HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-12 PRESENTATIONS 90OZ ` Z I I !jdV
L�
v�
n i
�J
r -
3_
i7
C-
3�
:2:7
Nald ltl_N3NID
t F
31VGdn NVId IV039 SONIUS WlVd
d��Oy dJ
,
w,
_ a
411,
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
Land Uses Originally Proposed 7GENERAL PLAN
City Council Meeting - February 22, 2006
_1
•f,
m
I
r
f .
" a
i
M �
E
I \
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
0 Regional Business Center — 5,560 Acres GENERAL PLAN
_
- — C_-o a of the-Desert
_
114 acres
f \
I 1 A
! - _ - - - k f `.
l -
f I
- - - i
Sense of Scale CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
Proposed College of the Desert Campus 7GENERAL PLAN
AeIJE)np AbJOUD puiM .
slaaauln .
saioadS paaabuapuD
T,
builaoddnS uoilala60n T
saioadS paaaBuapu3
pajsl� Ajjaaapa_� =_
iT
dOHSW •
pooIJ aaaA-pp • Ndld M N3J
oivasias
siol3e:j AeIJOnp
aNd° nbJ
tat
MA
I I y1
IN� 11 I�II I - -- T
III I I
%
-
�777� r �
� i
hi
I �
I
I I�
r'r E
F:-
High Importance 10 O
O
0
0
0
Seismic Hazards
Source: EGI Safety Element Technical Background Report Low Importance 0 0
-- - - --
\\
k
\\\\ gg
\ \ \
ON
\\ o
�\ INNO
IM
gi
_.
ON
-- --- \ ' - - * s
\\\
MOMM
High Importance 10 E===
0
I�
0
Areas of 100-Year Flood o
O
Source: FEMA, EGI Safety Element Technical Background Report Low Importance 0 0
I �nl �I - 11 � — I � 1 � � j I0
1tf
,
�i O
CL
t
1 III _]��i if l\ l�\ \ _
a
^ .c
o
ill ,�
I,
nth
J� N
S
*14
� 14
� e� v
e
�.
i ♦ ♦,
O.d ., — ,. A\ � ��\�� I
f: rli Iwo %
i
2
I v
\♦ Co
y „�,L i� a ail C
z: O
(O m
I I
I I
III
i
C
-,- O CL
., _i i� — _....._..... (D
,.. ...._..�.—_e. G
e O
L
1 O �
I L
0
co
� I \
LIN
_I �11 ie1, a
L
3
�YhNNN
I-
Lf
v\~ r vim•;.•, v;; fI
-
- 111 �.I � - _ � •.. I I I .I
NOR
I I I
tii
IF
\A Q,� IF W
�� eA el h��e�Ae {� ,A 1 VJ Yi
r _- ,._y
co
co
CZ
—_ �. .IL.. I•. I W
CD
\S
0
CU
41
II Vlj �'le � Q
N
Z
Co N
*��y � E
�� el\y l Q
Cu
CO LL Cliff)
N ui
I N I U
I:.
O
lil IU
I I
4 C
ca
CL
r �
-I, 4IN
�
I \�
II I
Q
v �\\'Vv
a I vAv\ V\ArA\\\\� wr
Vv\V\V V' ���
' - ` \\\� ,-M\\ \��\ fA
IV��\V
�A\�AV\\\\\\\VA\A\ �
\`\\\\�\\\\\\\\\\f
cc O
\\ V L
�AV\\\
\\\\�.....AV"�� �YVAVAAVv\VA1AV\�V4 � O
�\\ \V\\\vV\\Vv° �AVAVA\VvA\\AvvA\vvvu
d
CO
Cu
vA �� \AVAV\AvA\AAI y.,
LU
I
0
i i ' o
i
I
!
C
_ IIIIII
I
a.,lnPs
Jdd>� dF9�
" �d y✓ 1
Pd' ��d
i.
,',✓-` .
I
cu
14,
i i i Ili I I , � %�'�f�' ✓ed��','f��`T,'r�f�.,r`�'"�� � �� _ (�
I f� ✓ ,r11'a.0 �
�d f
I y 7
C
.ii.� ,r I � ✓ ty+d✓ ca
- �' ,:-1,.''��;a?0�'!✓a',d�f.�,sd.,ir��rnd i d
r.,,y rA�fa',fap,�>✓ d> ✓i„r✓`r,�,��std��'++'i�✓sv l'/
�3a°.r'�,/�n�'f'.Ps� d e6a p� iJ/",���: ., r�.✓PF'� ,/%i; ' � f0
cu
I
I L
0
U
':Ht• I .
I
............................
....,
-- \ ..--
...........................
- — - ----
:
a
J
High Importance 10 0
O
0
�i
Wind Energy Overlay o
Source: Palm Springs 1993 General Plan
Low Importance 0 0
z AeIaanp A6aau �] puiM .
z slajauln .
saioadS paaa0uapu�] <_
c 5uijaoddnS uollalaban T
saioadS paaa6uapu3
pajsl� Allaaapa j
r:
S dOHSA
6 pooIJ aaa/C-00 NVId MINID
U olwsias
�oedw o 61om
sa013sj AeIJGnp
Ittil tit
; .
anoge ao L 10 6ui3luea a le auil 844 Mead :uoilepuowwooau
z AeIaanp AbJeUD puiM .
z slaaauin .
saiaadS paaabuapuD =>
c builioddnS UOW1969n T
saiaadS paaabuapu3
pajsl� Allaaapa - .
8 dOHSW _
6 pooJ_� aaafC-00 Nd1d MIND
U aivasias
13eduai jo }ufia/N sjopej Ae ,IaA
O ..
a, it bJ
-
a-
r/
!
I
F
F _ f t
V T
r /
ll�r �
/ /� "i.
/l/j
s
i k
f'
ILI
J,
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
Composite Constraints GENERAL PLAN
Seismic, Flood & MSHCP Conservation Areas
Y
F�f
iifr>%f I� i.,� . i✓r / WI "
r-
•r f
/ f//_
lr/ /
/ _ 3
> %/✓ r -- -
- Frjrr/
r
_Area 4 -
- Area 2 r
Approx 950 Acres
s f, Area 3 A ro
,;r pp X -
`,r ,I �I ARpro�t - 2r200 Acres / —
/i 2 1 00 Ac Gs
r
/ /ii f-�� ff fr ✓/f F j
.��,rr L �: T /r✓ , r/.rr'✓,/ r / / ,/ /r" ,r/r f -- r`rl-
_
✓ `�l r�/i/�/%i r'�/r/�Iiirjr /ri'r/jl,/. Areal 1 `mil/�I✓��,�
Ap-pro =450 Acres
/rf/``��F �vr//>�/rs� i,/lir of / i''i 1✓i ,F�/rr -- _— _ -
_
r.
- -
! sar / F✓ �i/f
� •, ; ' _ � ;r ` �. � - ,•1 is - '� - --
/r
I
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
Composite Constraints GENERAL PLAN
Seismic, Flood & MSHCP Conservation Areas
r -
---- - - _
I
- -
-Area-4 Area 2
Approx_. 950 Air-es �� � � -�Ate�3 _� „
- - y Appro)(-j I _
p ApPro r ;00 Acres — - —
-
_ 2 100 AcG__ - _
- - - ' e -
- Area 1
450-Acres
LJ
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
Development Phasing 7GENERAL PLAN
17 7�q 1 4
AL
1p R
GENERAL PLAN
Questions
C)
4 /FOPS
GENERAL PLAN
�I
L�
Sphere of Influence Discussion
C,
u�
cry
n_
n_
CURRENT BOUNDARIES AND SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Desert Hot Springs arms
cc
MISSION LAKES
PIEASDN > 9th _
DESEET VIEW
D Bert Hot 5p{�ings HACIENDA
S here of Influ nce -
. . _ T25 TWO BUNCH PALMS
- - - T35 - -
b
3 0 3 15th
a o
Aa � p 2
mm
O p
� 9 Z
1
C
L -_1 ._____ DILLON
L 9
L �
9 Z
< n
Palm Springs WtERs},yT� ion m m n s sphere of Influence
v
� mrn
° Unincorporated Lands
z VARNfR (Riversiie County)
z
------ ---- Palm
�,h.aw
Springs a
Sphenaf
In{lama _
Cathedral
City
CURRENT BOUNDARIES AND SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
J
Desert Hot Springs Ia&, _
cc
' MISSION LA'fiE5
_ PIERSaN 8[h
' CESERT VIEW
sert Not Sps ings HACIENDA
S1 here of Influence -
y �<
_ T25 TWO BUNCH PALMS
.. - T35
b n
3 v 3 151h
a o 0
AA O z
mm o . n
h � z
...�^.
�i rea to
_:onsiA ed
Palm Springs N1AR$q mm -- --= —`--I' _.--
Sphere of Influence p rox ma ely 1,440 Acre )
� � 20th
Unincorporated Lands
'^ N� (Riversi le County)
Palm
Springs h.
,SPC
le,..
\I
Cathedral
t
City
�7
3J
�7
V�
m
2�
Z
�J
suoilsont)
dN a, y
n
' - Lit
F?ALM SA
V N
t I
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: April 12, 2006 STUDY SESSION
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE — 1-10 CORRIDOR LAND USE RESTUDY and
PRESENTATION OF RELATED SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
INFORMATION
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY
At the Study Session, staff will be presenting land use scenarios to evaluate the 1-10
corridor to allow for greater future development opportunities. The Council will have an
opportunity to direct staff and the consultant on follow-up General Plan studies. Related
information regarding an update to the city's Sphere of Influence will also be presented
and direction to proceed will also be sought from Council on that topic.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council receive the information presented and provide Staff direction on how to
proceed with the General Plan Update Land Use designations for the area presented
and related spheres of influence update reports to LAFCO.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
BACKGROUND:
At the City Council Study Session of February 22, 2006 The Proposed Land Use
Designations for the General Plan Update were presented. The purpose of this review
was to inform Council of the direction that had been taken with regard to assignment of
land use designations and hear any concerns prior to moving forward with other
General Plan Elements that are dependent on the Land Use Element (for example:
Traffic and Circulation).
Council requested a re-study of the proposed land uses along the 1-10 corridor --
specifically that area of the city north of the rail road tracks -- in order to maximize
development opportunities, subject to physical and other constraints that exist in that
area. Item No. c c n
C n .
City Council Staff Report
(insert meeting date) -- Page 2
(insert brief title)
PRESENTATION:
A Powerpoint presentation will be made at the study session of April lfh showing the
maximum developable land use for this area. A series of natural and manmade
conditions will be 'overlaid' to inform the Council of constraints that it may wish to take
into consideration in determining whether all, or a part, of this area should be included in
the "developable land use designation". (List of constraints attached).
The developable land use designation mentioned above has been given its own name:
"Regional Business Use". This was done to accommodate a number of land uses in
this area that may be desired and appropriate adjacent to the freeway. These
anticipated land uses already in exist in the General Plan (such as Light Industrial,
Office, Regional Commercial). This new land use designation is recommended in order
to take into account that the 1-10 corridor development might require a different set of
guidelines than what might be desired in any one of the other land use designations
already in place elsewhere in the city. It is intended to offer flexibility in this unique land
area without compromising desired development guidelines already in place elsewhere
in the city.
Once Council provides direction, staff will work with consultants to analyze traffic,
circulation and other inter-related aspects of the General Plan Update and will advise
Council if the desired land use causes unreasonable or unmitigable conditions in other
aspects in the General Plan.
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.
BACKGROUND:
The General Plan Update is required to include those areas that are within the city's
"Sphere of Influence"; those areas outside the City's corporate boundaries that are
anticipated for future annexation. Coincident with the ongoing General Plan Update,
LAFCO (the Local Agency Formation Commission) has initiated its five year cyclical
process of updates to the spheres of influence and municipal service reviews (MSR's)
for the western cities in the Coachella Valley. A map showing the current City of Palm
Springs' Sphere of Influence as well as that of the adjacent cities of Desert Hot Springs
and Cathedral City is attached.
Staff will seek direction from Council on whether or not to pursue a proposal to LAFCO
to add territory to its sphere of influence, specifically north of the 1-10 corridor from the
Indian Avenue interchange to areas adjacent to the Gene Autry interchange.
Alternatively, the city may submit the LAFCO Municipal Service Review Updates with
the existing sphere of influence "as is".
FISCAL IMPACT: IFinance Director Review: e d
City Council Staff Report
(insert meeting date) -- Page 3
(insert brief title)
The fiscal impact of the recommended revisions to the proposed General Plan Update
Land Use Map would be to afford future economic benefit from taxes on businesses that
might locate and develop in the area adjacent to the 1-10 freeway. There would be
costs to the city (unknown at this time) for providing infrastructure (roads, utilities, etc.)
and services to these areas and future businesses.
Related to the contract for the General Plan Update, there may be additional
professional services costs required for additional traffic modeling and restudy of the
subject areas. (Exact costs are being evaluated at this time; estimated to be less than
$10,000).
The fiscal impact of expanding the city's sphere of influence would be to afford future
economic benefit from taxes on businesses that develop in the territory within the
expanded sphere of influence should those areas be annexed into the city. There
would be costs to the city (unknown at this time) for providing infrastructure (roads,
utilities, etc.) and services to these added sphere of influence areas, regardless of
whether annexation occurs in the future or not.
Related to the cost for the General Plan Update, there may be professional services
costs required for amending the General Plan to include new sphere of influence areas.
(Professional services for this effort have not been solicited or estimated).
rig . E p in; ni)nServlces
, iP Thomas J. Wils
Direr-of PI Assistant City Manager,
Development Svcs
David H. Ready, City `—
Attachments:
1. Constraints list
2. Map showing Existing Sphere of Influence
City Council Staff Report
(insert meeting date) -- Page 4
(insert brief title)
General Plan Update — Land Use Plan — 1-10 Corridor Restudy
CONSTRAINTS WHICH MAY LIMIT INTENSIFIED LAND USE
Constraint Priority #1: Seismic Faults and Zones.
Geographic records show faults known to exist in the area including those with recorded
movement and activity and those with no recorded activity. It is recommended that
areas with active fault zones be excluded from the Regional Business Land Use.
Constraint Priority #2: 100 year Flood Plain Zone.
Army Corps of Engineer records show those areas which lie within the flood plain. In
some areas, water flow can be controlled and diverted via capital investment in channels
and pipelines. Areas where the water volume or topography makes such investment
impractical are recommended to be excluded from the Regional Business Land Use.
Constraint Priority #3: Federally Listed Endangered Species and Related Habitat
Existing federally listed environmental protection of species and habitat is considered by
staff to be of greater consequence than those which may be under study or in draft form
for municipal or governmental review or future action. The likelihood of objection,
opposing public sentiment and/or real litigious challenge to designating such areas as
"developable" is a greater in these areas. It is recommended these areas be excluded
from the Regional Business Land Use.
Constraint Priority #4: The Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
These areas include habitat and species identified as deserving of protection and
preservation. Actions by the City of Palm Springs will be important in influencing the
outcome of this recommended protection ordinance. Its pending currency in public
debate and opinion as well as possible future litigious activity make it a constraint worth
considering.
Constraint Priority #5: Accessibility
Existing roadways, freeway interchanges, access points, and topography make some
areas under study more accessible than others. The lengthy process and capital costs
involved in the approval, engineering and construction of access roads, bridges, and
major freeway interchanges make a compelling argument that those areas with
accessibility infrastructure already in place be encouraged to be built out before others
that would necessitate major up front governmental capital investment. A "Phasing
Plan" is recommended.
Constraint Priority 96: Wind Energy Generation Overlay
The Wind Energy Generation Overlay applies a constraint to those areas within it in
terms of the intensity and type of development allowed therein.
Constraint Priority #7: Mineral Resources
Although the area is unstudied in terms of specific identification of mineral resources,
known sand and gravel deposits in these areas represent natural resources that may be
of interest to the city. Development via the Regional Business Land Use may make
these resources unavailable for extraction.
City of Desert Hot Springs CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS
0 Sphere of Influence CURRENT BOUNDARIES AND SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
j�� - r/ f
I ,
Mission
Lakes
CC
MIESION LAKES
i
r
}
w
�i PIERSON > 8" -L
I 'I DESERT VIEW
�� HACIENDA
4 I
�' • _ T25 TWO BUNCH PALMS
T35
N y
5th
a o r0
O� Z Q li Z
z c
mm = o. - a
z
ti z
� E I
[, 4
P
DILLON
i I
t I 1 I 3
r i i........I O
[ I f
F Palm Springs INTERSTATE ��E m"��' 3
Sphere of Influence
zam
4 o z
i o
a
! � VARMER
a
, z
_._.._ ...,.___ Palm
Chy of
Springs
"Iuanof
I influenm
Cathedral
I
City