS THE DESIGN IS FURTHER ADVANCED FOR THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

3. FINAL SHAPE OF FABRIC SHADE COVERS IS IN DEVELOPMENT.

DESIGNER PORTFOLIO: BALL-NOGUES STUDIO
NOTE: ILLUSTRATIONS SHOWN ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CREATIVE PORTFOLIO DESIGNED BY BALL-NOGUES STUDIO NOT THE SPECIFIC STRUCTURAL ART PIECE THAT HAS BEEN COMMISSIONED FOR DESERT ISLAND. 6-1050

HOTEL SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
24 PE = 244.33
PE = 244.33
PE = 248.83
PE = 244.33
6-1051

A R C H I T E C T U R E

HOTEL RESIDENCE
6-1052

HOTEL RESIDENCE LOCATION KEY MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
25 6-1053

HOTEL RESIDENCE RENDERING
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
26 6-1054

HOTEL RESIDENCE FLOOR PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
27 6-1055

HOTEL RESIDENCE ROOF PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
28 6-1056

HOTEL RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
29 NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL
LOCATIONS. SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR
COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE.
6-1057

HOTEL RESIDENCE BUILDING SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
30 6-1058

A R C H I T E C T U R E

OWNER'S RESIDENCE
6-1059

OWNER'S RESIDENCE LOCATION KEY MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
31 6-1060

OWNER'S RESIDENCE FLOOR PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
32 6-1061

OWNER'S RESIDENCE ROOF PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
33 6-1062

OWNER'S RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
34 NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS.

SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE. 6-1063

OWNER'S RESIDENCE BUILDING SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
35 6-1064

A R C H I T E C T U R E

MAINTENANCE BUILDING
6-1065

MAINTENANCE BUILDING LOCATION KEY MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
36 RENDERING NO. 1
RENDERING NO. 2
6-1066

MAINTENANCE BUILDING PLANS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
38 6-1067

MAINTENANCE BUILDING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
38 NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS.

SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE. 6-1068

MAINTENANCE BUILDING SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
39 6-1069

A R C H I T E C T U R E

POOL CAFE
6-1070

POOL CAFE LOCATION KEY MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
40 6-1071

POOL CAFE / WATERFRONT RENDERING
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
41 6-1072

POOL CAFE FLOOR PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
42 6-1073

POOL CAFE ROOF PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
43 6-1074

POOL CAFE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
44 NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS.

SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE. 6-1075

POOL CAFE BUILDING SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
45 PE = 241.33
PE = 241.33
6-1076

A R C H I T E C T U R E

YOGA PAVILION
6-1077

YOGA PAVILION LOCATION KEY MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
46 6-1078

YOGA PAVILION FLOOR PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
47 6-1079

YOGA PAVILION EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
48 NOTE:

SEE BUILDING ELEVATION CALLOUTS FOR COLOR/MATERIAL LOCATIONS.

SEE MATERIALS BOARD, PAGE 12, FOR COLOR/MATERIAL PALETTE. 6-1080

YOGA PAVILION BUILDING SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
49 6-1081

A R C H I T E C T U R E

TENNIS PAVILION
6-1082

TENNIS PAVILION LOCATION KEY MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
50 6-1083

8. 9
'
8'
19'
12 '

PROPOSED RESTROOMS

SHEET VIEW - SEE RIGHT

8. 9
'
8'
12 '
19'

PROPOSED RESTROOMS
214 SF

TENNIS PAVILION FLOOR PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
51 3
AH.40
3 AH.40
3 AH.30
2 AH.40
1 AH.40
4 AH.30
1 AH.30

PROPOSED TENNIS PAVILION RESTROOMS
SCALE: 1" = 5'

PROPOSED TENNIS PAVILION
SCALE: 1" = 10'
6-1084

TENNIS PAVILION ROOF PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
52 6-1085

TENNIS PAVILION EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
53 6-1086

TENNIS PAVILION SECTIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
54 6-1087

L A N D S C A P E
6-1088

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: LANDSCAPE OVERVIEW
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
55 6-1089

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: OVERALL HOTEL SITE PLAN
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
56 6-1090

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: HOTEL AREA DETAIL MAP
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
57 6-1091

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: GOLF EDGE DESERT PLANTING (ENLARGEMENT AREA A) DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
58 6-1092

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: HOTEL RESIDENCE COURTYARD (ENLARGEMENT AREA B) DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
59 6-1093

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: POOL GARDENS (ENLARGEMENT AREA C) DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
60 6-1094

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: GRAND AISLE & HOTEL (ENLARGEMENT AREA D) DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
61 6-1095

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: ORNAMENTAL AGAVE GARDEN & YOGA LAWN (ENLARGEMENT AREA E) DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
62 6-1096

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: FRANK SINATRA DRIVE EDGE SCREENING (ENLARGEMENT AREA F) DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
63 6-1097

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: PLANTING LEGEND & IMAGERY
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
64 6-1098

P H O T O M E T R I C
6-1099

EXTERIOR PHOTOMETRIC PLAN: ZONE "A"
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
65 6-1100

EXTERIOR PHOTOMETRIC PLAN: ZONE "B" & "C"
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
66 6-1101

EXTERIOR PHOTOMETRIC PLAN: ZONE "D"
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
67 6-1102

EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN: ZONE "A"
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
68 6-1103

EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN: ZONE "B" & "C"
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
69 6-1104

EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN: ZONE "D"
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
70 6-1105

EXTERIOR LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS
DESERT ISLAND: RESORT HOTEL | PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20, 2023 PAGE
71 6-1106

1/24/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 7

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2023
12:30 P.M.

MINUTES
Meeting Location
City of Rancho Mirage
City Hall - Council Chamber
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Remote Access Information iii
Zoom Link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82889752063?pwd=aF
AxK1VMZGZkRUluN0xpTTM1dVhYZz09
Passcode: 463502
Webinar ID: 828 8975 2063
Zoom Call-In No.: 1 669 900 9128
1 (888) 475-4499
CALL TO ORDER – 12:35 P.M.

OATH OF OFFICE FOR TOM DOCZI & JOHN MILANDER
Kristie Ramos, City Clerk, provided the Oath of Office for Board Members Tom Doczi and John Milander.

Roll Call: Doczi, Greenwood, Lockyer, Milander, O’Donnell, Patel, and Sanborn.

Doczi, Greenwood, Milander, O’Donnell, Patel, and Lockyer – Present (Patel, and Lockyer via telecommunication)
Sanborn – Absent
MOVED/SECONDED BY O’DONNELL TO EXCUSE BOARD MEMBER SANBORN’S ABSENCE. MOTION CARRIED 6/0.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES – November 14, 2022
MOVED/SECONDED BY PATEL /O’DONNELL TO APPROVE THE November 14, 2022,

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES WITH ONE MODIFICATION TO CORRECT THE SPELLING OF CHAIR O’DONNELL’S LAST NAME.

MOTION CARRIED 3/0/3 WITH BOARD MEMBERS DOCZI, LOCKER, AND MILANDER ABSTAINING.

DISCUSSION ITEM
ATTACHMENT 18
6-1108

1/24/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 7

1.Environmental Assessment Case No. EA22-0012, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA22-0002, Specific Plan Amendment Case No. SPA22- 0002, Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22-0004, Development Agreement Case No.

DA22-0003, and Preliminary Development Plan Case No. PDP22-0001 – Desert Island Hotel. The Desert Island Specific Plan Amendment will occupy 17.2 acres within the existing Desert Island development. A General Plan/Zoning Map Amendment is to amend the underlying designation of Private Open Space (OS/PV) to Resort Hotel (Rs-H) for 10.5 acres of the existing Desert Island golf course for the development of a new 42-key boutique hotel and 11 private hotel residences along with passive outdoor gathering areas, tennis, pool, café, and yoga amenities. A new golf training park and new maintenance building will be built to replace the existing driving range and old maintenance building being displaced by the hotel project. Located south of Frank Sinatra Drive and west of Island Drive on a portion of the Desert Island golf course (APNs:688-040-001; 688-050-002; -005; 688-060-008; - 023)
Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.

Board Member Milander asked why the project is broken into so many project areas.

Ms. Lopez stated that the project is broken down into subareas due to the different development standards and overall vision of the project.

Ben Torres, Planning Manager, added that as part of the application they are applying for a specific plan amendment. As part of that amendment, there are specific areas that need to be identified with varying development standards.

Board Member Milander asked if the project planning areas are based on parcel size and to clarify if the lot coverage is based on planning areas or parcel size.

Ms. Lopez answered that each area has different development standards, the hotel grounds have a setback of 12 feet, and 45% lot coverage. The lot coverage is based on parcel size.

Paul Depalatis, the applicant’s representative, further clarified each subarea.

Board Member Doczi asked if the setbacks are based on the proposed development standards for each subarea.

Ms. Lopez confirmed that the setbacks are based on the new development standards proposed in the specific plan amendment.

Board Member Patel asked what the proposed setbacks on the Frank Sinatra Drive marked 240 & 220 feet and how did they arrive at that distance.

Ms. Lopez clarified that the distances of 240 and 220 feet are only as a reference and deferred to the applicant on the location of the structures.

Board Member Doczi asked if the residences are going to be for rent as a whole unit or by the room.

Ms. Lopez confirmed that the residences would be rented as a whole and would defer those questions to the applicant. The condos are also proposed in the development agreement and 6-1109

1/24/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 7 that is under review. The applicant has not expressed the desire to rent them out as individual rooms within the residence.

Board Member Patel asked why they were labeled as private residences if the intent is to function like an Airbnb model.

Chair O’Donnell referred that question to the applicant.

Board Member Dozi asked if the development meets the minimum parking standards of the city ordinance, especially regarding the Grand Aisle.

Ms. Lopez confirmed that they do meet the municipal code requirements and explained that the Grand Aisle would have completely shaded parking due to the proposed shade structures.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant to provide their project presentation on the operations & overall vision.

Miguel Nelson, the owner, introduced himself and his team. He stated that the private luxury rentals will be rented and managed by the hotel. The intent is to be rented as luxury rentals. The overall concept is a tranquil, exclusive, luxury boutique resort that is garden-forward, environmentally sensitive, low impact on the community, and private.

Mr. Depalatis further explained the project components and their proposed location.

James Myer, the project architect, explained that the design philosophy is for minimalistic architecture. The intent is rancho-style homes that are back-to-back to create a uniform experience. He emphasized that the residences are meant to be rented out as a whole home.

Chair O’Donnell asked if anyone from the landscape team was present.

Mark Lenning, the project landscape architect, explained that his team’s approach was to create a simple desert experience with the landscaping.

Board Member Greenwood asked for feedback on the construction methodology behind the plan.

Mr. Myers stated that economics is one reason. A premanufactured steel building with a very specific set of architectural guidelines would allow for a larger building. The intent is to construct the components offsite and then construction time is reduced. He acknowledged the architecture is industrial, with complementing wood, stone, and color elements.

Board Member Milander asked the applicant’s team to expand on the overall functionality of the project, especially regarding the operation of the hotel.

Mr. Nelson described the hotel’s floor plan to better illustrated the typical hotel stay.

Mr. Myers explained that the concept is to emulate a motel with a digital check-in/check-out.

Chair O’Donnell opened the meeting to board questions.
6-1110

1/24/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 7 Board Member Greenwood stated that his initial questions are based on the hotel portion. He asked for further reasoning on why the design concept is industrial in nature.

Mr. Myers explained that the main design feature of the metal structures created a cohesive design as well as provided a faster construction timeline since the materials would be made offsite and simply assembled onsite.

Board Member Greenwood voiced his concern about the overall execution of the project. He questioned the locations of the mechanical equipment.

Mr. Myers answered that they propose all ground-level AC units.

Board Member Lockyer asked what level of approval is being sought at this point and would a second review be forthcoming.

Ms. Lopez mentioned that the board can either recommend approval to the Planning Commission and move the project forward, or based on the outcome of the meeting the applicant can revise or clarify exhibits and re-submit for further consideration Chair O’Donnell asked if there could be a third option, to conditionally approve the project, but revisit the design for a future date.

Mr. Torres explained that this is not the usual procedure and summarized the actions the Board may take.

Board Member Greenwood countered that the level of detail that has been provided is too preliminary to offer a complete review of the project. The project requires more clarification on critical components.

Chair O’Donnell asked the board to separate their overall architectural questions from the agreed-upon detailed architectural questions that are not limited to mechanical plans.

Board Member Greenwood expressed that those components are important to understand the project.

Mr. Myers explained that the level of architectural details that are being requested is more than what this preliminary stage would provide. At this time the applicant’s team has not retained mechanical, electrical, and plumbing consultants.

Board Member Milander voiced concerns about the project. He noted there are no designations of ADA parking spaces/units, trash enclosures, mechanical spaces, and access clearances.

Mr. Myers added that artist that is creating the shade structures is hoping to have them be an art attraction.

Board member Lockyer stated that the continuous parking spaces in the Grand Aisle would create a sea of hot concrete in the summer.

Board Member Greenwood proposed that the comments/questions be refocused on the site orientation of the proposed buildings’ architecture.
6-1111

1/24/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 7 Chair O’Donnell asked the board to list their questions and comments.

Board Member Doczi stated the applicant’s team has done a wonderful job describing their ideas, but the level of detail in the booklet is unimaginative. He further explains that the design missed the opportunity to provide a more organic design and that the site plan would benefit from further refinement.

Board Member Greenwood asked the development team to elaborate on the north side of the two-story building.

Mr. Myers answered that it is a 130-yard driving area, putting green, a warm-up area, and movable training equipment.

Board Member Greenwood asked if further buildings would be proposed in the subject area.

Mr. Myers answered that no future buildings would be proposed in that area. The driving range area is included as a frame of reference.

Board Member Greenwood asked if this golf area is part of the Desert Island golf course and its relationship with the proposed project.

Mr. Myers answered that the golf course is a separate component.

Board Member Greenwood asked for clarification of the project phasing.

Mr. Myers answered the phasing of the project.

Board Member Patel asked if club members could use the lounge and pool areas.

Mr. Nelson clarified that only hotel guests would be permitted in those areas.

Board Member Greenwood complemented the original design intent with the covered parking structures, but mentioned there is a design disconnect.

Mr. Depalatis explained that artist retained to build the shade structures is an investor in the project and would work closely with the team to create a cohesive product.

Board Member Greenwood added that he likes the design, but there needs to be a more fleshed- out product to move the project forward.

Mr. Nelson described his intent on the hotel grounds.

Board Member Doczi voiced his concerns about vehicle lighting issues with the hotel residences.

Mr. Myers explained the landscape design would further mitigate any lighting issues in the residences.

Board Member Patel made comments regarding the hotel’s design.

Mr. Myers answered that hotel units are above the parking lot level and can be accessed by stairs.
6-1112

1/24/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 7 Board Member Greenwood asked about ADA accessibility.

Mr. Myers answered two ADA units will be accessible as well as other ADA access points such as the elevator.

Board Member Patel asked the reasoning for a continuous building.

Mr. Myers answered the hotel component is four buildings. The 400-feet of building is only 200 feet of building.

Board Member Patel agreed with Board Member Doczi’ s comments. He added that in general, the proposed project has great potential.

Board Member Lockyer summarized his concerns regarding the hotel’s design.

Chair O’Donnell commented that a motion to restudy the project was likely the meeting outcome.

Board Member Lockyer concurred.

Chair O’Donnell asked each member to summarize their respective comments and questions.

Board Member Milander summarized his comments and questions.

Board Member Greenwood added his comments and questions.

Mr. Depalatis stated that the project design and location were based on the current conditions of the site.

Mr. Nelson added that the intent was to incorporate the existing site while taking advantage of the majestic mountain views.

Board Member Patel would like to see an exhibit that integrates the proposed project and the existing clubhouse.

Board Member Greenwood mentioned he would like to see a continuance of the project.

Board Member Lockyer added he would like to see hardscape details, materials, samples, delineation, and site circulations.

Chair O’Donnell add that it is a consensus that the board would restudy the project.

Public comment: - None.

MOVED/SECONDED BY GREENWOOD/DOCZI TO RECOMMEND THAT THE PROJECT BE

CONTINUED TO A DATE TO BE DETERMINED BY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT SUBJECT

TO THE SUBMISSION OF A COMPILED LIST TO CLARIFY THE INTENT OF THE RESUBMISSION.

MOTION CARRIED 6/0.
6-1113

1/24/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 7

ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to consider the Architectural Review Board adjourned the meeting at 2:50 p.m.

Prepared by: Deanna Mendoza, Development Services Technician Date Approved by Architectural Review Board: 2/27/2023
6-1114

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 13

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2023
12:30 P.M.

MINUTES
City of Rancho Mirage
City Hall – Council Chambers
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
CALL TO ORDER – 12:30 P.M.

Roll Call: Doczi, Greenwood, Lockyer, Milander, O’Donnell, Patel, and Sanborn.

Doczi, Greenwood, Milander, O’Donnell, Patel, and Sanborn – Present Lockyer – Absent
Ben Torres, Planning Manager, informed the board that Board Member Lockyer will be resigning from the Architectural Review Board effective March 1, 2023.

MOVED/SECONDED BY GREENWOOD/O’DONNELL TO EXCUSE BOARD MEMBER LOCKYER’S ABSENCE. MOTION CARRIED 6/0.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES – January 23, 2023
MOVED/SECONDED BY GREENWOOD/MILANDER TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 23, 2023 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AS PRESENTED.

MOTION CARRIED 6/0.

ACTION ITEM

1.Review and recommend to the City Council the Architectural Review Board annual report for 2022.

Ben Torres, Planning Manager, presented the staff report.

Public comment: - None.

MOVED/SECONDED BY GREENWOOD/PATEL TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVE AND FILE THE 2022 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD REPORT. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN AND MOTION CARRIED 6/0.

ATTACHMENT 19
6-1115

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 13

DISCUSSION ITEM

2. Environmental Assessment Case No. EA22-0012, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA22-0002, Specific Plan Amendment Case No. SPA22- 0002, Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM22 -0004, Development Agreement Case No.

DA22-0003, and Preliminary Development Plan Case No. PDP22 -0001 – Desert Island Hotel. The Desert Island Specific Plan Amendment will occupy 17.2 acres within the existing Desert Island development. A General Plan/Zoning Map Amendment is to amend the underlying designation of Private Open Space (OS/PV) to Resort Hotel (Rs -H) for 10.5 acres of the existing Desert Island golf course for the development of a new 42 -key boutique hotel and 11 private hotel residences along with passive outdoor gathering areas, tennis, pool, café, and yoga amenities. A new golf training park and new maintenance building will be built to replace the existing driving range and old maintenance building being displaced by the hotel project. Located south of Frank Sinatra Drive and west of Island Drive on a portion of the Desert Island golf course (APNs:688-040-001; 688-050-002; -005; 688-060-008; - 023)

Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.

Chair O’Donnell opened the meeting to board questions for staff.

Board Member Greenwood asked what the relationship with the HOA is? What is the oversight that Desert Island Homeowner’s Association has and what review has happened?

Ms. Lopez stated that the project has received HOA approval, which is on file with the Planning Division and the applicant and team have met with the residents of the community.

Board Member Greenwood commented on the roofing component of the two -story building and expressed his concerns. He asked for confirmation that the existing Clubhou se will not service or provided any function to the hotel.

Ms. Lopez stated that the applicant has expressed that clubhouse staff would be crossed trained.

Board Member Greenwood asked in what ways would the clubhouse staff assist the hotel functions.

Ms. Lopez deferred the operational question to the applicant.

Chair O’Donnell asked if any other board member had further questions for staff.

Board Member Doczi asked about the access gate and when it would be open.

Ms. Lopez explained the main gate would remain open during the hotel’s operation.

Board Member Doczi, asked for an elaboration the hotel entrance, circulation, path of travel, and turnaround point.

Ms. Lopez deferred to the applicant.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant to make a presentation on the revised project.

6-1116

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 13

Paul Depalatis, the applicant’s representative, further clarified the comments made earlier and deferred to the project architect regarding the architectural questions. Mr. Depalatis further explained the project components and their proposed location and the changes that had been made to the project with highlighted details.

James Myer, the project architect, answered the board members’ questions and explained the design philosophy is for minimalistic architecture. The intent is to maximize the open space and landscaping he emphasized that the residences and hotel be densified to maximize the natural landscaping. He stated that they have not contracted a mechanical engineer but would internalize everything to try to have a minimal footprint.

Chair O’Donnell asked if any other board member had any other questions of the applicant?

Board Member Doczi asked how the pool area’s fencing would be proposed.

Mark Lenning, the project landscape architect, explained the design of the pool area.

Majna Dukic, Development Services Director, added that the project would have to comply with all safety codes for both the commercial and residential pools.

Chair O’Donnell asked if anyone else had questions for the applicant.

Board Member Greenwood commented that the site is a commercial development that would need to comply with ADA standards and asked for clarification on how these standards are being met.

Mr. Myers explained the ADA design and mechanical plan design.

Ms. Dukic added that if that is something that the board is concerned about, the board can direct staff to ensure that all mechanical equipment is screened with the final development plan if the project is approved. If there are changes that go outside of the approved boundaries, then either a minor modification or a major modification application would be required.

Mr. Myers addressed the mechanical concerns. He also explained the reasoning behind the vision and articulation of the project design. He discussed the different material types such as wood, stone, and color elements.

Board Member Greenwood asked about the operations, support functions, and programmatic functions of the hotel.

Mr. Myers explained the concept of the support functions.

Board Member Doczi asked applicant to explain the landscape areas b etween the Grand Aisle parking area and the hotel entrances.

Mr. Lenning, project landscape architect described his team’s approach to the landscaping design.

Chair O’Donnell asked the architect about the parking. He asked if Mr. Myers had tried working on different design overlay to move the Grand Aisle parking to a different location in order to create a pedestrian-oriented instead of vehicle-oriented design. 6-1117

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 13

Mr. Myers explained that the concept of the grand isle and it was meant to celebrate the concept.

Chair O’Donnell commented he is struggling that this could be a landscape court and layers of landscape elements and summarized his concerns regarding the drive aisle design.

Miguel Nelson, project applicant and owner, described the hotel’s open space and how it enhances of the quality of this area.

Chair O’Donnell opened the meeting to board discussion.

Board Member Milander asked the is the next process for the project.

Ms. Lopez answered there are three options. Option 1, the project can be recommended approval by the ARB as is and go to the Planning Commission, option 2 the project can be recommended approval by the ARB with conditions of approval that have to be met before the FDP is approved and then go to the Planning Commission with those conditions, or option 3, the project comes back to the ARB for further review.

Board Member Milander asked if the FDP would come in front of the board.

Ms. Lopez answered no, the FDP is approved at staff level.

Mr. Torres answered for clarification the FDP is the full construction submittal. Planning staff reviews it for conformance of the final approved pla ns and also final conditions of approval to confirm that all conditions are being responded to as well.

Board Member Doczi said that the project is seeking six entitlements: General Plan Zoning Map Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Parcel Map, Development Agreement Case, and Preliminary Development Plan, and asked for clarification on what the ARB was reviewing and approving.

Ms. Lopez asked if the board is hoping to move this forward but come back to review site plan and landscape plan.

Board Member Milander clarified that Board Member Doczi would like to approve the entitlements without approving the design of the project.

Ms. Lopez clarified that at this point what is being approved by the ARB is the Specific Plan Amendment and the Preliminary Development Plan.

Board Member Milander summarized his comments and questions. He feels that they learned nothing new from the previous meeting except for the location of the mechanical units.

Chair O’Donnell clarified the board and Planning Commission’s role. He stated that project can stand on its own and the details would be worked out.

Board Milander questioned the functions that are missing to fully analyze the project.

Vice Chair Patel concurred with Chair O’Donnell.

6-1118

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 13

Board Member Doczi added his comments and questions.

Board Member Milander added his comments and questions.

Chair O’Donnell asked if Doczi can put his comments into a motion.

Ms. Lopez asked board members to list out the concerns for the applicant can respond to the questions and comments.

Board Milander stated that the board had previously provided a list of concerns to be addressed and they weren’t addressed.

Ms. Lopez asked if give the board would like the applicant to revisit the list and provided a revised project.

Board Member Greenwood commend the applicant for what they are doing there, but noted that this project was headed to a continuance. He stated that there is a lot that still needs to be determined from a program standpoint, the construction methodology has to be a blend and take into account the consistency. This type of methodology is taking precedence over trying to blend in a mixing of additional architecture. He expressed interest in seeing a restudy of the two-story building of bring it closer to the design of the one -story residence units. He said he would be supportive of a continuance of the project and a restudy of elements of that nature.

Public comment: - None.

Chair O’Donnell asked Board Member Greenwood to state a motion.

Board Member Milander asked the question of continuance versus just denying the project.

Chair O’Donnell confirmed that we are asking for a restudy.

Board Member Greenwood concurred with asking for a restud y.

Board Member Greenwood mentioned he would like to see a continuance of the project.

Chair O’Donnell add that it is a consensus that the board would restudy the project.

MOVED/SECONDED BY GREENWOOD/PATEL TO RECOMMEND THAT THE PROJECT BE

CONTINUED TO A DATE TO BE DETERMINED BY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO RESTUDY BASED ON THE BOARD COMMENTS. MOTION CARRIED 5/1

3. Environmental Assessment Case No. EA22-0018, Preliminary Development Plan Case No. PDP22-0004, and Street Name Change Case No. STN22-0001 – Linea. Applicant:

Prest Vuksic Greenwood Architects for Linea Rancho Mirage, LLC. Consideration to construct 9 single-family residences on 4.63 acres of vacant land on the southern half of Tract Map No. 35089 between Ginger Rogers Road and Via Florencia. The project consists of 3 house concepts and range in size from 4,870 to 5,688 square feet. This project includes a request to change the current street name of Bellavia Court South to Via Linea. (APN s:
685-351-001 through -016).

Note: Board Member Greenwood recused himself from Discussion Item 3. 6-1119

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 13

Joy Tsai, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.

Chair O’Donnell opened the meeting to board questions for staff.

Board Member Milander inquired about how the subdivision and grading plans were approved and completed without Architectural Review Board review.

Ms. Tsai clarified the project site’s history: The tentative tract map was approved in 2008 and the map was extended throughout the years through automati c time extensions from the state.

The final map was recorded in 2018. She further stated that subdivision improvements are required as a part of the subdivision process.

Board Member Milander asked why the residential rear yards are not a part of the pr oject and as a part of their review.

Ms. Tsai explained that as the project is a small tract home development, landscape plans for the rear yard are not required and that only the front yard landscape plans are required.

Board Member Milander asked whe ther the street name change will affect both private streets in the subdivision or not.

Ms. Tsai responded that the street name change request is only applicable for the south side of the Ginger Rogers Road and that the north and south half of the subdivi sion have different property owners. The project property owner requested to change the private street name in order to differentiate their project.

Vice Chair Patel commented that the project is well thought off and very articulated architecture as well as the layout of the plans over simple architecture that works very well.

Board Member Sanborn inquired about the reason why the project is being presented to the ARB if they are only proposing single-family residences.

Mr. Torres replied that the project is being presented to the ARB because the applicant submitted a Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) application for home designs for the subdivision. If the applicant were to submit applications for single -family residences under Senate Bill 9 (SB 9), then the residences would be reviewed at the ministerial level.

Chair O’Donnell asked about the side-loading garages and pointed out that there is only one lot that proposed a side-loading garage. He asked staff to confirm whether the City’s zoning ordinance allows a reduction of front yard setback for a side-loading garage.

Ms. Tsai answered in the affirmative to Chair O’Donnell’s question.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant to make a quick presentation.

Andrew Adler, applicant, presented the proposed project and addressed the board members’ questions.

Chair O’Donnell asked if any other board member had questions for the applicant.

6-1120

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 13

Board Member Milander expressed his concern about water usage.

Mr. Adler elaborated the landscape design intent for the project and the CC&R’s that will be in place.

Board Member Sanborn asked about placement of the solar panels and vents.

Mr. Adler answered member Sanborn’s questions and concerns.

Chair O’Donnell expressed concerns about prevailing wind and solar orientation and the layout of the homes. He recommended that the applicant re-study the floor plans of the homes based on prevailing wind and solar orientation. He pointed out that this community will be a community with a garage-dominate façade. He asked if there was a way to allow reductions in setbacks with a side-loading garage to improve the community’s curb appeal.

Mr. Torres replied that side-loading garages may be set back a minimum of fifteen feet from the front property line and that the building setback line for the front is twenty -five feet for the Very Low Density Residential (R-L-2) zoning district.

Chair O’Donnell asked if a minor modification or variance could help reduce the building setback requirement another twenty five percent.

Mr. Torres responded that the director may grant a minor variance, up to a maximum of ten percent of the standards being modified , if certain findings can be made.

Public comment: - None.

Board Member Milander added if it was possible to add provisions to prohibit live turf.

Mr. Torres added that municipal code permits no more than 10% of landscape to be water intensive uses for all development projects.

Ms. Tsai clarified that the City’s landscape standards are already incorporated as a standard condition of approval for all projects and that the City’s landscape standards provide that only ten percent of the total landscaped area (in addition to turfed area) is allowed to be non-drought tolerant species.

MOVED/SECONDED BY MILANDER/SANBORN TO RECOMMEND THE PROJECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS PRESENTED. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN AND THE MOTION CARRIED 5/0 WITH BOARD MEMBER GREENWOOD RECUSED.

Note: Board took a five-minute break.

4. Environmental Assessment Case No. EA22-0014, Development Agreement Case No.

DA22-0002, and Preliminary Development Plan Case No. PDP22-0002 – Eisenhower Medical Center Memory Care, Child Care, and Administration Building. Applicant: Prest Vuksic Greenwood Architects for Eisenhower Health. Consideration to construct three single story buildings on 4.31 acres. The buildings will consist of 19,890 square feet for a memory care center, 17,116 square feet for childcare center, and 37,724 for an administration office.

Located at the southeast corner of Country Club Drive and Wilshire Palm Drive. (APN: 682 - 010-021).
6-1121

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 13

Ben Torres, Planning Manager, presented the staff report.

Note: Board Member Greenwood recused himself from Discussion Item 4.

Chair O’Donnell opened the meeting to board questions for staff.

Board Member Milander asked if staff could go over existing zoning, and what is being proposed to change.

Mr. Torres clarified they are not changing the zone. The zoning for this site is Public/Quasi- Public zone.

Board Member Milander asked, what is the height of the parking lot lighting?

Mr. Torres explained that the height of the light poles is 16 feet 6 inches excluding the base.

Board Member Sanborn inquired if the applicant had any meeting with the neighboring community to over the site plan development and landscape.

Mr. Torres mentioned that the applicant can respond to that question.

Chair O’Donnell questioned the day care vehicular traffic and intensity.

Mr. Torres explained that Mr. Ali Tourkaman, Eisenhower representative can better explain the hospitals staff schedule.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant to make a quick presentation.

Nicole Williams, project representative addressed the Board Members traffic questions and concerns.

Mr. Tourkaman elaborated on Eisenhower staff schedules.

Chair O’Donnell asked about the day lighting sources .

Ms. Williams answered that they are providing daylight into multiple spaces.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant to make a quick presentation.

Vice Chair Patel, made a positive comment about the projects design.

Public comment: - None.

Board Member Milander expressed his concerns about the neighbors to the east and the lighting in the parking lot. He inquired if there was something that the applicant can do to improve the lighting for the neighbors to the east.

Mr. Torres answered Board Member Milander’s questions. He added how staff will notify the neighbors making them aware of the project and giving them an opportunity to submit public comments or attend future public hearings.
6-1122

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 13

Chair O’Donnell ask Board Member Doczi for his opinion on the landscape edge. He also questioned if covered parking with downward lighting should be encouraged.

Board Member Doczi went through several areas of the projects as part of the discussion.

Mr. Tourkaman addressed the lighting and the noise concerns.

Chair O’Donnell asked if engineering had taken a look at this project and made any proposing changing the median so that someone can make a u turn.

Mr. Torres mentioned engineering made recommendations/comments and staff provided this to the applicant. At that time the applicant wanted to move forward with their own driveway approach.

Ms. Dukic clarified that shared drive would require a consent from the property owner .

Chair O’Donnell inquired about the vacant property on the west and if there have been plans to acquire that property.

Mr. Tourkaman confirmed that they looked into that property and the property is not available.

Board Member Sanborn added his comments and questions.

Board Member Milander summarized his concerns about the parking lot lighting and would like to make it a condition that it operate until 6 pm and then minimal low site lighting for non- operational hours.

MOVED/SECOND BY PATEL/SANDBORN TO RECOMMEND THE PROJECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE LIGHTING CONDITION. MOTION CARRIED 4/1 WITH BOAD MEMBER GREENWOOD RECUSED.

5. Environmental Assessment Case No. EA21-0002, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA21-0001, Development Agreement Amendment Case No.

DA21-0002, and Major Modification Case No. MOD21-0004 – The Ritz-Carlton Phase II Expansion. Applicant: Kam Sang Company for Newage Rancho Mirage LLC/ Ritz Ca rlton.

Consideration to construct the Ritz Carlton residences consisting of 106 units ranging in size from 1 to 3 bedrooms, 23,840 square feet of event space, 6,273 square feet of restaurant, 5,510 square feet for amenities, a 381-space subterranean parking structure, and other recreational amenities on a 35.01-acre project site which includes the existing hotel. A General Plan/Zoning Map Amendment is also proposed to amend the Mountain Reserve (MR) designation for the projects Sky Mesa Recreational area to Resort Hotel (Rs-H). Located at 69800 Frank Sinatra Drive. (APNs: 689-330-026; -028; -032; -034; 689-020-012; -014; 689- 331-001; -018).

Ben Torres, Planning Manager, presented the staff report.

MEMBER PATEL LEFT THE MEETING AT 3:25PM

Chair O’Donnell opened the meeting to board questions for staff.

6-1123

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 13

Board Member Milander inquired about the prior zoning of Sky Masa area .

Mr. Torres answered that a portion of the Sky Mesa area is currently zoned Mountain Reserve.

He mentioned in order for this area to allow restaurant and other uses they are proposing a change of zone to Resort Hotel.

Board Member Milander expressed his comments and concerns.

Ms. Dukic clarified that the current owners purchased the property a few years ago prior to that, the project had other ownership.

Board Member Milander inquired about the City’s rules about the retaining walls and the max heights.

Mr. Torres, answered we typically take into consideration the height from the highest adjacent grade.

Ms. Dukic added that our standard municipal code maximum is 6 ft, unless proposed with a Preliminary Development Plan.

Board Member Sanborn asked if the project would be seen from Highway 111.

Mr. Torres, answered that you shouldn’t be able to see this from Highway 111. Overall, it is going to be a two story product but we have the existing hotel that will be more visible along Highway 111, the residence portion of the project will be at the back of property.

Ms. Dukic added that concern was a part of their initial design in our preliminary conversations, and they did pay attention to what would be visible from Highway 111 and that would be the Sky Mesa portion.

Board Member Greenwood asked if the applicant shared their goals for the development schedule.

Mr. Torres will defer that question to the applicant to answer.

Board Member Greenwood added his comments and questions.

Mr. Torres explained the project design and location where the services will be handled.

Board Member Milander inquired the grading numbers.

Mr. Torres referred the board to the Preliminary Grading Plan and asked the applicant to further elaborate.

Board Member Sanborn asked if there is a sheet that shows the retaining wall system.

Mr. Torres referred the board to the grading plan and exhibit sheet 15-15 that provided the information.

Chair O’Donnell asked what interactions the applicant had with the Mirada. He also inquired what was previously proposed on the site.
6-1124

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 13

Mr. Torres explained that a project was proposed around 2007, but that project was never built.

Chair O’Donnell asked if this was a less intensive project then what was previously proposed.

Mr. Torres responded that the previous project prepared an Environmental Impact Report and for this project a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared.

Ms. Dukic added the units counts might have been somewhat similar and the S ky Mesa portion is the one thing that is unique and new to this consideration.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant to make a brief presentation.

Everardo Garcia, project Architect presented the proposed project and addressed the concerns brought up.

John Hicks, applicant representative presented and further elaborated on the project. He addressed and discussed the landscaping and retaining wall concerns.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant to provide their project presentation . He would like to see more on operations of exiting hotel. Will the hotel continue to allow the residents of Mirada to utilize some of the amenities of the hotel.

Mr. Hicks explained the operation and services of the hotel and how they will still continue have amenities available for the residents.

Board Member Milander expressed his comments and concerns about the retaining walls and the disturbance of the landscape.

Mr. Hicks answered that rock formation will remain intact. That is a primary feature, and everyone agrees to that. He explained concept of the geo wall retaining system.

Board Member Milander expressed his concerned about the noise of the mechanical units.

Mr. Hicks discussed the mechanical equipment.

Ms. Dukic added that the applicant had a noise study conducted as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project.

Mr. Torres confirmed that a noise study had been conducted and noise level were determined to be less then significant.

Board Member Milander asked if an Environmental Impact Report was prepared on the previous development.

Ms. Dukic confirmed that the previous project did a full EIR . For this project we worked off analysis done there and expanded to adjust to the project as well.

Board Member Milander asked if the lawn area will be grass.

Mr. Hicks responded it will be synthetic turf and perimeter landscaping will be desert themed. 6-1125

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 13

Board Member Greenwood asked if the Sky Mesa restaurant will replace the Edge.

Mr. Hicks responded that both restaurants would remain operational.

Chair O’Donnell asked the applicant questions about the roofs and the designs.

Board Member Greenwood added to the roof discussion.

Board Member Milander asked about the ramping walkway to the S ky Mesa restaurant.

Mr. Hicks responded they have conducted an extensive grading plan for the project as a part of this submittal. He stated that they worked with a civil engineer that has been involved through the entire time.

Board Member Milander would like to see more information to be able to vote for approval. He mentioned his concerns about grading and would like visuals.

Chair O’Donnell, asked about vehicle circulation.

Mr. Hicks explained the concern about vehicle circulation.

Board Members Milander and Greenwood added questions about the vehicle circulation.

Board Member Milander asked staff if there a point in the project where story poles are installed.

Ms. Dukic added that is not a standard requirement that is asked for all applicants. She mentioned if it was something that the board would like to see, the applicant can respond to the request.

Board Member Greenwood added his comments and questions.

Board Member Milander added his comments and questions.

Chair O’Donnell added his comments and questions.

Board Member Sanborn summarized his concerns regarding the hotel’s landscape design.

Ms. Dukic clarified that the hotel requires a 50 ft setback due to the Resort Hotel zone and it is a greater setback then other zoning standards within the City.

Board Member Greenwood added his comments and questions.

Public comment: - None.

Chair O’Donnell add that it is a consensus that the board would like to see more information and asked for a motion. He directed staff to summarize the comments provided.

Mr. Torres summarized the boards comments:

6-1126

2/27/23 Approved Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 13

1. Provide renderings and line of sight exhibits from viewpoints along Highway 111 and from Mirada to the project.

2. Provide a construction section of the walkway within Sky Mesa.

3. Provide more details and construction information on the geo -mesh retaining walls.

4. Provide more information on the Sky Mesa buildings, including mechanical equipment and how the building will be constructed into the mountain.

5. Look into the landscaping to see if fewer plantings are possible and scale the landscape symbols.

6. Provide cut/fill information on the grading plans.

7. Install story polls on the property for buildings B-5, B-6, B-7, B-9, B-12, & B-14.

MOVED/SECONDED BY MILANDER/GREENWOOD TO RESTUDY THE PROJECT BASED ON THE BOARD COMMENTS. MOTION CARRIED 5/0

ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to consider the Architectural Review Board adjourned the meeting at 4:41 p.m.

Prepared by: Deanna Mendoza, Development Services Technician Date Approved by Architectural Review Board: 3/27/2023

6-1127

Page 1 of 9 ends

Rancho Mirage City CouncilJuly 20, 2023

Rancho Mirage City Council
July 20, 2023