HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/1/2014 - STAFF REPORTS - 2.I. ppLM SA
c
u N
w ,r
City Council Staff Report
C �P
4<�poaN
DATE: October 1, 2014 CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT: SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1860
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
PDD 232 AMND IN LIEU OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR A
RESIDENTIAL GATED DEVELOPMENT OF 72 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS
ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND 114 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN 19 6-UNIT
BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS LOCATED ON A ROUGHLY 24-ACRE
PARCEL AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY
AND FARRELL DRIVE
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Office of the City Clerk
SUMMARY:
The City Council will consider adoption of Ordinance No. 1860.
RECOMMENDATION:
Waive the reading of the ordinance text in its entirety and adopt Ordinance No. 1860,
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PDD 232 AMND IN LIEU OF A
CHANGE OF ZONE FOR A RESIDENTIAL GATED DEVELOPMENT OF 72 SINGLE
FAMILY UNITS ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND 114 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN 19 6-UNIT
BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS LOCATED ON A ROUGHLY 24-ACRE PARCEL AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND FARRELL DRIVE (CASE
5.1046 PDD 232 AMND /TPM 36767 / TTM 36689)."
STAFF ANALYSIS:
On September 17, 2014, Ordinance No. 1860 was introduced for first reading, as noted
below:
ACTION: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 23660, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS AN ADEQUATE EVALUATION
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PLANNED
Item No. 2. 1 .
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NOS, 1860
October 1, 2014
Page 2 of 2
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A CHANGE OF ZONE, THE
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AND THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP UNDER CEQA
AND APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 36767 AND TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 36689, PROPOSING A DEVELOPMENT OF 72 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS, 114 MULTI FAMILY UNITS IN 19
SIX-UNIT BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS, WITH PRIVATE STREETS OFF-
STREET PARKING AND OPEN SPACE ON A ROUGHLY 24-ACRE SITE
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EAST TAHQUITZ CANYON
WAY AND SOUTH FARRELL DRIVE (CASE 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM
36767 / TTM 36689)," amending the Condition of Approval to restudy the mulit-
family units and the space around community swimming pools, require twenty-
four (24 foot) streets, and adding back the proposed bike path; 2) Waive the
reading of the ordinance text in its entirety and read by title only; and 4) Introduce
on first reading Ordinance No. 1860, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PDD 232 AMND IN LIEU OF A CHANGE OF ZONE
FOR A RESIDENTIAL GATED DEVELOPMENT OF 72 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS
ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND 114 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN 19 6-UNIT
BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS LOCATED ON A ROUGHLY 24-ACRE PARCEL
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND FARRELL
DRIVE (CASE 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 / TTM 36689)." Motion
Mayor Pro Tern Hutcheson, seconded by Councilmember Lewin, and
carried 3-1 on a roll call vote.
AYES: Councilmember Lewin, Mayor Pro Tern Hutcheson, and
Mayor Pougnet.
NOES: Councilmember Foat.
ABSENT: Councilmember Mills.
This report provides for the City Council to waive further reading and adopt the
ordinance. The ordinance shall be effective 30-days from adoption.
ames Thompson David H. Ready, Esq., P
City Clerk City Manager
/kdh
Attachments: Ordinance No. 1860
02
ORDINANCE NO. 1860
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
PDD 232 AMND IN LIEU OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR A
RESIDENTIAL GATED DEVELOPMENT OF 72 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS
ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND 114 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN 19 6-UNIT
BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS LOCATED ON A ROUGHLY 24-ACRE
PARCEL AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY
AND FARRELL DRIVE (CASE 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 /
TTM 36689)
WHEREAS, Family Development, LLC, ("Applicant') has filed an application with the City
pursuant to Section 94.03.00 (Planned Development District), 94.04.00 (Architectural Review),
94.07.00 (Zone Change) of the Zoning Code seeking approval for a preliminary Planned
Development District in Lieu of a Change of Zone proposing a residential gated development
of 72 single family units on individual lots and 114 multi-family units in 19, 6-unit buildings on
four lots on a roughly 24-acre parcel located at the southeast corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way
and South Farrell Drive, with deviations in the underlying development standards; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs
to consider Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 /TTM 36689, was given in accordance
with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2014, a public hearing on the applications was held by the Planning
Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing the Planning Commission carefully reviewed and considered all of
the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including, but not limited
to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented and voted 6-0-1 (Klatchko
recused) to approve the preliminary PDD in lieu of Change of Zone and to recommend its
approval by Ordinance of the City Council and approve the Tentative Tract Map and Tentative
Parcel Map by Resolution, subject to Conditions of Approval; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered a "project' pursuant to the terms of the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider
Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 / TTM 36689, was given in accordance with
applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2014, a public hearing on the application for the project was
held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and
03
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 2
WHEREAS, a Planned Development District in lieu of a Change of Zone is adopted by
ordinance and includes two readings and a thirty-day period before it is effective; and
WHEREAS, an ordinance was prepared for two readings before Council for the approval of
Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence
presented in connection with the meetings on the project, including but not limited to the staff
report, and all written and oral testimony presented.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the
PDD and TTM applications are considered a project under the guidelines of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An initial study was conducted on behalf of the City by
Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc., which concluded that there were aspects of the
project that may cause a significant impact on the environment. Mitigation measures were
proposed to reduce these impacts to less than significant. A 20-day public review period for
the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (DMND) was held beginning on April 17, 2014 and
ending on May 6, 2014. No comments were received that would require modification or
recirculation of the DMND. The City Council hereby adopts this Mitigated Negative Declaration
as an adequate analysis of the project's environmental impacts pursuant to the guidelines of
the CEQA.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Zoning Code Section 94.07.00 (Change of Zone), "the council in
reviewing a proposed change of zone shall consider whether the following conditions exist in
reference to the proposed zoning of the subject property":
A PD may be approved in lieu of a change of zone as specified in Section 94.07.00 as follows:
1. The proposed change of zone is in conformity with the general plan map and
report. Any amendment of the general plan necessitated by the proposed change
of zone should be made according to the procedure set forth in the State
Planning Law either prior to the zone change, or notice may be given and
hearings held on such general plan amendment concurrently with notice and
hearings on the proposed change of zone.
The project was reviewed for conformity with the General Plan as follows:
General Plan Policy CD5.2 "When new residential structures are developed in
existing neighborhoods with established uniform or consistent non-conforming
setbacks, allow the setbacks of new structures to be consistent with those of the
existing surrounding development".
04
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 3
The proposed development is not consistent with many of the existing setbacks of the
surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission imposed conditions for enhanced
landscaping at the perimeter of the project to buffer the surrounding community from the
development. With this condition, the Planning Commission determined that this inconsistency
to be adequately mitigated.
Policy CD 14.4 "Prevent long monotonous walls and fencing through undulation,
modulation, surface articulation and landscaping.
Perimeter walls appear consistent with this policy.
Policy CD 14.5: Limit heights of walls and fencing and encourage the use of wall
breaks and transparent fences to protect views.
It does not appear that the perimeter walls incorporate breaks or open fence sections, however
the Planning Commission conditioned the project for more undulation and enhanced
landscaping on the outer side of the perimeter walls.
Policy CD 14.6: Prohibit gated community entries and perimeter walls around
entire neighborhoods. Instead, provide privacy through design features such as
meandering streets, ample landscaping, and house placement that provides
privacy and exclusivity.
The proposed gated development does not conform to this General Plan policy. The Planning
Commission concluded that with its condition for enhanced landscaping, more undulation and
variety in the perimeter walls, and pedestrian entry doors at all single family units backing onto
public streets, the project can be deemed consistent with this finding.
Policy CD.22.1 ; Require new and infill development to be of compatible scale,
materials, and massing as existing development. Also ensure that the design
character of the new development is appropriate to the area.
The proposed development is of a similar scale to the development to the north, but does not
relate as well in scale to the existing development to the west, east and south. As noted
above, the Planning Commission's conditions of approval provided sufficient buffer that these
inconsistencies in scale could be deemed adequately mitigated.
Policy CD.22.7 Ensure that residential communities are well connected with
each other and with nearby commercial uses through the inclusion of pedestrian
and bicycle friendly design feature such as trails, paths, and pedestrian oriented
streets in the neighborhood's design.
As noted above, the Planning Commission's conditions for added pedestrian gates and
connectivity to the public streets would render the project consistent with this policy
"...Private streets provide access to individual parcels of land in planned
05
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 4
development communities approved with privately maintained access. Private
streets in any residential or mixed use land use designation may be reduced to a
minimum of 28 feet (curb face to curb face) provided that (1) additional off-street
parking is provided as determined by the City Engineer, the Fire Chief and
Director of Planning, (2) rolled or wedge curb is provided such that vehicles may
park partially out of the traveled way, and (3) pedestrian paths or sidewalks, if
located along the street, , separated from the curb by a minimum five-foot
parkway are provided."
The project does not conform to this General Plan policy. The Planning Commission's
condition that the roadways be revised to this standard would render the project consistent
with this policy.
The project appears consistent with the General Plan in terms of density.
2. The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone,
in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and
other considerations deemed relevant by the commission and council.
The applicant proposes 71 single family residential units (SFR's). SFR's are permitted in the
many multi-family zones subject to the R-1-A development standards. The applicant is
seeking relief from these development standards including lot area, lot dimensions, setbacks,
lot coverage, and building height. The project is surrounded by a variety of related (residential
uses), including multi-family condominiums, apartments, and estate-sized single family homes.
The project only partially conforms to this finding because it does not relate in its proposed
development standards to the single family homes to the south. It also does not relate well to
the commercial/mixed use development to the west because it proposes the back yards of
single family residences to back onto a secondary thoroughfare and the commercial/mixed-
use/and future educational development to the west. With the incorporation of the Planning
Commissions conditions, the project can be found consistent with this finding.
3. The proposed change of zone is necessary and proper at this time, and is not
likely to be detrimental to the adjacent property or residents
The proposed PD in lieu of a change of zone proposes small-lot single family units and multi
family units that are considerably different from those in the existing development surrounding
the site. The proposed arrangement of back yards of single family units backing up to a
secondary thoroughfare and a commercial/educational center does not reflect good planning
principles. The Planning Commission imposed conditions for enhanced landscaping at the
perimeter of the project to visually buffer the surrounding community from the development.
With this condition, the Planning Commission determined this inconsistency to be adequately
mitigated so as to not be detrimental to adjacent properties.
SECTION 3. The City Council approves PDD 232 AMND (Case 5.1046) with conditions as
outlined in Resolution No. 23660.
06
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 5
SECTION 4. The City Council approves the zone map change from PD 71A to PD 232 for a
roughly 24-acre parcel at the southeast corner of East Tahquitz Canyon Way and South Farrell
Drive in conjunction with Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND and TTM 36689 and TPM 36767
subject to conditions as outlined in Resolution No. 23660.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days
after passage.
SECTION 6. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered to and directed to certify to the
passage of this Ordinance, and to cause the same or summary thereof or a display
advertisement, duly prepared according to law, to be published in accordance with law.
ADOPTED this 15t day of October, 2014.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
07
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 6
CERTIFICATION:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that
Ordinance No. 1860 is a full, true, and correct copy, and was introduced at a regular meeting
of the Palm Springs City Council on September 17, 2014, and adopted at a regular meeting of
the City Council held on by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California \
OR
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
NOTIFICATION
`OM'S
City Council
Meeting Date: October 1, 2014
Subject: Ordinance No. 1860
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, Kathie Hart, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that a copy of the attached Ordinance Summary was published in the Desert Sun on
October 11, 2014.
1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Kathie Hart, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Kathie Hart, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that a copy of the attached Ordinance Summary were 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 October 7, 2014.
1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Kathie Hart, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
The Desert Sun Certificate of Publication
750 N Gene Autry Trail _
Palm Springs, CA92262
760-778-4578 1 Fax 760-778-4731
2014 OCT 16 SN 11: 19
State Of California ss: J A � 1 r, , '(,.
County of Riverside CITY CLERK
Advertiser:
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS/LEGALS
PO BOX 2743
PALM SPRINGS CA 922632
2000478845
I am over the age of 18 years old, a citizen of the United
States and not a party to, or have interest in this matter. I
hereby certify that the attached advertisement appeared
in said newspaper (set in type not smaller than non panel)
in each and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit:
Newspaper: .The Desert Sun
10/11/2014
NO 1629 '
ORDINANCE NO.isle
AN ORDINANCE OF .THE CITY OF PALM
NARY PLANNED RDDE�ELOPMENT DISTERUICT
ZONEPop 232 FOR AMINO ES DENTAL GATEU OF A CHANGE LOP MENT OF 72 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON INDI-
I acknowledge that am a principal Clerk Of the printer Of VIDUAL LOTS AND 114 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS
The Desert Sun, printed and published weekly in the City IN 19&UNIT BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS LO-
'CATED ON A ROUGHLY 24-ACRE PARCEL AT
Of Palm Springs, County of Riverside, State Of California. THE SOUTHEAST CORNER'OF TAHOUITZ
The Desert Sun was adjudicated a newspaper Of general 5.1AON4Y6ORDDAY D FARRELLd DRIVE SC SE
circulation on March 24, 1988 by the Superior Court of the 36689)
County of Riverside, State of California Case No. 0(rAfromWIsaumnury
191236. This
elooOppn ererOG n aMxores a prefimrnarryv Planned
and 114 mullNaa iy hom for es singlelamly homes
24 sore parOel at the southwest c-awnua�qu�p
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true Canyon eyand Farrell Drive,
CERTIFICATION
and correct. Executed on this 11th day of October, 2014 in
'mM%rn s, MPSONdo here City Clerk at the City Of
Palm Springs,C la. No. leap ise'tuli�t hereby
yd certify that Ordinance
Irdroduced ate correct fig,and was
2014, and ado ad at awn Iarn September 17,
Palm Springs City COundl con u m�6np Of me
the following Vole: 1,II014,by
AYES: COundlmember Levin, Mayor Pro
Tem Hutcheo Blue.and Mayor Pougnat.
NOES: Councilmem6er Foal.
ASSENT: Coundlmember Mills.
DBclar Is S)Ignature I ABSTAIN: None. rtryry
City M Palm SpdnnA cd%mia
Published:10N7/14
ORDINANCE NO. 1860
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PDD 232 AMND IN LIEU OF A
CHANGE OF ZONE FOR A RESIDENTIAL GATED
DEVELOPMENT OF 72 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON
INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND 114 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN 19
6-UNIT BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS LOCATED ON A
ROUGHLY 24-ACRE PARCEL AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND FARRELL
DRIVE (CASE 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 / TTM
36689)
City Attorney's Summary
This Ordinance approves a preliminary planned
development project for 72 single family homes and 114
multi-family homes on an approximately 24 acre parcel at
the southwest comer of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Farrell
Drive.
CERTIFICATION
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, do hereby certify
that Ordinance No. 1860 is a full, true and correct copy, and was introduced at a regular
meeting on September 17, 2014, and adopted at a regular meeting of the Palm Springs
City Council on October 1, 2014, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember Lewin, Mayor Pro Tern Hutcheson, and Mayor Pougnet.
NOES: Councilmember Foat.
ABSENT: Councilmember Mills.
ABSTAIN: None.
ames Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
ORDINANCE NO. 1860
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PDD 232 AMND IN LIEU OF A
CHANGE OF ZONE FOR A RESIDENTIAL GATED
DEVELOPMENT OF 72 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON
INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND 114 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN 19
6-UNIT BUILDINGS ON FOUR LOTS LOCATED ON A
ROUGHLY 24-ACRE PARCEL AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND FARRELL
DRIVE (CASE 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 / TTM
36689)
CityAttorney's Summary
This Ordinance approves a preliminary planned
development project for 72 single family homes and 114
multi-family homes on an approximately 24 acre parcel at
the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Farrell
Drive.
WHEREAS, Family Development, LLC, ("Applicant") has filed an application with the
City pursuant to Section 94.03.00 (Planned Development District), 94.04.00
(Architectural Review), 94.07.00 (Zone Change) of the Zoning Code seeking approval
for a preliminary Planned Development District in Lieu of a Change of Zone proposing a
residential gated development of 72 single family units on individual lots and 114 multi-
family units in 19, 6-unit buildings on four lots on a roughly 24-acre parcel located at the
southeast corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and South Farrell Drive, with deviations in
the underlying development standards; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Springs to consider Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 / TTM 36689, was
given in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2014, a public hearing on the applications was held by the
Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing the Planning Commission carefully reviewed and
considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project,
including, but not limited to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented
and voted 6-0-1 (Klatchko recused) to approve the preliminary PDD in lieu of Change of
Zone and to recommend its approval by Ordinance of the City Council and approve the
Tentative Tract Map and Tentative Parcel Map by Resolution, subject to Conditions of
Approval; and
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 2
WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to
consider Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND / TPM 36767 / TTM 36689, was given in
accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2014, a public hearing on the application for the project
was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, a Planned Development District in lieu of a Change of Zone is adopted by
ordinance and includes two readings and a thirty-day period before it is effective; and
WHEREAS, an ordinance was prepared for two readings before Council for the
approval of Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence
presented in connection with the meetings on the project, including but not limited to the
staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,
the PDD and TTM applications are considered a project under the guidelines of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An initial study was conducted on behalf
of the City by Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc., which concluded that there were
aspects of the project that may cause a significant impact on the environment.
Mitigation measures were proposed to reduce these impacts to less than significant. A
20-day public review period for the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (DMND) was
held beginning on April 17, 2014 and ending on May 6, 2014. No comments were
received that would require modification or recirculation of the DMND. The City Council
hereby adopts this Mitigated Negative Declaration as an adequate analysis of the
project's environmental impacts pursuant to the guidelines of the CEQA.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Zoning Code Section 94.07.00 (Change of Zone), "the council
in reviewing a proposed change of zone shall consider whether the following conditions
exist in reference to the proposed zoning of the subject property".
A PD may be approved in lieu of a change of zone as specified in Section 94.07.00 as
follows:
1. The proposed change of zone is in conformity with the general plan
map and report. Any amendment of the general plan necessitated by the
proposed change of zone should be made according to the procedure set
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 3
forth in the State Planning Law either prior to the zone change, or notice
may be given and hearings held on such general plan amendment
concurrently with notice and hearings on the proposed change of zone.
The project was reviewed for conformity with the General Plan as follows:
General Plan Policy CD5.2 "When new residential structures are
developed in existing neighborhoods with established uniform or
consistent non-conforming setbacks, allow the setbacks of new structures
to be consistent with those of the existing surrounding development'.
The proposed development is not consistent with many of the existing setbacks of the
surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission imposed conditions for
enhanced landscaping at the perimeter of the project to buffer the surrounding
community from the development. With this condition, the Planning Commission
determined that this inconsistency to be adequately mitigated.
Policy CD 14.4 "Prevent long monotonous walls and fencing through
undulation, modulation, surface articulation and landscaping.
Perimeter walls appear consistent with this policy.
Policy CD 14.5: Limit heights of walls and fencing and encourage the use
of wall breaks and transparent fences to protect views.
It does not appear that the perimeter walls incorporate breaks or open fence sections,
however the Planning Commission conditioned the project for more undulation and
enhanced landscaping on the outer side of the perimeter walls.
Policy CD 14.6: Prohibit gated community entries and perimeter walls
around entire neighborhoods. Instead, provide privacy through design
features such as meandering streets, ample landscaping, and house
placement that provides privacy and exclusivity.
The proposed gated development does not conform to this General Plan policy. The
Planning Commission concluded that with its condition for enhanced landscaping, more
undulation and variety in the perimeter walls, and pedestrian entry doors at all single
family units backing onto public streets, the project can be deemed consistent with this
finding.
Policy CD.22.1; Require new and infill development to be of compatible
scale, materials, and massing as existing development. Also ensure that
the design character of the new development is appropriate to the area.
The proposed development is of a similar scale to the development to the north, but
does not relate as well in scale to the existing development to the west, east and south.
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 4
As noted above, the Planning Commission's conditions of approval provided sufficient
buffer that these inconsistencies in scale could be deemed adequately mitigated.
Policy CD.22.7 Ensure that residential communities are well connected
with each other and with nearby commercial uses through the inclusion of
pedestrian and bicycle friendly design feature such as trails, paths, and
pedestrian oriented streets in the neighborhood's design.
As noted above, the Planning Commission's conditions for added pedestrian gates and
connectivity to the public streets would render the project consistent with this policy
"...Private streets provide access to individual parcels of land in planned
development communities approved with privately maintained access.
Private streets in any residential or mixed use land use designation may
be reduced to a minimum of 28 feet (curb face to curb face) provided that
(1) additional off-street parking is provided as determined by the City
Engineer, the Fire Chief and Director of Planning, (2) rolled or wedge curb
is provided such that vehicles may park partially out of the traveled way,
and (3) pedestrian paths or sidewalks, if located along the street, ,
separated from the curb by a minimum five-foot parkway are provided."
.The project does not conform to this General Plan policy. The Planning Commission's
condition that the roadways be revised to this standard would render the project
consistent with this policy.
The project appears consistent with the General Plan in terms of density.
2. The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed
zone, in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related
uses, and other considerations deemed relevant by the commission and
council.
The applicant proposes 71 single family residential units (SFR's). SFR's are permitted
in the many multi-family zones subject to the R-1-A development standards. The
applicant is seeking relief from these development standards including lot area, lot
dimensions, setbacks, lot coverage, and building height. The project is surrounded by a
variety of related (residential uses), including multi-family condominiums, apartments,
and estate-sized single family homes. The project only partially conforms to this finding
because it does not relate in its proposed development standards to the single family
homes to the south. It also does not relate well to the commercial/mixed use
development to the west because it proposes the back yards of single family residences
to back onto a secondary thoroughfare and the commercial/mixed-use/and future
educational development to the west. With the incorporation of the Planning
Commissions conditions, the project can be found consistent with this finding.
3. The proposed change of zone is necessary and proper at this time, and
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 5
is not likely to be detrimental to the adjacent property or residents
The proposed PD in lieu of a change of zone proposes small-lot single family units and
multi-family units that are considerably different from those in the existing development
surrounding the site. The proposed arrangement of back yards of single family units
backing up to a secondary thoroughfare and a commercial/educational center does not
reflect good planning principles. The Planning Commission imposed conditions for
enhanced landscaping at the perimeter of the project to visually buffer the surrounding
community from the development. With this condition, the Planning Commission
determined this inconsistency to be adequately mitigated so as to not be detrimental to
adjacent properties.
SECTION 3. The City Council approves PDD 232 AMND (Case 5.1046) with conditions
as outlined in Resolution No. 23660.
SECTION 4. The City Council approves the zone map change from PD 71A to PD 232
for a roughly 24-acre parcel at the southeast corner of East Tahquitz Canyon Way and
South Farrell Drive in conjunction with Case 5.1046 PDD 232 AMND and TTM 36689
and TPM 36767 subject to conditions as outlined in Resolution No. 23660.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30)
days after passage.
SECTION 6. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered to and directed to certify to
the passage of this Ordinance, and to cause the same or summary thereof or a display
advertisement, duly prepared according to law, to be published in accordance with law.
ADOPTED this 15t day of October, 2014.
STEPHEN P. POUGNET, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JAMES THOMPSON, CITY CLERK
Ordinance No. 1860
Page 6
CERTIFICATION:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that Ordinance No. 1860 is a full, true, and correct copy, and was introduced at a
regular meeting of the Palm Springs City Council on September 17, 2014, and adopted
at a regular meeting of the City Council held on by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California 1