Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
4/2/2008 - STAFF REPORTS - 1.D.
' AAtAwffat t RECEIVED RESORT & SPA +,17YOFPALl-isPRING's V" PALM SPRINGS 2003HAR28 P11 5: 04 March 28, 2008 hf7 5 TE10F1F5GPi CITY CLER;; Letter to Mayor and City Council: As you are well aware on February 20t'2008 the City Council instructed staff to work with the Palm Mountain Resort to review our project and address City Council concerns that addresses parking, in-lieu parking fees and landscaping. We have worked diligently with staff to maximize the number of parking stalls, and have begun to address landscaping as requested. On Wednesday, April 2°d, we will be asking for the entitlements for this project so we can proceed to a full design of the buildings for further approvals of the ACC, the Planning Commission and the City Council once again. There were many prominent local leaders that spoke on our behalf on February 20"i. Respecting the council's time,we have chosen to develop an endorsement list. Attached are over 100 names and organizations that support our project. I hope you will find the time to review this list. If you would like me to walk you through these changes, one on one, for about ten minutes prior to the Council meeting please do not hesitate to give me a call. Thanking you in advance, Tim Ellis 11 f 2 General Manager f- 155 South Behudo,Palm Springs,CA 92262 • 760-325.1301 • Fax 760)32,"937 WORLDHDTELS . Appmved Toll-Flee Reservatiom:1-300-622-9431 • www.palmmotUiLailuesOrt.com cowroer cuu.ecnoa NAME PHONE# EMAIL AFFILIATION HOSPITALITY Aftab Dada 760.861 3444 Hilton Duane Rohrbaugh drohrbaugh@wyndham corn Wyndham Johnathan Heath 617.650.7983 Viceroy Michael Green Triangle Inn, owner Robert Kallmeyer 760-969-6001 Hyatt Regency Suites Palm Springs John Yzagurrie Holiday Inn PS Lee Morcus & Lisa Salinas 760-568-2144 EKMorcus(d)aol.com Kaiser Restaurant Group Harold Matzner hbmatzner@cbaol.com Spencers etc. Tony Bruggemans 760.325 5050 Le Vallauris Lisa Salinas Kaiser Restaurant Group Jim Dowler 760.851.5988 idowler(a@dc.rrcorn Retired Marcia Craig 760,799.6928 Local support Michael Estrada 760.904,9561 Falls Steakhouse Raymond Lovato 760 861.1685 desertvacationps(eDael com Desert Vacation Villas Terry Fraser 760-327-8469 terryfraser(a)desertisleresort.com Desert Isle of Palm Springs Paul Hietter 760-323-7518 paul(d,loveatfirstbite.com Love at First Bite catering Michael Estrada 760,904 9561 Falls Steakhouse Shellie Reade hbmatzneraa cbaol.com EDIA & AR 'IENTERT INMENT - David Peet david(d7TotaIMarketing Partners.corn Total Marketing Partners Mary Jardin 760 778.7654 Follies Bob Marra bob@coachella-valley.com Milt Jones Palm Springs Life Magazine Frank Jones Palm Springs Life Magazine Harold Meyerman Pres. Board Trustees of P.S. Art Museurr Julius Kazen 760.272.0047 Jkazen@srcmall.net Spa Resort Casino Director Sherry Davis Inland Empire Film Committee Rick Saputo PS Bottoml-ine Magazine, Owner/Pub. Marshall Stone marshalltalk@acl.com Jeff Hooker 760-320-5272 ihockerC&dc.rr,com J. Hocker&Associates Public Relations Joey English Joe Chocolate aol.com TV and Radio Wesley Cole 760.219,4495 WeslayaPalmSprincsGreen J. Hocker&Associates Public Relations Mariah Hansen 415.596.8730 Dinah Shore w/end Barbara Wisbey The BottomLine/PULP Magazines David Portner Travel Host Magazine Gene Petregallo 760.831.6046 Tourism TV Kim Waltrip evite Mark Farley 760.641.8805 Elite Land Tours Andrew&Victoria Starke 760-864-6278 astarke alms_ rin s owerbaseball.com Palm Springs POWER Baseball Bruce Moccia brucemoccia@aol.com CJ Cameron 760-485-7554 desertbestmap(d)vahoo com Ad Works Darrell Veltz darrell@pdsignarama.com Desiree Huenen-Gerhardt 760-322-3776 prigissis agearthlink net ___ Pinocchio in the Desert Dick Taylor 760-322-3522_ dtaylor@dtprods_com Doug Woodmansee pearwoodboys@aol.com __ Les Dames du Soleil Guy Lawson dtaylor@dtprods.com Katherine Hough khough@psmuseum.org Marshall Pearcy pearwoodboys@aol.com Rich Lane 760-346-8184 richlane(a)bhcc corn Bob Hope Chrysler Classic Robert Yates evite Marketing/Advertsing Brad Jones lonz99@aol.com Art Gallery Owner Christina Sasse christina@psfilmfest org PS Intl Film Festival REAL ESTATE AND RELATED Ed Torres µ~ torres Maggie Montez @Proactivebsi corn pro-Active Business& Land Dev Jg 760,409 4432 CB Richard Ellis Jim Sanak lim@scottandjimhomes.com Kathy Reed 760,275.5852 Real Estate Firm Mark Bragg —Shadowrock Mark Chitjian Pro-Active Business & Land Dev Michael Braun 760-325-3321 Mbraun_(a)wessmandevelonment corn Wessman Development Monty Collins evite Interior Design Kevin Blake 949.616.2679 kblake@akeena.net Akeena Solar Monty Collins evite Interior Design Phillip Brent brucemoccia@aol.com Real Estate Robert Hughes 760-276,6914 bob hu hes ro erties corn Hughes Properties Christopher Kennedy 760-325-3214 Chns Chnste herKenned .corn Christopher Kennedy Interior Design Scott Palermo jim@scottandjimhomes.com Sheila Cobrin 760-325-4171 cobrin@proactivebsi corn Lance O'Donnell 02 Architects Tom Adamo E Adamo(cDmsn corn Main Street Board/Property Owner PROFESS ONAL� Lron sbela ers corn FSlovak, Baron & Em David Baron a @ wy _ pey LLP Pat& Cathy Lilly 750.674.1418 Palm Desert National Bank Bob Elsner 760-799,2389 relsner[ilaol.com Airport Commision Chair Jeff Gogle Canyon Natl Bank Jerry Dark evite Microsoft Executive Alison Elsner 760413-5053 aelsnerCa•@desertvmca org Palm Springs YMCA Todd Hooks Aqua Caliente& Pres-Elect C. of C. John Pivinski evite Anita &. Bill Powers bpowers@pacificwesternbank.com Anita Roark 760.568.2691 American Cancer Assn Casey Jones 760-309-2506 Clones(d,)TimeOutService.com TimeOut Charlie Creasy charliesco@att-net Chris Rapoff evite Chiropractor Chuck Mace 760-325-7400 cmacerc7Cisps.com 1st Community Ins Services Valerie Zugates 760-8624639 valerie zu ates ubs corn UBS Financial Services Tom Truhe MD tomtruhe(cDaol corn_ John Day evite Alhambra Dr, PS Joseph Hoffman evite Alhambra Dr, PS W Douglas Kunz dkunzroDspnntmail corn W Douglas Kunz, DVM Jill Hunerburg 760-972-7229 Financial Services Joy Meredith -- •,._.�~r760.333.6820 _—Chair of Retailers Scott Meredith psca@msn.com Pegge Goertzen usinvest@aol.com Handbag Art/Retail Philip Cohen 760-325-1010 phili .Cohen@oohlaladepansos com ooh la la de Paris Eyewear Searle Burns 760-325-8004 Regina's Jewelers David & Lisa Austin leisa imagogallenes corn John Matthews aloejohn.aloepeople@verizon.net NEIGHBORS & OTHER SUPPORTERS Blair Millar Dave Johnson Roxann Ploss riploss(d)do rr com Vic Gainer vicgainer@aol.corn Tamara & Doug Stevens stevens329@dc.rr corn Don Huneke terry.anddon@verizon.net Cynthia Escarpita cescarpita@hnmgroup corn Frank Geismar fgeismarl evite John Parker __ norsk920@aol.com Joyce Ohmura 760-774-8585 1 Larada Johnson laradaiohnson(c7aol.com Robert McIntyre Skip Bue norsk920@aol.com Terry Daniels terry anddon@verizon net Vincent Cappa evite ORGANIZATIONS. PSEDC Mainstreet Business Asscoiation P.S. Chamber of Commerce °,pP.LMS" r -y a ° V N z F IL * ry�ryoeFiea ' % z °qt,F°Ra�P CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT rn v DATE: April 2, 2008 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: CASE 5.1162 GPA, A GENERAL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT AND CASE p 5.1162 PD342, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE EXISTING PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT m AND SPA ON APPROXIMATELY 2.77-ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 155 C SOUTH BELARDO ROAD, Cif FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager r BY: Director of Planning Services 0 T The above-referenced project was presented to the City Council at the public hearing E meeting that was held on February 20, 2008. The Council voted to continue the public M hearing in part to allow the applicant to respond to two issues; parking and proposed landscaping for the project. The applicant has since submitted revised landscape and site plans with new parking layout and calculations. —� Parkinq Requirement: The Palm Mountain Resort and Spa is currently a 120-room establishment with 82 parking spaces. Under the City's Zoning Ordinance, the current parking condition is considered existing non-conforming ("grandfathered") and may continue as is. The y applicant is responsible, however for the required parking for the proposed additional 68 rooms. Pursuant to Section 93.06.00(D)(16)(b), (Off-street Parking Requirements), of the Palm Springs Zoning Code, establishments with more than 50 guest rooms are required to ^' provide 0.75 spaces for each guest room. With this, the applicant is required to provide n 51 additional spaces for the proposed 68 rooms. Staff has reviewed the revised site plan submitted by the applicant; 44 new spaces are provided on site; there is a deficit of 7 spaces. Item No. 1 • D • City Council Staff Report February 6,2008 Case:5.1162 PD342 Page 2 of 3 The applicant has proposed to enter into an Interim Parking Agreement for off-site parking spaces that will run with the land. A draft Covenant has been submitted to the City for review. Basic elements of the covenant are: r • Interim Plan rents sufficient number of spaces a • Upon availability of City Parking structure, applicant will pay in-lieu parking Z fee of$15,000 per space as a permanent solution Z • If the interim plan is not successful, and no public parking spaces is available, applicant will be required to reduce the number of available rooms by 11 units M to offset parking deficit of 7 spaces until such spaces are found. Staff has reviewed the draft covenant and believes that it provides the means to satisfy the project's parking needs. A condition has been added to require recordation of a final covenant subject to approval by the City Attorney, prior to issuance of building permits. 0 Landscape Plans: m The applicant has made several changes to the proposed landscape plan to address C the Council's concerns regarding the adequacy of proposed landscaping. Specifically, M changes have been made to the overall design, proposed plant types, sizes and r quantities. The changes include the following: O • Landscape Planters are proposed in approximately every 8 parking spaces, the Code requires planters in every 10 spaces • Rock cobble in every planter adjacent to parking space • Shade Canopy trees, 24"-36" Box in size. Some of the proposed trees are m Yellow Oleander, Mesquite, Mediterranean and California fan palms, Queen and Pindo palms, Washingtonian palm & Willow Acacia, etc. Z • Retention of existing trees (14 Scarlet firethorn) • Decorative Paving The applicant has also revised the site plan layout to accommodate the required minimum of 5 feet separation from the face of buildings and other structures. Detailed analysis of the project, Planning Commission Staff Reports dated November 28, 2007 and January 9, 2008, and Findings in support of approving the proposed (A project were previously provided to the Council. _q X zL,_ — rai swing, P Thomas Wilson Dir ctor of Pla in Services Assistant City M�nager 2� David H. Ready, City an r 000052 City Council Staff Report February 6,2008 Case:5 1162 PD342 Page 3 of 1 Attachments: r 1. Vicinity Map 2. Draft Resolution 3. Draft Conditions of Approval z 4. City Council Staff Report dated February 20, 2008 z 5. Memo & Resolution to the Planning Commission dated January 23, 2008 6. Planning Commission Minutes dated January 9, 2008 (Excerpt) Ill 7. Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 9, 2008 8. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 28, 2007 (Excerpt) 9. Planning Commission Staff Report & Resolution dated November 28, 2007 10. Environmental Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration 11. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 12. Revised Site Plan & Landscape Plan 0 13. Site Cross-Sections M 14. Public Correspondence C m r O v m z v cn n OF?ALM s♦41 Department of Planning Services " _ Vicinity Map +we ^ rq(tFp 0.�P S Legend ICI, f �nJ L =400. O ff AM ADO RD ®Profea Site WJ — < fill u AN DREA$RD L 4 s r a � J Li i vi TAHQUI I Z DR n _ z O J r U z L R W V J Z II —M ARE fJAS RD ARENAS RD ~ c � p p ❑ O ❑ ❑ � z isC z — _ —O O J � ❑ i r'7 m •'� W� BARISTO RD a _01 q fL7 NA"G.4 WY ❑ — SATURNINO RD 0 - jJ J a T CITY F-L QP PALM SPRING CASE NO: 5.1162 PD342 DESCRIPTION: To consider an application for a 5.1162 GPA Planned Development District to renovate the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa from a 120-room hotel to APPLICANT: Palm Mountain Resort, a 188-room hotel located at 155 South Belardo LP Road, zone R3. APN: 513-142-001. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, APPROVING CASE NUMBER 5.1162-GPA; THEREBY AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FROM THE EXISTING DESIGNATION OF SMALL HOTEL RESORT COMMERCIAL TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT — DOWNTOWN CORE, AND APPROVING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CASE NUMBER 5.1162 PD342 FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO REDEVELOP THE PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA ON 2.77 ACRES AT 155 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD. WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed an application with the City pursuant to Section 94.03.00 of the Palm Springs Zoning Code for a General Plan Amendment and the establishment of a Planned Development District; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting of January 9, 2008, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Case Numbers 5-1162-GPA and 5.1162 PD342 to the City Council; WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider Case Numbers 5.1162-GPA and 5-1162 PD342, Planned Development District 342, was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on April 2, 2008, a public hearing on the application was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA°), and an Environmental Assessment has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meetings on the project, including but not limited to the staff reports, environmental documentation, and all written and oral testimony presented- THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: City Council Resolution April 2, 2008 Case 5,1162 GPA, 5,1162 PD342 Page 2 of 4 Section 1: Environmental Analysis A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The Planning Commission 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. The Planning Commission independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the MND prior to its review of this Project and the MND reflects the City Council's independent judgment and analysis. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been developed as required by CEQA. Section 2: Planned Development District Section 94.03.00(B) of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance states that the Planning Commission and City Council shall find that the proposed uses as shown on the preliminary development plans for the PDD are in conformity with the required findings and conditions set forth in Section 94.02.00 (Conditional Use Permit), the General Plan and sound community development. Findings are hereby made in support of establishing the proposed Planned Development District as follows: 1. The proposed planned development is consistent and in conformity with the general plan pursuant to Sections 94.07.00(A)(1) and 94.02.00(A)(4) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. The proposed land uses of hotel rooms and ancillary facilities serving the hotel guests are in conformity with the General Plan Amendment proposed as part of this action and sound community development. The increase in hotel rooms promotes economic development for the City in its endeavors to encourage tourist development while the elimination of the restaurant and nightclub will reduce negative noise and nuisance impacts on the surrounding community. 2. The use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the general plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. The proposed land uses are deemed to be desirable for the public welfare and convenience and is in conformity with the General Plan and its objectives, and are authorized by the Zoning Code. The major existing use on the subject site is a hotel. Under the Planned Development District, the proposed project expands the number of hotel rooms while eliminating the public restaurant and nightclub. ona �� s City Council Resolution April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 GPA, 5.1162 PD342 Page 3 of 4 Existing land uses in the vicinity include other hotel developments, a proposed hotel development on an existing vacant lot, as well as retail, restaurant, and service uses in the Central Business District. I The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate such use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features required in order to adjust such use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood. The proposed development is similar to the character and design of the existing development on the site. The size of the site is adequate to accommodate the proposed uses within the Downtown Central Core designation. Landscaping, wall and setbacks are the same or greater as the existing facility. The 2.77-acre site adequately accommodates the additional hotel rooms while providing parking, setbacks and site amenities and increasing open space. Adjacent uses in the neighborhood include other existing hotels and a proposed hotel on the vacant lot on the west side of Cahuilla. 4. 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 subject site is currently developed and has an established street network adequately servicing the site. The basic street system remains unchanged. The traffic study prepared for the proposed development concludes that traffic generation will decrease due to the elimination of restaurant uses, and that levels of service operation will be sufficient to carry the traffic to be generated. 5. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan, and other conditions of approval attached, are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare and may include minor modification of the zone's property development standards under the Planned Development District. The conditions imposed on the approved site plan include the elimination of the existing land use of a public restaurant and nightclub which have previously shown to increase traffic generation, parking demand and the generation of noise impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Conditions related to the provision of a Specific Parking Plan are designed to protect the safety and general welfare of the neighborhood to assure that the increase in hotel units does not adversely impact the adjacent areas. City Council Resolution April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 GPA, 5.1162 PD342 Page 4 of 4 Per Section 94.03.00(C) of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, the following development standards are appropriate to the orderly development of the site: PD342 Development Standards Lot area 120,537 s . ft. Density 641 s . ft. of lot area per room Height Not greater than 32.5 feet Setbacks Front: Tahquitz Canyon 21' — per site plan Side Yard: Belardo 25' — per site plan Side Yard: Cahuilla 25' — per site plan Rear Yard: 63'9"- from Chase Hotel per site plan Re uired open space 55% Parking Subject to a Specific Parking Plan NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council takes the following actions: • Adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration • Approves Case Number 5.1162-GPA, thereby amends the General Plan from the existing designation of Small Hotel Resort Commercial to Central Business District-Downtown Core • And approves preliminary development plans for Case 5.1162 PD342, Planned Development District 342, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part of this resolution. ADOPTED this 2"d day of February, 2008. David H. Ready, City Manager ATTEST: James Thompson, City Clerk EXHIBIT A Case 5.1162 PD342 Case 5.1162 GPA Palm Mountain Resort and Spa 155 South Belardo Road CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL April 2, 2008 1. 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, and the Fire Chief, or their respective designee, depending on which department recommended the condition. 2. Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 3. On-street bus parking shall be prohibited on Tahquitz Canyon Way, Belardo Road and Cahuilla Road. On-site bus parking shall be prohibited. Upon delivery of bus passengers, buses shall be parked at an off-site location, outside the Central Business District and the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood. 4. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record a covenant providing 25 parking spaces with form and contents to be approved by the City Attorney. Administrative 5. 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. 6. 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 5.1162 PD342 and Case 5.1162 GPA. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of such claim, action, or 0000,9 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 P0342, 5.1162 GPA Page 2 of 14 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. 7. The property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements, including and without limitation, sidewalks, bikeways, parkways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable laws, 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. 8. This project shall be subject to Chapters 2.24 and 3.37 of the Municipal Code regarding public art. The project shall either provide public art or payment of an in lieu fee. In the case of the in-lieu fee, the fee shall be based upon the total building permit valuation as calculated pursuant to the valuation table in the Uniform Building Code, the fee being 1/2% for commercial or industrial projects, 1/4% for new residential subdivisions, or 1/4% for new individual single-family residential units constructed on a lot located in an existing subdivision with first $100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be located on the project site, said location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning Services and the Public Arts Commission, and the property owner shall enter into a recorded agreement to maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing. Environmental Assessment 9. The mitigation measures of the Initial Study and subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration shall apply to the proposed project. The applicant shall submit a signed agreement that the mitigation measures will be included in the Planning Commission consideration of the environmental assessment. Mitigation measures are included in the Initial Study and the Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 P1)342, 5.1162 GPA Page 3 of 14 Mitigated Negative Declaration, and hereby incorporated into these conditions by reference. 10. The developer shall reimburse the City for the City's costs incurred in monitoring the developer's compliance with the conditions of approval and mitigation monitoring program, including, but not limited to inspections and review of developer's operations and activities for compliance with all applicable dust and noise operations, and cultural resource mitigation. This condition of approval is supplemental and in addition to normal building permit and public improvement permits that may be required pursuant to the Palm Springs Municipal Code. Final Design 11, Final landscaping, irrigation, exterior lighting, and fencing plans shall be submitted for approval by the Department of Planning Service, prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office prior to submittal. All landscaping located within the public right-of-way or within community facilities districts must be approved by the Public Works Director and the Director of Parks and Recreation. 12. The final development plans shall be submitted in accordance with Section 9403,00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Final development plans shall include site plans, building elevations, floor plans, roof plans, grading plans, landscape plans, irrigation plans, exterior lighting plans, sign program, mitigation monitoring program, site cross sections, property development standards and other such documents as required by the Planning Commission. Final development plans shall be submitted within two (2) years of the City Council approval of the preliminary planned development district. 13. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan in accordance with zoning Ordinance Section 93.21.00, Outdoor Lighting Standards, for review and approval by the Director of Planning Services. a. 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- b. If lights are proposed to be mounted on buildings, down-lights shall be utilized. No lighting of the hillside is permitted. Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 P0342, 5.1162 GPA Page 4 of 14 General Conditions/Code Requirements 14. 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. Refer to Chapter 8.60 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements. 15. 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. 16, The grading plan shall show the disposition of all out and fill materials. Limits of site disturbance shall be shown and all disturbed areas shall be fully restored or landscaped. 17. Separate architectural approval and permits shall be required for all signs. A detailed sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of building permits. 18. All materials on the flat portions of the roofs shall be earth tone in color. 19. All roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from all possible vantage points bath existing and future per Section 93.03.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. The screening shall be considered as an element of the overall design and must blend with the architectural design of the building(s). The exterior elevations and roof plans of the buildings shall indicate any fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building, the equipment heights, and type of screening. Parapets shall be at least 6" above the equipment for the purpose of screening. 20. No exterior downspouts shall be permitted on any fagade on the proposed building(s) which are visible from adjacent streets or residential and commercial areas. 21. Perimeter walls, if proposed, shall be designed, installed and maintained in compliance with the corner cutback requirements as required in Section 93.02.00.D. 22. The design, height, texture and color of building(s), fences and walls shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 23. The street address numbering/lettering shall not exceed eight inches in height. OOOOi12 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5.1162 GPA Page 5 of 14 24. Construction of any residential unit shall meet minimum soundproofing requirements prescribed pursuant to Section 1092 and related sections of Title 25 of the California Administrative Code. Compliance shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director of Building and Safety. 25. Prior to the issuance of building permits, locations of all telephone and electrical boxes must be indicated an the building plans and must be completely screened and located in the interior of the building(s). 26. The architecture for the new buildings shall be submitted to the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) for review and approval prior to Final Planned Development approval. 27. The final landscaping plan and plant palette shall be submitted to the AAC for review prior to approval of the Final Planned Development permit. Building and Fire Departments 27. Permits: Prior to any construction on-site, all appropriate permits must be secured. 28. Plot Plan: Prior to completion of the project, an 8.5"x11" plot plan and an electronic CAD version shall be provided to the fire department. This shall clearly show all access points, fire hydrants, knox box locations, fire department connections, unit identifiers, main electrical panel location, sprinkler riser and fire alarm locations. Large projects may require more than one page. 29. Radio Communications: The applicant must install an in-building Public Safety Radio Communications Coverage System composed of a radiating cable system or an internal multiple antenna system with FCC-certified bi- directional 800 MHz and 150 MHz (as required to meet the two indicated 150 MHz frequencies) amplifier(s), distribution system, and subcomponents shall be required for all buildings in excess of three stories, or has subterranean floors, or subterranean parking. This system must meet the City of Palm Springs Public Safety Radio System Coverage Specifications. 30. Automatic Fire Sprinklers: An approved, automatic Fire Sprinkler System is required. 31. Audible Water Flow Alarms: An approved audible sprinkler flow alarm shall be provided on the exterior of the building(s) in approved locations. An approved audible sprinkler flow alarm to alert the occupants shall be provided in the interior of the building(s) in a normally occupied location. (904.3.2.CBC.) Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5.1162 GPA Page 6 of 14 32. Fire Hydrant & FDC Location: A public commercial fire hydrant is required within 30 feet of the Fire Department Connection (FDC). Fire hose must be protected from vehicular traffic and shall not cross roadways, streets, railroad tracks or driveways or areas subject to flooding or hazardous materials or liquid releases. 33. Fire Department Connections: Fire Department connections shall be visible and accessible, have two 2.5 inch NST female inlets, and have an approved check valve located as close to the FDC as possible. All FDC's shall have KNOX locking protective caps. Contact the fire prevention secretary at 760 323-8186 for a KNOX application form. 34. Residential Smoke Detector Installation with Fire Sprinklers: Provide Residential Smoke Detectors (FIREX #0498 accessory module connected to multi-station FIREX smoke detectors or equal per dwelling and fire sprinkler flow switch)_ Detectors shall receive their primary power from the building wiring, and shall be equipped with a battery backup. (310.9.1.3 CBC) In new construction, detectors shall be interconnected so that operation of any smoke detector causes the alarm in all smoke detectors within the dwelling to sound. (2-2.2.1 NFPA 72) Provide a note on the plans showing this requirement. 35. Access: Fire department access roads shall be provided so that no portion of the exterior wall of the first floor of any building will be more than 150 feet from such roads. CFC 902.2.1 36. Mid Rise/High Rise: High-rise and mid-rise buildings shall be accessible on a minimum of two sides. Roadways shall not be less than 10 feet (3048 mm) or more than 35 feet (10,668 mm) from the building. Landscaping or other obstructions shall not be placed or maintained around structures in a manner so as to impair or impede accessibility for fire fighting and rescue operations. 37. Fire Extinguisher Requirements: The applicant/hotel operator shall provide one 2-A:10-B:C portable fire extinguisher for every 75 feet of floor or grade travel distance for normal hazards. Show proposed extinguisher locations on the plans (1002.1 CFC). Extinguishers shall be mounted in a visible, accessible location no more than 5 feet above floor level. Preferred location is in the path of exit travel near an exit door. 38. Fire Alarm System: Fire Alarm System required. Installation shall comply with the requirements of NFPA 72. 39. Water Supply: The water supply and location/s of fire hydrants must be approved prior to any work being performed on the job site. (903.1 CFC) 000014 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5.1162 GPA Page 7 of 14 40. Water Systems and Hydrants: Underground water mains and fire hydrants shall be installed, completed, tested and in service prior to the time when combustible materials are delivered to the construction site (903 CFC). Installation, testing, and inspection will meet the requirements of NFPA 24, 1995 Edition. Prior to final approval of the installation, the applicant's contractor shall submit a completed Contractor's Material and Test Certificate to the Fire Department, (9-2.1 NFPA 24, 195 Edition). 41 Access During Construction: Access for firefighting 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 lbs. (Sec. 902 CFC) 42. Knox (emergency access) Key Switch: A Knox key operated switch hall be installed at every automatic gate, if provided. Show any such switch locations on plans. Show requirement in plan notes. 43, Rapid Entry System Approval: The Knox Fire/Police/Ambulance Rapid Entry System is the only Key Box, Lock Vault, Key Cabinet, Key Switch, Padlock, FDC Cap, or Decal approved for use by the City of Palm Springs Fire Department. 44. Building or Complex Gate Locking Devices: Locked gate(s) shall be equipped with a Knox key switch device or Key box. Boxes shall be mounted at 6 feet above grade. Contact the Fire Department at 760-323- 8186 for a Knox application form, (902.4 CFC) 45, Ventilating Hood & Duct System: A ventilating hood and duct system shall be provided for commercial-type food heat-processing equipment that produces grease-laden vapors. (1005.1 CFC) 46. Fire Extinguishing System Required: Approved automatic fire extinguishing systems shall be provided for the protection of commercial type cooking equipment. (10052.1 CFC) 47. Fire Flow: Recommend that the hydrant system be evaluated by applicant to ensure that required fire flow is met. Police Department 48. Developer shall comply with Article II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. dOM5 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5.1162 GPA Page 8 of 14 Engineering Department: Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. STREETS 49. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. TAHOUITZ CANYON WAY 50. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced. BELARDO ROAD 51. Dedicate an additional right-of-way for a property line - corner cut-back at the southwest corner of the intersection of Belardo Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way, in accordance with the proposed new curb ramp and City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 105. 52. Remove the existing asphalt concrete pavement within the bay parking area as necessary to construct a bay parking driveway approach to accommodate bay parking stalls along the Belardo Road frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. Bay parking stalls shall be located completely on-site, behind sidewalk, and not within public right-of-way. 53. Remove the existing asphalt concrete pavement within the bay parking areas and replace with decorative paving, colored and/or patterned to relate to the overall design in accordance with Zoning Code 93.06.00.C.15.e. 54. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced. CAHUILLA ROAD 55. Dedicate an additional right-of-way for a property line - corner cut-back at the southeast corner of the intersection of Cahuilla Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way, in accordance with the proposed new curb ramp and City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 105. 56. Remove the existing driveway approaches along the bay parking area as necessary to construct a bay parking driveway approach to accommodate bay parking stalls along the Cahuilla Road frontage in accordance with 000018 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5-1162 GPA Page 9 of 14 City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. Bay parking stalls shall be located completely on-site, behind sidewalk, and not within public right- of-way. 57. Remove the existing asphalt concrete pavement within the bay parking areas and replace with decorative paving, colored and/or patterned to relate to the overall design in accordance with Zoning Code 93.06.00.C.15.e. 58. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced- SANITARY SEWER 59. All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. GRADING 60. Submit a Precise Grading Plan prepared by a California registered civil engineer to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The Precise Grading Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permit. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and/or its grading contractor and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall be required to comply with Chapter 8.50 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, and shall be required to utilize one or more "Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures" as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook for each fugitive dust source such that the applicable performance standards are met. The applicant's or its contractor's Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be prepared by staff that has completed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class. The applicant and/or its grading contractor shall provide the Engineering Division with current and valid Certificate(s) of Completion from AQMD for staff that have completed the required training. For information on attending a Fugitive Dust Control Class and information on the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook and related "PM10" Dust Control issues, please contact AQMD at (909) 396-3752, or at www.AQMD.gov. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan, in conformance with the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook, shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Division prior to approval of the Precise Grading Plan. The first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan shall include the following information: a copy of final approved conformed copy of Conditions of Approval; a copy of a final approved conformed copy of the Site Plan; a copy of current Title Report; a copy of Soils Report; and a copy of the Water Quality Management Plan. 000017 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5,1162 GPA Page 10 of 14 61. Prior to approval of a Grading Plan, the applicant shall obtain written approval to proceed with construction from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Archaeologist. The applicant shall contact the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Richard Begay (760-699-6907), or the Tribal Archaeologist, Patty Tuck (760-699-6907), to determine their requirements, if any, associated with grading or other construction. The applicant is advised to contact the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Archaeologist as early as possible. If required, it is the responsibility of the applicant to coordinate scheduling of Tribal monitors during grading or other construction, and to arrange payment of any required fees associated with Tribal monitoring. 62. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters. 63. A Notice of Intent to Comply with Statewide General Construction Stormwater Permit (Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ as modified December 2, 2002) is required for the proposed development via the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Phone No. 760-346- 7491). A copy of the executed letter issuing a Waste Discharge Identification number shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 64. In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.025 (c), the applicant shall post with the City a cash bond of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) per disturbed acre for mitigation measures for erosion/blowsand relating to this property and development. 65. A Geotechnical/Soils Report prepared by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer shall be required for and incorporated as an integral part of the grading plan for the proposed development. A copy of the Geotechnical/Soils Report shall be submitted to the Engineering Division with the first submittal of a grading plan. 66, In cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the California Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project, applicants for grading permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of soil will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved "Notification of Intent To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties" (RIFA Form CA-1) prior to approval of the Grading Plan (if required). The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is M0 8 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5 1152 GPA Page 11 of 14 located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert (Phone- 760-776- 8208). DRAINAGE 67. This project may be required to install measures in accordance with applicable National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Best Management Practices (BMP's) included as part of the NPDES Permit issued for the Whitewater River Region from the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The applicant is advised that installation of BMP's, including mechanical or other means for pre-treating stormwater runoff, may be required by regulations imposed by the RWQCB. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to design and install appropriate BMP's, in accordance with the NPDES Permit, that effectively intercept and pre-treat stormwater runoff from the project site, prior to release to the City's municipal separate storm sewer system ("MS4"), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the RWQCB. If required, such measures shall be designed and installed on-site; and provisions for perpetual maintenance of the measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 68. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The WQMP shall address the implementation of operational Best Management Practices (BMP's) necessary to accommodate nuisance water and storm water runoff from the site. Direct release of nuisance water to the adjacent public streets or property is prohibited. Construction of operational BMP's shall be incorporated into the Precise Grading Plan. GENERAL 69. Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development shall be backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115. The developer shall be responsible for removing, grinding, paving and/or overlaying existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets as required by and at the discretion of the City Engineer, including additional pavement repairs to pavement repairs made by utility companies for utilities installed for the benefit of the proposed development (i.e. Desert Water Agency, Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, Time Warner, Verizon, etc.). Multiple excavations, trenches, and other street cuts within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development may require complete grinding and asphalt concrete overlay of the affected off-site streets, at the discretion of the City Engineer. The pavement condition of the existing off-site streets shall be returned to a Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5.1162 GPA Page 12 of 14 condition equal to or better than existed prior to construction of the proposed development. 70. On phases or elements of construction following initial site grading (e.g_, sewer, storm drain, or other utility work requiring trenching) associated with this project, the applicant shall be responsible for coordinating the scheduled construction with the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Archaeologist. Unless the project site has previously been waived from any requirements for Tribal monitoring, it is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Richard Begay (760-669-6907), or the Tribal Archaeologist, Patty Tuck (760-669-6907) for any subsequent phases or elements of construction that might require Tribal monitoring. If required, it is the responsibility of the applicant to coordinate scheduling of Tribal monitors during construction, and to arrange payment of any required fees associated with Tribal monitoring. Tribal monitoring requirements may extend to off-site construction performed by utility companies on behalf of the applicant (e.g. utility line extensions in off-site streets), which shall be the responsibility of the applicant to coordinate and arrange payment of any required fees for the utility companies. 71. All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground. 72. In accordance with Chapter 8.04.401 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, all existing and proposed electrical lines of thirty-five thousand volts or less and overhead service drop conductors, and all gas, telephone, television cable service, and similar service wires or lines, which are on- site, abutting, and/or transecting, shall be installed underground unless specific restrictions are shown in General Orders 95 and 128 of the California Public Utilities Commission, and service requirements published by the utilities. The existing overhead utilities across the frontage of the property adjacent to Cahuilla Road meet the requirement to be installed underground. Utility undergrounding shall extend to the nearest off-site power pole; no new power poles shall be installed unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. A letter from the owners of the affected utilities shall be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to approval of a grading plan, informing the City that they have been notified of the City's utility undergrounding requirement and their intent to commence design of utility undergrounding plans. When available, the utility undergrounding plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Division identifying all above ground facilities in the area of the project to be undergrounded. Undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5.1162 GPA Page 13 of 14 73. All existing utilities shall be shown on the improvement plans required for the project. The existing and proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to the property line. 74. Upon approval of any improvement plan by the City Engineer, the improvement plan shall be provided to the City in digital format, consisting of a DWG (AutoCAD 2004 drawing file), DXF (AutoCAD ASCII drawing exchange file), and PDF (Adobe Acrobat 6.0 or greater) formats. Variation of the type and format of the digital data to be submitted to the City may be authorized, upon prior approval of the City Engineer. 75, The original improvement plans prepared for the proposed development and approved by the City Engineer shall be documented with record drawing "as-built' information and returned to the Engineering Division prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. Any modifications or changes to approved improvement plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to construction. 76. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any intersection or 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. 77. 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 in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904. MAP 78. The property identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 513-142-001, consisting of parcels identified as Lots 1 through 16, 23 through 28, of Block 15; and the easterly 8 feet of Cahuilla Road (vacated) adjacent to Lots 1, and 23 through 28 of Block 15, of the Map of Palm Springs, Map Book 9, Page 432, (records of San Diego County), shall be merged. An application for a parcel merger shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. A copy of a current title report and copies of record documents shall be submitted with the application for the parcel merger. The application shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. TRAFFIC 79. The existing on-street parking restriction on the south side of Tahquitz Canyon Way extending 40 feet west of Belardo Road shall remain. On- street parking shall be prohibited on the south side of Tahquitz Canyon 000021 Conditions of Approval April 2, 2008 Case 5.1162 PD342, 5.1162 GPA Page 14 of 14 Way extending west of Belardo Road, as necessary to provide minimum required sight distance for northbound vehicles approaching the Tahquitz Canyon Way and Belardo Road intersection, as required by the City Engineer. 80. A minimum of 48 inches of clearance for handicap accessibility shall be provided on public sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel within the development. 81. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects as required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum, all construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with State of California, Department of Transportation, "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones" dated 2006, or subsequent additions in force at the time of construction. END OF CONDITIONS 000022 w r � �pALM SpP -y a V N z `cpo..rev' r Z ~Cg41FOR��P CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT m �Gp,. , e`GU�1 DATE: f€&RId AR� 6,210 08 ra � F/zelz000 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: CASE 5.1162 GPA, A GENERAL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT AND CASE 5.1162 PD342, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE t] REDEVELOPMENT OF THE EXISTING PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT rn AND SPA ON A 2.77-ACRE SITE AT 155 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD. FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager rn BY: Director of Planning Services r 0 SUMMARY The City Council will consider a proposal for a General Plan Amendment to amend the existing designation from "Small Hotel Resort Commercial" to "Central Business District rn — Downtown Central Core," permitting a density of up to 70 hotel units per acre- The Z proposal also include a request to redevelop the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa from its current 120 rooms with 13,500 square feet of public restaurant/nightclub space to —1 188 rooms with approximately 1,200 square feet of meeting room space, a new swimming pool, administrative support areas, and 1,500 square feet of kitchen and food service space to serve hotel guests only. RECOMMENDATION 1. Open the public hearing and receive public testimony. f/) 2- Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, APPROVING CASE NUMBER 5.1162-GPA; THEREBY AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FROM THE EXISTING 0 DESIGNATION OF SMALL HOTEL RESORT COMMERCIAL TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT — DOWNTOWN CORE, AND APPROVING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CASE NUMBER 5.1162 PD342 FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO REDEVELOP THE PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA ON 2.77 ACRES AT 155 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD." City Council Staff Report February 6,2008 Case:5.1159 PD340,TTM 34729 Page 2 of 3 PRIOR ACTIONS On October 10, 2007, the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) reviewed the project r on a preliminary basis for basic massing and site design. The consensus of the Committee was that the proposed renovation is consistent with the existing development. The Commiftee passed the motion to forward the preliminary plans to the Z Planning Commission for its consideration. The plans will be resubmitted to the AAC for review of final development plans at a later date. m On November 28, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed the project and continued the item, requesting clarifications and revisions in regards to parking, height and density. In response, the applicant revised the project and the item was granted preliminary architectural approval and was recommended for approval to the Council at the Commission's January 9, 2008 regular meeting. D STAFF ANALYSIS M The project would eliminate the existing restaurant and nightclub and construct 68 C additional hotel rooms and a small restaurant facility for hotel guests only. Three m existing buildings would remain; two 2-story buildings would be demolished and replaced with two 3-story buildings that would provide the additional 68 hotel rooms. r Redevelopment of the site would be regulated by the adoption of a proposed Planned 0 Development District that sets development standards for the project. The General Plan Amendment would amend the site's General Plan designation from "Small Hotel Resort Commercial" to "Central Business District — Downtown Central M Core," permitting a density of up to 70 hotel units per acre. z Off-street parking would be increased from 82 spaces to 115 spaces. The Palm Springs Zoning Code (PSZC) requires 154 parking spaces for the proposed project. The applicant requested and the Planning Commission recommended credit for 24 spaces for the historic use of tour buses. The Planning Commission further recommended that the applicant pay for 15 additional spaces through the City's in-lieu fee program for D downtown parking (15 spaces @ $12,000/space = $180,000). _ Detailed analysis of the project is provided in the attached Planning Commission Staff cn Reports dated November 28, 2007 and January 9, 2008. Findings in support of —I approving the proposed project are included in the attached Draft Resolution and Ordinance. Staff and the Planning Commission have reviewed this project under the provisions of 0 the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and determined that after the inclusion __1 of specific mitigation measures contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. City Council Staff Report February 6,2008 Case.5.1159 PD349,TTM 34729 Page 3 of 3 Fiscal Impact. The project will have a beneficial fiscal impact through 1) collection of additional r^ transient occupancy tax revenues from the additional 68 hotel rooms, and 2) collection n of in-lieu parking fees (15 spaces @ $12,000/space = $180,000). Z Z ra Awing, AIC Thomas Wilson Dir r of Planning Services Assistant City I anager David H. Ready, City er C m Attachments: r 1. Vicinity Map 2. Draft Resolution 3. Draft Conditions of Approval 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated January 9, 2008 (Excerpt) 5. Planning Commission Staff Report & Resolution dated January 9, 2008 rn 6. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 28, 2007 (Excerpt) Z 7- Planning Commission Staff Report & Resolution dated November 28, 2007 8. Environmental Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration 9. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10. Site Plan 11. Site Crass-Sections v Cn X 0 000925 �O �OF p'LM SpA, CITY OF PALM SPRINGS c a DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES Z 'C4LIF0RN`pr MEMORANDUM M m 0 Date: January 23, 2008 To: Planning Commission ❑ From: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Servic E m Subject: 5.1162 PD342 (Palm Mountain Resort) I*T m On January 9, 2008, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the above r referenced project. At the hearing, the Commission determined that the applicant pay 0 for seventeen (17) in-lieu parking spaces and directed staff to prepare a new draft resolution and modified conditions of approval for action at the hearing of January 23, 2008. Since the last meeting, there have been discussions an the calculations and haw the Ill Commission arrived at 17 spaces instead of 15. Staff has reviewed the tape of the Z hearing and checked the arithmetic of the parking numbers as shown below. Required parking: 154 Credit for tour bus: -24 Net Parking required- 130 Provided parking: -115 ❑ Deficit: 15 There is no requirement that the Commission follow a specific formula in determining Ili the in-lieu fee, only that there be a reasonable relationship between the on-site parking —I reduction and the conditions to mitigate the reduction. The attached draft resolution and conditions of approval reflects the directions given by the Commission which requires the applicant to pay for 17 in-lieu parking spaces. 0 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution & Conditions of Approval 000026 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CASE NO. 5.1162-PD342 AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CASE 5.1162 PD342 AND APPROVAL OF CASE 5.1162 GPA TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA LOCATED AT 155 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD, ZONE R3, SECTION 15. WHEREAS, Palm Mountain Resort, L.P. (Applicant) has filed an application with the City pursuant to Government Code 65350 of seq for a General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed an application with the City pursuant to Section 94.03.00 of the Palm Springs Zoning Code for the establishment of a Planned Development District; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider Case Number 5.1162 PD342, a General Plan Amendment and Planned Development District 342, was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on January 9, 2008, a public hearing on the applications was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and an Environmental Assessment has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meetings on the project, including but not limited to the staff reports, environmental documentation, and all written and oral testimony presented. 006027 Planning Commission Resolution of Approval January 23, 2008 Case No. 5.1162 PD342 Page 2 of 5 THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Environmental Analysis A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The Planning Commission 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. The Planning Commission independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the MND prior to its review of this Project and the MND reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been developed as required by CEQA. Section 2: General Plan Amendment The Planning Department has studied the proposed General Plan Amendment, a mapping change from Small Hotel Resort Commercial to Central Business District (Downtown Central Core), and reports the following findings: The proposed General Plan Amendment is to change the classification of the site from Small Hotel — Resort Commercial to Central Business District (Downtown Central Core) is a reasonable and appropriate extension of the adjacent Central Business District (Downtown Central Core) for a hotel development whose guests utilize the restaurants, retail services and service facilities of the downtown area and is consistent with the Central Business District land use classification. The amendment also serves the City's interest in economic development activity by increasing the number of hotel units to serve guests who shop and dine in the Central Business District. Section 3: Planned Development District Section 94.03.00(B) of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance states that the Planning Commission and City Council shall find that the proposed uses as shown on the preliminary development plans for the PDD are in conformity with the required findings and conditions set forth in Section 94.02.00 (Conditional Use Permit), the General Plan and sound community development. Findings are hereby made in support of establishing the proposed Planned Development District as follows: 1. The proposed planned development is consistent and in conformity with the general plan pursuant to Sections 94.07.00(A)(1) and 94.02.00(A)(4) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. 00002E Planning Commission Resolution of Approval January 23, 2008 Case No. 5.1162 PD342 Page 3 of 5 The proposed land uses of hotel rooms and ancillary facilities serving the hotel guests are in conformity with the General Plan Amendment proposed as part of this action and sound community development. The increase in hotel rooms promotes economic development for the City in its endeavors to encourage tourist development while the elimination of the restaurant and nightclub will reduce negative noise and nuisance impacts on the surrounding community. 2. The use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the general plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. The proposed land uses are deemed to be desirable for the public welfare and convenience and is in conformity with the General Plan and its objectives, and are authorized by the Zoning Code. The major existing use on the subject site is a hotel. Under the Planned Development District, the proposed project expands the number of hotel rooms while eliminating the public restaurant and nightclub. Existing land uses in the vicinity include other hotel developments, a proposed hotel development on an existing vacant lot, as well as retail, restaurant, and service uses in the Central Business District. 3. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate such use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features required in order to adjust such use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood. The proposed development is similar to the character and design of the existing development on the site. The size of the site is adequate to accommodate the proposed uses within the Downtown Central Core designation. Landscaping, wall and setbacks are the same or greater as the existing facility. The 2.77-acre site adequately accommodates the additional hotel rooms while providing parking, setbacks and site amenities and increasing open space. Adjacent uses in the neighborhood include other existing hotels and a proposed hotel on the vacant lot on the west side of Cahuilla. 4. 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 subject site is currently developed and has an established street network adequately servicing the site. The basic street system remains 000029 Planning Commission Resolution of Approval January 23, 2008 Case No. 5.1162 PD342 Page 4 of 5 unchanged. The traffic study prepared for the proposed development concludes that traffic generation will decrease due to the elimination of restaurant uses, and that levels of service operation will be sufficient to carry the traffic to be generated. 5. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan, and other conditions of approval attached, are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare and may include minor modification of the zone's property development standards under the Planned Development District. The conditions imposed on the approved site plan include the elimination of the existing land use of a public restaurant and nightclub which have previously shown to increase traffic generation, parking demand and the generation of noise impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Conditions related to the provision of a Specific Parking Plan are designed to protect the safety and general welfare of the neighborhood to assure that the increase in hotel units does not adversely impact the adjacent areas. Per Section 94.03.00(C) of the Palm Springs zoning Ordinance, the following development standards are appropriate to the orderly development of the site: PD342 Develo ment Standards Lot area 120,537 sq. tt. Density 641 sq. ft. of lot area per room Height Not greater than 32.5 feet Setbacks Front: Tahquitz Canyon 21' — per site plan Side Yard: Belardo 25' — per site plan Side Yard: Cahuilla 25' — per site plan Rear Yard: 63'9"- from Chase Hotel per site plan Required o ens ace 55% Parking Subject to a Specific Parking Plan NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves preliminary development plans for Case 5.1162 PD342, Planned Development District 342, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part of this resolution and recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of preliminary development plans for Case 5,1162 PD342, Planned Development District 342, and recommends approval of Case 5.1162 GPA, a General Plan Amendment, to the City Council subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part of this resolution. 000020 Planning Commission Resolution of Approval January 23, 2008 Case No. 5.1162 PD342 Page 5 of 5 ADOPTED this 23Id day of January, 2008. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA Craig A. Ewing, AICP Director of Planning Services DDDDa ? i City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes Of January 9, 2008 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 4. Case 5.1161 CUP-A (Gene Autry Plaza) - An application by D.R. West, LLC to amend the existing Conditional Use Use Permit to allow a drive- through facility and construct approximately 67,232 square feet of r commercial at the southeast comer of Gene Autry Trail (Highwa and Ramon Road, Zone W-M-1, Section 20, APN: 680-170-044. P t Planner: David A. Newell, Assistant Planner) David A. Newell, Assistant Planner, provided backgro formation as outlined in the staff report dated January 9, 2008. Chair Marantz opened the Public Head -Jim Cioffi, Cioffii Architects, pr ed further details on the redesign of the project. There being no furthe pearances, the Public Hearing was closed. Chair Mara ommented that the statue (public art feature) on the comer of this intersec ' Is a great addition to this project and the entire area. M C (Scott/Ringlein, 6-0) To approve, subject to Conditions of Approval. 5. Case 5.1162 PD 342 (Palm Mountain Resort and Spa) - An application by Palm Mountain Resort, LP, for a General Plan Amendment and Planned Development District to renovate an existing 120 room hotel to a 188 room hotel on an approximately 2.77-acre site located at 155 South Belardo Road, Zone R3, Section 15, APN 513-142-001. (Project Planner: Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner) Lyn Calerdine, Contract Planner, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated January 9, 2008. Mr. Calerdine noted a correction on page 4 of the resolution, the density should be 641 square feet not 625 square feet. Chair Marantz re-opened the Public Hearing; Tim Ellis, General Manager of Palm Mountain Resort, provided further details on the revisions made to the project pertaining to the reduction of hotel rooms, the elimination of on-site bus parking and the utilization of compact parking spaces. Aftab Dada, General Manager of the Hilton Resort, emphasized the importance of having first class, quality rooms to attract conventions to the city. 4 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of January 9,2008 (public Hearing con'td) -Michael Estrada, on behalf of The Matchbox and The Falls, spoke in support of the project, stating he has no concerns with the issues of height and parking; sees no negative impact to his business and the community. -Mark Farley, Palm Springs, spoke in support of the project, noting the importance of n having affordable rooms in the city- -Kathy Reed, Palm Springs, real estate owner, stated that all of her downtown clients (restaurants and stores) are excited to have additional rooms (tourist) within walking distance to their business. -Angelica Romero, Palm Springs, read a letter from Blair & Jason Millar and a letter from Lee Appel, stating their support of the project. -Juno Hildner, Palm Springs, suggested denial of the general plan amendment and compliance with the zoning ordinance. -Lauri Alayian, Palm Springs, on behalf of the HTCNO, stated that their endorsement is based upon that the applicant will provide valet parking for overflow parking and referred to the height and mass of the Palm Hotel_ -Ini Ghidrun, Slovak Baron & Empey, addressed testimony relating to the Palm Hotel, emphasizing that these are two entirely different projects and this project should be weighed on its own merit. Tracy Conrad, Palm Springs, concerned with the mass and height; recommended compliance with the zoning regulations. -Steve Simms, Palm Springs, stated concern with the compact parking; recommended compliance with the zoning regulations. - Lea Goodsell, Palm Springs, read a letter from Harold Matzner, stating his support of the project. -Dana Stewart and James McKinley, Palm Springs, voiced concern with approval of projects not in conformance with the General Plan, opposed to the density and height of the project. Frank Tysen, Palm Springs, voiced concern with insufficient parking indicating the expansion should not violate parking and height restrictions. -Craig Blau, Palm Springs, owns the Chase Hotel, directly adjacent to the south, would like to see this project to move forward, however is concerned with the parking. -Allen Sanborn, Rancho Mirage, project engineers and architect, clarified that the project does meet the parking requirements and addressed the height reduction- -Dave Johnston, Palm Springs, lives in the neighborhood and supports the project; noting the applicant's effort in complying with the city's requirements- -Tim Ellis, applicant, addressed testimony, provided further details on the application submittal in relation to the General Plan update. Mr. Ellis addressed the over-flow parking, neighborhood meetings, compact parking and the under-parking of the adjacent neighbors. There being no further appearances, the Public Hearing was closed. 5 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of January 9,2008 Commissioner Caffery noted a concern with the deletion of the in-lieu parking fees. The Commission and staff further discussed the project's proposed on-site/off-site parking and the city's requirements. Commissioner Ringlein emphasized that we are a tourist community with a lack of roams and stressed the importance for the City Council to initiate a master parking plan. M/SIC (Ringlein/l(MOTION FAILED DUE TO A LACK OF SECOND) To approve, the Planned Development and recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment and Planned Development to the City Council, subject to Conditions of Approval, as amended: *Revised Condition #3: On-street bus parking shall be prohibited on Tahquitz Canyon Way, Belardo Road and Cahuilla Road. Upon delivery of bus passengers, buses shall be parked at on off-site location outside of the downtown corridor. MOTION FAILED. Mr. Scott suggested an in-lieu parking fee for the 39 parking spaces or below-grade parking which would allow the increase of hotel rooms. Mr_ Scott felt this is a great hotel location and encouraged the development but not to the detriment of the General Plan and the area. Commissioner Caffery stated that the city does need the rooms and does not have a concern with the height and density of the project. However, he noted a concern with the 22 on-site parking spaces and suggested an in-lieu fee be applied to the remaining parking spaces. M/SIC (Ringlein/Caffery, 5-1/Scott) To approve the Planned Development and recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment and Planned Development to the City Council, subject to Conditions of Approval, as amended: *Eliminate the on street parking and replace with in lieu fees for 17 parking spaces. *Condition #3: On-street bus parking shall be prohibited on Tahquitz Canyon Way, Belardo Road and Cahuilla Road. Upon delivery of bus passengers, buses shall be parked at an off-site location outside of the downtown corridor. *Direct staff to prepare a revised resolution and bring it back to the Commission. A recess was taken at 3:05 p.m. The meeting resumed at 3:12 p.m. 6 0000v4 oFpPLh1 SA CITY OF PALM SPRINGS r 4� z a " DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES Z MEMORANDUM rn Date: January 9, 2008 To: Planning Commission From: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services Subject: 5.1162 PD342 (Palm Mountain Resort and Spa) C On November 28, 2007, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the rn above referenced project. At the hearing, the Commission requested additional information and/or expressed concern on the following issues: r 0 • Height of the Project, particularly along Cahuilla Road • Density of the Project • Bus Parking Adequacy of Parking m In response to the Commission's concerns, the applicant has modified the proposal and Z provided additional information. This memo summarizes the revisions to the project and responds to the questions posed by the Commission. This item has been properly noticed and the Commission may re-open the continued public hearing, receive testimony, close the public comment section, and take action on the applications. Prior staff reports, exhibits and environmental documentation prepared for this project 0 have been distributed previously to the Planning Commission and are attached for — reference. N PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the property from Small Hotel Resort Commercial to Central Business District (Downtown Central Core) and a Planned Development District application to renovate the existing Palm Mountain Resort and Spa located on an approximately 2.77-acre site —� at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Belardo Road. The applicant, Palm Mountain Resort, LP (PMR), proposes the following key project components: Demolishing the existing public restaurant and nightclub building on the site Q Q 5 ii"F Planning Commission Memo January 9,2008 Case 5.1162 PD342(Palm Mountain Resort and Spa) Page 2 of 4 • Demolishing the existing two-story guest room building along Cahuilla Road .D Increasing the number of guest rooms on the site from 120 to 188 by constructing two new three-story guest buildings along Belardo Road and Cahuilla Road r • Increasing the amount of open space on the site and providing an additional pool to a serve guests • Constructing replacement restaurant facilities limited to room and pool service Z • Increase parking spaces from 82 to 115 Z RECOMMENDATION m D That the Planning Commission: • Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. D • Approve preliminary development plans for Case 5.1162 PD342, as conditioned. • Recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and M Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. C • Recommend that the City Council approve preliminary development plans for M Case 5.1162 PD342, as conditioned. • Recommend that the City Council approve Case 5.1162 GPA, as conditioned. r ANALYSIS 0 Height of the Project: The applicant has revised the proposal to reduce the maximum height of the buildings from 35 feet to 32.5 feet; this height is less than the existing building along Tahquitz Canyon Way. Revised cross-sections are attached. Table 1 m shows the revised development standards for the project. Building height is defined in Z the PSZC as the vertical height of the structure, measured from a point eighteen (18) inches above the average grade at the curb adjacent to the property. Table 1 Comparison of Existing R-3 Development Standards and Proposed Planned Development District 342 Standards Standard R-3 Zoning Proposed Planned Development District 342 Lot area Minimum 20,000 sq. ft. 120,537 sq. ft. —I Density— hotels 1,000 sq. ft. of lot area per 641 sq. ft. of lot area per X room (120 rooms) room 188 rooms) Height Not greater than 30 feet Not greater than 32.5 feet over a maximum of 50% of n all buildings Setbacks Front: Tahquitz Canyon 20 ft. — 35 ft. 21 ft. — per site plan Side yard: Belardo 1 25 ft. 1 25 ft. — per site plan 0 0 a 0 Planning Commission Memo January 9,2008 Case 5.1162 PD342(Palm Mountain Resort and Spa) Page 3 of 4 Standard R-3 Zoning Proposed Planned Development District 342 Side yard: Cahuilla 25 ft. 25 ft. — per site plan r Rear yard: 10 ft. or equal to height of 63 ft. 9 in. from Chase (Chase Hotel) building Hotel per site plan Required opens ace 40% 55% Z - Parking 154 spaces required 115 spaces subject to a Z Specific Parking Plan (See discussion below) M O Density: The applicant has reduced the proposed number of hotel rooms from 193 to 188. However, this does not change the need for a General Plan Amendment that increases the allowed density to 70 units per acre, consistent with the adjacent Downtown Central Core. The proposed density is 68 dwelling units per acre. The property is on the edge of both the Downtown Central Core and Small Hotel Resort Commercial district in the historic Tennis Club neighborhood. Staff recommends M approval of the General Plan Amendment as a logical extension of the Downtown < Central Core. The project acts as a transition between the Downtown Central Core and the Small Hotel Resort Commercial designations. Ill r Bus Parking: Based upon the Commission's concern, the applicant no longer proposes O to reserve bus parking spaces along Belardo Road. Instead, the applicant will arrange bus parking at an off-site location such as Palm Springs International Airport. Condition of Approval #3 prohibits on-site and on-street parking of buses. 9 Parking: The applicant has made several changes to the proposed parking program to m address the Commission's concerns regarding the adequacy of parking. These changes include the following: Z 1. The reduction in rooms has reduced the requirement for parking from 159 to 154 spaces. 2. The applicant has eliminated the on-site spa, further reducing the number of required parking spaces by two. v 3. The applicant has reconfigured the on-site parking to increase the number of parking spaces from 100 spaces to 115 spaces by: a. Expanding the managed parking area to increase the number of parking Cn spaces from 16 to 20. b. Increasing the number of overall spaces by designating certain spaces as compact. 4. The elimination of the majority of the existing bay parking on Belardo Road -- creates three new on-street spaces, which the applicant proposes to add to the n "historic on-street parking" that is common in this area. Currently, 19 on-street parking spaces exist in the area. 5. With the implementation of the above changes, the applicant no longer requests administrative relief from the provision of parking spaces. In addition, the applicant no longer requires credit by paying for eight in-lieu parking spaces. ODrD6 i Planning Commission Memo January 9,2008 Case 5 1162 PD342(Palm Mountain Resort and Spa) Page 4 of 4 As in the previous proposal, the applicant is requesting limited use of the on-street spaces adjacent to the project (consistent with the character of the neighborhood) and r credit for historic use of buses to transport guests to the hotel. Table 2 summarizes the revised parking plan. Under the proposed Specific Parking Plan, the applicant meets the requirements of the_PSZC. _Z Table 2 Z Parking Re uirements and Proposed Parking Ill Number of Spaces Required Parking Spaces Per Zoning Code 188 Rooms 154 Proposed Parking Spaces: Proposed on-site parking spaces (including compact and 115 managed spaces) On-street parking (historic and proposed) 22 0 Credit for use of tour bus access 15% of demand 24 DTI Total Spaces and Credits 161 _ C ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT M r Pursuant to Section 15073.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for this project did not need to be 0 re-circulated because no substantial revisions were required. NOTIFICATION No changes to the project or to Staffs analysis have occurred except as described in M this memo. A public hearing notice for this hearing was advertised and mailed to Z surrounding property owners. At the time of this writing Staff has not received inquiry or comment. No comments were received regarding the MND during the public review period. ATTACHMENTS: O 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photo of Existing Site Conditions N 3. Draft Resolution & Conditions of Approval 4. Revised Site Plan 5. Proposed Cross Sections a7 6. Planning Commission Staff Report Case 5.1162, November 28, 2007 7. Mitigated Negative Declaration n 8. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9. Letter dated January 3, 2007, from Casa Cody ""I City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of November 28,2007 i Commissioner Scott requested staff address if this project would be built in phases. David Hilliard, representing Palm Canyon 102, responded that the commercial proje will be built all at once and addressed the outdoor seating area. M/S/C (Scott/Cohen, 6-0, 1 abstained/ Chair Marantz) To approve, as su ed. Chair Marantz re-entered the Council Chamber at 1.45 p.m. 4. Case SP 07-111 (Tahquitz Square) - Ana cation by Best Signs, Inc., on behalf of Wessman Development Co y, requesting a sign program for the multi-tenant commercial buildin ocated at 1700 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Zone C-1-AA, Secti 13, APN: 502-065-008 and 018. (Project Planner: David A. Ne I, Assistant Planner) David A. Newell, Assistant PI er, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated Novemb 8, 2007. Staff noted the e ' ng signs will remain as is and any new signs will require conformance to new sign program. The Com Sion discussed the requirements/prohibition of window signs and removal of Sig /C (Scott/Cohen, 7-0) To approve, subject to Conditions of Approval. PUBLIC HEARINGS: S. Case 6.1162 PE) 342 (Palm Mountain Resort and Spa) - An application by Palm Mountain Resort, LP., for a General Plan Amendment and Planned Development District to renovate an existing 120 room hotel to a 193 room hotel on an approximately 2.77-acre site located at 155 South Belardo Road, Zone R3, Section 15, APN 513.142.001. (Project Planner: Edward 0. Robertson, Principal Planner) i Lyn Calerdine, Contract Planner, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated November 28, 2007. Mr_ Calerdine provided further details pertaining to the density, impacts to view, proposed height and the parking spaces_ Commissioner Caffery noted a concern with inadequate parking in the downtown area. Mr. Caffery felt that either an Administrative Modification or in-lieu fees should be applied towards this project, not both. i 3 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of November 28,2007 Chair Marantz opened the Public Hearing: -Tim Ellis, General Manager for Palm Mountain Resort, provided further details regarding hotel rooms and the market, removal of the restaurant, mechanical equipment upgrade to low-efficiency, room count, Transient Occupancy Tax increase and hotel amenities. Mr. Ellis reported a neighborhood meeting was held to address their concerns. -Lea Goodsell, Palm Springs, read a letter from the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Organization, in support of the project with the exception of insufficient parking; and a letter from Spencer's restaurant, in support of the project- -joy Meredith, president of Downtown Mainstreet Merchants Association, spoke in favor of the project and requested the downtown parking problems not be placed completely on this project -Jono Hildner, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project and encouraged revisions to height and parking concems. -Bob Helbling, Palm Springs, suggested the applicant revise the plans to address the parking concerns. -Frank Tysen, Palm Springs, voiced concerns with impact of views to the neighboring hotel and insufficient parking; requested project be sent back for further studies and scaling down of the hotel. -Steve Simms, Palm Springs, voiced concern with enforcement of the existing zoning code; higher density and elimination of parking spaces. -Tamara Stevens, representing Palm Springs Economic Development Corporation, in support of renovation and upgrading of properties and will provide more specific comments to the City Council, upon further review of the project- -Tracy Conrad, Palm Springs, spoke in opposition of the project, voiced concern with rezoning of the project, insufficient parking spaces, density and height; suggested revisions be made to the project. -Craig Blaur, Chase Hotel, stated the biggest concern with this project is insufficient parking- -Heather Holendano, Palm Springs, spoke in support of the project, emphasized the benefits to the city will be increased revenue and business. -Gene Petrigallo, Palm Springs, business owner, spoke in support of the project; stated the hotel will provide great rates and requested approval of the project. Moan Martin, Palm Springs, requested enforcement of the city requirements and suggested renovation of the hotel could be done by maintaining the same footprint and height, as well providing more parking. -Tim Ellis, General Manager, addressed public testimony, clarified that this project was not rejected by the Architectectural Advisory Committee, the tour-bus business will fill rooms on the weekends, and indicated that better value/quality rooms are needed in the downtown area. Mr. Ellis provided further details on the location for the bus parking- There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed. R l t i City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Minutes of November 28, 2007 Commissioner Caffery reiterated his concern with insufficient parking spaces, as well as the additional panting spaces taken up by the tour buses. Chair Marantz expressed concern with the on-site parking for the tour buses which would take up 16 parking spaces on Belardo Road. Staff noted there is additional bus parking in the area of Museum Drive, Chair Marantz suggested a recommendation to impose bus parking on an off-site location. Commissioner Cohen concurred. The Commission further discussed the in-lieu parking fee, the parking requirements and on-site bus parking. Commissioner Scott stated he felt that the issue of density and height has been overlooked and is in favor a continuance. Commissioner Hutcheson was in agreement of a continuance so that the project could go back for revisions to meet the existing parking, height and zoning requirements. Commissioner Ringlein noted she is in favor of continuance and suggested imposing conditions to address off-site bus parking and valet tandem parking. MISIC (Scott/Caffery, 7-0) To continue to an undetermined date, for a restudy to allow for increased density, but not increased height, and meet parking requirements. A recess was taken at 3:15 p.m. The meeting resumed at 3:27 p.m. 6. Case 6.1153 CUP /3.3038 MAJ (Sunquitz Shopping Center) - Arlopppftation by H&H Investments to construct a single story, 17 are feet retail building and a single story, 19,510 squa office building on approximately 3.76 acres located at outhwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way, RA, Section 14, APN 508-100.039. (Project Planner: Christophe wn, Contract Planner) Commissioner Hutcheso ted his abstention and would not be participating in the discussion and vote left the Council Chamber at 3:28 p.m. Christoph own, Contract Planner, provided background information as outlined in the eport dated November 28, 2007. Mr_ Brawn reported an error on engineering ition#72, Calle EI Segundo should be changed to Sunrise Way. 5 i �0 OFpALM S, r V N z Elanninq Commission Staff Re ort m v Date: November 28, 2007 Case No. 5.1162 PD342 Application Type: General Plan Amendment M Planned Development District < Location: 155 South Belardo Road M r Applicant: Palm Mountain Resort, L.P. O 11250 El Camino Real, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92130 113 Zone: R-3 9 m General Plan: Small Hotel Resort Commercial Z APN: 513-142-001 --r From: Craig Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services Project Planner: Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the property from Small Hotel Resort Commercial to Central Business District (Downtown Central Core) and a Planned Development District application to renovate the existing Palm Mountain Resort and Spa located on an approximately 2.77-acre site 0 at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Belardo Road. The applicant, ..� Palm Mountain Resort, LP (PMR), proposes the following key project components: • Demolishing the existing public restaurant and nightclub building on the site • Demolishing the existing two-story guest room building along Cahuilla Road 000042 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No,5 1162 PO 342 Page 2 of 15 • Increasing the number of guest rooms on the site from 120 to 193 by constructing two new three-story guest buildings along Belardo Road and Cahuilla Road r • Increasing the amount of open space on the site and providing an additional pool n to serve guests • Constructing-replacement restaurant facilities limited to room and pool service Z • Increase parking spaces from 82 to 100 Z RECOMMENDATIONS m v � That the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and recommend adoption of the MND and MMRP to the City Council M 2, Approve Planned Development District 342 and recommend approval of Planned C Development District 342 to the City Council m 3. Recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment to the City Council r. PRIOR ACTIONS TAKEN ON THE PROJECT 0 On October 10, 2007, the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) reviewed the proposed site plan for basic massing and design. The consensus of the Committee was that the proposed site plan was a beneficial adaptive reuse of the site. The Committee m unanimously recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission_ Detailed architectural plans will be subsequently submitted to the AAC for final Z architectural review. BACKGROUND AND SETTING The existing Palm Mountain Resort and Spa is a 120-room hotel located on an approximately 2.77-acre fully developed site at the southwest corner of Tahquitz 0 Canyon Way and Belardo Road. The project vicinity map is shown in Attachment 1 and the existing site development is shown on an aerial photo base in Attachment 2. (n The project site is bounded by Tahquitz Canyon Way to the north, Cahuilla Road to the west, the Chase Hotel to the south, and Belardo Road to the east. The 55 year old facility includes 120 hotel rooms in three buildings paralleling Belardo Road, Tahquitz Canyon Way, and Cahuilla Road. In addition, the site includes a 13,500 square foot (sf) restaurant/administration building, containing an 11,000 sf restaurant --� and nightclub, a 1,050 sf spa area, and 1,450 sf of support facilities (administration, meeting rooms, etc.). 060043 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28 2007 Case No,5.1152 PD 342 Page 3 of 15 Table 1 shows the surrounding land uses, General Plan designations and zoning. r Table 1 a Surrounding Land Uses, General Plan, Zoning _ _ Z Existing Land Use Zoning Map Designation General Plan Z Designation R-3 Ill Project 120-room hotel with Multiple-Family Small Hotel Resort 0 Site restaurant/nightclub Residential and Hotel Commercial Zone C-B-D C-B-D North Desert Fashion Plaza Central Business District Central Business District - Downtown Central Core O R-3 Ill Chase Hotel Multiple-Family Small Hotel Resort C South Residential and Hotel Commercial Zone M East Downtown Parking Lot C-B-D C-B-D r and Mercado Plaza Central Business District Central Business District Hotel Casa Cody O Multiple-Family Small Hotel Resort West and vacant lot Residential and Hotel Commercial (future Palm Hotel) Zone m ANALYSIS Z The proposed project is indicated on the site plan shown in Attachment 3. The following existing facilities would be removed: • The existing two-story hotel room building along Cahuilla Road • The existing 13,500 square foot restaurant/nightclub and administration building 0 • Additional parking spaces; from the existing 82 to 100 spaces " U) Each of these buildings would be replaced by a new three-story building paralleling Belardo Road and Cahuilla Road, respectively, increasing the number of hotel rooms from 120 to 193 rooms. The ground floor of the new building along the southern portion M of the site would contain the lobby, meeting room, a spa (with two employees), a small — fitness center, and a 1,500 sf food and beverage facility for pool service and room 0 service only. A second swimming pool also will be added to the site. Table 2 summarizes the existing and proposed development. � D2� i7��r Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No 5 1162 PC 342 Page 4 of 15 Table 2 Demolition and Development Summary r'" Existing To Be Proposed Total after Z Description (sfl Demolished New Development (s s s Z Guest hotel rooms 49,298 14,132 46,366 81,532 Administration 500 500 2,558 2,558 M Spa &fitness 1,050 1,050 3,367 3,367 Q Kitchen, restaurant 10,996 10,996 1,500 1,500 & ni htclub Meeting rooms 950 950 1,209 1,209 TOTALS 62,794 27,628u 55,000 90,166 v General Plan Amendment m The proposed project requires a General Plan amendment because it exceeds the < General Plan density allowed on the site. On October 24, 2007, the City Council m approved the comprehensive update to the City's General Plan, which included r changing the site designation to Small Hotel Resort Commercial with a limit of 15 units per acre. According to the General Plan, the Small Hotel Resort Commercial O designation is intended to apply to "areas with smaller-scale, boutique type hotels that T are typically found in the Warm Sands and Tennis Club neighborhoods." At present, the existing site is developed at 43 units per acre and is non-conforming W m under the new General Plan as it exceeds 15 units per acre. The proposed project density of 70 units per acre cannot be approved without a General Plan Amendment. Z The proposed General Plan Amendment as shown in Attachment 4 would change the site's land use designation from Small Hotel Resort Commercial to Central Business District(Downtown Central Core), which allows for a density of up to 70 hotel units/acre. This proposed designation is the same as the new General Plan land use designation 0 for the Desert Fashion Plaza site immediately to the north of the site. The project would — be consistent in scale and form with abutting development to the north and to the east_ cn Due to its location adjacent to the Central Business District, hotel guests can walk to the Central Business District restaurant and retail uses. Hotel guests do not need to pass through the neighboring Tennis Club district to access the amenities of Downtown. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the following policies cited in the General Plan Update: Goal LU1: Establish a balanced pattern of land uses that complements the pattern and character of existing uses, offers opportunities for the intensification 000045 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No 5 1162 PD 342 Page 5 of 15 of key-targeted sites, minimizes adverse environmental impacts, and has positive economic results. r Goal LU7: Maintain and enhance the City's status and image as a premier resort a destination and cultural center in the Coachella Valley. Z These goals are supported by the following polices relevant to the proposal: Z Policy LU7.4: Encourage the expansion of existing facilities or the introduction of Ill new uses that are considered to be of significant importance and contribute v exceptional benefits to the City. Policy LU1.5: Allow for flexible development standards provided that the potential benefits and merit of projects can be balanced with potential impact. v Policy LU1.10: Encourage, where appropriate, high density projects to maximize m the use of the land. C Based on these considerations, Staff recommends amending the General Plan Map for m the project site to Central Business District (Downtown Central Core), provided a r Planned Development District is prepared and approved. 0 With the approval of the requested General Plan Map Amendment and Planned Development District, the proposed density of 70 units per acre would be consistent with the General Plan. Planned Development District m Z The current zoning on the site is R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential and Hotel). A Planned Development District is needed in order to provide relief from selected development standards of the R-3 zone. Pursuant to Section 94.03.00 (Planned Development District) of the zoning Ordinance, the Planned Development District is designed to provide various types of land use that can be combined in compatible relationship with each other as part of a totally planned development. It further states, `It is the intent of v this district to insure compliance with the general plan and good zoning practices while .... allowing certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of specific zone f/7 classifications." As such, the proposed Planned Development District includes certain departures from ;13 the development standards of the R-3 zone. Table 3 describes these departures: _ 0 0000,6 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28 2007 Case No 5 1162 PD 342 Page 6 of 15 Table 3 Comparison of Existing R-3 Development Standards and 17, Proposed Planned Development District 342 Standards Standard R-3 Zoning Proposed Planned Z Development District 342 Z Lot area Minimum 20,000 sq. ft. 120,537 sq. ft. Density- hotels 1,000 sq, ft. of lot area per 625 sq. ft. of lot area per m room 120 rooms room 193 rooms 0 Height Not greater than 30 feet Not greater than 35 feet over a maximum of 50% of all buildings Setbacks ----- — - 0 Front: Tahquitz Canyon 20 ft. - 35 ft. 21' - per site plan Side yard: Belardo 25 ft. 25' - per site plan m Side yard: Cahuilla 25 ft. 25' - per site plan C Rear yard: 10 ft- or equal to height of 63'9"- from Chase Hotel building per site plan M _Required open space 40% 55% r Parking 159 spaces required 100 spaces-, subject to a 0 Specific Parking Plan -a See discussion below As the above Table shows, the Planned Development District is required in this case, in M order to address variations in lot area per hotel room, height, and parking. Z Site Plan and Project Design The proposed site is approximately 2-77 acres. Currently, it is fully developed with 120 hotel units, a restaurant/nightclub, and ancillary uses. Under the Planned Development District, the proposed project will redevelop the existing site as follows: v • Increase overall existing room count from 120 units to 193 units • Eliminate approximately 11,000 sf of the total 13,500 sf restaurant and nightclub Cl) space • Increase parking spaces from 82 to 100 • Maintain the existing height of the tallest building on the site of 34'8" X • Reduce the building site coverage from 28% to 24% — • Provide open space, landscaping, and recreational amenities to approximately 0 55% of the site • Provide an additional swimming pool • Provide limited food service area for hotel guests only ODL ��7 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No.5,1162 PD 342 Page 7 of 15 The proposed site plan will renovate the site with the following building sections: '13 • The existing Tahquitz building of 3 stories and 21 units (34'8" in height) will (— remain. • The existing Belardo building of 2 stories and 23 units (23' in height) will remain. • The existing Courtyard building of 3 stories and 42 units (34'8" in height) will Z remain. Z • The new- Mercado building of 3 stories and 38 units (34' in height) will replace 11,000 sf of the existing restaurant. m • The new Mountain building of 3 stories (in 2 building sections) and 69 units (34' 0 in height) will replace the existing two-story building containing 36 units. The reconfigured site plan will place buildings parallel to the three street frontages of Tahquitz Canyon way, Belardo Road, and Cahuilla Road, as well as parallel to the 0 existing south parking lot. An existing building will remain in the center of the development. The existing swimming pool will be retained and a new pool will be added Ill between the new building along the parking lot and the existing central building. The C ancillary facilities (spa, food service, meeting room, administration) will be located on the ground floor of the new Mercado building parallel to the south parking lot. Ill r De_ nsity 0 Located in the R-3 zone, the project is subject to Section 92.04.03.C.1 for the lot area per hotel room (1,000 sf per hotel room) for a hotel with surface parking. Under the Planned Development District the project proposes a lot area per hotel room of 625 square feet which would be consistent with a General Plan land use designation of m Central Business District (Downtown Central Core). Z Architecture General building design, paint palettes, construction materials, and landscaping will remain similar to the existing elements. The AAC reviewed and endorsed the proposed general massing and design plan. The AAC will review detailed architectural design 0 upon submittal of final development plans. Open Space (q The project proposes approximately 55% of the site be dedicated to landscaping and -4 open hard-surfaced areas, which exceeds the requirements of the R-3 zoning district. X The open space will consist of perimeter landscaping, interior pedestrian promenades, ., swimming pools, and general planting areas. 0 --I 00000, Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No 5.1162 PD 342 Page 8 of 15 Access General access to the site remains unchanged, with the development having three r street frontages. The main pedestrian entrance will remain on Belardo Road, with public sidewalks provided on Belardo and Tahquitz Canyon- Secondary pedestrian access will be provided-via gates to the existing bay parking area along Cahuilla Road- Loading Z - and service access will be provided off Cahuilla or via the existing one-way parking lot Z on the south side of the property. m Parking 0 The following table calculates the parking requirements for the site as required under Section 93.06.00(B)(16) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. Table 4 Parking Requirements for Proposed Project m Parking Generator Number Units Rate Required C Spaces M First 50 guest rooms 50 Per Room 1 space/room 50 r Guest rooms above 50 143 Per Room 0.75 space/room 107 Food service 1,500 Sq- Ft- Public Non-public 0 0 Spa &fitness center 2 Employees 1 space/employee 2 TOTAL 159 The proposed project increases the existing off-street parking on the site from 82 to 100 M spaces- The following table shows the proposed number of parking spaces and their on- site location. As indicated in Table 4 above, the required number of parking spaces for Z the proposed project is 159- Table 5 below, indicates the applicant is proposing 100 spaces. There is a deficit of 59 parking spaces which will be addressed by the proposed Specific Parking Plan described in details in Table 6- Table 5 v Proposed Parking Spaces and On-Site Location On-Site Location Number of Parking Spaces On-sites aces 77 Creation of managed parking spaces under 16 X valet control on-site see discussion below. Proposed driveway spaces 7 TOTAL PROPOSED ON-SITE SPACES 100 The project proposes deficit parking by 59 spaces. The project proposes to address the deficit through a combination of on-street parking, administrative reduction in the 00aaY9 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No 5.1162 PD 342 Page 9 of 15 requirement for parking, and payment of in-lieu parking fees. These credits would be implemented through the proposed Specific Parking Plan. r Table 6 a Parking Credits and Payment of In-Lieu Fees Z Credits and In-Lieu Fees Number of Spaces Z Proposed on-site parking s aces See Table 5 100 Ill Administrative modification for parking reduction of 10% 16 O per Section 94.06.01 of the Zoning Code Historic use of adjacent off-sites aces 11 Credit for use of tour bus access 15% of demand 24 Payment of in-lieu parkin fees 8 spaces @ $12,000/space 11 v TOTAL SPACES AND CREDITS 159 m The Specific Parking Plan elements are described below. C Managed Parking: Should guest demand warrant, the managed parking program would m have the option of taking six striped spaces and using them as 16 managed spaces r (i.e., tandem parking by a valet, allowing closer stacking). For the majority of days, the proposed managed parking area would be self-policing and used primarily by hotel 0 employees. T On those days when occupancy exceeds 90%, the managed parking area would be 9 valet-served from 7:00 am to 11:00 pm. Only when occupancy exceeds 90% is there M the potential need to use some or all of the 16 managed parking spaces attributable to the remaining 10% of the rooms. A managed parking program that includes valet Z parking is consistent with Policy CR8.6 (Parking) which states: "Explore the development of a valet parking program to enhance parking access and availability Downtown." Administrative Modification: An Administrative Modification may be granted through the v PD in accordance with Section 94.06.01 of the Zoning Code_ Findings can be made due to historic development patterns in the neighborhood and the location of existing improvements in the area. [q Historic On-Street Parking: Staff supports the fact that on-street parking is common in the area. The City will credit the applicant with 11 on-street parking spaces, in addition to the Administrative Modification mentioned above. — Bus Passenger Relief,- The City will credit the applicant with a 15% reduction to account 0 for bus passengers. A Condition of Approval has been included indicating that the applicant shall pay for striping and signage for two bus parking spaces on the west side of Belardo Road. 000050 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,200T Case No 5 1162 PD 342 Page 10 of 15 In-Lieu Parking Fees: In order to balance the parking requirements, the applicant may pay the in-lieu parking fee at $12,000 per space for eight spaces, for a total of r $96,000,00- Staff supports the proposed Specific Parking Plan. A Condition of Approval has been Z included, requiring the applicant to apply for and receive approval of a Land Use Plan to Z implement this plan. m Landscaping 0 The applicant proposes to provide landscaping consistent with existing landscaping. The final landscape plans must be reviewed by the Architectural Advisory Committee_ The AAC will review final development plans, including landscape plans, upon submittal of a Final PD application. m Downtown Urban Design Plan C In conjunction with the comprehensive General Plan update the City adopted its IM Downtown Urban Design Plan. These guidelines recognize the Mercado Plaza r immediately to the east of the subject site and the Historic Tennis Club District immediately to the west of the subject site as areas of special interest. Q The guidelines state that "The Mercado Plaza is a vibrant public space because it contains many elements of a well designed gathering place: retail and restaurant uses, a strong water element, outdoor seating, interesting architecture, shade elements, consistent landscaping, public art, and specialized paving." m Z The guidelines also state, "The Tennis Club district is an important historic area in downtown Palm Springs. It contains many architecturally, socially, and culturally important hotels, small resorts, and residences. This district should continue to retain the current land uses, sense of place, and character that currently exists." Listed below are the relevant ideas and strategies pertaining to the subject development 0 and its impact on the Mercado Plaza and the Historic Tennis Club District. -- • Building Height, Orientation, Massing & Design Goal: Allow for mixed-use development while preserving mountain views and eclectic nature of downtown; preserve view corridors and create new ones when possible; preserve and enhance eclectic architecture. 0 Proposed Action: Orient buildings east-west to protect view corridors; develop --r and implement building massing guidelines to frame views; step back the upper floors of taller buildings to protect view corridors, vary height and massing to Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No.5.1162 P❑342 Page 11 of 15 maintain eclectic nature of downtown; design building to add to and reinforce the eclectic nature of downtown architecture. r The proposed renovation of the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa site is generally consistent with the intent of the goals and proposed actions of the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines. The proposed plans maintain the general building Z pattern as it currently exists, with buildings constructed along street frontages. Z Though this project does not orient all buildings in an east-west direction, the building pattern is appropriate for a site with three street frontages, especially Ill given that three existing buildings are being retained on the site. 0 The MND addresses the protection of the views from the Mercado Plaza. The primary issue is the increased height of the new Mercado building (approximately 10' to 12' taller than the existing building being demolished) and its impact on views. Site visits and photographic simulations revealed that even with the 0 additional height of a new three-story building, the views of the mountains in the M background will be maintained from the Mercado. In addition, the remaining central Courtyard building is currently three stories tall and 34'8" in height and is C located directly adjacent to the new three-story Mercado building. m The existing off-street parking lot running in an east-west direction is being r maintained. This lot also allows an open view through the subject site to the 0 west. "0 • Building Height (The Tennis Club District) Goal: Building heights should be consistent with current heights and zoning m restrictions. Z Goal: Building heights should result in a varied skyline. Taller buildings, if properly designed, will create dramatic view corridors that will add to the vitality of downtown. The proposed project retains the primary land use of a resort hotel on the site, consistent with the purpose of the Tennis Club District, and the building heights for the redevelopmentirenovation of the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa are W generally consistent with the goals for building heights in the Tennis Club District. The heights of the proposed new buildings on the subject site will be equal to or less than other existing buildings on the site. In addition, the redevelopment of ; the site will result in buildings of two stories and three stories, adding variety to _ the skyline. 0 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28 2007 Casa No,5 1162 PC 342 Page 12 of 15 REQUIRED FINDINGS The amendment to the General Plan is a legislative action and specific findings are not required. However, the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance states that the Planning n Department shall study any proposed amendment and shall provide information necessary to assure action consistent with the General Plan and shall report the Z findings to the Commission. Z General Plan Amendment Ill The proposed General Plan Amendment is to change the classification of the site from Small Hotel Resort Commercial to Central Business District (Downtown Central Core) is a reasonable and appropriate extension of the adjacent Central Business District (Downtown Central Core) for a hotel development whose guests utilize the restaurants, retail services and service facilities of the downtown area and is consistent with the Central Business District land use classification. The amendment also serves the City's m interest in economic development activity by increasing the number of hotel units to C serve guests who shop and dine in the Central Business District. m Planned Development District r Section 94.03.00(B) of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance states that the Planning 0 Commission and City Council shall find that the proposed uses as shown on the preliminary development plan for the PD are in conformity with the required findings and conditions set forth in Section 94.02.00 (Conditional Use Permit), the General Plan and sound community development. m Findings are hereby made in support of establishing the proposed Planned Z Development District as follows: 1. The proposed planned development is consistent and in conformity with the General Plan pursuant to Sections 94.07.00 (A)(1) and 94.02.00 (A)(4) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. O The proposed land uses of hotel rooms and ancillary facilities serving the hotel _ guests are in conformity with the General Plan Amendment proposed as part of this U) action and with sound community development. The increase in hotel rooms promotes economic development for the City in its endeavors to encourage tourist 'I development while the elimination of the restaurant and nightclub will reduce X negative noise and nuisance impacts on the surrounding community 2. The use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is in 0 harmony with the various elements or objectives of the general plan, and is not ..� detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No,5 1162 PD 342 Page 13 of 15 The proposed land uses are deemed to be desirable for the public welfare and convenience and is in conformity with the General Plan and its objectives, and are authorized by the Zoning Code. The major existing use on the subject site is a r hotel. Under the Planned Development District, the proposed project expands the number of hotel rooms while eliminating the public restaurant and nightclub. - - Z Existing land uses in the vicinity include other hotel developments, a proposed hotel Z development on an existing vacant lot, as well as retail, restaurant, and service uses in the Central Business District. Ill 3. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate such use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features required in order to adjust such use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood. v The proposed development is similar to the character and design of the existing m development on the site. The size of the site is adequate to accommodate the proposed uses within the Downtown Central Core designation. Landscaping, walls C and setbacks are the same or greater as the existing facility. m The 2.77-acre site adequately accommodates the additional hotel rooms while I", providing parking, setbacks and site amenities and increasing open space. O Adjacent uses in the neighborhood include other existing hotels and a proposed hotel on the vacant lot on the west side of Cahuilla. 4. 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 m proposed use. Z The subject site currently is developed and has an established street network adequately servicing the site. The basic street system remains unchanged. The traffic study prepared for the proposed development concludes that traffic generation will decrease due to the elimination of restaurant uses, and that levels of service operation will be sufficient to carry the traffic to be generated. O 5. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan, and other conditions of approval attached, are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare and may include minor modification of the zone's property development standards under the Planned Development District. The conditions imposed on the approved site plan include the elimination of the existing land use of a public restaurant and nightclub which previously have shown to increase traffic generation, parking demand and the generation of noise impacts —I on the surrounding neighborhood. Conditions related to the provision of a Specific Parking Plan are designed to protect the safety and general welfare of the Planning Commission Staff Report November 28,2007 Case No 5.1162 PD 342 Page 14 of 15 neighborhood to assure that the increase in hotel units does not adversely impact the adjacent areas. r Per Section 94.03-00(C) of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, the following development standards are appropriate to the orderly development of the site: 2 PD342 Development Standards Z Lot area 120,537 sf Density 625 sq. ft. of lot area per room M Height Not greater than_ 35 feet Setbacks Front: Tahquitz Canyon 21' — per site plan Side yard: Belardo 25' — per site plan Side yard: Cahuilla 25' — per site plan Rear yard: 63'9"- from Chase Hotel per site plan m Required open space 55% C Parking 100 Sip aces subject to a Specific Parking Plan m ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT r The Planning Department has reviewed this project under the provisions of the 0 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and determined that the project has the -� potential for significant impacts, but that the impacts would not be significant in this case because project modifications or mitigation measures incorporated into the Initial Study reduce impacts to less than significant levels- A Mitigated Negative Declaration has M been prepared, and attached to this Staff Report as Attachment 7. Z The following mitigation measures over and above standard City conditions, rules and __q regulations have been identified in the environmental document to reduce impacts of the proposed project to below a level of significance: • Mitigation Measure MM V-1 (Cultural) requires that a Native American Monitor(s) shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities on the site, because local experience has shown that there is always a possibility of buried cultural resources in a project area. f/) • Mitigation Measure MM V-2 (Cultural) requires that prior to the approval of any grading plan, the Director of Planning Services of the City of Palm Springs will ensure listed specifications regarding the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains and that the landowner or representative will rebury any Native American remains and associated grave good with appropriate dignity 0 under specified conditions. • Mitigation Measure MM VIII-1 (Hydrology & Water) requires that prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer a hydrology analysis of the project for review and approval to assure that . 000055 Planning Commission Staff Report November 28 2007 Case No.5.1162 PC 342 Page 15 of 15 stormwater runoff generated from the site in the developed condition shall be 0 equal to or less than stormwater runoff from the site in the undeveloped condition. r These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed conditions of n approval of the project, as contained in Attachment 7. The proposed Mitigated Negative Z Declaration was circulated on November 7, 2009 for a 20-day public comment period. Z No comments have been received as of this writing. m NOTIFICATION v A public hearing notice was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject property and published in The Desert Sun on November 7, 2007. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any comment. v CONCLUSION m With the proposed amendments described herein, the proposed project is consistent C with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The proposed mapping amendment to M the General Plan and the adoption of a Planned Development District are necessary r and proper at this time and will not be detrimental to the adjacent property or to residents. On this basis, staff recommends approval of the applications, including 0 adoption of General Plan Amendment 5.1162, adoption of Planned Development District application PD342, preliminary architectural review, and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. m Z and O. ko6ertson rai A. ing, C Principal Planner Direc or of Planning Services Attachments: v 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photo of Vicinity/Existing Site Plan 3. Proposed Site Plan 4. Proposed General Plan Amendment "I 5. Draft Planning Commission Resolution ;7 6. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 7. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program n --I PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1.0 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1, Project Title: Palm Mounlain Resort and Spa 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Palm Springs Departmeni of Planning Services 3200 E. Tahquilz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Edward O. Robertson, Principal Planner (760)-323-8245, or Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning (760) 323-8245 4. Project Location: City of Palm Springs at 155 South Belardo Road, Assessor Parcel 4513-142-001. The project site is bounded by West Tahquifz Canyon Way to the north, the Chase Hole] and West Arenas Road to the south, South Belardo Road to the east, and Cahuilla Road to the west. The regional location is shown in Figure 1, and the project site location is shown on a topographic base map in Figure 2, and on an aerial base in Figure 3. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Palm Mountain Resort, L.P., a California Limited Partnership 11250 El Camino Real, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92130 6. General Plan Designation: H43/30 7. Zoning: R3 Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study S � November 2007 Page I at 66 000 ©3 I i Desert Hot S rings To Los An eles I � f ac w[ -1d) 0*1 al Project Springs Location Cathedr, I Rancho Mira e City ;!;lt Palm India Indio Desert Wells N i;i<il No to Scale - SOURCE.15A 20O7 o S — -- — — FIGURE i 0 Palm ,llountaiD Resor[ a07d Spa CITI ca regional Localion P WSPiI]Op15 hiN17(.RAPIi I[S•FIGUBC I kCLI❑f.SSL LUV�ilO\A�2 i;nil 115-3:1.r00,w 116=33.u09 W 15'G58911F°32<000. V) -lil s ALO FT, II: Irn.LY ew:.r I 1._.:1 Jtfi ,-._. l� 11-4 ' +, - 'r-,•.� �iC[ S C 3,..'_it" S-^--�� i Y rlrl —j i i.. mse- •�:--i']-'f!� iL..�=-=a �`f- _ —.!�.-ST°[ . YJE-_'44 -__ 1 `, '� a.,o S � I �,��j f' :__ T. H�Y I � i / .i \:_. p 4M ate, '_'t -. •= '! '" •ems f,,,,. - r L Ft.a. 1`:: '1�Fr:_-�T-:`i�'-'l.T iT_ ''V.� i �r!-�,{"• :. fk.;�...__ ( y__ _ rs =.F't:"_z'.—_.:-1'az•. ',: �. --ii .}, "c'-•':..,1s`I.I+ >ti= 1. �4f 'iiQnA C L1 A;c ni.l F:Nr ,•il; - - f- i?. `;-�. ^.s�, '_�r` K1 ahui T..� `1_ Cn Y„Wal� _ _ pr. t IizCl:i --^^�� 1l1 7 �� �rl"<'"� :f( t• !:i .i:" iN�lE R}v5$A V-.L l'70N �• i• ..L•'-�H.e c.u�• ;.:`!-15 _7i o.ei r 1 °.!.i a� . C' .. __•r',. ! ! .,. ':.-]•�Cf 2 v Z - f ^1 �3i'�"mae:y� _ �i`��'�;.;_r `•_ixli fr r i;f`i ProIect•: 7 .:! f Location rnu y ` 1 y - "_di li'1 :Ya li'i I[�_. I. ?!!. ..a; v ,`- • �;:G - '.-:-: ry k r : �_, r, i7 ar IAA IL 7 LI _ll.y K�• ' c [ ry �.. [ .0 : i- � • 5.-,__.-F --h—_�• ACU_A _CALL 1 44 A•',C A't,I E11 SE. 1nFr" '~ I i' .: .z •� Ali. _ �}!i'tN•• 'A 34 h';''i-- = i;i , irl•f�I I F`31.U£10' V1 i 16"33 Mrs, V1 LVGSRF !IS-32.000' W - - MrUl RI,TUPQ F. , eG�.eels%% n e...m:->g•rF:,:in' o LSA F]GURC 2 �a Palm iWountain Resort and Spa C" Project Location CIO P%PSM701%IS ill fs D GR APHICSF1Gl,RF 2 PROJECT LOC:ITION TIM ? - -: '1"• -:4'. it 11iR.i�! `-3-���,' _ - - __A �'.Fi, .�. ? :, r DESERT FASHION PLAZA L " 't:-. - .�_ = _ �a - !� � � _ -``-•- � _ �-r � �' :star'- - -3:�.... yC, "� _ Se�r4111 S A FIGURE 3 o Palm Mountain Resort and Spa CDProject Location on Ae iaf Base Map ® 5OURCE.GOOGLL EAR1H,10U7 Y'.PSFW1)1 VS.Y Y FAGR.APFIK S FIGUKF 1 PRJE[T Of%T101.ON AFAIAL FALSF PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY 1 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets If necessary.) Existing Facility: The existing Palm Mountain Resort and Spa is located on a fully- developed site of approximately 2.77 acres in the R-3 (multiple-family residential and hotel) district with an R (Resort) overlay. The project site is owned by Palm Mountain Resort, LP, a California Limited Parinership (PMR). The site currently includes the following facilities: • 120 Hotel rooms in 4 buildings • 11,000 sf restaurant and nightclub • 1,050 sf spa and 1,450 sf other support facilities (administration, meeting rooms, etc.) The existing site development is shown in Figure 4, Proposed Facility: The project proposes to redevelop the 55 year-old facility from its current 120 rooms with 13,500 square feet (sf) of restaurant/nightclub space to a 193-room hotel establishment with approximately 1,200 sf of meeting rooms, approximately 1,500 sf of kitchen, food service (for hotel guests only: room and pool service), approximately 3,367 sf fitness center and spa area for hotel guests only, on additional swimming pool, as well as administrative support areas. General Plan Land Use Designations: The 1992 General Plan designed the site as H43/30, which limits the density of the site to 43 units per acre. On October 24, 2007, the City Council approved a comprehensive update to the General Plan, which changed the site designation to "Small Hotel," with a limit of 15 units per acre. Under the new General Plan, the existing site becomes a non-conforming use. Sites to the west and south of the project site are also designated small hotel, while sites to the north and east are designated Central Business District, which allows for a density of 70 hotel rooms per acre. The project site also is located in the Historic Tennis Club District and within the area subject to the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines. Project Objectives: The applicant's objectives far the project include the following: • To upgrade the existing facility to more modern standards appropriate for a resort hotel and spa in downtown Palm Springs • To support the redevelopment of the downtown Palm Springs Central Business District by increasing the number of hotel rooms within the Central Business District, thereby increasing the number of potential customers in the district. Palm Mountain Resod and Spa,Initial Study November 2007 Page 5 of 66 000061 Tahqutiz Building to Remain Existing Mountain Building t Belardo to be Building .�. To Remain Replaced r p. Courtyard Existin . Building to g .__ _ A. A Remain Y Restaurant Building to be Replaced P No Scale S A FIGURE 4 Palm Mountain Inn Resort and SPA Existing Site Development SOURCE GOOGLELARui ANULSA 1'TSI'70I u1641'111C5\Iicllliiv4 1.X Is'1'INC.SI n.DLL LLUI'NILN I 000032 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION • To increase the compatibility of the site with the existing Tennis Club neighborhood located to the souih and west of the site by eliminating the existing on-site restaurant/night club (except for a small facility serving guests only). The size of the existing restaurant is for greater than needed to support the hotel guests; it needs to draw customers from the surrounding area to be viable. • However, the site location is not visible from the main pedestrian areas along Palm Canyon Drive, and previous restaurants on the site have not been financially successful. In addition, when the reslaurant and night club were in full use, noise from operations generated consistent complaints from surrounding residents and other hotel guests. Therefore, the applicant proposes to replace the existing on-site restaurant and night club facility with additional hotel rooms Ihat would generate the some or less vehicular Iraffic. In summary, the project would eliminate the existing restaurant and night club, and construct 73 additional hotel rooms and a small restaurant focilily for hotel guests only, Project Objectives: To achieve these objectives, PMR has filed applications with the City of Palm Springs (Case No. 5.1162 PD342, PDD Focused Entitlement Process) for the following actions: Action Description Purpose General Plan Change designation from To allow an increase in the Amendment H43/30 (old General Plan) and allowed densily of the site Small Hotel (new General from 43 units/acre to 70 Plan) to Central Business unils/acre District under the new General Plan Preliminary Planned Set new design and Allow for setbacks and heights Development District development standards for consistent with the existing (with focused entitlement the site facility process) Site Plan Describes a graphical Show the relationship of description of proposed existing to proposed uses o e I layout The proposed General Plan Amendment is shown in Figure 5 (based upon the newly adopted General Plan). Proposed Site Plan: The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 6. The proposed project will redevelop the existing site as follows: • Increase overall exisling room-count from 120 units to 193 units • Eliminate the approximately 13,500 sf of building, which contains 11,000 sf of existing restaurant/night club space, as detailed in the chart below. • Provide 105 off-street parking spaces, whereas 82 usable off-street parking spaces are currently provided • Increase the density of the site from 43 units per acre to 70 units per acre ` Palm Mountain Resort and Spa,Initial Study November 2007 Page 7 of 66 000001 New City l_1t� r � General Plan Land Use _ 0 c „, _a` 3 Map W .4 o- 1LN a October, 2007 uo Ir��! LLL- (Downtown Area) Proposed �..71 L . 1'�I� � [�!::Jo������ General Plan Amendment o - ' a W m ;� — O N �� TO Proposed Chang j.; r^ _.w " a �I r From Small0� - ' Hotel to CBD I - - 'Rant No Scale S A FIGURE 5 Palm Nloun(din Inn Resurt and SPA Proposed General Plan Amendment sn�l(cr. r,u.m srawrs r,r-Nranl.I•G.n N.ou nl�l�.rs_un� I' I'S1']01 GIfAI'111C5\fl(;pf([i FROPOSCU L'Cn CILAL I'LA\:\\fi:Nl]NI-\T Sfle Dovelopmonl Plan • _.`_ ZN 4 M1y`1' i.'! ] !l � r L ] �~I •�:'��—. - =' }_ .�?}, .H— f �_!i-f �'r �y ' 'I fvlountzi Build!ng'{E econsfructed] i'•i. i r' -' 1 s' �- 00 INe��r�ercado,Bld kl; -5= C`ITII �Ir.NI111 RI:I11L'FIL9 AwV51D LW a L S A FIGURE 6 C CA Palm Mountain Resort and Spa souKn Gau6omAmWledou, Aecnst?1 2uo- Site Development Plan im�r'a7t� i�sru�ur.rf,Fi,ls'rl;'c Sla I)tl'CIOFI31211rI°IJn] PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION • Maintain (or stay below) the existing height of the tallest building on the site of 34V' • Reduce the building site coverage from 28% to 24% • Provide open space, landscaping, and recreational amenities above the code- required 45% to approximately 557. of the site • Provide an additional pool and limited food service area The proposed site plan will redevelop the site with the following building sections: • The exisling Tahquitz building of 3 stories and 21 units (34'8" in height) will remain. • The existing Belardo building of 2 stories and 23 units (23' in height) will remain. • The existing Courtyard building of 3 stories and 42 units (34'8" in height) will remain. • The new Mercado building of 3 stories and 38 units (34' in height) will replace the existing 13,500 sf building. • The new Mountain building of 3 stories and 69 units (34' in height) will replace the existing two-story building containing 36 units. The following chart oullines the square footage of building area devoted to each proposed use(s) for the existing and proposed development. Description710,996sf ing to be Proposed New Total after olished Development Guest rooms14,132�sf 46.366 sf 80,532 sf Administration500 t 2558 f 2,588 sf Spa&fitness1,050 sf 3,367 sf 3,367 sfKitchen, restaurant, 10,996sf 1.500 sr 1,500 sf nightclubMeetin rooms950 sf 1,209 sf 1,209 sf TOTALS 62,794 sf 28,628 sf 55,000 sf 89,196 sf 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Tahquitz Canyon Way and the Palm Springs Desert Fashion Mall beyond. South: The two-story Chose Hotel and Arenas Road beyond. East: Belardo Road and public parking lot for downtown commercial uses, located on Palm Canyon Drive, as well as the Mercado Plaza. West: Cahuilla Road and the one-story Hotel Casa Cody and undeveloped corner lot, with restaurant and Tennis Club area beyond. Palm Mountain Resort and spa, Initial Study November2007 Page 10 of 66 0 0 0 0 S 8 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, Or participation agreements) • None S Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study ¢, November 2007 Page I I of 66 00 ©�� 7 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY f MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental faclors checked below would be potentially affecied by This project, involving at least one impact Ihol is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicoled by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology/Water Materials ❑ Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study •^�� November 2007 Page 12 of 66 060068 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 3.0 DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be pre ared. r I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on R■1 ® the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project r proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 1■1 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect: ❑ 1) Has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) Has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. _ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects 1) Have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) Have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 01 Cra g A. E , AICP Date Director of Planning Services In 99 i, r, Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 �,,,, Page 13 of 66 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 4.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except 'No Impact" answers [hat are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A"No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show chat the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A 'No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollulanl5, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must lake account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration, Less Than Significonl With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"to a 'Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how ]hey reduce the effect 10 a less than significant level (mitigation measures "Earlier Analyses;' as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced)- 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D) In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigalion measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 ti✓ Page 14 of 66 - 000070 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 6) Lead agencies are encouraged 10 incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e,g_ general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriale, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiolad- 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals conlacfed should be tiled in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formals.- however. lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmenlal effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question: and b) The mitigation measure idenlified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance Palm Mountain Resort and spa, Initial Study November 2007 P;✓� Page 75of66 000071 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Thon Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project. a) Have a substanlial adverse effect on a ❑ El ® El vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources including, but nol limited to, trees, rock El El ❑ outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site ❑ ❑ ® ❑ and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substanlial light or glare that would adversely ❑ ❑ ® El day or nighttime views in the area? A) HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EEEECT ON A SCENIC VISTA? Less than Significant Impact. The most significant and sensilive scenic vista involves views from the Mercado Plaza on the east side of Belardo Road looking toward the mountains to the west. The City's Downtown Design Guidelines identify this particular mid-block view in its "Concept Sketch" for the downtown, with a goal to "preserve view corridors and create new ones when possible." The Guidelines state that "The Mercado Plaza is a vibrant public space because it contains many elements of a well designed gathering place: retail and restaurant uses, a strong water element, outdoor seating, interesting architecture, shade elements, consistent landscaping, public art, and specialized paving." The existing view from Palm Canyon Drive toward Mount San Jacinto at the Mercado Plaza is shown in Figure 7, as taken from the City's Downtown Urban Design Plan. As the figure shows, the existing Mercado Plaza blocks view of the proposed project site along with the lower portion of Mount San Jacinto. One cannot see the project site from this location along Palm Canyon Drive. The project site enters the viewplane only from the Bridge itself or when one crosses under it. The view from under the bridge is obscured by landscaping. Views of the project site from the bridgo are the most prominent, which are therefore analyzed in detail. The view from the bridge (see Figure 8) shows the existing Palm Mountain development and includes two- and three-story hotel buildings along Belardo on the northern section of the site, and the 27-foot-high, 13,500 sf ancillary hotel building containing restaurant, nightclub and administrative space. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study e November 2007 Page ff16 of�6y6 UVO��? PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The proposed project will retain the existing buildings along Tahquitz Canyon and the northern building along Belardo; therefore, there will be no change in the view in that direction. However, the project will replace the existing ancillary building with a new three-story, 34-foot-tall building containing a total of 38 units. The building would run parallel to Belardo for approximately 135 feet, as well as westward along the existing off-street south parking lot. This 135-foot long section of the new building, at three stories tall, has the greatest capacity to adversely affect the scenic vislo from the Mercado Plaza toward the mountains to the west. As shown in Figure 8, the views from the Mercado Plaza jai the second floor bridge between the Falls Restaurant and the Matchbox Restauranl) revealed that the mountains to the west would remain highly visible with the additional height of approximately 8-12 feet along the southern section of the site. The new three-story building along Belardo would be similar in design to other existing buildings on the existing site. The height of the new building would be consisfenl with the existing three- story building located immediately to the northwest in the center of the development. In addition, the existing open off-street parking lot opening onto Belardo along the southern edge of the site would remain an open parking area. Negative impact on views from the Mercado Plaza would be partially mitigated through site design incorporating increased landscaping in front of the new building as well as a new potential focal point at the hotel's new entrance at the circular driveway along Belardo. Thus, the impact of the development on scenic vistas is considered less than significant. IS)SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGE SCENIC RESOURCES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,TREES, ROCK OUTCROPPINGS,AND HISTORIC BUILDINGS WITHIN A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY? No Impact. The subject development is nol located on a State-designated scenic highway, and currently, the Sile is fully developed. The project site contains no significant Irees, rock outcroppings, or historic resources. The existing restouranl/nighiciub building proposed for demolition is not a registered historical building. The existing buildings on the project site are not listed as Class 1 or Class 2 Historic Buildings nor are they listed on the City's Historic Resources Survey. The subject site is located within the Historic Tennis Club District and is subject to the Downtown Design Guidelines. The "Interim Downtown Urban Design Plan", adopted by the City of Palm Springs on July 20, 2005, does not list the subject site os a "site of historical significance." Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 17 of 66 000073 Important Viewpoints From Downtown Urban Design Plan FR o --- : � }'�. _.,�I P - �rrc_ aev. :.. N :1 r P'di�,n., in�l�. •a .u�n Cs.. . d . i a. a Existing View from Palm Canyon Drive at Mercado Plaza L S A FIGURE 7 Palm Mountain Inn Resort and SPA Views from Palm Canyon Drive at Mercado Plaza SOURCL Ciq of PAM bP,mba Urban Ui,iyn P l m '_nnn P P5P070RLinph t,F,LITL 7 4nr•tram Palm Canyun Dina _ -; - •"�., "- _- -_ - - _.'�� - - - -�".�`�'f �.{' ''��' 'i�i'.3'--�x'�'� �-.as� - �, 's ..sue .� '�J�,,., "+�' # ,,j w.i-<� ' ' 'i�4 a.s _'��"�`,_�3•a =l•r;:"• �a-=r�3�`Y:-tt -;+c'` f� _ .:r �`3 ma.� _ l tt: IIy .•a. max-. _ _ - � 'WA, FUTURE BUILDING HEIGHT EXISTING BUILDING HEIGHT S A FIGURE 8 Palm (Mountain Resort and Spa CD View From (Mercado 6uildinu 3o U R('r P I I()MO K% IcD S1'p[: P'PSI'll.'OPIti IdNLT•,[.AAPIi I[SLILURLH VIE4Y fRUhS MLRC$IU FILILfJIN[. UQ PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION C)SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE THE EXISTING VISUAL CHARACTER OR QUALITY Of THE SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS? Less than Significant Impact. Please also refer to items A) and 6) above. The proposed new buildings on the site will match the architectural style and character of the existing buildings and will be constructed of similar building materials. The architecture will be reviewed during the architectural and site plan review process. Therefore, the impact on visual character is less than significant. Also, see I(a) and I(b). D) CREATE A NEW SOURCE OF SUBSTANTIAL LIGHT OR GLARE WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT DAY OR NIGHTTIME VIEWS IN THE AREA? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project limits are within the Special Lighting Area established for Mount Palomar Observatory. Therefore, the Project will be conditioned to adhere to the slandard city lighting requirements of the City standards regulating light pollution. Standard City Lighting Requirement Exterior lighting shall be conditioned as follows: l. Architecturally integrated with the character of the associated structures, site design and landscape 2. Directed downward and shielded, or specifically directed to walls, landscape elements or other similar features, so light is confined within the boundaries of the subject parcel 3. Installed so lights do not blink or flash and are not of unusually high intensity or brightness 4. Appropriate in height, intensity and scale to the uses and the site they are serving 5. Installed in conformance with the provisions of this section, the building code, and the electrical code, and under appropriate permit and site inspection With the implementation of this standard condition, project impacts are reduced below a level of significance and no additional mitigation is necessary. ,,•^• .., Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study 2e November 2007 Page 20 of 66 00007G PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Miligaflon Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact IL AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would Iho project: a) Converl Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the ❑ ❑ [] 0 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑ contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location El El ❑ or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? A) CONVERT PRIME FARMLAND, UNIQUE FARMLAND, OR FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE (FARMLAND),AS SHOWN ON THE MAPS PREPARED PURSUANT TO THE FARMLAND MAPPING AND MONITORING PROGRAM OF THE CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY,TO NON-AGRICULTURAL USE? No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an area designated by the Staie as "Prime," "Unique," or "Statewide Imporlont" farmland. Therefore, no impact will occur. B) CONFLICT WITH EXISTING ZONING FOR AGRICULTURAL USE, OR A WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACT? No Impact. The proposed project is not within or adjacent to an area zoned for agricultural use or under a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, no impact would occur. C) INVOLVE OTHER CHANGES IN THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT THAT, DUE TO THEIR LOCATION OR NATURE, COULD RESULT IN CONVERSION OF FARMLAND TO NON-AGRICULTURAL USE? No Impact. The proposed project is not within or adjacent to an area currently used for agricultural purposes; therefore, no impact will occur. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study k November 2007 Page 27 of 66 060077 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY t MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria eslablished by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict wilh or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ® ❑ quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non- attainmeni under an applicable ❑ ❑ ® El or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors I substantial El ❑ ® El concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a El El ❑ substantial number of people? A)CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE AIR QUALITY PLAN? Less than Signthconl Impact. The applicable "Air Quality Plan" is the 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The AQMP is, in turn, based upon the adopted general plans (and resulting vehicular trip generation) from the local jurisdictions that were in place when the AQMP was developed in 2003, In the case of I he City of Palm Springs, the applicable General Plan is the 1992 General Plan Update. Proposed land uses that are consistent with such adopted general plans are considered consistent with the AQMP and will not conflict with or obstruct implemeniolion of the applicable air quality plan, In addition, projects with emissions less than or equal is [hose analyzed in the AQMP are also consistent with the AQMP. The exisling buildings on the site are consistent with the 1992 General Plan, and therefore with the AQMP. Because the proposed project is a General Plan amendment that would increase the number of allowed hotel rooms on the site, the project is not consistent with the existing Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study 3 No 2007 W Page 22 0(66 000078 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY t MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION General Plan, and is not automatically consistent with the AQMP. However, the project can be shown to be consistent due io the following factors. 1. The basic land use (hotel) does not change. 2. The reduction in the size of the restaurant will reduce cooking emissions from restaurant uses. 3. On balance, the total number of daily and peak hour trips from the site will be reduced. As shown in the traffic analysis, while the number of trips from the hotel rooms is projected to increase, this increase is offset by the reduciion in the number of trips from the restaurant. Because total trips will decrease, so will total emissions from such trips. Therefore, the total emissions from the proposed project can be expected to be less than the emissions from the existing facility and, thus, less Ihon the emissions modeled in the AQMP. As such, the proposed project will not conflict or obslrucl the implementation of the AQMP, and will not result in any impacts. B) VIOLATE ANY AIR QUALITY STANDARD OR CONTRIBUTE SUBSTANTIALLY TO AN EXISTING OR PROJECTED AIR QUALITY VIOLATION? Less than Significant Impact: The project siie is located in the City of Palm Springs, an area within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB). This part or the SSAB is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which monitors regional air quality and models ozone-producing emissions in the project area. The SSAB region is separated from the South Coasi Air Basin (SCAB) region by the San Jacinto Mountains and from the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB) region by the Little San Bernardino Mountains, The Coachella Valley area is currently designated as non-attainment for the Federal (one hour) and State ozone standards, federal PMIo standard, State PM10 standard, and transitional for Federal (eight-hour) ozone standard. The Coachella Valley area is in attainment status for Federal and State standards for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SOY), and lead. For purposes of identifying the potential for significant impacts, the SCAQMD has established "thresholds of significance" for a project's daily emissions of certain pollutants including Reactive Organic Compounds (ROC), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx). Carbon Monoxide (CO), Sulfur Oxides (SOx) and PMio. Separate thresholds have been established for the operational and construction phases of a project. If the project emissions are less than the thresholds for each phase, then emissions are presumed to be less than significant. The City of Palm Springs uses the SCAQMD thresholds as its CEQA thresholds for air emissions. The following Table shows the emission standards for each phase in the Salton Sea Air Basin Palm Mountain Resod and Spa. Initial Study 9 November 2007 Page 23(pof 66 900'0 Lry 9 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pollutant Construction limits Operational limit ounds er day) (pounds per day) __ROC 75 75 NO. too _ 100 CO 550 _ 550 _ ___ PMI0 _ 150 150_ SOn 150 150 Source 5CAOMD u� ' Operational Impacts: Using the URBEMIS model approved by SCAQMD, the estimated emissions from the project during its operational phase have been calculated, including emissions from the project itself and emissions from vehicles accessing the site. These emissions are shown in the Table below along with the operational emission thresholds for the SSA6. Source Pollutants, Ibs/day �7 ROG NOx CO sox PMI0 Area Source Emissions 064 0.00 0.78 0.00 am Mobile Source Emissions 4.05 %.14 50.09 0.04 1 6,42 Total Emissions for 2009 4.69 7.14 50.87 0.04 6.42 SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 Project Exceeds SCAQMD Thresholds No No No No No Source: I.sA Associates Inc. 20o6 (see Appendix A for calculations) The project will not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for significant operalional impacts during operations, and operational impacts will be less than significant. Construction Impacts The primary pollutants or concern during the construction phase are PMic which is generated by grading activities and NO. The project will be required to comply with regional rules, which will assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. Fugitive dust from a construction site must be controlled with best available control measures so that such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Dust suppression techniques will be implemented to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site. Implementation of Ihese dust suppression techniques can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PMIo component) by 50 percent or more. These measures arc imposed on all projects located within the region and include: Asphalt Paving • The construction contractor shall adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD rules and regulations on cutback and emulsified asphalt paving materials. ry9��a Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 '�,.,,,.•% Page 24 of 66 000000 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT ANO SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Fugitive Dust • The SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 deal with the reduction and/or elimination of fugitive dust emissions resulting from construction aperations. The SCAQMD has eslablished the following slondard measures to implement Rules 402 and 403, • All disturbed areas, including storage piles that are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized for dust emissions using waler, chemical stabilizers/suppressants, or vegetative ground cover. • All on-site unpaved roads and off-rile unpoved access roads shall be effectively stabilized for dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizers/suppressants (if applicable). • All land-clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land-leveling, grading, cut-and-fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled for fugitive dusl emissions utilizing applications of water, or by presoaking. • When materials are transported off-site, all materials shall be covered or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emission, or at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. • All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulolion of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets of least once every 24 hours when operations are occurring. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient welling to limit the visible dust emissions. The use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.) Following the addition of mctenals to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized for fugitive dust emissions, utilizing Sufficient water or chemical stabilizers/suppressants. • Traffic speed on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph (if applicable). • Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent sill runoff to public roadways from sites wilh slopes greater than one percent. • Wheel washers for all exiting trucks shall be installed, or all trucks and equipment shall be washed off before leaving the site. • Windbreeks shall be installed at windward side(s) of construction areas. • Excavation and grading activity shall be suspended when winds exceed 20 mph. Areas subject to excavation, grading, and other construction oclivily shall be limited of any one time. • In addition, construction will comply with the Cily of Palm Springs Grading Ordinance (Palm Springs Municipal Code, Chapter 8.50). The following is the summary of the URBEMIS construction emission estimates (from Appendix B). Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study � ? November 2007 Page 25 of 66 000081 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Estimated Construction Criteria Pollutants: Pounds/Day a ROG NOx CO 502 PM10 10.21 69.16 8241 0,00 21.84 ) 31,17 68.62 88.49 0.00 2,55 75 100 550 150 150 t? No No No No NG Source: LSA/URBEMIS 2002 (Contained in Appendix A) With implementation of the above standard requirements, project construction emissions will be below the SCAQMD construction emission thresholds. Therefore, no additional mitigolion is necessary beyond the City's standard requirements. C) RESULT IN A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE NET INCREASE OF ANY CRITERIA POLLUTANT FOR WHICH THE PROJECT REGION IS NON-ATTAINMENT UNDER AN APPLICABLE FEDERAL OR STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD(INCLUDING RELEASING EMISSIONS THAT EXCEED QUANTITATIVE THRESHOLDS FOR OZONE PRECURSORS)? Less than Significant Impact. The above analysis addressed to Item (0), above, inherently addresses this question. D) EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS? Less than Significant Impact. The primary pollutant of concern for sensitive receptors is carbon monoxide (CO). The State of California set a standard of 9 parts per million (ppm) for a one-hour concentration, and 20.0 ppm for an eight-hour concentration. In April 2005, LSA prepared an analysis of cumulative projected CO emissions for the proposed Smoketree Commons Shopping Center at the corner of South Sunny Dunes and East Palm Canyon Drive (LSA, Air Quality Analysis, Smoketree Village Expansion Projecl, 2005). That report, on file and available for review aI the City of Palm Springs Planning Department, indicated chat existing CO levels at area intersections were less than one half of the applicable State and federal standards. The highest existing levels at the intersection of East Palm Canyon Drive and Barona Road were 6.7 ppm for the one-hour concentration and 3.7 ppm for the eighl-hour concentration. LSA's report estimated that the Smoketree Project would increase CO levels by up to 0.4/0.3 ppm for the one-hour and eighl-hour concentrations respectively, wish CO concentration levels remaining well below the standard. Since the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa project is for smaller at a 27,000 sf net increase Ihan the Smoketree Project, which had 188,000 sf, the incremental CO concentration for the Palm Mountain project would be correspondingly reduced. Therefore, CO levels with the Palm Mountain project can be expected to remain well under the standards. In general, CO levels in Palm Springs are for less than the standard due in part to relatively low traffic volumes compared to the Los Angeles area. As the project emissions will not cause CO concen Ira lions to exceed the standard, the project will have less than significant impacts to sensitive receptors. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa. Initial Study November 2007 Page 26 of 66 060082 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION E)CREATE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS AFFECTING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE? No Impact. According the SCAQMD, the following land uses are considered polenliolly odor producing: • Agriculture (farming and livestock) • Wastewater Treatment Plant • Food Processing Plants • Chemical Plants • Composting • Refineries • Landfills Dairies • Fiberglass Molding No such land uses are proposed with current project, and no sources of odor from the redevelopment of the hotel/spa site have been identified. Thus. no Significant impacts will occur. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa.Initial Study November 67 of Page 27 of 66 OOa��3 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY f MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Then significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the ro ect: a) I-lave a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special El El ❑ status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habital or other sensitive natural community idenlified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effecl on rederally protected wetlands, as defined by Seclion 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, ❑ El ❑ marsh, vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.), through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with El Elestablished native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local polices or ordinances protecting biological Li ❑ ❑ resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? r) Conflict with the provisions or on adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Nalural Community Conservation Plan, ❑ ❑ ❑ or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? MR1,7111 Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 28 of 66 000©004 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION A) HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT, EITHER DIRECTLY OR THROUGH HABITAT MODIFICATIONS, ON ANY SPECIES IDENTIFIED AS A CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, OR SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS, OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE? No Impact. The subject site has been fully developed for approximately 55 years. While buildings and asphalt cover a majority of the site, the remaining open Space is developed with common grass and common local vegetation maintained by professional landscape services. As no endangered, threatened, candidate or sensitive species have been identified, no impact will occur. B) HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON ANY RIPARIAN HABITAT OR OTHER SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS, OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE? No Impact. No riparian habitat or other sensitive nolural community is located on the fully developed site. Therefore, no associated impact will occur, C) HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON FEDERALLY PROTECTED WETLANDS AS DEFINED BY SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,MARSH, VERNAL POOL, COASTAL, ETC.) THROUGH DIRECT REMOVAL, FILLING, HYDROLOGICAL INTERRUPTION, OR OTHER MEANS? No Impact. There are no jurisdictional wetlands in the vicinity of the project. D) INTERFERE SUBSTANTIALLY WITH THE MOVEMENT OF ANY NATIVE RESIDENT OR MIGRATORY FISH OR WILDLIFE SPECIES OR WITH ESTABLISHED NATIVE RESIDENT OR MIGRATORY WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, OR IMPEDE THE USE OF NATIVE WILDLIFE NURSERY SITES? No Impact. The project is Surrounded on all sides by developed lands, with the exception of a vacant parcel at the northeast corner of Tahquitz Canyon and Cahuilla Road. That lot is sandy and barren, Because there is no movement to be interfered with, no impact is associated with this issue. E) CONFLICT WITH ANY LOCAL POLICIES OR ORDINANCES PROTECTING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, SUCH AS A TREE PRESERVATION POLICY OR ORDINANCE? No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances. Thus, the proposed project will have no impacts to local policies and ordinances. F)CONFLICT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF AN ADOPTED HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN, NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN, OR OTHER APPROVED LOCAL, REGIONAL, OR STATE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN? No Impact. The project Site is not Identified as a Conservation Area in any local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan, including the Final Draft of the proposed Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa. Initial Study November 2007 Page 29 of 66 0000"SJ PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significanf Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource ❑ ❑ ❑ as defined in Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological ❑ ® ❑ ❑ resource pursuant to Section 15064.52 c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or ❑ ❑ ❑ unique geological feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal ❑ ❑ ❑ cemeteries? A)CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A HISTORICAL RESOURCE AS DEFINED IN§15064,5? Less than Significant Impact: No building located on the subject site is listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. However, under CEQA Section 14065.5(a)(4): "The fact thol a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Hislorical Resources, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to section 5020.1 (k) of the Public Resources Code), or identified in on historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in section 5024.1.(g) of the Public Resources Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be an historical resource as defined in Public Resources Code sections 5020.1 (j) or 5024.1" The existing Cahuilla Building and the restaurant/nightclub building on the site are proposed for demolition. These buildings are not lisled on the City's list of Historic Buildings or on the California Register of Historical Resources. It is not listed among the "sites of historical significance" in the "Interim Downtown Urban Design Plan" adopted by iho City of Palm Springs on July 20, 2005. Therefore, the demolilion of the existing restaurant/nightclub building will result in a Less than Significant Impact. B) CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE PURSUANT TO §15064.5? Less than Significant Impact with Mingatton. Given the developed nature of the site, it is unlikely that archeological resources will be discovered during grading. However, the possibility cannot be locally discounted. The following standard City miligalion measures 4 Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 30 of 66 000086 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be applied to the project, as described below, 10 ensure that any previously unknown archeological resources Ihat might be discovered during grading are addressed appropriately. MM V-1 Local experience has shown that there is always a possibility of buried culturai resources in a project area. Given that, a Native American Monitors) shall be present during all ground-dislurbing activities including clearing and grubbing, excavation, burial of utilities, planting of rooted plants, etc. Conlact the Agua Colienle Band of Cahuillo Indian Cultural Office for additional information on the use and availability of Cultural Resource Monitors. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered. the Monitor shall contact the City of Palm Springs Direclor of Planning Services and after the consultation the Director shall have the authority io halt destructive construction and shall nolify a qualified archaeologist to investigate and, if necessary, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare a treaiment plan for approval by the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Aguo Caliente Cultural Resource Coordinator. Two copies of any cultural resource documentation generaled in connection with this project, including reports of investigations, record search results and Site records/updates, shall be forwarded to the Tribal Planning, Building, and Engineering Department and one copy to the City of Palm Springs Planning Services Deporlmeni prior to final inspection. C) DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY DESTROY A UNIQUE PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE OR SITE OR UNIQUE GEOLOGIC FEATURE? No Impact. The project site is fully developed and has no likelihood of any paleontological resources. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. D) DISTURB ANY HUMAN REMAINS, INCLUDING THOSE INTERRED OUTSIDE OF FORMAL CEMETERIES? No Impact. The existing site has been fully developed for 55 years. There is no likelihood that any human remains are located on the sile. However, the possibility cannol be totally discounted, and therefore, the following miligation measure will be added: MIA V-2 Prior to the approval of any grading plan, the Director of Planning Services of the City of Palm Springs will ensure that the following specification is included with grading requirements: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location on the project site other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps will be laken: l . There will be no further excavation or disturbance of the silo or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until: (a) The Riverside County Coroner is contacted to del ermine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and (b) If the Coroner determines the remains to be Native American: Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study ..aw ' November 2007 t . Page 37 of 66 000087 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION • The Coroner will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. • The NAHC will identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. • The most likely descendent (MID) may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriale dignity, the human remains and any associalcd grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Seclion 5097.98, or 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative will rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods wish appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance, • The NAHC is unable to identify an MLD. • The MLD identified failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the NAHC. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the MLD, and the mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. ry w Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 32 of 66 000088 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potenfially with Less Than Significant Mitigation 5ignificant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Fuist Y AND SOILS. Would the roiect: ople or structures to potential l adverse effects, including the , injury or death, involving: e of a known earthquake fault, neated on the most recent l-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for El ❑ Elthe area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground faiiure, ❑ ❑ ® El liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Resull in substantial soil erosion or the loss ❑ ❑ ® ❑ of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unil or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and El El ❑ potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Buiiding El ❑ ® ❑ Code (1994), crealing substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequalely supporting the use of septic tanks or alternalive wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewatcr? c� Palm Mountain Resort and Spa. Initial Study November 2007 Page 33 of 66 000029 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION A) EXPOSE PEOPLE OR STRUCTURES TO POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING: I) RUPTURE OF A KNOWN EARTHQUAKE FAULT,AS DELINEATED ON THE MOST RECENT ALQUIST-PRIOLO EARTHQUAKE FAULT TONING MAP ISSUED BY THE STATE GEOLOGIST FOR THE AREA OR BASED ON OTHER SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF A KNOWN FAULT? REFER TO DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SPECIAL PUBLICATION 42. No Impact, According to the California Department of Conservation Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones maps (May 2002) and the Draft Geotechnical Investigation, the proposed projccl is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, no impact related to fault rupture will occur. II) STRONG SEISMIC GROUND SHAKING? Less than Significant Impact. According to the Technical Background Report to the Safety Element of the General Plan for the City of Palm Springs, Riverside County, California, the project site is located within a few hundred feet of the Palm Canyon Fault, which is though to extend northward beneath the alluvium in the developed portion of the City along Palm Canyon Drive. The fault is considered non-active and is not likely to cause an earthquake in the future, although secondary co-seismic movement on the fault related to an earthquake on the San Andreas, Banning, Garnet Hill or even San Jacinto faults cannot be ruled out. Differences in geologic materials across this Pauli may influence geological conditions that may have a bearing on the development of a property that extends across the trace of the fault. For example, where the Palm Canyon and Deep Canyon (to the south) faults extend through the mountainous portions of southern Palm Springs, the faults may influence Slope stability. The Palm Canyon foull is associaied wilh the Aguo Coliente Spring, a significanl biological, social and economic resource in Palm Springs that is intimately tied to the history of the area. The Palm Canyon fault appears to form the vertical conduit for the spring wolers to reach the surface. The active faulis nearest the project limits are the San Andreas, Banning, Garnet Hill and San Jocinlo faults. The Garnet Hill Fault located approximately 5.0 miles north of the project site. While the maximum magnitude quake on the Garnet Hill Fault is estimated to be 7.0 (Richter scale), the City will require, as part of its standard conditions, that the proposed project be built to the latest geotechnical standards, thereby minimizing the risk of loss, injury, or death due to seismic ground shaking. Thus, impacts are considered less than significant. III) SEISMIC-RELATED GROUND FAILURE, INCLUDING LIQUEFACTION? Less than Significant Impact: According to the Technical Background Report to the Safety Element or the General Plan for the City of Palm Springs, Riverside, California (2005), the potential for liquefaction is low, The project is located in an area of the Cily indicated in the Report to have groundwater at a depth greater than 50 feet as well as fine-grained granular sediments. In addition, the project will be designed according to City codes and to the recommendations of the geotechnical engineer. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa. Initial Study -V4 November 2007 Page 34 of 66 0 a 0 0 9 0 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IV) LANDSLIDES? No Impact. The topography of the developed site is flat. Sloop mountains are located approximately one hall mile directly to the west of the site, with relatively flat land in between. Given this separation, no impact will occur. B) RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL SOIL EROSION OR THE LOSS OF TOPSOIL? Less than Significant Impact. The subject site is fully developed.The subject proposal involves the demolition of existing buildings and replacing them with new buildings. A small amount of asphalt is proposed to be eliminated and replaced with landscaping, and there will be a net increase in open space and landscaping. No portion of the subject proposal involves the loss of general topsoil Adherence to standard erosion control measures will reduce potential impacls associated with this issue to a less than significant level. C) BE LOCATED ON A GEOLOGIC UNIT OR SOIL THAT IS UNSTABLE, OR THAT WOULD BECOME UNSTABLE AS A RESULT OF THE PROJECT,AND POTENTIALLY RESULT IN ON- OR OFF-SITE LANDSLIDE, LATERAL SPREADING, SUBSIDENCE, LIQUEFACTION OR COLLAPSE? Less than Significant Impact. Please refer to Responses vI (a)li) - VI(o)(iv) and VI(b). D) BE LOCATED ON EXPANSIVE SOIL,AS DEFINED IN TABLE 18-1-B OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (1994), CREATING SUBSTANTIAL RISKS TO LIFE OR PROPERTY? Less than Significant Impact. The project is located on soils with a low shrink-swell potential (U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service 1980), therefore, potential impacts related to this issue are less than significant. E) HAVE SOILS INCAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SUPPORTING THE USE OF SEPTIC TANKS OR ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEMS WHERE SEWERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER? No Impact. The proposed project is currently served by sewers. As septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems will not be used, no impact related to this issue will occur. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study = = November 2007 Page 35 of 666 0000SI PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY t MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Millgation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the prp ect: a) Creole a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine El Eltransport, use or disposal of hazardous 0 El materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upsel and accident conditions ❑ ❑ ® ❑ involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emil hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, ❑ El substances or wasle within one-quarter mile of an existing Or proposed schOOl2 d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962,5 ❑ ❑ ❑ and, as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not bean adapted,within two miles of a public El ❑ airport or a public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinily of a private airstrip,would the projecl result in a safety ❑ ❑ ❑ hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency ❑ ❑ ❑ response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlonds are ❑ ❑ ❑ adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlonds? Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 36 of 66 oao6S2 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION A) CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH THE ROUTINE TRANSPORT, USE, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS? Less than Significant Impact. The project is a standard commercial development and will nol create a significant hazard through the transportation of hazardous materials for construction purposes. To the extent that hazardous materials are used on site, they will be handled, used, stored, transported, and disposed of pursuant to applicable State, federal, and local regulations. Therefore the impact will be less than significant. B)CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH REASONABLY FORESEEABLE UPSET AND ACCIDENT CONDITIONS INVOLVING THE RELEASE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INTO THE ENVIRONMENT? Less than Significant Impact. Please see Item A) immedialcly above. C) EMIT HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS OR HANDLE HAZARDOUS OR ACUTELY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, SUBSTANCES, OR WASTE WITHIN ONE-QUARTER MILE OF AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED SCHOOL? No Impact. The project is not within one-quarter mile or an existing or proposed school (Thomas Bros. Maps, San Bernardino and Riverside County, 2003; Palm Springs Unified School District, htto://www. usd.kI?,ca.us). D) BE LOCATED ON A SITE WHICH 15 INCLUDED ON A LIST OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES COMPILED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65962.5 AND, AS A RESULT,WOULD IT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT? No Impact. The project site has not been identified on a list of hazardous materials sites. Therefore, for this issue, the proposed development will have no impact. E) FOR A PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN AN AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN OR,WHERE SUCH A PLAN HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED,WITHIN TWO MILES OF A PUBLIC AIRPORT OR PUBLIC USE AIRPORT,WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN A SAFETY HAZARD FOR PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA? No Impact. The project is located approximately two and a half miles directly weSI of the Palm Springs International Airport. The project is not within the boundaries of the study area of the Airport Master Land Use Plan or the ALUC Compatibility Plan. Because the proposed project would not expose persons or property to an airport-related safety hazard, no impact associated with this issue will occur. F) FOR A PROJECT WITHIN THE VICINITY OF A PRIVATE AIRSTRIP,WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN A SAFETY HAZARD FOR PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA? No Impact. The projecl is not located in the vicinity or a private airstrip; therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. G) IMPAIR IMPLEMENTATION OF OR PHYSICALLY INTERFERE WITH AN ADOPTED EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN OR EMERGENCY EVACUATION PLAN? No Impocl. The City of Palm Springs developed an Emergency Operations Plan (FOP) in August of 2007. The project will not have any impact on the implementation of that plan. Project final plans will be reviewed by the Fire Deparlmenl to ensure Compliance. Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November2007 Page 37 of 66 0 0 a 0 S 3 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION H) EXPOSE PEOPLE OR STRUCTURES TO A SIGNIFICANT RISK OF LOSS, INJURY OR DEATH INVOLVING WILDLAND FIRES, INCLUDING WHERE WILDLANDS ARE ADJACENT TO URBANIZED AREAS OR WHERE RESIDENCES ARE INTERMIXED WITH WILDLANDS? No Impact. The project site and the surrounding properties are fully developed with the exception of the undeveloped, vacant site al the northeast corner of Cahuilla Road and Tahquitz Canyon. This land development isolates the subject property from the paten lial of wildland fires. No impact related to this issue will occur. t Palm Mountain Resort and Spa. Initial Study November 2007 Page 38 of 66 0 0 0 0 S i PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. would the project a) Violate any water quality sIondards or waste discharge requiremenls2 ❑ L1 ® ❑ b) Substantially deplele groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume Or a lowering of the local groundwater Table level (e.g , the production ❑ ❑ ® ❑ rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not supporl existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the exisling drainage pattern of the site or area. including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a ❑ ❑ ❑ manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially aller the existing drainage pal lern of the site Or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or ElEl El increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner Ihot would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water thcl would exceed the capacity or existing or planned ® ❑ El drainage systems, or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ g) Place housing within a I00-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard ElElBoundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a I00-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood ❑ ❑ ❑ flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss injury Or death involving flooding, ❑ ❑ including flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundotion by seiche,tsunami or mudflow? ❑ © ❑ Z Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 39 of 66 000995 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION A) VIOLATE ANY WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction and demolition activities associated with proposed project would result in the disturbance of less than one acre Of the total 2.77- acre site. The applicant would comply with all local slondards and permitting requirements regarding water qualily and storm water discharge, to eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm water systems and other waters of the nation, develop and implement any related storm water pollution prevention plans, and perform inspections or Storm water conlrol structures and pollution prevention measures. The applicant will be required to submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) at the time or application for a grading permit. Compliance with standard city rules and regulolions will reduce project impacts below a level of significance. B)SUBSTANTIALLY DEPLETE GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES OR INTERFERE SUBSTANTIALLY WITH GROUNDWATER RECHARGE SUCH THAT THERE WOULD BE A NET DEFICIT IN AQUIFER VOLUME OR A LOWERING OF THE LOCAL GROUNDWATER TABLE LEVEL(E.G.,THE PRODUCTION RATE OF PRE-EXISTING NEARBY WELLS WOULD DROP TO A LEVEL WHICH WOULD NOT SUPPORT EXISTING LAND USES OR PLANNED USES FOR WHICH PERMITS HAVE BEEN GRANTED)? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be served by Desert Water Agency and will not require its own well supplies.The project will result in the redevelopment of an existing hotel and Spa, with a small increase in associated landscaping and an additional pool Ihat will require additional water supplies. The Desert Water Agency (DWA) provides the domestic water supply in the City of Palm Springs and portions of Desert Hot Springs. DWA's primary source for the domestic water supply is groundwater from the Whitewater River Sub-basin, referred to below as "the aquifer." This aquifer is refreshed by three sources. 1. Runoff from local mountains 2. Recharge from Colorado River Aqueduct 3. Recharge from surface water Currently, recharge from the Colorado River Aqueduct is the aquifer's largest single source. While DWA does not have legal rights to Colorado River Water, it does have rights to water from the California State Water Project (SWP). However, no connection from the SWP to the Coachella Valley has been constructed. Instead, DWA and other local water agencies "swap" their SWP allocation for an equivalent amount of water from the Colorado River Aqueduct that is allocated to the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). During drought-condition years, the MWD allocation may be reduced, so the amount swapped to DWA is reduced. However, DWA operates the aquifer as a large storage basin (essentially an underground lake), drawing down the aquifer during droughl years while recharging it during wel years. For example, the DWA slored extra water in the aquifer during the 2004-2005 wet years (Reference 7). In December 2005, DWA approved its 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), its long-term plan for water supply through the year 2030. This plan anticipates the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study a November 2007 Page 40 of 66 00002b PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIQN population within DWA's service area to increase from 68,450 persons in 2005 to 100,600 in 2030, an increase of 47%. During this some period, DWA projects an actual decline (6%) in the amount of imported water available from MWD. The UWMP addresses this shortfall through a Three-pronged plan: • Reduce consumption by domestic water-at-large users (i.e., golf courses) by using more recycled water. Recently, the DWA has extended its recycled water distribution syslem fa include the Indian Canyons Golf Course and the Palm Springs Classic Golf Course. This use of recycled water, at 7% of total water supply in the year 2000, is expecled to increase to 9% in 2010, and to 12%in 2030. • Allow more recycied water to percolate down into the ground-water table. DWA currently operates a sellling pond for this purpose near Gene Autry Trail and Dinah Shore Drive and is planning additional such facilities in the future. • Encourage individual customers to choose low-water-use landscaping and avoid large amounts of turf. The City has odoplcd a Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance to assist in this effort. After implementalion of Ihese measures, and under typical weather conditions, during the next 15 years, the UWMP projects a surplus of wafer supply over demand of nearly 100,000 AF for the years 2005 through 2020, the accumulated surplus to be stored in the underground aquifer, For the period 2020-2030, UWMP projects a drowdown from the aquifer by about 40,000 AF, as the water demand due to population increase exceeds the currently available supply. The report notes that an additional increase in non- consumptive reuse (primarily recycled water percolated back into the aquifer) would more than offset any forecast 2020-2030 deficit. DWA is pursuing the implementation of these additional measures beyond 2020. The UWMP contains similar forecasts for single and multiple dry years. The project is not likely to affect groundwater recharge on a project level and may slightly increase non-consumptive return (irrigation) water. In addition, the minor increase in landscaping and open space area may allow increased percolation of groundwater to the aquifer during slorms. This retention would occur infrequently due to the dry climatic conditions present. In addition, there would be a slight net decrease in runoff created by impervious surfaces (rooftops and parking areas) built by the project. C)SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE SITE OR AREA,INCLUDING THROUGH THE ALTERATION OF THE COURSE OF A STREAM OR RIVER, IN A MANNER THAT WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL EROSION OR SILTATION ON- OR OFF-SITE? No Impact. The existing site is fully developed. Demolition of some buildings on the site, as well as a decrease in parking areas, will resull in a slight decrease in impervious surfaces. However, the basic drainage pattern for the development will remain unchanged. Because the project will adhere to City standard erosion control methods throughout construction, no impocl related to erosion or siltation will occur. Therefore, no impact will occur related to this issue. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 41 of 66 PALM MOUNTAIN RESDRT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION D)SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE SITE OR AREA, INCLUDING THROUGH THE ALTERATION OF THE COURSE OF A STREAM OR RIVER, OR SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE RATE OR AMOUNT OF SURFACE RUNOFF IN A MANNER THAT WOULD RESULT IN FLOODING ON- OR OFF-SITE? Less than Significant wilh Mitigation Incorporated. No stream-beds or rivers cross the site. See C) above. To ensure that the project does not result in any risk of downstream flooding, the following mitigalion measure shall be conditioned on the projecl: MM VIII-1 Prior to the approval of a grading perrnil, the applicant shall submit a hydrology analysis of the project to the City Engineer for review and approval. The project shall incorporate relention basins or equivalent facilities chat meet the following performance requirement: "Stormwaler runoff generated from the site in the developed condition shall be equal to or less than stormwater runoff from the site in the undeveloped condition." The hydrology analysis shall demonstrate the effecliveness of the proposed retention system to the satisfaction of the Cily Engineer. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce project impacts below a level of significance. F) CREATE OR CONTRIBUTE RUNOFF WATER THAT WOULD EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING OR PLANNED STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, OR PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF POLLUTED RUNOFF? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Please refer to Mitigation Measure VIII-1, as well as implementation of standard city policies and procedures. F) OTHERWISE SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE WATER QUALITY? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implemenlation of Mitigation Measures VIII-1 and implementalion of standard city policies and procedures will ensure that water quality will not be degraded. G) PLACE HOUSING WITHIN A 100-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD AREA AS MAPPED ON A FEDERAL FLOOD HAZARD BOUNDARY OR FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP OR OTHER FLOOD HAZARD DELINEATION MAP? No Impact. The proposed project does not include any housing; therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. In addition the project is not located within a 100-year flood zone. H) PLACE WITHIN A 100-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD AREA STRUCTURES THAT WOULD IMPEDE OR REDIRECT FLOOD FLOWS? No Impact. The projecl is located outside the 100-year [load hazard area. 1) EXPOSE PEOPLE OR STRUCTURES TO A SIGNIFICANT RISK OF LOSS, INJURY OR DEATH INVOLVING FLOODING, INCLUDING FLOODING AS A RESULT OF THE FAILURE OF A LEVEE OR DAM? No Impact. The proposed project does not include the alteration of any existing flood control features. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study e a November 2007 Page 42 of 66 0000S,'8 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION J) EXPOSE PEOPLE OR STRUCTURES TO INUNDATION BY SEICHE,TSUNAMI, OR MUDPLOW? No Impact. Impocls associated with a seiche or a tsunami are associaied with proximity io a standing water body or the ocean, respectively. The proposed project is not close to Standing water, and is not in a coastal area. Thus, no impacts from seiche or tsunami would occur. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 ' n Page 43 of 66 060029 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the O eCt: a) Physically divide an estoblished ❑ El ❑ community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited lo, the general ❑ El ® Elplan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning ordinance) adopted for iha purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effecl2 C) Conflict wilh any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community ❑ ❑ ❑ conservation plan? A) PHYSICALLY DIVIDE AN ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY? No Impact. The proposed project will redevelop a portion of an existing fully developed site.Surrounding properties are fully developed with the exception of an undeveloped lot at the northeast corner or Tohquitz Canyon and Cahuilla. Existing roadways have already been established. Thus, the project will nol divide an established community. B) CONFLICT WITH ANY APPLICABLE LAND USE PLAN, POLICY, OR REGULATION OF AN AGENCY WITH JURISDICTION OVER THE PROJECT(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,THE GENERAL PLAN,SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, OR ZONING ORDINANCE)ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF AVOIDING OR MITIGATING AN ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed land use is inconsistent with the City of Palm Springs General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Approval of the applicant's requests for a General Plan Amendment and a Planned Development District will make the land use consistent with these documents. Therefore the projeci's proposed actions are "self- curing" of any inconsistency between the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the project. At the time of application, the General Plan land use designation of the site is H43/30, which permits the development of up to 43 hotel units per acre. The updated General Plan currently under review by the City would designate the site as "Small Hotel Resort Commercial- 15 hotel room per net acre" even though the current development on the site exceeds this density. This proposed lower-density land use designation is intended to apply to "areas with smailer-scale, boutique type hotels that are typically found in the Warm Sands and Tennis Club neighborhoods." However, the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa currently contains 120 hotel units, plus reslourant and �. Palm MoVnfoln Resort and Spa,Initial Study �. = November 2007 Page 44 of 66 600100 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION nightclub space, which is too large to be generally consistent wilh the "Small Hotel Resort Commercial" designation. The proposed project action would amend the General Plan to re-map the site to Central Business District, with a Planned Development District application, which would permit the development of 70 hotel units per acre and establish appropriate development standards for the site. The project site abuts properties to the north and east which are currently designated as Central Business Districl in the General Plan. The designation of the project site as Central Business District is a reasonable extension of this land use classification. The current zoning on the sile is R-3 Multiple-Family Residential and Hotel Zone. The proposed development would not be consistent with the development standards contained in the R-3 District. The proposed Planned Development District designation on the site would essentially change the development standards on the site to fit the specific needs of the proposed development requested by the applicant, and would thereby achieve consistency for zoning purposes. These standards include the removal of high-intensity land uses of public restaurant and nightclub, with an increase in the number of hotel units on the sile. These changes in the allowable uses on the project site actually result in a lower intensify of development in terms of parking demand and traffic generation from the revised sile development. The applicant's plans will be reviewed by the architectural review committee for consistency with the "Interim Downtown Urban Design Plan" adopted by the City of Palm Springs on July 20, 2005, and the guidelines for the Historic Tennis Club District. No other adopted plans have jurisdiction over the proposed project. Approval of the applicant's request will result in a land use conflict that is less than significant. C)CONFLICT WITH ANY APPLICABLE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN OR NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN? No Impact. Please refer I discussion of habitat conservation plans in the Biological Resources section. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa,Initial Study November 2007 c,,,„.• Page 45 of 66 0001 G1 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to ❑ ❑ ❑ the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability or a locally important mineral resource recovery silo ❑ ❑ ❑ delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? A) RESULT IN THE LOSS OF AVAILABILITY OF A KNOWN MINERAL RESOURCE THAT WOULD BE OF VALUE TO THE REGION AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE STATE? No Impact. According to Figure 4.12-1 of the Riverside County General Plan EIR #441, the project is located within an area classified as MRZ-3. i.e., "Areas where the available information indicates that mineral deposits are likely to exist: however, the significance of the deposit is undetermined."The entire site is currently developed and no known mineral deposits are located on the site. The site is not identified on local plans or Slale plans as a mineral recovery area. Furthermore, mining is not a permitted use on the property, so even if mineral resources did exist on the site, they would be unrecoverable. Thus, the project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource in an area classified or designated by the State that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the Slate; therefore, no impact will occur. B) RESULT IN THE LOSS OF AVAILABILITY OF A LOCALLY IMPORTANT MINERAL RESOURCE RECOVERY SITE DELINEATED ON A LOCAL GENERAL PLAN,SPECIFIC PLAN OR OTHER LAND USE PLAN? No Impact. Please refer to Response X(A). Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 46 of 66 . . 0009 C2 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY t MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XI. NOISE. Would the project resull in,- a) Exposure of persons to or generolicn of noise levels in excess of standards esiablished in the total general plan or ❑ ❑ ❑ noise ordinance or of applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ❑ ❑ ❑ groundborne noise levels2 c) A substonlial permanent Increase in ambient noise levels in the project El ❑ ® El above levels existing without the project? d) A subslontial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ ® El vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project loco led within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, wilhin two miles of a public airport or a public use airport, ❑ ❑ ❑ would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels2 f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose ❑ ❑ ❑ people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? A) EXPOSURE OF PERSONS TO, OR GENERATION OF NOISE LEVELS IN EXCESS OF, STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN THE LOCAL GENERAL PLAN OR NOISE ORDINANCE, OR APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF OTHER AGENCIES? Less than Significant Impact. Currently, the existing $Ile is developed. The proposed project will merely redevelop the site with similar uses. The site is separated from houses within the area by existing streels and other developments in between. Noises coming from the site will be required to comply wish the City of Palm Springs Noise Ordinance. Any construction-relo led noise will comply with the City of Palm Springs noise ordinance, so noise levels will be less than significant. Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 47 of 66 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION B) EXPOSURE OF PERSONS TO, OR GENERATION OF, EXCESSIVE GROUND-BORNE VIBRATION OR GROUND- BORNE NOISE LEVELS? No Impact. The activity associated with this project will not produce any ground-borne noise levels or vibration, so there will be no impact. C)A SUBSTANTIAL PERMANENT INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS IN THE PROJECT VICINITY ABOVE LEVELS EXISTING WITHOUT THE PROJECT? Less than Significant Impact. Few areas within the project area currently experience traffic noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL. Table 5.21 of the Draft Environmental Impocl Report for the Palm Springs General Plan Update, dated December 1992, indicates that cumulative future traffic volumes and future noise level differences along Palm Canyon Drive near the subject site are expected to decline by approximately 12 dBA. The noise level created by redevelopment of the subject site will remain virtually unchanged or will increase by less than IT, so the impact will be less than significant. D)A SUBSTANTIAL TEMPORARY OR PERIODIC INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS IN THE PROJECT VICINITY ABOVE LEVELS EXISTING WITHOUT THE PROJECT? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Response XI(a), above, and Response XI(c), above, noise increases will be less than significant. E) FOR A PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN AN AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN OR, WHERE SUCH A PLAN HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED,WITHIN TWO MILES OF A PUBLIC AIRPORT OR PUBLIC USE AIRPORT,WOULD THE PROJECT EXPOSE PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA TO EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS? No Impact. The proposed project is located within approximately two and a half miles of the Palm Springs International Airport. However, the project would not affect operations at the airport; furthermore, according to the Draft EIR/EIS for Implementation of Airport Mosier Plan and F.A.R. Part 150 Study (Coffman Associates, 1995, for the City of Palm Springs), the proposed project is outside of the 60-CNEL noise contour of the Palm Springs International Airport. Because the proposed project will not expose people residing or working near the project area to airport-related noise, no impact associated with this issue will occur. F) FOR A PROJECT WITHIN THE VICINITY OF A PRIVATE AIRSTRIP, WOULD THE PROJECT EXPOSE PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA TO EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS? No Impact. The project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip, so no impact related to this issue will occur. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study •�N� November 2007 Page 48 of 66 6001 4 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Signircant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XII, POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: e) Induce substantial population glowlh in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ ❑ indirectly (e.g., through exiension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace subslontial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction ❑ ❑ ❑ of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ replacement housing elsewhere? a) INDUCE SUBSTANTIAL POPULATION GROWTH IN AN AREA, EITHER DIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE, BY PROPOSING NEW HOMES AND BUSINESSES) OR INDIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE,THROUGH EXTENSION OF ROADS OR OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE)? No Impact. The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will not induce population growth. The proposed project will replace existing hotel rooms with additional hole[ rooms, while eliminating existing facilities formerly used as a restaurant and nightclub. Any new employees hired will likely be hired from within the City or surrounding communities and will not create a demand for additional housing. Construction activities at the site will be short-term, likely will employ local workers, and will not aliract new employees to the area. Because the proposed project will facilitate minimal growth, no impact related to this issue will occur. B) DISPLACE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF EXISTING HOUSING, NECESSITATING THE CONSTRUCTION OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING ELSEWHERE? No Impact. The proposed project would not displace any exisling housing, so no impact will occur. C) DISPLACE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF PEOPLE, NECESSITATING THE CONSTRUCTION OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING ELSEWHERE? No Impact. The proposed project would not displace any housing or active businesses, so no impact will occur. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 49 of 66 000105 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATE❑NEGATIVE DECLARATION Potential ly Less Than Significa Significant With Less Than of Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIII, PUBLIC SERVICES_ Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated wilh the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order I maintain acceplable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: a) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ N c) Schools? [] ❑ ❑ E d) Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ a) FIRE PROTECTION? No Impact. The proposed project will moderately increase the number of hotel units on the site. The project will pay required fire protection fees, and fire services currently available will be adequate for the new facility, so no impacts related to this issue will occur, b) POLICE PROTECTION? No Impact. The proposed project will moderately increase the number of hole] unils on the site. The project will pay police protection fees, and police services currently available will be adequate for the new facility, so no impacts related to this issue will occur. C) SCHOOLS? No Impact. The proposed project will not result in a population increase or adversely affect any existing schools, so no impact will occur. d) PARKS? No Impact. The proposed project will not result in a resident-population increase or adversely affect any existing parks, so no impact will occur. e) OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES? No Impact. Because the project will not result in a resident-population increase, no impact to other public facilities would occur. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study _. November 2007 Page 50 of 66 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than _• Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIV. RECREATION, a) Would the project increase the use of exisling neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such El ❑ ❑ that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities, Or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, ❑ ❑ ❑ IK which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) INCREASE THE USE OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL PARKS OR OTHER RECREATIONAL FACILITIES SUCH THAT SUBSTANTIAL PHYSICAL DETERIORATION OF THE FACILITY WOULD OCCUR OR BE ACCELERATED? No Impact. The proposed project will not result in a population increase or adversely affect any existing parks or recreational facilities, so no impact will occur. B) INCLUDE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES OR REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES WHICH MIGHT HAVE AN ADVERSE PHYSICAL EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT? No Impact. The project does not entail the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, so no impact related to this issue will occur. ,,•^• .-< Palm Mountain Resort and Spa. Initial Study November 2007 Page 51 of 66 - 06010 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC_ Would the proie& a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le- result in a substantial ❑ ❑ ® ❑ increase in either the number of vehicle (rips, the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion ❑ ❑ ® ❑ management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Resuli in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic ❑ ❑ Ellevels or a change in location those results in substantial sofeiy risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., form equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative ❑ ❑ Eltransportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle lanes)? (3) CAUSE AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC WHICH IS SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE EXISTING TRAFFIC LOAD AND CAPACITY OF THE STREET SYSTEM(I.E., RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN EITHER THE NUMBER OF VEHICLE TRIPS, THE VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO ON ROADS, OR CONGESTION AT INTERSECTIONS)? Less than Significant Impact. The Palm Mounloin Resort & Spa Hotel Renovation - Focused Traffic Impact Analysis, dated September 10, 2007, prepared by Endo Engineering and attached as Appendix 8, states: "The trip generalion associaled with the proposed project will be loss than that associated with the existing entitlements. The replacement of 11,000 square feel of existing restaurant floor area with a 1,500 square- foot food and beverage area will eliminate more traffic from the street System in the Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page�572 of 66 UODA08 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION study area than will be added as a result of the proposed increase in the number of hoicl rooms." According to the Focused Traffic Impact Analysis contained in Appendix B, none of the future scenarios evaluated would result in peak hour traffic volumes at the key intersection of Belardo Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way sufficient to meel or exceed urban peak hour traffic signal volume warrants in the year 2008 or the year 2030 on a typical weekday or a VillogeFest Thursday. Signalization of this intersection is not warron I ed. The study notes that all of the motorists passing through the intersection of Belardo Road and fahquitz Canyon Way currently experience LOS B or beller operalion during the peak hours on weekdays and VillogeFest Thursdays in the peak season. With the traffic volumes associated with proposed project and the cumulative Palms Hotel, the intersection of Belardo Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way will continue to provide acceptable levels of service with all future scenarios evaluated. For the year 2030, will) development per the existing entitlements on-site, the northbound Belardo Road approach delay associated with future year 2030 peak hour traffic volumes is projected to be 15.4 seconds per vehicle (LOS C) in the midday and 12.4 seconds per vehicle (LOS B) in the evening on typical weekdays. On VillogeFest Thursdays, the evening peak hour average northbound delay is projected to be 15.6 seconds per vehicle (LOS C). Traffic on Tahquitz Canyon Way is projected to experience LOS A operalion in the peak hours. For the year 2030, with the proposed development an the rile, the proposed projecl would result in an average northbound approach control delay of 1.0 second per vehicle lower during the midday peak hour on typical weekdays in the year 2030. As a result, LOS B rather than LOS C operalion would occur on the Belardo Road approach. On VillogeFest Thursdays, the proposed projecl would reduce the northbound Belardo Road approach delay by 0.9 seconds, resulting in a better evening peak hour service level (LOS B rather than L05 C). The City requires projects to analyze their impacts at nearby intersections. Based upon City standards of LOS D at intersections, the project would have an adverse impact on circulation if it caused the existing or future LOS to be reduced below LOS D during the peak hours. The key intersection of Tahquitz and Belardo would be well above the acceptable LOS D for either the existing or future scenarios. Therefore, the net impact on traffic generation as a result of the redevelopment of the site will be less than significant. B) EXCEED, EITHER INDIVIDUALLY OR CUMULATIVELY, A LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD ESTABLISHED BY THE COUNTY CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR DESIGNATED ROADS OR HIGHWAYS? Less than Significant Impact. The applicable standards of the County Congestion Management Agency are the Same as those of the City. As analyzed in the Traffic w-.. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study ;. November 2007 - Page 53 of 66 000109 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Impact Analysis, the impact from the project, or cumulalively with the Palm Hotel project, will be less than significant, C) RESULT IN A CHANGE IN AIR TRAFFIC PATTERNS, INCLUDING EITHER AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC LEVELS OR A CHANGE IN LOCATION THAT RESULTS IN SUBSTANTIAL SAFETY RISKS? No Impact. The proposed project entails the construction of four new parking spaces off the existing circular driveway on Belardo Road, as well as three additional spaces within the driveway. While these off-street parking spaces may slightly increase traffic conflicts, they are conlrolled and have adequate sighl distance for iraffic or pedestrians along Belardo. However, any negative impact from these spaces is more than offset by the elimination of seven on-site spaces that currently back out onto Belardo, causing more hazardous conflicts with vehicular and pedestrian traffic on Belardo. The nel resuli will be a decrease in traffic soreiy risks associated with the development and no impact related to this issue will occur. D)SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE HAZARDS DUE TO A DESIGN FEATURE(E.G.,SHARP CURVES OR DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS) OR INCOMPATIBLE USES(E.G., FARM EQUIPMENT)? No Impact. The proposed redevelopment will be conslrucled using the existing design features, including general building and parking layouts, with the exception of the removal of parking spaces noted in c) above. Removal of the "pull-in and back-out" parking along Belardo will actually decrease the design feature hazards associated with the current as-built conditions. Therefore, no impact will occur from the redevelopmenl of the site as a result of design feolures. E) RESULT IN INADEQUATE EMERGENCY ACCESS? No Impact. The project will provide emergency access per City Fire Department standards. No impact will occur. F) RESULT IN INADEQUATE PARKING CAPACITY? Less than Significant Impact. Existing Setting: The existing development does not meet the requirements for parking spaces under current Palm Springs Zoning Codes, which have been significantly expanded since the original approval of the project. The following table shows the parking requirements of the existing facility under the existing code. Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 ;Jy Page 54 of 66 T 000Ts0 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY!MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Parking Requirements for Existing Development Parking Generator Number Units Rate Required Spaces First 50 Guest Rooms 50 Per Room 1 space/ 50 Room Guest Rooms above 50 70 Per Room 0.75 53 space/ room Food Service 4,720 Sq. ft. 1 space 79 er 60 sf Spa and Health Center 5 Employees 1/emp. 5 Total 187 The existing development provides a total of 82 off-street parking spaces, including five handicapped spaces. As such, the project has a deficit of 105 spaces under the current code. Since the baseline for purposes of CEGA is the existing condition, the existing deficit siluation is the environmental baseline. According to the PDD application, the projecl currently meets parking demand by utilizing on-street parking. In addition, the owners reduce parking demand by contracting with tour groups for approximately 22% of their business; the tour groups arrive by bus and do not require on-site parking. Proposed Project. The proposed project parking requirements are governed by Section 93.06.00.B.16 of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance The following table calculates the parking requirements for the redeveloped site. Parking Requirements for Proposed Project Parkin Generator Number Units Rate Required Spaces First 50 Guest 50 Per Room 1 space/ 50 Rooms Room oGuestooms above 143 Per Room 0.75 space! 107 roomrvice 1,500 Sq. ft. Non-Publicublic Health 2 Employees 1/emp I59 According to the applicant, 4,720 sf of the 11,000 sf restaurant facility Is available for dining; and the City bases its parking requirements on dining areas. ON Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 55 of 66 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The proposed project would redevelop the existing parking site to include 100 off-street parking spaces. 16 of the proposed parking spaces are in a "managed parking" area where six spaces are currently provided. On-Site Spaces 77 Creation of Managed Parking Spaces under Volel 16 Control on-site See discussion below Proposed Driveway Spaces 7 Total Proposed On-Site Spaces 100 Managed Parking The managed parking program would take six striped spaces and optionally use them as 16 managed spaces (Le., tandem parking by a valet, allowing closer stacking), when demand warranted such use for the majority of days the proposed managed parking area will be self policing and used prirnorily by hotel employees. On those days when occupancy exceeds 907., the managed parking area will be valet served from 7:00 AM to 1 1:00 PM. It is only when occupancy exceeds 90% 1hat there is the potential need to use all or a portion of the 16 managed parking spaces attributable to the remaining 10% of roams. Total required parking for the proposed project is 159 spaces for 193 rooms (0,824 spaces per room). At 90% occupancy (174 rooms) the occupied rooms could require the use of up to 143 parking spaces which would leave the managed 16 parking spaces allocated to the remaining 10% of rooms. With the managed parking program, the project would still provide less parking than required under the Palm Springs Zoning Code, but the "deficit" in parking would be reduced from current conditions. Available Space below Condition Code Requirements Parking Space Code Existing Develo menl 187 82 105 Proposed Redevelopment 159 100 59 Thus the parking "deficit" would be reduced from 105 to 59. Since the baseline for establishing impacts under CEQA is the existing condition, and the project reduces the parking deficit, the project will have less than significant impacts to parking under CEQA. However, the PDD must also address current project compliance with City parking requirements. The proposed project seeks to address the Cily's current parking requirement credits and payments of fees. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 56 of 66 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Proposed On-Site Spaces See above 100 Administrative Modification for Parking Reduction of 10% per Section 16 94,06.01 of the Zoning Code Historic Use of Ad'acent Off-Site Spaces 1 1 Credit for Use of Tour Bus Access 15% of demand 24 Payment of In-lieu Parkin Fees 8 spaces at $12,000 per space 8 Total S aces and Credits 159 Each of the proposed credits is discussed below: Administrative Modification An Administrative Modification may be gran led through the PD in accordance with Section 94.06,01 of the Zoning Code. Findings can be made due to historic development polterns in the neighborhood and the availability of on-street parking in the area. Bus Passenger Relief The City may credit the applicant with a I S% reduction to account for bus passengers. A Condition of Approval must be included indicoling that the applicant shall pay for Sloping and signage for 2 bus parking areas on Belardo. Historic On-Streei Parking The Cily can supporl the fact that on-street parking is common in the area. The City will credit the applicant with 1 1 on-street parking spaces, in addition to the Administrative Modification mentioned above. In-Lieu Parking Fees In order to balance the parking requirements, the applicant may pay the in-lieu parking fee at $12,000.00 per space for eight spaces far a total of $96,000.00. The applicant has the option of demonstrating, to the solisfaction of the Planning Commission, that other alternatives may be used to achieve the combination of 159 spaces and/or credits. These options may Include,- Provision of compact spaces per City requirements • Agreeing to a shared parking program with adjacent property owners such as the Desert Fashion Plaza, subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning Services. • Additional Valet Managed Parking Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study •p�y� November 2007 ' Page 57 of 66 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION With the approval through the Planned Developmenl reduction of parking requirements noted above, the impact of the redevelopment of the site on parking will be less than significant. G) CONFLICT WITH ADOPTED POLICIES, PLANS, OR PROGRAMS SUPPORTING ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION (E.G., BUS TURNOUTS, BICYCLE LANES)? No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict wilh allernative transportalion. No changes are proposed for any exisling bus routes or bike lanes as a result of the redevelopment of the site. Therefore, no impact related to this issue will occur. k Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 58 of 66 0001141 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY f MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Sign cant Mitigation significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, ❑ ❑ ❑ the construction of which could cause significant environmental effecis? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effecls? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing ❑ ❑ ® El and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves, or may serve, the project that it El ❑ ❑ has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand, in oddilion to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capocily to accommodate ❑ ❑ ® ❑ the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid ❑ ❑ ® ❑ waste? A) EXCEED WASTEWATER TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPLICABLE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD? Less than Significant Impact. Wastewater treatment will be provided by the City of Palm Springs, which has adequate capacity at its wastewater treatment plant on Mesquite Avenue, so impact will be less than significant. Palm Mountain Resod and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 59 of 66 000115 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION B) REQUIRE OR RESULT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW WATER OR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES OR EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES,THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS? No Impact. See response to XVI a); no impact on this issue will occur. C) REQUIRE OR RESULT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW STORMWATER DRAINAGE FACILITIES OR EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES,THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS? No Impocl. Net drainage compared to current levels will be slightly decreased due to an increase in landscaping and open space for the redeveloped Site. The project does not require the expansion of a storm drainage system, so there will no impact on this issue. D) HAVE SUFFICIENT WATER SUPPLIES AVAILABLE TO SERVE THE PROJECT FROM EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS AND RESOURCES, OR ARE NEW OR EXPANDED ENTITLEMENTS NEEDED? Less than Significant Impact. Water service would be provided by Desert Water Agency whose supply is adequate to serve the project. Water requirements far the reslaurant/nightclub use will be reduced under the proposed project, but water demand as a result of the additional hotel rooms will be increased. The water main is adjacent to the project site, so impacts relaled to this issue are less than significant, E) RESULT IN A DETERMINATION BY THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROVIDER WHICH SERVES OR MAY SERVE THE PROJECT THAT IT HAS ADEQUATE CAPACITY TO SERVE THE PROJECT'S PROJECTED DEMAND IN ADDITION TO THE PROVIDER'S EXISTING COMMITMENTS? No Impact. Please refer to Responses XVI a) and b). F) BE SERVED BY A LANDFILL WITH SUFFICIENT PERMITTED CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROJECT's SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL NEEDS? Less than Significant Impact. Solid wasle Collection services will be provided to the project Site by the Palm Springs Disposal Service (PSDS). Solid waste generated by the project will be sent to the Edom Hill transfer station in the City of Cathedral City, an 8- acre facility operated by Waste Management Inc. with a permitted throughput of 2,600 tons per day. Solid waste sent to the transfer station is transported to various landfills, all of which have capacity to accommodole waste from the project. From Edom Hill waste is trucked to Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill in Beaumont, located at 16411 Stale Highway 79 in Beaumont, approximately 24 miles west of Palm Springs City Hall. Lamb Canyon Landfill is pelmilted la accept 3,000 tons of waste per day. The remaining capacity is approximately 20,908,000 cubic yards of waste and its estimated closing date is 2023 (Source: Palm Springs General Plan Update EIR). Palm Springs Disposal Services uses Badlands Landfill as an alternate disposal site. The Badlands facility is located al 31 125 Ironwood Avenue in Moreno Valley, approximately 36 miles west of Palm Springs City Hall. Badlands is permitted to receive 4,000 tons of WOSIO per day and has a remaining capacity of approximately 21,866,000 cubic yards. Its estimated closing date is 2016 (Source: Palm Springs General Plan Update EIR). Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 60 of 66 000116 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION G) COMPLY WITH FEDERAL,STATE,AND LOCAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO SOLID WASTE? Less than Significant Impact. Any solid wasle generated by the project and during construction of the project will be disposed of In a manner Compliant with all federal. State, and local regulalions, so impacts related to this issue will be reduced to a less than significant level. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa.Initial Study 5 November 2007 Page 61 of 66 000117 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impost Incorporated Impact Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habilal of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminato a n plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? A) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO DEGRADE THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT,SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE THE HABITAT OF A FISH OR WILDLIFE SPECIES, CAUSE A FISH OR WILDLIFE POPULATION TO DROP BELOW SELF-SUSTAINING LEVELS,THREATEN TO ELIMINATE A PLANT OR ANIMAL COMMUNITY, REDUCE THE NUMBER OR RESTRICT THE RANGE OF A RARE OR ENDANGERED PLANT OR ANIMAL OR ELIMINATE IMPORTANT EXAMPLES OF THE MAJOR PERIODS OF CALIFORNIA HISTORY OR PREHISTORY? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Based upon the above onalysis, the project has no potential 10 degrade the quality of the environment. No significant cultural, historic, or paleontological resource has been identified within the project limits. By adhering to City measures related to views, historic areas, and design requirements, the project will ensure that any examples of California history and prehistory shall be mitigated after incorporation of the mitigation measures found in the Cultural Resources section Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study qj 'i November 2007 Page 62no��f 6556y� PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL,STUDY t MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION B) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE IMPACTS THAT ARE INDIVIDUALLY LIMITED, BUT CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE? ("CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE"MEANS THAT THE INCREMENTAL EFFECTS OF A PROJECT ARE CONSIDERABLE WHEN VIEWED IN CONNECTION WITH THE EFFECTS OF PAST PROJECTS,THE EFFECTS OF OTHER CURRENT PROJECTS,AND THE EFFECTS OF PROBABLE FUTURE PROJECTS.) Less than Significant Impact. The analyses of air, traffic, and noise are inherently cumulative; the balance of these issues are addressed in the City of Palm Springs General Plan. Impacts are less than significant. C) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT WILL CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. Impacts to human beings shall be mitigated after incorporolion of the mitigation measures found in the Hydrology and Water Quality and Transportalion/Traffic sections. Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study 9 November 2007 Page 63 of 66 000119 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT AND SPA INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REFERENCES Cily of Palm Springs. General Pion.1991. City of Palm Springs Zoning Code, available on line at http://www.gcode.us/codes/polmsprings/ Conservation Department.Alquist-Prlolo Earthquake Fault Zones, fta://flp.consrv.ca.gov_/pub/dma/oubs/sp/Sp42•pdf Earth Consultants International, Inc. Technical Background Report to the Safety Element of the General Plan for the City of Palm Springs. June 2005. Riverside County Planning Department, LSA Associates, Inc, and Transcore, Riverside County Integrated Project, General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report. October 2003. USGS, Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area. City of Palm Springs. Interim Downtown Urban Design Plan, July 20, 2005. Desert Water Agency, Urban water Management Plan, 2006 The Planning Center, Palm Springs General Plan Update EIR, 2007 LSA Associates, Inc., Air Quality Analysis, Smoketree Village Expansion Project, 2005 Appendices: A Air Quality Analysis for Palrri Mountain Resor I and Spa, LSA, 2007 B Palm Mountain Resort & Spa Hotel Renovation, Focused Traffic Impact Analysis, doted September 10, 2007 Palm Mountain Resort and Spa, Initial Study November 2007 Page 64 of 66 000120 Case 5.1162 Palm Mountain Resort and Spa 155 South Belardo Road February 6, 2008 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE MONITORING/ IMPLEMENTATION PARTY REPORTING ENTITY STAGE Cultural Resources V-1 Local experience has shown that there is always a possibility of Project Proponent City of Palm Springs During Project Grading buried cultural resources in a project area Given that, a Native Planning Department (Condition to be applied to American Monitor(s) shall be present during all ground-disturbing project grading plans) activities including clearing and grubbing, excavation, burial Of utilities, planting of rooted plants, etc. Contact the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indian Cultural Office for additional information on the use and availability of Cultural Resource Monitors. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor shall contact the City of Palm Springs director of Planning Services and after the consultation the Director shall have the authority to halt destructive construction and shall notify a qualified archaeologist to investigate and, if necessary, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare a treatment plan for approval by the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Cultural Resource Coordinator. Two copies of any cultural resource documentation generated in connection with this project, including reports of investigations, record search results and site records/updates, shall be forwarded to the Tribal Planning, Building, and Engineering Department and one copy to the City of Palm Springs Planning Services Department prior to final inspection. V-2 Prior to the approval of any grading plan, the Director of Planning Prefect Proponent City of Palm Springs Prior to Issuance of Services of the City of Palm Springs will ensure that the following Planning Department Grading Permits specification is included with grading requirements: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location on the project site other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps will be taken: 1. There will be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until: (a) The Riverside County Coroner is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and b If the Coroner determines the remains to be Native 5.1162 Palm Mountain Resort and SPA t February 6, 2008 American: • The Coroner will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. • The NAHC will identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. • The most likely descendent (MLD) may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, For means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative will rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify an FOLD • The MLD identified failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the NAHC. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the MILD, and the mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner H drolo and Water Qualit VIII-1 prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a Project Proponent City of Palm Springs Prior to Issuance of hydrology analysis of the project to the City Engineer for review and Building Department Grading Permits approval. The project shall incorporate retention basins or equivalent facilities that meet the following performance requirement "Stormwater runoff generated from the site in the developed condition shall be equal to or less than stormwater runoff from the site in the undeveloped condition." The hydrology analysis shall demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed retentions stem to the satisfaction of the City Engineer G O N 5.1162 Palm Mountain Resort and SPA 2 February 6, 2008 '� oroa oaav�as . � are Il e u ' € __"l= __ r �Ya5L �•. i,. "��� 4 J . 1 SY` 33.]Y25/S,�dB,'- r I4 �Y • _ �J SLi 5 5a1 -~ �\ \ � �____ _�___ `.. _'ELT~•— �� \ '} •. \ -- ,� \ nn wntunm mvtnnorr o l ��W,.- LMA3AM119 eM1 •:r o ., • u..,m..F. -^r°y -_ ` �o"�x®t!S . �. ARCrIITCCMFZE <: _'.'F. ,:y:.F�:•�:r;f _ E 7 s _ - _ _ 'i� __ N- - - - - _-_ -_ —-_-` OVi_ENGI.!EEC p '1 - _ ct �. .'sow>: - _ E±x v.e.Ar Aaa�r:"b zti• - I I Iarsc�� j !Pofm SFr+n gs. Ca Pilsly TrNC i: PLAN rzi'_ r� -- -------- .w --- ------- . �� ----- ------------- I QVIL QIGIHiT3 tL LA4DfU2Y£Y. SiTc SSCTION E-E Ci NY1r LA p LOOKI.YG EAST I SITE SSCTION C-C - YOO KIA'G iVE9T � I I I I SITc SCCTIO.Y O-O GELARDO - LOO KING IL'EST i Csl re ceosa Irk s_cTlogs I I ! ca-rwr� l Page 1 of 1 Tim Ellis From: Cmigmps@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 10 06 AM To: Steve.Pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov, rick.hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov; lee.weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov, ginny.foat@palmsprings-ca gov; chris.mills@palmsprings-ca.gov Cc: Martha.Edgmon@palmsprings-ca.gov Subject: Palm Mountain Resort Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members: Since I am unable to attend the meeting tonight and speak on behalf of Palm Mountain Resort, I would appreciate the opportunity to voice my opinion via email. I've attended several presentations regarding the property's renovation and believe that it is a project that should move forward. Objections to the project were met with solutions by Palm Mountain. The property is ready to begin the project, has the money to do so and in fact is anxious to begin work almost immediately so as to have the additional rooms and renovations completed quickly. It is my understanding that the impact on downtown will be significant in that the hotel, when renovations are complete, will bring an additional 40,000 people into the area -- people with shopping and dining high on their list of priorities for their visit It is also my understanding that parking is at issue and that has also been addressed by the hotel as off-site parking is available for coaches, if necessary. As a former business owner(and resident since 1963), 1 admire, respect and applaud those who risk their money by investing in our city even, especially, during difficult times. I encourage you to approve this project and help them to help us move in the right direction. Sincerely, Marcia Craig Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL Living,_ 000126 2/20/2008 BLAIR & JASON MILLAR February 12, 2008 Palm Springs City Council City of Palm Springs 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 To the Members of City Council: We are residents of the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood for 30 plus years, and we currently are living on South Pablo Drive. I understand recently the Board of Directors endorsed the renovation of the Palm Mountain Resort & later changed their mind and reconsidered their support. We were amazed a Board of Directors could support one day and not support a week later when in fact the project did not change. We are also disappointed that they did not continue to support. We believe strongly that the Palm Mountain Resort does need the renovating that the owner is proposing. Please know the Palm Mountain Resort does have strong neighborhood support. m� Sincerer i Blair & Ja o illar 371 S. PABLO DR. • PALM SPRINGS, CA • 92262 • PHONE: 760-325-2873• - - - - 0001-27 Page 1 of 1 Tim Ellis From: Ron Oden[roden@dc.rr.comj Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 2:56 PM To: 'Tim Ellis' Subject: New Microsoft Word Document(2) letter of support February 20, 2008 Dear Mayor Pougnet and members of the Palm Springs city council, As the former Mayor of Palm Springs I understand the myriad of issues that must be considered when making a decision regarding new and existing development projects. I am familiar with the present proposal of the Palm Mountain Resort but we know that their initial ambitious condo Hotel project created a lot of conflict and concern about it's appropriateness for the downtown corridor. Because I believed that the development team listened to the city council and public concern they offered a scaled back version that would be more suitable for Downtown Palm Springs that retains some vintage and remains within the original footprint. I think this is a marvelous compromise, because we still get over 100 brand new hotel rooms downtown and we all know that the Bed Tax is golden to our city. It also means a boost to the General fund based on the fact that resort will provide twice as many tourists to visit our shops and eat in our downtown restaurants. This project has my support, and I am looking forward to seeing this great project completed. Ron Oden Citizen! No virus found in Lhis outgoing measage. Checked by AVG Prue Edition. Version:7.5 516/Virus Database:269.20.8/1289-Release Dace.2/20/2008 10:26 AM 2/20/2008 Page 1 of 1 Dear Mayor, Council and City Manager, My name is Laura Walsh I own The Cocky Cactus at 150 N Palm Canyon. Though I live in Cathedral City my heart and livelihood are in Palm Springs. Please vote to approve the Palm Mountain remodel. We desperately need these rooms and the people they will bring. I realize that parking is a concern but understand that it has been addressed. If this is a reason to turn down the project I ask that you be fair and look at existing Inns in the area that currently have insufficient parking and ask that they are held to the same standards. Some say that three stories is too tall for our"village". That it will block this view or that view. This is ridiculous. All one has to do is walk a little one way or the other and views abound. The building will block no more than the trees and shrubbery surrounding most of its neighbors already do. I am not too sure what people mean when they use the word "village". Does it mean they want only one and two story buildings that fit some mold they have dreamed up? To me what makes us a "village" is the warm and friendly greeting when you enter our unique shops and restaurants. We are special but it is not the buildings that make us special it is the people who inhabit those spaces. Finally we need this expansion because we need the people, the customers for our stores and restaurants to survive. For you see most of the villagers no longer support the village. Please do not let a vocal few continue to hold us back. If we are to survive we need to be brave and move forward. Thank you, Laura Walsh The Cocky Cactus 150 N Palm Canyon Palm Springs, CA 92262 Wednesday, February 20, 2009 America Online: Guest 6904129 'III Business Offices �� I Historic PlazaTheatrc o- I JS Lasl IahiculL� Can on Wa I i Y Y 128 SuuLli P,rhn CanY on Lei ive 4 Suite 209 21262prirn?s, California Ralf n Sprurg;, C, lifoi Ili,] 92J62 I I I I IIII February 16, 2008 City of Palm Springs 3200 )E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264 ICI IIII I III Dear Mayor & Council: IIII IIII We were delighted to hear of the Palm Mountain Resort's plans to make a major III investment into their property. This can only Further enhance our Palm Springs hotel inventory, bring still more patrons to our downtown core and increase the City's T.O.T. collections.Ii I I I We have enjoyed a long relationship with this property housing both our visiting vendors Iil II and countless show patrons, and they have proven to be a wonderful tourism partner. ,IIII In fact, their original management was among the very 1'ew that offered encouragement and support when the idea of starting the Follies was First proposed. And their support has IIII never wavered. As well, the long term ownership of this property shows the type of IIII IIII commitment and vision needed for our downtown. We are continued respect and regards, we remain, IIII IIII I I tRi I'F Markowitz Mary Jar III Managing Director Director of Mar Feting III III II II Illil II III BUSINL-SS 011 ICL-S /tl //8 /6`, 1=I<LSLIkVAI Ic aI J`_, %60 3270225-FAX 7603?7 3196 My name is Jeanette Moore and I am the Director of Travel Industry Sales at the Palm Mountain Resort. i also currently serve on the PP&J executive committee for the Bureau of Palm Springs. I have been promoting Palm Springs in the hospitality industry for almost 30 years now and have seen tremendous growth in tourism, especially over the last eight years. I wanted to voice my support for the expansion of the Palm Mountain Resort as I feel it will be a tremendous asset to the city of Palm Springs, increasing tourism dollars. The Palm Mountain Resort has built a reputation over the last four years as a hotel that caters to motor coach tours. There is a management team in place that understands the needs and knows how to provide exceptional service to the tour industry. I understand the city has some concern over the number of parking spaces available to guests of the hotel, but a large part of PMR's business is motorcoach, which requires no parking spaces. At present the hotel can accommodate three tours of 78 rooms comfortably,however, the hotel has had to turn business away every year due to the high demand, in season. In conclusion, I would like to say that 1 have worked for Palm Mountain Resort in the early 90s and again for the last three years and whatever project the owner embarks on, it is with the utmost care and concern for the community, both esthetically and financially. The Palm Mountain Resort is a lovely properly that depicts the ambience of the Palm Springs of the 50s & 60s and the expansion will be an extension of that same ambience. aaa��� a Dear, Members of the City Counsel of Palm Springs 2-06-2008 1 apologize for my absence as I would like to deliver this message in person. I have been a business owner in Palm Springs for over four years now and have grown very concerned over the past two years with our apparent slow growth and now obvious down turn in our tour and travel industry. I am the operating partner in the Falls restaurant & Matchbox directly across the street from the Palm Mountain resort. I have become very familiar with the proposed renovation of this property and feel it is a vital start to the redevelopment of Palm Springs. I feel the plan including the proposed height and parking is responsible development and will help fill the desperate need for new and better quality hotel rooms. My businesses along with many others survive on the convention and southern California drive in market and in order for that segment of our business to thrive we need to have more and better quality hotel rooms. In the four years I have been in Palm Springs I have never heard a guest of mine complain or even comment about the view of the mountains from the Mercado plaza parking lot, but I have heard many complain about the lack of hotel rooms or the quality of them and in turn this has made them decide to stay down valley in a better quality facility like the Myatt Grand Champions or LQ resort. Michael Estrada Operating Partner The Falls Restaurants & Matchbox 760-416-8664 190 gPlesi A nark Road -Palm Springs, ICA 9225217�D.32S.1S77` �u� 7GD.s2S_85 9 February 20, 2008 )Ohn Pivinski Chid, 1 SCcuin-� Officcr Mayor Steve Pougnet Execuuve Committee Members of the City Council Roman? hiataker City of Palm Springs 1'residcnt Todr] Hooks Re: Palm Mountain Resort Pn sulani-F;Icp Dear Mayor and Council Members: Elizabeth A. Gobble ImmcchtcRgszPrLyidcnr The Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce's Executive Committee has reviewed the information for the proposed "I'rcasuru� Steve Erickson changes to the Palm Mountain Resort. The committee finds this to be an outstanding proposal to increase hotel rooms and gain DanjagsclP an anticipated 40,000 additional visitors per year to the city of Vice Prcaichcu Palm Springs. 3¢ad Lauritzen We believe that this needed increase in Hotel rooms in Vi" hrc idcn` downtown Palm Springs will also increase our restaurant and vaioriczugatcs retail business and we see it adding to the overall economy of Vic Presid�m Palm Springs. D:=-,CTORS The Chamber wholeheartedly supports this proposal and Rant]Ahrens encourages the council to vote in favor of a General Plan Tim EIIsG ju.c cur'bic Amendment to amend the existing designation from "Small Jonathan Henth Hotel Resort Commercial" to "Central Business District- Jill Hune.berg Downtown Central Core', permitting a density of up to 70 hotel Cisey ynnes units per acre. $eccy NS®reno Mery Fc.r cathV Van Hum Marun 77agnez Respectfully, t:ir<' I.�vsrm Rick TIurciacson o Pivinski ief Executive Officer Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce IDI O M,� Palm Springs t,11121 G,J%+w �F1,..,s,.n:',' ,y .4guyd February 20, 2008 Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council. Palm Springs Economic Development Corporation's Project Review Committee recently met to review the Palm Mountain Resort renovation project. We took a hard look at the parking issue and other aspects of this project and asked numerous questions all of which were answered to our satisfaction. Our findings are as follows: 1. The project incorporates and reuses existing structures on the site while replacing the out-dated restaurant building and one section of the hotel site with superior hotel accommodations in more energy-efficient buildings. 2. The project will bring more visitors to the downtown area without adversely impacting the adequacy of parking. 3. The project will promote a "greener" approach to tourism transportation by continuing to encourage motor coach tours that reduce automobile traffic. 4. The project will greatly improve the aesthetic quality of the area with its attention to landscaping and other details, including for example taking the utility lines underground on Cahuilla Road. Perhaps the most overlooked feature is that this is essentially a green project. • First, it adaptively reuses an existing structure on the site. Second, the project's flat roof is conducive to the use photo-voltaic panels, the feasibility of which the developer states he is pursuing. • Third, the project's design and operation will reduce greenhouse gases from automobile traffic. The Palm Mountain Resort reports that approximately 25% or more of its current guests arrive in tour buses rather than cars. The Planning Commission has endorsed a 15% parking credit for demonstrated tour bus traffic. The buses themselves would be parked outside of the downtown area. This is a creative approach that expands hotel occupancy while holding down automobile traffic. The result is a reduced need for on- site parking and the developer has gone as far as recognizing that the project's parking falls slightly short of the code requirement and has agreed to pay an in-lieu fee to the City's parking fund. Another important finding is the project is fully funded and ready to begin construction this summer. Palm Mountain Resort's renovation will provide a positive impact on downtown Palm Springs by bringing more first class hotel rooms to downtown that are located within walking distance to restaurants, retail and entertainment venues. Once the renovation is completed, the amount of TOT collected for this property will double providing additional dollars for our City coffers. For all of the foregoing reasons, PSEDC's Project Review Committee and Board of Directors ask that you approve this proposed project and allow it to move forward. Sinc r07 Ed fres President Palm Springs Economic Development Corporation 0n®ILS Jay Thompson From: RELSNER@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 3:16 PM To: steve.pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov; ginny.foat@palmsprings-ca.gov; Chris.Mills@palmsprings- ca.gov; Rick-Hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov; Lee.Weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov Cc: David.Ready@palmsprings-ca.gov;jay.thompson@palmsprings-ca.gov Subject: Palm Mountain Resort- Proposed Redevelopment Dear Mayor Pougnet, Mayor Pro-Tem Foot, and Council Members Mills, Hutcheson and Weigel -- I am writing as a Palm Springs resident to urge your favorable consideration of the proposed, redevelopment of the existing Palm Mountain Resort and Spa in downtown Palm Springs. A conflicting Rotary Club Board of Directors meeting will prevent my attending tonight's City Council meeting, where I had hoped to be speak under Public Hearings on agenda item I.C. I am very familiar with the current Palm Mountain Resort proposal, which I feel responsibly addresses and accommodates many of the prior concerns that had been raised. With tourism as Palm Springs' primary industry, the Palm Mountain Resort plays a key role in generating desirable customers for downtown retail businesses and restaurants, with a location that is within easy walking distance of most. Expanding from 120 to 188 rooms--without negatively impacting the skyline or mountain views from downtown--can only serve to fuel our city's economic engine, with projections of over 100,000 annual guests after the first year, compared to some 60,000 today. I have been impressed with the environmental responsibility and commitment that will be incorporated into the Palm Mountain Resort project. Hotel management has been "pro-green" in its approach to any expansion--including the potential for solar power and incentives for guests with automobiles to walk or use electric carts to downtown businesses. And, of course, a major component of Palm Mountain Resort's clientele involves 300 days of motor coach business annually--tourists who do not drive their cars to visit us, and who find desire reasonably-priced quality downtown hotel accommodations. And, incidentally, these motor coaches will be required to park outside the business district. 2/20/2008 (� Palm Mountain Resort is just one block from the geographic and business center of downtown--not as some would claim, in the Tennis Club neighborhood or a residential neighborhood. It is disheartening to me that, as is the case when any semblance of tourist-friendly progress is proposed for downtown, there us always a vocal minority oppose it--including some small hoteliers whose thinly disguised smoke screensand transparent resistance simply seek to block any further competition. Claiming the upgraded Palm Mountain Resort would "block the mountains" is not only false, but it repeats the demagogic scare words that opponents use to stir up emotional opposition to legitimate and constructive improvements that would prevent our City's downtown from stagnating. T implore you to accept the City Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the hotel's renovation, along with the proposed and very responsible parking plan. Respectfully, Bob Elsner 5P1 W. Via Lolo Palm Springs 92262 (760)416-1799 Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL Living. Q(31�11 6 2/20/zoos N - � 18 February 2008 � n c� non City of Palm Springs � s 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 "G N Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: RE: CASE 5.1162 PD 342 PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT & SPA RENOVATION / EXPANSION This letter is written to request that you deny the General Plan amendment and the proposed project that would increase the density, height, and massing of the Palm Mountain Resort & Spa. Palm Springs just completed a multiple-year project to update the General Plan. This update, and the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines that it contains, represent thousands of hours of work by hundreds of residents, business owners, neighborhood organizations, planners, committees, commissions, and elected officials. It represents a plan that was shaped by giving voice to all interests, so that the final vision represents the best interests of the community at large, not of any one individual or group- However, the plan is only meaningful if it is implemented- To significantly deviate from the General Plan so soon after its adoption would denigrate the work performed by the community at large. The staff report for this project proposes that this General Plan amendment is a "logical extension of the downtown central core-" I submit to you that there is a delicate balance between the downtown commercial core and the historic neighborhood behind it, and that this "logical extension" is in direct conflict with the interests of the neighborhood, the General Plan, and the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines. Its massing, height, and setbacks would set the hotel apart from the neighboring single-story structures, especially on the west edge of the property (Cahuilla Road). A renovation of the Palm Mountain Resort & Spa is an admirable idea. It is also one that can very likely be accomplished with lesser density and height than is proposed. Please deny the proposed General Plan amendment, and ask the applicant to revise the project to be in keeping with the vision of the General Plan. Sincerely, Lauri Aylaian 377 W. Baristo Road Palm Springs, CA 92262 760.323.1187 - - - 000137 CITY OF PALE� SPD12'GS 2008 FFB 20 AN 11. 29 4 January 2008 JAMES THON?SO q CITY CLFR!, Members of the Planning Commission City of Palm Springs 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Honorable Chair and Planning Commission Members: RE: CASE 5.1162 PD 342 (AS REVISED) —.- PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT & SPA RENOVATION / EXPANSION The Board of the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Organization has reviewed the proposed Palm Mountain Resort& Spa project as revised in December 2007. This proposed project is within the boundaries of our neighborhood organization, and has generated a great deal of discussion among Board members and the HTCNO members at large, This letter provides the position of the Board of Directors on the revised project as it was presented to us by General Manager Tim Ellis on 22 December 2007. The Board of Directors supports the project as currently proposed, with 188 hotel rooms and with no reduction in the required number of parking stalls via either administrative relief or payment of in-lieu parking fees. After careful consideration, the Board continues to support the proposed massing and height of the renovation project, as was conveyed to you in our letter dated 26 November 2007. Because our position has created some discord even within our own membership, we take this opportunity to explain fully the reasoning behind it. The existing three-story portion of the resort is taller than most other buildings in the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood, but the one- and two-story portions of the resort fit in well with the neighborhood. Under normal circumstances, we would be strongly opposed to the proposed increase in height, since it would eliminate the current transition from two stories to one story as you proceed west from the downtown urban buildings to the residential neighborhood. The increased height HTCNO 611 South Palm Canyon Drive#7220 Palm Springs, CA 92264-7453 vAvw.htcno.org ry n 0""'i "(s 110 7"IrAr W A#44MY01WIWIN would also block mountain views for properties east of the resort, However, in this particular instance, the City Council has already approved a much taller hotel (the Palms Hotel) immediately west of the Palm Mountain Resort. Approval of that project effectively removed the Palm Mountain Resort from the equation. It no longer serves as the transition point from the urban core to the residential neighborhood, and the Palm Hotel will now obstruct mountain views, regardless of whether the Palm Mountain Resort is two stories or three. From a land use and community planning perspective, the discord created by situating a four-story urban hotel (the Palms Hotel) in a single-story residential neighborhood far exceeds the "damage"that will be done by increasing the height of the Palm Mountain Resort& Spa as is proposed by this project, Additionally, the resort is showing its age and is much in need of the proposed renovation. Therefore, we encourage the Planning Commission to support Planned Development No. 342 for the Palm Mountain Resort & Spa as it is currently proposed. Sincerely, Dippel HT NO President copy; HTGNO Board Members Craig Ewing Edward Robertson HTCNO 611 South Palm Canyon Drive#7220 Palm Springs, CA 92264-7453 www.hicno.org 0001 9 Pacific Hospftalylly Group, Tac. n I- P" aREnCEIVf-:[) 0E 51ON ❑rVELOPME NT MANAG=MENT L1_Y V ALN SPR Ifa AIM 0: 04 NIFebruary 15, 2008 Jui•lE5 iTHO-If=st] '_; CITY CLEFii; I Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Palm Springs 3200 East Tahquit7 Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 RE. CASE 5.1162 PD 342, Palm Mountain Resort and Spa Renovation Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: On February 6, 2008 Palm Mountain Resort(PMR)requested a continuance of the above referenced PMR hearing until February 20, 2008. This letter is written to explain the reason for the requested continuance. The Historic Tennis Chub Neighborhood Organization (HTC) in a letter dated January 31, 2008 retracted its support for the PMR renovation. We became aware of the letter through a friend of our general manager, Tim Ellis, who provided him with a copy, late, the night before the City Council hearing. Since we are heavily invested in entitling the renovation of PMR we felt it prudent to request a continuance until we could find out what had happened to cause the HTC to retract its prior support. Within a matter of only a few weeks the I-ITC supported our renovation and then retracted its support? The renovation plans for the PMR haven't changed between the times of the two endorsements. HISTORIC TENNIS CLUB We learned that prior to the PMR hearing, not only were we not to receive an advance copy of the HTC letter, but also the Planning Department, and we assume the Honorable Mayor and Council Members, were not intended to receive an advance copy of the letter. This is the kind of letter which is usually attached to the Planning Department's Staff Report days prior to a City Council hearing. It became apparent to us that the HTC intended to submit the letter of retraction at the exact time of the hearing to create maximum shock value. We also believe that frank Tysen, the owner of the Casa Cody Inn, across the street and west of us, lobbied the board members of the 1-ITC and apparently convinced them to retract their prior support. The intended tactics which were to be used by the HTC are mrfair. PMR held several neighborhood meetings and at each meeting- residents oFthe HTC were invited to view our plans and to ask any questions whatsoever regarding our intentions. The HTC, by intending not to reciprocate in kind, but instead to secretly prepare to attack us at the time of the hearing, had every intention of inflicting maximum harm. The attached letter from 1125011 Camino Real,Suite 100,Sim Diego,California 92130 9'e(ephonu(858) 481-2476 • Fax(858)481.2998 • www.pltgcorp con OOOs�(� Blair and Jason Millar,residents of the HTC, we think,puts the tactics which were to be used by a few residents of the HTC in proper perspective. Upon an in depth analysis of the contents contained within the HTC letter, we have determined that there is nothing of substance contained therein which hasn't already been thoroughly discussed and vetted by both the Architectural Advisory Committee and, in particular,the Planning Commission. With the Planning Commission's oversight, we reduced our room count, eliminated our proposed in-house spa, and enhanced our on-site parking. Each issue has also been independently studied in detail,the results of which are contained in the MND, However, it should be pointed out that in the second paragraph of the HTC letter, the HTC completely mischaracterizes the existing building improvements on the PMR site. No where in the letter does the HTC draw attention to Our existing 3 story buildings,one along Tahquitz, and the other,our 40 room, 3 story Courtyard building, in the center of the PMR property, with each building influencing the transition from the cast side of PMR to the west side of'PMR, Furthermore, as you move west through the PMR site, past the 3 story buildings, you transition to a two story,not a single story building. We would think that this corrected information should, if one is looking at this objectively, be positively received by the HTC, especially when considering the negligible impacts on views both before and after the renovation. We have requested from the HTC Board that it at least remain neutral on the issue of approving or disapproving the renovation of the PMR. PARKING CONCERNS While issues associated with parking were not contained within the HTC letter we would like to briefly address the parking issues raised in the January 28, 2008 letter from tine owners of the Chase Hotel,Casa Cody Inn,and Orbit Hideaway. This letter was to be, submitted to you Mr. Mayor and Council Members for the February 6, 2008 council hearing. Again, there is nothing new raised in this letter, though, regarding the parking approvals for the PMR, it is fraught with errors. We find it interesting to note that the Orbit Hideaway, owned by Stan Amy and Christy Eugenis; and the Case Cody Inn, owned by Frank Tysen and 'Therese Hayes, are each significantly under parked. In fact, i1 is our understanding that the 9 room Orbit hideaway has no on site parking whatsoever, and the Casa Cody is known to use the PMR parking lots_ Our head engineer confronted a Casa Cody guest parking in one of the PMR parking lots and was told by the intruder that the goneral manager for the Casa Cody instructed him to park in our parking lot, We know that other surrounding property owners have also been somewhat cavalier about using the PMR parking. blow do people have the gall to complain about approved parking l'or a high quality renovation when their own properties are either under parked, as with the Casa Cody, or have no parking,as with the Orbit Hideaway? What solutions 000141 are these owners bringing forth to solve their own parking problems within the Historic Tennis Club district? PARKING SOLUTIONS The Planning Commission really scrutinized our approved parking plan. Credit was given to us for our motor coach tour business,which based upon the actual amount of motor coach tourism business we do,the credit given to us is actually on the minimal side. We do over 300 nights of this type of business. Prank Tysen doesn't know how much motor coach business we do. Only about 35% of the time do the busses remain parked at our Hotel. The rest of the time, the busses drop off the tourists, go away and do other business,and then come back days later to pick up our guests. If you still have concerns after this explanation Mr. Ellis is happy to open his books to show you the amount of Motor coach business the Hotel enjoys. If at anytime we find ourselves in the position of being unable to park automobiles on site we are prepared to enter into an agreement which requires us to park these automobiles at another off site location. Finally, with regards to our compact parking, the only comment that is necessary is to say that our compact parking is code approved and our architect laid out our on site parking plan to work efficiently. If you still have concerns after this explanation Mr. Ellis is happy to open his books to show you the amount of Motor coach business the Hotel enjoys. CONCLUSION As part of our ongoing intentions to bring an excellent renovation to the City of Palm Springs, PMR has recently spent in excess of$lmillion in an ongoing upgrade program for those portions of the PMR which will stay in place once the proposed renovations begin. Please stop by and take a look at the upgrades we are implementing_ It would be a welcomed improvement for the City of Palm Springs if our neighboring hotel owners would care for their properties in a similar manner. Instead of spending the effort in trying to derail what will be a quality renovation for the City of Palm Springs, why don't they follow our lead and choose to renovate and upgrade their own properties for the added mutual benefit of all the surrounding property owners? In closing, we now come before you Mr. Mayor and Council Members for what we trust will be an approval of the PMR tcnovation plans. Subject of course,to revisiting the AAC with detailed architectural plans, and then onto what we hope will be our last and final stop, the Planning Commission. This is a beautiful renovation which will bring on line over 100 brand new guest rooms. Once this project is built and open for the second 0001 2 year, we are projecting that there will be 103,000 people staying at our Hotel amtually,up 40,000 from today's numbers. These are new guests who will spend is and help grow the City of Palm Spring's number one industry—tourism,along with its associated shopping and dining. We thank each of you for your patience in reviewing this lengthy letter. We look forward to answering any of your questions. Respectfully submitted, ��!-cu-aL tL-e•h•� Robert G. Richardson Director of Development Cc Craig Ewing Edward Robertson Lyn Calerdine Tom Wilson MTCNO 000�� 3 111etaric Turme eld tilglaor'lw0a 0,7orm7anr CITY OF E PALM P]E D R i ;G t', s I 5 2098 FFB 19 All 9: 04 lA 48A ('Y 31 January 2008 Jci r5 Tf10 PSOi CITY CLEMK "rl A r J+ Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Palm Springs 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: RE: CASE 5.1162 PD 342 (AS REVISED) PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT & SPA RENOVATION / EXPANSION The Board of the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Organization has reviewed the proposed Palm Mountain Resort & Spa project as approved by the Planning Commission on 9 January 2008. This proposed project is within the boundaries of our neighborhood organization, and has generated a great deal of discussion among Board members and the HTCNO members at large. This letter is written to convey the revised position of the Board of Directors to the proposed project. The project is taller in height and far denser than is currently allowed under the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines, the General Plan, and the zoning ordinance. Approval of the project would eliminate the current transition from two stories to one story as you proceed west from the urban core to the residential neighborhood. The project would also obstruct the mountain views for the properties on the east side of the resort. The Palm Mountain Hotel and Resort is in the Tennis Club District. It is NOT in the Downtown Central Core or the Outer Core. To allow the proposed increase in density and a three-story design that permeates the site would effectively move the downtown core two blocks farther into the residential neighborhood and would eliminate a smooth transition from one to the other. Please note that this position paper supersedes our previous letters to the Planning Commission on the same project. The HTCNO Board of Directors' previous support was based upon the precept that a four-story hotel would be situated between the Palm Mountain Resort and the neighborhood. Our 4 January 2008 letter to the Planning Commission, and the testimony offered at HTCNO 511 South Palm Canyon Drive#7220 Palm Springs, CA 92264-7453 www litcno.org 009144 ator e �erale('ea6/vu�F6vrfaa(dyaairae r that meeting, clearly qualified our position by stating that "Under normal circumstances, we would be strongly opposed to the proposed increase in height, since it would eliminate the current transition from two stories to one story as you proceed west from the downtown urban buildings to the residential neighborhood, The increased height would also block mountain views for properties east of the resort. However, in this particular instance, the City Council has already approved a much taller hotel (the Palms Hotel) immediately west of the Palm Mountain Resort. Approval of that project effectively removed the Palm Mountain Resort from the equation. It no longer serves as the transition point from the urban core to the residential neighborhood, and the Palm Hotel will now obstruct mountain views, regardless of whether the Palm Mountain Resort is two stories or three " With the recent stripping of entitlements granted to-ef the Palm Hotel, the City Council has a rare opportunity to restore the vision of the community contained in the General Plan and the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines. That vision was the culmination of a number of years of collaborative effort between and among the members of the City Council, Planning Commission, General Plan Steering Committee, resident groups, business owners, and community visionaries. Please endorse the vision of Palm Springs contained in the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines and apply those conditions to the Palm Mountain Resort & Spa project as currently proposed. A scaled-down version of this project would be in keeping with the neighborhood and the community goals. Sincerely, Gene Dlppel HTCNO President copy: HTCNO Board Members Craig Ewing Edward Robertson HTCNO 611 South Palm Canyon Drive#7220 Palm Springs, CA 02264-7453 www.htcno.org 0 o 014 , HTCNO RESOLUTION NO. 07-01 Passed by acclamation by the board April 16,2007 WHEREAS, the character of the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood is a unique and defining element of the city of Palm Springs; and WHEREAS, this distinct neighborhood merits preservation by virtue of the vital role it plays in attracting visitors to the city and providing enjoyment for residents; and WHEREAS, the Palm Springs General Plan, Downtown Urban Design Guidelines, and municipal code (except 94,03.00 Planned Development District), are designed to enhance, protect and preserve the qualities, the values, and the character of the community; and WHEREAS, the entire community benefits when development is relatively consistent and predictable, and has clearly written and published standards; and WHEREAS, the General Plan and Downtown Urban Design Guidelines represent a consensus developed over several years and by parties representing many diverse interests, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, The Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Organization opposes any project or any Planned Development District that exceeds the densities or height limits, or provides reduced setbacks, open space, or number of parking spaces than is required by the current zoning ordinance and Downtown Urban Design Guidelines. 000146 02/12/2008 13;43 17603238937 PMR SALES PAGE 02/02 ;REer_'i? rF GITy 07 PkLfi SP?II':'GS BLAIR & JASON MILLAR 2093Fr,B19 AN9: 04 JAHES Tr10mPSGr' CITY CLERK February 12, 2008 Palm Springs City Council City of Palm Springs 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 To the Members of City Council: We are residents of the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood for 30 plus years, and we currently are living on South Pablo Drive. I understand recently the Board of Directors endorsed the renovation of the Palm Mountain Resort & later changed their mind and reconsidered their support. We were amazed a Board of Directors could support one day and not support a week later when in tact the project did not change, We are also disappointed that they did not continue to support, We believe strongly that the Palm Mountain Resort does need the renovating that the owner is proposing. Please know the Palm Mountain Resort does have strong neighborhood support, Sincerely, Blair & Ja Illar 371 S. PABLO DR. PALM SPRINGS, GA • 92262 PHONE' 760-325-2873- - - -' ODQ147 �EC�I`1�13 CITY OF PALt'1 SpPIi`IG`.• 2028 FEB 19 gi i0 22 DAMES T;j02 aPSON 1 CITY C��RI~ ?C Fa}.ATI Sp7.'7T]©s ---.-.:-� , 1 Assocm Lion of 0-wMers C iwlaav�gers :� �, X 91 `-1 n- •q•iX 'lal. .,Y4'AI6_ iu._ dl`watwaw�u .nsi., ,. February 15, 2008 Dear Palm Springs City Council: ShoPS (Small Hotels of Palm Springs, Inc.) currently has 26 contributing members made up of owners and/or managers operating small independent hotels within the city of Palm Springs —many of whom have properties located in the Historic Tennis Club District. It has been successfully marketing these businesses for four years. On February 12`i' it's board invited Tim Ellis, General Manager of the Palm Mountain resort, to give a presentation of the resort's improvement and expansion plans. After a lengthy discussion the board decided unanimously to issue the following statement: "We are generally supportive of the applicant's interest in improving its property and upgrading its product. We do, however, have some fairly significant concerns about the parking plan—especially considering that parking in the neighborhood is already a huge problem." The ShoPS Board Sincerely, Craig Blau, President Small Hotels of Palm Springs Q G SP C1 c ALt�{ TY O'er F, [t;PJ `� Sig Ptj 1= 55 the ultimate palm springs modern 3G,1-,Es TP,0HP,3011 experience 7 XIIL arbirin.com 562 w arena. palm springs,ca 92262 w�— phone(760) 323-3585 Fox(760) 323-3599 roll free (877)99•orbll (1.877-996.7248) �7 000149 Page 1 of 1 Kathie Hart From: Martha Edgmon Sent: February 20, 2008 9:57 AM To: Kathie Hart Subject: FW Palm Mountain Resort martAa Fdffwon LxccutivcAssis.anf MdyUr&Cb.v Tcl(76o)323.8200 )'ax.(760)325.8232 marAa.cdffe)onUpalmnPrrnprca.�pvv From: Craigmps@aol.com [mailto:Craigmps@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 10:06 AM To: Steve.Pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov; rick.hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov; lec.weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov; ginny.foat@palmsprings-ca.gov; chris.mills@palmsprings-ca.gov Cc: Martha.Edgmon@palmsprings-ca.gov Subject: Palm Mountain Resort Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members Since I am unable to attend the meeting tonight and speak on behalf of Palm Mountain Resort, I would appreciate the opportunity to voice my opinion via email. I've attended several presentations regarding the property's renovation and believe that it is a project that should move forward. Objections to the project were met with solutions by Palm Mountain The property is ready to begin the project, has the money to do so and in fact is anxious to begin work almost immediately so as to have the additional rooms and renovations completed quickly. It is my understanding that the impact on downtown will be significant in that the hotel, when renovations are complete, will bring an additional 40.000 people into the area -- people with shopping and dining high on their list of priorities for their visit It is also my understanding that parking is at issue and that has also been addressed by the hotel as off-site parking is available for coaches, if necessary. As a former business owner(and resident since 1963), 1 admire, respect and applaud those who risk their money by investing in our city even, especially, during difficult times. I encourage you to approve this protect and help them to help us move in the right direction. Sincerely, Marcia Craig Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch—the vid-eo on_AOL Living 02/20/08 Q CASA COD'Y 175 SOUTH CAHUILLA ROAD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 TEL (760)320-9346 FAX(760)323-4994 March 26, 2008 Craig Ewing Director of Planning City of Palm Springs RE: Need for more balanced staff reports re the Palm Mountain Resort expansion Dear Craig: I very much appreciate your candid answers regarding my questions re the proper role your staff plays in preparing planning reports for public bodies such as the Planning Commission and City Council. As I mentioned my queries were prompted by several publicly voiced criticisms that the Palm Mountain staff reports have seemed to favor the developer without being more responsive to the public interest of the community at large. In reflecting upon all this I do feel that these planning reports could definitely have benefited from more balanced treatment by staff. Not only is there no attempt to describe the neighborhood character, but the impact of the Palm Mountain proposal upon the surrounding neighborhood seems to have been slighted. For starters, there is the serious impact of grossly insufficient off street parking on the surrounding properties. In lieu and managed parking just does not create actual parking spaces. Besides, it should not be up to councilperson Foat to point out that in lieu parking does not apply to the present zoning classification_ Next there is the important impact of replacing two story buildings by three story plus heights negating the present gradual transition from two stories to an essentially one story neighborhood. Attention should have been given to how the proposal relates to recent public policies regarding the surrounding neighborhood. Again it should not have been up to the Mayor to point out that the Downtown Design guidelines purposely excluded this property from the Downtown Business District and considered it a definite part of the Historic Tennis Club District. This should be an important plamiing report item Then there is the brand new General Plan initiating a Small Hotel Resort Commercial Zone downsizing the Historic Tennis Club area from 4') units per acre to 15. This policy was specifically designed to protect the character and chann of this small hotel neighborhood. To tutu around and uaceremoruously endorse a change to the Central Business District Zone without pointing out that this really flies in the face of recent public policies does not seem appropriate. And how does this all play out in terms of recommending a negative declaration? 00031 Craig Ewing March 26, 2008 Page 2 The impact of this potentially precedent setting zone change from 15 units to 70 units per acre was given short shrift in the staff report. Though you argued during our conversation that the proposed zone change should really stand on its own merits you did admit that developers of future projects in the Historic Tennis Club could use this precedent as a reason to obtain similar considerations by the city. Thus it could and would weaken the integrity of the very important historic and successful small hotel zone. Chances are that it might result in slowly eroding the neighborhood borders by encouraging more intrusive central business district type development along the edges negating the whole intent of our new General Plan provisions. .Also, should not the proposed infractions on current zoning laws be more highlighted as well as indicating clearly what trade offs are being considered? For instance, I understand that the latest Palm Mountain proposal is considering eliminating the landscaping along Belardo to gain some eleven parking spaces. Does the new report indicate that this would cost the neighborhood about eight curb spaces now available so that the net gain is perhaps 3 spaces? And, what about the impact on the neighborhood of the loss of landscaping? The end result would certainly not add to the attractiveness of Us historic area which we are trying to protect and preserve. Furthermore it seems appropriate to indicate in the staff report the concerns of organizations such as the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Organization, Small Hotels of Palm Springs (SHOPS) and adjacent hotel owners. These are just a few suggestions which hopefully will help our planning process which I realize is not an easy one. And, I do appreciate your excellent capabilities and hard work. As a final question 1 wonder whether, given the above, it would not be appropriate to present several alternative recommendations to the Council besides a single yes or no on the entire project such as including perhaps scaled down versions of the project which would not need a wholesale set of zone changes Sincerely, Frank Tysen cc: Mayor and City Council City Manager 0aa 15 PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is apace for County Clerk's Filing stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) -No daoo ---- — _7 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE 5.1162-PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ` CASE 5.1162 GENERALIPLAN AMENDMENT County of Riverside 155 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD v PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT k SPA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Clly Council of the City o1 Palle Springs,Cellfoma,will held a ppubllc hearing at Its meeting of April 2,2000. The CIry Coun- cll meetln99 begins al 6 00 p.m,In the Council Cham• ber at Ciry Nall, 3200 East Iahquitz Canyon Way Pale,Springs, I am a Cilluen of the United States and N resident of The purpose of the haanng is to consider an sciatica- pan for a Planned Devolepmenl District by Pacific Hos- the County aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen andlSpa from a 12D room hte otel Po u 18alm Bpmomnhotel lot ears,and not a a To or interested in The cated at 155 South Balance Road zoned R3. A Gen- eralparty Plan Amendment is requu:ted to one pa mn pmp- above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a rrtys land use dasignatlon mall H from Said Resort Commercial to Central Busmers District (Downtown printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING Central Core)(a incleaue the maximum protect dcnsiry from 15 dwelling units per acre to 70 dwe)l)ng units per COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, ucre. printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, _ --_-- County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been "^ - adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the n Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of - • - - - California under the dale of March 24,1938.Case - Number 191236;that the notice,of which the - -1 annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller than non pariel,has been published in each regular �� - and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: -- - -_ March 22"a,2008 All in the year 2008` �•�— ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: •A No- ble of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration IMNb)has been fled and peslod in accordance with I certify(or declare under penalty of perjury that the 9odon 15072 of ChB California Environmental Quality p rS' p I Act(CSQA1 guidelines, Members of the public may fare oin is true and correct. view the Mlllgated Nopalwe Declaration in the planning g g Services Department Clry Hall, 02DO East Tahquilz Can on Way,Palm Apnnps and submit wrinen earn- Dated at Palm Springs,California this--24or,—day moms at,or prior to,the Cey Council noarmg. REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION! The stall report and other supportmg document,regardln of March —•- ---------•--,2008 this preloct are available ffor pubbIlt review at City Hall between the hours of 8 00 a m and 5 e0 p.m Monday f 'rough FrO g. Please contact the O(lice of the City / Clerk a!(76U)a23.82oa if you would like I0 schedule an appointment to review these documents COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION • Response -� to this notice may be made verbally at the Public Naar- ""—^•^•^^`- `—"--"-'—'�- Ing and/or In waiting,bolore Inn heannq.Wrineh com- ments miy be ma to the Ciry Council by letter(for mall or hand delivery)to, y1 James Thompson City Clark -S note E.T3nquitz Canyon Way �? y Palm 5pnngs,CA a2262 Anyy,chillan a of the proposed project In court may be limited to rasing only those Issues relsdd at the publlc ©� �]G hearing described in this notice, or in written corm- ��N '1= -pondonce delivered to the City Clerk al,or prior(a the yyubllc Yieering (Government Code Soction AO '+=U �... An opportunity wtll be ryivan at said hearing for ill mter- 7r psnd persons to be heard Questions regard'g this 4- } case miry be directed to Edward O.Robertson Princi- i�� ppal Planner, Planning Semlcn-;, Department at (760) SI nucealts ayuda con acts Uinta,porfavor Maims a In a C Ciudad de Palm 5ppnnpps v.puede hablar con Nadine e,a -'a Fieget telefono(760)323.8245 N James Thompson,City Clerk Published:3/22/08 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION 1 CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT James Thompson, City Clerk City Council Meeting Date. April 2, 2008 Subject: 155 South Belardo Road, Palm Mountain Resort (Case 5.1162) AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I, Kathie Hart, CMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to each and every person on the attached list on or before March 21, 2008, in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. (109 notices) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. ]Llt Kathie Hart, CMC Chief Deputy City Clerk AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION I, Kathie Hart, CMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Desert Sun on March 22, 2008. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Kathie Hart, CMC Chief Deputy City Clerk AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I, Dolores Strickstein, Secretary, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Drive, on the exterior legal notice posting board and in the Office of the City Clerk on or before March 21, 2008. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dolores Strickst in, Secretary 0001, 13 NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPS Case 5.1162 PD 343 MR PETE MORUZZI Palm Mountain Resort&Spa MODCOM AND PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE PHN for CC Meeting 04.02.08 HISTORIC SITE REP 1 I 1 PO BOX 4738 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-4738 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE 5.1162 PD 343 VERIFICATION NOTICE II 1 1 ATTN SECRETARY MRS.JOANNE BRUGGEMANS PO BOX 2743 506 W. SANTA CATALINA ROAD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 MS MARGARET PARK AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS INDIANS I I I I 1 1 777 E.TAHOUITZ CANYON WAY,#301 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR ROBERT RICHARDSON MR WILLIAM H. MC WETHY PACIFIC HOSPITALITY GROUP PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT SPONSORS 11250 EL CAMINO REAL, STE. 100 11250 EL CAMINO REAL, STE. 100 SAN DIEGO, CA 92130 SAN DIEGO, CA 92130 MR DOUG LIVINGSTON MR ALLEN SANBORN LIVINGSTON&ASSOCIATES SANBORN A/E INC. 6266 LAMDA DRIVE 71780 SAN JACINTO DRIVE SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 BLDG. E, SUITE C RANCHO MIRAGE, CA 92270 to 1 513-141-G12 513-092-004 513-143-005 CURRENT IDENT �M CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 389 T_ IT7 DR 100 N PALM CANYON DR 187 S PALM CANYON DR P_A PRINGS, CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-5504 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6303 $13-143-00 513-143-008 513-143-009 CURRENT 'SIDENT CURRENT RESTDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 191 S ALM CANYON DR 139 S PALM CANYON DR 101 S PALM CANYON DR P SPRINGS, CA 92262-6303 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6303 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6303 513-IA3-019 513-7,44-D 913-114-005 CURRENT RESIDENT CURREN" ESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT uf 155 S PALM CANYON DR 1L6 PALM CANYON ➢R 186 S PALM CANYON DR PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-8303 P SPRINGS, CA 92262-6330 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6356 513-144-011 513-144-013 513-153-001 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESI➢ENT CURRENT RESIDENT 124 S PALM CANYON DR 1.34 S PALM CANYON DR 205 S PALM CANYON DR PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-G330 PALM SPRINCS, CA 92262-6330 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-63I0 513-153-017 5I3-560-008 513-560-0 ,P CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURREN ' ESIDENT i��' 211 S PALM CANYON DR 123 N PALM CANYON DR 101 PALM CANYON DR PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6310 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-5590 P SPRINGS, CA 92262-5503 513-110-034 513-11.0-035 513-141-001 CURRENT RESIDENT CURR1,NT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 101 N MUSEUM DR 41.2 W TAHQUITZ CANYONWAY 385 W TAHQUITZ CANYONWAY PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-5659 PALM SPRINCS, CA 92262--5G49 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-5647 513-7�11-005 513-141- .n 513-141- 5 CURRENT IDENT �( CURREN RESIDENT rI CURRE RESIDENT �F'J 141 S ILIA RD f'= - 370 ARENAS RD h' 330 ARENAS RD PAL 'PRINGS, CA 92262-G331 P SPRINGS, CA 92262-6303 P M SPRINGS, CA 92262-6306 513-141-016 513-142-001 513-142-003 CURRENT RESI➢ENT CURRENT RESI➢ENT CURRENT RESIDENT 175 S CAHUTLLA RD 155 S EELARDO RD 200 W ARENAS RD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6331 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6327 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6306 513-151-002 513-151-006 5I3-151- y CURRZNT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURREN RESIDENT R-fl 355 W ARENAS RD 227 S CAHUTTlA RD 237 CAI-IUTLLA RD E'ALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6307 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6300 PA SPRINGS, CA 92262-6300 513-151-010 513-151-020 513-151-038 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 225 S CAHUILLA RD 375 W ARENAS R➢ 200 S CAHUILLA RD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6343 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6307 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92.262-6334 513-151-039 513-151-040 513-y3nRL�!'RDO 1M CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRRESIDENT 239 W ARENAS RD 205 HELAIt➢0 RD 261 RD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6301 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-�6344 P M SPRINGS, CA 92262-6329 513-151-044 913-153-01.- x` 513-4"-' CURRENT JET CURRENT SIDENT �,/"I CURR➢N E5IDENT 44 220 S •IUILLA R➢ 236 S ELARDO RD 400 ARENAS RD 3 PAT,M PRINCS, CA 92262-6334 PA SPRINGS, CA 92262 P M SPRINGS, CA 92262-6375 513-470-005 S13-470-006 513-120-080 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 400 W ARENAS RD 400 W ARENAS RD 399 VILLAGGIO N PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262.-6375 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6375 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6398 513-120-0 513-120-092 513-120-093 CURRENT ESIDENT y� u CURRF.N'C R$SSI]F'N'1' CURRENT RESIDENT 391 V LAGGIO N 1`11 398 VILLAGGSO S 392 VILLAGGIO S PAL SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6397 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6397 513-141-017 513-141-018 513-141-0 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURREN ESIDENT X11 302 VILLACGIO E 310 VILLAGGIO E 326 LLAGGIO E PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 M SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 513-141-0 513-141- i 513-191.-022 CURREN ESIDENT �� CURRE RESIDENT �}'� CURRENT RESIDENT 37.8 - LLAGGIO E 334 ILLAGGIU E 342 VILLACGIO E P SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 P _ M SPRINGS, CA 92262, 6396 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 513-141-023 513-141- 5 513-141�-026 CURRENT I➢ENT CURREN RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 350 VI AGGIO E 379 iLLAGGIO E 382 VILLAGGIO E PAL PRING5, CA 92262-6396 P M SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 51.3-141-027 **'* 52 Printed *** CURRENT RESIDENT 390 VILLAGGIO E PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6396 513-470-006 >CIRRUS 3-006 %j/'� 513-1220-081 CAROL C HOLMES OSPACE LLC I~ 1 ERIC J WOHLSCHLEGEL 89 TILDEN WAY ADWAY 611 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NE BELMONT, ME 04952-3246 RK, NY 10003-1123 WASHINGTON, DC 20002-6005 $13-141-019 513-141-018 513 151-038 W R VARECI-LA JON W HALL DESERT RAZE LLC 444 SEASONS DR 2587 HUTTON DR 14900 HINDRY AVE GRAND JUNCTIO, CO 81S03-8705 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210-1211 I-IAWTHORNE, CA 90250-6761 513-151-010 513-151- 513-151-020 MICHAEL J & MILDRED DELILL,O PALM P T EUGENE P & ADRIANA ROSSI 15516 W SUNSET BLVD 306 141 2ND S'1' 3215 E OCEAN BLVD PACIFIC PALIS, CA 90272-3544 S TA MONICA, CA 90401-2302 LONG BEACH, CA 90803-2624 513-153-001 513-110-035 513-141-026 CURT A & JACQUELINE TAUCHER PAUL C MARUT DOUGLAS R & KEIRPN HALE S335 E BROADWAY PO BOX 56958 PO BOX 697 LONG BEACH, CA 90603-3581 SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91413-1958 RANCHO CUCAMO, CA 91729-3.587 S13-142-001 513-470-005 513-134-D . PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT DBA HOL: BR.IOGETT A HASSETT KALS & A-SSOCIATES !� / 11250 EL CAMINO REAL N100 4242 CORTE ➢E LA S1ENA 47 N, ASEO LAREDO SAN DIEGO, CA 92130 SAN DIEGO, CA 92130-2118 CA.`1/ EDRAL CIT, CA 92234-I515 513-143-005 513-141-012 S13-092-004 JOHN C MCDONAL❑ PALM SPRINGS MOuBxN HOMES V HENRY FRANK 49035 CALLE FLORA 74140 EL PASEO 4 121 S PALM CANYON DR 216 LA QUINTA, CA 92253-2547 1?AT,M DFSFRT, CA 92260-4113 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6378 513-141-004 513-143-019 513-144-002 WESSMAN HOL➢INGS PLAZA MERCADO PLAZA LAS FLORES 300 S PALM CANYON DR 300 S PALM CANYON DR 300 S PALM CANYON DR PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-7302 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-7302 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-7302 513-144-011 51.3-560-008 513-110-034 WESSMAN HOLDINGS JOHN WI;SSMAN PALM SPRINGS ART MUSEUM INC 300 S PALM CANYON DR 300 S PALM CANYON DR 101 N MUSEUM DR PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-7302 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262•-7302 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-5659 513-141-001 S13-141-005 513-141-015 PAUL C BRUGCEMANS FRANK TYSEN CASA CODY B & B COUNTRY INN 385 W TAHQUIT7 CANYON WAY 1.75 S CAHUIT,LA RD 175 S CAHUILLA RD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-5647 PALM SPRING'S, CA 922.62-6331 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6331 513-141-016 513-142-003 513-151-006 CASA CODY B & B COUNTRY INN I CILASE HOTEL AT PALM SPRINGS I SCOTT G CHERKASKY 1.75 S CPfIUILLA RD 200 W ARENAS R➢ 227 S CAT-UILLA RD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6331 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6306 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6300 513-151-007 513-151-039 513-153-0 VIRGINIA BERARDINI *B* MAR1N & GETA URSESC❑ JOHN P RTZ 237 S CAHUILLA RD 239 W ARENAS R➢ 232 BELARDO RD PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6300 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6301 FPL SPRINGS, CA 92262 513-120-080 513•-120-093 513-141-017 TERRiLL L & MARIAN PHILLIPPI DEL111e1R & CHEREE AITKEN JOHN R JESTER 399 VILLAGGIO N 392 VILLAGGIO S 100 S SUNRISE WAY A PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6398 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6397 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6778 513-151-017 513-143-017 513-120-092 LOUIS S & HEW MILLER p CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PALM SPRINGS MODERN HOMES V 1155 TIF Y CIR N l�..h 3200 E TAHQ[1ITZ CANYON WAY PO BOX 1587 PALM RINGS, CA 92262-7778 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-6959 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-1587 513-153-016 513-144-005 513-144-006 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF MITCHELL J & JOYCE SLAYMAN CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PO BOX 1786 PO BOX 3190 PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-1786 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-3190 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743 513-153-029 513-141-021 513-151-002 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF TUTUNJIAN LARRY L & SHARON KRAMER PO BOX 2743 1775 E PALM CANYON DR 1909 ET, CAMINO REAL PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264-1613 REDWOOD CITY, CA 94063-2112 513-470-004 513-143-008 513-141-011 MARC L HERBERT BRAN➢ENBURG-OASIS PLAZA LLC WAI-100 CAL DBA A HIDEAWAY 2864 TICE CREEK DR 4 1122 WILLOW ST 200 4109 NE 19TH AVE B WALNUT CREEK, CA 94595,3265 SAN JOSE, CA 9S12S-3103 PORTLAND, OR 97211-5182 513-1S1-040 *** 49 Printed "** B & LINDA RUSSO PO Box 19536 SEATTLE, WA 98109-1S36 513-143.006 RETURNED MAIL CIRRUS AEROSPACE LLC 85 FIFTH AVENUE,6 FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10003 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE 5.1162 — PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 342 CASE 5.1162 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 155 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD PALM MOUNTAIN RESORT & SPA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of April 2, 2008. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an application for a Planned Development District by Pacific Hospitality Group to renovate the Palm Mountain .Resort and Spa from a 120-room hotel to a 188- room hotel located at 155 South Belardo Road, zoned R3. A General Plan Amendment is requested to change the property's land use designation from Small Hotel Resort Commercial to Central Business District (Downtown Central Core) to increase the maximum project density from 15 dwelling units per acre to 70 dwelling units per acre. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been filed and posted in accordance with Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines. Members of the public may view the Mitigated Negative Declaration in the Planning Services Department, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, and submit written comments at, or prior to, the City Council hearing. REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The staff report and other supporting documents regarding this project are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at (760) 323-8204 if you would like to schedule an appointment to review these documents. COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the Public Hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City Council by letter (for mail or hand delivery) to: James Thompson, City Clerk 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing (Government Code Section 65009[b][2]). An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Edward 0. Robertson, Principal Planner, Planning Services Department at (760) 323-8245. _ Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar con Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245. /3ames Thompson,FCityerk nk,ALM 8^� Department of Planning Services " V _ Vicinity Map W E �gc,Fou�`p Legend L tMADORD ®Prged Sl[e a 9 �JJ IT] � O U g AN DREAS"RD J W w 1 TAHODITZ DR ❑ 4 Z J 0 Z W U W 2 J —N ARENAS RD ARENAS RD — 7 ❑ 2� z z a � o a a z � I ¢In U � 4 v m WV BARISTO RD a d q PANGA wv o SATURNINO RD CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: 5,1162 PD 342, DESCRIPTION: To consider an application for a 5.1162 GPA Planned Development District by Pacific Hospitality Group to renovate the Palm Mountain Resort and APPLICANT: Pacific Hospitality Group Spa from a 120-room hotel to a 188-room hotel located at 155 South Belardo Road, zoned R3. AP N: 513-142-001,