HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-02-15 STAFF REPORTS 1A ETEM �.
i
i
i
i
! Land Use Density/Intensity
i
LAND USE DENSITY POPULATION FLOOR BLDG. LOT
(dwelling AREA HEIGHT COVERAGE
j units/acre) RATIO (feet) (%)
CSC Community - 30 D - 30 60
Shopping Center (.28 E)
(Commercial)
u
CSC Community 43/21 1.99C - 30 - 60 55(40H)
Shopping Center
(Hotel/Multi-
Family
Residential)
RC Resort 30 - 43 (86 I)A 49 D - 35 95
Commercial 15 - 21 B (.28 E)
P Professional 12 -21 B 73 D - 24 - 60 60
(.28 E)
GC General - 49 D - 30 60
Commercial (.28 E)
HC Highway 30 -43 A 44 D - 30 60
Commercial (.28 E)
BI Business 30 - 43 A 24 D - 30 - 60 60
Industrial ** (.23 E)
OPEN SPACE
C Conservation 1 / 20 2.52 C 30 10
D Desert 1 /5 - 3 '/2 1.90 C 15 10
PR Parks & 24 10
Recreation
W Watercourse -
INSTITUTIONAL &PUBLIC
CD Civic District 78 D 30 60
(.28 E)
A Airport 1 D 60 10
Notes:
A - Hotel Density
B - Multi-Family Dwelling Density
C - Per Permanent Household (63% of Total)
D - Employees/acres
E -Estimated expectation only
H - Hiah -'
,?p`M Sp4
iy
� c
U N
x x
'9CfFOoN, CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 15, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (CASE NO. 5.1098), APPLICATION BY
PALM CANYON 102, L.P. TO REVISE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
DESIGNATION TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE RESORT-
COMMERCIAL (RC) LAND USE DESIGNATION:
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Planning Department
SUMMARY
The applicant requests the City Council amend the General Plan to allow residential and
commercial uses in the Resort-Commercial (R-C) land use designation.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Open the public hearing and receive public testimony;
2) Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW PERMANENT RESIDENTIAL
I-AND USES IN THE RESORT-COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION."
STAFF ANALYSIS
On January 25, 2006, the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 (two recused) to recommend
that the Council amend the General Plan to allow residential and commercial activities in
the Resort-Commercial land use designation, by adding the following policy:
3.22.6 Permanent residential uses and commercial activities are allowed subject
to approval of a Planned Development.
The Commission recommendation was based on their conclusion that the providing the
additional land use flexibility proposed in the amendment would be of benefit to the
rrEM NO.
I
City Council Staff Report
February 15, 2006 -- Page 2
5.1098—General Plan Amendment—R-C Designation
community by allowing a broader range of projects to be proposed and considered. The
Commission included a recommendation that a Planned Development approval be
required for any residential or commercial use to assure that full review of the site plan
.and proposed uses would occur. The Commission also received testimony from two
neighboring property owners in favor of the proposed amendment. The Planning
Commission resolution, staff report and meeting minutes are attached to this-report.
FISCAL IMPACT: IFinance Director Review: &` �
No fiscal impact.
l Haig A' Ewing, AIC.P, Dir. of Ping Svcs Tom J. Wilslon, sst. City/Manager,
Dev't Svcs
David H. Ready, City M ger
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution of Approval
2. Final Planning Commission Resolution (Jan. 25, 2005)
3. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (Jan. 25, 2005)
4. Planning Commission Staff Report (Jan. 25, 2005)
5. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Aug. 9, 2005)
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS APPROVING CASE NO.
5.1098 FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO
ALLOW RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES
IN THE RESORT-COMMERCIAL (R-C) LAND USE
DESIGNATION
WHEREAS, on November 28, 2005, Palm Canyon 102 L.P filed an application to amend
the General Plan Resort Commercial (R-C) Land Use Designation to allow residential
and commercial development in said district; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
Section 15063, a draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and
distributed to local agencies and interested parties; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 2006, following notification in the prescribed manner, a
public hearing was held by the Planning Commission at which hearing the Commission
considered the application and associated staff report; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, following review and consideration all of the
evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including but not
limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented, voted to
recommend approval of the request, including adoption of a resolution on January 25,
2006; and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2006, following notification in the prescribed manner, a
public hearing was held where the City Council addressed the request, including the
Planning Commission's recommendation, public testimony and a staff report dated
February 15, 2006, including exhibits; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby adopts as its own findings of fact the facts
contained the staff report prepared for this project (dated February 15, 2006), including
the Planning Commission staff report of January 15, 2006.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: No environmental impacts are anticipated by the proposed General
Plan amendment and the City Council hereby adopts a Negative Declaration for
the project.
SECTION 2: The proposed General Plan Arnendment to add a policy which
would allow residential and commercial developments on lands designated
Resort-Commercial on the General Plan Land Use Map would provide protection
to existing resorts and resort-oriented neighborhoods, while allowing flexibility to
improve neighborhoods of mixed development.
C.J `M,
Resolution No.
Page 2
SECTION 3. Based on the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby amends
the General Plan to including the following policy addressing the Resort-
Commercial land use designation:
3.22.6 Permanent residential uses and commercial activities are allowed
subject to approval of a Planned Development.
ADOPTED THIS xxth day of Month, Year.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
Resolution No.
Page 3
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ASSOCIATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO
ALLOW RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES IN THE
RESORT COMMERCIAL (R-C) LAND USE DESIGNATION;
REQUESTED BY PALM CANYON 102, L.P.
WHEREAS, on November 28, 2005, Palm Canyon 102 L.P filed an application to amend the
General Plan Resort Commercial (R-C) Land Use Designation to allow residential and commercial
development in said district; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) Guidelines Section 15063, a
draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and distributed to local agencies
and interested parties; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 2006, following notification in the prescribed manner, a public hearing
was held by the Planning Commission at which hearing the Commission considered the application
and associated staff report; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence
presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including but not limited to the staff report,
and all written and oral testimony presented; and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission hereby adopts the facts of the staff report forthis application
as its own finding of facts.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: No environmental impacts are anticipated by the proposed General Plan amendment
and the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of a
Negative Declaration for the project.
Section 2: The proposed General Plan Amendment to add a policy which would allow
residential and commercial developments on lands designated Resort-
Commercial on the General Plan Land Use Map would provide protection to
existing resorts and resort-oriented neighborhoods, while allowing flexibility to
improve neighborhoods of mixed development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing,the Planning Commission
hereby recommends that the City Council amendment the Palm Springs General Plan to add the
following policy to the Resort Commercial (R-C) land use designation:
3.22.6 Permanent residential uses and commercial activities are allowed subject to
approval of a Planned Development..
ADOPTED this_'h day of , 2006
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
Chairman of the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission
2
Planning Commission J 2 L 7C31 Page 1 of 1
8. Case 5.1056 GPA - An application by Palm Canyon 102, L.P., to
amend the Palm Springs General Plan to allow residential land use at
the subject site, which is presently reserved for resort commercial
activities located at 850 and 990 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone C-1,
Section 23, APN 508-172-005, 508-172-006 and 508-172-007.
Commissioner Shoenberger stated he has a business related conflict of
interest and would not participate in the discussion or vote and left the
Council Chamber at 3:48 p.m.
Chair Marantz stated she has a business related conflict of interest and
would not participate in the discussion and the vote and left Council
Chamber at 3:48 p.m.
Director of Planning Services, Craig A. Ewing, provided background
information as outlined in the staff report dated January 25, 2006.
Chair Hochanadel opened the Public Hearing.
Robert Firth, Palm Springs, spoke in favor of proposed amendment.
April Hildner, Palm Springs, represents the Tahquitz River Estates
Neighborhood, spoke in favor of the proposed amend but concerned about
traffic impact on their neighborhood.
David Hilliard, applicant, gave additional information.
There being no further comments, Chair Hochanadel closed the Public
Hearing.
M/S/C (Roath/Ringlein, 5-0, 2 absent/Shoenberger, and Chair Marantz) To
recommend adoption of the Mitgated Negative Declaration and approval of
Case 5.1056 GPA to City Council, subject to Conditions of Approval.
Commissioner Shoenberger returned to Council Chamber at 3:57 p.m.
Chair Marantz returned to Council Chamber at 3:57 p.m.
hftp://palmsprings.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=11 2/9/2006
PALMS,,
�2
V N
N A
* RRORRiEO %
c'9<rFORN�P Planning Commission Staff Report
Date: February 1, 2006
Case No.: 5.1056
Application Type: General Plan Amendment
Location: 850 and 990 East Palm Canyon Drive
Applicant: Palm Canyon 102, L.P.
Zone: C-1
General Plan: RC
APN: 508-172-005, -006, -007
From: Director of Planning Services
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Palm Canyon 102, L. P. proposes to revise the General Plan Land Use designation to
allow residential uses on the site. The revision would amend the language to include
residential uses in the RC land use description for the subject property. Adoption of the
requested revision would allow an existing application for a mixed use project of live-
work units, residential condominiums and commercial uses to be deemed consistent
with the General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve a revision to
the General Plan as presented below, and the associated CEQA Negative Declaration.
PRIOR ACTIONS
On October 12, 2005, the Planning Commission voted to recommend a Planned
Development and Tentative Tract Map for a mixed use project consisting of 26 live-work
units, 80 condominium townhomes and 15,000 square feet of commercial space.
Planning Commission Staff Report February 1, 2006
5.1056—General Plan Amendment Page 2 of 4
On November 16, 2005, the City Council continued the project, directing staff to address
the conformance of the project with the Resort-Commercial (RC) land use designation
of the General Plana
13ACKGROUND
Upon review of the General Plan, staff determined that the RC - Resort Commercial
Land Use designation does not specifically allow permanent residential uses. The
description states:
"Objective
3.22 The Resort Commercial (RC) land use designation provides for resort
hotels, including a broad range of convenience and tourist commercial
services principally serving resort clientele; these services include
restaurants, entertainment and retail uses. Commercial recreation and
entertainment facilities are closely associated with this designation, but
should be designed to be compatible with neighboring development and to
assure safe and adequate access from the highway and off-street parking.
Resort Commercial facilities are most appropriate for the Palm Canyon
Drive / Tahquitz Canyon Drive [sic] corridors outside the downtown area
where an auto-oriented scale is established."
No mention of residential uses is made either in the above objective or in policies in
support of this objective. Staff notes that a separate policy adopted for the Tahquitz
Canyon Corridor allows permanent residential usesz; however, the subject site is not
within the Tahquitz Canyon Corridor and the policy does not apply to it. Following
notification of staffs determination, the project applicant submitted an application to
amend the General Plan to allow residential and commercial uses in the RC land use
designation.
It should also be noted that the City granted approval to a residential project at the site
in 2003. At that time, staff considered the project in light of the RC land use
designation, but not identify any conflict with the designation. We now believe that such
a conflict should have been resolved at that time, as well as during the processing of the
present application last year.
On December 17, 2003, the City Council approved an earlier application for a Tentative Tract Map and
Planned Development District for a similar mixed use development — 18 live-work lofts, 48 residential
condominiums and about 45,000 square feet of commercial space (PD-285). The project was
subsequently abandoned.
2 General Plan Policy 3.23.4: "Integrated permanent residential uses with commercial activities may be
considered provided that the residential and commercial spaces are fully separated, the impacts of noise,
odor and other adverse characteristics of commercial activity can be adequately mitigated, and a healthy,
safe and well-designed environment is achieved for the residential units. Residential uses shall not be
located along the street level frontage of Tahquitz Canyon Way."
2
Planning Commission Staff Report February 1, 2006
15.1056—General Plan Amendment Page 3 of 4
ANALYSIS
The applicant has not proposed specific language for review by the City to resolve the
policy conflict raised by the mixed use proposal. Staff has considered how the Resort-
Commercial is used in the City and whether it would be appropriate to expand the
potential for residential development in the RC designation beyond the current
allowance in the Tahquitz Canyon Corridor.
In reviewing the General Plan Land Use Map, staff notes that the RC designation is
used in specific areas of the City (listed here from north to south):
■ Along both sides of North Palm Canyon Drive, between Alejo and Tachevah
■ Along the west side of Calle Encilia, between Ramon and Alejo
■ The Agua Caliente Spa Resort
• Along both sides of Tahquitz Canyon Way, between Calle Encilia and Sunrise
■ Along both sides of South Palm Canyon, from above Sunny Dunes to the
intersection of South Palm Canyon and East Palm Canyon. This is where the
subject site is located.
■ Three sites along East Palm Canyon — At Sunrise, at Barona and at
Cherokee Way.
Most of these RC areas are developed with hotels or resort facilities such that the land
use designation confirms an existing resort area. However, there are some sites that
are either vacant — including the subject site — or developed with non-resort uses. This
is especially true of the South Palm Canyon area below Sunny Dunes where a mix of
uses defines the neighborhood, including an auto dealer and office building with RC
designations and surrounding lots that include non-tourist serving commercial and office
(CBD), light manufacturing (M), an assemblage of multiple- and single-family residential,
churches and small hotels (H43/21, M15 and L4), and a waterway (W). Further, staff
does not believe that this mix of uses establishes any specific neighborhood identity nor
does it set a strong identity for limiting the subject site to resort development.
lit is possible that a hotel or resort facility will find the area attractive in the future such
that the RC designation would achieve its purpose; however, staff also believes that
allowing compatible uses such as commercial and residential would assure that the
General Plan is not a barrier to reasonable and appropriate development.
Consequently, staff has developed a new draft policy for consideration in the Resort-
Commercial designation, as follows:
3.22.6 Permanent residential uses and commercial activities are allowed subject
to approval of a Planned Development.
This policy would allow residential and commercial activities in RC areas where they
make sense, but would allow the City to reject projects that might compromise existing
resort commercial activities, including inappropriate conversion of hotels and resorts.
Staff believes that the policy would allow for the preservation of well-established resort
neighborhoods, while allowing ill-defined areas such as the South Palm Canyon
neighborhood to evolve with a stronger identity and economic base.
3
Planning Commission Staff Report February 1, 2006
:i.1056—General Plan Amendment Page 4 of 4
REQUIRED FINDINGS
There are no required 'findings' for an amendment to the policies of the General Plan.
The City may approve any change that Council determines would further the
improvement of the City. The Planning Commission must first adopt its
recommendation based on the same criterion. Based on the discussion above, staff
has concluded that the above addition to the RC policies would add protection to
existing resort neighborhoods, but allows flexibility when appropriate comparable uses
are proposed. Therefore, staff supports the amendment as one that would further the
improvement of the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A Negative Declaration of environmental impact has been prepared for the amended
Language for the General Plan and circulated for public review between from December
24, 2005 through January 13, 2006. Comments were received from the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the Southern California
Association of Government (see attachments). Staff has concluded that their comments
do not affect the draft Negative Declaration for the amendment and staff will
recommends its adoption to the City Council.
NOTIFICATION
Notification was published in the Desert Sun as prescribed by City ordinance.
, ai A.,Pkng, P
Dir tefof PI nin Services
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Draft Resolution of Recommendation to Approve Amendment
3. Draft Negative Declaration, with Comment Letters
4. Applicant's Letter Requesting General Plan Amendment (11/28105)
5 Excerpt from General Plan — Resort Commercial Land Use
4 y
Department of Planning Services
Vicinity Map 4v E
ar..,
S
FFM4 -
CALLE ROCA � 0
\ Q o
Ll
SUNNY DUNES RD
�'rNVVUGTRIAL �-
IIJE I i
cr
8 RI t/['RSiDE DR 7 t
'Y SAN LOR N?O R)
MESQUITE AVE
0 111 Q
z
m � PALl7 VEftDE AVE
a
z
Legend
_ 4000-rILILO AVE
R JLI I I
O Palm_Springs_Parcels /
rF9 Site (II, _
400 Feet 1 u�dt
— � � MOROPJt;O RD —
U
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO: 5.1056 PD-314 DESCRIPTION:
TTM 33575
A 11.71 acre Planned Development of 106 residential units,
APPLICANT: PALM CANYON 102, LP one common lot, a recreation center, two pools, and 15,000
sq.ft. of retail space at 850 & 990 South Palm Canyon
Drive, Zone C1, Section 23.
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ASSOCIATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO
ALLOW RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES IN THE
RESORT COMMERCIAL (R-C) LAND USE DESIGNATION;
REQUESTED BY PALM CANYON 102, L.P.
WHEREAS, on November 28, 2005, Palm Canyon 102 L.P filed an application to amend the
General Plan Resort Commercial (R-C) Land Use Designation to allow residential and commercial
development in said district; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) Guidelines Section 15063, a
draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and distributed to local agencies
and interested parties; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 2006, following notification in the prescribed manner, a public hearing
was held by the Planning Commission at which hearing the Commission considered the application
and associated staff report; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence
presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including but not limited to the staff report,
and all written and oral testimony presented; and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission hereby adopts the facts of the staff report forthis application
as its own finding of facts.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: No environmental impacts are anticipated by the proposed General Plan amendment
and the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of a
Negative Declaration for the project.
Section 2: The proposed General Plan Amendment to add a policy which would allow
residential and commercial developments on lands designated Resort-
Commercial on the General Plan Land Use Map would provide protection to
existing resorts and resort-oriented neighborhoods, while allowing flexibility to
improve neighborhoods of mixed development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing,the Planning Commission
hereby recommends that the City Council amendment the Palm Springs General Plan to add the
following policy to the Resort Commercial (R-C) land use designation:
3.22.6 Permanent residential uses and commercial activities are allowed subject to
approval of a Planned Development..
ADOPTED this-th day of , 2006
i
,AYES:
NOES:
,ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
Chairman of the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission
2
I
I
I
NOTICE OF INTENT
TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
General Plan Amendment
850 and 990 South Palm Canyon, Palm Springs, California
(PD 314-Palm Canyon at Mesquite)
LEAD AGENCY: City of Palm Springs
3200 East Tahquitz Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
CONTACT PERSON: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services (760) 323-8245
PROJECT TITLE: General Plan Amendment, Case No. 5.1056
PROJECT LOCATION: 850 and 990 South Palm Canyon, Palm Springs, CA,
APN: 508-172-005, -006, -007
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes an amendment to the Palm Springs General
Plan to allow residential land use at the subject site, which is presently reserved for resort
commercial activities. The proposed project would alter the land use policy for the Resort
Commercial land use designation of the General Plan.
FINDINGS/DETERMINATION: The City has reviewed and considered the proposed project and
has determined that the project - an amendment to the land use policies of the Palm Springs
General Plan - will not have significant adverse impacts. The City hereby prepares and
proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: A 20 day public review period for the Draft Negative Declaration will
commence on December 24, 2005 through January 13, 2006 at 5:00 p.m. for interested
individuals and public agencies to submit written comments on the document. Any written
comments on the Negative Declaration must be received at the above address within the
public review period. In addition, you may email comments to the following address:
DianeB@ci.palm-springs.ca.us. Copies of the Negative Declaration and Initial Study are
available for review at the above address and at the City library.
Date: Signature:
Craig A. Ewing, AICP
Director of Planning Services
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project title:
General Plan Amendment
Planning Case No. 5.1056
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
3. Contact person and phone number:
Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services
760-323-8245
4. Project location:
850 and 990 South Palm Canyon, Palm Springs, CA,
(APN: 508-172-005, -006, -007)
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
Palm Canyon 102, L.P., c/o The Martin Group
100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1845
Santa Monica, CA 90401
6. General plan designation:
RC (Resort Commercial), which provides for resort hotels and other visitor-serving residential
uses, restaurants, entertainment facilities and retail commercial uses.
7. Zoning:
C1 (Retail Business Zone), which is intended as a business district, primarily retail business in
character, with related hotels, service, office, cultural and institutional uses. Multiple family
residential is also permitted subject to R-3 (Multi-family Residential and Hotel Zone).
8. Description of Project:
The applicant proposes to revise the General Plan Land Use designation to allow residential
uses on the site. The revision would amend the language to include residential uses in the RC
land use description for the subject property.
General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
November 2005
r
01{/FOR1�\P V
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:
North- Waterway
South- Commercial and Residential
East- Residential
West- Commercial and Vacant
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
None
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land UseJPlanning
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation[fraffic
❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
❑ environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
1
November 2005
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Ej I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable
standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
December 21, 2005
Craia A. Ewina AICP Date
Director of Planning Services
3
General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
„ November 2005
r+t6oaM� li"1%" 'l;
r .
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be
explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the
project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-
site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then
the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. 'Potentially Significant Impact" is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one
or more 'Potentially Significant Impact" eniries when the determination is made, an EIR is
required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from 'Potentially Significant
Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
(mitigation measures"Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined
from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions
for the project.
4
General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
November 2005
C7f/iOAN�� ( ,l 1L"Vt
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to
the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
5
General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
November 2005
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less-Than _
Significant
. . Potentially.' ;,With ,J,Less Than .:-
Significant` 'Mitiga'tion ; =�hSignificant
Impact', 'Incorporated` fmdact"'. `-l�o Impact'
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic El El Elvista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock El El Eloutcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
o) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its ❑ ❑ ❑
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
that would adversely affect day or nighttime ❑ ❑ ❑
views in the area?
a-d) No Impact. The request is for a land use policy change that does not by itself alter the
appearance of the sight nor impact any scenic vistas or resources. No light or glare
would result from the land use policy revision.
LessTban
} Potentially S'gnific nt Less
� ,
s Than
Sigmficant-:( ' Mitigation SignificantImpact-:%; ,, fncor"pprated 'Impact -No Impact
11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would
the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the ❑ ❑ ❑
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
6
Pr'`"'•., General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
r?.
November 2005
fi
��lgkoaN� i N AeJ.
P.l
i
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
:Significant-
Potentiallj< _` With- .Les'Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incoryibrated fmp�cf ''No Impact
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment that, due to their location or ❑ ❑ ❑
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural use?
(a-c) No Impact. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency has not designated this area as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance. No impact to farmland would occur.
less Than
4Significanf
Potential,lj%_,; With =Less Than
Significant' ' - Mitigation - Significant ' - -
Impact• ' :Irycorpo'rated' . ':,linpact ,,',No Impact`
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ❑ ❑ ❑
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ El
to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is in non-attainment under an El El
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions that
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ❑ ❑ ❑
number of people?
a-e) No Impact. The project is within the jurisdiction of the South County Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD). The SCQAMD Governing Board adopted the 2003 Air
Quality Management Plan (AQMP) on August 1, 2003. The 2003 AQMP updates the
attainment demonstration for federal standards for ozone and PM 10; replaces the 1997
attainment demonstration for the federal carbon monoxide (CO) standard and provides
"cry"r, General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
yM
y November 2005
r9<IFOFN n
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
a basis for a maintenance plan for CO for the future; and updates the maintenance
plan for the federal nitrogen dioxide (NO2) standard that the South Coast Air Basin has
met since 1992. The revision of the AQMP points to the urgent need for additional
emissions reductions (beyond those incorporated in the 1997/99 Plan) from all sources,
specifically those under the jurisdiction of the California Air Resources Board and the US
EPA which account for approximately 80 percent of the ozone precursor emissions in the
Basin (www.ogmd.gov/aqmp/).
The project is an amendment to the land use limitations of the site, but does not propose
any specific new development. No impact on air quality is anticipated by the land use
amendment; however, any project proposed under the new designation would be
evaluated for air quality impacts through a separate analysis.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially., With Less Than
SignifIeant, Mf0gafion- Significant "
d Irhpact Inwr.porated, 'Impact, .Nw mp`act
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special ❑ ❑ ❑
status species in local or regional plans, policies
or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies or ❑ ❑ ❑
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited ❑ ❑ ❑
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.),
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or ❑ ❑ ❑
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree ❑ ❑ ❑
preservation policy or ordinance?
8
General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
o November 2005
�Ctl� A •
Rtl�r I �(•7,�
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER INITIAL STUDY NEGATIVE DECLARATION
_ L�sa.Than .
. „ S;g�lficant
..Pofentiallyr`, :With„ Less Than --
'`significant: .}Mittgatioh Significant
y,- Inca orated .: .Impact .'�,? ImPact ry o Impact ,-
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted TG
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community El El ElConservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional or state habitat conservation plan?
a-f) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect any biological resources. Any
project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be
evaluated for potential impacts.
Lm Than
" significapt, ° '
Potentially„ , ,With, Less Than
"',Significant, Mrtigatipn Significant
_��'I' agt lacorpoirated 'Impact Nolin c(�
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the El ❑ Elsignificance of a historical resource as defined in EJ
" 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the El ❑ Elsignificance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to " 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique El El Elpaleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
cl) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ ❑
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
a-d) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect any cultural resources. Any project
which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be evaluated for
potential impacts.
Leas Than
Significant
Potentially it Les§Than '
,Si rig* ant, - Miti Lion Significant
Impact - Incorporated (fmpapt No Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death, involving:
General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
N'
q November 2005
�e4tnoAM�� I '�F1J`�I'J
. _7J
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER INITIAL STUDY NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CessThan` -
- - "S1g,ri ficant _
Potentially „' ;With -Less Than.
Significafit , Mitigation- Significant
Impact'; Incorporated 'Impact No Impact
..... .'' K. .,,. . .
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other ❑ ❑ ❑
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ Elliquefaction?
iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of El ❑ Eltopsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a result
of the project, and potentially result in on- or off- ❑ ❑ ❑
site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-3 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), ❑ ❑ ❑
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater El El Eldisposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
a-e) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect any geological resources or soils.
Any project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be
evaluated for potential impacts.
io
General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
.$ November 2005
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
"Less Than
o=_Significant. _
Potentially =With , iet3 Than -
-" Significant Mitigation". �'Sighificant '
Impact,' IncoipgrateH --" Impact . Nor
rnpac,
i"
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use or ❑ ❑ ❑
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the ❑ ❑ ❑
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste El El Elwithin one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, ❑ ❑ ❑
would it create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a ❑ El Elpublic use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard ❑ ❑ ❑
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere
with, an adopted emergency response plan or ❑ ❑ ❑
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to ❑ ❑ ❑
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
a-h) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect any hazards or hazardous
materials. Any project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use
policies will be evaluated for potential impacts.
General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, initial Study/Negative Declaration
a November 2005
4
♦C4<�RN�� f
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
... - � Less'Than
Si�nifjcant
Potentially `.,With Leis Than ' '
Significant 'Mitigatioh Significant .... `
Impact` Incorporated ' , 1ntQpct `: No Impact;
Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste El ❑ El
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table ❑ ❑ ❑
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner that ❑ ❑ ❑
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially ❑ ❑ ❑
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned El El El
drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or El ❑ ElFlood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ❑ El Elthat would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including ❑ ❑ ❑
flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑
12
r•^`"'_ General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
November 2005
A .n
I
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
a-j) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect hydrology or water quality. Any
project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be
evaluated for potential impacts.
Significant
I'ote�Bally < ' WiHI LessShan
Stgniflcant ' Mitigation 'Sjgndicanc i,
vhn(�act lncofpprated '.Impact. No Impact:
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, the general ❑ El Elplan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ ❑
plan or natural community conservation plan?
a) No impact. The proposed amendment would allow for the development of residential
uses in a mixed neighborhood of commercial and residential uses. No established
community would be divided by the introduction of residential uses at the site.
b) No Impact. The proposed amendment would allow for the development of residential
uses in a mixed neighborhood of commercial and residential uses. The existing General
Plan policies that seek to avoid or mitigate environmental effects are not altered by this
amendment. Any project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use
policies will be evaluated for potential impacts.
c) No Impact. The project would not conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan. No impact would occur.
Les ,T '
-Significant
Potentially ='_With -'Less'Than'
Significant 'Mitigation ;Slgnrfipant
Impact Iifcotporated - ' Impact . - No Impact;: ,
... .. ...
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ El ❑
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important El ❑ ❑
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
I3
4DGeneral Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive Initial Study/Negative Declaration
November2005
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
a-b) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect mineral resources. Any project
which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be evaluated for
potential impacts.
` Less'Than
., 'Signifiea4t,
Potentially With' `=LessThan
SlBnificant ,'Mitigation - ;$igmficant,'
ImgaYt Inc0000i'ated, .Impact '-.No1 act.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local El El Elgeneral plan or noise ordinance or of applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise ❑ ❑ ❑
levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing ❑ ❑ ❑
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above ❑ ❑ ❑
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a ❑ El ❑
public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or El El El
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
a-f) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect noise. Any project which is applied
for under the proposed amended land use policies will be evaluated for potential
impacts.
it
General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
2
u November 2005
C1<IFORN��
i
I
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Is s—
Less,Than'-
-° Significant '-'
Potend�,lly ZYith Less Than
Significant , "Mitigation ' Signficant
I,mpacG, Idgo�poYated °.Impact , No Impact,
XII, POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and ❑ El El
or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑
housing elsewhere?
a) No Impact. The proposed amendment may induce the development of housing, but is
not expected to induce substantial population growth in the area. Any project which is
applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be evaluated for
potential impacts.
b-c) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not displace population or housing. Any
project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be
evaluated for potential impacts.
' :CessThan '-
' Significant '
Potentially .°M!ith, ' ' Less Than
SignificanfMitigation'. Significant
impact . Incorporated =Impact N Impact
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of
the following public services:
a) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑
d) Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑
T5
General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Pabn Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
.?; November 2005
�4[6oFN�� •
`I
I
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
a-e) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect public services. Any project which
is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be evaluated for
potential impacts.
Less Than
-sigriifieant p '
?,1 Potent 11Y, With L'ess.Th' ;
Sign'ifidant, Mitigation`, _. •Significant
Impact Incorporated `'-:'_hmpact Nolmpact,
XIV. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical ❑ ❑ ❑
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities, or
require the construction or expansion of El El Elrecreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
a-b) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect recreation. Any project which is
applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be evaluated for
potential impacts.
,
;Le;S'7han
Significant
Potentially ,With ^Less han- ,
Sigoificant. - Mitigation, .'Significant
,Jmpact JncfkrPorated �-Irnpaet ='Nolmpacit
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial El El ❑
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county El ❑ Elcongestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in ❑ ❑ ❑
location that results in substantial safety risks?
General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
^$ sN November 2005
,�O14Iro�M� +J
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
-' , - significant
Potentially -With :Less Than,
$igoificait "tAliHgafion Significant
Im act In'corporatEd ;Impacf No Impact
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ ❑ Elintersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus ❑ ❑ ❑
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
a-g) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect transportation or traffic. Any
project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be
evaluated for potential impacts.
t Less Than
significant
Potentially ,With Less Than
Signfiicant Mifigation Signitccant
in a'ct� `"Ipcorporated ;'ImpacN'' No Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ❑
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of El ❑ El
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing ❑ El Elfacilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or ❑ ❑ ❑
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the ❑ ❑ ❑
project's projected demand, in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
17
General Plan Amendment/850& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
November 2005
i
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
-' '- Significant
Potentially With - ' Less Than '
Signifirra It Mitigation' Si- gnificant
Impart IhtoFporated Impact" Nolmpact-
0 Se served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste ❑ ❑ ❑
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and El ❑ ❑
regulations related to solid waste?
a-g) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect utilities and services systems. Any
project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use policies will be
evaluated for potential impacts.
','Less Than
;Significant
With
Potentially„ . Mitigation Less Than
Significant -Ipcorpbrate _signrficant,
> Impact d ;Impal a`-;' No Impact,::
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish
or wild-life population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ❑ ❑ ❑
animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of rare or endangered plants or animals,
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
"Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable ❑ ❑ ❑
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that
will cause substantial adverse effects on human ❑ ❑ ❑
beings, either directly or indirectly?
TB
General Plan Amendment/850&990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
g November2005
•C1(IFOF�\' Ir-�?i�
TRAMWAY INDUSTRIAL CENTER/INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
a-c) No Impact. The proposed amendment will not affect any of the mandatory findings of
significance. Any project which is applied for under the proposed amended land use
policies will be evaluated for potential impacts.
•r"`"=yk General Plan Amendment/050& 990 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
November 2005
•7IIFORH� i ,
WARREN D.WILLIAMS Fly f1 1995 MARKET STREET
General Manager-Chief Engineer 5�° °no RIVERSIDE,CA 92501
Q
p 951.955.1200
951.788.9965 FAX
=+ : www.floodcontrol.co.riverside.ca.us
'nONsaAVAT 1��
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
January 11, 2006
Mr. Craig A. Ewing, AICP
Director of Planning Services
City of Palm Springs
3200 East Tahquitz Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Dear Mr. Ewing: Re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative
Declaration for General Plan Amendment
850 and 990 South Palm Canyon,
Palm Springs, CA
This letter is written in response to the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for the General Plan
Amendment of 850 and 990 South Palm Canyon(APN's 508-172-005, -006 and-007), Palm Springs, CA.
The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) has the following
comments/concerns that should be addressed in the Initial Study(IS):
1. The project area appears to be located within the District's Palm Springs Master Drainage Plan
(MDP). When fully implemented, these MDP facilities will provide flood protection to relieve
those areas within the plan of the most serious flooding problems and will provide adequate
drainage outlets. The IS should evaluate potential impacts to existing and proposed MDP facilities
in the project area. The MDP` maps may be viewed online under Programs & Services at
www.floodcontrol.co.riverside.ca.us/districtsite/ default.asn. To obtain further information on the
MDP contact Art Diaz of the Planning Section at 951.955.1345.
2. Existing District facilities are located within the proposed project area and may be impacted, Any
work that involves District rights-of-way, easements or facilities will require an encroachment
permit from the District. The construction of facilities within road right-of-way that may impact
District storm drains should also be coordinated with us. To obtain further information on
encroachment permits or existing facilities, contact Ed Lotz of the Encroachment Permit Section at
951 955.1266.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the IS. Please forward any subsequent environmental
documents regarding the project to my attention at this office. Any further questions concerning this letter
may be referred to Steve Horn at 951.955.5418 or me at 951.955.1233.
Very truly yours,
TERESA TUNG j}
Senior Civil Engineer
,i
a TLMA
Attn: David Mares
Art Diaz "
Ed Lotz J„b�, t. ' d;111i
SCH:mcv
P8\104286
i
I
I
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
January 11, 2006
Mr. Craig T. Ewing, AICP
Director of Planning Services
ASSOCIATION of City of Palm Springs
GOVERNMENTS 3200 East Tahquitz Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Main MCI RE: SCAG Clearinghouse No. 1 20050834 General Plan Amendment,
818 west Seventh Street Case No. 5.1056
lzth Floor
Los Angeles,California Dear Mr. Ewing:
90017-3435 Thank you for submitting the General Plan Amendment, Case No. 5.1056 For
review and comment. As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant
t(213)236-t800 projects, SCAG reviews the consistency of local plans, projects and programs
f(213)236-1825 with regional plans. This activity is based on SCAG's responsibilities as a
regional planning organization pursuant to state and federal laws and
www.scag.ca.gov regulations. Guidance provided by these reviews is intended to assist local
Om,a,s:President Toni Cup,Nit Hueneme• agencies and project sponsors to take actions that contribute to the attainment
'apVice president-,ripaeroLG o Los Angeles of regional goals and policies.
County•Second Vre mm ediate Gary Everpress San
Bernardino County•Immediate Past president
Ron Roberts.Temecula
Imperial County:Victor Carrillo,Imperial County We have reviewed the General Plan Amendment, Case No. 5.1056, and have
-Jon For,El Centro
Inc Angeles County:Vvari Rorke,Los Angeles determined that the proposed Project is not regionally significant per SLAG
Came, Sev,,,MaroslavoDeath-HaryBaunw• Intergovernmental Review IGR Criteria and California Environmental Quality Act
Ca Alden l Man„alma Beach•Harry Baldwin, g ( ) y
San Gabriel Debark
Bowleg Cemlos Todd
Campbea,BnrbaHaronyights-Margaret Clark,
(CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15206). Therefore, the proposed Project does not
•Stan ead- La Habra Heights•Margaret Mike
Rosemead•Geae Daniels,Dunlop,
am •Mike warrant comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the
Jeo,G,za,Palmdale•Judy Dunlap,Inglewood
RaeGGocaft,LonsApollo, avidGnbn,Dovmey proposed Project, we would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at
•Enc 6arcelN.Los Angeles•Wendy Court Los
Angeles•Frank Ghole,Cudahy•tonics Hahn, that time,
Los Angeles•Isadore Hall Compton•Keith W
Hanks,Annual • Tom LaBarge, Los Angeles
Paola Lantz Pomona Sa •PavIN°wlsoa c° Los Adescription of the proposed Project was published in SCAG's December 16-31,
Pam O'Connor, oma Momea•Also Padiilon Los
Angeles•Bernard Parks,Los Angeles•Ian Perry,
Los Angeles • Ed Reyes, ins Angeles • Bnl 2005 2006 Intergovernmental Review Clearinghouse Report for public review and
Rosendahl, Les Angeles • Greg Smith. Los
Angeles • Tom Sykes. Violent • Paul Talbol, Comment,
Alhambra•Sidney pylon,Pasadena•Term Reyes
,pangs,Lang Beach•Anlomo Whom area,Jos
Angeles•Dennis Washburn,Colahosas•lack
Weiss,LosAageles•Dennis Zino,La,Angeles The project title and SCAG Clearinghouse number should be used in all
Orange County:Chris Nnndy.Orange Brennan,•CmIG( correspondence with SCAG concerning this Project. Correspondence should be
Brea-LouBarnes, stPalma ve, uenaPark
- Ri h�° B �°`An.;„eim - Debbie Caolk sent to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator. If you have any questions,
Beach•Cartoon Created'Lorenz lease contact me at 213 236-1851. Thank you.
Niguel•Rkhmd Dever,take Forest•Marilynn p ( )
Poe, Los Alamltos • Ted Ridgeway, Newport
Beam
Riverside County:left Some,Rrverade County• Sincerely,
DI Buckley, Lake Elsinore • Bonne
Flickinger, Moreno Valley • Ron Loveridge,
ity
Riverside Greg Polls,
Coun y- Gary
vol • Ron
Roberts,Tentemla
San Bernardino County: Gary Tivoli, San
Bernardino Monty• -Lee A Dale,Barstow•
Paul Eaton, Jasper,
l•Lee Ann Garcia,Grand BRIAN WA LACE Terrace•➢m Jhland fawn of IF Valley•tarry
MCCallon,highland•Dehurah Bob,,[,.,,RobRlal[e -
•AlanWapner,onlario Associate Regional Planner
Ventura County:Judy Mekels,Ventura County•
Intergovernmental Review _I?qil;
Glen Corona,Semi Valley•Carl Morehouse,San
Buenaventura•Tone young.Port Hueneme
Orange County Transportation Authority:Lou
Correa,County.1 Orange `_IT.;q d',j�"z,�;., „ �- se ry
Riverside County Transportation Commission:
Robin Lowe,Hemel
Ventura County Transportation Commission
Keith Mdlhouse,Moorpark
® Pren,dnnk,d i, r
PALM CANYON 102, L.P.
o/o The Martin Group
Suite 1845
100 Wilshire Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90401
To]: 310-393-8006 Fax; 310-393-2401
Novm,ber 28,2005
Mr. Craig Ewing
Director of Planning
City of Palm Springs
3200 E.. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Subject: Palm.Canyon at Mesquite- 11.7 acres
Patin Canyon 102,L.P. /Tentative Tract Map 33575 Approval
Tear Mr.Ewing,
We appreciate your investigation of our request to determine that the Tentative Tract
Map Application is consistent with use schedule in the General Plan. As I said in my
prior e-mails,we believe that they are consistent,but if not we would like to request that
the Planning Department proceed with a site specific General Plan Amendment to allow a
mix of residential and commercial uses on the above referenced site.
You had mentioned a fee of approximately$6,047 if a General Plan Amendment is
required. We would, first of all,like to request that this fee be waived in light of the
oversight in not mentioning this issue to its until the City Council meeting. if it is not
possible to waive the fee,we would like to request that this fee be shared with other
applicants in the event that another site specific general plan amendment is processed
simultaneously.
Thank you for your assistance in this regard. I may be reached at(310)968-4436 if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
PALM
By: David Hilliarc
DAB:=
cc: 17zeodore Snyder
David Martin
Resort Commercial
Objective
3.22. The Resort Commercial (R-C) land use designation provides for resort hotels, including a broad range of
convenience and tourist commercial services principally serving resort clientele; these services include
restaurants, entertainment and retail uses. Commercial recreation and entertainment facilities are closely
associated with this designation, but should be designed to be compatible with neighboring development
and to assure safe and adequate access from the highway and off-street parking. Resort Commercial
facilities are most appropriate for the Palm Canyon Drive/Tahquitz Canyon Drive corridors outside the
downtown area where an auto-oriented scale is established.
Polic
3.22.1. Accommodate a full diversity of commercial uses, including retail, office, food sales and service, general
merchandise, apparel and accessories, dry goods, financial services, and personal services which provide
for the day-to-day needs of nearby residents and visitors.
3.22.2. Accommodate the development of hotels and other visitor-serving residential uses at a maximum density
of 43 guest rooms per net acre.
3.22.3. Accommodate commercial recreation uses which cater to both the City's residents and its visitors.
3.22.4. Special attention to setbacks, landscaping,architecture and signs shall be required to emphasize the City's
unique resort character.
3.22.5. Structures shall be a maximum of thirty-five(35) feet in height. A minimum of five percent (5%) of any
property or project shall be reserved for open space or recreation areas.
Tahc,uitz Canyon Corridor (See Subarea 7 of Summary of Downtown
Development Policies)
This area' s recent development activity is due to the Palm Springs
Convention Center. This area has the potential for a substantial
amount of additional tourist-oriented retail, restaurant and hotel
development. Tahquitz Canyon Way is the major, east-west, axis, a
broad boulevard with a median lined with palm trees, linking
downtown with the airport . This area has direct access to the
Downtown to the west and is flanked by areas, to the north and
south, with a potential for high-density residential and hotel
uses.
3/3/93 I-62
i
objective
1.23. Fstablishment of a unique district which capitalizes on the presence of the Palm Springs Convention Center
as it major economic and cultural use, expanding its role as a principal public activity center and
accommodating the introduction of convention-related supporting uses, including restaurants, retail
commercial and entertainment, theaters, hotels and limited offices.
policies
i 13.I. Facourage and accommodate a full diversity of commercial uses, including retail, office, food sales and
service, general merchandise, apparel and accessories, dry goods, financial services, personal services,
entertainment and cultural which provide for the day-to-day service needs of the nearby residents,
employees and visitors.
1.23.2. Encourage the establishment of additional full-service hotels and quality restaurants. Provide for quality
medium- and high-density residential uses at the edges of this district.
1 23.3. Encourage high-intensity uses on the street level of buildings which have Tahquitz Canyon Way frontage
between Downtown and Avenida Caballeros to promote an active pedestrian link between the Convention
('enter and Downtown.
1 !1 d Integrated pertuanent residential uses with commercial activities may be considered provided that the
iesidential and commercial spaces are fully separated, the impacts of noise, odor and other adverse
characteristics of commercial activity can be adequately mitigated, and a healthy, safe and well-designed
environment is achieved for the residential units. Residential uses shall not be located along the street level
frontage of'Iahquitz Carryon Way.
t 2.t 5 Pcrutit ant increase in height for entertainment production facilities requiring greater than normal floor
heights in concert with related uses, provided that a planned development is submitted and approved by
the City which demonstrates that the project:
a. contains activities and functions which will be a significant asset for the City;
b. achieves a higher level of architectural design performance than would normally occur;
C. adequately mitigates all impacts attributable to the increase in height;
it. conveys the sense of "the Village" in its siting of structures, massing, scale, use of open space
incorporating "pedestrian-friendly" uses and architectural character; and
C. provides benefits to the adjacent area and the greater City above those which can be exacted to
account for its direct impacts.
I ?1.6 Require that all uses and buildings enhance pedestrian activity along Tahquitz Canyon Way in accordance
with the land use and design policies and standards specified in this section. Strengthen the pedestrian
linkage along Tahquitz Canyon Way toward the Historic Village Center of the downtown through improved
lighting and expanded sidewalk area and encouragement of complementary retail, office and restaurant
uses
1 _'1.7. ('ontuun: to explore the pedestrian linkage along Andreas Road toward the focus area of the downtown
Uuough increased landscaping and widened sidewalks and encouragement of complementary retail, office
and restaurant uses.
1/3/93 I-63
3.23.8. Encourage that new structures be designed to create a"village-like"environment, by the siting and massing
of buildings around common pedestrian areas and open spaces which are linked to Tahquitz Canyon Way
and other circulation links to the focus area of downtown, inclusion of pedestrian-oriented uses at the
ground elevation, and use of vertical setbacks of buildings in excess of 2 stories or 30 feet above grade.
3.23.9_ Accommodate expanded development of the Palm Springs Convention Center.
3.23.10. Develop a view corridor study, when feasible, for Tahquitz Canyon Way, for the purpose of
maintaining the natural views along this major entrance to the downtown, between Sunrise Way
and Avenida Caballeros and allow additional or reduced height for hotels within the parameters
of such study.
Gallery District
This area has regained vitality in recent years from the influx of
art galleries and decorative arts professions . The area also
contains numerous offices. The area is typified by low-rise
buildings and is primarily auto-oriented. Landmark buildings
include the Pacific Building in the heart of this area and the El
Mirador Garage, a recently-renovated historic structure, currently
occupied by Desert Hospital, at its northern boundary. These
structures are the centerpieces for the City' s first historic
district, the Las Palmas Business Historic District .
This area is flanked on each side by low-density, high-end
residential areas. Several quality small hotels as well as a number
of run-down motels are located along Indian Canyon Drive in and to
the north of the area. The Desert Hospital , the City's largest
employer, is immediately northeast of this area.
(jective
3.24. Enhancement of the unique role and identity of Palm Canyon Drive between Alejo Road and Tachevah
Drive as a corridor of regional-serving art galleries, design furnishings establishments, specialty shops and
restaurants as primary uses and maintenance of its low-rise, "village-like" and pedestrian character. A
uniform and consistent pattern of development which serves adjacent residents and continues the character
of specialty uses.
Policies
3.24.I. Accommodate a full diversity of commercial uses, including retail, office, food sales and service, general
merchandise, apparel and accessories, dry goods, furniture, financial services, personal services and
cultural which provides for the day-today service needs of nearby residents, employees and visitors.
3/3/93 I-64
D ryThisj i�sp g r nun y clerks Ptltng stamp
PROOF OF PUBLICATION 2086 F
(2015.5.C.C.P)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Riverside
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of CITY COUNCIL
the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
years,and not a party to or interested in the GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/CASE NO.5,1098
above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING AMENDMENT OF"RESORT-COMMERCIAL"LAND USE
COMPANY a newspaper ol'general circulation, DESIGNATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USEMAP
printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Springs,Cahtouua,will load a public hearing at its meeting of February
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of 15,2006 The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
California under the date of March 24, 1988.Case Chamber at City Hall,3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Film Springs,
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the The pui pose of this hearing is to consider a recommendation of the Palm
annexed Is a printed copy(set in type not smaller Springs Planning Commission to amend the Resort-Commercial(R-C)
than non pariel,has been published in each regular Land Use Designation to allow residential uses,sublect to approval of a
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any Plaimed Development District, on all properties so designated in the
General Plan. The application was initiated by Palm Canyon 102,L.P. to
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: allow wsidenhal land uves at a site located at 850 and 990 South Palm
Canymi Drive;Zone C-L Section 32/T4/R4,APN 508-172-005,508-172-
February 40',2006 006,and 5OS-172 007;however,the Commission's recommendation would
------------------------------------------------------------- apply city-wide to all properties designation R-C in the General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Draft Mitigated Negative
--------------------------------------------------------------- Declination was prepued for [his,project under [lie guidelines of the
All in the year 2006 California Envinnunental Quality Act(CEQA)and will be..reviewed by the
City Council at the hearing Members of the public may view this docu-
ment at the Planning Services Department,City Hall,3200 East Tahquitz
I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the Canyon Way,Palm Springs,and subnut written comments al,or prior to,
foregoing is true and correct. the City Council hearing
n REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff report and other sup-
Elated at Palm Springs,California this-----� ',----day porting docclueab,iogarding this project are available for public review at
City Hall bel woen the hours of 8:00 a m and 5 00 p.m,Monde through
/ Y
of------�'-Febr'nilry;---'------------------------2006 Priday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at(760) 323-8204 if you
would like to
ointment to review
---------.1`,,'„-{ ---~ ---_„ ----------------- COMMENT ON THISaAPPLICAT�ION: response tooethiis notice
d h ce may he
_._ �/ made verhall mt the PnbLc Hcarnig and or in writing before the hearing.
Si commentsrj 1 e made to the City Council by letter(for mail or
...r_...- hand delivery)to:
Janes Thompson,City Clerk
p 32N E.Tahquitz Canyon Way
3° is Palm Springs,CA 92262
Any challenge of Lite proposed general plan amendment in court may be
limited to raising only those issues raised at Ihe,public hearing described
in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at,
or poor,to the public hearing (Government Code Section 65009Jb]i2]).An
opportunily will he gmveam at said hearing for all interested pi a cos to be
heard.Questions regaiding this case may be directed to Craig A.Ewing,
AICP a[(760)323-8245.
Si neeesita syuda con rota calla,porfavor Ilame a In Ciudad de Palm
Springs y puedc hablar con Nadine Doger telef rto(760)323-S245.
[S�
James Thompson,City Clerk
i
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/ CASE NO. 5.1098
AMENDMENT OF "RESORT-COMMERCIAL" LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will
hold a public hearing at its meeting of February 15, 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 a recommendation of the Palm Springs Planning
Commission to amend the Resort-Commercial (R-C) Land Use Designation to allow residential
uses, subject to approval of a Planned Development District, on all properties so designated in
the General Plan. The application was initiated by Palm Canyon 102, L.P. to allow residential
land uses at a site located at 850 and 990 South Palm Canyon Drive; Zone C-1, Section 32 /T4
/ R4; APN 508-172-005, 508-172-006, and 508-172-007; however, the Commission's
recommendation would apply city-wide to all properties designation R-C in the General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared
for this project under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will
be reviewed by the City Council at the hearing. Members of the public may view this document
at the Planning Services Department, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs,
and submit written comments at, or prior to, the City Council hearing.
(REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff report and other supporting documents
regarding this project are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at (760)
:323-8204 if you would like to schedule an appointment to review these documents.
COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the
Public Hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City
Council by letter (for mail or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City Clerk
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Any challenge of the proposed general plan amendment 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 Craig A. Ewing, AICP at (760) 323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar
con Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245.
?mes�_Thompson, City Clerk
c)< '42
3,24.2. Encourage and accommodate the development of specialty (boutiques, gift shops, etc.), arts-related
(galleries, print shops, bookstores, etc.), restaurant and entertainment, interior decorators, architects and
other designers, and similar uses.
3.24.3. Accommodate housing units on the second level or higher or to the rear of building, provided the impact
of noise, odor and other adverse characteristics of commercial activity can be adequately mitigated, and
a healthy, safe and well-designed environment is achieved for the residential units. Provide opportunities
for artists to have studios in concert with residential units.
3.24.4. Investigate the development of a parking district to encourage higher-density re-use of appropriate
properties with such uses as offices and restaurants.
3.24.5. Encourage cooperative advertising and promotion of the area.
3 24.6. Encourage the outdoor display of art objects.
324,7. Encourage the development of quality outdoor dining facilities.
3.24.8. Establish a unified landscape and/or banner theme for the area.
3.24.9. Provide pedestrian linkage with the medical/hospital-related uses to the immediate north, especially to the
restaurants.
3/3/93 I 6 5 43