Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2006-06-21 STAFF REPORTS 1C
June 20 2006 r , � 1 L. To Palm Springs Mayor and City Council R1E, Proposed Palms Hotel In view of the massive confusion about the Wessman OPA re the Pallms Hotel, I have attached aprevious memo dated Dec. 13, 2006, which 1 "believe correctly explains the agreement. Already the Planning Commission abdicated its duties being under the false impression of what the OPA is really all about- Stori po➢es were originally asked for by Commission members as a proper aspect of the planning process but were not provided. 1 must emphatically state that I only agreed to a(density transfer because 1 was assured that due process would ensure some reasonable compromise that everyone could live with. If it were a done deal 1 would not have agreed. The Redevelopment Building Proposai was based on what could be the highest possible yield provided that all other community considerations could be satisfied which is why proper land use review was stipulated. Finaily, the presently proposed transfer amounting to a total of 15 Tight of zone units from the Winteis property added to 36 right of zone units from the Wessman property totaling 51 units differs ftom earlier agreements (see Exhibit B of OPA), 51 units would not leave any units at all for the Winters property which has 6 rentable units. Frank Tysen 175 S, Cahuilia Rd. ® Pahn Springs, CA 92262 .cuyL o.•a:• . I a, AW lip 111111111111V V-0 "M '00-t'w Rk Nme+uwril Ww�,,,qzv fS Ri 2w���ME Office of the City Attorney City of Palm Springs DIRECT DIAL: (714)564-2642 (760)323-8211) DIRECT FAX: (714)565-2542 E-MAIL, dchnWSS-LAW COM douglash(a),ci Palm-springs ca us TO: Hon. Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Attorney DATE: June 20, 2006 RE: Legal Rights and Responsibilities of the City Owner Participation Agreement Between Wessman Development Company and the Community Redevelopment Agency Agenda Item 1.0 Summary The City Council has requested this Office review the Owner Participation Agreement between the Community Redevelopment Agency of Palm Springs and the Wessman Development Company regarding the development of a "boutique hotel" at the southwest corner of Tahquitz and Cahuilla Road and evaluate whether the City Council has any legal obligations pursuant to this agreement in the Council's consideration of Agenda Item 1.0 on the Council's Agenda of June 21, 2006. It is the opinion of this Office that the OPA does not restrict or limit the City's ability to review the Wessman Company's application for a planned development for the "boutique hotel" and the City Council has the authority to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application as provided in the City's Planning Code. Diiscussion In 2004, the City's Community Redevelopment Agency was in initial discussions 4th the Wessman Company regarding the potential redevelopment of Wessman's property at the southwest corner of Tahquitz and Cauhilla. One of the options that the Agency and Wessman were considering was Agency acquisition of an adjacent parcel, the "Winter Parcel," and sale of the Winter Parcel to Wessman for inclusion in Wessman's proposed boutique hotel project. The Agency and Wessman, however, were not the only suitors for the Winter Parcel. Frank Tysen and Therese Hayes, the owners of the Casa Cody Hotel, also desired to acquire the property to satisfy their own hotel services needs. Tysen made an offer to acquire the Winter Parcel and had actually entered into escrow to purchase the property when the Agency attempted to exercise its rights of first refusal to purchase the Winter Parcel under an earlier agreement between the owners of the Winter Parcel and the Agency. ey ..S'. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council May 6, 2005 Page 2 It is our understanding that a creative compromise was achieved under the auspices of the office of Councilmember McCulloch. Under the compromise, the Winter Parcel and the development rights associated with the Winter Property would be divided so that Wessman and Tysen could each achieve their respective goals. Tysen would get the Winter Parcel, the house on the Winter Parcel, the ability to pursue the remodel of the interior of the house into hotel rooms, and the ability to incorporate the Winter Parcel into the Casa Cody. Wessman would get what was described at the time as the "transfer" of development rights from the Winter Property to the Wessman project. As an added bonus, ostensibly for the benefit of the public, the Winter Parcel and the exterior of the historic structure would be preserved. The vehicles to achieve this compromise consisted of two critical documents: An Owner Participation Agreement between the Agency and Wessman, and a Consent to Project executed by Frank Tysen and Therese Hayes. There are a few additional considerations that must be kept in mind. First of all, the Owner Participation Agreement is between Wessman and the Agency— the City is not a party to the OPA. Second, the OPA, due to the exigent circumstances of the time and the need to document the proposed compromise, preceded City review and approval of land use entitlement applications. These considerations were clearly understood under the terms of the OPA and the OPA recognized that subsequent approvals by the City would be required. Section 3.3 of the OPA expressly provides: "Notwithstanding anything herein contained to the contrary, it is expressly understood by the parties hereto that the Agency makes no representations or warranties with respect to the approvals required by any other governmental entity or with respect to approvals hereinafter required from the City or the Agency. NOTWITHSTANDING THE GENERALITY OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE PROJECT WILL REQUIRE LAND-USE APPROVAL BY THE CITY AND NOTHING HEREIN, INCLUDING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT IN EXHIBIT B AND THE APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT BY THE AGENCY, SHALL LIMIT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY BY ITS PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE, CONDITIONALLY APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE PROJECT." The portion of the OPA quoted above, consisting of the all capital letters and bold print, is as it appears in the approved OPA. Please note that the OPA is included with the Council's Agenda materials for Item 1.C; see pages 0052 through 0071. In addition, the above sentence in its emphatic,form as quoted above is actually repeated at the end of the Description of the Project, Exhibit "B" to the OPA; see page 0066 of the Agenda materials.) Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council May 6, 2005 Page 3 Thus, it is evident that the OPA did not attempt to limit and should not be construed as limiting the ability of the City to exercise its governmental oversight and authority to approve, conditionally approve, or deny applications for development entitlements related to the boutique hotel project pursuant to the City's Zoning Code. The City Council has full discretion to review and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the planned development application for the boutique hotel on the Council Agenda for June 21. There are a few additional notes of interest. Tysen and Hayes are not parties to the OPA; however, they are the parties to the other essential component of the compromise: the Consent to Project. (The Consent to Project is attached to this memorandum for your reference.) In this document, Tysen and Hayes agreed to consent to Wessman's boutique hotel project so long as the project remained consistent with the Scope of Development as provided in the OPA. Although the OPA was amended last year to extend the time for Wessman's performance, the Scope of Development has not been amended. Thus, so long as the boutique hotel project is consistent with the Scope of Development in the OPA, this Office would consider the Consent to Project to be in full force and effect. The Consent to Project is important for other reasons. It includes a commitment by Tysen to preserve the exterior of the historic structure. The Consent to Project also formally acknowledges the "transfer" of development rights contemplated in the compromise and requires Tysen's recording a covenant .'surrendering development rights beyond those necessary" for Tysen's remodel of the historic structure on the Winter Parcel. Conclusion The compromise over the Winter Parcel and the development of the Wessman boutique hotel did not affect the City's governmental obligation and right to review any land use applications for the project. Indeed, by its very terms, the OPA between the Agency and Wessman expressly acknowledged that the City's review authority was not affected or limited in any way by the OPA. Thus, the City Council has full authority to review and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application for a planned development permit for the Wessman boutique hotel. DOUGIL OLLAND CITY AT / EY By: Douglas Holland Ofy Attorney EXHIBIT "E" CONSENT TO PROJECT Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement dated May 4, 1988, the Palm Springs Cormmrmity Redevelopment Agency has a first right to acquire that certain parcel identified as the Winters Parcel, located on North Pahn Carryon Drive and adjacent to the Property described in the foregoing agreement. Prank Tysen and Therese Hayes ("Tysen"), ov hers of the Casa Cody which is adjacent to the Winters Parcel to the south, on 175 South Cahuilla made an offer to acquire the Winters Parcel_and the Agency responded on January 26, 2004 attempting to exercise their right to acquire the Winters Parcel. The Agency is prepared to abandon its effort to acquire the Winters Parcel if Tysen is willing to permit a transfer of certain development rights from the Winters Parcel to the parcel to the north owned by John Wessman ("Wessman Parcel"), which is the subject of this OPA. Tysen has reviewed the OPA and the development plan contained within the Scope of Development. The parties understand that the Project must go through the City of Pahm Springs' regular development approval process. Tysen, on behalf of owners of the Tysen Parcel, has reviewed and understands the Project and will consent to the development of the Project if it is consistent with the Scope of Development and will not create impacts on the Tysen and Winters Parcels beyond those which would arise from the development of the Project in accordance with the Scope of Development. Nothing herein shall be deemed to affect in any manner the right of the City to disapprove, alter or approve the development plan for the Project, whether consistent or inconsistent with this OPA. In addition, the parties acknowledge that the Project contemplates in some degree the r transfer of development rights from the Winters Parcel to the Site. Tysen intends to renovate the N structure with the four existing guest quarters to become four hotel units and will preserve the y exterior of the historic structure in accordance with the Seller's condition of sale. Accordingly, NN upon acquisition, Tysen will record a Covenant agreement surrendering development rights on 7 the Winters Parcel beyond those necessary for his proposed renovation of the existing structure. Approved this 2nd day of June-,2004 s� Prank Tysen t5✓ Therese H yes i EXHIBIT "E" TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT 1003/012/30897.02 t Jay Thompson Dt ,. ,'t`s From: Craig Ewing pp n.• Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 1:50 PM To: Edward Robertson Cc: Jay Thompson; Martha Edgmon; David Ready Subject: FW: Palms Hotel To All, This was posted directly to the City Council, but thought each of you might want or need a copy. - Craig From: Sheryl Hamlin [mailto:sherylham]in@earthlink.net] Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 11:47 AM To: Chris Mills; Ginny Foat; Mike McCullough; Ron Oden ; Steve Pougnet Cc: Craig Ewing; gbjaguar@earthlink.net; HJMEYE1932@aol.com; Janice Lyle ; Tracy Conrad ; James Cioffi; 'Michael Braun'; ladybldrl@aol.com; 'Mark Russell'; svenholm@msn.com; Cyndee Schaefer ; elissagoforth@aol.com; gene Dippel; Janice Kaminisky; Jim Jess ; Lauri Aylaian; Ray Cochran; sheryl@hamlin.net Subject: Palms Hotel Dear Mayor and Council Members, RE: Palms Hotel The basis for the Palms Hotel was a density transfer between the Winters' property and the Wessman Development property. Density Transfer is an acceptable planning tool and as you know was one of the hallmarks of the Citizens' Task Force on Mountain Planning and Preservation (CTF). That is where the similarities end. The CTF density transfer was vetted among neighborhood groups, citizen groups, business groups and the tribe. The Winters-Wessman density transfer was created and executed privately. The CTF density transfer was carefully calculated, so that the end state of PA8 (recipient of the density)was not overloaded. In the Winters-Wessman density transfer no such consideration was given, so that the end state is out of proportion and unbalanced. A density transfer between two adjacent properties is a degenerate use of the density transfer because of the potential for discontinuities. Please see the attached PDF for pictures of the surrounding properties and views and privacy that will be affected. Furthermore the Palms Hotel with its restaurant and rooms and staff will degrade the street parking in the vicinity and create a fire hazard for the Tahquitz Villas and residents of the Hill (copied on this email) because it needs twice the number of spaces the property can provide. All hotel guests will have to wait for their cars to be shuttled from the new Museum Plaza. The PaIms Hotel should be the anchor for the new Museum Plaza. Its architecture is dazzling and should be surrounded by shops, restaurants and residences, as projected for the area. Remember the mall was originally a grand, old hotel and tourism is what put the town on the map! I urge you to allow Mr. Wessman to build condominiums on the corner property, as he stated in the Planning Commission meeting, respectful to the surrounding properties and start moving ahead on the blighted Fashion Plaza, Thanks. f��-��6`�`:D�eRj�+a Av`VJ9•`iic-f�.9�=..gym, 6/19/2006 Palms Hotel: Planning with Neighbors in Mind Sheryl Hamlin, Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Organization May 10, 2005 WAS" ffilaw The planning process must include the surrounding spaces. The density transfer in the case of the Winters'property created discontinuities be- . . tween adjacent properties. An example from a previous height discontinuity is shown in the St. Baristo condominiums, a PDD by Wessman-Gonzales. ; J The first picture shows the 33'St. Baristo condominiums south of a historic single family residence on Cahuilla Note how St Baristo towers over this .e, .. SFR and actually eliminates the winter sun to this house. Furthermore,the privacy of the backyard of the SFR was eliminated by this 33' building, depreciating the property value as well as the quality of life. The proposed 44' Palm Hotel will be adjacent to two historic single family residences the Francis Winters' home and Le Vallauris. Although these ,.�.._.._ properties are both commercial,their business model thrives on the familial St. Baristo at 33' next to historic SFR on Cahuilla setting of the historic homes where they reside. The second photo shows the historic Winters'property lawn looking west. The Villas condominiums at 26'can be seen to the west. The third photo is taken from the historic Winters' residence looking north. Two utility poles are shown One pole is about 12 feet from the property line and the second one is about 45 feet from the property line. The sec- ,. and pole is about 40'tall. These poles are on the lot of the proposed hotel. The proposed Palm Hotel at 44' is taller than these two utility poles plus a top floor balcony. It is possible that windows on the south side of the hotel will look directly into the lawn of the Winters' property. And it is possible that windows from the west side of this hotel will look down into the condo- miniums at The Villas which are south and west of the proposed hotel pro- ject. Clearly the balcony guests will view both the lawn of the Winters' property and The Villas and potentially into Le Vallauris and The Willows. Historic Winters' lawn looking west into the Villas This project should not go forward until the developer produces a real-time, three-dimensional(3-D)computer simulation of the project and its sur- rounding areas View projections from hotel windows should be shown. Furthermore, because the developer does not have enough parking spaces and will rely on the mall for the overflow parking, the hotel and the mall should be considered as one project and submitted together, including '" a 3-D computer simulation of the mall and the hotel. It is inappropriate to consider this hotel until the entire mall project is submitted. 41 i . Picture taken from Le Vallau- �'� ...� ris'parking lot.The 40' utility Historic Winters' property looking north toward the proposed Palm Hotel.The telephone poles are on the pole is shown just to the left of Palms Hotel property and are about 40'tall. the cypress tree. June 16, 2006. Palm Springs City Council, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California 92262. Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council: RE: Proposed Palm Hotel, 327 West Tahquitz Case No. 5.1089 Planned Development 322 We are property owners at 400 West Arenas Road, around the comer from this proposed hotel development. The project is totally unacceptable to us at the density proposed. A four-story building would be completely out of character in this neighborhood. There is nothing higher than two stories on the entire block. Along the westerly side of Cahuilla Road between Arenas and Tahquitz Canyon Way there is, in fact, presently nothing taller than a one story structure. 'We are not at all opposed to the intended use here, but the developer should be restricted to a two-story limit. Thank you. JN�4w� Marc Herbert, 2864 Tice Creek Dr, No. 4 Walnut Creek, CA. 94595. 15 June 2006 2C06 IES;1 '.s l City of Palm Springs 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Dear Mayor and City Council Members: RE: PROPOSED PALMS HOTEL PROJECT The Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Association (HTCNO) strongly objects to the Palms Hotel project as currently proposed due to the extraordinary concessions required to "shoehorn" the building into the site. A Planned Development is intended "to allow certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of specific zone classifications," in keeping with the General Plan and good planning practices. This could be reduced setbacks or increased density or height increases for specific building components. The Planned Development proposed here reduces setback requirements by up to 85% and increases the building height 50% and increases the density by 30% and reduces on-site parking 33% and increases lot coverage by 30%. These are not variances; this is not flexibility. This is wholesale capitulation. The HTCNO opposes these concessions because they would force onto the site a building that is out-of-proportion with the neighborhood, and that will overwhelm its surroundings. The proposed project would redefine the experience of the area for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. What is now "charming" and "quaint," with beautiful mountain views, would become a built environment dominated by a monolithic structure. The site is on a bicycle trail traveled by visitors and residents, and is on the route of the Inn Walk that is held every December to celebrate the holidays and spotlight the character of historic Palm Springs. Redefining the neighborhood to be "urban" obviates one of the main draws of our community. The; Owner Participation Agreement between the Community Redevelopment Agency and Wessman Holdings appears to be the culmination of negotiations between two private property owners and the Community Redevelopment Agency. It did not involve, or even give consideration to, the neighborhood or the community at large. We take this opportunity to speak to the issue, because the proposed project does effect more than the two adjoining property owners. It significantly impacts our neighborhood and the historic section of Palm Springs. City of Palm Springs Mayor and Council Members Palms Hotel - Proposed Planned Development District 15 June 2006 A developer's financial goals for a project do not constitute a compelling reason for granting variances. We respectfully urge you to represent the interests of the community at large and to deny the project as currently proposed. A similar project that complies with zoning setbacks, height restrictions, and parking requirements would be enthusiastically supported by our neighborhood organization. Sincerely, .� Lauri Aylaian HTCNO Board of Directors Copy: David Ready Craig Ewing HTCNO Board Members June 16 2006 -" , TO: The Palm Springs City Council 2 PJ 006 „ I i 1 IROM: Historic Tennis Club District Small Hotels RE: Proposed Palm Hotel We, the undersigned owners of neighboring Historic Tennis Club boutique hotels, are deeply concerned about the proposed Palm Hotel at Tahquitz and Cahuilla. Though we support a boutique inn at that location, our concern is with the proposed density as well as the height of four stories and a fifth story deck in a neighborhood of one and two story buildings. We fear the potentially destabilizing impact of what currently is a successful small hotel community. We are informed that if that request is granted other applications for such heights may be forthcoming producing a domino effect. This would create further adverse environmental impacts on the neighborhood. Our client base which is very much dependent upon the area's low-rise character, low density and the consequent relaxed ambience would be negatively affected. We feel that this project does not qualify for an infill exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act because it is not consistent with the Palm Springs ?oning ordinance and all zoning regulations, the General Plan designation and all General Plan policies including exceeding applicable density and height limits, inadequate open space requirements as well as major departures from setback requirements such as a 142' setback reduced to 15' and a 53' setback reduced to 3'. Additionally the proposed high percentage of off site parking suggests that from a sound planning perspective the property would be substantially overbuilt. Moreover, the CEQA exemption is not applicable because there is a reasonable probability of significant environmental effects due to unusual circumstances including density bonus transfer. The significant density being shifted to this site results in severe land use and esthetic impacts and a project that is entirely incompatible with its surroundings and setting. We also question whether the city has proper density transfer procedures and if so whether they were properly followed. What is the basis under the General Plan and the zoning regulations for such an increase in density? If such density transfers are permitted we question whether the density transfer has been properly calculated. Also the proposed project exceeds the scope of development discussed in the Owners Participation Agreement. What is the:basis for the divergence? The changes affect roollop use, greater height, lack of below grade parking and restaurant size. ! R• �Py',f"C,r'�Vpev�..e. �4��E° G�c°.'.. rd�ra Palm Spring City Council June 16, 2006 Page 2 Furthermore we contend that the Palm Springs Planning Commission on May 24, 2006 did not properly scrutinize the Palm Hotel application since they erroneously believed that they did not have the discretion to exercise their proper planning authority and duties. Because of all this we contend that the necessary findings for approval cannot be met. Therefore we recommend no infill exemption, denial of the project, or at least to return the matter to the planning commission for a proper restudy including the use of story poles and flags outlining the proposed building silhouette or adequate computer simulation. The Andalusian Court Old Ranch Inn Xuka Akimoto Larry Pitcher and Edward Fine Arenas Gardens Orbit In and Hideaway Roger Malone and Eugene Milligan Christy Eugenis and Stan Amy Calla Lily Inn San Giuliano Inn Rod and Charlotte Callahan Eugene Rossi Chase Hotel KOIakia Pensione Craig and Kathleen Blau Doug and Josie Smith Coyote Inn The Willows Gary and Mary Nold Tracy Conrad and Paul Marut ,`off PALM SA4 .y u °q<�FORN�P CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: June 21, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: THE PALMS HOTEL — CASE NO. 5.1089, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 322, AN APPLICCATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FOUR-STORY BOUTIQUE HOTEL WITH 51 ROOMS INCLUDING 11 SUITES, ROOF TERRACE AREA WITH CABANAS, A RESTAURANT, A BAR, A WATER FEATURE, AND SWIMMING POOL ON AN APPROXIMATELY 36,217 SQUARE FEET SITE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND CAHUILLA ROAD. FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Department of Planning Services SUMMARY The: City Council will consider a proposed four-story boutique hotel with 51 rooms, including 11 suites, roof terrace area with cabanas, a restaurant, a bar, water feature and a swimming pool and off-street parking facility along with the environmental assessment. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Open the public hearing and receive public testimony. 2. Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CASE NUMBER 5.1089, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 322, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF A 51-UNIT BOUTIQUE HOTEL, ON APPROXIMATELY 36,217 SQUARE FEET PARCEL LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND CAHUILLA ROAD, SECTION 15." PRIOR ACTIONS: On January 23, 2006, the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC), considered the proposed project design, and voted 4-0-1 (abstain), to recommend denial of the project. At the review of the proposed development, the AAC made these observations: Item No. 1 . n . City Council Staff Report Juno 21,2006--Page 2 5.1089-PD-822 • The overall architecture is good. • The proposed building mass does not have an appropriate relationship to the site or the surroundings, especially the west elevation. • That the applicant could be more creative with the parking solutions. • The density would fit, however additional architectural treatment is needed. The AAC also recommended that should the Planning Commission vote for a recommendation to approve the proposed project, the applicant will be required to bring back the project to the Committee for restudy of the architecture. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 10, 2006, to consider the proposed project. At the meeting, after presentations by staff and the applicant, and public comments, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to continue the hearing to the meeting of May 24, 2006. Furthermore, the Planning Commission asked staff to provide further clarifications on the following questions: • The setback of the Le Vallauris property • The applicant's off-site parking program • Additional parking requirements for the proposed restaurant and employees • The applicability of the Downtown Design Guidelines to this project • The applicability of the "Owner Participation Agreement" (Settlement Agreement) on the Commission's decision making process. The detailed responses to these questions are provided in the attached Planning Commission staff report dated May 24, 2006. At the meeting of May 24, 2006, the project was again reviewed by the Planning Commission which adopted a favorable recommendation to City Council (by a vote of 5-2). The Planning recommended an additional condition of approval which requires the applicant to provide parking spaces for the restaurant and employees of the future establishment. STAFF ANALYSIS: The project consists of a Planned Development District (PDD) to establish design standards and guidelines for the proposed 51-unit boutique hotel. The proposed four-story hotel building with a swimming pool on 36,217 square feet will be located at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road. The subject site is made up of two vacant parcels surrounded primarily by existing hotels, restaurant and other commercial uses. As proposed, the project area will include a total building area of 50,331 square feet. The; property is generally rectangular and largely flat with the shorter street frontage along Tahquitz Canyon Way. To the north of the site, across Tahquitz Canyon Way is the vacant Desert Fashion Plaza. To the south is the Casa Cody Inn building, to the 0"G2 City Council Staff Report June 21,2006--Page 3 5.1039-PD-322 east across Cahuilla Road is an existing three-story hotel structure and to the west is the Le Vallauris Restaurant. The; General Plan designation of the subject site is H43/30 (High density residential; allowing a maximum of 30 dwelling units per net acre). The zoning designation is R-3, which allows the development of multiple-family residential, hotels, resort housing and certain limited commercial uses under the City of Palm Springs Zoning Code. Restaurants are also permitted uses within the R-3 zoning designation, provided that the use is an integral part of the hotel and located within the same building. The applicant is proposing a density of approximately 42 units per acre, which exceeds the maximum density allowed within the zoning designation. However, the application includes a Planned Development District and a development agreement between the applicant and the City dated June 2, 2004, and titled "Owner Participation Agreement' (Attachment 3), that addresses the scope and use of the proposed hotel site. Also, the development agreement allows the applicant a transfer of density bonus from the "Winter's" property, located adjacent to the proposed hotel site. Table 2: A comparison of requirements for the R-3 zone and the proposed Planned Development Standards is seen on this table. R-3 Zoning Code Requirement Proposed PD Standard Allows multiple-family projects and hotel Same developments Minimum lot size: 20,000 SF 36,217 s.f. and 51,990 s.f. with the addition of the transferred density Minimum lot width: 130 Feet Approximately 178 Feet Minimum lot depth: 150 Feet Approximately 204 Feet Density: Minimum 1,000 sf/du lot area of a hotel or Approximately 710 sf/du lot area per the resort hotel with surface parking. A minimum development agreement of 800 sf/du with underground parking (51 DU this project) Height: Up to 30 feet for hotels 44 Feet, 4 Stories Setbacks at Property Lines North: 25 feet Approximately 3.4 feet South: 25 feet Approximately 13 feet East: 25 feet 17 feet West: 25 feet 15 feet Parking: 1 per room for the first 50 rooms 34 on-site spaces and 17 off-site spaces are being provided Open S ace: 45% 45.9% Coverage: 30% 39% 0O City Council Staff Report June 21,2006--Page 4 5.1089-PD-322 Table 2: Exhibit "B" of the Owner Participation Agreement Criteria R-3 Development Proposed Allowed Allowed Standards Project project Yield Project Yield on Wessman's on both project properties combined Minimum Lot 20,000 sq. ft. Meets standard 20,000 sq. ft. 20,000 sq. ft. Size minimum lot size (36,900 sq. ft.) minimum lot minimum lot size size Density 1:1,000 sq. ft. 48 units 36 units 51 units Building 30'over no more 4 stories (42- 30' over no 30' over no Height than 50% of 44) more than 50% more than 50% without High ground floor area of ground floor of ground floor Rise area. area. Ordinance Open Space 45% 22,950 s.f. 22,950 s.f. If all of Winter under R-3 before bay before bay were counted Standards parking and parking and (as part of a (not High driveways driveways total of 51,900 Rise) (approx. 16,000 (approx. 16,000 s.f.) as open s.f.)- comes s.f.)- comes space would be close to 45% close to 45% about 61 Parking 1 for each room 22 spaces on Would need 48 Would need 51 up to 50 rooms, site, remainder spaces spaces 0.75 for each by covenant room over 50 rooms Pursuant to Section 94.03.00 (A) of the Zoning Code, a planned development district (PD) may be approved in lieu of a change of zone as specified in Section 94.07.00. The PD is requested for this project to allow relief from several development criteria. 0 The project proposes a four-story building with a height of 44 feet; hotel structures within the R-3 zoned areas are limited to a maximum height of 30 feet. The proposed height of 44 feet meets the definition of a high-rise building per Section 93.04.00 of the zoning ordinance. As proposed, the project does not meet the setback requirement for high-rise buildings as envisioned by the Owner Participation Agreement; the PD will provide the flexibility to deviate from the requirements of the Zoning Code. 40 Flexibility is also needed to allow off-site parking for the project. The parking requirement for hotels requires 1 parking space per room for the first 50 rooms, . which will require a total of 51 spaces for this project. The applicant is proposing only 34 spaces on-site and 17 additional off-site spaces across from the 06�zi City Council Staff Report June 21,2006--Page 5 5.1089-PD-322 proposed site. The Planning Commission conditioned its approval to include a requirement that additional off-site parking be provided to account for restaurant and employee parking. The applicant owns and operates a parking structure across from the subject site which is less than 150 feet from the proposed hotel location. • A minimum of 25 feet setback is required within the R-3 zoning areas. The applicant is proposing approximately '18 feet setback from the property line along Cahuilla Road, 15 feet setback from the property line westerly of the project site, approximately 17 feet setback along the easterly portion and approximately 3.5 feet setback from the property line along Tahquitz Canyon Way. • The PD will provide flexibility for the proposed density of the development. Per the R-3 Zoning standards, a minimum of 1,000 square feet per dwelling unit lot area is required of hotels or resort hotels with surface parking. A minimum of 800 square feet per dwelling unit lot area is required for hotels or resort hotels with underground parking. The applicant is proposing approximately 710 square feet dwelling unit lot area per the Owner Participation Agreement, but also consistent with the General Plan policies. A more detailed analysis can be seen in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 25, 2006. Findings in support of approving the proposed subdivision are included in the attached draft resolution of approval. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, the project is not subject to any further environmental review. FISCAL IMPACT: IFinance Director Review: No fiscal impact. � Gving, AIG s "ils ssisi nt City Manager Dire r of Planning ;Services David H. Ready, City M� e� City Council Staff Report Jung;21,2006--Page 6 5.1089-PD-322 Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Draft Resolution and Conditions of Approval 3. Reduced Site Plans and Elevations 4. Planning Commission Staff Report dated 5/10/06 5. Planning Commission Minutes dated 5/10/06 (Excerpts) 6. Planning Commission Staff Report dated 5124/06 7. Planning Commission Minutes dated 5/24/06 (Excerpts) 8. Copy of the Owner Participation Agreement = Department of Planning Services w N E Vicinity Map s 9a 0 5 w co TAHQUITZ DR R ram 9 r5 0 J ZUj Q = J V M ARENAS RD Legend) � site IT =400'P.adius D -W4 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: 5.1089 PD-322 DESCRIPTION: Application to construct a four-story hotel with 51 rooms including 11 suites, roof terrace area with APPLICANT: Wessman Holdings, LLC cabanas, bar and a water feature, a restaurant, bar and for The Palm Hotel pool cabanas located at 327 West Tahquitz Canyon Way, Zoned R-3, Section 15. APN: 513-141-013, 513-141-004. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CASE NUMBER 5.1089, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 322, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF A 51-UNIT BOUTIQUE HOTEL SUBJECT TO THE ATTACHED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT A, ON AN APPROXIMATELY 36,217 SQUARE FEET PARCEL, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND CAHUILLA ROAD, ZONED R-3, SECTION 15. WHEREAS, Wessman Holdings, LLC (the "Applicant') has filed an application with the City pursuant to Section 94.03.00 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, for Planned Development District 322 and site development approval; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered an infill "project' pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and no further Environmental Assessment is required for this project in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider Planned Development District 322 and proposed related development was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on May 24, 2006, a public hearing on the application for project was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meeting on the project, including but not limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider said Case Number 5.1089 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on June 21, 2006, a public hearing on the application for the project was held by City Council in accordance with applicable law; and WHIEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meeting on the project, including but not limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented. �O�T� City Council Resolution No. Page 2 of 3 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: This project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, this project is not subject to any further environmental review. Section 2: Pursuant to Section 94.03.00 (E) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code, the City Council makes the following findings: a. The proposed planned development is consistent and in conformity with the general plan pursuant to Sections 94.07.00 (A)(1) and 94.02.00 (A)(4) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. The proposed planned development is consistent with the general plan in recognizing that Planned Districts allow departures from strict provisions of zone classifications while providing flexibility for compatible land uses. The proposed project conforms to most development standards provided within the R-3 development standards with the application of a Planned Development District. The proposed PD is intended to allow flexibility to provide reduced setbacks, off-street parking and increased density, up to that allowed by the General Plan. b. The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed planned development district, in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and other relevant considerations. The project site is relatively flat, bounded on two sides by streets, and can accommodate the hotel use envisioned by the General Plan and the proposed development. Access is available to the site along the two streets. All the necessary amenities required for the kind of the proposed use are being provided. The required parking spaces could not be provided on-site due to the size of the parcel however, the applicant is proposing additional off-street parking spaces to serve the hotel. The distance between the site and the off-street parking space is less than 150 feet. C. The proposed establishment of the planned development district is necessary and proper, and is not likely to be detrimental to adjacent property or residents. 00F�, U � y%-i City Council Resolution No. Page:3 of 3 A planned development district is necessary to accommodate the proposed type of hotel development incorporating varying building heights, hardscape and landscape features consistent with hotel development in the surrounding. The development is not likely to be detrimental to adjacent property or residents because the proposed use is not substantively different than those already envisioned by the General Plan, and existing land uses in the vicinity. Furthermore, the hotel development will be compatible with the existing land uses in the general vicinity. Surrounding uses include hotels, restaurants and other commercial uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the architectural design of the project, and recommends that the City Council approve Case Number 5.1089 and PD-322. ADOPTED this 24th day of May, 2006. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA James Thompson, City Clerk David H. Ready, City Manager Resolution No. Page:4 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 March 15t 2006, by the following vote: AYIES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California 00�J T, EXHIBIT A Case No. 5.1089-PD-322 THE PALM HOTEL SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TAHQUI'TZ CANYON AND CAHUILLA ROAD June 21, 2006 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning Services, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition. Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS Administrative 1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations. 2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative officers concerning Case No. 5.1089-PD-322. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgement or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, parkways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and agencies having jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be included in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City. 4. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 a filing fee of $64.00 is required. This project has a de minimus impact on fish and wildlife, and a Certificate of Fee Exemption shall be completed by the City and two copies filed with the County Clerk. This application shall not be final until such fee is paid and the Certificate of Fee Exemption is filed. Fee shall in the form of a money order or cashier's check payable to Riverside County. 5. This project shall be subject to Chapters 2.24 and 3.37 of the Municipal Code regarding public art. The project shall either provide public art or payment of an in lieu fee. In the case of the in-lieu fee, the fee shall be based upon the total building permit valuation as calculated pursuant to the valuation table in the Uniform Building Code, the fee being 1/2% for commercial or industrial projects, 114% for new residential subdivisions, or 1/4% for new individual single-family residential units constructed on a lot located in an existing subdivision with first $100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be located on the project site, said location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning Services and the Public Arts Commission, and the property owner shall enter into a recorded agreement to maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing. 6. The developer shall reimburse the City for the City's costs incurred in monitoring the developer's compliance with the conditions of approval and mitigation monitoring program, including, but not limited to inspections and review of developers operations and activities for compliance with all applicable dust and noise operations, and cultural resource mitigation. This condition of approval is supplemental and in addition to normal building permit and public improvement permits that may be required pursuant to the Palm Springs Municipal Code. CC&R's 7. The applicant prior to issuance of building permits shall submit three (3) sets of a draft declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC&R's") to the Director of Planning Services for approval in a form to be approved by thb City Attorney, to be recorded prior to certificate of occupancy. The CC&Rs shall be submitted with a list of the adopted conditions of approval and an indication of where applicable conditions are addressed in the CC&Rs. The CC&R's shall be enforceable by the City, shall not be amended without City approval, shall require maintenance of all property in a good condition and in accordance with all ordinances. 8. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Springs, a deposit in the amount of $3500, for the review of the CC&R's by the City Attorney. A filing fee, in accordance with the fee schedule adopted by the City Council, shall also be paid to the City Planning Services Department for administrative review purposes. 9. The CC&R's shall have a disclosure statement regarding the location of the project relative to roadway noise, City special events, roadway closures for special events and other activities which may occur in the Central Business District, Desert Museum and Desert Fashion Plaza. Said disclosure shall inform perspective buyers about traffic, noise and other activities which may occur in this area. Cultural Resources 10. Prior to any ground disturbing activity, including clearing and grubbing, installation of utilities, and/or any construction related excavation, an Archaeologist qualified according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines, shall be employed to survey the area for the presence of cultural resources identifiable on the ground surface. Final Design 11. Final landscaping, irrigation, exterior lighting, and fencing plans shall be submitted for approval by the Department of Planning Services, prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office prior to submittal. All landscaping located within the public right of way or within community facilities districts must be approved by the Public Works Director and the Director of Parks and Recreation. 12. The final development plans shall be submitted in accordance with Section 94.03.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Final development plans shall include site plans, building elevations, floor plans, roof plans, grading plans, landscape plans, irrigation plans, exterior lighting plans, site cross sections, property development standards and other such documents as required by the Planning Commission. Final development plans shall be submitted within two (2) years of the City Council approval of the preliminary planned development district. 13. An exterior lighting plan in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 93.21.00, Outdoor Lighting Standards, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning Services prior to the issuance of building permits. ►. c+��ti14 Manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior lighting on the building and in the landscaping shall be submitted for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. If lights are proposed to be mounted on buildings, down-lights shall be utilized. No lighting of the hillside is permitted. 14. The applicant shall be required to take the project back to the Architectural Advisory Committee for review, upon a recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission. 15. The applicant shall provide a total of 73 parking spaces for the hotel guests, the restaurant and employees of the establishment. (Added by PC on May 24, 2006) Public Safety CFD GENERAL CONDITIONS/CODE REQUIREMENTS 16. Architectural approval shall be valid for a period of two (2) years. Extensions of time may be granted by the Planning Commission upon demonstration of good cause. 17. The appeal period for this application is 15 calendar days from the date of project approval. Permits will not be issued until the appeal period has concluded. 18. The project is subject to the City of Palm Springs Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The applicant shall submit an application for Final Landscape Document Package to the Director of Planning Services for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Refer to Chapter 8.60 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements. 19. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Building Official. Refer to Chapter 8.50 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements. 20. The grading plan shall show the disposition of all cut and fill materials. Limits of site disturbance shall be shown and all disturbed areas shall be fully restored or landscaped. 21. Separate architectural approval and permits shall be required for all signs. A detailed sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits. 22. All materials on the flat portions of the roof shall be earth tone in color. 23. All awnings shall be maintained and periodically cleaned. 24. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from all possible vantage points both existing and future per Section 9303.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. The screening shall be considered as an element of the overall design and must blend with the architectural design of the building(s). The exterior elevations and roof plans of the buildings shall indicate any fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building, the equipment heights, and type of screening. Parapets shall be at least 6" above the equipment for the purpose of screening. 25. No exterior downspouts shall be permitted on any facade on the proposed building(s) which are visible from adjacent streets or residential and commercial areas. 26. Perimeter walls shall be designed, installed and maintained in compliance with the corner cutback requirements as required in Section 9302.00.D. 27. The street address numbering/lettering shall not exceed eight inches in height. 28. Submit plans meeting City standard for approval on the proposed trash and recyclable materials enclosure prior to issuance of a building permit. 29. Details of pool fencing (material and color) and equipment area shall be submitted with final landscape plan. 30. No outside storage of any kind shall be permitted except as approved as a part of the proposed plan. 31. Vehicles associated with the operation of the proposed development including company vehicles or employees vehicles shall not be permitted to park off the proposed building site unless a parking management plan has been approved. 32. Prior to the issuance of building permits, locations of all telephone and electrical boxes must be indicated on the building plans and must be completely screened and located in the interior of the building. Electrical transformers must be located toward the interior of the project maintaining a sufficient distance from the frontage(s) of the project. Said transformer(s) must be adequately and decoratively screened. 33. Loading space facilities shall be provided in accordance with Section 9307.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Said facilities shall be indicated on the site plan and approved prior to issuance of building permits. 34. Standard parking spaces shall be 17 feet deep by 9 feet wide; compact sized spaces shall be 15 feet deep by 8 feet wide. Handicap parking spaces shall be 18 feet deep by 9 feet wide plus a 5 foot walkway at the right side of the parking space; two (2) handicap spaces can share a common walkway. One in every eight (8) handicap accessible spaces, but not less than one (1), shall be served by an 8 foot walkway on the right side and shall be designated as "van accessible". 35. Handicapped accessibility shall be indicated on the site plan to include the location of handicapped parking spaces, the main entrance to the proposed structure and the path of travel to the main entrance. Consideration shall be given to potential difficulties with the handicapped accessibility to the building due to the future grading plans for the property. 36. Compact and handicapped spaces shall be appropriately marked per Section 93.06.00.C.10. 37. Curbs shall be installed at a minimum of five (5) feet from face of walls, fences, buildings, or other structures. Areas that are not part of the maneuvering area shall have curbs placed at a minimum of two (2) feet from the face of walls, fences or buildings adjoining driveways. 38. Parking lot light fixtures shall align with stall striping and shall be located two to three feet from curb face. 39. Islands of not less than 9 feet in width with a minimum of 6 feet of planter shall be provided every 10 parking spaces. Additional islands may be necessary to comply with shading requirements. 40. Shading requirements for parking lot areas as set forth in Section 9306.00 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be met. Details to be provided with final landscape plan. 41. Parking stalls shall be delineated with a 4 to 6 inch double stripe - hairpin or elongated "U" design. Individual wheel stops shall be prohibited; a continuous 6" barrier curb shall provide wheel stops. 42. Concrete walks with a minimum width of two (2) feet shall be installed adjacent to end parking spaces or end spaces shall be increased to eleven (11) feet wide. 43. Tree wells shall be provided within the parking lot and shall have a planting area of six feet in diameter/width. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: STREETS 1. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. 2. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a registered California civil engineer to the Engineering Division. The plan(s) shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. 3. Vacation of right-of-way is required to facilitate the proposed development application. An application for the right-of-way vacation of the westerly 5 feet of Cahuilla Road along the project frontage shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for separate processing and approval. Upon a finding by the Planning Commission that there is no significant impact to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the proposed neighborhood, in accordance with General Plan Policy 7.1.6, a reduced right-of-way width of 45 feet may be approved for Cahuilla Road. As required, coordinate final relocation, adjustment or abandonment of all utilities with the respective utility companies, and demolition of all existing improvements, reconstruction of affected intersecting streets, and coordination of improvements with adjacent property owners, as appropriate, with the Engineering Division. All agreements and improvement plans relative to the above mentioned items shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the submittal of the street improvement plans. The right-of-way vacation application shall be submitted and approved by the City Council prior to approval of the Precise Grading and Paving Plan. 4. Removal of decorative enhancements to Tahquitz Canyon Way is required to facilitate the proposed development. The existing raised, landscaped median installed as a requirement of Case 5.0804, Planned Development 254, and Tentative Tract Map 29077 (otherwise known as the "Palm Springs Villas") was required in response to specific City Council direction to provide for an enhanced entryway on Tahquitz Canyon Way to the project and properties in that area, as indicated in Resolution 20393 adopted on July 17, 2002. The proposed service driveway on Tahquitz Canyon Way at Museum Way conflicts with the existing raised, landscaped median. The applicant shall be required to submit a proposal for an alternative aesthetic treatment subject to the review and approval of the Le Vallauris restaurant (located at 385 W. Tahquitz Canyon Way), the Villas Homeowners Association, and the Willows Historic Palm Springs hotel (located at 412 W. Tahquitz Canyon Way). Pending their concurrent approval, which can not be unreasonably withheld upon a determination by the City Engineer and Director of Planning Services, the alternative aesthetic treatment to replace the median shall be subject to the review and approval by the Planning Commission . and City Council as an element of Planned Development 322. TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY 5. Dedicate an additional right-of-way for a property line - corner cut-back at the northeast corner of the subject property in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 105. 6. Remove the existing street improvements as necessary to construct a 15 feet wide driveway approach for service access, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. The centerline of the driveway approach shall be located a minimum of 12 feet east of the west property line. 7. Subject to approval of an alternative aesthetic treatment on Tahquitz Canyon Way, to facilitate access to the proposed service driveway the existing landscaped median located in Tahquitz Canyon Way shall be removed, and street pavers matching the existing pavers in Tahquitz Canyon Way shall be installed in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer and the Villas Homeowners Association. 8. Remove the existing street improvements as necessary to construct a 26 feet wide driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. The centerline of the driveway approach shall be located approximately 80 feet west of the centerline of Cahuilla Road. Access to the driveway shall be limited to ingress only. Appropriate signage and striping shall be installed regulating the use of this driveway for ingress only, subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer. 9. All existing "Heritage Trail' sidewalk, bikepath, and landscaping improvements along the Tahquitz Canyon Way frontage shall remain in place except where removals are required for proposed driveways. 10. Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 3 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement along the Tahquitz Canyon Way frontage where removals are required, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. 11. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced. CAHUILLA ROAD 12. Remove the existing street improvements as necessary to construct a driveway approach to accommodate bay parking stalls along the Cahuilla Road frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. Bay parking stalls shall be located completely on-site, and not within public right-of-way. Bay parking shall be restricted within 35 feet from the north property line; the two most northerly bay parking stalls shown on the preliminary Site Plan shall be deleted. Paving material for bay parking shall be decorative paving, colored and/or patterned to relate to the overall design, in accordance with Palm Springs Zoning Code 93.06.00 C15e. 13. Remove the existing street improvements as necessary to construct a 27 feet wide driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. The centerline of the driveway approach shall be located approximately 20 feet from the south property line. The driveway approach shall be a combined access to the proposed trash enclosure and a 14 feet wide egress lane. Access to the driveway shall be limited to egress only. Appropriate signage and striping shall be installed regulating the use of this driveway for egress only, subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer. 14. Dedicate an easement 4 feet wide along the back of the driveway approach for sidewalk purposes. 15. Construct a varying width (5 feet minimum) sidewalk west of the proposed bay parking stalls (on-site) along the Cahuilla Road frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. The sidewalk shall be constructed with colored Portland Cement concrete. The admixture shall be Palm Springs Tan, Desert Sand, or approved equal color by the Engineering Division. 16. Construct access ramps for the proposed sidewalk, as necessary, meeting applicable City standards. 17. Dedicate an easement for sidewalk purposes, as necessary, for the proposed sidewalk located on-site and west of the proposed bay parking stalls along the entire frontage. 18. Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 2'/ inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire Cahuilla Road frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. 19. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced. ON-SITE 20. The on-site layout of parking spaces is subject to further review and approval by the City Engineer. Deletion or relocation of proposed parking spaces may be required during review and approval of construction plans for on-site improvements, as required by the City Engineer. Approval of the preliminary site plan does not constitute approval of the on-site layout of parking spaces as proposed. 21. The minimum pavement section for all on-site pavement shall be 2'/ inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. SANITARY SEWER 22. Any existing sewer system located on-site shall be removed. Sewer service to adjacent properties (if any) shall be maintained by reconnection to the public sewer system, in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. 23. All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. The existing sewer service to the property may be used for new sanitary facilities. New laterals shall not be connected at manholes. GRADING 24. Submit a Precise Grading and Paving Plan prepared by a California registered civil engineer to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The Precise Grading and Paving Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permit. 25. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and/or its grading contractor and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall be required to comply with Chapter 8.50 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, and shall be required to utilize one or more "Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures" as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook for each fugitive dust source such that the applicable performance standards are met. The applicant's or its contractor's Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by staff that has completed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall provide the Engineering Division with current and valid Certificate(s) of Completion from AQMD for staff that have completed the required training. For information on attending a Fugitive Dust Control Class and information on the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook and related "PM10" Dust Control issues, please contact AQMD at (909) 396-3752, or at www.AQMD.gov. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan, in conformance with the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook, shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Division prior to approval of the Precise Grading and Paving plan. 26. The first submittal of the Precise Grading and Paving Plan shall include the following information: a copy of final approved conformed copy of Conditions of Approval; a copy of a final approved conformed copy of the Site Plan; a copy of current Title Report; a copy of Soils Report; and a copy of the associated Hydrology Study/Report, 27. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters. 28. A soils report prepared by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer shall be required for and incorporated as an integral part of the grading plan for the proposed development. A copy of the soils report shall be submitted to the Building Department and to the Engineering Division prior to approval of the Grading Plan. 29. In cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the California Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project, applicants for grading permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of soil will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved "Notification of Intent To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties" (RIFA Form CA-1) prior to approval of the Precise Grading and Paving Plan. The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert (Phone: 760-776-8208). DRAINAGE 30. Provisions for the interception of nuisance water from entering adjacent public streets from the project site shall be provided through the use of a minor storm drain system that collects and conveys nuisance water to drywells, landscape or parkway areas, and in only a stormwater runoff condition, pass runoff directly to the streets through parkway or under sidewalk drains. 31. This project may be required to install measures in accordance with applicable National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Best Management Practices (BMP's) included as part of the NPDES Permit issued for the Whitewater River Region from the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The applicant is advised that installation of BMP's, including mechanical or other means for pre-treating stormwater runoff, may be required by regulations imposed by the RWQCB. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to design and install appropriate BMP's, in accordance with the NPDES Permit, that effectively intercept and pre-treat stormwater runoff from the project site, prior to release to the City's municipal separate storm sewer system ("MS4"), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the RWQCB. If required, such measures shall be designed and installed on-site; and provisions for perpetual maintenance of the measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including provisions in Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for the development (if any). 32. The applicant shall accept and convey stormwater runoff released from the adjacent property (Tract Map 29077 — "The Villas") at an outlet point located at the southwest corner of the subject property. Conveyance of off-site stormwater runoff may be made by surface drainage through a concrete drainage channel along the south property line appropriately sized to convey the estimated 100 year off-site stormwater runoff volume. The stormwater runoff may be released directly to Cahuilla Road 33. Submit storm drain improvement plans for all on-site storm drainage system facilities for review and approval by the City Engineer. 34. All on-site storm drain systems shall be privately maintained. 35. Unless otherwise demonstrated that drainage implementation fees were previously paid for this property, the project is subject to flood control and drainage implementation fees pursuant to Resolution 14082. The acreage drainage fee at the present time is $9,212.00 per acre per Resolution No. 15189. Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. GENERAL 36. Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development shall be backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115. The developer shall be responsible for removing, grinding, paving and/or overlaying existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets as required by and at the discretion of the City Engineer, including additional pavement repairs to pavement repairs made by utility companies for utilities installed for the benefit of the proposed development (i.e. Desert Water Agency, Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, Time Warner, Verizon, etc.). Multiple excavations, trenches, and other street cuts within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development may require complete grinding and asphalt concrete overlay of the affected off-site streets, at the discretion of the City Engineer. The pavement condition of the existing off-site streets shall be returned to a condition equal to or better than existed prior to construction of the proposed development. 37. All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground. 38. In accordance with Chapter 8.04.401 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, all existing and proposed electrical lines of thirty-five thousand volts or less and overhead service drop conductors, and all gas, telephone, television cable service, and similar service wires or lines, which are on-site, abutting, and/or transecting, shall be installed underground unless specific restrictions are shown in General Orders 95 and 128 of the California Public Utilities Commission, and service requirements published by the utilities. The existing overhead utilities adjacent to the south property line approximately 80 feet west of the east property line, and running north from the south property line approximately 50 feet and then turning easterly to the east property line, meet the requirement to be installed underground. A detailed plan approved by the owner(s) of the affected utilities depicting all above ground facilities in the area of the project to be undergrounded, shall be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to approval of any grading plan. Undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 39. All existing utilities shall be shown on the Grading Plan required for the project. The existing and proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to the property line. 40. Upon approval of any improvement plan by the City Engineer, the improvement plan shall be provided to the City in digital format, consisting of a DWG (AutoCAD drawing file) and DXF (AutoCAD ASCII drawing exchange file). Variation of the type and format of the digital data to be submitted to the City may be authorized, upon prior approval of the City Engineer. 41. The original improvement plans prepared for the proposed development and approved by the City Engineer shall be documented with record drawing "as- built" information and returned to the Engineering Division prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Any modifications or changes to approved improvement plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to construction. 42. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any intersection or driveway which does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section 93.02.00, D. 43. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904. MAP 44. The existing parcels shall be merged. An application for a parcel merger shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. A copy of a current title report and copies of record documents shall be submitted with the application for the parcel merger. The application shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval, and shall be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. TRAFFIC 45. Based on the Traffic Study for The Palms Hotel Project (dated May 1, 2006) by George Dunn Engineering , the following mitigation measure(s) will be required: a. Applicant shall pay fair share contribution of 5% (or $7,500) for the future traffic signal at Belardo Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way, as determined in the final Traffic Study as approved by the City Engineer. 46. Recommendations from the Traffic Study for The Palms Hotel Project are subject to change pending the final approval of the Traffic Study by the City Engineer. Additional traffic mitigation measures identified in the final Traffic Study shall be satisfied by the applicant, as may be required by the City Engineer. 47. A minimum of 48 inches of clearance shall be provided on public sidewalks for handicap accessibility. Minimum clearance on public sidewalks shall be provided by either an additional dedication of a sidewalk easement (if necessary) and widening of the sidewalk; or by the relocation of any obstructions within the public sidewalk along the Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road frontages of the subject property. 48. All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends and striping associated with the proposed development shall be replaced as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 49. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects as required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum, all construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with State of California, Department of Transportation, "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones" dated 1996, or subsequent additions in force at the time of construction. 50. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which shall be paid prior to issuance of building permit. l nr POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Developer shall comply with Article II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1. Prior to any construction on-site, all appropriate permits must be secured. FIRE DEPARTMENT Public Safety CFD 1. The Project will bring a significant number of additional residents to the community. The City's existing public safety and recreation services, including police protection, criminal justice, fire protection and suppression, ambulance, paramedic, and other safety services and recreation, library, cultural services are near capacity. Accordingly, the City may determine to form a Community Services District under the authority of Government Code Section 53311 et seq, or other appropriate statutory or municipal authority. Developer agrees to support the formation of such assessment district and shall waive any right to protest, provided that the amount of such assessment shall be established through appropriate study and shall not exceed $500 annually with a consumer price index escalator. The district shall be formed prior to sale of any lots or a covenant agreement shall be recorded against each parcel, permitting incorporation of the parcel in the district. 2. 'Premises Identification: Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. (901.4.4 CFC) 3. Automatic Fire Sprinklers: An approved, automatic Fire Sprinkler System is required. 4. Standpipe System: An approved standpipe system is required. (CBC 904.5.2) 5. Fire Hydrant & FDC Location: A public commercial fire hydrant is required within 30 feet of the Fire Department Connection (FDC). Fire Hose must be protected from vehicular traffic and shall not cross roadways, streets, railroad tracks or driveways or areas subject to flooding or hazardous material or liquid releases. 6. Fire Department Connections: Fire Department connections shall be visible and accessible, have two 2.5 inch NST female inlets, and have an approved check valve located as close to the FDC as possible. All FDC's shall have KNOX locking protective caps. Contact the fire prevention secretary at 760-323-8186 for a KNOX application form. 7. Fire Extinguisher Requirements: Provide one 2-A:10-B:C portable fire extinguisher for every 75 feet of floor or grade travel distance for normal hazards. Show proposed extinguisher locations on the plans. (1002.1 CFC) Extinguishers shall be mounted in a visible, accessible location 3 to 5 feet above floor level. Preferred location is in the path of exit travel near an exit door. 8. Fire Alarm System: Fire Alarm System required. Installation shall comply with the requirements of NFPA 72. 9. Mid Rise/High Rise: High-rise and mid-rise buildings shall be accessible on a minimum of two sides. Roadways shall not be less than 10 feet (3048 mm) or more than 35 feet (10 668 mm) from the building. Landscaping or other obstructions shall not be placed or maintained around structures in a manner so as to impair or impede accessibility for fire fighting and rescue operations. 10.Plot Plan: Prior to completion of the project, a 8.5"x11" plot plan and an electronic CAD version shall be provided to the fire department. This shall clearly show all access points, fire hydrants, knox box locations, fire department connections, unit identifiers, main electrical panel locations, sprinkler riser and fire alarm locations. Large projects may require more than one page. 11.Residential Smoke Detector Installation: Provide Residential Smoke Detectors. Detectors shall receive their primary power from the building wiring, and shall be equipped with a battery backup. (310.9.1.3 CBC) In new construction, detectors shall be interconnected so that operation of any smoke detector causes the alarm in all smoke detectors within the dwelling to sound. (2- 2.2.1 NFPA 72) Provide a note on the plans showing this requirement. 12.Fire Department Access: Fire Department Access Roads shall be provided and maintained in accordance with Sections 901 and 902 CFC. (902.1 CFC) • Minimum Access Road Dimensions: 1. Private streets shall have a minimum width of at least 20 feet, pursuant to California Fire Code 902.1 however, a greater width for private streets may be required by the City engineer to address traffic engineering, parking, and other issues. The Palm Springs Fire Department requirements for two-way private streets, is a minimum width of 24 feet, unless otherwise allowed by the City engineer. No parking shall be allowed in either side of the roadway. 13. Vertical Clearance for covered parking on ground level: Palm Springs fire apparatus require an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 9 feet. (902.2.2.1 CFC) 14. Access Gates: Fire/Police/Ambulance access gates shall be at least 14' in width when in the open position and equipped with a Knox (emergency access) key switch. A Knox key operated switch shall be installed at every automatic gate. Show location of switch on plan. Show requirement in plan notes. 15. Building or Complex Gate Locking Devices: Locked gate(s) shall be equipped with a Knox key switch device or Key box. Boxes shall be mounted at 6 feet above grade. Contact the Fire Department at 760-323-8186 for a Knox application form. (902.4 CFC) 16. Road Design: Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and constructed as all weather capable and able to support a fire truck weighing 73,000 pounds GM (902.2.2.2 CFC) The minimum inside turning radius is 30 feet, with an outside radius of 45 feet. 17. Elevator Stretcher Requirement: At least one elevator shall be designed to accommodate medical emergency service. The elevator(s) so designed shall accommodate the loading and transport of an ambulance gurney or stretcher 24 inches by 76 inches in the horizontal position. The elevator entrance shall have a clear opening of not less than 42 inches wide or less than 78 inches high. The elevator car shall be provided with a minimum clear distance between walls or between walls and door excluding return panels not less than 80 inches by 54 inches, and a minimum distance from wall to return panel not less than 51 inches with a 42 inch side slide door. (3003.5a CBC) 18. Ventilating Hood & Duct System: A ventilating hood and duct system shall be provided for commercial-type food heat-processing equipment that produces grease-laden vapors. (1005.1 CFC) 19. Fire extinguishing system required: Approved automatic fire extinguishing systems shall be provided for the protection of commercial type cooking equipment. (1005.2.1 CFC) 20. Hood & Duct Fire Protection System Coverage: The automatic fire extinguishing system used to protect ventilating hoods and ducts and cooking appliances shall be installed to include cooking surfaces, deep fat fryers, griddles, upright broilers, char broilers, range tops, and grills. Protection shall also be provided for the enclosed plenum space within the hood above filters and exhaust ducts serving the hood. (1005.2.3.1 CFC) 21. Hood & Duct Fire Protection System plan submittal: The contractor should submit fire extinguishing system plans as soon as possible, Submittal shall include manufacturer's data/cut sheets and listings with expiration dates on all equipment and materials used. 22. Flood & Duct Fire Protection System Plan Review Procedure: Plans must be submitted directly to a Fire Department approved engineer for review and recommendation of approval. A list of approved engineers is attached. Once plans are recommended for approval, they will be forwarded to the Fire Department for final approval. 23. Portable Fire Extinguishers for Food Processing Equipment: In addition to the fixed system, a fire extinguisher listed and labeled for Class K fires shall be installed within 30 feet of commercial food heat processing equipment, as measured along an unobstructed path of travel. (1005.2.7 CFC) The preferred location is near the exit from the cooking equipment area. Show proposed location on the plans. 24. Automatic Power and Fuel Shutoffs: The automatic fire extinguishing system shall be interconnected to the fuel or current supply for cooking equipment. The interconnection shall shut oft all cooking equipment and electrical receptacles which are located under the hood when the system is actuated. (1005.2.4.1 CFC) ADA COORDINATOR 1. See Phil Kaplan. ______—________ SPACES �. - ..-- - _— _ _3 1� v - of 321.# In I f 9 B � 6 • 3 3 3T � I •• _ 32 13 ., ol- io H _ _ fz _ I a,d� - _ I1 - _ _ am_,�..n ' 4 39K _ 33 z 13_ f[ L.N 331 u 13 1216 3Lt3 a, c,ns 3 cue, .,n NI-e e - _ 3.t I a 31.1t - I❑ ❑ '❑ rew.�- I _ c 27 256 I ' J -IDII at t7' ` 325 CONSTRUCTION 3n SYSTEMS ASSEMBLIES 2se 1 �, 2ss� 31. �'16 32s- ______ 259 23 2! 251 316 —� �; cru cmw x _ -r 3Lt9 23 nni a _ Loh - au - - _-31sa �' 3zz. - In fill 2=1➢ 253 31A 3t21- IT 3z1 � 26d1 2521 Y J III11111 li Ji cavu _ _c-o re 313-- .i 30 — cry x 22 — = 31.2" 1 _ � ' �I _ LEGEND 251:I i i311 39C 1_E I 20 t9 21` — GO FI `I r -- . _I-_-_-____ _ _ _ _ _ _- _ _ , I -Palm Hotel nz1 N 0 t 2! PIoMSed FImf Plan GD(I. vxll M. SPACES �o i io w CONSTRUCTION it I I o o o SYSTEMS I ASSEMBLIES _ B 9� ID rV —�]is 1� 14 --�a� mnv -- -- - - ryy — �' 8-012 1-7 44 VMS -Now 1:1 FINg ,x- - vow i �— d= - - ; - II � 1 -- Pro oseaaie.et°ee Secdon NDn Palm Hotel SPACES -�- ' ' C [ 1 I I I1 'I ] I—IiJ L nay �o I2 _ f III—.III— CONSTRUCTION _3 6 SYSTEMS ASSEMBLIES ..11 -- L - G - �., . , LlI IT 'F Pm see elavauons Secaoes sown "Palm Hotel c c ,E16 [2 - - J_ FLF__LJne=l u oam_ a.wG SPACES 72 IF CONSTRUCTION SYSTEMS I ASSEMBLIES LIP cc,IE Ell" III Ill I.'FIAIL 12I 13 I ] 1.11 - - cry II - l0 _� 2� ttEII �21 13 •�� ] �1 u s ry T oro v I' 10 2 to - -In °i_iia ss 01110 J ra 15 16 I] �-tL"��'� ty _ I' III 1 - nar..ILI v� s ivies ° y _ sza ~° r-F.E.IF -- EI '1 INN � G fi 2: PO o5C4 Eava40n5I SCC C^S-WCs `Palm Hotel A33 az°r. I : SPACES 1 12 13 r�i—� 12 III CONSTRUCTION — I— SYSTEMS[ASSEMBLIES To c arwuc I ..._r x r.mr.., a.. 1 n.rccawi c.r _. I I n:'r srt-mor.rccoacurr��uvnn rm e.:c r fV J 1 _ — - - -- -- - 12 , 77 - I -A =1 - I � z I 'x ,s x+ 'Palm Hotel mi a o�VALMSp4 4 * CRRORRfEQ E,'` <,FORN�P Planning Commission Staff Report Date: May 10, 2006 Case No.: 5.1089 — PD-322 Application Type: Preliminary Planned Development District and Architectural Approval Location: SW Corner, Tahquitz Canyon Way & Cahuilla Road Applicant: Wessman Holdings, LLC Zone: R-3, Section 15 General Plan: RC (Resort Commercial) with NCC (Neighborhood Convenience Center) designation for corner APN: 513-141-013, 513-141-004 From: Craig Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services Project Planner: Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner PROJECT DESCRIPTION The; proposed project is an application by Wessman Holdings, LLC, to develop a 51- unit, four-story boutique hotel building with a swimming pool on approximately 36,217 square feet site located at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road. The subject site is made up of two vacant parcels surrounded primarily by existing hotels, restaurant and other commercial uses. As proposed, the project area will include a total building area of approximately 50,331 square feet that includes hotel rooms, suites, small restaurant, a lounge area, meeting rooms and storage areas. The proposed hotel will feature a roof terrace area with cabanas, a bar, a restaurant and water elements. The proposed hotel will also have an outdoor dining area, a swimming pool/spa area and parking spaces. Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10/06 Case: 5.1089-PD322 Page 2 of 7 RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed application according to Planned Development District standards subject to conditions of approval by: 1. Adopting Planned Development District 307; and 2. Approving the site layout and conceptual architectural design for Case 5.1025. PRIOR ACTIONS On January 23, 2006, the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC), considered the proposed project design, and voted 4-0-1 (abstain), to recommend denial of the project. At the review of the proposed development, the AAC made these observations: • The overall architecture is good. • The proposed building mass does not have an appropriate relationship to the site or the surroundings, especially the west elevation. • That the applicant could be more creative with the parking solutions. • The density would fit, however additional architectural treatment is needed. The AAC also recommended that should the Planning Commission vote for a recommendation to approve the proposed project, the applicant will be required to bring back the project to the Committee for restudy of the architecture. BACKGROUND AND SETTING The proposed project site is located at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road, and consists of two vacant parcels. The site is generally rectangular with the shorter street frontage along Tahquitz Canyon Way. The site is largely flat. To the north of the site, across Tahquitz Canyon Way is the vacant Desert Fashion Plaza. To the south is the Casa Cody Inn building., to the east is an existing three-story hotel structure and to the west is the Le Vallauris Restaurant. Table 1: Surrounding land uses, General Plan, Zoning Land Use General Plan Zoning kEast Vacant Desert Fashion Plaza CBD C-B-D Casa Cod Inn H43/30 R-3 Three-sto Hotel H43/30 R-3 Le Vallauris Restaurant H43/30 R-3 Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10/06 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 3 of 7 ANALYSIS The General Plan designation of the subject site is H43/30 (High density residential; allowing a maximum of 30 dwelling units per net acre). The zoning designation is R-3, which allows the development of multiple-family residential, hotels, resort housing and certain limited commercial uses under the City of Palm Springs Zoning Code. Restaurants are also permitted uses within the R-3 zoning designation, provided that the use is an integral part of the hotel and are located within the same building. The applicant is proposing a density of approximately 42 units per acre, which exceeds the maximum density allowed within the zoning designation. However, the application includes a Planned Development District and a development agreement between the applicant and the City dated June 2, 2004, and titled "Owner Participation Agreement" (Attachment 3), that addresses the scope and use of the proposed hotel site. Also, the development agreement allows the applicant a transfer of density bonus from the "VWinter's" property, located adjacent to the proposed hotel site. Table 2: Exhibit "B" of the Owner Participation Agreement Criteria R-3 Development Proposed Allowed Allowed Standards Project project Yield Project Yield on Wessman's on both project properties combined Minimum Lot 20,000 sq. ft. Meets standard 20,000 sq. ft. 20,000 sq. ft. Size minimum lot size (36,900 sq. ft.) minimum lot minimum lot size size Density 1:1,000 sq. ft. 48 units 36 units 51 units Building 30'overno more 4 stories (42- 30' over no 30' over no Height than 50% of 44) more than 50% more than 50% without High ground floor area of ground floor of ground floor Rise area. area. Ordinance Open Space 45% 22,950 s.f. 22,950 s.f. If all of Winter under R-3 before bay before bay were counted Standards parking and parking and (as part of a (not High driveways driveways total of 51,900 Rise) (approx. 16,000 (approx. 16,000 s.f.) as open s.f.)- comes s.f.)- comes space would be close to 45% close to 45% about 61 Parking 1 for each room 22 spaces on Would need 48 Would need 51 up to 50 rooms, site, remainder spaces spaces 0.75 for each by covenant room over 50 rooms Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10/06 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 4 of 7 Pursuant to Section 94.03.00 (A) of the Zoning Code, a planned development district (PD) may be approved in lieu of a change of zone as specified in Section 94.07.00. The PD is requested for this project to allow relief from several development criteria. First, the project proposes a four-story building with a height of 44 feet; hotel structures within the R-3 zoned areas are limited to a maximum height of 30 feet. The proposed height of 44 feet meets the definition of a high-rise building per Section 93.04.00 of the zoning ordinance. As proposed, the project does not meet the setback requirement for high-rise buildings. In addition to the Owner Participation Agreement, the PD will provide the flexibility to deviate from the requirements of the Zoning Code. Second, this flexibility is also needed to allow off-site parking for the project. The parking requirement for hotels requires 1 parking space per room for the first 50 rooms, which will require a total of 51 spaces for this project. The applicant is proposing only 34 spaces on-site and 17 additional off-site spaces across from the proposed site. The applicant owns and operates a parking structure across from the subject site which is less than 150 feet from the proposed hotel location. Third, a minimum of 25 feet setback is required within the R-3 zoning areas. The applicant is proposing approximately 18 feet setback from the property line along Cahuilla Road, 15 feet setback from the property line westerly of the project site, approximately 17 feet setback along the easterly portion and approximately 3.5 feet setback from the property line along Tahquitz Canyon Way. Fourth, the PD will provide flexibility for the proposed density of the development. Per the R-3 Zoning standards, a minimum of 1,000 square feet per dwelling unit lot area is required of hotels or resort hotels with surface parking. A minimum of 800 square feet per dwelling unit lot area is required for hotels or resort hotels with underground parking. The: applicant is proposing approximately 710 square feet dwelling unit lot area per the Owner Participation Agreement, but also consistent with the General Plan policies. Table 2: A comparison of requirements for the R-3 zone and the proposed Planned Development Standards is seen on this table. R-3 Zoning Code Requirement Proposed PD Standard Allows multiple-family projects and hotel Same developments Minimum lot size: 20,000 SF 36,217 s.f. and 51,990 s.f. with the addition of the transferred density Minimum lot width: 130 Feet Approximately 178 Feet Minimum lot depth: 150 Feet Approximately 204 Feet Density: I Minimum 1,000 sf/du lot area of a hotel or Approximately 710 sf/du lot area per the resort hotel with surface parking. A minimum development agreement of 81DO sf/du with underground parking (51 DU this project) Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10106 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 5 of 7 Height: Up to 30 feet for hotels 44 Feet, 4 Stories Setbacks at Property Lines North: 25 feet Approximately 3.4 feet South: 25 feet Approximately 13 feet East: 25 feet 17 feet West: 25 feet 15 feet Parking: 1 per room for the first 50 rooms 34 on-site spaces and 17 off-site spaces are being provided Open Space: 45% 45.9% Coverage: 30% 39% Site Plan/Access: The proposed site which has been vacant for some time is approximately 36,217 square feet parcel located at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road. As designed, the site plan will consist of one four-story structure totaling approximately 50,331 square feet. A six-foot screening wall is being proposed along the southern and westerly property lines of the site. A passenger loading area is proposed along the westerly portion of the hotel building. As designed a swimming pool/spa area and fabric shade structures will be located in the middle of the proposed site. Two main points of access to the proposed hotel complex are proposed at Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road. The access point on Tahquitz Canyon Way will be restricted to entrance only into the hotel complex while the access along Cahuilla Road will be restricted to exit only from the hotel. Architecture: The: proposed architecture is a contemporary urban style, utilizing special finish masonry, stainless steel screen, painted metals, concrete flatwork and stucco materials. The: applicant has incorporated various architectural elements into the design of the building elevations to complement the surrounding. Proposed amenities in the hotel will include a swimming pool with spa, an exercise/gym room, meeting rooms and roof gardens. The four-story structure will consist of 51 rooms including 11 suites, a reception/lobby area and office spaces. The L-shaped building is asymmetrical in both layout and design to reduce its visual mass. The building is broken up at different intervals with projections and off-sets towards the southerly portion of the site to provide contrast and aesthetically pleasing effect. The Owner Participation Agreement requires the applicant to position the hotel on the site with 20 feet clearance from the northerly boundary of the Winter's parcel and to provide extensive and dense landscaping between the properties. As designed and proposed, the hotel structure is positioned approximately 25 feet clearance from the northerly boundary of the Winter's parcel. The applicant is also proposing an extensive Planning Commission Staff Report 5110106 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 6 of 7 and dense landscaping to serve as a buffer between the proposed hotel and the property to the south of the subject site. The proposed color scheme of the building features up to five different combinations and will consist of earth tone colors that blend in with the natural surrounding of the area. Landscaping.- The applicant has proposed approximately 19 percent of the site to be landscaped. The setback areas will consist primarily of landscaping, and the perimeter of the project site- in particular, the southerly portion that abuts the Casa Cody Hotel will have dense and visually prominent landscaping when viewed from the surrounding areas. REQUIRED FINDINGS As a development project, findings are required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Findings can be made in support of establishing the proposed Planned Development District as follows: a. The proposed planned development is consistent and in conformity with the general plan pursuant to Sections 94.07.00 (A)(1) and 94.02.00 (A)(4) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. The proposed planned development is consistent with the general plan in recognizing that Planned Districts allow departures from strict provisions of zone classifications while providing flexibility for compatible land uses. The proposed project conforms to most development standards provided within the R-3 development standards with the application of a Planned Development District. The proposed PD is intended to allow flexibility to provide reduced setbacks, off- site parking and increased density, up to that allowed by the General Plan. b, The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed planned development district, in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and other relevant considerations. The project site is relatively flat, bounded on two sides by streets, and can accommodate the hotel use envisioned by the General Plan and the proposed development. Access is available to the site along the two streets. All the necessary amenities required for the kind of the proposed use are being provided. The required parking spaces could not be provided on-site due to the size of the parcel however, the applicant is proposing additional off-site parking spaces to serve the hotel. The distance between the site and the off-site parking space is less than 150 feet. Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10/06 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 7 of 7 C. The proposed establishment of the planned development district is necessary and proper, and is not likely to be detrimental to adjacent property or residents. A planned development district is necessary to accommodate the proposed type of hotel development incorporating varying building heights, hardscape and landscape features consistent with hotel development in the surrounding. The development is not likely to be detrimental to adjacent property or residents because the proposed use is not substantively different than those already envisioned by the General Plan, and existing land uses in the vicinity. Furthermore, the hotel development will be compatible with the existing land uses in the general vicinity. Surrounding uses include hotels, restaurants and other commercial uses. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This project is not subject to any further environmental review. NOTIFICATION A public hearing notice was advertised and was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject property/adjacent property owners. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any comment. c rat IE ward O. rtson Cr Ig . E g, AI P incipal Planner Director of Planni g Services ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Reduced Site Plans and Elevations 3. Draft Resolution / Conditions of Approval 4. Owner Participation Agreement 5. Letters from concerned citizens i�n/7A CITY OF PALM SPRINGS t PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Present: Cohen, Hutcheson, Ringlein, Roath, Shoenberger, Vice Chair Hochanadel, and Chair Marantz. Absent: None. REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: The May 10, 2006, agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Department of Planning Services counter by 5:00 p.m. on May 5, 2006. OILJ13LIC HEARINGS: 3. - An application by Wessman Holdings, LLC, to construct a utique hotel building with a swimming pool on approximately 36, 217 square feet site located at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road, Zone R-3, Section 115, APN 513-141-013 and 004. Principal Planner, Edward Robertson gave background information as outlined in the staff report dated May 10, 2006. Director of Community and Economic Development, John Raymond, provided background information and clarification relating to the Winter's property and the Owner Participation Agreement. Chair Marantz opened the Public Hearing. John Wessman, applicant, gave further clarification relating to the Winter's property, the Owner Participation Agreement, and the proposed project including parking and landscaping. Gene Dippal, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Bob Helbling, Palm Springs, read a letter written by Lauri Aylaian, in opposition to the project. Steve Hubbard, Operations Director, Palm Springs Art Museum, indicated that the museum was not opposed to the project. Michael Bruskis, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition to the project: Roxanne Floss, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Charles Sacs, Palm Springs, spoke opposition of the project. John Williams, Palm Springs, spoke opposition of the project, City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2006 Pam Price, Palm Springs, spoke opposition of the project. Johanna Schenke, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Bob Helbling, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Andrew Cardenas, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Jay Nelson, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Frank Tysen, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. There being no further comments, Chair Marantz closed the public hearing. A recess was taken at 3:06 p.m. The meeting resumed at 3:16 p.m. Commissioner Roath commented on the architecture and found it appealing; but he does not support the project because it does not meet the requirements for the Downtown Guidelines, heights, setbacks, lot coverage or on-site parking. Commissioner Shoenberger stated his concerns with the Downtown Guidelines, height and parking requirements not being met. Chair Marantz suggested the continuance of this project so that staff could provide further clarification on setbacks, heights and the Downtown Guidelines. She requested the applicant to erect story poles on the site. Commissioner Hochanadel suggested to the applicant to consider!underground perking by reducing the proposed building partially by one floor. Commissioner Hutcheson concurred and suggested that the applicant submit a 3 dimensional model; he felt the project is out of scale for the neighborhood and parking has not been appropriately addressed. He is in favor of a re-study. Commissioner Ringlein is also in favor of the applicant submitting a 3-dimensional model; and requested consideration of the development of the downtown corridor in relation to the final product. John Wessman, applicant, stated he prefers for the Commission to make a decision today; and he feels that he has designed a building that has a footprint of what was submitted to City Council. M/S/C (Roath/Cohen, 7-0) To continue, to Planning Commission meeting of May 24; 2006; planning staff to restudy setbacks, parking, the Downtown Guidelines and further clarification on the Owners Participation Agreement from the City Attorney, 01 s3 �O?ALM gA� .y V N k * rye�POR/.iFn °q`,FO �P Planning Commission Staff Report Date: May 24, 2006 Case No.: 5.1089 — PD-322 Application Type: Preliminary Planned Development District and Architectural Approval Location: SW Corner, Tahquitz Canyon Way & Cahuilla Road Applicant: Wessman Holdings, LLC Zone: R-3, Section 15 General Plan: RC (Resort Commercial) with NCC (Neighborhood Convenience Center) designation for corner APN: 513-141-013, 513-141-004 From: Craig Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services Project Planner: Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 10, 2006, to consider an application by Wessman Holdings, LLC to construct a four-story hotel with 51 rooms including 11 suites featuring a roof terrace area with cabanas, bar and a water feature, a restaurant, bar and pool cabanas located at 327 West Tahquitz Canyon Way, Zoned R-3, Section 15. At the meeting, the Planning Commission asked for further clarifications on the following issues: The setback of the Le Vallauris property The applicant's off-site parking program ■ Additional parking requirements for the proposed restaurant and employees The applicability of the Downtown Design Guidelines to this project Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10/06 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 2 of 5 • The applicability of the "Owner Participation Agreement" (Settlement Agreement) on the Commission's decision making process. The project is fully described on the attached staff report (dated May 10, 2006) previously presented to the Planning Commission. The Le Vallauris Restaurant Setbacks The Le Vallauris restaurant is located adjacent to and west of the proposed Palm Hotel. The front setback of the existing restaurant is approximately twenty-eight (28) feet from the: property line and forty-four (44) feet from the edge of pavement along West Tahquitz Canyon Way. By way of comparison the proposed hotel's setback on Tahquitz is 3.5 feet to property line and 19.5 feet to edge of payment. Staff also notes that the Palm Mountain Hotel, which is located east of the proposed hotel site (across Cahuilla Road) has a front setback of approximately sixteen (16) feet to the property line (32 feet to the edge of pavement). Le Vallauris' east side yard setback (facing the proposed hotel) is approximately forty (40) feet to the property line. The proposed hotel's west side setback — facing Le Vallauris — is seventeen (17) feet The applicant's off-site parking program The parking requirement for hotels is 1 parking space per room for the first 50 rooms, which will require a total of 51 spaces for this project. The applicant is proposing only 34 spaces on-site and 17 additional off-site spaces across from the proposed site. The applicant owns and operates a parking structure across from the subject site which is less than 150 feet from the proposed hotel location. Staff has reviewed the zoning code and believes the following sections are important to the use of off-site parking, as proposed for the hotel: Section 93.06.00.A.2 — "Off-street parking" means an area together with the required number of parking spaces and improvements thereon, as required by this section, for vehicle parking and maneuvering necessary to serve particular land uses, irrespective of the zone in which they occur" Section 93.06.00.B.2.a — Provisions of Off-street Parking. "Off-street parking in connection with any existing building or use shall be provided so long as such building or use remains. Any off-street parking which is permitted but not required by this Zoning Code shall comply with all regulations herein" Section 93.06.00.B.5.c — Other uses. "Parking facilities shall be located not more than three hundred (300) feet from the building or use they are required to serve..." Staff notes that "other uses" includes hotels, restaurants and other non-residential activities. Under these provisions, staff believes that the use of off-site parking is clearly permissible, but must be established through the use of binding agreements so that the art y., i�9 Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10106 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 3 of 5 parking is available as long as the use is active. The recommended conditions of approval for the project require such an agreement be executed prior to issuance of building permits. Additional Parkinq requirements for the proposed restaurant and employees: As previously noted, hotel parking is set based on the number of hotel rooms. However, the Commission may consider the additional requirements for "resort hotels". pursuant to Section 93.06.00.D.16.c: "One parking space shall be provided for every 60 square feet of gross floor area of dining room, bar and dancing areas, and places where the public is served. As an alternative where seating can be determined, one parking space for every 5 seats shall be provided. An additional 20 percent of the above required parking spaces shall be provided for the use of the employees" Against this standard, the proposed project would be required to provide additional 18 parking spaces for the restaurant use, and 4 additional parking spaces for the employees. A total of 73 parking spaces will be required for the proposed project. Staff supports the requirement for this increased total, which could be provided off-site, as noted in the discussion above. The applicability of the Downtown Design Guidelines to this project The location of the proposed Palm Hotel is outside of the Interim Downtown Urban Design Plan area, therefore the development standards contained in the design guideline do not apply to this project. The applicability of the "Owner Participation Agreement" (Settlement Agreement) on the Commission's decision making process The Owner Participation Agreement (OPA), contains specific development standards applicable to the proposed project; however, a provision contained in the OPA states the following: "Notwithstanding the generality of the foregoing, it is expressly acknowledged that the project will require land-use approval by the city and nothing herein, including the description of the project in exhibit b and the approval of the agreement by the agency, shall limit the discretion of the city by its planning commission and city council to approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the project". In reviewing the Owner Participation Agreement with the City Attorney, staff believes that the Agreement specifically allows the transfer of development potential from the Winters property to the Wessman property. However, it does not obligate the Commission to approve any particular development plan, nor limit its evaluation to the project's conformity with the description contained in Exhibit "b" of the Agreement. The Commission may consider the Agreement's project description as it decides ,if the proposed design is the appropriate way to organize a 51-unit hotel on the site. In any case, the Commission must identify the facts by which it determines if the project meets or fails to meet the required PD findings. Planning Commission Staff Report 5110/06 Case:5.1089-PD322 Page 4 of 5 In reviewing the case, staff remains persuaded that the proposed hotel places the bulk of the building close to the more intensely developed part of the neighborhood — opposite Desert Fashion Plaza and the Desert Art Museum. We believe that alternative designs would require adding building bulk to the south and westerly portions of the site, and thereby have greater secondary impacts on the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed application according to Planned Development District standards subject to conditions of approval by: 1. Adopting Planned Development District 307; and 2. Approving the site layout and conceptual architectural design for Case 5.1089. REQUIRED FINDINGS As a development project, findings are required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Findings can be made in support of establishing the proposed Planned Development District as follows: a. The proposed planned development is consistent and in conformity with the general plan pursuant to Sections 94.07.00 (A)(1) and 94.02.00 (A)(4) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. The proposed planned development is consistent with the general plan in recognizing that Planned Districts allow departures from strict provisions of zone classifications while providing flexibility for compatible land uses. The proposed project conforms to most development standards provided within the R-3 development standards with the application of a Planned Development District. The proposed PD is intended to allow flexibility to provide reduced setbacks, off- site parking and increased density, up to that allowed by the General Plan. b. The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed planned development district, in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and other relevant considerations. The project site is relatively flat, bounded on two sides by streets, and can accommodate the hotel use envisioned by the General Plan and the proposed development. Access is available to the site along the two streets. All the necessary amenities required for the kind of the proposed use are being provided. The required parking spaces could not be provided on-site due to the size of the parcel however, the applicant is proposing additional off-site parking Planning Commission Staff Report 5/10/06 Case:5.1059-PD322 Page 5 of 5 spaces to serve the hotel. The distance between the site and the off-site parking space is less than 150 feet. C. The proposed establishment of the planned development district is necessary and proper, and is not likely to be detrimental to adjacent property or residents. A planned development district is necessary to accommodate the proposed type of hotel development incorporating varying building heights, hardscape and landscape features consistent with hotel development in the surrounding. The development is not likely to be detrimental to adjacent property or residents because the proposed use is not substantively different than those already envisioned by the General Plan, and existing land uses in the vicinity. Furthermore, the hotel development will be compatible with the existing land uses in the general vicinity. Surrounding uses include hotels, restaurants and other commercial uses. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This project is not subject to any further environmental review. NOTIFICATION A public hearing notice was advertised and was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject property/adjacent property owners. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any comment. _ CVl . s nEdw rd O. Robe rai ipPrin al Plan Diret fw Pi nae Services ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Planning Commission staff report dated May 10, 2006 3. Reduced Site Plans and Elevations 4. Draft Resolution / Conditions of Approval 5. Owner Participation Agreement 6. Letters from concerned citizens CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT May 24, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Present: Cohen, Hutcheson, Ringlein, Roath, Shoenberger, Vice Chair Hochanadel, and Chair Marantz. Absent: None. REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: The May 24, 2006 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletimboard and the Department of Planning Services counter by 5:00 p.m. on May 19, 2006. 5. Case 5.1089 PD 322 - An application by Wessman Holdings, LLC, for the Palm Hotel, to construct a four-story boutique hotel with 51 rooms including 11 suites, a restaurant, bar and pool cabanas on approximately 36,217 square feet site located at 327 West Tahquitz Canyon Way, Zone R-3, Section 15, APN 513-141-013 and 004. Principal Planner, Edward Robertson, gave background information as outlined in the staff report dated May 24, 2006. Discussion was made relating to the boundaries of the Downtown Design Guidelines and clarification was made that this site is outside this area. Chair Marantz opened tFle Public Hearing. John Wessman, Wessman Development, addressed concerns from the Commission and gave further details relating to the site plans and the Winters' property. Jay Gustafson, Palm Springs, encouraged this project but not on this site. s� City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT of May 24, 2006 Ed Torres, president of PSEDC, read a statement in support of the OPA signed on June 2, 2004, by the City of Palm Springs Community Redevelopment Agency. Bob Helbling, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Aftab Dada, manager of the Hilton, voiced his support for the project. Sheryl Hamlin, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Doug Smith, Palm Springs, hotel owner, spoke in opposition of the project. Jono Hilder, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project. Frank Tysen, Palm Springs, gave clarification relating to the OPA and spoke in opposition of the project. John Stiles, Palm Springs, spoke in support of the project. John Wessman, applicant rebuttal, read a portion of the OPA and gave additional information. There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Roath stated his opposition to the proposed project. Commissioner Shoenberger stated his views relating to the OPA agreement and the role of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Hochanadel stated his concurrence with Commissioner Shoenberger. Commissioner Hutcheson voiced his concerns relating to set-backs and felt the project is out-of-scale with the neighborhood; is opposed to the project. Commissioner Ringlein stated she is 90% in agreement with Commissioner Shoenberger's statement. Chair Marantz stated her only concern was the minimal amount of parking spaces; she is in favor of the project with the 73 parking spaces required. Assistant Director of Public Works, Marcus Fuller, reported the following revision to the resolution to include a reference to General Plan Policy 7.1.6 "To allow a reduction of Right-of-Way width to 45' on Cahuilla - City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT of May 24, 2006 Road and include a finding of consistency with the Circulation Element of the General Plan for a Vacation of the westerly 5 foot of Right-of-Way on Cahuilla Road". M/S/C (Shoenberger/Ringlein, 5-2/1-lutcheson, and Roath) To recommend approval to the City Council; subject to the requirement of providing 73 parking spaces. DoC g6ner22004 a 04GO455 Page i of Zt ReooCc t Tfof Klverside�rds eL. Orso RECORDING REQUESTED BY. Assessor, CWMty Clerk L Retarder AND WIEN RD�SPRINGS Ill�li�lllllll��lla(I�N�IIIINIIIIIIIIIIIIiili City of Palm Springs M a u Fur sr¢ on peon nxan l{ G P. Mi6c O.Box 2743 Palm Springs,CA 92263 Attu; City Clerk ,• A R L OXI' IOMG_—I—IHIIId 1piG 6%,YA �72lL bv�. rtxlg.lat {r#n3. t� J RU _f Owner Participation Agreement Title of Document THIS AREA FOB USE ONLY T198 PAGEADDBD TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR RECORDING INFORMATION M.00 Additional Recording Fee Applies) G Vta(bxoHRlknCOBU.kHQ �(v Wessman Development Corp. Owner Participation i AGREEME T#0478Creement • CITY" CLERIC Res 1253, 6-2-04 *9YOF PN:M BPRINtItt OMM48 -- — — — PALM&PfWJACA i�'te>♦ OViVERPARTICIPATIONAGREEMENT • " - THIS OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into this end day of June 2004,by and between the COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, a public body, corporate and politic, whose offices are located at 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California 92262 ("Agency")'and John Wessman dba Wessman Holdings LLC,a California limited liability corporation, whose offices are located at 1555 South Palm Canyon Drive, G-106,Palm Springs, California,92264("Participant"). The Agency and the Participant hereby agree as follows: WHEREAS, this Agreement pertains to the development of certain property at the southwest comer of Tahquitz Canyon and Cahuilla Road (the "Site) which is owned by Participant;and WHEREAS, the parcel adjacent to the site to the south is known as the Winters Parcel, and the parcel to the south of the Winters Parcel is owned by Frank Tysen and Therese Hayes, and is occupied by a 23-room hotel known as Casa Cody;and WHEREAS,Participant has proposed the development of a hotel on the Site but believes the project could be enhanced by incorporating the Winters Parcel in the Project. Participant projects transient occupancy tax revenue to the City of $300,000 annually, as well as tax increment revenue to the Agency of$50,000 per year;and WHEREAS, Tysen would also like to incorporate the Winters Parcel in Casa Cody, and made an offer to acquire the Winters Parcel; and on December 12, 2003, entered into an escrow, 91123 at Liberty Escrow,to purchase the same;and WHEREAS, Agency has a first right of refusal to acquire the Winters Parcel pursuant to that certain agreement dated May 4, 1988, which Agency attempted to exercise after being informed of the Tysen offer;and WHEREAS, the parties believe that a compromise can be reached satisfactory to objectives of all paities by(i)the Agency entering this Agreement for the development of a hotel by Participant, (ii) assuring a more intense development by Participant by transferring development rights from the Winters Parcel (which has restricted development opportunity due to the existence of a historic structure), (iii) Tysen consenting to the hotel project, and (iv) the Agency withdrawing its effort to acquire the Winters Parcel so that Tysen can proceed with its acquisition. NOW, THEREFORE,the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS. I.I. Cam. The term "City" shall mean the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, a chartered municipal corporation, having its offices at 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California 92262. 0941488455 �E 1 0 0310 12/3 0$97.02 1.2. Consent to Proiew,t. The tern "Consent to Project" shall mean that certain Consent attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference. 1.3. Executive Director. The term "Executive Director" shall mean the Executive Director of Agency, 1.4. Project. The term "Project" shall mean the hotel project to be constructed by the Participant upon the Site more particularly described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 1.5. Redevelopment Plan. The term "Redevelopment Plan" shall mean the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan for Merged Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 ("Project Area")as adopted by Ordinance No. 1584 of the City Council of City on May 31,2000, as amended from time to time. A copy of the Redevelopment Plan is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City. The Redevelopment Plan is incorporated herein by this reference and lnade a part hereof as though fully set forth herein. 1.6. Schedule of Performance. The term "Schedule of Performance" shall mean that certain Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit"C'and incorporated herein by reference. 1.7. Site or Property. The term "Site" or "Property" shall mean that certain real property owned by Participant located on North Palm Canyon Drive in the City of Palm Springs, State of California, more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 2. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT. The purpose of this Agreement 15 to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area by developing the Site as a hotel within the Project Area The development of the Site m� which is located within the Project Area, and the fulfillment generally of this Agreement are in the best interests of the City and the welfare of its res;dents and arc in accordance with the public purposes and provisions of applicable federal,state,and local laws and regulations, under which m the Project has been undertaken and is being assisted. m The Palm Springs economy is based on tourism. It is therefore a further purpose of this Agreement to add a unique, high class hotel to the City's hotel inventory to compliment and further expand the tourism industry. This will also assist the City's economics. With a projected 48 rooms and 70 percent occupancy and rates averaging $250 per night, projected transient occupancy tax revenues exceed $300,000 and tax increment to the Agency exceeding $50,000 per year. Finally, it is a purpose of this Agreement to create a mechanism for the transfer of development rights from the Winters Parcel to the site. With Mr. Tysen's support for this concept, the Agency is willing to forego the exercise of its right of first refusal to acquire the Winters Parcel, Said support shall be evidenced by the Consent to Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit E. ..2_ ID031012l30897.02 3. CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. 3.1. . Plans and Specifications. The Participant shall constrict the Project upon the Site in accordance with construction drawings, working specifications and related docmnents that have been submitted to and approved by the Agency in advance and in writing according to the description in Exhibit"B". 3.2. Permits. Before commencement of construction of the Project, Participant shall obtain any and all permits and approvals which may be required by the City or any other governmental agency with jurisdiction. 3.3. Governmental Approvals. Notwithstanding anything herein contained to the contrary, it is expressly understood by the parties hereto that the Agency makes no representations or warranties with respect to the approvals required by any other governmental entity or with respect to approvals hereinafter required from the City or the Agency. NOTWITHSTANDING THE GENERALITY OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE PROJECT WILL REQUIRE LAND-USE APPROVAL BY THE CITY AND NOTHING HEREIN, INCLUDING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT IN EXIT B AND THE APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT BY THE AGENCY, SHALL LIM[T THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY BY ITS PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE, CONDITIONALLY APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE PROJECT. The Agency reserves full police power authority over the Project and the Participant acknowledges that the City retains such full police power as well. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to be a prejudgment or commitment with respect to such items nor to guarantee Y° that such approvals or permits will be issued within any particular time or with or without any m° particular conditions. b.Ny ' 3.4. Costs of Construction. The cost of constructing the Project shall be borne by the Participant. 3.5. Construction Schedule. Participant shall submit the construction drawings, working specifications and related documents for approval by the Agency on or before the date set forth hi the Schedule of Performance. Constriction of the Project shall commence on or before the date set forth in the Schedule of Performance and shall be completed within the time set forth in the Schedule of Performance except as mutually agreed in writing by Participant and Agency. The Project shall be deemed complete upon the issuance of a Certificate of Completion as provided in Section 3.8, or upon notification to the Participant by the Agency's Director of Community Development that rehabilitation of the Project is complete, whichever r occurs first. cme%07 -3. 1003/01MOS92.02 ���rr f- 3.6. Right of Access. Representatives of Agency and City shall have the reasonable right of access to the Site during the period of construction for the purposes of this Agreement,including,but not limited to,the inspection of the work being performed. 3.7. Nondiscrimination During Construction. Participant, for itself and its successors and assigns, agrees that during the rehabilitation of the Project, Participant will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion,sex,marital status,ancestry or national origin. 3.8. Certificate of Completion. Upon written request by Participant, and upon satisfactory completion of the Project, Agency shall issue to Participant a Certificate of Completion. The Certificate of Completion shall be, and shall so state, a conclusive determination of satisfactory completion of the Project required by this Agreement, and a full compliance with the terms of this Agreement relating to commencement and completion of the Project. "or the date Participant is entitled to issuance of the Certificate of Completion, and notwithstanding any other provision of tlris Agreement to the contrary,any party then owning or thereafter purchasing,leasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in the Site shall not(because of any such ownership, purchase, lease or acquisition) incur any obligation or liability under this Agreement, except that such party shall be bound by the covenants that survive the issuance of the Certificate of Completion,as set forth in the CC&RS. The Certificate of Completion is not a notice of completion as referred to in California Civil Code Section 3093. 3.9. Insurance and Indemnification. (a) losurance. Prior to the commencement of any construction by Participant of the Project,Participant or its contractor for the work hereunder,shall procure and maintain in a form and content satisfactory to Agency,during the entire term of construction,the following policies of insurance; f3 gam: (i) Comprehensive General Liability Insurance. A policy of comprehensive general liability insurance written on a per occurrence basis in an amount not less than either Q) a combined single limit of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) or (ii) bodily injury limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) per person, ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000,00) products and completed operations and property damage limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) per occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)in the aggregate. .` (ii) Worker's Compensation Insurance. A policy of worker's compensation insurance in such amount as will fully comply with the laws of the State of c California and which shall indemnify, insure and provide legal defense for both the Participant, Agency and the City against any loss, claim or damage arising from any injuries or occupational diseases occurring to any worker employed by or any persons retained by the Participant in the course of carrying out the work or services contemplated in this Agreement. (iii) Automotive Insurance. A policy of comprehensive automobile liability insurance written on a per occurrence basis in an amount not less than either (i) bodily •4- 100310W30897.02 injury liability limits of$250,000.00 per person and $500,000,00 per occurrence Laid properly damage liability limits of$100,000.00 per occurrence and $250,000.00 in the aggregate or (ii) combined single limit liability of$500,000.00. Said policy shall include coverage for owned, non-owned,leased and hired cars. (iv) Builder's Risk insurance. A policy of "builder`s risk" insurance covering the full replacement value of all of the improvements to be constructed by Participant pursuant to this Agreement. All of the above policies of insurance shall be primary insurance and shall name Agency, City, and their officers, employees and agents as additional insureds. The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation and contribution it may have against Agency, City, and their officers, employees and agents and their respective insurers. All of said policies of insurance shall provide that said insurance may not be amended or cancelled without providing thirty(30) days prior written notice by registered mail to Agency and City. In the event any of said policies of insurance are cancelled, the Participant or its contractor shall, prior to the cancellation date, submit new evidence of insurance in conformance with this Section to the Executive Director. No work or services under this Agreement shall commence until the Participant has provided Agency with Certificates of Insurance or appropriate insurance binders evidencing the above insurance coverages and said Certificates of insurance or binders are approved by Agency. The policies of insurance required by this Agreement shall be satisfactory only if issued by companies qualified to do business in California,rated "A"or better in the most recent edition of Best Rating Guide, The Key Rating Guide or in the Federal Register, and only if they are of a financial category Class V1I or better,unless such requirements are waived by the Risk Manager of the City("Risk Manager")due to unique circumstances. Participant shall provide in aIl contracts with contractors, subcontractors, architects and engineers that said contractor, subcontractor or engineer shall maintain the policies of insurance m required to be maintained pursuant to this Section. ®gym The Participant agrees that the provisions of this Section shall not be construed as limiting in any way the extent to which the Participant may be held responsible for the payment of damages to any persons or property resulting from the Participant's activities or the activities of any person or persons for which the Participant is otherwise responsible. (b) Indemnification. During the period of construction of any of the improvements pursuant to this Agreement and until such time as is issued a Certificate of Completion for the Project, Participant agrees to and shall indemnify and hold the Agency and the City harmless from and against all liability, loss, damage, cost or expenses (including reasonable attorneys'fees and'court costs) arising from or as a result of the death of any person or any accident, injury, loss, or damage whatsoever caused to any person or to the property of any person which shall occur on the Site and which shall be directly or indirectly caused by the Z acts done thereon or any errors or omissions of the Participant or its agents, servants, employees or contractors. C _5_ 1 1003Al2MD897.02 4. USE OF THE SITE. 3 Participant covenants and agrees that it shall devote the Site to hotel use which is consistent with the Redevelopment Plan,the applicable zoning restrictions,and this Agreement. 5. ENFORCEMENT. 5.1. Events of Default. In the event either party defaults in the performance or observance of any covenant, agreement or obligation set forth in this Agreement, and if such default remains uncured for a period of thirty(30) days after written notice thereof shall have been given by the non-defaulting party, or, in the event said default cannot be cured within said time period, the defaulting party'has failed to commence to cure such default within said thirty (30) days and diligently prosecute said cure to completion, then the non-defaulting party shall declare an event of default to have occurred hereunder. 5.2, Remedies, The Agency's sole remedy for Participant's violation of this Agreement shall be terrnination,in which case Participant shall have no further rights hereunder. ..Participant specifically acknowledges that Agency is entering into this Agreement for t5e purpose of assisting in the redevelopment of the Site and not for the purpose of enabling Participant to speculate with land _ � J 5.3. No Waiver. Waiver by either party of the performance of any covenant, condition or promise shall not invalidate this Agreement, nor shall it be considered a waiver of any other covenant, condition or promise. Waiver by either party of the time for performing any g act shall not constitute a waiver of time for performing any other act or an identical act required ,XgN- to be perfarmed at a later time, The delay or forbearance by either party in exercising any m o " remedy or right as to any default shall nqt operate as a waiver of any other default or of any m rights or remedies or to deprive suo party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. i= 5.4. Rights and Remedies are Cumulative. Except as otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative, and the exercise by any party of one or more of its rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at,the some or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by another party. 5.5, Attorneys'Fees. In the event,of litigation betwecn the parties arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs and expenses incurred in addition to whatever other relief to which it may be. entitled. 1'0031012130e97.02 { 6. MISCELLANEOUS. 6.1. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern the interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. 6.2. Notices. Formal notices, demands, and communications between Agency, City and Participant shall be sufficiently given if personally delivered or dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the addresses set forth above. All notices shall be deemed to be received as of the earlier of actual receipt by the addressee thereof or the expiration of forty-eight(48) hours after depositing in the United States Postal System in the manner described in this Section. 6.3. Conflicts of Interest. No member,official, or employee of Agency shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any decision relating to this Agreement which affects his personal interests or the interests of any corporation,partnership, or association in which he is, directly or indirectly,interested. 6.4. Nonliability of ARencv Officials and Employees. No member, official, employee, or consultant of Agency or City shall be personally liable to Participant, or any successor in interest of Participant, in the event of any default or breach by Agency or for any amount which may become due to Participant or to its successor,or on any obligations under the tens of this Agreement. 6.5. Modifications. Any alteration, change or modification of or to this Agreement, in order to become effective, shall be made by written instrument or endorsement thereon and in each such instance executed on behalf of each party hereto. l � 6.6. Assurances to Act in Good Faith. Agency and Participant agree to Qow execute all documents and instruments and to take all action and shall use their best efforts to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement. Agency and Participant shall each diligently and in N- good faith pursue the satisfaction of any conditions or contingencies subject to their approval. m m s= 6.7, Severabilitv. Wherever possible,each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law. If, however, any provision of this Agreement shall be prohibited by or invalid under applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity, without invalidating the remainder of such provision or the remaining provisions of this Agreement. .�. 6.8, Force Maieure. The time within which Participant or the Agency sball be required to perform any act under this Owner Participation Agreement shall be extended by a period of time equal to the number of days during which performance of such act is delayed due to war, insurrection, strikes, lock-outs, riots, floods, earthquakes, fires, casualties, natural disasters, Acts of God, acts of the public enemy,'epidemics, quarantine restrictions, freight embargoes, governmental restrictions on priority, initiative or referendum, moratoria, processing C with governmental agencies other than City or Agency, unusually severe weather, or any other. similar causes beyond the control or without the fault of the party claiming an extension of time to perform. An extension of time for any such cause shall be for the period of the enforced-delay -7- 1003/012l3097.02 and shall commence to run from the time of the commenccment of the cause,if written notice by the party claiming such extension is sent to the other party within thirty(30) days of knowledge of the commencement of the cause. Any act or failure to act on the part of a party shall not excuse performance by that party, mmm MEM p�jmN �vW m�0 II �m r� m M.M •.ice+ r� a+� _ Y C(zle� . 10031012/30897.02 IN WITNESS WI EREOF the Agency and Participant have execeted this Agreement as of the date fast written above. "AGENCY" COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,a public body,corporate and politic QATTEST: By: VZ.T7Jlrl_YwIIY• _ ssrstant Secretary Patricia A. Sanders APMKWW OY ME ComMUrqv y rf%V, AGMr air RM no. APPROVED AS TO FORM: p►b!�"1$G ALESHME&WYNDER,LLP . Da d J re,Esq., `,, I.• .:,` `SQ r a Agency Counsel N Qv�vY9 ♦p jly� ���r�l +//+/il Yiil.ffl.. 1 (0 00 'Y�rii�T�l..11111�1" GOR �f We.'2 an Hof rags, LLC r Its: John essman By: Its: r� -9- raa3rorz�aemoz CAL➢FOANIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California Cou as. niyef _,�ers;de r 1 On UYIe 0�004 _before me, u.1- '�' 0 , tcI-�0 RitorVIF'Mc � Name endige MOR kPa.'Jule Ndery Puhk] personally appearedROV', Oderj, ClnRIIVMan cchd '�Ciric(8I,SQPAC Nemep79Sl,.W SS 5� n1 SSG rota} Y ,9porsonally known to me / ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence _ _ ., to be the persor(>ek whose name� ar .WvfANfl:NgS S subscribed to the within Instrartt�nt and CanptfYldt#1487823 [ acknowledged to me that 131111 executed HamyhI-CaI the same In hWHeM authorized Mreawcoo* capa " res and that by that MyCamm.6�YefMay21, of"gin on the instrument the e s,or — — — o — — — — — — the entity upon behalf of which the person s® acted,executed the Instrument. WITNESS my hand and official , . 91gMlue ofNWNPuhlla :( - �'Ga•'S' OPVONAL I Though the Wonnatran balowre not rege6e1byraw,rtmayPM"vafewbre to pardons m4M9 on the docamenr and coutdpdrven $M��- ?k .•- '_ Gav&gmtremovMmdreatlar;II offhar form m anolI docemeat . :Orr'. •�G cF.!%;L Description of Attached Document Title or Type of DocumenteeN^�P�rtp. - Document Date: c.�V 4l Q o[l r d r� Number of Pages:,___LQ r Signer Above:�s)Other Than Named Abo T. M q—j�-t�IiI ('0 0 S -1, . c�6611 1.,7•eCsif�gHf /•ti'UQhQ4rtiR x%-Thev- Capacity(fes)) Claimed by Signer CCJJ C/ 1C Q}CL AN+� Pat Ci n t- `fir Signer's Name: D Vl � 11"I q t-f ��CLci ❑ Individual ``� roP r" L ne e e)K Corporate Officer—Taie(s): C114it('j40Vl and (}ssfirs£CY'etap ❑ Partner—❑limited 13General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: II R Signer is Representing: Tne �A111.m11Vlf'�� e,&eye10pmey(t . nC C n 81, NNlmd Nwrylamoelbn•ByeNe aolahw.PO,Eox 21PG•[Autrco�L•CA81a13-P,G2•wxA bw!I dr%d9 PO No,6W PAI hlllHf¢e 14ladr6 7 I III{{Illl11111(1�111�!{I�illll{Illal{410111�11II �,L>�Q7D 4 of00 t�fl CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of C fGe�0 2�tJlfJ County of �//EC5ir7� On CZAit /©, ;200�71 before me, IWI- e-77d64 P. /GG/t15 Date Nem "T .1 OlUm(e.4.•Ja D..Nalery PulWl personally appeared i Of7r&) Lr-1&_55AfAA) fName(e)O!sgpeNe) [3 personally known to me—OR—d proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persona whose name( is/subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/Stxfthdq executed the same in hl a rauthorized capacily(t5,and that by w •MARTfIA R.HICaGINS hi err signatureO{)on the instrument the person(, t COMM Nt285fi42 m or the entity upon behalf of which the person(b) acted, frl - Notaiy Aub1iB-California Ln executed the instrument. W _ � RNERSIpECOI1N7Y =� ] hfy Comm.Exp.Uec.27,2AtlA [ j 7 w WITNESS [�ym*y�hand�� /�a/'�nd ofyfl/c/ijet seat. .�---L.L`-Fr✓T-' " 519MMe of M1'ela�Y o OPTIONAL Though the informafton below is notrequired by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. s Description of Attached Document � f Title or Type of Document: d�rf/ �MZTfCl�Aa70� ee �7 m� Document Date: L>'GG/tJ� 1D4� Number ofPages: ma Signer(s)Other Than Named Above,&V/D 44,65M Met" �� 46;�}&A1Gr.� 63Ce-A),5CZ, Capacity(1es) Ciaimed�y igner(s)' ' Aas7 � erA�ec� Signer's Name: L OHA) W E56M 443 Signer's Name: ❑ Individual 0 Individual ❑ Corporate Officer ❑ Corporate Officer Trtle(s):. Title(s): e ❑ Partner—❑Limited ❑General ❑ Partner—O Limited ❑General ..� ❑ Aftomey-In-Fact ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conse ator - • r ❑ Guardian or Conservator lid' Other: � Top of thumb here ❑ Other: Top OF thumb hwe N := tT'•"Y/litr�J i CL.C-,M�IJ.Me�Nb- _ Signor Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: a 1096 Nmwal No ryA mlwm•U36 nemmame.PO.BOK 7184•Carwpa Park,CA 913094184 Pwd.No.6W F w to oaTb6-Free iA 7"w EXB7BIT"A" LEGAL DESCRIMON OF THE SITE THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: EXI-HBIT A PARCEL 1: LOTS 1, 2, 3AND 4 IN BLOCK 8 OF PALM SPRINGS, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 9 PAGE 432 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ALSO ALL THAT PORTION OF THE WESTERLY 8 FEET OF ORANGE AVENUE, AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP AND NOW KNOWN AS CAHUILLA ROAD WHICH LIES SOUTHERLY OF TEE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1, EXTENDED EASTERLY AND NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4, EXTENDED EASTERLY AS ABANDONED BY RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, ON MARCH 1, 1926, A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF ABANDONMENT RECORDED MARCH 10, 1926 IN BOOK 667 PAGE 29 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. :PARCEL 2: THE EAST HALF OF LOT 24 AND THE EAST 24.2 FEET OF LOT 21 OF ALL IN BLOCK 8 OF PALM SPRINGS, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 9 PAGE 432 OF MAPS,RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA '� I llfllll�lfil llll l�l��IIIII��I INIII�I III�IIII,I�I I��I 86����o�eSaaR m� Cr,�� _, EXHIBIT"B" DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The Project consists of a three and four-story, 48-unit, high-end boutique hotel project. The Site Plan is attached to this Exhibit as Bl. The first floor includes administrative and recreational areas, four hotel suite units, and parking. The second and third floors include 37 hotel rooms(17 and 20). The fourth floor would include 7 large hotel units,one exceeding 500 sq.ft.and the others 1000 sq. ft. The hotel will be of the caliber of a W Hotel but on a smaller scale, such as the Hotel Healdsdburg in the Valley of the Moon adjacent to-the Sonoma Valley region of the Northern California or The Inn at the Market in Seattle or the Camelback Gardens Hotel in Telluride. The projected daily rate per room is in the$2004300 range. The anticipated construction cost of the Project will exceed Seven Million Dollars($7,1000,000.00). The architecture will be contemporary, urban style with the use of block, steel and other natural materials. The hotel will be positioned on the site with 20 feet clearance from the northerly boundary of the Winters Parcel, with extensive landscaping between the properties. Amenities would be those typical of a boutique hotel: outstanding rooms with W hotel quality furnishings and beds,a pool with spa, a workout/gym room,and if space permits,a small restaurant. The entrance will be a sweeping arch with the or stamped concrete off of Tahquitz m Canyon Way. Parking will be below grade in so far as possible with 22 spaces provided. The " remainder of the required spaces will be provided by recorded covenant at the Fashion Plaza row across the street. maw The Project contemplates a unique transfer of development rights, as it is proposed that the historic residential structure on the Winters Parcel will remain.) The table below shows the R-3 development standards, the development proposed in the Project, and the development which would be allowed on the Site singles or on both properties together. .:r ; EXMIT"B" TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT ern 1003Po12/30897.02 Criteria R-3 Development Proposed Project Allowed Project Allowed Project Standard Yield on Wessman's Yield on Both Project Properties Combined Minimum Lot 20,000 s.f Meets standard 20,000 s.f.minimum 20,000 s.£minimum Size minimum lot size (36,900 s.f.) lot size lot size _ Density l:l 0o0 s.f. 48 units 36 units 51 units Building Height 30'over no more 4 stories(42-44') 30'over no more than 30'over no more without high than 50%of ground 50'0 of ground floor than 50%of ground Rise Ordinance Hoar area area. floor area. Open Space 45% 22,950 s,£before bay 22,950 s.f.before bay If all of Winter were under R-3 parking and driveways parking and driveways counted(as part of a Standard(not (approx. 16,000 s.f.)0 (approx 16,000 s.f.)— total of51,900 s.f)as High]rise) comes close to 45% comes close to 45% "open space"then open space would be about 6l% Parking I for each room up 22 spaces on site, Would need 48 spaces Would need 51 to 50 rooms;0.75 remainder by covenant spaces for each room over 50 rooms The construction of the Project will require construction of walls and installation of landscaping along the southern boundary of the Site and partially on the Winters Parcel. Participant shall enter into an agreement withh the property owner concerning walls, fencing and landscaping in such area, and specifying the method of construction. Interference with business N operation on the Winters Parcel shall be minimized. TV NOTWITHSTANDING THE GENERALITY OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE PROJECT WILL REQUIRE LAND-USE APPROVAL BY THE CITY AND NOTHING HEREIN, INCLUDING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT IN EXHIBIT B AND THE APPROVAL Or, THE AGREEMENT BY THE AGENCY, i~ SHALL LIMIT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY BY ITS PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE, CONDITIONALLY APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE PROJECT. EXIiB1T TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT 1003/0IZ90897.02 ( I n � � _ I • tlyy i `4+ y I `~ .� , 1 y � � u 1 { p.. I� A � �� ����� � a �s� ' ��� �� ��;a �, � b .*.::�' a n � �. e , ' j x' l 1f����1Y�11�111f�i�ffu�111N�11���1i1��� ��2�eg � �'��~ 76 of 2! 1�r^'r'i �,, EICC rr aCa SCIMDULE OF PERFORMANCE Description Date 1. Conceptual Planning with Architect 3 months from the execution date of this agreement 2. Preliminary Architectural Drawings 3 months[6 months from the [Ready for City Submittal] execution date of this agreement] 3. Architectural and PDD Approvals 6 months[12 months from the execution date of this agreement] 4. Final Architectural Construction Drawings 6 months[18 months from the execution date of this agreement] S. Building Department Review 3 months [21 months from the execution date of this agreement] 6. Financing 3 months [24 months from the execution date of this agreement] 7. Construction 12 month[36 months from the execution date of this agreement] The above time requirements may be lengthened by up to 180 days (cumulatively) at the discretion of the Executive Director where Participant is proceeding in good faith to perform under this Agreement. c raa _ !8 11111111 hill IIII�IIi11111111111111I�1�11111111lII Wrl � sBefl CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION FREE RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: THE PALM SPRINGS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 3200 E, Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 Attn: Executive Director (Space Above This Line For Recorder's Office Use Only) CERTIFICATE OP'COMPLETION WHEREAS, by an Owner Participation Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement") dated _ 2004, by and between THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS (hereinafter referred to as "Agency"),and Wilco Development, (hereinafter referred to as "Participant"),-Participant has redeveloped the real property(the "Site"), legally described on Exhibit 1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference,according to the terms and conditions of said Agreement, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3.7 of the Agreement, promptly after completion of all construction work to be completed by Participant upon the Site,and upon request by Participant, Agency shall furnish Participant with a Certificate of Completion in such form as to permit it to mN be recorded in the Official Records of the County of Riverside;and gm WHEREAS,the issuance by Agency of the Certificate of Completion shall be conclusive evidence that Participant has complied with the terms of the Agreement pertaining to the redevelopment of the Site; and WHEREAS, Participant has requested that Agency furnish Participant with the Certificate of Completion;and . MR � WHEREAS, Agency has conclusively determined that the redevelopment of the Site has been satisfactorily completed as required by the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Agreement provided for certain covenants to ran with the land, which covenants were incorporated in a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (the "Declaration"), EXHIBIT"D" TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT Page I of 3 roo3ro�osvxoz NOW,THEREFORE: 1, As provided in the Agreement,Agency does hereby certify that redevelopment of the Site has been£ally and satisfactorily performed and completed, and that such redevelopment is in hill compliance with said Agreement. 2. This Certificate shall not constitute evidence of Participant's compliance with the Declaration,the provisions of which shall continue to run with the land. 3. This Certificate of Completion shall not constitute evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of any obligation of Participant to any holder of a mortgage, or any insurer of a mortgage, scouring money loaned to finance construction work on the Site, or any part thereof. Nothing contained herein shall modify in any way any other provision of said Agreement. 4., This Certificate is not a Notice of Completion as referred to in California Civil Code Section 3093. 5, Except as stated herein, nothing contained in this instrument shall modify in any way any other provisions of the Agreement or any other provisions of the documents incorporated therein. IN VATNESS WHEREOF, Agency bas executed this Certificate as of this _ day of ,200 THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS By w Q o Executive Director Q Nn ON Oti N 6 I i Jaey, EXHIBIT"D" TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT Page 2 of 3 uommx2re0997.02 EX MIT(T" LEGAL DESCWT[ON OF SITE [TO BE INSERTED] 2 m �apN @ pm d.151 P1 Nm f`O 0 � r r� L= I� ON Cmeswc) E) HIBIT"D" TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT Page 3 of 3 1003/OI2130897.02 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT THIS Amendment No. 1 to an OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement') is entered into this day of , 2005 by and between the COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, a public body, corporate and politic, whose offices are located at 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California 92262 ("Agency") and John Wessman d/b/a Wessman Development Company, whose offices are located at 300 South Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, California, 92262 ('Participant'). The Agency and the Participant hereby agree as follows: EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE Description Time Period Date 1. Participant submits Already completed. October 28, 2005 plans and drawings for the project to the City for application review 2. City issues a Within 30 days of formal On or before "completeness" letter to application. November 27, 2005 Participant 3. Participant cures any Within 30 days of receipt of On or before deficiencies in the Completeness Letter. December 27, 2005 application. 4. Project is reviewed by Within sixty (60) days of On or before January Architectural Advisory application being deemed 30, 2006 if there are Commission complete by the Director of no deficiencies in the Planning Services. application. 5. Developer revises and Within 30 days after The dates in this schedule resubmits plans, disapproval will be adjusted by the drawings, and additional time necessary to resubmit and review specifications, if disapproved plans. necessary 6. City reviews and Within 15 days after The dates in this schedule approves or disapproves resubmittal will be adjusted by the resubmitted plans, additional time necessary to drawings, and resubmit and review g disapproved plans. specifications, if O F �" 1003/012/30897.02 necessary 5. Project receives its Within sixty (60) days of On or before January environmental application being deemed 30, 2006 if there are determination from the complete by the Director of no deficiencies in the Planning department Planning Services. application. (Environmental Assessment) 6. Environmental review of Within one hundred twenty On or before May 30, the project is complete. (120) days of completion of 2006 the Environmental Assessment. 7. Project is reviewed by Within forty-five (45) days of On or before July 15, Planning Commission. completion of draft 2006 environmental document. & Project is reviewed and Within 60 days of approval On or before environmental document by the Planning Commission. September 15, 2006 certified by City Council. 9. City files Notice of Notice period is 30 days. On or before October Determination of CEQA 15, 2006 action. 10. Participant submits Within 180 days of approval On or before construction documents by City Council. December 15, 2006 for Building Department review. 11. City reviews building Within 90 days of submittal On or before March plans and prepares to to the Building Department. 15, 2007 issue permit. 12. Developer obtains all On or before the date that is On or before March necessary permits and ten (10) days after the date 15, 2007 approvals City notifies Developer that City is prepared to issue building permits for the Project 12. Participant submits Within 90 days after approval On or before evidence of financing of Project by the City December 15, 2006 commitment for the Council. Project to Agency. 13. Agency approves or Within 30 days of receipt by On or before Janua disapproves financial Agency 15, 2007 commitment and lender 14. Participant commences Within 45 days of receiving On or before April 30, construction of the Notice from the City that it is 2007 Project. ready to issue building permits. 15. Participant completes Within 540 days of issuing On or before October construction on the building permits. 30, 2008 Project. 1E3. Participant requests final Within 15 days of completing On or before inspection of the Project construction of the Project. November 15, 2008 by the City 17. Agency issues certificate Within ten (10) days of On or before of Completion for the written request by Developer, November 25, 2008 Site and Developer's satisfactory completion of all improvements It is understood that the foregoing Schedule of Performance is subject to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the text of the Agreement. The summary of the items of performance in this Schedule of Performance is not intended to supersede or modify the more complete description in the text. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between this Schedule of Performance and the text of the Agreement, the text shall govern. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day first above written. "AGENCY" COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, a public body, corporate and politic Chairman ATTEST: Agency Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: u Agency Counsel "DEVELOPER" John Wessman dba Wessman Development Company (Check One: individual, _partnership, _corporation) [NOTARIZ Signature Print Nam Print Title: Mailing Address: 3Do i`e_�Ir�c�r (Corporations require two signatures; one from each of the following: (A) Chairman of Board, President, any Vice President; AND (B) Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer, or Chief Financial Officer.) [END OF SIGNATURES / NOTARY JURAT(S) FOLLOW] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. . COUNTY OF ) ON before me, Notary Public, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. [SEAL] Signature STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ON DE--C-E(Ag'-a 13�UO before me, Lt;,�-sA IA. o+��Psc2 Notary Public, personally �— appeared _ Jac-�-�l. ss tic A-�C personally known to me ( ) to be the person() whose named) is/fie subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/�; e/tley executed the same in his/wr/thOk authorized capacity(), and that by 'his1hsT7t]a9ir signature() on the instrument the person(;), or the entity upon behalf of which the person() acted, executed the instrument. Wit 7sy han d offici eal. [SEAL] .... ..................of Sign a ure au. uur..LoNAR t° ComM m M7547737 ' Nofory Public-COIPorniolZ Rivers1cle County Z My CoMMImmisslOn Ex�ires :.ouunnwuuiiui.�iiY.2.�i•.i?i';m PROOF OF PUBLICAT16 L This is s'pacc for County Clerk's Filing Stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) ��J f if'! a 5 ?t;'• = ? ; J. r;1=S i I;uliI .: CITY CLIM,e% STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside No. 1875 - -- — _ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY CITY PALM SPRINGS PLANNED DESE VELOPMENT 322 THE PALM HOTEL 327 WE$T•TAHgUITZ CANYON WAY I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of _NOTICE-is HE than the city-Ceuncll the County aforesaid;I am over the age of"eighteen ot"Kii City dT Pglm Springs, Calrtornls,1 hold a — "hePub C ,coring it Its meeting of Juno L>I-�200G. the COun it Chambeereat�'Itye-ins qL 6 oo p.,i years,and not a party to or interested in the quit, Canyon Way, Palm Spring;;. above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a The purposo of this hearing is ro consider an ap- printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING s fa ion by Wellman Holdings, LLC to construct COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, -uitee f"T"ry hggoa wirh ,1 reoma Including 11 g bar and auwa[�feature, ,restsuranr, baraansd printed And published In the city Of Palm Springs, Poo Way,at; to at d at 327 West Tahquitz Can- County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been y y 3, Section 15 adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of """ ^ • --+. California under the date of March 24,1988.Case Number 191236;that the notice,of which the ^---- � annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller than non parcel,has been published in each regular And entire issue of said newspaper and nor in any --- supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: "I ri',-i Irl! III rI r;ii,i'il�i June ro lrr r' --,,,.._--............. ^J JI ................ All in the year 2006 eci ,04 ENTAL I3 ER [NATION; This pro- f certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the )lacr is Cgtogoncally Exempt under Section 16332 to fill Ci;velopmen`Pra1ums)of the Guidelines for foregoing is true and correct. tall quail mentatiOn o, the dllfOrnla Envimnmen- , y Act ICE A). REpVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION;Tho Dated¢t Palm Springs,California this-13e:, day- rerartrand oelersupportln�doc4mcnl,=rcrg!. p ) ct l re bct ao ay3lls le for public revlCw al Afall the try Hall between the hours of a:o0 a.m. and 5,e p.m. Monday thifiu❑h Fpday.Pless�contact of--••--Jun -- -----,2np6 the Office of tee Clry Crark at p60) 323-8204 If , you would like to sphedulo an appointment to rc- vicw[floss tlacumCnts. CoOMMEo T ON ISbe APPLICATIde ON Nr Falcons, a puns,hearing and/or In wrlting before the hearin .Writ- - _._________ y n ,-� en comments r Op made to the Ci ouncil �I n ure by latter(mall or hand delivery) to: ry g 1 Jani Thompson City Clerk 32eo E. Tghqultz �snyon Way Palm Springs, CA 52262 Any challenge of thu proposeq project In court "lay be limited to "Ising only those issues raLOd at the public he•.rng described In this notice or in written corre;pondonce dellvpred to th, City Clerk at, or;pnor, to the ppubllc hearing. (Govern h d b ment Code Section 65009(b]l2)). Intores1cdt persons)toobeNheard pd.ticn-refgard a torn yr-ncl alyPlannler planning Survl�0. ob- partmant ar 1 60) 323-6245. Si nece,ita ayuda Con e' Nadine Pieger p60) ta carta,porfavor(lame a Is Ciudad dal Palm SpFing, 3-8245.y pucde hablar con 32 rnos I'nomp„on, try�l,,, Published; 6/10/2oog , E SA U' N City of Palm Springs * * Office of the City Clerk e �OOaoan+eo^q,e " 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262 F�D Tel: (760) 323-8204 • Fax. (760)322-8332 • Web: www.ci.palm-springs.ca.us 'R� AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing, to consider an application by Wessman Holdings, LLC to construct a four-story hotel with 51 rooms including 11 suites featuring a roof terrace area with cabanas, bar and a water feature, a restaurant, bar and pool cabanas located at 327 West Tahquitz Canyon Way, on June 21, 2006. A copy of said notice was mailed to each and every person set forth on the attached list on the 6th day of June, 2006, in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. (65 notices mailed) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 6th day of June, 2006. 4JAh, THOMPSON City Clerk /kdh H:\USERS\C-CLK\Hearing Notices\Affdavit-Wessman 062106doc Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 t) ""1 NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPS Public Hearing Notice MS APRIL HILDNER MR TIM HOHMEIER 5.1089 PD-322 (TAHQUITZ RIVERS ESTATES) (DEEPWELL ESTATES) The Palm Hotel 241 EAST MESQUITE AVENUE 1387 CALLE DE MARIA CC Meeting-06.21.06 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 MS ROXANN PLOSS MR JOHN HANSEN MS MALLIKA ALBERT (BEL DESIERTO NEIGHBORHOOD) (WARM SANDS NEIGHBORHOOD) (CHINO CANYON ORGANIZATION) 930 CHIA ROAD PO BOX 252 2241 NORTH LEONARD ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MS DIANE AHLSTROM MR BOB MAHLOWITZ MS PAULA AUBURN (MOVIE COLONY NEIGHBORHOOD) (SUNMOR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP) (SUNRISENISTA CHINO AREA) 475 VALMONTE SUR 246 NORTH SYBIL ROAD 1369 CAMPEON CIRCLE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR BOB DICKINSON MR BILL SCOTT MR. SEIMA MOLOI VISTA LAS PAL.MAS HOMEOWNERS (OLD LAS PALMAS NEGIBORHOOD) (DESERT HIGHLAND GATEWAY) 755 WEST CRESCENT DRIVE 540 VIA LOLA 359 W.SUNVIEW AVENUE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-1459 MS LAURI AYLAIAN MODCOM AND MR PETE MORUZZI HISTORIC TENNIS CLUB ORG HISTORIC SITE REP 1 I I PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE 377 WEST BARISTO ROAD PO BOX 4738 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-4738 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO 5.1089 PD-322 PLANNING &ZONING DEPT MRS JOANNE BRUGGEMANS VERIFICATION NOTICE 1 1 1 ATTN SECRETARY 506 W SANTA CATALINA ROAD PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743 MS MARGARET PARK AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA, AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS 1 II I I I I INDIANS 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 WESSMAN HOLDINGS, LLC ALLEN & PHILIP,ARCHITECT 300 S. PALM CANYON DRIVE 7030 E. FIFTH AVENUE SPONSORS 1 I 1 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 SCOTTSDALE,AZ 85251 MR JOHN SANBORN STEVE MARTINO, LANDSCAPE SANBORN A/E 7030 E. FIFTH AVENUE 1224 S. GENE AUTRY TRAIL,#C SCOTTSDALE,AZ 85251n�} PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264 INTERESTED PARTIES 1 I 1 �eAS Z_ 513-110-034 513-110-0 ofu� 513-120-058 Palm Springs Desert Museum I, Paul C arut Palm Springs Modern Homes V PO Box 2310 P0 ,13,&k 3340 74140 El Pasco 4 Palm Springs, CA 92263 elm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-120-077 513-120-078 513-120-079 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Harry W Dohrowolsky Leonel Medeiros 74140 E1 Pasco 4 413 N Villaggio 2189 Market St 3 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Francisco, CA 94114 513-120-080 513-120-081 513-120-086 Terrill L & Marian Phillippi Eric J Wohlschlegel Palm Springs Modern Homes V PO Box 8596 611 Massachusetts Ave Ne 74140 El Pasco 4 Newport Beach, CA 9265E Washington, DC 20002 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-120-088 513-120-090 513-120-091 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V 74140 El Paseo 4 74140 E1 Paseo 4 74140 E1 Pasco 4 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-120-092 513-120-093 513-120-094 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V 74140 El Paseo 4 74140 E1 Pasco 4 74140 El Pasco 4 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-120-095 513-120-097 513-120-098 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V 74140 El Pasco 4 74140 E1 Pasco 4 74140 El Pasco 4 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-141-001 513-141-004 513-141-005 Paul C Bruggemans Wessman Holdings Frank Tysen 385 W Tahguitz Canyon Way 300 S Palm Canyon Dr 175 S Cahuilla Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513-141-011 513-141-012 513-141-013 'niahoo Cal Palm Springs Modern Homes V Wessman Holdings 4109 NE 197h Ave B 74140 El Pasco 4 300 S Palm Canyon Dr Portland, OR 97211 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513-141-015 513-141-016 513-141-017 Casa Cody B & B Country Inn Casa Cody B & B Country Inn Palm Springs Modern Homes V 175 S Cahuilla Rd 175 S Cahuilla Rd 74140 El Pasco 4 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-141-018 513-141-019 513-141-020 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V 74140 E1 Paseo 4 74140 E1 Paseo 4 74140 El Pasco 4 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-141-021 513-141-022 513-141-023 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V 74140 E1 Paseo 4 74140 E1 Paseo 4 74140 E1 Paseo 4 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-141-024 513-141-025 513-141-026 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V 74140 E1 Paseo 4 74140 El Paseo 4 74140 El Paseo 4 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513-141-027 513-141-028 513-142-001,,Ea�d Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Springs Modern Homes V Palm Mop.ntain Resort 74140 El Paseo 4 74140 E1 Paseo 4 1185 ^ Sorrento Valley Rd C Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 S Diego, CA 92121 513-142-003 513-470-004 513-470-005 Chase Hotel Of Palm Springs Marc L Herbert Donald K Mckinley 200 W Arenas Rd 2864 Tice Creek Dr 4 4242 Corte De La Siena Palm Springs, CA 92262 Walnut Creek, CA 94595 San Diego, CA 92130 513-470-006 513-560-008 513-560-009 Carol C Holmes John Wessman John Wessman 89 Tilden Way 300 S Palm Canyon Dr 300 S Palm Canyon Dr Belmont, ME 04952 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 *** 45 Printed *** NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO. 5.1089 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 322 THE PALM HOTEL 327 WEST TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of June 21, 2006. 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 this hearing is to consider an application by Wessman Holdings, LLC to construct a four-story hotel with 51 rooms including 11 suites featuring a roof terrace area with cabanas, bar and a water feature, a restaurant, bar and pool cabanas located at 327 West Tahquitz Canyon Way, Zoned R-3, Section 15. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff report and other supporting documents regarding this project are also available for public review at the City Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at (760) 323-8204 if you would like to schedule an appointment to review these documents. COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the public hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City Council by letter (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 Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner, Planning Services Department at (760) 323-8245. Si riecesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar con Nadine Fieger (760) 323-8245. rJ mes Thompson, City Clerk N Department of Planning Services W+FM Vicinity Map s LJ 0 w TAHQUITZ DR a a cr Cr J Q J {) m ARENAS RD Legend o -- site LM=500-Radius n rJ5 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: 5.1089 PD-322 DESCRIPTION: Application to construct a four-story hotel with 51 rooms including 11 suites, roof terrace area with APPLICANT: Wessman Holdings, LLC cabanas, bar and a water feature, a restaurant; bar and for The Palm Hotel pool cabanas located at 327 West Tahquitz Canyon Way, Zoned R-3, Section 15. APN: 513-141-013, 513-141-004.