HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/7/2001 - STAFF REPORTS (21) DATE: February 7, 2001
TO: City Council
FROM: Director of Planning & Building
CASE NO, 5.0843- CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION IN RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF
PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION BY FRIEND
DEVELOPMENT PALM SPRINGS, LLC FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 104-UNIT APARTMENT
PROJECT ON A VACANT 4.97 NET ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF EAST PALM CANYON DRIVE AND ARABY DRIVE, R-3 ZONE, SECTION
25,
APPEAL:
That the City Council consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Case
No. 5.0843, a Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Approval for the development of a
104-unit apartment project on a vacant 4.97 net acre parcel located at the southeast corner
of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, Section 25. The applicant is Friend
Development Palm Springs, LLC, and the officers/owners are Mr. Wyn Holmes and Mr.
Randall Friend.
SUMMARY:
At its meeting of January 17, 2001, the City Council considered all evidence presented
regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Case No. 5.0843, a
Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Approval for the development of a 104-unit
apartment project on a vacant 4.97 net acre parcel located at the southeast corner of East
Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, Section 25. The applicant is Friend Development
Palm Springs, LLC, and the officers/owners are Mr. Wyn Holmes andMr. Randall Friend.
The Council approved a motion (3-2 with Oden and Kleindienst dissenting) directing staff
to prepare a resolution of denial for the project. The draft resolution is attached.
Director f Planning and Building /
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Vicinity Map
2. City Council 2-17-01 staff report & attachments
3. Planning Commission 12-13-00 staff report, minutes, resolution & conditions
4. Written correspondence from the public regarding proposed project
5. Draft resolution dated 2-7-01 for City Council adoption
v
DATE: January 17, 2001
TO: City Council
FROM: Director of Planning & Building
CASE NO.5.0843-APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OFAN APPLICATION
BY FRIEND DEVELOPMENT PALM SPRINGS, LLC FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 104-UN ITAPARTMENT PROJECT ON
A VACANT 4.97 NET ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EAST
PALM CANYON DRIVE AND ARABY DRIVE, R-3 ZONE, SECTION 25.
APPEAL:
That the City Council consider an appeal of the Planning.Commission's approval of Case No.
5.0843, a Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Approval for the development of a 104-unit
apartment project on a vacant 4.97 net acre parcel located at the southeast corner of East Palm
Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, Section 25. The applicant is Friend Development Palm Springs,
LLC, and the officers/owners are Mr. Wyn Holmes and Mr. Randall Friend.
SUMMARY:
On December 22, 2000, the Planning Commission voted unanimously (5-0, with Commissioners
Raya and Schoenberger absent)to approve the application with conditions, including a condition
f that the preliminary landscape plan be brought back to the Commission within 30 days of Planning
Commission action. The site is bounded by East Palm Canyon Drive on the north,Araby Drive on
the west, Palapas Nursery on the east,and single-story, multi-family residences on the south. The
site is relatively flat with native vegetation scattered across the property and no overhead utilities;
however, the strip of land between East Palm Canyon Drive and the access road to Palapas
Nursery slopes down from north to south, with the street grade being approximately seven feet
higher than the proposed finished floor near the east end of the property. The site is zoned R-3
and is surrounded on all sides by R-3 properties. The proposed project is consistent with
applicable zoning and General Plan standards. The project will consist of eight,two-story buildings,
with each building ranging from six to eight units. The project is proposed to consist of 48 one-
bedroom units and 56 two-bedroom units. Carports will provide 104 covered parking spaces, and
50 non-covered spaces will also be provided for a total of 154 parking spaces within the gates. The
applicant's revised site plan shows 40 additional parking spaces on the private access road to
Palapas Nursery. This parking will be available for apartment tenants and Palapas Nursery
customers.
The appellant, Scott Kennedy of 2398 Starr Road (on behalf of his father Joe V. Kennedy of 1758
South Araby and Arnold Becker of 1756 South Araby), is appealing the Planning Commission's
decision based on concerns regarding proposed building height, setbacks, density, CEQA
exemption, on-site parking and traffic impacts. The City Council may uphold, overrule or modify
the decision of the Planning Commission. Following the public hearing, the City Council should
provide direction to staff regarding preparation of an appropriate resolution.
I
Case 5.0843 - CUP Appeal Staff Report
January 17, 2001
Page 2 of 5
APPEAL ISSUES:
The appeal letter indicates that many of the condo units have either front yards, rear yards or
windows that come within close proximity to and within view of the proposed project. The condo
units which come closest to the proposed project are located at the east end of the project near
Buildings 5 and 6, and these condos are within several feet of the property line. The owners of
these units are supportive of the project as evidenced by their signatures on the petition submitted
by Park South HOA.
Park South condominiums have a southerly view of the mountains, but the view to the north is not
particularly noteworthy, i.e., hedges and traffic on East Palm Canyon. The unit at 1758 South
Araby faces north toward the proposed project and the rear yard faces south. The distance from
the condominium unit to the proposed apartment building is 62 feet. Within this 62 feet is the
appellant's front yard (10 feet), the HOA's private street (32 feet) and the apartment setback to
-- --=proposed-Building-3 (20-feet)It-should be noted-that Building does not have any south-facing
balconies. The height of the existing hedge which separates the two properties is currently well
in excess of 12 feet at this location. The architect's sight line perspective illustrates the northerly
view from this condo unit would be blocked by the existing hedge.
The unit at 1756 South Araby faces south, and the rear yard faces north, with the six-foot garden
wall set just a couple feet off the HOA's private street. The existing 32-foot wide HOA's private I,
street is located between this condominium unit and the property, as well as the setback to the
apartment setback to Building 2 of 20 feet. The distance between the nearest proposed building
and 1758 South Araby is approximately 55 feet. The height of the existing hedge which separates
the two properties is currently well in excess of 12 feet at this location. Building 2 has south-facing
balconies. The architect's sight line perspective illustrates the perspective of a six-foot tall person
standing on a second floor balcony facing south and illustrates that the view into the rear yard of
the condo unit would be blocked by the existing hedge.
The appealletter indicates-that=an-administrative-modification/variance has-been granted related
to height. The proposed building height for the project(24 feet at the highest point)falls within the
allowed height in the zone; thus, no administrative modification or variance is necessary.
The appeal letter indicates that an administrative modification/variance has been granted for
building setbacks. The Zoning Ordinance does allow the granting of an Administrative Minor
Modification for a setback reduction of up to 20%. The property development standards for rear
yards in the R-3 zone require that any portion of a structure in excess of 12 feet in height have a
minimum setback equal to its height if abutting any residential zone. The building heights for the
proposed project are 24 feet at the highest point, and 19'6"at the point closest to the property line.
The proposed site plan includes a dashed line illustrating a 24-foot distance between the property
line and the proposed buildings. The south edges of Buildings 1, 2, 3 and 5 are within that 24 feet,
but are no closer than 19.2 feet. The south portion of one apartment unit on Building 4 and the
west portion of one apartment unit on Building 6 is within that 24 feet, but is no closer than 19.2
feet. Staff and the Planning Commission are sensitive to the issue of a two-story building in
proximity to a single-story building,which is why conditions requiring heavy landscape buffers and `
perimeter walls have been included, as well as a condition that a very detailed prelimina
,I.L A,
Case 5.0843 - CUP Appeal Staff Report
January 17, 2001
Page 3 of 5
landscape plan be presented to the Planning Commission for approval. Given the additional
distance buffer provided by the Park South HOA private street and the conditions requiring heavy
landscape buffers and perimeter walls, the Planning Commission supports the requested
Administrative Minor Modification.
The appeal letter indicates that an administrative modification/variance has been granted for on-
site parking. The Zoning Ordinance allows the granting of an Administrative Minor Modification for
a parking reduction of up to 10%. Carports will provide 104 covered parking spaces, and 50 non-
covered spaces will also be provided for a total of 154 parking spaces within the gates, which is
16 spaces short (10%) of the parking requirement. However, it should be pointed out that an
additional 40 spaces will be provided on the access road to Palapas Nursery. This road is located
on the applicant's private property and parking will be available for apartment tenants and Palapas
Nursery customers. The Planning Commission supports the requested Administrative Minor
Modification. The Planning Commission found that on-site parking and available parking in the
adjacent private access road would provide sufficient parking. Additionally, the applcant has
agreed to-install arrelu-ctrorriu-swing-arm-gate forthe-HOKs private street: This would prohi6i any
apartment tenants from using this area for project parking.
The appeal letter indicates that the proposed project barely falls within the density range of the
General Plan, as the General Plan allows a maximum density of 21 dwelling units per acre in this
zone, and the proposed density is 20.92 units per acre. The appeal letter indicates that this is not
( in keeping with what has been established in the Araby Drive area. In its deliberations, the
Planning Commission observed thatthe existing condominium development is also zoned R-3,and
was Phase 1 of the two-phase project was not developed at the R-3 maximum height and density
standards; however, the second phase was never implemented, leaving the subject parcel vacant
for many years. The Commission noted that in today's real estate market, it is virtually impossible
to go forward with a project that does not maximize its development potential. Given the fact that
the project does not exceed density standards for the area,the Planning Commission supports the
--- proposed-density.The appeal letter indicates that the proposed project barely meets the criteria established by CEQA
for a categorical exemption as an in-fill project because it is 4.97 acres, just 0.03 acres short of
requiring environmental review. The proposed project meets all five criteria of CEQA Article 19,
(Categorical Exemptions)Section 15332 (In-fill Projects), including the criteria that"The proposed
development occur within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially
surrounded by urban uses." It should be noted that the size of the project will be further reduced
by Planning Department Condition No. 50, which requires the applicant to adjust the parcel map
to grant to the owner of 1842 Araby Drive the portion of the applicant's property currently in use as
an outdoor patio area at 1842 Araby Drive. Nevertheless, staff did perform an Initial Study and
found no significant impacts. Given the fact that the proposed project clearly meets the five criteria
established by CEQA guidelines,the Planning Commission was comfortable in certifying the project
is categorically exempt.
L�1
Case 5.0843 - CUP Appeal Staff Report
January 17, 2001
Page 4 of 5
The appeal letter indicates that there are concerns with respect to increased traffic, congestion and
parking availability as it pertains both to the area surrounding the proposed project as well as the
intersection of Araby Drive and East Palm Canyon Drive. The applicant submitted a traffic study
for the project, and the City Engineer reviewed it and determined that the project will not create
significant impacts to the existing levels of service. The Planning Commission inquired about the
possibility of adding a left-turn arrow on the signal at the intersection of East Palm Canyon Drive
and Araby, and the City Engineer reports that the signal at this intersection will be looked at as part
of CVAG's Valley-wide interconnection study in early 2001.
In the interest of neighborhood involvement and participation, staff directed the applicant to meet
with the adjoining condominium project. The applicant met with the Park South Homeowners
Association on Saturday, November 18, 2000, and a Planning staff member was in attendance.
The homeowners association presented a petition with an attached list of conditions they would
require in order to support the project. This petition was signed by homeowners from 20 of the 30
units in the Park South HOA(including Joe V.Kennedy of 1758 South Araby Drive.) The applicant
indicated concurrence with the listed conditions via the principals' signatures, and as a result,
those conditions have been incorporated into Planning Commission's conditions of approval (see
Planning Department Condition Nos. 15, 45, 46, 47, 48 and 50). These conditions require the
applicant to provide, at the applicant's expense, the following:
1. A decorative,electronic swing arm access gate at the west end of the existing private street
serving Park South condominiums for the purpose of ensuring private parking for Park
South condominium residents;
2. Two remote control devices per condo unit to activate the electronic swing arm access gate;
3. Lighting fixtures to up-light the existing palm trees along the private street serving Park
South condominiums;
4. Lighting fixtures to illuminate the private street serving Park South condominiums;
5. New gates in the perimeter walls at 1796 and 1798 Araby to provide a clear path of travel
- -—from-those-rear-yards-to the public way,-- - — -
—— - � djustment�ortithe-parceLmap=granting=to4heownero"= 8�abTTDrive tffep Mty
the applicant's property which is currently in use as an outdoor patio area at 1842 Araby
Drive; and
7. A new monument sign identifying the Park South condominium development.
The Planning Commission staff report dated December 13, 2000 is attached, which provides a
comprehensive overview of the proposal.
f1
Case
5.0843 CUP Appeal Staff Report
January 17, 2001
Page 5 of 5
NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within 400 feet of the project site have been notified of the public hearing. As
of the writing of this report, correspondence and inquiries from the public have been received by
staff. Copies of written comments submitted by the public both in support of and in opposition to
the proposed project are attached.
Director of nning and Building
�GtyMan�age: v
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Revised Site Plan
3. Planning Commission 12-13-00 staff report, minutes, resolution & conditions
4. Written correspondence from the public regarding proposed project
Dec . 22, 2000
To : Palm Springs City Council
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
From: Scott Kennedy on behalf ofi
Joe V. Kennedy 1758 S . Araby Dr. - _
Arnold Becker D.D.S . S . Araby Dr .
Re : Appeal to City Council regarding Case No . 5.0843 ,
Friend Development Palm Springs (Villa Del Sol Apts . )
Dear Council ,
The intention of this filing is to reflect our objection
of the proposed construction of the Villa Del Sol Apartments
and to appeal it to Council for further contemplation and
consideration.
There are a variety of concerns that have come about due
to this proposed project that could negatively impact the
surrounding area.
Amoung our greatest concerns is the impact that the project
would impose on the neighboring Park South Condominiums, a
very low density one story development. Many of the Park
South units have either front yards , rear yards, or windows
that come within close proximity to and within view of the
very high density two story proposed project.
There has been a number of adminstrative modifications
and variances that have been granted to Friend Development
by the Planning Commission. These modifications are regarding
Villa Del Sol Apartments height, building setbacks , and
availiable on-site parking. This would have a detrimental
impact on the Park South Condominiums privacy, access, safety,
and quality of life .
This is coupled with the fact -that—t}re prbgo�epo ject
barely falls within the density range of the General Plan.
The General Plan provides "for the development of a threshold
of 15 and a maximum of 21 dwelling units per acre" . The
Villa Del Sol proposed density is 20 .92 units per acre . This
is not in keeping with what has been established in the Araby
Drive area.
Additionally, this project barely fails to meet the
criteria for consideration from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) . The size of the property 'is 4. 97 acres ,
just .03 of an acre short of receiving CEQA provisions.
There are also concerns with respect to the increased
traffic , conjestion, and parking availibility that would occur
if this project were to be constructed. These concerns are
directed both to the area surrounding Villa Del Sol as well
as the intersection of Araby Dr. and East Palm Canyon Dr.
2
It is our conclusion that there has been a abusive use
of adminstrative modifications that have been granted to this
project, and that it would be detrimental to a standard of life
that is enjoyed and expected in the Araby Drive area. We feel
this would set a bad precedent in this community and in this
city. The nature of this property requires an extreme sensitivity
to its neighbors , and we feel a return to the origional intent
of the ordinances and the law would help to protect the areas
existing residents from an out of town developer interested
in maximizing profits .
We thank you for your consideration on this matter and
look forward to elaborating on these issues at a public meeting.
Sincerely,
Scott Kennedy
�9,g err
/Wm
Z�
VICINITY I"AP
�5013A X N. T.S.
C
CA/NV
0
t'I?OJFCT S
LOCA110N v
MP
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO. 5.08�5 DESCRIPTION Conditional hlse permit fora 104 unit apartment com�l ex A
APPb CANT FriorJ bevelopme t the saAAeast comer of Fast palm Cannon brive and' Arabu
Pove
RF
ECG -WE
D
PLANNING DIVISION
i
jl E�
'i
maECT OArA.
\, 6 '�1 L ....... •w... �� •ur...`n���Ys�sri,L,A \\ �W. — <{!II
7 9�r
- _.......�_ � \ ."'�.*u..• �• .• �a\�`.� •x'2,. \ @as
T� \
/ I
` I
_ SITE PLAN
DATE: December 13, 2000
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Director of Planning & Building
CASE NO. 5.0843- APPLICATION BY FRIEND DEVELOPMENT PALM SPRINGS, LLC A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITAND ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 104-
UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT ON A VACANT 4.97 NET ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EAST PALM CANYON DRIVE AND ARABY DRIVE, R-3 ZONE,
SECTION 25.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission approve Case No. 5.0843, a Conditional Use Permit and
Architectural Approval for the development of a 104-unit apartment project on a vacant 4.97 net
acre parcel located at the southeast corner of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, Section
25,through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions. Final building design
and recommendations will be presented at the meeting. The applicant is Friend Development Palm
Springs, LLC, and the officers/owners are Mr. Wyn Holmes and Mr. Randall Friend.
BACKGROUND:
This public hearing was continued from the November 22, 2000 Planning Commission meeting.
Friend Development Palm Springs, LLC has submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit
to develop a 104-unit apartment project on a vacant 4.97 net acre parcel located at the southeast i
corner of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive. The site is bounded by East Palm Canyon
Drive on the north, Araby Drive on the west, Palapas Nursery on the east, and single-story, multi-
family residences on the south. The site is relatively flat with native vegetation scattered across
the property and no overhead utilities; however,the strip of land between East Palm Canyon Drive
and the access road to Palapas Nursery slopes down from north to south, with the street grade
being approximately seven feet higher than the proposed finished floor near the east end of the
property.
GENERAL PLAN/LAND USE DESIGNATIONS:
General Plan Designations:
Project site: H-43/21 (High Density Residential)
North: H-43/21 (High Density Residential)
South: H-43/21 (High Density Residential)
East: H-43/21 (High Density Residential)
West: H-43/21 (High Density Residential)
Existing Land Use/Zoning Designations:
Project site: Vacant- R-3 (Multiple-family Residential and Hotel Zone)
North: Multi-family residential (across East Palm Canyon) - R-3
South: Multi-family residential,(single story) - R-3
East: Palapas Nursery (single story) - R-3
West: Vacant (across Araby Drive) - R-3
Case 5.0843 - CUP Staff Report
December 13, 2000
Page 2 of 7
The proposed project will take access from Araby Drive and will have a gated entry. A 30-foot wide
access road fronting the north side of the property will be preserved as access for the Palapas
Nursery. The project will consist of eight, two-story buildings, with each building ranging from six
to eight units. The proposed unit sizes range from one to two bedrooms with the one-bedroom
units consisting of approximately 735 square feet and the two-bedroom units consisting of 975
square feet. The project is proposed to consist of 48 one-bedroom units and 56 two-bedroom
units. Carports will provide 104 covered parking spaces, and 50 non-covered spaces will also be
provided for a total of 154 parking spaces within the gates. The applicant's revised site plan shows
40 additional parking spaces. This parking will be available for apartment tenants and Palapas
Nursery customers.
GENERAL PLAN ANALYSIS:
The proposed project will be located on a site which is designated H-43/21 (High Density
Residential)on the City of Palm Springs General Plan Land Use Map. The objective of the H-43/21
General Plan Designation (providing for the development of a threshold of 15 and a maximum of
21 dwelling units per acre) is to allow for multi-family apartments and similar permanent housing.
The proposed development of 104 apartment units on a 4.97 net acre site (20.92 units per acre)
( fits within the range of uses allowed within the High Density Residential General Plan category.
ZONING ANALYSIS:
The project site is zoned R-3, Multiple-family Residential and Hotel Zone. The R-3 zoning
designation is intended to provide for the development of high density apartments, hotels and
similar permanent and resort housing and certain limited commercial uses directly related to the
housing facilities. The proposed project fits within the range of uses allowed within the R-3 zone.
Pursuant to Zoning Code Section 92.25.00, multi-family dwellings are permitted in the Resort
Overlay Zone only by Conditional Use Permit,such permit subjectto Planning Commission findings
that the proposed use is compatible with its surroundings and that the site in question is not
appropriate for other uses allowed by right within the underlying zone. The purpose of the Resort
Overlay Zone is to ensure adequate opportunities for tourism. The subject property is irregular in
shape and is not likely to be developed as a hotel or other similar use in the future.
PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS:
1. Land Use Transition and Noise:
Property to the west(across Araby)is vacant. Property to the south is developed with single-story,
multi-family residential units. An existing private street separates the majority of the existing condo
units from the proposed project, and staff has included a condition of approval requiring six-foot
walls and heavy landscaping between the two uses. Two of the existing single-story condominium
buildings are located quite close to the property line. An existing hedge which varies in height from
approximately eight to 12 feet is located between the existing single-story condominium and the
f proposed two-story development. lia,A I�
Case 5.0843 - CUP Staff Report
December 13, 2000
Page 3 of 7
The developer was advised to meet with the homeowners association to address any concerns
regarding the proximity of the two-story development to the existing single-story units. The
developer met with the Park South Homeowners Association on Saturday,November 18,2000,and
a Planning staff member was in attendance. The homeowners association presented a petition
with an attached list of conditions they would require in order to support the project. This petition
was signed by homeowners from 20 of the 30 units in the Park South HOA. The developers
indicated concurrence with the listed conditions via their signatures, and as a result, those
conditions have been incorporated into staffs revised recommended conditions of approval (see
Planning Department Condition Nos. 14, 45, 46, 47, 48 and 50).
At its November 22, 2000 meeting, the Commission expressed an interest in reviewing more
detailed landscape plans, including cross sections of certain areas. The architect indicates that a
detailed plan could not be provided in time for the December 13, 2000 meeting. However, the
architect has submitted a perspective from the south which shows that a six-foot tall person would
have to be a minimum of 105 feet away from the 24-foot high buildings in order to see the 24-foot
high apartment buildings over the existing single-story condominiums and proposed landscaping.
Staff has also included a condition that the revised preliminary landscape plan be submitted to the
Planning Commission within 30 days of Planning Commission's approval of the project.
The property to the west is occupied by Palapas Nursery, and staff has included a condition of
approval requiring six-foot walls and heavy landscaping between the two uses. Since the
November 22, 2000 public hearing, the site plans has been revised to reflect sidewalks and
landscaping between the carports and the access road, and this will serve to buffer the north side
of the project from the access road to Palapas Nursery. Additional landscaping, including
Eucalyptus trees, will be included along the slope of the East Palm Canyon Drive frontage.
The operators of Palapas Nursery brought to staffs attention that a recorded easement exists
which generally indicates that the access road is 30 feet in width, and the new access road is to
be the same width and the same or better composition as the existing access road. The
developer's revised site plan includes a 30-footwide access road with a five-foot wide sidewalk and
landscaping between the access road and the perimeter wall, as well as parking on the south side
of the access road and two pedestrian access gates into the project. While the revised plan shows
a five-foot sidewalk and landscape area between the carports and access road, the project
architect indicates a preference to eliminate the sidewalk requirement in order to accommodate a
10-foot landscape area with berming up to the carport wall, as this would soften the appearance
considerably.
2. Traffic and Circulation:
The project includes two access points which have been located to minimize conflicts with existing
development. The main entry is located on Araby and is gated to reduce traffic into the site. The
second access point is the emergency gate located along the frontage road near the east end of
the project. Emergency access issues have been addressed in the proposed site plan by providing
two access points to the project. Staff has also included a condition of approval requiring that the
final design of the vehicular access points,which includes access gates,turn-around"areas,on-site —'
circulation, etc. be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning and Buildi an ALS
Case 5.0843 - CUP Staff Report
December 13, 2000
Page 4 of 7
Fire Marshal prior to issuance of building permits.
The applicant submitted a traffic study for the project, and the City Engineer has reviewed it and
determined that the project will not create significant impacts to the existing levels of service.
SunLine Transit Agency has also reviewed the plans and recommended that a bus bay turn-out
be located on the southeast corner of East Palm Canyon and Araby Drive. Staff has included
conditions of approval requiring said bus bay turn-out as well as a bus shelter which is
architecturally integrated with the project.
The Commission inquired about the possibility of adding a left-turn arrow on the signal at the
intersection of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby. The signal at this intersection will be looked
at as part of CVAG's Valley-wide interconnection study in early 2001,
The General Plan shows a half-street right-of-way width on East Palm Canyon Drive of 101 feet
(total of 202 feet). The intent of the General Plan is to allow for a frontage road. The proposed site
plan includes a 30-foot frontage over an easement. Thus, the proposal meets the intent of the
General Plan. A five-foot sidewalk and bikeway easement will also be accommodated. The
existing special conditions, size of the site, topography and irregular shape render difficulties in
constructing full street improvements at the street grade. Therefore, the proposed resolution of
approval includes a finding that the appropriate street standard on East Palm Canyon Drive at this
location is a 101-foot ultimate half-street right-of-way pursuant to the General Plan right-of-way.
This finding is made because existing development patterns make acquisition of lands to comply
with existing street standards in feasible. Section 7.1.5 of the General Plan allows cross-section
standards to be modified by the Planning Commission to take into consideration the need for
special right-of-way widths where property cannot be feasibly acquired or the nature of the terrain
through which the street passes to prevent scarring of the landscape.
3. On-site Parking:
Zoning Code Section 93.06.00, Off-street parking, requires a total of 170 parking spaces for the
project, based upon the unit count and number of bedrooms per unit specified under this
application. Section 93.06.00 does not require that parking spaces for apartment units be covered.
The proposed site plan indicates a total of 154 parking spaces, 104 of which will be covered by
carports. The total number of parking spaces to be provided is 10% less than the code requires;
however, Section 94.06.01(A)(6)authorizes the Planning Commission or the Director of Planning
and Building to grant a reduction in the number of required parking spaces by not more than 10%.
As such, the applicant requests approval of an Administrative Minor Modification. The applicant
asserts that the size of the units and the rental rates for luxury apartments will not attract large
families, thus the parking need will be reduced. The applicant's proposal to cover 104 of the
spaces with carports adds a nice amenity for the residents, and will provide more shading than the
50% code requirement for parking lot shade trees. Additionally, the revised site plan indicates 40
parking spaces on the south side of the access road for the project's overflow parking. Staff is
supportive of the requested Administrative Minor Modification.
JX*VO r I 1
,aa. 1� I y
Case 5.0843 - CUP Staff Report
December 13, 2000
Page 5 of 7
4. Building Setbacks:
Zoning Code Section 93.01.02, Special Setbacks, requires that the building setback line on the
north and south sides of the street be 125 feet from centerline of East Palm Canyon Drive between
Sunrise Way and Golf Club Drive. The proposed site plan indicates a 125-foot setback from the
centerline to the carport structure located immediately west of the main entry gate, but moving
easterly from that point, the proposed site plan reflects a 110-foot setback. The structures located
at the 110-foot setback include six carports and the northeast corner of Building 8. Zoning Code
Section 94.06.01(A)(5) authorizes the Planning Commission or the Director of Planning and
Building to grant a reduction of yards by not more than 20% of the requirement of the zone. As
such,the applicant requests approval of an Administrative Minor Modification. The irregularshape
of the lot makes suitable development quite difficult, unless some modifications are permitted.
Therefore,staff supports the requested Administrative Minor Modification regarding the East Palm
Canyon setback reduction.
The property development standards for rear yards in the R-3 zone require that any portion of a
structure in excess of 12 feet in height have a minimum setback equal to its height if abutting any
residential zone. The building heights for the proposed project are 24 feet. The proposed site plan
indicates a 19.2' setback along the east property line next to Palapas Nursery, the south property
line next to existing single-story, multi-family residential uses as well as the south property line
adjacentto the existing private street. Zoning Code Section 94.06.01(A)(5)authorizes the Planning
Commission or the Director of Planning and Building to grant a reduction of yards by not more than
20% of the requirement of the zone. Staff has included a condition of approval requiring a heavy
landscape screen and six-foot high perimeter wall along the east property line to screen the project
from the adjacent commercial use to the east. Staff has also included a condition of approval
requiring heavy landscaping between the two-story apartments and the six-foot perimeter wall
where the two-story apartments(specifically Buildings 5 and 6)are adjacent to existing single-story,
multi-family units on the south end of the project. Additionally, staff has included a condition of
approval requiring heavy landscaping in a five-foot wide area on the outside of the six-foot high
perimeter wall along the private street immediately south of the project. Staff believes that these
conditions will reduce any potential impacts that the proposed setback reduction may generate,
and, therefore, staff supports the requested Administrative Minor Modification.
5. Streetscape:
Although not indicated on the revised site plan, staff has included conditions of approval requiring
a bus bay turn-out as well as a bus shelter which is architecturally integrated with the project. The
turn-out and shelter will be located just east of the intersection of East Palm Canyon Drive and
Araby Drive.
The proposed revised site plan includes landscaping on the sloped strip of land between East Palm
Canyon and the 30-foot wide access drive to Palapas Nursery. The north side of East Palm
Canyon features Eucalyptus as a street tree, and staff has included a condition of approval
requiring that Eucalyptus be utilized as a street tree along the project's East Palm Canyon frontage.
Case 5.0843 - CUP Staff Report
December 13, 2000
Page 6 of 7
Staff would point out that the Engineering Department conditions include a requirement for a five-
foot wide sidewalk between the carport structures and the 30-foot wide access road. The
Engineering Department indicates that the City will vacate to the developer a six foot (plus or
minus)strip of right-of-way along the north side of the access road in order to accommodate both
the 30-foot recorded easement access road and the five-foot wide sidewalk. The Planning
Department conditions include a requirement that the entire 30-foot easement be dedicated for a
bikeway.
The applicant is requesting the Commission to waive the condition for the five-foot wide sidewalk.
While the revised plan shows a five-foot sidewalk and five-foot landscape area between the
access road and the carports,the project architect indicates a preference to eliminate the sidewalk
in order to allow a 10-foot landscape area to accommodate berming up to the carport wall, as this
would soften the appearance considerably. The project architect indicates that the applicant's
alternative preference would be to locate the sidewalk on the north side of the access road. The
City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building point out that elimination of the sidewalk
adjacent to the access road would necessitate a requirement for a sidewalk on the south side of
East Palm Canyon, as well as a bike lane.
The existing driveway into Palapas Nursery is located at the northeast corner of the proposed
f project, and staff has included a condition of approval requiring a heavy landscape screen and six-
foot high perimeter wall along that northeast corner to buffer the project from the traffic/parking
associated with the adjacent commercial use east of the project. Additionally, staff has included
a condition of approval requiring a heavy landscape hedge in a five-foot wide area on the outside
of the six-foot high perimeter wall along the private street immediately south of the project.
A monument sign to identify the project and Palapas Nursery is proposed to be located in a
landscaped area north of the 30-foot wide access drive at the corner of Araby Drive and East Palm
Canyon, as well as a project sign proposed to be located at the entry to the project. Staff has
included a condition of approval requiring that specific details for the project entry signage be
presented to the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits.
6. On-site amenities:
On-site recreational facilities include a pool and spa on the west end portion of the project, and a
wading pool and spa on the eastern portion of the project. The proposed site plan indicates that
57% of the project will be comprised of open space, with lawn areas for passive and active
recreation scattered throughoutthe project,both between adjacent buildings and between buildings
and the property line. The applicant indicates that laundry-hook-ups will be provided in each unit,
and that there is no need for a maintenance building on the property.
7. Architecture: The contemporary style architecture presents a clean, uncluttered look. The
building elevations will have a smooth plaster finish and will feature framed arches over the main
entries flanked by European style columns to soften the appearance. Cantilevered overhangs will
shade the balconies. All windows will be recessed a minimum of 10 inches to assist in solar
control, and many will feature decorative metal shade structures. Wing walls will add archite t
interest to the lower level end units.
Case 5.0843 - CUP Staff Report
December 13, 2000
Page 7 of 7
The"end"elevations will face inward toward other end elevations, with the exceptions of Buildings
1 and 8. The architect indicates that landscaping treatments will be used to enhance those
elevations. Gabled roofs with light weight concrete tile will be utilized. Mechanical equipment has
been integrated into the revised roof plans. Carports will blend in with the building architecture.
The project has been reviewed on several occasions, and the architectural design has been
significantly upgraded in terms of richness of the overall design. The final design will be submitted
to the Planning Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND NOTIFICATION:
This Conditional Use Permit is categorically exempt from environmental assessment per Section
15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Section 15332, In-fill Development
Projects,states that projects characterized as in-fill development have been determined not to have
a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, are exempt from the provisions of CEQA.
All property owners within 400 feet of the project site have been notified of the public hearing. As
of the writing of this report, correspondence and inquiries from the public have been received by
staff. Copies of written comments submitted by the public both in support of and in opposition to
the proposed project are attached.
CONCLUSION:
At this time, staff is comfortable in recommending that the Planning Commission approve the
requested Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Approval, subject to the conditions outlined in
Exhibit A of the Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Vicinity Map
2, Revised Site Plan
3. Resolutions/Conditions
4. Written correspondence from the public regarding proposed project
A17
AA+4r
Page 4 of 8
December 13, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Case 5.0843—Application by Friend Development Palm Springs, LLC, for a Conditional Use
Permit and Architectural Approval for a 104-unit apartment complex at the southeast corner of
East Palm Canyon and Araby Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 25.
Continued Public Hearing from November 22, 2000 Planning Commission meeting.
Assistant Planner Chafin reviewed the Planning Commission concerns documented at the
November 22, 2000 meeting and revisions to the plan since that meeting.
She reported that the required number of parking spaces for the project is 170 and that the
applicant has applied for a reduction to 154 parking spaces within the gated area. She stated
that because 104 of the spaces will be covered carports, a 10% reduction, or 17 spaces, could
be allowed. She stated that an additional 40 spaces are shown on the revised plan on the
south side of the access road. .4 ti?
Page 5 of 8
December 13, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes
She reported that the applicant's engineer and the City's engineers have met and thoroughly
reviewed the site plan; determining it to be accurate. She explained that two center lines are
shown —the "right of way" legally recorded centerline and the centerline of the proposed street
improvements or "construction centerline." She reported that the Zoning Ordinance
establishes special setbacks for East Palm Canyon Drive and that the code specifically states
that setbacks are to be taken from the centerline. She stated that, due to the fact that the code
does not require setbacks to be taken from the construction centerline, the setbacks will be
measured from the legally recorded centerline. She reported that the project does qualify for a
setback reduction.
She reviewed an sight line exhibit that addressed privacy issues due to the single-story/two-
story combination on the two properties —showing that a six-foot tall person would need to be
105 feet away in order to see over a single-story building to the eave of the roof of the
proposed buildings (which are 24'T high).
She further reported that the Park South Homeowners Association proposed several conditions
to mitigate their concerns regarding the project and that those conditions have been included in
the recommended conditions of approval; including heavy landscaping around the perimeter of
the project. She noted that the condominium project is not a gated community; however, the
applicant has agreed to place an access gate at the entry to the access road.
Regarding the safety of the main intersection to the project, she reported that the Coachella
Valley Association of Governments is performing a valley-wide traffic study and that the
intersection of Araby Drive and East Palm Canyon Drive will be studied next year.
She stated that the sign application will be submitted at a later date.
Chairman Mills opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Joe Kennedy, Park South homeowner, addressed the Planning Commission to state that
he is concerned with the safety of East Palm Canyon Drive in that area; especially the
reduction to fewer lanes in this area. He also stated that he is concerned that the project may
not have enough parking spaces and that the density seems too high for this parcel. He stated
that his home would be 55 feet from the project.
Mr. Arnold Becker, Park South homeowner, addressed the Planning Commission to state that
he believes the density of the proposed project is too high. He also asked that the Planning
Commission consider the landscaping plan because the proposed 16-foot tall palm trees would
not provide privacy. He also stated that he was concerned about the setbacks.
Mr. David Gilmore, Park South homeowner, addressed the Planning Commission to state that
he is uncomfortable with the proposed land use and noise. He requested that the Planning
Commission require a wall of at least eight feet in height to separate the properties. He stated
that he also has concerns regarding setbacks and parking.
Mr. Hugh Kaptur, project architect, addressed the Planning Commission. In order to respond to
concerns from Park South homeowners, he reviewed sight line exhibits explained the planned
privacy elements to the project. He stated that the second-story windows on Building #2 that
W2 A ) 9
Page 6 of 8
December 13, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes
face the condominiums are high bathroom windows located over tubs. He explained that the
project proposes a three-foot wide walk (of number two compaction on desert chaff rolled into
berms to lower the carport structures which would be a more desirable view from Highway 111
and provide an acoustical barrier); rather than the standard five-foot walk due to the fact that it
will receive no regular pedestrian activity. He thanked Assistant Planner Chafin for her
comprehensive staff report.
Mr. David Gilmore, Park South homeowner, addressed the Planning Commission again to
request that the landscape be maintained at a 15-foot buffer.
Director stated that the street section requirement along East Palm Canyon Drive is a 10' right
of way; but that it is recognized that the shape of the parcel and the frontage road make this is
a unique situation. He explained the need for a sidewalk and bikeway easement parallel to
East Palm Canyon Drive to enable the crossover when/if the bridge is widened at East Palm
Canyon Drive. He also stated that, in order to qualify for future grant consideration, the
sidewalk and bikeway must meet City standards. He outlined the importance of moving people
through a neighborhood with a logical and safe path of travel and how that could be
accomplished with the subject easement. He stated that the City's master plan calls for both
sides of East Palm Canyon Drive to have a bikeway/sidewalk and that for safety and aesthetic
concerns the bike and walkways should not be next to the road.
i
Director reported that the Planning Commission will review the landscaping plan at a later date.
Chairman Mills stated that the proposed project's density is appropriate and that the adjacent
condominium project was built at a density that is less than would be allowed. He agreed that
the proposed project should continue to work at being a good neighbor; however, the shape,
zoning, and probable cost of the parcel all support the proposed density. He also noted that
this property was previously Phase 2 of the existing adjacent condominium project. He asked
the Director to give an example of allowed uses for this lot. Director reported that in this zone
(the second highest density in the City) multiple family residences, hotels, apartments,
condominiums, child care facilities, country clubs, hospitals and urgent care facilities, and
professional office buildings.
M/S/C (Matthews/Caffery 5-0, 2 absent) to approve subject to conditions in staff report and:
Amend Engineering condition No. 20 to indicate that the curb face only on the
north side of the access road shall be painted red;
Planning condition No. 50 amended to read, "Pursuant to an agreement
between the applicant and the Park South Homeowners Association, the
applicant shall include on the parcel map an adjustment to grant to the owner of
1842 Araby Drive the portion of the applicant's property currently in use as an
outdoor patio at 1842 Araby Drive.
Rooftop air conditioning equipment be studied further by Design Review.
{ 24
Page 3 of 10
November 22, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Case 5.0843 —Application by Friend Development Palm Springs, LLC, for a Conditional Use
Permit and Architectural Approval for a 104-unit apartment complex at the southeast corner of
East Palm Canyon and Araby Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 25.
Commissioner Shoenberger abstained due to a conflict of interest.
Assistant Planner Chafin reviewed the application and exhibits for the Planning Commission.
She explained that the site is relatively flat with native vegetation and no overhead utilities;
however, the stip of land between East Palm Canyon Drive and the access road to Palapas
Nursery slopes down from north to south, with the street grade being approximately seven feet
higher than the proposed finished floor near the east end of the property. She explained that � '
Page 4 of 10
November 22, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes
I
access to the project would be from Araby Drive and will have a gated entry. She also
explained that the property to the west is vacant; to the south developed with single-story multi-
family residential units. She stated that an existing private street separates the majority of the
existing units from the proposed project and that the conditions of approval include
requirements for heavy landscaping and six-foot walls between the two uses. She explained
that two of the existing condominiums are close to the property line and there is an existing 8-
10 ft. hedge between the proposed two-story development and the existing single-story units.
She reported that the South Park Homeowners Association submitted a list of ten requested
additional conditions of approval which, she reported, the developer is in agreement with and
are on file in the Planning Division. She further reported that the property to the west is
occupied by Palapas Nursery and this will also be conditioned to include six-foot walls and
heavy landscape screening.
Planner explained that the operators of Palapas Nursery notified staff that a recorded
easement exists that shows that the access road is 30 feet wide and that the new access road
must be at least that wide and of the same, or better, composition as the existing road. She
pointed out that the developer's plans show a 24-foot wide access road with a five-foot wide
sidewalk.
Director explained the Caltrans maps and the right-of-way for East Palm Canyon and the effect
upon the perimeter of the project, the berming, fill slope and easement design. He stated that
the irregular shape and awkward location of the lot make the project a design challenge. He
commended the applicant for their work on this challenging site and recommended that the
Planning Commission continue the application until the applicant could work through
neighborhood issues and confirm accurate right-of-way and setbacks.
Chairman Mills opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Tim Lester, JWL Development Concepts, addressed the Planning Commission to state that
his firm has a philosophy for the site that includes a pleasant entry off of Araby Drive, a
turnaround in back, buildings with 12-16 units with balconies, patios, walk-in closets and will
keep them away from Highway 111 as much as possible.
Mr. Hugh Kaptur addressed the Planning Commission to state that his design intent is to keep it
simple with a contemporary scheme with traditional elements at the entrances.
Mr. David Mlynarski, project engineer, described and showed a map of the irregularly-shaped
centerline of East Palm Canyon Drive. He reported that the project is situated at the site of
Phase Two of the existing adjacent condominiums. He asked to address Engineering
conditions of approval numbers 4, 7, 15, and 17 after the Public Hearing is closed.
Mr. Joe Kennedy, Araby Road resident, addressed the Planning Commission to state that the
proposed project is 55 feet away from his home and that, although he wants the project to go
l
forward, he feels that it has too many units and is too high. SOL A _
Mr. Stan Foster, member of the Board of Directors of the Park South HOA, addressed
Planning Commission to urge that the 30-foot road stay intact and that a traffic light be installed
at Araby Road and East Palm Canyon Drive for safety reasons. He thanked staff for attending
Z24
Page 5 of 10
November 22, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes
the HOA meeting on November 18, 2000 and said that the developers have been very
Y
agreeable to work with and that the project is harmonious.
Mr. David Baron, Slovak, Baron, & Hemphil, addressed the Planning Commission to urge that
the 30-foot road is maintained, that he is confident that the landscape plan is appropriate, and
that he is pleased with the proposed signage. He commended the developer for their work on
this project.
Mr. Dave Gilmore, Araby Road resident, addressed the Planning Commission to thank staff for
attending the HOA meeting. He stated that his concerns are regarding the setbacks and
requested reduction in parking.
Mr. Vern Chupp, Araby Road resident, addressed the Planning Commission to state that he is
unhappy with a high-density apartment project at this site.
Mr. Scott Kennedy addressed the Planning Commission to state that the rear-yard setback is
(19') concerning to him as far as loss of privacy. He stated that he is also concerned with
landscaping, specifically the sweet acacia, the eucalyptus, and pine. He explained that the
view of the palm trees along South Ridge is an important view from his neighborhood.
There being no further appearances, the Public Hearing was closed.
Mr. David Mlynarski, project engineer was called to the podium to address right-of-way issues.
He stated that the developer is willing to work with the City to assure that the applicable portion
of East Palm Canyon Drive is re-striped, that Araby Road is widened, and that a traffic light is
considered for Araby Road and East Palm Canyon Drive. He stated that the developer will
work with Palapas Nursery on the signage.
Engineering staff reported that the City Traffic Engineer has checked the revised traffic study
(which did address a traffic light at the intersection of Araby Road and East Palm Canyon
Drive) and confirmed that the definitive turning lanes are sufficient. She explained that
expansion of traffic signals is predicated upon traffic generated by development in the general
area over the next 10-20 years (which includes the current project).
Director stated that carports are not required by code and that proposed carports may
encroach into the East Palm Canyon Drive setback. He stated that a variance could be filed or
the carports eliminated. He stated that parking is not a significant concern with the project. He
reviewed the site map and elevations for the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Raya suggested that the back and front doors be lit with shielded lighting ore
recessed down lights to avoid random patterns or hot spots.
Director reported that the existing condominium developer's chose to build under the allowable
density and that Phase II of the condominiums would have been allowed to build at the R J
proposed density. He explained that with the proposed development, security will be increased
for adjacent neighbors and street noise will be reduced. He stressed the importance of
landscaping buffer between the properties, and explained that although the property has many
deterrents to development, he is please with the progress which the developer has made to
Page 6 of 10
November 22, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes
date on the plans. He asked that the developer bring exhibits with proper right-of-way
delineations and encroachments to show enhanced landscape and blow-ups of this area of
Palm Canyon Drive. He stated that five foot sidewalks are an expectation for those plans. He
observed that the letter received from the homeowners association did not mirror the
comments during the public hearing. He suggested that the developers have another meeting
with the homeowners association to review setbacks and landscaping.
Director stated that there will be a tree program around the perimeter of the project, with the
accent on Palm Canyon Drive. He also stated that the conditions of approval would be
redrafted to include the agreed-upon requests from the homeowners association and that the
engineering conditions would reflect the changes discussed.
Commissioner Raya stated that he was comfortable with the project, its architecture, and
lighting. He stated that he would like to see the air conditioning units represented on the plans.
He also asked that traffic and the signal on Araby Road and Palm Canyon Drive be discussed
further.
M/S/C (Klatchko/Rays 5-0, 2 absent) to continue to the December 13, 2000 Planning
Commission meeting.
RESOLUTION NO. 4725
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS,CALIFORNIA,APPROVING,SUBJECTTO THE
CONDITIONS STATED, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
5.0843,TO FRIEND DEVELOPMENT PALM SPRINGS LLC
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 104-UNIT APARTMENT
PROJECT ON A 4.97 NET ACRE PARCEL AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EAST PALM CANYON DRIVE
AND ARABY DRIVE, R-3 ZONE, SECTION 25, AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
-------------
WHEREAS, Friend Development Palm Springs LLC ("Applicant") has filed an application
with the City pursuant to Sections 94.25.00 and 94.04.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for the
development of a 104-unit apartment project on a 4.97 net acre parcel located at the
southeast corner of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, R-3 zone, Section 25; and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Springs to consider Applicant's application for Conditional Use Permit No.5.0843was given
in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS,on November 22,2000, a public hearing on the application for Conditional Use
Permit No. 5.0843 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable
law, said public hearing being subsequently continued to December 13, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Conditional Use Permit, (Case No. 5.0843), is categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Section 15332 (in-fill Development Projects). ;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission 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 and all written and oral testimony.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
This Conditional Use Permit is categorically exempt from environmental assessment
per Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that
Section 15332 states that in-fill development projects are exempt from CEQA.
Section 2: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 94.25.00, the Planning Commission
finds that with the incorporation of those conditions set forth in Exhibit A:
a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for
which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Pursuanttothe Zoning Ordinance, multi-family dwellings are permitted in the Resort
Overlay Zone only by Conditional Use Permit, such permit subject to Planning
Commission findings that the proposed use is compatible with its surroundings and
that the site in question is not appropriate for other uses allowed by right within the o
underlying zone. The purpose of the Resort Overlay Zone is to ensure adequate
opportunities for tourism. The subject property is irregular in shape and is not likely
to be developed as a hotel or other similar use in the future. zoasw
Case 5.0843 - Resolution
December 13, 2000
Page 2 of 4
b. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan.
The subject property is designated as H-43/21 (High Density Residential) on the
City's General Plan Land Use Map and R-3 (Multiple-family Residential and Hotel
Zone) pursuant to the Zoning Map. The objective of the H-43/21 General Plan
Designatiorr(providing for the development of a threshold of 15 and a maximum of
21 dwelling units per acre) is to allow for multi-family apartments and similar
permanent housing. The proposed development of 104 apartment units on a 4.97
net acre site (20.92 units per acre) fits within the range of uses allowed within the
High Density Residential General Plan category.
c. The use applied for is necessary or desirable for the development of the
community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, and
is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in
which the proposed use is to be located.
The proposed development of 104 apartment units is in harmony with the various
elements and objectives of the City of Palm Springs General Plan and is not
detrimental to existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed
use is to be located.
d. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
said use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features
required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the
neighborhood.
With the incorporation of Administrative Minor Modifications for: a)a 20% reduction
in rear yard setbacks, b) a reduced setback (from 125 feet to 110 feet) from East
Palm Canyon Drive, and c) a 10% reduction in the number of required parking
spaces, the site for the proposed 104-unit apartment project, on a 4.97 net acre
parcel located at the southeast corner of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive,
is adequate in shape and size to accommodate said use, including yards,setbacks,
walls or fences, landscaping and other eatures required in order to adjust said use
to those existing or permitted future uses of the land in the neighborhood.
e. The site for the proposed use related to streets and highways is properly
designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the
proposed use.
The proposed development of 104 apartment units is bordered on three sides by
roadways, one of which is a private street, one of which is a collector street, and
one of which is a 30-foot wide access road alongside a major thoroughfare. A bus
bay turn-out and bus shelter will be required along the East Palm Canyon Drive
frontage in accordance with the design criteria of SunLine Transit Agency. The
payment of Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fund (TUMF) fees will be required
upon issuance of building permits. With all of the above items incorporated into the
recommended Conditions of Approval for the project (Exhibit A), the vehicular
circulation system will not be negatively impacted by trips generated from this
project.
Case 5.0843 - Resolution
December 13, 2000
Page 3 of 4
i
f. In accordance with Policy 7.1.5 of the General Plan, the appropriate street
standard on East Palm Canyon Drive at this location is a 101-foot ultimate half-street right-
of-way.
This finding is made because existing development patterns make acquisition of
lands to comply with existing street standards infeasible and unnecessary. Policy
7.1.5 of the General Plan states that cross-section standards may be modified by
the Planning Commission to take into consideration the need for special right-of-
way widths where property cannot be feasibly acquired or the nature of the terrain
through which the street passes to prevent scarring of the landscape. The General
Plan shows a half-street right-of-way width on East Palm Canyon Drive of 101 feet
(total of 202 feet). The intent of the General Plan is to allow for a frontage road.
The proposed site plan includes a 30-foot frontage over an easement. Thus, the
proposal meets the intent of the General Plan. A five-foot sidewalk and bikeway
easement will also be accommodated. The existing special conditions, size of the
site, topography and irregular shape render difficulties in constructing full street
improvements at the street grade.
g. The design or improvements of the proposed 104-unit apartment project are
consistent with the General Plan.
The subject site is zoned R-3 (Multiple-family Residential and Hotel Zone) and
designated H-43/21 (High Density Residential) pursuant to the City's General Plan a
Land Use Map. The project will be compatible with the General Plan and existing
land uses to the south, north (across East Palm Canyon Drive)and east, as well as
future uses of vacant land to the west (across Araby Drive), which could be
developed with a variety of high density residential uses pursuant to the City's
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Furthermore, the project has been designed
to be sensitive to and not conflict with the existing commercial use to the east and
existing multiple family residences directly to the south of the site by incorporating
elements such as, but not limited to, a combination of heavy landscaping and block
walls along shared property lines.
h. The site is physically suitable for the type of development contemplated by the
proposed 104-unit apartment project.
The project has been designed to comply with all performance and development
standards of the R-3 Zone of the Zoning Ordinance, with the exception of the
Administrative Minor Modifications for: a) a 20% reduction in rear yard setbacks,
b)a reduced setback(from 125 feet to 110 feet)from East Palm Canyon Drive, and
c) a 10% reduction in the number of required parking spaces. The site is relatively
flat with native vegetation scattered across the property and no overhead utilities,
and will be accessed via Araby Drive. Thus, the project should be compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood.
i. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, including any minor
modifications of the zone's property development standards.
Case 5.0843 - Resolution
December 13, 2000
Page 4 of 4
All proposed conditions of approval are necessary to ensure public health and
safety, including,but not limited to,the requirements for public street improvements,
landscape and wall treatments along the project perimeter.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the foregoing, the Planning
Commission hereby approves Case No. 5.0843, subject to those conditions set forth in
EXhibit A on file in the Department of Planning and Building, which are to be satisfied prior
to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless otherwise specified.
ADOPTED this 13th day of December , 2000.
AYES: Caffery, Jurasky, Klatchko, Matthews, Mills;
NOES: None;
ABSENT: Raya, Schoenberger;
ABSTAIN: None.
ATTEST: ITY OF ALM SPRINGS
G ///� �k
Secr ry, Planning Commission Cha man, Planning Commission
RESOLUTION NO. 4725
EXHIBIT A
Conditional Use Permit No. 5.0843
Friend Development Palm Springs, LLC
Southeast corner East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive
December 13, 2000
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Before final acceptance ofthe project,all conditions listed belowshall be completed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee,
depending on which department recommended the condition.
Any agreements,easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by
the City Attorney.
PLANNING:
1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the
Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances and
resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations. i.
2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm
Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an approval
of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative officers
concerning Case 5.0846. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any
such claim,action,or proceeding againstthe City of Palm Springs and the applicantwill either
undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal costs or will advance
funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails
to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate
fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify,
or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing,the City retains the
right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the
City shall waive the indemnification herein, except,the City's decision to settle or abandon a
matter following an adverse judgement or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the
indemnification rights herein.
3. Commencement of use or construction under this Conditional Use Permit and Architectural
Approval shall be within two(2)years from the effective date of approval. Extensions of time
may be granted by the Planning Commission upon demonstration of good cause.
Oita
;-0 x J4 � �
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 2 of 14
4. Construction documents shall be subjectto review and approval by the Planning Commission
prior to issuance of building permits.
5. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 a filing fee of $78.00 is required. This
project has a de minimus impact on fish and wildlife,and a Certificate of Fee Exemption shall
be completed by the City and two copies filed with the County Clerk. This application shall
not be final until such fee is paid and the Certificate of Fee Exemption is filed. Fee shall in the
form of a money order or cashier's check payable to Riverside County.
6. The appeal period for this application is 15 calendar days from the date of project approval.
Permits will not be issued until the appeal period has concluded.
7. A revised preliminary landscape plans shall be submitted to the Planning Commission within
30 days of Planning Commission approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit and
Architectural Approval.
8. Final landscaping, irrigation, exterior lighting, and fencing plans shall be submitted for
approval by the Department of Planning and Building prior to issuance of a building permit.
Landscape plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's
Office prior to submittal.
9. The project is subject to the City of Palm Springs Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.The
applicant shall submit an application for Final Landscape Document Package to the Director
of Planning and Building for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Refer to Chapter 8.60 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements.
10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Plan shall be
submitted and approved by the Building Official. Refer to Chapter 8.50 of the Municipal Code
for specific requirements. -
11. The grading plan shall show the disposition of all cut and fill materials. Limits of site
disturbance shall be shown and all disturbed areas shall be fully restored or landscaped.
12. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks-3'wide and 6"deep.
The irrigation system shall be field tested prior to final approval of the project. Section
14.24.020 of the Municipal Code prohibits nuisance water from entering the public streets,
roadways or gutters.
13. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk
and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs
Engineering specifications.
14. Separate architectural approval and permits shall be required for all signs. A detailed sign
program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to
issuance of building permits.
00
�,� 30
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 3 of 14 1
15. Pursuant to an agreement between the applicant and the Park South Homeowners
Association, the applicant shall provide, at the applicant's expense, a new monument sign
identifying the Park South condominium development. Said sign shall be subject to review
and approval by the Department of Planning and Building.
16. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from all possible vantage points
both existing and future per Section 93.03.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. The screening shall
be considered as an element of the overall design and must blend with the architectural
design of the building(s). The exterior elevations and roof plans of the buildings shall indicate
any fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building,the equipment heights,and
type of screening. Parapets shall be at least 6" above the equipment for the purpose of
screening.
17. No exterior down spouts shall be permitted on any facade on the proposed building(s)which
are visible from adjacent streets or residential and commercial areas.
18. Perimeter walls shall be designed, installed and maintained in compliance with the corner
cutback requirements as required in Section 93.02.00.D.
19. The design, height, texture and color of building(s), fences and walls shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Director of Planning and Building prior to issuance of building
permits.
i
20. The street address numbering/lettering shall not exceed eight inches in height.
21. Construction of any residential unit shall meet minimum soundproofing requirements
prescribed pursuant to Section 1092 and related sections of Title 25 of the California
Administrative Code. Compliance shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Building
Official.
22. An exterior lighting plan in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance Section 93.21.00, Outdoor
Lighting Standards,shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning&
Building priorto the issuance of building permits.A photometric study and manufacturer's cut
sheets of all exterior lighting on the building, in the landscaping, and in the parking lot shall
be submitted for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. If lights are proposed to be
mounted on buildings, down-lights shall be utilized.
23. If proposed, parking lot light fixtures shall align with stall striping and shall be located two to
three feet from curb face.
24, Parking lot lighting shall be primarily from carport structures mounted above parking spaces
and shielded from direct view, as to minimize impacts on adjacent properties, to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building.
25. Submit plans meeting City standard for approval on the proposed trash and recyclable
materials enclosure prior to issuance of a building permit.
AdXA
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
{ Page 4 of 14
26. This project shall be subjectto Chapters 2.24 and 3.37 of the Municipal Code regarding public
art.The project shall either provide public art or payment of an in lieu fee. In the case of the
in-lieu fee, the fee shall be based upon the total building permit valuation as calculated
pursuant to the valuation table in the Uniform Building Code, the fee being 1/2% for
commercial projects or 1/4%for residential projects with first$100,000 of total building permit
valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be located on the
project site, said location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and
Building and the Public Arts Commission,and the property owner shall enter into a recorded
agreement to maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing.
27. Details of pool fencing (material and color)and equipment area shall be submitted with final
landscape plan.
28. Nosirens,outside paging oranytypeof signalization will be permitted,exceptapproved alarm
systems.
29. No outside storage of any kind shall be permitted except as approved as a part of the
proposed plan.
30. Prior to the issuance of building permits, locations of all telephone and electrical boxes must
be indicated on the building plans and must be completely screened and located in the interior
of the building. Electrical transformers must be located toward the interior of the project
i maintaining a sufficient distance from the frontage(s)of the project. Said transformer(s)must
be adequately and decoratively screened.
31. An Administrative Minor Modification shall be granted for reduced setbacks from East Palm
Canyon, reduced rear yard setbacks and reduced parking requirements, prior to issuance of
a building permit.
32. Shading requirements for parking lot areas as set forth in Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning
Ordinance shall be met. Details to be provided with final landscape plan.
33. Parking stalls shall be delineated with a 4 to 6 inch double stripe - hairpin or elongated "U"
design. Individual wheel stops shall be prohibited; a continuous 6"barrier curb shall provide
wheel stops.
34. Concrete walks with a minimum width of two(2)feet shall be installed adjacent to end parking
spaces or end spaces shall be increased to eleven (11)feet wide.
35. Tree wells shall be provided within the parking lot and shall have a planting area of six feet
in diameter/width.
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 5 of 14
36. Standard parking spaces shall be 17 feet deep by 9 feetwide;compact sized spaces shall be
15 feet deep by 8 feet wide. Handicap parking spaces shall be 18 feet deep by 9 feet wide
plus a 5 foot walkway at the right side of the parking space; two (2) handicap spaces can
share a common walkway. One in every eight(8)handicap accessible spaces, but not less
than one(1), shall be served by an 8 foot walkway on the right side and shall be designated
as"van accessible".
37. Handicapped accessibility shall be indicated on the site plan to-include the location of
handicapped parking spaces, the main entrance to the proposed structure and the path of
travel to the main entrance. Consideration shall be given to potential difficulties with the
handicapped accessibility to the building due to the future grading plans for the property.
38. Compact and handicapped spaces shall be appropriately marked per Section 9306.00C 10.
39. Curbs shall be installed at a minimum of five (5)feet from face of walls,fences, buildings, or
other structures. Areas that are not part of the maneuvering area shall have curbs placed at
a minimum of two (2)feet from the face of walls, fences or buildings adjoining driveways.
40. All parking areas shall be adequately screened pursuant to Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning
Ordinance,including the use of decorative screen walls in the streetscape areas between on-
site parking areas and the public streets. As such, four foot high walls and/or berms are
required. Should berming be used adjacent to retention basins for on-site drainage, the
berming shall fit aesthetically and shall not include extreme slopes for either the berms or the
retention basins. If walls are utilized, the design, height, texture and color of the walls shall
be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning and Building prior to
issuance of building permits.
41. The final design of the vehicular access points, which include access gates, turn-around
areas, on-site circulation, etc. shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of
Planning and Building and Fire Marshal prior to issuance of building permits.
42. The City will vacate to the applicant a six-feet (plus or minus) strip of land along the public
right-of-way immediately north of the 30-foot access road in order to accommodate both the
30-foot wide access road and a five-foot sidewalk on the south side of the access road. Once
the strip of land is vacated by the City, the applicant will include on the map the precise
location of the 30-foot access road.
43. The applicant shall grant the City an easement for a bikeway on the 30-foot access road.
44. A heavy landscape hedge shall be provided and maintained in a five-foot wide area on the
outside of the six-foot high perimeter wall along the private street immediately south of the
project, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building.
i
L
daaA �3
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 6 of 14
45. The applicant and the Park South Homeowners Association, the applicant shall provide, at
the applicant's expense, a decorative, electronic swing arm access gate at the west end of
the existing private street located south of the project. Said access gate shall accommodate
disabled access and shall include a turn-around area to accommodate stacking for at least
two automobiles. Said gate shall be subject to architectural review pursuant to Section
94.04.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Power source for operation of said gate shall come from
Park South Homeowners Association.
46. The applicant and the Park South Homeowners Association, the applicant shall provide, at
the applicant's expense,two remote control devices for each condominium unit to activate the
electronic swing arm access gate to be provided at the east end of the existing private street
located south of the project.
47. The applicant shall provide,at the applicant's expense, lighting fixtures to up-light the existing
palm trees along the existing private street located south of the project, as well as lighting
fixtures to illuminate the existing private street located south of the project. Power source for
operation of said fixtures shall come from the applicant's property. Said lighting fixtures shall
comply with Section 93.21.00 of the Zoning Ordinance.
48. The applicant shall provide, at the applicant's expense, gates in the existing perimeter walls
at 1796 Araby Drive and 1798 Araby Drive, said gates to be located such that a clear path of
travel is provided from the rear yards to the public way.
I
49. Heavy landscaping shall be provided between the apartment buildings and the six-foot
perimeter wall where the two-story apartment buildings (specifically Buildings 5 and 6) are
adjacent to existing single-story, multi-family units on the south end of the project. The
existing hedge located between the existing single-story multi-family units and the proposed
two-story apartment units shall be replaced with mature, dense hedges to the satisfaction of
the Director of Planning and Building.
50. The applicant shall include on the parcel map an adjustment to grant to the owner of 1842
Araby Drive the portion of the applicant's property currently in use as an outdoor patio area
at 1842 Araby Drive.
51. A six-foot high perimeter wall and heavy landscape screen shall be provided along the east
property line to screen the project from the adjacent commercial use to the east, to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building.
52. The project shall comply with all Title 24 regulations, as well as California Multi-Family
Disabled Access regulations.
53. Color and finish of both sides of all perimeter walls shall be constructed with decorative block.
SAW
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 7 of 14
54. A bus shelter shall be constructed along the East Palm Canyon Drive frontage in conjunction
with the bus bay turnout on East Palm Canyon Drive. The design of the shelter shall be
integrated architecturally with the architecture of the buildings, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Building. Contact SunLine Transit Agency for details regarding bus
stop furniture/shelter requirements and maintenance requirements.
55. Eucalyptus shall be utilized as a street tree along the East Palm Canyon frontage.
56, Gated and secured pedestrian connectionsfrom the publicsidewalk along East Palm Canyon
Drive and Araby Drive into the project shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Director of
Planning and Building.
57. Two gated and secured pedestrian access points into the project shall be provided along the
30-foot wide access road located on the north side of the project.
POLICE DEPARTMENT:
1. Developer shall comply with Section II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code.
FIRE DEPARTMENT:
1. Construction shall be in accordance with the1998 California Fire Code, 1998 California
Building Code, City of Palm Springs Ordinance 1570, Desert Water Agency requirements,
NFPA 13, 14, 24, 70, 72 and 760 plus UUCSFM listings and approvals.
2. Approved numbers or addresses shall be plainly visible and legible from the street or road
fronting the property per 1998 California Building Code, Chapter 5, Section 502.
3. Fire Department Access Roads shall be provided and maintained in accordancewith the 1998
California Fire Code, Article 9, Section 902 and local ordinances.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT:
1. Prior to any construction on-site, all appropriate permits must be secured.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
The Engineering Department recommends that if this application is approved, such approval is
subject to the following conditions being completed in compliance with City standards and ordinances:
Before final acceptance of the project,all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 8 of 14
STREETS
1. Any improvements within the street right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs
Encroachment Permit. Work shall be allowed according to Resolution 17950 -
Restricting Street Work on Major and Secondary Thoroughfares.
2. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the
Engineering Department. The plan(s)shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of any grading or building permits.
Minimum submittal shall include the following, IF applicable:
A. Copy of signed Conditions of Approval from Planning Department.
B. Proof of processing dedications of right-of-way, easements, encroachment
agreements/licenses, covenants, reimbursement agreements, etc. required
by these conditions.
EAST PALM CANYON DRIVE
3. Dedicate additional right-of-way as required to incorporate the bus turn out and
adjacent 8 foot wide sidewalk.
r
3A. Developer shall apply for the vacation of the south 7 feet of the Palm Canyon Drive
East right-of-way from at point 83 feet+east of the northeast corner of the tract to the
southeast property line. Developer shall be responsible for final resolution of all
utilities,demolition of all existing improvements,reconstruction of affected intersecting
streets and coordination of improvements with adjacent property owners,if applicable,
for the street vacation. All agreements and improvement plans relative to the above
mentioned items shall be approved by the City Engineer priro to the submittal of the
street improvement plans.
4. Construct an 8 inch curb and gutter, 38 feet SOUTH of the existing construction
centerline along the entire frontage, with a 35 foot radius curb return at the
intersection of Araby Drive per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200.
5. Construct a curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at the
SOUTHEAST cornerof the intersection with Araby Drive per City of Palm Springs Std.
Dwg. Nos. 212 and 212A.
6. Construct a 160-foot long by 10-foot wide bus turn out on the EAST PALM CANYON
DRIVE frontage beginning at the ECR of the southeast corner of the intersection of
Araby Drive.The configuration shall be approved by the City Engineer in conjunction
with SunLine Transit. Contact SunLine Transit for details regarding bus stop
furniture/shelter requirements. Developer shall construct shelter inclusive of furniture
and lighting.
Jck
A 3(
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 9 of 14
7. Remove and replace existing pavement with a minimum pavement section of 5 inch
asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of
24 inches at 95% relative compaction, OR equal, from edge of proposed gutter to
clean sawcut edge of existing pavement along the entire frontage in accordance with
City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 340.The pavement section shall
be designed, using"R"values,by a licensed Soils Engineer and submitted to the City
Engineer for approval.
ARABY DRIVE
8. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter, 20 feet EAST of centerline along the entire
frontage of the subject property,with a 35 foot radius curb return at BOTH SIDES of
the intersection with the ACCESS ROAD and at the intersection with East Palm
Canyon Drive per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200.
9. Construct the BOTH SIDES of an 8 foot cross gutter and spandrel at the intersection
of ARABY DRIVE and ACCESS ROAD with a flow line parallel to the centerline of
ARABY DRIVE in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200
and 206.
10. Construct a minimum 5 foot wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage
in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210.
11. Construct a curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards on
BOTH SIDES of the intersection with the ACCESS ROAD per City of Palm Springs
Std. Dwg. Nos. 212 and 212A.
12. Remove and replace existing pavement with a minimum pavement section of 3 inch
asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of
24 inches at 95% relative compaction, OR equal, from edge of proposed gutter to
centerline along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard
Drawing No. 110 and 315.The pavement section shall be designed,using"R"values,
by a licensed Soils Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for approval.
PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD (Easement)
13. The ECR (end of curb return) on the north side of the Access Road shall be a
minimum of 40 feet south of the BCR (beginning of curb return)on the south side of
East Palm Canyon Drive.
14. The centerline curve radius shall be a minimum fo 130 feet.
15. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter, 15.00 feet FROM BOTH SIDES of centerline
along the entire frontage, with a 35 foot radius curb return at the INTERSECTION
WITH ARABY DRIVE per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200.
t
A 37
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 10 of 14
16, The two (2)west driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with City
of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 205 and have minimum widths of 24 feet.
The east driveway approach shall be constructed in accordance with City of Palm
Springs Standard Drawing No. 204 and have minimum widths of 24 feet.
17. Construct a minimum 5 foot wide sidewalk behind the curb on the SOUTH side of the
access road in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210.
17A. A pedestrian access easement for the 5 foot wide sidewalk, the curb ramp area and
access to Palm Canyon Drive East (at the southeast corner of the tract) shall be
dedicated to the City on the parcel map.
18. Construct a curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at the
NORTHEAST corner of the subject property per City of Palm Springs Std. Dwg. Nos.
212 and 212A.
Construct curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at both
sides and across the median island of the main driveway per City of Palm Springs Std.
Dwg. Nos. 212 and 212A.
i 19. Remove and replace existing pavement with a minimum pavement section of 2-1/2
inch asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inch aggregate base with a minimum
subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction,OR equal,from edge of proposed
gutter to edge of proposed gutter along the entire frontage in accordance with City of
Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110. The pavement section shall be designed,
using"R"values,by a licensed Soils Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for
approval.
20. The curb face on the north side of the street shall be painted red to designate NO
PARKING.
SANITARY SEWER
21. Connect all sanitary facilities to the City sewer system. Lateral shall not be connected
at manhole.
GRADING
22. A copy of a Title Report prepared/updated within the past 3 months and copies of
record documents shall be submitted to the City Engineerwith the first submittal of the
Grading Plan.
Case 5,0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 11 of 14
23, Submit a Grading Plan prepared by a Registered Professional to the Engineering
Department for plan check. Grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for comments prior to submittal to the Engineering Department.
The Grading Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any
grading or building permits.
Minimum submittal includes the following:
A. Copy of Planning Department comments regarding the grading plan.
B. Copy of signed Conditions of Approval from Planning Department.
C. Copy of Site Plan stamped approved and signed bythe Planning Department.
D. Copy of Title Report prepared/updated within past 3 months.
E. Copy of Soils Report, IF required by these conditions.
F. Copy of Hydrology Study/Report, IF required by these conditions.
G. Copy of the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit from the State
Water Resources Control Board (Phone No. 916 657-0687) to the City
Engineer prior to issuance of the grading permit.
24. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks-3'wide and
6" deep - to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or
gutters.
25. In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.00, the
developershall postwith the City a cash bond of two thousand dollars($2,000.00)per
acre for mitigation measures of erosion/blowsand relating to his property and
development.
26. A soils report prepared by a licensed Soils Engineer shall be required for and
incorporated as an integral part of the grading plan for the proposed site. A copy of
the soils report shall be submitted to the Building Department and to the Engineering
Department along with plans, calculations and other information subject to approval
by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the grading permit.
27. The hydrology study mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the grading plan.
28. Contact the Building Department to get PM10 requirements prior to request for
grading permit.
000
09 39
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 12 of 14
29. In cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the California
Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project, applicants for
grading permits involving an engineered grading plan and the export of native soil
from the site will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of
Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved"Notification of Intent
To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside, and Los
Angeles Counties"(RIFA Form CA-1)or a verbal release from that office prior to the
issuance of the City grading permit. The California Department of Food and
Agriculture office is located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert. (Phone: 760-
776-8208)
DRAINAGE
30. The developer shall accept all flows impinging upon his land and conduct these flows
to an approved drainage structure. On-site retention/detention or other measures
required by the approved hydrology study shall be included on the grading plan.
31. The project is subject to flood control and drainage implementation fees.The acreage
drainage fee at the present time is $7,271.00 per acre per Resolution No. 15189.
Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit.
ON-SITE
32. The minimum pavement section for all on-site streets/parking areas shall be 2-1/2
inch asphalt concrete pavement over 4-inch aggregate base with a minimum
subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, OR equal.The pavement section
shall be designed, using "R" values, determined by a licensed Soils Engineer and
submitted with the Fine Grading Plan to the City Engineer for approval.
33. The on-site parking lot shall be constructed in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Zoning Ordinance, Section 9306.00.
GENERAL
34. Any utility cuts in the existing off-site pavement made by this development shall
receive trench replacement pavement to match existing pavement plus one additional
inch. See City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115. Pavement shall be
restored to a smooth rideable surface.
35. All proposed utility lines on/or adjacent to this project shall be undergrounded prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
I J
WO
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 13 of 14
36. All existing utilities shall be shown on the grading/street plans. The existing and
proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to the property line. The
approved original grading/street plans shall be as-built and returned to the City of
Palm Springs Engineering Department prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy.
37. The owner shall enter into a covenant agreeing to underground all existing overhead
facilities on/or adjacent to this property that are less than 35 kV in the future upon
request of the City of Palm Springs City Engineer at such time as deemed necessary.
The covenant shall be consummated and submitted to the Engineering Department
prior to issuance of a grading permit. An updated title report or a copy of the current
tax bill shall be provided to verify ownership.
38. The developer is advised to contact all utility purveyors for detailed requirements for
this project at the earliest possible date.
39. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any driveway
which does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight
distance per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 203.
40. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public
sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of
Palm Springs Engineering specifications.
MAP
41. The existing lots or parcels shall be combined. The developer shall submit a parcel
map prepared by either a Registered Civil Engineer or a Licensed Land Surveyor to
the Engineering Department. This condition shall be complied with before issuance
of grading or building permits.
42. The Title Report prepared for subdivision guarantee for the subject property, the
traverse closures for the existing parcel and all lots created therefrom, and copies of
record documents shall be submitted with the Parcel Map to the Engineering
Department.
43. The Parcel Map shall be prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor or qualified Civil
Engineer and submitted to the Engineering Department for review. Submittal shall be
made prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
Case 5.0843 - Conditions of Approval
December 13, 2000
Page 14 of 14
TRAFFIC
44. The developer shall provide a minimum of 48 inches of sidewalk clearance around all
street furniture, fire hydrants and other above-ground facilities for handicap
accessibility.The developer shall provide same through dedication of additional right-
of-way and widening of the sidewalk or shall be responsible for the relocation of all
existing traffic signal/safety light poles, conduit, pull boxes and all appurtenances
located on the PALM CANYON DRIVE EAST,ARABY DRIVE and ACCESS ROAD
frontages of the subject property.
45. The developer shall have restriping plans approved by the City Engineer and shall
restripe the Araby Drive approach to East Palm Canyon Drive prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
The striping on East Palm Canyon Drive shall be modified to transition traffic going
eastbound through the Araby Drive intersection.
46. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation and modification of the existing
traffic signal poles, conduit, pull boxes and all appurtenances located on the
SOUTHEAST corner of PALM CANYON DRIVE EAST and ARABY DRIVE in
accordance with the requirements of the City of Palm Springs.
I
47. A 30 inch "STOP" sign and standard "STOP BAR" and "STOP LEGEND" shall be
installed per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 620-626 at the following
locations:
Araby Drive @ Access Road
48. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects as
required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum, all
construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with State of
California,Department of Transportation,"MANUAL OF TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE WORKZONES"dated 1996,orsubsequent
additions in force at the time of construction.
49. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee based on the
RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY ITE Code B land use.
�
0%
i U -J� . J( lw l u lycvltT a_ ! slclaj c0-
4-T,, caf o f ra (w - Sp �AF Qpp w ✓a-P :
o " 'j k
A P(,v I vtd Cq'fm � �nGC�S S
Paxc,(-iy P
Iret
P
P —Z Qcc -1 s ck .es
\ _/ q / ` �t
\ CP � ► UL 1� / rr^)` q7� � t-u// DOE �`
��n � e -/o r voenf"� s rMc
-7) 4 ec d &t,5-/ W 'P-kv/- -ar 15-ey Ou/
0 z
�P/ o ,
a �� �/e ea Pew l�/� sa ��h P1
1n ux
� 00
-
za7iel 74e �zCG� SS y Oc[OJ
10
�1� r �a �M
/ d ►- K Sou to
Np ve. pmi e r lle a0O O
II LS
C; Y\ o,4fa LdaucC.l
� l
l� � rvlepw �-e ►^5 asso � �'��io � � a� re� �d
SuppOY 7� 1/// lGl De S� � C��CI ✓ 7rv9L? Gt /
CoM� ��jC d 7~A S C'oPo4i'Iil c7114-
Y'-O
71
Yled /- e r-�,
o
17 9
co
0
/ 17 7
/ 7 7D
qj
�'OY �� 6 0
17
/:75
s
YV
SEMB ^Y:76032M7 NOV 21 'UU 10:45 r.uz
SELZER, EALY, HEMPHILL & RLASDEL, LLP
" �lAat,(cLK+l7'MRp,JR�
ATTORNEYS AT LAW tHQ
;Koar k"X ms F6L7[SWz9=WM=I
auk
November 21, 2000
VIA FACSIMME714-871-5620 DECEOWE
D
NOV
Randy Friaad V1 2
Friend DMelopmemt-palm Springs,LLC
1235N.liarborBlvd PLANNING DIVISION
Sulto 200
Fullerton,CA 92832
Re. Earl Neel.Friend Development
Dear Randy:
This letter will confirm our telephone eonveMdon this afternoon. As you kaow,I
represent W.Earl L Neel. YOU have advised that Friend Development is in tbeprocess Ofapplying
to the city of Palm Springs for approval of an apartment complex on the Mumholland property,
whiob.is 4acem to)&.NeWs property.
If Friend Development will agLw to make the proposed access road over the
Mtmholland property to the Neel property a minimum of thirty(30)feet, and agree to dcfcr tiro
S30,000paymentreferencedbolow,Ivlr,Ncolwillfotmally support6w FrieadDevelopmaatpmjoct.
In order for that to occur,this letter agreement needs to be signed by both parties as OPSdoasly
as possible
As you know, Mr. Neel and the Neel Family Trust are parties t0 a Settlement
Agreement and Mutual Relcaso dated February 4, 1997 between the Neel iu=Tts,Donovan and
Cindy Taylor,Seymour Lazar and oftn AstemcnO. Pursuant to Article 3 of the
Settlement Agreement,Neel and Taylor ontheonebW and Lazar on the other hand agreed to share
equally In tlrc cost of conswWou of tht above referenced new access road and demolition of the
existing access road,provided that the m edmum liability forNeoncylor would be$30,000. You
have agreed,on behalf of Lazar andPAW IM-velopment,to defer the payment of said$30,000 wxtil
the demise of Mx.Neel so that the$30,000(or his share of it)can be paid by his estate rather than
him. W.Neel agrees to cause his estate to give Friead Development notice obis demise wltbin a
thirty day period from his demise. Again,Mr- Nee!is willing to support your project if you will
enter into this agreement.
A Y4
SELZER, BALY, E5MPAWU& BLASM
November 21, 200q
Page 2
Please note that I representtheNeel interests only. However,this Aentvvill be
binding on Friend Development and Neal upon execution,
If the above is acceptable,please sign when-indicated below,
very truly yours,
W.Curt Ealy
Selzer,My,Hemphill&Blasdel,LLP
WCE/sj
ABOQYYE AGREED TO AND ACCEFIED:
Earl-J.Neel
74!f�
Friend Development-Palm Springs,LLC,
a Califomia Limited Liability Company
By:Randy Friend,Matttging Member
� PA y 7
TOTAL P.03
iv; ptUP � UWtu
r � stis�E��s:3 c��rNb�-y�-�or�000
PLANNING DIVISION
ARNOLD BECKER, D.D.S.
l]entlatry 4955 Van Nuys Boulevard • Suite 518
Sherman Oaks, California 91403
4ovember 14,2000 (818) 783.8891
Douglas R. Evans
Director of Planning and Building
Planning Commission
City of Palm Springs
Mr, Evans,
I am a condominium owner in the Park South complex which is located at East Palm Canyon and Araby Dr.
The intention of this letter is to submit a written objection to the proposed construction of an apartment project
on a vacant parcel of land at the southeast comer of East Palm CanyoskDrive and Araby Drive which is adjacent
to the Park South complex. This proposed 104 unit apartment complex is too large a project for this area and
the negative environmental impact will alter the quality of the area.
I object to the variances that have been contemplated by the project application. These regulations are designed
to protect the neighborhood against an intrusion of traffic noise and general congestion. A reduction of parking
ry - lrements increases the density of the living quarters without providing adequate parking spaces. The
d_,equence of this will be an increase in the number of automobiles parking on the streets in the area. A
project of 104 units will mean an additional 100 plus cars in an already congested area.The reduction of the
rear yard setbacks and the special setbacks along East Palm Canyon Drive will cause undesired physical
intrusion on our condominiums.
The one-unit apartments are only 735 square feet. The multitude of these small units implies that the Friend
Development Palm Springs is attempting to saturate the area with short-term rental units.Their concern for
profit is far greater than their concern for the problems this high density,rapid turnover housing creates.
Our condominiums are one story and this project includes two story units. With the reduction of the setbacks,
this will cause a loss of privacy for us as well as an increase of noise.
One of the attractions of Palm Springs is the quiet and the serenity of the beautiful desert landscape. This
oversized housing project will jeopardize these values, In addition,there will be a negative impact on the
wildlife, the aesthetics and the overall quality of life. This project is a significant downgrade for this
neighborhood. Please consider disallowing this high-density project with its modifications and reductions
which will violate the regulations that were designed to protect the neighborhood.
�" :7Y � 't3, �r _
a o%
Ad Becker, D.D.S.
Araby Drive '
brings, CA 92264
anklin, Attorney at Law YO
ad SQQ N3NS39 Q-KNaV 849ZCBLBTB bb:L9 090Z/rT/TT
6796 Rolling Hills Drive
Riverside, CA 92505
19 November 2000
Mr. Douglas R. Evans
Director of Planning and Building
R O. Box 2743
Palm Springs
CA 92263-2743
Dear Mr. Evans:
Your"Notice of Planning Commission Meeting" on 22 November 2000, regarding
Conditional Use Permit No. 5.0843,Friend Development Palm Springs, LLC, Southeast
corner East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, causes me some considerable concern.
I am the owner of a condo at Villa Alegria(#20), 1833 Araby Drive, Palm Springs, and
desire that the Commission uphold the rules and regulations of the city of Palm Springs
and not permit the reduction in areas, as proposed (20% reduction in rear yard setback,
10% reduction in parking requirements, and, 20% reduction in setbacks along East Palm
Canyon Drive). A high density housing area, packed more tightly together, can only
have an adverse effect on the correct development of our city of Palm Springs.
I regret to see a 104-unit apartment project in as small an area of 4.97 acres in the first J
place, and to reduce areas as suggested will tend to produce an urban ghetto and is not in
harmony with good city planning. My wife and I, therefore, respectfully request that the
proposal to grant a Conditional Use Permit to Friend Development Palm Springs, LCC
for a 104-unit apartment project on a vacant 4.97 acre parcel at the southeast corner of
East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 25, be reconsidered and the
"Minor Modifications"denied, within the Ili ' s and interests of good planning, health
and appearance for our city of Palm Spri S.
Sincerely Y urs,
Kenneth Vine, PhD
cc. Kim Chafin RECEIVED
PLANNING DIVISION
4sAv9►
1F35 Arah�' DfI
Palm Springs CA[:R:ECEIVED
Liuuklas R. Ecans. Nov. 17. 2000.
of Planning and Buildingalln Spl'lllg- i �. `)226'-2 4D'VISION
ni, t>' ,.n -,h1(_''Ct1On to tile: 1)rOnaSe(J conditional use permit application
i 6 4.3 reque Led by Friend Deveiopnieni Palm Springs.LLC for a 104 unit
L�partrneni project at the southeast corner of East Palm Canvon Drive and
ilt 1� C. i�-j L.niie ;e'CtiGii 'l
i 1ia':e 31':"1'.'; t en unaUf the impression that the Planning
mtnisslculs lob `vas to be a watchdog in maintaining the Palm Springs City
t_,iuncil s standards of building etc in order to maintain in an orderly manner
the development and growth of beautiful Palm Springs.
Now however. this same Planning Commission is sympathetically
1 accarding to the language of the Public -Notice i entertaining a multiple
at lance application b'. the above mentioned compatly that is inimitable to
the principles to ':which Planning Commission is dedicated to uphold.
The proposal would jam into 4.97 acres 104 apartment units. In order
to get this high density a Minor Modification ishoTkrs sympathetic bias of a
i0`i reduction in parking requirements would have to be made plus a 20'%
reduction in rear yard setback requirements plus a 20" reduction from
special setbacks along East Palm Canyon Drive. All the ingredients for an
urban ghetto,.
ly objection therefore is that the Planning Commission would even
c()n�wer this proposal with all tts variances. The Commission is to uphold
st:lrldaroR not dentgrate them of course the deyelorers are i presume
intere;;ted ullh in profit and will get away with anything the Planning
(AfiltlliMoil « ill permit PLEASE CONTINUE TO UPHOLD THE STANDARDS
THAT HAVE MADE PALM SPRINGS THE BEAUTIFUL CITY/RESORT THAT IT
IS.
I'll:Inla 5mcerely,
Il
e
�/"��
January 30, 2001
<J
We want to personally take this opportunity to thank you for your support of
the appeal on Del Sol Apartments at the corner of Araby and Highway 111.
Our neighborhood is deeply concerned about losing the quality of life we
have in the Araby area. The issues of conceni were covered extensively by
the speakers, and we are counting on your continued support of this appeal.
Any variances in height, parking and set backs will present problems. We
are not concerned only about privacy. There will be an added danger
because of the traffic difficulty that already exists at that intersection.
hifusing more vehicles into that intersection will probably cause serious
accidents.
We especially applaud the courage of your convictions in supporting
those of our neighborhood.
Sincerely, y�
r--
FFd � . ✓tc � , Q
oa�P C4➢UN(C%
�leyls
rV
Dave & Sue Valentino
2265 Smokewood Avenue
Palm Springs, CA 92264
February 7, 2001
To The Palm Springs City Council:
We are residents the Araby Cove neighborhood who attended our first City
Council meeting last month concerning a proposed apartment complex to
be situated at Araby Drive and Highway 111. Let us make it clear that we
are not "no growth" proponents as was expressed by one of the council
persons. Both of us worked in the building industry for many years and
were even involved in the development of a gated community in La
Quinta. We do, however, have serious concerns regarding the development
of an apartment complex at the entrance to our neighborhood, especially
one with such high density. Certainly, any type of growth within the
valley will generate more traffic, but please look at this specific
intersection and realize that the traffic generated by 104 apartment units
would be overwhelming, The left turn pocket when traveling west is not
long enough, especially on a blind curve, and any back up of traffic on
Araby for apartment residents turning left into their complex is just an
accident waiting to happen.
Simply put, the high density plan as submitted is just not right for this
area. Fewer apartments, perhaps all single story, may be more compatible
within this neighborhood.
In closing, we are two residents who helped put ALL of the city council
members in office -- please don't disappoint us with a decision that goes
against what we feel so strongly about.
Sincerely,
February 7, 2001
Council Members : fir. Jones
Ms . Reller-Sprugin
Ms . Hodaes
My husband and I are residents on Araby Drive
and we thank-you for supporting us and all our neighbors
with regards to the proposed development of a 104 unit
apartment building near us .
We now urge you to continue to oppose this complex
as the revision made by the contractor gives no relief to
our concerns of traffic flow, congestion and appearance.
Again our thanks and we ask for your continued
support.
v
Neal and Janie Eastenson
1833 Araby Dr. , Palm Springs
Palm Springs City Council February 7, 2001
Palm Springs, California
Subject: Proposed Villa Del Sol Apartments
Council members:
It is my understanding that the proposed Villa Del Sol Apartments are going to be
brought before the City Council again tonight in essentially the same configuration with
only a few modest changes.
As I have previously stated, the entire project is an ill-conceived idea that would create an
unbelievable boondoggle in our neighborhood.
I urge you to reject this entire proposal outright. There is little need for me to reiterate the
many concerns I have as they are numerous and have been presented to your body
previously. However, I do wish to remind the Council that the 100 plus automobiles
trying to access Highway 111 from this site would be the worst traffic nightmare in the
Coachella Valley.
Z.erelyou J1l
Donald a Abel
2970 Araby Circle
Palm Springs, CA 92264
IRVING & PEGGY P. BECKER
1833 ARABY DRIVE #11
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264
760/320-2408
PPBPS@aol.com (e-mail)
February 7, 2001
To Whom It May Concern
Re: Villa Del Sol Apartments
We would like to voice our concern regarding the construction of the Villa Del Sol
Apartment's.
We are against this development because of the density of the area and because
there have already been severe traffic problems at the intersection of Araby Drive
and Palm Canyon Drive.
Araby Drive is a special area of Palm Springs and should be kept that way. It is a
quiet street that will be changed irrevocably if you allow the modifications and
changes that the builder wishes to make.
We are not against improvements and growth in our city but this development is
taking a backward step for the neighborhood.
We appreciate your support in denying any new plans that allow the same amount
of units, traffic flow, configuration and appearance and we thank you in advance
for listening to our concerns.
Sincerely,
IrvinABcker�
P ec er
II _
C.\- 6
� J
_ ��
Z-
I
li
jil
I
_ �� r
�, ,` ir• , , ,r.,
i '�1��` _
�y� 1� +�' .f ( �� / _ fps•�f f�m,+unf':C.r ' �r�f���jf ���k�^4tb�F��.J�V.�Cu..9� F
�� //%� , `
!f l
�' ] �...
,� C,.v ..
„� ,�;
�� ^
r
f( ��S
V'
/ �j
,�f1F �-�
� /
,�,
,.
{ W
2550 Araby Drive
Palm Springs , CA 92264
February 7 , 2001
Palm Springs City Council
Attn: Ms . Deyna Hodges , Mr. Jim Jones , Ms . Jeanne Reller-Spurgin
Re : Proposed Vista Del Sol Apartment Project
Case No. 5 . 0843
Dear City Council Members :
Thank you for supporting the appeal of this project . Please
continue to do so. The Araby Cove neighborhood of Palm Springs
depends upon your votes .
Sincerely,
r
David Levy
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
OVERRIDING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CASE NO. 5.0843, AN APPLICATION BY
FRIEND DEVELOPMENT PALM SPRINGS LLC FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A 104-
UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT ON A VACANT 4.97 NET ACRE PARCEL
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EAST PALM CANYON DRIVE AND
ARABY DRIVE, R-3 ZONE, SECTION 25.
WHEREAS, Friend Development Palm Springs LLC (the"Applicant") has filed an application with
the City pursuant to Sections 94,25.00 and 94.04.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for the development
of a two-story, 104-unit apartment project on a 4.97 net acre parcel located at the southeast corner
of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 25; and
WHEREAS, a notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to
consider Applicant's application for Case No. 5.0843 was given in accordance with applicable law;
and
WHEREAS, on November 22, 2000 and continued to December 13, 2000, a public hearing on the
application for Case No. 5.0843 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with
applicable law; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of its public hearing on December 13, 2000, the Planning
Commission recommended approval of the project 5-0 (2 absent), subject to the conditions
contained in Resolution No. 4725; and
WHEREAS, an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Case No. 5.0843 was filed in a
timely mannerwith the City Clerk's office by Scott Kennedy on behalf of Joe V. Kennedy and Arnold
Becker (the "Appellant"); and
WHEREAS, a notice of a public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider
the appeal to the Planning Commission's approval of Case No. 5.0843 was given in accordance
with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on January 17, 2001, a public hearing on the appeal to the decision of the Planning
Commission's approval of Case No. 5.0843 was held by the City Council in accordance with
applicable law; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of its public hearing on January 17, 2001,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 meeting of February 7, 2001; and
WHEREAS, on February 7, 2001, the Resolution of Denial wasconsidered by the City Council in
Page 2 of 5
Case No. 5.0843
Resolution No.
accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Conditional Use Permit(Case No. 5.0843) is categorically exempt from
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)pursuant to Section 15332(In-fill
Development Projects); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has previously reviewed and considered all of the evidence
presented in connection with the hearing on the project and 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 and all written and oral testimony presented.
THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council finds as follows:
This Conditional Use Permit is categorically exempt from environmental assessment
pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that
Section 15332 states that in-fill development projects are exempt from CEQA.
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 92.25.00,94.02.00 AND 94.04.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, the
City Council finds that:
a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which
a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by the City's Zoning Ordinance. However, the proposed site
plan and architecture is not adequate as described below.
The purpose of Section 94.02.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, Conditional Use Permit, is to
evaluate land use proposals with respectto community and neighborhood issues, including
land use intensity, density, traffic, special locational requirements, the effect that the
proposed land use will have on property values, health, safety and welfare in the
neighborhood in which the proposed use is located. In this instance, based upon a review
of the application, plans and public hearing testimony, the City Council finds that the
proposed 104-unit apartment complex is not an appropriate intensity of land use on this
specific site.
In addition to a Conditional Use Permit, the property is subject to Section 94.04.00 of the
Zoning Ordinance, Architectural Review. This section requires that each multi-family
residential project be subject to Architectural Approval review and that the purpose of this
section is to ensure site plan and architectural compatibility as new development projects
are proposed. Conformance with this section is based upon consideration of site layout,
orientations, location of structures, harmonious relationship with existing and adjoining
developments, evaluate maximum height, building setbacks and overall mass of proposed
buildings and overall building design. The City Council finds that the development of 104
apartment units with eight buildings in a linear alignment is not consistent with community
design standards. The building mass,site layout, building orientation, building setbacks and
44a 8 2
Page 3 of 5
Case No. 5.0843
Resolution No.
overall project density overwhelm the site and cause an adverse effect on the neighboring
single-story residential condominium development.
Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, multi-family dwellings are permitted in the Resort Overlay
Zone only by Conditional Use Permit, such permit subject to Planning Commission findings
that the proposed use is compatible with its surroundings and that the site in question is not
appropriate for other uses allowed by right within the underlying zone. The purpose of the
Resort Overlay Zone is to ensure neighborhood compatibility and adequate opportunities
fortourism. Due to the irregular configuration of the subject property, long and narrow,while
the proposed apartment use is desirable, the density is not appropriate. As proposed, the
project is almost 21 units per acre and impacts the neighboring single-story low density
residential development where the appellants own residential dwelling units.
b. The design and improvements of the proposed apartment project is not consistent with
the General Plan. The site plan negatively impacts the adjacent single-story residential
condominiums located immediately adjacent to the subject property.
The proposed Conditional Use Permitwould allow for a 104-unit apartment project on a 4.97
net acre parcel located at the southeast corner of East Palm Canyon Drive and Araby Drive.
The application, as proposed, is permitted pursuant to Section 92.25.00 of the Zoning
Ordinance, which requires that all multiple-family dwellings shall be permitted only by
Conditional Use Permit, such permit subject to making findings that the proposed use is
compatible with its surroundings and that the site in question is not appropriate for other
uses allowed by right within the underlying zone.
The subject property is designated as H43/21 (High Density Residential) on the City's
General Plan Land Use Map and R-3(Multiple-family Residential and Hotel Zone) pursuant
to the Zoning Map. The site has frontage along East Palm Canyon Drive, a scenic corridor,
and Araby Drive. Policy 3.8.1.e. of the High Density Residential category of the General
Plan requires that the design of new residential and hotel development include protection
of privacy and view for adjacent single-family structures with increased setbacks to the
second-story mass. Development of the proposed two-story apartment buildings would not
be compatible with the adjacent existing single-story condominium development and would
result in a substantial loss of privacy and view due to the fact that the proposed project's
second-story windows and balconies would face the existing single-story multi-family
condominium development. A review of evidence presented at the public hearing shows
that if the apartments are constructed as proposed, individuals standing on balconies or
looking out windows will view directly into the windows of the existing single-story
condominium units. Additionally, the design, location and configuration of the proposed
apartment units,especially Buildings 5 and 6,would create a visual barrier and block almost
all views to the north.
While the High Density Residential category of the General Plan allows for a threshold of
15 units per acre and a maximum of 21 units per acre, the Page 1-29 of the General Plan
Page 4 of 5
Case No. 5,0843
Resolution No.
points out that, "The density ranges established forthe Low-, Medium-, Medium-High and
High-Density residential categories are not meant as "minimums" and "maximums". The
lower "threshold" figure for each of these categories represents a "guaranteed" density,
provided all other required conditions can be met, and the higher figure represents a
potential maximum that could be located in each area if certain criteria are met, reviewed
on a project-by-project basis. In other words, the density allocation for any projects starts
at the low end, and if a higher density is desired, the proposed development must
demonstrate qualities above the minimum development standards to achieve a higher
density." The proposed development cannot meet all development standards of the zone
without approval of Administrative Minor Modifications for a reduction in setbacks from East
Palm Canyon, reduction in rear yard setbacks and reduction in parking requirements. The
proposed development comprised of 20.92 units per acre would not be compatible with the
lower density of the adjacent existing multi-family condominium development.
The City Council received substantial public opposition to traffic which would be generated
by the project, noting that the existing traffic signal at the intersection of East Palm Canyon
Drive and Araby Drive needs to be upgraded and the proposed main entry to the project is
located very close to East Palm Canyon and could result in inadequate stacking and turning
movements at the subject intersection.
Section 93,01.02 of the Zoning Ordinance, Special Setbacks, requires that the building
setback line on the north and south sides of the street be 125 feet from centerline of East
Palm Canyon Drive between Sunrise Way and Golf Club Drive. Due to the long and narrow
irregular shape of the lot and the need for a private access road to the existing commercial
property to the east, the proposed site plan utilizes a 125-foot setback from the centerline
to the carport structure located immediatelywest of the main entry gate, but moving easterly
from that point, the proposed site plan reflects a 110-foot setback. Thus, the proposed
development cannot meet the special setback requirements. The project density, building
design and site plan do not adequately respond to the specific site conditions and the
resulting project is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood development patterns.
Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, Off-street parking, requires a total of 170 parking
spaces for the project, based upon the unit count and number of bedrooms per unit
specified under this application. The proposed site plan indicates a total of 154 parking
spaces within the gated portion of the project, 104 of which will be covered by carports and
an additional 40 parking spaces outside the gated portion of the project on the south side
of the private access road. The total number of parking spaces to be provided within the
gated portion of the project is 10% less than the code requires for the entire project. Thus,
the proposed development cannot meet the parking requirements .
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does not consider the proposed 104-
unit apartment complex appropriate for the subject property due to project density, site design,
setbacks and building massing. The City Council is willing to reconsider its action if the project is
redesigned to address the concerns raised herein, including density, site design, setbacks and
as a Y
Page 5 of 5
Case No. 5.0843
Resolution No.
building massing and hereby overrules the Planning Commission action and hereby denies without
prejudice Case 5.0843.
ADOPTED this day of 12001.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
City Clerk City Manager
REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM: /1T1
as a�