Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/15/2003 - STAFF REPORTS (10) DATE: October 15, 2003 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning and Zoning TTM 31354 - APPLICATION BY JAY REYNOLDS FOR PALM CANYON TOWNHOMES, LLC FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31354 TO CONSTRUCT 16 CONDOMINIUM UNITS LOCATED AT 2765 AND 2801 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE, ZONE R-2, SECTION 35. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 31354 for the construction of 16 condominium units located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. The applicant is Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC. The managing members of Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC are Dave Hilliard and Ted Snyder. SUMMARY The Planning Commission, at its August 13, 2003 meeting, voted 6-0 (1 absent) to recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 31354 and granted architectural approval for related Case 3.2348/7/1097. The applicant requested relief for the most southernmost pole on the property, with regards to the utility undergrounding requirements for the property. The Planning Commission recommended that the removal of the southernmost pole and utility undergrounding across South Palm Canyon Drive to the next off-site pole, be deferred to a covenant. During the meeting, the Commission expressed a desire to guarantee that the pole will be removed in the future due to the fact that there is no further development on the west side of South Palm Canyon Drive that could be responsible for removing the pole. The applicant and representatives of the abutting property owner spoke in favour of the project and the request for relief in the utility undergrounding. In subsequent discussions with the developer, staff determined that a covenant would not be possible to enforce. Therefore, staff requested that the applicant submit an itemized breakdown for each section of utility undergrounding. A cost breakdown and map is attached to this report. The City's ordinance requires that new development underground utility lines to the next off-site pole. For the subject proeprty, this would necessitate boring across South Palm Canyon Drive then further south behind the curb for a total run of 400 linear feet at a cost of $116, 056. The Planning Commission found that the cost was an undue burden on a 16 unit condominium project. The developer is proposing that the southernmost on-site pole be relocated across South Palm Canyon Drive to the southeast corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, in the public right-of-way. Staff supports the proposal to relocate the pole across South Palm Canyon Drive due to the tremendous cost of what is required per the City's ordinance (i.e. undergrounding to the next off-site pole). There are currently 3 existing poles on the east side of Sotuh Palm Canyon Drive. The benefit of relocating the pole across the street is that, should the hotel property ever develop, the cost of removing 4 poles and undergrounding utility lines without having to cross South Palm Canyon Drive should be greatly reduced. Please refer to Engineering Condition #30, which reflects staff's recommendation. dA BACKGROUND Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC has submitted an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 to construct 16 condominium units including associated on and off-site improvements for the property located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. The project site is currently vacant and consists of two (2) lots. The subject property is zoned R-2 (limited multi-family residential) and designated L2 (Low Density Residential 4-6 units/acre) on the General Plan. The proposed density of 16 dwelling units is currently inconsistent with the L2 General Plan designation. Therefore, a General Plan Amendment is being proposed for to redesignate the property from L2 to L6. The proposed General Plan Amendment is being considered separately from this application. The project will consist of 16 two-bedroom units, all two-stories with the exception of 1 one-story unit. There are five proposed floor plans, ranging in size from 2167 square feet to 2645 square feet in size. There will be 1 unit of Type A, 5 units of Type B, 5 units of Type C, 2 units of Type D, and 3 units of Type E. Access to the subject property will be from two entries on South Palm Canyon Drive. Forty-four (44) feet of right-of-way and public utility easement on South Palm Canyon Drive is proposed to be dedicated from the subject tract to the City of Palm Springs. Existing improvements consist of a two lane, undivided, striped roadway with no curb or gutter on South Palm Canyon Drive. Internal circulation consists of 24-foot wide common driveways designed to carry two-way traffic. The common driveways would be privately maintained as well as the landscaped areas on the subject property. Table 1: Surrounding General Plan Designations, Zoning, and Land Uses General Plan Zoning Land Uses North L6 R-2 Vacant(single family residential pads) South L2 R-2 Condominiums (Canyon Heights) East H 43/21 R-3 Timeshares, South Palm Canyon Drive West L2, C R-2, 0-20 Condominiums (Canyon Heights), Open Space ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing a project that complies with the L6 General Plan density and generally follows the R-2 zone standards, with the exception of the front and rear setbacks and building height. An administrative minor modification has been submitted in order to request some relief in the front and rear setbacks to 21 feet and a building height of 30 feet for the two hillside units. The required setback in the R-2 zone is 22 feet in both the front and rear yards. Modifications to building height for hillside properties may be approved up to 30 feet. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the modifications to the front and rear setbacks and building height due to the irregular shape of the parcel, restrictions placed on the property due to topography, and substandard lot depth. The Planning Commission analyzed the project in relation to the R-2 zone standards and found that the project is in compliance with the exception of the requested modifications to setbacks q J"'� and building height. With the approval of a proposed General Plan Amendment (Case No. 5.0966), the 16 dwelling units on 2.69 acres will be within the maximum allowable density of 16 units. The proposed two-story building height is compatible with the existing neighbourhood. Surrounding land uses are vacant land approved for single family residences to the north, Canyon Heights condominiums to the south, open space and Canyon Heights condos to the west, and timeshares across South Palm Canyon Drive to the east. The size and density of the contemplated development are appropriate for the site and the surrounding land uses. The project has at least two parking spaces for each unit with an additional 4 spaces for guest parking. In total, the applicant has provided 32 parking spaces for residents and 4 for guests, for a total of 36 parking spaces. In accordance with ADA requirements, included in the parking is one vehicle accessible parking space. Pursuant to Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, the project is required to have 28 parking spaces. Please refer to Table 2 for parking requirements. The target market for the development is 2 person households and will add to the City's supply of permanent housing. The applicant has indicated that the units will be sold at approximately $380,000 to $525,000 each. The project will not be gated and will have two entries on South Palm Canyon Drive. Walls facing onto South Palm Canyon Drive and also around each unit's patio have been proposed for privacy and noise attenuation. While the units will share walls due to the duplex configuration of the buildings, the intention is for each unit to be a private living space with individual, enclosed parking, outside space, and pool area. The architectural style of the project will be modern. In terms of technical site issues, the developer is proposing to remove 7 utility poles and relocate the new lines underground at the street. However, due to the cost of boring diagonally across South Palm Canyon Drive to the next off-site pole, the developer proposes to keep the southern most on-site pole, which could be removed by future development at the southeast corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive. The Planning Commission supports deferring the removal of the southern most on-site pole to a covenant. However, due to reasons discussed above, this may not be the most practical solution. With regards to street improvements, the Planning Commission recommends that an 8 foot wide sidewalk be constructed across the entire frontage of the project along with curb and gutter. The street improvements will require some cutting into the hillside. The Planning Commission has not recommended that the developer extend the sidewalk further north to connect to the Ridge Development entry due to the length of the extension (approximately 300 feet) and also to limit the amount of cut slope. In addition, the Planning Commission recommends that the applicant design landscaping that could reduce the glare from the warranted traffic signals at the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive. The details shall be provided with the final landscape plans. The property is relatively flat with a hill that rises approximately 40 feet above existing grade on the north portion of the property. The units located on the hill are approximately 30 feet high, measured from finished grade, but do not break the ridge of the hill. The building height will require the approval of an Administrative Minor Modification. Given the topography on the site, the two-story massing of the units, attempts to limit out slope, and their setback from South Palm Canyon Drive, the Planning Commission believes that the height is reasonable. In addition, the applicant has proposed the pad elevations for the units on the flat portion of the 5't43 site at average grade at curb. If the pads are lower than the proposed 515.5 feet, the pads would be below street level. Prior to construction, the developer shall be required to erect post and cable around the west and north property lines in order to limit slope disturbance and disturbance of adjacent properties. No exposed cut slopes shall be permitted unless hidden by structures or restored. Fill slopes shall not be permitted as the developer shall be required to construct retaining walls on downslopes. The developer will also be required to restore the hillside and replant with native vegetation disturbed as a result of cuts and fills. Details regarding cut slope and treatment shall be reviewed with the final grading plan. A hydrology report will also need to be submitted by the applicant in order to determine on-site retention and also to address the issue of possible at grade overflow along the west property line. Currently, the area where the project is situated is outside the Fire Department's 5-minute response time. A fee study is currently being prepared by the City in order to determine an appropriate fair share fee for development to contribute towards the construction of a new fire station in the South Palm Canyon area. The Planning Commission recommends a condition of approval, which would require the developer to pay the fire station construction fee, if a fee has been adopted by City Council at the time of building permit issuance. The draft fee study should be completed in the next several weeks. Table 2: Proposed modifications to property development standards (administrative minor modification) Required Proposed Front setback 22 feet 21 feet(second story) Rear setback 22 feet 21 feet Building height up to 30 feet on hillsides 30 feet Table 3: Parking Required and Proposed Required Proposed Units 24 spaces 32 spaces Guest 4 spaces 4 spaces Totals 28 spaces 36 spaces Table 4: Land Use Tabulations Area Percentage Building Area 23,367 square feet 25% Open Space 57,407 square feet 60% Parking/Driveways 14,463 square feet 15% Site Area 77 95,237 square feet 100% ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND NOTIFICATION The Environmental Assessment was mailed out to state and local agencies and interested parties. In reviewing the EA, the Planning Commission found there was the potential for significant impacts including air quality, cultural resources, and noise. However, with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, the impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. All property owners within a 400 foot radius of the project have been notified. Staff has received general inquiries from surrounding property owners but has not received any objections to the application. Staff also requested that the developer conduct a neighbourhood meeting with the adjacent Canyon Heights HOA. Director ofj fanning and Zoning City Manager �'� ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Planning Commission Minutes for August 13, 2003 3. Environmental Assessment 4. Comments regarding EA 5. Developer's proposal for utility undergrounding and cost estimates 6. Resolution 7. Conditions NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING .NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case 5.0966 GPA Tentative Tract Map 31354 Northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of October 15, 2003. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5.0966 GPA, a request initiated by the City of Palm Springs, Hollyhills Development, and Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for an amendment to the General Plan Map to redesignate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive from L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential 6 units/acre). The subject property is located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. The purpose of the hearing is also to consider an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for a one-lot subdivision to construct 16 condominium units and associated on and off-site improvements on 2.69 acres. The project will consist of 16 two-bedroom units, all two stories with the exception of 1 one-story unit. The units will range in size from 2167 square feet to 2645 square feet. The subject property is located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive (northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive), Zone R-2, Section 35. k 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 to the City Clerk 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 Jing Yeo, Associate Planner, (760) 323-8245. Publish: 9-25-03 PATRICIA A. SANDERS The Desert Sun City Clerk �� v VICINITY MAP N WOE S :r7r {°>i 7 /CAC/ 10 A 1tio t Par `rS /s <` rr y ru&.w k I •i� 13TAC� V r A. E It Fr a/°r N rr i S �rE o rK r HURRAY CANYON OR/VI t CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO.: 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 DESCRIPTION:Application by City of Palm Springs,Hollyhills Development & Palm Canyon Townhomes for a General Plan APPLICANT: City of Palm Springs, Hollyhills Amendmentto redesignate 5.8 acresfrom L2 to 1-6.Application by Development, and Palm Canyon Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for TTM 31354 to construct 16 Town ,Develop homes men LLC condos located at the NW corner of S.Palm Canyon Dr.&Murray' Canyon Dr.,Zone R-2, Section 35. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 13, 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 3 0 Dianne Marantz, Vice Chair X 3 0 Mark Matthews 2 1 Jerry Grence X 3 0 Tracy Conrad X 3 0 Ricky Wright X 3 0 Larry Hochanadel X 3 0 STAFF PRESENT: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning & Zoning Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner Jing Yeo, Associate Planner Kathy Marx, Associate Planner Gabriel Diaz, Assistant Planner Michele Boyd, Administrative Coordinator Chairman Shoenberger called the meeting to order at 1:45 p.m. The August 13, 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., August 08, 2003, M/S/C (Grence/Marantz 4-0, 2 abstentions, 1 absent)to approve the minutes of June 25, 2003 as presented. Page 8 of 16 Planning Commission Minutes August 13 2003 Case 5.0966 — Application by City of Palm Springs, Hollyhills Development, and Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for a General Plan Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres from L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential 4-6 units/acre) for property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35; and TTM 31354 - Case 3.2348 —Application by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for a Tentative Tract Map fora one-lot subdivision for condominium purposes and related Architectural Approval to construct 16 residential units located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. Jing Yeo, Associate Planner, reported that the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed project at Study Session and was well received by the Design Review Committee. She stated that the applicant is requesting relief from building height and setback requirements primarily for a second-story overhang. She stated that there are existing utility poles and that the applicant proposes to move and underground seven of them, leaving one in place due to the high cost of undergrounding those lines to the next adjacent pole which is located across South Palm Canyon Drive. She reviewed photographs of existing utility poles and stated that staff feels there may be an opportunity for undergrounding that pole with future area development. Chairman Shoenberger opened the Public Hearing. Mr. David Hilliard addressed the Planning Commission to state that he represents the applicant and has attended the Planning Commission Study Session regarding the proposed project. He stated that he believes the proposed requests are consistent with zoning as an infill development. He stated that there are three-story units directly across the street in addition to the Canyon Heights project and, to the north, there is a single family residence on the other side of the ridge. He stated that the proposed project will have a slightly lower impact on views and presented a model of the architecture. He stated that Canyon Heights Homeowners'Association does not have a problem with the proposed development of high quality, individual patio homes each with its own pool. He reported that he consulted with the Fire Department regarding curb cuts and access. Mr. Jay Reynolds, applicant and architect, addressed the Planning Commission to state that the cuts on the hillside are only for garages (approximately 20 feet by 26 feet) as the homes will U �Lb�e' l Page 9 of 16 Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2003 split-level architecture and retaining walls of six feet in height constructed in the backyard pool areas. Mr. Marshall Ininns, addressed the Planning Commission to state that he feels the project will be a benefit to the community. Mr. Nick DiBari addressed the Planning Commission to state that he is a partner and the realtor for the homes on the 3.5 acres above the proposed project. He stated that the homes on his property will be 3,500 square foot villas which will be priced at more than $1 million and that the proposed project will co-exist well with his project. He stated that he felt The Ridge is an eyesore. He stated that his development team will work to develop an easement and underground the utility poles in that area as well. Mr. Ted Synder addressed the Planning Commission to state that he is a member of the development team and that the proposed project will work with the City regarding offsite improvements but that digging up 350 feet of South Palm Canyon Drive for a 16 unit project is financially unfeasible and asked the Planning Commission to take that into consideration. There being no further appearances, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Hochanadel asked for clarification on the proposed remaining utility pole Staff reported that the remaining pole is located on the east side of South Palm Canyon Drive and the Ordinance requires that the development of the property underground to the next offsite pole so there is the potential the that Canyon Hotel may underground to this pole. Dave Barakian, City Engineer, reported that there is nothing to guarantee that the Canyon Hotel would underground this pole as the ordinance is specific about responsibility; however, he stated, if undergrounding is deferred by covenant, staff can work to get it done by the development across the street. Chairman Shoenberger stated that he is not anxious to burden a development of this size with the undergrounding but the City's direction is clear that the pole must be removed. M/S/C (Wright/Grence 6-0, 1 absent) to approve order of filing of Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, and TTM 31354/Case 3.2348 subject to Conditions of Approval and defer undergrounding of last utility pole by covenant, r a CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING INITIAL STUDY 1 Case No: 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 Project title: A. General Plan Amendment from L2 to L6 for 5.8 acres at the NW comer of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Section 35. B.Palm Canyon Townhomes 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: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning and Zoning Tel: (760) 323-8245 4. Project location: NW corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive 5, Project sponsor's name and address: City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Jay Reynolds OJMR Architects 502 S.Fairfax Avenue, Suite 202 Los Angeles, CA 90036 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 site is 5.8 acres in size and consists of 4 parcels (512-180-001, 512-180-007, 512- 180-012, 513-570-016). The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. Land uses surrounding the site include residential condominiums and open space to the west, residential condominiums to the south, vacant but previously subdivided single-family property to the north, and South Palm Canyon Drive, a timeshare resort, and multi-family residential to the east. The application is being initiated by the City of Palm Springs, Hollyhills Development, and Jay Reynolds on behalf of Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for a General Plan Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres of land from L2 (Low Density 2 units/acre) to L6 (Low Density 5-6 units/acre). The amendment is being requested in order to reconcile the inconsistent R-2 zoning and the L6 general plan designation. The amendments will result in a maximum allowable density of 35 units on 5.8 acres. City of Palm Springs Initial Study t July 24,2003<g?AJ The amendment will also facilitate the application on APN#s 512-180-001 and 512-180-007 by Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for TTM 38321, a one-lot subdivision for condominium purposes and related architectural approval (Case 3.2248) for the construction of 16 residential units, located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. Future proposed residential development on 512480-002 and 513-570- 016 shall require a separate permitting process. 6. Present Land Use: Vacant 7. General Plan designation: L2 8. Zoning: R-2 Proposed General Plan designation: L6 Proposed Zoning:R-2 9. Is the proposed action a "project" as defined by CEQA? (See Section 2.6 of State CEQA Guidelines. I£more than one project is present in Yes Cl No ❑ the same area, cumulative impact should be considered) 10. If"yes"above, does the project fall into any of the Emergency Projects Yes ❑ No 0 listed in Section 15269 of the State CEQA Guidelines? 11. If"no" on 10., does the project fall under any of the Ministerial Acts Yes ❑ No O listed in Section 15268(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines? 12. If "no" on 11., does the project fall under any of the Statutory Yes ❑ No 0 Exemptions listed in Article 18 of the State CEQA Guidelines? 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 have a significant Yes ❑ No 0 effect due to special circumstances, a categorical exemption does not apply). 14. Surrounding land uses and setting(briefly describe the project's surroundings): North: Vacant hillside,previously subdivided property for single family residential purposes, Multi-family residential condominiums South: Vacant, Canyon Heights condominium complex East: South Pam Canyon Drive, Timeshare resort,Multi-family residential condominiums West: Canyon Heights condominium complex, Vacant, Single family residential subdivision 15. Surrounding General Plan and Zoning: North: L2, C, L6/R-G-A(6),R-2 South: L2, SP-1 /R-2, SP-1 East: H 43/21,M15/R-3,R-2 West: L2, C, SP-1/R-2, 0-20, SP-1 City of Pahn Springs Initial Study 2 July 24,2003 16. Is the proposed project consistent with(if answered"yes"or"n&', no explanation is required): City of Palm Springs General Plan* Yes ❑x No ❑ N/A❑ Applicable Specific Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑X City of Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance Yes ❑X No ❑ N/A❑ South Coast Air Quality Management Plan Yes Z No ❑ N/A❑ Airport Part 150 Noise Study Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A 19 Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A 0 *The General Plan Map is proposed to be amended from L2 to L6 for 5.8 acres located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive. If the General Plan Amendment is approved,the project will be consistent with the General Plan. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 3 July 24,2003 /g- 13 17. Are any of the following studies required? Soils Report Yes 0 No ❑ Slope Study Yes ❑ No 9 Geotechnical Report Yes ❑ No 0 Traffic Study Yes ❑ No El Air Quality Study Yes ❑ No 0 Hydrology Yes 9 No ❑ Sewer Study Yes ❑ No 9 Biological Study Yes ❑ No 1K Noise Study Yes ❑ No 0 Hazardous Materials Study Yes ❑ No O Housing Analysis Yes ❑ No ❑X Archaeological Report Yes ❑ No 0 Groundwater Analysis Yes ❑ No Q Water Quality Report Yes ❑ No ❑x Other Yes ❑ No O 18. Other public agencies whose approval is required(e.g.,permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None 19. Incorporated herein by reference is the Final Environmental Impact Report on the General'Plan Update. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 4 July 24,2003. �1+1 V 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 ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ 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 Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1.AESTHETICS --Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or ❑ ❑ Z ❑ nighttime views in the area? La) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposal is for a General Plain Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres from L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential 4- 6 units/acre). Future development on the project site shall comply with the City's policies for hillside developments. Due to the varying topography on the project site,the density shall be determined based on the slope density criteria, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan policies regarding hillside development. That is, any portion of the site in excess of a 30% slope shall be retained as open space and excluded in computation of the total density. With regards to any development on the north portion of the project site, the site will be carefully evaluated and visual impact studies, soils, and geotechnical studies as well as slope analysis will be required. TTM 31354 proposes 16 units with a maximum height of 24 feet except for the hillside units, which City of Pahn Springs Initial Study 5 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact have a maximum height of 30 feet. The applicant will require the approval of an Administrative Minor Modification for building height and minor reductions in the front and rear setbacks. The design of the project is modern. The property is surrounded by residential development to the south and west and a timeshare resort to the east. The residential condominiums to the west will be the most impacted by the project. Therefore, the pad elevations for the proposed units have been kept at a minimum in order to preserve the views of the residential units to the west. In addition, the hillside units have been terraced on three levels in order to minimize cut slope. As a result, the General Plan Amendment will result in less than significant impacts related to scenic vistas. Lb) NO IMPACT. The project site is not located adjacent to a state scenic highway. However the project site is located adjacent to South Palm Canyon Drive, a City designated scenic corridor. There are no significant trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings or other significant aesthetic resources within the project site.TTM 31354 has been designed to integrate into the surrounding environment and have minimal impact on the slope at the north portion of the development. However, development proposed for the northern portion of the project site shall require a slope analysis in order to take into account views from South Palm Canyon Drive and also from the residential condominiums to the north. l.c) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed in response l.a) above, the proposal is for a General Plan Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres from L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential 4-6 units/acre). In order to ensure that the visual character and quality of the site and surroundings are not adversely affected, future development on the project site shall be carefully evaluated with respect to the City's policies for hillside developments. Due to the varying topography on the project site, the density shall be determined based on the slope density criteria, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan policies regarding hillside development. That is, any portion of the site in excess of a 30% slope shall be retained as open space and excluded in computing the total density. With regards to any development on the north portion of the project site (i.e.the Ridge development), visual impact studies as well as slope analysis will be required. Any proposed development on the project site shall undergo a public hearing and architectural review process. TTM 31354 will undergo a public hearing and architectural review process that includes the Design Review Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council. The maximum building height for the two-story units on the flat portion of the site is 24 feet. The project proposes pad elevations that are approximately at average grade at curb of 515.5, particularly for the units that abut the Canyon Heights development to the west. The two hillside runts at the north portion of the property have been integrated into the slope. The units will occur on 2 pad elevations with the garage at 520.5 feet and the main residence at 532.5 feet. The terraced unit design has been proposed in order to minimize cut slope. In addition, conditions of approval have been incorporated into the project design that limit cut slope and fill. Retaining walls have been encouraged as opposed to fill slope. Exposed cut slopes are. not permitted unless screened by structures or they shall be treated to match the native hillside. In addition, the applicant is proposing to remove 3 on-site poles and underground utilities, therefore improving the visual character of the site. With the incorporation of project conditions of approval and the architectural and public review process, the impacts to the site and visual character will be reduced to a level of insignificance. 1.d) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project site is substantially surrounded by urban development with existing night lighting. Residential project lighting and accent landscape lighting are proposed and will comply with Section 93.20.00 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, City of Palm Springs Initial Study 6 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact developments proposed for the project site will not be a new source of substantial light or glare and will not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Proposed developments will require the installation of new lighting for security and nighttime operations. Through the use of low sodium lighting and shielding, the new light sources are not anticipated to adversely affect the adjacent properties. The low sodium lighting will be oriented downward and toward the project site, and be shielded to minimize light spill onto adjacent property. As part of the review process, the City of Palm Springs Zoning Department will also review the proposed lighting plan for compliance with the City of Palm Springs Zoning Code, Section 93.21.00, outdoor lighting standards. Therefore,no significant impacts, related to light and glare, are anticipated. 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or El ❑ Elnature, could result in conversion of 19 Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 2.a-c)NO IMPACT. The project site is not located on prime farmhand,unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance. The project site is currently zoned for residential uses and is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the proposed uses would not conflict with any agricultural zoning or other agricultural regulations. There is no farmland or agricultural land in the immediate vicinity of the project site; therefore, the project could not result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 7 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant 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 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 state ambient air quality ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ substantial number of people? 3.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The applicable air quality plan for the project area is the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan (1997 AQMP). CEQA requires that projects be consistent with the applicable AQMP. The proposed project will conform to the SCAQMD 1997 AQMP. The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates in Chapter 6 that the SCAQMD considers a project to be less than significant if its impact is mitigated below the identified thresholds. Additionally, the project site is located in the Coachella Valley, which is under the recently adopted 2002 Coachella Valley PM,o State Implementation Plan. The CMPM1eSIP requires the development and implementation of a dust control plan for all grading activities in the Coachella Valley requiring a grading permit. The project proponent shall develop a dust control plan and submit it to the City Building Department for review prior to issuance of any grading permits. Therefore, since the proposed project is considered consistent with the region's air quality plan and a dust control plan will be developed and implemented prior to grading activities, the project will result in a less than significant impact on the SCAQMD's AQMP or the CVPM1aSIP. 3.b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The project may have substantial temporary impacts on local air quality due to dust emissions from heavy construction equipment and construction activities. Emissions associated with heavy construction equipment are typically associated with demolition, land clearing, grading, and excavation activities. Dust emissions also vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. However, since the proposed project is located in the Coachella Valley, which has City of Palm Springs Initial Study 8 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact significant problems with PMIo generation,the project proponent,prior to construction, will be required to develop and implement a dust control plan, in accordance with the 2002 Coachella Valley PMIo State Implementation Plan. 3.c-e) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed under response 3.b) above, with the incorporation of constriction related mitigation measures, the proposed project would not result in any significant air quality impacts and therefore, would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants or ozone precursors. In addition, the project site may be developed up to 35 residential units, which is anticipated to generate odors similar to those of residential uses. As a result,the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact related to odor generation. Mitigation Measures 1. Prior to beginning construction activities, the project proponent of the building contract will develop and submit a dust control plan to the City's Building Department, in accordance with the 2002 Coachella Valley PMIo State Implementation Plan. 2. Any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the amount of open space subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plans shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and minimize blowsand. 3. The contractor will ensure that all construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained. All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition to reduce operational emissions. 4. During construction, the site shall be watered and the equipment cleaned in the morning and evening. 5. During construction, all trucks leaving the site shall be washed off to reduce fugitive dust from being tracked onto local roadways. This measure requires the removal of particulate matter from equipment prior to movement on paved streets to control particulate emissions. As part of the conditions of grading permit approval, the construction crew shall wheel wash construction equipment and cover dirt in trucks during onsite hauling. Haul trucks leaving the site also are required to have a minimum freeboard distance of 12 inches, or to cover payloads. 6. The building contractor will ensure that low VOC paints are used for all architectural coatings. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 9 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Lnpact 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 status species in local or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 plans, policies, and 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, vernal ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other ❑ ❑ ❑ 99 approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 4.a-f)NO IMPACT. According to the City's General Plan, the project site is not located in an area that potentially has endangered species, vegetation, riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands, or native resident or migratory fish or wildlife. In addition,the project will not conflict with any local ordinances City of Palm Springs Initial Study 10 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact protecting biological resources and conflict with the provisions of an adopted conservation plan. The project is located outside Peninsular Bighorn Sheep critical habitat and is not located in an established habitat conservation area, according to the City's General Plan. Therefore, the project will not have an impact on biological resources. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as ❑ ❑ ❑ t] defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ O ❑ ❑ pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ ❑ ❑ O geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including ❑ ❑ ❑ those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 5.a, c) NO IMPACT. No structures currently exist on the project site. No impacts to paleontological resources or historic properties potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Place, the California Register of Historic Places, or the California Historic Landmarks are expected to occur. 5.b, d) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The proposed project is beyond the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Reservation. It is, however, located on lands within territory that contains cultural resources that comprise and define the Traditional Use Area. Some recent work in the general area completed by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians has yielded buried cultural material that was not apparent on the surface. Further, the foothills of the mountains are very near to the project area and comprise a zone know to be rich in cultural resources. To ensure that no significant impacts will occur should any archaeological resources be uncovered during site preparation, an on-site monitor from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Office will be hired by the project proponent or the building contractor to monitor the grading and excavation activities, The monitor shall halt grading or any other construction activity immediately if suspected archaeological resources are uncovered during such activities. Therefore, with the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, there will be a less than significant impact on archaeological resources. Mitigation Measures 1. 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 the Interior's Standards and Guidelines, shall be employed to survey the area for the presence of cultural resources identifiable on the ground surface. City of Palm Springs Initial Study I 1 July 24,2003 8# 4- ;?,/ Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2. 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 Cultural Resource Coordinator for approval. 3. 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. 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 area or based on other ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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, including ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 liquefaction? iv)Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 potentially result in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 Building Code ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 12 July 24,2003 �'/� a':2- Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ O where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? 6.a.i, iii, iv) NO IMPACT. The soils in the Palm Springs area generally consist of granular alluvial deposits derived from the adjacent mountains and hillsides. The deposits are composed primarily of silts, sands, and gravels. The City of Palm Springs is also located within the Coachella Valley,which is seismically active area. Major earthquake fault systems in the area include the San Andreas Fault System and the San Jacinto Fault System. The subject property is not known to be susceptible to liquefaction or landslides. The project is located on a flat, urban in-fill site at the corner of two intersecting secondary thoroughfares and is not located on top of a known fault or within a known earthquake fault zone. Therefore,no significant impacts related to fault rapture are expected to occur. 6.a.ii) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. No unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures are anticipated to occur with the project from the excavation, grading, and paving that will be needed to constrict the proposed structures. The ground motion impacts on-site are not greater than those expected for the surrounding region. Additionally, any proposed development will be required to meet the seismic requirements for projects located in seismically active regions. Development proposals will not introduce any new impacts, and, as a result, the impacts associated with seismic ground motion are considered to be less than significant. 6.b)NO IMPACT. The project would not result in any uses that would cause substantial soil erosion of the site's flat topography. Once grading and compaction of the site take place, the project site will be paved and landscaped. There will be some grading in the hillside portion of the site;however,retaining walls are proposed on down slopes. Therefore, soil erosion would be minimal and temporary and nature. Since a dust control plan will be developed prior to site preparation or construction activities, the loss of topsoil is not considered significant. 6.c-e) Based on the surrounding structures that have been built to the south, west, and east, it is not anticipated that there would be any significant geotechnical problems associated with project construction. City building ordinances require the proposed project, prior to grading, to complete geoteclurical evaluation by a qualified professional to analyze subsurface conditions and to provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed earthwork, foundation construction, and preliminary pavement design. This geotechnical evaluation will ensure the proposed project is constructed in a geologically safe manner. The proposed project will also be linked to the surrounding utility system including the municipal sewer systems. As a result, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts related to septic tank or alternative wastewater disposal. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 13 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 17 involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, ❑ ❑ ❑ substances, or waste within one-quarter mile 19 of an existing or proposed school? d)Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ El ❑ <] or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? t) For a project within the vicinity 'of a private airstrip, would the project result in a ❑ ❑ ❑ safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 14 July 24,2003 �A :� V Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 7.a-f) NO IMPACT. The proposed site is not known to contain hazardous materials, and of the known sites in Palm Springs, none are located within a two-mile radius of the site. The project site is zoned and designated for residential land use, therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to handle, store, or transport hazardous materials. As a result, the proposed project will result in less than significant impacts related to hazardous materials. The project site is not located within a quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school. The nearest school is Palm Springs High School, approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the project site. The site is also not located within 2 miles of Palm Springs International Airport. Therefore, the proposed project will not expose people on the project site to safety hazards beyond that of other properties in the area. 7.g, h) NO IMPACT. The proposed project would not involve any use that would interfere with the City's emergency operations plan or with major emergency evacuation routes out of the area. With regards to wildland fires, the City's General Plan indicates that fire danger is relatively low. The City of Palm Springs Fire Department has indicated that the project area is outside of the 5-minute response time and travel distance from the nearest fire station located at 1300 La Verne Way.Fire sprinklers are also required based on the size of buildings. The project site is not located near a wildlands fire hazard area. In addition, any plans for development will be required to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY--Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑x 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 N (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or ❑ x❑ ❑ river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 15 July 24,2003 ,R Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ❑ l7 quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h)Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x flood flows? i)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving ❑ ❑ ❑ N flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 mudflow? 8.a, f)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. No wells are proposed as part of this project. Proposed operations on the subject property will require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board as the site would be considered point-source for storm water runoff due to an increase in impervious surfaces. The NPDES permits regulates general construction activities. Compliance with permit conditions will ensure that there will be no violation of water quality or waste discharge requirements. 8.b) NO IMPACT. No water wells are proposed as part of TTM 31354, which proposes 16 condominiums on 2.69 acres. The entire project site has been identified in the City's General Plan as low density residential.Development on the project site is not anticipated to result in an abnormal draw on local water supplies of resources beyond a small to medium-sized residential development. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial groundwater depletion or interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations, or substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. No significant impacts are anticipated. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 16 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 8.c-f)NO IMPACT.Development on the project site will increase the amount of impermeable surfaces on-site, which has the potential to generate additional storm water runoff in the project area. The additional runoff generated by the increase impermeable surfaces will be retained off-site through the use of detention basins and on-site through dry wells. As a result, less than significant drainage or erosion impacts are expected to occur from the construction and subsequent operation of the proposed project. 8.g, h) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project site is currently vacant and sporadically covered with native vegetation. Storm water runoff falling on TTM 31354 naturally drains in a northeasterly direction. The project site is found on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 060257 0008C, dated June 18, 1996 for Riverside County. The FIRM designates a small part of the northern portion of the site as Zone B and the remainder of the site as Zone C.Zone C indicates areas subject to minimal flooding while Zone B indicates 100-500 year flows, less than 1 foot. The development of TTM 31354 and future residential development at the north portion of the project site will increase the amount of hard surface and will create additional storm water runoff, but with mitigation, this should not be significant. .A hydrology study is being prepared by the project proponent for TTM 31354 to determine appropriate measures to convey storm water runoff to off-site drainage systems. Similar hydrological analysis will also be required for any proposed development on the north portion of the project site. 8J,j)NO IMPACT. The nearest levee is the Murray Canyon Levee located southeast of the project site. If the Murray Canyon Levee breeched flood impacts on the site would be similar to that experienced by surrounding developments. Additionally, the proposed project will undergo plan check review by the City to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.As a result, less than significant impacts related to flooding are anticipated with the approval and subsequent operation of the proposed project. 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 plan, specific plan, ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ O conservation plan? 9.a, c)NO IMPACT. The proposed project site is undeveloped with scattered vegetation occurring on- site. The site is currently designated L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre) in the City's General Plan and zoned R-2 (Limited Multi-Family) in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Surrounding land uses City of Palm Springs Initial Study 17 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact include vacant land to the north,vacant land and the Canyon Heights condominium complex to the west and south, and multi-family residential and a timeshare resort to the east. Proposed development includes TTM 31354 and potential multi-family development. The proposed project will not physically divide an existing community. Therefore, the proposed project will not significantly impact existing . communities. The project is not located within a habitat conservation plan or natural community plan. Therefore,the proposed project will not conflict with the referenced plans. 9.b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed General Plan Amendment would facilitate the construction of up to 35 units on 5.8 acres.The project site is currently zoned R-2, inconsistent with the General Plan designation of L2. In 1993, the City embarked on a zoning consistency program. However the program was not completed with respect to the subject project site and therefore, the property has remained zoned for multi-family land uses but designated for single family uses on the General Plan. In analyzing the development of the surrounding community since 1993, staff concluded that the multi-family designation of L6 (Low Density Residential 4-6 units/acre) would be appropriate for the project site, given the multi-family land uses immediately in the vicinity of the project site. A General Plan Amendment is proposed to change the designation of the property from L2 to L6. The L6 designation is consistent and compatible with the existing development pattern in the neighbourhood,as the project is surrounded by the Canyon Heights condominiums to the west and south, Vista Canyon condominiums to the north, and residential condominiums and a timeshare resort to the east. The current designation of L2 is associated primarily with single-family residential estate-type land uses, which may not be appropriate given the location of the site, surrounding land uses and zoning, and proximity of the site to a secondary thoroughfare. With the approval of the General Plan Amendment, the proposed project will not result in any conflicts with the General Plan or zoning ordinance. 10, MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of ❑ ❑ ❑ value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 10.a, b) NO IMPACT. According to the City's General Plan, no mineral deposits of statewide or regional importance exist in the project area. Therefore,there will be no impact to mineral resources. 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 noise ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 18 July 24,2003 S.,/ aD Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 vicinity ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ z ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e)For aproject located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport ❑ ❑ ❑ (] or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 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? ll.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The impacts with regards to noise are related to the short-term construction impacts and potentially longer-term impacts due to mechanical equipment such as HVAC units. The project site is not located in a 60db CNEL contour or higher, therefore, a noise study is not required for the residential units. With the incorporation of mitigation measures during construction activities and the placement of proposed mechanical equipment,the impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level. 1 Lb-d)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.Proposed development on the 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, such as pile driving, are proposed as part of the project. The subject property is currently vacant, therefore, new noise impacts related to normal residential uses are expected. The City of Palm Springs' noise ordinance regulates construction hours, leafblowers, and acceptable noise levels in residential areas based on time of day. Therefore, development on the site will have a less than significant impact on ambient noise levels in the area. 1 Le, f)NO IMPACT. The project site is not located in an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of any known private airstrips.Therefore, development on the project site would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Mitigation Measures 1. During construction phases, the contractor shall ensure that all construction is performed in accordance with the applicable City of Palm Springs noise standards. This measure shall be added to City of Palm Springs Initial Study 19 July 24,2003 �,g a9 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact the construction contract. 2. All internat combustion powered equipment shall be equipped with properly operating mufflers and kept properly tuned to alleviate backfires. This measure shall be added to the construction contract. 3. During construction activities, the contractor shall locate portable equipment as far as possible from the adj acent residences.This measure shalt be added to the construction contract. 4. To the extent feasible, the contractor shall store and maintain equipment as far as possible from the adjacent residences. This measure shall be added to the construction contract. 5. The placement of all mechanical equipment associated with the proposed project such as HVAC systems shall be located and constructed to ensure compliance with Chapter 11.74(Noise Ordinance) of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a)Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ N ❑ indirectly(for example,through extension of roads'or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial munbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ N replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑ N housing elsewhere? 12.a) LESS TI4AN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Proposed development on the project site is not expected to result in substantial population growth. While up to 35 new residential units may be constructed, proposed development is not expected to create new jobs. Therefore,the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact on population growth. 12.b, c) NO IMPACT. No existing housing is located on the project site nor would any housing be displaced by the implementation of the proposed project. No residential uses occur on the project site nor would any persons be displayed by the implementation of the proposed project. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 20 July 24,2003 (z14 30 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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: i)Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ii)Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ l7 iii) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ z iv)Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 v) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 13.a.i)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. According to the City's General Plan, fire danger in the City is relatively low. The nearest fire station, Station No. 444, is located at 1300 La Verne Way on the northwest corner of La Verne Way and Caliente Road. According to the Palm Springs Fire Department, the proposed project is located outside of the 5-minute response time area and,pursuant to the City's Fire Code, will require the installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system. A fire station is proposed in the fixture for the area south of the project. Currently, the City is preparing a fee study to determine a fair share fee for the construction of a new fire station. The project proponent will be required to pay the fair share fee prior to issuance of building permits, if a fee is adopted by City Council at that time.As a result,the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact. 13.a.ii-v) NO IMPACT. With regards to police protection,'the proposed project is not anticipated to result in a significant increase in emergency calls to the project site. Therefore, the proposed project will not adversely impact police protection services.With regards to schools, the nearest school is Palm Springs High School, located approximately 3 miles from the project site. Under State Law, school districts may level school impact fees on residential development. Collection of this fee will serve to offset any unforeseen project-related student generation, although as the expected market for the units are couples with no children, no impacts to schools are expected. With regards to parks, the City currently has adequate park space; therefore, no impacts to existing parks are expected to occur as a result of the proposed project. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 21 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Lnpact Impact 14.RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ ❑ ❑ O 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, b) NO IMPACT. The project site proposes up to 35 residential units. Potential development is not on a scale large enough to impact the use of existing neighbourhood or regional parks such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur. In addition, the proposed project does not include public recreational facilities and does not require expansion or construction of new recreational facilities as each unit has its own private courtyard/recreational space. Development on the project site would is required to provide its own open space and recreational area amenities for the enjoyment of residents. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: 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 increase in either the ❑ ❑ O ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Z management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ Z ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 22 July 24,2003 � h Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e)Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f)Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ O ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ❑ 191 transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 15.a) LESS TITAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Proposed development on the project site will not generate enough trips per day to require a traffic study. There may be a temporary increase of vehicles during site preparation and construction of the proposed project. A traffic analysis completed for the amendment to Specific Plan #IA indicated that a traffic signal will be installed at the comer of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive,when warranted. The traffic signal will likely be located directly in front of TTM 31354. Development on the project site is also subject to TUMF fees, therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. 15.b, c, e, g)NO IMPACT. As was mentioned in response 15.a) above, the project will not result in a substantial increase in traffic in the area. The project also does not propose any uses that could cause any changes to air traffic patterns. The Fire Marshal has reviewed the site plan to ensure compliance with emergency access. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in significant impacts related to emergency access. With regards to alternative transportation, the project proponent is required to provide street improvements on S.Palm Canyon Drive.The required street improvements are consistent with that stated in the City's General Plan Circulation element. 15A) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project will be required to dedicate right of way and construct full street improvements on South Palm Canyon Drive. TTM 31354 project will be accessed by two driveways on South Palm Canyon Drive and future development at the north portion of the project site will be accessed by an existing driveway also on South Palm Canyon Drive. The distance from these access points to other off-site driveways and intersections will provide adequate visibility of oncoming traffic either on the roadways or entering and exiting the project site. Guest puking stalls for TTM 31354 will be provided perpendicular to the internal driveways,which are proposed at 24 feet wide. A review of the site plan by City departments did not indicate any on-site circulation issues. Proposed development for the north portion of the project site will undergo a similar review.Based on this analysis,the proposed project will result in less than significant impacts related to design features and surrounding land uses. 15J) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Proposed development on the project will be required to provide enclosed puking spaces for each unit in addition to guest parking spaces, in accordance with Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the project will not have inadequate puking capacity. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 23 July 24,2003 �e /I �3 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ 17 ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements ❑ ❑ ❑ N and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X waste? 16.a, d-g)NO IMPACT. All utilities and services are currently provided to the subject site. Due to the nature and size of this project, there should be no impacts to utilities and service systems as a result of the project. 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 City of Palm Springs Initial Study 24 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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. 16.e) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. TTM 31354 may require on-site construction of drainage improvements to convey storm water flows to area drainage facilities. In addition, improvements may be required on South Palm Canyon Drive, downstream of the project site to adequately convey concentrated storm water runoff flows outletted through the on-site storm drain system. A hydrology report will be prepared in order to determine if the increased storm water runoff due to development of the site exceeds the capacity of offsite drainage systems. Additional runoff generated by increases in impervious surface may be retained off-site through the use of detention basins. Since the project is not expected to significantly alter drainage patterns in the area, area expansion of new storm water drainage facilities would not be required as part of the project. 17, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining ❑ ❑ Z levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse ❑ t] effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 17.a-c)NO IMPACT. Based on the preceding analysis,the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or City of Palm Springs Initial Study 25 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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. As discussed in the respective issue areas,the proposed project would have either no impact or less than significant impacts after mitigation as to all environmental resources. Implementation of the identified project-specific mitigation measures and compliance with applicable codes, ordinances, laws and other required regulations, helps to reduce the magnitude of any impacts associated with the construction activities. Thus, the impacts would not be cumulatively considerable with the incorporation of mitigation measures presented herein. The analysis presented throughout this document identifies potentially significant impacts for some environmental disciplines. Appropriate mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project design to reduce these respective impacts to less than significant impacts. Therefore,project implementation is not anticipated to result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. 18. LISTED BELOW ARE TITS PERSON(_)WHO PREPARED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY: Ling Yeo,Associate Planner Carl Thibeault,Fire Marshal Carol Templeton,Assistant Engineer Mary Howard, Engineering Secretary Douglas R. Evans,Director of Planning and Zoning City of Palm Springs Initial Study 26 July 24,2003 //^^ 0�4 �l� r 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 environment, 0 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, becauise all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier 1] 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. aaa7 3 03 Douglas R. Ev rs Date Director of Planning and Zoning City of Palm Springs Initial Study 27 July 23,2003 �pP CALcn TRIBAL PLANNING, BUILDING i3 ENGINEERING 9 Oe ` CAHUI��P� RECEIVED September 9, 2003 SEP 10 2003 PIISON Mayor William Kleindienst and ANNIu DBVw City Council Via Doug Evans, Directof of Planning and Building �7 City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 Re: Case No. 3.2348/5.09*-GPA General Plan Amendment Dear Mayor Kleindienst and City Council, The Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians at its meeting of September 9, 2003, reviewed the subject case and, upon recommendation of the Indian Planning Commission, hereby recommend approval of the referenced project. Please n ct me if you have any questions or require any additional information. lei truly y urs, Tho s J. Davis, AICP Chie tanning Officer AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS TJD/cy C: Margaret Park, Director of Planning PALETTERS-TJM090903-William Kleindienst and City Council-General Plan Amendment.doc .0 IT 3 650 C. TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY • PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 • (760) 3253400 I=A& (760) 325-0593 RUG.i3.2003 2:37PM NO.897 P.2/3 WARP AN D. WILLIAM�� c t r od 1995 MARKET STRE$T Oencral Managcr•ChiefEngin r ��y° dnp RIVERSIDE,CA 92501 909.955.1200 4 G 909.738,9965 FAX i i y 83737.1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT August 13,2003 FAXED THIS )ATE TO 760.322.8360 Mr. Arig Yeo Associate Pl r Department of I lanning and Zoning City of Palm S ings 3200 East Tahq Fitz Canyon Way Palm Springs,C A 92262 Dear Mr.Yeo; Re: Notice of Availability of an Initial Study/ Environmental Assessment for Case No. 5.0966 and Tentative Tract Map 51354 This letter is w Itten in response to the Notice of Availability of an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA) for C No. 5,0966 and Tentative Tract Map 31354 which evaluates a General Plan Amendment to redesignate 5.8 'ores of land from L2 (Low Density 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density 5-6 units/acre) and the subsequent dew opment of Tentative Tract Map 313$4. Tentative Tract 31354 will consist of The construction of a one lot sob livision for condominium purposes, including 16 residential units and associated on and off- site improvemei ts, on 2,69 acres. The project is located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Car von Drive in the City of Palm Springs,Riverside County. i The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) has the following comments/cone Ims: 1. Th` proposed project area is located within the District's Master Drainage Plan (MDP) for the Pal ii Springs area. When fully implemented, these MDP facilities will provide flood protection to elieve those areas within the plan of the most serious flooding problems and will provide ad4 quate drainage outlets. The District's MDP facility maps can be viewed online at 3yv To obtain further information on the MDP and die pr osed District facilities,contact Art Diaz of the District's Planning Section at 909.955.1345. 2, Th District's existing Palm Canyon Wash is within the vicinity of the proposed project and may be mpacted. Any work that involves District right of way,easements or facilities will require an eft Qachment permit from the District. The construction of facilities within road right of way tha may impact District storm drains should also be coordinated with us. To obtain further inf rmation on encroachment permits or existing facilities, contact Ed Lotz of the District's Eni oachment Permit Section at 909.955.1266. 3, Thi proposed project will result in development that may contribute to increases in urban pol utant runoff, The Colorado River Basin Regional Drainage Area Management Plan (CR. DA YfP) describes the overall stormwater management strategies planned by Riverside County. Thi CR-DAMP has been prepared to meet the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Eli iination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit issued by the Colorado River Basin Regional We or Quality Control Board to the municipalities in the Colorado River Basin of Riverside Co nty. AUGA3.2003 2:37PM N0.897 P.3i3 J I 91737.1 Mr.Jing Yee -2- August 13,2003 City of Palm S ings Re: Notice of iAvailability of an Initial Study/ Environitontal Assessment for Case No. 5.0966 an Tentative Tract Map 31354 Th District and the NPDES Co-Permitees also prepared Supplement "A" entitled "New D elopment Guidelines" and the attachment to Supplement "A" entitled "Selection and Design of Stormavater Quality Control". These documents complement the DAMP by providing ad itional guidance in the selection and implementation of best management practices (BMPs). Th above documents (also available on the District's website at co.riverside.ca us/de is/flood/water uali n des,a should be used during the ev �uatlon of potential stormwater quality impacts and appropriate mitigation measures that may be deeded to address such impacts, including the elimination of non-stormwater discharges into dr mage facilities. Any questions regarding the above documents of the District's NPDES Pr am should be directed to Jason Ubley of the Distriots NPDES Section at 909.955.1273. Than you fot the opportunity to review the Notice of Availability. Please forward any subsequent environmental iocuments regarding the project to my attention at this office. Any further questions concerning this letter may be referred to me at 909.955.1233 or Marc Mintz at 909.955.4643, Vers t `ZZLTL4LYTH Senior Civil Engineer c: Art Diaz Ed Lotz Jason Uhle MAM:pIn Vp/VY/LVUJ G1.YJ ♦tip V.,.0 Gvu tVuu uJ L uvuJ uuvuluYW��� Z ...... .... - 4 F EP - 5 200J � ! ❑EVEUOPMENT Fax Cover Sheet Pages Including Cover:4 Date: September 5, 2003 To: Doug Evans Jing Yeo-� CC: David Hilliard Jay Reynolds Company: City of Palm Springs Fax: (760) 322-8360 From: Theodore M. Snyder Re: Updated costs estimates f ility undergrounding Doug & Jing, after our meeting with you on the 26'we meet with Edison to review some alternatives for the utility relocation. One proposal was to relocate the last pole on the south end of our property across the street to the south east corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon and Murray Canyon (see attached diagram). It seems that this would satisfy the planning commissions concern that this pole be removed and give the hotel developer additional flexibility in planning remaining under-grounding requirements with their street and sidewalk improvement plans. Edison indicted that they would prefer to place their improvements "behind curb" and this would allow additional coordination with the approved hotel plans. We would propose that our map conditions require that we remove all of the poles on our site, underground power and cable under South Palm Canyon and install a new pole on the southeast corner of South Palm Canyon and Murray Canyon. Please give me call to discuss this alternative. Also attached is an itemized cost break down of the improvement costs for each section of the under-grounding areas discussed at the last meeting (note costing by section and section map). The good news is that Edison lowered its estimate which reduced the overall project from an estimated $434,000 to $376,000. If the City would agree to allow a new pole as discussed above the cost would come down to approximately$303,000 for the under grounding effort. Based on our understanding of the relative benefit of the underground to the hotel site, we would request that a reimbursement agreement be established to obligate the hotel property to reimburse 50% of our cost to bring the utilities across the street. The estimated cost is $42,600 ($21,300 reimbursement agreement). Symphony Development 11828 LaGrange Avenue 4961 Occan View Las Angeles,Calrtornia90025-5200 La Canada,California 91011 (310)478 4060 (818)248 4005 (310)477 2522 Fax (818)248 4065 Fax Hillia 4Worldnct ttn l derTed(¢veo,IS�m �r4�1 00/04/2003 21:41 BAA 618 445 4uo,o �Yuvyuuuy ueveluymnuL, '.1-1 1T ip ,Q.m.O✓� POCc— /YTa' 1 � 3 n,.5J,tc, F,rat e�P rj I /I vY 6 �o L8 A-T 5'a 69c— ArlO d &�Wy&Aj Is z-; 1p0 //� lj rC7ftol/E Ibc 1 �'*JN m i` i � ItItII CL m k11fl MY VNTON Cq i I SEC 35 I _ 5� E I/a<OPMEfl SEC 5. � q IVI � 1 YI � of 531 x '1J F d' .m°ams s]mu cx.wxEE e} al �is}o5rac ruN I"YcN w.vsN o g > I __________________________________ n �c-;L UU/041LUUd L1:41 CAA 616 Z46 4UJb Jy 01pllULy LCVelUYmeuL uuoi uua f Estimated Cost of Utility Under-grounding for the subject site and properties to the north and south Cost Item Estimated Costs Properties to the north of ➢ Pole&Wire Removal $3,000 the Subject site including ➢ Edison (wire, cable, risers, switching 385 linear feet(Area A on gear, etc) Map) $75ffoot x 385 feet x 128% $36,960 ➢ Conduit $4.25/foot x 385 feet x 6 conduits x 128% $12,566 ➢ Trenching and Backfill $9/foot x 385 feet x 128% $4,435 $82,309 ➢ Concrete Fill $75/yard x .16 yards x 385 x128% $5,913 ➢ Asphalt repair $4.5/Sq Ft x 2 feet wide x 385 feet x 128% $4,435 ➢ Supervision $8,000 ➢ Contingency $7.000 Sub Total $82,309 Subject Property ➢ Pole &Wire Removal $8,000 Frontage of 660 linear ➢ Edison (wire, cable, risers, switching feet gear, etc) (16 unit townhome $75/foot x 660 feet x 128% $63,360 project) ➢ Conduit (Area B on Map) $4.25/foot x 660 feet x 6 conduits x 128% $21,542 ➢ Trenching & Backfill $9/foot x 660 feet x 128% $7,603 ➢ Concrete Fill $75/yard x .16 x 660 x128% $10,137 $177,685 ➢ Asphalt repair $4.5/Sq Ft x 2 feet wide x 660 feet x 128% $7,603 ➢ 1 Pull Box (6'x8.5') 8,000 x 128% $10.240 ➢ 1 Vault(6'(12") 15,000 x 128 $19,200 ➢ Supervision $15,000 ➢ Contingency 1$ 5,000 Sub Total $77,685 Property to the south of ➢ Pole&Wire Removal $4,000 the subject site including ➢ Edison (wire, cable, risers, switching 400 linear feet. (Area C gear, etc) on Map) $75/foot x 400 feet x 128% $38,400 ➢ Conduit $4.25/foot x 400 feet x 6 conduits x 128% $13,056 ➢ Trenching & Backfill $9koot x 400 feet x 128% $4,608 ➢ Asphalt repair $116,056 $4.5/Sq Ft x 2 feet wide x 400 feet x128% $4,608 ➢ Concrete Fill $75/yard x .16 x 400 x128% $6,144 ➢ 1 Pull Box(6'x8.5") $8,000 x 128 $10,240 ➢ Cable TV Relocation$18 per linear foot X 400 ft $7,500 ➢ Cable Power Relocation $8,000 ➢ Supervision $7,500 ➢ Contingency $12,000 Sub Total $116 056 Total Project Costs $376:0560 OU/04/9003 C1:46 PAX bid 248 406b .: bymPLOny UeVelOPRIeUL IVJUU4,Uu4 I n I•£Rlli/ \\\ I I I I Si I I IT I c ]5.>,5 Jill �{Avsh �nuuD �9 r, Tioxi k o y,u,l a "a ul I .6 K -pace, Kc-mb t44, alec ap a 1 ymca uo p MURR/.r cwrOH CA �. � % ICJ` L•,:.:�I 5 \\ I % 'S _� A V♦�j a � i �'� cam; �,Es%`� t.�►1DEf•�Rod��irlq ,JJ SEC 35 _ I 11 51 6 uc c wrcn _ cw-- So __ -- _______________ IUI 1 5 . 50 i / �S I cc : GC.. FIECEI ED AUG 2 5 20,03 NMI August 20, 2003 L, -- I �p{ �EI [DEVELOPMENT �NN - DIVI�10N 1329 -rTm 31 LaGrange Avenue quite 200 Jing Yeo Via Fax (760) 322-8360 Los Angeles California Associate Planner 9oot5-520D City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way P.O. Box 2743 Palm Springs, Califorina 92263-2743 RE: South Palm Canyon Project - Costs Estimates Utility Under-grounding Dear Jing: As requested we have outlined below cost estimates for utility under-grounding for the proposed project. As you know we have assumed that we will be responsible for removing four poles on our site and three poles on the property to the north of our property. We will be under-grounding power along our 660 feet and 385 feet of the adjacent property to the north, for a total of 1,045 feet of work. We have requested that the remaining pole at the south end of our property remain to limit the significant burden our 16-unit project is already supporting. The estimate cost to complete the offsite under-grounding work for our site and the property to the north is $278,000 before supervision and roadway repair. The estimate is based on a site meeting with South California Edison (Bobby Gray, Service Planner, Tel:760-202-4257) and our utility consultant (Richard Wasserman, Tei:760-578-1405). Currently the underground improvements in the street end at the north boundry of Lot 11 (property adjacent to the north). The existing undergrond improvements include six conduits (four 5 inch and two 6 inch conduits encased in concrete). After discussion with Edison the plan is to underground along Palm Canyon in the street easement. The footage along lot 11 is approximately 385 feet from the pick up point, and the subject footage is approximately 660 feet. The total distance is 1,045 feet, assuming we keep the southerly pole in place. The costs of under-grounding break down as follows: • Edison estimates for taking down the poles and pulling new wire is $100 per linear foot. • Cost of installing conduit is $3 per linear foot or $18 for the six conduit lines. Conduits must be encased in concrete (approximately 2 foot by 3 foot). • Trenching estimate is $5-6 per linear foot. Telephone, 310,478 4060 Facsmde. 310.477.2522 • Page 2 August 20,2003 • Edison charges a 28% tax on its costs and a 20% surcharge on the builder's costs. • Two pull stations would be required -$20,000 ($10,000 per station) This generates an estimated cost of$278,000 before supervision and roadway repairs. To the extent that we are required to remove the south-most pole, we would need to complete another approximate 400 feet of under-grounding. This is also complicated by the need) to underground the T.V. cable in addition to the power. The estimated additional cost is $156,000, including $106,000 in under- grounding and $40,000 for supervision and roadway repairs. We believe that we are already taking on more then our fair share of offsite work to improve the views of the mountains. We appreciate that the Planning Commission tried to mitigate this expense with the condition that a covenant be placed on the property. However, placing a covenant to remove this pole in the future effectively forces us to remove of the south-most pole now, as we will find it difficult to sell units with this cloud on the property title. Buyers will be unwilling to purchase units with a potential City capital call in the future. It should be noted that the six electrical conduits primarily benefit the proposed hotel development and the approximate 2,000 unit planned residential development to the south. Obviously, this level of electrical capacity would not nearly be necessary for our small 16-unit project. Placing the burden to remove the last power pole on the hotel and residential project to the south seems more than fair. In fact, in addition to postponing the removal of our south-most pole, it would seem fair to require the southerly development to sign a reimbursement agreement for a portion of our extensive off-site costs since they are receiving a proportionately greater benefit. As you know we struggled with these under-grounding costs as we originally considered purchasing this property. We are hopeful that that the Planning Commission recommendation can be revised on this issue. Thank you for your continued support Sincerely, Th o nyder (818) 48-4 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. 5.0966 GPA,for an amendment to the General Plan Map to redesignate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Dr. and Murray Canyon Drive from L2 to L6, Zone R-2, Section 35, applicant City of Palm Springs, Hollyhills Development, and Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC; and Tentative Tract Map 31354, for a one-lot subdivision to construct 16 condominium units and improvements on 2.69 acres, located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35, applicant Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes LLC, was mailed to each and every person on the attached list on the 30th day of September, 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 Sprin California, this 30`h day of September, 2003. PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk J i NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case 5.0966 GPA Tentative Tract Map 31354 Northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of October 15, 2003. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5.0966 GPA, a request initiated by the City of Palm Springs, Hollyhills Development, and Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for an amendment to the General Plan Map to redesignate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive from L2(Low Density Residential 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential 6 units/acre). The subject property is located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. The purpose of the hearing is also to consider an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for a one-lot subdivision to construct 16 condominium units and associated on and off-site improvements on 2.69 acres. The project will consist of 16 two-bedroom units, all two stories with the exception of 1 one-story unit. The units will range in size from 2167 square feet to 2645 square feet. The subject property is located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive (northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive), Zone R-2, Section 35. 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 to the City Clerk 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 Jing Yeo, Associate Planner, (760) 323-8245, Publish: 9-25-03 PATRICIA A. SANDERS The Desert Sun City Clerk VICINITY MAP N WOEW ✓ E Z!9 ZZ v 'O>y 5tit �.a/rc r / /sac he �@ tY I par W l3 +d � ry /rram k� sz zr 3 „ ' TtS Y rl Yin S ITE O I)y$I / '� .rr MURFAY CANYON OR/VE f CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO.: 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 DESCRIPTION:Application by City of Palm Springs,Hollyhills Development & Palm Canyon Townhomes for a General Plan APPLICANT: City Of Palm Springs, Hollyhllls Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres from L2toL6.Application by Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for TTM 31354 to construct 16 Development, and Palm Canyon condos located at the NW corner of S.Palm Canyon Dr.&Murray Townhomes, LLC Canyon Dr.,Zone R-2,Section 35. �8 (TTM�L1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds �` Labels dated 4-7-03 513 542 003 513 542 004 j 3 542 0 Gr-is s 3r� Suzanne Reynolds Natbeck Inv&Brian Catalde hiv Kin J er J&7emifer crime King 2917 Cervantes Ct 801 E Tahquitz Canyon Way#100 127211 27 nhua Blvd#480 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92262 udio City, A 91604 513 542 006 513 542 007 513 570 006 Natbeck Inv&Phillip Rose Natbeck Inv&Bank Of America Natl Cerciello Aldo&Manuela 2910 Cervantes Ct 333 S Beaudry Ave#21ST 5075 Shoreham PI#150 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Los Angeles, CA 90017 San Diego, CA 92122 513 570 007 513 570 008 513 570 010 National Capital Holdings Llc Cerciello Aldo&Manuela Hollylills Dev Inc 1100 Irvine Blvd 450 5075 Shoreham PI#150 PO Box 1161 Tustin, CA 92780 San Diego, CA 92122 Palm Springs, CA 92263 570 011 7,-u 513 570 014 513 570 015 Son n Hoa Ridge Pizzaro Investments Lie e At S a1m Canyon Homeowner 15 Bln anyon Rd 1100 Irvine Blvd#50 1313 t#200 alm Spnngs, A 92264 Tustin, CA 92780 L Angeles, 0017 513 570 016 HOLLY HILLS DEVELOPMENT ATTN: MR DAN BAILEY Philip Bloom&John Derocco 2705 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE 11400 W Olympic Blvd 49TH PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264 Los Angeles,CA 90064 C & 7,1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds 5,OelibLabels dated 4-7-03 512 132 001 512 132 002 2 132 0 Thomas&Sandra Denham Christann Manning M olari '7_11 2683 W La Condesa Dr 2681 W La Condesa Dr 266 a Condesa Dr Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Sprin CA 92264 512 132 004 512 132 005 512 132 006 Mazy Phelan ael oam e Kammer Michael Eldridge 7 Split Rock Ct 26 Condesa Dr 67170 Peineta Rd Melville, NY 11747 Ahn Springs,CA 92264 Cathedral City, CA 92234 512 132 007 512 132 008 512 132 009 Gary&Charlotte Solomon Jim Ellcouri Martin Robinett&Julie Smith 2644 W La Condesa Dr 2642 W La Condesa Dr PO Box 291 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Snohomish, WA 98291 512 132 010 512 132011 512 132 012 Vince&Kathleen Carmova Eugene Gabrych&Marian Gabrych Terrance Cabe&Charles Seacer 624 Tlmrlow St 2006 State Highway 395 145 E Perlita Cir Hinsdale, IL 60521 Fallbrook, CA 92028 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512132013 512132014 512132015 James Garber John&Dorothy Nocita Mapson Ellen P&Mapson 147 E Perlita Cif 152 E Perlita Cir 150 E Perlita Cir Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 132 016 512 132 017 512 132 020 5Q1O Monro mr Johnson Rod&Josie Vista Canyon Development Co Ros th Booth PO Box 403 447 S Camden Dr 999 een #1102 Cedar City,UT 84721 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 S Francisco, 94133 512 180 006 512 180 009 512 180 010 Canyon Villas Homeowners Assn Inc Lemmons Anna M Usa Bia 10701 Wilshire Blvd 26791 Paradise Mt Ln Unknown 04-28-200 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Valley Center, CA 92082 CA 512 180 011 512 180 012 512 180 013 Gilberto Chavez Pa Hem 7—rl Shellabarger 83630 Quail Ave PO 12006 613 Hemingway Ave Indio, CA 92201 net, 92546 Placentia, CA 92870 512 200 004 512 200 005 512 230 001 Deanna Andreas Usa Bia Sherr&Rosenfeld David Platt PO Box 2245 Unknown 04-28-200 V Elysa Ortiz Palm Springs, CA 92263 CA 642 N Larclmiont Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90004 512 230 002 512 230 003 512 230 004 David Feldman&Irene Feldmann David&Barbara Everly John&Lorna Stern Jr. 315 Winthrop Dr 2727 S Sierra Madre#3 1930 6th Ave S #303 Ithaca,NY 14850 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Seattle, WA 98134 ca IUUIy F) I-'alm Canyon Iownnomes, LLC, Jay Keynolds Labels dated 4-7-03 512 230 005 512 230 006 512 230 007 Randy Weiner Christine Ramos Michael&A lyn Hollinger 2727 S Sierra Madre#5 2727 S Sierra Madre#6 5303 White Ave Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Encino, CA 913 512 230 008 512 230 009 512 230 010 Michael&Marilyn Hollinger Kotler Betty Lesin&Lesin Betty T Ed&Cecile Gromis 5305 White Oak Ave#E 300 N Swall Dr 141 S Windsor Blvd Encino, CA 91316 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Los Angeles, CA 90004 512230011 512 250 001 512 250 002 Sierra Madre Apartments Michael Ross&Mario Hernandez Kelly Purcell 2727 S Sierra Madre 605 E Amado Rd#620 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 461 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Patin Springs, CA 92264 512 250 003 512 250 004 512 250 005 Don Sullivan&Mary Sullivan Bobby&Kendra Riccio Shirley Barasch 1511 Waterbury Way 2600 S Palm Carryon Dr#63 127 8th St La Habra, CA 90631 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Seal Beach, CA 90740 512 250 006 512 250 007 512 250 008 Arthur Burdorf&Jacqueline Burdorf Heidi Flaum&J&T Hollland Onue Jan&Carol&Orme 804 Walden Dr 401 Newport Center Dr#209 2072 Norris Rd Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 512 250 009 512 250 010 512 250 011 es<amu7—I 1 Mark Ryckwaert&Beverly Harris Gale Larson 266t467 S Calle El Segundo#D2 11133 Aqua Vista St#203 ent18103 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Studio City, CA 91602 512 250 012 512 250 013 512 250 014 Field Sharon&Field Sharon K Charles&Joanne Rapers Surdi Ronald V 1409 Sequoia Tit 24779 Delwood St 4017 Miraleste Dr Glenview, IL 60025 Harrison Township,MI 48045 Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 512250015 512250016 512250017 Cinda Johansen Robert Pavlovich&Sandra Pavlovich Oliver&Panrela Frieze Cobb 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 952 1260 41st Ave 642 NW 163rd St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Capitola, CA 95010 Shoreline,WA 98177 512250018 .-7_tl_o3 512250019 22500 �,tt ehea &K A Rosenthal Les rott 1407 n Ln 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#48 250 erbmy Ln E#123 P ble Beac r, A 93953 Palm Springs, CA 92264 attle, W 8112 512 250 021 512 250 022 512 250 023 Annette Johansen Rosemary Cooley Ronald&Christine Cook 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 442 1993 S Mesa Dr PO Box 391399 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Anza, CA 92539 tease- r �ri6, t. ioar1 rarm canyon I ownnomes, LLU, ,lay Keynold - lbl( Labels dated 4-7-03 512 250 024 512 250 025 512 250 026 Khalil Ailaboum Michael&Anna Appleton Robert Atkins&Steven Watson 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#43 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#38 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#37 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 250 027 512 250 028 512 250 029 Cynthia Wanta Richard Wispe&Thelma Wispe Maurice Sher&Barbara Sher 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#40 5341 Kenilworth Dr 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#34 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 250 030 512 250 031 512 250 032 Gerald Carlson Lorentz&Maria Fulop Donald&Lavonne Burdick 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#33 1935 Golden Rain Rd#1 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 05 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Walnut Creek, CA 94595 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 250 033 512 250 034 512 250 035 Merlow Wayne&Cherie Mare Hultgre Joseph&Nancy Catalano Jerome&Marlene Lipin 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#30 414 Emerson St 5511 W 62nd St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Upland, CA 91784 Los Angeles, CA 90056 512 250 036 512 250 037 512 250 038 Carol Lee Armstrong Witter Richard H&Loene M Pheripo&Filomena Iovenitti PO Box 16998 Witter 8566 811 Lark Hall Cif#C Irvine, CA 92623 68 E Alegria Ave Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Sierra Madre, CA 91024 512 250 039 512 250 040 512 250 041 Allen Deitelbaum&Vivian Deitelbamn Jaynes Cole Richard&Sarah Taylor 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#N028 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 427 534 Azalea Ave NE Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Bainbridge Island,WA 98110 512 250 042 512 250 043 512 250 044 Lane Winifred M Carl&Rosemary Lane icach, `!— 1 31532 Crystal Sands Dr 22840 Sparrowdell Dr 1750 Blvd 4605 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Calabasas, CA 91302 Lo A 90802 512 250 045 512 250 046 512 250 047 Donald Taylor Howard Maurice&Adeline Dale Kass Howard&Esther Friedman 20 Chemical Way 9855 Whitwell Dr 5518 Towers St Redwood City, CA 94063 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Torrance, CA 90503 512 250 048 512 250 049 512 250 050 Frank Jackson Richard Oconnor Charles&Madeline Royal 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#19 58 Linda Isle 9801 Wish Ave Palm Springs, CA 92264 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Northridge, CA 91325 512 250 051 512 250 052 512 250 053 Wolfgang Urbat&Ingrid Urbat Derri Day Rochelle Cohen 2318 Teasley St IS19 SandeliffRd 19528 Ventura Blvd#330 La Crescenta, CA 91214 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Tarzana, CA 91356 r, ww) raim canyon townnomes, LLU, aay rceynoias I Laneis aatea 4-(-U3 IV L 512 250 054 i 512 250 055 512 250 056 etzu Syl ' 7 l l Max Fields&Lucy Fields Harry&Lois June Paskil 400 ell Dr 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#12 22 Dover PI Valm Spring , A 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 512 250 057 512 250 058 512 250 059 Cleopatra Mascola&Louis Frank Mas Steven&Mayda Carnes Elizabeth Cameron 1909 Marina Dr 18417 Mount Cherie Cir 5417 Ocean View Blvd I San Pedro, CA 90732 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 La Canada, CA 91011 512 250 060 512 250 061 512 250 062 Cleopatra Mascola&Louis Frank Mas Bobbie Harper Pinto Gregory Casserly 1909 Marina Dr PO Box 5029 19 Whitecliff Way San Pedro, CA 90732 Palm Springs, CA 92263 San Francisco, CA 94124 512 250 063 512 250 064 512 250 065 Louis&Helen Srnits Frank Selberis Palm Canyon Properties Inc I 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#4 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 93 2600 S Pahn Carryon Dr#3 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 001 � 513 541 002 513 541 003 atbeck I anyon Heights Assoc Natbeck Inv&Harold Miller Natbeck Inv&David Fringer 11 are St#M4 333 E Channel St#2ND 2884 N Andalucia Ct DDiego, 92101 Stockton, CA 95202 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 4 513 541 005 513 541 006 Natbeck hi Harold Miller her Ka l_t beck &W Theodore Clark 333 E Cha St#2ND 3073 lon Rd 9307 endora Dr Stockton, A 5202 is Mesa, 92626 okane, 9223 513 541 007 513 541 008 513 541 009 Natbeck Inv&Polka Pramatarov Maryarm Ahlgren Natbeck Inv&David Witt PO Box 3094 68733 Perez Rd 4C-11 2852 N Andalucia Ct Clifton,NJ 07012 Cathedral City, CA 92234 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 010 513 541011 513 541 012 Natbeck&Alvin Rudd Natbeck Inv&Betsy Hammes Benneth&Suzy Katz 2850 N Andalucia Ct 2851 N Andalucia Ct 1150 Sacramento St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 San Francisco, CA 94108 513 541 013 513 541 014 513 541 015 Natbeck Inv&Tanya Grubich Donn Fry&Diane Stielstra Natbeck Inv&Leota Leake 100 S Sunrise Way#487 2873 N Andalucia Ct 2885 N Andalucia Ct Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 016 513 541 017 513 541 018 Natbeck Inv&Michael Shulimson Natbeck Inv&Ferro Ti&Alloys In Natbeck Inc&Gordon Leake 33397 Mulholland Hwy 17 Connaught Sq W221ij 212 Canyon Cir N Malibu,CA 90265 LONDON Palm Springs, CA 92264 UNITED KINGDOM a!° c tee;= =ev+o-iLLr,,cwr -✓z5a r. iu q rairn canyon r ownnomes, Lw, aay neynoias _ Laoers aaiea 4-1-U3 513 541 019 513 541 020 513 541 021 William&Domm Randle Albert Yunker Jr. Natbeck Inv&George Jurgich 96 Stumpfield Rd 2882 N Greco Ct 200 Beach PI#404 Kensington NH 03833 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Edmonds,WA 98020 513 541 022 513 541 023 513 541024 Natbeck Inv&Mary Williamson Evelyn Alexandre Natbeck Inv&Albert Neal Simmons 271 Murray Dr 1850 Gough St#604 100 S Sunrise Way#429 El Cajon CA 92020 San Francisco, CA 94109 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 541 025 513 541 026 513 541 027 Natbeck Inv&Larry Mather Donald Peterson Natbeck Inv&John Ivanoff 2927 Carryon Cir S 2952 Canyon Cir S 4024 12th St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Riverside, CA 92501 513 541 028 513 541 029 513 541 030 Natbeck Inv&June Simmons Natbeck Inv&Neil Goodhue Natbeck Inv&Carl Mar asak 500 W Crescent Dr 300 Hillside Ave F 201 S Mission Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Piedmont, CA 94611 San Gabriel, CA 91776 513 541 031 513 541 032 513 541 033 Natbeck Inv&Kenneth Mirch Natbeck Inv&Stephan Plager Nat Beck Inv&Kenneth Mirch 925 l7th St#4 235 4th Ave 219 Canyon Cir N Santa Monica, CA 90403 Santa Cruz,CA 95062 Palm Springs,CA 92264 513 541 034 513 541 035 513 541036 Natbeak Inv&Robert Debnam Manuel Mares Shirley Engleman 1334 NE Mayfield 231 Canyon Cir N 233 Canyon Cir N Portland, OR 97229 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 513 541 037 513 541 038 513 541 039 Natbeck Inv&Thomas Mark Trelak M J Playan Albert&Marion Carpenter 235 Canyon Cir N 2870 N Andalucia Ct 239 Canyon Cir N#81 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 513 541 040 513 541 041 513 541 042 Natbeck Inv&Lee Brandenburg Frank Bustillos Yale&Ethic Rutzick 1122 Willow St#200 1970 Fell St I649 Beechwood Ave San Jose, CA 95125 San Francisco, CA 94117 Saint Paul,MN 55116 513 541 043 513 541 044 513 541 045 Natbeck Inv& Shirley Dec Kubly r _1(( Natbeck Inv&Carolyn Nevotti 1112 7th Ave B1et>HS<CO'Rod, Ave#Jl 234 Canyon Cir S Monroe,WI 53566 CA 90069 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 046 513 542 001 513 542 002 Natbeck hiv&Hannah Sobel Sherry Ann Scherotter Natbeck Inv 230 Canyon Cir S PO Box 2224 PO Box 1906 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs,CA 92263 'Yg, D C/Iolo i JS MR PETER DIXON MS CHRISTINE HAMMOND Co LISt (TAHQUITZ RIVER ESTATES REP) TM $ l 431 SOUTH MONTE VISTA DRIVE 1155 SOUTH CAMINO REAL Town h©mes LLC PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 Ale MR BILL DAVIS AND MR FRANK TYSEN MR JOHN HURTER MS TRISHA DAVIS C/O CASA CODY COUNTRY INN PO BOX 2824 227 SOUTH CAHUILLA 175 SOUTH CAHUILLA ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-2824 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 I MR BOB WEI,THORN MR TIM HOHMEIER MR BOB SEALE 261 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD 1387 CALLE DE MARIA ;', 280 CAMINO SUR PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 I MR PHIL TEDESCO MR MARSHALL ROATH 1303 WEST PRIMAVERA DRIVE MS SHERYL HAMLIN PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE PALM SPRINGS OA 92262 MS MARGARET PARK AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS - =J-J-D-J CAHUILLA INDIANS 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS j VERIFICATION NOTICE-J-J PLANNING &ZONING DEPT ATTN: SENIOR SECRETARY PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-2743 MR JAY REYNOLDS MR. DAVID HILLIARD SPONSORS -J -J -J --J -J PALM CANYON TOWNHOMES LLC PALM CANYON TOWNHOMES LLC 11828 LA GRANGE AVE#202 11828 LA GRANGE AVE#202 LOS ANGELES CA 90025 LOS ANGELES CA 90025 I . MR TED SNYDER PALM CANYON TOWNHOMES LLC 4862 OCEAN VIEW BLVD LA CANADA CA 91011 I I , I I PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Piling Stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) No.5620 NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL YYdE-EI ING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case 5.0966 GPA STATE OF CALIFORNIA _ _ ____ Tentative Tract Map 31354__ - -- - - - Northwest corner of South Palm Canyon County of Riverside Drive and Murray Canyon Drive NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at Its meeting of October 15,2003 the City Council meeting begins at 7.00 p.m. In the Gouncil Chamber ai City Hall, 3200 b. Tell- ark Canyon Way, Palm Springs, I Ilia 5.0966 GPA,ose a request initiate is d by theeC,of I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Palm springs, Holha is Development, and tramp the County aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen Can yyon Townhome., LLC for an amendment to the Gareml Plan Male to redesignate 5 8 acres of years,and not a party to or interested in the ro pedy located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murraly Canyon Drive above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a from L2 (Low Density Pesldentia 2 unitslacrel to Le (Low Density Residential 6 units/acre) The printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING subject property is located at the northwest car- COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, net of souti Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Can- yon Duve, Zane R-2, Section 35 printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, The purpose of the hearing is to also consider an County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for aone-lot subdivision to construct 16 condominium Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of units and associated on and off-sit. improve- ments on 2.69 acres. The project will consist of California under the date of March 24,1988.Case 16 two-bedroom units, all two stories with the ex- ception of i one-story unit.The units will range m Number 191236; that the notice,of which the s¢e from z1s7 square feet to 2645 square feet The sub7'eci property Is located at 2765 and 2801 annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller south Palm Canyon Drive (northwest corner of than non pariel,has been published in each regular Soul Pone Canyon t ur 3sand Murray Canyon and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any ._ supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: viCiNITYMAP�„ , September 25 ' le ------ ------- - - - u----------- ------- -- ------------- = f All in the year 2003 I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 2616 Dated at Palm Springs,California this day af------ Se amber---- -- --------,2003 meet rig b tiro reviewed by dthe City iv Council at the Negative Prepared of Environmental sa. M has been prepared for may subject proposal. Members of the public may view this document unl the 00 1--- Tat of Planning and Zonmg, City Hall, 3200E Tattenc Canyon Signature Way,Palm Spprings,and submit written comments t. the City Cl.rk at or prior to the City Council hearing It any group challenges the action In court,Issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised' at the public hearing described rn tills notice or to 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 reggaN- rng this case ma yy be directed to Jing Yeo,Flsso- date Planner, (760)323-8245. PATRICIA A SANDERS 1 r - r 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, over the 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 24th day of July, 2003, 1 served the within NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING for PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO.5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 to consider a request by the City of Palm Springs and Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, for an amendment to the General Plan to re-designate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive from L23(Low Density Residential two(2) unites/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential six (6) units/acre). The second request is for TTM 31354, an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, to construct 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres including associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 for on-site and off-site improvements. The project will consist of 16 two-bedroom units, all two stories with the exception of one (1) one-story unit. The units will range in size from 2,167 square feet to 2,645 square feet. The subject property is located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive(northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive), Zone R-2, Section 35. This Notice was served on persons and agencies contained in Exhibit "B" attached hereto in said action or proceeding by depositing a true copy thereof, enclosed in a sealed envelope with certified- return receipt requested 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 and certified by Jing Yeo, Associate Planner, and attached hereto as Exhibit"B". I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. �r 7 ,1 --L'ory a D. Moffett Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 24th day of July, 2003. 5.0966 GPA Local Agencies & Utilities DESERT WATER AGENCY THE GAS COMPANY PALM SPRINGS DISPOSAL SVCS 1200 SOUTH GENE AUTRY TRAIL 211 NORTH SUNRISE WAY 4690 E MESQUITE AVENUE PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY DISTRICT MANAGEMENT DISTRICT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 980 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY 21865 EAST COPLEY DRIVE 36100 CATHEDRAL CANYON DRIVE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-4182 CATHEDRAL CITY, CA 92234 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TIME WARNER CABLE VERIZON ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 195 SOUTH SUNRISE WAY PO BOX 800 41725 COOK STREET PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 ROSEMEAD CA 91770 PALM DESERT CA 92260 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL STATE OF CALIFORNIA VERIZON ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS AND WATER CONSERVATION WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD MS JACQUE MCCORMACK DISTRICT/REGULATORY 73720 FRED WARING DRIVE 700 HIDDEN RIDGE MC W01J05 1995 MARKET STREET PALM DESERT CA 92260 IRVING TX 75038 RIVERSIDE CA 92501 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT AGUA CALIENTE BAND THE SIERRA CLUB OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8 OF CAHUILLA INDIANS MS JOAN TAYLOR 464 WEST 4T"ST 6T" FLOOR MS 72 MR TOM DAVIS TRIBAL PLANNING DIR 1800 SOUTH SUNRISE WAY SAN BERNARDINO CA 92401-1400 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS STATE of CALIFORNIA- DEPT of MR KIM SNYDER, DIRECTOR REGIONAL DIRECTOR FISH &GAME-REGION 6 PO BOX 2245 ATTN NATURAL RESOURCES EASTERN SIERRA& INLAND DESERT 4775 BIRD FARM ROAD 2800 COTTAGE WAY PALM SPRINGSCA 92263 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 CHINO HILLS, CA 91709 ECONOMIC BUILDING ENGINEERING & PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT WORKS FIRE POLICE Y °� PALM � �-ti City of Palm Springs U 0 Department of Planning&Building * ryr e * Planning Division °R�oRptEo 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way •Palm Springs,CaGfomia 92262 TEL:(760)323-8245 •FAX(760)322-8360•TDD(760)864-9527 MEMORANDUM From: Director of Planning and Zoning To: Distribution Subject: Notice of Availability of an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment that evaluates an application by the City of Palm Springs, Hollyhills Development, and Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for a General Plan Map Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres of land from L2 (Low Density 2 units/acre) to L6 (Low Density 5-6 units/acre) for the property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. The City of Palm Springs has prepared an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment(IS/EA)which evaluates a General Plan Amendment to amend approximately 5.8 acres from Low Density Residential 2 units/acre (1-2) to Low Density Residential 5-6 units/acre (1-6) for development as multi-family residential housing. The proposed General Plan Amendment will facilitate future residential development including an application by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for Tentative Tract Map 31354, a one-lot subdivision for condominium purposes, for the construction of 16 residential units and associated on and off-site improvements on 2.69 acres, Zone R-2, Section 35. 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,Cultural Resources,Land use and Planning, and Noise 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 July 24, 2003 to August 13, 2003. Written comments on the IS/EA should be submitted to Jing Yeo, Associate Planner Department of Planning and Zoning, City of Palm Springs, at the above address no later than August 13, 2003. The Planning Commission will review the proposed project at its meeting on August 13, 2003. At that meeting the Planning Commission may recommend that the City Council adopt a mitigated negative declaration at a later date.Please contact Jing Yeo,Associate Planner at(760)323-8245, if you have any questions regarding the City's review process for considering the IS/EA. Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case 5.0966 GPA Tentative Tract Map 31354 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs,California,will hold a public hearing at its meeting August 13, 2003. The Planning Commission meeting begins at 1:30 p.m.(public hearings start at 2:00 p.m.)in the Council Chamber at City Hall,3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5,0966, a request initiated by the City of Palm Springs and Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for an amendment to the General Plan to redesignate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive from L2(Low Density Residential 2 units/acre) to L6 (Low Density Residential 6 units/acre). The second request is for TTM'31354, an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC construct 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres including associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 for on and off-site improvements. The project will consist of 16 two- bedroom units,all two stories with the exception of 1 one-story unit. The units will range in size from 2167 square feet to 2645 square feet. The subject property is located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive (northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive), Zone R-2, Section 35. 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 forthe 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 Planning Commission hearing. An Opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested,persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may Ibe directed to Jing Yeo, Associate Planner, (760) 323-8245. PLANNING COMMISSION �DOUGLAS R. EVANS Director of Planning and Zoning VICINITY MAP, srs rz u e el $gip -0 Ore. J r'� «' Y Y`�� q r l-41 4 nsre . 7 /l6 AC t0 �tiU 1 Par/ w ' ,ss,am /iF FL Fr C Y Y4 mMsrt Li., Gxrr iTE Q /H3.4 yll i ' 1c i I I 1 f ' ;� irc i MURRAY CANYON OR/VE CITY. OF PALM SPRINGS CASC NO, 5.0966 GPA / TTM 31354. DESCRIPTION [ARRUCANT Application for a Tentative Tract Map to construct 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres inoluding "Jay Reynolds for associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 ;Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for on and off-site improvements located at the northwest comer of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive,Zone R-2,Section 35. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING INITIAL STUDY 1 Case No: 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 Project title: A. General Plan Amendment from L2 to L6 for 5.8 acres at the NW corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Section 35. B.Pahn Canyon Townhomes 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: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning and Zoning Tel: (760) 323-8245 4. Project location: NW comer of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive 5. Project sponsor's name and address: City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Jay Reynolds OJMR Architects 502 S. Fairfax Avenue, Suite 202 Los Angeles, CA 90036 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 site is 5.8 acres in size and consists of 4 parcels (512-180-001, 512-180-007, 512- 180-012, 513-570-016). The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. Land uses surrounding the site include residential condominiums and open space to the west, residential condominiums to the south, vacant but previously subdivided single-family property to the north, and South Pahn Canyon Drive, a timeshare resort, and multi-family residential to the east. The application is being initiated by the City of Palm Springs,Hollyhills Development, and Jay Reynolds on behalf of Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for a General Plan Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres of land from L2 (Low Density 2 units/acre) to L6 (Low Density 5-6 units/acre). The amendment is being requested in order to reconcile the inconsistent R-2 zoning and the L6 general plan designation. The amendments will result in a maximum allowable density of 35 units on 5.8 acres. City of Patin Springs Initial Study 1 July 24,2003 The:amendment will also facilitate the application on APN#s 512-180-001 and 512-180-007 by Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for TTM 38321, a one-lot subdivision for condominium purposes and related architectural approval (Case 3.2248) for the construction of 16 residential units, located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35. Future proposed residential development on 512-180-002 and 513-570- 016 shall require a separate permitting process. 6. Present Land Use: Vacant 7. General Plan designation: L2 S. Zoning: R-2 Proposed General Plan designation: L6 Proposed Zoning: R-2 9. Is the proposed action a "project" as defined by CEQA? (See Section 2.6 of State CEQA Guidelines. If more than one project is present in Yes >< No ❑ the same area, cumulative impact should be considered) 10. If"yes" above, does the project fall into any of the Emergency Projects Yes ❑ No 1] listed in Section 15269 of the State CEQA Guidelines? 11. If"no" on 10., does the project fall under any of the Ministerial Acts Yes ❑ No 0 listed in Section 15268(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines? 12. If "no" on 11., does the project fall under any of the Statutory yes ❑ No 0 Exemptions listed in Article 18 of the State CEQA Guidelines? 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 have a significant Yes ❑ No 9 effect due to special circumstances, a categorical exemption does not apply). 14. Surrounding land uses and setting(briefly describe the project's surroundings): North: Vacant hillside,previously subdivided property for single family residential purposes, Multi-family residential condominiums South: Vacant, Canyon Heights condominium complex East: South Palm Canyon Drive, Timeshare resort,Multi-family residential condominiums West: Canyon Heights condominium complex,Vacant, Single family residential subdivision 15. Surrounding General Plan and Zoning: North: L2, C, L6/R-G-A(6),R-2 South: L2, SP-1 /R-2, SP-1 East: H 43/21,M15 /R-3, R-2 West: L2, C, SP-1/R-2, 0-20, SP-1 City of Patin Springs Initial Study 2 July 24,2003 16. Is the proposed project consistent with(i£answered"yes"or"n&', no explanation is required): City of Palm Springs General Plan* Yes ❑O No ❑ N/A ❑ Applicable Specific Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A O City of Pahn Springs Zoning Ordinance Yes ❑O No ❑ N/A❑ South Coast Air Quality Management Plan Yes ❑X No ❑ N/A❑ Airport Part 150 Noise Study Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A❑O Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A❑O *The General Plan Map is proposed to be amended from L2 to L6 for 5.8 acres located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive. If the General Plan Amendment is approved, the project will be consistent with the General Plan. City of Patin Springs Initial Study 3 July 24,2003 17. Are any of the following studies required? Soils Report Yes Q No ❑ Slope Study Yes ❑ No 0 Geotechnical Report Yes ❑ No O Traffic Study Yes ❑ No ❑x Asir Quality Study Yes ❑ No 2 Hydrology Yes Q No ❑ Sewer Study Yes ❑ No l] Biological Study Yes ❑ No 1] Noise Study Yes ❑ No Z Hazardous Materials Study Yes ❑ No O Housing Analysis Yes ❑ No Z Archaeological Report Yes ❑ No Z Groundwater Analysis Yes ❑ No ❑x Water Quality Report Yes ❑ No 1] Other Yes ❑ No O 18. Other public agencies whose approval is required(e.g.,permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None 19. Incorporated herein by reference is the Final Environmental Impact Retort on the General Plan Update. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 4 July 24,2003. 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 ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ 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 Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1.AESTHETICS --Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ nighttime views in the area? La) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposal is for a General Plan Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres from L2(Low Density Residential 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential 4- 6 units/acre). Future development on the project site shall comply with the City's policies for hillside developments. Due to the varying topography on the project site, the density shall be determined based on the slope density criteria, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan policies regarding hillside development. That is, any portion of the site in excess of a 30% slope shall be retained as open space and excluded in computation of the total density. With regards to any development on the north portion of the project site, the site will be carefully evaluated and visual impact studies, soils, and geotechnical studies as well as slope analysis will be required. TTM 31354 proposes 16 units with a maximum height of 24 feet except for the hillside units, which City of Palm Springs Initial Study 5 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated ,Impact Impact have a maximum height of 30 feet. The applicant will require the approval of an Administrative Minor Modification for building height and minor reductions in the front and rear setbacks. The design of the project is,modern. The property is surrounded by residential development to the south and west and a timeshare;resort to the east. The residential condominiums to the west will be the most impacted by the project. 'Therefore, the pad elevations for the proposed units have been kept at a minimum in order to preserve the views of the residential units to the west. In addition, the hillside units have been terraced on three levels in order to minimize cut slope. As a result, the General Plan Amendment will result in less than significant impacts related to scenic vistas. Lb) NO IMPACT. The project site is not located adjacent to a state scenic highway. However the project site is located adjacent to South Palm Canyon Drive, a City designated scenic corridor. There are no significant trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings or other significant aesthetic resources within the project site.TTM 31354 has been designed to integrate into the surrounding environment and have minimal impact on the slope at the north portion of the development. However, development proposed for the northern portion of the project site shall require a slope analysis in order to take into account views from South Palm Canyon Drive and also from the residential condominiums to the north. Lc) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed in response La) above, the proposal is for a General Plan Amendment to redesignate 5.8 acres from L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential 4-6 units/acre). In order to ensure that the visual character and quality of the site and surroundings are not adversely affected, future development on the project site shall be carefully evaluated with respect to the City's policies for hillside developments. Due to the varying topography on the project site, the density shall be determined based on the slope density criteria, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan policies regarding hillside development. That is, any portion of the site in excess of a 30% slope shall be retained as open space and excluded in computing the total density. With regards to any development on the north portion of the project site (i.e.the Ridge development), visual impact studies as well as slope,analysis will be required. Any proposed development on the project site shall undergo a public hearing and architectural review process. TTM 31354 will undergo a public hearing and architectural review process that includes the Design Review Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council. The maximum building height for the two-story units on the flat portion of the site is 24 feet. The project proposes pad elevations that are approximately at average grade at curb of 515.5, particularly for the units that abut the Canyon Heights development to the west. The two hillside units at the north portion of the property have been integrated into the slope. The units will occur on 2 pad elevations with the garage at 520.5 feet and the main residence at 532.5 feet. The terraced unit design has been proposed in order to minimize cut Slope. In addition, conditions of approval have been incorporated into the project design that limit cut slope and fill. Retaining walls have been encouraged as opposed to fill slope. Exposed cut slopes are not permitted unless screened by structures or they shall be treated to match the native hillside. In addition, the applicant is proposing to remove 3 on-site poles and underground utilities, therefore improving the visual character of the site. With the incorporation of project conditions of approval and the architectural and public review process, the impacts to the site and visual character will be reduced to a level of insignificance. Ld) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project site is substantially surrounded by urban development with existing night lighting. Residential project lighting and accent landscape lighting are proposed and will comply with Section 93.20.00 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, City of Palm Springs Initial Study 6 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact developments proposed for the project site will not be a new source of substantial light or glare and will not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Proposed developments will require the installation of new lighting for security and nighttime operations. Through the use of low sodium lighting and shielding, the new light sources are not anticipated to adversely affect the adjacent properties. The low sodium lighting will be oriented downward and toward the'project site, and be shielded to minimize light spill onto adjacent property. As part of the review process, the City of Pahn Springs Zoning Department will also review the proposed lighting plan for compliance with the City of Palm Springs Zoning Code, Section 93.21.00, outdoor lighting standards. Therefore, no significant impacts, related to light and glare, are anticipated. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: hi 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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)NO IMPACT. The project site is not located on prime farmland,unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance. The project site is currently zoned for residential uses and is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the proposed uses would not conflict with any agricultural zoning or other agricultural regulations. There is no farmland or agricultural land in the immediate vicinity of the project site;therefore,the project could not result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 7 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant 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 ❑ ❑ 191 ❑ of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ ❑X ❑ ❑ 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 state ambient air quality ❑ ❑ d ❑ standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ substantial number of people? 3.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The applicable air quality plan for the project area is the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan(1997 AQMP). CEQA requires that projects be consistent with the applicable AQMP. The proposed project will conform to the SCAQMD 1997 AQMP. The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates in Chapter 6 that the SCAQMD considers a project to be less than significant if its impact is mitigated below the identified thresholds. Additionally, the project site is located in the Coachella Valley, which is under the recently adopted 2002 Coachella Valley PMio State Implementation Plan. The CMPM10SIP requires the development and implementation of a dust control plan for all grading activities in the Coachella Valley requiring a grading permit. The project proponent shall develop a dust control plan and submit it to the City Building Department for review prior to issuance of any grading permits. Therefore, since the proposed project is considered consistent with the region's air quality plan and a dust control plan will be developed and implemented prior to grading activities, the project will result in a less than 'significant impact on the SCAQMD's AQMP or the CVPMtaSIP. 3.b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The project may have substantial temporary impacts on local air quality due to dust emissions from heavy construction equipment and construction activities. Emissions associated with heavy construction equipment are typically associated with demolition, land clearing, grading, and excavation activities. Dust emissions also vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. However, since the proposed project is located in the Coachella Valley, which has City of Palm Springs Initial Study 8 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact significant problems with PM1O generation,the project proponent,prior to construction,will be required to develop and implement a dust control plan, in accordance with the 2002 Coachella Valley PMJe State Implementation Plan. 3.c-e) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed under response 3.b) above, with the incorporation of construction related mitigation measures, the proposed project would not result in any significant air quality impacts and therefore, would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants or ozone precursors. In addition, the project site may be developed up to 35 residential units, which is anticipated to generate odors similar to those of residential uses. As a result,the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact related to odor generation. Mitigation Measures 1. Prior to beginning construction activities,the project proponent of the building contract will develop and submit a dust control plan to the City's Building Department, in accordance with the 2002 Coachella Valley PM,e State Implementation Plan. 2. Any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the amount of open space subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plans shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and minimize blowsand. 3. The contractor will ensure that all construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained. All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition to reduce operational emissions. 4. During construction, the site shall be watered and the equipment cleaned in the morning and evening. 5. Dining construction, all trucks leaving the site shall be washed off to reduce fugitive dust from being tracked onto local roadways. This measure requires the removal of particulate matter from equipment prior to movement on paved streets to control particulate emissions. As part of the conditions of grading permit approval, the constriction crew shall wheel wash construction equipment and cover dirt in trucks during onsite hauling. Haul trucks leaving the site also are required to have a minimum freeboard distance of 12 inches, or to cover payloads. 6. The building contractor will ensure that low VOC paints are used for all architectural coatings. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 9 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant 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 status species in local or ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x plans, policies, and 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, vernal ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ z 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, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x such as a tree 'preservation policy or ordinance? t) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 4.a-f)NO IMPACT. According to the City's General Plan, the project site is not located in an area that potentially has endangered species, vegetation, riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands, or native resident or migratory fish or wildlife. In addition,the project will not conflict with any local ordinances City of Palm Springs Initial Study 10 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No , Impact Incorporated Impact Impact protecting biological resources and conflict with the provisions of an adopted conservation plan. The project is located outside Peninsular Bighorn Sheep critical habitat and is not located in an established habitat conservation area, according to the City's General Plan. Therefore, the project will not have an impact on biological resources. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including ❑ d ❑ ❑ those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 5.a, c) NO IMPACT. No structures currently exist on the project site. No impacts to paleontological resources or historic properties potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Place, the California Register of Historic Places, or the California Historic Landmarks are expected to occur. 5.b, d) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The proposed project is beyond the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Reservation. It is, however, located on lands within territory that contains cultural resources that comprise and define the Traditional Use Area. Some recent work in the general area completed by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians has yielded buried cultural material that was not apparent on the surface. Further, the foothills of the mountains are very near to the project area and comprise a zone know to be rich in cultural resources. To ensure that no significant impacts will occur should any archaeological resources be uncovered during site preparation, an on-site monitor from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Office will be hired by the project proponent or the building contractor to monitor the grading and excavation activities. The monitor shall halt grading or any other construction activity immediately if suspected archaeological resources are uncovered during such activities. Therefore, with the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, there will be a less than significant impact on archaeological resources. Mitigation Measures 1. Prior to any ground disturbing activity, including clearing and grabbing, installation of utilities, and/or any construction related excavation, an Archaeologist qualified according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines, shall be employed to survey the area for the presence of cultural resources identifiable on the ground surface. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 11 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2, 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 Agtua Caliente Cultural Resource Coordinator for approval. 3. 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. 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 area or based on other ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ © ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 liquefaction? iv)Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or 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 potentially result in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 Building Code ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 12 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? 6.a.i, iii, iv) NO IMPACT. The soils in the Palm Springs area generally consist of granular alluvial deposits derived from the adjacent mountains and hillsides. The deposits are composed primarily of silts, sands, and gravels. The City of Palm Springs is also located within the Coachella Valley,which is seismically active area. Major earthquake fault systems in the area include the San Andreas Fault System and the San Jacinto Fault System. The subject property is not known to be susceptible to liquefaction or landslides. The project is located on a flat, urban in-fill site at the corner of two intersecting secondary thoroughfares and is not located on top of a known fault or within a known earthquake fault zone. Therefore,no significant impacts related to fault rupture are expected to occur. 6.a.ii) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. No unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures are anticipated to occur with the project from the excavation, grading, and paving that will be needed to construct the proposed structures. The ground motion impacts on-site are not greater than those expected for the surrounding region. Additionally, any proposed development will be required to meet the seismic requirements for projects located in seismically active regions. Development proposals will not introduce any new impacts, and, as a result, the impacts associated with seismic ground motion are considered to be less than significant. 6.b)NO IMPACT. The project would not result in any uses that would cause substantial soil erosion of the site's flat topography. Once grading and compaction of the site take place, the project site will be paved and landscaped. There will be some grading in the hillside portion of the site;however,retaining walls are proposed on down slopes. Therefore, soil erosion would be minimal and temporary and nature. Since a dust control plan will be developed prior to site preparation or construction activities, the loss of topsoil is not considered significant. 6.c-e) Based on the surrounding structures that have been built to the south, west, and east, it is not anticipated that there would be any significant geotechnical problems associated with project construction. City building ordinances require the proposed project, prior to grading, to complete geotechnical evaluation by a qualified professional to analyze subsurface conditions and to provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed earthwork, foundation construction, and preliminary pavement design. This geotechnical evaluation will ensure the proposed project is constructed in a geologically safe manner. The proposed project will also be linked to the surrounding utility system including the municipal sewer systems. As a result, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts related to septic tank or alternative wastewater disposal. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 13 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ O involving; the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d)Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section ❑ ❑ ❑ l7 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a ❑ ❑ ❑ safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where :residences are intermixed with wildlands? City of Palm Springs Initial Shady 14 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 7.a-f)NO IMPACT. The proposed site is not known to contain hazardous materials, and of the known sites in Palm Springs, none are located within a two-mile radius of the site. The project site is zoned and designated for residential land use, therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to handle, store, or transport hazardous materials. As a result, the proposed project will result in less than significant impacts related to hazardous materials. The project site is not located within a quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school. The nearest school is Palm Springs High School, approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the project site. The site is also not located within 2 miles of Pahn Springs International Airport. Therefore, the proposed project will not expose people on the project site to safety hazards beyond that of other properties in the area. 7.g, h) NO IMPACT. The proposed project would not involve any use that would interfere with the City's emergency operations plan or with major emergency evacuation routes out of the area. With regards to wildland fires, the City's General Plan indicates that fire danger is relatively low. The City of Palm Springs Fire Department has indicated that the project area is outside of the 5-minute response time and travel distance from the nearest fire station located at 1300 La Verne Way. Fire sprinklers are also required based on the size of buildings. The project site is not located near a wildlands fire hazard area. In addition, any plans for development will be required to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY--Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or ® ❑ waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or ❑ ❑x river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 15 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or ❑ ❑ river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or ❑ ❑ ❑ 191 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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x flood flows? i)Expose people or strictures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving ❑ ❑ ❑ 1] flooding,including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ❑ ❑ ❑ mudflow? 8.a, f) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. No wells are proposed as part of this project. Proposed operations on the subject property will require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board as the site would be considered point-source for storm water runoff due to an increase in impervious surfaces. The NPDES permits regulates general construction activities. Compliance with permit conditions will ensure that there will be no violation of water quality or waste discharge requirements. 8.b) NO IMPACT. No water wells are proposed as part of TTM 31354, which proposes 16 condominiums on 2.69 acres. The entire project site has been identified in the City's General Plan as low density residential.Development on the project site is not anticipated to result in an abnormal draw on local water supplies of resources beyond a small to medium-sized residential development. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial groundwater depletion or interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations, or substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. No significant impacts are anticipated. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 16 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 8.c-f)NO IMPACT. Development on the project site will increase the amount of impermeable surfaces on-site, which has the potential to generate additional storm water runoff in the project area. The additional runoff generated by the increase impermeable surfaces will be retained off-site through the use of detention basins and on-site through dry wells. As a result, less than significant drainage or erosion impacts are expected to occur from the construction and subsequent operation of the proposed project. 8.g, h) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project site is currently vacant and sporadically covered with native vegetation. Storm water runoff falling on TTM 31354 naturally drains in a northeasterly direction. The project site is found on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 060257 0008C, dated June 18, 1996 for Riverside County. The FIRM designates a small part of the northern portion of the site as Zone B and the remainder of the site as Zone C. Zone C indicates areas subject to minimal flooding while Zone B indicates 100-500 year flows, less than I foot. The development of TTM 31354 and trture residential development at the north portion of the project site will increase the amount of hard surface and will create additional storm water runoff, but with mitigation, this should not be significant. .A hydrology study is being prepared by the project proponent for TTM 31354 to determine appropriate measures to convey storm water runoff to off-site drainage systems. Similar hydrological analysis will also be required for any proposed development on the north portion of the project site. 8J,j)NO IMPACT.The nearest levee is the Murray Canyon Levee located southeast of the project site. If the Murray Canyon Levee breeched flood impacts on the site would be similar to that experienced by surrounding developments. Additionally, the proposed project will undergo plan check review by the City to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.As a result, less than significant impacts related to flooding are anticipated with the approval and subsequent operation of the proposed project. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, ❑ ❑ l7 ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 conservation plan? 9.a, c)NO IMPACT. The proposed project site is undeveloped with scattered vegetation occurring on- site. The site is currently designated L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre) in the City's General Plan and zoned R-2 (Limited Multi-Family) in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Surrounding land uses City of Palm Springs Initial Study 17 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact include vacant land to the north,vacant land and the Canyon Heights condominium complex to the west and south, and multi-family residential and a timeshare resort to the east. Proposed development includes TTM 31354 and potential multi-family development. The proposed project will not physically divide an existing community. Therefore, the proposed project will not significantly impact existing communities. The project is not located within a habitat conservation plan or natural community plan. Therefore,the proposed project will not conflict with the referenced plans. 9.b) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed General Plan Amendment would facilitate the construction of up to 35 units on 5.8 acres.The project site is currently zoned R-2,inconsistent with the General Plan designation of L2. hi 1993, the City embarked on a zoning consistency program. However the program was not completed with respect to the subject project site and therefore, the property has remained zoned for multi-family land uses but designated for single family uses on the General Plan. In analyzing the development of the surrounding community since 1993, staff concluded that the multi-family designation of L6 (Low Density Residential 4-6 units/acre) would be appropriate for the project site, given the multi-family land uses immediately,in the vicinity of the project site. A General Plan Amendment is proposed to change the designation of the property from L2 to L6. The L6 designation is consistent and compatible with the existing development pattern in the neighbourhood, as the project is surrounded by the Canyon Heights condominiums to the west and south, Vista Canyon condominiums to the north, and residential condominiums and a timeshare resort to the east. The current designation of L2 is associated primarily with single-family residential estate-type land uses, which may not be appropriate given the location of the site, surrounding land uses and zoning, and proximity of the site to a secondary thoroughfare. With the approval of the General Plan Amendment, the proposed project will not result in any conflicts with the General Plan or zoning ordinance. 10. MID]ERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of ❑ ❑ ❑ value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery ❑ ❑ ❑ n site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 10.a, b) NO IMPACT. According to the City's General Plan, no mineral deposits of statewide or regional importance exist in the project area.Therefore,there will be no impact to mineral resources. 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 noise ❑ ❑O ❑ ❑ ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 18 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ❑ ❑ O ❑ groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity ❑ ❑ z ❑ above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ll.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The impacts with regards to noise are related to the short-term construction impacts and potentially longer-term impacts due to mechanical equipment such as HVAC units. The project site is not located in a 60db CNEL contour or higher, therefore, a noise study is not required for the residential units. With the incorporation of mitigation measures dining construction activities and the placement of proposed mechanical equipment,the impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level. 1 l.b-d)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Proposed development on the 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, such as pile driving, are proposed as part of the project. The subject property is currently vacant, therefore, new noise impacts related to normal residential uses are expected. The City of Palm Springs' noise ordinance regulates construction hours, leafblowers, and acceptable noise levels in residential areas based on time of day. Therefore, development on the site will have a less than significant impact on ambient noise levels in the area. 1 Le, f)NO IMPACT. The project site is not located in an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of any known private airstrips.Therefore,development on the project site would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Mitigation Measures 1. During construction phases, the contractor shall ensure that all construction is performed in accordance with the applicable City of Palm Springs noise standards. This measure shall be added to City of Palm Springs Initial Study 19 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact the construction contract. 2. All internal combustion powered equipment shall be equipped with properly operating mufflers and kept properly tuned to alleviate backfires. This measure shall be added to the constriction contract. 3. During constriction activities, the contractor shall locate portable equipment as far as possible from the adjacent residences.This measure shall be added to the constriction contract. 4. To the extent feasible, the contractor shall store and maintain equipment as far as possible from the adjacent residences. This measure shall be added to the construction contract. 5. The placement of all mechanical equipment associated with the proposed project such as 14VAC systems shall be located and constructed to ensure compliance with Chapter 11.74 (Noise Ordinance)of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a)Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ indirectly(for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the constriction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 housing elsewhere? 12.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Proposed development on the project site is not expected to result in substantial population growth. While up to 35 new residential tents may be constructed, proposed development is not expected to create new jobs. Therefore,the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact on population growth. 12.b, c) NO IMPACT. No existing housing is located on the project site nor would any housing be displaced by the implementation of the proposed project. No residential uses occur on the project site nor would any persons be displayed by the implementation of the proposed project. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 20 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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: i)Fire protection? ❑ ❑ O ❑ ii)Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X iii) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ z iv)Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 v) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ O 13.a.i)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. According to the City's General Plan, fire danger in the City is relatively low. The nearest fire station, Station No. 444, is located at 1300 La Verne Way on the northwest corner of La Verne Way and Caliente Road. According to the Palm Springs Fire Department,the proposed project is located outside of the 5-minute response time area and, pursuant to the City's Fire Code, will require the installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system. A fire station is proposed in the fature for the area south of the project. Currently, the City is preparing a fee study to determine a fair share fee for the construction of a new fire station. The project proponent will be required to pay the fair share fee prior to issuance of building permits, if a fee is adopted by City Council at that time.As a result,the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact. 13.a.ii-v) NO IMPACT. With regards to police protection, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in a significant increase in emergency calls to the project site. Therefore, the proposed project will not adversely impact police protection services. With regards to schools,the nearest school is Patin Springs High School, located approximately 3 miles from the project site. Under State Law, school districts may level school impact fees on residential development. Collection of this fee will serve to offset any unforeseen project-related student generation, although as the expected market for the units are couples with no children, no impacts to schools are expected. With regards to parks, the City currently has adequate park space; therefore, no impacts to existing parks are expected to occur as a result of the proposed project. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 21 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 14.RECITATI0N a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ ❑ ❑ O 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ N might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 14.a, b) NO IMPACT. The project site proposes up to 35 residential units. Potential development is not on a scale large enough to impact the use of existing neighbourhood or regional parks such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur. In addition, the proposed project does not include public recreational facilities and does not require expansion or construction of new recreational facilities as each unit has its own private courtyard/recreational space. Development on the project site would is required to provide its own open space and recreational area amenities for the enjoyment of residents. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the streetsystem (i.e., result in a substantial 'increase in either the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels El ❑ El 9 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 ❑ ❑ Z ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? City of Palm Springs Initial Study 22 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No _ Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e)Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 f)Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ❑ (] transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 15.a) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Proposed development on the project site will not generate enough trips per day to require a traffic study. There may be a temporary increase of vehicles during site preparation and construction of the proposed project. A traffic analysis completed for the amendment to Specific Plan #lA indicated that a traffic signal will be installed at the corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive,when warranted.The traffic signal will likely be located directly in front of TTM 31354. Development on the project site is also subject to TUMF fees, therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. 15.b, c, e, g) NO IMPACT. As was mentioned in response 15.a) above, the project will not result in a substantial increase in traffic in the area. The project also does not propose any uses that could cause any changes to air traffic patterns. The Fire Marshal has reviewed the site plan to ensure compliance with emergency access. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in significant impacts related to emergency access. With regards to alternative transportation, the project proponent is required to provide street improvements on S.Palm Canyon Drive. The required street improvements are consistent with that stated in the City's General Plan Circulation element. 15A)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project will be required to dedicate right of way and construct full street improvements on South Palm Canyon Drive. TTM 31354 project will be accessed by two driveways on South Pahn Canyon Drive and future development at the north portion of the project site will be accessed by an existing driveway also on South Palm Canyon Drive. The distance from these access points to other off-site driveways and intersections will provide adequate visibility of oncoming traffic either on the roadways or entering and exiting the project site. Guest parking stalls for TTM 31354 will be provided perpendicular to the internal driveways,which are proposed at 24 feet wide. A review of the site plan by City departments did not indicate any on-site circulation issues. Proposed development for the north portion of the project site will undergo a similar review.Based on this analysis,the proposed project will result in less than significant impacts related to design features and surrounding land uses. 15.f) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Proposed development on the project will be required to provide enclosed parking spaces for each unit in addition to guest parking spaces, in accordance with Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the project will not have inadequate parking capacity. City of Palm Springs Initial Study 23 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ N ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate ❑ ❑ ❑ Z 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 waste? 16.a, d-g)NO UvIPACT. All utilities and services are currently provided to the subject site. Due to the nature and size of this project, there should be no impacts to utilities and service systems as a result of the project. 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 City of patio Springs Initial Study 24 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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. 16.c) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. TTM 31354 may require on-site construction of drainage improvements to convey storm water flows to area drainage facilities. In addition, improvements may be required on South Palm Canyon Drive, downstream of the project site to adequately convey concentrated storm water runoff flows outletted through the on-site storm drain system. A hydrology report will be prepared in order to determine if the increased storm water runoff due to development of the site exceeds the capacity of offsite drainage systems. Additional runoff generated by increases in impervious surface may be retained off-site through the use of detention basins. Since the project is not expected to significantly alter drainage patterns in the area, area expansion of new storm water drainage facilities would not be required as part of the project. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cmnulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental ❑ 11 9 effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse ❑ ❑ El effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 17.a-c)NO IMPACT. Based on the preceding analysis,the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the enviromment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or City of Palm Springs Initial Study 25 July 24,2003 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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. As discussed in the respective issue areas,the proposed project would have either no impact or less than significant impacts after mitigation as to all environmental resources. Implementation of the identified project-specific mitigation measures and compliance with applicable codes, ordinances, laws and other required regulations, helps to reduce the magnitude of any impacts associated with the construction activities. Thus, the impacts would not be cumulatively considerable with the incorporation of mitigation measures presented herein, The analysis presented throughout this document identifies potentially significant impacts for some environmental disciplines. Appropriate mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project design to reduce these respective impacts to less than significant impacts. Therefore,project implementation is not anticipated to result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. 18. LISTED BELOW ARE THE PERSON(S)WHO PREPARED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY: Jing Yee,Associate Planner Carl Thiheault,Fire Marshal Carol Templeton, Assistant Engineer Mary Howard,Engineering Secretary Douglas R.Evans,Director of Planning and Zoning City of Palm Springs Initial Study 26 July 24,2003 Y 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 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. a� 7- 2-3 -0-3 — Douglas R.Ev ns Date Director of Planning and Zoning City of Palm Springs Initial Study 27 July 23,2003 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, over the 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 22nd day of July, 2003, 1 served the within NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING for PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO.5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 to consider a request by the City of Palm Springs and Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, for an amendment to the General Plan to re-designate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive from L23 (Low Density Residential two(2)unites/acre)to L6 (Low Density Residential six (6) units/acre). The second request is for TTM 31354, an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, to construct 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres including associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 for on-site and off-site improvements. The project will consist of 16 two-bedroom units, all two stories with the exception of one (1) one-story unit. The units will range in size from 2,167 square feet to 2,645 square feet. The subject property is located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive(northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive), Zone R-2, Section 35. 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 April 7, 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 L1Lore�a D. Moffett Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 22nd day of July, 2003. NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case 5.0966 GPA Tentative Tract Map 31354 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs, California,will hold a public hearing at its meeting August 13, 2003. The Planning Commission meeting begins at 1:30 p.m.(public hearings start at 2:00 p.m.)in the Council Chamber at City Hall,3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5.0966, a request initiated by the City of Palm Springs and Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for an amendment to the General Plan to redesignate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive from L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre) to L6 (Low Density Residential 6 units/acre). The second request is for TTM 31354, an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC construct 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres including associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 for on and off-site improvements. The project will consist of 16 two- bedroom units, all two stories with the exception of 1 one-story unit. The units will range in size from 2167 square feetto 2645 square feet. The subject property is located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive (northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive), Zone R-2, Section 35. 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 forthe 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 priorto 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 Planning Commission hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested,persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Jing Yeo, Associate Planner, (760) 323-8245. PLANNING COMMISSION DOUGLAS'R. EVANS Director of Planning and Zoning VICINITY MAP. i T LA5 a mr � A 7(6 AC ISL t3 Par/ ,S C w. rr rx 4 rrr 105 ya i s I rE (D / i, 3o ga_ i MORRAr CANYON DRIVE CITY. OF PALM SPRINGS CA SE _NQ 5M66 GPA / TTM 31354 DES UT-10 Application for a Tentative Tract Map to construct AP P i, I GMT 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres including associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 lay Reynolds for Palm Canyon 7oWnhomes, LLC for on and off-site improvements located at the northwest comer of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive,Zone R-2,Section 35. Public Hearing Notices Notification Information for Planning Commission Hearing on August 13, 2003 Case No. 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354, Applicant Name: Jay Reynolds & Dave Hilliard Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC 11828 La Grange Ave #202 Los Angeles, CA 90025, and Mr. Ted Snyder Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC 4862 ocean View Blvd La Canada CA 91011 Project Location & General Plan Amendment to re-designate 5.8 acres for a 16-Unit Townhome Project at South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Assigned Planner: Jing Yeo, Associate Planner Labels Prepared by: First American Title Company and Yoav Shernock, City Planning Technician Certification to City Clerk Date: July 22, 2003 Property Owners / Groups / Date Notices Number of Notices Organizations Mailed Mailed Applicant/Sponsors July 22, 2003 3 Property Owners: Land Owner (master lessor) July 22, 2003 142 Master Lessor (sub-lessor) Sub-lessee (unit owner) Indian Land Owners to BIA July 22, 2003 10 Neighborhood Coalition July 22, 2003 9 Homeowners Association July 22, 2003 1 ONIPP N/A Agua Caliente Band of July 22, 2003 1 Cahuilla Indians Rep City Rep for Verification July 22, 2003 1 TOTAL NUMBER MAILED: 167 of vAM sw* City of Palm Springs �``` ••^''�' Department of Planning &Zoning �<IFORN MEMORANDUM Date: July 22, 2003 From: Yoav Shernock Planning Technician Subject: Mailing Labels for Notice of Public Hearing for August 13, 2003 Planning Commission Case 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC This is to certify that the attached labels were created on April 7, 2003 using the most current information available. To the best of my knowledge, the labels are complete and accurate. �('1Zf Yoav Shernock, Planning Technician July 22, 2003 :Idm Case. 3.2348 (TTM 3@9215-& 7.1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds Labels dated 4-7-03 512 132 001 512 132 002 - 2 132 0 Thomas&Sandra Denham Christman Manning M olari '7,_ 2683 W La Condesa Dr 2681 W La Condesa Dr 266 a Condesa Dr Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 m Sprin CA 92264 512 132 004 512 132 005 _ 512 132 006 Mary Phelan el oonn ] armner Michael Eldridge 7 Split Rock Ct �26? Condesa Dr 67170 Peiueta Rd Melville, NY 11747 Springs, CA 92264 Cathedral City, CA 92234 512 132 007 512 132 008 512 132 009 Gary&Charlotte Solomon Jim Ellcouri Martin Robinett&Julie Smith 2644 W La Condesa Dr 2642 W La Condesa Dr PO Box 291 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Snohomish, WA 98291 512 132 010 512 132 011 512 132 012 Vince&Kathleen Cannova Eugene Gabrych&Marian Gabrych Terrance Cabe&Charles Seacer 624 Thurlow St 2006 State Highway 395 145 E Perlita Cir Hinsdale, IL 60521 Fallbrook, CA 92028 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 132 013 512 132 014 512 132 015 Tames Garber John&Dorothy Nocita Mapson Ellen P&Mapson 147 E Perlita Cir 152 E Perlita Cir 150 E Perlita Cir Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 132 016 512 132 017 512 132 020 oth Morro lnu Johnson Rod&Josie Vista Canyon Development Co Rosa tth Booth PO Box 403 447 S Camden Dr 999 een #1102 Cedar City, UT 84721 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 S Francisco, A 94133 512 180 006 512 180 009 512 180 010 Canyon Villas Homeowners Assn Inc Lennnons Arma M Usa Bia 10701 Wilshire Blvd 26791 Paradise Mt Ln Unknown 04-28-200 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Valley Center, CA 92082 CA 512 180 011 512 180 012 512 180 013 Gilberto Chavez a Hem 7—at Shellabarger 83630 Quail Ave PO 12006 613 Hemingway Ave Indio, CA 92201 aet, 92546 Placentia, CA 92870 512 200 004 512 200 005 512 230 001 Deanna Andreas Usa Bia Shen&Rosenfeld David Platt PO Box 2245 Unknown 04-28-200 V Elysa Ortiz Palm Springs, CA 92263 CA 642 N Larchmont Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90004 512 230 002 512 230 003 512 230 004 David Feldman&Irene Feldman David&Barbara Everly John&Lorna Stem Jr. 315 Winthrop Dr 2727 S Sierra Madre#3 1930 6th Ave S 4303 Ithaca, NY 14850 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Seattle, WA 98134 r d. l -G Case..3.2348 (TTM 3e925 & 7,1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds Labels dated 4-7-03 3r3s'-q, 512 230 005 512 230 006 512 230 007 Randy Weiner Christine Ramos Michael& lyn Hollinger 2727 S Sierra Madre#5 2727 S Sierra Madre#6 5305 White Ave Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Encino, CA 113 512 230 008 512 230 009 512 230 010 Michael&Marilyn Hollinger Kotler Betty Lesin&Lesin Betty T Ed& Cecile Gromis 5305 White Oak Ave#E 300 N Swall Dr 141 S Windsor Blvd Encino, CA 91316 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Los Angeles, CA 90004 512 230 011 512 250 001 512 250 002 Sierra Madre Apartments Michael Ross&Mario Hernandez Kelly Purcell 2727 S Sierra Madre 605 E Amado Rd#620 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#61 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 250 003 512 250 004 512 250 005 Don Sullivan&Mary Sullivan Bobby&Kendra Riccio Shirley Barasch 1511 Waterbury Way 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 463 127 8th St La Habra, CA 90631 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Seal Beach, CA 90740 512 250 006 512 250 007 512 250 008 Arthur Burdorf&Jacqueline Burdorf Heidi Flaum&J&T Hollland Orme Jan&Carol&Orme 804 Walden Dr 401 Newport Center Dr#209 2072 Norris Rd Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 512 250 009 512 250 010 512250011 nes C an Mark Ryckwaert&Beverly Harris Gale Larson 266 i h St 467 S Calle El Segundo#D2 11133 Aqua Vista St#203 Ajfemown-,*N 18103 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Studio City, CA 91602 512 250 012 512 250 013 512 250 014 Field Sharon&Field Sharon K Charles&Joanne Rupers Surdi Ronald V 1409 Sequoia Trl 24779 Delwood St 4017 Miraleste Dr Glenview, IL 60025 Harrison Township,MI 48045 Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 512250015 512250016 512250017 Cinda Johansen Robert Pavlovich& Sandra Pavlovich Oliver&Pamela Frieze Cobb 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#52 1260 41st Ave 642 NW 163rd St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Capitola, CA 95010 Shoreline, WA 98177 512250018 7-1t.-oryj 512250019 X25etrtbury -tt ehea D&K A Rosenthal 1407 n Ln 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#48 Ln E#123 P ble Beac 1, A 93953 Palm Springs, CA 92264 112 512 250 021 512 250 022 512 250 023 Annette Johansen Rosemary Cooley Ronald&Christine Cook 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 442 1993 S Mesa Dr PO Box 391399 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Anza, CA 92539 Case. 3.2348 (TTM 36535 & 7.1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds Labels dated 4-7-03 -3-i3ly 512 250 024 512 250 025 512 250 026 Khalil Ailabouni Michael&Anna Appleton Robert Atkins& Steven Watson 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#43 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 938 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#37 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 250 027 512 250 028 512 250 029 Cynthia Wanta Richard Wispe&Thelma Wispe Maurice Sher&Barbara Sher 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 440 5341 Kenilworth Dr 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#34 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 250 030 512 250 031 512 250 032 Gerald Carlson Lorentz&Maria Fulop Donald&Lavorme Burdick 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#33 1935 Golden Rain Rd#1 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#35 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Walnut Creek, CA 94595 Palm Springs, CA 92264 512 250 033 512 250 034 512 250 035 Merlow Wayne&Cherie Mare Hultgre Joseph&Nancy Catalano Jerome&Marlene Lipin 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 930 414 Emerson St 5511 W 62nd St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Upland, CA 91784 Los Angeles, CA 90056 512 250 036 512 250 037 512 250 038 Carol Lee Armstrong Witter Richard H&Loene M Pheripo&Filomena Iovenitti PO Box 16998 Witter 8566 811 Lark Hall Cir#C Irvine, CA 92623 68 E Alegria Ave Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Sierra Madre, CA 91024 512 250 039 512 250 040 512 250 041 Allen Deitelbaum&Vivian Deitelbaum James Cole Richard&Sarah Taylor 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#NO28 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#27 534 Azalea Ave NE Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 512 250 042 512 250 043 512 250 044 Lane Winifred M Carl&Rosemary Lane m Wilc 7-It 31532 Crystal Sands Dr 22840 Sparrowdell Dr 1750 cean Blvd#605 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Calabasas, CA 91302 Lo Beach, A 90802 512 250 045 512 250 046 512 250 047 Donald Taylor Howard Maurice&Adeline Dale Kass Howard&Esther Friedman 20 Chemical Way 9855 Whitwell Dr 5518 Towers St Redwood City, CA 94063 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Torrance, CA 90503 512 250 048 512 250 049 512 250 050 Frank Jackson Richard Oconnor Charles&Madeline Royal 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 919 58 Linda Isle 9801 Wish Ave Palm Springs, CA 92264 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Northridge, CA 91325 512 250 051 512 250 052 512 250 053 Wolfgang Urbat&Ingrid Urbat Derri Day Rochelle Cohen 2318 Teasley St 1819 Sandcliff Rd 19528 Ventura Blvd 4330 La Crescenta, CA 91214 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Tarzana, CA 91356 41 ,. Case..3.2348 (TTM 30� & 7.1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds Labels dated 4-7-03 30sy 512 250 054 512 250 055 512 250 056 etzn IS `7 1 Max Fields&Lucy Fields Harry&Lois June Paskil 400 ell Dr ^ 1 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr 412 22 Dover PI P n Spring , 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 512 250 057 512 250 058 512 250 059 Cleopatra Mascola&Louis Frank Mas Steven&Mayda Carnes Elizabeth Cameron 1909 Marina Dr 18417 Mount Cherie Cir 5417 Ocean View Blvd San Pedro, CA 90732 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 La Canada, CA 91011 512 250 060 512 250 061 512 250 062 Cleopatra Mascola&Louis Frank Mas Bobbie Harper Pinto Gregory Casserly 1909 Marina Dr PO Box 5029 19 WhiteclifC Way San Pedro, CA 90732 Palm Springs, CA 92263 San Francisco, CA 94124 512 250 063 512 250 064 512 250 065 Louis&Helen Snits Frank Selberis Palm Canyon Properties Inc 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#4 2600 S Palm Canyon Dr#3 2600 S Palm Carryon Dr#3 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 001 7,_tt 513 541 002 513 541 003 atbeck qf auyon Heights Assoc Natbeck Inv&Harold Miller Natbeck Inv&David Fringer 11 ate St#M4 333 E Channel St 42ND 2884 N Andalucia Ct n Diego, 92101 Stockton, CA 95202 Palm Springs, CA 92264 5" 541` 4 513 541 005 513 541 006 Natbeck In Harold Miller her Ka;etf 7 beck &W Theodore Clark 333 E Cha St#2ND 3073 on Rd J I 9307 endora Dr Stockton, A 5202 to Mesa, 92626 Srokane, 9223 513 541 007 513 541 008 513 541 009 Natbeck Inv&Petka Pramatarov Maryann Ahlgren Natbeck Inv&David Witt PO Box 3094 68733 Perez Rd#C-11 2852 N Andalucia Ct Clifton,NJ 07012 Cathedral City, CA 92234 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 010 513 541 011 513 541 012 Natbeck&Alvin Rudd Natbeck Inv&Betsy Hammes Bemreth& Suzy Katz 2850 N Andalucia Ct 2851 N Andalucia Ct 1150 Sacramento St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 San Francisco, CA 94108 513 541 013 513 541 014 513 541 015 Natbeck Inv&Tanya Grubich Dori Fry&Diane Stielstra Natbeck Inv&Leota Leake 100 S Sunrise Way#487 2873 N Andalucia Ct 2885 N Andalucia Ct Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 016 513 541 017 513 541 018 Natbeck Inv&Michael Shulimson Natbeck Inv&Ferro Ti&Alloys In Natbeck Inc&Gordon Leake 33397 Mulholland Hwy 17 Connaught Sq W221ij 212 Canyon Cir N Malibu, CA 90265 LONDON Palm Springs, CA 92264 UNITED KINGDOM 2-10 ,9 Case.,3.2348 (TTM 30!92s& 7.1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds Labels dated 4-7-03 3i 5Y 513 541 019 513 541 020 513 541 021 William&Donna Randle Albert Yunker Jr. Natbeck Inv&George Jurgich 96 Stumpfield Rd 2882 N Greco Ct 200 Beach P1#404 Kensington,NH 03833 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Edmonds,WA 98020 513 541 022 513 541 023 513 541 024 Natbeck Inv&Mary Williamson Evelyne Alexandre Natbeck Inv&Albert Neal Simmons 271 Murray Dr 1850 Gough St#604 100 S Sunrise Way#429 El Cajon, CA 92020 San Francisco, CA 94109 Palm Springs, CA 92262 513 541 025 513 541 026 513 541 027 Natbeck Inv&Larry Mather Donald Peterson Natbeck Inv&John Ivanoff 2927 Canyon Cir S 2952 Canyon Cir S 4024 12th St Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Riverside, CA 92501 513 541 028 513 541 029 513 541 030 Natbeck Inv&June Simmons Natbeck Inv&Neil Goodhuc Natbeck Inv& Carl Mamsak 500 W Crescent Dr 300 Hillside Ave 201 S Mission Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Piechnont, CA 94611 San Gabriel, CA 91776 513 541 031 513 541 032 513 541 033 Natbeck Inv&Kenneth Mirch Natbeck Inv&Stephan Plager Nat Beck Inv&Kenneth Mitch 925 17th St#4 235 4th Ave 219 Canyon Cir N Santa Monica, CA 90403 Santa Cruz, CA 95062 Pahn Springs, CA 92264 513 541 034 513 541 035 513 541 036 Natbeak Inv&Robert Debnam Manuel Mares Shirley Engleman 1334 NE Mayfield 231 Canyon Cir N 233 Canyon Cir N Portland, OR 97229 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 037 513 541 038 513 541 039 Natbeck Inv&Thomas Mark Trelak M J Playan Albert&Marion Carpenter 235 Canyon Cir N 2870 N Andalucia Ct 239 Canyon Cir N#81 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 040 513 541 041 513 541 042 Natbeck Inv&Lee Brandenburg Frank Bustillos Yale&Ethic Rutzick 1122 Willow St#200 1970 Fell St 1649 Beechwood Ave San Jose, CA 95125 San Francisco, CA 94117 Saint Paul,MN 55116 513 541 043 513 541 044 513 541 045 Natbeck Inv&Shirley Dec Kubly Sc er 7_1(( Natbeck Inv& Carolyn Nevotti 1112 7th Ave :�slt>Ho'll taro Ave#Jl 234 Canyon Cir S Monroe, WI 53566 od, CA 90069 Palm Springs, CA 92264 513 541 046 513 542 001 513 542 002 Natbeck Inv&Hannah Sobel Sherry Ann Scherotter Natbeck Inv 230 Canyon Cir S PO Box 2224 PO Box 1906 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Case. 3.2348 (TTM 3 & 7.1097) Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC, Jay Reynolds Labels dated 4-7-03 w3" 513 542 003 513 542 004 5 3 542 0 Suzanne Reynolds Natbeck Inv&Brian Catalde Inv Kin J ufer J&Jennifer Inte King 2917 Cervantes Ct 801 E Tahquitz Canyon Way#100 12;M 14,ntura Blvd 4480 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92262 dio City, A 91604 513 542 006 513 542 007 513 570 006 Natbeck Inv&Phillip Rose Natbeck Inv&Bank Of America Nall Cerciello Aldo&Manuela 2910 Cervantes Ct 333 S Beaudry Ave#21ST 5075 Shoreham Pl#150 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Los Angeles, CA 90017 San Diego, CA 92122 513 570 007 513 570 008 513 570 010 National Capital Holdings Lle Cerciello Aldo&Manuela Hollyhills Dev Inc 1100 Irvine Blvd#50 5075 Shoreham PI 4150 PO Box 1161 Tustin, CA 92780 San Diego, CA 92122 Palm Springs, CA 92263 570 Ol l -T 513 570 014 513 570 015 on 111 Hoa Ridge Pizzaro Investments Llc Rd,,e AtjpKhn Canyon Homeowner 15' Blu anyon Rd 1100 Irvine Blvd#50 1313 t 4200 alm Springs, A 92264 Tustin, CA 92780 L Angeles, 0017 513 570 016 Philip Bloom&John Derocco 11400 W Olympic Blvd#9TH Los Angeles, CA 90064 Neighborhood Coalition List MR PETER DIXON Case 5.0966 GPA & TTM 31354 431 SOUTH MONTE VISTA DRIVE Palm Canyon Townhomes LLC PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 August 13, 2003 MR BILL DAVIS AND MR FRANK TYSEN MR JOHN HURTER MS TRISHA DAVIS C/O CASA CODY COUNTRY INN PO BOX 2824 227 SOUTH CAHUILLA 175 SOUTH CAHUILLA ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-2824 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR BOB WEITHORN MR TIM HOHMEIER MR BOB SEALE 261 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD 1387 CALLE DE MARIA 280 CAMINO SUR PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MR PHIL TEDESCO MR MARSHALL. ROATH 1303 WEST PRIMAVERA DRIVE MS SHERYL HAMLIN PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 l MS MARGARE,T PARK AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS =J-J-J �-J=J CAHUILLA INDIANS 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS VERIFICATION NOTICE=9-J--J PLANNING &ZONING DEPT ATTN: SENIOR SECRETARY PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-2743 i MR JAY REYNOLDS MR. DAVID HILLIARD SPONSORS -J -J =D=J =J -J PALM CANYON TOWNHOMES LLC PALM CANYON TOWNHOMES LLC 11828 LA GRANGE AVE#202 11828 LA GRANGE AVE#202 i LOS ANGELES CA 90D25 LOS ANGELES CA 90025 I MR TED SNYDER PALM CANYON TOWNHOMES LLC 4862 OCEAN VIEW BLVD LA CANADA CA 91011 PALM SA City of Palm Springs Department of Planning &Zoning C N 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 ' °••°+• Telephone: 760-323-8245 °.44i FoVL Fax: 760-322-8360 E-mail: LorettaM@ci.palm-springs.ca.us F A X TRANSMISSION Date: July 22, 2003 To: Claudia Salgado, and Arvada Wilson Bureau of Indian Affairs From: Loretta Moffett, Senior Secretary Planning Department Subject: August 13, 2003 - Planning Commission Hearing Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC Case 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 Good morning Claudia and Arvada! Here are the APN numbers for Indian landowners within the 400' radius of the above-referenced project who need to be notified of the August 13, 2003 Planning Commission Hearing. 512-180-005 512-180-009 512-180-012 512-180-006 512-180-010 512-180-013 512-180-007 512-180-011 512-200-004 1 am enclosing 10 notices and ask for your assistance in forwarding them on to the nine Indian landowners involved. Please call me at 323-8245, ext. 8762 if you need any of our postage paid envelopes and I will gladly deliver the necessary envelopes to you. Again, many thanks for your help! Enclosures July 24, 2003 To: City Clerk 1. Here are three additional names that need to be added to the affidavit I sent over to you dated July 22 for Case 5.0966 GPA/TTM 31354 2. Here is the affidavit and list of public agencies that were mailed the same notice and the Initial Study for Case No. 5.0966 GPA/TTM 31354 mailed certified on July 24, 2003. Copies were also sent to the City departments shown at the bottom of this list. Thanks. 1 513 570 001 513 570 004 513 570 005 Mra Funding Corp Alberni Group Llc Albe)o (16'1 op Llc 1444 S Alpine Dr PO Box 1161 PO B West Covina,CA 91791 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palmgs, CA 92263 513 570 009 513 570 013 Mra Fun Corp Cerciello Aldo&:Manuela 1414 S Al e Dr 5075 Shoreham PI#150 West Co CA 91791 San Diego, CA 92122 1 r i ✓1, d� t_J f lit i..,, s �-i `a 4r ..✓4_ � � { NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Case 5.0966 GPA Tentative Tract Map 31354 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs,California,will hold a public hearing at its meeting August 13, 2003. The Planning Commission meeting begins at 1:30 p.m.(public hearings start at 2:00 p.m.)in the Council Chamber at City Hall,3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider Case 5.0966, a request initiated by the City of Palm Springs and Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for an amendment to the General Plan to redesignate 5.8 acres of property located at the northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive from L2 (Low Density Residential 2 units/acre) to L6 (Low Density Residential 6 units/acre). The second request is for TTM 31354, an application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 by Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Townhomes, LLC construct 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres including associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 for on and off-site improvements. The project will consist of 16 two- bedroom units, all two stories with the exception of 1 one-story unit. The units will range in size from 2167 square feetto 2645 square feet. The subject property is located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive (northwest corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive), Zone R-2, Section 35. 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 forthe 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 Planning Commission hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested,persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Jing Yeo, Associate Planner, (760) 323-8245. PLANNING COMMISSION DOUGLASR. EVANS Director of Planning and Zoning VICINITY MAP, 0� i 5 5tiy / G-ar c , l O V -0 /!6 AC t1E V ��3 ii1Q {;y Pe`rI w /SJM N/ kC /sr rr sIM � / o / / o F ure � HURRAY CANYON OR/VE , CITY. OF PALM SPRINGS CASE N0, 5.0966 GPA / TTM 31354 _—.SQR�PTION Apptication for a Tentative Tract Map to construct AP�LIG�.L�T 16 condominium units on 2.69 acres inoluding )Jay Reynolds foi- associated architectural approval Case No.3.2348 F'alm Canyon Townhomes, LLC for on and off site improvements located at the northwest comer of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive,Zone R-2,Section 35. RESOLUTION NO. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31354 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 16 CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 2.69 ACRES LOCATED AT 2765 AND 2801 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE, ZONE R-2, SECTION 35. WHEREAS, Jay Reynolds for Palm Canyon Town Homes, LLC (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 16 condominium units located at 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-2, Section 35; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed Tentative Tract Map 31354 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 Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider TTM 31354 and related architectural approvals (Case 3.2348/7.1097), was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on June 25, 2003, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 and related architectural approvals (Case 3.2348/7.1097) was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on June 25, 2003, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 and related architectural approvals (Case 3.2348/7.1097)was removed from the agenda to be re- noticed for a future date in order to prepare an Environmental Assessment fora requested General Plan Amendment (Case 5.0966); and WHEREAS, on August 13,2003, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 and related architectural approvals (Case 3.2348/7.1097)was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider TTM 31354, was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on October 15, 2003, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 31354 was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66412.3, the City Council has considered the effect of the proposed subdivision, Tentative Tract Map 31354, 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 mannerwhich 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 31354, 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 forthe projectand all written and oral testimony presented. THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council finds that the current environmental assessment for Case No. 5.0966 GPA and TTM 31354 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 Planning Commission finds thatwith 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 L6 ( Low Density Residential 4-6 units/acre). The applicant is proposing 16 units and therefore, is 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 31354. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development contemplated by the proposed subdivision. The site is proposed for sixteen (16) two-bedroom units on 2.69 acres of land. The proposed development is within the maximum allowable density of 16 to 32 units, as ��, a permitted under the General Plan and Zoning Code. There will be no incompatibility issues as the subject property is surrounded by vacant single family residential pads to the north, multi-family residential and some vacant land to the west and south, and timeshares to the east. The applicant proposes a relatively low density residential development that will be compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood. 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. Adraft Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared forthe project and found that with the incorporation of mitigation measures with respect to air quality, noise, and cultural resources, the project will have a less than significant impact on the environment. The property is also less than 5 acres, is surrounded by development, is consistent with the General Plan, is surrounded by urban development, and has all utilities available.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. The applicant will be required to improve the portion of South Palm Canyon Drive in front of the project to major thoroughfare standards. The 24-foot wide common driveways providing internal circulation for the project will be privately maintained. The applicant will also be required to underground all utilities on-site, except where provided by the Planning Commission and City Council. � G NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby approves TTM 31354, 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: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA City Clerk City Manager Reviewed and Approved as to Form: � � I EXHIBIT A Tentative Tract Map 31354 2765 and 2801 South Palm Canyon Drive October 15, 2003 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition. Any agreements,easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS Administrative 1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations except as specifically modified herein. 2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative officers concerning TTM 31354 and Case 3.2348. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgement or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and 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. �G� 4. Architectural approval shall be valid for a period of two(2)years. Extensions of time maybe granted by the Planning Commission upon determination of good cause. 5. The appeal period for an Architectural Approval and Tentative Map application is 15 calendar days from the date of project approval. Permits will not issued until the period has concluded. 6. Final landscaping, irrigation, exterior lighting, and fencing plans shall be submitted for approval by the Department of Planning and Zoning prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office prior to submittal. CC&Rs 7. 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 Zoning for approval in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to approval of a final map. 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. 8. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Springs, a deposit in the amount of$2500, 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. Environmental Assessment 9. The mitigation measures of the environmental assessment and mitigation monitoring program as approved as conditions of approval, dated July 24, 2003, shall apply. Mitigation measures are as follows: a. Prior to beginning construction activities, the project proponent of the building contract will develop and submit a dust control plan to the City's Building Department, in accordance with the 2002 Coachella Valley PM,, State Implementation Plan. b. Any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the amount of open space subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plans shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and minimize blowsand. C. The contractor will ensure that all construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained. All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition to reduce operational emissions. d. During construction, the site shall be watered and the equipment cleaned in the morning and evening. e. During construction, all trucks leaving the site shall be washed off to reduce fugitive dust from being tracked onto local roadways. This measure requires the removal of particulate matter from equipment prior to movement on paved streets to control particulate emissions. As part of the conditions of grading permit approval, the construction crew shall wheel wash construction equipment and cover dirt in trucks during onsite hauling. Haul trucks leaving the site also are required to have a minimum freeboard distance of 12 inches, or to cover payloads. f. The building contractor will ensure that low VOC paints are used for all architectural coatings. g. 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 the Interior's Standards and Guidelines, shall be employed to survey the area for the presence of cultural resources identifiable on the ground surface. h. 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 Cultural Resource Coordinator for approval. i. 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. j. During construction phases, the contractor shall ensure that all construction is performed in accordance with the applicable City of Palm Springs noise standards. This measure shall be added to the construction contract. k. All internal combustion powered equipment shall be equipped with properly operating mufflers and kept properly tuned to alleviate backfires. This measure shall be added to the construction contract. I. During construction activities,the contractor shall locate portable equipment as far as possible from the adjacent residences. This measure shall be added to the construction contract. M. To the extent feasible, the contractor shall store and maintain equipment as far as possible from the adjacent residences. This measure shall be added to the construction contract. n. The placement of all mechanical equipment associated with the proposed project such as HVAC systems shall be located and constructed to ensure compliance with Chapter 11.74 (Noise Ordinance) of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. Cultural Resources 5. 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 the Interior's Standards and Guidelines, shall be employed to survey the area for the presence of cultural resources identifiable on the ground surface. 6. 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 Cultural Resource Coordinator for approval. g c 7 7. 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. Final Design 8. An Administrative Minor Modification application shall be submitted for the reduction in front and rear setbacks and for the modification to building height, prior to issuance of building permits. 9. The garage doors shall be painted such that they do not stand out or other alternative materials to be approved by the Design Review Committee. 10. The applicant shall review the location of traffic signals, if warranted, at the intersection of South Palm Canyon and Murray Canyon Drive and shall incorporate landscaping that will reduce the glare from the signals to adjacent residential development to the west. 11. Exposed cut slopes shall be prohibited unless they are screened by structures or restored. All hillside areas disturbed during.grading and construction activities shall be restored. 12. Hillside areas that are not proposed for development shall be fenced off prior to any grading activity. 13. Prior to any grading activity, a fence shall also be erected around the north and west property lines in order to prevent the use of off-site areas for staging activities. A post and cable fence is acceptable. 14. That the developer shall pay a fire station construction fee in the amount established by the City Council (if adopted) at the time of building permits. 15. Final building colours shall be submitted for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. GENERAL CONDITIONS/CODE REQUIREMENTS 1. 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. 2. Prior to 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. 3. 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. g0, F 4. Separate architectural approval and permits shall be required for all signs. A detailed sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits. 5. All materials on the flat portions of the roof shall be earth tone in color. 6. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from all possible vantage points both existing and future per Section 9303.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. The screening shall be considered as an element of the overall design and must blend with the architectural design of the building(s). The exterior elevations and roof plans of the buildings shall indicate any fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building, the equipment heights, and type of screening. Parapets shall be at least 6" above the equipment for the purpose of screening. 7. No exterior downspouts shall be permitted on any facade on the proposed building(s)which are visible from adjacent streets or residential and commercial areas. 8. Perimeter walls shall be designed, installed and maintained in compliance with the corner cutback requirements as required in Section 9302.00.D. 9. The design, height, texture and color of building(s), fences and walls shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 10. The street address numbering/lettering shall not exceed eight inches in height. 11. Construction of any residential unit shall meet minimum soundproofing requirements prescribed pursuant to Section 1092 and related sections of Title 25 of the California Administrative Code. Compliance shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director of Building and Safety. 12. 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 and Zoning prior to the issuance of building permits. Manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior lighting on the building, in the landscaping, and in the parking lot 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 photometric study shall be required for all parking areas, driveways and entries. 13. Submit plans meeting City standard for approval on the proposed trash and recyclable materials enclosure prior to issuance of a building permit. 14. 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 feeing being 1/2% for commercial projects or 1/4%for residential projects with first$100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be located on the project site, said location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Zoning and the Public Arts Commission, and the property owner shall enter into a recorded agreement to maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing. 15. Details of pool fencing (material and color)and equipment area shall be submitted with final landscape plan. 16. 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. 17. Shading requirements for parking lot areas as set forth in Section 9306.00 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be met. Details to be provided with final landscape plan. 18. Parking stalls shall be delineated with a 4 to 6 inch double stripe - hairpin or elongated "U" design. Individual wheel stops shall be prohibited; a continuous 6" barrier curb shall provide wheel stops. 19. Concrete walks with a minimum width of two (2) feet shall be installed adjacent to end parking spaces or end spaces shall be increased to eleven (11)feet wide. 20. Tree wells shall be provided within the parking lot and shall have a planting area of six feet in diameter/width. 21. Standard parking spaces shall be 17 feet deep by 9 feet wide; compact sized spaces shall be 15 feet deep by 8 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 (2) handicap spaces can share a common walkway. One in every eight(8) handicap accessible spaces, but not less than one (1), shall be served by an 8 foot walkway on the right side and shall be designated as "van accessible". 22. Handicapped accessibility shall be indicated on the site plan to include the location of handicapped parking spaces, the main entrance to the proposed structure and the path of travel to the main entrance. Consideration shall be given to potential difficulties with the handicapped accessibility to the building due to the future grading plans for the property. 23. 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. 24. Trash cans shall be screened from view and kept within fifty(50) feet of the street. Contact Palm Springs Disposal Service (760-327-1351) to verify individual can collection will be provided. If individual can collection is not permitted, trash enclosures shall be provided. 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. �6I-D FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Building or Complex Gate Locking Devices: Locked gate(s)shall be equipped with a KNOX key switch device or Key box. Contact the fire department at 323-8186 for a KNOX application form. (902.4 CFC) 2. Automatic Fire Sprinklers: An approved, automatic Fire Sprinkler System is required. 3. Water Systems and Hydrants: Underground water mains and fire hydrants shall be installed, completed, tested and in service prior to the time when combustible materials are delivered to the construction site. (903 CFC). Prior to final approval of the installation, contractor shall submit a completed Contractor's Material and Test Certificate to the fire department. (9-2.1 NFPA 24) 4. Fire Extinguisher Requirements: Provide one 2-A:10-B:C portable fire extinguisher for every 75 feet of floor or grade travel distance for normal hazards. Show proposed extinguisher locations on the plans. (1002.1 CFC) Extinguishers shall be mounted in a visible,accessible location 3 to 5 feet above floor level. Preferred location is in the path of exit travel near an exit door. 5. Fire Alarm System: Fire Alarm System required. Installation shall comply with the requirements of NFPA 72. 6. Trash Container Protection: Trash container space is within 5 feet of the building wall. Provide information on the type and size of trash container to be stored there. If it is a dumpster with a capacity of 1.5 cubic yards or greater,then the enclosure must be protected by an approved automatic fire sprinkler. (1103.2.2 CFC) ENGINEERING 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 Engineerto the Engineering Division.The plan(s)shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits. SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE 3. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter, 32 feet west of centerline along the entire frontage, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. Transition of new curb and gutter to the existing improvements on South Palm Canyon Drive off-site (south and north of the project site) shall be made to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. � c. 11 4. Construct a minimum 24 feet wide driveway approach for the southerly access to the project site in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. The centerline of the proposed driveway approach shall be located approximately 205 feet north of the south property line, in accordance with the approved site plan. 5. Construct a minimum 32 feet wide driveway approach for the northerly(main)access to the project site in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 205. The centerline of the proposed driveway approach shall be located approximately 365 feet north of the south property line, in accordance with the approved site plan. 6. Construct an 8 feet wide sidewalk adjacent to curb along the entire South Palm Canyon Drive frontage in accordance with City fo Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 7. Construct a Type C curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at each side of the north driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 214. 8. Construct a Type B (mid-block) curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards opposite the northeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 213. 9. Remove and replace existing pavement with a minimum pavement section of 3 inch asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire South Palm Canyon Drive frontage, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 330. 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. 10, Construct a parkway drain in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 705 at a location as approved on the associated storm drain improvement plans. 11. Additional improvements on South Palm Canyon Drive downstream of the project site as necessary to adequately convey concentrated stormwater runoff flows outletted through the proposed on-site storm drain system shall be made as required by a Hydrology Study and Hydraulic Analysis of South Palm Canyon Drive prepared for this project. Measures to prevent erosion and degradation of off-site street improvements due to concentrated stormwater runoff shall be made to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. PRIVATE STREET 12. The on-site private street shall consist of a 24 feet wide two-way street as shown on the approved site plan. All on-site private streets shall be constructed with a minimum pavement section of 2'/ inch asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction. Provisions for drainage of private streets, including curbs and gutters, shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 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. �� 1a 13. Parking shall be prohibited along the private street except for designated parking areas. SANITARY SEWER 14. All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system if not already connected. Laterals shall not be connected at manholes. 15. Construct an on-site (private) sewer system to collect and convey sewage through a maximum of one lateral to the sewer main located in South Palm Canyon Drive. 16. 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 17. Submit a Precise Grading Plan prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer or qualified Architect to the Engineering Division for review and approval.The Precise Grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval to submit for plan check, prior to submittal to the Engineering Division.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 submittal includes the following: A. Planning Department approval to submit for plan check B. Copy of signed Conditions of Approval from Planning Department C. Copy of Site Plan stamped approved and signed by the Planning Department D. Copy of current Title Report E. Copy of Soils Report F. Copy of Hydrology Study/Report 18. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks, 3'wide and 6" deep, to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters. 19. 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 the Precise Grading Plan. 20. In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.00, the developer shall post with the City a cash bond of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) per acre for mitigation measures of erosion/blowsand relating to his property and development. 21. 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 Precise Grading Plan. 22. Contact the Building Department to get information regarding the preparation of the PM10 (dust control) Plan requirements. 23. 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) or a verbal release from that office priorto the issuance of the City grading permit.The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert(Phone: 760-776- 8208). DRAINAGE 24. All stormwater runoff passing through and falling onto the site shall be accepted and conveyed to an approved drainage system(if available). On-site retention/detention or other facilities approved by the City Engineer shall be required if off-site drainage systems are unavailable or cannot contain the increased stormwater runoff generated by the development of the property. Provide a hydrology study to determine if the increased stormwater runoff due to development of the site exceeds the capacity of offsite drainage systems (if any exist), and to determine required stormwater runoff mitigation measures for the proposed development. Final detention/retention basin sizing and other stormwater runoff mitigation measures shall be determined upon review and approval of the hydrology study by the City Engineer and may require redesign or changes to site configuration or layout consistent with the findings of the final hydrology study. 25. The project is subject to flood control and drainage implementation fees. The acreage drainage fee at the present time is$7,271.00 per acre per Resolution No. 15189. Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. 26. Off-site stormwater runoff collected and conveyed through an on-site storm drain system shall be privately maintained by a Home Owners Association (HOA). Provisions for maintenance of the storm drain system acceptable to the City Engineer shall be included in the Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for this project. 27. Construction of a stormwater inlet structure on adjacent off-site property shall require written authorization of the record property owner prior to approval of storm drain improvement plans. Absent written approval of the adjacent property owner, all storm drainage improvements shall be constructed on-site. 28. Submit storm drain improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the Engineering Division.The plan(s)shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits. GENERAL 29. 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. 30. 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 similarservice 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 located along the west side of the subject property meet the requirement to be installed underground. The developer shall underground the existing overhead lines across the property and the existing overhead lines across South Palm Canyon Drive by setting a new power pole at the southeast corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Drive. Specific requirements for utility undergrounding shall be in accordance with Souther California Edison regulations. 31. 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. 32. 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. 33. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any drivewaywhich does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code 93.02.00 D. 34. 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 35. The 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. 36. A Final Map shall be prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor or qualified Civil Engineer and submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The map shall be approved by the City Council prior to issuance of building permits. TRAFFIC 37. 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. Required clearance shall be provided through dedication of additional right-of-way and widening of the sidewalk or by relocation of encroachments along the public street frontages. 38. 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. 39. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which shall be paid prior to issuance of building permit.