HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/6/2005 - STAFF REPORTS (4) a
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT
Receipt# 200500838
Lead Agency. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Date. 07/22/2005
Couniv Agency of Filing: Riverside Document No: 200500838
Project Title CASE 5.1043,A GPA FOR CASAS DE LA VENIA
Project Applicant Name CASAS DE LA VENIA Phone Number: 760 322-6272
Project Applicant Address: 1857 S.PALM CANYON RD PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
Project Applicant: Private Entity
CHECK APPLICABLE FEES:
❑Environmental Impact Report
❑Negative Declaration
❑Application Fee Water Diversion(State Prater Resources Control Board Only)
❑Project Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs
❑X County Administration Fee $64.00
❑X Project that is exemptf oni fees(DeMinvins Exemption)
❑Prated that is exempt f oni fees(Notice of Exemption)
Total Received $64.00
Signature and title of persmr recervmg payment. ,✓')�j
fir' ro� t7
Notes. >
r m }
f V17
�� 1J
W
f;T
Notice of Determination Form C
To: ❑ Office of Planning and Research From: (Public Agency) City of Palm Springs
PO Box 3044, 1400 Tenth Street,Room 212 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Po Box 2743
Sacramento,CA 95812-3044
Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743
County Clerk _.(dddress)
County of Riverside
Attn:Cindy Koehler, Dept. Clerk i7,'gl✓,�P�iSg@1F'f•DI1iU�1v (-�
2720 Gateway Drive Riversde, CA 92507Ak
u_Jlt -
Subject: .i
Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 211108 or 21152 of the Public Resod.kes Code.
t eUTAP�,
Case 5.1043 A General Plan Amendment for Casas De La Venia _
Project Title
n.a Matthew Feske 760-323-8245
State Clearinghouse Number Lead Agency Area Code/Telephone/Extension
(If submitted to Clearinghouse) Contact Person gI
City of Palm Springs, County of Riverside �Q`ro4tu����� °?✓ -tS WCS�' rs°">"1`F " uu`
Project Location(include county)5,, Vr e-� r�crSl Ciw'xy-, 101 iLv-p t C—cvad- 6+ ilAt-- r�Ne l
try- oocAA— 4- f>rem�lu LZ1 cy L 9w,
Project Description:
The project is an application by Bob and Rebecca La Venia for an amendmentnt to the
General Plan Land Use Map to re-designate approximately 2 acres West of South Palm
Canyon Drive, South of East Palm Canyon Drive, East of Mesa Drive and North of
Avenida Granada from L2 (Low Density Residential-2 units per acre) to L4 (Low Density
Residential-4 units per acre) . This would create consistency with the zoning
0rdtr,�Kc,# 4wcLOJ'f mot.
This is to advise that the City of Palm Springs has approved the above described project on
[ZLead Agency ❑Responsible Agency
07/06/2005 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project:
(Date)
1.The project[E]will Owill not]have a significant effect on the environment.
2. V1 An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
VJ A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3.Mitigation measures[[:]were Owere not] made a condition of the approval of the project.
4.A statement of Overriding Considerations[❑was V]was not]adopted for this project.
5.Findings[[]were ❑were not]trade pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at:
City of Palm Spri gs-3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way-PO Box 2743-Palm Springs,CA-92263-2743
07/13/2005 Director of Planning
Signature(PublicAgency) Date Title
Date received for filing at OPR:
January 2004
26 ���� 2—
California Department of Fish and Game
Certificate of Fee Exemption
De Minimis Impact Finding
Project Title:
Project Location (including County):
The project consists of approximately 0.538 acres West of South Palm Canyon Drive, East of
Mesa Drive, South of East Palm Canyon Drive, and North of Avenida Granada.
Name and Address of Project Proponent:
General Plan Amendment by Bob and Rebecca La Venia.
Project Description:
The project is an application by Bob and Rebecca la Venia for a General Plan Amendment to
amend the General Plan Map Designation for Approximately 0.538 acres West of South Palm
Carryon Drive, East of Mesa Drive, South of East Palm Canyon Drive, and North of Avenida
Granada from L2 (Low Density Residential-2 units per acre) to L4 (Low Density Residential-4
units per acre.
Findings of Exemption:
I. An Initial Study has been conducted by the City of Palm Springs to evaluate the potential
for adverse environmental impacts.
2. A Negative Declaration has been prepared by the City of Palm Springs.
3. The lead agency has no evidence before it, including the information in the Initial Study,
the Negative Declaration and public comments, to indicate that the proposed project
could have any potential for an adverse effect on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat
upon which the fish and wildlife depends.
Certification:
I hereby certify that the lead agency has made the above findings and that based upon the record,
the project will not individually or cumulatively had an adverse effect on fish or wildlife
resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
/XP
� 07/13/2005
Norm Canchola Date
Director of Planning Services
City of Palm Springs
Reference: CCR Section 753.5
u � M
* �EaPAtE� 9 uq
Cq</FORN�P City Council Staff Report
DATE: July 6, 2005 Public Hearing
SUBJECT: CASE TPM 32261 —AN APPLICATION BY BOB & REBECCA LA VENIA
FOR A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF
APPROXIMATELY 0.538 ACRES OF LAND INTO TWO LOTS OF
APPROXIMATELY 0.258 ACRES AND 0.258 ACRES, LOCATED AT
1901 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE, ZONE R-1-C, SECTION 27, APN
513390044.
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY
There is an associated General Plan Amendment (Case 5.1044) to change the General
Plan — Land Use designation from L2 to L4. This allows the proposed subdivision to be
consistent with the General Plan. The Planning Commission voted to recommend
approval to the City Council of the General Plan Amendment to change the General
Plan Map from L2 to L4 at its June 8, 2005 meeting. The Planning Commission voted
to recommend approval to the City Council of the Tentative Parcel Map at its November
24, 2004 meeting, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA APPROVES TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32261,
FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 0.538 ACRES OF LAND INTO TWO
LOTS OF APPROXIMATELY 0.258 ACRES EACH, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL
AND ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (CASE 5.1044) BY THE
CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1901 SOUTH PALM CANYON
DRIVE, ZONE R-1-C, SECTION 27..
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The subject property is designated L2 (Very-Low Density Residential). The L2
designations allow residential developments with a maximum of two units per acre. The
Item No. 1 . C ,
City Council Staff Report
-- Page 2
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
objective of the General Plan for the L2 designation is to develop large estates and/or
traditional single-family residences. The proposed subdivision will allow for the
maximum density of two units per acre. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the
General Plan.
The subject property is zoned R-1-C (Single-Family Residential) and the subdivision will
split one lot of approximately 0.538 acres into two lots of 0.258 acres (11 ,238 square
feet) each. The R-1-C Zone requires a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet, each lot
is approximately 11,238 square feet. The R-1-C Zone requires lot dimensions for an
interior lot of 100' in width and 100' in depth for Parcel 1, which fronts Mesa Drive. The
R-1-C Zone requires lot dimensions for an interior lot of 100' in width and 130' in depth
for Parcel 2, which fronts South Palm Canyon Drive. The proposed subdivision will
create Parcel 1 with dimensions of 89' in width and 117' to 132' in depth; Parcel 2 will
have dimensions of 89' in width, 126' in depth. An Administrative Minor Modification will
be required for Parcel 1 , for the lot depth is substandard. The proposed subdivision,
with the Administrative Minor Modification, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance.
Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 are vacant and no grading is proposed at this time. No
architectural plans have been submitted at this time.
This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), the
proposed Tentative Parcel Map meets the conditions outlined for minor alterations in
land use limitations.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
Nor(n Canchola,birector of Planning Services David H. Ready, City M�a, er
Attachments:
City Council Vicinity Map
City Council Draft Resolution
City Council Draft Conditions of Approval
Copy of Planning Commission Report
Copy of Planning Commission Resolution
Copy of Planning Commission Conditions of Approval
�nb-*
City Council Staff Report
-- Page 3
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
N
w Department of Planning and Zoning vv-+ -E
Vicinity MapL—L—j
s
[1FOR� f 4
J
E;- PORTAL EL PORTAL
FF
cn
GAt+lljt4o A1-� BRA
x
Sib
-
Z
u a
z
c!� C')
q M rn [—QT
¢ � v
\ CAMINO CARMELITA �II
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO.: TPM 32261 DESCRIPTION: Application by Bob & Rebecca La
Venia to subdivide approximately 0.538 acres into
APPLICANT: Bob & Rebecca La Venia 2 lots, Located at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive,
Zone R-1-C, Section 27, APN 513390044
City Council Staff Report
Page 4
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 32261, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 0.538 ACRES
OF LAND INTO TWO LOTS. LOCATED AT 1901 SOUTH PALM
CANYON DRIVE, ZONE R-1-C, SECTION 27.
WHEREAS, Bob & Rebecca La Venia (the "Applicant') has filed an application with the City
pursuant the Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 9.60 for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide
approximately 0.538 ACRES of land into two lots located at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive,
Zone R-1-C, Section 27; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed Tentative Parcel Map 32261 with the City and has paid the
required filing fees; and
WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map was submitted to appropriate agencies as required by
the subdivision requirements of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, with the request for their
review, comments, and requirements; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs
to consider Tentative Parcel Map 32261, was given in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on November 24, 2004, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Parcel
Map 32261 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2005, a public hearing on the request for a General Plan Amendment to
change the General Plan Map designation was heard and approved by the City Council in
accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to
consider Tentative Parcel Map 32261, was given in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2005, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Parcel Map 32261
was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision, Tentative Parcel Map 32261, is considered a "project'
pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and is categorically
exempt from the provisions of CEQA per Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use
Limitations).
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:
City Council Staff Report
.- Page 5
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council finds that, Tentative Parcel Map 32261 is
categorically exempt from environmental assessment per Section 15305 (Minor
Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
Section 2: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5, the City Council finds that the
proposed subdivision and the provisions for its design and improvement are
compatible with the objectives, polices, and general land uses and program
provided in the City's General Plan and any applicable specific plan.
Section 3: Pursuant to the Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 9.60, the City Council finds
that with the incorporation of those conditions attached in Exhibit A:
a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a
subdivision is authorized by the City's Zoning Ordinance and General Plan.
The proposed Tentative Parcel Map application to subdivide approximately 0.538 acres
into two lots is in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the City of Palm
Springs General Plan and is not detrimental to the existing uses specifically permitted in
the zone in which the proposed use is to be located.
b. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, including yards,
setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, and other features required in order to adjust
said use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood.
The proposed subdivision is approximately 0.538 acres of land. The proposed
subdivision will create two lots of approximately 0.238 acres each. The proposed
subdivision will create two lots that will be adequate in size and shape to permit future
single-family residential land uses.
C. That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways properly designed and
improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use.
Access will be from South Palm Canyon Drive and Mesa Drive, new access for the
future single-family residences. The driveways would be privately maintained as well as
the landscaped areas around the development.
d. That the conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.
The proposed subdivision is consistent with good development practices and would be
beneficial to development in the vicinity.
City Council Staff Report
June 15, 2005 -- Page 7
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Resolution
No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Palm Springs on by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
City Council Staff Report
Page 8
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
EXHIBIT A
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32261
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1901 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE
JULY 6, 2005
Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or
their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition.
Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved
by the City Attorney.
PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE:
1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of
the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances
and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations.
2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of
Palm Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an
approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or
administrative officers concerning Case TPM 32261. The City of Palm Springs will
promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of
Palm Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the
City's associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the
City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any
such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant
shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of
Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or
abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall
waive the indemnification herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a
matter following an adverse judgement or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of
the indemnification rights herein.
3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and
repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, 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
City Council Staff Report
Page 9
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
agencies having jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be
included in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City.
4. 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 projects or 1/4% for residential projects 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 and Zoning 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. (Projects received after September 12, 2003).
6. The Project will bring additional residents to the community that will contribute to the
cumulative impact on 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 which are near capacity.
Accordingly, the City may determine to form a Community Services District under the
authority of Government C. 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.
7. The owner of the property shall maintain the existing landscape on both lots until a new
landscape plan is approved by the director of Planning Services and/or designee and
implemented.
8. Applicant shall apply for an Administrative Minor Modification for approval by the Director
of Planning Services for a substandard lot (Parcel 1), which is substandard in depth by
less than 20%.
POLICE DEPARTMENT:
9. Developer shall comply with Section II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal
Code.
City Council Staff Report
-- Page 10
TPM32261 —Tentative Parcel Map
FIRE DEPARTMENT:
10. None
ENGINEERING:
11. 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.
12. Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
STREETS
13. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs
Encroachment Permit.
14. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the
Engineering Division. The plan(s) shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of any grading or building permits.
SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE
15. Dedicate an additional 11 feet to provide the ultimate half street right-of-way width of 44
feet along the entire frontage.
16. Construct all driveway approaches in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard
Drawing No. 201. An on-site vehiculr turnaround (hammerhead or similar configuration)
shall be constructed.
17. Construct a 12 feet wide combination sidewalk and bicycle path along the entire South
Palm Canyon Drive frontage. The construction shall be adjacent to the curb with colored
Portland Cement concrete. The admixture shall be Palm Springs Tan, Desert Sand, or
approved equal color by the Engineering Division.
18. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced.
MESA DRIVE
19. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter, 18 feet east of centerline along the entire frontage,
in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200.
20. Construct all driveway approaches in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard
Drawing No. 201.
21. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance
with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210.
fT';
r;ity Council Staff Report
- Pagel 1
TPM32261 -Tentative Parcel Map
22. Remove and replace existing pavement with a minimum pavement section of 2-1/2
inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a
minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of
proposed gutter to centerline of pavement along the entire Mesa Drive frontage in
accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 300. If an
alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be
designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the
project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval.
GRADING
23. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks to keep nuisance
water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters.
MAP
24. A Parcel 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 Parcel Map to the Engineering Division as part of the review
of the Map. The Parcel Map shall be approved by the City Council prior to issuance of
building permits.
25. Pursuant to Government Code 66411.1, all required public improvements shall be listed
in an Improvement Certificate on the Parcel Map and clearly noted that the required
public improvements will be the minimum development requirements for Parcels 1 and 2
of Tentative Parcel Map No. 32261, but shall not be required to be completed until such
time that development is contemplated on the subject Parcels.
O� PALM sA
City of Palm Springs
* * Office of the City Cleric
h NCO e #
m°oaateo 3200 Tnhqurcz Canyon Way • Palm Spungs,California 92262
Oq�/FO R TEL (760)323-8204 •TDD (760)864-9527
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
Bob And Rebecca La Venia for a Tentative Parcel Map for the subdivision
approximately 0.538 acres of land in to two lots of approximately 0.269 acres
each, located at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-1-C, Section 27, at
6:00 p.m., on Wednesday, July 6, 2005. A copy of said notice was mailed to each
and every person set forth on the attached list on the 24t' day of June, 2005, in a
sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at
Palm Springs, California. (270 notices)
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 29th day of June, 2005.
/J MES THOMPSON
ity Clerk
/kdh
HAUSERS\C-CMAgenda Preparation\07-06-06\Affidavit of MailingNotices LaVenia.doc
Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CASE NO. TPM32261
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
BOB AND REBECCA LA VENIA
1901 SOUTH PALM CANYON 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 July 6, 2005. 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 the hearing is to consider Case TPM32261 an application by Bob and
Rebecca La Venia for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide approximately 0.538 acres of
land in to 2 lots of approximately 0.269 acres each. Located at 1901 South Palm
Canyon Drive, Zone R-1-C, Section 27.
This project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section
15315 (Minor Land Alterations) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
whereas the proposed Tentative Parcel Map meets the conditions outlined for Minor
Land Alterations.
Response to this notice may be made verbally at the public hearing and/or in writing
before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City Council by letter (mail
or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
If any individual or group challenges ,the action in court, issues raised may be limited to
only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written
correspondence at or prior to the meeting. Notice of Public Hearing is being sent to all
property owners within four hundred (400) feet of the subject property. An opportunity
will be given at said hearings for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding
this case may be directed to Department of Planning Services, (760) 323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor [lame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede
hablar con Nadine Fieger (760) 323-8364.
J es Thompson, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CASE NO. 5.1043
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs,
California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of July 6, 2005. 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 the hearing is to consider:
A) Case 5.1044 / 3.2669 / 3.2670 an application by Judy and Virgil Havener. The
proposed project involves a General Plan Amendment and an Architectural
Approval, The General Plan Amendment is to change the General Plan Map
designation of L4 to M15 for the area bound by Calle de Ricardo to the North,
Camino Parocela to the South, Paseo Dorotea to the East, and El Placer to the
West. The Architectural Approval is to construct a 4 unit, single story apartment
building, located at 4022 Calle De Carlos, Zone R-2, Section 19, APN'S 680-043-
008, and 680-044-007.; and
(3 B) Case 5.1043 an application by Bob and Rebecca La Venia. The proposed
involves a General Plan Amendment. The General Plan Amendment is to
change the General Plan Map designation of L2 to L4. located at 1901 South_
Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-1-C, Section 27
Pursuant to Section 21000 et seq. of the Public Resources Code and Section 15063 of
the California Environmental Quality Act, Negative Declarations have been prepared for
Case No. 5.1044 GPA and 5.1043 GPA.
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 Planning Commission by
letter (mail or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City Clerk
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
If any individual or group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to
only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written
correspondence at or prior to the meeting. Notice of Public Hearing is being sent to all
property owners within four hundred (400) feet of the subject property. An opportunity
will be given at said hearings for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding
this case may be directed to Department of Planning Services, (760) 323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs puede
hablar con Nadine Fieger (760) 323-8364. ,
'J es Thompson, City Clerk
N
�•"` $p Department of Planning Services W E
Vicinity Map s
C4iAORii'*
T
OVERLOOK RD
� J
EL PORTAL. EL PORTAL
■ UyCf
js
a
n CALLE BRAVO
z
0
z
0
VI A H UER TO
u L
p,
Legend
SITE
Q 400'_Radius r I 1 LA VERNE ANY
LILiIANA DR
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS I+
CASE NO.: TPM 32261 DESCRIPTION: Application by Bob & Rebecca La Venia to
subdivide approximately 0.538 acres into 2 lots, Located at 1901
APPLICANT: Bob & Rebecca La Venia South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-1-C, Section 27, APN
513390044
No 2654
CITY CITY OF PALM SPIRINGS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
043
GENERAL SPLAN AMENDMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council
of the City of Palm Springs, Califor of nia, Will holdhear a
Cty Coned meeting begint its s'at 6u006P M0In the
PROOF OF PUBLICATION Thl Canyon Wgy Palmt pings II, 3200 East TahquRz
(2015.5.C.C.P) The purpose of the hearing is to consider:
I i
STATE OF CALIFORNIA �r 'I • _
County of Riverside t f I
I '
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of LL ,i;'s=• r--:^s:�'"�,
y g g Ay Case 5.10449 3,2669 / 3.2670 an application
the Count aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen b Judyand Virgil Havener. The proposed project
years,and not a party to or Interested in the Involvehdects al Aeneial Plan Amendment and an Ai-
above-entitled is to chaiPre the Gha General Plan Amend-
above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a gg enei al Plan Map designa-
tion of Ld to e Tor floe area bound by Calle de
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING R,cardo to the North, Camino Parocela to the
South, Pasco Dorotea to the East, and EI placer
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, Soul West.The Architectural Approval Is to con_
County and published in the city of Palm Springs, trust
at 4022'single
all,oet carioca za Approval
building oc lo-
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been 19, APN's 680-043-008, and LZ-ne -2 Section
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the 007; and
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of
California under the date of March 24,1988.Case "M"" .*.
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the 1"7
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller
than non pariel,has been published in each regular
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any /
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit:
Iltil)} -
dune 25 ,200$
fl ' nn
i �
All in the year 200$
I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the B) Case 5.1043 an application by Bob and go-
foregoing is true and correct, becce La Veme.The proposed involves a General
g g Plan Amendment. The General Plan Amendment
is to change the General Plan Map designation of
nr - LZ to L4 located at 1901 South Palm Canyon
Dated at Palm Springs,California this-----28 day Drive, zone P-1-C, Section 27 y
~� Pursuant to Section 21000 at seq. of the Public
0f-r-------- do¢-----------------------------200$ forma Env Cade and Section 15063 of the Call-
rations have beental (tua li Act, Negative Decla-
r" GPA and been prepared for Case No. 6.7044
5.1043 GPA,
cA I � '
^--- - Response to this notice may be
---------------=--------^----^----^----------------------- the public hearingand/or y made verbally at
hearin m writing before the
--� —= Signature 9 Written comments may be made to the
(;r �.r '�?.- g Pep)to Commission by letter(mail or bang de-
L,_I er-
r.r4rp - James Thompson
hquitz City Clerk
3200 East Tahquitz Canyyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
If apt. 'ndroidual or group challenges the action In
C:J rti issues raised may be limited to only these
1 issues raised at the
Public
c_ this notice of rn writte correseonng described m
or to the meetln Public
at or ppn-
- •�. ";J L; ng sent to all g'Property
of Public Hearing is be-
-`J - cold(400)feet ofrthe subject propeky gaup hun-
�— 2[ tunity will be given at said heather for all inter-
Info("" eoaPersons to be heard. Questions re ai
plan-
Mug Set ving
ces b ddire-ild to Department of Plan-
( ) 23-8245.
ri Si necesita
is Ciudad de upalm con
cayyrta, porfavor Ilame a
- i L ,Nadine Regei (760) 323 8364. puede hahler con
James 'rhomp son, City Clerk
Pub: June 2 , 2005
MR BILL DAVIS AND
NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION MR PETER DIXON MS TRISHA DAVIS
C.C.JULY 6,2005 Hearing (TENNIS CLUB AREA) (TENNIS CLUB AREA)
TPM 32261 -Bob&Rebecca La Venia 1836 VIA AGUILA 3375 FOOTHILL ROAD#821
PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 CARPINTERIA, CA 93013
MR FRANK TYSEN
(C/O CASA CODY COUNTRY INN) MS CHRISTINE HAMMOND MR BOB WEITHORN
SMALL HOTELS (TAHQUITZ RIVER ESTATES) (TENNIS CLUB/SMALL HOTELS)
175 SOUTH CAHUILLA ROAD 1155 SOUTH CAMINO REAL 261 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR TIM HOHMEIER (MS ROXANN PLOSS) MR PHIL TEDESCO
(DEEPWELL) OLD LAS PALMAS (DEEPWELL RANCH)
1387 CALLE DE MARIA 930 CHIA 335 BIG CANYON DRIVE
PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264
MR MARSHALL ROATH
MS SHERYL HAMLIN MR JOHN HURTER
(HISTORIC TENNIS CLUB AREA) (RACQUET CLUB AREA)
565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE PO BOX 2824
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-2824
MS MARGARET PARK
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA
INDIANS �J�J�J�J INDIANS
650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
VERIFICATION NOTICE-0=0-:J PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ATTN MS LORETTA D MOFFETT
PO BOX 2743
PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-2743
MR PETE MORUZZI
PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE
HISTORIC SITE REP-0-:J=J PO BOX 4738
PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-4738
MR AND MRS BOB LA VENIA
1968 MESA DRIVE
SPONSORS&OWNERS=J-J=D PALM SPRINGS CA 92264
� 1
J
511-190-001 511-190-008 511-190-009
Palm Canyon Mobileclub Lloyd & Minna Maryanov Lawrence C Bershon
PO Box 9118 2060 S La Merced Way 2066 S La Merced Way
Fountain Vall, CA 92728-9118 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9032 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9032
511-190-010 511-190-011 511-190-012
Eddie & Lee Madick James V Bradford Rene & Pat Etienne
2074 S La Merced Way 2082 S La Merced Way 4137 Don Ibarra P1
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9032 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9032 Los Angeles, CA 90008-4212
511-190-013 511-190-014 511-190-015
Mitch D Susnar Powell F Edge Charlotte T Levy
114 E La Verne Way 12G E La Verne Way PO Box 42
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9015 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9015 Skokie, IL 60076-0042
Sll-190-016 511-190-017 57.1-190-018
Bruce Bartley Irving & Martha Kazan Pamela R Molloy
6200 Longwood Rd 162 E La Verne Way 207 E Kirkwall Rd
Little Rock, AR 72207-2719 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9015 Glendora, CA 91740-5651
511-190-019 511-190-020 511-190-021
Jack S & Geraldine A1had *B* Rose T Schwimer Stanley R & Harriet Litt
5319 Butterworth Rd PO Box 3061 PO Box 351
Mercer Island, WA 96040-4729 Beverly Hills, CA 90212-0061 Mercer Island, WA 98040- 0331
511-190-022 511-190-023 511-190-024
Peter Eckert Nathan T Kessler Sanford & Kathleen Steiner
827 14Th St 234 E La Verne Way 1421 Lama Rd
Santa Monica, CA 90403-1703 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9015 Kalamazoo, MI 49008-2804
511-190-025 511-190-026 511-190-027
Stacy B Ward Tr Barnow Robert F & Joanne Kraft
2091 S Ramitas Way 508 N Kings Rd 1 4846 S Knoll Ct
I Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027 Los Angeles, CA 90048-6022 W Bloomfield, MI 48323-2521
511-190-028 511-190-029 511-190-030
Stanley M & Barbara Spie *B* Steve M Lieser Eugene P & Honey Glick *M*
709 Calle Del Resplendor 14554 Keswick St 2071 S Ramitas Way
Santa Fe, NM 87505-5969 Van Nuys, CA 91405-1201 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027
511-190-031. 511-190-032 511-190-033
Roger F & Barbara Etheringtoz Kurt Haggstrom H P Shields
2700 Newport Blvd 222 2063 S Ramitas Way 3160 Oak Rd 310
Newport Beach, CA 92663-3731 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027 Walnut Creek, CA 94597
511-190-034 511-190-035 511-190-036
Kenneth G Simmonds Robert L Lahatt Rob W Parkins
2057 S Ramitas Way 1500 SW 5Th Ave 2501 2051 S Ramitas Way
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027 Portland, OR 97201-5438 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027
511-190-037 511-190-038 511-190-039
Berte T Weinberg Julienne J & R Leyda Leonard & Maryellen Schneidm�
591 S Swidler P1 2630 SW Vista Ave 153 Lake St
Orange, CA 92869-5220 Portland, OR 97201-8446 Sherborn, MA 01770-1607
1511-190-040 511-190-041 511-190-042
�Garabet & Alice Vakian Edward M Aronin Gary W & Mary Stray
4048 Falling Leaf Dr 8140 Calabar Ave 2033 S Ramitas Way
Encino, CA 91316-4419 Playa Del Rey, CA 90293-7812 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027
511-190-043 511-190-044 Sll-190-045
( Shirley A Cruse Marvin W & Jacquelyn Heyboer Norman S & Merle Panish
12009 S Ramitas Way 2027 S Ramitas Way 3048 Dannyhill Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027 Los Angeles, CA 90064-2006
511-190-046 511-190-047 511-190-048
Weston Holding Cc Renata Young Robert J Kuehl
2154 NE Broadway St 2017 S Ramitas Way 2013 S Ramitas Way
Portland, OR 97232-1561 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027
511-190-049 511-190-050 511-190-051
Ralph J & Ralph Santora Emily H Megrath Gerald S Jacobs
1420 Sunset Ave 2007 S Ramitas Way 2003 S Ramitas Way
Santa Monica, CA 90405-5845 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9027
511-190-052 511-190-053 511-190-054
Shelly R Montez Barbara Egger Anthony B & Nancy Fisher
245 Calle Bravo 875 La Playa St 277 2905 Paper Ln
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9065 San Francisco, CA 94121-3259 Newport Beach, CA 92660 -3311
� 511-190-055 SII-190-056 511-190-057
Kent Mathews Edward & Stephanie Booker Duwayne E Trost
1734 NE Halsey St 8148 California Ave PO Box 8275
Portland, OR 97232-1428 Whittier, CA 90602-2821 Black Butte R, OR 97'759-8275
1511-190-058 511-190-059 511-190-060
William L Rogers Connie M Hancock Edward R & Jolene Skillin
2155 SW 75Th Ave 193 Calle Bravo PO Box 240
Portland, OR 97225-3709 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9065 Angola, IN 46703-0240
511-190-061 511-190-062 511-190-063
William K & Kathleen Paxson Elsa S Kunin Irwin A & Shirley Baker *M*
31670 SW Arbor Glen Loop 171 Calle Bravo 2828 Salem Ave
Wilsonville, OR 97070-9440 Palm Springs, CA 92264-3007 Saint Louis P, MN SS416-1918
511-190-064 511-190-065 51.1-190-066
Virgina J Wire Mary A Wallentine Kenneth W & Claudia Wulf
157 Calls Bravo 151 Calls Bravo 2002 S La Merced Way
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9065 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9065 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9066
511-190-067 Sll-190-068 511-190-069
'' Edmund A & Rachel Mantini Mack Silbert Arnold I & Vivian Missner
22416 Skylake PI 2018 S La Merced Way 6625 N Kenton Ave
Santa Clarita, CA 91350-5236 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9066 Lincolnwood, IL 60712-3321
511-190-070 511-190-071 511-190-072
Richard H Helfant *B* Heidi L Herpel Gerald S & Sandra Ostroff
1624 Via Arriba 4403 Ocean Front Walk 101 218 Main St
Palos Verdes , CA 90274-1233 Marina Del Re, CA 90292-6732 Kirkland, WA 98033- 6106
511-190-073 511-190-074 511-190-075
' Jerome Pershin Cc Lawrence & Iris Simon Arthur Wolf
25225 Franklin Park Dr 152 E Via Puerto 4611 Louise Ave
'Franklin, MI 48025-1291 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9067 Encino, CA 91316-3528
Sll-190-076 511-190-077 511-190-078
Tr Moldawer Barry T Kramer Berford Cc
PO Box. 2849 41 Geldert Ct PO Box 2624
Palm Springs, CA 92263-2849 Tiburon, CA 94920-1460 Rapid City, SD 57709-2624
511-190-079 511-190-080 51.1-190-081
Richard M Meyerson Justin M & Marianne Fishbein Myrle T Gabor
527 3Rd Ave 187 197 E Via Huerto 6155 Woodman Ave 217
New York, NY 10016-4168 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9067 Van Nuys, CA 91401-2971
511-190-082 511-190-083 511-190-084
Sally T Mink Sidney & Sharlene Ladin Norman D & Rhonda Tschi'da
183 E Via Huerto 3450 Fairway Ln 2948 NE 160Th Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9067 Minnetonka, MN SS305-4451 Portland, OR 97230-5114
511-190-085 511-190-066 Sll-190-087
Sylvia & Robert Schneeweiss Holding Dennis L Lise Brix
190 Laurel Brook Rd 2626 Skyway Dr 30 H St
Middlefield, CT 06455-1217 Grand Prairie, TX 75052-7609 San Rafael, CA 94901-1792
511-190-088 511-190-089 511-190-090
John Dobbins Hendrik & Doreen Deboer West Homeowners Assn Inc
1366 E San Jacinto Way 103 E Via Huerto 1111 E Ramon Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262-5806 Palm Springs, CA 92264-9067 Palm Springs, CA 92264-7795
511-191-001 Sll-191-003 511-191-004
Ngon D & Christina Nguyen Helen L Smith Barbara Layden
1614 E Morava Pl PO Box 23S 15809 NE Sacramento St
Anaheim, CA 92805-5435 Palm Springs, CA 92263-0235 Portland, OR 97230-5217
511-191-005 511-191-006 511-191-007
Douglas J & Nancy Rumsey Anita L Legg *M* Eli V & Susan Giaquinto *M*
13 Hetzel Ln 5301 Laurel Canyon. Blvd 245 2183 16Th Ave
Port Jervis, NY 12771-3722 N Hollywood, CA 91607-2777 San Francisco, CA 94116-1846
L�
511-191-008 511-191-009 511-191-010
Dennis R & Dawn Ainsworth Tr Bennett Lyn & Bernice Eubanks
' 13480 Salmon River Rd 441 Linda Vista Ave 611 S Palm Canyon Dr 7224
San Diego, CA 92129-2610 Pasadena, CA 91105-1119 Palm Springs, CA 92264-7453
511-191-011 511-191-012 511-191-013
Robert C Dykes Jon B Gardner Ernest T & Gaile Hohman
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 11 3615 S Carolina St 5 56478 Eclipse Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-6253 San Pedro, CA 90731-0267 Bend, OR 97767-2016
� 511-191-014 511-191-015 511-191-016
Marilyn E Lucea Plan F Reeder Heike Peters
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 14 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 15 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr IG
,Palm Springs, CA 92264-8380 Palm Springs, CA 92264-6493 Palm Springs, CA 92264- 8953
511-191-017 511--191-019 511-191-020
Irene Davis Gary N & Maria Schubert Gary N & Maria Schubert.
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 17 256 Melrose Dr 256 Melrose Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264- 6023 Oxnard, CA 93035-4431 Oxnard, CA 93035-4431
511-191 -021 511-191-022 511-191-023
Gary N & Maria Schubert Perk A & Phyllis Slingsby Marion J Bulman
, 256 Melrose Dr 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 22 72.6 Indiana Ct 4
Oxnard, CA 93035-4431 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8952 El Segundo, CA 90245-3403
511-191-024 511-191-025 511-191-026
John T Stevens Goldrich & Kest Industries Ralph J Raya -
446 College Ave 5150 Overland Ave 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 26
Santa Rosa, CA 95401-8952 Culver City, CA 90230-4914 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8952
511-191-027 511-i91-028 511-191-029
, Stuart M Weiss Pamela Heintzleman Joseph Darwish
1043 S Crescent Heights Blvd 1231 Poplar St 3419 Geary Blvd 2
Los Angeles, CA 90035-0426 Ramona, CA 92065-1839 San Francisco, CA 94118-3341
511-191-030 511-191-031 511-191-032
Ingeborg M & Dilara Mehmed Reginald & Maria Ignacio Dawn & Dennis Ainsworth
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 30 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 31 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 32
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8381 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8381 Palm Springs, CA 922G4-2610
511-191-033 511-191-034 511-191-035
Dennis R & Dawn Ainsworth Sherrie Lindborg Lazlo I & Piroska Balogh
13480 Salmon River Rd 1314 Marquette Ave 1406 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 35
San Diego, CA 92129-2610 Minneapolis, MN 55403-4125 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8951
: 511-191-036 511-191-037 Sll-191-038
Robert T & Judith Mitchell Patrick Sullivan Jeffery G Larsen
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 36 1060 Goldeneye Vw 52395 Bermudas
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8951 Carlsbad, CA 92009-1224 La Quints, CA 92253-4418
L�
511-191-039 511.-191-040 511-191-041
Cinda Miller Sandra J Ivins Jason & Kara Nichols
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 39 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 40 1201 S Manzanita Ave
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8950 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8950 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8408
511-191-042 511-191-043 511-191-044
Stephen S Standaart Aida Shihadeh Dolores K & Edward Skehan
6033 STh Ave Ne 532 Paseo Rosal 701 Ascot Ct
Seattle, WA 98115-6515 Chula Vista, CA 91910-8024 Libertyville, IL 60048-5238
511-191-045 511-191-046 511-191-047
Carolynne Rhodes Sheryl L Durffee Robert J Feste
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 45 403 N Orchid Tree Ln P 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 4-7
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8950 Palm Springs, CA 92262-6568 Palm Springs, CA 92264-89,19
511-191-049 511-191-050 511-191-051
Harold & Arlene Levitch Bob Gendelman Alfred L Milliner
3720 S Stone St 9735 Reseda Blvd 50 5150 Overland Ave
Spokane, WA 99223-4569 Northridge, CA 91324-1346 Culver City, CA 90230-4996
511-191-0S7. Sll-191 -053 511-191-054
J N Bonnell Tr Steinberg Beryl R Hall
980 E Parocela Pl N A 924 15'rh St 1 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 54
Palm Springs, CA 92664 Santa Monica, CA 90403-3137 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8382
511-191-055 511-191-056 511-191-057
John D Rousseau Charles A Selner Harry C Lines *M* -
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr. 55 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 56 27 Commerce St 5C
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8382. Palm Springs, CA 92264-8382 New York, NY 10014-5753
511-191-058 511-191-059 511-3.91-060
Carla J Weber Gerald T Willmont Beverly A Riley
1900 S Palm, Canyon Dr 58 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 59 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 60
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8382 Palm Springs-, CA 92264-8382 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8948
511-191-061 511-1.91-062 511-191-063
Robert C & Patricia Cienkus Donald G & Brenda Johnson Newton L Butler
4552 N Lockwood Ave 2728 E 20Th St 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 63
Chicago, IL 60630-3724 Signal Hill, CA 90755-1003 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8948
51.1-191-064 511-191-065 511-191-06G
Robert C & Patricia Cienkus Tr Friedman Amie & John Lee
4552 N Lockwood Ave 18224 Crater Lake Ct 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 66
Chicago, IL 60630-3724 Fountain Vall, CA 92708-5917 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8948
511-191-067 511-191-068 511-191-069
David J Ticonchuk Orlando T & Mary Green Nachshon Lustig
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 67 20215 Scobey Ave PO Box 5171
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8384 Carson, CA 90746-3058 Palm Springs, CA 92263-5171
511-191-070 511-191-071 511-191-072
, Steffan T Hemming James E & Kay Chabot Stephen M Harris
'APO Box 2405 PO Box 224 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 72
Palm Springs, CA 92263-2405 Long Beach, WA 98631-0224 Palm Springs, CA 92264-0020
511-191-073 511-191-074 511-191-075
: Jeremy B Watkins Irving & Phyllis Pozepoff Tr Barthel
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr. 73 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 74 PO Box 11041
Palm Springs, CA 92264-6919 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8947 Tacoma, WA 98411-1005
511-191-076 511-191-077 511-191-078
' Joseph R Lettieri Gregory S & Linda Cutshall Gary N & Maria Schubert
: 1950 S Palm Canyon Or 102 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 126 256 Melrose Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8371 Palm Springs, CA 92264-4676 Oxnard, CA 93035-4431
511-191-079 511-191-080 511-191-081
' Martin C Cutshall Scott Edwards Juan R & Irene Michael
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 105 1350 N Crescent Heights Blvd 1916 Cactus Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 Los Angeles, CA 90046-2886 San Diego, CA 92154-8107
511.-191-082 511-191-083 511-191-084
Stanley K & Phyllis Dickens Troy R Stiles Juan M & Griselda Arenas
'73244 Bursera Way 2144 California St Nw 9205 Dinsdale St
Palm Desert, CA 92260-5706 Washington, DC 20008-1878 Downey, CA 90240-6324
5i1-191-085 511-191-086 511-191-087
Diane M Cognate Josue J Andrade Charles C & Joan Corrado
1950 S Palm Cyn ill 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 112 917 Hartzell St
Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8966 Pacific Palis, CA 90272-3819
511-191-088 511-1.91-089 511-191-090
: Claybourn D & A Shelton Charles W Caldwell Clinton E & Rosalie Young
: 304 Portland Cir 35791 Canada C'ir 301 Browning Ct
Huntington. Be, CA 92648-0267 Cathedral Cit, CA 92234-7513 Roseville, CA 95747-5832
1511-191-091 511-191-092 511-191-093
Carla V Higuera Ignacio & Nora Austrian Dennis R & Dawn Ainsworth
1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 117 30675 Avenida Juarez 13480 Salmon River Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8966 Cathedral Cit, CA 92234-2912 San Diego, CA 92129-2610
511-191-094 511-i9i-095 511-191-096
Daniel L & Mary Sitko Ernest A & Lectta Cutshall Robert C & Patricia Cienkus
481 Round Lk 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 121 710 Waukegan Rd
Horton, MI 49246-9738 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 Glenview, IL 6002E-4104
511-191-097 511.-191-098 511-191-099
Kenneth J Macmurray Robert m Rimac Jonathan D Beckman
1175 Park Grove Dr 400 S Farrell Dr B107 7410 Delaware Ln
Milpitas, CA 95035-3532 Palm Springs, CA 92262-8965 Vancouver, WA 98664-2143
CJ
511-191-100 511-191-101 511-191.-102
, Gregory S & Linda Cutshall Stephenson George & Sandra Piccardi
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 126 18146 Deer Park Ln PO Box 1099
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 Victorville, CA 92392-3936 Big Bear Lake, CA 92315-1099
511-191-103 511-191-104 511-191-105
Gregory T Scalice Allen E Layton Edward B & Hilary Frigillana
3.950 Palm Canyon Di 129 23348 Batey Ave 5441 Azure Ct
Palm Springs, CA 92264-6066 Harbor City, CA 90710-3052 Byron, CA 94514-9218
511-191-106 511-191.-107 511-191-108
Jonathan D & Jodi Beckman Gerald L & Bonnie Antalick Fred G Fuerst
7410 Delaware Ln 14 Bear Fountain Ct 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 234
.Vancouver, WA 98664 Wentzville, MO 63385-3519 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8963
511-191-109 511-191-11.0 511-191-112
Howard Lam Warren B & Virginia Vesper Garth May
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 135 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 136 48698 Desert Flower Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8963 Palm Desert, CA 92260-6236
.511-191-113 511-191-114 511-191-115
Dennis C Stephens Tr Root Elizabeth Flores
PO Box 14312 1089 Kaski Ln 1950 S Palm Cyn 141
San Francisco, CA 94114-0312 Concord, CA 94518-8427 Palm Springs, CA 92264
511-191.-116 511-191-117 511-191-116
Thomas G & Opha Cowgill Dianne E Boger David L & Alan Petersen
PO Box 1118 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 143 1788 N Widdows Way
San Andreas, CA 95249-1118 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8373 Orange, CA 92865-4366
511-191 119 511-191.-120 511-191-121
Robert R Quinlan Sheila Weiers Mary A Kaestner
1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 145 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 146 3184 Oakcrest Dr Nw
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8373 Palm Springs, CA 92264-4723 Salem, OR 97304-1219
511-191-122 511-191-123 511-191-124
Tr Gordon Rick L & Linda Pinson Michael A Scebbi
2212 Danville Blvd 3210 Fanwood Ave 3222 Ashgate Way
Alamo, CA 94507-2661 Long Beach, CA 90808-1703 Ontario, CA 91761-0364
511-191-125 511-191-126 511-191-1.27
Glenn G Bulow Denise Wislon David Gehin
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 151 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 152 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 153
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 Palm Springs, CA 92264-5850 Palm Springs, CA 92264-0951
511-291-128 511-191-129 511-191-130
Richard M & Francesca Kerr Barbara A Hitchcock Betty L Stahl
7716 175Th St Sw 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 155 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 156
Edmonds, WA 98026-5024 Palm Springs, CA 92262-5904 Palm Springs, CA 92264-6961
511-191-131 511-191-132 511-191-133
Charles & Joan Corrado Robert Adams Steven P Moniz
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 157 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 158 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 159
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8961 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8961
511-191-134 511-19l-135 511-191-136
Randall D Steele William P Wolf Priscilla Mercado
68385 Los Gatos Rd 2215 Market St 478 1950 S Palm Canyon Dr 162
Cathedral Cit, CA 92234-3675 San Francisco, CA 94114-1612 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8961
511-191-137 511-191-138 511-191-139
Sharon A Castle Thomas P Ross Jules & Dorothy Kosloff
12272 2Nd, St 3770 Torito Cir 5110 N 40Th St 100
Yucaipa, CA 92399-4212 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8937 Phoenix, AZ 85018-2143
511-191-140 511-191-141 511-191-142
Meredith & Alan Bowers Daniel P Stimpert Christopher & Patricia Roger:
3195 Serena Ave 1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 167 795 Camino Magnifico
Carpinteria, CA 93013 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 San Marcos, CA 92069-8945
511-191-143 511-191-144 Sll-191-145
Francesca Harrison Frances G Chicosky Hassell. W Scott
19419 Pacific Coast Hwy 1471 E El Alameda 61.58 Whited Rd
Malibu, CA 90265-5411 Palm Springs, CA 92262-5844 Sebastopol, CA 95472-4037
511-191-146 511-191.-147 511-191-148
Nicholas Kostecki Dawn Grindeman Christian J Pettersen -
1900 S Palm Canyon Dr 172 6091 Saturn St 751 Sylvanoak Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8945 Los Angeles, CA 90035-6402 Glendale, CA 91206 -2143
511-1.91-149 513-390-003 513-390-004
Michael L Williams Richard R & Penny Olsen Donald T Macewan
5150 Overland Ave 75008 W Hanks Rd 1885 S Mesa Dr
Culver City, CA 90230-4914 Prosser, WA 99350-6670 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8305
513-330-005 513-390-010 513-390-016
Gainer Linda M Kelly Robert L Kuperman
25819 Skylark Dr 235 W El Portal 501 S Palm Canyon Dr
Torrance, CA 90505-3933 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8319 Palm Springs, CA 92264-7437
513-390-017 513-390-018 513-390-024
Melvin A & Carol Gerrard *M* Tr Tompkins Carl A Pizzuti
246 W Camino Alturas 7492.3 Us Highway Ill 244 215 W Camino Alturas
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8980 Indian Wells, CA 92210-7134 Palm Springs, CA 92264-3231
513-390-025 513-390-026 513-390-028
Thomas F & Judy Hauseur Frederick R & Jeanne Howard Aaron & Lyndi Dani
211 W Camino Alturas PO Box 169 255 N El Cielo Rd 168
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8902 Yakima, WA 98907-0169 Palm Springs, CA 92262-4843
C�J
513-390-030 513-390-035 513-390-043
Nick Carnegie Michael Brannon Deborah P Hafer *M*
2106 Waugh Dr PO Box 2587 3696 Hidden Trail Dr
Houston, TX 77006-1116 Palm Springs, CA 92263-8929 Jamul, CA 91935-2108
513-390-046 513-390-047 513-390-048
Jeffrey A & Michelle Weaver Robert & Geraldine Harman Robert & Geraldine Harman
340 S Farrell Dr A202 199 Desert Lakes Dr 199 Desert Lakes Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92262-7932 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270-4053 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270-4053
513-400-006 513-400-007 513-400-008
Judith K Hemley Celia K & Douglas Lohmar. Christopher J Sheldon
256 W Camino Buena Vista 244 W Camino Buena Vista 230 W Camino Buena Vista
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8904 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8904 Palm Springs, CA. 92264-8904
513-400-009 513-400-010 513-400-011
Erwin R & Beverly Null Jonathan D & Margaret Gordon Gerald W & Vick=. Hayek
220 W Camino Buena Vista 2550 Garden Ln 1960 S Mesa Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8904 Greenwood Vil, CO 80121-1601 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8973
513-400-012 513-400-013 513-400-018
Mitchell M & Jean Perara Bob A & Rebecca La Venia George A & Flint Pearson
1965 S Palm Canyon Dr 1855 S Palm Canyon Dr 16868 A St
Palm Springs, CA 92264-8917 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8938 Huntington Be, CA 92647-4831
513-400-027 513-400-030 513-400-031
James Nielsen Howard H Wiefele Rosemary, H Cooley
210 W Camino Carmelite. 255 W Camino Buena Vista 1993 S Mesa Dr
Palm Springs, CA 92264-2604 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8904 Palm Springs, CA 92264-2604
513-400-037 513-400-038 *** 260inted ***
Kathleen A Keane Bernard A & Barbara Sherurjn F''
6087 Pitcairn St 1988 S Mesa Dr
Cypress, CA 90630-8973 Palm Springs, CA 92264-8973
511-191-002 511.-191-018 511-191-048
Steve Ayres Marietta & William Glasier Helen &Henning Langelo
11A Dorothy Rd RR #2 3065 Transcanada Hwy NO 1 3065 A1lenhy Rd ,
London SW 112JJ England Mill Bay BC Canada VO4 Duncan BC Canada V9L 6W5
511-191-111 513-390-031 513-400-040
S Pierce & S Samson S. Brown & WD Burton Mildred Bollin
RTE De Beaumont St 1.907 Mesa Dr 1998 Mesa Dr
Peter Jersey JE 37BcQ UK Palm Springs CA 92264 Palm Springs CA 92264
*** 266 Print***
I Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
'DATE: JUNE 8, 2005
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SERVICES
CASE 5.1043 - GPA - APPLICATION BY BOB AND REBECCA LA VENIA, FOR A GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN MAP DESIGNATION FOR
APPROXIMATELY 0.538 ACRES WEST OF SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE, SOUTH OF
EAST PALM CANYON DRIVE, AND NORTH OF AVENIDA GRANADA FROM L2 (LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - 2 UNITS PER ACRE) TO L4 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - 4
UNITS PER ACRE). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1901 SOUTH PALM
CANYON DRIVE, ZONE R-1-C, SECTION 27, APN 513390044.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council:
1. Order the filing of a Negative Declaration; and
2. Approve Case No. 5,1043 for a General Plan Amendment to the General Plan Map
designation of L2 (low Density Residential) to L4 (Low Density Residential) for the property
located at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive and the Mesa area (Exhibit B), Zone R-1-C,
Section 27.
BACKGROUND
An application has been filed by Bob and Rebecca La Venia for a General Plan Amendment to
the General Plan Map designation from L2 to L4 for the property located at 1901 South Palm
Canyon Drive. While the applicant has filed an application for the specific property, the City of
Palm Springs has expanded the General Plan Amendment to include the Mesa area (Exhibit B)
for these properties have a similar situation. The density allowed by the General Plan is
inconsistent with the allowed density of the Zone. The General Plan Amendment to the General
Plan Map designation will correct the difference in the density allowed by the General Plan and
the density allowed by the Zone.
Currently the General Plan designation is L2 designation, which allows for a maximum density
of 2 units per 'acre. The General Plan amendment will change the designation to L4
designation, which allows for a maximum density of 4 units per acre. The Zone is R-1-C, which
allows for 10,000 square foot lots OR 4.356 lots per acre. Staff has reviewed all of the
properties in the Mesa area and found that over 70% are inconsistent with the General Plan, but
consistent with the Zone. The General Plan Amendment will correct the differences in the
allowed density between the General Plan and the Zone
The subject area located in the Mesa (Exhibit B) area: to the east is South Palm Canyon Drive,
to the west are the mountains, to the south is Avenida Granada, and to the north is East Palm
Canyon Drive. The subject property is one lot of approximately 0.538 acres (23,435 square
feet).
2 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Plamier: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
The Planning Commission on November 24, 2005 voted 6-0 to recommend to the City Council
to approve the Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the one lot into two lots of approximately
0.258 acres (11,238 square feet) each. The approval of the Tentative Parcel Map is predicated
upon the approval of the General Plan Amendment.
ANALYSIS
The General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance are inconsistent for the area. The subject property
is designated L2 by the General Plan Map and is Zoned R-1-C (Single-Family Residential).
The General Plan density allows for 2 units per acre or 21,780 square feet per lot and a
maximum of 2 lots. The R-1-C Zone allows for 10,000 square foot lot areas or 4.35 lots per
acre. Approximately 70% of the surrounding properties are less than 0.50 acres (21,780 square
feet) in area. Given the existing and future development of the surrounding properties, staff
found that a L4 designation would be more appropriate for the area. The proposed L4 General
Plan designation will allow the density to be consistent with the R-1-C Zone and will not change
any of the development standards already in place by the Zoning Ordinance.
The existing lot size at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive is 23,435 square feet. The L2
designation would allow only 1 unit, while the proposed L4 designation would allow 2 units. The
R-1-C Zone allows a lot area of 10,000 square feet and allowed 2 lots.
The proposed L4 General Plan designation would be compatible with the surrounding
properties. Staff has prepared a table that outlines the surrounding properties with the General
Plan designation and Zone.
General Plan Zoning Land Uses
North RC, H43/21 R-2, R-3 Multiple-Family Residential / Hotel
South L2, PR R-2, R-3 Multiple-Family Residential / Hotel
East C 0-20 Open Space
West M15, H43/21 R-2, R-3 Multiple-Family Residential / Hotel
Currently the properties designated L2 are single-family residences that transition the multiple-
family residential to the east and the mountains to the west. The proposed L4 designation will
not change the development pattern for this neighborhood. The development standards will
remain the same, for the R-1-C Zone is not changing, only the allowed density per the General
Plan.
The General Plan is undergoing an update of land use designations, which includes the subject
property area. The City of Palm Springs has identified this area as one of the areas that is
known to be inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance and that a change in the General Plan Map
designation would be compatible with the existing developments in this area. Therefore the
v
3 Application Cornplete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
request for the General Plan Amendment to the General Plan Map is consistent with the goals
of the City and the General Plan Update.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND NOTIFICATION
An Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared for the proposed General Plan
Amendment in accordance with the regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). The Negative Declaration found the General Plan Amendment to the General Plan
Map designation will not have any significant impacts to the environment.
NOTIFICATION
A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration were published in the newspaper and mailed
to local agencies and interested parties.
The public hearing notice for the proposed project was published in the Desert Sun newspaper.
A public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within 400' of the project site.
As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any inquiries.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Draft Resolution
3. Draft Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A)
4. Map of area (Exhibit B)
5. Copy of Notice of Intent to Adopt (for the Planning Commission packet only, otherwise on
file in the Planning Services Department)
6. Copy of Negative Declaration (for the Planning Commission packet only, otherwise on file in
the Planning Services Department)
4 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Plaiuzer: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
D4�partmEnt of Planning Services w E
, .
Vicinity I+wflap S
O V ERLOI OI< RED
FT I
L i
1
EL PORTAL EL PORTAL '
1
CAN1�N'� At 1 CALLS BRAVO
L
o
GFSn�Cy06��NP � O� VIA HUERTO
Legend
o re
Q LA VER NE WY
LILiIAI`.IAI R � < .l T / I
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO.: 5.1043 DESCRIPTION: An application by Bob and Rebecca La
General Plan Amendment Venia, for a General Plan Amendment to amend the
General Plan Map designation for approximately 0.538
acres west of South Palm Canyon Drive, south of East
APPLICANT: Bob and Rebecca La Venia Palm Canyon Drive, and north of Avenida Granada
from L2 (Low Density Residential) or 2 dwelling units
per acre to L4 (Low Density Residential) or 4 units pe
acre, located at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone
R-1-C, Section 27, APN 513390044.
5 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Peske
Staff Engineer: NA
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO
THE CITY COUNCIL for a General Plan Amendment to CHANGE
THE General Plan Map DESIGNATION FROM L2 (LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1-2 UNITS/ACRE) to L4 (LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 3-4 UNITS/ACRE), IN ORDER TO
increase the allowed General Plan density to that of the R-1-C
Zone LOCATED AT 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive, ZONE R-1-
C, SECTION 27.
WHEREAS, Bob and Rebecca La Venia (the "applicant') has filed Case 5.1043 with the City for
a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan Map designation from L2 to L4 for the
property located at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palm Springs (the "applicant') has expanded Case 5.1043 for a General
Plan Amendment to the General Plan Map designation from L2 to L4 for the Mesa area (Exhibit
B), which includes the property at 1901 South Palm Canyon Drive; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment to the General Plan Map designation from L2 to L4
for the Mesa area (Exhibit B) will not change the Zone designation of R-1-C for the Mesa area
(Exhibit B); and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs
to consider Case No. 5.1043; and
WHEREAS, on June 8, 2005 a public hearing to consider Case No. 5,1043 was held by the
Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the
evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including but not limited to the
staff report, all written and oral testimony presented.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the Planning Commission finds that the Initial Study and
Negative Declaration adequately address the general setting of the General Plan
Amendment, its potentially significant impacts; and
Section 2: The General Plan Amendment to the General Plan Map designation will replace
the L2 (Low Density Residential) land use designation with the L4 (Low Density
Residential) land use designation. This will allow the allowed density to change
from 1-2 units per acre to 3-4 units per acre, which is consistent with the existing
Zone designation and existing developments in this area.
I
6 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Section 3: The subject area is located in the Mesa area (Exhibit B): to the east is South
Palm Canyon Drive, to the west are the mountains, to the south is Avenida
Granada, and to the north is East Palm Canyon Drive.
Section 4: The proposed General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan Map
designation from L2 to L4 is necessary and proper at this time, and will not be
detrimental to the adjacent property or residents.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning
Commission hereby recommends approval to the City Council of the General Plan Amendment
to the General Plan Map designation from L2 to L4 for the proposed area (Exhibit B), subject to
Conditions of Approval in Exhibit A.
ADOPTED THIS 8th day of June, 2005.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
Chairman of the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission
I
7 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Plarner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
EXHIBIT A
CASE 5.1043
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1901 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE
JUNE 8, 2005
Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or
their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition.
Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered_into shall be in a form approved
by the City Attorney.
PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
Administrative:
1. Any proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of
the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances
and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations.
2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of
Palm Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an
approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or
administrative officers concerning Case 5.1043. The City of Palm Springs will promptly
notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm
Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's
associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City
Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such
claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall
not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Palm
Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or abandon
the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the
indemnification herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following
an adverse judgement or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the
indemnification rights herein.
I
8 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
EXHIBIT B
_ r
OL
L \\ 5 1L1—_ T�--
\\�O�/ERuO K�RD,
f �
„` t Q2MIN'U�LTL�RAS� I L
\ ` CPLI CCBR&VO_
IJ( GSM No-4 � L1, h}� A
LVAfA J�1-1
L RtI z}Ny147
G
A I - CA IHMA..
I
� 1
`r40 PR,SDCJ
T- r
wy rr 1 LiL
LE
T
�GdA} 11
Z i
--
-- —
n4lndl
9 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff Plaruier: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1961 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE
LEAD AGENCY: The City Of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92263
CONTACT PERSON: Matt Feske; (760) 323-8245
PROJECT TITLE: Casas De La Venia (Case #5.1043)
PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is located at 1961 South Palm Canyon Drive, (APN
513-390-044), Zone R-1-C, Section 27, (Case #5.1043)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A General Plan Amendment is proposed from L-2 which allows 2 lots per
acre to L-4 which allows 4 units per acre. The proposed General Plan Amendment would
provide consistency with existing parcels. The proposed two (2) lots would be 11, 225+/- square
feet (approximately 1/4 acre) each.
FINDINGS/DETERMINATION: The City has reviewed and considered the proposed project and
has determined that the project will not have significant adverse impacts. The City hereby
prepares and proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: A 20 day public review period for the Draft Negative Declaration will
commence on May 14, 2005 through June 2, 2005 at 5:00 p.m. for interested individuals and
public agencies to submit written comments on the document. Any written comments on the
Negative Declaration must be received at the above address within the public review period. In
addition, you may email comments to the following address: MathhewF@ci.palm-springs.ca.us
Copies of the Negative Declaration/Initial Study are available for review at the above address
and at the City library.
PUBLIC MEETING: This matter has been tentatively set for public hearing on June 8, 2005
Date: Signature
Gary Wayne, Plarming Director
10 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Environmental Checklist Form
1. PROJECT TITLE:
A General Plan Amendment
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Paler Springs, CA 92262
3. Contact person and phone number:
Gary Wayne, Director of Planning Services
(760) 323-8245
4. Project location:
1961 South Palm Canyon Drive, (APN 513-390-044), Zone R-1-C, Section 27
5, PROJECT SPONSORS NAME AND ADDRESS:
City of Palrn Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
L-2 (Low density which allows rip to 2 lots per acre)
7. ZONING:
R-1-C (Single family residential zone, 10, 000 sq. ft.)
8. Description of project:(Describe the whole action involved,including but not fronted to later phases of the pioIcet,and any
secondary,support,or off site features necessary for its implemen(ation.Attach additieual sheets if necessary.)
A General Plan Amendment is proposed from L-2 which allows 2 lots per acre to L-4 which
allows 4 units per acre.
The proposed General Plan Amendment would provide consistency with existing parcels. Of
the forty-five parcels located between Palm Canyon Drive from the West through to Mesa
Drive on the East, El Camino Way from the North, and Camino Carmelita to the South, three
parcels meet the requirements and forty-two are non-compliant. The proposed two (2) lots
would be 1], 225+/- square feet(approximately 1/4 acre) each.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:
North—R-1-C / Single family residential zone, 10, 000 sq. ft
South - R-1-B / Single family residential zone, 15, 000 sq. ft
East—R-2/Limited Multiple Zone and PD 80/Plamred Development.
West- R-1-B / Single fammily residential zone, 15, 000 sq. ft
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement).
a. Palm Springs Police Department
b. Palm Springs Fire Department
c. Palm Springs Unified School District
d. Desert Water Agency
12 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Teske
Staff Engineer: NA
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The enviromnental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant hnpact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils
Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology/Water
❑ Materials ❑ Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic
❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
13 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
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
enviromnent, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
❑ enviromnent, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the enviromnent, and
11 an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the enviromnent, 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.
Signature Date
14 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Plainer: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Evaluation Of Environmental Impacts:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A "No hnpact" 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 EIR is
required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant
Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
(mitigation measures "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-
referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined
from the earlier document and the extenl 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 docunent should, where appropriate, include a reference to
the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
15 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: MatthewPeske
Staff Engineer: NA
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
16 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated 'Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on ❑ ❑X
a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to, ❑ ❑ ❑
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site and ❑ ❑ ❑
its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare that would adversely affect ❑ ❑ ❑
day or nighttime views in the area?
a-b) No Impact The site and surrounding area are generally flat and do not contain any
scenic vistas. The site is covered with weeds and grasses. The site does not contain any
thick,stands of trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings. Therefore, no impacts to
scenic resources would occur. Further, construction of the project would not obstruct or
disrupt views of a scenic vista.
c-d) No Impact. The proposed project would serve as infill in an area that is predominantly
residential. The area does not contain any unique features which would be lost or
compromised as a result of the project. The project would comply with City design
standards and would continue the existing development pattern identified in the General
Plan. Therefore, impacts to visual character, including light and glare, are no considered
to be significant.
17 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared
by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the ❑ ❑ ❑
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑
contract?
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) No Invpact. No impact to farmland would occur.
b) No Impact. No Williamson Act Contracts are located on the parcel comprising the
project site. Furthermore, no Williamson Act Contracts are located in the inunediate
vicinity of the project site (Williamson Act Contracts) of the Palm Springs General Plan
FIR(Palm Springs, 1992). Therefore, no impacts to Williamson Act Contracts would
occur.
c) No Impact. The proposed project site is located in an urban area. Parcels adjacent to the
site are designated Single-Family Residential, Multi Family and Vacant. Implementation
of the proposed project would therefore not result in conversion of famlland to non-
agricultural uses. There will be no impact to agricultural laid.
I
18 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Sigg-nificant
Potentially With, Less Than
"Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑
quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially 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 applicable federal ❑ El Elor state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions that
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to Elsubstantial pollutant concentrations? El El N
e) Create objectionable odors affecting El ❑ ❑
a substantial number of people?
21
a-e) No Impact. The project is within the jurisdiction of the South County Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD). The SCQAMD Governing Board adopted the 2003
Air Quality Management Plan(AQMP) on August 1, 2003. The 2003 AQMP updates the
attaimZient demonstration for federal standards for ozone and PM10; replaces the 1997
attannuent demonstration for the federal carbon monoxide (CO) standard and provides a
basis for a maintenance plan for CO for the future; and updates the maintenance plan for
the federal nitrogen dioxide (NO2) standard that the South Coast Air Basin has met since
1992. The revision of the AQMP points to the urgent need of additional emissions
reductions (beyond those incorporated in the 1997/99 Plan) from all sources, specifically
those under the jurisdiction of the California Au Resources Board and the US EPA which
account for approximately 80 percent of the ozone precursor emissions in the Basin
(www.agmd.gov/agmp/).
The project is not anticipated to conflict with or obstruct implementation of 2003 AQMP.
There will be no impact.
The Federal and California State Ambient Au' Quality Standards for important pollutants
are summarized in Table 1 and described in detail below.
19 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Plamzer: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
TABLE 1
FEDERAL AND STATE AMRIENTAIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant Averaging Time Federal Primary Standard State Standard
1-Hour 0.12 ppm 0.09 ppot
Ozone (03)
B-I-loud 0.08 ppm —
8-Hour 9 0 ppm 9.0 ppm
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
1-Hour 35.0 ppm 20.0 ppm
Annual 0.05 ppm —
NiUogen Oxide(NO.)
1-Hour — 0.25 ppm
Annual 0.03 ppm —
Sulfur Dioxide(SO2) 24-Hour 0.14 ppm 0.05 ppin
1-f-lour — 0.5 ppm
Annual 50{g/m' 30/g/m'
PM,, 24-Hour 150 fg/m' 50/g/m'
Annual 15{g/m' --
PM z, 24-Hour 651.g/m' _
Lead 30-Day Avg. — 1.5 fWrv'
Month Avg. 1.5 µ;/in' -
Sowce California Ali Resources Board, "Ambient Air Quality Standards,"January 25, 1999.
ppm =partspei million
{g/m3 = Mus ogiams pei Cubic Meter
Ozone (0) is the roost prevalent of a class of photochemical oxidants formed in the urban abmosphere The creation of ozone is a
result of complex chemical reactions beroreen hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the presence of sunshine. Unlike other
pollutants,ozone is not released directly into the almosphlee from any sources The major sources of oxides of nitrogen and reactive
hydrocarbons, known as ozone precursors,are combustion sources such as facmnes and automobiles,and evaporation of solvents and
fuels. The health effects of ozone are eye mrtation and damage to lung tissues.
Cwban Manoxidc(CO)is a colorless,odorless,toxic gas formed by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. CO concern afions are
generally higher in the winter,when meteorological conditions favor the built)-up of directly emitted contaminants. CO health warning
and emergency episodes recto almost entirely during(lie winter. The coast significant source of carbon monoxide is gasoline puavered
automobiles,as a result of inefficient fuel usage in internal combustion engines. Various industrial processes also emit carbon
monoxide.
Niltogen Oxides(NOx)the fu hna'y receptors of ultraviolet light initialing the photochemical reactions to produce suing.Nitric oxide
combines with oxygen in the presence of reactive hydrocarbons and sunlight to total nitrogen dioxide and ozone. Oxides of nitrogen are
contributors to other an pollution problems including:high levels of fine particulate matter,Pool'visibility and acid deposition.
Sulfur Dioxide(S02)n esults from the combustion of high sulfur content hurls. Fuel combustion is tine major source of S02,while
chemical plants,snlhu'recovey plants,and metal processing are minor contributors.Sndfaces result from a relation of sulfur dioxide
and oxygen in the toeseme of sunlight. S02 levels are generally higher in the winter than in the summer(when sunlight is plentiful and
sulfate is more readily Ibrnod).
Patuculate Miruci(PMIO and PM2.5)consists of particles in the atmosphere as a by-product of file[combustion,through abrasion such as
lire wear,and through soil erosion by wind. Particulates can also be formed Through photochemical reactions in the atmosphere.
PT110 refers to finely divided solids or liquids such as soot,dust,and aerosols which are 10 microns or less in dianeten and can enter Lie
lungs. Pine particles are those less than 2.5 adcrrmelers in dianmte'and arc also referred to as PM2.5.
Lead is found in old paints and coatings,plumbing and a variety Mother materials. Once in We blood stream,lead can cause damage
to the brain,nervous system,and other body systems.Children are most susceptible to the effects of lead. The South County Air Basin
and riverside County portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin a'ein attainment for the federal and Stale standards for lead.
The SCQAMD has established significance thresholds for operational and constriction-related
emissions. Daily and quarterly thresholds are established. Since a project's quarterly emissions
are determined by averaging over a 3-month period (including only actual working days), it is
20 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
possible to not exceed the quarterly thresholds while exceeding the daily thresholds shown in
Table 2.
TABLE 2
EMISSIONS SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA(POUNDS/DAY)
P011ulant CO ROG NOx Sox - PMt0
Operational Emissions
Pounds/Day 550 55 55 150 150
Construction Emissions
Pounds/Day 550 75 100 150 150
Source: SCQAMD, CEQA An Quality Handbook, November 1993
Projects in the Coachella Valley with peak (highest daily) operation-related emissions that exceed any of these
emissions thresholds should be considered significant
I
I
I
21 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff P1amler: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact, , Incorporated Impact No Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special ❑ ❑
status species in local or regional plans,
policies or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or ❑ ❑ ❑
regional plans, policies or regulations, or
by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands, as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, El ❑
vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.),
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with ❑ El ❑
established native resident or migratory
FJ
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological ❑ ❑ Elresources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, ❑ ❑ ❑
or other approved local, regional or state
habitat conservation plan?
22 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
a) 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. Therefore,
the project would not result in impacts to endangered, threatened, or rare species or their
habitats.
b) No Impact. The site is not identified as having any natural community that could be
affected by the project. Therefore, the project would not have an adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community.
c) No Impact. The site does not contain any wetland areas. Therefore, no impact to
federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 would occur.
d) No Impact. The project area is primarily undeveloped but has been disturbed and does
not contain any migration corridors or waterways. Therefore, no migratory patterns of
fish or wildlife would be impacted by this project and no impact would occur.
e) No Impact. The project site is undeveloped; clearing the site would not require 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.
23 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical ❑ ❑ ❑
resource as defined in " 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an archaeological ❑ ❑ ❑
resource pursuant to " 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) No Impact. For paleontological resources, files from the Museum of Paleontology at the
University of California Berkeley were searched. The GeoRef database was also
consulted for information relating to the Palm Springs region.
If prehistoric or historic cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during any
ground-disturbing activities, all work in the area shall stop immediately and the City shall
be notified of the discovery. No work shall be done in the area of the find and within 100
feet of the find until a professional archaeologist can determine whether the resource(s)is
significant. If necessary, the archaeologist shall develop mitigation measures consistent
with the State CI QA Guidelines in consultation with the appropriate state agency and, if
applicable, a representative fi'om the Native American Heritage List. A mitigation plan
shall be submitted to the City for approval. Mitigation in accordance with this plan shall
be implemented before any work is done in the area of the resource find.
d) No Impact. The proposed project would be subject to State law regarding the discovery
and disturbance of human remains. Should any previously utridentified or unanticipated
human remains be discovered during future project development, the City o('Palm
Springs requires mitigation consistent with the General Plan Archaeological and
Paleontological Policy.
24 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less,Tlian
Significant Mitigation Significant "
Impact loccr'porated Impact 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.
I
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, ❑ El ❑
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the El ❑ ❑
loss of topsoil?
l c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and ❑ ❑ Elpotentially 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 ❑ ❑ ElBuilding Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
a)
i) No 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.
25 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
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 Unifornn Building Code
(UBC). Adherence to the provisions of the UBC would reduce potential for
structural darnage in the event of an earthquake. Therefore, no impact would
occur.
ii) No 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, thickness, density, water
content, and firn-mess of underlying bedrock affect seismic response. Seismically
induced shaking and some damage should be expected to occur but damage
should be no more severe in the project area than elsewhere in the region.
Therefore, no impact would occur.
iii) No impact. There are no known geological hazards caused by ground failure or
liquefaction which would prevent use of the site. 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) No impact. Existing codes regulate land grading and erosion control if and when
construction occurs during winter months (Novernber-March). Therefore, no
impact would occur.
c-d) No Impact. See items a and b, above.
e) No Impact. The project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater Therefore, no impact would occur.
26 Application Coinplete: 4/10/05
Staff Plattner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Bess Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the El ❑
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 El El N
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 El ❑ ❑
§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 public use airport, ❑ ❑ ❑ M
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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
I
27 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
h) Expose people or structures to a
sign ificant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands? J
a, b) No Impact. The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the
enviromnent 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. The proposed project site is not within the Noise Impact Combining Zone
(Palm Springs General Plan 1993).
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. Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
h) No Impact. Based on the site's location in an urban area, ii would not be subject to
t wildland fire. No impact would occur.
I
I
28 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Plain-ter: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant'
Impact; Incorporated hnpact No Impact
VIL. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑
waste 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 table ❑ El ❑
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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
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 stormwater 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 Flood Insurance Rate ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
29 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA_
Less Than
- Significant
Potentially with Less Than
significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated 'Impact No Impact
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard
area structures that would impede or
redirect flood flows? ❑ ❑ ❑
i) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of a failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or ❑ El ❑
mudflow?
a,d,e) No Impact. The project would be required to meet all applicable water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements thereby avoiding violation of such standards or
requirements. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b) No Impact. A net deficit i aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table is
not anticipated and therefore, no impact would occur.
c-d) No 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. Therefore, no impact would occur.
e-f) No Impact. No additional impacts to water quality are anticipated.
g-h) No bnpact. The project site is located in an area (determined by FEMA) determined to be
located outside a 500-year floodplain. Therefore, flooding impacts associated with the
proposed project are not considered significant.
i) No Impact. The Palm Springs General Plan Envirorunental Impact Report does not
identify flooding as a result of levee or dam failure as having apotential to expose people
or structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death in City of Patin Sprigs.
Therefore, no inpact would occur.
I j) No Impact The City of Palm Springs is not located in an area subject to seiche, tsunami
or mudflow. Therefore, no impact would occur.
30 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Plainer: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less,Than
Sigoificant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant 'Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated _hnpact, . No Impact
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑
community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to, the general plan, specific ❑ ® ❑
Plan, local coastal program or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community ❑ ❑ ❑
conservation plan?
a) No impact. The project would not divide an established community and no impact
would occur.
I
b) Less than significant. A General Plan Amendment is proposed from L-2 which allows 2
lots per acre to L-4 which allows 4 units per acre.
c) No Impact The project would not conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan. No impact would occur.
I
I
I
I
31 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No 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 general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
a-b) No Impact. No significant mineral resources have been identified in the project area.
The Palm Springs General Plan FIR (Palm Springs, 1992) has not identified any mineral
resources in the plartning area. Therefore, no impact to mineral resources would occur.
I
I
I
I
32 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially . With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
hhpact 'Intorporaled. Impact No hnpact
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 ❑ ❑ ❑ X❑
above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ El Elproject vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) Fora 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 public use airport, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑Y
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 working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
a,b,d) No Impact. The proposed project would not subject surrounding residents to noise
elevations and/or Bound vibration. Therefore, no impact would occur.
c) No Impact. The proposed residential uses are not anticipated to exceed any applicable
noise standards. The proposed project would not be exposed to excessive noise from
neighboring uses. Therefore, this impact is not considered significant.
e-f) No Impact. The project site is not located within any of the clear, approach/departure
and overflight zones for the Palm Springs Airport facility
33 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact incorporated Impact No Impact
XI1. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth
in an area, either directly (e,g., by
proposing new homes and businesses) 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-c) No-Impact. The project site is in an area that is surrounded by residential uses and would
represent an extension of existing residential development. The project site is vacant. No
existing residents or housing would be displaced to accommodate the proposed project.
Therefore, impacts to population and housing arc not considered significant.
I
I
I
f
34 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
significant Mitigation Significant
- Impact Incorporated Impact ,No 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? ❑ ❑ ❑
j d) Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ ® _
a) No impact. The project site is located in the Palm Springs Fire Department service area.
The project would not increase demands for fire services within the City. Therefore,
impacts to fire protection would not be significant.
b) No impact. The project site is located within the service area of the City of Palm Springs
Police Department. The project would not increase demands for law enforcement services
within the City. Therefore, impacts to police protection would not be significant.
c) No impact. The project site is located within the Palm Springs School District. The
Leroy F. Green School Facilities Act of 1998, which governs a school district's authority
to levy school impact fees, assists in mitigating impacts to schools. California
Government Code Sections 65995(h) and 65996(b)note that payments of fees provide
full and complete school facilities mitigation. Therefore, no impact would occur.
d) No impact. The project site is located within the boundaries of the Palm Springs
Department of Parks and Recreation service area. State law requires each new residential
development to dedicate land for panic facilities or pay au in-lieu fee to cover the cost of
acquiring park land elsewhere. The City uses a dedication formula of 5-acres per 1,000
persons. The amount of population generated by the project does not reach the 1,000
person standard. The project does not include provision of any on-site parks. Therefore,
no impact would occur.
e) No impact. The project would not create any significant impacts to the service levels.
Therefore, no impact would occur,
35 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff Plarmer: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Sjgoificant
Potentially I with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated 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 recreational facilities, which ❑ ❑ ❑
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
a-U) No Impact. The proposed project, as a general plan amendment would not increase use
of existing recreational facilities. Therefore,no impact would occur.
36 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigaiion Significant No
Impact Incorporated 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 increase in either the ❑ ❑ ❑
number of vehicle trips, the volume-to-
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or
cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion ❑ ❑ ❑
I
management agency for designated roads
I or highways?
jc) Result in a change in air traffic
patterns, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that ❑ ❑ ❑
results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
l dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g„ farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency El El ❑
access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ IX
g) Conflictwith adopted policies, plans
or programs supporting alternative ❑ El El
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
a-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
would not result in increases in traffic volumes on area roadways, nor would it result in
as exeeedance of a county established level of service Therefore, no impact would occur.
37 Application Complete: 4110105
Staff Plarmer: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with. Less Than
Significant Mitigation,, _ Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. WOULD THE PROJECT:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ ❑ ❑
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing 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 facilities, the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available
to salve the project from existing ❑ ❑ ❑
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider that serves
or may serve the project that it has ❑ ❑
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand, in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) 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-g) No impact. The project would not increase the amount of wastewater flows to the
RWTP. As described in the City of Palm Springs General Plan EIR, capacity
requirements at the treatment plant are calculated on population based water-flow
projects and are not related to specific land uses or designations. As the proposed project
would not substantially add to flows anticipated tinder the general plan and no expansions
in treatment capacity would be necessary, impacts to wastewater treatment are not
considered significant.
i
38 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
Less Than
Significant
with
Potentially Mitigation "Less Than
sigh(ficanf Incorporate Significant
- - Impact d 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 considerable when ❑ ❑ ❑
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.
c) Does the project have environmental
effects that will cause substantial adverse ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
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 would be
constructed on areas that are not identified as sensitive.
Prehistoric or historic cultural resources would not be adversely affected because no
' archeological or historic resources are known to exist in the project areas. Further,
project implementation includes compliance with appropriate procedures for avoiding or
preserving artifacts or human remains if they are discovered.
b) No bnpact. The project would be consistent with the City's General Plan and world not
create any significant impacts. All project impacts would be reduced by adhering to
basic regulatory requirements and/or conditions of approval.
I
i
I
39 Application Complete: 4/10/05
Staff Planner: Matthew Feske
Staff Engineer: NA
c) No Impact. The proposed project would not have any direct or indirect adverse impacts
on humans. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any direct or indirect adverse
impacts on humans.
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) South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 1993
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I