The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1/19/2005 - STAFF REPORTS (17) DATE: January 19, 2005 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning Services CASE NO. 5.0996 PD-294 TTM 31766 - APPLICATION BY WESSMAN DEVELOPMENT FOR, A PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (NO. 294) FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31766 TO SUBDIVIDE 42.2 ACRES INTO 79 LOTS AND CONSTRUCT 79 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND THE VACATION OF THE WESTERLY 23 FEET OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE, LOCATED ON WEST RACQUET CLUB DRIVE, EAST OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE AND SOUTH OF TRAMWAY ROAD, ZONE R-1- A, SECTION 3, APN # 594040046. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: 1) approve Planned Development District-294 for the construction of 79 single-family residential units with associated on and off- site improvements; 2) approve Revised Tentative Tract Map 31766 (dated December 15, 2004); 3) vacate of the westernmost 23 feet of Vista Grande Avenue; and 4) adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. BACKGROUND: The City Council met on January 5, 2005, conducted a public hearing on this project and directed staff to refine the draft conditions of approval in regards to the following topics: • Location and placement of second story units on the site; • Slopes and the re-naturalization of graded areas, through wall locations, appropriate boulder stacking and well-designed landscape treatments; • City Council review and approval of the final PD; and • Infrastructure, edge conditions and street improvements. One December 22, 2004, the Planning Commission voted 5 — 1, with one member absent, to approve the project. SUMMARY: Staff has worked with the City Attorney and the applicant to revise the conditions as directed. A legislative,d'raft of the cTdiri§hs in a "track changes" format is attached to facilitate your review. Director of Pfanning Services' City Manager ATTACHMENTS 1. City Council staff report of January 5, 2005 (Previously provided) 2. Resolution 3. Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval — Legislative draft 0 pA�M Sla City of Palm Springs Office of the City Clerk v` �^ (760) 323-8204 } « C'�DIIAl4� FORN�* MEMORANDUM Date: January 6, 2005 To: General Public From: City Clerk NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the regular meeting of January 5, 2005, Public Hearing Item No. 17 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31766 — CASE 5.0996 — PD-294 WESSMAN DEVELOPMENT— CRESCENDO PROJECT 1000 WEST RACQUET CLUB DRIVE S OF TRAMWAY ROAD AND W OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE the public hearing was opened, public testimony was received, and the public hearing was closed. Mayor and Council discussion was continued to January 19, 2005, 7:00 p.m., Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. I, James Thompson, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California certify this Notice of Continuance was posted on January 6, 2005, as required by established policies and procedures. �c.a JAMES THOMPSON 42t City Clerk w `W H:\USERS\C-CLK\Desk\ADJ MTG NTC.DOC DATE: January 5, 2005 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning Services CASE NO. 5.0996 PD-294 TTM 31766 - APPLICATION BY WESSMAN DEVELOPMENT FOR, A PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (NO. 294) FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31766 TO SUBDIVIDE 42.2 ACRES INTO 79 LOTS AND CONSTRUCT 79 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND THE VACATION OF THE WESTERLY 23 FEET OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE, LOCATED ON WEST RACQUET CLUB DRIVE, EAST OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE AND SOUTH OF TRAMWAY ROAD, ZONE R-1- A, SECTION 3, APN # 594040046. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve: 1) Planned Development District-294 for the construction of 79 single-family residential units with associated on and off- site improvements; 2) Revised Tentative Tract Map 31766 (dated December 15, 2004); 3) The vacation of the westernmost 23 feet of Vista Grande Avenue; and 4) adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. SUMMARY: One December 22, 2004, the Planning Commission voted 5 — 1, with one member absent, to approve the project. The public hearing had been continued from December 8, 2004. Wessman Development has proposed the Crescendo project as a Preliminary Planned Development District. An Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared by the City of Palm Springs, and are incorporated by reference. The project has two entrances which take access from West Racquet Club Drive and a new third entry from Girasol. Recreational amenities include a pedestrian trail approximately 4,900' in length that will be maintained as permanent open space by the homeowners association. Overall density is 1.9 units per acre, which is less than the maximum allowed density of 2.0 units per acre. Within the project, the applicant proposes to subdivide approximately 42 acres into 79 residential lots and additional lettered lots for associated site improvements. The project is proposed as a Planned Development District (PDD) with an associated Tract Map (TM 31766). The PDD includes modified minimum lot sizes for residential lots ranging in size from 15,000 square feet to 54,500 square feet. The underlying zoning designation is the R-1-A single-family residential zone, which requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. Surrounding adjacent lot sizes range from 9,455 square feet to 20,000 square feet in area. The General Plan designation for the project site is L-2 Low- Density Residential which allows two dwelling units per acre to accommodate various types of low density residential development, including large estate lots and traditional single-family homes. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) have been prepared for the project and circulated to responsible agencies and the public. 5.0996-PD-274, TTM 31766 Crescendo Project January 5, 2005 Page 2 BACKGROUND: This project was continued by the Planning Commission from its December 8, 2004 meeting to its December 22, 2004 meeting. On December 8, 2004, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to restudy several facets of the project including: • Subdivision design, terracing of pads and grading; • Building heights; and • Circulation and connectivity to adjacent roadways. On December 15, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised map with the intent of addressing some of the Planning Commission's concerns. Staff has reviewed the revisions and they appear to address some of the Planning Commission's concerns. Grading and Terraced pads: The project site slopes from west to east and from south to north. The applicant has redesigned the map and grading program to reduce the terracing and benching effect. The revised grading program would create tiered, multi-level building pads. The applicant has redesigned the grading to increase the number of slopes, while reducing the height of the slopes, this serves to distribute grade changes more evenly through the project. A side effect of the revised grading program is that rear yard setbacks would be increased to a minimum of 15 feet, which complies with the R-1-A zone rear yard setback provisions. A complete summary of the impacts of the revision is attached as the Summary of Changes to the Site Plan and TTM 31766. The City Council should be aware that acceptance and approval of the minor pad elevation differences (24-32 inches) as multi-level pads could establish a precedent for future consideration of pad elevations and building heights in the hillside areas. Building Heights: Relative to the creation of multi-level pads, the applicant proposes to redesign the residences to step the building pads 24" to 32". This would have the effect of creating steps between the garages and the main residences. Where casitas are proposed in front yards, the casitas would be at the same pad elevation as the garages. The applicant contends that because the building pads have been redesigned with multi-levels, the project now complies with General Plan Policy 3.4.3, which allows building heights to exceed 18' in hillside areas. No other changes to the building height or mass are proposed. The proposed residences are 20' in elevation. Some units are available with optional guest suites, which feature 500 square feet of habitable living space, and have 26' tall elevations. Because the proposed second story mass is limited in area, staff is comfortable that approval of the project architecture creates visual interest, increases the number of proposed elevations, yet does not establish a precedent for the mass of full two-story residences on pads with minimal grade changes. Circulation and Roadway Connectivity: Following direction provided by the Planning Commission, the applicant redesigned the project circulation to provide a third access point at Girasol Road. This would intersect the project at the northeast corner of the site. As of the writing of this report, the Fire Department and Engineering have not had the opportunity to fully review the proposed redesign. As a result, minor changes to the draft conditions of approval may be distributed at the public hearing. However, the project's Traffic Engineer (George Dunn Engineering) has reviewed the circulation changes and notes that the secondary access point is not likely to generate "significant volumes" of traffic. CEQA: An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for this project. Public comments were received on this project. Key issues of concern included adequacy of the Initial Study, grading and terracing of pads, building height, rock crushing, noise and traffic. A written summary summarizing key public comment and responding to those comments has been prepared by Paul DePalatis, the environmental consultant to the City on this project, and is included herein for your review. Following the December 8, 2004 public hearing, the applicant redesigned the project to address some of the issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff has determined that the changes to the subdivision design and the PDD as described in this report do not create any new significant environmental effects, nor do they increase the severity of impacts previously identified, nor do they require modifications to mitigation measures added to the project. Therefore, the changes are within the scope of the Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. C YO Di Dr of lanning Seru' es City Manager ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Provided under separate cover) 3. Planning Commission staff reports, December 8, 2004, December 22, 2004 4. Revised Tentative Tract Map and Preliminary Grading Plan 5. Written Summary of Changes to Site Plan and Grading 6. Supplemental Traffic Analysis, George Dunn Engineering, December 10, 2004 7. Summary of Key Public Comments with Responses, Paul DePalatis 8. Resolution and Conditions of Approval AM y� SAN RAFAEL DRIVE A 9 OPO �Ayf`' s'.p 9yy0 FRANCIS DRIVE Sppd` A'A yO '9y09Li0 yLiy< RACQUET CLUB AD w PRWECT, J O a it 3 0 SITE o VISTACHINO N a 0 z TACHEVAH DRIVE M TAMARISK ROAD �m y ALEJO ROAD O 9G �P s AMADO ROAD 2 o PA SPRING a o Q REGIONAL U U TAHQUITZ CANYON My U AIRPORT w W w < a J BARISTO ROAD U V RAMON ROAD a SUNNY DUNES ROAD O It Q SUNNY DUNES ROAD O Q rc w w o h MESgUITEAVENUE MESQUITE AVENUE o 0 SONDRA ROAD ESCOBADRIVE �SrpglM = ,� � �NrDNDRiI.E u �o i Z j U W Q 2 Q Z 5 0 O Vicinity Map T "CRESCENDO" (TTM 31766) INITIAL STUDY NOT TO SCALE N DePalatis Associates EXHIBIT 2 PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 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 before the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, in conjunction with TTM 31766, Case No. 5.0996, PD-294, application by Wessman Development for the Crescendo project, located at 1000 West Racquet Club Drive, south of Tramway Road and West of Vista Grande Avenue, Zone R-1-A, Section 3, to each and every person set forth on the attached list on the 9th day of December, 2004. A copy of said Notice is attached hereto. Said mailing was completed by placing a copy of said Notice in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 9th day of December, 2004. KATHIE HART Acting City Clerk „%Cl �a NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO. 5.0996 PD-294, TTM 31766 ASSESSORS PARCEL#504-040-046 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of January 5, 2005. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an application by Wessman Development for the Crescendo project. The application includes the following elements: ■ Zone Change - In order to provide zoning which conforms to the design reflected on Tentative Tract Map 31766 (including a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet), a zone change application is required. The proposed project requires a change of the current zoning from R-1-A to PD No. 294 (Planned Development District). ■ Tentative Tract Mao -The project applicant is requesting the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31766. ■ Preliminary Planned Development District No 294 - The project applicant is requesting the approval of a Preliminary Planned Development District to implement the proposed PD zoning. ■ Right-of-Way Vacation - The project applicant is requesting the vacation of the westerly 23 feet of the Vista Grande Avenue right-of-way. The proposed project involves the development of 79 single-family residential lots on approximately 42.2-acres in north Palm Springs. City approval of a tentative tract map (to subdivide the property), a change of zone from R-1-A to PD (to allow minimum lot sizes of 15,000 square feet, minimum interior lot width of 100 feet, minimum cul-de-sac and local street front setback of 10 feet, minimum corner lot side setback of 12 feet and minimum interior lot rear setback of 10 feet), a preliminary planned development district (to implement the PD zone) and the vacation of the westerly 23 feet of Vista Grande Avenue are required. The project is located at 1000 West Racquet Club Drive, south of Tramway Road and west of Vista Grande Avenue,Zone R-1-A, Section 3. The City has prepared an Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Mitigation measures addressing Aesthetics, Air Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise and Utility/Service Systems are included. A copy of the Initial Study and proposed MND can be reviewed or obtained from the City of Palm Springs at the address below. The proposed application, site plan, and related documents are available for public review daily, between 8 am and 5 pm at the City of Palm Springs in the Department of Planning Services, located at 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. 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 City Council 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 Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner, Department of Planning Services, (760)323-8245. Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar con Nadine Fieger(760) 323-8364. Kathie Hart Acting City Clerk -� I; CITY OF - - CASE NO.: 1996 -D •4 TTM 31766 � ' ■ • • •• • • • The Crescendo Project A' - Developm DATE: December 8, 2004 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Director of Planning Services CASE NO. 5.0996 PD-294 TTM 31766 - APPLICATION BY WESSMAN DEVELOPMENT FOR, A PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (NO. 294) FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31766 TO SUBDIVIDE 42.2 ACRES INTO 79 LOTS AND CONSTRUCT 79 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND THE VACATION OF THE WESTERLY 23 FEET OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE, LOCATED ON WEST RACQUET CLUB DRIVE, EAST OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE AND SOUTH OF TRAMWAY ROAD, ZONE R-1- A, SECTION 3, APN # 594040046. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission recommend approval to City Council for: 1) Planned Development District-294 for the construction of 79 single-family residential units with associated on and off-site improvements; 2) Tentative Tract Map 31766; 3) approval of the vacation of the westernmost 23 feet of Vista Grande Avenue; and 4) adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. BACKGROUND: This item was continued by the Planning Commission from its November 10 and 24, 2004 meetings. Wessman Development has proposed the Crescendo project as a Preliminary Planned Development District. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared by the City of Palm Springs, and are incorporated by reference. The project has two separate entrances which both take access from West Racquet Club Drive. Recreational amenities include a pedestrian trail approximately 4,900' in length that will be maintained as permanent open space by the homeowners association. Overall density is 1.9 units per acre, which is less than the maximum allowed density of 2.0 units per acre. Within the project, the applicant, proposes to subdivide approximately 42 acres into 79 residential lots and additional lettered lots for associated site improvements. The project is proposed as a Planned Development District (PDD) with an associated Tract Map (TM 31766). The PDD includes modified minimum lot sizes for residential lots ranging in size from 15,000 square feet to 54,500 square feet. The underlying zoning designation is the R-1-A single-family residential zone, which requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. Surrounding adjacent lot sizes range from 9,455 square feet to 20,000 square feet in area. The General Plan designation for the project site is L-2 Low- Density Residential which allows two dwelling units per acre to accommodate various types of low density residential development, including large estate lots and traditional single-family homes. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) have been prepared for the project and circulated to responsible agencies and the public. The public comment period began 5.0996-PD-274, TTM 31766 Crescendo Project December 8, 2004 Page 2 September 30, 2004 and ended November 10, 2004. Comments received on the proposed MND are attached to this staff report. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND OUTREACH PROCESS: An application for the Preliminary Planned Development District was submitted on October 15, 2003 (PDD). An application for the Tentative Tract Map (TTM) followed on February 29, 2004. A general information meeting for the neighborhood was held on April 22, 2004. Property owners within 400 feet of the project site were notified of the meeting through the Office of Neighborhood Involvement and Public Participation. The project has also been reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on two occasions. On May 10, 2004, the DRC approved the project, subject to following recommendations: 1. No two story units on Vista Grande, acceptable elsewhere and on Racquet Club; 2. Consider opening the project to other streets in the neighborhood; 3. Add pedestrian links to streets; and 4. Public streets. On July 26, 2004, the DRC reviewed revisions to the project, which incorporated recommendations number one, three and four above, and voted to approve the project (3-2), subject to following recommendations: 1. Provide detailed plans of slope treatments; 2. Photo simulations of project along Tramway road would be desirable; 3. Encourage the incorporation of modern architecture: 4. The streets should connect, in a seamless relationship to the neighborhood to the south and east; 5. Mitigate slope differences on each side of street; and 6. Step floor plans where possible The applicant subsequently followed recommendation number one. ANALYSIS: The proposed project, which is not gated, will consist of the development of the 42.2 acre site. The private interior streets were platted to reflect the street pattern of existing development located to the south, with pedestrian connectivity through the site achieved through pathways linked from the cul-de-sacs to Racquet Club Drive. Table 1 indicates adjacent land uses, general plan designation and zoning. TABLE 1 SURROUNDING CONDITIONS North1 SurrVista Grande Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs Aerial Tram Land ending Tram Way, Avenue, Land Use Vacant Land Single Family Way,Vacant Land,Agua Single Family Residences Cahente Indran Reservation Residences General Plan L6,M43/211 L2 L4 L2 Zoning U-R,R-3 R-1-B R-I-C R-I-A General Plan. L2(Residential Low,2 UPA),L4(Residential Low,4 UPA),L6(Residential Law,6 UPA),M43/21(Residential Medium,,43 UPA,21 UPA for apartments) Zoning: R-1-A(Single Family Residential,20,000 min lot),R-1-11(Single Family Residential,15,000 man lot),R-1-C(Singl e Ramnly Residential,10,800 nrin lot),U-R(Urban Reserve) NOTES I M43/21 is also within Redevelopment Project Area 9A and Resort Combining Zane GENERALPLAN The project site is designated L-2 and is subject to a number of General Plan policies. These are summarized below. Policy 3.2.1: Extension of urban growth into undeveloped areas will be phased logically according to the following development criteria: A. Availability of services; B. Logical extension of services- C. Contiguity with existing development; and D. Conformance with an approved PDD or other city approval. The proposed project is located directly adjacent to existing single-family residential development on the east and south, and vacant land to the north and west. The project serves to both infill and to extend the existing residential uses around it, and consequently there will be minimal extension of City infrastructure and services. The proposed project will comply with Criteria A-D above and is, therefore, consistent with Policy 3.2.1. Policy 3.3.1: Encourage developers to design residential projects which maintain the scale and rhythm of the existing adjacent lot divisions and building siting or use other creative design and planning solutions which establish and maintain a distinctive environment for existing residential neighborhoods. The project will maintain the scale of existing the existing residential neighborhoods by locating single-story residences adjacent to existing single-story, single-family development. Also, the proposed subdivision is of a similar intensity (at 2 units per acre) and slightly larger lot size :' 5.0996-PD-274, TTM 31766 Crescendo Project December 8, 2004 Page 4 (15,000 — 54,500 square feet) as found in the existing neighborhoods (with lot sizes ranging from approximately 10,000 — 20,000 square feet). Additionally, the project proponent has included a variety of roofline types in order to add diversity and character defining features to the proposed project. Policy 3.3.3: Encourage the preservation of scenic viewsheds from adjoining properties to a reasonable degree. The project is consistent with this policy in that the project would not include two-story units in the project perimeter. The low profile of the homes and similar grade levels to adjacent residences should minimally impact views from existing residences or vistas from State Highway 111 due in part to landscape berms proposed along the project perimeters and along Racquet Club Road and Tramway Road. Policy 3.4.3: Limit new building heights to a maximum of 26 feet with minimum setbacks from property lines equal to the height. The proposed homes are primarily single-story in height, with limited two-story options and will not exceed 20' to 26' feet. Pad heights and roof elevations for each lot should be specified in the Final Development Plan to control final building heights. Policy 5.12.1: New Development should be so designed that all buildings fit into the natural landscape with a minimum of onsite grading. Approximately 225,000 cubic yards of cut and fill are proposed which will be balanced onsite. The grading plan creates large, flat terraces that allow for double-loaded streets (with building pads on either side); this plan allows all storm water to drain to the street and it allows sewer laterals to drain to the main (located in the street). Manufactured slopes will occur between the terraces. The Crescendo project grading plan proposes a series of five terraces; the manufactured slopes will range from 20-30 feet high and will be heavily landscaped with native boulders and desert plant materials. The preliminary grading plan indicates, with exception of the homes that back to Vista Grande Avenue, building pads will be located below the road grade of the adjacent public streets and will also be at a similar grade to the existing residences. The applicant has tried to minimize the extent of the grading, and although the project can be considered to step with the terrain, substantial grading is proposed. Alternative grading approaches that create a greater number of terraces and reduced slope heights may be possible, and would require a redesign of the project. Policy 5.4.4: Hillside development shall satisfy the following performance criteria: b) Natural Slopes in excess of 30% shall remain undisturbed. d) Disturbed areas not proposed for development shall be re-naturalized and re-vegetated. e) Utilize low lighting levels to avoid glare. 0 All public utilities shall be located underground. g) Plant species native to the immediate region shall be used in all non-recreational landscaping located in or adjacent to open space areas. As designed, and with the recommended conditions of approval, the project is consistent with Policy 5.4.4. ZONING As indicated previously, the underlying zoning designation for the project site is R-1-A (single- family residential). Table 2 compares the PDD proposal with the R-1-A zoning regulations. The project requests a reduction in minimum lot size and lot width, front yard setback, corner lot side setback and minimum interior lot rear setback. The project also requests additional building height. The following table reflects standards of development for the R-1-A zoning designation that are consistent with the project proposal: Development Standard R-!-A Proposed Minimum lot depth 120' 120' Side yard setback - 10, 10, Interior lot Rear yard setback - 15' 15, Lot to lot Rear yard setback - 25' 25' Major thoroughfare Maximum lot coverage 35% 35% The Zoning Ordinance allows 35% lot coverage for the R-1-A zone. The General Plan allows a maximum of 30% lot coverage. To comply with the General Plan, the maximum lot coverage for any given lot will be limited to a maximum 30%. However, for the overall project, 65% of the project area will be maintained as usable open space/recreational area. ARCHITECTURE As part of the Planned Development District for the project, the applicant has submitted architectural plans. The proposed models feature three models, each with three single story elevations at 20 feet in height. Unit 2 and 3 include an optional second floor master bedroom, at a maximum of 26' in height. The units ranging in size 2,845 from to 3,732 square feet. Second story will not exceeding 500 square feet on the second floor. Other available options include guest suites, 3-car garages and media rooms. The applicant intent is to create varied elevations in order to provide the feel of a "custom home" style development. All proposed residences will feature a minimum of two parking spaces in a garage and an additional two spaces in front of the garage in accordance with established parking standards. q 5.0996-PD-274, TTM 31766 Crescendo Project December 8, 2004 Page 6 RETENTION BASINS In March of 2004, the Developers Round Table appointed a Retention Basin Policy Committee to study the City's existing storm water retention policy and make recommendations to the Developments Round Table and ultimately to the Planning Commission and City Council. The _application was received by the City prier to the establishment of this committee and the drafting of this policy. Nevertheless, the project should be evaluated in terms of the draft policy that would: a) allow a maximum of 40% to 50% of the project perimeter to be used for drainage; b) discourage the use of parkways as primary retention areas; and c) consider on-site open space, in conjunction with drywells and other subsurface solutions as alternatives to using landscaped parkways for on-site retention areas. The intent of this policy is to limit the development of project with deep basins or "moats" at the street frontage, but not to specify maximum depths or slopes in order to allow flexibility in design of the basins. In the proposed project, there are five large retention areas that are all proposed to be located along the project perimeters. They will be located as part of the common area amenity where portions of the pedestrian trail will be located. Depth of the basins will vary up to 15 feet and will be designed to handle storm water from a 100-year storm. The site landscape concept plan shows extensive desert landscaping for all the retention areas that will allow these areas to be integrated into the perimeter park and pedestrian trail. Although the quality of the proposed landscaping appears to be exceptionally high with native boulders and desert plant materials, all of the retention areas for the project are located in the perimeter. The project perimeter along Racquet Club Road has a large retention basin at the lower easterly end; however, the basin will be located behind a heavily landscaped berm or slope and thus will not be visible from Racquet Club Road. The northerly perimeter of the project contains three retention basins thus exceeding the 50% guideline. Furthermore, because of their proposed depth, the design of the basins could be viewed as moats. STREET VACATION Approximately 23 feet of the westerly Vista Grande Avenue right-of-way is proposed to be vacated; the vacated portion will be incorporated into the landscaped perimeter that includes the pedestrian trail and manufactured slope area. Vista Grande Avenue will be widened from the existing 25-foot width to 30 feet. Although the applicant utilizes the vacated portion of the right- of-way for the benefit of the private development, it will also provide a public benefit with the pedestrian trail and attractive landscaping. The remaining 30 foot paved street (Vista Grande Avenue) will be adequate for all foreseeable future needs. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS Under Section 94.03.00 of the Zoning Code, Planned Development Districts are intended to be in compliance with the General Plan and good zoning practices even though the project may incorporate certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of the zone classifications. The General Plan Land Use Implementation Program provides for the use of Planned Development Districts to increase buildable area and height and alter other standard development regulations provided certain benefits accrue to the City. ;'� The proposed project includes funds for community beautification through the public art program, community parks through the Quimby Act, regional transportation infrastructure though the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fund (TUMF) program, public safety through the public safety impact fee, a meandering pedestrian trail landscaped with a desertscape flora palette that is accessible to the public, and luxury single-family housing. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND NOTIFICATION An Initial Study/Environmental Assessment was prepared for this project and was previously provided under separate cover. Studies to support the Environmental Assessment were prepared by professionals within a variety of research disciplines including soils, geotechnical, traffic, air quality, hydrology, biology, noise and archeology. Based upon the environmental checklist and supporting environmental analysis and aforementioned special studies, the proposed project has the potential to have significant impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, land use and planning, noise, and utility services. The recommended mitigation measures are designed to reduce these project related impacts to a level of less than significant. All mitigation measures included in the Environmental Assessment Mitigated Negative Declaration, and are incorporated by reference into the Conditions of Approval. Staff has received several phone calls and visits from concerned residents regarding the project and Environmental Assessment. Upon completion of the IS/EA, staff found that although the project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant impact in this case because of the mitigation measures described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. All property owners within a 400 foot radius of the project have been notified. Correspondence regarding this project has been received. A copy of the correspondence has been attached. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Mitigated Negative Declaration (previously circulated) 3. Resolution 4. Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval 5. Correspondence n a P MITIGATION MONITORING Et REPORTING PROGRAM for the Crescendo Mitigated Negative Declaration State Clearinghouse #920040668 December 3, 2004 DRAFT Prepared For: City of Palm Springs Post Office Box 2743 Palm Springs, California 92263 (760) 323-5245 Prepared By, DePalatis Associates, Inc. 73-255 El Paseo Drive, Suite 15 Palm Desert, California 92260 TABLE OF CONTENTS MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM For the CRESCENDO MND Section Title Paae 1.0 Mitigation Monitoring £t Reporting Requirements ...........................................1 2.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program....................................................4 sr City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MND (SCH 120040668) Mitigation Monitoring Program 1.0 MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING REQUIREMENTS The California statutory legislation (A.B. 3180, CORTESE) requires responsible agencies to adopt monitoring and reporting programs to ensure that mitigation measures contained in Environmental Impact Reports and Mitigated Negative Declarations are effectively implemented. This document is designed to ensure that mitigation measures contained in the Crescendo Mitigated Negative Declaration are properly monitored to ensure that effective implementation occurs. This program (consisting of this narrative text and the following forms) has been designed so that the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are all listed sequentially as they occur in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. For each mitigation measure, the program specifies a City department or other agency which will be responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. The program provides the time or times that each mitigation measure will be monitored. The form provides an opportunity for the department listed as responsible for monitoring the implementation of a mitigation measure to indicate whether the measure has been implemented satisfactorily and to provide the date of the assessment, along with a signature to indicate that implementation has or has not been accomplished. If there is any question as to the correct interpretation of a mitigation measure, the Mitigated Negative Declaration should be consulted to see whether the text contains information on how to correctly interpret that mitigation measure. Should the Environmental Impact Report not provide the required clarification, the City of Palm Springs Director of Planning Services shall be the final authority on how the mitigation measure is to be interpreted. Decisions made by the Director may be appealed through the usual course of administrative appeals. A copy of the page of the monitoring program that contains the mitigation measure in question, completed and initialed by the responsible persons(s) shall constitute written verification of compliance. Should the person or persons responsible for monitoring the implementation of a mitigation measure find that satisfactory performance of the mitigation measure has not occurred, this shall be documented as a finding and signed by the responsible individual(s). A copy of the completed page of the mitigation monitoring program containing the mitigation measure that has not been satisfactorily implemented must be transmitted to the Director of Planning Services. In no case shall an approval be granted which is contingent upon implementation of a mitigation measure without written confirmation from the person or persons responsible for monitoring the mitigation measure that the mitigation measure has been satisfactorily implemented. A copy of this Mitigation and Reporting Monitoring Program is to be provided to each person or department listed as responsible for monitoring a mitigation measure. A person in a department is responsible for ensuring the monitoring of mitigation measures alongside which that department is listed. Where two or more persons or departments are listed as responsible for monitoring, all findings of satisfactory implementation of mitigation measures are required before approvals contingent on implementation of mitigation measures are granted. A Department of Planning Services staff member shall hold a Department meeting to evaluate the efficiency of the Mitigation and Reporting Monitoring Program. Those I`• •. responsible for ensuring that mitigation measures are implemented will submit a brief report ` t�'',: to the Director of Planning Er Building outlining the effectiveness of the implementation ,. measures. The Department meeting is required to be scheduled prior to issuance of grading +'(,lkc December 3, 2004 �3 Page 2 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo-MND(SCH 120040668) Mitigation Monitoring Program permits. Subsequent Department meetings should be scheduled as deemed necessary by Department staff. Along with the staff report, a summary of the findings from the Mitigation and Reporting Monitoring Program shall be submitted to the Planning Commission, which shall in turn report on the effectiveness of the Mitigation and Reporting Monitoring Program to the City Council with recommendations to rectify any difficulties raised. t. December 3, 2004 Page 3 of 13 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MND(SCR 120040668) Mitigation Monitoring Program 2.0 MITIGATION MONITORING Er REPORTING PROGRAM TOPIC 1 - AESTHETICS Mitigation Measure MM 1-1: The final map shall include a variable width easement or common-interest lot for an enhanced landscape parkway adjacent to Tram Way. The landscape parkway enhancement shall be a minimum of 15-feet and an average of 25-feet wide as measured from property line in addition to landscape of Tram Way private road parkway area. The on- site parkway enhancement area may incorporate proposed detention basins so long as they are attractively landscaped with desert plant materials to complement the parkway design treatment and are viewable from Tram Way. if safety fencing of the basins is required, an attractively designed view fence shall be incorporated into the landscape design. Implementation: Prior to the map recordation, the applicant shall submit a final map to the Engineering Division and Department of Planning Services for their approval. Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to final map recordation Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services. Date Completed: Mitigation Measure MM 1-2: Design of the landscape buffer along Train Way, the manufactured slope along the east property line and the public walkway system shall be subject to review and approval by the City's Design Review Committee. Native boulders and plant materials shall be used extensively in the landscape design to reflect the rocky, desert landscape currently on the site. Implementation: Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall submit a final landscape plan to the Department of Planning Services for approval by the City's Design Review Committee, Com liance Record: Timing: Prior to issuance of final map recordation Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services. Date Completed: Mitigation Measure �1 MM 1-3: Only single story residential structures (maximum 1S feet high) shall be allowed December 3, 2004 Page 4 of 15 city of Palm Springs "Crescendo-MND(SCH 12004066S) Mitigation Monitoring Program on those lots abutting the eastern project boundary. Implementation: Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall submit a final architectural plotting plan to the Department of Planning Services for approval by the City's Design Review Committee. Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to issuance of final map recordation Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services. Date Completed: TOPIC 2 -AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES No mitigation measures are required for this topic. TOPIC 3 - AIR QUALITY Mitigation Measure MM 3-1: Due to the small margin of safety between diesel NO, erissions and the adopted significance threshold requires that all reasonably available diesel exhaust emissions be minimized. • Any construction equipment using direct internal combustion engines shall use a diesel fuel with a maximum of 0.05 percent sulfur and a four-degree retard. • Idling trucks or heavy equipment shall turn off their engines if the expected duration of idling exceeds ten (10) minutes. • The on-site rock crusher shall operate off of electric power delivered to the site and not from an on-site diesel generator. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall submit construction specifications to the Engineering Division which require the contractor to implement the above referenced air quality measures. Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to the issuance of grading permits. Monitoring Entity: The project's construction manager, Department of Planning Services, Building Official, Engineering Division. Date Completed: r, r December 3, 2004 Page 5 of 13 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo-MND (SCH 120040668) Mitigation Monitoring Program Mitigation Measure MM 3-2: The recommended dust control and construction activity mitigation plan shall include the following elements; • Earthwork will be balanced onsite to the extent practical to minimize truck trips for import or export of dirt. • Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction-related dust particulates. Portions of the site that are undergoing surface earth moving operations shall be watered such that a crust will be formed on the ground surface then watered again at the end of each day. Site watering will be performed as necessary to adequately mitigate blowing dust. • Any vegetative cover to be utilized onsite shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the disturbed area subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems required for these plants shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain good ground cover and to minimize wind erosion of the soil. • Any construction access roads (other than temporary access roads) shall be paved as soon as possible and cleaned after each work day. The maximum vehicle speed on unpaved roads shall be 15 mph. • Grading operations shall be suspended during first stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 mph. • Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled by implementing traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes. • Perimeter walls (if any) and landscaping shall be constructed in a manner that assists in protecting the site from blowsand. All walls and landscaping shall be maintained on a regular basis to remove accumulated blowsand. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall submit construction specifications to the Engineering Division which require the contractor to implement the above referenced air quality measures. Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to the issuance of grading permits. Monitoring Entity: The project's construction manager, City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services, City Building Official, Engineering Division. Date Completed: F; J ` December 3, 2004 Page 6 of 13 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MND(SCH 120040668) Mitigation Monitoring Program TOPIC 4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Mitigation Measure MM 4-1; Prior to any ground or habitat disturbance on a site which provides burrowing owl habitat, the applicant shall cause a pre-construction survey of the site to be conducted for presence of the species. • Surveys and relocation, if applicable, shall be conducted between September I and January 31, in accordance with the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995) or other then-current protocols as directed by the City Director of Planning Services. • Owls should be excluded from burrows in the development envelope and within an appropriate buffer zone by installing one-way doors in burrow entrances or other technique as deemed appropriate. The biological monitor must ensure through appropriate means (e.g, monitoring for owl use, excavating burrows) that the burrows to be impacted are not being used, The City shall determine whether creation of artificial burrows is necessary as part of the relocation effort. • Occupied burrows shall not be disturbed during the nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies trough non-invasive methods that either: (a) the birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or (b) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and capable of independent survival. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit a predevelopment survey to the Director of Planning Services discussing the on-site presence of burrowing owls and, if necessary, recommendations for their protection during construction activities. Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to issuance of grading permits. Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services. Date Completed: Mitigation Measure MM 4-2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit an application for Final Landscape Document Package to the Director of Planning Services for review and approval. The landscape plan shall exclude the use of exotic plants within 100-feet of the , fl abutting natural areas along the western project boundary, Implementation, Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit a Final Landscape Document pacl<age to the Director of Planning Services for review and approval ' I. demonstrating that exotic plants are excluded within 100 feet of the western project December S, 2004 Page 7 of 13 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MND (SCH 120040668)Mitigation Monitoring Program boundary. Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the Department of Planning & Building will conduct an on-site visit to ensure that the above measures have been implemented. Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to issuance of building permits, issuance of occupancy permits. Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services, Date Completed: Mitigation Measure MM 4-3: Project CC&Rs shall require that landscaping along the project perimeter be maintained according to the approved Final Landscape Document Package. The CC&Rs may make provision for amendments to the perimeter landscaping upon approval by the Director of Planning Services. The CC&Rs shall contain a provision prohibiting the use of exotic plants within 100-feet of the western project boundary. Implementation- Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the developer shall submit final CC&Rs to the Director of Planning Services for review and approval with provisions requiring the project Homeowners Association to maintain perimeter landscaping in accordance with the approved landscape plan and prohibiting the use of exotic plants within 100-feet of the western project boundary. Compliance Record Timing: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services. Date Completed: TOPIC 5 — CULTURAL RESOURCES No mitigation measures are required for this topic. TOPIC 6 — GEOLOGY AND SOILS No mitigation measures are required for this topic. TOPIC 7 — HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS No mitigation measures are required for this topic. December 3, 2004 Page 8 of 13 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MAID (SCH 120040668) Mitigation Monitoring Program TOPIC 8 - HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Mitigation Measure.- MM 8-1 The project includes five retention basins to address the 100 year, 1 hour stone flow. Implementation: Prior to issuance of grading permits the applicant shall submit the on-site surface drainage plans to the Engineering Division. The applicant shall have a detailed drainage plan prepared for the project site prepared by a certified engineer that complies with County of Riverside Flood Control District standards and the City of Palm Springs' Flood Prevention Ordinance that during a storm of between 10 to 100-years frequency does not damage proposed structures or endanger human health and safety. Upon verification of compliance, the City Engineer shall notify the Director of Planning Services. Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to issuance grading permits. Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Engineering Division and Department of Planning 8r Building; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Date Completed: TOPIC 9 - LAND USE AND PLANNING Mitigation Measure: MM 9-1: Building heights will be limited to 26 feet except that single-story structures on lots abutting the eastern project boundary will be limited to 18 feet. Implementation: Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall submit a final architectural plotting plan to the Department of Planning Services for approval by the City's Design Review Committee. Compliance Record- Timing: Prior to issuance of final map recordation Monitoring Entity: City of Palm Springs Department of Planning Services. Date Completed: TOPIC 10 — MINERAL RESOURCES No mitigation measures are required for this topic. Vh December 3, 2004 Page 9 of 13 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MND (SCH 120040668)Mitigation Monitoring Program TOPIC 11 - NOISE Mitigation Measure: MM 97-1. All construction vehicles and equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of a dwelling shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers. This requirement shall be included on the contractor specifications and shall be verified by the Building Official. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit construction specifications to the Engineering Division requiring the contractor to implement the above referenced noise measures. During grading and construction activities the City's Building Official shall ensure that the above mitigation measures are adhered to by the project's construction manager. Compliance Record: Timing: This shall be checked on a weekly basis for the duration of the grading and construction period by the project's construction manager, the City Building Official. Monitoring Entity: Project construction manager, Engineering Division, Building Official. Date Completed: Mitigation Measure: MM 99-2: Stockpiling and/or vehicle staging areas shall be located onsite and as far as practical from sensitive noise receptors (i.e. residential homes located south and east of the project). This requirement shall be included on the contractor specifications and shall be verified by the Building Official. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit construction specifications to the Engineering Division requiring the contractor to implement the above referenced noise measures. During grading and construction activities the City's Building Official shall ensure that the above mitigation measures are adhered to by the project's construction manager. Compliance Record: Timing: This shall be checked on a weekly basis for the duration of the grading and construction period by the project's construction manager, the City Building Official. Monitoring Entity: Project construction manager, Engineering Division, Building Official. Date Completed: December 3, 2004 �. Pagenl0 of 13 City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MAID (SCR 120040668)Mitigation Monitoring Program Mitigation Measure: MM 11-3: Rock crushing equipment shall be located at the extreme northwest corner of the property. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit construction specifications to the Engineering Division requiring the contractor to implement the above referenced noise measures. During grading and construction activities the City's Building Official shall ensure that the above mitigation measures are adhered to by the project's construction manager. Compliance Record: Timing: This shall be checked on a weekly basis for the duration of the grading and construction period by the project's construction manager and the City Building Official. Monitoring Entity: Project construction manager, Engineering Division, Building Official. Date Completed: Mitigation Measure: MM 11-4: A berm of processed rock shall be constructed and maintained of sufficient height to screen the rock crushing operation and maintain off-site noise levels of 53 d6 (L5d or less at existing residences to the east and south. if one crusher is used, the berm height shall be fifteen feet on the east and twelve feet on the south. if two crushers are used, the berm height shall be twenty feet on the east and seventeen feet on the south. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit grading plans and construction specifications to the Engineering Division requiring the contractor to implement the above referenced noise measure. During grading and construction activities the City's Building Official shall ensure that the above mitigation measures are adhered to by the project's construction manager Compliance Record: Timing: This shall be checked on a weekly basis for the duration of the grading and construction period by the project's construction manager and the City Building Official. Monitoring Entity: Project construction manager, Engineering Division, Building Official. Date Completed: 1 _� Mitigation Measure: MM 11-5: The developer shall contact the owner of Tram Way to obtain a temporary right- e. of-access for construction and delivery truck traffic to use Tram Way. If the owner of Trar-- December 3, 2004 Page 17 of City of Palm Springs "Crescendo"MND (SCH 120040668) Mitigation Monitoring Program Way is unwilling to grant such a truck access route, a construction access plan shall be developed and implemented if Racquet Club Drive is used by vehicles of three or more axles. The access plan would limit the number of vehicles per hour and the time of day that access is allowed. The construction access plan shall include the following measures: • Truck access shall not occur before 7:00 a m. (8:00 a.m. on Saturday). • No construction trucks shall operate on Racquet Club Drive after 3:00 p.m. when children may be playing, riding bikes, etc. • Truck traffic shall be limited to no more than three (3) trucks in and three (3) trucks out each hour by vehicles with three or more axles. • Truckers shall be warned to not use engine decompression ("jake brakes") when traveling downhill for any access alternative. Violators will be banned from site access after failing to heed a first warning. Implementation: The developer shall provide a letter to the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway requesting use of Tram Way for construction traffic. If Tram Way is not available for such use, prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit construction specifications to the Engineering Division requiring the contractor to implement the above referenced noise measure. Compliance Record: Timing: This shall be checked on a weekly basis for the duration of the grading and construction period by the project's construction manager and the City Building Official. Monitoring Entity: Project construction manager, Building Official. Date Completed: Mitigation Measure: Mild 11-6: Surficial material and boulders shall be stockpiled to create a temporary noise berm prior to crusher operation. The crusher shall operate behind this temporary berm until such time as the permanent berm described in MM 11-4 has been created. Implementation: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit grading plans and construction specifications to the Engineering Division requiring the " lt' contractor to implement the above referenced noise measure. Prior to operation of the crushing plant, the Building official shall perform an on-site inspection to ensure that the temporary berm is in place. �..i Compliance Record: Timing: Prior to issuance of grading permits, prior to operation of crushing plant Monitoring Entity: Project construction manager, Engineering Division, Building Official. December 3, 2004 Page 12 of 13 City of Patin Springs "Crescendo"MND (SCH 120040663) Mitigation Monitoring Program Date Completed: TOPIC 12 - POPULATION AND HOUSING No mitigation measures are required for this topic. TOPIC 13 - PUBLIC SERVICES Mitigation Measure. MM 93-1 The project will bring a significant number of additional residents to the community. The City's existing public safety and recreation services, including police protection, criminal justice, fire protection and suppression, ambulance, paramedic and other safety services. Accordingly, the City may determine to form a Community Services District under authority of Ordinance 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 or 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 the sale of any lots or a covenant agreement shall be recorded against each parcel. Implementation- Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, an assessment district shall be in place to fund public safety and recreation services, which includes the project site. If the assessment district has not been formed by this time, the developer shall record a covenant agreement against each lot waiving the right to protest formation of the assessment district. The covenant language shall be approved by the City Attorney. Compliance Record- Timing: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Monitoring Entity: Department of Planning Services. City Attorney. Date Completed: TOPIC 14 - RECREATION No mitigation measures are required for this topic. TOPIC 15 - TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC No mitigation measures are required for this topic. TOPIC 16 - UTILITY AND SERVICE SYSTEMS No mitigation measures are required for this topic. 0 December 3, 2004 Page 13 of 13 DATE: December 22, 2004 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Director of Planning Services CASE NO. 5.0996 PD-294 TTM 31766 - APPLICATION BY WESSMAN DEVELOPMENT FOR, A PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (NO. 294) FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31766 TO SUBDIVIDE 42.2 ACRES INTO 79 LOTS AND CONSTRUCT 79 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND THE VACATION OF THE WESTERLY 23 FEET OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE, LOCATED ON WEST RACQUET CLUB DRIVE, EAST OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE AND SOUTH OF TRAMWAY ROAD, ZONE R-1- A, SECTION 3, APN # 594040046. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission recommend approval to City Council for: 1) Planned Development District-294 for the construction of 79 single-family residential units with associated on and off-site improvements; 2) Revised Tentative Tract Map 31766 (dated December 15, 2004); 3) approval of the vacation of the westernmost 23 feet of Vista Grande Avenue; and 4) adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. BACKGROUND: This project was continued by the Planning Commission from its December 8, 2004 meeting. At that meeting the Planning Commission directed the applicant to restudy several facets of the project including: • Subdivision design, terracing of pads and grading; • Building heights; and • Circulation and connectivity to adjacent roadways. On December 15, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised map in order to address the Planning Commission's concerns. Staff has reviewed the revisions and they appear to address some of the Planning Commission's concerns. Grading and terraced pads: The project site slopes from west to east and from south to north. The applicant has redesigned the map and grading program to reduce the terracing and benching effect. The revised grading program would create tiered, multi-level building pads. The applicant has redesigned the grading to increase the number of slopes, while reducing the height of the slopes, this serves to distribute grade changes more evenly through the project. A side effect of the revised grading program is that rear yard setbacks would be increased to a minimum of 15 feet, which complies with the R-1-A zone rear yard setback provisions. A complete summary of the impacts of the revision is attached as the Summary of Changes to the Site Plan and TTM 31766. The Planning Commission should be aware that acceptance and approval of the minor pad elevation differences (24-32 inches) as multi-level pads could establish a precedent for future consideration of pad elevations and building heights in the hillside areas. 5.0996-PD-274, TTM 31766 Crescendo Project December 22, 2004 Page 2 Building Heights: Relative to the creation of multi-level pads, the applicant proposes to redesign the residences to step the building pads 24" to 32". This would have the effect of creating steps between the garages and the main residences. In some instances where casitas are located in front yards, the casitas would be at the same pad elevation as the garages. The applicant contends that because the building pads have been redesigned as tiered-pads and are no-longer uni-level, the project now complies with General Plan Policy 3.4.3, which allows building heights to exceed 18' in hillside areas. No other changes to the building height or mass are proposed. The proposed residences are 20' in elevation. Some units are available with optional guest suites, which feature 500 square feet of habitable living space, and have 26' tall elevations. Because the proposed second story mass is limited in area, staff is comfortable that approval of the project architecture creates visual interest, increases the number of proposed elevations, yet does not establish a precedent for the mass of full two-story residences on pads with minimal grade changes. Circulation and Roadway Connectivity: Following direction provided by the Planning Commission, the applicant redesigned the project circulation to provide for direct street access to Girasol Road, which intersects the project at the northeast corner of the site. As of the writing of this report, the Fire Department and Engineering have not had the opportunity to fully review the proposed redesign. As a result, minor changes to the draft conditions of approval may be distributed at the public hearing. However, the project's Traffic Engineer (George Dunn Engineering) has reviewed the circulation changes and notes that the secondary access point is not likely to generate "significant volumes" of traffic. CEQA: A written summary of the presentation of the environmental consultant's presentation to the Planning Commission, during the December 8, 2004 public hearing, summarizing key public comment and responding to those comments, has been prepared by Paul DePalatis and is included herein for your review. The changes to the subdivision design and the PDD as described in this report do not create any new significant environmental effects, nor do they increase the severity of impacts previously identified, nor do they require modifications to mitigation measures added to the project. Therefore, the changes are within the scope of the Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration already presented to the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Revised Tentative Tract Map and Preliminary Grading Plan 3. Written Summary of Changes to Site Plan and Grading 4. Supplemental Traffic Analysis, George Dunn Engineering, December 10, 2004 5. Summary of Key Public Comments with Responses, Paul DePalatis 6. Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval AM � � J y sAN RAFAEL DRIVE 9� OPO. i o FRANCIS DRIVE �3VPy_�,'.vti4 9M� SON O RACQUET GLUBR AO � PROJECT SITE w VISTA CHINO TACHEVAH DRIVE TAMARISK ROAD CF O �m ALEJO ROAD T� PA a� AMASS ROAD 0 PAQ,IgPRING o o REGIONAL T o TAHQUITZCANYON WAY U AIR—'PORT w O w y a w RARISTO ROAD U 6 V RAMON ROAD O G SUNNY DUNES ROAD � SUNNY DUNES ROAD rc ul w V MESQUITEAVENUE MESQUITE AVENUE o V S SONORA ROAD ESCOEADRIVE , Q W Py JN o �,��0 f HSrpAIMGgNYOh w �J MRI F 0 Mrs z � U Z � Q 4 a Z W j Q O ~ Vicinity Map :` T "CRESCENDO" (TTM 31 766) INITIAL STUDY s ,m, NorroSCALE N DePalatis Associates EXHIBIT 2 PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES VICINITY MAP UTILITIES NOTES W�aml.w�lw. jv _ emmwrs svuwur ao T N+oa .wl 4s Js�"Q4 \` LAND USE 5UMMARY r_Ir.Rscavey'�!;-xF•, PIKE PAP{/i" Pcnesremm�rn rcY rny��rm , �;ya ,,, ��.({��.p„• , � � ` Inc ,i'sy' t LEGAL DESCRIPTION c<yd'" -!� 4 .PS d� Lw. = Z --y-��• -iL$ fg$^c il4�jp ` ul� - '`13� �y?� � \ �� ^��,_ c'_€ � ?I-` " ''� mi e II Inz 11�Y _ zJ � r - t e•��:.o,✓,' t l � \ � w ,.a xuxea ov lemsm ton / j' - f -n 4 x IOv L Xv isso 1 r m1^ PREPARED FOR:WESSMAN PREPARED BY COMPANY L�x�'_, U.R. 1`VY(1` nmsP,a,g:,uszzra zs - 1 yl PP ♦ -r n O�;o,� ,p°,OYpb bsol vssuso -a=-.._. eMGE zslnr_ 'S/- J ]2 I 59 = ,-1, - 9 s� _ „r Y_32 , F •1<n -S NtOYrCI SITE PLAN R 751f NO. 31/00 ,.is tC I i .ll 13 111 s l F-J MJ4llco'IrvrmEs }I � •L//�` T! si,! �� - r I T�V F1FF- � _ � I �`�..,,,n,+r7 0{s i< a'F T!lii EAST= RACQUFT CLUB z _ C-PcnEsrewri ra5r�.igr - . ^'•_,�-• e - �� /� ;s„ -- VFl� w n r r e 6 r ; ream € ¢Hrr,s r.r,1*"•++m-ru\rM�'wM'R�mnm..,. Summary of Changes to Stie Plan and Tentative Tract Map 31766 Per Planning Commission Comments Lot Pad Elevation Changes Number Garage Portion Livable Portion Rear Slope Height Difference Rear Lot Setback Change by Foot Change by Foot Before Proposed Rear Slope From Top or Raise Lower No Change Raise Lower No Change Feet Feet Height Toe of Slope 1 1 1 24 23 1 30 2 * 2 11 9 2 55 3 1 1 19 18 1 15 4 1 3 30 25 5 40 5 * 2 23 17 6 41 6 *7 20 18 2 36 * * 11 11 0 * 34 g 2 23 21 2 46 9 1 1 19 18 1 18 I1 1 3jM27 11 0 24 11 *12 * 14 0 33 2 18 2 2713 2 4 17614 2 25 516 15 2 25 216 215 21 6 21 17 1 1 25 23 2 15 18 2 24 19 5 28 19 2 22 19 3 26 20 1 1 22 18 4 45 21 1 1 22 17 5 46 22 23 22 17 5 36 24 18 17 1 21 15 15 0 25 25 3 3 25 22 3 22 26 1 3 18 17 1 30 27 3 5 22 17 5 28 28 2 4 22 17 5 32 29 1 3 22 18 4 31 30 1 3 22 19 3 35 31 3 5 24 19 5 26 32 1 1 25 23 2 36 33 2 4 27 21 6 30 34 27 25 2 30 35 2 3 29 26 3 18 36 2 28 21 7 40 37 2 38 27 21 6 33 2 25 21 4 22 39 27 23 4 28 2 an 2 27 21 6 35 Per Planning Commission Comments Lot Pad Elevation Changes Number Garage Portion Livable Portion Rear Slope Height Difference Rear Lot Setback Change by Foot Change by Foot Before Proposed Rear Slope From Top or Raise Lower No Change Raise Lower No Change Feet Feet Height Toe of Slope 41 2 29 23 6 40 42 * 2 29 22 7 41 43 2 28 21 7 37 4 * 2 24 20 4 32 45 2 46 * 27 23 4 31 47 * * 28 18 10 26 48 2 28 11 17 28 2 24 20 4 15 49 3 5 28 21 7 16 50 3 5 29 11 18 17 51 2 14 14 0 20 52 2 27 18 9 53 22 2 25 21 4 25 54 2 4 27 21 6 17 55 3 5 28 21 7 16 56 2 * 29 23 6 28 57 4 6 28 22 6 33 58 1 1 28 23 5 24 59 2 * 27 25 2 15 60 1 1 1 27 18 9 17 61 1 1 21 16 5 25 62 3 20 13 7 30 63 1 15 13 2 24 64 * 2 17 15 2 30 65 2 3 N/C 22 31 66 67 * N/C 17 17 * 17 17 17 68 1 1 15 13 2 25 69 2 2 22 13 9 27 70 1 1 21 16 5 22 71 3 5 27 21 6 24 72 * 2 27 25 2 22 73 2 4 28 25 3 18 74 28 22 6 25 75 3 4 3 15 76 2 4 4 15 77 1 3 3 15 78 2 2 15 79 N/C N/C 15 - v r "EGE UMN George Dunn Engineering Palota �� 1. prigs, Ca fornia Palm Springs, California 92262 Telephone: (760)416-6810 FAX:(815)371-3522 E-mail—o,eorgedunnC@eartlilink.net December 10, 2004 Mr.John Wessman/Mr. Michael Braun Wessman Development 300 South Palm Canyon Drive Palm Springs, California 92262 Telephone: (760) 325-3050 x28 FAX: (760) 325-5848 Subject: Supplemental Traffic Analysis — Revised Access Point for the Crescendo Project Dear Mr. Wessman/Mr. Braun, It is understood that an additional access will be provided to The Crescendo project via a new 28-foot wide roadway connecting to Vista Grande Avenue. It is also understood that this access is intended to provide a secondary access that could be used by trips generated by the project as well as the adjacent neighborhood. The addition of this access point might provide some project-generated trips with more direct access to and from the north via Cabrillo Road However, the majority of the trips to and from the proposed development would be expected to have origins and destinations to the east and south so it would not be anticipated that significant volumes would use this secondary access point (7 project trips during the AM peak hour and 9 project trips during the PM peak hour assuming all project trips to and from the north would use this access point, which is unlikely). Should you have any questions about this proposal or require additional information, please contact George Dunn at (760) 416-6810. Sincerely, Digitally s1D,,d by o George`Dunn ;'eaoas`„o George Dunn, P.E. GEORGE DUNN ENGINEERING t� The Crescendo Project,Pa[In Springs, Ca&forma 1' Prepared for Wessman Development J December 10,200A George Dunn Engineeri[ Crescendo Project Summary of Key Public Comments with Responses Following is a summary of key objections to the project made during the public comment period. A response follows each comment. 1. Use of an MND is not allowed by CEQA for this project. As indicated in the responses that follow, there has been no substantial evidence submitted to support a "fair argument" that the Project will cause significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore, use of a Mitigated Declaration is appropriate under CEQA for this project. 2. The MND fails to properly describe the terracing of the project. The MND clearly portrays that the entire site will be converted from native desert land to a residential subdivision using graded slopes to create building pads. On page 18, the MND states that 'The project would require grading of the property to create building pads for home sites. " Likewise, page 44 states that, (the projectJ would replace the existing native landscape containing desert vegetation, boulders and cactus with residential homes. " Exhibit 6 shows a series of tiered lots separated by slopes and retaining walls with proposed elevations. The magnitude of site grading is described on page 18 by identifying the cubic yards of earthwork required for project construction. On page 15, the MND also identifies that a tentative tract map has been submitted to the City showing "the building pad and proposed elevation of each lot, proposed open space lots, proposed infrastructure, the proposed internal street pattern and representative street sections". Thus, the grading design has been adequately described in the MND and the availability of more detailed information disclosed to the public. 3. The Initial Study defers mitigation since it allows for future approval of a Final Planned Development District. Approval of a Final Planned Development District is ministerial in nature and does not introduce any new mitigation measures. It merely provides the City with a vehicle to ensure that the details of final architecture and landscaping plans are consistent with the preliminary development district approval. The project design and impacts of that design are fully disclosed in the Preliminary Planned Development District and analyzed in the Initial Study. Therefore, the approval of a Final Planned Development District does not constitute a deferral of mitigation. 4. The Initial Study defers mitigation since it allows for future approval of Tram Way for construction traffic. It has been determined that Tram Way was dedicated to the City as a Public access from the project site to Highway 19 1. Therefore, use of Tram Way by construction traffic would be allowed subject to City regulations. ..\4 r In addition, a letter of non-objection for the use of Tram Way for construction traffic has been received from the Mount San Jacinto Winter Park Authority. Therefore, use of Tram Way by construction traffic has been established and does not constitute a deferral of mitigation. 5. The General Plan requires an EIR for the Crescendo project because it is on the Chino Cone formation. The General Plan requires the preparation of an EIR for properties located within the Chino Cone Area Plan, not on the Chino Cone formation. The boundaries of the China Cone Area Plan were established by the City's Urgency Ordinance and do not include the Crescendo project. Therefore, the General Plan does not require preparation of an EIR for this project. 6. The project is inconsistent with General Plan policy because it overwhelms mountain views. Policy 3. 1.3 states that development should not 'overwhelm natural features such as washes and views of the mountains". As revised in mid 2004, this same policy states that this goal is not to be considered in isolation of other relevant General Plan policy. Policy 3.3. > is a related policy and reflects the application of this Citywide principal on a project specific level encouraging the "preservation of scenic viewsheds from adjoining properties to a reasonable degree". The Crescendo project has implemented various design features to preserve mountain views from adjacent properties. It will be up to City to determine whether the project design has achieved this to a reasonable degree. While it would be impossible to develop this property with absolutely NO impacts on views (as is the case with every project), the Project has been designed to minimize view impacts. The nearest properties south of West Racquet Club Drive as well as those east of Vista Grande Avenue do not orient outdoor living areas toward the Project and therefore their mountain views are not significantly impacted. Only 4 residences adjacent to the easterly project boundary orient rear yards toward the project, such that views are an issue. As shown in Exhibits 94a and 94b of the Initial Study, the project's grading design will preserve a greater "hillside" view than would alternative development approaches that place buildings at grade. 7. The project is inconsistent with General Plan policy because it does not provide adequate open space. The General Plan policy 3.4.5 requires 70 percent of the site to remain in open space. Calculations contained in the Initial Study demonstrate that the project complies with this requirement. Comments claiming that the Initial ,Study calculations were inconsistent failed to distinguish between General Plan open space criteria, ✓✓Ilich are calculated on a total site basis and those relating to maximum residential building coverage per the Zoning code, which are calculated on a lot by lot basis. The project meets both standards. A 01 _\\ l�':a B. The assessment of biological impacts did not consider potential impacts to the Loggerhead Shrike. The biology report noted that the site was suitable habitat for the Loggerhead Shrike, however, neither the project biologist nor biologists submitting comments on the project identified any of the species on site. The shrike is a resident species and so the inability to detect it or evidence of its residence on the site strongly suggests that it does not regularly utilize the site or immediate vicinity. The Shrike is not listed as a rare, threatened or endangered species, rather, it is considered in the literature regarding the Coachella Valley as a "common resident." CEQ,4 requires mandatory findings of significance and preparation of an EIR only if a project will negatively impact a rare, threatened or endangered species, none of which is the case with this project. 9. The assessment of biological impacts did not consider potential impacts from the introduction of invasive plants. The project proposes no invasive plant species. In addition, the project location is not pristine and non-native plant species have already been introduced into the natural environment by existing urban development in the vicinity. The applicant is willing to add a restriction within the project CC&R's prohibiting non-native plant species along the perimeter and wihin the interior of the project, and such restriction can be added as an additional condition of approval, 10. Any view blockage constitutes a significant impact. The City's determination must be whether an impact is "significant". 'An agency may find that an impact to the environment is less than significant If it concludes that the impact is not a substantial adverse change; it need not find a zero impact to conclude that it is less than significant." [National Parks & Conservation Association v County of Riverside (7999) 71 CA4th 1342, 1359.1 The lead agency, in this case the City, must establish its own thresholds of significance, but in determining whether an environmental impact is significant, "the question is whether a project will affect the environment of persons in general, not whether a project will affect particular persons. " [Mira Mar Mobile Community, 110 CA4th 477, at 492.] The City's policy 3. 1.8 of the General Plan establishes the threshold of significance in this case, that scenic viewsheds from adjoining properties be preserved to a reasonable degree. Neither this policy nor the CEQA require that viewsheds be preserved in their pristine state. 11 . Alteration of onsite desert landscape constitutes a significant impact. The on site desert landscape of the property;s not a unique resource as it is commonly found in and around the City, No unique plants, features or animals exist or depend on the project site. The site is not in a pristine setting being surrounded on two sides by residential development and on a third by Tram Way. Loss of 42 acres of this desert landscape is therefore not significant. Further, the project will require use of only native y� k, �F�JA plant species in its landscaping palette, thereby preserving desert landscape to the extent reasonablypossible. 12. The Air Quality Analysis is inadequate because it fails to consider all construction impacts. The initial Study considered all simultaneous air quality impacts including construction equipment, rock crushing equipment and water trucks. 13. The Air Quality Analysis is inadequate because it underestimates the operational impacts of fireplace and heating emissions. The air quality analysis prepared for the project focused on summer conditions when ozone standards are frequently violated. This is appropriate because winter is generally a period of excellent air quality in Palm Springs and ROG is an ozone contributor during the day in summer. By contrast, fireplace and heating emissions in Palm Springs generally occur at night in winter. These assumptions were used to model fireplace and heating emissions, accurately concluding that these emissions would not be significant. The alternative air quality analysis proposed by commenters would result in an analysis of nocturnal winter air emissions based upon unrealistic input assumptions about fireplace and heating emissions during a time period when such emissions are not relevant to ozone air quality. The results of such an analysis are inappropriate and misleading. 14. Flooding impacts from Chino Canyon were not addressed. Storm flows discharged from Chino Canyon are diverted around the Crescendo project by the Corps of Engineers Chino Canyon Flood Control Levee. This facility was constructed in 1971 and is recognized in the City's Master Plan of drainage. No evidence has been presented demonstrating that the flood control levee is inadequate. 15. The impacts of traffic noise were not adequately mitigated. Comments contend that the impacts of noise on the project from surrounding roadways are not considered. The noise report determined that traffic volumes on these roads would produce noise levels below City thresholds. In addition, 6-foot high walls proposed around private outdoor living areas would further reduce outdoor noise levels. Consequently, the initial study correctly concluded that the primary noise impacts would relate to construction operations. 16. The impacts of crusher noise and vibration were not adequately mitigated. Comments contend that the height of the noise attenuation berm for rock crushing is inadequate. The noise analysis assumed a mean noise source height of 8-10 feet for the rock crushing equipment, which is consistent with actual equipment design and operation. The noise berm height is effective in light of these real world assumptions. Comments have d incorrectly assumed that the primary noise source from the rock crusher is at a greater height than is actually the case, and therefore the assumption on which the comments are based is erroneous. Comments contend that ground borne vibration from rock crushing equipment is perceptible V4 mile from the source. This statement is seriously in error and unsupported by facts including D.O.T publications. Crushing equipment has large springs to absorb vibration to protect the equipment and its operator. This same built in protection limits ground vibration to only a few feet. Based on established standards and equipment measurements, crusher vibration will be imperceptible at any adjacent homes. 17. The traffic analysis should have evaluated additional intersections. Intersections were selected based on Palm Springs and Riverside County traffic study guidelines and no impacted intersections were overlooked. Level-of-service impacts would not be expected at the Palm Canyon Road/Tram Way intersection since the project has no direct access to Tram Way. Similarly, no level of service impacts would be expected on the roadways west of Palm Canyon Drive because the project would add only approximately one car per minute on Racquet Club Road west of Palm Canyon Drive during the AM peak hour and 1.5 cars per minute during the PM peak hour, using conservative (worst-case) trip generation assumptions. 18. The impacts of vacating Vista Grande Avenue were not adequately addressed. Vista Grande Avenue is a looped local street that serves a very limited area and could only be extended within the Crescendo project. As a local street, the road is not shown on the General Plan Circulation element and is not intended as a major circulation road. Consequently, there are no other future developments that might make use of this road. In addition, the Crescendo project has been designed without any street connections that would add traffic to Vista Grande Avenue and without any lots that would take driveway access on Vista Grande Avenue. Therefore, the vacation is appropriate since it leaves sufficient right-of-way to accommodate the existing and future street improvements. 19. Emergency Access/Fire Hazards are not adequately mitigated. Comments contend that the use of gated emergency accesses is inadequate. Emergency access requirements vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The City of Palm Springs Fire Department has reviewed the Crescendo project and determined that the proposed gated emergency accesses provide acceptable secondary access to the project. Comments contend that building sprinklers do not constitute adequate mitigation for projects sited beyond the Fire Department's 5 minute response area. However, the City's Fire Code specifically identifies AN '; sprinklering of buildings as the preferred mitigation for projects lying outside the 5-minute response area. Sprinklering is a proven method to slow the spread of fire, thus effectively extending the response time available to fire fighters at a given location. The project complies with this requirement and effectively mitigates portions of the project beyond the 5- minute response area. [Have we confirmed all this with Carl?] Comments contend that, since the project has not obtained approval for use of Tram Way, the project does not comply with emergency access requirements. Tram Way has been dedicated to the City as a public access from the project site to Highway 111, Therefore, emergency vehicles and construction traffic would be allowed to use this roadway, subject to City regula tions. 20. Cumulative Impacts are not adequately addressed Air Quality - Air quality emissions occur close to the source for those pollutants that are emitted in their already unhealthful form. Cumulative impacts could occur for those that require additional photochemical or physical/chemical conversions over time and distance before they form sinog or other complex pollutants. Unreacted pollutants of concern would include PM-10 and, possibly, CO. There has not been a recorded violation of CO standards in the history of the Palm Springs air monitoring station, therefore any cumulative impacts would involve only dust (PM-10) during construction operations. For a cumulative air quality impact to occur, two or more pollutant sources must be simultaneously active with an exact wind alignment that combines the two sources. if the two sources are not simultaneously active, no cumulative effect can occur. Likewise, if the sources are separated by distance, cumulative impact potential is reduced by virtue of atmospheric dilution of pollutants during transport. Four proposed projects have been identified within reasonably close proximity to Crescendo. These include Boulders, Tramway, Tuscan Hills and Shadow Rock. These projects are all at different points in the development process and will not be constructed simultaneously. Tuscan Hills is already approved and will enter the construction phase first. Neither Crescendo or Boulders have been approved and the applicant has indicated that construction will be phased with Crescendo preceding Boulders. Finally, the Tramway project has only recently been submitted to the City for processing. Entitlement and development time/rames dictate that it will lag behind the other projects. The Shadowrock project has been delayed since the early 1990s and its development status is uncertain. In addition, it is separated from the project by about a mile making the precise wind alignments necessary to cause a cumulative FM- 10 impact highly unlikely. For these reasons, cumulative construction Impacts are considered negligible for the Crescendo project. Noise - Cumulative noise impacts for Crescendo are negligible because there will be no other major construction during the excavation and rock crushing phase, It has further been demonstrated that noise standards for Crescendo and Boulders will be met at the property line. With considerable intervening distance, the noise "signature" from one project will be undetectable at the other site. The lack of simultaneous rock crushing and the negligible off-site extent of any construction noise "envelope"creates zero cumulative impact potential. Water Supply- While the project would result in consumption of additional amounts of water and add cumulatively to the Coachella valley's overdraft condition, this is not found significant. Desert Water has provided a will- serve letter for the project and, in evaluating larger projects in the City, has concluded that adequate water supplies exist and can be obtained to serve new development, As stated in the Initial Study, mitigation in the form of water management actions currently in effect at DWA and other agencies on a valleywide level, mitigate these cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. 21. The project induces growth on surrounding properties. The project is not located in an isolated area but is an infill development with utilities located at or in close proximity to the site. The waterline extensions associated with the project cannot serve undeveloped properties to the west, which are at elevations too high to receive water service from the existing water tanks. Since the City will not approve new development without a water system, the Crescendo project does not Induce growth on these adjacent lands, it merely seeks to serve itself. The extension of sewer is already a requirement of the approved Tuscan Hills project. Since this project Is ahead of Crescendo, the sewer line will already be installed when Crescendo is ready to connect. In addition, properties to the west are located within the boundaries of the City's Chino Cone Urgency ordinance and are subject to a development moratorium until a Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report are approved. Consequently, implementation of the Crescendo project would not induce significant growth on adjacent vacant lands, n ri '� I January 12,2005 Cheryl Rodberg 159 Caravan St. Palm Springs,Ca.92264 760-322-9025 e mail psdollmaker.yahoo To: Palm Springs City Council Palm Springs needs month-to-mouth resusitation. Please allow the Chino Cone project to go ahead as soon as possible.The city needs new rooftops to attract the finer shops and businesses and to create new jobs After viewing last week's city council meeting I want my voice heard,(or at least read). The city council,planning department,city attorney,the developer of the project on the Chino Cone have done due diligence. All seem to have been very thoughtful and concerned for all parties.At the conclusion of a very lengthy meeting the developer was still willing to make concessions to the people trying to block his very legal project. The people opposed to the project have very deeply held views. I don't believe anything could be said to change their belief system.They don't want anything to rock their world However, everything constantly changes,including the city of Pahn Springs and the mountains. The proof, watch channel 17. Lots of photos showing a constantly changing and evolving Palm Springs. The original residents of the valley probably were not too happy with the early development. Some group will always want everything to be frozen in time.The"do not disturb"mentality is destroying the city.However,the reality is a city grows or it dies. Revive it or lose it. I ahnost forgot the rock crusher. The newest way to stop the development. The developer is doing everything possible to minimize the noise.Most developers would just go ahead.Life has unpleasant and annoying aspects to it. If a resident is home during construction hours they could learn to ignore the noise and vibration.Life does not come with guarantees.Lots of people adapt. Who knows what might happen as a result of the development? A wonderful new love, a great new golfing buddy,or a dear member of your family might move in. Thank you, Cheryl Rodberg CC.Ron Oden,Mike McCulloch, Ginny Foat, Chris Mills, Steve Pougnet Lawrence A. Cone, M.D., DSc,.F.A.C.P. A Professional Corporation 39000 Bob Hope Drive ?, Probst Building 4308 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Telephone 760 346 5688 Facsimile 760 773 3976 January 17, 2005 City of Palm Springs Mayor and City Council Members Palm Springs, California 92262 Dear Council Members: The Coachella Valley and particularly the areas surrounding Palm Springs contain sandy and rocky surfaces that harbor a fungus termed Coccidioides immitis. This microbe leads to the development of coccidioidomycosis which is endemic to California and a few other western states. This disease in humans often causes pneumonia and in those individuals with immune impairment such as people with AIDS can lead to a disseminated illness and death. We have previously reported on outbreaks of this disease in the Coachella Valley at National and International meetings on coccidioidomycosis.(1-3) Last year (2004) was one of the most severe outbreaks in California and the Coachella Valley. I personally examined more new patients with coccidioidomycosis last year than in most years previously. Most had AIDS. Outbreaks of coccidioidomycosis occur following aersolization of sand. Therefore, I would anticipate that construction projects that will last for several years in the grinding of stone and removal of virgin desert earth in a residential areas will prove hazardous to the environment. This is particularly dangerous to patients with AIDS and those living with chronic pulmonary diseases. These are particularly common medical problems in Palm Springs. I would strongly advise that these projects not be approved prior to an Environmental Impact Report being prepared and certified. Thank you for your time mcerely yours,n Lawrence A. Cone, M.D., F.A.C.P. Board certified in Infectious Diseases 1972 References; 1. Cone et al. Changing patterns of Coccidioidomycosis in the Coachella Valley of Souther California. 5`h International Conference on Coccidioidomycosis. San Francisco, CA, Aug 1994. Abstr. 5P 2. Cone et al. Comparative study of histoplasmosis and coccidioidomycosis in HIV+persons Residing in the Colorado Desert of Southern California. J Investig Med 2000 3. Cone et al. Coccidioidomycosis in Persons over Age 65. Proceedings of the Annual Coccidioidomycosis Study Group Meeting, Meeting Number 40, Phoenix, AZ, March 30, 1996 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: Donna Krause [kruzzie@mac.com] � Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 2:39 PM r. To: JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: Environmental Impact Study on Crescendo and Boulders Project As a healthcare provider and home owner in Pahn Springs, I don't understand why the Mayor and 3 city council members feel an environmental impact study does not need to be done on the above projects. The health and safety of our residents depend upon it. I would like to go on record as wanting these studies to be done before these projects are begun. Donna Krause, RN 2796 Cardillo Avenue Palm Springs, CA 92262 0 c 1/18/2005 �j , .. January 17, 2005 E >` Liability on Boulders and Crescendo projects. We have a liability problem. Let me put it this way. Ladies and gentle men of the jury, your honors, not long ago the City of Palm Springs allowed an open pit strip mining operation to be built next to my clients' homes. The strip mining operation came to my clients, my clients did not move in next to it. This has led to increased physical problems that can only be associated with this mining operation. And why do I say the people running this open pit strip mining operation are responsible for my clients' deteriorating health? Because it is an open pit strip mining project, in the city, next to homes, lasting 3 years or more requiring the excavation, moving, and grinding up of over two billion pounds of rock? How could this not affect my clients' health? If we were living in the furthest reaches of Appalachia today it would not be allowed to put in an open pit strip mining operation next to homes in a city. Let us look at the parity of this project compared to other housing tracts in the area. On the other side Highway 1 I 1 they are building houses on the valley floor. The neighbors of this project aren't happy. No one wants a new housing tract next to them. One day a bunch of guys come in and start work on one of the house pads. They clear cut the bushes, bring in a tractor, run it around for an hour or two and they are ready to put in the chalk lines. We live in a growing community and some expansion is necessary. I am sorry for the inconvenience these neighbors have been subjected to; however, this activity has only taken three hours. Three hours seems a prudent amount of inconvenience for the neighbors. Now let us compare this project with the one across the across the street. On the hillside developments we are talking about three years of noise, vibrations, polluted air from the tractors, sand, dust, excavation of heavy materials, transport of heavy materials, and the grinding up of literally billions of pounds of rock. On its face, this project is notoriously and outrageously improper. Would any prudent person doubt that subjecting people to this kind of environmental abuse is harmful? The answer to this question is a resounding NO. You could not find a jury in this state that would not find for the plaintive in a "citizen verses a strip mining' case. This project is absolutely and completely indefensible in any court of law in this state. You also have to remember this is California and strip mining is not real popular here. Plaintive wins! Your honor, my clients have a nervous condition after being subjected to pit mining and vibrations caused by the operation built next to their homes. Plaintive wins again because this is an indefensible project. Your honor, my client's dog has hemorrhoids. You could probably even get an award for that because this project is so totally and outrageously improper. Open pit strip mines have no defense. Every time I sit in the Council Chambers I look up at the doors and think that outside those doors there are literally millions and millions of attorneys slobbering and drooling to get a piece of this action. Why shouldn't they be slobbering and drooling, they can't loose. Anytime you have a situation that is defenseless in a court of law something is very, very wrong. Because of past fiscal mismanagement our City is in debt for many millions of dollars. The City will do anything to enlarge the tax base to make up for past failings. In this situation the City would be going from a bad situation to some thing much worse. The City has already had to lay off Cops and Firemen. How many more will have to be laid off if this project is allowed? Trutlifiilly, I don't know if the City has liability for any of the decisions it makes, even if those decisions are absolutely improper. Our law, English common law, was given to us by the King. The King did not allow himself to be sued. It's good to be the King. The City of Palm Springs may well be our king and we but their peasants. I hope the City has liability in this matter because if they do they will have to take responsibility for what they do. I have always found that governments in which people take reasonability run properly. If there is no responsibility then that government no longer belongs to the people. Let us say that the City has no liability in this, no matter how improper their decisions. Liability will then be left up to the developer. When law suits start, the developers insurance will be found to be woefully lacking, his corporation will declare bankruptcy and it is a don deal. The people of Palm Springs not only have to deal with an improper project, but they also have no recourse for damages. They have been screwed not once but twice. If the City of Palm Springs decides to allow this project, please, please, I beseech you; make sure there is adequate insurance to cover the needs of our citizen victims. How much insurance is adequate? In other states with less stringent planning requirements then California's, you can find open pit mining operations next to people's houses. It should be noted, however, that in most all of these cases the houses moved in next to the mining operation, the mining operation did not move in next to the houses. A prudent corporation, planning to set up operation for 6 months, would carry between 25 million and 150 million dollars in liability insurance, depending on how depth of their pockets. When we look at the situation in Palm Springs, we see a project that is indefensible in court. Anyone who sties will win. Truthfully, I don't know how much these projects should be insured for. If everyone that sues wins is a billion dollars enough? Is 3 billion enough? I don't know the answer and everyone I have asked doesn't M know either because no one has ever seen a project that is totally indefensible in court. The insurance should cover all citizens within 1000 yards of the projects perimeter and coverage should run for the lifetime of all those living in that area. Silicosis may not show up for many years. If it does people must have recourse. I have been watching the approval process of this project for many months and I have learned one thing and that is how much I fear the city government of Palm Springs. This project is so flawed that it should never have seen the light of day. To have allowed it to reach this far in the approval process says that the city doesn't care about people's health, welfare, quiet enjoyment of one's home, opinions or needs. That scares me. What will they do to us next? I would like to thank Mr. Wessman. Mr. Wessman, I do not fault you for wanting to do what you do. This is America and that is what it is all about. Anybody can try to do pretty much anything they want controlled by the checks and balances of government. I believe this was the wrong project at the wrong time and in the wrong place. What I want to thank you for is having brought before the city such a woefully unpopular and improper project. If you had not brought this project up all the people taking part in stopping it would never really have understood what our city government was like. Understanding ones government is the first step in overhauling it. Thank you. Atson Reeder Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: MSFH41@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 2:33 PM To: Ron O@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; michaelm@ci.pal m-springs.ca.us; chrism@ci.pal m-springs.ca.us; Stevep@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; gin nyf@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; mallika@dc.rr.com Subject: The Boulders & Crescendo Developments Gentlemen & Lady, I am appalled that you would choose to approve either of these projects in the face of the measures coming up in the March 8th election!!! You are figuratively slapping the faces of the voters who elected you, which with the exception of Ginny Foat, I will vote out at the first opportunity, hopefully a recall. I have read all about your"visions"and can only conclude that you are blind, and in the hip pocket of the builders, who no doubt are financially supporting (buying)you. Come to your senses, please!! These decisions should not be made until after the people speak on March 8th! Regretfully yours, Marge Hall Resident and voter from Palm Springs o ► r 9 [2o05 1/19/2005 Pagel of 2 Jay Thompson From: Rev. Kevin A. Johnson [revkev@bloominthedesert.orgj Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 7:14 AM To: JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: Building Plans Dear Mr. Thompson; For the Palm Springs City Council record: We do not understand why current developers are allowed— even encouraged—to trash with unbridled building plans and unchecked land use the spirit of Ruth Hardy, who worked hard to preserve the ambiance and oasis nature of Palm Springs. She was a council woman who protected the valuable assets of the city with building restrictions meant to preserve a gem of a city. While some restrictions have been relaxed for good purpose, I write to ask that you stop the maddening march to turn Pahn Springs into just another cramped and crowded city like others in the valley. Stop the loss of desert ecology in exchange for vistas dominated by tightly packed rooftops and humidity inducing golf courses. We do not want Pahn Springs to be like other desert cities. We want Palm Springs to be the gem of the valley, not the costume jewelry. Recently developers and city officials have demonstrated a lack of care for the heritage that we inherit: Removing tons dirt from the Araby wash to fill in under the overcrowded and too-tall Pintura; Enabling density between Araby and the wash so as to ruin the business of Palapas motivating the owners to sell the beautiful setting to developers and move to Rancho Mirage; Approving homes, a hotel and a golf course in the mountains around Murray Peak; Boulder crushing plans on the Northwest side to squeeze too many buildings into a space stripped of its natural setting; -- Denying future generations the eco-geological treasures of Chino Cone; All evidence the checkered past and unhealthy future of Palm Springs developments. Please note that there is much unchallenged building going on in Palm Springs. This is clear indication that the dissatisfaction with and opposition to certain projects comes from the will and wisdom of the citizens and not an unthinking resistance to anything new. So, please listen to the level-headed, conservation-minded citizens who are signing petitions. Resist the profiteering developers who think of new pads instead historic and ecological preservation. Think long- term value instead of just cash flow. Please require and abide by an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Crescendo. And, please take a major step back from approving projects with density and building height variances from the zoning and building codes on the books. And please take a step forward toward greater sensitivity to the eco-geological treasures given to us by our Creator and nurtured by our forbearers. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, I f l c s f ccyCiQ.d`d91SY�a.,fi� jL'J6 4--c'rI CU/ 1/19/2005 Page 2 of 2 Kevin A. Johnson Michael P. Shear Patin Springs Year-Round 1/19/2005 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: raymond bertoia [ray92262@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 1:40 AM To: RonO@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; michaelm@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; chrism@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; Stevep@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; ginnyf@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: eir for Crescendo and Boulders To: Mayor and City Council Members From: Carol and Ray Bertoia Dear Council, This letter is in reference to the EIR for Boulders and Crescendo. I am very concerned that the city is fighting so hard against an EIR report. As a person who lives smack dab in the middle of both developments I have many concerns. I am very concerned about my health. I read Dr. Cone's report. I am very worried that I will be sick for the next two years. Isn't either one of these projects the largest to be approved by this city? It seems foolhardy to have two approved at such an untested price, at the same time. What if the houses aren't sold and the land has been terraced and graded? I will have to live with that ugliness surrounding me every day. Has the city thoroughly investigated what is going to happen to all that water that at present flows down the wash? Is the city going to pay for my house if it is flooded because the city didn't want a thorough investigation? I don't understand why the city isn't asking these questions. I came from Charleston S.0 and their preservationist attitude has made it the jewel of the south. Shouldn't we aspire to being more than just a Pahn Desert clone? We are the only city in the desert that hasn't blown it yet. This is a battle our mayor should be fighting. Of course, he is the one who supported Martha's Village at the entrance to our city. Just remember once it's gone there is no going back. Carol and Ray Bertoia ce� lq )-zoo G�lie, �s haw m 1/19/2005 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: gladys krenek [g.krenek@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 8:17 PM To: JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: EIR Crescendo Boulders TO: City Clerk James Thompson The following email I have written to Mayor Ron Oden, Mayor Pro Tem Michael McCullough, Council Members -Chris Mills, Steve Pougnet, Ginny Foat I beg of you to require an EIR for the Crescendo and Boulders Project. This is absolutely essential. Its the duty of the Mayor of Palm Springs and the Council Members to protect the health of the citizens of Palm Springs, also the wild-life and plants in the areas on the mountain slopes must be maintained in their natural habitat. These projects threaten the health of the Palm Springs citizens and the destruction of the plant and animal life in the regions of these proposed projects. Sincerely, Gladys N Krenek 623 Chino Canyon Rd. Palm Springs, CA 92262 nilILl� 9�, t 19 1/19/2005 AOL Email Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: Caroleadam@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 7:48 PM To: JayT@ci.palm-sprhgs.ca.us Subject: (no subject) If you have not already seen the letter from Dr. Cone you will have the opportunity to do so at tomorrows city council meeting. The health of this valley is in your hands and will be on your conscience. What reason will you give the people for not having an environmental impact report? Carole Sukman 1385 Sierra Way Palm Springs, 92264 3270512 I / (9 / Z60S A,M14-1 �,J P9a I�✓2a� 1/19/2005 � 1 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: Gabriel Russell lgabrielwithlove@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 5:25 PM To: JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: EIR on Crescendo and Boulder Projects Dear Mayor and Council Members: I am a concerned citizen living in Palm Springs. My concern is the approval of Crescendo Development (79 homes), and the Boulders Project. I strongly urge that an Enviromnental Impact Report (EIR)be required for both these projects. I strongly disagree that there will be no impact on the well being of those that live here. Please consider this as you and your families will be affected as well if these projects are allowed to take place. Sincerely, Gail Russell Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! Get yours free! tdl 01,aj 1/19/2005 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: Alan Cameron [acameron@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 6:02 PM To: Ginny Foat; Michael McCullough; Chris Mills; Ron Oden; Steve Pougnet; James Thompson Subject: The Boulders My wife has been instructed by her doctor we must sell our house and move as the dust from the boulder crushing will probably cause her"chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder" or worse. The doctor thinks what you are proposing next to residential areas is the "dumbest thing I have ever heard". In almost all areas of our country it would be completely ridiculous to scavenge a beautiful hillside as you are proposing in Little Tuscany However, considering all but Ms Foat has accepted thousands of dollars for your campaigns from Wessman and the head of the planning commission's husband is president of GM construction shows such a complete lack of integrity I understand the outrage of most citizens in Palm Springs. I also understand why the"Desert Sun" believes you should be replaced. If one of my employees accepted money from a customer they would immediately be holding a "pink slip". You have an opportunity to unite this city by not allowing Wessman all the variance he is again requesting. It is obvious you lack the character to stand against Wessman and the citizens that carry the tax burden are not seriously considered. If you allow"The Boulders"approval I will contribute many thousands of dollars to your opponents and work hard to make you go away. It is obvious most people in Palm Springs think the same thing. Respectfully, Alan Cameron 875 Chino Canyon Road Palm Springs goo 1/19/2005 Message Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: Dave Grindstaff[dgrindstaff@dc.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 4:28 PM To: Ron O@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; michaelm@ci.pal m-springs.ca.us; chrism@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; Stevep@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; ginnyf@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: EIR Dear City Council - I am writing to express my support for Environmental Impact Statements to be prepared and certified prior to the approval of both the Boulders and Crescendo projects. I believe it is in Palm Spring's best interest to make sure that the preparation of these building sites not be detrimental to either the local environment or citizen health. thank you, David Grindstaff 2555 N Junipero AVE Palm Springs, CA 92262 rIot,tAL_ y y.Ot tl� [_° fr-/ CO J„ C14— aft/r9�0� J: 'O" l,Q PUB.uCJ —rd55T]MnNI 1/18/2005 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: MoonTao@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 12:09 PM To: Ron O@cLpalm-springs.ca.us; michaelm@ci.pal m-springs.ca.us; chrism@ci.pal m-springs.ca.us; Stevep@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; ginnyf@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; JayT@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: Comments on Crescendo development to be read into the record tonight January 19,2005 RE: Crescendo Development FROM: Cheryl Stereff and Dennis Marchese 755 Girasol Court Palm Springs, CA. 92262 Dear Mayor Oden and City Council members, We reside at one of the homes that border the east side of the proposed Crescendo development.We realize we are privileged to live near the untouched desert. The boulderscapes in Chino Canyon are Cochella Valley's virgin redwood forests. First of all,we appreciate the close scrutiny the City Council gave to the proposed Crescendo project during the meeting two weeks ago.It is very encouraging.Exceptional ideas came from council members on how to make this project a much better fit for our neighborhood.We especially applaud the Council's suggestions to not have two level homes,utilizing more rocks and boulders under two feet into the landscape,having all curbside landscaping and street improvements completed first,having custom homes on lots over 30,000 square feet, and pulling back the incline between lots. Requiring the developer to build bi-level homes fits into our neighborhood. That said,not fully considering the environmental consequences before granting final approval to this project has the tremendous potential to produce considerable physical and psychological distress to our neighborhood's well-being.To single out our very quiet neighborhood to the health damaging dust and noise of massive grading, as well as rock crushing feels like a travesty.To tear up the magnificent boulder strewn vistas without a full Environmental Impact Report appears absolutely shortsighted.We hope you wisely choose to conduct a comprehensive(EIR)before granting filial approval. We need an in-depth study of how this particular development will transform our desert ecosystem and impact human health before moving full steam ahead. Much too often,the saga of human design on nature has produced disasterous consequences. It appears to be the trend these days to continue to rely on the 20th century consumption model of housing rather than entering the 21st century reality of fostering sustamability.The future of Palm Springs demands more innovative "green"housing designs and development rather than to continue to produce homes that are the equivalent of a fleet of Hummers perched on the hillsides.As you are considering this project why not require the developer to design housing that includes ecological innovations for the generations to come? Dennis Marchese Cheryl Stereff feyg �l � � �Ohr� 1/19/2005 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: DMTiffanylamps@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 8:26 PM To: MoonTao@aol.com Subject: Letter October 18, 2005 Dear Whom It May Concern, We live at 755 N. Girasol Ct, in Palm Springs, which is one of four homes that borders and touches the proposed development called "Crescendo".We realize that the developer(owner) has a right to build homes on this 40 acre parcel, if approved by planning commission and city council. We also know that in this proposed development there are many issues that should be considered before granting final approval. The environmental impact to this property can be devastating if additional studies(ERI) are not taken and final approval is given. As hikers, there are crevasses of four to five feet deep on the property, which I have seen standing water in after a rain. These are crevasses where coyote, rabbits, and much wildlife have lived and made burrows. As a medical patient with acute bronchial allergies, how does a major development like this one keep the dust down to a breathable level the whole time in progress?This property has boulders the size of cars sunk deep in the ground. How does a developer counciously remove these giant boulders?There are discussions of a proposed rock grinding operation that would make dust and noise levels safe, according to the studies supplied by the developer. How come we (citizens ) have to take the studies of hired experts by the developer as the gospel truth? Why can't we have our own study completed in a comprehensive way, like a full Environmental Impact Review Study completed? This way, once all those facts are in, then the Council can make a decisive decision on what is best suited for this precious property. If an comprehensive study (ERI)was completed, then the surrounding neighbors would stand behind the decision the Council would make. We certainly would stand behind the Councils decision if this study was completed. There has been a major misjusticed served to the citizens of this wonderful community during the planning stages of this development. And that lies in the fact that the Planning Commission has given full approval of this project without the scrutiny that the Council has now seemed to have taken. Last Council meeting was very encouraging because wonderful ideas came from our council on how to make this project a better one. Councils decision to not have two level homes was smart, utilizing more rocks and boulders under two feet wide into the landscape was great, having all the curbs and street improvements completed first was excellent, possibly having custom homes on lots over 30,000 square feet was good for the existing neighbors, pulling back the incline between lots was the right idea, making the developer build bi-level homes fits right into our neighbor hood, and other newly created ideas will make this a more visual pleasing and appealing project for all. So why can't we (citizens)and Council take more time to tighten and tweak this project to a great and well thought out project that we all can be part of., and happy with. The Council had wonderful ideas and can come up with more creative ones if they are given the time. And while we are tightening this project up, should'nt we have a Environmental Impact Review Study of our own ? This would end all the neighbors concerns and we could all agree to give our city one great project called "Crescendo". Sincerely Yours, Dennis Marchese Cheryl Stereff 1/19/2005 January 19, 2005 City Council Palm Springs Crescendo Development Mayor and Council: Many scientific topics relate to a proposed building project and many dangerous impacts can be the result of poor research about air, water, soil, health, drainage, habitat, etc. The research on Crescendo is 5 years old. Hardly current. No one is their right mind would accept data that is 5 years old in 2005. It is a requirement to have the most up-to-date information to make an informed decision. The Negative Declaration is invalid as it is not based on current information. For example, the letter, from Dr. Larry Cone, dated January 17, 2005, which Council has, relating the rocky and sandy surfaces, around Palm Springs harbors a fungus that can cause pneumonia in humans, especially those with chronic lung disease, or with low immune systems, such as elders, infants, and those with AIDS. It often leads to widespread disease and death. It is airborne as a direct result of construction and rock crushing. Now, if Planning had done their research, they would have noted that Dr.Cone appeared in this room, in 2000, stating how dangerous to health, another proposed nearby construction would be to humans. That information should have been in an updated report. There is never an excuse for poor research when it comes to our health due to a project. I spoke to several County superiors who oversee SCQAMD...they oversee us in air, EIRs, and even in rock crushing. The Agency has the authority to "Take over local projects" that skirt, fail, or do not comply with the law. They feel 5 year old data is not adequate...current evaluation is required...including medical data. And, of interest, they show they never received the Crescendo or Boulders report for review. Is that a lapse or habit to withhold data? You know nothing about the soil, the drainage, habitat, water, air, or stability of the hill. You don't understand how all the dozens of scientific issues interact. Having a developer tell you, "An EIR is not needed shows an attitude of reckless endangerment towards human health, and a willful attitude that he knows better than expert research". You have a legal burden to protect the public and the land. You cannot approve this project without current data....which is required. The pattern of violations of Palm Springs is not acceptable. And frankly, I don't think it is the duty of the people to do your research or make certain you obey the law. Maybe you should start including all the experience of the people your decisions. Dr. Jane Smith 19 January 19, 2005 I am very concerned. The last time I was in this council chamber I heard members of the City Council, which shall remain unnamed at this time, say screw the people of this City, this is not their government it ours and we will do with it as we please. I am referring to the council members statement that they where going to make the decisions on the hillside developments now, by themselves, without the voice of the people being heard. I would remind this board that on this subject, the people have already spoken. The people spoke when they went out and got enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballet. To not allow the people of our city to be heard would be to thwart the very basics of our democratic process. When the members of the City Council took their seats on this board, you swore an oath to uphold the rights of the people. If you approve this project, without the peoples consent, you weren't telling the truth when you took your oath. Generally, government cannot slow the business of governance because of changes in the law that have yet to be enacted, however, that is not the case in this situation. In this we are dealing with exactly the reason the initiative process was started and fulfilled. The people have spoken and they demand to be heard. This is their right and your responsibility. I don't know if the initiative on saving our hillsides is a good one on not. I haven't read it. I don't know if, when the people vote, it will be for or against this plan. What I do know is that the people have the right to speak and that right shall not be infringed upon, not even by you. As I am sure you know these hillside developments are a liability nightmare of indefensibility. I have spoken with neighbors who are now planning to sell their homes so as not to be subjected to this kind of long term abuse. Unfortunately, the real estate market is down and selling next to an open pit strip mining operation, which by law has to be disclosed, is problematical. The coming law suits are already starting to stack up and this project hasn't even been approved. What does that tell you? Does the City of Palm Springs have any liability for their decisions? I don't know. I have talked with many people that work for the City and they are generally nice people just like anyone else. In city government, it is usually the little guy that pays the price when fiscal problems arise. Janitors, secretaries, fire, police, maintenance, etc., will probably all loose their jobs before you would lose yours. Would you dare to be so callous, so cavalier, u a b G�4 q} that you would jeopardize these peoples very livelihood,just so you can support one special interest? We all know that on the other side of these chamber doors are millions and millions of attorneys just pulling at the bit to bankrupt and take over our city. Please don't let them do that. Stop this rape of our lands and let the people speak on this matter. So, what do I think of all of this? Any questions? — �- A^~Thank you. -'` Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, My name is John Goodrich. I live at 440 W. Chino Canyon Road. As you are well aware, the proposal to mine, grind and crush rocks on the Crescendo and Boulders sites is a major concern for our neighborhoods. It is not my intention to review all the theoretical calculations, the formula and the arguments for and against the adequacy of the mitigation proposed in the Initial Studies. I just want to read into the record the personal experiences of a number of neighbors to the south of the City who have no connection with Crescendo or the Boulders but who have had, over an extended period, a very personal experience of rock crushing. The following is a text of an e-mail sent today to City Hall as a follow up to a letter sent to the Council last month: ----------------------------------text (attached)------------------------------------------ In conclusion, I would ask you not to assume a formula will suffice. Remember we are faced with fifteen months of this. Take the opportunity to see for yourself. And if your experience confirms that of these neighbors, then do not allow rock crushing to be part of this project OS Copy of an e-mail dated January 19, 2005 from Mr. David Epp to Mr. Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner, City of Palm Springs Dear Mr . Meyerhoff, This statement is intended to describe the impact of a rock crushing operation in Murray Canyon on a neighboring residential community over the past few months . We as a neighborhood feel that the noise and interior vibration-- despite a 30 foot plus berm and the use of spring stabilized equipment--has been devastating and denied each of us within a thousand feet or more of the operation, the reasonable Use and Enjoyment of our residences . The impact of this operation exceeds all reasonable sound levels and has plagued the neighborhood with the smell of Diesel fuel, dust, and potentially harmful airborne particulate as described by the A.Q.M. D. as a known health risk to ALL persons, not just those with pre-existing compromised immune systems . There is no mitigating circumstance that can justify this type of operation anywhere near existing residences . Damage to interior items in my new home such as plumbing, grouted tile and other finish surfaces can never be proven to be a direct result of this operation, but have no other reasonable explanation. This rock crushing activity restricts the use of outdoor areas of our residences for the majority of daylight hours, once again denying the homeowner any reasonable use and enjoyment of their home . Thank You--Homeowner-450 Bogert Trail, Palm Springs Read into the record during Public Comment in the course of the Council Meeting on January 19, 2005 by: John Goodrich 440 W Chino Canyon Road Palm Springs, CA 92262 Page 1 of 2 From: roxann ploss T o: U lafles Sachs Date: 1/19/2005 6-05-20 PM_ Subject: going tonight? If you don't have a presentation, could you read something short for me? In the past fourteen months while hillside development has been argued, reargued and argued again, ten houses in my little neighborhood have been remodeled and put up for sale...and without adding any extra burden to the infrastructure of Palm Springs. Two are still on the market but the other eight have been sold at double, triple and even one at quadruple the price listed just two years ago. This is true in the Historic Tennis Club area, Las Palmas, the Old Movie Colony...all over town. Mr. Wessman's argument, then, that we absolutely MUST" build his tract homes in order to bring revenue to the town does not hold water. Those revenues are being generated right now and without terracing, grading or the crushing of boulders. What he wants to do will, obvious to most of us in this room, be injurious to our health. If you have not required the necessary EIS's, and you go ahead with your approval tonight, it seems you are simply trading one set of people's lawsuits for another, greater class action suit once the medical results are reported. This vote tonight puts many things in jeopardy. Health. Eco- tourism. Aesthetics. The ground water table. The air. The quality of life. No matter which way you vote tonight, either a very large segment of the town will be angry or a smaller, richer and more powerful group will be equally as angry. Why not do the right thing? Wait to hear the voice of the zoos- fileWC:\Documents and Settings\Charies Sachs\Local Settings\Temp\C98DA318�. 1/19/20i a� Page 2 of 2 people in March. To do anything less would be to ignore your responsibilities as representatives of the people. fileWCADocuments and Settings\Charles Sachs\Local Settings\Temp1C98DA318-... 1/19/2005 1-19-05 Good Evening Council, Dana Stewart and ,Dames McKinley of Palm Springs, Otherwise known as Pete and Repeat. Here we are again, to ask for an Environmental Impact Study. One of the reasons we do so, is because of our experience with a number of Native American Tribes, with whom we have dealt, have required one. This includes the Cabazon Tribe's Resource Recovery Park, built on marginal land in Indio, and it was required for Environmental technologies. You have plans to completely disfigure the land with massive development and have not required even an EIR! They do not wish to give up any sovereignty whatsoever. We take exception to characterizations by Doug Evans to the Planning Commission and others that have spoken here regarding the Aqua Caliente and the part they play in all this. The PC and Mr. Evans, and some citizens affected by this prejudice, gave dire warnings about what the Tribe, our very good neighbors, might do if they were in possession of more land. To tell you the truth, we have more faith in their stewardship than yours. � We also take exception with the mischaracterization by Mr. Mills that the Crescendo is an "infill" project by calling the Tramway Road a "development". First, he calls us all liars, then he insults our intelligence. Who's side is he on? Certainly, not on the side of the public, who's health and wealth is at stake. This is why we also call for a Fiscal Impact Report. He would rather jeopardize the public's health and benefit for the profits of special interests. We were given this treasure of Eden to cherish and to protect, not to destroy. These hillsides are sacred to all but you. Through the most cardinal of sins— AVARICE —you endanger us, and blaspheme the Almighty. We will always fight for the public welfare over the profits of special interests. VERY Sincerely yours. Mallika and Timothy G. Albert 2241 N. Leonard Road Palm Springs, CA 92262 residence 760.322.7263 office 760.323.6034 fax 760.323.3282 cell M 760.409.0884 cell T 760.409,1104 email Mallika@dc.rr.com; UAL777Timna do rr.com To: Mayor Ron Oden, Mayor Pro Tern Michael McCullough, Council member Chris Mills, Council member Steve Pougnet, Council member Ginny Foat, City Clerk James Thompson Date: January 19th, 2005 For Public Record, offered at City Council Meeting Re: Tentative Tract Map 31766-Case 5.0996.DD 294 Wessman Development Crescendo Project 1000 West Racquet Club Drive.South of Tramway Road and W of Vista Grande Ave We, and hundreds of other residents, live in a neighborhood between the proposed Crescendo development, before you tonight for approval, and the Boulders which soon seeks your approval. The Crescendo Initial Study (IS), whether 1 inch or 12 inches thick, is no substitute for a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Several issues were not adequately addressed in the Crescendo Initial Study and you should require an E.I.R. for it and for all proposed developments vents on the hillside boulder fields surrounding or adjacent to several large residential neighborhoods. Council member Ginny Foat has requested an E.I.R. for the Crescendo Project, based on her unanswered questions. Mr. Wessman has chosen to ignore requests for specific information she, and others, have respectfully "requested" from him. Her particular concerns are about air quality,noise,rock crushing operations, slope stability, and "visualizing"this hillside project. Lawrence A. Cone, M.D. D Sc., F.A.C.P., a local physician and a medical expert, also wrote to you calling for an Environmental Impact Report prepared and certified, before approval of developments, such as Crescendo and Boulders, i.e. "construction projects that will last for several years in the grinding of stone and removal of virgin desert earth in residential areas..." Crescendo fits that definition as does the Boulders. Dr. Cone's research states these construction projects and operations "will prove hazardous to the environment and is particularly dangerous to patients with AIDS and those living with chronic pulmonary diseases. These are particularly common medial problems in Pahn Springs. " Although we do not currently have chronic pulmonary or respiratory diseases, we are concerned about our own health and those neighbors who are living with AIDS. Nor do any of us want to be prisoners in our homes for the next few years, fearful to open door and windows and unable to enjoy our outdoor garden areas due to a highly deteriorated air quality from these developments. We unequivocally request that you not approve the Crescendo project, prior to the preparation and certification of an Environmental Impact Report. Oil llgf2obs L-; cA: 19 w :v F� www 4 y" nwr^. x .wa .xY GG, wny�� 'YE FY� 1 _ 1 in•irob.i.o .'M1..fN4NiA41N. ., u..... r I w as w u W� lX � �ayl. a .•', + r 1 I R.i l 51 LF CAM �.!'t y�ri n A W M � III ..�Y ,.«r1� � .fir .� x�• � h�. i� � r v. 1 , d ry f I Y a� RESOLUTION NO. 21191 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND APPROVAL OF CASE NO. 5.0996 FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 294 (PD-294) AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31766 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 79-UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED AT 1000 WEST RACQUET CLUB DRIVE, WEST OF VISTA GRANDE AVENUE, SOUTH OF TRAMWAY ROAD, ON APN#594-040-046, ZONE R-1-A, SECTION 3. WHEREAS, on February 19, 2004, Wessman Development ("Applicants") filed an application with the City pursuant to Sections 9403.00 and 9402.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for a Planned Development District and Preliminary Development Plan for a 79-unit single family residential project, for the property located at 1000 West Racquet Club Drive, south of Tramway Road and west of Vista Grand Avenue, on APN # 594-040-046, Zone R-1-A, Section 3; and WHEREAS, the applicant has filed an application with the City pursuant to Section 9.62.00 et. seq. of the Municipal Code for Tentative Tract Map 31766 for the subdivision of a 42 acre parcel into a 79 numbered lots and additional lettered lots; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider an application for a Tentative Tract Map and a Planned Development District 5.0996, PD- 294 (PD 294)was issued in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, said Planned Development District and Tentative Tract Map were 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, on April 20, 2004, the Office of Neighborhood Involvement and Public Participation convened a neighborhood meeting to provide information on the project to the community; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2004 and July 26, 2004, the Design Review Committee reviewed this project; and WHEREAS, a City Council subcommittee was formed to meet with the neighborhood residents to listen to their concerns; WHEREAS, on several occasions the City Council subcommittee met with the neighboring residents to listen to their concerns; and WHEREAS, on November 4, 2004, at the Planning Commission Study Session, the Planning Commission reviewed the project; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2004, November 24, 2004, December 8, 2004, and December 22, 2004 a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31766, Planned Development District 294, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program was held by the Planning Commission was held 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; and WHEREAS, on December 22, 2004, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council approve said project; and WHEREAS, on January 5, 2005, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31766, Planned Development District 294, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program was held by the City Council was held in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff to prepare additional conditions for the project, regarding building height and locations, infrastructure and street improvements and re- naturalization of slopes using boulder stacking and landscaping; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2005, the City Council met to review revised conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council 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 CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council finds that, with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures, potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from this project will be reduced to a level of insignificance and therefore recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. Section 2: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 94.02.00, the City Council finds that: a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a Planned Development District is authorized by the City's zoning ordinance. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance for the underlying R-1-A zone, single-family residential development(single family residences) is a permitted use. b. The said use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, and is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to the existing or future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. The proposed project consists of subdividing 42 acres into 79 single-family lots. The site has a current zoning designation of R-1-A (minimum 20,000 square feet) and a General Plan designation of Residential Low (2du/ac). The applicant is proposing a Planned Development District (PDD) and Tentative Tract Map (TTM 31766). The project will be provided access from Racquet Club Road. The development will have secondary emergency-only access from Tramway Road and Vista Grande Avenue. Recreational amenities, including open space through the provision of a pedestrian trail around and through the project will be provided and maintenance will be under the auspices of the Home Owners Association. The PDD includes modified minimum lot sizes of 15,000 sq. ft. House sizes will range from 1,500 square feet to 2,845 square feet. The maximum lot coverage is 35%, which is consistent with General Plan requirements. C. The site for the intended use 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. This Planned Development District application proposes to provide specific development standards for the project as well as a preliminary development plan as provided for by Zoning Code Section 9403.00. Approval by the Planning Commission and City Council of the preliminary development will constitute approval of the Preliminary Planned Development District. Pursuant to the R-1-A zone, Section 92.01.01.D.10 of the Zoning Ordinance, in order to encourage a more creative approach in the development of land and to allow for more usable open space areas, large scale residential developments may be permitted on site of not less than four and one half acres of land. The land is required to be developed as an integrated unit, conforming to density and all other property development standards except that lot area, lot dimensions, and yards may be modified: provided the overall development equals the general quality of development in this zone. A number of facts exist in support of this application for PD-294, including the provisions for common area improvements with areas devoted to the common open space trail and recreation amenity in addition to the provision of private rear yards proposed as part of this project The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses, and the proposed project is within allowable density of the underlying R-1-A. d. 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. The proposed project will contribute to improvement of the existing street system that will serve the site, and with said improvements, the public street system will be adequate to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use. The project will also contribute to providing pedestrian connectivity in the neighborhood, through the provision of the 4,900 foot pedestrian trail. e. The conditions to be imposed are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, of the existing neighborhood in which this project is situated. 3 The conditions imposed are necessary to bring the project into compliance with applicable zoning, building, and other regulations to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the existing neighborhood in which this project is located. Section 3: Pursuant to 9.62.010 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code and Section 92.01.00 et. sec. of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council finds that: a. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Residential L-2, Low -Density Residential, General Plan designation which governs the subject property as well as all property adjacent to the subject site. b. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map are consistent with the underlying R-1-A zone in which the property is located. The proposed project is consistent with existing development in the vicinity. The proposed lot sizes are consistent with existing development lots in the vicinity. The proposed uses, single family residences are consistent with existing residential development in the vicinity of the proposed project. C. The site is physically suited for this type of development. The project is surrounded on two sides, to the south and to the east by single family development. The proposed project is consistent with sound planning practices, utilizes existing infrastructure in the area, and continues the existing development patter. The project site and each lot contain adequate developable building area. The maximum building or lot coverage proposed is 35%, which is consistent with the General Plan. The project does not include leap-frog development characteristic of sprawl. There are no bodies of water, ravines, or significant topographic features on the subject property. d. The site is physically suited for the proposed density of development. City zoning criteria for the underlying R-1-13 zone and L-2 General Plan designation encourage and allow for a more creative approach in the development of land, which allows for more usable open space areas. Pursuant to Section 92.01.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, large scale residential developments may be permitted on sites of not less than four and one half acres of land. The land is required to be developed as an integrated unit, conforming to density and all other property development standards except that lot area, lot dimensions, and yards may be modified, provided the overall development equals the general quality of development in this zone. F The proposed project will allow for a housing opportunity which provides common open space amenities, public street and smaller lot sizes. This type of housing product has provided a necessary niche in the housing inventory for the City of Palm Springs. The General Plan Designation of L-2 permits establishment of a maximum of 2 dwelling units per acre for single family housing. The proposed project would consist of the development of a 42 acre site. The proposed density of Phase II is 79 units or 1.88 dwelling units per acre, less than the allowed 2 dwelling units per acre anticipated by the General Plan. The overall density allowed with the low density (1-2) General Plan designation is 84 units. Therefore the proposed density for the project is in accordance with the General Plan. e. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or their habitats. The Initial Study prepared for the project determined that the project is adjacent to existing developments to the south and east. Through the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, any environmental impacts regarding animal or plant life will be reduced to a level of less than significant. There are no bodies of water on the subject property and therefore no fish will be disturbed. A number of easements transect the property. The Whitewater Mutual Water Company holds an easement for pipelines. An existing irrigation line is to be relocated and the easement quitclaimed regarding the Whitewater Mutual Water Company easement. Southern California Gas holds as easement for pipelines that will be quitclaimed. California Electric Power Company holds a 20' wide easement for pole line and incidental purposes that will be quitclaimed. California Water and Telephone Company hold a 10' wide easement for pole anchor purposes that will be quitclaimed. Lastly, Southern California Edison holds a 10' wide easement with facilities and those power facilities will be relocated and the easement quitclaimed. 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby orders the filing of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves the Mitigation Monitoring Program for PD-294, approves PD-294 and Tentative Tract Map 31766, subject to those conditions set forth in the attached Exhibit A, which are to be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits unless otherwise specified. ADOPTED this 19th day of January, 2005. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA City Clerk City Manager Reviewed and Approved as to Form: r EXHIBIT A CASE 5.0996 PD-294, CRESCENDO PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT(PD#294) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31766 1000 WEST RACQUET CLUB DRIVE APN#594-040-046 WESSMAN DEVELOPMENT DRAFT LEGISLATIVE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL APPROVED: JANUARY ._99, 2005 _ EXPIRES:JANUARY 19,2007 Deleted;s Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning Services, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition. Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. PLANNING 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 5.0996, PD-294 and TTM 31766. 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 judgment or failure to appeal,shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and agencies having jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be included in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City. 4. The applicant, prior to issuance of building permits, shall submit a draft declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC&R's") to the Director of Planning Services for approval in a form to be approved by the City Attorney,to be recorded prior to certificate of occupancy. The CC&R's shall be enforceable by the City, shall not be amended without City approval, and shall require maintenance of all property in a good condition and in accordance with all ordinances. 5. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Springs, a deposit in the amount of$2000, for the review of the CC&R's by the City Attorney. A$585 filing fee, or the fee in effect at the time of submission, shall also be paid to the City Planning Department for administrative review purposes. 6. 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. 7. 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 %% for residential projects with the first $100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be based 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. 8. The Project will bring a significant number of additional residents to the community. The City's existing public safety and recreation services, including police protection, criminal justice, fire protection and suppression, ambulance, paramedic, and other safety services and recreation, library and cultural services are near capacity. Accordingly, the City may determine to form a Community Services District under authority of Government Code -- oereted:om 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 of 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. Environmental Assessment: 9. The mitigation measures of the environmental assessment shall apply. The applicant shall submit a signed agreement that the mitigation measures outlined as part of the negative declaration will be included in the plans prior to Planning Commission consideration of the environmental assessment Final Design: 10, If, within two (2) years after the date of approval by the City Council of the preliminary development plan, the final development plan, as indicated in Section 94.03.00(1), has not been approved as provided below in Condition #11, the procedures and actions _ Deleted:bymePia�� 9 which have taken place up to that time shall be null and void and the Planned commission Development District and Tentative Tract Map shall expire. Extensions of time may be allowed for good cause. 11. The final development plans shall be submitted in accordance with Section 94.03.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Final construction plans shall include site plans, building elevations, floor plans, roof plans, fence and wall plans, entry plans, landscape plans, irrigation plans, exterior lighting plans, street improvement plans and other such documents as required by the Planning Commission and City Council. Final construction plans shall be submitted within two years of approval. The Final Planned_I oexetea:me Piznning Comm m.n Development District shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council 12. Pad heights and roof elevations shall be specified for each lot as a part of the Final Development Plan. 13. No retention basin may extend past property lines of the project site. 14. An exterior lighting plan in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 93.21.00, Outdoor Lighting Standards, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning &Zoning prior to the issuance of building permits. Manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior lighting on the building and in the landscaping shall be submitted for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. If lights are proposed to be mounted on buildings, down-lights shall be utilized. 15. If lights are proposed to be mounted on buildings,down-lights shall be utilized. 16. A photometric study shall be required for the entries. Architecture and Landscaping: 17. The project is subject to the City of Palm Springs Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The applicant shall submit an application for Final Landscape Document Package to the Director of Planning Services for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Referto Chapter 8.60 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements. 18. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs Engineering specifications. � 1 u 19. No exterior down spouts shall be permitted on any faoade on the proposed building(s)that are visible from adjacent streets or residential land commercial areas. 20. The design,height,texture and color of fences and walls shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All walls shall be located back from too of slope to permit screening by landscaping and stacked boulders Walls and fences shall be adequately and entirely screened by stacked boulders 21. The street address numbering/lettering shall not exceed eight inches in height. 22. Details of fencing (materials and color)submitted with final landscape plan. 23. The path of travel to the common trail area shall be compliant with the disabled access codes. 24. Front and rear yards shall be fully landscaped prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The landscape palate shall utilize drought tolerant species. Planting of turf shall be prohibited from front yards. Turf shall otherwise be limited to active recreation areas in rear yards only(including private yards).The utilization of desert vegetation shall be incorporated throughout the project site. The developer shall be responsible for installation of front and rear yard landscape, irdgation and exterior lighting. The HOA will be responsible for enforcement of these requirements. 25. Planned Development District (PD #294) development standards are approved as follows: Front Yard - -- --- --- ____ ____ --10', with,20'to face of garage eleted:_ -- D---- --- - - Side Yard—Interior Lot 10, - Side Yard—Corner Lot 12' Rear Yard—lot to lot 15, Rear Yard—backing to Local or Collector street 15' Rear Yard—Backing to Major Street 25' Second Story, max.500 square feet 26:(See Options 1_and 2,)_ Height—Dominant rid eline is Proiections and architectural features 21' zs the minimum house s;ze shall be "Option 17 No second story units allowed along perimeter of the project or Deleted:,500 square feet,with a mix of housing sizes up to adjacent to another second story unit Second story units shall be limited to a maximum of 25%of the total number of lots 09 total) may residences ma _ Deleted: square feet. Larger y be permitted as long as the building footprints consistent *Option 2: No second story units shall be allowed within the development. All with setback and lot coverage maximunits shall be limited to a maximum height of 18 feet requirements theoft lot shall be 30%0%of the net lot area. 'Option 3: Lots greater than 30,000 square feet shall be developed with custom residences A total of nine lots (#1 3 9 23 24 46 47 67 and 75) shall be developed with custom residences 1 27. A perimeter pedestrian trail, a minimum of 6' (six foot) in width shall be required around the project. A minimum of three shaded seating areas, with water fountains and trash receptacles, shall be required. The specific locations of the seating areas shall be selected in consideration of maximizing views, while also maintaining the privacy of adjacent parcels. 28. Hillside related conditions: a) Disturbed areas not proposed for development shall be re-naturalized and re- vegetated. b) Utilize low lighting levels to avoid glare c) All public utilities shall be located underground. d) Plant species native to the immediate region shall be used in all non-recreational landscaping located in or adjacent to open space areas. e) Project perimeters slopes and retention basins shall be re-naturalized through the use of boulders and heavy landscaping_ f) Special attention shall be taken to re-naturalize slopes and areas adjacent to project perimeters with boulders and heavy landscaping to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services g) Rock crushing — all sizes of rocks and boulders shall be retained for use in re naturalizing slopes which represent existing natural diversity of rock sizes h) Retaining walls visible from the public right of way shall be completely screened by stacked boulders. i) Split level pads shall be required for all lots General/Grading: 29. Maximum pad heights shall be specified for each lot and shall be approved as part of the Final Planned Development District. 30. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit,a Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Building Official. Refer to Chapter 8.50 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements. 31. The grading plan shall show the disposition of all cut and fill materials. Limits of site disturbance shall be shown and all disturbed areas shall be fully restored or landscaped. 32. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks— 3' wide and 6" deep. The irrigation system shall be tested prior to final approval of the project. Section 14.24.020 of the Municipal Code prohibits nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways or gutters. POLICE DEPARTMENT 33. Developer shall comply with Section II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 34. Prior to any construction on—site,all appropriate permits must be secured. FIRE 35. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and constructed as all weather capable and able to support a fire truck weighing 73,000 pounds GVW. (902.2.2.2 CFC) 36. Palm Springs Fire Apparatus require an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13'6". 37. Locked gate(s) shall be equipped with a KNOX key switch device or Key box. Contact the Fire Department at 323-8186 for a KNOX application form. (902.4 CFC) 38. Project is beyond five-minute response time from the closest fire station and therefore automatic Fire Sprinkler System is required. 39. Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. (901.4.4 CFC) Show location of address on plan elevation view. Show requirement and dimensions of numbers in plan notes. Numbers shall be a minimum 4 inches,and of contrasting color to the background. 40. Access for fire fighting equipment shall be provided to the immediate job site at the start of construction and maintained until all construction is complete. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13' 6". Fire Department access roads shall have an all weather driving surface and support a minimum weight of 73,000 Ibs. (Sec.902 CFC) 41. An operational fire hydrant or hydrants shall be installed within 250' of all combustible construction. No landscape planting, walls, or fencing is permitted within 3 feet of fire hydrants,except groundcover plantings. 42. Residential fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with DWA or Mission Springs Water District specifications and standards. No landscape planting, walls, or fencing is permitted within 3 feet of fire hydrants. ENGINEERING ,STREETS _ ____ _ ___ ___ _ Deleted:Before final acceptance of the project,all coneihons I;steo below 43Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs mall be`ompletea t°me satiafact;on ofthe City Engineer¶ Encroachment Permit. ¶ 44_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. TRAMWAY ROAD Deleted:below 45. Tramway Road shall be constructed as a Special Street Section in accordance with the °eleted:are General Plan and applicable Specific Plans Improvements listed for Tramway Road that_," Deleted: ¶ were required in accordance with the Improvement Certificate on Parcel Map 23130, as consbnal shown by Map on file in Book 181, Pages 50 to 53, inclusive, of Parcel Maps, records of =curb accordance with City of Riverside County, California, consisting of construction of a 6 inch curb and gutter, 38 feet canlon)Drawing Ci No. of southeast of centerline along the entire frontage and construction of,a minimum pavement section of 3 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inches of crushed miscellaneous~ B feet wide sidewalk base,shall be deferred The applicant shall deposit the engineer's estimate of the cost of ', along the entire the required improvements for construction by others in the future, prior to final map�� frontage in accordance with city of approval, Palm Springs Standard Drawing No 46. Construct a rlvewa from TramwayRoad to the north end of"_E" Street as necessary to ° Construct a 20 feet wide dnveway emergency i -- - - ---- ` approach in accordance with City provide emergency vehicle access into the development. The driveway shall be ',',�,',', - ,constructed of a suitable material (turf block) or decorative and colored concrete, subject f, I, Deleted:Palm springs standard Drawing No 201 north of the end of to review and approval by the Director of Planning Services and Fire Marshall. °E"street forservlce and emergency vehicle access into the development f 47. The applicant shall coordinate with the Tramway Authority regarding construction ' I Construct scheduling and coordination of work occurring on Tramway Road Deleted:miseoaneens RACQUET CLUB ROAD Deleted:with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95%relative 'in r` compaction,orequal,from edge of 48Construct a w, edge curb„32 feet north of centerline along the entire frontage in accordance proposed galterm clean sawoat edge with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. The wedge curb shall have a design, �ii; , ofpa frontage et na accordance along the ` entire frontage in accordance with Providing the necessary stormwater runoff capacity required for the street and shall be ', l",`',', City of Palm Springs standard subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer. p Brewing No 110 and 340 if an alternative pavement section Is proposed,the proposed pave 1 49_Construct a new 54 feet wide street intersection for"A" Street, located approximately 320 �� ',��I�, Deleted:designed by a California feet west of the intersection of North Leonard Road, and a new street 54 feet wide ;,',i registered Geotechmcal Engineer intersection for"E" Street, located approximately 15 feet east of and just offset from the '; I',I,' using"R"values from the prole,.,...z intersection of North Milo Drive, both as shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, with Deleted: pursuant to city council 25 feet radius curb returns and spandrels, and a 6 feet wide cross gutter, in accordance action action,the with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No.200 and 206. Deleted: If improvements to ,a Tramway Road are required pursuant _ Construct a Type A curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at „ to City council action,the appii 3 yp _-l '��,' each side of the intersections of"A"and"E" Street and Racquet Club Road in accordance `I Deleted:6 inch think concrete with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No.212. ii Deleted:An alternative to concrete pavement may 51_Construct a minimum pavement section of 3 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 6 ',` ';, Deleted:approved inches of crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum_ subgrade of 24_inches at 95% Deleted:6 inch relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to clean sawcut edge of ` ` Deleted: and gutter pavement at centerline along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Deleted:Entry designs'or access Standard Drawing No. 110 and 330. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the into the development from Racquet proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical club Road shall be reviewed a(- rAi Engineer using 'R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for Deleted: feet for vehicle stacking in approval. advance of the key card or control ' unit for gate access shall be or 5 52 The applicant shall propose a decorative treatment for the west end of Racquet Club Road Deleted:misetanecns with appropriate traffic signs subiect to the review and approval by the Citv Engineer. I -- Deleted:Install an end of road bamcade and appropriate trailsigns al the westerly end of Racque ., 6 t1 VISTA GRANDE AVENUE 53Construct a w, edge curb,5 feet west of centerline The wedge curb design shall be subiect _ - Deleted:6 inch to the review and approval by the City Engineer. Deleted: along the enure frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs 54_Construct a 20 feet wide driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No 200 Standard Drawing No. 201 at the corner of Vista Grande Avenue and Girasol Road for service and emergency vehicle access into the development,or as otherwise approved by the Fire Marshall. 55_Construct a driveway from the driveway approach a_t_the corner of Vista Grande Avenue__ Deleted:6inchthickconcrete and Girasol Road to the north end of "D' Street as necessary to provide emergency vehicle access into the development. The driveway shall be constructed of a suitable__ - - Deietea:An alrernanve to concrete material (turf block)or decorative and colored concrete, subject to review and approval by pavement may be approved the Director of Planning Services and Fire Marshall. 56 Construct a minimum pavement section of 2'/2 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95%relative compaction, or equal, from clean sawcut edge of pavement to edge of proposed gutter along the entire frontage. Additional pavement removals or asphalt concrete pavement overlay shall be installed in order to construct a cantilevered pavement section with a cross-slope of 2% from the proposed curb face. 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. ON-SITE STREETS 57_All centerline radii shall be a minimum of 130 feet. M.—All on-site cul-de-sacs shall be constructed in accordance with City of Palm Springs standards with a minimum 43 feet curb radius. 59_All "knuckles" for on-site streets shall be constructed in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 104. 60_Dedicate an easement extending from back of curb to back of curb to the City of Palm Springs for public utility,purposes, and for service and emergency vehicles and personnel_ _-- Defetea:and sewer ingress and egress,over the private streets. 61_Dedicate an easement, 30 feet wide (or as required by the City Engineer and Fire Marshall),for emergency vehicle ingress and egress, over Lot 24 as necessary to provide access from Vista Grande Avenue to the north end of"D" Street. This access shall be limited to emergency access purposes only. 62_Dedicate an easement, 30 feet wide (or as required by the City Engineer and Fire Marshall),for emergency vehicle ingress and egress,over Lots 47 and 66 as necessary to provide access from Tramway Road to the north end of"E"Street. n' ��.1 ,G3 Construct a concrete wedge curb or rolled curb, 14 feet on both sides of centerline along_ _- - Deleted:The typical section for'A" the entire frontages and throughout the cul-de-sacs The on site streets shall be through.C.streets indicating a 24 constructed with a typical crowned cross-section The pavement section shall be feet wide travel way,as shown on the Tentative Tract Map dated August 31, constructed using a minimum pavement section of 2'/ inches asphalt concrete pavement 2004,is not approved A minimum 28 over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95°/ feet wide travel way shall be constructed to provide for parking relative compaction or equal. Alternatively, the on-site streets may be constructed with along on side of the on-site streets, decorative colored concrete or pavers subject to the review and approval by the Planning and a roll or wedge curb shall be Commission. constructed to adequately convey on- site stormwater runoff and nuisance waterto on-site drainage systems 64Parking shall be restricted along one side of all on-site streets, as necessary to maintain a Construct a roll orwedge cum 20 feet wide clear travel way. Regulatory Type R26 "No Parking" signs or red curb shall acceptable sides City ofcEngineer,la y g ry yp 9 g feet acceptable both saes of centerline along be installed along one side of all on-site private streets, owe ed the enure frontages,and throughout City Engineer. A Home Owners Association shall be responsible for regulating and the cul-de-sacs A minimum 28 feet wide travel way shall be provided on maintaining required no parking restrictions, which shall be included in Codes, Covenants all on-site streets. and Restrictions required for the development. Delet7proposed, 65_All on-site cul-de-sacs shall be constructed in accordance with City of Palm Springs #'cct a minimum pavement sectio '/:inch asphalt concrete Standard Drawing No. 101. A minimum 43 feet inside radius shall be required for all on- pavemver 4 inch crushed site cul-de-sacs. misceus base with a minimum subgrf 24 inches at 95%relative `-- - ---- ------ ------ - ----- ----- ----- - -____ _____ _____ - ,' comp ,orequaI l fanal[ernative SANITARY SEWER pavemection is proposed,the propovement section shall bedesig a California registered66_AII sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. ewer laterals shall Geotel Engineer using 7'not be connected at manholes. valuesfromthe project site and submitted to the City Engineer for ¶ 67_ approvalSubmit sewer improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the � �� Deleted:New Engineering Division. The plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Deleted:All sower mains ' constructed by the developer and to ' become part of the public sewer 68 If sewer service is required from Racquet Club Road, extend the existing 8 inch sewer system snap be telemsed prior to main across the entire Racquet Club Road frontage as required b the City Engineer. - acceptance of sewer system for q 9 q y y g in by the City 69_Construct an 8 inch sewer main within all on-site streets and connect to the existing public Deleted:Dedicate venous sewer system..Connection to the public sewer system shall be made using an 8 inch_, - Deletes:with a minimum width ofzo lateral connection to the public sewer main and not into an existing manhole or with a new feel manhole. Deleted:sanitary rDeleted:d: The sewer easements ]0. Reserve sewer easements ,across Interior lots as necess2 to implement the on-site,; e keptclearand freeofany - ry----- - obsimcdonsto allowforthe ❑p yate sewer system, _____ ed operation and maintenance ______ _____ - ewer system within the of 71. All on-site sewer systems shall be privately maintained by a Home Owners Association ents. Constructionesent structures,patios, (HOAI. Provisions for maintenance of the on-site sewer system acceptable to the C� ing pools and egwpment, Engineer shall be included in the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) te antl patio decks,shall not be . Planing of large trees or required for this project unless as provided for below in Condition#72 other planting material with invasive or deep root structures shall be 72 If the on-site sewer system is constructed in a manner avoiding sewer mains located restricted Installation of boulders within the easements shall not be within Interior side yards and across fill slope areas and is not constructed within allowed Sewer easements shall not decoratively paved streets(colored concrete or pavers) the on-site sewer system may be be located within cut or Ell slope conditions,except where the sewer publicly maintained by the City subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Acceptance of passes from a higher street to a lower the on-site sewer system for public maintenance shall be subject to the following street through the rearyard of interior f)roylslons: lots.Along side yards,the toe of cut or fill slopes shall be located at i a. All sewer mains constructed by the developer and to become Dart of the public sewer system shall be televised prior to acceptance of the sewer system for maintenance by the City. b. Easements with a minimum width of 20 feet shall be dedicated as necessary to implement the on-site sanitary sewer system The sewer easements shall be kept clear and free of any and all obstructions to allow for the continued operation and maintenance of the sewer system within the easements Construction of permanent structures patios swimming pools and equipment concrete and patio decks shall not be allowed Planting of large trees or other planting material with invasive or deep root structures shall be restricted Installation of boulders within the easements shall not be allowed. Sewer easements shall not be located within cut or fill slope conditions. c. Provisions for maintenance of the public sewer easements, acceptable to the City Engineer, shall be included in the Covenants, Conditions. and Restrictions(CC&R's)_ -- (Deleted:Codes, required for this development. Notice shall be clearly included in the CC&R's defining the restrictions of development within the public sewer easements across the various lots within the development. The CC&R's shall advise the property owners of the City's right to enter the properties, clear and remove any and all obstructions within the easement, and give the City right to charge all costs incurred in enforcing this provision to the Homeowners Association. The CC&R's shall also advise the property owners of the fact that the City is not required to replace in like kind any landscaping or other improvements within the easements in the event repair or replacement of the existing sewer or system is required, and that the City shall be limited to leaving the property in a rough graded condition following any such repair or replacement. GRADING 73_Submit a Rough Grading Plan prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer to the Engineering Division for review and approval. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and/or its grading contractor and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall be required to comply with Chapter 8.50 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, and shall be required to utilize one or more "Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures" as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook for each fugitive dust source such that the applicable performance standards are met. The applicant's or its contractor's Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by staff that has completed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall provide the Engineering Division with current and valid Certificate(s) of Completion from AQMD for staff that have completed the required training. For information on attending a Fugitive Dust Control Class and information on the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook and related 'PM10" Dust Control issues, please contact Elio Torrealba at AQMD at(909) 396-3752, or at etorrealba@AQMD.gov. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan, in conformance with the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook, shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Division prior to approval of the Grading plan.The Grading Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permit. Il 6 _The first submittal of the Grading Plan shall include the following information: a copy of the final approved conformed copy of the Conditions of Approval; a copy of the final approved conformed copy of the Tentative Tract Map and/or Site Plan; a copy of a current Title Report; a copy oflhe amended Geotechnical/Soils Report;and a copy of the associated I _ - oeieted:a Hydrology Study/Report. 74_A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit, issued from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Phone No. 760-346-7491) is required for the proposed development.A copy of the executed permit shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to approval of a Grading Plan. 75_In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.025 (c), the ,applicant shall post with the City a cash bond of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00)_per - neietea:developer disturbed acre for mitigation measures for erosion/blowsand relating to this property and development. 76,, In_cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the California_ _- Deleted:<#>A soda report prepared Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project, applicants for grading by a California registered permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of soil will be required to resent Geotechnical Engineer shall be q P required for and incorporatedas an a clearance document from a Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the integral part ofthe gradingngplan for form of an approved"Notification of Intent To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas the proposed development.A copy of of Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties' (RIFA Form CA-1 prior to approval of the sousing report Phan en and thin P PP the Building Department to the the Grading Plan (if required). The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is Engineering Division prior to approval located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive,Palm Desert(Phone:760-776-8208). ofthe Grading Plan q 9 77 Rock crushing operations on-site during rough grading shall be performed in a manner that maintains a sufficient supply of natural boulders for use in re naturalized fill slopes and retaining walls and in perimeter landscaped parkways 78 The perimeter of the project shall be redesigned by softening the exterior of the proiect by decreasing the perimeter cut and fill slopes from a maximum of 2:1 to a maximum of 3:1 or 4:1 as approved by the of Planning Services and the City Engineer, including the use of landscaping and boulders Slopes shall be softened by reducing slope heights and through the use of landscaping and boulders to achieve a natural appearance. All project fill slopes shall be re-naturalized by using a "Permeon" spray treatment to restore the natural desert varnish. 79. The final rough grading plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the City Council as part of its review of the Final Planned Development District A rough grading permit shall not be issued prior to the City Council's review and approval of the rough grading plan and the Final Planned Development District DRAINAGE 80Accept all stormwater runoff passing through and falling onto the site and conduct this runoff to approved drainage structures as described in the Preliminary Hydrology Report for Tentative Tract Map 31766, prepared by Hunsaker&Associates(as may be amended and/or revised). The applicant shall be responsible for construction of drainage_f, oersted:developer improvements, including but not limited to retention/detention basins, catch basins, storm drain lines, and outlet structures, for conveyance of off-site stormwater runoff and .,� �V�,ri l•" � 'st1 U management of on-site stormwater runoff, as described in a final Hydrology Report for the development,as approved by the City Engineer. The preliminary Hydrology Report for the development shall be amended to include catch basin sizing, storm drain pipe sizing, and retention/detention basin sizing calculations and other specifications for construction of required on-site storm drainage improvements. 1. The retention basin located at the southeast corner of the project adjacent to Racquet Deleted:Required Club Road shall be revised to decrease the overall depth by increasing Its size and Deleted:basins shall not be lowering the adjacent berm and fill sloe and shall be subject to the review and approvah� ofthefinal rough grading plan by the City Council. - - - ' Deleted:within parkways or exterior - --- -- -- - _ locations where they are visible 82An existing 25 feet wide drainage easement exists across the western boundary of the Deleted:the public,unless otherwiseapproved by ma cry council development. This easement exists for the purpose of constructing Line 2 from the Master ` Retention basin locahons,design, Drainage Plan of the Palm Springs Area, in coordination with Riverside County Flood Deleted: Control District(RCFC). Realignment of the existing drainage easement within "G'Street, Deleted:improvements as proposed on the Tentative Tract Map, will require approval of RCFC, following review Deleted:City Engineerand Director and approval of storm drain improvement plans for Line 2 from the Master Drainage Plan of Planning Services of the Palm Springs Area. The applicant shall be responsible for preparing a complete set_ - Deleted:The developer of storm drain improvement plans for the entire reach of Line 2, from the southern edge of Chino Canyon to the Chino Canyon Levee. Plans shall be submitted to RCFC for review and approval. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall construct _-_ - - Deleted:developer the segment of Line 2 across the project, and extensions north and south of the property, acceptable to the City and RCFC, sufficient to avoid future impacts to property owners within the development. Upon the completion of the construction of Line 2 within "G' Street, following RCFC acceptance, the City shall initiate proceedings to vacate the existing 25 feet wide drainage easement across the western boundary of the project, and shall quitclaim the 12 feet wide temporary construction easement. 83_In the event the design of Line 2 is not completed prior to final map approval, the existing __- -EDee :,is not approved by 25 Feet wide drainage easement and 12 feet wide temporary construction easement County Flood Control located across the western boundary of the property shall remain. A Covenant shall be RCFC),or the segment of ross the property is notprepared and recorded against Lots 75 through 79 restricting construction on the lots until ed and accepted by RCFC Line 2 is constructed The applicant shall deposit$2 000 with the City for preparation of the covenant by the City Attorney and shall be responsible for all costs in the preparation and approval thereof. The Covenant shall be executed prior to final map approval and shall be recorded by the City with the final map M. The project is subject to flood control and drainage implementation fees pursuant to Resolution 14082. The acreage drainage fee at the present time is $6,511 per acre per Resolution No. 15189. Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. Validated costs incurred for the design and construction of Line 2 may be credited toward the drainage fee otherwise due. The applicant shall provide copies of all invoices and fees,___--(Deleted-,The developer and appropriate records evidencing payment of design and construction costs related to Line 2 in order to receive credit toward the required drainage fee. 85. All residential lots shall be designed to provide adequate drainage to the adjacent on site streets. Drainage shall be accommodated in a manner that does not interfere with the split level pads of the lots (M. GENERAL Deleted:A combination bikepath and pedestrian trail system shall be 86 All on-site and off-site street improvements and all perimeter landscaping and parkway , constructed along the perimeter ofthe development providing public access improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy into and around the property The (excluding certificates of occupancy issued for model homes)_ bikepath and �eleted:bikepath and 87 A 6 feet wide meandering pedestrian trail system shall be constructed along the perimeter " Deleted:in accordance with chapter of the development providing public access into and around the property. Appropriate rest 8 04401 of stops shall be provided along the pedestrian trail system with public access to make this Deleted:City of Palm Springs feature a recreational amenity. The pedestrian trail system shall be constructed to the Municipal Code,an existing and satisfaction of the City Engineer and Planning Commission using decorative colored proposed electrical concrete or other ADA acceptable material. Easements for public access into and around Deleted:cf tMrty-ave thousand volts the property shall be dedicated to the City on the final map as required to allow public use or less and overhead service drop of Yhe,pedestrjan trail system._ !; conductors,and all gas,telephone, television cable service,and similar service woes or lines,which are on- 88_Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off- j site,abutting,antl/ortmnsec[ing, site streets required by the proposed development shall be backfilled and repaired in Deleted: a mass specific restrictions are shown in General Orders accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115. Deleted: and 128 of the California Public Utilities Commission,and 89_All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground. service requirements published by the 'd utilities A detailed plan approved by 90 All existingutilities shall be shown on the radio and street plans. The existing and he owrie s)of me affected urirnes grading p g y; depicting all above ground fac;INes In proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to the property line. the area of the project to be undergrounded,shall be submitted to or to 91 The original im improvement plans prepared for the proposed development and approved b approval Engineering any grading pnn I p p p P P P P pP y �!�; approval of any grading plan¶ the City Engineer shall be documented with record drawing "as-built" information and !' 4 returned to the Engineering Division, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Any O>The existing overhead utilitiesj' across the northerly property lines modifications or changes to approved improvement plans shall be submitted to the City I; meotthe requirement toheinstalled Engineer for approval prior to construction. underground The developer is advised to investigate the nature of I ; these utilities,the availability of ,92. The existing overhead utilities across the_oortherly propery _lines shall_b_e_ installed I undergrounding these utilities with underground, respect to adjacent and off-site - - ---- - ---- - ---- ----- ---- properties,and to present its case for a waiver of the Municipal Code 93. Contact Whitewater Mutual Water Company to determine impacts to any existing water requirement,ifappropnate,to the lines and other facilities that may be located within the property. Make appropriate Planning Commission and/or City Council as part of its review and arrangements to protect In place or relocate any existing Whitewater Mutual Water approval ofthis project.¶ Company facilities that are impacted by the development A letter of approval for relocated 9 or adjusted facilities from Whitewater Mutual Water Company shall be submitted to th I `#>If utility undergroundingis deferred in accordance with specific Engineering Division prior to issuance of a grading permit direction by the Planning Commission and/or City Council,the record property owner shall enter into a 94 Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any driveway which covenant agreeing to underground all does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of the existing overhead utiufies of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section 93.02.00,D. require tl by the Municipal Code in the future upon request of the City of Palm Springs City Engineer at such 95,—All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk time as deemed necessary.The and/or curb shall have City approve deep d d root barriers installed er Cit of Palm S rin s covenant shall be executed and p y p g notarized by the property owner and Standard Drawing No. 904. submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit A current title report,or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership A covenant preparation fee of$1'„ g t;Aj; •r MAP Deleted:developer 96 A Final Ma shall be prepared b a California registered Land Surveyor or qualified Civil Deleted: Following approval plan of P P P Y 9 Y q storm dram improvement plans for Engineer and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval.A Title Report Line 2 by Riverside County Flood prepared for subdivision guarantee for the subject property, the traverse closures for the control District(RCFC),the City shall ` quitclaim the temporary construction existing parcel and all lots created therefrom, and copies of record documents shall be easement provided RCFC's approval submitted with the Final Map to the Engineering Division as part of the review of the Map. includes a realignment of Line 2 The Final Map shall be approved by the City Council prior to issuance of building permits. through o"street as proposed on the Tentative Tract Map PP P P Y Springs, y ' Deleted:existing 25 97_Prior to approval of a final ma theyo licant shall dedicate to the Cityof Palm S rin s, b separate instrument, a 12 feet wide temporary construction easement adjacent to the east J Deleted:drainage easement side of the 25 feet wide drainage easement, for the purposes of the future construction of J Deleted:easement Line 2 from the Master Drainage Plan of the Palm Springs Area in its original alignment Deleted: Abandonment of the (as required by the Improvement Certificate recorded concurrently with Parcel Map existing drainage easement upon the , fling of a Final Map may only occur 23130),------ ______ _ __ ____- ------ - ------- - - upon completion of construction of Storm Dram Line 2 within"G'Street, 98_In accordance with Section 66434 (g) of the Government Code, the.westerly 23 feet of " and written authorization from the Riverside County Flood Control Vista Grande Avenue may be abandoned upon the filing of a Final Map identifying the District and the City Engineer abandonment of the,riaht-of-way dedicated to the City of Palm Springs,------- 4 - ---- In the event construction of the segment of Line 2 from the Master TRAFFIC Drainage Plan of the Palm Springs Area across the development is not 99_Furnish and install a decorative street light at the northwest corners of thejroect's main completed prior to approval of a anal P map,a Covenant in a form approved entrances("A"and "E"Streets)on Racquet Club Drive to the satisfaction of the Director of by the City Attorney shall be recorded Planning Services and the City Engineer. against all impacted lots[hat are affected by the future construction of Line 2 (as determined by the City 100. Submit traffic striping plans for improvements to Racquet Club Road prepared by a Engineer)in either its anginal California registered Civil Engineer to the Engineering Division for review and approval.All alignment or realignment The Covenant shall advise future required traffic striping improvements shall be completed in conjunction with required homeowners of the potential street improvements,to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. temporary impacts related to a significant public works construction project across or adjacent to their 101. Street name and stop signs shall be required at each on-site street intersection, as property,as well as the requirement required by the City Engineer, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing to provide the City and the Riverside County Flood Control District(RCFC) Nos.620 through 625. any and all access and temporary rights to the property necessary to 102. A 24 inch stop sign and standard stop bar and legend shall be installed in accordance with implement the MasterDrdmage Plan and construct the regional Flood City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 620-625 each exit onto Racquet Club Road control improvement. The Covenant ("A"and"E"Streets), shall be approved by the City Attorney and executed by the owner prior to approval of a final map. 103. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects as Following construction and required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum, all acceptance by RCFC of the segment of Line 2 across the development,the construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with State of City shall prepare and record a California, Department of Transportation, "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Release of Covenant against the Maintenance Work Zones" dated 1996, or subsequent additions in force at the time of impacted lots for which a Covenant was recorded. The applicant shall construction. deposit$2,000 with the City for preparation of the covenant by the 104. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which shall be paid City Attorney and shall be responsiblefor all costs In the preparation and prior to issuance of building permits. approval thereof ---------. -------- --------- __________ ______ __Fresidemml : ¶ AM lots shall be desgnede adequate drainage to the on-site streets Page 7: [1]Deleted Author with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement at centerline along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 340. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section Page 7: [2]Deleted Author designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. If improvements to Tramway Road are Page 7: [3] Deleted Author If improvements to Tramway Road are required pursuant to City Council action, the applicant shall coordinate with the Tramway Authority regarding construction scheduling and coordination of work occurring on Tramway Road. Page 7: [4]Deleted Author Entry designs for access into the development from Racquet Club Road shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Submit a detailed entry design showing storage lanes and maneuvering areas. Include standard vehicle and truck turning radius track lines on the detail. A minimum of Page 7: [5] Deleted Author feet for vehicle stacking in advance of the key card or control unit for gate access shall be provided, with a turn-around maneuvering area in front of the entry. Final design shall also be subject to review and approval by the Fire Marshall. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. A landscaped parkway between the curb and sidewalk may be provided, subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and Director of Planning Services. Page 7: [6] Deleted Author Install an end of road barricade and appropriate traffic signs at the westerly end of Racquet Club Road Page 9: [7]Deleted Author The sewer easements shall be kept clear and free of any and all obstructions to allow for the continued operation and maintenance of the sewer system within the easements. Construction of permanent structures, patios, swimming pools and equipment, concrete and patio decks, shall not be allowed. Planting of large trees or other planting material with invasive or deep root structures shall be restricted. Installation of boulders within the easements shall not be allowed. Sewer easements shall not be located within cut or fill slope conditions, except where the sewer passes from a higher street to a lower street through the rear yard of interior lots. Along side yards, the toe of cut or fill slopes shall be located at or beyond the limits of the sewer easements, as required by the City Engineer Page 13: [8] Deleted Author and 128 of the California Public Utilities Commission, and service requirements published by the utilities. A detailed plan approved by the owner(s) of the affected utilities depicting all above ground facilities in the area of the project to be undergrounded, shall be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to approval of any grading plan. The existing overhead utilities across the northerly property lines meet the requirement to be installed underground. The developer is advised to investigate the nature of these utilities, the availability of undergrounding these utilities with respect to adjacent and off-site properties, and to present its case for a waiver of the Municipal Code requirement, if appropriate, to the Planning Commission and/or City Council as part of its review and approval of this project. If utility undergrounding is deferred in accordance with specific direction by the Planning Commission and/or City Council, the record property owner shall enter into a covenant agreeing to underground all of the existing overhead utilities required by the Municipal Code in the future upon request of the City of Palm Springs City Engineer at such time as deemed necessary. The covenant shall be executed and notarized by the property owner and submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. A current title report; or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. A covenant preparation fee of $135 shall be paid by the developer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Contact Whitewater Mutual Water Company to determine impacts to any existing water lines and other facilities that may be located within the property. Make appropriate arrangements to protect in place or relocate any existing Whitewater Mutual Water Company facilities that are impacted by the development. A letter of approval for relocated or adjusted facilities from Whitewater Mutual Water Company shall be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to issuance of a grading permit. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any driveway which does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section 93.02.00, D. l