HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/15/2015 - STAFF REPORTS ppALM Sp
W
V N
x <oeoxao
Cq!lFOIt City Council Staff Report
DATE: July 15, 2015 PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO
ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAM WAY AND TO DESIGNATE
ADD A 5 ACRE PARCEL TO THE PLAN AREA AS PERMANENT OPEN
SPACE, ZONE ESA-SP (CASE 5.1154-A SP)
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY
This action considers a request to amend the Desert Palisades Specific Plan in two
ways:
(1) Revise the emergency access point on Tram Way to a gated residential access
point; and
(2) Incorporate into the Specific Plan Area an approximate 5 acre parcel of land located
on the northerly side of Tram Way and previously identified as "Not a Part", for
boulder placement and landscape enhancement and designation as permanent
open space.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is requires consideration of potential
environmental impacts associated with the Amendment, and an Addendum to the
previously-certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for review
and approval by the City Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Open the public hearing and receive testimony; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO
THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR,
AND AMENDING THE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW
RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAM WAY AND TO INCORPORATE INTO THE
PLAN AREA AN APPROXIMATE 5 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED ON
THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF TRAM WAY FOR BOULDER PLACEMENT AND
LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT TO BE DESIGNATED AS PERMANENT OPEN
SPACE."
ITEM NO. ��
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015-- Page 2
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
BACKGROUND:
Related Relevant Actions by Planning, BqltdftiM Fire, etc.'
01/05/11 The City Council approved the Desert Palisades Specific Plan and
certified the Final Environmental Impact Report EIR for the project.
The City Council approved an addendum to the previously-certified
01/07/15 EIR to extend the time frame in which grading activities could occur
from December 315t to January 315t
The Planning Commission recommended approval of proposed
06/24/15 amendments to the Desert Palisades Specific Plan allowing for
residential access to Tramway Road, and to designate a 5 acre area
as permanent open s ace within the Specific Plan Area.
ANALYSIS:
The Desert Palisades Specific Plan was adopted by the City Council on January 5,
2011, through Ordinance No. 1784, and allows for the development of 110 home sites
on approximately 100 acres, including: private roads, public trails, open space, common
area landscaping, berming of boulders and perimeter landscaping along Tram Way,
construction of an emergency access onto Tram Way, and construction of a DWA
reservoir site. The Final EIR for the Specific Plan was also certified by the City Council
at that time.
Figure 1 identifies the location of the Specific Plan Area; a Vicinity Map showing a 500-
feet radius is included as Attachment 1. As shown in Figure 1, a triangular area of the
Site located on the northerly side of Tram Way was identified as "Not a Part (N.A.P.)".
Figure 1
\ C
cvoa 13voa.vs
a
Q
�P1 Z Z
U �
v'1 u
� a
avoa ertu iano�va �
v rin
Z z
W AVM NYOBNYS 6 O
VHII VIA
N S
WOa NOANV�daN�
k
1
Sly o
lyj PMI aAMA '� S
UiNJ V1M O G
City Council Staff Report
July 15. 2015 -- Page 3
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
An aerial view of the Specific Plan Area showing the alignment of streets and
subdivision of single family home lots is provided in Figure 2.
Figure 2
P+
PKQPaQE-0[NINNCYD WfHR PROP.P-KICNA4[MJ;
o 0 00
000
o d
_00 0000 0 00
0 0_o 00
oo�lo 00 .
000
w.A.
vFSS:VG t
S'F
As noted in Figure 2, the Specific Plan includes an "enhanced buffer zone" located
adjacent to and along Tram Way. ;
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015-- Page 4
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
The layout of the on-site private streets within the Specific Plan Area includes one main
Project Entry at the west end of Racquet Club Road, and two emergency access points
on Tram Way and Sanborn Way, as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3
EMEROENCY ACCESS
AND P EFUTURE
' PROJECT E1RY
FULL ENTRY
RACQUET
LWE ROAD
N.A.P.
sy
d�If
SAMORN
WAY
0
L�
t
N�
� as
OWA RESERVOIR ACCESS
As noted in Figure 3, the emergency access point on Tram Way was identified and
acknowledged as a "possible future full entry."
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015 -- Page 5
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
Proposed Amendment
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment includes two elements:
(1) Revise the emergency access point on Tram Way to a gated residential access
point; and
(2) Incorporate into the Specific Plan Area an approximate 5 acre parcel of land located
on the northerly side of Tram Way and previously identified as "Not a Part", for
boulder placement and landscape enhancement and designation as permanent
open space.
No other changes to the specific plan are proposed. An addendum to the Final EIR has
been prepared to address the proposed amendment to the Specific Plan.
Specific Plan Amendment— Element 9 (Tram Way Access)
The Specific Plan (Section IV — Site Circulation) describes access to and from the
project, and states:
...the project will include three points of vehicular access. There will be one main
entry into the project at the current westerly terminus of Racquet Club Road that
will include monument signage, desert entry features and landscaping. A second
access point is located south of the main entry, at Sanborn Way, which currently
dead-ends at the subject property's eastern boundary. This entry will be a locked
gate used for emergency access only. A third access is proposed as an
emergency only access from Tram Way at this time. If future residents desire a
direct path to the Tram or other potential attractions in the area, such as golf,
spas, and resorts, conversion to a full access is possible with minimal
disturbance on the landscape, however this conversion will be subject to later
review by the City and the San Jacinto Winter Park Authority.
The developer has requested that the City consider revising the Specific Plan to
implement the potential "full entry" noted for the Tram Way access for the future
residents living within the project. This proposal will require a revised design of the on-
site private road (Palms Peak Road) alignment, and construction of a new guardhouse
in an island that separates incoming and outgoing traffic; the entrance onto Tram Way is
proposed to be gated and restricted to vehicular access in the same way as the
currently approved gated entry at Racquet Club Road. However, pedestrian pathways
are proposed on each side of Palms Peak Road, connecting the internal sidewalk
system to the public trail located along and adjacent to Tram Way.
The proposal includes new improvements to Tram Way to provide a dedicated
westbound left-turn lane for traffic entering the development from Tram Way, and a
deceleration/egress lane onto Tram Way, for traffic leaving the development and
descending down Tram Way to N. Palm Canyon Drive. These proposed improvements
are identified in Figure 4.
05
_ l i
I "
- /-• ` _� � _ , p . v r � 'ten
5 '
9 Y
i I
tOp
h
Ij-
\ r >n
f /
\ / \�/ram � -�� \ ++
Jill
f` ! 3
NJ
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015 -- Page 7
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
A supplemental traffic analysis has been prepared by the project's original traffic
engineer, Endo Engineering, to analyze potential environmental impacts associated with
the request to convert the emergency access on Tram Way to a full access entry. The
traffic analysis determined that approximately 25% of the residential traffic would be
diverted from Racquet Club Road to Tram Way, resulting in a reduction of
approximately 280 vehicle trips per day on Racquet Club Road. The analysis indicates
that the additional traffic on Tram Way maintains the total traffic volume on Tram Way
below its capacity, and that Tram Way will continue to operate at or better than Level of
Service D in accordance with the City's General Plan requirements.
As noted in the Specific Plan, Tram Way is considered a private road and is operated
and maintained under the jurisdiction of the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority, (the
"Authority"). Initially, the proposal anticipates that the Tram Way access will only be
available to residents of the development during the hours that Tram Way is open to the
general public; the gate at the intersection with N. Palm Canyon Drive will still be utilized
to close Tram Way when the tram is not open. The proposal also includes installation of
a second vehicular gate to close Tram Way immediately west (uphill) of the Tram Way
access point which will allow the Authority to continue to control access to Tram Way
from the project when the Tram is closed. Ultimately, the developer proposes to
continue coordinating with the Authority on alternatives to allow continuous ("24/7")
access from the project to Tram Way, pursuant to such plan otherwise approved by the
Authority.
The developer represents that the Authority is aware of its request to convert the
emergency access point to a permanent gated residential access including the
improvements required to Tram Way, and that prior to issuing any formal approval of
the change in access to Tram Way, the Authority is coordinating with the developer on a
change of use agreement which includes provisions for appropriate design and
construction of the Tram Way improvements. Staff is recommending that the City
Council approve this element of the Specific Plan Amendment, with a stipulation that
implementing these changes to Tram Way requires the express consent of the
Authority. Section 3 of the Resolution approving the Specific Plan Amendment includes
the following requirement:
The final access and configuration of the Tramway Road entry to the development shall
be subject to review and approval by the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority
Construction Traffic
As construction of the project commenced in Fall 2014, residents of the adjacent
neighborhood voiced concerns over the temporary impacts generated by the dust,
noise, vibrations, and volume of construction traffic accessing the site from Racquet
Club Road. In January 2015 at the time the City Council considered and approved an
Addendum to the previously-certified EIR to extend the time for grading operations to
February 1, the neighborhood requested that the City require construction traffic to
access the site from Tram Way. Staff coordinated with the developer, and the 07
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015 -- Page 8
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
developer requested and received approval from the Authority, for their contractors to
use Tram Way. Subsequently, the Racquet Club Road entry has not generally been
used to access the site while construction has continued through 2015.
Public response to this element of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment has been
positive, in that there will be a decrease in traffic using Racquet Club Road, and
corresponding impacts to the adjacent neighborhoods. However, some residents have
requested that the City implement a new requirement as part of the Specific Plan where
the City would restrict all construction traffic from using Racquet Club Road — thereby
mandating that all construction traffic use Tram Way. This proposal requires the City
Council's consideration of three facts:
1) The previously-certified EIR analyzed all potential impacts (such as air quality, noise,
and traffic) associated with both temporary construction activities and long-term
activities resulting from the project. The EIR assumed all construction traffic would
use Racquet Club Road, as the main legal point of access to the site. As noted in
the EIR (Section 3.11 — Noise, Page 261), Noise generated by construction
equipment, including trucks, graders, bulldozers, and portable generators, can reach
high levels. Excavation and grading activities typically represent the highest
potentials for noise impacts. The City Council's certification of the Final EIR
incorporated certain mitigation measures that are intended to reduce any potentially
significant environmental impacts to less than significant levels.
2) Racquet Club Road and Sanborn Way are the only two legal public access points to
the Specific Plan Area. As acknowledged, Tram Way is considered a private road
under the control of the Authority, and the City Council's approval of a condition
restricting all construction traffic to Tram Way may not be appropriate given that the
City does not control the use of Tram Way.
3) The Specific Plan and previously-certified EIR includes a component related to
construction of new domestic water improvements (water lines and reservoir/storage
tanks) by Desert Water Agency ("DWA"). DWA is a separate governmental entity,
and the City's restriction on the use of Racquet Club Road by contractors may not
apply to DWA and its contractors.
Staff recommends that the City continue to proactively coordinate with the developer
and the Authority to ensure that as much construction traffic as possible is directed to
use the Tram Way access, to reduce the previously analyzed potential impacts due to
construction on the neighborhoods adjacent to the Specific Plan Area. Included as
Section 6 of the Resolution is the adoption of the following suggested additional
Mitigation Measure:
MM 3.15-11(a): The developer shall coordinate with the San Jacinto Winter Park
Authority to route as much construction traffic from Racquet Club Road to Tram Way as
is reasonably possible and acceptable to the San Jacinto Winter Park Authority.
08
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015-- Page 9
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
Specific Plan Amendment— Element 2 (Add Remnant 5 Acre ±Parcel)
As shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3, the Specific Plan Area excluded a portion of the
underlying property owned by the developer located on the northerly side of Tram Way.
This approximate 5 acre parcel is separated from the remaining development and was
not identified as part of the Specific Plan. Currently, this remnant parcel remains a
developable parcel subject to the applicable regulations of Planning Area 3 of the ESA-
SP Zone on the Chino Cone. This remnant parcel is highlighted in Figure 5.
Figure 5
o/
Cl
0 00 0�
- ao� oQ°L1t
Co o �o
J
Q0000 �d
-�o0ooc�
tiE! r 'R 5RC v '
09
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015-- Page 10
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
The developer has indicated that during completion of the initial site work in 2014/2015,
an excess of oversized boulders has been generated that exceed the volume required
for the perimeter buffers, and will require disposal off-site. In lieu of hauling these
excess boulders to an off-site location, the developer has proposed to include the 5 acre
remnant parcel on the northerly side of Tram Way within the Specific Plan Area allowing
for its use for be utilized for boulder placement. Facilitating this request is consistent
with the objectives in the Specific Plan.
The Specific Plan (Section II — Land Use and Development Plan) describes the project
setting and use of boulders generated on-site, and states:
Boulders removed from the initial on-site construction are proposed to be
incorporated into the perimeter of the project boundary, and will aid in buffering
the development from the adjacent residential tracts to the east, and motorists
along Tram Way to the west and north.
The Specific Plan (Section VI — Landscaping Guidelines) describes the objectives of
naturalized landscaping of the Specific Plan Area, and with regard to perimeter
treatment along Tram Way, states:
The objective of the landscaping concept for the portion of the project fronting
Tram Way is to create both a visual and acoustical buffer that integrates with the
existing appearance of the Chino Cone to the motorists and pedestrians using
Tram Way.
The buffering element includes the use of relocated boulders to create a natural
buffer, and to channel and control runoff that currently flows along the shoulder
and within the pavement section of Tram Way. The shoulder along Tram Way as
it currently traverses the Chino Cone already contains boulders excavated during
previous roadway construction. This condition, coupled with the fact that
boulders are abundant on the property, and are the dominant feature throughout
the area, makes a natural boulder wall/buffer along this frontage the most natural
and aesthetically pleasing solution. The incorporation of this buffer is also
consistent with the ESA-SP Zoning Ordinance.
The approved perimeter landscape treatment along Tram Way is shown in Figure 6.
ti
. Ya
'IA
O.P.• `,P
re
. . . IrmorwIlLsi:91111.62 IA@AZMQII(;;1*m lima Is III
6' gAz:1 .•'A,'` ` ill
AM
A•�r
<NL � 'il�,ii• " �►-- � �' d���� ((({\\\�` op
«-�I,1ii�T� e:., mac.•..
•• • - • - - • ••• -• • . •• • -• • ' - • . • -
Figure 8
AA
IL
do
Q r:• sty :'?p .,��. ~1 � '�� ��•
1
r�
City Council Staff Report
July 15. 2015-- Page 13
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
As a consideration of incorporating this 5 acre remnant parcel into the Specific Plan
Area for depositing excess boulders from within the development, staff recommends
that the 5 acre remnant parcel be designated for permanent open space and dedicated
to the City in fee, eliminating any possibility of future development of that parcel.
Preserving this currently developable parcel as open space for the Chino Cone is
consistent with the goals of the ESA-SP zone. Included as Section 7 of the Resolution
is the adoption of the following suggested additional Mitigation Measure:
MM 3.9-1(a): The additional approximate 5 acre remnant parcel added to and included
within the Specific Plan, located northerly of Tram Way, shall be designated as Open
Space, and permanently preserved by dedication to the City of Palm Springs in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney.
Addendum to the Final OR
As an associated action relative to the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, the
proposed Addendum to the Final EIR implements the original mitigation measure
related to timing of grading operations. Mitigation identified in the Final EIR required
that site grading activities cease from January 1 to June 30 to avoid the traditional
Peninsular Bighorn Sheep lambing period; in January 2015, the City Council approved
an Addendum to the Final EIR modified the timing of grading operations by extending
the deadline for completion of grading operations by 30 days, from January 1 to
February 1, subject to a biological monitor being present on the site. As a consideration
of the proposed amendment to the Specific Plan, staff recommends that the original
mitigation measure related to timing of grading operations be implemented, requiring all
grading operations to cease by January 1.
FINDINGS:
Findings for the proposed amendment are as follows:
• The proposed amendment does not impact the conformity of the Desert Palisades
Specific Plan to the General Plan or California Governmental Code;
• The proposed amendment does not impact the conformity of the project to the
Zoning Code, and is consistent with the requirements for the ESA-SP zone;
• The proposed amendment does not alter or intensify the development proposed for
the site, and serves to protect a portion of the site from future development;
• The proposed revisions to the site plan are consistent with Goal LU13 and Policy
LU13.7 of the General Plan relative to preserving the natural features and
appearance of the site; and
• The proposed amendment is consistent with the mitigation measures proposed
under the Final EIR approved by City Council in January 2011.
1 �
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015-- Page 14
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed amendment to the Desert Palisades Specific Plan will lessen the impacts
due to traffic using Racquet Club Road and will facilitate permanent preservation of
open space. The addendum to the EIR adequately evaluates the environmental
impacts of the proposed changes to the project. The project is consistent with the
General Plan and Zoning Code for the Chino Cone Special Policy Area and the ESA-SP
zone, and is consistent with the vision for this environmentally-sensitive area.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
was prepared and circulated for this project. The Draft EIR was released for review on
January 21 , 2010. Copies of the Draft EIR and Final EIR were previously distributed to
the City Council. Notices of the reports were sent to all applicable agencies and
published in accordance with CEQA. Comments were received by the City and
responses to comments were provided in the final EIR. The Final EIR identified
potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures to protected species, but
concluded that the impacts would not be significant because the project modifications
and mitigation measures incorporated into the project would reduce impacts to less than
significant levels. A copy of the final EIR is on file with the City Clerk. The change to
the Tramway Road entryway and the designation of the five-acre parcel at the
northwest corner of the project site will not significantly impact the adopted mitigation
measures. The proposed amendment to the project has been adequately evaluated in
the addendum to the Desert Palisades Specific Plan EIR and it has been concluded that
with the mitigation measures that are in place, the amendment will not cause a
significant impact on the environment nor require recirculation of the entire EIR.
NOTIFICATION:
A public hearing notice was published in accordance with the requirements of State law
and local ordinance. Public comment letters received in response to the notice have
been included as an attachment to this report.
14
City Council Staff Report
July 15, 2015 -- Page 15
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
SUBMITTED:
Prepared by:
Finn Fagg, AICP Marcus L. Fuller, MPA, PE, PLS
Director of Planning Services Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
Approved by:
David H. Ready, Esq.
City Manager
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Draft Resolution
3. Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment No. 1
4. Addendum No. 1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
5. Site plans and renderings
6. Supplemental Traffic Analysis — Endo Engineering
7. Minutes — 6/24/15 Planning Commission Meeting
H. Public comment letters
15
ATTACHMENT 1
6
`Of PPLM Sao O
Department of Planning Services
Vicinity Map LI
r44ip0.N�P•
I
� �SA -
! Ip SAP �
4
RA CQUET_CLUB
-.
1 I
o trn + Q'
J
ter Z �' =VIA OLIVERA
,tl ' I $ _
SAN13ORN WAY
VIA ESCUELA
I
CNWO_CANYON RD
PANORAMA RD,
W i
---- — --'- ai STEVENS RD
0-
Legend
s
®sae
_.-- Surmundng Parcels
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
ATTACHMENT 2
, s
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE
PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR, AND AMENDING THE
DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW
RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAM WAY AND TO
INCORPORATE INTO THE PLAN AREA AN
APPROXIMATE 5 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND
LOCATED ON THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF TRAM
WAY FOR BOULDER PLACEMENT AND
LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT TO BE
DESIGNATED AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS FINDS:
A. On April 30, 2007, Ed Freeman on behalf of Pinnacle View, LLC submitted
an application for review pursuant to PSZC Sections 92.21.1.00 through 07
(Environmentally Sensitve Area — Specific Plan) and a Tentative Tract Map (TTM
35540) for the development of a 110-lot subdivision on a site of approximately
117 acres at the western terminus of Racquet Club Road.
B. On December 7, 2007, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and
Initial Study on the project, indicating that a draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) would be prepared on the proposed Specific Plan and Tentative Tract
Map, and 30-day period was provided for responses.
C. On January 19, 2010, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was issued to public
agencies and interested parties noting a revised EIR would be prepared and a
45-day period was provided for responses.
D. On January 21, 2010, the DEIR was prepared and circulated for a 45-day
public review period.
E. All public comments received on the DEIR were reviewed and written
responses were provided in a Final EIR (FEIR).
F. After a series of noticed public hearings, the Planning Commission
approved Resolution No. 6161 recommending that the City Council certify the
FEIR as complete and approve Case 5.1154 SP Desert Palisades Specific Plan,
including Tentative Tract Map 35540, subject to conditions of approval.
G. On January 5, 2011, a public hearing on the application for the project was
held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law, wherein the City
Council certified the FEIR and approved Cases 5.1154 SP and TTM 35540, after
considering all written and public testimony in conjunction with the cases. 1
Resolution No. _
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
Page 2
H. On January 7, 2015, the City Council approved an addendum to the FEIR
pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, allowing an extension of the
time period in which to conduct grading operations subject to additional mitigation
measures.
I. On June 11, 2015, the City of Palm Springs prepared an amendment to
the Desert Palisades Specific Plan, proposing the use of the Tramway Road
emergency access point for permanent resident access and designating a
portion of the site for boulder placement and permanent open space.
J. On June 24, 2015, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public
hearing on the amendment to the Desert Palisades Specific Plan, and
recommended approval to the City Council of the proposal to allow permanent
resident access to Tramway Road and to designate an approximately five-acre
parcel within the plan area as permanent open space.
K. On July 15, 2015, the City Council considered the proposed amendments
to the specific plan and the associated addendum to the FEIR evaluating the
environmental impacts of the changes to the plan, and determined that the
proposed changes do not represent a new significant environmental effect or an
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, and that the
amendment and associated addendum may be approved.
L. The City Council hereby finds that adoption of the proposed Specific Plan
Amendment would:
1 . Reduce the traffic impact to Racquet Club Road while maintaining
the current level of service on Tramway Road.
2. Reduce construction and environmental impacts by allowing
boulder placement on a remnant development parcel.
3. Remove the development potential from a portion of the Chino
Cone by designating the parcel as permanent open space within
the Specific Plan area.
M. The adoption of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with
the Zoning Code for the Chino Cone Special Policy Area and the ESA-SP zone,
and is consistent with the goals and policies identified in the General Plan
relative to the Chino Cone/Snow Canyon Special Policy Area.
N. An addendum to the previously certified Final Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR) for the subject project is an adequate environmental assessment
of the potential adverse impacts of the proposed amendments to the specific plan
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 20
Resolution No.
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
Page 3
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS RESOLVES:
SECTION 1. The Desert Palisades Specific Plan shall be amended to
include the exhibit identified as "Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment No.
1 — ESA-SP Planning Area #4," attached hereto.
SECTION 2. The Desert Palisades Specific Plan shall be amended to
incorporate the plans identified as "Tram Way Entry" and 'Tram Way Corridor
Design Areas," detailing the changes to the Palms Peak Road entrance and
identifying the boulder placement north of Tramway Road, attached hereto.
SECTION 3. The final access and configuration of the Tramway Road
entry to the development shall be subject to review and approval by the Mt. San
Jacinto Winter Park Authority.
SECTION 4. An addendum to the previously certified Final Environmental
Impact Report for the subject project is an adequate environmental assessment
of the potential adverse impacts of the proposed request for an amendment to
the Desert Palisades Specific Plan, under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) guidelines.
SECTION 5. Mitigation Measure 3.4-1 of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan
shall be modified as follows, which shall be sufficient and adequate to reduce any
potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels:
MM 3.4-1: The developer shall ensure that the following mitigation measures
be required to reduce potential impacts to bighorn sheep:
• Deeding all hillside acreage within the project boundaries to the City of
Palm Springs as part of their hillside conservation area.
• Ensuring that grading operations (earth moving) shall not take place
from FebFwary January 1 to June 30, the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep
lambing period. Grading operations shall be confined to between July
1 and danaafy-31 December 31 , when disturbance to sheep is less
likely.
n.d shall he n . t n cite !!-Finn aRY Felling operations that MLe
plaGe iR the "nth of len„aFy. All grading aGt :;ties shall sease�:,Q
desist when the hiele al m nitE)F deteffniees that BighGFR sheep
PFeseeta OF in the YiGiRity Of then eat Site
• Providing a research grant to the Bighorn Institute for further research
on the causes underlying the long-term decline in bighorn sheep
numbers. The amount to be paid to the Bighorn Institute shall be
determined by the institute in consultation with the applicant. The
applicant shall furnish the City with a receipt of payment prepared by
21
Resolution No.
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
Page 4
the institute.
that is adjaGent to the habitat
• No rock crushing or blasting operations shall occur on-site during any
phase of project development. Rock crushing operations shall be
limited to off-site locations for materials resulting from the development
of the Desert Water Agency reservoir site, common area
improvements, and the on-site infrastructure. Proposals for rock
splitting on individual lots will be evaluated at the time such
development applications are received for review and approval by the
City.
SECTION 6. The following Mitigation Measure 3.15-11(a) of the Mitigation
Monitoring Plan shall be added which shall be sufficient and adequate to support
previously identified measures to reduce any potentially significant impacts to
less than significant levels:
MM 3.15-11(a): The developer shall coordinate with the San Jacinto Winter
Park Authority to route as much construction traffic from Racquet Club Road
to Tram Way as is reasonably possible and acceptable to the San Jacinto
Winter Park Authority.
SECTION 7. The following Mitigation Measure 3.9-1(a) of the Mitigation
Monitoring Plan shall be added which shall be sufficient and adequate to support
previously identified measures to reduce any potentially significant impacts to
less than significant levels:
MM 3.9-1(a): The additional approximate 5 acre remnant parcel added to and
included within the Specific Plan, located northerly of Tram Way, shall be
designated as Open Space, and permanently preserved by dedication to the
City of Palm Springs in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15th day of July, 2015.
DAVID H. READY, CITY MANAGER
ATTEST:
JAMES THOMPSON, CITY CLERK
22
Resolution No. _
Case No. 5.1154-A SP
Page 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
July 15, 2015, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JAMES THOMPSON, CITY CLERK
City of Palm Springs, California
2�
ATTACHMENT 3
24
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment No. 1—ESA-SP Planning Area #4 City of Palm Springs
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT
The purpose of this amendment is to 1) provide language to allow a second resident
access on Tram Way replacing the previously approved Emergency access depicted in
the approved Specific Plan and 2) bring the former Not a Part remainder parcel under
the auspices of the Specific Plan to allow completion of the landscape regimen at the
project entry including construction of the Boulder Berm required by the Chino Cone
Ordinance along Tram Way.
BACKGROUND
Desert Palisades was approved by the Palm Springs City Council on January 5, 2011
as the first project to follow the requirements of the City of Palm Springs Chino
Cone/ESA-SP Ordinance. The development of the first phase of Desert Palisades
began in 2014. That first phase of construction has pointed to two areas where
modification of the Specific Plan will improve the overall project: 1) conversion of the
Emergency Access on Tram Way to a full secondary access for Desert Palisades
residents, and 2) inclusion of an additional 5+/- acre parcel on the north side of Tram
Way into the Specific Plan to be designated as permanent open space after completing
the development of the required landscape boulder berm on both sides of Tram Way.
TRAM WAY ACCESS
The approved Specific Plan proposed only the westerly terminus of Racquet Club for full
access to the project with two emergency points of access, one at Tram Way and a
second at Sanborn Way. The Specific Plan indicated that the access at Tram Way
might be considered at some point in the future for full access and would require assent
from the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway which controls the private portions of Tram Way
and the City of Palm Springs that controls the Specific Plan. The desirability of a full
access has become apparent as an alternative during the first phase of construction
both for reducing traffic on Racquet Club and as a marketing window. It is also felt that
constructing the full access improvements at the initial construction stage would be
preferable than coming back later when the revegetation along Tram Way was complete
and would have to be disrupted. See Exhibit A-1 for the design of the new entry
including expansion of the street section at the entry to include a center left turn lanes,
deceleration and acceleration lanes and a bicycle path on the north side of Tram Way.
This exhibit augments Exhibit 15 in the Specific Plan which depicts the Tram Way entry
as "Emergency Access and Possible Future Full Entry'
In working with the Tram staff, a phased program is contemplated which will allow the
full access during those hours that the Tram road is open for Tram business and then
1 25
Desert Palisades Specific Plan Amendment No. 1—ESA-SP Planning Area#4 City of Palm Springs
be locked so no Desert Palisades traffic enters Tram Way during the time the Tram
gates are closed near Highway 111. In addition to constructing the improvements
requested by the Tram including a center turning lane, and a deceleration lane for
downhill traffic, the plan is to install an additional lockable gate just uphill from the
Desert Palisades entry to further secure Tram Way during closed hours.
Future improvements in coordination with the Tram could allow full 24/7 access but only
with a plan approved by the Tram staff.
INCLUSION OF N.A.P. PARCEL IN DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN
The owners of the Desert Palisades property also own a small, remainder 5 acre parcel
("N.A.P. Parcel") on the opposite side of Tram Way from Desert Palisades. Since the
N.A.P. P-arsel portion of the original parcel was situated within the Chino Cone Planning
Area #3 and not in Planning Area #4 as is Desert Palisades, the initial plan was to leave
the N.A.P. Parcel out of the Specific Plan for Desert Palisades. The construction of the
first phase of the project confirmed an excess of oversized boulder material and since
the property surrounding the N.A.P. Parcel is allotted Tribal land, it was determined that
using the N.A.P. Parcel to complete the boulder berms using excess boulders from
Desert Palisades construction on both sides of Tram Way would be the best use of that
property. Once the boulder berm is completed and the site hydroseeded with native
plant materials, the land will be dedicated as permanent open space. See Exhibits A-2
and A-3 that show the landscape design for the parcel and a visual simulation of that
design as seen from Tram Way. These exhibits augment Exhibit 18 in the approved
Specific Plan.
2 26
ATTACHMENT 4
27
ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
DESERT PALISADES/ SCH NO. 2007121044
Certified by the City of Palm Springs on January 5, 2011
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to analyze and consider the
environmental consequences of their decisions to approve development projects over which they
exercise discretion. CEQA achieves this objective by requiring agencies to prepare Environmental Impact
Reports (EIR's) for projects with the potential to cause significant impacts on the physical environment.
EIR's are public documents that assess environmental effects related to the planning, construction, and
operation of a project, and indicate ways to reduce or avoid possible environmental damage. An EIR also
discloses growth-inducing impacts, effects found not to be significant, significant cumulative impacts,
and significant impacts that cannot be avoided, if any. The purpose of an EIR is to inform. EIR's are not
policy documents that recommend project approval or denial.
As lead agency, the City of Palm Springs prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Desert
Palisades Project, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources
Code, section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section
15000 et seq., as amended). The City Council certified the final EIR (Final EIR) for the Desert Palisades
Project at a public hearing on January 5, 2011, approved the Desert Palisades Final EIR for that project,
and adopted the findings and statement of overriding considerations at a public hearing on January 5,
2011. The analysis in the Final EIR was at a "project" level of detail, which anticipated the potential
impacts of future discretionary approvals to implement the project.
Applications for subsequent Site Plan and Architectural Review would not require preparation of
subsequent environmental documentation, CEQA Section 21166 limits the ability of an agency to require
an additional EIR, once one has been certified for the project.
Pursuant to Section 15367 or the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Palm Springs is the lead agency for
the project. The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or
approving the project that may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City, as the lead
agency, has the Authority for project approval and certification of the accompanying environmental
documentation. The Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority will serve as a Responsible Agency under
State CEQA Guideline 15381. The Responsible Agency means a public agency which proposes to carry
out or approve a project for which a lead agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or Negative
Declaration. For the purposes of CEQA, the term "responsible agency" includes all public agencies other
than the lead agency which have discretionary approval power over the project.
28
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
21166. Subsequent or Supplemental Impact Report Conditions
When an environmental impact report has been prepared for a project pursuant to this division, no
subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report shall be required by the lead agency or by any
responsible agency, unless one or more of the following events occur:
(a) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
environmental impact report.
(b) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being
undertaken which will require major revisions in the environmental impact report.
(c) New information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the
environmental impact report was certified as complete, becomes available.
The CEQA Guidelines further refine the circumstances under which a supplemental or subsequent EIR
may be required. Section 15162 is as follows:
15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations
(a) When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR
shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial
evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects;
2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative
declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was
certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the
following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration.
2
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would
in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from
those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to
adopt the mitigation measure or alternative."
The project applicant has now submitted a request to amend the Specific Plan and consecutively
augment measures discussed in the FEIR. Before acting on these requests the City must apply the
standards outlined above to determine whether a subsequent or supplemental EIR is required. In
reviewing the previously certified Final EIR, City Staff reviewed the applicants requested items which
merit discussion.
1) Conversion of the Emergency Access on Tram Way to full secondary access for Desert Palisades
residents.
2) Inclusion of an additional 5+/- acre parcel on the north side of Tram Way into the Specific Plan
to be designated as permanent open space after completing the development of the required
landscape boulder berm on both sides of Tram Way.
After reviewing the facts and analyzing the circumstances, Palm Springs City Staff has determined that a
new EIR is not required, because none of the circumstances described in CEQA Section 21166 as
implemented by CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 present themselves. Staff has prepared this addendum
to discuss these issues and the basis for this determination.
3 30
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
2.1 PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM
Project Background
Desert Palisades was the first project to follow the requirements of the City of Palm Springs Chino Cone
Ordinance and Environmentally Sensitive Area — Specific Plan (ESA-SP) Zoning Standards. The
development of the first phase of Desert Palisades began in 2014. That first phase of construction has
revealed two areas in which modification of the Specific Plan will improve the overall project: 1)
conversion of the Emergency Access on Tram Way to a full secondary access for Desert Palisades
residents, and 2) inclusion of an additional 5+/- acre parcel on the north side of Tram Way into the
Specific Plan to be designated as permanent open space after completing the development of the
required landscape boulder berm on both sides of Tram Way.
Palms Peak Road at Tram Wav Access Revision to Full Secondary Access
Description of Amendment
The Desert Palisades Project Roadway improvement and construction activities have successfully
completed the work associated with the relocation of large rock materials, installation of roadway
culverts and the grading of Palms Peak Road in compliance with the approved Final Map. The work
effort has focused on maintaining and/or restoring the Tram Way corridor natural resources in
accordance with the request of the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority and in compliance with the
landscape standards of the approved Desert Palisades Specific Plan.
The approved Specific Plan proposed only the westerly terminus of Racquet Club for full access to the
project with two emergency points of access, one at Tram Way and a second at Sanborn Way, The
Specific Plan indicated that the access at Tram Way might be considered at some point in the future for
full access and would require assent from the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority which controls the
private portions of Tram Way and the City of Palm Springs that controls the Specific Plan. The
desirability of a full access has become apparent as an alternative during the first phase of construction
both for reducing traffic on Racquet Club and as a marketing window. It is also felt that constructing the
full access improvements at the initial construction stage would be preferable than revising the plan
when the revegetation along Tram Way was complete and would have to be disrupted.
In working with the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority staff, a phased program is contemplated
which will allow the full access during those hours that Tram Way road is open for Palm Springs Aerial
Tram business and then be locked so no Desert Palisades traffic enters Tram Way during the time the
Tram Way gates are closed near Highway 111. The improvements requested by the Mt. San Jacinto
Winter Park Authority include a center left turn lane, a deceleration lane for downhill traffic, a 6 foot
wide bike lane on the north side, and an additional lockable gate is proposed just uphill from the Desert
Palisades Palms Peak entry to further secure Tram Way during closed hours.
Future improvements in coordination with the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority could allow full
24/7 access but only with a plan approved by the Tram staff.
4 31
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
The project infrastructure improvement activities are respecting and in some cases exceeding the
development requirements of the Chino Cone area which are included in the City General Plan Land Use
element. In general, the development requirements emphasize a site design that respects and conforms
with the established standards relative to the special characteristics of the subject area and the City
environment as a whole; these General Plan land use policies concerning the Chino Cone have also
served as the foundation to the "ESA-SP" Environmentally Sensitive Area Specific Plan Zone as well as
the Desert Palisades Project EIR.
Project Analysis and Design
The approved Specific Plan and engineering plans include design for a 4 lane entrance/exit composed of
two lanes for ingress and two lanes for egress, with a median and a gated access point. The update of
the improvement plans will provide further refinement of this entry configuration. The guard house is
intended to assist in the ongoing security of the site considering public access to onsite Chino Canyon
trail and adjacent pedestrian trails along Tram Way that provide pedestrian access to the project.
Infrastructure Construction Field Conditions
In consideration of the visibility of the design condition of the Tram Way corridor by pedestrian and
vehicular traffic the function of this portion of the property has been re analyzed. Rather than
functioning as a back of house entrance, this portion would be better utilized to demonstrate the high
level of design that incorporates the natural features as discussed throughout the Project Specific Plan
and EIR. The Applicant is proposing that this portion of the project include a more refined aesthetic.
Additionally as discussed in the project EIR, the management of public foot traffic through the project
was anticipated to require some creative solutions. An onsite guardhouse structure at this location is
proposed to provide active monitoring at the point in which the project intersects an area of high
exposure associated with tourist and local utilization of the Palm Springs Aerial Tram and Tram Way. It is
anticipated that these improvements would have beneficial impacts to the Project Entry and Tram Way
corridor.
Proposed Landscape and Entry Way Revisions
See Exhibit A-1 for the design of the new entry, Exhibit A-2 and A-3 also shows proposed design
illustrations including landscape materials that would complement the existing conditions of the Chino
Cone as well as the Tram Way corridor. The area associated with the intersection of Palms Peak Road
and Tram Way has been graded and currently includes design features that are approved for full ingress
and egress as well as pedestrian access associated with the trail along the project frontage on Tram
Way. The proposed Guard House would be constructed on Palms Peak Road with low visibility from
traffic on Tram Way to enhance the security of the site and public trails. The additional oversized rock
that has been encountered during the extraction of native materials is also proposed to be further
incorporated into the revised site design for the Palms Peak Road.
The project anticipates that the updated design of Palms Peak Road extending south from the Tram Way
entrance would result in positive impacts to site design and is fully covered by the approved Desert
5 � 4
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
Palisades EIR and no further environmental approvals are necessary. Due to the comparison of the
approved linework and the proposed refinements, the Tram Way Entry improvements should be
considered a site design approval.
In consideration of the positive impacts mentioned above,the applicant would ask that the City consider
this revision to the Project's Grading, Infrastructure and Landscape Plans.
Application of CEClA Guidelines Section 15612
Is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there have been substantial changes proposed
in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of a new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects as a result of considering the revision of the Palms Peak Road to a secondary full
access at Tram Way?
:• No, the proposed revision of Palms Peak Road to a full secondary access at Tram Way does not
constitute a substantial change to the Project. The site design at Palms Peak Road includes four
full lanes so the revisions to the design will be minimal.The additional safety features requested
by the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park Authority will increase the safety at this location. The
redistribution of traffic from the Racquet Club entrance will be minimal.
Per the Desert Palisades Specific Plan Supplemental Traffic Analysis of Revised Site Access
prepared by Endo Engineering, in the approved traffic study (FEIR adopted 1.5.11), all of the
project related trips (1,140 vehicles per day) were assigned to Racquet Club Road east of the
project site and through the intersection of Racquet Club Road and Palm Canyon Drive. Using
the split from the original certified Traffic Study. Approximately 15% of the site traffic was
assigned to the north and Interstate 10 via Highway 111. 30% of the site traffic was assigned to
the east via Racquet Club Road. The remaining 55% was assigned to the south along Palm
Canyon Drive toward Downtown Palm Springs. Of the 30% assigned to Racquet Club Road, east
of Palm Canyon Drive, 10 % of the site traffic was projected to travel to the north via Indian
Canyon Drive and 20% was expected to travel to the east and south via Racquet Club Road and
Indian Canyon Drive.
The Currently proposed access to Tram Way would improve access for future residents of the
site to and from the north via Highway 111 and Indian Canyon Drive. With the revised site
access plan, approximately 25% of the project related traffic (280 daily trips) would be expected
to use Tram Way, west of Highway 111, rather than Racquet Club Road. The project related
traffic volume on Racquet Club Road, west of Palm Canyon Drive would be reduced to 860 daily
trips. The distribution of project related traffic onto two independent access routes would
reduce the future project related traffic volumes on Racquet Club Road by approximately 25%.
The approach to incorporate the excavated boulders into the site design through the
construction of boulder berms and barrier features would be maintained. Some additional
6 IN
03
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
design components will be incorporated to clearly identify the entrance. Consistent with the
prior analysis and activities that have taken place in Phase 1A, the design of the entrance would
be constructed to reflect a natural appearance. The proposed guard house will be designed to
reduce its visibility from Tram Way per previous consultation with the Mt. San Jacinto Winter
Park Authority, resulting in less than significant impacts.
Is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there have been substantial changes with
respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of
the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects as a result of the consideration of
revising the Palms Peak Road to full secondary access?
No, there is no evidence suggesting that there have been substantial changes with respect to the
circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions to the
previous EIR. The Supplemental Traffic Analysis of Revised Site Access indicates that the
proposed revisions of Palms Peak Way to full secondary access will not introduce new
environmental effects or trigger mitigation measures that have not already been developed for
the Project site. Additionally, the revisions of this access will redistribute some traffic from the
Racquet Club entrance reducing impacts at that location.
Is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there is new information of substantial
importance related to the consideration of the Palms Peak Road to a secondary full access at Tram Way
which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the
time the previous EIR was certified that shows: (I) the project will have one or more significant effects
not discussed in the EIR, (2) significant effects previously shown will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR, (3) mitigation measure or alternatives previously found to be infeasible
would in fact be feasible, or (4) there are considerably different mitigation measure or alternatives
from those analyzed in the previous EIR that would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects?
No, there is no evidence suggesting that there is new information of substantial importance
relating to new significant effects or the severity of previously identified significant effects, or
new alternatives or mitigation measures or the efficacy of previously considered alternatives or
mitigation measures. The proposed revision of Palms Peak Road to a full secondary access will
comply with existing Mitigation and Monitoring Program developed for the Project, which is
currently being implemented. Additionally coordination with the Mt. San Jacinto Winter Park
Authority was required within the adopted EIR. This coordination has resulted in additional
improvements on Tram Way that will augment pedestrian and vehicle safety. No increase in the
severity of the previously identified effects is expected by following the established and proposed
site design concepts at the location. As a consequence it can be concluded that no new
considerably different mitigation measures would be required. No new alternatives need be
7 34
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
analyzed. Nonetheless, it is important to note that there has been no change at this time from
the circumstances analyzed in the EIR.
8 35
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
Relocation of Rock to the 5-acre Parcel North of Tram Wav
Description of Amendment
Grading and rock-relocation activities primarily associated with Phase 1A began on October 14, 2014
and were completed on December 31, 2014. These improvements accommodated all of the excavated
boulders into the site design in the form of boulder berms and barrier features constructed to reflect a
natural appearance according to the quantities of rock encountered. Construction best management
practices prevented disturbance of the principal drainage areas on-site.
The owners of the Desert Palisades property also own a small, 5 acre parcel ("N.A.P. Parcel") on the
north side of Tram Way from Desert Palisades. Since the N.A.P. parcel was situated within Chino Cone
Planning Area 43 and not in Planning Area 44 as is Desert Palisades, the initial plan was to leave the
N.A.P. parcel out of the Specific Plan for Desert Palisades. The construction of the first phase of the
project confirmed an excess of oversized boulder material and since the property surrounding the N.A.P.
parcel is allotted Tribal land, it was determined that using the N.A.P. parcel to complete the boulder
berms using excess boulders from Desert Palisades construction on both sides of Tram Way would be
the best use of that property. Once the boulder berm is completed and the site hydroseeded with native
plant materials,the land will be dedicated as permanent open space.
The applicant is proposing that a portion of the 5+/- acres north of Tram Way be utilized for oversized
rock berming and landscape improvements consistent with the practices previously analyzed in the EIR
for the Project and those that have already taken place for the Project in Phase 1A. Though this area was
analyzed as "not a part" in the EIR, the technical studies encompassed land beyond this 5-acre parcel
per the Chino Cone Ordinance requirements and industry standards.
Exhibit A-2 and A-3 include illustrations of the placement of the rocks in consideration of avoiding the
onsite active and historic drainage channels (per MSA existing hydrology analysis). The exhibits also
illustrate that placement of rock and landscape materials that would complement the existing
conditions of the Chino Cone as well as the Tram Way corridor.
Placement of the rock will follow the best construction and post-construction practices to preserve the
on-site active and historic drainage channels and to provide stable and long-term erosion protection.
This will be achieved in part through the re-naturalization of the new berm features. Oversized rock
placement could reasonably be conducted on approximately 2.5 acres of the total 5-acre parcel. Utilizing
an estimated height of 6 feet (varies organically) this location could contain approximately 24,200 CY of
rock. If the oversized rock is relocated to an alternative offsite location a total of approximately 2,420
truckloads would be anticipated. This translates in 4,840 truck trips (in and out of the project) that will
be avoided. The project anticipates the utilization of the 5 acres north of Tram Way would result in
positive impacts related to CEQA, not only for traffic impacts but also to Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas
by reducing emission from truck trips related to construction activity.
9 36
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
Application of CEQA Guidelines Section 15612
Is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there have been substantial changes proposed
in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EiR due to the involvement of a new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects as a result of considering the relocation of rock to the 5-acre parcel north of Tram
Way?
No, the proposed relocation of rock to the adjacent five-acre parcel north of Tram Way does not
constitute a substantial change to the Project. The Geology and Soils Section (3.6) of the EIR
previously analyzed the nature of temporary disturbance during grading and construction
activities related to streets and infrastructure. The approach to incorporate all of as much of the
excavated boulders into the site design through the construction of boulder berms and barrier
features would be maintained in the proposed activities for the 5-acre parcel north of Tram
Way. Consistent with the prior analysis and activities that have taken place in Phase 1A, these
features would be constructed to reflect a natural appearance and that would have the ability to
adjust according to the quantities of rock encountered throughout the site during
construction/excavation activities, resulting in less than significant impacts.
is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there have been substantial changes with
respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of
the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects as a result of the consideration of
relocating rock to the 5-acre parcel north of Tram Way?
No, there is no evidence suggesting that there have been substantial changes with respect to the
circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions to the
previous EIR. This analysis reveals that the nature of the proposed relocation of rock to the 5-acre
parcel will not introduce new environmental effects or trigger mitigation measures that have not
already been developed for the Project site.
is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there is new information of substantial
importance related to the consideration of relocating rock to the 5-acre parcel north of Tram Way which
was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time
the previous EIR was certified that shows: (1) the project will have one or more significant effects not
discussed in the EIR, (2) significant effects previously shown will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR, (3) mitigation measure or alternatives previously found to be infeasible
would in fact be feasible, or (4) there are considerably different mitigation measure or alternatives
from those analyzed in the previous EIR that would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects?
No, there is no evidence suggesting that there is new information of substantial importance
relating to new significant effects or the severity of previously identified significant effects, or
new alternatives or mitigation measures or the efficacy of previously considered alternatives or
10 37
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
mitigation measures. The proposed relocation of rock would adhere to the existing Mitigation
and Monitoring Program developed for the Project, which is currently being implemented. No
increase in the severity of the previously identified effects is expected by following the
established earth and rock movement limitations. As a consequence it can be concluded that no
new considerably different mitigation measures would be required. No new alternatives need be
analyzed. Nonetheless, it is important to note that there has been no change at this time from
the circumstances analyzed in the EIR.
3.1 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND GRADING SUMMARY
On January 7, 2015 the City Council approved an Addendum to the certified EIR for the Desert Palisades
project in order to allow for a 30 day extension to the seasonal construction from July 1 - December 31'`
to July1 - January 31". This extension was provided by the City to allow the project to complete
construction and grading activities in Phase 1, prior to the commencement of the bighorn sheep lambing
season. As a result of this extension a biological monitor was present on site during the month of
January 2015 to observe the presence of any bighorn sheep in the vicinity and halt construction as
necessary.
The project will now revert to the original seasonal construction schedule of July 1 — December 31", as
shown in MM3.4-1 below, this construction schedule is outside of the big horn sheep lambing period
and on site biological monitoring will no longer be necessary.
Biological Resources
MM 3.4-1: The developer shall ensure that the following mitigation measures be required to reduce potential
impacts to bighorn sheep:
• Deeding all hillside acreage within the project boundaries to the City of Palm Springs as part of their
hillside conservation area.
• Ensuring that grading operations shall not take place from January 1 to June 30, the Peninsular Bighorn
Sheep lambing period. Grading operations shall be confined to between July 1 and December 31, when
disturbance to sheep is less likely.
• Providing a research grant to the Bighorn Institute for further research on the causes underlying the long-
term decline in bighorn sheep numbers. The amount to be paid to the Bighorn Institute shall be
determined by the institute in consultation with the applicant. The applicant shall furnish the City with a
receipt of payment prepared by the institute.
• Placing a b gharn and pet 9F00f fence affiund the area te be developed that is adjacent In habitat.
• No rock crushing or blasting operations shall occur on-site during any phase of project development. Rock
crushing operations shall be limited to off-site locations for materials resulting from the development of
the Desert Water Agency reservoir site, common area improvements, and the on-site infrastructure.
Proposals for rock splitting on individual lots will be evaluated at the time such development applications
are received for review and approval by the City.
Additional allowable construction operations during the seasonal construction of July 1" and December
31"would include the following:
1. Boulder excavation/ mounding during street over-excavation
2. Street back fill import material
3. Boulder export from site
11 38
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
The approved EIR limits grading activities and the movement of boulders to the July 1 — December
31"schedule. However, year round construction operations could include the following:
1. Landscape construction
2. Boulder landscape construction (strap cradle only)
3. Wet and dry utility construction, to include backfill of all trench material
4. Vertical construction
5. Relocation of construction materials
6. Home construction
The project will remain in full compliance with the Certified EIR and the mitigation measures contained
within.
4.1 BASIS FOR AN ADDENDUM TO AN EIR
CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 explains when an addendum is required:
15164. Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration
(a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR
if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section
15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.
(b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical
changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling
for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
(c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the
final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
(d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative
declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
(e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162
should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's required findings on the project,
or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence."
All though there have been no changes to the project, an addendum is appropriate because there have
been minor technical additions and new information. Additionally, none of the conditions described in
Section 15162 calling for a preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. These occurrences do not
constitute substantial changes to the project or the circumstances due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects. Similarly, subsequent considerations do not constitute new information that would
show new effects or substantially more severe effects. Likewise,there is no known mitigation measures
that would in fact be feasible or that would substantially reduce significant effects, that the project
12 39
Addendum No.1 to Final Environmental Impact Report
Desert Palisades/SCH No. 2007121044
proponent has declined to adopt. Furthermore, there have been no other changes, evidence or new
information which would require revisions to the previous EIR. Because none of the criterion in section
15162 has been met, an addendum is appropriate.
13 40
ATTACHMENT 5
41
_ � i PWJPFAS`
f
i
� / .n / rt�raiox / _ � -. s o'owsc.iao 1-. s — � l r.w.ur,w webudxw -. •-
9 .. s , !r .i`u"w>dm ..�b DAM WAY
_
----------
lot
} v � f l�n A� r� _� � for ti•��I�Jr �/ i i�J �� ( \�r .� � ' 7 A � /'
• A A 1 >
L \ \ IN
v AI v. a
ss L l / v
\ -
/
/
1
CONSULTING,MSA
.
r �
u
m
® rir m i
+9a
kw
jr
T
� �, i G {. a !' � �. 1` �T �•• T b^ ..
i
r
�1
L { �ro R I � �• y3.
i
BYO' ,
14�
� ypyy
.r
x:
z y ,
yy A}
f;
aim
nil
r
n; z Nlit
Nq
q b
c
�+�ti~lei✓ dt�.1�$��"' t�i7 �y`.
ly.
•et
.k
ATTACHMENT 6
J
WWMA
Endo Engineering Traffic Engineering Air Quality Studies Noise Assessments
April 6, 2015
Mr. Ed Freeman
Pinnacle View, LLC
P.O. Box 1754
Lake Oswego, OR 97035-0579
Subject: Desert PalisadesSpecffic Plan Supplemental Traffic Analysis of Revised Site Access
Dear Mr. Freeman;
Endo Engineering prepared the Desert Palisades Specific Plan Traffic Impact Study (dated May 16, 2007)
evaluating the traffic impacts associated with the development of 117± acres with 110 lots for custom single-
family detached residential dwelling units in the City of Palm Springs, California. The development envisioned a
private residential community that may eventually be gated with privately maintained streets, recreational
amenities, and open space. The Desert Palisades Specific Plan was approved and fully entitled.
Two master planned roadways, Racquet Club Road and Tram Way, could potentially provide access for the
development. The approved Specific Plan included access from the western terminus of Racquet Club Road. A
connection to Sanborn Way (north of the D.W.A. water reservoirs) was shown in the approved Desert Palisades
Specific Plan for emergency access only. Although Tram Way crosses the northwest corner of the project site,
no site access was shown to Tram Way in the approved Site Plan.
It is our understanding that the site access plan for the Desert Palisades Specific Plan has been revised to include
access to and from Tram Way. No change in the number of residential lots is proposed and no development is
proposed within the 5-acre parcel north of Tram Way, which will be used to store rocks uncovered during the
development of the site.
Effect of Proposed Access Modification on Site Traffic Assignment
In the approved traffic study, all of the project-related trips (1,140 vehicles per day) were assigned to Racquet
Club Road east of the project site and through the intersection of Racquet Club Road and Palm Canyon Drive.
Approximately 15 percent of the site traffic was assigned to the north and Interstate 10 via Highway 111. Thirty
percent of the site traffic was assigned to the east via Racquet Club Road. The remaining 55 percent was
assigned to the south along Palm Canyon Drive toward downtown Palm Springs. Of the 30 percent assigned to
Racquet Club Road, east of Palm Canyon Drive, 10 percent of the site traffic was projected to travel to the north
via Indian Canyon Drive and 20 percent was expected to travel to the east and south via Racquet Club Road
and Indian Canyon Drive.
The currently proposed access to Tram Way would improve access for future residents of the site to and from the
north via Highway 111 and Indian Canyon Drive. With the revised site access plan, approximately 25 percent of
the project-related traffic (280 daily trips)would be expected to use Tram Way, west of Highway 111, rather than
Racquet Club Road. The project-related traffic volume on Racquet Club Road, west of Palm Canyon Drive,
would be reduced to 860 daily trips.
28811 Woodcock Drive, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677-1330
Phone: (949) 362-0020 E-Mail: endoengr@cox.net
46
Tram Way
The Winter Park Authority has authority over Tram Way, from the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway to State
Highway 111. When the Desert Palisades Specific Plan was originally submitted for approval, the Winter Park
Authority declined the Desert Palisades project access to Tram Way. The Winter Park Authority has since altered
its position and is currently willing to consider access to Tram Way by the proposed project.
Tram Way has a 100-foot right-of-way and is paved as a two-lane undivided roadway with a 40-foot roadbed.
The City of Palm Springs General Plan update classifies Tram Way as a two-lane divided roadway. The current
daily design capacity (LOS D) of Tram Way as a two-lane undivided roadway is 11,700 vehicles per day (VPD).
If Tram Way were widened to a two-lane divided roadway, the daily design capacity would be 16,200 VPD
A 24-hour traffic count made by Kunzman Associates on January 13, 2005 determined that the daily traffic
volume on Tram Way was 1,917 vehicles per day. Endo Engineering determined in the 160 @ Tram Way (TTM
35176) Traffic Impact Study that the average daily traffic (ADT) volume on Tram Way, west of Highway 111 was
1,720 VPD in March of 2007. Based upon an existing capacity of 11,700 VPD, Tram Way is currently providing
excellent levels of service.
Upon buildout of the City of Palm Springs General Plan, Tram Way is projected to have a daily traffic volume of
13,500 ADT west of Highway 111. This projection reflects all potential future development along Tram Way.
Development at this intensity is unlikely because of various environmental constraints. In the event that this traffic
volume does occur, the General Plan shows that the capacity of Tram Way may be increased to 18.000 VPD by
widening Tram Way, immediately west of Highway 111, to provide a two-lane divided cross-section. This
improvement would allow Tram Way to accommodate the projected future traffic volumes upon General Plan
buildout at an acceptable level of service.
In August of 2007, Endo Engineering prepared the 160 @ Tram Way (TTM 35176) Traffic Impact Study which
evaluated the intersection of Palm Canyon Drive with Tram Way. That traffic study determined that the
intersection of Palm Canyon Drive with Tram Way was operating at LOS B during the midday and evening peak
hours in the year 2007. In that study, the intersection of Palm Canyon Drive with Tram Way was projected to
operate at LOS C during the midday and evening peak hours of the year 2025.
Level of Service at Key Intersections
The Desert Palisades Specific Plan Traffic Impact Study determined that project-related traffic would utilize three
percent of the intersection capacity during the midday peak hour and one percent of the intersection capacity
during the evening peak hour at the key intersection of Palm Canyon Drive and Racquet Club Road. The
intersection of Palm Canyon Drive and Racquet Club Road was projected to operate at LOS C during the midday
and evening peak hours upon General Plan buildout with or without site traffic volumes.
The proposed site access to Tram Way would provide a shorter route tolfrom the north for future residents. This
would attract approximately 280 daily trips to Tram Way, west of Highway 111, that were previously assigned to
Racquet Club Road, west of Palm Canyon Drive. The operation of the intersection of Palm Canyon Drive and
Racquet Club Road should improve slightly with the revised site access but during the peak hours it would still
provide LOS C.
The new site access proposed on Tram Way would add 22 vehicles during the midday peak hour and 29
vehicles during the evening peak hour to Tram Way, west of Highway 111. It would also reduce the project-
related traffic volume on Highway 111, between Tram Way and Racquet Club Road. The peak hour operation of
the intersection of Tram Way with Highway 111 is unlikely to change as a result of the redistribution of site traffic
associated with the proposed access on Tram Way. Site traffic changes during the peak hours would ultilize less
than two precent of the intersection capacity.
2 47
Site traffic destined to/from the south would be unaffected by the new access on Tram Way. Therefore, the
projected levels of service at the two key intersections located on Palm Canyon Drive south of the Racquet Club
Road (Palm Canyon Drive at Via Escuela and Palm Canyon Drive at Vista Chino) should not change as a result
of the proposed site access on Tram Way.
Recommendations
Tram Way has a 45 MPH posted speed limit and a horizontal curve in the vicinity of the proposed site access.
The site access intersection with Tram Way should occur at a ninety degree angle with traffic on the minor street
controlled by a STOP sign.
The site traffic volume entering the proposed site access from Tram Way is projected to include six vehicles
during the midday peak hour and nineteen vehicles during the evening peak hour. With the current traffic volume
on Tram Way, this volume of vehicles turning left into the site would not be sufficient to meet the ITE suggested
warrant for an isolated left turn bay at the site access.' A traffic volume of approximately 5000 vehicles per day
would be required on Tram Way to meet the ITE warrant for an isolated left-turn bay at the proposed site access.
Motorists approaching an at-grade intersection should have an unobstructed view of the whole intersection and of
a sufficient length of the intersecting highway to permit control of the vehicle to avoid collisions. The sight
triangles must be free of obstructions that might interfere with a driver's ability to see other vehicles approaching
on the cross-street. Any object within the sight triangle high enough above the elevation of the adjacent roadway
to constitute a sight obstruction (such as entry monuments, cut slopes, hedges, trees, bushes, rocks, etc.) should
be removed or lowered.
Adequate sight distance between pedestrians, drivers, and cyclists should be provided within the street space at
driveways, intersections, and crosswalks. As required by the City of Palm Springs, adequate sight distance shall
be provided at the proposed site access on Tram Way per AASHTO guidelines in A Policy on Geometric Design
of Highways and Streets.
Conclusion
The Desert Palisades Specific Plan development would benefit from an access on Tram Way. The proposed
Tram Way access would improve access for future residents of the site to and from the north via Highway 111
and Indian Canyon Drive. The distribution of project-related traffic onto two independent access routes would
reduce the future project-related traffic volumes on Racquet Club Road by approximately 25 percent. Separate
independent site access routes are desirable for emergency services in the event that one route is blocked. The
additional site access onto Tram Way would not result in a significant impact on traffic operations.
We trust that this information will assist you and the City of Plam Springs in determining the significance of
potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed change in site access. If you have questions regarding the
findings herein, please do not hesitate to contact our offices by telephone at (949) 362-0020 or by e-mail at
endoengr@cox.net.
Sincerely, r" n Sr, , \
ENDO ENGINEERING Q f
LEE ^
WO ,"
' -�
Grego E o
Principal TR 11G1
` � ryf31f2o16 �
TIPAFF�G ✓ .p
Source: Vergil G.Stover and Frank J Koepke,Transportation and Land Development,2002,Figure 5-21.
3
48
ATTACHMENT 7
49
City of Palm Springs
Planning Commission Minutes
June 24, 2015
The meeting resumed at 2:30 pm.
2B. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TO AMEND THE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC
PLAN TO ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAMWAY ROAD AND TO DESIGNATE
A +/- 5 ACRE PORTION OF THE PLAN AREA FOR PERMANENT OPEN SPACE,
ZONE ESA-SP, PLANNING AREA 4 (CASE 5.1154 SP). (FF)
Planning Director Fagg presented the proposed amendment as outlined in the staff
report.
The Commission asked technical questions pertaining to:
• Who owns the parcel of land that will be dedicated to the public?
• Accessible open space for public use;
• Prohibition of construction trucks on Racquet Club Road.
Planning Director Fagg pointed-out that a condition of approval will need to be added to
the resolution pertaining to approval of final design subject to San Jacinto Winter Park
Authority.
Commissioner Roberts opened the public hearing:
EMILY HEMPHILL, legal representation for Desert Palisades, clarified that this is an
approved project and provided details on development for permanent open space.
There being no further speakers the public hearing was closed.
ACTION: To recommend approval to City Council with the added condition of approval
pertaining to approval of the final design subject to San Jacinto Winter Park Authority.
Motion: Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Middleton and unanimously
carried 4-0-2 on a roll call vote.
AYES: Commissioner Lowe, Commissioner Middleton, Commissioner Roberts,
Commissioner Weremiuk
ABSENT: Commissioner Calerdine, Vice-Chair Klatchko
2C. 750 LOFTS, LLC FOR A MIXED-USE HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON E
PARCEL LOCATED AT 750 NORTH PAL -1/R-3/PDD
1041 RESORT COMBINI ALMAS BUSINESS HISTORIC DISTRICT
HD-1 C 374 GPA/CUP AND 3.3795 MAJ.) (KL)
-- --- Page 4 -- — - 50 rf
ATTACHMENT 8
51
OF Wis
CO
O 0
June 16,2015
i615JUN22 AMII: 4:. O
�'• F ' i h��t;r
Attn:James Thompson,City Clerk
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262 EST.JUNE 19,1883
Re: Case 5.1154 Specific Plan,Desert Palisades
The Soboba Band of Luiseiio Indians appreciates your observance of Tribal Cultural
Resources and their preservation in your project. The information provided to us on said
project(s)has been assessed through our Cultural Resource Department, where it was
concluded that although it is outside the existing reservation, the project area does fall
within the bounds of our Tribal Traditional Use Areas. At this time the Soboba Band
does not have any specific concerns regarding known cultural resources in the specified
areas that the project encompasses,but does request that the appropriate consultation
continue to take place between the tribes,project proponents, and government agencies.
Also, working in and around traditional use areas intensifies the possibility of
encountering cultural resources during any future constructionlexcavation phases that
may take place. For this reason the Soboba Band of Luisefio Indians requests that
approved Native American Monitor(s)be present during any future ground disturbing
proceedings, including surveys and archaeological testing, associated with this project
The Soboba Band recommends that you contact the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians and other tribes that are closer to the project area. In the event that future
monitoring does become necessary and a monitor from the Agua Caliente Band of
Cahuilla Indians is not able to be retained,cultural monitors from the Soboba Band of
Luisefio Indians will be available.
Sincerely, 4
Joseph Ontiveros
Cultural Resource Director
Soboba Band of Luisefio Indians
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto,CA 92581
Phone(951) 654-5544 ext. 4137
Cell(951)663-5279
iontiverosfla soboba-nsn.gov
52
! 'i ; i "Ei P.O. Box 5402
Palm Springs, CA 92263
Re: Case 5.1154 specific plan
James Thompson, City Clerk
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Dear Mr. Thompson:
I object to revisions to the previously approved Desert Palisades Specific Plan
which would allow resident access to the Tramway Road.
The Tramway Road is owned by the Winter Park Authority for access to the
Tram Station. Allowing Desert Palisades access to this road would impede
the flow of traffic to the Tram Station and negate their expense for a road to
this project.
The Tramway Road is narrow and does not permit passing. Access to private
property would require revisions to the traffic flow which could create a very
dangerous situation.
The Desert Palisades project can build their own road into the project and not
profit at the expense borne by the Winter Park Authority for access to the
Tram Station.
If this plan is approved the Desert Palisades will be back requesting the city to
install traffic lights and make road revisions. I volunteer at the tram station
several times a week and know the impact approving this request would have
on traffic flow.
Please reject this request.
J D. Forneris
53
To: Jay Thompson, Office of City Clerk
To: Marcus Fuller, Office of Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
Please distribute to the Planning Commissioners.
Planning Commission Meeting 6/24/15
Regarding item 2B
2B. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TO AMEND THE DESERT
PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAMWAY
ROAD AND TO DESIGNATE A +/- 5 ACRE PORTION OF THE PLAN
AREA FOR PERMANENT OPEN SPACE, ZONE ESA-SP, PLANNING
AREA 4 (CASE 5.1154 SP). (FF)
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to City Council.
Dear Commissioners,
I live at 2490 N. Janis Drive which is at the corner of West Racquet Club and
Janis Drive. I would like to add my support for the proposed amendment to the
Desert Palisades Plan to change the Tramway Road driveway from an
emergency entrance to the main entrance/exit for the residence of Desert
Palisades but ask that you insert language keeping all construction traffic off of
Racquet Club Drive. In a special situation where construction traffic will use
Racquet Club, I ask that that the neighbors be noticed and measurable and
enforceable mitigation measures be put into place or that the ones in place be
enforced. The existing EIR already requires a traffic management plan so it may
not be necessary to amend the EIR. It is however, necessary to ensure a traffic
mitigation plan is in place that contains the necessary elements to protect us. I
would also ask that the pedestrian access to and through Desert Palisades is
reinforced allowing full and free access to hiking trails from Racquet Club Road.
The construction traffic to and from Desert Palisades last fall was beyond
reasonable, a safety concern, an infringement, created significant amounts of
dust, noise, and vibrations, and negatively impacted our quality of life on so many
levels. The Little Tuscany Neighborhood Organization banded together and
presented a letter to the City Council about the negative impacts which is part of
the public record. I would like to think we learned from this experience and it will
provide wisdom on how to balance our quality of life with the number of
construction projects that are approved for this area.
Thanks for your consideration,
Sincerely
Dennis Woods
2490 N. Janis Drive.
Palm Springs, CA 92262
email: Dennis.L.Woods@gmail.com
54
Flinn Fagg
From: Jay Thompson
Sent: Monday,June 22, 2015 8:39 AM
To: Terri Hintz; Flinn Fagg
Subject: FW: Planning Commission Meeting 6/24/15 Supporting item 2B
From: Bradley Kain [mailto:tinyhopep@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 7:45 AM
To: Jay Thompson; Marcus Fuller
Cc: Dennis Woods; Scott Bridgeman; Bradley Kain
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting 6/24/15 Supporting item 2B
To: Jay Thompson, Office of City Clerk
To: Marcus Fuller, Office of Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
Planning Commission Meeting 6/24/15
Regarding item 2B
2B. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TO AMEND THE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO
ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAMWAY ROAD AND TO DESIGNATE A +/- 5 ACRE PORTION
OF THE PLAN AREA FOR PERMANENT OPEN SPACE, ZONE ESA-SP PLANNING
AREA 4 (CASE 5.1154 SP). (FF)
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to City Council.
We live at 1011 West Racquet Club Rd which is at the corner of West Racquet Club and Milo Dr. We
are out of town and will not be able to attend the Planning Commission Meeting on 6/24/15. We
would like to add our support for the proposed amendment to the Desert Palisades Plan to change
the Tramway Road driveway from an emergency entrance to the main entrance/exit for the residence
of Desert Palisades.
This change would maintain the current traffic on West Racquet Club to the existing traffic plus the
additional 12 new houses currently approved for Tuscany Heights. Adding traffic from the additional
110 planned Desert Palisades houses would be disruptive to our neighborhood. It would change
West Racquet Club from street where it's safe to walk along the side of the road to a traffic
thoroughfare.
The construction traffic to and from Desert Palisades last fall was a safety concern for the our
neighborhood. It was unsafe to walk up or down West Racquet Club with all the speeding
construction trucks.
Thanks for your consideration,
Sincerely
Bradley Kain and Scott Bridgeman
1011 W Racquet Club Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262
55
Flinn Fagg
From: Jay Thompson
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 3:58 PM
To: Terri Hintz; Flinn Fagg
Subject: FW: Planning Commission Meeting 6.24.2015 Supporting of Item 2B
From: MOR48art@aol.com [mailto:MOR48art@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:17 PM
To: Jay Thompson; marcus.fuller@palmspring-ca.gov
Cc: Dennis.L.Woods@gmail.com; tinyhopep@yahoo.com; tinyhopep@aol.com; dannsmith@mail2SanFrancisco.com
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting 6.24.2015 Supporting of Item 2B
To: Jay Thompson, Office of City Clerk and
Marcus Fuller, Office of Assistant City Manager/ Engineer
Meeting: Planning Commission Meeting
June 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM
Agenda: Support of Item 2B
We are writing to support the proposed amendment outlined in Item 2B, which directly focuses on changing the main
entrance for the Desert Palisades Development. Currently, the plan requires that West Racquet Club Road be used as
the main artery to this development. As residents who live (2502 N. Girasol Avenue) at the corner of North Girasol Avenue
and West Racquet Club Road, we can firmly attest to the presence of excessive speeding vehicles, noise and dust we
have suffered through during the early stages of this development. Changing the main entrance from West Racquet Club
Road and over to Tramway Road would help to maintain traffic at a safer/ lower and more tolerable neighborhood
level. This would also ensure the safe and continued use by pedestrians, bicyclist and skateboarders.
Desert Palisades is slated to eventually offer 110 private lots for future development. Also, Tuscany Heights is in the
process of starting development of their 12 remaining lots. Our neighborhood is growing and must now seriously focus on
the issue of increased traffic. The proposed 2B change would help in managing traffic in a balanced and professional
manner. The ultimate goal being that our community will evolve as one whole desirable place to live.
PLEASE PLACE OUR SUPPORT FOR ITEM 213 INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD AND FOR THE PRESENTATION TO
THE PLANNING COMMISIONERS.
Many thanks for your consideration,
Maurice Wilson and Dann Smith
2502 N. Girasol Avenue
Palm Springs, CA 92262
56
Flinn Fagg
From: Jay Thompson
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 3:59 PM
To: Terri Hintz; Flinn Fagg
Subject: FW: Planning Commission Meeting 6/24/15 Supporting item 2B
From: David Dry [mailto:devdry@roadrunner.comj
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 1:38 PM
To: Jay Thompson
Cc: Marcus Fuller
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting 6/24/15 Supporting item 2B
To: Jay Thompson, Office of City Clerk To: Marcus Fuller, Office of Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
Planning Commission Meeting 6124/15 Regarding item 2B
2B. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TO AMEND THE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW RESIDENT
ACCESS TO TRAMWAY ROAD AND TO DESIGNATE A +/- 5 ACRE PORTION OF THE PLAN AREA FOR
PERMANENT OPEN SPACE, ZONE ESA-SP, PLANNING AREA 4 (CASE 5.1154 SP). (FF) RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval to City Council.
We would like to add our support for the proposed amendment to the Desert Palisades Plan
to change Tramway Road from an emergency entrance to the main exit/entrance for future residents of Desert
Palisades.
We live at 2494 N. Vista Drive.
The proposed change would help maintain current traffic patterns on West Racquet Club Road.
The Tuscany Heights development has 12 new homes already approved which will add considerably to traffic.
Adding an additional 110 Desert Palisades homes to the existing traffic on
Racquet Club would be very disruptive to the neighborhood.
The construction traffic to and from the Desert Palisades development last fall and early this year
was a safety concern and was very noisy. Speeding construction trucks created a very unsafe 57
1
environment for walkers and normal local traffic.
Thank you for your consideration,
David Dry/ Paul Russell
2494 N. Vista Drive
z
58
Flinn Fagg
From: Barb and Jeff Kaplan <barb_kaplan@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 10:51 AM
To: Flinn Fagg
Cc: Dennis Woods
Subject: RE: Desert Palisades
Dear Mr. Fagg,
We are two of the homeowners that are relatively flipped out about the potential for heavy load traffic abuse
on Racquet Club. We realize that there may be nothing we can do to prevent what we see as a probable
nightmare but we know from the experience of this past year that lower Racquet Club absolutely can't support
heavy loads barreling up and down the hill. We're on the corner of RC and Cardillo and have had virtually no
issues with our house for the 12 years we've owned it but we're now having issues that we know our a result
of the trucks with heavy loads roaring up and down Racquet Club. We've already had 18 tiles pop that had to
be re-set at a considerable sum for this retired couple. We can deal with the noise but our house is being
damaged by the loads and of course, since the traffic has temporarily stopped, we had no further issues.
There is no question in our minds that our problems are the result of heavy loads (our house absolutely was
shaking during that period) and we doubt that we have any recourse other than to bluntly (excuse the
language) be screwed.
We are begging you to limit load traffic as much as possible and use Tramway Road. We really don't want to
leave the neighborhood but we also cannot afford to keep paying for repairs from damage that has nothing to
do with our own usage.
If you would work with the city to install speed bumps and/or speed restrictions we think it would make a
considerable difference in limiting potential damage to properties on the street. Respectfully, you're not
literally hanging on the street watching these guys gun it up the hill. It's truly frightening.
Thanks for your consideration,
Barb and Jeff Kaplan
916 716 6786
Subject: RE: Desert Palisades
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:11:31 -0700
From: Flinn.Fagg@palmsprings-ca.gov
To: dennis.l.woods@gmail.com
CC: And rewCharlesHirsch@gmail.com; Barb_Kaplan@hotmail.com; billericksonpsp@gmail.com;
tinyhopep@yahoo.com; cheryl@secondwindcreations.com; Christina_Minervini@yahoo.com;
cliffpalm@dc.rr.com; devdry@roadrunner.com; gkrenek@dc.rr.com;Jimzinca@gmail.com;
joelmstarkman@icloud.com; JRICCII@DC.RR.COM;jpatricklenny@aol.com; MOR48art@aol.com;
mdbirnberg@gmail.com; nixmacl@icloud.com; ray92262@yahoo.com; robertrotman@gmail.com;
Steve_Kula@att.net; tim@obayley.net; Marcus.Fuller@palmsprings-ca.gov
5J 1
Flinn Fagg
From: Dennis Woods <dennis.l.woods@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 1:52 PM
To: Flinn Fagg
Cc: Andy Hirsch; Barb Kaplan; Bill Erickson; Brad Kain; Cheryl Beverly; Christina Mineruini;
Cliff Grantham; David Dry and Paul Russell 310-356-6046; Gladys Krenek;Jim Miller;Joel
Starkman; Julia Ricci; Maureen &James Lenny; Maurice Wilson; Michael Birnberg; Nickie
McLaughlin,; Ray &Carol Bertoia; Robert Rotman; Steve Kula;Tim O'Bayley; Marcus
Fuller
Subject: Re: Desert Palisades
Dear Flinn,
Thank you for the response. The concern is long term construction impacts from both the master and merchant
builders. . An agreement is a good thing and most appreciated if it is effective in reducing impacts. We have not
seen this agreement and do not know if the agreement will be enforceable to the future builders or even the
master developer. The way to ensure the agreement is enforceable by the City is to enter the components of the
agreement you reference into the approval documents for the Specific Plan and EIR amendment. Since traffic
patterns are being reviewed for this amendment, it is most appropriate to evaluate everything to do with traffic
entering and exiting the site be it construction traffic or final build out traffic. It is also appropriate and legal to
apply necessary mitigation measures.
Our history with this developer and the significant impacts we experienced during initial construction of Desert
Palisades indicates that the mitigation measures developed to avoid impacts were not adequate and need to be
amended based upon our real life experience in the field. Mitigation measures are developed to alleviate or
lessen impacts. The mitigation monitoring program is a feedback loop to make sure the mitigations are
working. Experience with this project indicates that there was a shortcoming and that the mitigations did not
work and need to be adjusted.
Tramway Rd was not an option in the original Specific Plan and FIR. It is now an option, the focus of the
amendment, and therefore it is most appropriate to alter the mitigation measures to reflect this change and
create new mitigation measures as we know the previous ones were not sufficient to avoid the impacts. Since
the amendment impacts traffic patterns, adds land to the specific plan that was not a part of the original specific
plan, and amends the big horn lambing mitigation, these are all opportunities for the public and others to
comment on, and for the issues to be reviewed and considered before a decision is made. We are working with
you to be proactive in this effort BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL HEARING. It is also an opportunity for staff
to be proactive and insert mitigations to alleviate impacts.
With this in mind we would like to review the entire record for this amendment so that we can comment
accordingly including the agreement you referenced above. Most importantly we want to see that there are
enforceable measures in place to mitigate the construction impacts by diverting the construction traffic to
Tramway Rd. and away from Racquet Club since this is now an option and using Tramway Rd. clearly has less
of an impact. In the meantime, please add this e-mail to the public record.
Cordially,
Dennis Woods
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Flinn Fagg <Flinn.Faggna nalmsprings_ca_gou> wrote:
i
60
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Date: July 15, 2015
Subject: Case 5.1154 SP — Desert Palisades
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, Kathie Hart, MMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do
hereby certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was published in the
Desert Sun on July 1, 2015.
1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
IL"a-A �j
Kathie Hart, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Kathie Hart, MMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do
hereby certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted at City Hall,
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Drive, on the exterior legal notice posting board, and in the Office
of the City Clerk on July 1, 2015.
1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Kathie Hart, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I, Kathie Hart, MMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do
hereby certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to each and
every person on the attached list on July 1, 2015, in a sealed envelope, with postage
prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California.
(8 notices)
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
�"4 � tFl —
Kathie Hart, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
61
v
o The Desert Sun Certificate of Publication
750 N Gene Autry Trail
Palm Springs, CA92262 RECEIVED_
760-778-4578/Fax 760-778-4731T Y OF PALM S P R 1 i s
YOI5 JUL -9 AM 8139
State Of California as: JAW% T OMPSUIi1
County of Riverside
@11Y VER K NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING I1
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE 5.1154 SP
Advertiser: AN APPLICATION BY HE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
TO AMEND HE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS/LEGALS TO ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAMWAY ROAD
PO BOX 2743 PORTTO DESIGNATE AN APPROXIMATE 5 ACRE
PALM SPRINGS CA 922632 ON OF THE PLAN AREA FOR PERMANENT
OPEN SPACE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GWEN that the City Council of
the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public
hearing at Its meeting of July 15,2015.The City Council
2000737448 meeting begins at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber
at City Hall, 3200 East Tahqultz Canyon Way, Palm
Springs,
The purpose of the hearing is to consider a revision
to the previously approved Desert Palisades Specific
I am over the age of 18 years old, a citizen of the United Plan to allow resident access to Tramway Road and
States and not a party to, or have interest in this matter. I to designate an approximate 5-acre parcel within the
hereby certify that the attached advertisement appeared plan area as .permanent open space. The proposed
in said newspaper (set in type not smaller than non panel) action will also require consideration of an addendum-
in each and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any to the Final EIR under CEQA. The Desert Palisades
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: Specific Plan Covers a site of approximately 117 acres
at the western terminus of W.Racquet Club Road(Case
Newspaper: The Desert Sun 5.1154 SP;Zone ESA-SP Planning Area 4).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:An addendum
to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is
7/4/2015 proposed for this project under the guidelines of the
California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).Members
of the public may view this document at the Planning
Services Department, City Hall,3200 East Tahqultz
Canyon Way, Palm Springs, and submit written
comments at,or prior to,the City Council hearing.
REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff
I acknowledge that I am a principal clerk of the printer ofreport and other supporting documents .regarding
The Desert Sun, printed and published weekly in the City this PmJsct are available for public review at City Hall
of Palm Springs, County of Riverside, State of California. been the hours of 8:00 a.m.and 6:00 p.m.,.Monday,
The Desert Sun was adjudicated a newspaper of general through Thursday.Please contact the Office of the City
circulation on March 24, 1988 by the Superior Court of the Clerk-at(760)323-82Q4 f you would like to schedule an
appointment t0 reV18W these documents.of Riverside, State of California Case No.
COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION:Response to this
191236. notice may be made verbally at the Public Hearing and/
or in writing before the hearing.Written comments may
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true be made to the City Council by letter(for mall or hard
and correct. to;. Executed on this 4th day of July, 2015 in JainesTthompson,City Cleric
Palm Springs,C ornia. 3200 E.Tahqultz 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[bX2j).
Dacia fs Signature An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all
interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding
•`� '1 this case may be directed to Flinn Fagg, Director of
Planning Services at(760)323-8245.
S1 necesifa ayuda con esta carta, por favor flame a la
Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar con Felipe
Primera por tekrfono(760)323-8253:
ac
osmoos«.o, James Thompson,city Clerk
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE 5.1154 SP
AN APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TO AMEND THE
DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO
TRAMWAY ROAD AND TO DESIGNATE AN APPROXIMATE 5 ACRE
PORTION OF THE PLAN AREA FOR PERMANENT OPEN SPACE
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 15, 2015. 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 revision to the previously approved Desert
Palisades Specific Plan to allow resident access to Tramway Road and to designate an
approximate 5-acre parcel within the plan area as permanent open space. The proposed
action will also require consideration of an addendum to the Final EIR under CEQA. The
Desert Palisades Specific Plan covers a site of approximately 117 acres at the western
terminus of W. Racquet Club Road (Case 5.1154 SP; Zone ESA-SP Planning Area 4).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: An addendum to the Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) is proposed for this project under the guidelines of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Members of the public may view this document at the Planning Services
Department, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, and submit written
comments at, or prior to, the City Council hearing.
REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff report and other supporting documents
regarding this project are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. 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][2]).
An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions
regarding this case may be directed to Flinn Fagg, Director of Planning Services at
(760) 323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, por favor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar
con Felipe Primera telefono (760) 323-8253.
'James Thompson, City Clerk
62
t^ MR PETE MORUZZI
a PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE
P.O. BOX 4738
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-4738
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
f c s PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ATTN SECRETARY
PO BOX 2743
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743
MS PATRICIA GARCIA
_ MS MARGARET PARK, DIRECTOR TRIBAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA OFFICER
INDIANS AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA
PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT DEPT. - INDIANS
5401 DINAH SHORE DRIVE - 5401 DINAH SHORE DRIVE
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264
SOBOBA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS MR FRANK TYSEN
ATTN:JOSEPH ONTIVEROS CASA CODY INN
CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGER 175 S. CAHUILLA ROAD
P-O. BOX 487 SAN JACINTO, CA 92581 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262
I� VIEW,PINNACLE 4 LLCMSA CONSULTING, INC.
P.O. BOX 17534200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 RANCHO MIRAGE, CA 92270
63
RECEIVED
:F PALM 8Pi
From: Marcus Fuller
To: Jay Thompson;Kathie Hart 2015 JUL 14 PM 5t 2
Cc: Jennifer Nelson;Cindy Cairns;Tabitha Richards
Subject: FW: Desert Palisades Comment Letter J A mES T HQ VI PF (%ta
Date: Tuesday,My 14,2015 5:12:31 PM nn CITY CLERK
Attachments: )nl;07 3S i it,',fo CC no"Palisades m=ndmenY dodl�
2015 O�h 07�L11�t�er to CC Desert Pal-lades e�ctensio rFlnaLdotlJ
� 9571Y.1.Fil.t13
FYI
Marcus L. Fuller, MPA, PE, PLS
Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 322-8380
Marcus.Fuller(a� ap fmspri gsca.aov
From: Dennis Woods [mailto:dennis.l.woods@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday,July 14, 2015 4:33 PM
To: Chris Mills; Ginny Foat; Paul Lewin; Rick Hutcheson; Steve Pougnet
Cc: CityClerk; Marcus Fuller; Flinn Fagg; David Ready
Subject: Desert Palisades Comment Letter
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
Attached is the Little Tuscany Neighborhood Organization's letter commenting on item I (:'-.
< C S I .0 DF _N _ T
_ . -RC.-_ ad
,:!,itifr w i C)J-tFN S,I i r xS 5 s sSE✓"; that is on your agenda for
Wednesday July 15, 2015.
In addition, we are attaching our January 7, 2015 letter to you that outlined problems with
construction activities as it supports our July 14, 2015 comment letter.
In short, we are requesting a modification to a mitigation measure, direction to staff to
explore a traffic signal as required by the EIR, and develop a plan and implementation
schedule for W. Racquet Club Rd. We ask that our letter and the attachment be entered into
the public record.
Our July 14, 2015 letter has been vetted with the Little Tuscany Board as well as the Little
Tuscany Neighborhood Improvement Committee. We hope you take our comments seriously
and into consideration during your discussion.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at:
310.710.7123
or
Dennis L Woods(i, I a' Born
Cordially,
Dennis Woods
1 I�•�� Ac���onal 'ma�c2�I�h �m ID
Little Tuscany Neighborhood Organization
Palm Springs City Council
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
July 14, 2015
Subject: July 15, 2015 City Council Agenda Item AMENDMENT TO THE DESERT
PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAM WAY AND TO
DESIGNATE ADD A 5 ACRE PARCEL TO THE PLAN AREA AS PERMANENT OPEN
SPACE, ZONE ESA-SP (CASE 5.1154-A SP)
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
We, The Little Tuscany Neighborhood Organization, respectfully request the City Council
approve the amendment to the Desert Palisades Specific Plan but ask the following as a
condition of our approval:
1. That mitigation measure MM 3.15-11(a)be amended to be more affirmative, more
consistent with the existing FIR, and provide leverage for enforcement if necessary.
The record indicates, and the City Council may remember, that the construction impacts
from initial construction activities carried out by the master developer were severe,
under-regulated, and not adequately mitigated by the EIR. This is documented in our
January 7, 2015 letter to you that is attached. We want regulations in place requiring the
City to enforce mitigation measures, especially construction mitigation to avoid impacts
to the neighboring residents. This would apply to the master developer and to any
merchant or private builder that may build within the Specific Plan. If the mitigation
measures in the EIR are not effective in mitigating the impacts, it is requested that the
City use the purpose and role of the mitigation monitoring program to adjust the
construction practices to mitigate impacts.
Currently the FIR provides the City with regulatory control as follows:
Page 329 - Temporary hazards during construction can arrive for conflicts between
construction and passenger traffic ......developer will consult with the City for of a
construction strategy
Page 340 - Construction Traffic is proposed to be primarily from Tram Way.
Page 342 - A traffic control plan will be submitted and approved by the City Engineer. At
this time schedule and route shall be established
115 j15
Page 345 SC 3.15-9 (a) - A traffic control plan shall be submitted and approved.
Schedules and routes of traffic will be included in the plan
Below is our requested revision to MM 3.15-11
MM 3.15-11(a): The developer and and, and all merchant or primate builders shall submit
a traffic control plan for review• and approval by the City that will coordinate with the
San Jacinto Winter Park Authority to roate construction traffic to Tram Way and avoid
use of IV Racquet Chub Rd. Ci1v staff retains the right to amend and alter the traffic
control plan and any construction plan to ensure protection of existing residential areas
from negative impacts.
2. We request that Council direct staff to begin discussion with Caltrans to install a traffic
signal at North Palm Canyon Drive and Via Escuela as required by MM 3.15-6(a). The
master developer has already deposited $14,610 on 9/24/2014 into a City account as his
fair share, however, starting the process to install the signal and identify costs does not
appear to be included in any long-range planning work at the City. This stretch of N.
Palm Canyon has no pedestrian crossings and has been submitted for consideration into
the City's hot spot analysis. Whether or not full funding has been identified or received,
there is now seed money to begin the analysis. The following mitigation is already
included in the EIR:
MM 3.15-6(a): The project proponent may be required to contribute on a "fair-share"
basis to the cost of the future traffic signal and exclusive northbound and southbound left-
turn lanes at the intersection of North Palm Canyon Drive and Via Escuela prior to
recordation of Tract Map.
3. We request that Council direct staff to explore the design and geometries of W. Racquet
Club Road to identify and schedule improvements. The original EIR put 1,140 vehicles
per day onto W. Racquet Club Rd.just from the Desert Palisades Project alone. There are
several other projects approved in the area that will put this and more trips onto W.
Racquet Club Road. The cumulative impacts of these trips require that the City look at
the future build-out of W. Racquet Club Rd. and identify design and funding for its
completion. In meeting with City staff it appears that this is not a current work
assignment and that the funding is anticipated to come from the other approved projects.
This approach is flawed as it does not account for the roadway where the City has not
made a nexus to collect money from developers to fund all the necessary improvements.
It is possible that the following mitigation measures in the EIR might address W. Racquet
Club Rd. but at the writing of this letter it could not be verified. Nonetheless starting
work on the ultimate design and identifying all the funding sources is a proactive
approach before the anticipated traffic arrives.
MM 3.15-7(a): The project applicant shall contribute on a fair-share
basis to circulation improvements required on roadways and/or at
intersections that are not in the TUMF program, as specified in the
traffic study prior to prior to Building Permits.
4. We want the record to reflect our objection to the traffic analysis for the amendment for
the following reasons:
o The original traffic study is over 5 years old and neither does it nor the traffic
study for this amendment include new regulations and implementation tools
available in the complete streets act, SB 375, AB 32, bicycle best practices, etc.
o The traffic study for the amendment does not address or incorporate the
cumulative impacts of the vast development that has happened or been approved
within the City. The traffic analysis for the amendment relies on traffic counts and
numbers that are over 5 years old without a calibration or verification that the
projected numbers are accurate.
o The amended traffic study does not address trails, pedestrian or bicycle issues or
safety along W. Racquet Club Rd. relying on the original EIR after which
conditions, laws, and attitudes related to multi-modal use of roadways have
substantially changed.
o The amended traffic study neither incorporates the fact that Tram Way is
available for construction traffic nor that the short term impacts would be greatly
reduced by using Tram Way over W. Racquet Club Rd. In fact the traffic study
for the amendment does not address short-term construction traffic impacts in a
qualitative or quantitative defensible manner even though the record is clear that
there have been significant impacts with using W. Racquet Club Road for
construction traffic.
o The traffic analysis for the amendment does not acknowledge that there are
substantial changes in the general conditions in the past 5 years and that attitude
towards the use and function of roadways has changed.
o The traffic analysis for the amendment assumes all traffic assigned to the north
will use Tram Way. This assumption is not supported by verifiable evidence and
does not take into account that residents are unlikely to take a longer route into
and out of their homes. While some may well take Tram Way when their
destination is I-10 West, all other trips are more likely to take the most direct
route, which will be Racquet Club.
Cordially,
Dennis Woods, Co-Chair: Dennis.L.Woods@gmail.com
Tim O'Bayley, Co-Chair: tim@obayley.net
Michael Birnberg, Co-Chair: mdbirnberg@gmail.com
Enc: January 7, 2015 to City Council
CC: Marcus Fuller, Assistant City Manager
James Thompson, City Clerk
Flinn Fagg, Director of Planning Services
Little Tuscany Neighborhood via NextDoor.com
Little Tuscany Neighborhood Organization
Palm Springs City Council
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
Subject: January 7, 2015 City Council Agenda Item 2.K. THE DESERT PALISADES
SPECIFIC PLAN ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO A PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FIR) RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT OF A
117-ACRE SITE IN PLANNING AREA 4 OF THE ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE AREA—SPECIFIC PLAN ZONE (ESA-SP) (CHINO CONE) AT THE
WESTERN TERMINUS OF WEST RACQUET CLUB ROAD:
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
We, The Little Tuscany Neighborhood Organization, respectfully request the City
Council defer action on item 2K on the agenda until several issues are addressed. First
and foremost, the current grading operations are not abiding by the certified EIR and
mechanisms to ensure compliance are absent as are protections for the neighborhood. The
construction impacts to the neighborhood are significant and not being addressed or
mitigated. Neither the neighborhood association nor the adjacent neighbors were notified
of this agenda item and the matter gravely impacts us. Add to this that item 2K is a
consent item on the agenda even though the matter of the item is well beyond routine
business. As you are aware, putting it on the consent calendar does not permit for a
thorough discussion or robust public comment.
ABBREVIATED HISTORY
The City issued an over the counter staff approved grading permit on 10/9/2014 with a
start date of 10/13/2014. This approval did not include any conditions or reference any
aspect of the EIR. It was simply approved by staff with no process to ensure compliance
with the EIR or thought of ways to protect the neighborhood. Construction at the site
actually started well before the issuance of the grading permit and is continuing while this
letter is being drafted on January 7, 2015 in defiance of the FIR. It was not until we
asked questions did the City staff even address issues and mitigations in the EIR. To this
day the issues and impacts have been not fully addressed and we as the residents are
severely impacted by the construction activities and lack of regulatory control by the
City.
ISSUES
As mentioned, first and foremost the City is not proactively and fully monitoring or
regulating all aspects of the construction activities per the FIR. Some activities are being
monitored but on a spotty basis and the results have been ineffective.
Traffic Control Plan
One egregious example of disregard for the EIR is the lack of a required a traffic control
plan, a plan that should be looking at haul routes that have the least impact, the number of
trucks, the speed of the trucks, the duration of the haul, the amount or tonnage of haul,
etc. We asked the City staff for the document by telephone, by email, and in personal
visits to City Hall. The document was never produced. We copied the City Manager and
the City Engineer on the issues two months ago to give them a heads up on the problems
and on January 7, 2015, we telephoned the Assistant City Manager regarding the traffic
control plan and other issues. We are now putting our concerns into the public record
with the intent to get resolution. We also put in a formal public records request. The
result of the public records request was that the City has no Traffic Control Plan. This in
itself is a serious violation of CEQA as it is an EIR requirement.
Right to Use our Homes
A private nuisance is a civil wrong; it is the unreasonable, unwarranted,
or unlawful use of one's property in a manner that substantially interferes with the enjoy
ment or use of another individuals property, without an actual trespass or physical
invasion of the land. In the case of the Desert Palisades development we have been
severely impacted and the enjoyment of our land has been diminished. The law
recognizes that as land owners or those in rightful possession of the land, have the right
to the unimpaired condition of the property and the reasonable comfort and convenience
in its occupation.
Dust
Although there is a street sweeper, the sweeper kicks up more dust than imaginable.
Large semi-tractor trailer trucks rumble up and down Racquet Club Road uncovered and
the resulting dust cloud and debris all along Racquet Club Road is beyond a nuisance. We
are not able to enjoy our property in a normal manner. More stringent and regulated dust
control needs to be put into place.
Noise
The noise of hundreds of semi-tractor trailer trucks all day long starting sometimes before
lam makes using our property in a normal and customary manner out of the question. It
is a nuisance that can be mitigated by looking at the problem and seeking solutions such
as using another haul route, slowing the trucks down, reducing the number of trucks
daily, using different trucks, etc.
Pollution
Besides dust, the daily stream of trucks and the resulting exhaust increases the particulate
matter and toxins in the air.
Speed
The speed at which the trucks roll exceeds the speed limit and several complaints have
been submitted to the City but to date there has not been a speed check put into place.
Speed on a heavily used walking route is a safety issue. In addition speed causes more
dust and noise.
ADT
The EIR looked at the average daily trips yet there is no monitoring of those trips to
ensure the FIR was accurate. The City has not been overseeing the process and quite
frankly is absent in regulating this in many cases just referring to the developer and
actually saying they are too busy to know the details each project. Since the time the
grading permit was issued the non-stop stream of trucks from 7 am to 5 pm must equate
to more hauling than anticipated in the EIR. If this is the case the EIR is in error and
instead of lengthening the construction period we ask that controls be put into place
before construction activities are resumed and that the residents are involved and
informed.
Pedestrian Safety
Racquet Club is a walking route and the trucks are severely impacting this form of active
outdoor activity
Animal Migration
Several bobcats, coyotes, snakes and other animals are being displaced and moving into
the neighborhoods as their habitat is being disturbed. The area is also a lambing area for
the endangered bighorn sheep.
Blocking ofstreets
Trucks are blocking streets, driveways, and intersections
Communication
That has been minimal communication from the City or the developer on this project. As
stated earlier, we were forced to put in a formal public records request for simple matters.
We have asked for even more information and that information has not been produced.
Instead of processing formal public record requests, we suggest a joint meeting with City
staff that does not include the developer. City staff has repeatedly not been capable of
answering questions deferring them to the developer and we would like to see the City be
in more control and protect the neighborhood.
Defiance of the Law
The developer continues to defy the law. First by operating before the actual issuance of
the permit, then repeatedly starting operations prior to 7 am, and now he is operating after
January 1, 2015 in complete defiance of the certified EIR.
SOLUTIONS
Above are just a just a few of the issues that are unresolved. We respectfully request at a
minimum the City do the following:
1. Stop all construction until all issues can be evaluated and protections are put into
place for the neighborhood allowing us to enjoy our property in a customary
manner.
2. Indentify a point person who will actually be the go-to person from a regulatory
standpoint to monitor the project. This person should be completely independent
of the developer and work in a non-biased manner. If City staff is to busy or
overwhelmed to effectively do the job, the City has the option to charge the
developer for costs to fees to hire a such a person on a short term basis.
3. Initiate joint meetings with the Neighborhood Organization and City staff to
address a myriad of issues with the intent to put protections into place.
4. Review the EIR and ensure all mitigations are in place and effective. In areas
where the EIR failed to properly identify impacts or the conditions have changed
since the EIR was certified (such as the number of trucks) supplement the EIR
and develop mitigations and a mitigation monitoring program.
5. Host a bigger meeting to discuss the cumulative impacts of all the large scale
projects that have been approved for the neighborhood and outline how the issues
will be addressed in the future.
Cordially,
Dennis Woods, Co-Chair: Dennis.L.Woods@gmail.com
Tim O'Bayley, Co-Chair: tim@obayley.net
Michael Birnberg, Co-Chair: mdbimberg@gmail.com
CC: michael.flores@wildlife.ca.gov
heatber.pert@wildlife.ca.gov
eddy.konno@wildlife.ca.gov
chris_gregory@fws.gov
Jfriedland@NRDC.org
Cindy Berardi
From: Jennifer Nelson
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 3:24 PM
To: Kathie Hart; Cindy Berardi
Cc: Jay Thompson; Marcus Fuller;Tabitha Richards
Subject: FW:In Support of City Council Meeting Item LD
From: Bradley Kain [mailto:tinyhopepCcbyahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 2:34 PM
To: Jay Thompson; Marcus Fuller; Jennifer Nelson
Cc: Dennis Woods; Scott Bridgeman; Bradley Kain
Subject: In Support of City Council Meeting Item 1.13
I .D. AMENDMENT TO THE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW RESIDENT
ACCESS TO TRAM WAY AND TO DESIGNATE A 5-ACRE PARCEL TO THE PLAN AREA AS
PERMANENT OPEN SPACE (CASE 5.1154-A SP): Additional Staff Report Material
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Open the public hearing and receive public testimony; and 2) Adopt
Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR, AND AMENDING THE DESERT PALISADES
SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAM WAY AND TO INCORPORATE INTO
THE PLAN AREA AN APPROXIMATELY 5 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED ON THE
NORTHERLY SIDE OF TRAM WAY FOR BOULDER PLACEMENT AND LANDSCAPE
ENHANCEMENT TO BE DESIGNATED AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE."
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
We live at 1011 West Racquet Club Rd which is at the corner of West Racquet Club and Milo Dr. We
are out of town and will not be able to attend the City Council Meeting on 7/15/15. We would like to
add our support for the proposed amendment to the Desert Palisades Plan to change the Tramway
Road driveway from an emergency entrance to the main entrance/exit for the residence of Desert
Palisades. We also would like to add our support for Dennis Woods, Little Tuscany Neighborhood
Organization Co-Chair, 7/14/15 letter. I hope something can be done to deal with our current
construction traffic problem on Racquet Club Road. Please include my email in the record for the
meeting.
I read in the attached materials to the City Council 7/15/15 Agenda that Vicki Lee Endo, P.E., T.E.
Registered Professional Traffic Engineer TR 1161 did a report on the Tramway entrance that was sent
to Mr. Ed Freeman, Pinnacle View, LLC, on July 13,15. Have any traffic studies been done on all the
construction traffic speedine up and down Racquet Club Road? It has been dangerous for anyone walking up or
down Racquet Club Road when the construction trucks have taken over. The construction traffic has been
noisy, dirty and it's beating up the road.
Please see the attached email from Marcus Fuller from Feb 18, 2015.
Thanks for your consideration,
t
Sincerely,
Bradley Kain and Scott Bridgeman
1011 W Racquet Club Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262
email: TinyHopeP(a yahoo.com
305-807-1510
From: Bradley Kain <tinvhopepCa)yahoo.com>
To: Jay Thompson<Iay.thompson(a)palmsprings-ca.gov>; Marcus Fuller<marcus.fuller(a)Palmsprings-ca.gov>
Cc: Dennis Woods<dennis.l.woods(a)g mail.com>; Scott Bridgeman <tinyhopep(c).aol.com>; Bradley Kain
<ti nyhopep(o)ya hoo.com>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 10:45 AM
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting 6/24/15 Supporting item 2B
To: Jay Thompson, Office of City Clerk
To: Marcus Fuller, Office of Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
Planning Commission Meeting 6/24115
Regarding item 2B
2B. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TO AMEND THE DESERT PALISADES SPECIFIC PLAN TO
ALLOW RESIDENT ACCESS TO TRAMWAY ROAD AND TO DESIGNATE A +/- 5 ACRE PORTION
OF THE PLAN AREA FOR PERMANENT OPEN SPACE ZONE ESA-SP PLANNING
AREA 4 (CASE 5.1154 SP). (FF)
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to City Council.
We live at 1011 West Racquet Club Rd which is at the corner of West Racquet Club and Milo Dr. We
are out of town and will not be able to attend the Planning Commission Meeting on 6/24/15. We
would like to add our support for the proposed amendment to the Desert Palisades Plan to change
the Tramway Road driveway from an emergency entrance to the main entrance/exit for the residence
of Desert Palisades.
This change would maintain the current traffic on West Racquet Club to the existing traffic plus the
additional 12 new houses currently approved for Tuscany Heights. Adding traffic from the additional
110 planned Desert Palisades houses would be disruptive to our neighborhood. It would change
West Racquet Club from street where it's safe to walk along the side of the road to a traffic
thoroughfare.
The construction traffic to and from Desert Palisades last fall was a safety concern for the our
neighborhood. It was unsafe to walk up or down West Racquet Club with all the speeding
construction trucks.
Thanks for your consideration,
Sincerely
Bradley Kain and Scott Bridgeman
1011 W Racquet Club Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262
2
email: TinyHopeP(a)yahoo.com
305-807-1510
Re: Pacific Palisades Update
People
• Bradley Kain
• Feb 24
To
Marcus Fuller
cc
• Tabitha Richards
• Dennis Woods
• Robert Rotman
Hi Marcus,
I've attached photo taken at 6:40am this morning. Thanks for your help
3
wglY'
r
All the best,
Brad
Bradley Kain
TinyHopePAyahoo.com
305-807-1510
From: Marcus Fuller<Marcus.Fullerftalmsprinas-ca.aov>
To: Bradley Kain<TinvHopePnvahoo.com>
Cc: Tabitha Richards<Tabitha.Richards(a)palmsprinas-ca.00v>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 7:48 AM
Subject: RE: Pacific Palisades Update
Brad—the photo wasn't attached.
I'll follow up with the contractor to emphasize the need to wait until lam.
4
Marcus L. Fuller,MPA,PE,PLS
Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
City of Palm Springs
r�� Palm S rings,tz Canyon Way
QIrJT t Palm Springs, CA 92262
CALIFORNIA (760)322-8380
Marcus.Fullerja`palmsnrinzsca.zov
Like no place else."
From:Bradley Kain[mailto:TinyHopeP(kiyahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday,February 24,2015 6:55 AM
To: Marcus Fuller
Cc: Dennis Woods;Robert Rotman
Subject: Pacific Palisades Update
Hi Marcus,
I was woken up at 6:35am by a truck going up the hill in front of me house at 1011 W Racquet Club. I go out to
get the paper since I'm now up to find a line up of trucks and men standing in the street waiting for the gate to
open at Desert Palisades. The attached photo was taken at 6:40am this morning.
All the best,
Brad
Bradley Kain
TinyHopeP(a�yahoo.com
305-807-1510
All the best,
Brad
Bradley Kam
TinyHopeP ct yahoo.com
305-807-1510
On Feb 18, 2015, at 7:59 AM, Marcus Fuller<Marcus.Fuller(&palmsprings-ca.gou> wrote:
Brad,
We will expect construction access to continue using Tram Way rather than Racquet Club Road,
and have asked Desert Palisades to honor his verbal agreement made to the City Council at their
January 7, 2015, meeting.
Although the FIR did analyze impacts associated with construction access from Racquet Club
Road—I have urged Desert Palisades to do whatever he can to route as much construction traffic
via Tram Way rather than Racquet Club Road.
The City's Municipal Code (8.04.220)provides permitted construction hours of lam to 7pm
weekdays, and 8am to 5pm Saturday, with no work on Sundays or certain holidays.
5
I have reminded Desert Palisades of the allowed construction hours, and to not start or service
any equipment prior to lam.
<image001.png>
Marcus L. Fuller,MPA, PE, PLS
Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 322-8380
Marcus.Fuller6i palntsprinzsca.Qov
From:Bradley Kain [mailto:TinyHopcP(c6yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 2:34 PM
To: Marcus Fuller
Cc: Dennis Woods; Tim O'Bayley; Nickie McLaughlin; Andy Hirsch; Bill Erickson; Christina
Mineruini; Julia Ricci; Maureen & James Lenny; Maurice Wilson; Michael Birnberg; Robert
Rotman; Joel Starkman; David Ready; Douglas C. Holland; Jay Thompson; Flinn Fagg; Cindy
Cairns; Tabitha Richards; Jennifer Nelson
Subject: Re: Desert Palisades Update
Hi Marcus,
Will the construction access to the Desert Palisades site be from Tramway Road or from West
Racquet Club Road for the work being done the next 6 months?
We had a lot of trucks going up and down West Racquet Club Road this past fall. We had trucks
lined up at the top and bottom of the hill. We had trucks backing up beeping into Milo
Drive. This is a residential street. All the construction trucks made our neighborhood unsafe to
walk and very noisy. Please have them access the site from Tramway Road.
What hours and days of the week is construction work permitted for? Any chance having them
not start until 8:OOam? The work so far has had a 7:OOam start on weekdays. Which means we
start hearing trucks from 6:30am on.
All the best,
Brad
Bradley Kain
Ti nyHop eP(a).yahoo.com
305-807-1510
On Feb 12, 2015, at 4:50 PM, Marcus Fuller<Marcus.Fuller 2cpalmsprings-ca.gov> wrote:
Dennis,
In reply to your questions:
1. The grading permit that has been issued was limited to the grading required to
clear and excavate and/or fill the on-site streets to the subgrade elevations
identified on the approved street plans. All other work (i.e. underground utilities,
6
street construction, etc.) will be constructed pursuant to construction permits
issued for that work.
2. Yes, underground utility installations require trenching and backfill, but that
operation is a necessary element of the utility work that occurs after the grading
operations are complete, in that the streets have been cleared, excavated and/or
filled to the approved subgrade elevation which then dictate the depth to which
the underground utilities are to be installed. We do not consider utility
excavations/trenching an element of"grading".
3. The Municipal Code itself does not define"grading", but adopts the Uniform
Building Code as you noted. Generally, "grading" is defined as the excavation
and/or fill identified on a grading plan, necessary to establish the rough grading
elevations shown thereon. For Desert Palisades, there is no grading plan other
than the grading limits (cut/fill) shown on the street plans, which identified the
required grading to clear, excavate and/or fill the on-site streets to the subgrade
elevations identified on the approved street plans.
<image001.png>
Marcus L. Fuller, MPA,PE, PLS
Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 322-8380
Marcus.Fuller(&Palmsprinpsca.,zo
From: Dennis Woods [mailto:dennis.l.woodsLci gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 12:29 PM
To: Tim O'Bayley
Cc: Marcus Fuller; Nickie McLaughlin; Andy Hirsch; Bill Erickson; Brad Kam;
Christina Mineruini; Julia Ricci; Maureen & James Lenny; Maurice Wilson;
Michael Birnberg; Robert Rotman; Joel Starkman; David Ready; Douglas C.
Holland; Jay Thompson; Flinn Fagg; Cindy Cairns; Tabitha Richards; Jennifer
Nelson
Subject: Re: Desert Palisades Update
Dear Mr. Fuller,
Indeed keeping communication open has many advantages as does
understanding the process, the rules, and the regulations. To this end I think
it helpful to secure clarification on your email:
In your February 10, 2015 email you wrote:
"The City has ordered Desert Palisades to cease all grading operations."
Later in the same email you wrote:
"However, it is important for you to understand that this biological mitigation
measure did not impose a restriction on all activities during the Bighorn Sheep
lambing period—the restriction was limited to grading operations.
Desert Palisades is allowed, under the adopted final EIR, to proceed with other
activities throughout the year, including construction of on-site utilities and
infrastructure(water, sewer, storm drainage, etc.), and construction of the on-site
private streets (curbs, gutters, pavers, etc.).
Additionally, Desert Palisades is required to ensure that all disturbed areas are
adequately addressed to prevent dust nuisance, requiring the use of water trucks
and other equipment."
Here are a few clarifying questions:
1. Will the water, sewer, storm drain construction be permitted by the
City under the grading permit already issued by the City or are the
activities being permitted under another permit. If another permit,
please identify the type of permit and date of issuance.
2. Will the installation of water, storm drain, streets, etc, require any
cutting, trenching, filling, or movement of earth?
3. What is the City's official definition of grading per the municipal
code?
I was not able to find a definition of grading in the City's code but did find
the following:
Palm Springs Municipal Code:
101.2.1 Building Code. Any reference to the International Building Code or
California Building Code shall mean the Palm Springs Building Code as with
amendments (Sections 8.04.010 and 8.04.015). The provisions of the Building
Code shall apply to every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or
attached to such buildings or structures except as provided for in the Residential
Code.
International Building Code:
Definition: GRADING: An excavation or fill or combination thereof.
2013 California Building Code (Section J101 and Section J102):
Definition : GRADING: An excavation or fill or combination thereof.
Cordially,
Dennis Woods
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Tim O'Bayley <tim ,obayley.net> wrote:
Dear Marcus,
8
Thanks so much for all of your help throughout this process. Helping everyone
understand what is and isn't allowed helps to set expectations appropriately for
everyone - neighbors, developer, and city staff.
I appreciate your help.
Cheers,
Tim O'Bayley
Publicist & Creative Director
O'Bayley Communications
tim(aboba, ley net
www.obayley.net
Office: 760-778-3525
Fax: 760-778-3529
Mobile: 760-799-3845
On Feb 10, 2015, at 9:09 AM, Marcus Fuller<Marcus.Fuller(czpalmsprings=
ca.gov> wrote:
Neighbors and Colleagues,
I would like to update you on the status of Desert Palisades.
As you know, on January 7, 2015, the City Council approved an amendment of a
biological mitigation measure from the EIR.
Specifically, the measure was modified to read:
MM 3.4-1: The developer shall ensure that the following
mitigation measures be required to reduce potential impacts to
bighorn sheep:
• Deeding all hillside acreage within the project boundaries
to the City of Palm Springs as part of their hillside
conservation area.
Ensuring that grading epeFations shall not take place-
(rani T... uai 1 to 1.....e 30 the peninsular 1]:..1......, Sheep
s less likely.
Ensuring that grading operations (earth moving) shall
not take place from February 1 to June 30, the Peninsular
Bighorn Sheep lambing period. Grading operations shall be
9
confined to between July 1 and January 31, when
disturbance to sheep is less likely. A qualified biologist shall
be designated as a biological monitor and shall be present
onsite during any grading operations that take place in the
month of January. All grading activities shall cease and
desist when the biological monitor determines that Bighorn
sheep are present on or in the vicinity of the project site.
• Providing a research grant to the Bighorn Institute for
further research on the causes underlying the long-term
decline in bighorn sheep numbers. The amount to be paid to
the Bighorn Institute shall be determined by the institute in
consultation with the applicant. The applicant shall furnish
the City with a receipt of payment prepared by the institute.
• No rock crushing or blasting operations shall occur on-
site during any phase of project development. Rock crushing
operations shall be limited to off-site locations for materials
resulting from the development of the Desert Water Agency
reservoir site, common area improvements, and the on-site
infrastructure. Proposals for rock splitting on individual lots
will be evaluated at the time such development applications
are received for review and approval by the City.
The City has ordered Desert Palisades to cease all grading operations.
Therefore, the continued import of material for the on-site private streets, which
we considered a grading operation, will not occur until July 1.
However, it is important for you to understand that this biological mitigation
measure did not impose a restriction on all activities during the Bighorn Sheep
lambing period—the restriction was limited to grading operations.
Desert Palisades is allowed, under the adopted final EIR, to proceed with other
activities throughout the year, including construction of on-site utilities and
infrastructure (water, sewer, storm drainage, etc.), and construction of the on-site
private streets (curbs, gutters, pavers, etc.).
Additionally, Desert Palisades is required to ensure that all disturbed areas are
adequately addressed to prevent dust nuisance, requiring the use of water trucks
and other equipment.
We will continue to monitor construction of this project for compliance with all of
the mitigation measures identified in the EIR.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
<image002.png>
Marcus L. Fuller,MPA, PE, PLS
Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 322-8380
Marcus.Fuller{a nalmsprinzsca.zov
10
From: Dennis Woods [mai Ito:dennis.l.woods(c gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 7:43 AM
To: Marcus Fuller
Cc: Nickie McLaughlin; Tabitha Richards; David Ready; Andy Hirsch; Bill
Erickson; Brad Kain; Christina Mineruini; Julia Ricci; Maureen & James Lenny;
Maurice Wilson; Michael Birnberg; Tim O'Bayley; Robert Rotman; Joel
Starkman
Subject: Re: Item 2K on the December 7, 2015 Agenda
Gentlemen,
Neighbors reported and I verified that as of 7:22 am this morning, February 3,
2015, streams of large large semi-tractor trailer trucks carrying earth were
entering and exiting the Desert Palisades site. Can you let us know if the City is
sanctioning this activity so that the neighbors are aware of the rules and
regulations being applied. I believe what neighbors though was suppose to happen
(all activity ending the end of January) as spelled out in the EIR and in the City
Council approved EIR addendum versus what is actually happening is creating
confusion.
Cordially,
Dennis Woods
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Marcus Fuller<Marcus.Fuller(c�palmsprings-
ca.gov> wrote:
Thank you for your email, and I hope to address the concerns and information
regarding the project.
The restriction on grading operations (earth moving) was related to the clearing,
grubbing, boulder loading/relocation, excavations and similar raw earthwork
"grading operations"that have occurred and were limited to July 1 —January 31
(as recently modified by the City Council).
The intent of this environmental mitigation measure is to limit the noise and
vibration caused by the equipment and operations associated with earth moving
and loading of boulders, and how that might affect the lambing sheep.
The grading operations thus far were related to clearing and excavating the on-site
roadways for subsequent construction of the on-site utilities (water, sewer,
electric, gas, cable, etc).
It is my understanding that the continuing work beyond January 31 is associated
with the import of clean sand into the previously excavated roadways.
Excavations into the on-site roadways within the clean imported sand for
installation of utilities is also anticipated.
The equipment and operations associated with import/delivery of sand and
installation of utilities is not expected to generate the noise and vibration
associated with the grading operations; however, we will continue close
coordination with the project biologist to ensure that none of the activities are
occurring with noise levels or vibrations that would otherwise affect the lambing
sheep.
rr
<imagc001.png>Marcus L. Fuller, MPA, PE, PLS
Assistant City Manager/City Engineer
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 322-8380
Marcus.FL[lle apalmsprin.zsca.pOV
From: Nickie McLaughlin [mailto:nixmacl a,icloud.com]
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 8:58 AM
To: Dennis Woods
Cc: Marcus Fuller; Tabitha Richards; David Ready; Andy Hirsch; Bill Erickson;
Brad Kain; Christina Mineruini; Julia Ricci; Maureen &James Lenny; Maurice
Wilson; Michael Birnberg; Tim O'Bayley; Robert Rotman; Joel Starkman
Subject: Re: Item 2K on the December 7, 2015 Agenda
God Morning Neighbors and City Staff,
I awoke this morning to the continuing Desert Palisades project which came as a
surprise as it was my understanding that the grading permit was to cease on
January 31 st for the Bighorn Sheep lambing season. I spoke to two of the o nsite
workers who suggested I call the number on the board by the project which I did
and spoke with a gentleman called Tim. Tim informed me he was only the
manager for dust control so I should call MSA who were the project managers. I
spoke with someone named Paul regarding the expiration date of the grading
permit and he said I would have to speak with the developer, Ed Freeman. When
asked for Mr. Freeman's contact number he was unable to find his number for me.
As I have obviously misunderstood the extension, I would be very grateful if if
either Mr. Fuller or Mr. Ready could provide us with the details of the extension
of the grading permit.
Sincerely,
Nickie McLaughlin
760.835.5628
All the best,
Brad
Bradley Kain
TinHopeP@yahoo.com
305-807-1510
12
Jay Thompson
From: Ginny Foat <gfinla@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 8:02 AM
To: Jay Thompson
Subject: FW: Palisades development nuiscense
Please duplicate for council.
Thanks,
Ginny
From: John Piro <reelblu(aDaol.com>
Subject: Palisades development nuiscense
Date: July 10, 2015 at 11:21:18 AM PDT
To: ginny.foat(a)palmspringsca.gov
Ginny, As a follow-up to our brief conversation on Friday July 3, I am putting my complaint regarding the
unbearable rattling and shaking of my house from the above development's removal of/and or movement
of boulders while the developer is grading the site. On Thursday July 2, my entire house was shaking,
windows, glasses and dishes were rattling, as if we were having some sort of earthquake! My residence is on
the comer of Racquet Club Rd. and Milo Dr. a distance away from the site, yet I still was being subjected to this
disturbance for the good part of the day. I can't imagine how difficult it was for any of the residents whose
homes are situated on the West side of Milo Drive abutting the site. If there is anything you can do to insure that
this disturbance does not continue thru out the entire build out process, I would greatly appreciate it. My right to
peace and tranquility has been sorely abused. Thank you, John Piro & Richard Barbaro. 2498 No. Milo Dr.
Palm Springs, ca. 92262.
i