The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7/25/2007 - STAFF REPORTS - 1.D. Jay Thompson ' From: Edward Robertson •> p; r• '. Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 10:49 AM 2�O? JUL LJ J To: David Ready; Jay Thompson Cc: Tom.Wilson@palmsprings-ca.gov; Ken Lyon Subject: Hank Gordon Good morning David/Jay Staff is in receipt of Hank Gordon's request to continue Case No. 5.1104—General Plan Amendment for 30 days. The request has been reviewed, and we are in support of the request. Please let me know of any further clarifications or questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Edward D. Robertson Principal planner City of Palm Springs, Planning Department 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 Tel: (760) 323-8245 Fax:(760) 322-8360 Edward_Robertson@palmsprings,-ca.gov 7/23/2007 Jay Thompson =" From: David Ready Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 5-14 PM �LW To: Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Request for GPA Section 14 Say, For finalization of the agenda.....request from applicant. fyi DAVID H. READY, Esq., Ph.D. r_ CITY MANAGER City of Palm Springs Tel: (760)322-8350 3200 E.Tahqutz Canyon Way Fax: (760)323-5207 Palm Springs, CA 92262 TDD: (760)864-9527 www.palmsprings-ca.gov Dav_id,Readydpalmsprings=cca.r ov From: Hank Gordon [mailto:hgordon@Iaurichproperties.comJ Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 5:03 PM To: Craig Ewing (E-mail); david.ready@palmsprings-ca,gov Cc: Dave Baron (E-mail) Subject: Request for GPA Section 14 Craig/David: I respectfully request that the Agenda item for the City Council meeting of July 25 be continued for 30 days to allow me the opportunity to obtain a reconsideration of the Tribe's Planning Commission's position on this issue. Thank you Hank Gordon a7��5/aao7 7/23/2007 �p,pALM SA'N 41 � N � hFa�btn+w fie' rgi►pasNNp CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 25, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: CASE #>t 5.1104 A REQUEST FROM LAURICH PROPERTIES FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH DRIVE-THROUGH TELLER FACILITIES AND DRUG STORE/PHARMACIES WITH PRESCRIPTION PICK-UP WINDOWS BE PERMITTED IN THE RESORT/ATTRACTION (RA) ZONE SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Department of Planning Services SUMMARY Launch Properties has submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to the Section 14 Specific Plan to allow financial institutions with drive-through teller facilities and drug store/pharmacies with prescription pick-up windows in the Resort/Attraction (RA) zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). On May 23, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the matter and recommended denial of the request. General Plan Amendments require action by the City Council at a noticed public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TO DENY CASE NO, 5.1104 A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST TO ALLOW FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH DRIVE- THROUGH TELLER FACILITIES AND DRUG STORE / PHARMACIES WITH PRESCRIPTION PICK-UP WINDOWS AS A PERMITTED USE WITH A CUP IN THE RESORT-ATTRACTION (RA) LAND USE AREA OF SECTION 14." PRIOR ACTIONS: On April 3, 2006 the Indian Planning Commission (IPC) reviewed a pre-application for a project that included a drive-through pharmacy and unanimously agreed that "the use of ITEM NO, IQ City Council Staff Report July 25, 2007-- Page 2 Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment a drive-thru would not be supported at this location..." Copy of the April 3, 2006 Tribal Staff memo to City Staff is attached. On July 18, 2006 the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians reviewed Case 5.1104 regarding drive-through facilities in the Resort Attraction (RA) zone of Section 14, and recommended denial of the request. Copy of the July 26, 2006 letter from the Tribe to the City is attached. On May 23, 2007 at a publicly noticed hearing, the Planning Commission voted 7-0-0 to recommend the City Council deny the requested General Plan Amendment to the Section 14 Specific Plan. STAFF ANALYSIS: Section 6.1.2 of the Section 14 Specific Plan lists permitted and prohibited uses in the Resort-Attraction (RA) land use designation. Drive-through / drive-in facilities are listed as a prohibited use in the RA zone. The applicant's request would amend the Plan to distinguish some drive-through uses from others: specifically banks and pharmacies would be allowed by CUP and all other types would remain prohibited. In order to evaluate the request staff reviewed the underlying rational and purpose of the Section 14 Plan and its RA zone. The Section 14 Specific Plan establishes detailed standards, design guidelines and land use designations to regulate development in Section 14. The Plan identifies Section 14 as one of the most important locations for resort, recreation and entertainment activities and development in the City of Palm Springs. The Specific Plan emphasizes a form of development that is walkable, pedestrian-oriented and visitor-friendly. The Resort-Attraction land use area in Section 14 is intended for development of large-scale, resort hotels and entertainment complexes that enhance the visitor experience. Staff notes that drive-through facilities are permitted in Section 14, but only in neighborhood-serving retail and commercial use areas The attached Planning Commission Staff Report provides additional information on the analysis of the Section 14 Specific Plan as it relates to drive-through uses. The Specific Plan does not currently identify or define different types of drive-through uses. Staff believes that to permit even limited drive-through facilities outside the specific zones where they currently allowed by the Specific Plan would be inconsistent with the pedestrian-oriented goals and visitor/resort-focused type of development that the policies of the Section 14 Specific Plan describe. The Planning Commission, in considering this item noted that the request had been heard twice by the Tribe, both at Tribal Planning Commission and Tribal Council and it 000002 i i i i City Council Staff Report July 25, 2007— Page 3 i Case 5.1104 General plan Amendment i was not recommended for approval by either Tribal body. It was also identified that drive-through facilities were discussed on several occasions by the General Plan Steering Committee as that body worked on the update of the Palm Springs General Plan. The committee considered drive-throughs to be undesirable, especially in the resort entertainment district of the City that is comprised of Section 14. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal 'mpacL for92q,A,. E-<Ving, A P Thomas Wils Direc or of Plannin Servi Assistant City Manager David H. Ready, City ana e Attachments, Draft City Council Resolution Planning Commission Resolution Planning Commission minutes of May 23, 2007 (excerpts) Planning Commission staff report dated May 23, 2007 with attachments Letters from Applicant of March 17, 2006 and November 16, 2006 © u � 00 z RESOLUTION NO. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA TO DENY CASE NO. 5.1104 A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST TO ALLOW FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH DRIVE-THROUGH TELLER FACILITIES AND DRUG STORE / PHARMACIES WITH PRESCRIPTION PICK-UP WINDOWS AS A PERMITTED USE WITH A CUP IN THE RESORT- ATTRACTION (RA) LAND USE AREA OF SECTION 14 . WHEREAS, State law authorizes local government with certified General Plans to prepare and adopt Specific Plans, and WHEREAS, the Section 14 Specific Plan was created in 2004 to provide a dynamic and comprehensive vision and guiding document for development in Section 14 as a vibrant destination resorUtourist location within the City of Palm Springs, and WHEREAS; on November 2, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution #20866 following referendum Measure U, a special election in which the citizens of the City of Palm Springs voted to adopt the Section 14 Specific Plan ("the Plan"), and WHEREAS, Chapter 1.5 of the Plan defines the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and states. The Specific Plan, once it is approved, will replace the zoning for the area unless otherwise noted, including land uses permitted, the amount of development permitted, and standards for that development. Secondarily, it defines the character and form of the development on the site through a series of design guidelines. The specific Plan serves as a supplement to existing City regulations. Specific Plan regulations supersede other regulations. And In the event of a conflict between the requirements contained in this Specific Plan and the underlying zone designations for the property in question, the Specific Plan shall prevail.; and WHEREAS, Chapter 9.1.4 of the Plan states- Amendments to the Specific Plan require review and approval by the Palm Springs Planning Commission and the City Council, final approval rests with the Tribal Council-", and 009C10i City Council Resolution July 25,2007 5 1104-GPA Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, Chapter 6.1.2 of the Section 14 Specific Plan lists drive-through f drive-in facilities as a prohibited use in the Resort-Attraction (RA) land use zone.- and WHEREAS, Chapter Four. "Features of the Specific Plan" states; Section 4.1.1: "Integrate a mixture of fun and exciting retail restaurant, entertainment, and office uses... that creates a strong and attractive pedestrian place". "Transform Tahquitz into the main activity spine of the resort, shopping and entertainment district." Chapter 4.2: Consolidated Projects. "These designations are intended to encourage coordinated development on a number of parcels that have been consolidated into a larger site." "The Catalyst projects are the most critical to Section 14." "...catalyst projects would serve as signature attractions that are intended to foster further high-quality and compatible development, knit together existing development, and most importantly, serve as models of bold, new visual image for Section 14." "Visitors would have the option of arriving at their hotel from the airport by shuttle, then partaking of the diverse attractions, shopping and entertainment venues in Section 14 and downtown...without needing a car." "Transformation of the public right-of-way on Tahquitz Canyon Way into a dynamic recreation and cultural boulevard." "The current standards, established by the (Palm Springs) General Plan, generally overemphasize an automobile-oriented design, which hinders achievement of a more balanced vision for the area_" and WHEREAS; on March 17, 2006 Mr. Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) in reference to the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way to exempt drug stores that have a prescription pick up window and banks that have a drive- through teller facility from Prohibitive Uses in the Specialty Retail-Entertainment- Office (SREO) zone, and u000f"5 I i I City Council Resolution July 25,2007 5.1104-GPA Page 3 of 5 WHEREAS on April 3, 2006 the Indian Planning Commission (IPC) reviewed a pre-application for a proposed commercial center at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way that included offices and a stand-alone pharmacy / drug store with drive-through facilities and voted unanimously that, "the use of a drive-thru would not be supported at this location...", and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2006 the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians reviewed Case No. 5.1104 including a request to amend the Section 14 Specific Plan to allow drive-throughs, and recommended denial of the request, and WHEREAS, on November 16, 2006, Mr. Gordon submitted a letter referencing the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way, amending his initial request and petitioning for the following: ■ Allow drive-through windows at drug stores and banks with a Conditional Use Permit in the Resort-Attraction (RA) zone and • Allow General Retail Uses with a Conditional Use Permit in the Resort — Attraction (RA) zone. (The applicant subsequently deleted this from his request at the Planning Commission meeting of May 23, 2007). And WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider the application for Case No. 5.1104 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, at said meeting of May 23, 2007, during a public meeting held in the prescribed manner, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with Case 5.1104, including, but not limited to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented and voted to deny the case; and WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider Case No. 5,1104 was given In accordance with applicable law, and WHEREAS on July 25, 2007, a public hearing on Case No. 5.1104 was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law, at which hearing the Council 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 OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Pursuant to the Section 14 Specific Plan; 0 Ono 0R City Council Resolution July 25,2007 5.1104-GPA Page 4 of 5 a. That allowing drive-through facilities at banks and drug store / pharmacies in the Resort Attraction (RA) land use zone with a CUP would be inconsistent with the Section 14 Specific Plan because the vision, goals, standards and regulations for development in Section 14 emphasize non-vehicular and pedestrian-oriented in scale, character and features- b. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive-throughs with a CUP would be inconsistent with the type of development permitted in the Resort-Attraction zone of the Specific Plan and not reflective of the integrated entertainment / retail definition of this zone. c. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive-through facilities with a CUP in Catalyst Zones of the Resort- Attraction land use area would be inconsistent with the intent of the creation of Catalyst Zones because these zones were created to promote large scale, bold, and visionary consolidated development projects of a tourist/resort nature, and stand-alone drug store / pharmacies with drive-through facilities would not be reflective of the scale and character of development desired for Catalyst Zones. d. That allowing drug stores / pharmacies with drive-through facilities with a CUP at the parcel referenced in the applicant's request letter on the southwest corner of Sunrise Way and Tahquitz Canyon Way is inconsistent with the Specific Plan guidelines for that parcel because the policies, incentives and vision identified in Chapter 8 "Consolidated Development": Catalyst Area B, Sub-area 2 (of which this parcel is a part) encourages "an integrated Family Entertainment and Recreation Complex with resort and high-density residential uses linked together with pedestrian pathways" — not drive-through drug store / pharmacy uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby denies Case No. 5.1104 General Plan Amendment. ADOPTED this th day of 2007. David H., Ready, City Manager ATTEST: James Thompson, City Clerk ©00 `l0 t i City Council Resolution July 25,2007 51104.GPA Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS ) I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Resolution No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on by the following vote- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California a�oao� RESOLUTION NO, 7007 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA TO DENY CASE NO. 5.1104 A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST TO: (1) ALLOW FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH DRIVE-THROUGH TELLER FACILITIES AND DRUG STORE / PHARMACIES WITH PRESCRIPTION PICK-UP WINDOWS AS A PERMITTED USE WITH A CUP IN THE RESORT-ATTRACTION (RA) LAND USE AREA OF SECTION 14 . WHEREAS, the Section 14 Specfc Plan was created in 2004 to provide a dynamic and comprehensive vision and guiding document for development in Section 14 as a vibrant destination resort/tourist location within the City of Palm Springs, and WHEREAS; on November 2, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution #20866 following referendum Measure U, a special election in which the citizens of the City of Palm Springs voted to adopt the Section 14 Specific Plan ("the Plan"), and WHEREAS, Chapter 9.1.4 of the Plan states that amendments to the Specific Plan require review and approval by the Palm Springs, Planning Commission and the City Council; with final approval resting with the Tribal Council, and WHEREAS, Chapter 6.1.2 of the Section 14 Specific Plan lists drive-through / drive-in facilities as a prohibited use in the Resort-Attraction (RA) land use zone. WHEREAS; on March 17, 2006 Mr. Hank Gordon of Launch Properties submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to exempt drug stores that have a prescription pick up window and banks that have a drive-through teller facility from Prohibitive Uses in the Specialty Retail-Entertainment-Office (SREO)zone, and WHEREAS on April 3, 2006 the Indian Planning Commission (IPC) reviewed a pre-application for a proposed commercial center at the southwest comer of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way that included offices and a stand-alone pharmacy / drug store with drive-through facilities and voted unanimously that, "the use of a drive-thru would not be supported at this location... and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2006 the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians reviewed Case #5.1104 including a request to amend the Section 14 Specific Plan to allow drive-throughs, and recommended denial of the request, and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider the application for Case#5.1104 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2007, a public hearing on Case #5.1104 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law, at which hearing the Commission 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. Planning commission Resolution May 23,2007 5 1104-GPA Page 2 of 2. 1 THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Pursuant to the Section 14 Specific Plan, a. That the General Plan Amendment (GPA) requesting drive-through facilities at banks and drug store / pharmacies in the Resort Attraction (RA) land use zone with a CUP would be inconsistent with the Section 14 Specific Plan because the vision, goals, standards and regulations for development in Section 14 emphasize non-vehicular and pedestrian-oriented in scale, character and features. b. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive-throughs with a CUP would be inconsistent with the type of development allowed in the Resort-Attraction zone of the Specific Plan because stand-alone retail facilities are not reflective of the integrated entertainment/ retail definition of this zone. c. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive-through facilities with a CUP in Catalyst zones of the Resort-Attraction land use area would be inconsistent with the intent of the creation of Catalyst Zones because these zones were created to promote large scale, bold, and visionary consolidated development projects of a tourist/resort nature, and stand-alone drug store / pharmacies with drive-through facilities would not be reflective of the scale and character of development desired for Catalyst Zones. d. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive-through facilities with a CUP at the parcel on the southwest comer of Sunrise Way and Tahquitz Canyon Way is inconsistent with the Specific Plan because the policies, incentives and vision identified in Chapter 8 "Consolidated Development": Catalyst Area B, Sub-area 2 (of which this site is a part) encourages "an integrated Family Entertainment and Recreation Complex with resort and high-density residential uses linked together with pedestrian pathways" — not drive-through drug store / pharmacy uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby denies Case#5.1104 General Plan Amendment_ ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2007. AYES: 7, Caffery, Ringlein, Marantz, Hochanadel, Cohen, Hutcheson, Scott NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA I fg ing,AlPq Direct6ir of Planni g ervices n!illfl7 fi CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 23, 2007 Council Chamber, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 1:34 p.m_ ROLL CALL: Present Present Year: FY 2006/2007 This Meeting: to Date: Excused Absences: Chair Marantz X 24 1 Vice Chair Hochanadel X 24 1 Cohen X 21 4 Ringlein X 21 4 Hutcheson X 23 2 Caffery X 19 3 Scott X 19 3 REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: The agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board (west side of Council Chamber) and the Planning Services counter by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, May 18, 2007. Craig A. Ewing noted a request for a continuance was received for Item 3 - Case 32999 SFR 17.1215 AMM. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS: (Three minute time limit.) Chair Marantz opened Public Comments. -Earl Rose, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; voiced concern with the scale and density of the project, as well as the balcony views infringing on the neighbors privacy. -Bill Byrne, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; concemed with the 2-story height. -Marjorie Conley Aikens, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; concerned with the percentages stated for the 2-story homes in surrounding area. flfinni i City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 23,2007 -Maureen Guinan, on behalf of the applicant, regarding Item 3, requested a continuance or approval of the project- -Beatrice Dunn, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; concerned with the mass. -Daniel Hogan, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; voiced concern with the height, size and privacy issues. -Steven Van, applicant for Item 3, stated the property is small on a 4200 square foot lot and requested a continuance for this project. -Tom Warrick, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; concerned with the height. -Dan Valentino, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; reiterated concern with the hillside status given to this parcel of land. -John Harrell, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3; provided details using an aerial photograph of the proposed parcel- -Franklin Burns, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of Item 3, stated this project does not fit into the general character of the La Mesa neighborhood. -Dana Stewart and James McKinley, Palm Springs, spoke in apposition of Item 8; voiced concern with the health and safety hazards of the windmills. There being no further comments, Public Comment was closed. CONSENT CALENDAR: Commissioner Hutcheson noted his abstention on Item 2B. Chair Marantz noted her abstention on Item 2B. M/S/C (Scott/Cohen, 7-0) To approve, as apart of the Consent Agenda. (Noting Commissioner Hutcheson's abstention on Item 2B and Chair Marantz's abstention on Item 2B.) 2A. Draft Minutes of April 11, 2007 Approved, as part of the Consent Agenda. 2B_ Case 5A046 PD 232 / TTM 33341 - An application by Greg Trousdell on behalf of Aqua Palm Springs, LLC, requesting a one-year time extension for Final Planned Development 232 for the re-subdivision of 24 acres and construction of 156 condominiums located at 2705 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Zone P, Section 13. (Project Planner: Bryan Fernandez, Assistant Planner) (Noting Commissioner Hutcheson's and Chair Marantz's abstention.) Approved, as part of the Consent Agenda. a 121 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 23, 2007 MISCELLANEOUS 3. Case 3.2999 SFR 17.1215 AMM - An application by Steven Van to construct an approximate 6,355 square foot single family residence, with an increase of building height to 26', located at 350 El Portal Zone R-1-0 Section 27. (Planner Christopher Ison, Planning Technician) Commissioner Caffery noted his abstention and would not be participating in the discussion and vote. He left the Council Chamber 2:08 p.m. The Commission and staff discussed the request for a continuance_ Commissioner Hutcheson requested the applicant state his intent for a continuance. Mr. Steven Van responded his intent is to appease the entire neighborhood and plans to proceed with a 2-story home_ Commissioner Hutcheson stated he is not in favor of this project. He noted that the Commission has previously heard a lot of public testimony and feels an obligation to protect the character of the neighborhood. M/SIC (Hutcheson/Scott, 6-0, 1 abstained/ Caffery) To deny, Case No, 32999 SFR and 7.1215 AMM, Craig A. Ewing noted this action may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with city regulations. Commissioner Caffery re-entered the Council Chamber at 2:13 p.m. 4. Case 3.2941 MAJ 15.1103 CUP - An application by Palm Springs Modem Homes VI, LLC, to amend the existing architectural approval to replace the approved carport trellis with a fabric sail located at 2855 North Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-3, Section 3. (Project Planner: Christopher Ison, Planning Technician) Chair Marantz noted her abstention and would not be participating in the discussion and vote. She left the Council Chamber at 2:14 p.m. Commissioner Hutcheson noted his abstention and would not be participating in the discussion and vote. He left the Council Chamber at 2:14 p.m. Christopher Ison, Planning Technician, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated May 23, 2007. 3 060-013 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Mimutes of May 23, 2007 James Cioffi, architect, submitted a sample of the proposed material and provided additional details. His noted his preference for the material is white but is willing to change the color, if the Commission so desires. The consensus of the Commission is a neutral desert color. M/S/C (Caffery) To approve for the shade sail around the pool and carport areas; color to be determined by the architect. MOTION WAS LOST DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. M/S/C (Ringlein/Cohen, 4-1/Caffery), 2 abstained/Hutcheson/ Chair Marantz) To approve, the shade sail around the pool area cabanas and carports, as amended: *Neutral color to blend-in harmoniously with the environment. Chair Marantz and Commissioner Hutcheson re-entered the Council Chamber 2:25 p.m. S. Appointment of Alternate Member of the Architectural Advisory Committee - Paul Ortega. Craig A. Ewing provided details on the nomination of a Landscape Architect for an Alternate Member of the Architectural Advisory Committee, M/S/C (Caffery/Hutcheson, 7-0) To appoint, Paul Ortega as Alternate Member to the Architectural Advisory Committee. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6. Case 5.1104 GPA - An application by Hank Gordon on behalf of Launch Properties, Inc., for a General Plan Amendment to the Section 14 Specific Plan to allow drive-through uses and "General Retail Uses" as a permitted use subject to a Conditional Use Permit in the Resort Attraction (RA) zone located on the southwest comer of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way. (Project Planner: Ken Lyon, Associate Planner) Ken Lyon, Associate Planner, stated the applicant has asked that the "General Retail Uses" request be dropped from consideration so that the only matter before the Commission today is the request for a General Plan Amendment to allow drive-through uses. Mr. Lyon provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated May 23, 2007. 4 OGU�1� City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 23,2007 Chair Marantz opened the Public Hearing- -Hank Gordan, applicant, addressed a discrepancy with the memorandum from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians dated April 3, 2006. -Wesley Cole, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of drive-throughs. -Hank Gordan, applicant rebuttal, stated all the new pharmacies in the city provide drive through prescription pick-up windows for convenience, There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Scott requested staff confirm the tribe's denial of the application, Staff responded that it has been heard both by the Tribal Planning Commission and the Tribal Council and bath entities recommend denial. Commissioner Ringlein commented that as a member of General Plan Steering Committee, the neighborhood representatives reviewed the Section 14 Plan and the consensus was that drive throughs are undesirable in the community. M/S/C (Caffery/Ringlein, 7-0) To deny, Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment. 7. Case 5.1139 CUP / 5.1140 CZ - An application by Spencer Recovery Center, Inc. for a Change of Zane from C-1 to R-3 and a Conditional Use Permit to allow an assisted living center/substance abuse treatment center located at the Las Palmas Hotel, 1404 North Palm Canyon Drive, Zone C- 1, Section 10, APN: 505-184-011. (Project Planner: Ken Lyon, Associate Planner) Commissioner Hutcheson stated his abstention on Item 7 and Item 8 and would not participating in the discussion and vote. He left the Council Chamber at 2:45 p.m. Ken Lyon, Associate Planner, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated on May 23, 2007. Mr. Lyon reported two letters of opposition were received. Chair Marantz opened the Public Hearing. -Gerald Douglas, Palm Springs, stated concern with the type of visitors coming to the residential area. -Samuel Baek, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project, concerned with increased drug and criminal activity in the neighborhood. -Casey Lesher, Palm Springs, spoke in favor of the treatment center. 5 000015 ' City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 23, 2007 i -Donna King, Palm Springs, commented she is a drug & alcohol counselor and is very familiar the treatment center; spoke in favor of the project. -James Bonghecht, spoke in favor of the project; stated he is a recovering alcoholic addict and people who are using drugs do not visit patients in treatment centers. -Gabe Hynes, Dana Point, addressed the concerns and reiterated that people who come to treatment centers are people who want help. There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Caftery noted a concern with this type of usage in the downtown area and could not support the project. Commissioner Ringlein commented she would like to hear how these treatment centers have worked in other communities. M/S/C (Ringlein) To continue, refer applicant to bring back references from communities where current business is conducted. MOTION WAS LOST DUE TO A LACK OF A SECOND. M/S/C (Caffery/Vice Chair Hochanadel, 4-2/Cohen/ Ringlein), 1 abstained/ Hutcheson) To deny, Case 5.1139 Conditional Use Permit and Case 5.1140 Change of Zone. Craig A. Ewing stated this action is subject to appeal to the City Council in accordance with city regulations. A recess was taken at 3:20 p.m. The meeting resumed at 3:30 p.m. 8. Case 5.1115 CUP / 6.493 VAR - An application by Dillon Wind LLC, for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the development of five 1-megawatt wind energy conversion systems (WECS) in Area 5. The application also includes a Variance application to exceed the 300 foot commercial WECS height limit. Area 5 is located within the limits of the City of Palm Springs approximately 6,000 feet west of Indian Avenue and 2000 feet north of 1-10. (Project Planner: Edward Robertson, Principal Planner) Commissioner Hutcheson previously noted his abstention and would not be participating in the discussion and vote. He left the Council Chamber at 2:45 p.m. Commissioner Cohen noted a business related conflict of interest and would be abstaining from the discussion and vote. He left the Council Chamber at 3:35 p.m. 6 G000ie City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 23, 2007 Edward Robertson, Principal Planner, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated May 23, 2007_ He stated that Riverside County is the C.E.Q.A lead agency for this project's Environmental Impact Report. Commissioner Scott requested staff address the land use for the adjacent properties. Staff responded that the surrounding uses are zoned industrial or manufacturing industrial. Chair Marantz opened the Public Hearing- -Andy Liehan, Portland Oregan, Director of Wind Energy Permitting for PPM Energy, provided additional information using a Power Point presentation outlining the benefits against climate change, project vicinity, energy industrial zone, existing wind turbines, and community involvement, -Ed Torres, president of the Palm Springs Economic Development Corporation, stated the PSEDC reviewed the project and recommends approval. -Fredrick Noble, on behalf of Desert Wind Association and Wind Tech Energy, provided additional information regarding the replacement of older windmills and a bird study conducted in 1999 and 2000. There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed, The Commission discussed the size of the new turbines and energy production in comparison to the existing turbines, long-term utility rates using renewable energy and the neighborhood meeting. M/S/C (Caffery/Scott, 4-1Nice Chair Hochanadel), 2 abstained/Cohen/ Hutcheson) To adopt the Final Environmental Report, and approve Case 5.1115 Conditional Use Permit and Case 6.493 Variance. Commissioner Hutcheson and Commissioner Cohen re-entered the Council Chamber at 3-57 p.m. 9. Case 5.1132 PD 333 / 3.3002 MAJ / TTM 35236 - An application by Loft Partners Palm Springs, LLC., to construct a 200 room hotel, 143 condominiums and a parking structure on 10.47 acres located at the northwest comer of Amado Road and Avenida Caballeros, Zone R4 & RGA- S, Section 14 (IL). (Project Planner: Edward Robertson, Principal Planner) Craig A, Ewing, Director of Planning Services, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated May 23, 2007. Mr. Ewing noted three letters of opposition were received. ©a�.0 017 I City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 23,2007 it Chair Marantz opened the Public Hearing- -Laurie Kibbey, representing The Loft Partners, provided additional details using a Power Point presentation relating to community outreach, vision objectives, project description and amenities. -Ed Torres, president of Palm Springs Economic Development Corp., stated the board of directors approved the project with 2 stipulations: a review of the site lines affecting neighboring properties and consideration of neighborhood commercial on Avenida Caballeros parking side. -Candace Casey, California Development Enterprises spoke in favor of the project and urged approval. -Brian Harnik, on behalf of Alejo Caballeros LLC, stated a discrepancy with the review period for the environmental document; concerned with the impact to the Alejo Caballeros project and requested a continuance. -John Weisner, Palm Springs, not opposed to the project but concerned with the height; requested story poles placed at the site. -Wayne Cox, Palm Springs, voiced concern with the height and requested story poles. -Haddun Libby, spoke in favor of the project and encouraged continual growth of the city. -Ryan Espinosa, Palm Springs, spoke in support of the project and urged the project to move forward. -Lea Goodsell, Palm Springs, provided statistics of hotel rooms in other cities and spoke in support of the project. -Wesley Cole, Palm Springs, spoke in favor of the project and commended the development team. -Phil Balen, Palm Springs, stated he is "pro" development however is concerned with the heights. -Dennis Freeman, represents Alejo Caballeros II, voiced concern with the balcony views from the adjacent property and requested story poles. -Laurie Kibby, applicant rebuttal, provided further details pertaining to setbacks, elevations and the photos simulations of views from adjacent properties. There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was continued. M/S/C (Ringlein/Cohen, 7-0) To continue, to the meeting of June 13, 2007; and refer the applicant to provide story poles or balloons at the proposed site. 10, COMMISSION WORK PROGRAM: `Work Program Priorities and Subcommittee Assignments 11. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS: Update. flodoi� i i City of Palm springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 23, 2007 12. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS AND REQUESTS: Chair Marantz reported the Architectural Advisory Committee has interest in a citywide standardized bus port system. Mr. Ewing responded this concern would be forwarded to the Public Works Department. 13. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further comments, the meeting adjourned at 5.08 p.m. *Director f Leires P 9 000019 OF p ALM,rAq V N Fa C. 441j=0"N' Planning Commission Staff Report Date: May 23, 2007 Case No.: 5.1104 GPA Application Type: General Plan Amendment Location: Southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way and all areas with the Resort-Attraction (RA) land use designation in Section 14. Applicant: Hank Gordon, for Laurich Properties, Inc. Zone: N/A General Plan: Section 14 Specific Plan APN: 508-100-039 From: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services Project Planner: Ken Lyon, Associate Planner PROJECT DESCRIPTION Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties, Inc. proposes a General Plan Amendment (GPA) of the Section 14 Specific Plan requesting: 1. That financial institutions with drive-through teller facilities and drug store/pharmacies with prescription pick-up windows be allowed in the Resort/Attraction (RA) zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and 2. That general retail uses be allowed in the Resort/Attraction (RA) zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit. Adoption of this amendment would revise the Section 14 Specific Plan to enable financial institutions and drug store/pharmacies to construct and operate facilities with drive-through windows on the subject properly and other properties in Section 14 in the same (RA) zone designation subject to a CUP. It would also enable any uses in the Section 14 Specific Plan determined to be "general retail" to be allowed subject to a CUP on this parcel and any parcel in Section 14 with the same (RA) zone designation. The applicant asserts that the prohibition on 00002'0 Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 drive-in/drive-through was intended to prohibit fast food restaurants, not bank or drug store drive-through's. No specific amendment language was proposed in the applicant's request. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council DENIAL of this request. PRIOR ACTIONS TAKEN ON THE PROJECT On March 17, 2006 Planning Services received a letter from Laurich Properties requesting a General Plan Amendment exempting banks and drug stares with drive-in windows from the list of prohibited uses in the (SREO) zone (the applicant since informed Planning Services that he meant the (RA) zone which is the underlying Specific Plan land use designation for the parcel at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way) On March 20, 2006 Planning Services received and processed a pre-application for a proposed commercial retail center at the southwest comer of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise way. The center included strip of medical office buildings along the southern portion of the parcel and a stand-alone pharmacy/drug store with drive-through facilities. On April 3, 2006 the Indian Planning Commission (IPC) reviewed the pre-application and unanimously agreed that "the use of a drive-thru would not be supported at this location..." Copy of the April 3, 2006 Tribal Staff memo to City Staff is attached. On July 18, 2006 the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians reviewed Case#5,1104 including a request to amend the Section 14 Master Plan to allow drive-throughs, and recommended denial of the requested General Plan Amendment. Copy of the July 26, 2006 letter from the Tribe to the City is attached. On November 16, 2006 the applicant revised his request for a General Plan Amendment to incorporate drive-throughs and general retail as uses permitted with a CUP within the RA land use designation. BACKGROUND AND SETTING The applicant's property is located within Section 14, and development of this Section is regulated by The Section 14 Specific Plan ("The Plan"). Drafted in 2004, the Plan was adopted by the Citizens of Palm Springs via referendum in a special election on November 2, 2004 and was subsequently adopted by the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on November 2, 2004 by resolution #20866. The Plan provides no specific procedure for amendments, however chapter 9.1.4 notes that "amendments require review and approval by the Palm Springs Planning Commission and the City Council; final approval rests with the Tribal Council." Since the Plan was adopted by the City as an amendment to the 1993 Palm Springs General Plan, Staff has concluded that an amendment to the Section 14 Specific Plan will be processed in accordance with the state and local regulations applicable to General Plan Amendments. 2 000021 Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 ANALYSIS To evaluate this amendment request, staff considered three policy areas of the Section 14 Specific Plan: • Land Use, • Catalyst Opportunity Sites, and • Regulation and Development Standards Each policy is outlined below and is followed by specific findings and recommendations by Staff. Land Use. Land Use regulations in the Resort-Attraction (RA) land use designation are defined in Chapters 4.1.2 and 6.1.2 of the Section 14 Specific Plan (excerpts are attached as an appendix to this staff report). From Chapter 4.1.2: Resort-Attraction (RA): "This designation allows for large-scale resort hotel complexes, hotels, and major commercial recreation attractions integrated with retail and entertainment facilities The list of permitted uses in the RA zone are generally large scale uses such as resort hotels, health clubs, commercial recreational facilities and movie theaters. A secondary list of smaller scale permitted uses is also identified, but it is noted that they are only permitted as part of a hotel, and include such things as apparel stores, bakeries, cabaret lounge, specialty food store, gift stores, and jewelry stores. Financial institutions are a permitted use in the RA area. Drug store/pharmacies are permitted without a CUP in the RA area only if they are part of a hotel. Stand-alone drug store/pharmacies are permitted with a CUP in the RA area. Drive-in/drive- through uses are specifically prohibited in the RA land use designation area. Catalyst Opportunity Sites. Catalyst Opportunity Sites (COS) are large contiguous parcels within the Section 14 area and are identified in Chapter 42 of the Plan as 'the most critical to Section 14". The applicant's parcel at the southwest corner of Tahquitz and Sunrise Way, as well as the majority of areas designated RA are identified as Catalyst Opportunity Sites. Chapter 4.2 notes: "Catalyst projects would serve as signature attractions that are intended to foster further high-quality and compatible development, and most importantly, serve as models of a bold, new visual image for Section 14." Regulations and Development Standards - Definition of General Retail. The Plan does not define "general retail", nor does the City of Palm Springs General Plan nor the City of Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance. The Section 14 Specific Plan and The Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance address permitted uses on a 'prescriptive basis'; listing specific permitted uses, those permitted by Land Use Permit, by Conditional Use Permit and those expressly prohibited. Only under "permitted uses" is there a statement that addresses other uses not specifically listed, 3 �o002? Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 "Other uses which are found by the Indian Planning Commission and/or the City Planning Commission to be consistent with the spirit and intent of this land use classification." Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment request and has identified several policy statements in the Section 14 Specific Plan that provide guidance in evaluating the request: Introduction. Item 4, "Master Plan Vision'; The vision recognizes that Section 14 plays a key role in energizing downtown Palm Springs and that it must have a vital, impressive image and new, expanded, and revitalized uses that appeal to a// age groups of tourists and permanent residents..." Chapter Two - Summary of Existing Conditions and Issues; Chapter 2.3.1 Image and Identity of Section 14; "..current visitor attractions and scenic desert elements have not realized Section 14's full potential as a vacation Mecca". "Within the area, there is a noticeable absence of visual and physical elements as well as activities that knit it together into a singular and memorable location." Chapter Three—Vision and Development Strategy; Chapter 3.1, "To further promote the sense that all of Section 14 is a resort, the Specific Plan emphasizes use of alternative transportation modes within the area to give visitor a vacation from their automobile." "The resort, attraction, entertainment, and retail activities in Section 14 will primarily unfold on Tahquitz Canyon Way. Small-scale one-to two-story buildings with shopping and outdoor dining to attract pedestrians will be common on Tahquitz Canyon Way." "Promote and provide incentives for "critical mass" catalyst projects with a mix of uses ... to establish a bold, new visual environment ... ' "The unique attractions could include museums, family entertainment, an IMAX theater, a cinemaplex, ice skating, an indoor/outdoor sports activity complex, theme restaurants and/or a specialty shopping complex." Chapter Four— Features of the Specific Plan; 4.1.1: "Integrate a mixture of fun and exciting retail restaurant, entertainment, and office uses... that creates a strong and attractive pedestrian place". "Transform Tahquitz into the main activity spine of the resort, shopping and entertainment district." Section 4.2: Consolidated Projects. "These designations are intended to encourage coordinated development on a number of parcels that have been consolidated into a larger site. 4 cool? 9 Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 "The Catalyst projects are the most critical to Section 14." "...catalyst projects would serve as signature attractions that are intended to foster further high- quality and compatible development, knit together existing development, and most importantly, serve as models of a bold, new visual image for Section 14." "Visitors would have the option of arriving at their hotel from the airport by shuttle, then partaking of the diverse attractions, shopping and entertainment venues in Section 14 and downtown...without needing a car." "Transformation of the public right-of-way on Tahquitz Canyon Way into a dynamic recreation and cultural boulevard." "The current standards, established by the (Palm Springs) General Plan, generally overemphasize an automobile-oriented design, which hinders achievement of a more balanced vision for the area..." Chapter Five-- Streetscape and Circulation Standards and Guidelines. Section 52.10 addresses gateways and notes the corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way as one of the key gateway points into Section 14. Specific gateway design elements are described therein. Chapter Six - Base Plan Development Standards. 6.1.2 Resort Attraction: (RA) Permitted and Prohibited Uses: Drive through/drive-in facilities are a prohibited use. 6.1.3 Local Serving Commercial (LSC) Permitted and Prohibited Uses: Drive through/drive-in facilities are allowed only with a Conditional Use Permit. 6.1.4 Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Permitted and Prohibited Uses: Drive through/Drive-in facilities are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. 6.2.9 Pedestrian Access. "Direct pedestrian access shall be provided from buildings to the sidewalk on Tahquitz Canyon Way..." 6.2.10 Building Location. "Buildings should be located as close as possible to the required front setback."(to enhance the pedestrian experience.) 6,2.18 Off-street parking. "No parking area shall front on Tahquitz Canyon Way.." Chapter Seven - Design Guidelines. 7.2.1 Building and Parking Orientation. "Commercial buildings should be placed with a street orientation to emphasize the pedestrian environment, avoid a `sea of parking" 5 060024 Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 visible from the street, and to create the sense of an edge along the street" Chapter 8 - Development Standards and Design Guidelines for Consolidated Development. "Catalyst Opportunity Site 8 — Family Entertainment Complex/Residential" (This is the designation for the land parcels at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way.) "The vision for Sub-area 2 of Site 8 is of a sports/recreational/educational complex that caters to families and has both indoor and outdoor facilities and desert oasis landscaping throughout." Chapter 8.2.5 Permitted Uses (Sub area 2 of Site 8): Family entertainment and recreational sports complexes including, but not limited to, miniature golf, batting cages, roller blade/skateboard park, basketball courts, volleyball courts, tennis practice area, rock climbing wall, fishing pond, ice skating, skiing training, bowling lanes and small, indoor children's' play/party area. Video/amusement, slick track, bumper boats, and billiard parlor permitted with a conditional use permit." From the Palm Springs General Plan, the Specific Plan makes specific reference to the following policy statements that are identified as complementary and consistent with the vision of the Specific Plan; Policy 323.5 "Require all uses and buildings to enhance pedestrian activity." Policy 3.23.6, "Strengthen the pedestrian linkage along Tahquitz Canyon Way toward the downtown..." Policy 3.23.8; "Encourage buildings that create a village-like environment through siting and massing around pedestrian open spaces that link to Tahquitz Canyon Way complementary uses, and vertical setbacks." REQUIRED FINDINGS There are no specific findings for evaluating a General Plan Amendment, nor are there specific findings for amendments to the Section 14 Specific Plan. Staff has analyzed statements and policies noted above in formulating the findings and recommendations for this application. Staff finds that: 1. The location of allowable Drive-in/drive-through uses in Section 14 do not include RA zones. Pursuant Sections 6.1.3 and 6.1.4 of the Plan, Drive-through/drive-in facilities are allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Local Serving Commercial (LSC) zones, but only with a conditional use permit (CUP). The (LSC) zone is located in the two block area at the northeast corner of Indian Canyon Drive and Ramon Road. The (NC) zone is located at the northwest corner of Ramon Road and Sunrise Way. 6 0160®25 PlanningCommission Staff Report P Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zane Date: May 23, 2007 The Plan has intentionally denoted those areas where drive-in/drive-throughs are permitted. There are no instances where RA is adjacent or contiguous to land uses where drive-through/drive-in facilities are permitted. Thus there would seem to be no argument for allowing this use in RA because of contiguity or adjacency to `already-in- place' drive-through uses. 2. Drive-in/drive through uses do not appear consistent with the spirit or intent of land uses permitted in the RA zone nor with underlying Section 14 pedestrian-oriented Development Standards. a. The Specific Plan makes frequent reference to development guidelines that "give visitors a vacation from their automobile" (Section 3.1) and encourage that people get out of their car and engage the destinations and venues on foot. b- Chapter 3.1 refers to the character of development and emphasizes "Options such as walking and bicycling should be encouraged." "The resort attraction, entertainment, and retail activities (will) attract pedestrians...on Tahquitz Canyon Way..." c. Section 4.1.1 notes development along Tahquitz Canyon Way should "create a strong and attractive pedestrian place"... and notes in Section 4.3; "Visitors would have the option... (of) partaking in the diverse attractions, shopping and entertainment venues ...without needing a car." d. Table 6-1, "Commercial Development Standards", refers to pedestrian-oriented development in heading 6.2.9 and 6.2.10 (entitled Building Location) it notes "(buildings) shall be located as close as possible to the required front setback'. 6.2.112 also addresses pedestrian oriented front setback features. 6.2.18 notes "no off-street parking shall front on Tahquitz Canyon Way'. With the emphasis throughout the Section 14 Specific Plan on high-end pedestrian- focused resort and entertainment development, Staff has concluded that Drive-throughs would be incompatible with these development goals. e. Chapter 8 "Consolidated Development Standards and Guidelines", notes in 8.2.9 (f) "no parking areas shall be permitted on Tahquitz Canyon Way or Sunrise Way, unless parking is no closer than 25 feet from the front property line, with said 25 feet landscaped pursuant to approved plans." Staff believes this would suggest the further de-emphasis of car-oriented development on the parcel associated with this application and with all RA zoned parcels that front Tahquitz. 4. Drive-through activities may conflict with Section 14 Design Guidelines for this parcel and this zone. a. Chapter 7 notes the use of "arbors, courtyards, decorative paving, plazas and paseos" and makes reference to avoiding vehicular interruption of the pedestrian experience- 7 C002� Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 b. Chapter 4.4 speaks to Urban Design and Streetscape Concept; and notes in Section 4.4 "Dramatic shared entrances for mixed-use projects or resorts, but with no parking visible from Tahquitz Canyon Way'. "New and remodeled facades designed close to the street with pedestrian friendly features at the ground level, such as awnings, display windows, recessed entries from the sidewalk and outdoor dining." Staff believes the required vehicular access, queuing and stacking lanes and fumes from cars in those queues, ingress and egress curb cuts and ancillary parking necessary to support drive-through development may be inconsistent with these design guidelines. 5. Drive-in/Drive-through uses along Tahquitz Way may not be consistent with the Palm Springs General Plan, which stress that development along Tahquitz Way is to be, pedestrian focused. a. Chapter 9 of the Specific Plan references the General Plan objectives and policies that relate to Tahquitz Canyon Way and its importance as a pedestrian oriented special corridor. Staff believes the General Plan policies referenced in the Specific Plan further address the pedestrian-focused, non-vehicular vision for Section 14 and drive-through facilities may be inconsistent with this vision. 6. Stand-alone drug stores with drive-through facilities may be incompatible with the goals and objectives of creating "Catalyst Opportunity Sites" a. Catalyst Opportunity Sites are unique areas where several contiguous parcels of undeveloped land present development opportunities that could create large- scale, bold, new development visions and images for Section 14. Catalyst sites are the key to realizing the emphasis on developing Section 14 as a resort- focused commercial and visitor center and the focus on large-scale attractions for all of Palm Springs. Staff believes permitting a land use such as a stand-alone drive through drug store may not be in keeping with this type of large scale, bold development vision for a Catalyst site. 7. General Retail may be a term too broad in its definition to add to the list of uses permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in the RA zone. a. The Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance defines "retail store" as, "a business of selling goods, wares or merchandise directly to the ultimate consumer." If one accepts that "general retail" and "retail store' are implied to be of the same meaning, then all the retail uses listed as permitted, all retail uses permitted by LUP, all retail uses permitted by CUP, and all retail uses that are prohibited would be classified as `general retail'. Staff believes this 'blanket definition' may lead to unintended conflicts between the various prescriptive lists of permitted and prohibited uses and render the statements of controlled or prohibited uses as unenforceable. 8 060027 Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 8. The intersection of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way is one of the principal entrV points to Section 14 from the Palm Springs International Airport, and drive-through facilities at this location may diminish the gateway or 'first impression' significance of this key entry point. a. Existing development along Tahquitz Canyon Way is generally resort commercial while the development along Sunrise Way tends to be more local serving commercial retail. The convergence of these differing development patterns at this intersection creates a dilemma of determining which may be more appropriate to 'carry through' the intersection. b. Section 5.2.10 and Figure 5-19 identifies the intersection of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise as one of the key gateways into Section 14 and defines the type of gateway design desired for that intersection. Staff believes the resort/entertainment character of Tahquitz Canyon Way may be the more appropriate development type to 'carry through' at this corner because: • Tourism and entertainment are the most important economic drivers for the City of Palm Springs and thus is more appropriate to 'carry through', • Tahquitz Canyon Way is perhaps the most important 'aesthetic' east-west thoroughfare in the City (as established by the formal line of native palm trees and the wide landscaped median and boulevard design); and • Visual continuity from the terminus at the airport on the east to the heart of the downtown core at Palm Canyon Drive on the west should be maintained and strengthened. • The Section 14 Gateway at this corner suggests the 'starting point' of the Tahquitz resort/entertainment zone is here, not midway down the block, and as such resort/tourist development consistent with the Tahquitz Canyon Way corridor should be emphasized over the neighborhood commercial nature of Sunrise Way. In summary, the Section 14 Specific Plan was created to promote cohesive development as "a high quality and integrated destination resort, vibrant entertainment and living environment'. The Plan emphasizes development that is pedestrian and resort/vacation destination in nature and scale. It encourages development of walkable entertainment, shopping and recreational venues with strong linkages to downtown Palm Springs. The Plan limits drive-in/drive through use to a small portion of Section 14 along Ramon Road in zones where commercial retail development is provided for the convenience of the residential population in Section 14 and adjacent areas. Numerous references to non-vehicular, pedestrian oriented development and land use, tight controls on location and screening of parking lots and minimized curb cuts for vehicular access in the Plan point to the underlying goal that development in Section 14 not be automobile-focused. Drive-in/drive-through banks and drug store/pharmacies and "general retail" uses do not seem consistent with the spirit and intent of the permitted uses in the Resort Attraction land use category. There is no language, policy or other statement that would infer or imply that the prohibition of drive-through/drive-in facilities was meant to apply only to fast food restaurants; rather it is 9 650023 Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1104 General Plan Amendment for Resort Attraction Zone Date: May 23, 2007 strongly suggested through numerous policy statements that nearly all of Section 14 be pedestrian-friendly. The Catalyst site concept - encouraging large-scale, bold, visionary developments with a resort and entertainment focus — that are primarily found in the Resort Attraction land use zone also seems incompatible with the applicant's desire to develop stand-alone drug store/pharmacy and general retail use in this zone. Based on these findings, staff has concluded that the intent of the Section 14 Specific Plan was to prohibit all types of drive-in/drive-through uses - except where specifically allowed - because they are inconsistent with the goal of high-end pedestrian-oriented resort development for this part of the City. Staff further concludes that because of the 'blanket' nature of the term "general retail', that the Plan's intended prohibition of certain retail uses would be rendered unenforceable. Staff recommends denial of the request in its entirety. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project is exempt from environmental review per Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Minor alteration in land use limitation). NOTIFICATION Because more than 1,000 residents would be affected by an amendment to the Section 14 Specific Plan, a public hearing notice was posted in the local newspaper notifying property owners within 400 feet of the subject Specific Plan area. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any comment. On December 18, 2006 Notices of invitation for Tribal Consultation pursuant to SB 18 were sent to those tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. Staff received respo ses noting no further notification was requested. Ke Lyo ssociate Planner ig . ing, P Dire of Plan ' g Services ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Draft Resolution 3. Tribal Staff to Mayor& City Council letter dated July 26, 2006. 4. Figure 4-7 from the Section 14 Specific Plan 5. Excerpts from the Section 14 Specific Plan Section 4.12 and 6.12 6. Mani to Lyon memo dated April 3, 2006 7. Laurich to Ewing letter dated November 16, 2006 8. Laurich to Ewing letter dated March 17, 2005 10 Department of Planning Services w+E ° V Vicinity Map 5 Mt-carol L7 r] --r III i_l. LJ LL-I- i t FJ; - -I{-1 LL�` ..h==.R — ��"�-� Ei r+r.L s[o � 1 xl S --UI�",_,_, vw ACavuLCO }&IYnAV?1MPN_TF ,¢ a;`a s 1. 1[INo IL 1..y � IffI � I I- ] —ram ••�� I b � 1 v w Js,:i '�_•�Il `W Ili I 1 I_."ARK, PA I aesertr RaLx1�6R.... I. - m - .. ---I•-:1 4 X ul----' - f�MAPo-Ro J ------ —I---I 1:L1 i- .. i---11 1 1 1 �ANORe¢�'Ro .�� m _.y'•I. I h- --.._........ "� - -`- UITLorr' r v T PufiZ VO iG -= E AY0.—J `J __ ^r- 7- .I - n_heN_ _o..._• Rr'� C M1 of 4 an �srq RP I III--_' n-FM_W cl'C n l•�.• J 9APURNINPftD" II I -- TIFFANY CIRCLE5 I il Legend f ' Project Site Q 400'Radius Surrounding Parcels �L_ r=='y --I'-1�i-�I ' 71TI ;dPkrX,a 11 i-11 �f ICI 1 1 � �' L�J j I-! MrNr1/+'NrE W III CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: 5.1104 GPA DESCRIPTION: To consider an application by Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties, Inc. for a APPLICANT: Hank Gordon General Plan Amendment to allow drive-through Laurich Properties, Inc. uses and "General Retail" uses as a permitted use subject to a Conditional Use Permit in the Resort/Attraction zone designation of Section 14. RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA TO DENY CASE NO. 5.1104 A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST TO: (1) ALLOW FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH DRIVE- THROUGH TELLER FACILITIES AND DRUG STORE PHARMACIES WITH PRESCRIPTION PICK-UP WINDOWS AS A PERMITTED USE WITH A CUP IN THE RESORT-ATTRACTION (RA) LAND USE AREA AND (2) ALLOW GENERAL RETAIL AS A PERMITTED USE WITH A CUP IN THE RESORT ATTRACTION (RA) LAND USE AREA OF SECTION 14 . WHEREAS, the Section 14 Specific Plan was created in 2004 to provide a dynamic and comprehensive vision and guiding document for development in Section 14 as a vibrant destination resort/tourist location within the City of Palm Springs, and WHEREAS; on November 2, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution #20866 following referendum Measure U, a special election in which the citizens of the City of Palm Springs voted to adopt the Section 14 Specific Plan ("the Plan"), and WHEREAS, Chapter 9.1.4 of the Plan states that amendments to the Specific Plan require review and approval by the Palm Springs, Planning Commission and the City Council; with final approval resting with the Tribal Council, and WHEREAS, Chapter 6.1.2 of the Section 14 Specific Plan lists drive-through 1 drive-in facilities as a prohibited use in the Resort-Attraction (RA) land use zone. WHEREAS; on March 17, 2006 Mr. Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to exempt drug stores that have a prescription pick up window and banks that have a drive-through teller facility from Prohibitive Uses in the Specialty Retail-Entertainment-Office (SREO) zone, and WHEREAS on April 3, 2006 the Indian Planning Commission (IPC) reviewed a pre- application for a proposed commercial center at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way that included offices and a stand-alone pharmacy / drug store with drive-through facilities and voted unanimously that, "the use of a drive-thru would not be supported at this location...", and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2006 the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians reviewed Case #5.1104 including a request to amend the Section 14 Specific Plan to allow drive-throughs, and recommended denial of the request, and WHEREAS, on November 16, 2006 Mr. Laurich amended his GPA request to allow drive-through's for drug stores and banks within the Resort Attraction (RA) zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and to allow general retail in the Resort Attraction (RA) zone subject to a CUP, and WHEREAS, the Plan does not provide a definition for the term `general retail', and 060031 Planning Commission Resolution May 23.2007 5,1104-GPA Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider the application for Case # 5,1104 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2007, a public hearing on Case #5.1104 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law, at which hearing the Commission 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, and THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Pursuant to the Section 14 Specific Plan; a. That the General Plan Amendment (GPA) requesting drive-through facilities at banks and drug store / pharmacies in the Resort Attraction (RA) land use zone with a CUP would be inconsistent with the Section 14 Specific Plan because the vision, goals, standards and regulations for development in Section 14 emphasize non-vehicular and pedestrian- oriented in scale, character and features. b. That the development of stand-alone drug stores/ pharmacies with drive- throughs with a CUP would be inconsistent with the type of development allowed in the Resort-Attraction zone of the Specific Plan because stand- alone retail facilities are not reflective of the integrated entertainment i retail definition of this zone. c. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive- through facilities with a CUP in Catalyst Zones of the Resort-Attraction land use area would be inconsistent with the intent of the creation of Catalyst Zones because these zones were created to promote large scale, bold, and visionary consolidated development projects of a tourist/resort nature, and stand-alone drug store / pharmacies with drive- through facilities would not be reflective of the scale and character of development desired for Catalyst Zones. d. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive- through facilities with a CUP at the parcel on the southwest corner of Sunrise Way and Tahquitz Canyon Way is inconsistent with the Specific Plan because the policies, incentives and vision identified in Chapter 8 "Consolidated Development: Catalyst Area B, Sub-area 2 (of which this site is a part) encourages "an integrated Family Entertainment and Recreation Complex with resort and high-density residential uses linked together with pedestrian pathways" — not drive-through drug store / pharmacy uses. oaoo3 Planning commisslon Resolution May 23,2007 5.1104-GPA Page$of 3 e. That 'general retail' is a term too broad in its definition to add to the list of uses be allowed with a CUP in the RA zone, because 'general retail' implies any type of business selling goods, wares or merchandise directly to the ultimate consumer; a definition that would render the current prescriptive list of uses unenforceable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby denies Case#5.1104 General Plan Amendment. ADOPTED this th day of 2007. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA Planning Commission Chairman Planning Commission Secretary 06003i r [T'IC'a - rSF l , vl I L l"l D Pi aEAL cirhN 11!11dz JEV� LOPM F,NI-1 July 26, 2005 HAND DELIVERED AND VIA FACSIMILE Mayor Ron Oden and City Council CITY OF PALM SPRINGS 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 RE: Case No, 5.1104 General Plan Amendment to Section 14 Master Plan -- Drive Thru Uses Dear Mayor and City Council: The Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians reviewed the above referenced case at its meeting of July 18, 2006, and recommends denial of the general plan amendment. Please contact me should you have any questions at 760,883.1326. Very truly yours, Margaret E. Park, AICP Director of Planning AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS MP/mg C: Tribal Council Gary Stopp, Chief of Staff Tom Davis, Chief Planning & Development Officer Craig Ewing, Director of Planning Services, City of Palm Springs Ken Lyon, Associate Planner, City of Palm Springs 777 E�.o 177 CF Pd "^ N 1M A.", SU17E 361 , PALM SPRINGS , GA. 52262 'i 601 251iA 00 F 760/32S/692,2 Ac, U ABA LI E NTS .OR - 0000 CA11 TRIBAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ,SF, E' 650 E. TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 • (760) 325-3400 FAX (760) 325-6952 Ck H �- MEMORANDUM DATE: April 3, 2006 TO: Ken Lyon, Associate Planner, City of Palm Springs i FROM: Kathy Marx, Senior Planner cfv__� RE: Rite Aid pre-application project proposal at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way The Indian Planning Commission (IPC) informally reviewed the above pre-application project proposal at its April 3, 2006, meeting. There was unanimous agreement from the IPC to not support the project as designed. The IPC would like to relay this information to the project proponent as early on as possible in the design process. It was agreed that the project is not a Resort Attraction oriented project but rather a conventional neighborhood shopping center. The use of a drive-thru would not be supported at this location either. i i i Cha ter F° al Serving Commercial District. South of Arenas Road, on Indian Canyon Drive are a num- ber small stores and older business establishments, such as appliance shops, second-hand stores, drug store, and small restaurants. The moderate speed traffic on Indian Canyon Drive and the v 'ed physical character of existing development make an emphasis on pedestrian-od- ented design nd uses feasible for this district. Within the Local Serving Commercial District, the Specific Plan uld: Emphasize e ongoing growth of tbis area as a small-scale, local-serving commercial district. Continue to support estaurants, antique/second-hand shops, and convenience retail. Encourage development laat is designed to be comfortable and attractive to pedestrians, yet facilitate access by auto obiles. Residential. Residential development ' Section 14 today consists of beautifully landscaped enclaves that integrate outdoor amenitieslch as pools or tennis courts, Most of the remaining land in Section 14 would be dedicated t8idential land uses. Within the residential neighborhoods, the Specific Plan would: Support high and moderate-density resiXiaddition opment, including market-rate congregate care facilities and primary resid to traditional second homes. Allow lower-intensity resort units designe character as the surrounding residential development. Encourage medium density residential development along Alejo d and Sunrise Way, north of Avenida Caballeros, as a buffer for existing adjacent lower 'ntensity housing development. Encourage further residential development that offers housing in a private d quiet ��per�il�i�g�sake-that creates an mama e 4.1.2 Base Land Use Plan Based on the Vision, development strategics and land-use concept and recognizing that existing zoning (C-1-AA, R4VP,C-1 and C-2), with its overlapping resort,commercial, and multiple-fam- ily residential designations has lead to an unclear vision for Section 14, the Specific Plan establishes new, more focused, land use designations. Figure 4-1, the Land Use and Circulation Plan,illustrates how the Specific Plan designates land within Section 14. The Specific Plan's land use designations, which are further defined in Chapter 6, include the following: SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN PAGE 4-4 0 b a 1 3 i Chapter Four: reatures of the Specific Plan Specialty Retail-Entertainment-Office (REO) - This designation allows for the integra- tion and concentration of large-scale specialty retail, restaurant, entertainment and office development along portions of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Indian Canyon Drive and emphasizes a pedestrian-transit focus, while providing for on-site parking as well. Resort-Attraction (RA) - This designation allows for large-scale resort hotel complexes, hotels, and major commercial recreation attractions integrated with retail and entertainment facilities. Local Serving Commercial (LSC) - This designation allows for smaller-scale retail and service activities, and emphasizes varied uses that will serve the needs of residents and visitors in a pedestrian-attractive environment primarily accessed by automobile. Neighborhood Commercial (NC) - This designation allows for neighborhood convenience commercial uses that serve the daily needs of local residents in a complex or center that is primarily accessed by automobile. High Density Residential(HR) - This designation encourages multiple-fanuly residential development of 21 to 30 dwelling units per acre, and allows hotel uses in a private and exclusive setting. Medium Density Residential (MR) - This designation allows for multiple-family development of 15 dwelling units per acre Medium Density Residential Buffer (MBR) - This designation allows for multiple-fam- ily development of 8 dwelling units per acre, designed to create a buffer between estate homes north of Alejo Road. Cemetery (C) - This designation allows for the protection and perpetuation of the Tribal cemetery as a cemetery and recognized cultural resource. Table 4-1 summarizes the land use distribution and buildout density for the Section 14 Specific Plan. Based on the market analysis and the objectives of the Specific Plan, full buildout is not anticipated within the planning horizon of 15 years. Existing development is built at a density below allowable, but is not expected to turn over in the near term. Market factors suggest that most new development would be built at an average density of 20 dwelling units per acre, rather than the 30 dwelling units per acre that is permitted under the High Density Residential designa- tion and calculated in Table 4-1. Anticipated residential growth is not expected to exceed 2,500 new dwelling units over the next 15 years. Market development assumptions for the 15 year period can be found in the Appendix. SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN PAGE 4-5 ®GUU37 Chapter Four-- Features of the Specific Plan 4.2 Consolidated Projects Promoting Coordinated and Compatible Development Consolidated projects consist of Catalyst Projects, identified on Figure Restaurant Park, SDeaaky 4-1, Revitalization Incentive Projects, Retall, Ernertainment and Residential Consolidated Projects. Palm brin Hotel, narc as, J Palm Springs �perianca These designations are intended to Ir>daor/Cvtdoor Inlema Pedestriam7ransil Street encourage coordinated development on Festival Marketplace a number of parcels chat have been con- Specialized Housing solidated into a larger site. The Specific Plan provides specific incentives (Chapter 8), such as increased density I and reduced parking requirements, and supplemental development standards and design guidelines to promote consolidated projects. The consolidated projects will permit greater flexibility in design and development options. ' The catalyst projects are the most critical to Section 14. As the name implies, catalyst projects would serve as Resider>tial signature attractions that are intended to foster further high-quality and compati- Family Entertairimertt/ ble development, knit together existing Sports/Hutel, Market Rate development, and most importantly, Senior Housing serve as models of a bold, new visual image for Section 14. Catalyst projects would be designed as consolidated complexes that consist of compatible and synergistic uses, shared parking (parking structures), and vigorous pedestrian spaces. 4.3 Pedestrian/Bikeway/Shuttle Network and Open Space Systems Multiple Options for Getting Around A major ingredient of the Vision for Section 14 is the creation of an extensively landscaped pedestrian/bikeway/shuttle network (see Figure 4-1), which connects with the City of Palm Spring General Plan proposed bikeways_ Generally following the established street grid, this network would connect resort uses and attractions, and help boost Section 14's image as a recreational resort_ Visitors would have the option of arriving at their hotel from the airport by shuttle, and then partaking of the diverse attractions, shopping and entertainment venues in Section 14 and downtown via this network, without needing a car. Those who do travel to SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN PAGE 4-7 D,d.D,U 8 Chapter Sit: Base Plan 6.7.2 Resort-Attraction (RA) dry goods and notion stores electronics and stereo stores Permitted Uses - Resort-Attractions film and camera sales and exchanges artist's studios florist shops athletic/health club food stores (specialty only) bowling See specialty food stores. commercial recreational facilities furniture stores conservatories or public gardens gift stores convention center grocery & fruit store (specialty only) financial institutions (banks, savings & loans) See specialty food stores. hotels and resort hotels health spas movie theaters/cinema hobby shop museums ice cream parlors offices (except contractors) interior decorationidesign stores public parks/plazas jewelry stores skating facilities leather goods/luggage stores Including ice skating, roller skating, or music and record stores skateboard. newspaper/periodical shops sports (recreational) activity facilities optical and optometrical stores photographic studios The following uses are permitted only as part picture framing of a hotel: plant sales antique shops restaurants, tca rooms or cafes apparel stores Including the service of alcoholic art galleries beverages as an accessory to the service art supply store of food. auction galleries shoe stores bakeries (retail) specialty food and beverage barber shops specialty market places beauty parlors sporting goods bicycle rental (indoor) stamp and coin stores books and stationery stores storage of goods within a building as an cabaret and cocktail lounge accessory to a permitted retail use, but no - Only in connection with restaurants. general warehouse - Any such use shall not be. located theaters (indoor)/legitimate stage closer than 300 feet to a cemetery, toy store except for catalyst projects, travel agencies china and glassware stores video sales and rental cigar and smoke shops wine shops clothes cleaning/pressing valet pressing and cleaning computer stores Only in conjunction with hotel. confectionery stores video/amusement machines dance studios As an accessory use subject to the delicatessen provisions of PSZO. drug store/pharmacy virtual reality entertainment SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN PAGE 6-6 000030 Chapter Six: Base Plan Other uses which are found by the Indian casinos Planning Commission and/or City Planning - Only on Tribal land with Tribal Cormmission to be consistent with the spirit Council approval. and intent of this land use classification_ china and glassware stores cigar and smoke shops Uses Permitted with a Land Use Permit - clinics Resort-Attraction clothes cleaning/pressing automobile rental agencies computer stores Only as part of a resort hotel. confectionery stores billiard parlors convenience stores catering dance studios As accessory to permitted restaurant. delicatessen child care center dressmaking shops conversion of upper floors to apartments drug store/pharmacy Consistent with PSZO. dry goods and notion stores farmers market electronics and stereo stores festival and exhibits film and camera sales and exchanges outdoor dining florist shops take-out food stores (specialty only) In conjunction with permitted furniture stores restaurant general warehouse gift stores Uses Permitted with a Conditional Use grocery & fruit store (specialty only) Permit-Resort-Attraction health spas antique shops hobby shop apparel stores hotels and resort hotels art galleries In which more than 10% of the guest art schools rooms contain kitchen facilities. art supply store ice cream parlors auction galleries interior decoration/design stores automobile parking lot/structure not in jewelry stores conjunction with permitted use. leather goods/luggage stores automobile parts (retail) libraries automobile sales (new) liquor stare bakeries (retail) modeling schools barber shops music and record stores beauty parlors newspaper/periodical shops bicycle rental (indoor) optical and optometrical stores books and stationery stores photographic studios cabaret, cocktail lounge, nightclubs, and picture framing discotheques plant sales Any such use shall not be located private clubs closer than 300 feet to a cemetery, Only as part, of a hotel_ except for catalyst projects_ radio and TV stations SUCTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN PAGE 6-7 GG(1(14O i i Chapter Six: Base Plan i i residential, multiple-family kennels and catteries i Consistent with the regulations and laundromat, launderette, laundry standards of High Density Residential. meat market restaurants, tea rooms or cafes mobile home parks Including the service of alcoholic bev- motor scooter, motorbike & motorcycle erages as an accessory to the service of food_ sales & rentals second-hand goods, as primary use pawn shops shoe repair pet stores and grooming shoe stores post office branches specialty food and beverage lodges and meeting halls sporting goods single-family residence specialty market places thrift shops stamp and coin stores trade school storage of goods within a building as an trailer storage accessory to a permitted retail use, but no upholstery shop supermarket wholesale and warehousing tailor shops theaters (indoor)/legitimate stage comwe,6 , .._ time shares Consistent with PSZO_ Pe itted Uses -Local Serving toy store Cam ercial travel agencies antiqu hops valet pressing and cleaning apparel , ores Only in conjunction with hotel. appliance •Its video/amusement machines incl 'ng repair, only as an accessory. As a secondary use, subject to the art galleries provisions of PSZO. artist's studios video sales and rental art supply store virtual reality entertainment athletic/health clu wine shops auction galleries automobile parts (rota Prohibited Uses - Resorl-Attraction bakeries (retail) barber shops adult entertainment beauty parlors animal hospitals beauty colleges appliance repair bicycle rental (indoor) automobile service stations bicycle sales and repair beauty colleges books and stationery stores car washes cabaret and cocktail lounge churches Only in connection with recta ants. drive-thmugh/drive-in facilities Any such use shall not be locate clos- gasoline station er than 300 feet to a cemetery, except for ata- hardware and appliance stores lyst projects. hospital china and glassware stores industrial and manufacturing uses cigar and smoke shops SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN PAGE�i� I� r LEGEND =1_�--------------------- L_1l—_I L—__1 L�-+ I f U U U L�� s� Cualy4�pportunlly Site I = Al]!0 ROAD €[ ;Rr I MiR I MDR MDR MBR MBA MBR �xA m=rlay ®REO Oreday ®RnortlAenctlon =1 E 1{ o - =1 I IE MR REO RVOIEflhaWnmen110ffce E� REO I RA 11 E HR t MR _ MR MR iSC local SeMn;Commercial IL _` �— _ - NC Ne%Fborhaod Commercial — — _I— — — — — — — _ _ —_�ANA�O ea AD — — — — — — — HR RE?Iden[i al HI;h i, ! RA I RA I ' HR RA RA Ii HR ? - I I '� MR MR xesidentl xl Medium c ABR Residential M.dium Duller AND[FAS I !OA➢ I I ANDI AS ROAD "� t I Neighho rhoudgsp eclallzed aark 1 RA W _1 j, 1 1 RA i W RA i =E REO !, i B� 1 Ceneiery JJ Rf0 1 f 3! 00 `L W:Iermvrse { TARO Wit � CANTO AT ---- ��>.� r REO REO QUO C C 8Eq ! RA �! Major mvrded rAaroughfara `a RA { + AA I ae Mijor noroughfare .........................: 3...........I....... ' I Al1HAf ROAD Reau ce Parement Width i .a Maior aomughPo ra with I I - 1 HR Spi�mi Iharoughram LSC ? MR I MR HR emn day Thamaghfare Hg I MR 1 R>} 1 'NAR15TO ROAD (}y Fire Sla[on LSC lJ ............HF ........... I lArutintiD [DAD MR HR N ® a t HR W Ir zad' +cal 800' 1200' WIFIR _ { FIGURE 4-1FIR HR NC NC Land Use and Circulation Plan I INC : PROPOSED CHANGES C—� SEORON 14 MAHER OEVELOPMEDli PiLAN Page 4-3 f� Q 1 L,AURIGH ; ; ; P R O P E R T I E S 1 N C. N r r November 16, 2006 Ira U.S.Mail and email Mr. Craig A. Ewing Director of Planning Services CITY OF PALM SPRINGS 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Ref: SWC Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way Palm Springs, California D car Mr. Ewing: On March 17, 2006 I wrote you requesting a General Plan Amendment to the Section 14 Specific Plan. I wish to amend such request as follows: 1. Allow drive-throughs for drug stores and banks within the Resort Attraction Zone, subject to approval of a Conditional Use permit 2. Allow general retail uses in the Resort Attraction Zone, subject to an approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Very truly yours, LAURTCH PROPERTIES, INC. by: qa"l g. rld.QGL HANK GORDON Chairman IIIIG:dem cc: Richard Gordon, LPI Ernie Noia, Esq. Tracy Verastegui, Rite Aid Mayor Ron Oden, City of Palm Springs David Baron, Esq 1770 North Buffalo; Suite 101 0 Las Vegas, Nevada 89128 (702) 220-4500 ■ Fax (702)220-9064 00004.E � LAURICH P R a P E R T I E S INC. March 17, 2006 Via Federal Express Mr. Craig A. Ewing Director of Planning Services CITY OF PALM SPRINGS 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Ref: SWC Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way Palm Springs, California Dear Mr. Ewing. By this letter, I am formally requesting the City to effectuate a General Plan Amendment to Section 6.1.1 of the Section 14 Specific Plan. Specifically to exempt drugstores that have a prescription pick up window and banks that have drive-through teller facilities from Prohibitive Uses in the Speciality Retail-Entertainment-Office zone. As you are aware, drive-through/drive-in facilities are presently a prohibitive use in such zone. Having done some research in this matter, it is my opinion that both the Tribe and the City staft'were concerned with not having drive-through fast food restaurants within Section 14 and therefore the prohibited use. I do not believe that either the Tribe or the City Planning staff considered a bank drive-thru or drugstore when including them as Prohibited Uses. Pursuant to your previous e-mail to me. I am enclosing our check in the arnount of S6,672.50 to cover the City fees involved with this request. r�r - 1770 N. BUFFALO DR., SUITE 101 • LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89128 (702) 220-4500 • FAX (702) 220-4900 Mr Crai,P,Ewine CITY Or PALM SPRINGS Much 17,2006 Pa,E 2 Please advise me as to what other documentation you may need accordingly. Laurich Properties, Inc. by: L � ( ' i-IANK GORDON Chairman HHG:dem enclosure cc: Richard Gordon, LPI Ernie Noia, Esq. Tracy Verastegui, Rite Aid Mayor Icon Oden, City of Palm Springs Margaret Park, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuillia Indians �000 LAURICH ; ■ ■ ■ P R O P E R T I E S N C. ■ ■ ■ May 24, 2007 Via email Ken Lyon Associate Planner City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92263 Ref: Case #5.1104GPA Dear Mr. Lyon: This is to advise you that the undersigned hereby appeals the decision of the Planning Commission of May 23, 2007, to the City Council, on the above referred to matter. Please advise me as to what fees are required for this appeal and we will forward them to you immediately. Very truly yours, Laurich Properties, Inc. BY: -qa44 �O�ta�4ot HANK GORDON Chairman HHG:dem cc: David Baron, Esq. Mayor Ron Oden City of Palm Springs David Ready, City Manager 1770 North Buffalo; Suite 101 ■ Las Vegas, Nevada 89128 (702) 220-4500 ■ Fax (702) 220-9064 f1UlJ :1"f ,7 ?ALM S• r0 City of Palm Springs II Office of the City Clerk ' ^ P•ORni F4 C �P 3200 Tahginra Canyon Way • Palm Springs California 922l2 A(f FO RN TEL (760)323-8201 •TDD (760)864-9527 June 6, 2007 Mr. Hank Gordon Laurich Properties, Inc 1770 North Buffalo, Ste. 101 Las Vegas, NV 89128 RE: Case No. 5.1104 GPA Dear Mr, Gordon: This is in response to your letter to Ken Lyon, Associate Planner, and Palm Springs City Manager David Ready, requesting an appeal of the Planning Commission decision denying the application of Laurich Properties for the General Plan Amendment Case No. 5.1104 GPA- By operation of law, this action would require City Council approval, and as such neither an appeal, nor an appeal fee is required. I am sure the Planning Department will be in touch to schedule a de novo hearing before the City Council with respect to the application. Sincerely, CITY OF PALM SPRINGS mes Thompson City Clerk cc: Ken Lyon, Associate Planner David H. Ready, City Manager Post Office Box 2743 6 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 060047 F PALM sp Q City of Palm Springs Office of the City Clerk cO"oearcv � 32U0 E.Tahyuai C.uiynn Way ' Palm Springs, Ca11�pM1lla )22C2 I F0?0 " Trl•(760) 323.8204 • Fax (760) i22-8312 • Web: www.palms1,rm,,s-ca.gnv AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES 1, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing, to consider an application by Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties for a General Plan Amendment to the Section 14 Specific Plan requesting that financial institutions with drive-through teller facilities and drugstore/pharmacies with prescription pick-up windows be allowed in the Resort/Attraction (RA) zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in Section 14, was mailed to each and every person set forth on the attached list on or before the 13th day of July, 2007, in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. (396 notices mailed) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 18th day of July 2007. AMES THOMPSON Cify Clerk /kdh Affidavit Laurich 07-25-07.doo Post Officc Box 2743 • Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 i� PROOF OF PTJSLICATION : f l Coudty,Clcrk's Piling Slanlp (2015.5.C.C.P) r .J_ :I_ Y C1..--I'. STATE Or CALIFORNIA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING County of Riverside CITY OF PALM STY PRINGS CASE 5.1104-GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN Thar the City Council Of the City of Palm 5ion ggs California will hold d ppw4c hearing eT i4 meeTing of Jply 25,2007.'rho Clly Courlotl miii hopins ,d 6.0o p.m n the Council Chamber et lbo H311,32e0 East Tahqull,� I am a citizen Of the United States and a resident of Canyon way, Palm Springs. the County aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen I The purpose of the hearing is to consider a re• I quo by Flank Cordon of Launch Properties for a years,and not a party to or Interested in the CnErsl Plan Amendimrit To the Section 14 Spa- ciflc plan reqpasting that thandal Institutions with above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a drive-through tenor factoties and drugstore/phar- printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING rl lowed m h1ill Presto Mena,onu� wind ws belact COMPANY a newspaper of general Circulation, to a Conditional use Permit(CUP) in Section 1a, The;Ik-associated with this request Is located at printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, the southwest corner of and Sundae Way; however, his Cencral Plan t Tahquitz Canyon Way ' County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been AlnLndmeml would affect all parcels located with- adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the of thectRosenl Attraction (RA) land u;o designation Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of California under the date of March 24,1988.Case —=--- Number 191236;that the notice,of which the "" .. - annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller than non pariel,has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any - supplement thereof on the fallowing dates,to wit:July 14"',14d' 2007 All in the year 2007 — ,- I certify(or declare)Bader penalty of perjury that the ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION-This pro- foregoing is true and correct. Ioct Is ossmpT from invironfnental review per Section 1530.5 of Thv Calllorma Envlrnnments( m �- i Qual ),tla (C Act EQA) (Minor alteration hi land uac Dated of Palm Springs,California this---17 day REVIEtV OF PROJECT INFORMATION:The staff report and other suppporting tlocumenly regarding of—..— July — >-------�-,2007 this maper are available for public review it CIryry Hall Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. Ind 5.00 p m. Mond ly thrcwpph Friday. Please contact the Crr"cc of the City Gletk at fi ee) 323-0204 If you would like to schedule an appolnnncnt to review these document'. --- --.�- --_.-- -...-^ I COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Respponse to this notice may bu made verbally at Thu Pubhic Si nature Hearing and/or In writing before the he,,rmg Writ- Tell comments may be made to the City Council by letter(far mall or hand delivery)to: James Thompson City Clark 3200 E.Tsllquia Densyon Way Palm Sp(Ings CA 9a,2G2 Any challenge of the proposed project in court mayy 0u Itmhtud To raising only tho,:e lasuos raised at ti v public hearing described in the, notice or r 7� In written correepontl,.nce d0vated to thv Clty V Clerk at, or pprior,To-[he ppublic hearing. (Gover menT Code Seetlon 6500g( n b][2]) 1 `4 An opportunity will bo given at said hearinq for iii mterevled persons Io be heard.Quesaons reg;lrd- Ing this c,aa may be directed to Ken Lon De- partment of Planning Servlccs aT(750) Z&8245. Si nacesifa eyuda can said carta,ppdavoe flame a la Ciudad do Palm Spring y puode Fabler Can Nadine Regal-telatano pGOJ 3aa-82a5, Jsmns hompson, LIry(-Jlefk Published:7N4/20o7 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE 5.1104 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE SECTION 14 SPECIFIC PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of July 25, 2007. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a request by Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties for a General Plan Amendment to the Section 14 Specific Plan requesting that financial institutions with drive-through teller facilities and drugstore/pharmacies with prescription pick-up windows be allowed in the Resort/Attraction (RA) zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in Section 14. The site associated with this request is located at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way-, however, this General Plan Amendment would affect all parcels located within the Resort Attraction (RA) land use designation of Section 14. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This project is exempt from environmental review per Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Minor alteration in land use limitation). REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff report and other supporting documents regarding this matter are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at (760) 323- 8204 if you would like to schedule an appointment to review these documents. COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the Public Hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City Council by letter (for mail or hand delivery) to: James Thompson, City Clerk 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior, to the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009[b][21). An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Ken Lyon, Department of Planning Services at (760) 323- 8245. Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porFavor flame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y_puede habl_ar con Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245. ?mes Thompson, City Clerk Department of Planning Services W+ Vicinity Map 5 MCRrp FL-�,..":{ �._0 vw nCn u�Cp 3 F �.PICv3-[SP I.J 141. .. I�_. 0411 !II - --r —aua9 qn -- _..ANort I.�»'trrii5,'JJJ�.}rT 4, r t'JTA111IT11 �� -- --� - T-A llfTY I I 1IIIII TF 9A3r'T0�Rt) . .. �- ....�.....nFFaNY CIR� EN _.'SA 1JENJ O.lif]__..._ 4; TIP NY CIRCLE Legend v — ® Project Site J T .,- - 400'Radius -- -1- I nSurrounding PaYcels — L., mirCP i.,q �, r.,:r�: II I F�ti — Y. .'Ir GMN4N v¢w CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: 5.1104 GPA DESCRIPTION: To consider an application by Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties, Inc. for a APPLICANT: Hank Gordon General Plan Amendment to allow drive-through Laurich Properties, Inc. uses and "General Retail" uses as a permitted use subject to a Conditional Use Permit in the Rescrt/Attraction zone designation of Section 14.