The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About22050 - RESOLUTIONS - 10/3/2007' RESOLUTION NO. 22050 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, TO DENY CASE NO. 6.1104, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH DRIVE -THROUGH TELLER FACILITIES AND DRUG STORE / PHARMACIES WITH PRESCRIPTION PICK-UP WINDOWS TO BE PERMITTED USE WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN THE RESORT/ATTRACTION (RA) LAND USE AREA OF SECTION 14. WHEREAS, State law authorizes local government with certified General Plans to prepare and adopt Specific Plans, and WHEREAS, the Section 14 Specific Plan was created in 2004 to provide a dynamic and comprehensive vision and guiding document for development in Section 14 as a vibrant destination resort/tourist location within the City of Palm Springs, and WHEREAS; on November 2, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution 420866 following referendum Measure U, a special election in which the citizens of the City of Palm Springs voted to adopt the Section 14 Specific Plan ("the Plan"), and WHEREAS, Chapter 1.5 of the Plan defines the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and states. The Specific Plan, once it is approved, will replace the zoning for the area unless otherwise noted, including land uses permitted, the amount of development permitted, and standards for that development. Secondarily, it defines the character and form of the development on the site through a series of design guidelines. The specific Plan serves as a supplement to existing City regulations. Specific Plan regulations supersede other regulations. and In the event of a conflict between the requirements contained in this Specific Plan and the underlying zone designations for the property in question, the Specific Plan shall prevail; and WHEREAS, Chapter 9.1.4 of the Plan states: Amendments to the Specific Plan require review and approval by the Palm Springs Planning Commission and the City Council; final approval rests ' with the Tribal Council;" Resolution No. 22050 Page 2 and WHEREAS, Chapter 6.1.2 of the Section 14 Specific Plan lists drive -through / drive-in facilities as a prohibited use in the Resorl-Attraction (RA) land use zone; and WHEREAS, Chapter Four: "Features of the Specific Plan" states; Section 4.1.1: "Integrate a mixture of fun and exciting retail restaurant, entertainment, and office uses... that creates a strong and attractive pedestrian place". "Transform Tahquitz into the main activity spine of the resort, shopping and entertainment district." Chapter 4.2: Consolidated Projects. "These designations are intended to encourage coordinated development on a number of parcels that have been consolidated into a larger site." "The Catalyst projects are the most critical to Section 14." "...catalyst projects would serve as signature attractions that are intended to foster further high -quality and compatible development, knit together existing development, and most importantly, serve as models of a bold, new visual image for Section 14." "Visitors would have the option of arriving at their hotel from the airport by shuttle, then partaking of the diverse attractions, shopping and entertainment venues in Section 14 and downtown... without needing a car." "Transformation of the public right-of-way on Tahquitz Canyon Way into a dynamic recreation and cultural boulevard." "The current standards, established by the (Palm Springs) General Plan, generally overemphasize an automobile -oriented design, which hinders achievement of a more balanced vision for the area..." F1iT WHEREAS; on March 17, 2006 Mr. Hank Gordon of Laurich Properties submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) in reference to the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way to exempt drug stores that have a prescription pick up window and banks that have a drive -through teller facility from Prohibitive Uses in the Specialty Retail -Entertainment -Office (SREO) zone; and Resolution No. 22050 ' Page 3 WHEREAS on April 3, 2006 the Indian Planning Commission (IPC) reviewed a pre - application for a proposed commercial center at the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way that included offices and a stand-alone pharmacy / drug store with drive -through facilities and voted unanimously that, "the use of a drive-thru would not be supported at this location;" and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2006 the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians reviewed Case No. 61104 including a request to amend the Section 14 Specific Plan to allow drive-throughs, and recommended denial of the request; and WHEREAS, on November 16, 2006, Mr. Gordon submitted a letter referencing the southwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way, amending his initial request and petitioning for the following: • Allow drive -through windows at drug stores and banks with a Conditional Use Permit in the Resort -Attraction (RA) zone and • Allow General Retail Uses with a Conditional Use Permit in the Resort — Attraction (RA) zone. (The applicant subsequently deleted this from his request at the Planning Commission meeting of May 23, 2007). and ' WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider the application for Case No. 5.1104 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, at said meeting of May 23, 2007, during a public meeting held in the prescribed manner, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with Case 5.1104, including, but not limited to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented and voted to deny the case; and WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider Case No. 5.1104 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS on July 25, 2007, a public hearing on Case No. 5.1104 was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law, at which hearing the Council carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including but not limited to, the staff report and all written and oral testimony presented. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Resolution No. 22050 Page 4 SECTION 1. Pursuant to the Section 14 Specific Plan; a. That allowing drive -through facilities at banks and drug store / pharmacies in the Resort Attraction (RA) land use zone with a CUP would be inconsistent with the Section 14 Specific Plan because the vision, goals, standards and regulations for development in Section 14 emphasize non -vehicular and pedestrian -oriented in scale, character and features. b. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive- throughs with a CUP would be inconsistent with the type of development permitted in the Resort -Attraction zone of the Specific Plan and not reflective of the integrated entertainment / retail definition of this zone. c. That the development of stand-alone drug stores / pharmacies with drive - through facilities with a CUP in Catalyst Zones of the Resort -Attraction land use area would be inconsistent with the intent of the creation of Catalyst Zones because these zones were created to promote large scale, bold, and visionary consolidated development projects of a tourist/resort nature, and stand-alone drug store / pharmacies with drive -through facilities would not be reflective of the scale and character of development desired for Catalyst Zones. d. That allowing drug stores / pharmacies with drive -through facilities with a CUP at the parcel referenced in the applicant's request letter on the southwest corner of Sunrise Way and Tahquitz Canyon Way is inconsistent with the Specific Plan guidelines for that parcel because the policies, incentives and vision identified in Chapter 8 "Consolidated Development": Catalyst Area B, Sub -area 2 (of which this parcel is a part) encourages "an integrated Family Entertainment and Recreation Complex with resort and high -density residential uses linked together with pedestrian pathways" -- not drive -through drug store / pharmacy uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby denies Case No. 5.1104 General Plan Amendment. ADOPTED this 3`d day of October, 2007. David H. Ready, City M ` er ATTEST: fJ�6-6es Thompson, City Clerk Resolution No. 22050 ' Page 5 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS) I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Resolution No. 22050 is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on the 3ro day of October, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmember Foat, Councilmember McCulloch, Councilmember Mills, Mayor Pro Tern Pougnet, and Mayor Oden. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California