Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/17/2003 - STAFF REPORTS (15) DATE: December 17, 2003 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning and Zoning CASE NO. 5.0977 PD-288 TTM 31887 - APPLICATION BY JOHN WESSMAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 288 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31887 TO CONSTRUCT 38 CONDOMINIUM UNITS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 284 S. CAHUILLA ROAD, ZONE R-2 AND R-3, SECTION 15, RECOMMENDATION That the City Council order the filing of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve Planned Development District 288 for the construction of 38 condominium units and Tentative Tract Map 31887 for the property located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15. The applicant is John Wessman. SUMMARY The Planning Commission at its November 26, 2003, meeting voted to recommend approval to the City Council of Planned Development 288, Tentative Tract Map 31887 and filing a Mitigated Negative Declaration by a 4-0-3 vote. If approved by the City Council a 38 unit condominium project could be constructed on the site. The approval would include relief from zoning standards affecting setbacks from property boundaries, distance between structures, height of structures and required parking. During the public hearing, the applicant spoke on behalf of the proposed project addressing Commission concerns regarding parking. The applicant stated that the proposed parking was based on bedroom counts per unit. The applicant further stated that in the project description the maximum number of bedrooms per unit were utilized for the count and in fact, that in most three and four bedroom units the possibility of one to two of those bedrooms being utilized as dens or offices was likely. Staff addressed the Commission stating that each unit did include a two car garage or carport and that the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance parking standards could be viewed as over-parked in an urban infill project such as the proposed project. One letter has been received objecting to the project from an affected property owner within the 400 foot notification boundary. The property owner objected to number of units proposed, proximity of units to one another, height and setbacks. Three phone calls have been received by the Department of Planning and Zoning from property owners whose property is adjacent to Cahuilla Road. They expressed support for the project. As previously stated, two neighborhood meetings were held with strong support for the proposed project. Lastly, the ACBCI submitted a letter regarding cultural resources. Conditions of Approval are included which address cultural resources issues. BACKGROUND The applicant has submitted a request to construct 38 condominium units including associated on and off-site improvements for the property located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15. 1 L(P The project consists of a Planned Development District in order to construct twelve (12) two-story triplex buildings and one (1) single-story duplex building for a total of 38 condominium units. A one lot condominium Tentative Tract Map is also proposed. The project will include a centrally located recreational area with pool, spa, cabanas and rooftop outdoor dining space created above the carport guest parking spaces below and adjacent to the recreation area. The rooftop dining area will be partially covered. The project is located on a 2.7 acre previously developed site. The proposed project will require the demolition of an existing two story church, duplex, two single-family residences and paved parking lot. The subject site is currently zoned with a split zoning designation comprised of both R-2 and R-3 (Limited multiple-family residential and multiple-family residential and hotel, respectively) zoning designations. A total of 46 dwellings would be allowed under the R-2/R-3 zone designations. The applicant's proposal of 38 dwelling units is below maximum allowable density. The project will gain vehicular access in two locations, one from Cahuilla Road to the east of the project and one from Lugo Road at the west of the project. The project is not gated with wall placement in an irregular pattern between units with multiple pedestrian access points. ANALYSIS The proposed project consists of twelve two story tri-plex buildings containing one third story living space consisting of 450 square feet. The tri-plex consists of two bungalows ranging in size from 1,803 square feet to 2,328 square feet and a carriage suite of 2,121 square feet. The bungalows each have an associated two car garage. The carriage unit has a one car garage and one car carport parking space. The total square footage per tri-plex is 7,630 square feet. The one duplex unit includes two units of 1,340 square feet. Each duplex unit includes two 1-car garages for a total square footage of 3,670 square feet. The architectural style of all structures is Mediterranean Monastery. All facades are multi-dimensional and rooflines are multi-tiered. The common recreational amenity space provided in the center of the site will include a pool, spa, cabanas, and roof top outdoor dining space above the carport covered guest parking. The dining space is 1,400 square feet. A roof will shade 1,000 square feet of the dining space. The height of the dining space element including roof is twenty-two (22) feet. The proposed project is not gated but does include walls between structures. Wall heights vary between 3 feet to 6 feet. Patio walls are 36 inches high. Four and one-half feet high decorative walls are located at the end of the interior drive aisles. Courtyard walls are five and one-half (5 '/ ) feet high. Interior side yard walls between units are six (6) feet in height. The applicant is proposing a Planned Development District with the underlying split zone designations of R-2 and R-3 (Limited multiple-family residential and multiple-family residential and hotel, respectively) zoning designations. Staff analyzed the project in relation to the R-2 and R-3 zone. The project departs from the specific zoning requirements by proposing changes from the R-2/R-3 zones' property development standards in parking, height of structures, yard setbacks and distance between buildings. R-2 Zone R-3 Zone Proposed Standards Standards Parking (the code bases this requirement on 92 - tenant spaces 72 - tenant spaces number of 17 - guest (Same as R-2) 6 - guest bedrooms per unit) 5 - disabled 1 - disabled 114 Total 79 Total Proposed Required Density 22 dwelling units 24 dwelling units allowed allowed 36 dwelling units 46 Total dwelling proposed units allowed Height 24' or 2 stories 24' or 2 stories 26' to 34' (36 units) 20' (1 single story duplex) Coverage 50% shall be 45% shall be 45% open space usable landscaped usable landscaped open space open space + for developments that include any structures that exceed 18' in height lot coverage of bldgs cannot exceed 30% Setbacks All bldgs exceeding Front: Lots facing Front: 15' in height on a local or 12' - 15' on require a 25' collector street Lugo Road setback from the requires a front 12' - 17' on property line from yard setback of 25' Baristo any existing Corner/Side: 20' Road adjacent single Rear: Any portion 38' on story of a structure in Cahuilla development... access of 12' Road + R-3 provisions requires a setback Side and Rear: equal to it's height 10' - abutting any adjacent to residential zone single story (26'-34') developmen t Distance Between 15' 15' 10' - 19 '/ ` Buildings Issues of concern regarding the proposed project include the height of structures in relation to property lines and adjacent single story structures and the impact to view corridors from existing properties. Additionally, the front yard setbacks as related to the street frontage and the proposed street improvement standards are areas of concern. In response to those concerns, the proposed project has been reviewed by the City's d 3 Design Review Committee. The function of the Design Review Committee is to provide ` J' recommendations to the Department of Planning and Zoning staff, in terms of project aesthetics. The Design Review Committee is comprised of design professionals including architects and landscape architects. The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project as submitted with unanimous group consensus. The Design Review Committee has determined that the proposed architectural design of the project, as depicted in the project elevations and cross sections is consistent with the high standards established within the City of Palm Springs. They have noted that the project is consistent with existing development in the project area, and noted that the proposed project would make a positive addition to the area. Additionally, the City's Office of Neighborhood Involvement and Public Participation has conducted two neighborhood meetings in regards to the proposed project. Both meetings were very well attended. The developer provided the participants with two site plans for the project in order to determine neighborhood preferences. One plan proposed drive aisles within the project to be adjacent to property lines at locations that abutted single-family and multi-family properties. The second option site plan proposed two story structures adjacent to the property lines and drive aisles entering the site at mid-street locations. The majority of neighbors immediately impacted were at the meeting and fully supported the second option if the property boundaries were well landscaped, second story balconies were not located on the north elevations of the two tri-plex units adjacent to single-story properties and one two story unit was changed to single story. All plans have been adjusted accordingly. As a result of input from the neighborhood and the Design Review Committee's aesthetic analysis, a two story unit located in the northern section of the project and adjacent to existing single-story residential has been replaced with a single story unit. One design element of the project was not proposed at the time of the Neighborhood Involvement Meetings. That included the carport covering the guest parking adjacent to the recreation area and the rooftop outdoor dining area with shade structure. The proposed development is not age restricted. The applicant has indicated that the units will be sold starting at $500,000 each. Interior drive aisles are twenty-four (24) feet wide. The site is surrounded on three sides by street fronts. Sidewalks are currently provided sporadically. The development proposal includes an existing five (5) foot wide sidewalk adjacent to curb on Baristo Road and a proposed eight (8) foot wide sidewalk adjacent to curb on Lugo Road. Staff has concluded that a five (5) foot wide sidewalk adjacent to curb on Lugo Road would be in conformance with that existing on Baristo Road. Cahuilla Road's frontage is comprised of bay parking interspersed with four pedestrian access points, one vehicular access point and a pedestrian pathway provided along the entire frontage between the bay parking and the project's residential units. The sidewalk location within the project is a point of departure from the City's typical street standards. Staff has included as a condition of approval that the pedestrian pathway adjacent to Cahuilla Road be constructed of decorative pavers to match the interior drive aisles. (See Planning Condition of Approval # 33) and that easements for public access be provided where sidewalks leave the right-of-way (See Planning Condition of Approval #34). As indicated previously, there are 79 parking spaces proposed. Two tenant parking spaces within attached garages are provided to each unit. Seven (7) covered guest parking spaces are provided adjacent to the recreation area. One of which one is a disabled parking space. In order to comply with the City's Zoning Ordinance and the Americans With Disabilities Act, one van accessible space and two standard disabled parking spaces shall be provided adjacent to the recreation area for a total of four f `� disabled spaces. (See Condition of Approval # 27). All interior drive aisles and walkways are constructed of interlocking pavers. The development of 23 bay parking spaces is proposed adjacent to Cahuilla Road. All bay parking will be required to be constructed with decorative concrete (See Planning Condition of Approval #37). The development of those spaces will occur within the same time frame as the project development but the number of parking spaces are not allotted to the proposed project. The bay parking spaces will be allotted to a future development proposal associated with the historic community church on the northeast corner of Baristo Road and Cahuilla Road. Because other improvements associated with the previously discussed modified street section on Cahuilla Road such as decorative pedestrian walkways City staff have concluded that the completion of the bay parking would be appropriate at this time. Of those twenty-three (23) bay parking spaces, 2 are disabled. Of the 2 disabled spaces provided, one is van accessible. The parking calculations are based upon number of bedrooms per unit. The required parking space calculations utilized the highest bedroom count possible. The applicant provided bedroom count numbers relative to each unit design that defined all additional rooms that could possibly be used as bedrooms. For example, the Bungalow 2 design is defined as "up to 4 bedrooms." It is probable that one to two of those four bedrooms will be used for other purposes such as office or den space. Therefore it is the Planning Commission's recommendation that flexibility of the strict application of the City's parking standards is utilized in the analysis of available parking. In support of the overall design proposal the Planning Commission has reviewed the following facts: (1) The total lot size is 2.7 acres including four hundred and fifty (450) feet of frontage on Lugo Road, two hundred and ninety (290) feet of frontage of Baristo Road and three hundred and fifty (350) feet of frontage on Cahuilla Road. (2) The property has a split zoning designation of R-2 and R-3, that could allow ten more dwelling units than as proposed. (3) The project proposes consolidation of a multiple number of lots of modest dimension (50' x 100') that are difficult to develop in a multi-family zoning designation without consolidation. (4) The project is in close proximity of downtown and is located in an area of mixed uses, including single-family residences, resort hotels, and traditional multi-family apartment complexes. (5) The project is a redevelopment project that is incorporating vacant land and a church that no longer being used. Based upon these facts the Planning Commission has concluded that the proposed development is in keeping with the mass and scale of the neighborhood not only in architectural scale but also in a cultural scale consistent with the mixed use capacity of the neighborhood. The General Plan for the City of Palm Springs discusses in the Housing Element City planning goals that include providing a variety of housing types to meet the diversity of needs throughout the City's residential neighborhoods through the planned development process. The General Plan Circulation Element emphasizes the reduction of vehicular trips by promoting positive community design. The proximity of this project to downtown shopping, banking and recreation and the overall design concept that promotes indoor and outdoor relationships creating a pedestrian friendly and positive neighborhood environment accomplish those aforementioned goals and policies. The project, as proposed, requires the City abandonment of portions of public right-of- way for Cahuilla Road and Lugo Road. City records indicate that the easterly 16 feet of /u Lugo Road had been vacated many years ago by Riverside County prior to City incorporation, however, no formal records of this action by Riverside County can be found. The abandonment of the easterly 16 feet of the Lugo Road right-of-way would be consistent with making Lugo Road a standard local street with a 50 feet wide right-of- way. The original subdivision map for Palm Springs dedicated Lugo Road with a 66 feet wide right-of-way. Furthermore, existing street improvements are constructed which evidence the fact that the street is offset to the west and constructed to a local street standard, supporting the fact that consideration of and some form of approval for abandonment of the easterly 16 feet portion of Lugo Road was done at some point in time. However, given that formal records regarding abandonment of Lugo Road right-of- way can not be found and do not reflect upon title of the adjacent property, it is necessary for the City to officially abandon and vacate this portion of Lugo Road right- of-way adjacent to the property. The developer has configured a site plan which incorporates and uses the easterly 16 feet of Lugo Road right-of-way, and in the event it is determined that this portion of right-of-way can not be abandoned, the project as proposed would require re-design, and subsequent evaluation and approval by the Planning Commission and/or City Council, as appropriate. The developer will be required to coordinate with all public utility companies prior to final map approval to ensure that there is no need now or in the future for that portion of Lugo Road. In accordance with the Map Act, following receipt of approvals from all affected utility agencies, this portion of Lugo Road will be vacated through recordation of the final map, and not be separate action by the City Council. The project, as proposed, also requires the City abandonment of the westerly 5 feet of Cahuilla Road. The requested abandonment is related to the proposed declassificaiton of Cahuilla Road as a collector street, and would require a special local street designation, with a total right-of-way width of 45 feet. This proposal has been reviewed by and met the approval of the City Engineer. In the event utility agencies require use of this portion of Cahuilla Road, a public utility easement will be reserved on the final map, and this fact will not affect the ability of the developer to move forward with the project as proposed. The vacation and abandonments noted above are consistent with the General Plan, if an associated General Plan Amendment for Cahuilla Road is approved. On-site retention is not required of this development, as it is possible for the property to adequately convey existing and any increased stormwater runoff directly to Baristo Road, which is constructed as an open flood control channel. Additionally, due to the fact that a substantial portion of this property was developed, it is not expected that the project will increase to any large degree the amount of stormwater runoff generated as a result of the proposed project. The Engineering Division is not requiring a Hydrology Study, however, recommendations are included that improvements be made on-site that prevent daily nuisance water from entering Baristo Road, and be maintained on-site within landscaped areas. The City of Palm Springs' Fire Department has included Conditions of Approval to address staff concerns for fire protection. A Tentative Tract Map for a one lot subdivision for condominium development is required by the State of California Map Act. The map will consolidate all existing lots of record to be recorded as one lot. Upon entitlement the developer will be required by Conditions of Approval to submit for review to the City Attorney, covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's) that will govern the future tenants in regards to maintenance of the overall property, including such things as landscaping, roofing, painting, etc. it �l,�lo ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND NOTIFICATION An Initial Study/Environmental Assessment was prepared for this project and is included as an attachment to the this report. In completing the IS/EA, staff found two potentially significant impacts of air quality and cultural resources. The impacts to air quality and noise are the result of short-term construction and grading activities. Cultural resources are a concern in Palm Springs, and while the General Plan does not identify the site as a potential area for cultural resources, a tribal representative or qualified archaeologist should be on-site to monitor rough grading operations in the event cultural resources are discovered. A cultural resources data search was conducted by a qualified archeologist. Conditions of approval regarding monitoring of grading for the project have been included for this project. The project proposal includes the demolition of existing structures on the site. The construction date of the church and duplex excludes them from historic review and they are not designated historic sites. One single-family residence that was constructed) before 1945 but was deemed by the City's Historic Site Preservation Board as not. significant. Other areas of environmental concern with less than significant impacts included water, aesthetics and traffic. Impacts to water are related to the ability of the off-site storm water drainage system to carry storm water runoff from the project site, which has no proposed on-site retention and an adequate supply of water. A hydrology study will be required to address the run-off created by development of impervious surfaces. The water supply is provided by Desert Water Agency. The applicant is required to comply with all water service requirements as requested by that agency. Lastly view corridors were of concern to the adjacent neighbors. The site plan has included modification to facilitate those concerns, such as reduction in height of one unit and staggered placement of all units. Upon completion of the IS/EA, staff 'Found that although the project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant impact in this case because of the mitigation measures described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. All property owners within a 400 foot radius of the project have been notified. As of the writing of this report, staff has received one letter objecting to the proposal and three phone lls of support for the proposal from adjacent property owners. Director%f Planning and Zoning City Manager ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Initial Study/Environmental Assessment 3. Letter from Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians dated October 13, 2003 4. Public Comments 5. Planning Commission Minutes, November 26, 2003 (to be provided) 6. Resolution, Planned Development District/Tentative Tract Map 7. Conditions of Approval NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case No. 5.0977, PD-288 TTM 31887 284 S. Cahuilla Road NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of December 17, 2003. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5.0977, a application by John Wessman for a Planned Development District 288 and Tentative Tract Map 31887 to construct 38 condominium units on 2.7 acres.The project will consist of 12 two-story tri-plex buildings and 1 one-story duplex building. The individual units range in size from 1803 square feet to 2328 square feet in size. The application requests relief from Cityzoning requirements for parking,building height,front,side and rear yard setbacks and distance between structures. The subject Property is located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15. The applicant, John Wessman, is also requesting consideration of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector roadway between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north, to be considered under separate action. If Cahuilla Road is changed to a local roadway it would continue to function as a two lane roadway. An Environmental Assessment has been prepared and will be reviewed by the City Council at the meeting. A draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been prepared for the subject proposal. Members of the public may view this document in the Department of Planning and Zoning, City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, and submit written comments at or prior to the City Council hearing. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at, or prior to the City Council hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Kathy Marx, Associate Planner at (760) 323-8245. Publish: November 27, 2003 PATRICIA A. SANDERS The Desert Sun City Clerk i VICINITY MAP W E 5 ODONNELL GOLF CLUB TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY SITE 0 - o ARENAS RD. � � S o o c� z o o o a a z g o z z o gQ w c� Z d J U m Q z a BARRISTO RD. d z g a P t1J V tl. O �ui a O U RAMON RD. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO.: 5.0977 PD— 288 P9801 "TION: p planned development and tentative map TTM 31887 proposal to build 12 tri-plex and one duplex condominium units on 6PE°LICANT: 2.7 acres and to amend.the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove John Wessman Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector street from Ramon Road to Tahquitz Canvon Way. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING INITIAL STUDY 1. Case No: Case No. 5.0877 -PD-288 and TTM 31887 Project title: Community Church Project 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 3. Contact person and phone number: Kathy Marx, Associate Planner Tel: (760) 323-8245 4. Project location: Northwest corner of Cahuilla Road and Baristo Road, Assessor's Parcel No. 513-151-009, 018 and 019 5. Project sponsor's name and address: John Wessman, 300 S. Palm Canyon Dr., Palm Springs, CA 92262 6. 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.) The project consists of a Planned Development District in order to construct twelve (12) two-story triplex buildings and one (1) duplex building for a total of 38 condominium units. A one lot condominium Tentative Tract Map is also proposed. The project will include a centrally located recreational area with pool, spa and cabanas. The project is located on a 2.7 acre previously developed site. The proposed project will require the demolition of an existing two story church facility, duplex, two single-family residences and paved parking lot. The subject site is currently zoned with a split zoning designation comprised of both R-2 and R-3 (Limited multiple-family residential and multiple-family residential and hotel, respectively)zoning designations. A total of 46 dwelling would be allowed under the Planned Development District R-2/R-3 zone designation. The applicant's proposal of 38 dwelling units is below maximum allowable density. The project will gain vehicular access in two locations, one from Cahuilla Road to the east of the project and one from Lugo Road at the west of the project. The project is not walled or gated, therefore there are multiple pedestrian access points. The project departs from the specific zoning requirements by proposing the following changes from the R-21R-3 zones property development standards. Parking spaces as required per zone would include 90 tenant spaces and 22 guest for a total of 112 spaces. Parking spaces proposed for the project are 72 tenant spaces and 10 guest for a total of 82 spaces. Height of structures allowed by zone is 24'. The project proposes City of Palm Springs Initial Study 1 10/21/2003 a structure height of 26' to 34'. City zoning standards require all buildings exceeding 15' in height to have a 25' setback from the property line adjacent to existing single story development. The project proposal includes a range from 8' to 12' in setbacks from the property line for structures exceeding 15' in height adjacent to existing single story development. The zoning ordinance requires front yards facing on a local or collector street to have a front yard setback of 25' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Lugo Road (a collector street) of 12' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Baristo Road (collector street designation at that location) of 12'. Lastly, the project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Cahuilla Road (presently designated as a collector street) of 26'. The City's development standard in the R-2/R-3 zoning designation requires a separation distance between buildings of 15' and the project proposal complies with one exception of 10'. Another component of the project is a request to amend the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north. This change of street classificaion will result in Cahuilla Road becoming a local street with a fifty(50) foot right-of-way width. The project is proposing an alternative residential street section Cahuilla Road adjacent to the proposed project site that includes the narrowed right-of-way, aggregate walkways and modified curb and gutter. Both a collector and local roadway provide for a two travel lane roadway. No roadway closure is proposed. 7. Present Land Use: Church, paved parking lot, single-family residential and multi-family residential 8 General Plan designation: M15 and H43/30 8 a Zoning: R-2, R-3 M15 represents Medium-Density Residential ) R-2 represents a limited providing for a threshold of twelve (12) and a multiple-family residential maximum of fifteen (15).dwelling units per acre. zoning designation. R-3 H43130 represents High-Density Residential represents a multiple-family providing for a threshold of twenty-one (21) and hotel zone. dwelling units per acre and a maximum of thirty Proposed Zoning: N/A (30) dwelling units per acre. 9. Is the proposed action a "project" as defined by CEQA? (See Section 2.6 of State CEQA Guidelines. If more than one project Yes © No ❑ is present in the same area, cumulative impact should be considered) 10. If "yes" above, does the project fall into any of the Emergency Yes ❑ NON Projects listed in Section 15269 of the State CEQA Guidelines? 11. If "no" on 10., does the project fall under any of the Ministerial Yes ❑ NON Acts listed in Section 15268(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines? 12. If "no" on 11., does the project fall under any of the Statutory Exemptions listed in Article 18 of the State CEQA Guidelines? Yes ❑ No Ciry of Palm Springs Initial Study 2 10/21/2003 13. If "no" on 12., does the project qualify for one of the Categorical Exemptions listed in Article 19 of the State CEQA Guidelines? (Where there is a reasonable probability that the activity will Yes ❑ No 9 have a significant effect due to special circumstances, a categorical exemption does not apply). 14. Surrounding land uses and setting (briefly describe the project's surroundings): North: Multi-family residential/single-family residential South: Public street/single-family residential across the street East: Public street/church and resort hotel across the street West: Public street/resort hotel and single-family residential across the street 15. Surrounding General Plan and Zoning: North: H43/30 (High density residential/30 dwelling units per acre) South: L2 (Very low density residential/2 dwelling units per acre) East: H43/30 (High density residential/30 dwelling units per acre) West: M15 (Medium density residential/15 dwelling units per acre) Zone North: R-3 (Multi-family and Hotel) South: R-1-A (Single-family) East: R-3 (Multi-family and Hotel) West: R-2 (Limited Multi-family) City of Palm Springs Initial Study 3 10/21/2003 ! 2 16. Is the proposed project consistent with (if answered "yds" or "n/a", no explanation is required): City of Palm Springs General Plan* Yes ❑ No 0 N/A❑ Applicable Specific Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A IE City of Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance** Yes ❑ No [91 N/A ❑ South Coast Air Quality Management Plan Yes 19 No ❑ N/A❑ Airport Part 150 Noise Study Yes O No ❑ N/A❑ Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A 0 *The proposed project includes a request for a General Plan Circulation Element amendment to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector street. That change would reduce Cahuilla Road to a local street designation and change the right- of-way from sixty (60) feet to fifty (50) feet. The project also includes a proposal to create a modified residential street standard incorporating the reduced right-of-way, aggregate walkways and modified curbs and gutters. **The proposed project departs from specific development standards associated with the R-2 (limited multi-family residential) zone and R-3 (multiple-family residential and hotel) zone. The project does comply with the Planned Development District intent of allowing for certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of the zone classifications. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 4 10/21/2003 1 17. Are any of the following studies required? Soils Report Yes M No ❑ Slope Study Yes ❑ No 0 Geotechnical Report Yes ❑ No 0 Traffic Study Yes 0 No ❑ Air Quality Study Yes ❑ No 17 Hydrology Yes 0 No ❑ Sewer Study Yes ❑ No 0 Biological Study Yes ❑ No 0 Noise Study Yes ❑ No 0 Hazardous Materials Study Yes ❑ No 0 Housing Analysis Yes ❑ No 0 Archaeological Report Yes ❑ No 0 Groundwater Analysis Yes ❑ No 0 Water Quality Report Yes ❑ No O Other Yes ❑ No 0 18. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) 19. Incorporated herein by reference are: Final Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan Update Traffic Study of Cahuilla Road between Areanas Road and Baristo Road, George Dunn Engineering, July 11, 2003, City of Palm Springs Initial Study 5 10/21/2003 / K � iy ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources 9 Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources 9 Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/Water ❑ Land Use / Planning Materials Quality ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population /Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities /Service ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Systems EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. AESTHETICS --Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ scenic vista? ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, ❑ ❑ ❑ Z trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely ❑ ❑ d ❑ affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1.a) AESTHETICS (Less than Significant Impact). Preliminary architectural plans have been submitted. Plans for the condominium development will be subject to the City's Architectural Review process. The proposed project consists of twelve two story tri-plex buildings containing one third story City of Palm Springs Initial Study 6 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact living space consisting of 450 square feet. The tri-plex consists of two bungalows ranging in size from 1,803 square feet to 2,328 square feet and a carriage suite of 2,121 square feet. The bungalows each have an associated two car garage. The carriage unit has a one car garage and one covered parking space. The total square footage per tri-plex is 7,630 square feet. The one duplex unit includes two units of 1,340 square feet. Each duplex unit includes two 1-car garages for a total square footage of 3,670 square feet. The architectural style of all structures is Mediterranean Monastery. All facades are multi-dimensional and rooflines are multi-tiered. Issues of concern regarding the proposed project include the height of structures in relationship to property lines and adjacent single story structures and the impact to view corridors from existing properties. Additionally, the front yard setbacks as related to the street frontage and the proposed street improvement standards are areas of in need of evaluation. In response to those concerns, the proposed project has been reviewed by the City's Design Review Committee. The function of the Design Review Committee is to provide recommendations to the Department of Planning and Zoning staff, in terms of project aesthetics. The Design Review Committee is comprised of design professionals including architects and landscape architects. The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project as submitted with unanimous group consensus. The Design Review Committee has determined that the proposed architectural design of the project, as depicted in the project elevations and cross sections is consistent with the high standards established within the City of Palm Springs. They have noted that the project is consistent with existing development in the project area, and noted that the proposed project would make a positive addition to the area. Additionally, the City's Office of Neighborhood Involvement and Public Participation has conducted two neighborhood meetings in regards to the proposed project. Both meetings were very well attended. The developer provided the participants with two site plans for the project in order to determine neighborhood preferences. One plan proposed drive aisles within the project to be adjacent to property lines at locations that abutted single-family and multi-family properties. The second option site plan proposed two story structures adjacent to the property lines and drive aisles entering the site at mid-street locations. All the neighbors immediately impacted were at the meeting and fully supported the second option if the property boundary were well landscaped, second story balconies are not located on the north elevations of the two tri-plex units adjacent to single-story properties and one two story unit was changed to single story. All plans have been adjusted accordingly. As a result of input from the neighborhood and staff's aesthetic analysis, a two story unit located in the northern section of the project and adjacent to existing single-story residential has been replaced with a single story unit. With this change potential significant aesthetic/view impacts are reduced to a less than significant impact. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 7 10/21/2003 ru / � Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1.b-c)AESTHETICS (No Impact). The proposal is not located adjacent to the State Highway and consequently will have no impacts on the aesthetics of highway corridor. The development of the property will not disrupt any scenic resources. 1.d) AESTHETICS (Less than Significant Impact). The development of the subject property as currently envisioned will result in new sources of night time lighting. The City's final review of the development proposal includes a photometric study of the entire site. Light created by the project is not allowed to spill beyond the perimeters of the site. Downcast lighting is also a requirement per City zoning ordinance. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑ contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location ❑ ❑ ❑ 17 or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 2.a-c) AGRICULTURE (No Impact) The project site has never been used agriculturally and it would not be feasible for agricultural usage. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 8 10/21/2003 N R7 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 3, AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ 9 ❑ ❑ quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ projected air quality violation? 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ substantial number of people? ❑ 3.a-b)AIR QUALITY(Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) The Coachella Valley has been under scrutiny by EPA for"serious" non-attainment of PM 10 standards. The EPA and AQMD have been working with the Cities and County to promulgate stricter regulations and procedures in an attempt to meet this Federal air quality standard. A new ordinance has been developed in order to establish minimum requirements for construction and demolition activities and other specific sources in order to reduce man-made fugitive dust and the corresponding PM 10 emissions. The ordinance deals with construction activities, vacant lands, unpaved roadways and the like that have been determined to be the source of significant contributions to PM 10 violations. The Coachella Valley will continue to be closely monitored and could face sanctions unless the PM 10 standard is met for three consecutive years. The project site is also located within the Salton Sea Air Basin, which has been designated as a "severe-17" Ozone non-attainment area because of violations of the Federal ambient air City of Palm Springs Initial Study 9 10/21/2003 / / f Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact quality standards for ozone primarily due to pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin. This designation indicates that the attainment date for the federal ozone standards is November 2007 (17 years from the date of enactment of the Federal Clean Air Act.) This project will be consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook standards. However, due to future project construction and grading activities, short term impacts to air quality could occur. To minimize construction activity emissions, the project applicant will be required to comply with the City's Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Ordinance and the new fugitive dust control ordinance. Compliance with this Ordinance will mitigate the impacts to air quality to a level of insignificance. MITIGATION: 1. The applicant shall comply with Section 8.50 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control (PM-10) and prepare and submit a plan to the Building Department to control fugitive dust emissions in compliance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The plan must implement reasonably available control measures to ensure that project emissions are in compliance with the SCAQMD. 3c-d)AIR QUALITY(No Impacts) The project will be located on a site that is surrounded by residential development. The proposed project will not alter climatological conditions either locally or regionally. The proposed residences will not interrupt wind patterns. The irrigation of landscaping will not effect the moisture or temperature of the area in a significant way due to the size of the project. 3.e) AIR QUALITY (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT) Short term impacts, such as odors and pollution created by diesel engines of large equipment during construction and grading operations, may occur as a result of the development of the site but due to the short term nature these are considered less than significant. The City of Palm Springs garbage disposal service has agreed to pick up residential trash at individual units eliminating the use of a large dumpster that could have the potential to create objectionable odors for the users and adjacent property owners. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 10 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special 13 0 0 0 status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or 0 13 El 9 regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, 0 ❑ 17 9 vernal pool, coastal, 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 0 0 EI 0 established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? City of Pahn Springs Initial Study 11 10/21/2003 l K APO Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, ❑ ❑ ❑ CI or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 4. a,b,c,d,e,f The subject property has been fully developed previously. All portions of the site has been previously disturbed. Therefore the project will have no impact to endangered species or their habitats. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or ❑ ❑ ❑ z unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ cemeteries? 5.a) CULTURAL RESOURCES. (No Impact) The site has been previously developed. As defined in CEQA 16064.5, no significant historic resources exist on this site. 5.b) CULTURAL RESOURCES (Less Than Significant Impact With mitigation) The project has previously been fully developed but the potential for subsurface cultural resources that could be disturbed during site grading exists due to the proximity of Tribal lands. Tribal interest in such properties and resources prescribes the following Conditions of Approval shall be incorporated into the entitlement process, if so approved: 1. An archeologist qualified according to the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines shall perform a record search of the proposed project area, to be conducted prior to initiation of construction. 2. A Cultural Resources Monitor, designated by the Agua Caliente Cultural Resource Office, shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities. 3. Should buried deposits be encountered, the Cultural Resources Monitor shall have the authority to halt construction and notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines) to prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the City of Palm Springs Initial Study 12 10/21/2003 / `� /� oil Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact City, State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Cultural Resource coordinator for approval and any repatriation of cultural materials be done in cooperation with the Ague Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. 5.c) CULTURAL RESOURCES (No Impact) The General Plan for the City of Palm Springs indicates there should be no impact to paleontological resources as a result of this project. 5.d) CULTURAL RESOURCES (Less Than Significant Impact) As previously noted, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians utilized a vast territory beyond the bounds of the existing reservation. The possibility of finding human remains does exist in this area. In accordance with Public Resources Code 5097.94, if human remains are found, the Riverside County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. If the coroner determines that the remains are not recent, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to determine the most likely descendent for the area. The designated Native American representative then determines in consultation with the property owner the disposition of the human remains. Compliance with this law will reduce any potential inputs to a less than significant level. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, ❑ ❑ 19 including the risk of loss, injury, or death ❑ involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 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? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 City of Palm Springs Initial Study 13 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Result in substantial soil erosion or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 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 ❑ a a 0 Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ 17 where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 6.a)ii) GEOLOGIC (Less Than Significant Impact). The site is located in an area where the primary geologic hazard is severe ground shaking from earthquakes originating on nearby faults. A major earthquake above magnitude 7 originating on the local segment of the San Andreas fault zone would be the critical seismic event that could effect the site within the design life of the proposed development. Engineered design and earthquake-resistant construction increases the safety and allow development in seismic areas. Based upon data obtained from a review of selected literature and the site evaluation, the site is suitable for the proposed project. Standard City requirements to protect future residents include that the developer be required to submit a precise grading plan and soils report for the project area for review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of building permits and that all structures will be constructed to meet Uniform Building Code specific earthquake design standards. The soils report will address subsidence and the possibility of expansive soils on the property. The grading plan will be required to be in compliance with the soils report. Grading and construction decisions will be made upon review of the grading plan and soils report. 6.a)i)iii-iv)b-e) GEOLOGIC (No impact) The subject site consists of 2.7 acres of previously developed land. The development of the proposed 38 multi-family residences will involve minor grading of the existing terrain. There are no known geological hazards present on the site other than ground shaking potential associated with earthquakes, and the site is not located within any Alquist-Priolo or City adopted special study zone. A site inspection conducted by the Department of Planning and Zoning verified that the site is relatively flat, City of Palm Springs Initial Study 14 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact with no slopes exceeding 10%, Therefore, there is no potential for a significant effect on the environemnt due to intrusion into slop or hillside areas. The project is being proposed on a previously developed site. No significant increases in wind erosion, blowing sand or water erosion either on or off-site are expected based upon review by the Planning and Engineering Departments. Therefore, there is no potential for a significant effect on the environment due to erosion provided the project complies with Air Quality mitigation and City ordinances which address wind and water erosion. According to the General Plan, settlement and liquefaction as a result of seismic shaking are not considered significant hazards in Palm Springs. Therefore, there will be no impact to the environment as a result of liquefaction hazard. The project site is located on the valley floor and is underlain by deposits of recent alluvium. Because the site is level, no unique geologic features are known to be present. Therefore, there is minimal potential for a significant effect on the environement due to impacts to unique geological features. A site inspection by the Department of Planning and Zoning staff reveals no major land forms on the site. There are no known unstable earth conditions associated with the project site, and the nature of the project is such that there is no possibility of creating an unstable condition. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS —Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the ❑ ❑ 19 ❑ routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and ❑ ❑ accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ❑ ❑ ❑ l@ one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 15 10/21/2003 / +J1 u 11 V ^ 1 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code CI Section 66962.5 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 or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would 0 EI 11 O the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in 9 a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency 11 p 17 9 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 9 wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 7.a-b) (Less Than Significant Impact) The development proposal includes the demolition of a church, two single-family residences, a duplex and an asphalt parking lot. The potential that the demolition may include hazardous materials exists. A demolition permit is required to be obtained from the City's Building Department. This process includes an asbestos survey and approval of the demolition by the South Coast Air Quality Management District per Rule 1403. The survey shall include the inspection, identification, and quantification of all friable, and Class I and Class II non-friable asbestos-containing material, and any physical sampling of materials. Any contaminated material that is found must be removed before the facility is demolished by a licensed contractor with certification for that purpose. Transport of any hazardous materials found at the site must be performed by a certified company with transportation vehicles that are clearly marked and designed for the purpose. Hazardous wastes must be delivered to approved sites only. These measures are taken to safeguard the City of Palm Springs Initial Study 16 10/21/2003 ` k2 , s Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact public at all times. Compliance with existing City and Air Quality Management District permit requirements will reduce any potential impact to a less than significant level. 7.c-h) HAZARDS (No Impact). The project is not located within 1/4 mile of a public school, nor located at a previously determined hazardous waste site, nor within 2 miles of an airport. The project would not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plan, nor is it situated in an area that would be susceptible to wiidland fire. Therefore there is no impact from these hazards by the proposed project. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY-- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the ❑ ❑ 9 course of a stream or river, in a manner ❑ which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 17 10/21/2003 J � 11 - Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage ❑ ❑ Q 11 systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood ❑ ❑ ❑ CI Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ❑ ❑ ❑ mudflow? 8.a) (No Impact) The project will utilize water provided by Desert Water Agency, a public water provider within the City. Wastewater will be removed from the project site through the municipal sewer system. 8.b) (Less Than Significant Impact) The Desert Water Agency (DWA) currently owns, operates, and maintains water distribution and pumping facilties within the project area. Project proponents will be required to connect to existing DWA water infrastructure to provide water to the site for construction and domestic water service. The develop will be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and other requirements of the DWA in order to provide water service to the site. Water service requirements may include, but are not limited to, upgrades, modifications, replacement, and abandonment of existing DWA facilities. These improvements may require construction within and adjacent to public rights-pf-way and existing and/or proposed easements. Construction will occur in accordance with DWA and City requirements and will not cause any significant effects on the environment. 8.c-e) HYDROLOGY AND WATER (Less Than Significant Impact) No streamcourse is on or adjacent to the proposed development site. The subject site is found on the Flood Insurance City of Palm Springs Initial Study 1$ 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 060257 0006D, dated July 7, 1999, for Riverside County. The FIRM designates this area as Zone B, within a 500 year floodplain boundary. The potential to impact a local floodway does exist although the City's storm water runoff system has been designed in relation to the potential carrying capacity that would be necessary with the occurrence of such a catastrophic event. The applicant proposes to capitalize on the City's Master Drainage Plan, and use its policy of allowing development to convey stormwater runoff directly to approved drainage carriers. In this case, the existing property is adjacent to Baristo Road, a fully improved street with curb and gutter improvements. Surface runoff from the subject property will drain south off the property to Baristo Road and then into Baristo Channel running east to eventually flow into Tahquitz Creek Channel. The availability of adjacent adequately sized storm drain lines allows the project to defer an onsite retention/detention facilities and meet the flood control requirements required by the City of Palm Springs. 8.f-)j HYDROLOGY AND WATER (No Impact) Based upon the knowledge of the Planning and Zoning staff and the City Engineer, the project will not degrade water quality, place housing or other structures within a 100 year floodplain, or expose people or structures to risk of a breached dam or ocean tsunami, seiche or mudflow. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ 9 plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community ❑ ❑ ❑ d conservation plan? 9.a,c) NO IMPACT. This project is a redevelopment project relating to a previously developed site that consisted of a church, paved parking lot, duplex and two single-family residences. The demolition of existing structures and reconstruction of multi-family residential units is City of Palm Springs Initial Study 19 10/21/2003 / v 't � Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact consistent with the existing adjacent property uses. The project site is surrounded by small resort hotels, single-family residences, and small unit multi-family residences. The size and number of units proposed is consistent with the surrounding properties and would not divide an established community. No habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan applies to this previously developed site. 9.b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project departs from the specific zoning requirements by proposing the following changes from the R-2/R-3 zones property development standards. Parking spaces as required per zone would include 90 tenant spaces and 22 guest for a total of 112 spaces. Parking spaces proposed for the project are 72 tenant spaces and 10 guest for a total of 82 spaces. Height of structures allowed by zone is 24'. The project proposes a structure height of 26' to 34'. City zoning standards require all buildings exceeding 15' in height to have a 25' setback from the property line adjacent to existing single story development. The project proposal includes a range from 8' to 12' in setbacks from the property line for structures exceeding 15' in height adjacent to existing single story development. The zoning ordinance requires front yards facing on a local or collector street to have a front yard setback of 25' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Lugo Road (a collector street) of 12' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Baristo Road (collector street designation at that location) of 12'. Lastly, the project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Cahuilla Road (presently designated as a collector street) of 26'. The City's development standard in the R-2/R-3 zoning designation requires a separation distance between buildings of 15' and the project proposal complies with one exception of 10'. Staff and the established neighborhood group in proximity of the project site have reviewed the proposed changes to the standards for development associated with the project and concluded that with modifications to the site plan and architectural plans the project would have a less than significant impact on the neighborhood. Those modifications include changing a two story building to one story located adjacent to the northern property boundary and adjacent single story residences; alternating front setbacks distances along street frontages to create a variety of street profiles; changing entrances to mid-project locations in order to relieve critical massing and allowing for view corridors from all directions; architecturally designing multi-faceted facades on all elevations and a variety of roof heights on each unit to create interest and breaking up critical massing; upgrading all interior street material from asphalt to interlocking colored pavers; leaving the project not gated nor walled in order to conform with the overall neighborhood pattern of accessibility and street interest; and developing alternate residential street section of a narrowed right-of-way proposal on Cahuilla Road, aggregate walkways and modified curb and gutter. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: City of Palm Springs Initial Study _ 20 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of ❑ ❑ ❑ value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local ❑ ❑ ❑ O general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 10.a-b) NO IMPACT. This project has no impact to sand and gravel resources. No other mineral resources are known to exist. 11. NOISE —Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ❑ ❑ © ❑ groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 21 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose ❑ ❑ ❑ Cl people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 11.a, b, d) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The impacts related to noise would be associated with short-term construction activities. Although periodic noise levels have a potential to be higher during periods of construction, this will be temporary in nature and all vehicles will be required to have adequate muffling devices to ensure compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance. The proposed project site would not be expected to result in exposure of persons to or generation of groundborne vibration or noise levels. No sources of groundborne noise are proposed as part of the project. This project will have the potential of exposing existing residential properties only during the short term of construction. Construction hours are limited by the City's Noise Ordinance, also. Any new development would create an increase in noise levels but the proposed project is below the density levels associated with the overlying zoning designations thereby minimizing the impact of noise level increase to a previously adopted use by the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. With the incorporation of mitigation measures during construction activities, the impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level. 11.c, e, f) NO IMPACT. No substantive increase in noise levels would be associated with this completed project. This project is not located in within two miles of an existing airport therefore residents would not be subjected to air traffic noise at any level of significance. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and ❑ p 19 ❑ businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the ❑ El 9 construction of replacement housing ❑ elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of ❑ f7 ❑ replacement housing elsewhere? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 22 10/21/2003 lq � 31 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 12.a-c) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project will add 38 dwelling units to the site. Four existing dwelling units will be demolished. No substantial population growth will occur directly from this development proposal nor will substantial numbers of existing people or housing be displaced and necessitate relocation. The allowable number of dwelling units for the site as designated by the Zoning Ordinance is 46. Therefore the proposal of 38 dwelling units is well within the General Plan guidelines for the site. There will be no significant impact to housing or population. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 13. a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT This project is within the City's five minute response time for fire services and within reasonable proximity of the Police Station. The project is adequately served by other public services as well. The Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD) is currently experiencing a reduction in enrollment numbers. Staffing for PSUSD schools is maintained at a ratio of one teacher for every 30 students at the primary levels and one teacher for every 27 students at the secondary levels. These levels comply with the maximum teacher to student ratio of 1:30 set by the State of California. The project proponent will be required to pay a school facilities fee to PSUSD. The impact fee assists the school district to defray costs of new facilities associated with new development. The City of Palm Springs recently adopted a resolution amending resolution 20362 of the City's Comprehensive fee schedule, requiring the payment of fees for park and recreational City of Palm Springs Initial Study 23 10/21/2003 �ILI �-3� Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact purposes as authorized by Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution requires a developer to pay an in-lieu fee for park and recreation facilities computed by multiplying the area of park to be dedicated by the fair market value of the land being developed plus the cost to acquire and improve the property plus the fair share contribution, less any credit given by the City based upon the formula contained in Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution was adopted in accordance with the State of California's Quimby Act to facilitate the further development of park and recreation facilities at a local level. This project will not generate a significant impact to public utilities because of the location of the project site, the payment of the school facilities fee and the payment of in-lieu park fee. 14. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which ❑ ❑ ❑ might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 14.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. This project will include a swimming pool, cabanas and spa. It is not adjacent to or located in nearby proximity to a public recreational facility. The City of Palm Springs recently adopted a resolution amending resolution 20362 of the City's Comprehensive fee schedule, requiring the payment of fees for park and recreational purposes as authorized by Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution requires a developer to pay an in-lieu fee for park and recreation facilities computed by multiplying the area of park to be dedicated by the fair market value of the land being developed plus the cost to acquire and improve the property plus the fair share contribution, less any credit given by the City based upon the formula contained in Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution was adopted in accordance with the State of California's Quimby Act to facilitate the further development of park and recreation facilities at a local level. Based upon the site location and necessary compliance with City ordinance the impact to public recreational facilities will be less than significant. 14.b) NO IMPACT. The project includes no recreational facilities that would have an adverse physical effect on the environment. 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: City of Pahn Springs Initial Study 24 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated impact Impact a) 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 ❑ ❑ Q ❑ increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion ❑ ❑ ❑ CI management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in ❑ ❑ ❑ traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency ❑ ❑ ❑ 191 access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 15.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. A traffic study conducted by George Dunn Engineering in July 2003, was prepared for the proposed development. The proposal to construct 38 condominium units is expected to generate 234 daily trip-ends. In itself, this amount of traffic generated by a proposed development would not require preparation of a traffic study, however, the applicant proposes to amend the General Plan Circulation Element to remove Cahuilla Road's designation from a collector roadway between Ramon Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way. The General Plan Amendment required the preparation of the traffic study for this project. Existing street conditions are a two lane roadway with a 50' right-of-way. The amendment to the General Plan would maintain the 50 foot two lane roadway that is determined by the traffic study adequate to carry local existing and proposed residential traffic. City of Palm Springs ffiitial Study 25 10/21/2003 � � h Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact There is no need to require a 60' right-of-way. It is also the City's General Plan policy to allow for special street sections. The development proposal includes aggregate walkways and modified curb and gutter construction. This is consistent with existing conditions within the neighborhood. Review and approval by the City Engineer will reduce any potential impacts. 15. f) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The proposed project is providing 72 covered parking spaces for residents and 10 guest parking spaces. This is a reduction in parking as required by the City Zoning Ordinance by 30 spaces. The project does include interior drive aisles 24—26 feet in width. 15.b-e and g ) NO IMPACT. The project proposal to reclassify Cahuilla Road between Ramon Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way from a collector street to a local street with a special section will have no significant adverse impacts on local circulation or access. Nor will the proposed project create any significant adverse impacts on local circulation or access. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater .treatment facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑ D ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 are new or expanded entitlements needed? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 26 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it ❑ ❑ ❑ CI has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 waste? 16.a, c-g) NO IMPACT The development proposal would not exceed the waste water treatment facility capacity, would not require the construction of a new storm drain system, will be served by a waste transfer-and recycle site that can accommodate the project's needs and will comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations relating to solid waste. Therefore there shall be no significant impact to those systems. 16 b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The Desert Water Agency (DWA) currently owns, operates, and maintains water distribution and pumping facilities within the project area. Project proponents will be required to connect to existing DWA water infrastructure to provide water to the site for construction and domestic water service. The developer will be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and other requirements of the DWA in order to provide water service to the site. Water service requirements may include, but are not limited to, upgrades, modifications, replacement, and abandonment of existing DWA facilities. These improvements may require construction within and adjacent to public rights-of-way and exiting and/or proposed easements. Construction will occur in accordance with DWA and City requirements and will not cause any significant effects upon the environment. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE City of Pahn Springs Initial Study 27 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ 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 which will cause substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 17. b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The project will less than significant impact resulting from short-term air quality concerns during the construction process by mitigation measures of the permit and inspection process of the City Building Department and the South Coast Air Quality Management District for fugitive dust control. Cultural concerns regarding the potential for archeological resources under the soil substrate will be mitigated by archeological date base research conducted before the issuance of any permits and the presence of a qualified on-site cultural resource monitor during demolition and construction. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 28 10/21/2003 l'f 7 18. LISTED BELOW ARE THE PERSON(S)WHO PREPARED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning and Zoning Kathy Marx, Associate Planner Don Duckworth, City Building Official David Barakian, City Engineer Marcus Fuller, Senior Civil Engineer Ron Nicholas, Engineering Assistant Bary Freet, City Fire Chief Carl Thibeault, Fire Marshal John Nixon, Cultural Resources Officer, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Woody Adams, Desert Water Agency , Dave Luker, Desert Water Agency George Dunn, Traffic Engineer 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 prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 0 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 proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ 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 (a) have been analyzed ❑ adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 29 10/21/2003 / `/ A 3`d Douglas R. Vans Date Director of Planning and Zoning Exhibits Available for review at the Palm Springs City Hall located at 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photo 3. General Plan 4. Architectural Elevations 5. Site Plan 6. Site Cross Sections 7. Traffic Study City of Palm Springs Initial Study 30 10/21/2003 a / ll � � TRIBAL PLANNING , DUILDING g CNGINCI�rl-M - —i �cgHUI 7 October 13, 2003 _1( {I_`_X)Q�i p jf}�� 11l _n46 i,J Y'1�1 R'.ti}f 1✓4 d I V i ^✓i Mr. Douglas R. Evans, Dir of Planning and Zoning City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs CA 92262 Re: Project # 6.0977, Wessman Development, 36 Condominiums, 245 South Cahuilla Road, Palm Springs, Riverside County, California Mr. Evans, The Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) has compared the information regarding the project above to the holdings of the Agua Caliente Register. The proposed project location identified above is beyond the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Reservation. It is, however, located on lands within territory that comprises and defines the Tribal Traditional Use Area. While no archaeological survey has been done across the subject tract, there are several historic/prehistoric resources reported nearby. Because of this, the THPO requests the following. 1. Based on the project location, the Ague Caliente THPO recommends that you employ an Archaeologist qualified according to the Secretary of the Interior's (SOI) Guidelines to perform a record search and a survey of the area prior to initiation of construction. The THPO also requests copies of any cultural resource documentation that might be generated in connection with this effort. 2. Further, experience has shown that there is always a possibility of buried cultural resources in the area. Given that, the Tribe requests that Cultural Resource Monitor(s) be present during ground disturbing activities. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (SOI) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan. The Tribe appreciates your cooperation in maintaining the Agua Caliente cultural heritage. If you have any questions, please feel free to call at 1 (760) 883 1313 or at e.mail: inixonaC2a4uacaliente.net. Cordially, A A /U 3 os ixon, Ph. D., RPA Cultural Resource Coordinator AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS c: Tom Davis, Chief Planning Officer Margaret Park, Director of Planning Agua Caliente Register V 650 C TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY • PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 • (760) 325-3400 • FAx: (760) 325-6952 ------ ------ -------- � � � ^ G O , Oa p cZGoZ �� _j `72a-cam. v l VAYC CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 26, 2003 Council Chamber, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 ROLL CALL Present Present FY 03-04 This Meeting to Date Excused Absences Jon Shoenberger, Chair X 10 0 Dianne Marantz, Vice Chair X 9 1 Mark Matthews X 9 1 Jerry Grence X 9 1 Tracy Conrad X 8 2 Ricky Wright X 10 0 Larry Hochanadel X 10 0 STAFF PRESENT: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning & Zoning Dave Barakian, City Engineer Marcus Fuller, Senior Engineer Jing Yeo, Principal Planner Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner Kathy Marx, Associate Planner Gabriel Diaz, Assistant Planner Michele Boyd, Administrative Coordinator Chairman Shoenberger called the meeting to order at 1:35.m. * * * * * The November 26, 2003 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Department of Planning &Zoning counter by 4:00 p.m., November 21, 2003. * W * * * M/S/C (Matthews/Marantz 4-0, 3 abstentions) to approve the minutes of November 19, 2003 as presented. lyhpL Page 2 of 8 Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 2003 PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC HEARINGS: Case 5.935—PD 59—Application by Desert Chapel for revisions to the Desert Chapel Master Plan, Planned Development District 59 for consideration of special events, nighttime football games, and rededication of the Sunny Dunes right of way located on 10.16 acres at 630 South Sunrise Way, PD 59 Zone, Section 24. Continued from the meeting of November 12, 2003. Motion, if desired: Continue to the meeting of December 10, 2003 per applicant request. Case 5.0842 — PD 77 —Application by Christopher Mills Architect, Inc. for Maurice Refoua for an amendment to the existing Planned Development District to add to existing retail center and expand parking for retail use at 611 South Palm Canyon Drive, PD-77 Zone, Section 22. Continued from the meeting of November 12, 2003, Motion, if desired: Continue to the meeting of December 10, 2003 per applicant request. Case 5.0977 — PD 288 —TTM 31887 —Application by John Wessman for an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector roadway between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north, Zones R-2 & R-3, Section 15; and 5.0977, PD 288—TTM 31887—Application by Wessman Development for a Planned Development District and Tentative Tract Map to construct 38 condominium units for the property at 284 South Cahuilla Road, Zones R-2 and R-3, Section 15. Commissioner Conrad abstained due to a conflict of interest as she owns property within 400 feet of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Cahuilla Road. Chairman Shoenberger abstained due to a conflict of interest as the applicant is currently contracting to purchase property owned by a partnership in which he has an interest. Commissioner Marantz abstained due to a conflict of interest as her family does business with the applicant. Commissioner Hochanadel abstained due to a conflict of interest as he is currently contracting to sell property to the applicant. Director explained that, for purposes of a quorum, the abstaining commissioners will draw lots to determine participation. Those lots were drawn and Chairman Shoenberger drew the lot to participate and vote. Commissioners Conrad, Marantz, and Hochanadel left the meeting. Director confirmed that the participating Commissioners had reviewed the very detailed staff report �Y� Page 3 of 8 �!I L,ir�L Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 2003 and Kathy Marx, Associate Planner, gave a brief overview and reviewed exhibits for the Planning Commission. She reported that the Planning Commission had been sent a letter from the Historic Tennis Club Neighborhood Organization in support of the General Plan Amendment. Dave Barakian, City Engineer, reported that, as part of a City Council approved plan and in response to neighborhood requests, there will be traffic calming speed cushions (rubber bumps bolted to the street) installed which will reduce traffic to approximately 15 m.p.h. on Cahuilla Road. Staff reviewed street elevations and site plans and reported that both the Design Review Committee and the neighborhood association have reviewed the architectural plans. She clarified that the two-story element height will be 34 feet. In response to concerns expressed at the very well attended neighborhood meeting regarding aesthetics, views, and impact to adjacent residences, the developer chose to change a tri-unit to a single-story duplex and flipped the site plan to preserve the privacy of an adjacent small resort hotel. Commissioner Matthews noted that the exhibits reference GHA Construction and asked for clarification of this company's involvement on the project. The applicant confirmed that he is contracting with GHA to be the builder on the project. Commissioner Matthews then recused himself due to a conflict of interest as he has a current business transaction with GHA Construction in another city. Commissioners Marantz, Hochanadel, and Conrad (in addition to Commissioner Matthews) returned to the meeting to draw lots for quorum purposes. Commissioner Conrad drew the lot for participation. Commissioner Matthews, Hochanadel, and Marantz left the meeting. Commissioner Conrad reported that she had been monitoring the meeting via the televised broadcast during her absence so was therefore prepared to resume the meeting at the point Commissioner Matthews announced his conflict of interest. Chairman Shoenberger opened the Public Hearing. Mr. John Wessman, applicant, addressed the Planning Commission to state that blending this urban project into the established neighborhood has been fun and that he likes the front-yard treatment and pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. He stated that he feels the architecture fits the historic neighborhood very well. He stated that the project architect, Mr. Mark Shyer, is available for questions, if any. He clarified that the project is below the allowable density of 53 units. He confirmed that a traffic study was completed. Ms. Trisha Davis addressed the Planning Commission to thank the City for installing the speed humps in this heavily trafficked area as current conditions are dangerous for pedestrian traffic. Mr. Scott Kenady, Palm Springs Modern Committee, addressed the Planning Commission to state that he is the Advocacy Chairman for the Committee and reminded the Planning Commission that alterations to Class 1 historic sites (such as the nearby 1936 community church) cannot be approved without preparation of a complete Environmental Impact Report and following all California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. He stated that Palm Springs Modern Committee will be monitoring these projects and will insist that CEQA be followed. Page 4of 8 Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 2003 There being no further appearances, the Public Hearing was closed. Director reported that any proposed modification to the old church will be fully reviewed by staff for conformance with State requirements and noted the referenced Class 1 site is not a part of the subject application. He reported that City Council has commented that the existing community church may make an ideal bed & breakfast inn which would protect the economic viability of this historic site. Chairman Shoenberger commented that he attended a Design Review Committee meeting at which the subject application was reviewed and reported that it was very well received and that he believes the applicant has done an admirable job of integrating this project into an existing neighborhood, and was appreciative that there were no walls or gates incorporated into the project. He stated that he is concerned that parking, especially guest parking, may be inadequate and may cause a problem on Cahuilla Road. Director confirmed that staff is comfortable with the proposed parking for the infill project in this older neighborhood, that each unit has assigned garage parking, and that the CC&Rs will clearly state that garages must be utilized for parking (rather than for storage or other use). Commissioner Conrad requested that the applicant comment on the parking calculations. Mr. Wessman reported that the units will not be marketed to families at all so the multi-bedroom parking calculation over-estimates the actual number of cars being utilized by a demographic that will likely use second bedrooms for offices or dens. M/S/C (Grence/Conrad 4-0, 3 abstentions) to approve filing of negative declaration and approve project subject to Conditions of Approval. Motion, if desired: Approve subject to Conditions of Approval in Staff Report. 6. Case 5.0728 - Request by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and City of Palm Springs for various amendments to the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements, approval of the Section 14 Master Plan/specific Plan, and Zoning Map Amendments to remove all existing zoning within Section 14 and establish nine new land use designations, all for 640 acres bound by Alejo Road to the north, Sunrise Way to the east, Ramon Road to the south, and South Indian Canyon Drive to the West, Zone C-1, C-1-AA, C-2, R-G- A(8), R-2, R-4, R-4-VP, PD-101, PD-180, and PD-164, Section 14. The application is detailed as follows: 11�Aq (A) General Plan Map Amendment To: 1) Redesignate the following areas from H43/30 (High Density Residential) to RC (Resort AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES I,the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing before the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, in conjunction with Case No. 5.0977 — PD288 — TTM 31887, to construct 38 condominium units on 2.7 acres, located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, requesting relief from City zoning requirements for parking, building height, front, side and rear yard setbacks and distance between structures, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15; applicant, John Wessman, was mailed to each and every person on the attached list on the 261h day of November, 2003. A copy of said Notice is attached hereto. Said mailing was completed by placing a copy of Said Notice in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 26th day of November, 2003. P RICI 4SDaRS City Clerk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case No. 5,0977, PD -288 TTM 31887 284 S. Cahuilla Road NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of December 17, 2003. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5.0977, a application by John Wessman for a Planned Development District 288 and Tentative Tract Map 31887 to construct 38 condominium units on 2.7 acres. The project will consist of 12 two-story tri-plex buildings and 1 one-story duplex building. The individual units range in size from 1803 square feet to 2328 square feet in size. The application requests relief from Cityzoning requirements forparking, building height,front,side and rear yard setbacks and distance between structures. The subject property is located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15. The applicant, John Wessman, is also requesting consideration of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector roadway between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north, to be considered under separate action. If Cahuilla Road is changed to a local roadway it would continue to function as a two lane roadway. An Environmental Assessment has been prepared and will be reviewed by the City Council at the meeting. A draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been prepared for the subject proposal. Members of the public may view this document in the Department of Planning and Zoning, City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, and submit written comments at or prior to the City Council hearing. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at, or prior to the City Council hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Kathy Marx, Associate Planner at (760) 323-8245. PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk VICINITY MAP N W E S ODONNELL GOLF CLUB TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY SI E ARENAS RD. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z g o w c� z U m d BARRISTO RD. RAMON RD. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO.: 5.0977 PD— 288 DESCRIPTION: A planned development and tentative map TTM 31887 proposal to build 12 tri-plex and one duplex condominium units on APPLICANT: 2.7 acres and to amend the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove John Wessman Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector street from Ramon Road to Tahquitz Canyon Way. C �F�rn�1��660® 5-0�7 �P John Wessman 300 S. Palm Canyon Drive Palm Springs, CA 92262 The Collaborative West Attention: Faye 100 Avenida Miramar San Clemente, CA 92672 Hunsaker&Associates Attn: Ben Three Hughes Irvine, CA 92618-1010 Scheurer Architects Attention: Steve 20411 SW Birch Street, Suite 300 Newport Beach, CA 92660 r:5-� eY ? 7 -IUD-'z 99- (t) 513 120 056 513 132 003 513 132 004 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Pilger Assoc Inc G Douglas Smith 74140 El Pasco#4 221 S Patencio Rd 231 S Patencio Rd Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 513 132 005 513 132 006 513 1 0 G D Smith Patencio Estates Lie Patencio states 257 S Patencio Rd 28640 Landau Blvd#1 28640 L u Blvd#1 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Cathedral City, CA 92234 Cath ty,CA 92234 513 132 017 513 133 001 513 133 002 Roger Malone&Eugene Milligan 487 Arenas Lie Emil&Joan Forrer 529 W Arenas Rd 830 Cherrystone Dr PO Box 198 ! Palm Springs, CA 92262 Los Gatos, CA 95032 Tahoe Vista, CA 96148 513 133 004 513 13 05 513 133 006 Mena fG Douglas 'th G Douglas Smith 231 S Lugo Rd 257 S Paten Rd 265 S Lugo Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Sprin s, A 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 513 300 513133012 513133013 Thom sso G D Smith Gary&Mary Nold 295 S Lu d 2201 S Palm Canyon Dr#117 234 S Patencio Rd Palm Sp CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 133 014 513 016 513 134 001 Larry Pitcher&G E Fine Charles &Leonard Grotta Wahoo-cal Rentals Lie 120 Hill St 275 S Lugo 4109 NE 19th Ave#B Avalon, CA 90704 Palm Springs, 2262 Portland, OR 97211 513 134 002 513 134 003 513 134 004 Bushman F X&E G Tippin Donald&Deborah Garsh 5515 Inner Circle Dr PO Box 8171 PO Box K Riverside, CA 92506 Tahoe City,CA 96145 Chula Vista,CA 91912 513 134 005 513 134 006 513 134 007 Frances Nadoldski&Dianne Sluzas Lee Toman&Jan Cronquist Rossi Eugene P&Adrian&Rossi 411 W Arenas Rd#5 989 Lombard Ave 3215 E Ocean Blvd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Saint Paul,MN 55105 Long Beach, CA 90803 513 134 008 513 134 009 513 134 010 Neil Graham Diane Colgan Robert Meissner 20982 Brookhurst St#201 111 Moss Rock Ct PO Box 791 Huntington Beach,CA 92646 Folsom, CA 95630 Big Bear Lake, CA 92315 513 Oil 513136001 513136002 Kalsm ssociates Don Kuzma&Dale Bun Adair Holdings Inc 47 N Pase edo 6507 NE loth Ave 2533 N Carson St#A-231 Cathedral 1 A 92234 Vancouver,WA 98665 Carson City,NV 89706 21 513 136 003 1 513 136 004 1 513 136 005 Ted Harvey Marni Scott&Maureen Doherty Laabs Gary A&Current Resident 480 W Baristo Rd 1905 Plainfield Rd#C 2780 Alum Rock Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 Darien,IL 60561 San Jose, CA 95127 513 136 006 513 136 007 513 136 009 Robert Gemmell&Gerald King Dean Corella Stephen&Mary Donahue PO Box 9 488 W Baristo Rd 44 Killian Way San Berardino, CA 92402 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 j 513 136 009 513 1 Ol1 513 141012 Silver Palm Villas Wahoo c lc Palm Sp s Modern Homes V 48550 Madison St 4109 NE 19 Ave#B 74140 El Pa #4 Indio,CA 92201 Portland, O 9 211 Palm Desert 92260 513 141015 513 141 016 513 142 001 Casa Cody B&B Con Inn L1c Casa Cody B& Country Inn Mountain Resort Palm 175 S Cahuilla Rd 175 S Cahuilla 11855 Sorrento Valley Rd#C Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs,C 9 62 San Diego, CA 92121 513 142 003 513 151002 513 151006 Craig Blau Larry&Sharon Kramer William Davis&Trisha Davis 200 W Arenas Rd 1909 El Camino Real 227 S Cahuilla Rd Palm Springs,CA 92262 Redwood City, CA 94063 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 151007 513 151009 513 151010 Virginia Berardini Community Church Of Palm Springs Danny Creager 237 S Cahuilla Rd PO Box 1898 1428 Tularcitos Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Cathedral City, CA 92235 Milpitas, CA 95035 513 151013 513 151014 513 151015 Joann Mcclure William&Sharon Simon Coleman Dennis Devermont&Devermont Marg 1134 Clermont Dr 251 S Lucerne Blvd 19528 Celtic St South Bend,IN 46617 Los Angeles, CA 90004 Northridge,CA 91326 513 151 016 513 151 017 513 15 Ol Steven k Louis Miller&Matthew Miller Comm Church Of Palm Springs 307 W ;?gs, Rd 1155 Tiffany Cir N PO Box 18 Palm Sp 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Cathedral C' , CA 92235 513 151 019 513 151 020 513 152 002 Community Ch c Of Palm Springs Emil&Joan Forrer Marin&G Ursescu PO Box 1898 375 W Arenas Rd Current Resident Cathedral City, C 235 Palm Springs, CA 92262 239 W Arenas Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 152 006 513 152 010 513 152 011 Community Ch Of Palm Springs Karen Prince-wiethorn Belardo Court Associates PO Box 1898 261 S Belardo Rd 600 Queen Anne Ave N Cathedral City, CA 235 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Seattle,WA 98109 `l 4 513 152 014 513 152 018 513 15 019 Karen Prince-wi tot Karen Prince- thorn Karen n -wiethorn 261 S Belardo Rd 261 S Belardo 261 S Bel o Rd Palm Springs, CA 9 62 Palm Springs,CV 2262 Palm.Sprin , CA 92262 513 152 020 513 153 001 513 153 015 Douglas Mannoff&Donna Mazmoff Curt Taucher&Jacqueline Taucher Com Redeve in in Agency City Palm 200 S Cahuilla Rd 5335 E Broadway PO Box 1786 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Long Beach, CA 90803 Palm Springs, C 92263 513 153 016 513 53 '17 513 153 024 Redevelop nl gency City Of Palm S City P Springs First Church Of Christ Scientist PO Box 1786 PO Box 743 605 S Riverside Dr Palm Springs, 92263 Palm Sp gs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 153 029 513 153 034 513 182 0 1 Redevelopment Agency City Of Palm S Larry Karmer Vineyard Prop Artie Stev so &Ethel Severson PO Box 2743 S K Vine Prop 730 Santiag ve Palm Springs, CA 92263 1909 El Camino Real Long Beach, 90804 Redwood City, CA 94063 513 182 004 513 182 OS 513 182 006 Leo&Aylaian Lauri Fuller William Li An PlIslerer Enrico Margarite D&Tommy B 377 W Baristo Rd 332 Pablo NJ Enrico Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Spring A 92262 340 Pablo Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 182 007 513 182 008 513 182 009 David&Janice Kaminsky Guy Gorelik Madeleine Dejean 342 Pablo Dr 310 S Patencio Rd PO Box 2491 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92263 513182014 513182015 513182016 John Wessman Ronald Kirk Virgil Heinrich&Ardis Heinrich 360 Pablo Dr 2130 Dry Creek Rd 352 Pablo Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Jose, CA 95124 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 182 020 513 182 021 513 182 024 William&Geraldine Jarvis Christopher&Gina Tuttobene Riordan Michael G&Franklin Tr Wats 11920 100th Ave#1203 345 S Monte Vista Dr 445 W Baristo Rd EDMONTON AB Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 CANADA 513 182 025 513 201001 513 201002 Artie Stevenson&Ethel Severson Holm Stephen&Nelda Chagin 730 Santiago Ave 2301 Fairview Ave E#3 303 W Baristo Rd Long Beach, CA 90804 Seattle,WA 98102 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 201 003 513 201004 513 201 005 G C Brewer E Michael Vetterli Charles Howland 116 S Larchmont Blvd 318 Pablo Dr PO Box 460069 Los Angeles, CA 90004 Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Francisco,CA 94146 513 202 001 513 202 002 513 202 005 Palm Springs Womans Club Eric Mellum Casa Real Estate Limited Partnership PO Box 626 9901 Paramount Blvd#250 5750 Wilshire Blvd#610 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Downey, CA 90240 Los Angeles,CA 90036 513 202 009 513 2 0 0 513 203 013 La Serena Villas Lie La Sere Villas Llc Marek Lp 760 N La Cienega Blvd 760 N La ienega Blvd 72-240 Highway 1111 Waring Plz Los Angeles, CA 90069 Los Angel s, CA 90069 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513 470 001 513 470 002 513 470 003 Johnston John Gerard Jr. Anne Abercrombie 147 S Tahquitz Dr PO Box 2458 221 S Patencio Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Covina, CA 91722 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 470 004 513 470 005 513 470 006 Marc Herbert&Groth Ric Vonhungen Wanda Walker&Walker Wand Carol Holmes 2864 Tice Creek Dr#4 3512 Ross Rd PO Box 1078 Walnut Creek,CA 94595 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Belfast,ME 04915 513 470 007 513 470 008 5134 0 009 John&Jean Metzger Peter Phillips Rand- J Boose 600 Arbolado Dr PO Box 115 1808 NE ott St Fullerton, CA 92835 Fawnskin, CA 92333 Portlan O 97212 5134 010 513470013 513 7 014 Metzger R&Jean M&Metzger F John Gerard Jr. &Maria Belem Gerard John rard Jr. 600 Arbola D PO Box 2458 PO Bo 458 Fullerton, C 835 Covina, CA 91722 Covi A 91722 513 501 001 513 501002 513 501003 Robert Barthel&Vinetta Barthel Gordon Leake R K Miller Inv Co&Susan Lse Bennet 123 NW 4th St#520 500 W Arenas Rd#2 500 W Arenas Rd#3 Evansville,IN 47708 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 501 004 513 501005 513 501006 R K Miller Inv Co Inc Levine Joan C R K Miller Inv Co Inc Kathleen Highsmith 213 Rio Del Mar Blvd Philip Thompson Jr. 5 Forest Glen Ln SW Aptos, CA 95003 554 11th Ave Lakewood,WA 98498 Salt Lake City,UT 84103 513 501 007 513 501008 513 501009 R K Miller Investment Co Inc R K Miller Investment Co Inc R K Miller Inv Co Inc&Terry Hauswir 3335 Mountain Ln 1450 La Perla Ave 1943 Pariva Dr Park City,UT 84060 Long Beach, CA 90815 Cardiff By The Sea, CA 92007 513 501010 513 501011 513 530 001 R K Miller Inv Co Inc&Cannann Bre Lot Common Bernard Baird&Carol Rake 1447 Wikiup Dr PO Box 2002 3200 Alki Ave SW 4201 Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Seattle,WA 98116 r Neighborhood Coalition List as of October 1, 2003 MR PETER DIXON MR BILL DAVIS AND 5.0977-pd-288 431 SOUTH MONTE VISTA DRIVE MS TRISHA DAVIS John Wessman PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 227 SOUTH CAHUILLA PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR FRANK TYSEN MR BOB WEITHORN MR TIM HOHMEIER C/O CASA CODY COUNTRY INN 261 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD 1387 CALLE DE MARIA 175 SOUTH CAHUILLA ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 MS CHRISTINE HAMMOND MR PHIL TEDESCO MR MARSHALL ROATH 1155 SOUTH CAMINO REAL 1303 WEST PRIMAVERA DRIVE MS SHERYL HAMLIN PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MS ROXANNE PLOSS 930 CHIA PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 MS MARGARET PARK AGUA CALIENTE REPRESENTATIVE AGUA CALIENTE CAHUILLA INDIANS 650 EAST TAHOUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 SENIOR SECRETARY PLANNING &ZONING DEPT. PLANNING DEPT. REP. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263 Z9ZZ6 VO SDNIi1dS W1Vd Z9ZZ6 VO SONINdS W1Vd bE0L6 2i0 MSO 31IV1 3AIb0 S3>IWI liJ3S30 oLE 3AI210 V1SIA 31NOW HlnOS ti IN 3AIi10 WnS 496L 1NAGISB2id 9A10 S,NVWOM S d GAO II 11a3 WU ?JW SINOP V Vd SW NOSNVH ON VNG3 SW ZLO LOZ EL9 800 L EL9 41 91806 VO `g0uaa 2uo7 Z9ZZ6 VD `s2undS wied �$ h 1S seuro7 seZ a 19175 p-d seuary dA 6Z5 uosdureS.fnud auofm xaSo' >£h� 500 06S £IS Z00 0£9 06 . i PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for Conroy Clerk's Filing Stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) No.6445 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - -STATE OF CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL County of Riverside CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case No. 5.0977, PD-2a8 TTM 31887 - 284 S. Cahuilla Road NOTICE IS HERESY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of Deceit i 17, 2003. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 pp m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 3200 I aln a citizen of the United States and a resident of E. Tahqultz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case years,and not a art to or interested in the 5 09 7, a application by John Wessman for a Y party Planned Development District 288 and Tentative above-entitled matter.I am the principal cleric of a Trees Map 318 7 to construct 38 condominium P P anus on 2 7 acres. The project will consist of 12 printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING two-start'tri-plex buildings and 1 one-story du- plex butlding. The indivi ual units range In size COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, from 1ao3 square feet to z3ze square feet in size The application requests relief from City zoning printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, w application for parking, building height, front, CUnO of Riverside,and Which newspaper has I1C¢n side and rear yard setbacks and distance be- Countytween structures. The subject property is located adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the at 284 S. Cahuilla Road,Zone R-2 and R-3, Sec- tion 15. Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of California under the date of March 24,1988.Case VICINITYMAP Number 191236;that the notice,of which the 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: November 270' - - ----------------------------------- -------- __----------------------------------------------------------- cinovrn,ni caaixcs All in the year 2003 I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the The applicant, John Wessman, is also requesting consideration of an amendment to the General foregoing is true and correct. Plan Circulation Element to remove Cahuilla 1st Road's designation as a collector roadway be- tween Ramon Road on the south and Tahqultz anyon Way on the north, to be considered Dated at Palm Springs,California this--------day Co . re separate action If Cali Road is changed to a local roadway it would continue to of----------December-------------------—-------,2003 function as a two lane roadway. An Environmental Assessment has beer prepared and will be reviewed by the City Council at the meeting.A drah Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been prepared for the ------------------------------------- ------- subject proposal. Members of the public may view this document in the Department of Planning Signature and Zoning, City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way,Palm Springs, and submit written comments at or prior to the City Council hearing. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be Imilted to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written cc rrespondcries at, or prior to the City Council hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing foi all interested persons to be heard Questions regard- ing this case may be directed to Kathy Marx,As- sociate Planner at (760) 323-8245 PATRICIA A. SANDERS 27. 911r City Clerk r L PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) No.6145 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case No. 6.0977, PD-288 TTM 31887 264 S. Call uilla Read STATE OF CALIFORNIA - NUTIQE Ig �E REBV GIVEN that the Planmog Comity of Riverside ConimrsSfO'fi T'ifie'crt-t,P a 9prmcls Caircor- - - nla, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of November 26, 2003 The Planning Co remission meeting begins at 1'30 p m.{publlc hearings start at 2 00 p.m.) In the Council Chambers at City Hall, 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The ppurpose of the hearng is to consider Case 5 0977, a request by John Wass man for an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Plan I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of to remove Cahullla Road's designation as a col- lector roadway between Ramon Read on the the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen South and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north. This change of street classification will result in years,and not a party to or interested in the Cahullla Road becoming a local Street with a fifty above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a foot right-of-way width. The applicant Is propos- P I Inll an alternative residential street section on Ca printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING huilla Road adjacent to the propposed project site COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, that includes the narrowed ugllt-of-way, aggre- gate walkways and modified curb and gutter printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, The second request Is tot an appncabon for a Planned Develo meet Dishict 28 and lcntative County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been Tract Map 3188pi by John Wessman to construct ter adjudgednewspaper a news a of l circulation 38 condominium units on 2 7 acres. The project genera rcuation b Y the will consist of 12 two-story tn-plex buildings and Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of 1 one-story, duplex building The individual units range in size from 1803 square feet to 2328 California under the date of March 24, 1988.Case square feet in size The application reqquests relief from City zoning requirements for Number 191236;that the notice,of which the ing height,front, aide and rear yardpark, build- setbacks and annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller a distance cated between S. Call�iia Road,�Zeene qR�-z and than non pariel,has been published in each regular R-3, Section 15 and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any VICINI7YMAP _ supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: i October 271111 _ __________________—_____ ______________________ Jx - y .I Jl 3 `lJ i e S All in the year 2003 — I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the 5 foregoing is true and correct. 28th omoranua erprume Dated at Palm Springs,California this---------day An Environmental Assessment has been prepared of----------October-----------------------------2003 and will ee reviewed by the Planning ComNegative - at the meeting A draft Mitigated been pared Code- ration view Environmental Impact has been tme nt of for the subJect proposal. Members of the public may view this document in the Department of ---------------------------------------------------------------L Planning and Zonng, City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, and submit written Signature cam meets at or pnar to the Planning Commission hearing If any group challenges the action in court, issues aised may be limited to only those Issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice of In written correspondence at, or poor to the City Council hearing. An opportunity,will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard.Questions regard- ing this case may be directed to Kathy Maul As- sociate Planner at (760)323-8245 PLANNING COMMISSION /s/Douglas R.Evans l3irsctor of Planning and Zoning 27 l3 51- -1017 ( � AI�ST�u°r� r•>/ Sp gs, c N� 92262 wry 5S13136009 °rP if 4gS50 P. Vyl lliF _, Ia�O CAa9 04 t h' o �jg�°a.�91yyaor °arL A 92315 1dp - � .. 11t14 apt, 'Q�zt 680 091 Sh 006 �2C 1 °Iy#Is0 f yl a Cys n�� a bong � 1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) I,the undersigned, say: I am and was at all times herein mentioned, a citizen of the United States and employed in the County of Riverside,overthe age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action or proceeding; that my business address is 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, California; that on the 23`tl day of October, 2003, 1 served the within NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING for PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. 5.0977-PD-288 to consider a request by John Wessman for an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector roadway between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north. This change of street classification will result in Cahuilla Road becoming a local street with a 50-foot right-of-way width. The applicant is proposing an alternative residential street section on Cahuilla Road adjacent to the proposed project site that includes the narrowed right-of-way, aggregate walkways, and modified curb and gutter. The second request is for n application for a Planned Development District 288 and Tentative Trace Map 31887 by John Wessman to construct 38 condo units on 2.7 acres consisting of 12 two-story tri-lex buildings and one one-story duplex building ranging in size from 1,803 to 2,328 sq. ft. in size. The application requests relief from City zoning requirements for parking, building height, front, side, and rear yard setbacks and distance between structures. The subject property is at 284 South Cahuilla Road, Zone R2 and R3, Section 15. This Notice was served on persons contained in Exhibit"A"attached hereto in said action or proceeding by depositing a true copy thereof, enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in a mailbox, sub-post office, substation or mail chute, or other like facility, regularly maintained by the Government of the United States in the City of Palm Springs,California, addressed to the list of persons or firms indicated on the report received from the title company dated September 11,2003 and certified by the City's Planning Technician, and attached hereto as Exhibit"A". I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. r� j1hed� n I LD. Moffett Dated at Palm Springs, California, this24th day of October, 2003. v NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case No. 5.0977, PD -288 TTM 31887 284 S. Cahuilla Road NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of November 26, 2003. The Planning Commission meeting begins at 1:30 p.m.(public hearings start at 2:00 p.m.) in the Council Chambers at City Hall,3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5.0977, a request by John Wessman for an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector roadway between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north. This Change of street classification will result in Cahuilla Road becoming a local street with a fifty foot right-of-way width. The applicant is proposing an alternative residential street section on Cahuilla Road adjacent to the proposed project site that includes the narrowed right-of-way, aggregate walkways and modified curb and gutter. The second request is for an application for a Planned Development District 288 and Tentative Tract Map 31887 by John Wessman to construct 38 condominium units on 2.7 acres. The project will consist of 12 two-story tri-plex buildings and 1 one-story duplex building. The individual units range in size from 1803 square feet to 2328 square feet in size. The application requests relief from City zoning requirements for parking, building height, front, side and rear yard setbacks and distance between structures. The subject property is located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15. An Environmental Assessment has been prepared and will be reviewed by the Planning Commission at the meeting. A draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been prepared for the subject proposal. Members of the public may view this document in the Department of Planning and Zoning, City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, and submit written comments at or prior to the Planning Commission hearing. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at, or prior to the City Council hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Kathy Manx, Associate Planner at (760) 323-8245. PLANNING COMMISSION G DOUGLAS . EVANS Director of Planning and Zoning Publish and Mail: 10/23/03 VICINITY MAP W E S OD"NNELL GOLF CLUB T;4HOUITZ CANYON WAY SITE 0 - o ARENAS RD. a O pC O g p o > o a Q w v Q J Q W LE,� m d z BARRISTO RD. z o. X U.l z IIU^ V IL O LU O U N RAMON RD, CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO.; 5.0977 PD— 288 DESCRIPTION: A planned development and tentative map TTM 31887 . proposal to build 12 7i-plex and one duplex condominium units on APPLICANT: 2.7 acres and to amend.the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove John Wessman Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector street from Ramon Road to Tahquitz Canyon Way. Public Hearing Notices Notification Information for Planning Commission Hearing on November 26, 2003 Case No. 5.0977 PD 288, TTM 31887 Applicant Name: John Wessman Address Wessman Developments 350 South Palm Canyon Drive Palm Springs, CA 92262 Project Location & 284 South Cahuilla Road Description: A planned development and tentative map proposal to build 12 tri- plexes and one duplex condo units on 2.7 acres and to amend the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector street from Ramon Road to Tahquitz Canyon Way. Assigned Planner: Kathy Marc, Associate Planner Labels Prepared by: Stewart Titel and Yoav Shernock, Planning Technician Certification to City Clerk Date: November 20, 2003 Property Owners / Groups / Date Notices Number of Notices Organizations Mailed Mailed Applicant/Sponsors October 23, 2003 4 Property Owners: Land Owner (master lessor) October 23, 2003 106 Master Lessor (sub-lessor) Sub-lessee (unit owner) Indian Land Owners N/A Neighborhood Coalition October 23, 2003 9 Homeowners Association ONIPP Agua Caliente Band of October 23, 2003 1 Cahuilla Indians Rep City Rep for Verification October 23, 2003 1 Public Agencies - IS or EA October 23, 2003 17 Other Interested Parties - EA internal October 23, 2003 3 TOTAL NUMBER MAILED: 141 O� 0.ALM S^T City of Palm Springs �'` ••••'�' Department of Planning &Zoning �GFo0.N MEMORANDUM Date: October 25, 2003 From: Yoav Shernock Planning Technician Subject: Mailing Labels for Notice of Public Hearing, November 26, 2003 Planning Commission Case No. 5.0977 PD 288 John Wessman - Community Church Project This is to certify that the attached labels were created on September 11, 2003 using the most current information available. To the best of my knowledge, the labels are complete and accurate. (-7 1 '1r Yoav 96ernock, Planning Technician October 25, 2003 :Idm ©`I V 7 -.P�-z 513 120 056 513 132 003 513 132 004 Palm Springs Modern Homes V Pilger Assoc Inc G Douglas Smith 74140 El Paseo#4 221 S Patencio Rd 231 S Patencio Rd Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 132 005 513 132 006 513 1N 097 G D Smith Patencio Estates Llc Patencio states 257 S Patencio Rd 28640 Landau Blvd#1 28640 L u Blvd#1 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Cathedral City, CA 92234 Cathe 'ty, CA 92234 513 132 017 513 133 001 513 133 002 Roger Malone&Eugene Milligan 487 Arenas Llc Emil&Joan Forrer 529 W Arenas Rd 830 Cherrystone Dr PO Box 198 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Los Gatos, CA 95032 Tahoe Vista, CA 96148 513 133 004 513 13 05 513 133 006 Mena G Douglas th G Douglas Smith 231 S Lugo Rd 257 S Paten Rd 265 S Lugo Rd Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Sprin s, A 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 133 008 513 133 012 513 133 013 Thomas Larusso G D Smith Gary&Mary Nold 295 S Lugo Rd 2201 S Palm Canyon Dr#117 234 S Patencio Rd Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 133 014 513 133 016 513 134 001 Larry Pilcher&G E Fine Charles Long III&Leonard Grotta Wahoo-cal Rentals Llc 120 Hill St 275 S Lugo Rd 4109 NE 19th Ave#B Avalon, CA 90704 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Portland, OR 97211 513 134 002 513 134 003 513 134 004 Bushman F X&E G Tippin Donald&Deborah Garsh 5515 Inner Circle Dr PO Box 8171 PO Box K Riverside, CA 92506 Tahoe City, CA 96145 Chula Vista, CA 91912 513 134 005 513 134 006 513 134 007 Frances Nadoldski&Dianne Sluzas Lee Toman&Jan Cronquist Rossi Eugene P&Adriana&Rossi 411 W Arenas Rd#5 989 Lombard Ave 3215 E Ocean Blvd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Saint Paul,MN 55105 Long Beach, CA 90803 513 134 008 513 134 009 513 134 010 Neil Graham Diane Colgan Robert Meissner 20982 Brookhurst St#201 111 Moss Rock Ct PO Box 791 Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Folsom, CA 95630 Big Bear Lake, CA 92315 513 134011 513 136 001 513 136 002 Kalsman&Associates Don Kuzma&Dale Burr Adair Holdings Inc 47 N Paseo Laredo 6507 NE loth Ave 2533 N Carson St#A-231 Cathedral City, CA 92234 Vancouver, WA 98665 Carson City,NV 89706 513 136 003 513 136 004 513 136 005 Ted Harvey Mani Scott&Maureen Doherty Laabs Gary A&Current Resident 480 W Baristo Rd 1905 Plainfield Rd#C 2780 Alum Rock Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 Darien,IL 60561 San Jose, CA 95127 513 136 006 513 136 007 513 136 008 Robert Gemmell&Gerald King Dean Corella Stephen&Mary Donahue PO Box 9 488 W Baristo Rd 44 Killian Way San Bernadine, CA 92402 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 513 136 009 513 14J 011 513 141,012 Silver Palm Villas Wahoo c lc Palm Spn s Modem Homes V 48550 Madison St 4109 NE 191 h,,Ave#B 74140 El Pa #4 Indio, CA 92201 Portland,01 j 9 211 Palm Desert, 92260 513 141 015 513 141016 513 142 001 Casa Cody B&B Con Inn Llc Casa Cody B & Country Inn Mountain Resort Palm 175 S Cahuilla Rd 175 S Cahuilla 11855 Sorrento Valley Rd#C Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, C 9 62 San Diego, CA 92121 513 142 003 513 151002 513 151 006 Craig Blau Larry&Sharon Kramer William Davis&Trisha Davis 200 W Arenas Rd 1909 El Camino Real 227 S Cahuilla Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Redwood City, CA 94063 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 151 007 513 151009 513 151010 Virginia Berardini Community Church Of Palm Springs Danny Creager 237 S Cahuilla Rd PO Box 1898 1428 Tularcitos Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Cathedral City, CA 92235 Milpitas, CA 95035 513 151 013 513 151 014 513 151 015 Joann Mcclure William&Sharon Simon Coleman Dennis Devermont&Devermont Marg 1134 Clermont Dr 251 S Lucerne Blvd 19528 Celtic St South Bend,IN 46617 Los Angeles, CA 90004 Northridge, CA 91326 513 151 016 513 151 017 513 15 01 Steven Primack Louis Miller&Matthew Miller Comm Church Of Palm Springs 307 W Arenas Rd 1155 Tiffany Cir N PO Box 18 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Cathedral , CA 92235 513 151 019 513 151020 513 152 002 Community Ch c Of Palm Springs Emil&Joan Forrer Marin&G Ursescu PO Box 1898 375 W Arenas Rd Current Resident Cathedral City, C 235 Palm Springs, CA 92262 239 W Arenas Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 152 006 513 152 010 513 152011 Community Ch Of Palm Springs Karen Prince-wiethom Belardo Court Associates PO Box 1898 261 S Belardo Rd 600 Queen Anne Ave N Cathedral City, CA 235 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Seattle, WA 98109 513 152 014 513 15201 513 15 019 Karen Prince o Karen Prince- ' thorn Karen -wiethorn 261 S Belardo Rd 261 S Belardo 261 S Bel o Rd Palm Springs, CA 9 62 Palm Springs, C 92262 Palm Sprin , CA 92262 513 152 020 513 153 001 513 153 015 Douglas Mannoff&Donna Mannoff Curt Taucher&Jacqueline Taucher Com Red m nt Agency City Palm 200 S Cahuilla Rd 5335 E Broadway PO Box 1786 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Long Beach, CA 90803 Palm Springs, C 92263 513 153 016 513 53 '17 513 153 024 Redevelop nt gency City Of Palm S City P m Springs First Church Of Christ Scientist PO Box 1786 PO Box 743 605 S Riverside Dr Palm Springs, 92263 Palm Sp gs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 153 029 513 153 034 513 182 0 1 Redevelopment Agency City Of Palm S Larry Karmer Vineyard Prop Artie S v o &Ethel Severson PO Box 2743 S K Vine Prop 730 Sanfiag ve Palm Springs, CA 92263 1909 El Camino Real Long Beach, 90804 Redwood City, CA 94063 513 182 004 513 182 005 513 182 006 Leo&Aylaian Lauri Fuller William&Lillian An Pfisterer Enrico Margarite D&Tommy B 377 W Baristo Rd 332 Pablo Dr Enrico Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 340 Pablo Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 182 007 513 182 008 513 182 009 David&Janice Kaminsky Guy Gorelik Madeleine Dejean 342 Pablo Dr 310 S Patencio Rd PO Box 2491 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92263 513182014 513182015 513182016 John Wessman Ronald Kirk Virgil Heinrich&Ardis Heinrich 360 Pablo Dr 2130 Dry Creek Rd 352 Pablo Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Jose,CA 95124 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 182 020 513 182 021 513 182 024 William&Geraldine Jarvis Christopher&Gina Tuttobene Riordan Michael G&Franklin Tr Wats 11920 100th Ave#1203 345 S Monte Vista Dr 445 W Baristo Rd EDMONTON AB Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 CANADA 513 182 025 513 201001 513 201002 Artie Stevenson&Ethel Severson Holm Stephen&Nelda Chagin 730 Santiago Ave 2301 Fairview Ave E#3 303 W Baristo Rd Long Beach, CA 90804 Seattle, WA 98102 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 201 003 513 201 004 513 201 005 G C Brewer E Michael Vetterli Charles Howland 116 S Larchmont Blvd 318 Pablo Dr PO Box 460069 Los Angeles, CA 90004 Palm Springs, CA 92262 San Francisco,CA 94146 513 202 001 513 202 002 513 202 005 Palm Springs Woman Club Eric Mellum Casa Real Estate Limited Partnership PO Box 626 9901 Paramount Blvd#250 5750 Wilshire Blvd#610 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Downey,'CA 90240 Los Angeles, CA 90036 513 202 009 513 2 0 0 513 203 013 La Serena Villas Llc La Sere Villas Llc Marek Lp 760 N La Cienega Blvd 760 N La ienega Blvd 72-240 Highway I I I I Waring Piz Los Angeles, CA 90069 Los Angel s, CA 90069 Palm Desert, CA 92260 513 470 001 513 470 002 513 470 003 Johnston John Gerard Jr. Anne Abercrombie 147 S Tahquitz Dr PO Box 2458 221 S Patencio Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Covina, CA 91722 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 470 004 513 470 005 513 470 006 Marc Herbert&Groth Ric Vonhungen Wanda Walker&Walker Wand Carol Holmes 2864 Tice Creek Dr#4 3512 Ross Rd PO Box 1078 Walnut Creek, CA 94595 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Belfast,ME 04915 513 470 007 513 470 008 513 470 009 John& Jean Metzger Peter Phillips Randall&Joan Boose 600 Arbolado Dr PO Box 115 1808 NE Knott St Fullerton, CA 92835 Fawnskin, CA 92333 Portland,OR 97212 5134 0to 513470013 513 7 014 Metzger R&Jean M&Metzger F John Gerard Jr. &Maria Belem Gerard John rand Jr. 600 bola D PO Box 2458 PO Be 458 Fullerton, C 835 Covina,CA 91722 Covi A 91722 513 501001 513 501 002 513 501 003 Robert Barthel&Vinetta Barthel Gordon Leake R K Miller Inv Co&Susan Lse Bennet 123 NW 4th St#520 500 W Arenas Rd#2 500 W Arenas Rd#3 Evansville, IN 47708 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 501004 513 501 005 513 501 006 R K Miller Inv Co Inc Levine Joan C R K Miller Inv Co Inc Kathleen Highsmith 213 Rio Del Mar Blvd Philip Thompson Jr. 5 Forest Glen Ln SW Aptos, CA 95003 554 1Ith Ave Lakewood, WA 98498 Salt Lake City,UT 84103 513 501 007 513 501 008 513 501 009 R K Miller Investment Cc Inc R K Miller Investment Co Inc R K Miller Inv Co Inc&Terry Hauswir 3335 Mountain Ln 1450 La Perla Ave 1943 Pariva Dr Park City,UT 84060 Long Beach, CA 90815 Cardiff By The Sea, CA 92007 513 501 010 513 501011 513 530 001 R K Miller Inv Co Inc&Carmann Bre Lot Common Bernard Baird&Carol Rake 1447 Wikiup Dr PO Box 2002 3200 Alki Ave SW 4201 Santa Rosa,CA 95403 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Seattle,WA 98116 513 530 002 513 530 003 513 30 04 Roger NWolle Patsy Sampson Patsy pson 529 W Arenas Rd 5461 E Las Lomas St 5461 E Lomas St Palm Springs,CA 92262 Long Beach, CA 90815 Long eac , CA 90815 513 182 003 513 201 012 MS PAM ELA K JONES MR ROBERT T LLOYD 1961 SUMMIT DRIVE 324 SOUTH MONTE VISTA DRIVE LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 Neighborhood Coalition List as of October 1, 2003 MR PETER DIXON MR BILL DAVIS AND 5.0977-pd-288 431 SOUTH MONTE VISTA DRIVE MS TRISHA DAVIS John Wessman PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 227 SOUTH CAHUILLA PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR FRANK TYSEN MR BOB WEITHORN MR TIM HOHMEIER C/O CASA CODY COUNTRY INN 261 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD 1387 CALLE DE MARIA 175 SOUTH CAHUILLA ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 MS CHRISTINE HAMMOND MR PHIL TEDESCO MR MARSHALL ROATH 1155 SOUTH CAMINO REAL 1303 WEST PRIMAVERA DRIVE MS SHERYL HAMLIN PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MS ROXANNE PLOSS 930 CHIA PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 MS MARGARET PARK AGUA CALIENTE REPRESENTATIVE AGUA CALIENTE CAHUILLA INDIANS 650 EAST TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 SENIOR SECRETARY PLANNING&ZONING DEPT. PLANNING DEPT. REP. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263 Scheurer Architects The Collaborative West Attention: Steve Attention: Faye 20411 SW Birch Street, Suite 300 100 Avenida Miramar SPONSORS (4) Newport Beach, CA 92660 San Clemente, CA 92672 Hunsaker&Associates John Wessman Attn: Ben 300 S. Palm Canyon Drive Three Hughes Palm Springs, CA 92262 Irvine, CA 92618-1010 2003 Environmental AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE INC LIAMS Document Distribution List 560ROAD PALMM S SPRINGPRINGS CA 92264 5.0977 Agency for Case 5.0977 EA Mailing DESERT REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER DESERT WATER AGENCY THE GAS COMPANY 1150 NORTH INDIAN CANYON DRIVE 1200 SOUTH GENE AUTRY TRAIL 211 NORTH SUNRISE WAY PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS DISPOSAL SERVICES PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY 4690 E MESQUITE AVENUE 980 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 21865 EAST COPLEY DRIVE DIAMOND BAR CA 91765-4182 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 36100 CATHEDRAL CANYON DRIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS 32505 HARRY OLIVER TRAIL CATHEDRAL CITY CA 92234 PO BOX 800 1000 PALMS CA 92278 ROSEMEAD CA 91770 TIME WARNER CABLE VERIZON VERIZON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS 41725 COOK STREET ,=-AL;9"" SPRINGS 6A 92262 11103 MS JACQUE MCCORMACK PALM DESERT CA 92260 700 HIDDEN RIDGE MC W01JO5 IRVING TX 75038 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL RIVERSIDE COUNTY ASSESSOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL AND WATER CONSERVATION 3255 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY HEALTH SERVICES DISTRICT/REGULATORY RM 114 3111 TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY 1995 MARKET STREET PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 RIVERSIDE CA 92501 AGUA CALIENTE CAHUILLA INDIANS ENGINEERING & PUBLIC MR TOM DAVIS PLANNING DIRECTOR CITY ATTORNEY 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY WORKS PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 FIRE Y f PALM s A'ti City of Palm Springs V vY * * Department of Planning&Building m * H00RORAt EO y3 * 3200 Tahqmtz Canyon Way•Palm Springs,California 92262 Cg41 FO P, TEL (760)323-8245 •FAX(760)322-8360 •TDD(760)864-9527 MEMORANDUM From: Director of Planning and Zoning To: Distribution Date: October 24, 2003 Subject: Notice of Availability of an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment that evaluates Case No. 5.0977-GPA-PD-288 and TTM 31887, an application by John Wessman for an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector roadway between Ramon Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way, a Planned Development District and a Tentative Tract Map for property located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, which includes: 1) A General Plan Amendment, to amend the text of the General Plan Circulation Element to remove Cahuilla Road's designation from a collector roadway between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north. This change is street status will result in Cahuilla Road becoming a local roadway with a fifty (50)foot right-of-way width. 3)To approve Planned Development District 288 in order to construct twelve(12)two-story triplex buildings and one (1) duplex building for a total of 38 condominium units. A one lot condominium Tentative Tract Map is also proposed. The project will include a centrally located recreational area with pool, spa and cabanas. The project is located on a 2.7 acre previously developed site. The proposed project will require the demolition of an existing two story church facility, duplex, two single-family residences and paved parking lot. The subject site is currently zoned with a split zoning designation comprised of both R-2 and R-3(Limited multiple-family residential and multiple- family residential and hotel, respectively) zoning designations. A total of 46 dwelling would be allowed under the Planned Development District R-2/R-3 zone designation. The applicant's proposal of 38 dwelling units is below maximum allowable density. The project will gain vehicular access in two locations, one from Cahuilla Road to the east of the project and one from Lugo Road at the west of the project. The project is not walled or gated, therefore there are multiple pedestrian access points. The project departs from the specific zoning requirements by proposing the following changes from the R-2/R-3 zones property development standards. Parking spaces as required per zone would include 90 tenant spaces and 22 guest for a total of 112 spaces. Parking spaces proposed for the project are 72 tenant spaces and 10 guest fdr a total of 82 spaces. Height of structures allowed by zone is 24'. The project proposes a structure height of 26'to 34'. City zoning standards require all buildings exceeding 15'in height to have a 25'setbackfrom the property line adjacent to existing single story development. The project proposal includes a range from 8' to 12' in setbacks from the property line for structures exceeding 15' in height adjacent to existing single story Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 A development. The zoning ordinance requires front yards facing on a local or collector street to have a front yard setback of 25' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Lugo Road (a collector street) of 12' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Baristo Road (collector street designation at that location)of 12'. Lastly, the project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Cahuilla Road (presently designated as a collector street) of 26'. The City's development standard in the R-2/R-3 zoning designation requires a separation distance between buildings of 15' and the project proposal complies with one exception of 10'. 4) To approve Tentative Tract Map 31887, which includes the subdivision of 2.7 acres into a one lot condominium map. The project is located at 284 S. Cahuilla Road, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15. Development of the project will include some or all of the following permits: A Planned Development District(PDD)for the land uses and development standards; a Tentative Tract Map (TTM)for condominium ownership; grading and building permits, including a PM-10 permit; State of California Department of Agriculture (Fire Ant Program clearance)and South Coast Air Quality Management District permit for demolition of commercial structures. The City has authorized the release of the IS/EA for public review and comment for the project summarized above. Mitigation measures addressing air quality and cultural issues that are contained in the IS/EA. A copy of the IS/EA and related processing materials can be reviewed or obtained from City at the address above. The period of review and comment will be from October 27 to November 26, 2003. Written comments on the IS/EA should be submitted to Kathy Marx, Associate Planner Department of Planning and Zoning, City of Palm Springs, atthe above address no later than November 26, 2003. The Planning Commission will review the proposed project at its meeting on November 26, 2003. At that meeting the Planning Commission may recommend that the City Council adopt a mitigated negative declaration at a later date. Please contact Kathy Marx, Associate Planner at (760) 323- 8245, if you have any questions regarding the City's review process for considering the IS/EA. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING INITIAL STUDY 1. Case No: Case No. 5.0877 -PD-288 and TTM 31887 Project title: Community Church Project 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 3. Contact person and phone number: Kathy Marx, Associate Planner Tel: (760) 323-8245 4. Project location: Northwest corner of Cahuilla Road and Baristo Road, Assessor's Parcel No. 513-151-009, 018 and 019 5. Project sponsor's name and address: John Wessman, 300 S. Palm Canyon Dr., Palm Springs, CA 92262 6. 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.) The project consists of a Planned Development District in order to construct twelve (12) two-story triplex buildings and one (1) duplex building for a total of 38 condominium units. A one lot condominium Tentative Tract Map is also proposed. The project will include a centrally located recreational area with pool, spa and cabanas. The project is located on a 2.7 acre previously developed site. The proposed project will require the demolition of an existing two story church facility, duplex, two sing le-family'residences and paved parking lot. The subject site is currently zoned with a split zoning designation comprised of both R-2 and R-3 (Limited multiple-family residential and multiple-family residential and hotel, respectively)zoning designations. A total of 46 dwelling would be allowed under the Planned Development District R-2/R-3 zone designation. The applicant's proposal of 38 dwelling units is below maximum allowable density. The project will gain vehicular access in two locations, one from Cahuilla Road to the east of the project and one from Lugo Road at the west of the project. The project is not walled or gated, therefore there are multiple pedestrian access points. The project departs from the specific zoning requirements by proposing the following changes from the R-2/R-3 zones property development standards. Parking spaces as required per zone would include 90 tenant spaces and 22 guest for a total of 112 spaces. Parking spaces proposed for the project are 72 tenant spaces and 10 guest for a total of 82 spaces. Height of structures allowed by zone is 24'. The project proposes City of Palm Springs Initial Study 1 10/21/2003 a structure height of 26' to 34'. City zoning standards require all buildings exceeding 15' in height to have a 25' setback from the property line adjacent to existing single story development. The project proposal includes a range from 8' to 12' in setbacks from the property line for structures exceeding 15' in height adjacent to existing single story development. The zoning ordinance requires front yards facing on a local or collector street to have a front yard setback of 25' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Lugo Road (a collector street) of 12' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Baristo Road (collector street designation at that location) of 12'. Lastly, the project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Cahuilla Road (presently designated as a collector street) of 26'. The City's development standard in the R-2/R-3 zoning designation requires a separation distance between buildings of 15' and the project proposal complies with one exception of 10'. Another component of the project is a request to amend the General Plan Circulation Plan to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector between Ramon Road on the south and Tahquitz Canyon Way on the north. This change of street classificaion will result in Cahuilla Road becoming a local street with a fifty(50) foot right-of-way width. The project is proposing an alternative residential street section Cahuilla Road adjacent to the proposed project site that includes the narrowed right-of-way, aggregate walkways and modified curb and gutter. Both a collector and local roadway provide for a two travel lane roadway. No roadway closure is proposed. 7. Present Land Use: Church, paved parking lot, single-family residential and multi-family residential 8 General Plan designation: MI5 and H43/30 8 a Zoning: R-2, R-3 M15 represents Medium-Density Residential ) R-2 represents a limited providing for a threshold of twelve (12) and a multiple-family residential maximum of fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre. zoning designation. R-3 H43/30 represents High-Density Residential represents a multiple-family providing for a threshold of twenty-one (21) and hotel zone. dwelling units per acre and a maximum of thirty Proposed Zoning: N/A (30) dwelling units per acre. 9. Is the proposed action a "project" as defined by CEQA? (See Section 2.6 of State CEQA Guidelines. If more than one project Yes 0 No ❑ is present in the same area, cumulative impact should be considered) 10. If "yes" above, does the project fall into any of the Emergency Yes ❑ No ❑O Projects listed in Section 15269 of the State CEQA Guidelines? 11. If "no" on 10., does the project fall under any of the Ministerial Yes ❑ No 0 Acts listed in Section 15268(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines? 12. If "no" on 1I., does the project fall under any of the Statutory Yes ❑ No ❑O Exemptions listed in Article 18 of the State CEQA Guidelines? City of Palm Springs Initial Stttdy 2 10/21/2003 13. If "no" on 12., does the project qualify for one of the Categorical Exemptions listed in Article 19 of the State CEQA Guidelines? (Where there is a reasonable probability that the activity will Yes ❑ No ❑X have a significant effect due to special circumstances, a categorical exemption does not apply). 14. Surrounding land uses and setting (briefly describe the project's surroundings): North: Multi-family residential/single-family residential South: Public street/single-family residential across the street East: Public street/church and resort hotel across the street West: Public street/resort hotel and single-family residential across the street 15. Surrounding General Plan and Zoning: North: H43/30 (High density residential/30 dwelling units per acre) South: L2 (Very low density residential/2 dwelling units per acre) East: H43130 (High density residential/30 dwelling units per acre) West: M15 (Medium density residential/15 dwelling units per acre) Zone North: R-3 (Multi-family and Hotel) South: R-1-A(Single-family) East: R-3 (Multi-family and Hotel) West: R-2 (Limited Multi-family) City of Palm Springs Initial Study 3 10/21/2003 a 16. Is the proposed project consistent with (if answered "yes"or 'In/a", no explanation is required): City of Palm Springs General Plan* Yes ❑ No ❑O N/A ❑ Applicable Specific Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑O City of Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance** Yes ❑ Nog N/A ❑ South Coast Air Quality Management Plan Yes ❑O No ❑ N/A ❑ Airport Part 150 Noise Study Yes O No ❑ N/A ❑ Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑O *The proposed project includes a request for a General Plan Circulation Element amendment to remove Cahuilla Road's designation as a collector street. That change would reduce Cahuilla Road to a local street designation and change the right- of-way from sixty (60) feet to fifty (50) feet. The project also includes a proposal to create a modified residential street standard incorporating the reduced right-of-way, aggregate walkways and modified curbs and gutters. **The proposed project departs from specific development standards associated with the R-2 (limited multi-family residential) zone and R-3 (multiple-family residential and hotel) zone. The project does comply with the Planned Development District intent of allowing for certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of the zone classifications. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 4 10/21/2003 17. Are any of the following studies required? Soils Report Yes 0 No ❑ Slope Study Yes ❑ No 0 Geotechnical Report Yes ❑ No 0 Traffic Study Yes 0 No ❑ Air Quality Study Yes ❑ No 0 Hydrology Yes 0 No ❑ Sewer Study Yes ❑ No 0 Biological Study Yes ❑ No 0 Noise Study Yes ❑ No 0 Hazardous Materials Study Yes ❑ No 0 Housing Analysis Yes ❑ No 0 Archaeological Report Yes ❑ No 0 Groundwater Analysis Yes ❑ No 0 Water Quality Report Yes ❑ No 0 Other Yes ❑ No 0 18. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) 19, Incorporated herein by reference are: Final Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan Update Traffic Study of Cahuilla Road between Areanas Road and Baristo Road, George Dunn Engineering, July 11, 2003. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 5 10/21/2003 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources O Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/Water ❑ Land Use/ Planning Materials Quality ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities /Service ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Systems EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ IA scenic vista? ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1.a) AESTHETICS (Less than Significant Impact). Preliminary architectural plans have been submitted. Plans for the condominium development will be subject to the City's Architectural Review process. The proposed project consists of twelve two story tri-plex buildings containing one third story City of Palm Springs Initial Study 6 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact living space consisting of 450 square feet. The tri-plex consists of two bungalows ranging in size from 1,803 square feet to 2,328 square feet and a carriage suite of 2,121 square feet. The bungalows each have an associated two car garage. The carriage unit has a one car garage and one covered parking space. The total square footage per tri-plex is 7,630 square feet. The one duplex unit includes two units of 1,340 square feet. Each duplex unit includes two 1-car garages for a total square footage of 3,670 square feet. The architectural style of all structures is Mediterranean Monastery. All facades are multi-dimensional and rooflines are multi-tiered. Issues of concern regarding the proposed project include the height of structures in relationship to property lines and adjacent single story structures and the impact to view corridors from existing properties. Additionally, the front yard setbacks as related to the street frontage and the proposed street improvement standards are areas of in need of evaluation. In response to those concerns, the proposed project has been reviewed by the City's Design Review Committee. The function of the Design Review Committee is to provide recommendations to the Department of Planning and Zoning staff, in terms of project aesthetics. The Design Review Committee is comprised of design professionals including architects and landscape architects. The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project as submitted with unanimous group consensus. The Design Review Committee has determined that the proposed architectural design of the project, as depicted in the project elevations and cross sections is consistent with the high standards established within the City of Palm Springs. They have noted that the project is consistent with existing development in the project area, and noted that the proposed project would make a positive addition to the area. Additionally, the City's Office of Neighborhood Involvement and Public Participation has conducted two neighborhood meetings in regards to the proposed project. Both meetings were very well attended. The developer provided the participants with two site plans for the project in order to determine neighborhood preferences. One plan proposed drive aisles within the project to be adjacent to property lines at locations that abutted single-family and multi-family properties. The second option site plan proposed two story structures adjacent to the property lines and drive aisles entering the site at mid-street locations. All the neighbors immediately impacted were at the meeting and fully supported the second option if the property boundary were well landscaped, second story balconies are not located on the north elevations of the two tri-plex units adjacent to single-story properties and one two story unit was changed to single story. All plans have been adjusted accordingly. As a result of input from the neighborhood and staff's aesthetic analysis, a two story unit located in the northern section of the project and adjacent to existing single-story residential has been replaced with a single story unit. With this change potential significant aesthetic/view impacts are reduced to a less than significant impact. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 7 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1.b-c) AESTHETICS (No Impact). The proposal is not located adjacent to the State Highway and consequently will have no impacts on the aesthetics of highway corridor. The development of the property will not disrupt any scenic resources. 1.d) AESTHETICS (Less than Significant Impact). The development of the subject property as currently envisioned will result in new sources of night time lighting. The City's final review of the development proposal includes a photometric study of the entire site. Light created by the project is not allowed to spill beyond the perimeters of the site. Downcast lighting is also a requirement per City zoning ordinance. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland ❑ ❑ ❑ Z 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ l7 contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location ❑ ❑ ❑ or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 2.a-c) AGRICULTURE (No Impact) The project site has never been used agriculturally and it would not be feasible for agricultural usage. City of Palm Spings Initial Study 8 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 3. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ 9 ❑ ❑ quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ Al ❑ ❑ projected air quality violation? 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to ❑ ❑ ❑ 17 substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ substantial number of people? ❑ 3.a-b)AIR QUALITY(Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) The Coachella Valley has been under scrutiny by EPA for"serious" non-attainment of PM 10 standards. The EPA and AQMD have been working with the Cities and County to promulgate stricter regulations and procedures in an attempt to meet this Federal air quality standard. A new ordinance has been developed in order to establish minimum requirements for construction and demolition activities and other specific sources in order to reduce man-made fugitive dust and the corresponding PM10 emissions. The ordinance deals with construction activities, vacant lands, unpaved roadways and the like that have been determined to be the source of significant contributions to PM 10 violations. The Coachella Valley will continue to be closely monitored and could face sanctions unless the PM 10 standard is met for three consecutive years. The project site is also located within the Salton Sea Air Basin, which has been designated as a "severe-17" Ozone non-attainment area because of violations of the Federal ambient air City of Palm Springs Initial Study 9 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact quality standards for ozone primarily due to pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin. This designation indicates that the attainment date for the federal ozone standards is November 2007 (17 years from the date of enactment of the Federal Clean Air Act.) This project will be consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook standards. However, due to future project, construction and grading activities, short term impacts to air quality could occur. To minimize construction activity emissions, the project applicant will be required to comply with the City's Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Ordinance and the new fugitive dust control ordinance. Compliance with this Ordinance will mitigate the impacts to air quality to a level of insignificance. MITIGATION: 1. The applicant shall comply with Section 8.50 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control (PM-10) and prepare and submit a plan to the Building Department to control fugitive dust emissions in compliance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The plan must implement reasonably available control measures to ensure that project emissions are in compliance with the SCAQMD. 3c-d)AIR QUALITY(No Impacts) The project will be located on a site that is surrounded by residential development. The proposed project will not alter climatological conditions either locally or regionally. The proposed residences will not interrupt wind patterns. The irrigation of landscaping will not effect the moisture or temperature of the area in a significant way due to the size of the project. 3.e) AIR QUALITY (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT) Short term impacts, such as odors and pollution created by diesel engines of large equipment during construction and grading operations, may occur as a result of the development of the site but due to the short term nature_these are considered less than significant. The City of Palm Springs garbage disposal service has agreed to pick up residential trash at individual units eliminating the use of a large dumpster that could have the potential to create objectionable odors for the users and adjacent property owners. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 10 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X vernal pool, coastal, 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 ❑ ❑ established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? City ofPalin Springs Initial Study 11 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, ❑ 0 ❑ ❑X or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 4. a,b,c,d,e,f The subject property has been fully developed previously. All portions of the site has been previously disturbed. Therefore the project will have no impact to endangered species or their habitats. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical ❑ ❑ ❑ resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or ❑ ❑ ❑ O unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal ❑ ❑ ❑ cemeteries? 5.a) CULTURAL RESOURCES. (No Impact) The site has been previously developed. As defined in CEQA 15064.5, no significant historic resources exist on this site. 5.b) CULTURAL RESOURCES (Less Than Significant Impact With mitigation)The project has previously been fully developed but the potential for subsurface cultural resources that could be disturbed during site grading exists due to the proximity of Tribal lands. Tribal interest in such properties and resources prescribes the following Conditions of Approval shall be incorporated into the entitlement process, if so approved: 1. An archeologist qualified according to the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines shall perform a record search of the proposed project area, to be conducted prior to initiation of construction. 2. A Cultural Resources Monitor, designated by the Agua Caliente Cultural Resource Office, shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities. 3. Should buried deposits be encountered, the Cultural Resources Monitor shall have the authority to halt construction and notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines) to prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the City of Palm Springs Initial Study 12 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact City, State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Cultural Resource coordinator for approval and any repatriation of cultural materials be done in cooperation with the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. 5.c) CULTURAL RESOURCES (No Impact)The General Plan for the City of Palm Springs indicates there should be no impact to paleontological resources as a result of this project. 5.d) CULTURAL RESOURCES (Less Than Significant Impact) As previously noted, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians utilized a vast territory beyond the bounds of the existing reservation. The possibility of finding human remains does exist in this area. In accordance with Public Resources Code 5097.94, if human remains are found, the Riverside County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. If the coroner determines that the remains are not recent, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to determine the most likely descendent for the area. The designated Native American representative then determines in consultation with the property owner the disposition of the human remains. Compliance with this law will reduce any potential inputs to a less than significant level. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, ❑ ❑ including the risk of loss, injury, or death ❑ involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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? ❑ ❑ O ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, ❑ ❑ ❑ 191 including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x City of Palin Springs Initial Sludy 13 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Result in substantial soil erosion or 11 ❑ ❑ ❑x the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and13 11 ❑ 0 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 1:1 0 00 Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems ❑ 0 0 Z where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 6.a)ii) GEOLOGIC (Less Than Significant Impact). The site is located in an area where the primary geologic hazard is severe ground shaking from earthquakes originating on nearby faults. A major earthquake above magnitude 7 originating on the local segment of the San Andreas fault zone would be the critical seismic event that could effect the site within the design life of the proposed development. Engineered design and earthquake-resistant construction increases the safety and allow development in seismic areas. Based upon data obtained from a review of selected literature and the site evaluation, the site is suitable for the proposed project. Standard City requirements to protect future residents include that the developer be required to submit a precise grading plan and soils report for the project area for review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of building permits and that all structures will be constructed to meet Uniform Building Code specific earthquake design standards. The soils report will address subsidence and the possibility of expansive soils on the property. The grading plan will be required to be in compliance with the soils report. Grading and construction decisions will be made upon review of the grading plan and soils report. 6.a)i)iii-iv)b-e) GEOLOGIC (No impact)The subject site consists of 2.7 acres of previously developed land. The development of the proposed 38 multi-family residences will involve minor grading of the existing terrain. There are no known geological hazards present on the site other than ground shaking potential associated with earthquakes, and the site is not located within any Alquist-Priolo or City adopted special study zone. A site inspection conducted by the Department of Planning and Zoning verified that the site is relatively flat, City of Palm Springs Initial Study 14 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact with no slopes exceeding 10%, Therefore, there is no potential for a significant effect on the environemnt due to intrusion into slop or hillside areas. The project is being proposed on a previously developed site. No significant increases in wind erosion, blowing sand or water erosion either on or off-site are expected based upon review by the Planning and Engineering Departments. Therefore, there is no potential for a significant effect on the environment due to erosion provided the project complies with Air Quality mitigation and City ordinances which address wind and water erosion. According to the General Plan, settlement and liquefaction as a result of seismic shaking are not considered significant hazards in Palm Springs. Therefore, there will be no impact to the environment as a result of liquefaction hazard. The project site is located on the valley floor and is underlain by deposits of recent alluvium. Because the site is level, no unique geologic features are known to be present. Therefore, there is minimal potential for a significant effect on the environement due to impacts to unique geological features. A site inspection by the Department of Planning and Zoning staff reveals no major land forms on the site. There are no known unstable earth conditions associated with the project site, and the nature of the project is such that there is no possibility of creating an unstable condition. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS —Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the ❑x routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and 0 0 X accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0 one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 15 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code El ❑ ❑x Section 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 or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in ❑ ❑ 0 a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency ❑ 0 17 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 ❑ ❑ 19 wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 7.a-b) (Less Than Significant Impact)The development proposal includes the demolition of a church, two single-family residences, a duplex and an asphalt parking lot. The potential that the demolition may include hazardous materials exists. A demolition permit is required to be obtained from the City's Building Department. This process includes an asbestos survey and approval of the demolition by the South Coast Air Quality Management District per Rule 1403. The survey shall include the inspection, identification, and quantification of all friable, and Class I and Class II non-friable asbestos-containing material, and any physical sampling of materials. Any contaminated material that is found must be removed before the facility is demolished by a licensed contractor with certification for that purpose. Transport of any hazardous materials found at the site must be performed by a certified company with transportation vehicles that are clearly marked and designed for the purpose. Hazardous wastes must be delivered to approved sites only. These measures are taken to safeguard the City of Palm Springs Initial Study 16 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact public at all times. Compliance with existing City and Air Quality Management District permit requirements will reduce any potential impact to a less than significant level. 7.c-h) HAZARDS (No Impact). The project is not located within 114 mile of a public school, nor located at a previously determined hazardous waste site, nor within 2 miles of an airport. The project would not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plan, nor is it situated in an area that would be susceptible to wildland fire. Therefore there is no impact from these hazards by the proposed project. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY-- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑ ❑ ❑ 17 waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern, of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 17 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or ❑ ❑ ❑ O redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death ❑ ❑ 0 0 involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ❑ ❑ l7 O mudflow? 8.a) (No Impact) The project will utilize water provided by Desert Water Agency, a public water provider within the City. Wastewater will be removed from the project site through the municipal sewer system. 8.b) (Less Than Significant Impact) The Desert Water Agency (DWA) currently owns, operates, and maintains water distribution and pumping facilties within the project area. Project proponents will be required to connect to existing DWA water infrastructure to provide water to the site for construction and domestic water service. The develop will be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and other requirements of the DWA in order to provide water service to the site. Water service requirements may include, but are not limited to, upgrades, modifications, replacement, and abandonment of existing DWA facilities. These improvements may require construction within and adjacent to public rights-pf-way and existing and/or proposed easements. Construction will occur in accordance with DWA and City requirements and will not cause any significant effects on the environment. 8.c-e) HYDROLOGY AND WATER (Less Than Significant Impact) No streamcourse is on or adjacent to the proposed development site. The subject site is found on the Flood Insurance City of Palm Springs Initial Study 18 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 060257 0006D, dated July 7, 1999, for Riverside County. The FIRM designates this area as Zone B, within a 500 year floodplain boundary. The potential to impact a local floodway does exist although the City's storm water runoff system has been designed in relation to the potential carrying capacity that would be necessary with the occurrence of such a catastrophic event. The applicant proposes to capitalize on the City's Master Drainage Plan, and use its policy of allowing development to convey stormwater runoff directly to approved drainage carriers. In this case, the existing property is adjacent to Baristo Road, a fully improved street with curb and gutter improvements. Surface runoff from the subject property will drain south off the property to Baristo Road and then into Baristo Channel running east to eventually flow into T ahquitz Creek Channel. The availability of adjacent adequately sized storm drain lines allows the project to defer an onsite retention/detention facilities and meet the flood control requirements required by the City of Palm Springs. 8.f-)j HYDROLOGY AND WATER (No Impact) Based upon the knowledge of the Planning and Zoning staff and the City Engineer, the project will not degrade water quality, place housing or other structures within a 100 year floodplain, or expose people or structures to risk of a breached dam or ocean tsunami, seiche or mudflow. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an establishedEl ❑ ❑ 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 ❑x ❑ plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community ❑ 0 ❑ ❑X conservation plan? 9.a,c) NO IMPACT. This project is a redevelopment project relating to a previously developed site that consisted of a church, paved parking lot, duplex and two single-family residences. The demolition of existing structures and reconstruction of multi-family residential units is City of Palm Springs Initial Study 19 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact consistent with the existing adjacent property uses. The project site is surrounded by small resort hotels, single-family residences, and small unit multi-family residences. The size and number of units proposed is consistent with the surrounding properties and would not divide an established community. No habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan applies to this previously developed site. 9.b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project departs from the specific zoning requirements by proposing the following changes from the R-2/R-3 zones property development standards. Parking spaces as required per zone would include 90 tenant spaces and 22 guest for a total of 112 spaces. Parking spaces proposed for the project are 72 tenant spaces and 10 guest for a total of 82 spaces. Height of structures allowed by zone is 24'. The project proposes a structure height of 26' to 34'. City zoning standards require all buildings exceeding 15' in height to have a 25' setback from the property line adjacent to existing single story development. The project proposal includes a range from 8' to 12' in setbacks from the property line for structures exceeding 15' in height adjacent to existing single story development. The zoning ordinance requires front yards facing on a local or collector street to have a front yard setback of 25' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Lugo Road (a collector street) of 12' from property line. The project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Baristo Road (collector street designation at that location) of 12'. Lastly, the project proposal is for a minimum front yard setback on Cahuilla Road (presently designated as a collector street) of 26'. The City's development standard in the R-2/R-3 zoning designation requires a separation distance between buildings of 15' and the project proposal complies with one exception of 10'. Staff and the established neighborhood group in proximity of the project site have reviewed the proposed changes to the standards for development associated with the project and concluded that with modifications to the site plan and architectural plans the project would have a less than significant impact on the neighborhood. Those modifications include changing a two story building to one story located adjacent to the northern property boundary and adjacent single story residences; alternating front setbacks distances along street frontages to create a variety of street profiles; changing entrances to mid-project locations in order to relieve critical massing and allowing for view corridors from all directions; architecturally designing multi-faceted facades on all elevations and a variety of roof heights on each unit to create interest and breaking up critical massing; upgrading all interior street material from asphalt to interlocking colored pavers; leaving the project not gated nor walled in order to conform with the overall neighborhood pattern of accessibility and street interest; and developing alternate residential street section of a narrowed right-of-way proposal on Cahuilla Road, aggregate walkways and modified curb and gutter. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: City of Paltn Springs Initial Study 20 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local ❑ ❑ ❑ 191 general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 10.a-b) NO IMPACT. This project has no impact to sand and gravel resources. No other mineral resources are known to exist. 11. NOISE—Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or ❑ ❑ O ❑ noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 21 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose ❑ ❑ ❑ Z people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 11.a, b, d) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The impacts related to noise would be associated with short-term construction activities. Although periodic noise levels have a potential to be higher during periods of construction, this will be temporary in nature and all vehicles will be required to have adequate muffling devices to ensure compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance. The proposed project site would not be expected to result in exposure of persons to or generation of groundborne vibration or noise levels. No sources of groundborne noise are proposed as part of the project. This project will have the potential of exposing existing residential properties only during the short term of construction. Construction hours are limited by the City's Noise Ordinance, also. Any new development would create an increase in noise levels but the proposed project is below the density levels associated with the overlying zoning designations thereby minimizing the impact of noise level increase to a previously adopted use by the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. With the incorporation of mitigation measures during construction activities, the impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level. 11.c, e, f) NO IMPACT. No substantive increase in noise levels would be associated with this completed project. This project is not located in within two miles of an existing airport therefore residents would not be subjected to air traffic noise at any level of significance. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the ❑ ❑ Z ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ replacement housing elsewhere? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 22 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 12.a-c) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project will add 38 dwelling units to the site. Four existing dwelling units will be demolished. No substantial population growth will occur directly from this development proposal nor will substantial numbers of existing people or housing be displaced and necessitate relocation. The allowable number of dwelling units for the site as designated by the Zoning Ordinance is 46. Therefore the proposal of 38 dwelling units is well within the General Plan guidelines for the site. There will be no significant impact to housing or population. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ O ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ 191 ❑ 13. a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT This project is within the City's five minute response time for fire services and within reasonable proximity of the Police Station. The project is adequately served by other public services as well. The Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD) is currently experiencing a reduction in enrollment numbers. Staffing for PSUSD schools is maintained at a ratio of one teacher for every 30 students at the primary levels and one teacher for every 27 students at the secondary levels. These levels comply with the maximum teacher to student ratio of 1:30 set by the State of California. The project proponent will be required to pay a school facilities fee to PSUSD. The impact fee assists the school district to defray costs of new facilities associated with new development. The City of Palm Springs recently adopted a resolution amending resolution 20362 of the City's Comprehensive fee schedule, requiring the payment of fees for park and recreational City of Palin Springs Initial Shady 23 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact purposes as authorized by Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution requires a developer to pay an in-lieu fee for park and recreation facilities computed by multiplying the area of park to be dedicated by the fair market value of the land being developed plus the cost to acquire and improve the property plus the fair share contribution, less any credit given by the City based upon the formula contained in Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution was adopted in accordance with the State of California's Quimby Act to facilitate the further development of park and recreation facilities at a local level. This project will not generate a significant impact to public utilities because of the location of the project site, the payment of the school facilities fee and the payment of in-lieu park fee. 14. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑O might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 14.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. This project will include a swimming pool, cabanas and spa. It is not adjacent to or located in nearby proximity to a public recreational facility. The City of Palm Springs recently adopted a resolution amending resolution 20362 of the City's Comprehensive fee schedule, requiring the payment of fees for park and recreational purposes as authorized by Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution requires a developer to pay an in-lieu fee for park and recreation facilities computed by multiplying the area of park to be dedicated by the fair market value of the land being developed plus the cost to acquire and improve the property plus the fair share contribution, less any credit given by the City based upon the formula contained in Ordinance No. 1632. This resolution was adopted in accordance with the State of California's Quimby Act to facilitate the further development of park and recreation facilities at a local level. Based upon the site location and necessary compliance with City ordinance the impact to public recreational facilities will be less than significant. 14.b) NO IMPACT. The project includes no recreational facilities that would have an adverse physical effect on the environment. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: City of Palm Springs Initial Study 24 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) 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 ❑ ❑ 19 ❑ increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 15.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. A traffic study conducted by George Dunn Engineering in July 2003, was prepared for the proposed development. The proposal to construct 38 condominium units is expected to generate 234 daily trip-ends. In itself, this amount of traffic generated by a proposed development would not require preparation of a traffic study, however, the applicant proposes to amend the General Plan Circulation Element to remove Cahuilla Road's designation from a collector roadway between Ramon Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way. The General Plan Amendment required the preparation of the traffic study for this project. Existing street conditions are a two lane roadway with a 50' right-of-way. The amendment to the General Plan would maintain the 50 foot two lane roadway that is determined by the traffic study adequate to carry local existing and proposed residential traffic. City of Patin Springs Initial Study 25 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact There is no need to require a 60' right-of-way. It is also the City's General Plan policy to allow for special street sections. The development proposal includes aggregate walkways and modified curb and gutter construction. This is consistent with existing conditions within the neighborhood. Review and approval by the City Engineer will reduce any potential impacts. 15. f) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The proposed project is providing 72 covered parking spaces for residents and 10 guest parking spaces. This is a reduction in parking as required by the City Zoning Ordinance by 30 spaces. The project does include interior drive aisles 24—26 feet in width. 15.b-e and g ) NO IMPACT. The project proposal to reclassify Cahuilla Road between Ramon Road and Tahquitz Canyon Way from a collector street to a local street with a special section will have no significant adverse impacts on local circulation or access. Nor will the proposed project create any significant adverse impacts on local circulation or access. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x are new or expanded entitlements needed? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 26 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 waste? 16.a, c-g) NO IMPACT The development proposal would not exceed the waste water treatment facility capacity, would not require the construction of a new storm drain system, will be served by a waste transfer and recycle site that can accommodate the project's needs and will comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations relating to solid waste. Therefore there shall be no significant impact to those systems. 16 b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The Desert Water Agency (DWA) currently owns, operates, and maintains water distribution and pumping facilities within the project area. Project proponents will be required to connect to existing DWA water infrastructure to provide water to the site for construction and domestic water service. The developer will be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and other requirements of the DWA in order to provide water service to the site. Water service requirements may include, but are not limited to, upgrades, modifications, replacement, and abandonment of existing DWA facilities. These improvements may require construction within and adjacent to public rights-of-way and exiting and/or proposed easements. Construction will occur in accordance with DWA and City requirements and will not cause any significant effects upon the environment. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE City of Palm Springs Initial Study 27 10/21/2003 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 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 which will cause substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ 1XI adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 17. b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The project will less than significant impact resulting from short-term air quality concerns during the construction process by mitigation measures of the permit and inspection process of the City Building Department and the South Coast Air Quality Management District for fugitive dust control. Cultural concerns regarding the potential for archeological resources under the soil substrate will be mitigated by archeological date base research conducted before the issuance of any permits and the presence of a qualified on-site cultural resource monitor during demolition and construction. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 28 10/21/2003 18. LISTED BELOW ARE THE PERSON(S)WHO PREPARED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning and Zoning Kathy Marx, Associate Planner Don Duckworth, City Building Official David Barakian, City Engineer Marcus Fuller, Senior Civil Engineer Ron Nicholas, Engineering Assistant Bary Freet, City Fire Chief Carl Thibeault, Fire Marshal John Nixon, Cultural Resources Officer, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Woody Adams, Desert Water Agency Dave Luker, Desert Water Agency George Dunn, Traffic Engineer DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 1 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 (a) have been analyzed 0 adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. City of Pabn Springs Initial Study 29 10/21/2003 �QG�� Douglas R. ans Date Director of Planning and Zoning Exhibits Available for review at the Palm Springs City Hall located at 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photo 3. General Plan 4. Architectural Elevations 5. Site Plan 6. Site Cross Sections 7. Traffic Study City of Palm Springs Initial Study 30 10/21/2003 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE FILING OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PD-288, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TTM-31887 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 38 CONDOMINIUM UNITS LOCATED AT 284 CAHUILLA ROAD, ZONE R-2 AND R-3, SECTION 15. WHEREAS,John Wessman(the"Applicant")has filed an application with the City pursuant to Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 9.60 for a Tentative Tract Map to construct 38 condominium units located at 284 Cahuilla Road, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 15; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed Tentative Tract Map 31887 with the City and has paid the required filing fees; and WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map was submitted to appropriate agencies as required by the subdivision requirements of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, with the request for their review, comments, and requirements; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider TTM 31887, PDD 288 and review of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment, was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on November 26, 2003, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31887, Planned Development District 288 and Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved bythe Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2003, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31887, Planned Development District 288 and Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved bythe City Council in accordance with applicable law, WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66412.3, the City Council has considered the effect of the proposed subdivision, Tentative Tract Map 30941, on the housing needs of the region in which Palm Springs is situated and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources; the approval of the proposed project represents the balance of these respective needs in a manner which is most consistent with the City's obligation pursuant to its police power to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision, Tentative Tract Map 31887, 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 meeting on the Project, including but not limited to the staff report, all environmental data including the environmental assessment prepared for the project and all written and oral testimony presented. / J qe THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council finds that the current environmental assessment for TTM 31887 adequately addresses the general environmental setting of the proposed Project, its significant environmental impacts, and the mitigation measures related to each significant environmental effect for the proposed project. The City Council further finds that with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures, potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from this project will be reduced to a level of insignificance and therefore recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. Section 2: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 the City Council finds that the proposed subdivision and the provisions for its design and improvement are compatible with the objectives, polices, and general land uses and program provided in the City's General Plan and any applicable specific plan. Section 3: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 (Subdivision Map Act), the City Council finds that with the incorporation of those conditions attached in Exhibit A: 1. The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan designation for the site is H43/30 and M15, high density residential and medium density residential, respectively. The General Plan would allow 46 dwelling units on the project site. The applicant is proposing 38 units and therefore, is well within the density parameters of the General Plan. 2. The design of improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 the City Council finds that the proposed subdivision and the provisions for its design and improvement are compatible with the objectives, polices, and general land uses and program provided in the City's General Plan. All street, drainage, and utilities improvements are subject to the standards of the General Plan and Conditions of Approval associated with TTM 31887. Code relief to distance between buildings to be reduced from 15 feet to 10 feet minimum, front yard setbacks from 25 feet to 12 feet minimum, height from 24 feet to 34 feet maximum and parking space numbers from 114 to 79 minimum have been determined to be compatible with overall goals and policies of the General Plan. Those include but are not limited to Land Use Element residential land use objective 3.3d, "The provision of residential land uses in and adjacent to the downtown area," and 3.3b, "Sound, healthful and attractive residential areas based on the low-density space and occupancy standards appropriate for Palm Springs and the open desert character of Palm Springs living." Additionally, the General Plan specifically mentions the redevelopment opportunities associated with the historic Downtown so that it may continue to be the attractive business, financial, entertainment, cultural and fashion shopping "heart" of Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley. In support of that objective the General Plan continues in Section 3,17.12 to specifically mention the project area `south of the Fashion Plaza' to continue redevelopment to include high-quality residential, resort or hotel development at the westerly terminus of Tahquitz Canyon Way. The proposed project location is within a block of Tahquitz Canyon Way. Therefore it is concluded that the relief to certain code standards will not be in conflict with the overall intent of the General Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development contemplated by the proposed subdivision. The site is proposed for thirty-eight (38) two to four bedroom units on 2.7 acres of land. The proposed development is well under the maximum allowable density of 46 units, as permitted under the General Plan and Zoning Code. There will be no incompatibility issues as the subject property is surrounded by a single-family residential use to the south, a church, single-family residential and multi-family residential use to the east, multi-family residential uses to the north, and single-family and multi-family residential uses to the west. The applicant proposes a medium density residential development that will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. The design of the proposed subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. All potential environmental impacts as a result of developing the subject property are fully disclosed in the Environmental Assessment. The demolition of existing structures has been determined not to have a significant impact to any historic structures. The incorporation of the mitigation measures as prescribed in the EA will ensure that any potentially significant impacts will be reduced to a level of insignificance. Therefore, the design of the proposed subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements must follow the conditions of approval including, but not limited to,the application of the Uniform Building Code Seismic Safety Standards, and the City of Palm Springs Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance in order to ensure public health and safety. 6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Baristo Road to the south of the project site will maintain the current street width , curb and gutter improvements. The applicant will be required to provide a five(5)foot wide adjacent to curb sidewalk. Lugo Road to the west has an existing fifty(50)foot wide street section with intermittent sidewalk improvements. City right-of-way maps indicate a prior sixteen (16) foot right-of-way vacation on Lugo but documentation to support recordation of that vacation is not available. The applicant will be required to obtain the vacation of sixteen (16)feet of right-of-way on Lugo Road. The applicant will also be required to provide an five(5)foot wide adjacent to curb sidewalk on Lugo Road. Cahuilla Road has an existing forty-five(45)foot wide street section. The applicant will be required to obtain the vacation of five (5) feet of right-of-way of Cahuilla Road in order to construct bay parking. The vacation of Lugo and Cahiulla Road right-of-way is not in conflict with the General Plan. The applicant will be required to provide bay parking and a five (5) foot wide decorative paving walkway between the bay parking and the development. The City of Palm Springs will request a five foot wide easement to accommodate the pedestrian walkway. The 24- foot wide common drive aisles providing internal circulation for the project will be privately maintained. Section 4: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 9402.00, the City Council finds that: a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a Planned Development District is authorized by the City's zoning ordinance. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance for the underlying R-2 and R-3 zones, multi-family residential development is a permitted use. b. The said use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, and is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to the existing or future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. The proposed project consists of a one lot subdivision and tentative tract map of 2.7 acres to provide for the construction of 38 condominium units, twelve (12) two-story triplex buildings and one (1) single-story duplex building. The project will include a central recreational area of pool, spa and cabanas. The project site was previously developed and will require the demolition of a church, a duplex, two single-family residences and a paved parking lot. The project is not gated and includes wall placement in an irregular pattern between units with multiple pedestrian access points. Vehicular access will provided at two entryways, one from Lugo Road and one from Cahuilla Road. This multi-family residential project is in harmony with the objectives of the General Plan, is desirable for the development of the community and is not detrimental to the existing or future uses specifically permitted in the zone for which it is proposed. C. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood. The project site is 2.7 acres and is of adequate size to accommodate said use. Pursuant to the development standards for the R-2 and R-3, limited multi-family residential and multiple-family residential and hotel zone standards, respectively, the proposed project presents a more creative approach in the development of land and creates a harmonious in-fill development in a single and multiple family historic neighborhood. Density standards for numbers of dwelling units proposed is below those permitted by the zoning designation. Surrounding streetfacades are staggered with multi-level structures,walls,courtyards and pedestrian accessways. The intent of the project is to blend with the adjacent neighborhood rather than stand apart as a walled and gated island. This Planned Development District intends to maintain good zoning practices while including certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of the R-2 and R-3 zoning classifications. lyc� `� Therefore, it is determined that the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use. d. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use. The proposed project will contribute to improvement of the existing street system that will serve the site, and with said improvements, the public street system will be adequate to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use. e. The conditions to be imposed are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, of the existing neighborhood in which this project is situated. The conditions imposed are necessary to bring the project into compliance with applicable zoning, building, and other regulations to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the existing neighborhood in which this project is located. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council orders filing of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves PD-288 and TTM 31887, subject to those conditions set forth in the attached Exhibit A, which are to be satisfied prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless otherwise specified. ADOPTED this day of , 2003. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA City Clerk City Manager Reviewed and Approved as to Form: , x. 1 i° � � EXHIBIT A CASE 5.0977-PD-288 PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PD#288) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31887 284 CAHUILLA ROAD JOHN WESSMAN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL December 17, 2003 Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition. Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. PLANNING Administrative: 1a. 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. 1 b. 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 5.0977-PD 288 and TTM 31887. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgment or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 2. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and y e, �0 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. 3. The appeal period for an Architectural Approval and Tentative Tract Map application is 15 calendar days form the date of project approval. Permits will not be issued until the appeal period has concluded. 4. The applicant prior to issuance of building permits shall submit a draft declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC&R's") to the Director of Planning and Building for approval in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to certificate of occupancy. The CC&R's shall be enforceable by the City, shall not be amended without City approval, shall require maintenance of all property in a good condition and in accordance with all ordinances. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Springs, a deposit in the amount of $2000, for the review of the CC&R's by the City Attorney. A $250 filing fee shall also be paid to the City Planning Department for administrative review purposes. 5. Pursuant to Park Fee Ordinance No. 1632 and in accordance with Government Code Section 66477 (Quimby Act), all residential development shall be required to contribute to mitigate park and recreation impacts such that, prior to issuance of residential building permits, a parkland fee or dedication shall be made. The parkland mitigation fee amount shall be based upon the cost to acquire and fully improve parkland. Final Design: 6. If, within two (2) years after the date of approval by the City Council of the preliminary development plan, the final development plan, as indicated in Section 94.03.00(1), has not been approved by the Planning Commission, the procedures and actions which have taken place up to that time shall be null and void and the Planned Development District and Tentative Tract Map shall expire. Extensions of time may be allowed for good cause. The final development plans shall be submitted in accordance with Section 94.03.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Final construction plans shall include site plans, building elevations, floor plans, roof plans, fence and wall plans, entry plans, landscape plans, irrigation plans, exterior lighting plans, sign program, site cross sections, property development standards, street improvement plans and other such documents as required by the Planning Commission. Final construction plans shall be submitted within two years of the Planning Commission approval. 7. An exterior lighting plan in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 93.21.00, Outdoor Lighting Standards, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning & Zoning prior to the issuance of building permits. Manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior lighting on the building and in the landscaping shall be submitted for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. If lights are proposed to be mounted on buildings, down- lights shall be utilized. a. If lights are proposed to be mounted on buildings, down-lights shall be utilized. I¢�, 7 b. A photometric study shall be required for all parking areas, driveways and entries. C. Illumination levels in the parking area shall be an average of one-foot candle with a ratio of average light to minimum light of four to one (4:1). d. Bay parking shall have decorative bollard or alternative light fixtures. 8. Elevations for all sides of the carport structure and second story rooftop dining area roof shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Zoning for review by the City of Palm Springs Design Review Committee to be included in Final Planned Development District approval. Architecture and Landscaping: 9. Separate architectural approval and permits shall be required for all signs. 10. 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 and Zoning for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Refer to Chapter 8.60 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements. 11. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs Engineering specifications. 12. No exterior down spouts shall be permitted on any fagade on the proposed building(s) which are visible from adjacent streets or residential land commercial areas. 13. The design, height, texture and color of fences and walls shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 14. The street address numbering/lettering shall not exceed eight inches in height. 15. Details of pool fencing (materials and color) and equipment area shall be submitted with final landscape plan. 16. All landscaping shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 17. Shading requirements for parking lot areas as set forth in Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be met. Details to be provided with final landscape plan. 18. The ground floor level bathroom proposed for Bungalow 2 shall require wheelchair accessibility per Multi-family Disabled Access Regulations California Title 24— 1109A.2.1. 19. Minimum yard setbacks for the project shall be required as follows: Front: 12' on Lugo Road 12' on Baristo Road 38' on Cahuilla Road Side and Rear: 10' to adjacent single story development / '�c 20. Distance between buildings shall be a minimum of 10'. 21. Height of triplex units shall not exceed 34'. Height of duplex unit shall not exceed 20'. Height of roof above second level outdoor dining area shall not exceed 22'. General: 22. No outside storage of any kind shall be permitted except as approved as a part of the proposed plan. CC&R's shall prohibit storage within and modification to outdoor balconies. 23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay developer fees to the Palm Springs Unified School District pursuant to the requirements established in SB50. The amount of fees paid will be determined based on the established state formula for determining construction costs. General/Grading: 24. 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. 25. The grading plan shall show the disposition of all cut and fill materials. Limits of site disturbance shall be shown and all disturbed areas shall be fully restored or landscaped. 26. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks — 3' wide and 6" deep. The irrigation system shall be tested prior to final approval of the project. Section 14.24.020 of the Municipal Code prohibits nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways or gutters. General/Waste Disposal: 27, The applicant shall submit plans meeting City standards for a proposed trash enclosure or a letter from the municipal waste disposal service indicating that individual unit pickup for waste disposal is acceptable shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Zoning prior to the issuance of a building permit. Parking: 28. Four handicapped accessible parking shall be provided adjacent to the recreation area. Of those four, one shall be van accessible. Handicapped accessibility shall be indicated on the site plan to include the location of handicapped parking spaces and the path of travel to the entry ways. 29. Standard parking spaces shall be 17 feet deep by 9 feet wide. Handicap parking spaces shall be 18 feet deep by 9 feet wide plus a 5 foot walkway at the right side of the parking space; two handicap spaces can share a common walkway. One handicap space shall be designated as "van accessible" and served by an 8 foot walkway on the right side. lye 30. Handicapped spaces shall by appropriately marked per Section 93.06.00 ( C) (10). 31. Curbs shall be installed at a minimum of five (5) feet from face of walls, fences, buildings, or other structures. Areas that are not part of the maneuvering area shall have curbs placed at a minimum of two (2) feet from the face of walls, fences or buildings adjoining driveways. 32, Parking stalls shall be delineated with a 4 by 6 inch double stripe or equivalent design — hairpin or elongated "U" design. Individual wheel stops shall be prohibited; a continuous 6" barrier curb shall provide wheel stops. 33. Prior to the issuance of building permits, locations of all telephone and electrical boxes must be indicated on the building plans and must be completely screened and located in the interior of the building. Electrical transformers must be located toward the interior of the project maintaining a sufficient distance from the frontage(s) of the project. Said transformer(s) must be adequately and decoratively screened. 34. Pedestrian walkways provided two feet back from face of curb in front of the bay parking adjacent to the 284 Cahuilla Road property shall be constructed of decorative pavers to match interior drive aisles. 35. A one and one-half (1 ''/2) foot wide landscape median shall separate the pedestrian walkway that is located two (2) feet back from face of curb. Only low ground-cover plant materials shall be required in this median. 36. A public access easement shall be dedicated to provide for public access to the pedestrian walkway provided in front of the bay parking adjacent to the 284 Cahuilla Road property where the sidewalk leaves the public right-of-way. 37. Bay parking adjacent to 284 Cahuilla Road property shall be constructed of decorative/colored paving. Miscellaneous: 38. This project shall be subject to Chapters 2.24 and 3.37 of the Municipal Code regarding public art. The project shall either provide public art or payment of an in lieu fee. In the case of the in-lieu fee, the fee shall be based upon the total building permit valuation as calculated pursuant to the valuation table in the Uniform Building Code, the fee being 1.2% for commercial projects or %n% for residential projects with the first $100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be based on the project site, said location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Zoning and the Public Arts Commission, and the property owner shall enter into a recorded agreement to maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing. 39. Prior to any ground disturbing activity, including clearing and grubbing, installation of utilities, and/or any construction related excavation, an Archaeologist qualified according to the Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines, shall be employed to survey the area for the presence of cultural resources identifiable on the ground surface. / �Cl � 40. Given that portions of the project area are within an alluvial formation, the possibility of buried resources is increased. A Native American Monitor shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities and that, should buried deposits be encountered, that the Monitor have the authority to halt destructive construction and that the Monitor notify a Qualified Archaeologist to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. 41. One copy 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. 42. All mitigation measures as proposed by the Environmental Assessment Negative Declaration for Case 5.0977 PD—288 shall apply and are hereby adopted as conditions of approval. Monitoring shall occur during review of final plans, construction and operation of the project. POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Developer shall comply with Section II of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1. Prior to any construction on—site, all appropriate permits must be secured. FIRE 1. Residential Smoke Detector Installation: Provide Residential Smoke Detectors. 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 arranged so that operation of any smoke detector causes the alarm in all smoke detectors within the swelling to sound. (2-2.2.1 NFPA 72) 2. Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. (901.4.4 CFC) 3. Fire Flow: The estimated fire flow for this project is 1500 gallons per minute. ENGINEERING The Engineering Division recommends that if this application is approved, such approval is subject to the following conditions being completed in compliance with City standards and ordinances. Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. STREETS 1. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. 2. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the Engineering Division. The plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. 3. Abandonment of existing public rights-of-way are required to facilitate the proposed development application. Abandonment of the westerly 5 feet of the public right-of-way for Cahuilla Road and the easterly 16 feet of Lugo Road is proposed. The developer shall be responsible for coordinating approval of the abandonment of the public rights-of- way with all public utility agencies. Developer shall coordinate final relocation, adjustment or abandonment of all utilities with the respective utility agencies; and shall coordinate demolition of all existing improvements, reconstruction of affected intersecting streets, as appropriate, with the Engineering Division. CAHUILLA ROAD 4. Dedicate an easement for sidewalk purposes 8 feet wide along the back of the proposed bay parking connecting to public right-of-way, as required by the City Engineer. 5. Remove the existing driveway approaches and close with new roll curb and gutter and sidewalk in accordance with applicable City Standards (as required). 6. Remove the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk (where existing) and construct a roll curb and gutter as approved by the City Engineer, with the back of the roll curb located 20 feet west of centerline, along the entire frontage excluding those portions required to transition to existing and/or proposed curb and gutter. 7. Remove existing curb return, spandrel and cross-gutter and construct a 25 feet radius curb return, spandrel and cross-gutter at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cahuilla Road and Baristo Road in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200 and 206. 8. Construct a 24 feet wide driveway approach (Main Entry) in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 205. The driveway approach shall use standard curb and gutter and transition to roll curb and gutter located onsite and on Cahuilla Road. The centerline of the driveway approach shall be located approximately 285 feet north of the centerline of Baristo Road, as shown on the approved site plan. 9. Construct an 5 feet wide sidewalk two feet back from face of curb behind the proposed bay parking in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. Connections shall be made to existing or proposed sidewalk adjacent to the curb along Cahuilla Road, as required by the City Engineer. 10. Construct a Type A curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cahuilla Road and Baristo Road in ` Y(JI;,- accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 212. 11. Construct a pedestrian curb ramp along either side of the Main Entry in line with the required 8 feet wide sidewalk, as required to provide disabled access along the public pedestrian walkway. 12. Construct a minimum pavement section of 2'/z inch asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed roll curb and gutter to centerline along the entire Cahuilla Road frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. BARISTO ROAD 13. Remove the existing sidewalk (where existing) and construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk adjacent to curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 14. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced. LUGO ROAD 15. Remove the existing driveway approaches and close with new curb, gutter and sidewalk in accordance with applicable City Standards. 16. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter 9 feet east of centerline along the entire frontage (where not currently existing) and connecting with existing improvements adjacent to the property in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. 17. Remove the existing curb return, spandrel and cross-gutter and construct a 25 feet radius curb return, spandrel and cross-gutter at the northeast corner of the intersection of Lugo Road and Baristo Road in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200 and 206. 18. Construct a 24 feet wide driveway approach (Main Entry) in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 205. The driveway approach shall use standard curb and gutter and transition to roll curb and gutter located onsite. The centerline of the driveway approach shall be located approximately 285 feet north of the centerline of Baristo Road, as shown on the approved site plan. 19. Construct a 5 feet wide sidewalk along the entire frontage (where not currently existing) and connecting with existing improvements adjacent to the property in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 20. Construct a Type A curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at the northeast corner of the intersection of Lugo Road and Baristo Road in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 212. �c� G ► 3 21. Construct Type C curb ramps along either side of the Main Entry in line with the required 5 feet wide sidewalk, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 214. 22. Construct a minimum pavement section of 2'/z inch asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to centerline along the entire frontage (where required) in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. 23. All broken or off grade street improvements shall be repaired or replaced. SANITARY SEWER 24. All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. Laterals shall not be connected at manholes. 25. Construct an on-site (private) sewer system to collect and convey sewage through a maximum of one lateral connection each to the existing sewer mains located in Lugo Road and Baristo Road. 26. All on-site sewer systems shall be privately maintained by a Home Owners Association (HOA). Provisions for maintenance of the on-site sewer system acceptable to the City Engineer shall be included in the Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for this project. GRADING 27. Submit a Precise Grading Plan prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer or qualified Architect to the Engineering Division for review and approval. A PM 10 (dust control) Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Department prior to approval of the Precise Grading plan. The Precise Grading Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Minimum grading plan submittal includes the following: A. Copy of signed Conditions of Approval from Planning Department. B. Copy of Site Plan stamped approved and signed by the Planning Department. C. Copy of current Title Report D. Copy of Soils Report 28, Drainage swales 3 feet wide and 6 inches deep shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or / � Ca1� gutters. 29. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit, issued from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Phone No. 760-346-7491) is required for the proposed development. A copy of the executed permit shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to approval of a Grading Plan, 30, In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.025 (c), a cash bond of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) per acre shall be posted with the City for mitigation measures of erosion/blowsand relating to his property and development. 31. A soils report prepared by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer shall be required for and incorporated as an integral part of the grading plan for the proposed development. A copy of the soils report shall be submitted to the Building Department and to the Engineering Division prior to approval of the Grading Plan. 32. Contact the Building Department to get information regarding the preparation of the PM10 (dust control) plan requirements. 33. 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. The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert (Phone: 760-776- 8208). DRAINAGE 34. The developer may conduct stormwater runoff off-site to Baristo Road, an existing master-planned storm drain channel. Provisions for the interception of nuisance water from entering Baristo Road from the project site shall be provided through the use of a minor storm drain system that collects and conveys nuisance water to landscape or parkway areas adjacent to Baristo Road, and in only a stormwater runoff condition, pass runoff directly to the street through parkway or under sidewalk drains. 35. The project is subject to flood control and drainage implementation fees. The acreage drainage fee at the present time is $9,212.00 per acre per Resolution No. 15189. Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. Credit for previous drainage fees paid (if any) may be allowed upon evidence of prior payment to the City. ON-SITE 36. Construct 22, 24 and 26 feet wide private streets as shown on the Tentative Tract Map dated November 13, 2003, between concrete roll curbs with a minimum pavement section of 2'/z inch asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal. As an alternative, a pavement section consisting of interlocking pavers overlaid atop compacted subgrade may be allowed, consistent with manufacturer's recommendations for installation of interlocking pavers used in street construction. 37. Parking shall be prohibited along all private streets. GENERAL 38. 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. 39, All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground. 40. All existing utilities shall be shown on the grading/street plans. The existing and proposed service laterals shall be shown from the main line to the property line. 41. 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 certificate of occupancy. Any modifications or changes to approved improvement plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to construction. 42. 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 running north-south through the middle of the property meet the requirement to be installed underground. The developer is advised to investigate the nature of these utilities, the availability of undergrounding these utilities with respect to adjacent and off-site properties, and to present its case for a waiver of the Municipal Code requirement, if appropriate, to the Planning Commission and/or City Council as part of its review and approval of this project. If utility undergrounding is deferred in accordance with specific direction by the Planning Commission and/or City Council, the record property owner shall enter into a covenant agreeing to underground all of the existing overhead utilities required by the Municipal Code in the future upon request of the City of Palm Springs City Engineer at such time as deemed necessary. The covenant shall be executed and notarized by the property owner and submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. A current title report; or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. /Y,�_l �° 43. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area or in the public right-of- way 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. 44. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904. MAP 45. A Final Map shall be prepared by a California registered Land Surveyor or qualified Civil Engineer and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. A Title Report prepared for subdivision guarantee for the subject property, the traverse closures for the existing parcel and all lots created therefrom, and copies of record documents shall be submitted with the Final Map to the Engineering Division as part of the review of the Map. The Final Map shall be approved by the City Council prior to issuance of building permits. 46. In accordance with Section 66434 (g) of the Government Code, the portions of the existing public rights-of-way for Lugo Road and Cahuilla Road may be abandoned upon the filing of a Final Map identifying the abandonment of the easements granted to the City of Palm Springs. Prior to approval of a Final Map, the developer shall coordinate with each public utility company and determine specific requirements as to the abandonment and/or relocation of existing underground utilities that may exist within the public rights-of-way to be abandoned. Prior to approval of a Final Map, the developer shall provide to the City Engineer a letter of approval regarding the proposed abandonments of portions of Lugo Road and Cahuilla Road rights-of-way from each public utility agency. 47. In the event it is determined that a public utility or public agency requires the use of, now or in the future, the subject portion of Cahuilla Road right-of-way proposed for abandonment, a public utility easement shall be reserved on the Final Map along that portion of the Cahuilla Road right-of-way to be abandoned (the easterly 5 feet of the Final Map). TRAFFIC 48. A minimum of 48 inches of sidewalk clearance shall be provided around all street furniture, fire hydrants and other above-ground facilities for handicap accessibility. The developer shall provide same through dedication of additional right-of-way and widening of the sidewalk or shall be responsible for the relocation of all existing ornamental/safety light poles, conduit, pull boxes and all appurtenances located on all street frontages of the subject property. 49. All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends and striping associated with the proposed development shall be replaced as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 50. Relocate the existing street name/stop sign at the northwest corner of Cahuilla Road and lVe- �`� Baristo Road as required to facilitate the proposed improvements, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 624. 51. A 24 inch stop sign, stop bar and legend shall be installed at each Main Entry, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 620-625. 52. Relocate all ornamental/safety street lights as directed by the City Engineer. The developer shall coordinate with the Facilities Division as necessary to relocate existing ornamental/safety street lights that are required to be relocated as a result of the proposed development, and shall relocate and connect to existing electrical service provided to the street lights. 53. This property is located within Lighting District No. 1. The developer shall agree to cooperate with efforts of property owners within this District to replace, modify or improve the existing lighting system within the District, including any increased assessments required to facilitate the proposal (if any) brought forward to the City. 54. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects as required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum, all construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with State of California, Department of Transportation, "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones" dated 1996, or subsequent additions in force at the time of construction. 55. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which shall be paid prior to issuance of building permit.