Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-01-18 STAFF REPORTS 1C p p`M Spy iy c V N � x H * ro1AO,ATkO,k M t/FoB�N CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 18, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: THE MURANO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 33393, SUBDIVIDING AN APPROXIMATELY 20-ACRE PARCEL INTO 57 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN AN R-1-C ZONED DISTRICT FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Department of Planning Services SUMMARY The City Council will consider a proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 33933 (Murano) by Avenida Caballeros/San Rafael, LLC, along with the environmental assessment and mitigated negative declaration for the project. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Open the public hearing and receive public testimony. 2. Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33393, THEREBY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33393, AND DIRECTING STAFF TO FILE THE ASSOCIATED NOTICE OF DETERMINATION FOR THE 57 SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, ON AN APPROXIMATELY 20-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF AVENIDA CABALLEROS, BETWEEN EAST FRANCIS DRIVE AND SAN RAFAEL DRIVE, SUBJECT TO THE ATTACHED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT A" STAFF ANALYSIS: I On December 14, 2005, the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission which adopted a favorable recommendation to City Council (by a vote of 5-0-2). The proposed tentative tract map is a request for the creation of fifty seven new single- family residential lots within an R-1-C zoning designation. The subject property is an I Item No. 1 . n . I I i j City Council Staff Report January 18, 2006 -- Page 2 TTM 33933 approximately 20-acre, relatively flat vacant parcel located at the east side of Avenida Caballeros between San Rafael Drive to the north and Francis Drive to the south. The primary access into the tract will be from four private cul-de-sacs along Avenida Caballeros, There are no existing streets improvements around the subject property, however all the proposed streets and access within and around the site are designed to meet the City's standards. The General Plan designation of the site is L-4 (low density residential), and the zoning designation is R-1-C (single-family residential). The R-1-C district allows up to a maximum of four dwelling units per net acre with a minimum lot size requirement of 10,000 square feet, with a minimum lot width and minimum lot depth of hundred (100) feet. The proposed jot sizes will range from 10,339 to 16,960 square feet. The proposed density is approximately three units per net acre, which is well below the maximum density of four units per net allowed within the R-1-C district. The proposal complies with the L-4 density, and the lots are consistent with the requirements of the zoning district in terms of lot sizes, depth and width. Table 1: Comparison of the R-1-C development standards and proposed subdivision R-1-C Standards Proposed Subdivision Minimum lot size 10,000 square feet 10,339-16,960 square feet Minimum lot Width 100 feet 100 feet Minimum jot depth 100 feet 100 feet Setbacks: Front Yard 25 feet 25 feet Side Yard 10 feet 10 feet Rear Yard 15 feet 15 feet Maximum Lot Coverage 35 Percent 35 Percent Density (per Gross Acre 4 DU /Ac. per Gen'I Plan Approximately 2.9 DU /Ac. A more detailed analysis can be seen in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated December 14, 2005. Findings in support of approving the proposed subdivision are included in the attached draft resolution of approval. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, an Initial Study was conducted for the proposed project. That study concluded that with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures, any potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from this project will be reduced to a level of insignificance, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be adopted for the project. The mitigation measures are included in the conditions of approval attached as Exhibit A to the draft resolution of ap Foval. t,/ FISCAL IMPACT: IFinance Director Review: No fiscal impact. i I I I City Council Staff Report January 18, 2006 -- Page 3 TTM 33933 Craig-~ ,-EWin `AI�P Thomas Wil Assistant City Manager Director of Pla�inInn Services David H. Ready, City Ma 'pager Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2, Draft Resolution and Conditions of Approval 3. Tentative Tract Map 33933 4. Planning Commission Staff report dated 12/28/05 5. Copy of Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration L I I ' Department of Planning Services uv N E Vicinity Map J W Er m Q ULz C Z a z w 7 SAN RAFAEL RD SAN RAFAEL RD D � a SUNFLOWER CIRCLE N U W U E Site w J �i'1 m 0 LI L U o � z SUNFLOWER CIRCLE S LIJ SUNDANCE CIRCLES FRANCIS DR 0 m SUNAIR RD /�06E WY O UJ W JANET CIR 4 LUNA WY yQ U F O U F � GRACE C1R ¢ GEM CIR I I ) I I I � � fL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: TTM 33933 DESCRIPTION: Application to subdivide an approxi- mately 19.95 acre parcel into 57 single-family residential APPLICANT: Murano Residential Project lots located East of Avenida Caballeros, between San PS Avenida Caballeros/ Rafael and Francis Drive, Zoned R-1-C, Section 2. APN: San Rafael LLC 501-020-016. i RESOLUTION NO. I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND THEREBY APPROVING f TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33933, A PROPOSAL FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 20-ACRE PARCEL INTO 57 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF AVENIDA CABALLEROS BETWEEN EAST FRANCIS DRIVE AND SAN RAFAEL DRIVE. WHEREAS, PS Avenida Caballeros/San Rafael, LLC, (the "Applicant') has filed an application with the City pursuant to Section 9.62.010 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, for Tentative Tract Map 33933; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered a "project' pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and an Environmental Assessment has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review and comments in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider Tentative Tract Map 33933 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on December 28, 2005, a public hearing on the application for the project was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66412.3, the Planning Commission has independently considered the effect of the proposed subdivision, Tentative Tract Map 33933, on the housing needs of the region in which Palm springs is situated and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meeting on the project, including but not limited to the staff report, all environmental data including the environmental assessment prepared for the project and all written and oral testimony presented; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the appropriate findings could be made, and recommended that the City Council adopt the draft mitigated negative declaration, thereby approving the project; and WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map 33933 is subject to the approval of the City Council; and HAWSERS\EdwardR\TrM 33933-Murrano=Mumno Reso doc Resolution No. Page 2 of 4 WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider Tentative Tract Map 33933 was give in accordance with applicable law; and I WHEREAS, on January 18, 2006, a public hearing on the application for the project was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City Council has considered the effect of the proposed project on the housing needs of the region, j and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of residents and available fiscal and environmental resources; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meeting on the project, including but not limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The City Council finds that with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures, potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from this project will be reduced to a level of insignificance and therefore recommends the adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. The City Council has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the MND prior to its review of this Project and the MND reflects the City Council's independent judgment and analysis. Section 2: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 (Subdivision Map Act), the City Council finds that with the incorporation of those conditions attached in Exhibit A: a. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans. The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with the goals and objective of the L-4 (Low Density Residential), General Plan designation which governs the subject property as well as all property adjacent to the subject site. The applicant is proposing fifty seven lots on an approximately 20-acre parcel; this proposal is within the density parameters of the General Plan. b. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map are consistent with the zone in which the property is located. HAOSERS\EdwardR\TTM 33933-Murrano\CG Murano Reso.doc Resolution No. Page 3 of 4 The proposed project is consistent with the zoning designation of R-1-C, which allows the development of single-family residence at the proposed location. The proposed subdivision and the provision for its design and improvements comply with the applicable development standards for streets and lot design. c. The site is physically suited for this type of development IThe project site is relatively flat and each lot contains adequate developable I building area. There are no known bodies of water, ravines, or significant topographic features on the subject property. d. The site is physically suited for the proposed density of development. I The General Plan Designation of L-4 establishes a threshold density of 3 dwelling units per acre and a maximum of four dwelling units per acre. The proposed density of approximately 3 dwelling units per net acre is within the allowable range of density. Thus the site is physically suited for the number of proposed number of lots, and the density of the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. e. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or their habitat. The Environmental Initial Study prepared for the site determined that the project is adjacent to existing residential uses to the southern, northern and easterly portions of the location. With the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, any environmental impacts affecting animals or plants will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. There are no known bodies of water on the subject property and therefore no fish, wildlife or their habitat will be disturbed. f. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the proposed subdivision includes the provision of public water and sewer systems, a drainage design that protects home sites while providing water quality basins, and a street system which is consistent with City Standards. g. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. There are no known public easements across the subject property; therefore, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any public easements for access HAUSERS\EdwardR\TM 33933-Murrano\CC Mureno Reso.doc Resolution No. Page 4 of 4 through or use of the property. The applicant is required to dedicate necessary I easements for public access and circulation in and around the new subdivision. Section 3: The City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map 33933, and directs staff to file the associated Notice of Determination. Section 4: The City Council approves Tentative Tract Map 33933. ADOPTED this 18t' day of January, 2006. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: David H. Ready, City Manager ATTEST: James Thompson, City Clerk H1USERS\EdwardR\TTM 33933-Murrano\CC Murano Reso doc EXHIBIT A CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33933 i APN: 501-020-016 East Side of Avenida Caballeros & San Rafael Road Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning Services, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition. Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. Administrative 1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations. 2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action,or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside,void or annul, an approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative officers concerning Tentative Tract Map 33933. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter or pay the City's associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgment or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, parkways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition,free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and agencies having jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be included in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City. i 4. This project shall be subject to Chapters 2.24 and 3.37 of the Municipal Code regarding public art.The project shall either provide public art or payment of an in lieu fee. In the case of the in-lieu fee,the fee shall be based upon the total building permit valuation as calculated pursuant to the valuation table in the Uniform Building Code, the fee being 1/2% for commercial or industrial projects, 1/4% for new residential subdivisions, or 1/4%for new individual single-family residential units constructed on a lot located in an existing subdivision with first $100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be located on the project site, said location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning Services and the Public Arts Commission, and the property owner shall enter into a recorded agreement to maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing. 5. Pursuant to Park Fee Ordinance No. 1632 and in accordance with Government Code Section 66477 (Quimby Act), all residential development shall be required to contribute to mitigate park and recreation impacts such that, prior to issuance of residential building permits, a parkland fee or dedication shall be made. Accordingly, all residential development shall be subject to parkland dedication requirements and/or park improvement fees. The parkland mitigation amount shall be based upon the cost to acquire and fully improve parkland. The applicant shall submit a property appraisal to the Planning Services Department for the purposes of calculating the Park Fee. The Park Fee payment and/or parkland dedication shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. (Environmental Assessment R. The mitigation measures of the environmental assessment shall apply. The applicant shall submit a signed agreement that the mitigation measures outlined as part of the mitigated negative declaration will be included in the Planning Commission consideration of the environmental assessment. Mitigation measures are as follows: MM III-1 Earth-moving activities shall be suspended during the first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 MPH, per the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan and SCAQMD Rule 403.1. MM III-2 Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction-generated dust particulates. Portions of the project site that are undergoing earth moving operations shall be watered such that a crust will be formed on the ground surface and then watered again at the end of the day, as part of the construction specifications, MM III-3 Any construction access roads should be paved as soon as possible and cleaned after each workday. The maximum vehicle speed limit on unpaved road surfaces shall be 15 MPH. MM III-4 All trucks should maintain at least two feet of freeboard. MM 111-5 All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose dirt material off-site should be covered and washed off before leaving the site. MM III-6 Adjacent streets should be swept if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares. MM III-7 As part of the construction specifications, any vegetative ground coverto be i utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the disturbed I area subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plants shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and j minimize wind erosion of the soil. MM III-8 Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for j off-peak traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through-traffic lames. I 7. The developer shall reimburse the City for the City's costs incurred in monitoring the developer's compliance with the conditions of approval and mitigation monitoring program, including, but not limited to inspections and review of developers operations and activities for compliance with all applicable dust and noise operations, and cultural resource mitigation. This condition of approval is supplemental and in addition to normal building permit and public improvement permits that may be required pursuant to the Palm Springs Municipal Code. CC&R's 8. The applicant prior to issuance of building permits shall submit three (3) sets of a draft declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC&R's")to the Director of Planning Services for approval in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to certificate of occupancy. The CC&Rs shall be submitted with a list of the adopted conditions of approval and an indication of where applicable conditions are addressed in the CC&Rs. The CC&R's shall be enforceable by the City, shall not be amended without City approval, shall require maintenance of all property in a good condition and in accordance with all ordinances. 9. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Springs, a deposit in the amount of $2000, for the review of the CC&R's by the City Attorney.A filing fee, in accordance with the fee schedule adopted by the City Council, shall also be paid to the City Planning Services Department for administrative review purposes. Public Safety CFD 10. The Project will bring a significant number of additional residents to the community. The City's existing public safety and recreation services, including police protection, criminal justice, fire protection and suppression, ambulance, paramedic, and other safety services and recreation, library, cultural services are near capacity. Accordingly,the City may determine to form a Community Services District under the authority of Government Code Section 53311 et seq, or other appropriate statutory or municipal authority. Developer agrees to support the formation of such assessment district and shall waive any right to protest, provided that the amount of such assessment shall be established through appropriate study and shall not exceed$500 annually with a consumer price index escalator. The district shall be formed prior to sale of any lots or a covenant agreement shall be recorded against each parcel, permitting incorporation of the parcel in the district. i i ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The Engineering Division recommends that if this application is approved, such approval is subject to the following conditions being completed in compliance with City standards and ordinances. Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. STREETS 1. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. 2. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a registered California civil engineer to the Engineering Division. The plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits. AVENIDA CABALLEROS 3. Dedicate abutters rights of access to Avenida Caballeros adjacent to Lots 6, 17, 18, 29, 30, 41, 42 56 and 57; vehicular access to Avenida Caballeros shall be prohibited. 4. Remove the existing driveway approach across from the existing Sundance Tract entry and construct new curb and gutter to match existing improvements, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. 15. Remove the existing 8 inch curb and gutter located 32 east of centerline as necessary to construct the on-site private street intersections; and construct 25 feet radius curb returns, spandrels, and 6 feet wide cross-gutters at each intersection of the on-site private streets with Avenida Caballeros, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200 and 206. 6. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 7. Construct a Type A curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at the southeast corner of the intersection of Avenida Caballeros and San Rafael Drive, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 212. 8. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced. SAN RAFAEL DRIVE 9. Dedicate the ultimate half street right-of-way width of 44 feet along the entire frontage, together with a property line - corner cut-back at the northwest corner of the subject property, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 105. 10. Dedicate abutters rights of access to San Rafael Drive adjacent to Lots 49 through 56; vehicular access to San Rafael Drive shall be prohibited. 11. Remove the existing asphalt concrete berm and replace with an 8 inch curb and gutter located 32 feet south of centerline along the entire frontage, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. I 12. Remove the existing asphalt concrete sidewalk and construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 13. Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 3 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire San Rafael Drive frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 330, If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnica! Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. FRANCIS DRIVE 14. Dedicate the ultimate half street right-of-way width of 30 feet along the entire frontage of the subject property. 15. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter, 20 feet north of centerline along the entire frontage, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. '16. Construct driveway approaches for Lots 1 through 5 in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. The driveway access to Lot 1 shall be located on the west side of Lot 1, as far as possible from the Francis Drive and Aurora Drive intersection. '17. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 18. Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 3 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire Francis Drive frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 330. If an alternative pavement section is proposed,the proposed pavement section shall be 5 designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. 19. Neighborhood traffic calming improvements shall be constructed on Francis Drive at I Aurora Drive. The travel way shall be narrowed with curb "pop-outs" located on both sides of Francis Drive. Remove and reconstruct the existing curb return and spandrel at the southwest corner of Francis Drive and Aurora Drive with the new face of curb located 14 feet south of centerline, with an appropriate taper to match j the existing curb and gutter. Construct a complementary curb "pop-out"adjacent to Lot 1 and opposite the reconstructed curb return at the southwest corner of Francis Drive and Aurora Drive, with the new face of curb located 14 feet north of centerline. Stamped, colored concrete shall be constructed within the curb "pop-outs". Other traffic calming improvements may be required, including neighborhood identification signage, in consultation with the neighborhood group and as determined by the City Engineer. Final engineering and other details associated with the traffic calming improvements shall be subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer. AZURE COURT, ENAMOR COURT, LUCENT COURT, & SOLACE COURT (ON-SITE PRIVATE STREETS) 20. Dedicate easements for public utility purposes, including sewers, with the right of ingress and egress for service and emergency vehicles and personnel over the proposed private streets. 21. Easements for on-site private streets to be considered as part of the common space to be maintained by a Homeowner's Association shall be dedicated and/or reserved on the final map. 22. All on-site private streets shall be two-way and a minimum of 26 feet wide (as measured from curb face). Tree wells, if constructed, shall be staggered on each side of the street to provide a minimum 20 feet wide travel way at any one tree well. 23. All on-site streets shall be constructed with concrete wedge curbs to accept and convey on-site stormwater runoff to the on-site storm drain system, in accordance with applicable City Standards. 24. All on-site cul-de-sacs shall be constructed in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 101. Construct all cul-de-sacs with a minimum face of curb radius of 43 feet throughout the cul-de-sac bulb. 25. Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 2'/2 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal. If an alternative pavement section is proposed,the proposed pavement section shall be designed by 6 a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using"R"values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. 26. Parking shall be restricted along both sides of the on-site private streets, as necessary to maintain a minimum 24 feet wide clear two-way travel way. Regulatory Type R26 "No Parking" signs or red curb shall be installed along the private streets as necessary to enforce parking restrictions. The Home Owners Association (HOA) shall be responsible for regulating and maintaining required no parking restrictions, which shall be included in Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for the development. SANITARY SEWER 27. All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. New sewer laterals shall not be connected to existing sewer manholes. 28. Submit sewer improvement plans prepared by a California registered civil engineer to the Engineering Division. The plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits. 29. Dedicate a 20 feet wide easement for sewer purposes,adjacent to the westerly side and across Lots 1, 11, 12, 23, 24, 35, 36, and 47. 30. Construct an 8 inch V.C.P. sewer main across the frontages of the on-site private streets and extending from Azure Court to Francis Drive. The 8 inch V.C.P. sewer main shall extend within the center of the 20 feet wide sewer easement across Lots 1, 11, 12, 23, 24, 35, 36, and 47. 31. The easement shall be kept clear and free of any and all obstructions to allow for the continued operation and maintenance of the public sewer main within the easement. Construction of permanent structures, swimming pools and equipment, or other improvements determined to be an obstruction of the public sewer easement shall not be allowed. Planting of large trees or other planting material with invasive or deep root structures shall be restricted. Access to the public sewer easement from Francis Drive and the on-site private streets shall be maintained, including, if necessary, 15 feet wide gates with lock and access provided to the City of Palm Springs. 32. Provisions for maintenance of the public sewer easement, acceptable to the City Engineer, shall be included in the Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for this development. Notice shall be clearly included in the CC&R's defining the restrictions of development within the easement across Lots 1, 11, 12, 23, 24, 35, 36, and 47. The CC&R's shall advise the property owners of the City's right to enter the properties, clear and remove any and all obstructions within the easement, and give the City right to charge all costs incurred in enforcing this 7 provision to the owners of Lots 1, 11, 12, 23, 24, 35, 36, and 47. The CC&R's shall also advise the property owners of the fact that the City is not required to replace in like kind any landscaping or other improvements within the public sewer easement in the event repair or replacement of the existing sewer main is required, and that the City shall be limited to leaving the property in a rough graded condition following i any such repair or replacement. 33. All sewer mains constructed by the applicant and to become part of the public sewer system shall be televised prior to acceptance of the sewer system for maintenance I by the City. GRADING 34. Submit a Grading Plan prepared by a California registered civil engineer to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The plan shall show building set- backs, drainage swales with 1% minimum slope, high points of swales, and permanent individual retention basin locations on each lot. House footprints do not need to be shown on the plan. The combination Grading Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. a. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and/or its grading contractor and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall be required to comply with Chapter 8.50 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, and shall be required to utilize one or more "Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures" as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook for each fugitive dust source such that the applicable performance standards are met. The applicant's or its contractor's Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by staff that has completed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall provide the Engineering Division with current and valid Certificate(s)of Completion from AQMD for staff that have completed the required training. For information on attending a Fugitive Dust Control Class and information on the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook and related "PM10" Dust Control issues, please contact AQMD at (909) 396-3752, or at www.AQMD.gov. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan, in conformance with the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook, shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Division prior to approval of the Grading Plan. b. The first submittal of the combination Grading Plan shall include the following information; a copy of final approved conformed copy of Conditions of Approval; a copy of a final approved conformed copy of the Tentative Tract Map; a copy of current Title Report; a copy of Soils Report; and a copy of the associated Hydrology Study/Report. 8 35. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters. 36. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit, issued from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Phone No. 760- 346-7491) is required for the proposed development.A copy of the executed permit shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to approval of a Grading Plan. 37. In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.025 (c), the applicant shall post with the City a cash bond of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) per disturbed acre for mitigation measures for erosion/blowsand relating to this property and development. 38. A soils report prepared by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer shall be required for and incorporated as an integral part of the grading plan for the proposed development. A copy of the soils report shall be submitted to the Building Department and to the Engineering Division prior to approval of the Grading Plan. 39. In cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the California Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project, applicants for grading permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of soil will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved "Notification of Intent To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties" (RIFA Form CA-1) prior to approval of the Grading Plan (if required). The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at 73- 710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert (Phone: 760-776-8208). DRAINAGE 40, All stormwater runoff passing through the site shall be accepted and conveyed across the property in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. For all stormwater runoff falling on the site, individual on-site retention basins on each lot or other facilities approved by the City Engineer shall be required to contain the increased stormwater runoff generated by the development of the property, as described in the Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Report for Murano, prepared by The Keith Companies, as revised on November 7, 2005. Final retention basin sizing, catch basin sizing, storm drain pipe sizing, drywell sizing, and other specifications for construction of required on-site storm drainage improvements shall be finalized in the final hydrology study and approved by the City Engineer. 41. Stormwater runoff may not be released directly to the adjacent streets without first intercepting and treating with approved Best Management Practices (BMP's). 9 42. The applicant shall install a series of drywells, within the 5 feet wide private storm drain easements extending east from each of the on-site private streets and extending south along the east property line of the development from Azure Court to Francis Drive, as necessary to intercept stormwater runoff, including nuisance water, from the tributary area within the development. The drywells shall be appropriately sized to accommodate the expected daily nuisance water, as well as runoff from ordinary storm events (2-year storm events) using a maximum 2 inch per hour percolation rate, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Provisions shall be included in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's)for this development that require the routine maintenance of the drywells by the Home Owners Association (HOA), including the right of the City to inspect and require the HOA to remove and replace the drywells if they fail to function, causing stagnant water to accumulate above ground within the basin.The City shall be given the right, in the interest of the public's health, safety, and welfare, to order the removal and replacement of drywells in the event the HOA is non-responsive to the City's written notice, with costs to be recovered against the HOA by the City in accordance with state and local laws and regulations. In no event shall on-site stormwater runoff be released directly to Francis Drive without interception on-site by the private storm drain and drywell system. 43. Storm drain easements shall be reserved across the 5 feet wide private storm drain easements extending east from Azure Court, Enamor Court, Lucent Court and Solace Court, adjacent to the north property lines of Lots 11, 23, 35, and 47 and extending south adjacent to the east property lines of Lots 1, 11, 12, 23, 24, 35, 36, and 47, to Francis Drive. 44. Submit storm drain improvement plans for all on-site storm drainage system facilities for review and approval by the City Engineer. 45. Construct drainage improvements, including but not limited to catch basins, storm drain lines, and drywells for drainage of on-site streets as described in the Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Report for Murano, prepared by The Keith Companies, as revised on November 7, 2005. Final retention basin sizing, catch basin sizing, storm drain pipe sizing, drywell sizing, and other specifications for construction of required on-site storm drainage improvements shall be finalized in the final hydrology study and approved by the City Engineer. 46. The on-site storm drainage improvements shall be privately maintained by a Home Owners Association (HOA). Provisions for maintenance of the on-site storm drainage improvements acceptable to the City Engineer shall be included in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for this project. 47. Individual retention basins on each lot shall be identified on exhibits included in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for this project. Provisions shall be included in the CC&R's requiring the preservation in perpetuity of the individual retention basins for use as on-site stormwater retention basins. 10 Notice shall be given to the property owners within the development that the stormwater retention volume of the individual retention basins shall be maintained. The City shall be given the right, in the interest of the public's health, safety, and welfare, to order the reconstruction of individual retention basins in the event that property owners are non-responsive to the City's written notice to reconstruct their individual retention basin, with costs to be recovered against the property owner by the City in accordance with state and local laws and regulations. 48. The project is subject to flood control and drainage implementation fees. The acreage drainage fee at the present time is $6,511 per acre per Resolution No. 15189. Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. GENERAL 49. Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development shall be backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115. The developer shall be responsible for removing, grinding, paving and/or overlaying existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets as required by and at the discretion of the City Engineer, including additional pavement repairs to pavement repairs made by utility companies for utilities installed for the benefit of the proposed development (i.e. Desert Water Agency, Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, Time Warner, Verizon, etc.). Multiple excavations, trenches, and other street cuts within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development may require complete grinding and asphalt concrete overlay of the affected off-site streets, at the discretion of the City Engineer. The pavement condition of the existing off-site streets shall be returned to a condition equal to or better than existed prior to construction of the proposed development. 50. All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground. 51. All existing utilities shall be shown on the grading/street plans. The existing and proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to the property line. 52. Upon approval of any improvement plan by the City Engineer,the improvement plan shall be provided to the City in digital format, consisting of a DWG (AutoCAD drawing file)and DXF (AutoCAD ASCII drawing exchange file).Variation of the type and format of the digital data to be submitted to the City may be authorized, upon prior approval of the City Engineer. 53, The original improvement plans prepared for the proposed development and approved by the City Engineer shall be documented with record drawing "as-built" information and returned to the Engineering Division priorto issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Any modifications or changes to approved improvement plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to construction. 11 54. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any driveway which does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight i distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section 93.02.00, D. I 55. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904. MAP 56. A Final Map shall be prepared by a California registered Land Surveyor or qualified Civil Engineer and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval.A Title Report prepared for subdivision guarantee for the subject property,the traverse closures for the existing parcel and all lots created therefrom, and copies of record documents shall be submitted with the Final Map to the Engineering Division as part of the review of the Map. The Final Map shall be approved by the City Council prior to issuance of building permits. 57. A copy of draft Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions(CC&R's)shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval for any restrictions related to the Engineering Division's recommendations. The CC&R's shall be provided with the first submittal of the final map, and shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of the Final Map. 58. Upon approval of a final map, the final map shall be provided to the City in G.I.S. digital format, consistent with the"Guidelines for G.I.S. Digital Submission"from the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency." G.I.S. digital information shall consist of the following data: California Coordinate System, CCS83 Zone 6 (in U.S. feet); monuments(ASCII drawing exchange file); lot lines, rights-of- way, and centerlines shown as continuous lines;full map annotation consistent with annotation shown on the map; map number; and map file name. G.I.S. data format shall be provided on a CDROM/DVD containing the following:ArcGIS Geodatabase, ArcView Shapefile, Arclnfo Coverage or Exchange file (e00), DWG (AutoCAD drawing file), DGN (Microstation drawing file), and DXF (AutoCAD ASCII drawing exchange file). Variations of the type and format of G.I.S. digital data to be submitted to the City may be authorized, upon prior approval of the City Engineer. TRAFFIC 59. If not already completed by others, submit traffic striping plans for Avenida Caballeros at San Rafael Drive to provide a southbound left-turn lane, southbound through/right-turn lane, northbound left-turn lane, and northbound through/right-turn lane, prepared by a California registered civil engineer, for review and approval by the City Engineer. 12 60. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of its fair share of 4,05% (or$1,575) of the cost to install traffic striping improvements at the Avenida Caballeros and San Rafael Drive intersection to provide a southbound left-turn lane, southbound through/right-turn lane, additional westbound through lane, northbound left-turn lane, and northbound through/right-turn lane. E31. A minimum of 48 inches of clearance shall be provided on public sidewalks for handicap accessibility. Minimum clearance on public sidewalks shall be provided by either an additional dedication of a sidewalk easement(if necessary)and widening of the sidewalk; or by the relocation of any obstructions within the public sidewalk along the San Rafael Drive,Avenida Caballeros, and Francis Drive frontages of the subject property. 62, All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends, traffic control devices, signing, and striping associated with the proposed development shall be replaced as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. f53. Install a street name sign and a 24 inch stop sign, stop bar, and "STOP" legend at the northeast corner of Avenida Caballeros with Azure Court, Enamor Court, Lucent Court, and Solace Court, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 620 through 625. 64. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects as required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum, all construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with State of California, Department of Transportation, "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones"dated 1996,or subsequent additions in force at the time of construction. 65. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which shall be paid prior to issuance of building permit. POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Developer shall comply with Section II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2. Prior to any construction on-site, all appropriate permits must be secured. FIRE 3. Fire Flow: Fire flow will be estimated once the square footage and type of construction is known. 13 , PIE �iiIiY° tl tll pEplp !(< ptlpE 'ill �p loli YdlFl �► I e� #�i��1l itlel�i'10 6tl;a,gills III EIi' Y O I 44k 1 I M44MMMM44494494gMM444M yii w i 11 ! ! i�� �ptly � ..a� 1 iliii3liiril9ii9lii � YC � � _J (il \ 3 � MMMMM44MMMM44Ykk4Y � it p� iii3si994liiii5ii3 tl ; ---T----- Y Y 11 �e YClPYYYPYYYi44Y\!4Y � I I Y p1�9 zp 5 4M444444444Y4444hkk ! � pyi 11 ! Jr� 5�1 pIS T""'""°' kit 0 Q _t C '! qY Wa, I, 3 g ' In n eY , a p! J Nil _ E Pgg11 1. 4p w i • -�.-+-��pY IL F � � S6—Y6/ILI M y v�I ,19G9/ GW CifY 1JINJ �} �\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\\���,11 I' 1 1 p 4.1 f Y r IL �`� ' SIB o t � ,� � `;1• i � " ' � ,,. !'o $ tl� Iv'e{{ v1-es/eu an I—(99Y1 q/MY 1JYW WR6¢li anz\P6tt ey wJ�e+x�+�+•�rw+i\xmyr\K491\d nw++nFw+�++�uf�K-SWd'ii tlry nauou p a ii I PPALM Sp4 iy I � c u N I I + ry�R10RAiE� R, R iCqtIFO ILO"P Planning Commission Staff Report IDate: December 28, 2005 Case No.: TTM 33933 Application Type: Tentative Tract Map, to subdivide an approximately 20-acre parcel into 57 single-family residential lots Location: East side of Avenida Caballeros between East Francis Drive and San Rafael Drive. Applicant: PS Avenida Caballeros/ San Rafael Drive, LLC Zone: R-1-C (Single Family Residential) General Plan: L-4 (Low Density Residential) APN: APN: 501-020-016 From: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services Project Planner: Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a Tentative Tract Map application (TTM 33933), and is a request by Avenida Caballeros/San Rafael, LLC to subdivide an approximately 20-acre parcel into fifty seven (57) single-family residential lots within an R-1-C zoned area. The residential lots will range in size between 10,339 to 16,960 square feet. The subject property is located along the east side of Avenida Caballeros and San Rafael Drive. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and approval of the proposed tentative tract map to the City Council subject to the attached findings and conditions of approval. Planning Commission Staff Report` December 28,2005 TTM 33933 Page 2 of 5 BACKGROUND AND SETTING: The proposed tentative tract map is a request for the creation of fifty seven new single- family residential lots within an R-1-C zoning designation. The subject property is an approximately 20-acre, relatively flat vacant parcel located at the east side of Avenida Caballeros between San Rafael Drive to the north and Francis Drive to the south. Table 1: Surrounding land uses, General Plan, Zoning Land Use General Plan Zoning North Single Fam Housing CDL-6 PD-210 & PD-216 South Racquet Club L-4 R-1-C East Single Fam Housing L-4 PD-115 West Condominiums L-4 R-1-C ANALYSIS: The General Plan designation of the site is L-4 (low density residential), and the zoning designation is R-1-C (single-family residential). The R-1-C district allows up to a maximum of four dwelling units per net acre with a minimum lot size requirement of 10,000 square feet, with a minimum lot width and minimum lot depth of hundred (100) feet. The proposed lot sizes will range from 10,339 to 16,960 square feet. The proposed density is approximately three units per net acre, which is well below the maximum density of four units per net allowed within the R-1-C district. The proposal complies with the L-4 density, and the lots are consistent with the requirements of the zoning district in terms of lot sizes, depth and width. The primary access into the tract will be from four private cul-de-sacs along Avenida Caballeros. There are no existing streets improvements around the subject property, however all the proposed streets and access within and around the site are designed to meet the City's standards. There are six flag lots (lots 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, & 56) being proposed at the northerly section of the tract. Vehicular access into these lots from San Rafael Drive is not permitted. Therefore vehicular access into the affected lots will be provided through the proposed private streets; pedestrian access would be provided into these lots through San Rafael Drive. The applicant is proposing twenty five (25) feet wide driveways into the flag lots; the minimum driveway width required by the City is twenty four (24) feet. Currently, the applicant is not proposing any single-family residential development within the subdivision. The future housing units will have to comply with the uses and development standards as outlined within the R-1-C zone when proposed. Also, there are no perimeter walls or fences being proposed at this time; the height of any future 2 Planning Commission Staff Report December 28,2005 TTM 33933 Page 3 of 5 walls or fences must comply with the required standards for single-family residential uses. REQUIRED FINDINGS Findings are required for the proposed subdivision pursuant to Section 66474 of the Subdivision Map Act. These findings and a discussion of the project as it relates to these findings follow: a. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans. The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with the goals and objective of the L-4 (Low Density Residential), General Plan designation which governs the subject property as well as all property adjacent to the subject site. The applicant is proposing fifty seven lots on an approximately 20-acre parcel; this proposal is within the density parameters of the General Plan. b. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map are consistent with the zone in which the property is located. The proposed project is consistent with the zoning designation of R-1-C, which allows the development of single-family residence at the proposed location. The proposed subdivision and the provision for its design and improvements comply with the applicable development standards for streets and lot design. c. The site is physically suited for this type of development The project site is relatively flat and each lot contains adequate developable building area. There are no known bodies of water, ravines, or significant topographic features on the subject property. d. The site is physically suited for the proposed density of development. The General Plan Designation of L-4 establishes a threshold density of 3 dwelling units per acre and a maximum of four dwelling units per acre. The proposed density of approximately 3 dwelling units per net acre is within the allowable range of density. Thus the site is physically suited for the number of proposed number of lots, and the density of the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. e. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or their habitat. The Environmental Initial Study prepared for the site determined that the project is adjacent to existing residential uses to the southern and easterly portions of 3 i Planning Commission Staff Report ' December 28,2005 i TTM 33933 Page 4 of 5 I the location. With the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, any environmental impacts affecting animals or plan will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. As stated earlier, there are no known bodies of water on the subject property and therefore no fish will be disturbed. f. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the proposed subdivision includes the provision of public water and sewer systems, a drainage design that protects home sites while providing water quality basins, and a street system which is consistent with City Standards. g. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. There are no known public easements across the subject property; therefore, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any public easements for access through or use of the property. The applicant is required to dedicate necessary easements for public access and circulation in and around the new subdivision. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared and a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was sent to applicable agencies and published on December 5, 2005, in the Desert Sun for a 20-day review period ending December 27, 2005. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached to this report. The Mitigated Negative Declaration found the environmental impacts of the proposed project to be less than significant with the following mitigations: Mitigation Measures: MM III-1 Earth-moving activities shall be suspended during the first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 MPH, per the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan and SCAQMD Rule 403.1. MM III-2 Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction-generated dust particulates. Portions of the project site that are undergoing earth moving operations shall be watered such that a crust will be formed on the ground surface and then watered again at the end of the day, as part of the construction specifications, MM III-3 Any construction access roads should be paved as soon as possible and cleaned after each workday. The maximum vehicle speed limit on unpaved road surfaces shall be 15 MPH. 4 ' Planning Commission Staff Report December 28,2005 TTM 33933 Page 5 of 5 MM III4 All trucks should maintain at least two feet of freeboard. MM III-5 All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose dirt material off-site should be covered and washed off before leaving the site. MM III-6 Adjacent streets should be swept if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares. MM III-7 As part of the construction specifications, any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the disturbed area subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plants shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and minimize wind erosion of the soil. MM III-8 Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for off-peak traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through-traffic lames. NOTIFICATION A public hearing notice was advertised and was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject property owners. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any public comments regarding this project. E and R on 41cf ng, Al Principal Planner lann' g rvices ATTACHMENTS 'I. Vicinity Map 2. Reduce copy of TTM 33933 3. Mitigated Negative Declaration 4. Draft Resolution / Conditions of Approval 5 l MURANO RESIDcJTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDYWITIGATED NEGArrVE DECLARATION Murano Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration FQALMSA A. Prepared by RPORAtEO The City of Palm Springs C'441 FO RON November 2005 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/n.+lIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project title: Murano Residential Project, Case No. TTM 33933 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Palm Springs 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 3. Contact person and phone number: Edward O. Robertson Principal Planner (760) 323-8245 4. Project location: East of Avenida Caballeros, between East San Rafael Drive and Francis Drive, Palm Springs, CA 92262 (APN 501-020-016), Section 2,T4S, R4E 5. Project sponsor's name and address: PS Avenida Caballeros/San Rafael, LLC 2121 East Tahquitz Canyon Way,Suite 1 Palm Springs, CA 92264 6. General plan designation: L4 (Low Density Residential) 7. Zoning: The proposed project site is subject to the following zoning designations: R-1-C (Single-Family Residential Zone) The R-1-C zone provides standards that have been established to provide a variety of low- density housing types and neighborhoods with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Development standards are designed to provide protection and enhancement of the natural and urban setting consistent with the goals of the general plan. In accordance with the Palm Springs Zoning Code, Chapter 92.01.03, the proposed project consists of 57 single- family residential lots ranging from 10,300 square feet to 16,400 square feet, which are allowable uses for the R-1-C zoning designation. E. Description of project: The project applicant has proposed to develop 57 single-family residential units on lots ranging from 10,400 square feet to 16,400 square feet on a approximately 19.95 acre site. The proposed project site is located east of Avenida Caballeros, between East San Rafael Drive and Francis Drive, and is currently designated for low-density residential land uses (L-4), and also zoned for single-family residential uses (R-1-C). The site consists of a currently Murano Residential Project, Initial Study7Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-2 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STUDYIIVJTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I undeveloped, disturbed vacant lot that is bisected by foot trails, surrounded by sparse desert vegetation, and has been used for illegal dumping. The proposed project would construct a new internal street system for the 57 single-family 1 residences. Project access would be from the east side of Avenida Caballeros via four cul- de-sacs that result in four "tee" intersections between East San Rafael Drive and Francis Drive. Five of the fifty-seven proposed residential dwelling units will have direct residential frontage on the north side of Francis Drive. The project would include the development of wet and dry utilities, and individual (lot by loft) retention ponds. The project would also include new utility connections to existing gas, water, sewer, and electricity service lines. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting; (briefly describe the project's surroundings: North-Existing Residential R-1-C zoned South-Existing Residential R-1-C zoned East-Existing Residential R-1-Czoned West- Existing Residential R-1-C zoned 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement). Palm Springs Fire Department Palm Springs Building Inspector Riverside County Environmental Health Department Palm Springs Police Department Desert Water Agency Palm Springs Disposal Service Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-3 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Figure 1: Project Vicinity Map N ... _,, W E "^� S 'e :♦ z 'o • w♦ �e :e F SAN RAFAEL D I SAN RAFAEL RD Q w r z w R CQUET CLU RD � z m H-111 o VISTACHINO w ACHEVAH D N w J J < ALEJO I'D O Murano Residential Project initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-4 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STU DY&u fIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIGURE 2: PROJECT LOCATION MAP N W+E w It 4 z O a � — z o a = z a SAN RAFAEL DR SAN RAFAEL DR OAML44tiP � �r SUNFLOWER CIRCLE N J CARNATION ST v z U POPPY ST Site W H— jam o LILT YST O z W SUNFLOWER CIRCLE S DAISY ST m - Q FRANCISS DR (� W SUNAIR RD _ ¢ ADOBE WY ADOBE WY � Q H JANET C1R Y O LUNA WY Z W ¢ o w U r 0) 4 GRACE C1R 4 4 0 Q Ui S I W a GARDEN RD PA A WY = PADUA WY RACQUEF CLUES RD = R Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-5 -MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY)MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 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. I I I ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality I 1 ❑ Biological Resources I Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning i ❑ Mineral Resources Noise I ❑ ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-6 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/AyTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 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 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 I ® project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I 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. k k124 Ds rai . Ew ng, Ad Dat Dir ct En Wing ervices Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-7 • F f MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPLICATION CERTIFICATION: I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Signature Date Print name and title Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-8 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STUDY/MI IGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I 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 I 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" entries when the determination is made, an FIR 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 FIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier FIR 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 that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 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 Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November2005 1.0-9 4 • f J MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. I 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. I 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and I b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. I I I Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-10 L MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION L@ss'Th'an ' ", -Significant s Potentially With Less Tban Significant, "Aitigatioq( - Significant- ' IAnpacl _In@a7gorated „ '.IFripact, No Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ El vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock ❑ El Eloutcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime ❑ ❑ ® ❑ views in the area? a-c) No Impact. The proposed project would be located on a vacant piece of land in an area that is relatively flat and developed. There are no scenic vistas, resources, or state scenic highways in the project area. The area surrounding the proposed project site contains residential developments. The proposed project would conform to the surrounding uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to scenic resources, vistas, or degrade the visual quality of the site or surrounding areas. d) Less than Significant. The project proposes to build a 57 single-family residential subdivision. Any proposed lighting would be required to comply with Section 93.21.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the creation a substantial new source of light or glare to the area. Murano Residential Project, initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-11 'k MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STUDY/ryut (GATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION .; ..,. , ' Less:Than . - 1 �- Significant - Patertti 11 With Less Than 1 Significant: Mitigation Significant r _ Impacts . _Incorporated :Irnpaet No Impact- I 11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are i 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? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or ❑ ❑ ❑ nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? a-c) No Impact. The proposed project is on a vacant piece of land found to have agriculturally poor soil and would not be located on Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The proposed project site is not subject to a Williamson Act Contract; therefore, the proposed uses would not conflict with agricultural zoning or other agricultural regulations. There is no farmland or agricultural land in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project site. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-12 MURANo RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/kii I IGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION i 1 i Less Than Significant I ,. PotenCially 6Vith ';'JessTlwn Significant hon ' rSignifcant i Inipacf. ,Incorporated �; .. Iri1pact No.lmpad III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality I management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following I determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ i applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute El ❑ ® 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 El El 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-b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Salton Sea Air Basin, which has been designated by the California Air Resources Board as "nonattainment, for ozone and PM10". The project is within the jurisdiction of the South County Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Development of the proposed project site would be governed by the 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the 2002 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVPM10 SIP), which manages air quality in the area. The AQMP evaluated air quality impacts based upon the anticipated growth under the City's General Plan. According to the air quality study prepared by Endo Engineering (2005), the proposed project includes conforming uses on the project site; therefore it is consistent with the population and employment growth projections that form the basis of the AQMP and the Regional Growth Management Plan. Short-term impacts on air quality would occur during the construction activities. The proposed project is not projected to exceed the SCAQMD daily construction emissions threshold of significance. Therefore, the project shall not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2003 AQMP. This impact is considered less than significant. c) Less Than Significant With Mitigation Required. The air quality study (Endo Engineering, 2005) found that cumulative construction emissions generated over the short term, and operational emissions generated over the long term by the proposed project, in conjunction with other developments in the Coachella Valley may exceed the SCAQMD emissions significance threshold criteria. Adherence to the SCAQMD "Rules and Regulations" and compliance with locally adopted AQMP and PM10 SIP control measures would reduce the pollutant burden of each cumulative project. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be submitted to the City of Palm Springs for approval in conjunction with the application for grading permits associated with the project and prior to initiating any earth-moving operations on-site. The following mitigation measures are recommended for incorporation in the project to reduce the potential for potential adverse air quality impacts during construction. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-13 I J/ "MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MfTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I Mitigation Measures i MM 111-1 Earth-moving activities shall be suspended during the first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 MPH, per the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan and SCAQMD Rule 403.1. MM III-2 Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction-generated dust particulates. Portions of the project site that are undergoing earth moving operations shall be watered such that a crust will be formed on the ground surface and then watered again at the end of the day, as part of the construction specifications, MM 111.3 Any construction access roads should be paved as soon as possible and cleaned after each workday. The maximum vehicle speed limit on unpaved road surfaces shall be 15 MPH. MM III-4 All trucks should maintain at least two feet of freeboard. MM III-5 All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose dirt material off-site should be covered and washed off before leaving the site. MM III-6 Adjacent streets should be swept if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares. MM III-7 As part of the construction specifications, any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the disturbed area subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plants shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and minimize wind erosion of the soil. MM III-8 Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for off- speak traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through-traffic lames. d) Less than Significant Impact. During the short-term period of construction, the project could have the potential to expose the area to increased levels of dust emissions. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan would be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval prior to demolition. The project would be required to comply with Chapter 8.50 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code (Fugitive Dust Control), and shall be required to utilize one or more "Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures". Therefore, the project is not anticipated to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No impact would occur. e) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed residential subdivision is not anticipated to generate any long-term odors. Machinery, equipment, and/or vehicles may emit noticeable odors during construction. However, these odors are short-term in nature and typical of renovation and construction. Odors would cease following completion of the project. Therefore, impacts associated with exposure of substantial number of people to objectionable odors would be considered less than significant. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-14 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/M(TIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than - _ - , 'Significant r Potentially':' .Mitti, Less Than Sig Bcaht, , Mitigation 'Significant ' Impact: Incorporated "litmpaet` ` ,yo,lmpact, 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 El ❑ ❑ to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.), 19 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? 0 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community ❑ ❑ ElConservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? a-b) No Impact. The project will not 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. As determined by a biological study that was preformed (March 2005, Ecological Consultants), the area does not contain any rare, threatened or endangered plant or animal species, sensitive habitat, riparian habitat, or natural communities . In addition, the project site is a highly disturbed area surrounded by development, with dumping and foot trails on portions of the site. The project would not result in impacts to endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats or any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. c) No Impact. The site does not contain any wetland areas or waters. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act regulates the dredge and/or fill of waters and wetlands of the United States, specifically relating to how these activities may cause an adverse effect to, or loss of, federal wetland/water resources. Regulatory responsibility falls under the jurisdictional authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Under Section 404, any development or activity, which may result in temporary or permanent, impacts to these Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-1 S iMURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDYim�TIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 federally-protected resources must prepare a Pre-Construction Notification for review, and potential permitting, by the ACOE. Therefore, no impact to federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 would occur. I d) No Impact. The proposed project site is located in a developed, urban area of Palm ! Springs, and no corridors or habitat suitable for migratory or wildlife species occur onsite. Therefore, no migratory patterns of fish or wildlife would be impacted by this project and jno impact would occur. I e) No Impact. The project does not propose any removal or disturbance of sensitive biological resources or landmark trees. Therefore, no conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources would occur. f) No Impact. The City of Palm Springs does not have an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would have no impact on these types of plans. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-16 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STU DYAAI IGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than14 .. . . - Sig niticant Potentially rh L'ess Than Significant, Mitigation ' , Significant - 1m154rt. . I'nco;rporaMetl , ' Impact ..No Impact,,; V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the El ® El ❑ significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ® El ❑ significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ® ❑ ❑ paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ ❑ interred outside of formal cemeteries? a-c) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. No cultural resources were identified within one mile of the project area. Furthermore, no historic resources have been discovered on the project site. The Cultural Resources Survey Report (Tierra Environmental Services, 2004) for the project concluded that no impacts to cultural resources would result from the proposed project and further work to address cultural resources is not necessary unless the project expands outside of current building plans. Nonetheless, the following mitigations are included in the event that previously unknown resources are encountered during construction. MIA V-1 As there is always a possibility of buried cultural resources in a project area, a Native American Monitor(s) shall be present during all ground disturbing activities including clearing and grubbing, excavation, burial of utilities, planting of rooted plants, etc. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indian Cultural Office shall be contacted for additional information on the use and availability of Cultural Resource Monitors. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor shall contact the Director of Planning Services. Following consultation, the Director shall have the authority to halt destructive construction and shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist to investigate the find. If necessary, the Qualified Archaeologist shall prepare a treatment plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and Agua Caliente Cultural Resource Coordinator for approval. Timing/Implementation: During all ground disturbing activities. Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Palm Springs in consultation with the Aguo Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-17 yy� yf MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION d) Less than Significant Impact The proposed project would be subject to State law regarding the discovery and disturbance of human remains. Should any previously unidentified or unanticipated human remains be discovered during future project development, the City of Palm Springs requires mitigation consistent with the General Plan Archaeological and Paleontological Policy. I I I I I I I I Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-18 NIURANo RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION l.,es's T�ah •.' _ ,. Significant Potentially v With ":Less Than Significant mitigati9p" Significant Irtpact. Incorpdrated- '.Ihrpact -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: 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 ❑ El Elliquefaction? 19 iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ IN b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 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-B 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) i) Less Than Significant Impact. The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake hazard zone and there are no known faults crossing or in the vicinity of the project site. However, the project site, as with virtually all sites within the state, would be vulnerable to ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. The project site and surrounding vicinity are relatively flat eliminating the potential for landslides. The City of Palm Springs General Plan requires that the project be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Adherence to the provisions of the UBC would reduce potential for structural damage in the event of an earthquake. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant ii) Less Than Significant Impact. Any major earthquake damage in the City of Palm Springs is likely to occur from ground shaking and seismically related ground and structural failures. Local soil conditions, such as topography, soil strength, Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-19 � f ' MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/M�IGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 I jthickness, density, water content, and firmness of underlying bedrock affect seismic response. . A less than significant impact would be likely to occur. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant, iii) No Impact. There are no known geological hazards caused by ground failure or liquefaction,which would prevent use of the site. The proposed project would be required to conform to the Uniform Building Code, with structural design prepared by a State of California registered professional engineer. Therefore, no impact would occur. iv) No Impact. The ground is level and approval of the project would not expose people or structures to potential landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would be built on a vacant, relatively flat piece of land. Movement of onsite soils would occur during the construction phase of the proposed project. All excavated soil material would be subject to construction- phase Best Management Practice (BMP) requirements for erosion control as a part of the proposed project's compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board's (RWQCB) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Storm Water General Permit (See discussion under Hydrology Section). In addition, existing codes regulate land grading and erosion control if and when construction occurs during winter months (November-March) when precipitation is most likely to occur. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. c-d) No Impact. See items a & b, above. e) No Impact. The proposed project site is located in a developed, urban area currently served by the City of Palm Springs wastewater disposal system. Therefore, no impact would occur. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-20 } MURANO RESIDENTIAL PRO)ECTANITIAL STUDY/M�TIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CessThan Pbtentially Significafit With . �LessThan " $ignificarfi' itigation "Significant No " '" ,Impact; lKor grated - , Impact' -Impact 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ within 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 ❑ public 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ El urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a, b) No Impact. The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials Therefore, no impact would occur. c-d) No Impact. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No impact would occur. e-f) No Impact. The nearest airport is the Palm Springs Regional Airport located at Gene Autry Trail, approximately one and a quarter mile away from the project site. The proposed project site is not within the Noise Impact Combining Zone (Palm Springs General Plan 1993). Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-21 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION g) No Impact. The City of Palm Springs Emergency Plan was established to address planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters and technological incidents. The Plan focuses on operational concepts relative to large- scale disasters, which can pose major threats to life and property requiring unusual emergency responses. The project will not impair with the implementation of the aforementioned Emergency Plan, therefore, no impact would occur. I i h) No Impact. The proposed project would not 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. The site is adjacent to a major roadway and is in an urban infill area; therefore, no impact would occur. I I Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-22 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Mess Than .. - Significant Potentially With Less,Than Significapt, Mitigation '- .$rgnifican} . " -Impact Incorporated. ; Impact' _, No Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste El El ❑ ❑ discharge 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ N 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 which ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 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 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 El 1-1Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ❑ El ❑ that would impede or redirect flood flows? ID i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including ❑ ❑ ❑ N flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ N a,e,f) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project must file a Notice of Intent to control the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable under the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit and General Municipal Permit regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). There would be an increase in impervious surfaces thereby increasing the rate, surface run-off, and storm water volume. The City of Palm Springs Engineering Department has stated that the current standard, as detailed in the Master Drainage Plan for the City of Palm Springs, is adequate. The standard requires that runoff from a ten year frequency storm is allowed to accumulate in the streets until it reaches the top of the curb. Flows Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-23 f -MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION exceeding the ten-year frequency storm will generally be carried within the street right- of-way and a combination of both the street and the underground storm drain provides a high-level of protection. Landscaped areas would be designed in accordance with the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code Chapter 8.0 relating to water efficiency landscaping. The general direction of storm water flow for this project is from the northwest to the southeast. Given that the site is bounded on the west (Avenida Caballeros), north (San Rafael Drive), and south (Francis Drive) by existing streets, and on the east by Multi-family condominiums, the proposed project is not subject to offsite storm drain runoff. The proposed project would comply with all applicable water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, thereby avoiding violation of such standards or requirements. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. b) No Impact. A net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table is not anticipated and therefore, no impact would occur. c-d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not alter the course of any stream or river as none are located on-site or in the immediate vicinity of the site. The proposed project includes four separate cul-de-sacs that would provide cross-gutters and spandrels on Avenida Caballeros to maintain the existing street flow, and a short vertical curve before providing and east-to-west drainage pattern for the remainder of the cul- de-sacs. Based on the nominal percolation rate of 0.13 cfs, the drywell would be able to contain an incremental retention required for the cul-de-sac. The capacity of the proposed open channel would be greater than the anticipated maximum flow from the cul-de-sacs. The project may result in a slight change to the existing drainage pattern, due to the increased impervious surface area on a site that is currently undeveloped and vacant. However, the proposed project would comply with all drainage and runoff requirement s as discussed above in paragraph a). Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. g-h) No Impact. The proposed project site lies in Zone C of the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). Zone C represents "areas of minimal flooding". The proposed development would construct individual (lot by lot) retention ponds. The retention ponds would be constructed in the front and/or side yards of the residences and will be designed to retain the incremental and 100-year runoff.Therefore, no impact would occur. i) No Impact. The Palm Springs General Plan Environmental Impact Report does not identify risk of loss, injury, or death due to flooding as a result of levee or dam failure in the City of Palm Springs.Therefore, no impact would occur. j) No Impact. The proposed project is not located in an area subject to seiche, tsunami or mudflow. Therefore, no impact would occur. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-24 rvtURANO RESIDENTIAL PROIECTANITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ` .',Less Than " Potentially SignificantWith. ,. Less Than' bignificant ,_Mitiga#ion Significant ,Np- 'ImpaCt: .s..ancoipurafed Impact, Iol "pad,! 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 El Elplan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning 21 ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation El El Elplan or natural community conservation plan? 19 a) No Impact. The proposed project would add a new residential subdivision to an area that already contains existing residential developments. The project would not divide an established community and no impact would occur. b) No Impact. The proposed project would be consistent with the allowable uses within the L4 (Low Density Residential) land use designations, as well as the R-1-C (Single-Family Residential Zone) zoning designations that are applicable to the project site. The project meets the goals of the Palm Springs General Plan. No other land use plans or regulations are applicable to the proposed project site. Therefore, no impact would occur. c) No Impact. The project would not conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impact would occur. Murano Residential Project, initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-2 5 • 0 --MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STUDY)M TIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Tlwn " ' Potentially, Significant With' - Less Than ` Significant : •Mitigation- Significant 'No Impact :"Incorporated '. - Impact: impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 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 mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local El El El general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a-b) No Impact. The Palm Springs General Plan EIR (Palm Springs, 1992) has not identified any mineral resources in the planning area. Therefore, no impact to mineral resources would occur. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-26 i 14URANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I ' I Less Than ' Significant ' Pdtentially Wirth Less Thahr , SigniflGant `,'^Mitigation -;Significant -' , No I ipaci In'o, orated„ _. frgpaM' ' Impact 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 general 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 El ❑ public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or El ❑ ❑ working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a,c) Less Than Significant. The proposed project would result in short-term noise impacts associated with construction activities, and would cause temporary localized increases in noise levels to noise-sensitive land uses in the project vicinity. Ongoing intermittent noises would be associated with traffic generated from the proposed residential development. The Palm Springs Noise Ordinance (11.74.041) is used to regulate noise levels within the City of Palm Springs. Exterior noise levels up to 60 dBA CNEL are acceptable, while exterior noise levels up to 70 dBA CNEL are conditionally acceptable. Noise levels over 70 dBA are not acceptable. The proposed project would comply with the conditions of the City's Noise Ordinance, and impacts would be considered less than significant. b) No Impact. The proposed project would not generate noise that would subject surrounding residents to noise elevations and/or ground vibration. Therefore, no impact would occur. d) Less Than Significant Impact There would be some short-term increases in noise levels during construction of the proposed project. However, the City governs the time period that construction activities may occur and limits construction hours (7:00 a.m. through 8:00 p.m. per Palm Springs Noise Ordinance (11.74.041) and no construction activities permitted between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. per Construction Site Regulations [Chapter 8.04.2201). Compliance with existing regulations is considered Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-2 7 i I -MF 1 URANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUD MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I , sufficient to cause temporary increases in ambient noise levels associated with i construction to be a less than significant impact. e-f) No Impact. The proposed project lies within two miles of the Palm Springs International Airport. The proposed project would be residential subdivision, and would not place noise-sensitive uses within an area potentially affected by overhead airplane noise. Therefore, no impact would occur. Murano Residential Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-28 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTANITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION :Less_T, n Sigii) rd � . . ' PoI tia�y, -CWith fica r Less Than ' ,Significant `: Mitigztion' SigrGficaht No ' Imp'ait; �' Incorporated Impact 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) Less Than Significant. The proposed project includes the development of 57-single family residential units built on a vacant, undeveloped piece of land. The project will induce growth, although 57 units (57 units x 2 persons per household would increase the local population by 114 persons) is not a substantial increase to the population. The project is consistent with the land use designation and completely surrounded by residential developments. New construction services of gas, water, sewer, and electricity would be connected to existing, surrounding service lines as well as associated roads and cul-de sacs.Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur b,c) No Impact. The existing project site is an undeveloped, vacant piece of land surrounded primarily by existing residential developments. The proposed project would be located in a low-density residential zone. Therefore, no existing permanent residents or housing would be displaced to accommodate the proposed project. Therefore, no impact on existing housing or people would occur. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November2005 1.0-29 I I ' -�WRANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I ., , Potentially . `Significant With. Less Than" 5igmficAnt 'Alitiga Ion ,. Significant. No hilQ�d ' Incorporated ' Impact 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? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ a) Less Than Significant Impact. The City's existing public safety and recreation services, including police protection, criminal justice, fire protection, ambulance, library, cultural services and other safety services are near capacity. Accordingly, the City may determine to form a Community Services District under the authority of Government C. Section 53311 et sec, or other appropriate statutory or municipal authority. The applicant shall agree to support the formation of such assessment district and shall waive any right to protest, provided that the amount of such assessment shall be established through appropriate study and shall not exceed $500 annually with a consumer price index escalator. The district shall be formed prior to sale of any lots or a covenant agreement shall be recorded against each parcel, permitting incorporation of the parcel in the district.Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project would add approximately 1 14 new residents (57 units x 2 persons per household), which would result in an increased demand for police protection. The City strives to maintain a staffing/population ratio of 1:1,500. Increased demand for police services have lead the City to form an Assessment District to provide additional funding to the police department. Prior to approval of tentative tract map entitlements, the project will be reviewed by the Police Department and conditions for necessary law enforcement requirements will be identified. Therefore, impacts to police protection are considered less than significant. c) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes 57 single-family residences and may generate additional students for the Palm Springs Unified School District. Under state law, the proposed project will be required to pay the school impact fee (currently $2.14 pre square foot) to reduce the potential impact of additional students. Payment of fees is considered sufficient mitigation to reduce impacts to schools. The proposed project would not require the construction of new school facilities to serve the project and therefore, impacts to schools are considered less than significant. d) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project does not identify park acreage as part of the project. The City has a standard park ratio of 5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 population as required by City Ordinance 1632. Based on the project's estimated population of 114 people, the project would be required to dedicate 0.570 acres of parkland as part of the project. Since no parkland is identified as part of the project, the Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-30 I I w AURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION i developer would be required to contribute in-lieu fees for the provision of park facilities at the required ratio. Therefore, impacts to parks are considered less than significant. e) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would increase population and i thereby increase use of public facilities including roads, utilities, schools, parks, libraries, i police and fire protection services. However, the project would result in less than significant impacts to 'other' public facilities or services. i I I Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-31 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less:Yhan., Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant , „ Mitigation .Significant - No Impacf ;, _ Ineotpo,rated Impact '' Impact" 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 ED adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Less Than Significant. The proposed project would increase demand for parks and recreational facilities. However, because the project is only 57 units, with an anticipated population of 114, use of existing neighborhood and regional parks is not expected to result in substantial physical deterioration of these facilities. While no parks are proposed as part of the project, the applicant would be required to pay in-lieu fees to off-set impacts to parks. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant. b) No Impact. The project proposes new residences, but not a significant amount that would increase the physical deterioration to existing neighborhood parks and recreational facilities. The proposed project does not include any development or features that would increase the use of existing recreation facilities or increase demand for additional recreational facilities. The proposed project does not include any new recreational facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-32 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY)MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant': 'Potentially Witft '`Less Than i. Signtficant Mitigation Significant, .No, - 'IrJtppct ,IircotPoratedC.r .Impact Impact 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 ® El 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 El ® El 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ED location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous El El El or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus ❑ ❑ ❑ turnouts, bicycle racks)? a,b) Less Than Significant Impact. A study was prepared by Endo Engineering (July, 2005) to discover any traffic impacts that would be associated with the project. The study area included the intersection at Avenida Caballeros and East San Rafael Drive. The intersection is currently providing levels of service that are deemed acceptable; the study concluded that in the year 2007 the intersection is projected to operate at a level of service C during evening peak hour with and without project related traffic. The addition of project related traffic would increase the average delay up to 1.0 second per vehicle but will not change the peak hour levels of service at this key intersection. Without signalization, this intersection would provide LOS A during evening peak hours with or without site traffic in the year 2025. With signalization this intersection would provide a minimum LOS B. The proposed project will contribute incrementally to the need for a new traffic signal at the intersection of Avenida Caballeros and East San Rafael D(ve. Since Avenida Caballeros currently carries relatively low traffic volumes, none of the proposed site access locations on Avenida Caballeros are projected to meet peak hour traffic signal volume warrants upon project buildout. Therefore, the proposed project would create a less than significant impact to traffic volumes and the level of service to surrounding roadways. c-g) No impact. The proposed project is not anticipated to exceed either individually or cumulatively a level of service standard established by Riverside County. The project Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-33 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION would not result in significant increases in traffic volumes on area roadways, nor would it result in an exceedance of a county established level of service. Therefore, no impact would occur. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-34 • —-AIURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/M(ITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION .. .Less',Than . potentially , Significant With ::`Lass=Than Significant Mitigation -Significant' Jmpact' Ancolporated .;Impact'' ,,No Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the El El ® El 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 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 El El ID ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ® ❑ projects projected demand, in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 0 Be 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 ❑ ❑ ® ❑ regulations related to solid waste? a) Less than Significant Impact. Wastewater generated by project residents would be treated by facilities owned and operated by the City of Palm Springs. The wastewater treatment requirements, issued by the California RWQCB for the treatment plant, were developed to ensure that adequate levels of treatment would be provided for the wastewater flows emanating from all land uses within its service area. The residential wastewater from the project site will not cause the treatment plant to exceed these treatment requirements and this impact is considered less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project would receive water service from DWA and wastewater service from the City of Palm Springs. The proposed project will connect to existing DWA lines on Matthew Drive for domestic water service. There is also an 8"sewer main on Francis Drive,which will most likely be the main that this project connects to. The newly constructed sewer mains would feed into the existing 8" sewer main on Francis Drive. On-site infrastructure would include an 8-inch water line and an 8-inch sewer line. Capacity is available at both DWA's water treatment plant and the City's wastewater treatment plant. No new treatment facilities would be required in association with the proposed project. Therefore, impacts associated with expansion of water and wastewater facilities are considered less than significant. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-35 ,E J AURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION c) Less than Significant Impact. The project includes individual lot retention ponds with a maximum depth of 1-foot with 3:1 side slopes. The emergency overflow for each pond would be overland to the adjacent cul-de-sac. Each retention pond would have a surface area of approximately 520 sf, and an average depth of 1-foot, providing a retention volume greater than the required 407 cf. This project has been designed to provide storm drainage retention for the incremental site development for the "worse case" 100-year event. No off-site improvements to storm drainage facilities are required. Therefore, impacts associated with construction of storm drainage facilities are considered less than significant. d) Less than Significant Impact. According to the Palm Springs General Plan Final EIR, DWA has indicated, "there is a sufficient supply of water to serve the City of Palm Springs and the portions of the City's sphere of influence serviced by the agency at buildout." (1993). The project would add 55 single-family residential units requiring provision of water service. Assuming 260 gallons/unit/day, the project would require approximately 4.72 million gallons of water per year. Because the project is consistent with the General Plan Land use designation, impacts to water supply are considered less than significant. e) Less than Significant Impact. The project would receive wastewater treatment from the City of Palm Springs. The project is consistent with the density provisions of the City's Wastewater Master Plan, which is designed to accommodate General plan build out projects. The General Plan EIR indicates that implementation of the land uses identified in the General Plan will not have a significant affect on the City's sewer system. Wastewater treatment capacity is adequate to serve the project and the existing community. Therefore, impacts to wastewater treatment are considered less than significant. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Solid waste generated by the project would be transported to the Edom Hill Transfer Station. From the transfer station, solid waste and recycling are transferred to the Lamb Canyon Landfill, the Badlands Landfill, or the El Sobrante Landfill. The Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill is currently permitted to receive 3,000 tons per day and has a remaining capacity of 25,967,000 cubic yards. The Badlands Sanitary Landfill is currently permitted to receive 4,000 tons per day and has a remaining capacity of 15,036,809 cubic yards. The El Sobrante Sanitary Landfill is permitted to receive 10,000 tons per day and has a remaining capacity of 3,674,267 cubic yards. The Edom Hill Transfer Station has the capacity to accept up to 2,600 tons of waste per day for the next 20 years. The current average daily waste throughput at the Edom Hill Transfer Station is approximately 1,600 tons per day (Personal communication with Loren Lewis, Waste Management of the Desert). The project would generate approximately 0.225 ton per day of solid waste (assumes ten pounds/unit/day), which would be well within the daily capacity available at the Edom Hill Transfer Station. Therefore, impacts to landfill capacity are considered less than significant. g) Less Than Significant Impact. Solid waste generated by the proposed project would be collected by Palm Springs Disposal Services and disposed of at the Coachella Valley Transfer Station. The proposed project would be required to comply with State of California Waste Management Act (AB 939) by providing a recycling program implemented by Palm Springs Disposal Services. The proposed project would comply with federal, state, and/or local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts relative to complying with federal, state and local statues are considered less than significant. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-36 i M - i URANo RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STU DY/MJITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-3 7 ,4URANo RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION D Len han, Signifgpnt With Potentially Mitigation Less,Than,, ; zz , Significant Ineorpor re Signlfjcgnt_ ` Impact 'r Impact 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 ❑ El Elconsiderable 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? a) No Impact. The proposed project would not degrade the quality of the environment; result in an adverse impact on fish, wildlife, or plant species including special status species, or prehistoric or historic cultural resources because project components do not include any construction or development on areas that are not identified as sensitive. Prehistoric or historic cultural resources would not be adversely affected because no archeological resources are known to exist in the project areas, and the proposed project would be subject to mandatory mitigation measures regarding the preservation of the Federal, State, and local historic sites. Further, project implementation includes compliance with appropriate procedures for avoiding or preserving artifacts or human remains, archeological, or paleontological resources if they are discovered. b) No Impact. The project would be consistent with the City's General Plan and would not create any significant impacts. The proposed project is for the construction of a 57 unit single-family residential subdivision. All other projects in the surrounding area are residential subdivisions. The proposed project is located in a residential area where it is expected that active uses such as the contemplated use would occur. Adhering to basic regulatory requirements and/or conditions of approval would reduce all project impacts. c) No Impact. The preceding discussion has outlined the potential impacts and mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any direct or indirect adverse impacts on humans. Murano Residential Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-38 I I i t + _MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT/INITIAL STUDY/nIITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REFERENCES 1) City of Palm Springs. City of Palm Springs Draft Environmental Impact Report, December 1992. 2) City of Palm Springs. City of Palm Springs General Plan. 1992. 3) City of Palm Springs. City of Palm Springs Zoning Code. 2004. 4) Government Code Section 65962.5(f), "Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement". 5) Endo Engineering. Murano Residential Project Air Quality Impact Study July, 2005. 6) Endo Engineering. Murano Residential Project Traffic Impact Study July, 2005 7) Cornett, James. Ecological Consultants. Biological Assessment and Impact Analysis of the Proposed Enterprised Residential Project. March 4, 2005 8) Tang, Bai. CRM TECH. Historical/Archeological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel Number 501-020-016. March 16, 2005 9) The Keith Companies. Murano TTM 33933 Hydrology and Hydraulic Report September, 2005. Murano Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration November 2005 1.0-39 I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING I CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33933 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AVENIDA CABALLEROS, BETWEEN EAST OF SAN RAFAEL DRIVE, & FRANCIS DRIVE. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of January 18, 2006. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of this hearing is to consider an application by PS Avenida Caballeros/San Rafael, LLC, for Tentative Tract Map 33933 to subdivide an approximately 19.95-acre parcel into 57 single-family residential lots ranging from 10,400 to 16,400 square feet in size. The subject site is located at East of Avenida Caballeros, between San Rafael and Francis Drive, Zoned R-1-C, Section 2, T4S, R4E. 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 project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior, to the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009[b][2]). An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Edward O. Robertson, Planning Services Department, 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. aU_ ,1(nes Thompson, City Clerk Department of Planning Services � N � w Vicinity Map s d — 0 z u d z u1 SAN RAFAEL RD SAN RAFAEL RD F-- La SUNFLOWER CIRCLE N UJ W Ut IK site Si w �J u � 4 - LILY ST tda c=n z SUNFLOWER CIRCLE S UJ L d SUM1lDAfYCE CrRCI.�S _) ,�---� FRAhICIS DR O d v (� SUNAIR RD ADOBE WY H, 0 I w D � O S x z JANET CR LUNA WY _ d a GRACE CIR Q d GEM CIR i CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: TTM 33933 DESCRIPTION: Application to subdivide an approxi- mately 19.95 acre parcel into 57 single-family residential APPLICANT: Murano Residential Project lots located East of Avenida Caballeros, between San PS Avenida Caballeros/ Rafael and Francis Drive, Zoned R-1-C, Section 2. APN: San Rafael LLC 501-020-016, 0 IC G:P V D PROOF OF PUBLICATION This Is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) u: 40 Ci7 C'Le.Rll, No. 0069 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY COUNCIL County of Riverside CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33933 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AVENIDA CABALLEROS, BETWEEN EAST OF SAN RAFAEL DRIVE, 6 FRANCIS DRIVE. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the'City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at Its meeting of January 18,2006. I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of The City Council meeting be Ins at s:o0 p.m., in the Count aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen hteen the-Council Chamber at ;ty Mall,3209 East Tah- _ y. g g guitz Canyon Way, Palm-Springs. years,and not a party to or Interested in the The purpose of this hearin is to consider an ap- above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a elic tion for Tentative Avenida nidaMap all ro toasubdly el pointer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING an approximately 19.95-acre parcel into 57 sin- gle-family residential lots ranging from 10,400 to COMPANY a newspaper ol'general circulation, 'I6,400 square feet in size. The subject site Is IQ- printed and published In the elk of Palm Springs, cated at Eeat of Avenida Caballeros between San p P y T45,eHand Francis Drive,Zoned R-1-C,Section 2, County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of � 9,....... M;_••���• .•.y.. California under the date of March 24, 1988.Case Number t the notice,of which tl has been published in each regulal,' a ll w;"""""'- i ,!�iH •.".I I annexed is a printed co p set in type not smaller than non pa ie ,1 and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: January 7°',2006 t -'--- -- - ---------------------------------' I�ly I gi aril ---------------------------------------------------------------- A,II in the year 2006 �y ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for I certify(m'declare)under penalty of perjury that the this project under the guidelines of the California foregoing is true and correct. Environmental QuaIy ct 4CEQA) and will be re- viewed by the City Cou, at the hearing. Mem- bers of the public may view this document at the rli Planrinqq Services Department, City Hall, 3200 Dated at Palm SprjAgs,California this-----9 ,----day East Tahquitz-Canyon Way, Palm Sprin , and submit written commentsat,-o gs r prior to, the City ,/ Council hearing. of----------Januar e i REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION:The staff _`i report and other supporting documents regarding this protect are available for public review at Clty Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 C j v pp M. Monday through Fridayy. Please contact the ----(-------q------------------------------*,------------------- Office of the City Clark at (760) 323-8204 if you ""^SignafUre� \�J 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,Writ- ten comments may be made to the City Council by letter(for mail or hand delivery) to: James Thompson, City Clerk E.m 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way P"/4,�■4 •A'9 �+,�I 0 Springs, CA 92262 Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or p In written correspondence delivered to the laity Clerk at, or pnor, to the ppublic hearing. (Govern- ment Code Saction 65009jl An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard.Questions regard- In this case may be directed to Edward O. Rob- 3P3 n, Planning Services Department, at (760) SI necesita ayuda con sate carts,porfavor Ilame a Is Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar on Nadine Fleger telefono (760) 323-8245. Published: 7/7/2008 James Thompson, City Clerk N City ®f Palm Springs t * Office of the City Clerk 3200 E. Tahquia Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262 O �P 'Tel: (760)323-8204 • Pax: (760)322-8332 = Web: www a.palm-spnngs.ca.us AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing, to consider an application by PS Avenida Caballeros/San Rafael, LLC, for Tentative Tract Map 33933 to subdivide an approximately 19.95-acre parcel into 57 single-family residential lots ranging from 10,400 to 16,400 square feet in size, the subject site is located at East of Avenida Caballeros, between San Rafael and Francis Drive, Zoned R- 1-C, Section 2, T4S, R4E, on January 18, 2006. A copy of said notice was mailed to each and every person set forth on the attached list on the 6th day of January, 2006, in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. (204 notices mailed) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 9th day of January, 2006. 7 JPIES THOMPSON r /sty Clerk L /kdh H:\USERS\C-CLMHearing NoticesWffdavit-PS Avenida 01-18-06PHN.doc Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33933 MURANO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AVENIDA CABALLEROS, BETWEEN EAST OF SAN RAFAEL DRIVE, & FRANCIS DRIVE. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of January 18, 2006. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of this hearing is to consider an application by PS Avenida Caballeros/San Rafael, LLC, for Tentative Tract Map 33933 to subdivide an approximately 19.95-acre parcel into 57 ;single-family residential lots ranging from 10,400 to 16,400 square feet in size. The subject site is located at East of Avenida Caballeros, between San Rafael and Francis Drive, Zoned R-1-C, Section 2, T4S, R4E. 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 project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior, to the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009[b][2]). An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Edward O. Robertson, Planning Services Department, 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. James Thompson, City Clerk NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPS MS APRIL HILDNER Public Hearing Notice (TAHQUITZ RIVERS ESTATES) MR TIM HOHMEIER Murano Residential Project 241 EAST MESQUITE AVENUE (DEEPWELL ESTATES) TTM 33933 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 1387 CALLE DE MARIA CC Meeting -01.18.06 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 MS ROXANN FLOSS MR STEVEN PERRIN MS SHERYL HAMLIN (BEL DESIERTO NEIGHBORHOOD ) (DEEPWELL RANCH) (HISTORIC TENNIS CLUB AREA) 930 CHIA ROAD 1334 INVIERNO R\DRIVE 565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR JOHN HANSEN MS MALLIKA ALBERT MS DIANE AHLSTROM (WARM SANDS NEIGHBORHOOD) (CHINO CANYON ORGANIZATION) (MOVIE COLONY NEIGHBORHOOD) PO BOX 252 2241 NORTH LEONARD ROAD 475 VALMONTE SUR PALM SPRINGS CA 92263 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR KENT CHAMBERLIN MR BOB MAHLOWITZ MS PAULA AUBURN (TENNIS CLUB AREA) (SUNMOR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP) (SUNRISE/VISTA CHINO AREA) 373 MONTE VISTA 246 NORTH SYBIL ROAD 1369 CAMPEON CIRCLE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR BILL SCOTT MS. SEIMA MOLOI MR BOB DICKINSON (OLD LAS PALMAS NEGIBORHOOD) (DESERT HIGHLAND GATEWAY) VISTA LAS PALMAS HOMEOWNERS 540 VIA LOLA 359 W. SUNVIEW AVENUE 755 WEST CRESCENT DRIVE PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-1459 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 C�10 DC0Ilji Al lND MR PETE MORUZZI tl-14P�h G;�38C-;FFE !REP C J 1 PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE PO BOX 4738 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-4738 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO TTM 33933 PLANNING &ZONING DEPT MRS JOANNE BRUGGEMANS VERIFICATION NOTICE] 1 1 ATTN SECRETARY 506 W SANTA CATALINA ROAD PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743 MS MARGARET PARK AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS I I I I I I INDIANS 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MS. CANDACE CASEY MR. MICHAEL PERONI CALIFORNIA DEVELOP. ENTERPRISES THE KEITH COMPANIES SPONSORS I 1 1 2121 E.TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY,#1 73-733 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 PALM DESERT, CA 92260 MR. JAMES CIOFFI ( ' JAMES CIOI=FI ARCHITECTS 2121 E.TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY,#3 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 /y 3 .3 732 J OD 009-608-078 009-608-079 009-608-080 Ralph Hoepfner Marilyn Park Dennis King 7133 La Presa Dr 1331 E Francis Dr 1157 Chess Dr 101 Los Angeles, CA 90068 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Foster City, CA 94404 009-608-081 009-608-082 009-608-083 John R Sullivan James L Cherpes Joel D Miller 1351 E Francis Dr 28934 Islets Ct 2328 Bonnie Brae Palm Springs, CA 92262 Cathedral City, CA 92234 Santa Ana, CA 92706 009-608-089 009-608-090 009-608-091 Thomas E Adkins Linda Kent James F Collins 1290 E Vista Chino 1350 E Adobe Way 1340 E Adobe Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-608-092 009-608-093 009-608-094 Alexandra M Dwyer Michael J & Nancy Clapper Beth A Nicholas 1330 E Adobe Way 1320 E Adobe Way 1321 E Adobe Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-608-159 009-608-160 009-608-161 William & Roberta Cuthbertso Dennis M Eddy Franklin A Tinney 5595 Bisset Ave 1341 E Adobe Way 1331 E Adobe Way has Vegas, NV 89118 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-893 009-609-894 009-609-895 Gordon C & Harriett Thom *M* Maria Golidbroda Karl H & Christa Maier 1220 Sunflower Cir S 1230 Sunflower Cir S PC Box 889 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92263 009-609-896 009-609-897 009-609-898 Gary E Wagner Edward & Sedik Martikian Kevin R Westjohn 1200 Sunflower Cir S 3179 Beaudry Ter 4887 Kansas St Palm Springs, CA 92262 Glendale, CA 91208 San Diego, CA 92116 009-609-900 009-609-9 D 009-609-902 Roger H Rodgers Varooz Saroian ICH William W Marshall 2880 Sunflower Cir W 289 Sunflower Cir W 2900 Sunflower Cir W Palm Springs, CA 92262 P m Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-903 009-609-904 009-609-905 Thomas & A Mcgovern n M Aron Schwartz *M* Bernice Tikunoff 1337 Pas o Sereno !•� 2920 Sunflower Cir W 2930 Sunflower Cir W San D' as, CA 91773 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-906 009-609-907 009-609-908 Ignacio & Silvia Perez Irene M Dunne James W & Mildred Walker 1181 Sunflower Ln 1191 Sunflower Ln PC Box 660609 Palm Springs., CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Arcadia, CA 91066 r 009-609-909 009-609-910 009-609-911 Zane M C enger John & Mary Ewing Eli D & Stanley Youngerman 1211 S flower Ln PO Box 628 1231 Sunflower Ln Pal Springs, CA 92262 Blythe, CA 92226 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-959 009-609-960 009-609-961 Debbie Macias June P Siegrist Stephen Sims 179 Tarocco 3193 Sunflower Loop N 1155 E Paseo E1 Mirador Irvine, CA 92618 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-962 009-609-9 009-609-964 Gloria M buncombe Robert Beck PM James E Parker 3181 Sunflower Loop N 1329 uende Ln 3169 Sunflower Loop N Palm Springs, CA 92262 Pa fic Palis, CA 90272 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-965 009-609-966 009-609-967 Linda L Ovian William C & Anita Russel *M* Michael J Glanfield 212 Saint Joseph Ave 1464 E Gem Cir 3137 Sunflower Loop N Long Beach, CA 90803 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-968 009-609-970 009-609-971 Michael G & Judy White Walter L & Vicki Dwyer Ana Saleberry PO Box 698 PO Box 2841 3113 Sunflower Loop N Blooming Prairie, MN 55917 Big Bear Lake, CA 92315 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-972 009-609-973 009-609-974 David Movsesian Patricia D Pierce Suzanne E Spivak 3119 Sunflower Loop N 3101 Sunflower Loop N 3107 Sunflower Loop N Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-975 009-609-976 009-609-977 Albert Smith Jeffery L Winkler Aubrey Bayley 3081 Sunflower Cir W 3091 Sunflower Cir W 3061 Sunflower Cir W Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-978 009-609-979 009-609 80 M George Chenault Feiwel & Miriam Osina Teres Denny 1466 E Andreas Rd 6031 N Central Park Ave 305 Sunflower Cir W Palm Springs, CA 92262 Chicago, IL 60659 P m Springs, CA 92262 009-609-981 009-609-982 009-609-983 Glenn C & Linda Johnsen Stephen W Couckuyt William J & Malca Hasson 113 Verde Rd 3031 Sunflower Cir W 2652 29Th St 2 Chehalis, WA 98532 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Santa Monica, CA 90405 009-609-984 009-609-985 009-609-986 Kimberly Draper Daisy Noce Rose Henry *M* 99 Jane St 31 15056 Fernview St 2991 Sunflower Cir W New York, NY 10014 Whittier, CA 90604 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-987 009-609-988 009-609-989 Carol C Quan Darrell Gower Sal Laudicina 12314 Palm Dr 131 2971 Sunflower Cir W 4250 Via Dolce 318 Desert Hot Sp, CA 92240 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 009-609-990 009-609-991 009-609-992 Bruce E Reifel William W Freed Maria A Angelo 2951 Sunflower Cir W 2921 Sunflower Cir W 2931 Sunflower Cir W Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-993 009-609-994 009-609-995 Judee L Picone Tina Weintraub Nolan H & Georgia Payton PO Box 17602 2911 Sunflower Cir W 4232 Monteith Dr Sarasota, FL 34276 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Los Angeles, CA 90043 009-609-996 009-609- 97 009-609-998 Teddy J Etsell David Spero 2 Bryan P Vincent 620 State St 120 /217mSunflower Loop S 2879 Sunflower Loop S San Diego, CA 92101 Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-609-999 009-610-000 009-610-001 James S Elkin Mark T & Deborah Lehner Walter & Elaine Russo 2861 Sunflower Loop S 274 NE 14Th Ct PO Box 384 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Ridgefield, WA 98642 Newport Beach, CA 92662 009-610-002 009-610-003 009-610-004 Dean & Victoria Brenner Ellwyn A Hughes Scott W & Heidi Hood 2567 N Buena Vista St 3032 Verona Rd 461 W Grandview Ave Burbank, CA 91504 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Sierra Madre, CA 91024 009-610-005 009-610-006 009-610-007 James & Dorothy Shimabuku Susan L Questad Kimberly Lambert 3837 Seneca Ave 2831 Sunflower Loop S 2813 Sunflower Loop S Los Angeles, CA 90039 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-610-008 009-610-009 009-610-010 Lon J Cardiff Henry R & Jennie Torres Winston & Ingeborg Wright 2819 Sunflower Loop S 1820 S Marengo Ave 6 82 Sea Breeze Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 Alhambra, CA 91803 Rancho Palos , CA 90275 009-610-011 009-610-012 009-610-013 Marcia S Hardy Walter J & Charlene Pasciak Teri Litton 2802 Sunflower Loop S 844 N San Miguel Rd 2838 Sunflower Loop S Palm Springs, CA 92262 Walnut, CA 91789 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-610-014 009-610-015 009-610-016 Vic & Silva Kuyumjian Jimenez Sally H Mcmanus 1155 W Mahalo P1 1201 Sunflower Cir S 1211 Sunflower Cir S Compton, CA 90220 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 L7�i 009-610-017 009-610-018 009-610-019 Barbara A Sisto Wizard Of Odd Inc John K Lively 2144 N Lincoln Park W 3500 Cornell Rd 4504 Belvidere Ln Chicago, IL 60614 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 Edina, MN 55435 009-610-020 009-610-021 009-610-022 Kenneth E Martin Ronald B & Carmen Marcione Ruth Franklin 1251 Sunflower Cir S 1261 Sunflower Cir S 1271 Sunflower Cir S Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 009-610-023 009-610-024 009-610-025 Richard Braunstein Suzanne Morhaime Palm Springs Sunrise Palms H� 1281 Sunflower Cir S 1291 Sunflower Cir S 1443 Sunflower Cir S Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-020-008 501-029-018 501-025-0 Desert Water Agency Bonnie J Ouellette Marvin rlcff PO Box 1710 460 E Via Carisma 3107 unflower Loop N Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92264 `a/ a Springs, CA 92262 501-025-032 501-025-040 501-025-046 Bruce E Reifel Bryan P Vincent Scott W & Heidi Hood 2951 Sunflower Cir W 2879 Sunflower Loop S 461 W Grandview Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Sierra Madre, CA 91024 501-025-0 501-025-065 501-071-010 Ronald & Carmen Marcione Richard Braunstein Bradley Rivers PO Bolt 943 �M 1281 Sunflower Cir S 2311 Winrock Ave Ce^'7urr Glen, CA 92321 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Altadena, CA 91001 501-072-004 501-072- O5 501-072-006 Ewa Gosek *M* /P9m ellison '11 George C Mucherson PO Box 944 Francis Dr 969 E Francis Dr Palm Springs, CA 92263 prings, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-072-007 501-072-008 501-072-009 Randall K Johnson Todd W Hover Cation 968 E Sunair Rd 912 E Sunair Rd 890 E Sunair Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-081-001 501-081-002 501-081-003 John Eshaya Ruben M & Patricia Bazurto Stephen P Perry 516 N Gower St 1155 E Adobe Way 3760 Franklin Ave Los Angeles, CA 90004 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Los Angeles, CA 90027 501-081-004 501-081-020 501-081-02 Maureen L Gonzales Joseph Simeone Michael & Susan Boyer 2666 N Kitty Hawk Dr 254 E Avenida Granada 61 E una Cir Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 P Springs, CA 92262 501-082-001 501-082-002 501-082-003 John D Bethel Gary L & Pamela Hostetler Earl W & Diana Asbury 1191 E Francis Dr 1163 E Francis Dr 1105 E Francis Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-082-004 501-082-005 501-082-006 William A Price Daniel H Westfall Kenneth E Lyon 600 S Indian Trl 1033 E Francis Dr 4315 N Hazel St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Chicago, IL 60613 501-082-007 501-082-008 501-082-009 Larry Brewer Anthony G Bardo Patrick Miller 2786 N Avenida Caballeros 555 California St 5100 2696 N Avenida Caballeros Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Francisco, CA 94104 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-082-034 501-082-035 501-082-036 Richard E Scheible Maria Guerrero James Larsen 653 Mildred Ave 2745 N Kitty Hawk Dr 2793 N Kitty Hawk Dr Venice, CA 90291 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-082-037 501-082-038 501-082-039 John Margaris Louis Zimmerman David & Pamela Dipaul 300 S Thomas St 301 1102 E Adobe Way 1150 E Adobe Way Pomona, CA 91766 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-082-040 501-551-009 501-551 10 �M Richard & Kimberly Weaver Scott Thomsen 0 Jur'escu 1188 E Adobe Way 2885 Sundance Cir E 90 E Regency Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 ange, CA 92867 501-551-011 501-551-012 501-551-013 Richard D & Elaine Heffner Nevine S Niazi James K & Elizabeth Obrien 90 Riverside Dr 9604 N Copper Ridge Trl 2868 Sundance Cir W New York, NY 10024 Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-551-014 501-551-015 501-551-016 Albert S Johnson *M* Ernest & Patricia Ansara Steve R & Sally Barba 255 N El Cielo Rd 140 305 Calle Descanso 3719 El Sereno Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Clemente, CA 92673 Altadena, CA 91001 501-551-025 501-551-026 501-551-027 David Gomezcastro Pansy Jacinto Huguette Anhalt 3340 2Nd Ave 31784 Citrus Ave 982 Sundance Cir S San Diego, CA 92103 Redlands, CA 92374 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-551-028 501-551-029 501-551-030 Charles A Ashman William T & Yvonne Dean Joel D Weisman 984 Sundance Cir S 3995 Shasta Ave 211 S Spalding Dr 5401 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Los Alamitos, CA 90720 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 501-551-031 501-551-032 501-551-033 Paul Odroniec Betty G Youlden A F Tedesco 46 Lincolnshire Dr 330 Burlingame Ave 2861 Sundance Cir E Lincolnshire, IL 60069 Burlingame, CA 94010 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-551-034 501-551-03 501-551-036 Jeanne Vano er DD `, Firs tsc h Federal Svgs & Lo� James P Morrison 5415 Wil w View Dr 9- 1523 Ventura Blvd 510 n n/1 2933 Sundance Cir E Camarik'lo, CA 93012 S rman Oaks, CA 91403 f=� Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-551-037 501-551-038 501-551-039 Robert L Baird Michael H Hart Alice Cleary 2931 Sundance Cir E 675 Corbett Ave 302 752 Town Hill Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Francisco, CA 94114 New Hartford, CT 06057 501-551-040 501-551-041 501-551-042 Cheryl C Crane Michael D Alhadeff Lawrence G Bourne 2926 Sundance Cir W 615 2Nd Ave 100 2942 Sundance Cir W Palm Springs, CA 92262 Seattle, WA 98104 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-551-043 501-551-052 501-551-0 Larry L & Linda Jeney John R & Nancy Probst France Ragozzino 2944 Sundance Cir W 971 Sundance Cir N 16465 SW Royalty Pkwy Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Po land, OR 97224 501-551-054 501-551-055 501-551-056 Gary L Borden Ricardo A Salinas Eric C Schieber 995 Sundance Cir N 997 Sundance Cir N 2997 Sundance Cir E Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 501-551-057 501-551-058 501-551-059 Anita Rosenstein John T Warner Brant & Kathleen Richards 2995 Sundance Cir E 2973 Sundance Cir E PO Box 16895 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Anaheim, CA 92817 501-551-060 501-551-061 501-551-062 Steven B Adelman Shelley Peck Sundance Partnership 1901 Avenue Of The Stars 150 2955 Sundance Cir E 3110 Main St 200 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Santa Monica, CA 90405 501-561-005 669-444-007 669-444-008 Roger Dickson James F Bigley Christopher J & Deborah Neil 700 Tamarisk Ln 322 E Desert Willow Cir 777 E Tahquitz Canyon Way 20 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 669-444-014 669-452-016 669-452-017 Carl R Dick Linda Dalessio Linda Dalessio 180 W Oasis Rd 3303 E San Martin Cir 3303 E San Martin Cir Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 669-452-022 669-452-031 669-452-032 Bonnie Slettedahl John J & Florence Miller Mario G Berardi 10510 Northup Way 150 4411 E Sunny Dunes Rd PO Box 2467 Kirkland, WA 98033 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92263 669-452-033 669-452-034 669-452-035 Michael & Sandra Sirelson George Reed Genaro & Gloria Delarosa 954 W Via Olivera PO Box 580958 2388 N Sandra Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 N Palm Spring, CA 92258 Palm Springs, CA 92262 669-452-036 669-452-037 669-452-038 Abdon Figueroa Abdon Figueroa Greg P & Carrie Murphy PO Box 2487 PO Box 2487 166 W San Rafael P1 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92262 669-452-040 669-452-041 669-452-052 Shto Samuel D Hinkle Donald R & Charles Hetrick PO Box 18037 PO Box 4005 145 W Oasis Rd Beverly Hills, CA 90209 Blue Jay, CA 92317 Palm Springs, CA 92262 669-452-053 669-452-054 669-452-055 Bonnie Slettedahl Bonnie Slettedahl Gilmond Const Inc 10510 Northup Way 150 10510 Northup Way 150 1069 E San Jacinto Way Kirkland, WA 98033 Kirkland, WA 98033 Palm Springs, CA 92262 669-452-062 669-452-063 *** 197 Printed *** Khalil Ailabouni Khalil Ailabouni \1 2105 N Roberto Dr 2105 N Roberto Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 l I I I I I a