Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/2/2000 - STAFF REPORTS (5) DATE: February 2, 2000 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning& Building CASE NO. 5.0816 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 256) -APPLICATION BY JAMES MCINTOSH FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TWO-PHASED,MASTER PLANNED COMMERCIAL/RETAIL COMPLEX WITH PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF A WALGREENS DRUG STORE WITH DRIVE-THROUGH PHARMACY FACILITIES AND PHASE TWO CONSISTING OF TWO FUTURE OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDINGS, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND SUNRISE WAY, C-1- AA AND R-4-VP ZONES, SECTION 14. BACKGROUND: On January 5 and continued to January 19, 2000, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the above-referenced project. At the January 19"meeting,the City Council directed staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial for the project to be considered at the next City Council meeting. Attached is a copy of a Resolution of Denial for City Council Consideration. DOUGLA . EVANS, Director Planning and Building i'�ee" t"—/-- City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of Denial for Case No. 5.0816 (PD 256) JA No.3944 - CITY OF PALM SPRINGS - ORDINANCE NO, 1580 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZON- ING MAP FROM W-R-1-A (WATERCOURSE WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - 20,000 SO.FT. LOT SIZE TO 0-20 (OPEN SPACE - 20 ACRES MINIMUM LOT SIZE) LOCATED IN SEC- TION 10. WHEREAS, the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Com- pany (the "Applicant")filed and application with the City to amend the zoning designation on land lo- cated within Section 10 for the purpose of facihtat- mg development of an 18 hole golf course, club- house complex with restaurant/bar/pro shop/gueS- thouse, maintenance budding, and 20 condomini- um units the Project'); and WHEREAS, on January 6, 1999, the Palm Springs PROOF OF PUBLICATION 11 City Council adopted Ordinance No 1564 approv- mq the aforementioned zoning amendment; and /'+ /'+ WHEREAS, on January 19, 1999, the Sierra Club (2015.5.C.C.P) filed a petition for writ of mandate challengging the City's approval of the Project under CE[7A, the California Fish and Game Code, the Cahfornia En- dangered Species Act, the Federal Endangered Species Act, the City's General Plan, the City's zoning code, and the Due Process Clause of the federal Constitution, and WHEREAS;on April 12,-1999' the Sierra Club filed a Second Amended Petition for Wilt of Mandate, and the parties to the lawsuit briefed the ments of this petition, and the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside, California, Honorable Gloria Connor Trask, presiding, heard argument and took the matter under submission on August 23, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Court, througqh its ruling on the pe- tition issued on October 1, '1999 and its Judgment sued on December 17, 1999m found that the STATE OF CALIFORNIA City's approval of the Project complied with CEQA except that the administrative record did not con- COUnty Of Riverside except substantial evidence to support the City's find- - -_ � on 11 , 19!aa-IIIim-fly no "I" -- would not cause significant, direct impacts to Pen- insular bighorn sheep or that such impacts could be mitigated to a level of insignificance and (2) that all indirect signficant Impacts could be mRl- gated to a level of insignificance; and WHEREAS, the Court, rough its ruling on the pe- union and its Judg ment, denied each of the Sierra Club's claims untler the California Fish and Game Code, the California Endangered Species Act, the Federal Endangered,Species Act, the City's Gener- I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of al Plan, the City's zoning code, and the Due Pro- the County aforesaid;I am over the e o a £eighteen cess Clause of the federal Constitution; and g g WHEREAS, on December 17, 1999, the Court a- years,and not a party to or interested in the sued a peremptory writ of mandate remanding the above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a proceedings to the Cur and commanding the City to set aside the Projec approvals for the Mountain printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISIIINIG Falls Golf Preserve, including Ordinance No, 1564 COMPANY a general newspaper of l circulation, related to the zoning amendment, and to suspend g any and all Project activity until the City has com- printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, plied wrtn cEQA, and Countyof Riverside,and which newspaper has been WHEREAS, the Jud lent issued by the Court re- qtyres the City to file a return to the writ of man- adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the — date within thirty (30) days of the issuance thereof; Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of and P ty ti WHEREAS, to comply with the peremptory writ of California Under the date of March 24,1988.Case mandate and the Court's Judgment, and preserves Number 191236;that the notice of which the the public peace, health and safety,the City Coun- cd of the City of Palm Spring, on January 5,2000 annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller repealed Ordinance No. 1564 by Urgency Ordi- than non ariel,has been published in each regular nance No. 1677;and P P WHEREAS, the City of Palm Springs has complied and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any with all requirements under CEQA, as well as all supplement thereof 0n the following dates,t0 wit: requirements issued by the Court for the PrMet. TFIE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PP SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOL- Februa 6th LOWS: ry SECTION 1 Pursuant to Section 94.07.00013 6 of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, the Official Zoning Map of the City of Palm Springs, referred to herein, a hereby amended as follows ------- -- Change of Zone from W-R-1-A to 0-20 r The parcels of property legally shown on the ex- hibit labeled Section 1 are approved for a changqe All in the year 2000 of zone from W-R-1-A to 0-20, specifically APN's 505-010-005 and portions of 505-002-008, 1 certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. No 9th , Dated at Palm Springs,California this--day February of-----------------'----—,2000 Signature In SECTION 2. This Zoning Map Amendmeni is con- sistent with the General Plan in that the land uses authorized by the amendment are compatible with the objecir ves, policies and general land uses specified therein Moreover, this Zoning Map Amendment is reasonably related to the public welfare of the citizens of the City of Palm Springs, as well as the affected region, because it repro- seats a reasonable accommodation of competing interests for the area affected. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE, This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty(30) days after passage. SECTION 3. PUBLICATION The City Clerk is here- by ordered and directed to ceq,fy to the passage of this Ordinance and In -n—n tvn ­mn ORDINANCE NO. 1580 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FROM W-R-1-A (WATERCOURSE WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - 20,000 SQ. FT. LOT SIZE) TO 0-20 (OPEN SPACE - 20 ACRES MINIMUM LOT SIZE) LOCATED IN SECTION 10. ------------------------------------------- WHEREAS,the Mountain Falls GolfPreserve Company(the"Applicant")filed an application with the City to amend the zoning designation on land located within Section 10 for the purpose of facilitating development of an 18 hole golf course, clubhouse complex with restaurant/bar/pro shop/guesthouse, maintenance building, and 20 condominium units (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, on January 6, 1999, the Palm Springs City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1564 approving the aforementioned zoning amendment; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 1999, the Sierra Club filed a petition for writ of mandate challenging the City's approval of the Project under CEQA,the California Fish and Game Code,the California Endangered Species Act, the Federal Endangered Species Act, the City's General Plan, the City's zoning code, and the Due Process Clause of the federal Constitution; and WHEREAS, on April 12, 1999, the Sierra Club filed a Second Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate, and the parties to the lawsuit briefed the merits of this petition, and the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside, California, Honorable Gloria Connor Trask, presiding, heard argument and took the matter under submission on August 23, 1999; and WHEREAS,the Court,through its ruling onthe petition issued on October 1, 1999 and its Judgment issued on December 17, 1999, found that the City's approval of the Project complied with CEQA except that the administrative record did not contain substantial evidence to support the City's findings in Resolution No. 19431 that: (1)the Project would not cause significant,direct impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep or that such impacts could be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and (2)that all indirect significant impacts could be mitigated to a level of insignificance; and WHEREAS,the Court,through its ruling on the petition and its Judgment,denied each ofthe Sierra Club's claims under the California Fish and Game Code,the California Endangered Species Act,the Federal Endangered Species Act, the City's General Plan, the City's zoning code, and the Due Process Clause of the federal Constitution; and WHEREAS, on December 17 1999, the Court issued a peremptory writ of mandate remanding the proceedings to the City and commanding the City to set aside the Project approvals for the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve,including Ordinance No. 1564 related to the zoning amendment,and to suspend any and all Project activity until the City has complied with CEQA;and WHEREAS, the Judgment issued by the Court requires the City to file a return to the writ of mandate within thirty (30) days of the issuance thereof, and WHEREAS,to comply with the peremptory writ ofmandate and the Court's Judgment,and preserve the public peace,health and safety,the City Council of the City of Palm Springs,on Ja nuanua ry 55. , 2000 repealed Ordinance No. 1564 by Urgency Ordinance No. 1577 ; and Attachment 47 Page 2 Q$X Page WHEREAS,the City of Palm Springs has complied with all requirements under CEQA, as well as all requirements issued by the Court for the Project. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 94.07.00O13.6 ofthe Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance,the Official Zoning Map of the City of Palm Springs, referred to herein, is hereby amended as follows: Change of Zone from W-R-1-A to 0-20. The parcels of property legally shown on the exhibit labeled Section 1 are approved for a change of zone from W-R-1-A to 0-20, specifically APN's 505-010-005 and portions of 505-002-008. SECTION2. This Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the General Plan in that the land uses authorized by the amendment are compatible with the objectives, policies and general land uses specified therein. Moreover, this Zoning Map Amendment is reasonably related to the public welfare of the citizens of the City of Palm Springs, as well as the affected region, because it represents a reasonable accommodation of competing interests for the area affected. SECTION 3.. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty(30) days after passage. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this Ordinance, and to cause the same or summary thereof or a display advertisement, duly prepared according to law, to be published in accordance with law. ADOPTED this 2nd day of February , 2000. AYES: Members Oden, Reller-Spurgin and Mayor Kleindienst NOES: Members Jones and Hodges ABSENT: None ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA City Clerk Mayor REVIEWED BY: u zu �, aJox CN RO Lo v&A unuu �\vgAv\x It III niry,lN011 � � �Aw�w��N����i�����v���m�������� h � P sR o °' RESOLUTION NO. 19735 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CASE NO. 5.0816 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 256) FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TWO-PHASED COMMERCIAL/RETAIL CENTER ON 4.02 ACRES OF LAND WITH PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF A 15,112 SQUARE-FOOT WALGREENS DRUG STORE WITH DRIVE-THROUGH PHARMACY FACILITIES AND PHASE TWO CONSISTING OF TWO FUTURE OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDINGS TOTALING 11,400 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND SUNRISE WAY, C-1-AA AND R-4-VP ZONES, SECTION 14. WHEREAS, James McIntosh (the "Applicant") has filed an application with the City pursuant to Section 9402.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, Preliminary Planned Development District No. 256 for the development of a two-phase commercial/retail complex with Phase One development consisting of a 15,112 square-foot Walgreens Drug Store with drive-through pharmacy facilities and phase two consisting of two future office/retail buildings totaling 11,400 square feet, located on the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon way and Sunrise way, C-I-AA and R-4-VP zones, section 14 WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planing Commission of the City of Pahn Springs to consider Applicant's application for Planned Development 256 were given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on November 24, 1999 and continued to December 22, 1999, a public hearing on the application for Planned Development 256 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on December 22, 1999,the Planning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend approval of the application to the City Council subject to the findings and conditions stated in Resolution No. 4676; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider Applicant's application for Planned Development 256 were given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on January 5, 2000, and continued to January 19, 2000, a public hearing on the application for Planned Development 256 was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2000, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs directed staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial for consideration of the City Council at their February 2,2000 meeting; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 2000, the Resolution of Denial was considered by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the proposed Planned Development District, PD 256/Case 5.0816, is considered a "project" pursuant to the terns of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and a 35 R197 Page 2 Page 2 Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS,the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the Project, including but not limited to the staff report, all environmental data including the initial study, the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and all written and oral testimony presented. THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to Section 9403.00 of the Zoning Ordinance,the City Council finds that: a. That the proposed Planned Development District is not consistent with the applicable general and specific plans. The subject property is designated as 'RC" (Resort Commercial) and "H 43/30" (High Density Residential) with an "NCC" (Neighborhood Commercial Center) overlay at the intersection of Tahquitz Carryon Way and Sunrise Way on the City's General Plan Land Use Map. The site has frontage along both Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way, both of which are designated as scenic corridors in the City's General Plan. The subject property is designated "C-1-AA" (Large Scale Retail/Commercial Zone) and "R-4-V-P" (Vehicle Parking, Large Scale Hotel and Multiple Family and Limited Commercial/Retail Zone) pursuant to the Zoning Map. The General Plan serves as a long-term guideline for the development of the community and is required for each city in California, pursuant to the California Government Code. The Resort Commercial designation is primarily intended to provide for services principally serving resort clientele. The High Density Residential category is intended to provide high density and hotel-oriented development for visitors in central core areas of the City or other areas where pedestrian activity is anticipated. The proposed development, consisting of a master planned retail/office complex, would be anticipated to primarily serve the needs of the permanent population and not be resort hotel oriented nor will the project provide for additional housing in the community. Pursuant to the Community Design Element of the City's General Plan, all Major Thoroughfares (including Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way) are designated Scenic Corridors, where the highest level of design quality is expected for all new development within the community. These corridors have been established because of their physical orientation relative to the San Jacinto Mountains or other important natural features, the design precedent that has been established and/or their importance as a vehicular"link" in the City's transportation network. With the scenic corridor designation, special design features, such as upgraded landscaping, a high quality building design and upgrades to the pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities are required. The physical design of existing buildings along the Tahquitz Canyon Way corridor predominately and consistently suggests that of a high quality visual environment,through the development of relatively low-profile buildings with architectural individuality and uniqueness, upgraded on-site landscaping in front yard setback areas, an attractively landscaped median island and through building orientation, where structures with architectural stature have routinely been located on property at the minimum front setbacks, thereby promoting the building as the statement of development from surrounding public streets rather than unsightly expanses of parking lot. The proposed project includes a building of a higher profile than typical of buildings along Tahquitz Canyon Way and is plotted such that a majority of the on-site parking areas are the dominant visual feature in R19735 page 3 areas most subject to public view. This physical relationship is contrary to existing on-site development strategies referenced above for existing development both west and east of the site along Tahquitz Carryon Way. At their December 8, 1999 and continued to their December 22, 1999 public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project on a 5-2 vote. The Planning Commission was split on the proposed use and design at this important intersection of the City. Several design modifications to the building and site plan were recommended by the Planning Commission at the December 8, 1999 meeting to enhance the development and make the design more consistent with those typically found along Tahquitz Canyon Way and other major thoroughfares(i.e. reducing mass and height of the drug store building,re- locating the driveway on Tahquitz Canyon Way,etc.). The Planning Commission directed the applicant to revise the plans prior to their December 22, 1999 meeting. However, the applicant did not revise the plans for this meeting, protesting the project re-design and preferring that the plans for the project be considered"as is"and that conditions be applied by the Planning Commission accordingly. At the January 5, 2000 and continued to the January 19, 2000 City Council meeting, the applicant again protested the Planning Commission request for a re-design and requested that the City Council consider the project on the merits of its proposed design. The applicant requested relief from Planning Commission recommended conditions (payment for future construction of a landscaped median island in Sunrise Way, re-designing the mass and bulk of the building and re-locating of the vehicular drive on Tahquitz Canyon Way), conditions which were recommended to provide a project of appropriate scale and design at this location pursuant to the General Plan. The above added Planning Commission recommended conditions were incorporated into the project by the Planning Commission as the minimum acceptable conditions in order to forward a recommendation of approval of the Planned Development District to the City Council. The applicant also requested relief from the Planning Commission recommended condition regarding the undergrounding of existing overhead utilities on the property. The undergrounding of on-site utilities of 35 kV or less is required for all developing properties within the community,pursuant Section 8.04.401 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code.The applicant was seeking to defer the undergrounding of utilities in a manner that the City Council currently has no legal ability to waive such a request. In addition,the site is designated Resort Attraction pursuant to the Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan. The purpose of the Resort Attraction designation is to promote the consolidation of smaller, individually owned of allotted parcels for large-scale resort hotel complexes, hotels, and major commercial recreation attractions integrated with retail and entertainment facilities. Examples of lot consolidation for the intended uses within Section 14 include the Palm Springs Convention Center and the Wyndham Hotel. In addition, the project site is part of a larger Catalyst Opportunity Site per the Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan. The vision of Catalyst Opportunity Site `B" is to encourage consolidation of individual lots and provide for an integrated Family Recreation and Entertainment Complex combined with resort and high density residential uses linked together with pedestrian pathways. The site is also part of a smaller Subarea 2 within Catalyst Opportunity site `B", consisting of four vacant parcels of approximately 5 acres each along the Tahquitz Canyon Way frontage. The vision for Subarea 2 includes a sports/recreational/educational complex that caters to families and has both indoor and outdoor facilities and desert oasis landscaping throughout. The application entails a planned development for the development of a two-phased commercial/retail center on 4.02 acres of land,with Phase One consisting of a 15,112 square foot Walgreens Drug Store with a drive- thru pharmacy. Although the drug-store/pharmacy use is recommended to be a permitted use within the Resort Attraction zone per the Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan, J 643 g Pa 4 Pagee 4 the drive-thru portion of the proposed use is specifically listed as a prohibited use in the Resort Attraction zone. Furthermore,the proposed project is not designed or includes uses that would encourage the development of an integrated Family Recreation and Entertainment complex as recommended as the primary purpose and function for Subarea 2 of Catalyst Opportunity Zone "B". A prior application of a similar nature on vacant property across Tahquitz Canyon Way, immediately north of the site in question was not supported by the Tribal Comicil for the above reasons. hi conclusion,the project is not consistent with the applicable general and specific plans for all of the reasons stated above. b. That the said use is not necessary or desirable for the development of the community and is not in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan,and is detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zones in which the proposed use is to be located. The proposed Preliminary Planned Development District application for a commercial center would provide commercial/retail and general services to both the neighboring residents and visitors to the community, which are objectives of the General Plan as well as the zones in which the site is located. However,within existing shopping centers throughout the City are vacant spaces of sufficient size to accommodate the proposed uses that are zoned to permit the proposed uses. One of the goals of the City is to promote first and foremost the continued utilization and rehabilitation of existing properties as viable economic sites instead of encouraging new development of vacant properties that may cause the premature vacancy and decay of existing developed properties. With ample vacant retail/office space throughout the City,the development of the project in the manner proposed would be detrimental to existing uses or the future uses specifically pennitted in the zones in which the proposed use is to be located. Again,the Resort Commercial General Plan designation is primarily untended to provide for services principally serving resort clientele. The High Density Residential General Plan category is intended to provide high density and hotel-oriented development for visitors in central core areas of the City or other areas where pedestrian activity is anticipated. The proposed development, consisting of a master planned retail/office complex, would be anticipated to primarily serve the needs of the permanent population and not be resort hotel oriented nor will the project provide for additional housing in the community. Therefore,the proposed project is not in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan at the proposed location with the applicable General Plan designations. C. The design or improvements of the proposed planned development are not consistent with the General Plan. As stated earlier, pursuant to the Community Design Element of the City's General Plan, all Major Thoroughfares (including Tahquitz Carryon Way and Sunrise Way) are designated Scenic Corridors, where the highest level of design quality is expected for all new development within the community. These corridors have been established because of their physical orientation relative to the San Jacinto Mountains or other important natural features, the design precedent that has been established and/or their importance as a vehicular"link"in the City's transportation network. With the scenic corridor designation, special design features, such as upgraded landscaping, a high quality building design and upgrades to the pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities are required. The physical design of existing buildings along the Tahquitz Canyon Way corridor predominately and consistently suggests that of a high quality visual environment,through the development of relatively low-profile buildings with architectural individuality and R19735 Page 5 uniqueness, upgraded on-site landscaping in front yard setback areas, an attractively landscaped median island and through building orientation,where structures with architectural stature have routinely been located on property at the minimum front setbacks, thereby promoting the building as the statement of development from surrounding public streets rather than unsightly expanses of parking lot. The proposed project includes a building of a higher profile than typical of buildings along Tahquitz Canyon Way and is plotted such that a majority of the on-site parking areas are the dominant visual feature in areas most subject to public view. This physical relationship is contrary to existing on-site development strategies referenced above for existing development both west and east of the site along Tahquitz Canyon Way. d. The site is physically suitable for the type of development contemplated by the planned development. The project has been designed and/or recommended to be conditioned by the Plaming Commission to comply with all performance and development standards of the"C-1-AA"and "R-4-VP"Zones of the Zoning Ordinance.The site is essentially flat in topography and is void of any significant vegetation or structures, and can be directly accessed by Sunrise Way, Tahquitz Canyon Way (right turns in and out) and Arenas Road. Thus,the site is physically suitable for the type of development contemplated by the proposed subdivision. However, with the goal of producing an integrated design and environment for the entire parcel and on the larger scale, for all of Section 14, combined with the fact that no immediate plans for development of Phase Two accompany the request,the project would basically produce a two acre project that reduces the flexibility and versatility for development of the highest and best use of the remainder of the parcel and the balance of the Catalyst Opportunity Zone"B". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby denies Case No. 5.0816 (Planned Development District No. 256). ADOPTED this 2nd day of February 2000. AYES: Members Jones, Reller-Spurgin and Mayor Kleindienst NOES: Members Hodges and Oden ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA City Clerk City Manager REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FO s��`