HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/10/2003 - STAFF REPORTS DATE: September 10, 2003
TO: City Council
FROM: Director of Planning & Zoning
CASE NO. 5.0344 - PD164A - APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS AND
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS
FOR THE PALM SPRINGS CONVENTION CENTER PARKING LOT ON THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CALLE EL SEGUNDO AND ANDREAS ROAD (PRAIRIE
SCHOONER), R-4 V-P ZONE, SECTION 14.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission will review this item at its meeting on September 10, 2003.
The Planning Commission action will be presented at the City Council meeting.
SUMMARY:
The proposed development of the Prairie Schooner site as a parking lot for joint Casino
and Convention Center use is being reviewed through the Architectural process. Due to
a lack of quorum at its August 13 and 27, 2003, meetings, and a special meeting on
September 03, 2003. Staff will present an update and recommended conditions of
approval at the City Council meeting. Normally final plans are final with the Planning
Commission, but in this case, due to the license agreement with the Agua Caliente Band
of Cahuilla Indians, City Council approval is required.
BACKGROUND:
On May 07, 2003, the City Council approved a General Plan Policy and Planned
Development District No. 164, and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the expansion of the
Palm Springs Convention Center and related site improvements. As part of the
environmental review for the expansion project, the City included the Prairie Schooner
property as a future parking lot location with 475 parking stalls.
During the construction of the Spa Casino, the Prairie Schooner site is being used as a
construction trailer campus, and construction and employee parking,via a Construction
License Agreement approved by the Redevelopment Agency in November, 2002. On
September 03, 2003, the Community Redevelopment Agency approved an amendment
to the Construction License Agreement to reflect the number of parking spaces analyzed
in the Convention Center Expansion Mitigated Negative Declaration (City Council
Resolution No. 1226). As the Tribe is proposing to develop the Prairie Schooner property
as a parking lot with 475 parking spaces, adequate environmental review of the proposed
site underthe California Environmental Quality Act has been achieved. The parking lot will
be available for use by the Casino per amended lease agreement and for the Convention
Center. This joint use of this facility is consistent with the intent of the Convention Center
Environmental Assessment and will provide additional parking for both the Convention
Center and Casino.
Page 2 of 2
The proposed parking lot is consistent with the uses permitted under the Planned
Development Zoning District(PD-164A,approved by City Council on May 07,2003)which
applies to the site. The project is also consistent with project objectives set forth in the
Section' 14 Master Development Plan/Specific Plan.
recto Koj Planning and Z nin'
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Site Plan
2. Resolution
HUG-'LC-ZUU3 Ml W lb AfI MUI PLANNING PAX N0, 11 P. U3
AIM ill i?MI'l 4:2JPM HP l.F1SGR.]ET 3200 P-2
1-7
4
4 i. i f EV x
J-G •_
i_.-r-•.r.F... ,pµ u.,.�.v_..x..-.—....vi �n u lxaY.Ya.�ur.wK1'v'a�l�'T � r.
.r.
II
c
I agNnQas��
Pat Johansen, Chair
Coachella Valley Coalition for
Responsible Sovereignty
15 Stanford Dr
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Planning Commission
Redevelopment Agency
City of Palm Springs
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
September 3, 2003
Dear Members of the Planning Commission and Redevelopment Agency,
The attached surmnary report and appended documentation is submitted to the City of
Palm Springs by the Coachella Valley Coalition for Responsible Sovereignty.
It is our hope that the City will give serious consideration to the concerns and facts
expressed in these pages. The approval for the Prairie Schooner parking lot project
should not go forward. Instead, in light of the facts presented, the City should conduct a
fuller review of the proposal and give residents the time to review this proposal. The
project requires a complete Environmental Impact Report, which would give the public
the opportunity to be involved in the project decision.
Re tfully,
atricia A. Johans n Chair
Coachella Valley oalition for Responsible Sovereignty
Attachments:
r
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 1
Contents
Overview............................................................................................................................. I
CA Health and Safety Code (§ 33426.5) prohibits Redevelopment Agencies from
entering into any agreement that supports, enhances or promotes gambling, casinos of
whateverkind......................................................................................................................3
The Redevelopment Agency's transfer of the parcel in this manner is unlawful...............4
What is the fair value of the land?...............................................................................4
The project is not consistent with the City's redevelopment plan and is not the highest
and best use for the parcel...............................................................................................5
Public contracting rules require the agency to solicit bids for the parking lot project....6
The City has failed to comply with environmental rules....................................................6
An Additional Public Review Period is Required...........................................................6
It is reasonably foreseeable that the casino will increase the number of slot machines
and thereby traffic and environmental impacts beyond those identified in its previous
studies..............................................................................................................................6
This casino parking lot project is substantially different from what was studied in
previous environmental reports and will have significant environmental and social
consequences...................................................................................................................7
Noise ...........................................................................................................................7
Traffic..........................................................................................................................8
Inadequate Scope in Project Study Area.....................................................................8
Lighting and Aesthetics...............................................................................................9
Parking ........................................................................................................................9
Stephen Orosz, A Certified Traffic Engineer, Says the Proposed Project Changes are
Significant and City's Environmental Study is Inadequate ......................................10
This casino parking project interferes with the Redevelopment Agency's ability to
create adequate affordable housing............................................................................... 10
This casino parking project is a component the casino expansion project that will have
significant environmental and social consequences that also require study ................. 10
The Tribe's traffic study planned only 1,300 parking spaces, now the Tribe is
building3,000 ........................................................................................................... 11
Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 11
Other consequences of this casino will include ............................................................ 12
Impacts on public safety............................................................................................12
Impacts on affordable housing problems .................................................................. 12
Impactson schools.................................................................................................... 13
Impacts on Palm Springs Taxpayers......................................................................... 13
New language in the latest proposed agreement will reduce the opportunity for public
scrutiny of this deal and open the City to uncontrolled liabilities..................................... 14
Overview
The City Attorney reported in a July 30 City Council meeting that the Tribe has
determined that it needs more parking immediately to accommodate customers and
employees at its new casino when it opens on November 11 of this year.
v.2
�I
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 2
That same day, the three members of the City Council acting as the Palm Springs
Redevelopment Agency (Hodges, Reller-Spurgin, and Oden), voted unanimously to
"amend an existing construction license agreement" that was created to allow the Tribe to
use the City's `Prairie Schooner' parcel as a short term construction staging and parking
area for its casino across the street.
The amendment to the license agreement sets up a new deal for the Tribe to construct a
permanent parking lot on the City's parcel—including 200 spaces of casino valet
parking—and use it for 20 years. The September 3, 2003 version of the license
agreement places no restrictions on the Tribe's use of the parking lot, other than in those
occasions when the convention center might need extra parking.
The City attorney explained that normally, the transfer of public property rights and the
construction of a parking lot triggers a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA)
process and an EIR under state law, but he explained that the Tribe feels it couldn't have
the construction of the parking lot completed in time for the November opening if it
didn't have immediate indication of the City's willingness to transfer the parcel to the
Tribe for use as a casino parking lot.
The attorney said the amendment to the construction license creates a three-year
agreement that will give the City enough time to complete the requirements for the long-
term lease to the Tribe, and give the Tribe the immediate indication it needs so that the
Tribe can begin construction of the parking lot. The attorney said there was legally
nothing binding the City to create a DDA transferring the parcel to the Tribe and
authorizing reimbursement for construction expenses, but"the Tribe fully expects to be
repaid its $2 million by the City."t
This action by City Council circumvents state law about the construction of the parking
lot and its transfer to the Tribe. The attorney made it clear that the amendment to the
license agreement was being done in lieu of completing all the state's legal requirements
for the transfer, but he implied that the Tribe's situation constituted an emergency. He
said, "If you approve this, you need to approve the DDA. ,2 City Council and the public
will be severely limited by the license agreement when it comes time to negotiate the
final DDA.
A group of residents protested the agreement at the time the City Council voted on it:
they complained that the agreement itself had not been made public and residents had not
had a chance to review it prior to the vote. A few days later, when they obtained a copy
of the agreement from the City, they determined that it was improper and sent a letter to
the City. That letter identified a Brown Act violation, an Environmental Quality Act
violation, and Health and Safety Code violations. The letter promised legal action if
these deficiencies were not corrected.
In response, the City intends to rescind the agreement, amend it, and pass a substitute. In
its substitute agreement, the City is apparently seeking to use the Tribe's sovereign
immunity to shield the City's actions from public scrutiny and review of the agreement.
While the Tribe waived its sovereign immunity with all matters related to the land
See videotape of July 30,2003 Redevelopment Agency meeting.
z Ibid.
v.2
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 3
transfer in the first agreement, the revised version contains a full-bodied assertion of
immunity. The effect of this could be that citizens have no remedy in court to challenge
the propriety of the agreement.
Despite the City's revisions, residents still believe the agreement to have the Tribe
construct a casino parking lot on the city's land is improper for the following reasons:
• State law prohibits the use of redevelopment agencies for the support or
promotion of gambling;
• The agreement violates the requirements for the transfer of public property;
and,
• The City has failed to comply with state environmental laws governing public
projects.
Another troubling aspect of the revised parking lot agreement is the City's attempt to
shield its actions from public scrutiny and legal through a new assertion of tribal
sovereign immunity. Given the evidence, we also don't believe the payments reflect the
market value, much less the highest and best use for the property—and the evidence from
the City supports this assertion.
CA Health and Safety Code (§ 33426.5) prohibits
Redevelopment Agencies from entering into any
agreement that supports, enhances or promotes
gambling., casinos of whatever kind
The relevant section reads:
"an agency shall not provide any form of direct assistance
to:
(c) A development or business, either directly or indirectly,
for the acquisition, construction, improvement,
rehabilitation, or replacement of property that is or would
be used for gambling or gaming of any kind whatsoever
including, but not limited to, casinos, gaming clubs, bingo
operations, or any facility wherein banked or percentage
games, any form of gambling device, or lotteries, other than
the California State Lottery, are or will be played....
(e) This section shall not be construed to apply to agency
assistance in the construction of public improvements that
serve all or a portion of a project area and that are not
required to be constructed as a condition of approval of a
development described in subdivision (a), (b), or (c), or to
prohibit assistance in the construction of public
improvements that are being constructed for a development
that is not described in subdivision (a), (b), or(c)."
v.2
11,
}
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 4
The current license agreement for casino construction staging on the redevelopment
agency's parcel appears to be quite illegal, while the City is attempting to legitimate the
long-term agreement for the parking lot, based on its nearby convention center. The
State's redevelopment law clearly prohibits redevelopment agencies from assisting
casinos, and the Palm Springs license agreement allowing the use of city property for
casino construction staging appears to be in clear violation of that provision.
The code does make an exception for public improvements that are being constructed for
a different development (such as a convention center), and that is "the eye of the needle
through which the City wants to put this camel." The City is seeking to justify how the
parking lot on the Prairie Schooner parcel would serve the Convention Center. The
Prairie Schooner parcel would be the last rational choice for additional convention center
parking. The City Attorney implied that the Prairie Schooner parcel was to be used for
construction staging, should the convention center expansion be approved, which is
further indication that it was the casino and not the convention center that is the real
beneficiary of this deal.
In the meeting, City Councilmembers did argue that the City's new convention center
needed additional parking and that the "license agreement" contained provisions that
would enable sharing. The city attorney identified that 200 spaces in the lot would be
used for valet parking.
The Redevelopment Agency's transfer of the parcel in
this manner is unlawful
The City used the amendment to the construction license agreement instead of following
state law governing the transfer of city property.
This deal sets up a long-term transfer of the use of City property (a de.facto lease) to
another entity, which should trigger a report under Section 33433 of the CA Health and
Safety Code that requires a financial analysis and its publication at least 10 days prior to a
decision. We have no evidence that the City has conducted analysis to show that the
proposed deal is the highest and best use for the property and the taxpayer expenditures.
Furthermore, the deal calls for the Redevelopment Agency to repay the Tribe for the
construction of the parking lot that will be used by the Tribe's casino. While the City
currently has a$4.7 million general fund deficit, the Tribe casino is notoriously highly
profitable and expanding rapidly—yet pays no local taxes. This begs the question: why
would the redevelopment agency spend $2 million for a casino parking lot?
What is the fair value of the land?
In September 2000, the City Redevelopment Agency received an offer from a hotel
developer to pay $1.8 million for the site, or roughly $1.96 million in today's dollars., If
built, the hotel would have contributed additional revenue in the form of payments of
"Transient Occupancy Tax" rumored to be in the neighborhood of$1 million per year.
The present value of$1 million over 20 years is $12 million.
3 See September 20,2000 memo to Redevelopment Agency from Redevelopment Director. ^I�
v.2 I//
r
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 5
The City is willing to take much less from the Tribe—especially because the City is
agreeing to reimburse the Tribe for the $2 million parking lot to be built on the parcel.
The lease includes a 75% rent discount to the Tribe for the first ten years. After the Tribe
gets reimbursed for the parking lot, the required annual payments will be $268,000 for
the final ten years of the lease term.4
• The net present value of these lease payments is $1.89 million. Using an 8%
cap rate, and a market rent of$268,000, the market value of the parcel would
be $3.3 million,significantly less than a$2 million parcel with$2 million in
improvements, and much less than the revenue that would come from the
sale of the land to a hotel and the consequent TOT payments.
The deal calls for the Tribe immediately to spend $2 million up front for the construction
of a parking lot on City owned land adjacent to its new casino, and the City will repay the
Tribe for its costs. In his briefing to Council, the attorney said the only limit to the
Tribe's use of the City's parking lot would be that on those occasions where there was a
big show at the Convention Center.
According to the description provided by the attorney, the Redevelopment Agency will
net$68,000 for the first ten years (Tribal rent of$268,000 per year less $200,000
reimbursement for construction costs). For the balance of the tern, the Redevelopment
Agency will receive payments of$268,000. (If the City intended to follow state law, it
would be required to release an appraisal for the property that would help detennine
whether the price is fair.)
In his July 30 briefing to Council, the City Attorney said the City will begin the required
procedures—including public hearings and appraisals—for the EIR and the DDA as soon
as possible, but the amendment to the license agreement would allow the Tribe to move
ahead with constriction as it desires. The attorney said it would take six months to do the
DDA; The opening of the Tribe's new casino is roughly 70 days away from September 3,
2003, the date of approval of the license agreement amendment.
The project is not consistent with the City's redevelopment plan
and is not the highest and best use for the parcel
The City's most recent redevelopment plan identifies hotel development as the highest
and best use for the Prairie Schooner property 5 In 2000, the City received an offer of
$1.8 million ($1.96 million in 2003 dollars) to build a hotel on the subject property.6
Annual Transient Occupancy Tax payments associated with a hotel on the property
would have gone to the City's general fund. Assuming these TOT payments to be $1
million per year, the City's total net revenue from that sale of the property would have
been $14.5 million.
Under the proposed agreement, the City nets only $68,000 per year for the first ten years
and$268,000 for the next ten years. These payments total less than the minimum
acceptable return for this property worth$4 million ($1.96 million land value plus $2
million worth of improvements).
"First Amendment to the License Agreement,September 3,2003.
s 2001 Redevelopment Plan of the City of Palm Springs
6 September 20,2000 Memo from John Raymond to City Council M-
v.2
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 6
Public contracting rules require the agency to solicit bids for the
parking lot project
Prior to the agreement, the City failed to solicit bids for the construction of its parking lot,
which is an additional violation of the state code. Prevailing wage laws will also apply
to this public project.
The City has failed to comply with environmental rules
According to the City Attorney, the Tribe wants to complete the parking lot for the
opening of its new casino—approximately 90 days. In its July 30, 2003 vote to approve
the project, the City erroneously made no environmental analysis of the project (at that
time, the project called for the construction of 600 spaces). The City received a letter
objecting to its approval and apparently intends to rescind its July 30 approval and adopt
an alternate resolution on September 3. In this alternate resolution, the City intends to
rely on a"Mitigated Negative Declaration" filed for a 475 space parking lot as part of its
convention center expansion in May 2003. However, that environmental filing made no
mention of the project's use as a casino-related activity.
An Additional Public Review Period is Required
If the City intends to adopt a negative declaration for approval of the project, it must
publish notice of that intent and provide a public review period of not less than 20 days.
(Public Resources Code section 21092 (a) and (b) and CEQA Guidelines section 15072.)
It is reasonably foreseeable that the casino will increase the
number of slot machines and thereby traffic and environmental
impacts beyond those identified in its previous studies
The casino has filed plans with the City of Palm Springs to increase by approximately
131 percent the number of parking spaces that it reported in its previous Traffic Impact
Study Update 7 According to plans submitted to the City thus far, the number is
projected to increase from 1,313 to approximately 3,036. This increase provides
evidence of the casino's intention to increase the number of its customers. A November
2002 story in the LA Times reported, "the Spa Casino could eventually contain 50 table
games and 1,400 slot machines."8 According to the story, "The band plans to expand the
new Spa Casino within five years into a $400 million complex stretching across several
blocks of downtown Palm Springs."9
The casino's 2002 Traffic Impact Study ties some of the projects environmental impacts
to the number of customers, which is in turn linked by the casino's report to the number
of slot machines.10 Without commenting on the validity of this claim, it is reasonably
foreseeable that the casino will increase the number of its slot machines as soon as
7 See Parking Lot Plans submitted on August 8,2003 by Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians.
S Scott Gold, "Indian Casinos on a Roll:The number and quality of California Establishments are up
markedly, and they're poised to give Nevada a ran for its money." Los Angeles Times, November 22,
2002.
9lbid.
10 New Spa Casino Traffic Impact Study Update,October 23,2002,page 1-1.
v.2
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 7
possible and consequently will increase the number of its customers. These increases
will further increase the environmental and social impacts of both the Prairie Schooner
project and the casino project.
This casino parking lot project is substantially different from
what was studied in previous environmental reports and will
have significant environmental and social consequences
The City Redevelopment Agency is claiming that the environmental effects of this
parking lot project were analyzed in a previous environmental document adopted on May
7, 2003, entitled "Environmental Assessment for the Palm Springs Convention Center
Expansion and Associated General Plan Amendment".
That claim is incorrect on several points. First, the proposed use for the Prairie Schooner
parcel as a casino parking lot is a major and significant change in the previous project
description that will have significant additional impacts including noise, traffic, parking,
air quality, etc., and these additional impacts have not been analyzed. That document did
not discuss the use of the Prairie Schooner parking lot for casino patrons and employees.
Third, these are substantial changes to the project, and the City cannot rely on its old,
outdated project description.
Additionally, the previously adopted agreement for the casino to use the Prairie Schooner
lot included employee parking. The new version of the proposed agreement does not
contain that provision. This leads us to believe that the employee parking lot at the
corner of El Segundo and Ramon may in fact be a permanent facility. Neither the Tribe
nor the City have provided an alternative explanation.
In sum, the new proposed use of the Prairie Schooner parking lot for casino patrons is a
substantial change of substantial importance that will have significant effects, including
noise, traffic, parking, lighting and aesthetic impacts not discussed in the previous
document. Therefore, it is improper for the City to adopt this project proposal.
Noise
The City's environmental study of the noise and traffic impacts from the Convention
Center expansion project is based upon the projected demand profile for the Convention
Center, and does not include or discuss the impacts of the casino. "Traffic volumes in the
year 2004 (the opening year of the proposed expansion) with and without the project
were analyzed to determine the project-related impact on motor vehicle noise levels in
the vicinity." The City's existing plan states:
"During the evening peak hour, a total of 29 project-related vehicles are expected to
enter and/or leave the west parking lot via the driveway on Andreas Road. The noise
generated by project-related vehicles will be very similar to the noise currently
generated by the on-street parking activity that occurs along both sides of Andreas
Road in the vicinity and most likely lower than the noise generated by the use of this
lot by the City of Palm Springs as a construction vehicle staging area. Consequently,
project-related noise increases expected in the vicinity of the proposed west parking
lot, while not always inaudible to the residents of the adjacent residential
development, are considered insignificant." 1411
v.2
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 8
The study predicts its growth in noise impacts to correlate directly to the rate of
expansion in conference attendees, and makes no mention of casino operations and
attendance." The study's `peak use scenario' is derived from Convention Center
activity, not casino activity (for example, see page 2-6). We also point out that that study
does not appear to incorporate the impacts of the new casino on its noise level analysis,
which is an important deficiency. For example, the study states, "The convention center
does not host a significant number of late night parties so the parking lots are typically
clear by 10 p.m. or midnight." The casino operates round the clock and will clearly
generate significantly different noise impacts at this project site."
The City's report contains no management control plan for noise impacts that will ensue
from the use of the Prairie Schooner lot by casino patrons and valet. Additionally, the
mitigation measures adopted in the City's convention center document are not reflected
in the Tribe's parking lot design. Specifically, the City's plan reads, "The location of the
primary west parking lot access point at the southwest corner of the lot (on Calle El
Segundo, as far as possible from existing residential land uses located north of Andreas
Road and east of Calle El Segundo) will reduce the potential for intrusive noise events on
residents." 13 The location is different in the Tribe's proposed plan. Additionally, the
parking lot set-back presented in figure 2-3 of the City's environmental declaration
appears to be reduced in the Agua Caliente's design for the Prairie Schooner submitted to
the Planning Commission. Since these two items were a component of the City's
mitigation strategy, these elements of the new project are inconsistent with that plan.
Traffic
Inadequate Scope in Project Study Area
The City of Palm Springs requires traffic studies to address all intersections with a
minimum project traffic impact of 50 trips in the peak hour. The use of the Prairie
Schooner site by the casino necessarily expands the number of affected intersection
beyond the scope identified in the City's existing traffic study.
Just as in the noise study, the City's environmental study uses "Historical convention
activity levels and current convention center traffic peaking characteristics [to] provide a
means of identifying a current `design day' that reflects a weekday peak use seenario.s14
The City's study makes no mention of a casino-related use or a scenario involving the use
of the Prairie Schooner parking lot by casino patrons. While the existing traffic analysis
simulated and studied future traffic conditions that would ensue from the Convention
Center-expansion, it did not examine the traffic conditions that will ensue from the use of
the parking lot by casino patrons.ts
Palm Springs Convention Center Expansion Noise Impact Study, Endo Engineering,March 2003.p.2-2
_2-3.
12 Testimony of gaming industry expert,Maya Holmes,Research Director,Culinary Union,Local 226,Las
Vegas,Nevada.
13 Page 4-10.
14 Page 1-2.
15The Tribe also hired Endo Engineering to prepare its"New Spa Casino Traffic Impact Study Update"
dated October 2002. In that document,the project description stated,"a total of 1,313 parking spaces will
be available for the new proposed gaming facility." However, the Tribe's current parking lot development
v.2
I //2_�
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 9
The City's study reports:
"The proposed expansion of the Palm Springs Convention
Center will generate an increase of 1,380 daily trip-ends.
During the mid-day peak hour, 138 trip-ends would be
generated(83 inbound and 55 outbound). During the
evening peak hour, 184 trip-ends would be generated (9
inbound and 175 outbound)."t6
By contrast, a recent casino traffic study based on just 1,313 projected parking spaces
(roughly 3,000 are actually being constructed) anticipated 533 trip-ends would be
generated by that project during the evening peak hour (or as many as 1,200 assuming the
number of trip-ends is directly correlated to the number of parking spaces).
Lighting and Aesthetics
The Tribe reported in an August 13, 2003 Planning Commission meeting that it intends to
use parking lot lighting for its casino that exceeds to maximum candle-power allowed
under the City Code. (put that citation in the record)
The use of such lighting will have an adverse impact on surrounding businesses,
homeowners, and users. Because the City adopted its lighting guidelines to protect the
existing character of the City, the cumulative effect of the casino's parking lot lighting
that exceeds the standard will necessarily have a harmful effect on the character of the
entire downtown area of Palm Springs.
Parking
The license agreement adopted by the City and the Tribe on July 30, 200317 called for
roughly 600 parking spaces to be used by casino customers, employees, and convention
center patrons. The revised agreement reduces the number by 125 spaces and removes
any mention of employee parking. The revised document's failure to discuss provisions
for employee parking highlights the lack of any public study on the parking impacts of
the apparent decision to eliminate employee parking from the Prairie Schooner site. If
the proposed new agreement contemplates that employees will park in the street, then the
impacts of this decision need to be studied.
projects will result in approximately 3,000 parking spaces,calling into question the assumptions and
findings of its previous traffic study that projected 1,313 spaces. There is a 236%difference between the
number of parking spaces studied in the Tribe's traffic analysis and the actual number being built.
The casino's actual parking plan also includes a number of off-site parking lots in locations not studied in
its 2002 traffic analysis. For example,that study did not include in its project description the Tribe's
proposed 440 space parking lot at the corner of Calle El Segundo and Ramon. It did not analyze any
impacts of that lot on adjacent intersections,despite the City's requirement that projects with a minimum of
50 trips must do so.
16 Environmental assessment for the Convention Center,page 5-1.
17"First Amended License Agreement"adopted by Resolution 1225 of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Palm Springs,July 30,2003.
v.2 _ � 4�
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 10
Stephen Orosz, A Certified Traffic Engineer, Says the Proposed
Project Changes are Significant and City's Environmental Study
is Inadequate
We are submitting a letter from Steve Orosz, a Certified Traffic Engineer that provides
expert testimony that the proposed change in the project is significant and will generate
significant environmental effects, including traffic and parking effects. The significant
environmental effects from the change in the project include:
The effects of combined convention center and casino use of the parking lot has not been
studied and is likely to have significant environmental effects. Orosz writes that based on
the discussion in the most recent report for the convention center, there would be no
available parking in the Prairie Schooner lot during peak demands at the casino and the
convention center. He writes, "As such, the contemplated use of the Prairie Schooner lot
by the Casino is misleading and would lead to additional periods of insufficient parking
in the Convention Center/Spa Casino area.
Furthermore, Orosz reports that the City's study provides no information on how the
proposed casino valet system will operate.
"A comprehensive parking analysis showing the peak parking demands of the
convention center and spa casino is needed to document the potential environmental
effects that the combined use of the Prairie Schooner and surrounding parking lots would
have."rs
This casino parking project interferes with the Redevelopment
Agency's ability to create adequate affordable housing
The proposed$2 million expenditure by the Redevelopment Authority for a casino
parking lot will reduce the Agency's ability to create adequate affordable housing. Prior
to its acquisition by the Redevelopment Authority, the Prairie Schooner lot provided
affordable housing and low-cost homeownership in the form of a park for manufactured
homes.19 The City's termination of that use contributed to the City's existing deficit in
affordable housing. The decision to replace that use with a casino parking lot for a tribal
casino built at taxpayer expense contributes to the City's failure to provide adequate
affordable housing.
This casino parking project is a component the casino
expansion project that will have significant environmental
and social consequences that also require study
Based on information that has been made public, the Tribe intends to build six or seven
parking lots containing approximately 3,000 parking spaces in downtown Palm Springs
within the next 90 days.
is Steve Orosz, Certified traffic Engineer,Letter September 3,2003.
9 Public testimony of Palm Springs Planning Director,August 13,2003 Planning Commission hearing.
v.2 � I
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 11
The Tribe's traffic study planned only 1,300 parking spaces, now the
Tribe is building 3,000
In the last meeting, the Planning Commission approved an employee parking lot of over
440 spaces in the middle of a residential area.2o Residents provided detailed and specific
testimony of their personal knowledge of the significant adverse effects of this lot:
Unsafe traffic conditions at the corner of Ramon and El Segundo
Residents reported a high number of traffic accidents—which in some cases included
collisions between motorists and neighborhood homes and buildings—as a result of
unsafe conditions at the corner of El Segundo and Ramon.
The effects of the increased traffic on neighborhood streets
Residents expressed concerns about the effects of increased traffic on neighborhood
streets.
Public safety concerns
Residents reported concerns about the public safety issues that would arise by the
juxtaposition of increased casino traffic with residential areas.21
The adverse effects of lighting on the night sky
Tribal officials reported that casino parking lots will operate outside of existing City
standards with regard to lighting. The presence of large brightly light casino parking lots
operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week, is incompatible with existing municipal
standards and existing residential uses in the neighborhoods.
The adverse impact on the neighborhood and architectural character by
the parking lot
The casino parking lot is surrounded on all sides by residential uses. During the Planning
Commission public hearing,residents identified a series of aesthetic impacts that the
casino parking lot would have on their neighborhood, from excessive lighting to the lack
of adequate shielding and buffering around the parking lot.
The Tribe refused to discuss whether it had searched for any
alternatives to this site (which is a quarter mile from the casino)
When queried by Planning Commissioners, a Tribal official declined to discuss
alternatives to the employee parking lot at Ramon and El Segundo.
Alternatives
The cumulative traffic, noise, lighting, and aesthetic impacts of the City's convention
center expansion project and the related casino expansion project demand the search for
20 Case 5.0667,Palm Springs Planning Commission,August 13,2003.
21 Public Testimony from August 13,2003 Planning Commission meeting,incorporated herein by
reference.
v.2 /`/
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 12
alternatives. One possible alternative to reduce the wide variety of adverse impacts on
residential areas would be to construct a parking garage or a series of garages to isolate
the impacts of the casino parking lots from residents and residential neighborhoods.
Another alternative not studied by the Tribe is the use of satellite parking lots outside the
residential and historic district of downtown Palm Springs.
Other consequences of this casino will include
Impacts on public safety
Public safety costs associated with casino expansion will have a significant impact on the
city and its residents. The Palm Springs Police Department estimates "that the new
[119,000 square foot] casino will result in a 15% increase in the number of daily calls for
service at the casino and in the downtown.s22 Yet Police Chief Gary Jeandron is quoted
in a Desert Sun article that the police department is in a hiring freeze and vacant positions
in the police department will not be filled.23 Increased demand resulting from the casino
in the context of the Police Department's hiring freeze will result in slower response
times.
According to the Police Department, the financial impact of the new casino will cost the
city$435,433 in the first year of operation alone.24 In addition to the direct cost of casino
expansion on public safety spending, residents of Palm Springs have experienced
increases in crime since the introduction of casino operations in the downtown area.
Between 1996 and 2001 property crime rates across the state fell 27%, while the property
crime rate in Palm Springs increased 18%.
Impacts on affordable housing problems
The City of Palm Springs has publicly acknowledged that the expansion of the Spa
Casino will have an impact on the availability of housing in the city. The City,
responding to the Tribe's projection that their new Spa Casino would employ 975 people,
made the following observations: "The City has identified a considerable need for family
rental housing in the City, which is the most expensive and most difficult to develop. The
largest source of funds available to the City is the low and moderate income housing set-
aside from redevelopment tax increment. Since the Tribe will probably not pay property
taxes on the casino, it will not generate tax increment or housing funds to the Agency or
City:,25 As a consequence the City recommended to the Agua Caliente Tribe that "the
City and Tribe should develop a cooperative program...to develop new affordable
housing."26 The Tribe rejected the recommendation and has provided no analysis on the
impact on affordable housing as a result of casino expansion.
21 Conformity report,submitted by the Palm Springs City Manager to the Palm Springs City Council,
December 5,2002,page 7.
23 Darrell Smith,"Palm Springs DARE,police league may fall victim to budget crunch"The Desert Sun.
September 3,2003,page 113.
24 Conformity report(December,2002),p.7.
26 Conformity Report(December,2002),page 7. Rather than using$2 million in tax increment revenues to
build a casino parking lot,the redevelopment agency could be building affordable housing.
16 Conformity Report(December,2002),page 7.
v.2
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 13
Impacts on schools
Schools in the Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD) are negatively impacted by
the Spa Resort Casino and its expansion.
A recent survey of Agua Caliente Casino in Rancho Mirage, also owned by the Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, indicates that about 45% of non management workers
have children.27 The estimated total number of children for the Agua Caliente Casino in
Rancho Mirage is 435?8 That one casino thus contributes over 400 children to area
schools, with the vast majority (approximately 70%) attending a Palm Springs Unified
School District school. There is no reason to expect that the Spa workforce will be
markedly different from that of the Agua Caliente Casino. The Spa will be contributing at
least 400 more students to area schools. Moreover these children will have extra needs:
we estimate that anywhere from 40-75% of the children of Agua Caliente Casino workers
are poor enough to qualify for subsidized meals. Again, it is reasonable to assume that the
same will hold true for children of the Spa workforce.
The casino does not pay property tax, nor does it pay corporate taxes, (a major source of
revenue for the state general fund). 9 Public schools receive the greatest part of their
revenue from a mix of property tax and the state's general fund. If the Spa Casino were
taxed, once the first phase of expansion is completed, it would be contributing about$2.5
million annually to public schools. While it will not pay taxes, the Spa Casino will
contribute students and student needs.
Property taxes and aid from the state's general fund are the sources of revenue for the
general budget of state public schools. The Spa Casino, when its first phase of
redevelopment is completed, would pay approximately $2 million in property taxes (50%
of which would go to schools) if the casino were taxed. The state corporate tax rate of
8.84%, if levied on the Spa Casino's estimated profits (assuming only 1000 slot
machines, generating an estimated $42.5 million in annual profit) would mean over $3
million to the general fund. Approximately 40% of the general fund is used for public
schools. Thus, the Spa Casino will not be paying schools over $2.5 million dollars per
year.
Impacts on Palm Springs Taxpayers
A recent article in the Los Angeles Times detailed some of the impacts of the casino on
Palm Springs taxpayers. According to the article, city officials reported the Tribe did not
have to pay the city $47,000 for a building permit. Nor was it obliged to pay the $47,000
city construction tax or the $3,000 state fee used to map earthquake faults. The tribe
saves $45,000 a year by not paying the city's 5% utility users tax. Property taxes,
imposed at 1% of fair market value, would exceed$2 million a year.3o
27 Dr.Eric Nilsson,Angela Jamison, and Dr.David Fairris, Wages and Healthcare Benefits of Workers at
Agua Caliente Casino. UCLA Institute of Industrial Relations.March 2003
28 Capell&Associates,Shifting the Cost: Who Pays the Health Coverage of Workers at the Agua Caliente
Casino?March 2003.
29 See Dan Morain, "State Tax Breaks Help Indian Casinos Rise,"Los Angeles Times, August 10,2003.
30 Dan Morain,"Many Indians Exempt from State Taxes,"The Los Angeles Times, July 25,2003.
v.2
September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 14
New language in the latest proposed agreement will
reduce the opportunity for public scrutiny of this deal
and open the City to uncontrolled liabilities
New language in the proposed agreement appears intended to immunize the City from
court review of this transfer of publicly owned property to an Indian tribe. While the
City obtained from the Tribe a waiver of sovereignty on issues related to the parking lot
deal in the July 30 agreement, the City now proposes to limit the remedies of its
residents, other jurisdictions, and the State of California with respect to this agreement.
As a direct result of the City's newly proposed language, if a resident files a complaint
related to this deal, the Tribe will file a motion to quash service of summons on the
ground that the Tribe will assert a sovereign immunity from uncontested suit—
specifically enabled by the City's newly proposed language. The City actually has
sought to have previous suits against the City dismissed on the same grounds.
The City's new proposed language could have the effect of making no remedies available
to residents and the state who seek to review this agreement. To borrow from the
decision in Lundgren v. City of Palm Springs, "The City has no power to surrender,
impair, or embarrass the State's exclusive, sovereign civil or criminal jurisdiction over
land, including the State's jurisdiction to prohibit or regulate gambling on such land."
An additional result of this newly proposed language is that Palm Springs taxpayers will
not receive the indemnification and assistance in defense against lawsuits and claims that
developers usually provide against any claims arising from the government approvals and
arising from operation of the proposed facility. Kahn writes, "One can also safely predict
that at some point in the near future, casino patrons will be injured on or near this parking
lot (auto accidents, pedestrian slip-and-falls) and sue the City agency."31
31 September 3,2003 Memo to Planning Commission and City Council from Andrew Kahn / ✓ i
v.2
Index to Documents Submitted
1. September 3,2003 cover Letter from CVCRS to City Redevelopment Agency and
Planning Commission
2. September 3,2003 Summary report of objections submitted by CVCRS to City
Redevelopment Agency and Planning Commission
3. Video tape of 7/30/03 City Council meeting
4. Parking Lot Plans submitted to Palm Springs Planning Commission on August 8, 2003
by Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
5. Tribe's EIR
6. Tribe's Traffic Impact Study
7. Scott Gold, "Indian Casinos on a Roll: The number and quality of California
Establishments are up markedly, and they're poised to give Nevada a run for its money."
Las Angeles Times, November 22, 2002.
8. Housing element from the City's General Plan
9. 8/13/03 and 8/27/03 Planning Commission minutes and approvals of Tribe's parking lots
plan, incorporated herein by reference.
10. Darrell Smith, "Palm Springs DARE,police league may fall victim to budget crunch."
The Desert Sun. September 3, 2003,page 113.
11. (7130/03)First amendment to the license agreement laying out the terms of the deal
12. (10/16/02)Original license agreement that gave land to Tribe for use as constriction site
13. (8/13/03)Protest letter from CVCRS to City
14. (913/03)Revised first amendment to the license agreement that rescinds first version
15. (9/3103)Memo to Planning Commission and City Council from Attorney Andrew Kahn
regarding the lack of proper legal protection for public agencies in the proposed parking
lot agreement with Tribe.
16. Curriculum Vitae of planning expert Frank Tysen,former Palm Springs Planning
Commissioner
17. Dr. Eric Nilsson,Angela Jamison, and Dr. David Fairris, Wages and Healthcare Benefits
of Workers at Agua Caliente Casino. UCLA Institute of Industrial Relations. March 2003
18. Capell&Associates,Shifting the Cost: Who Pays the Health Coverage of Workers at the
Agua Caliente Casino?March 2003.
19. Tribal Casinos and Their Impacts on a California Community. Research Department of
the Hotel Employees &Restaurant Employees International Union for the Coachella
Valley Coalition for Responsible Sovereignty.February 2003.
20. (9/20/00)CRA for hotel ENA for Prairie Schooner that establishes value of$1.8 million
for the parcel
21. (10/24/O1)Redevelopment Plan
22. (12/5/02)City of Palm Springs Conformity Report identifying casino impacts
23. (11/5/02)Agua Caliente Tribe response to Palm Springs conformity report
24. Spa Resort Casino Project Report
25. September 3, 2003 letter from Stephen Orosz, A Certified Traffic Engineer, stating the
Proposed Project Changes are Significant and City's Environmental Study is Inadequate
26. Dan Morain, "State Tax Breaks Help Indian Casinos Rise,"Los Angeles Times, August
10, 2003.
27. Enviromnental Assessment for the Palm Springs Convention Center Expansion and
Associated General Plan Amendment Adopted May 7, 2003.
' {a✓z Gry �u�uc.
VpP CAL/FAT A/yo ,mac i G or4Y
TRIBAL PLANNING, BUILDING fr ENGINEERING
�CAHUI��P�
RECEIVED
September 10, 2003
SEP 10 2003
Doug Evans, Director of Planning and Building
City of Palm Springs PLANNING DIVISION
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
RE: SPA RESORT PARKING
Dear Doug,
There has been a great deal of misinformation circulated regarding the Tribe's
current parking development. Third party interests have distributed information
stating that the Tribe is developing 3000 parking spaces for the casino
development. This is grossly inaccurate. Please refer to the following summary:
1. The original project Environmental Assessment certified by the Tribe, City and
National Indian Gaming Commission (1994) provided for the development of
1,303 parking spaces.
2. The project report submitted to the City for review and comment in 2002
provided for 1,313 parking spaces (10 additional spaces). The report also
identified the need for temporary development of 320 spaces due to construction
(See Section 3.5.2 of the Project Report). The need to develop this lot at Calle
El Segundo and Ramon Road has been eliminated through a new arrangements
on nearby developed parking facilities.
3. Additional parking is being developed in cooperation with the City
Redevelopment Agency and Convention Center. Of the 475 spaces being
developed 200 will be for use for the Casino as valet parking spaces, the
remaining spaces are for public and Convention Center use.
4. One additional parking lot is also being developed along Indian Canyon Drive.
This parcel will provide 166 additional spaces expected for peak day and
overflow use.
Therefore, the actual total number of parking spaces for the Spa Resort Casino
Development will be approximately 1,679 spaces, resulting in a net additional of
approximately 366 spaces above that which was previously analyzed and approved.
650 C. TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY • PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 • (760) 3253400 • FAx: (760) 325-0593
Doug Evans
September 10, 2003
Page Two
I hope the above adequately identifies the actual situation and clarifies to the
Plannin Commission and City Council the parking development proposed.
V t I yours,
Th mas J. Davis, AICP
Ch' f Planning Officer
AGUA CALIENTE BAND
OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
TJ D/cy
C: Tribal Council
Rob Donnels, Director of Construction
Tim Taylor, Chief Operating Officer
Margaret Park, Director of Planning
P:\LETTERS-TJD12003\09 03\091003-Doug Evans Re SRC Parking.doc
RESOLUTION 20737
OF THE CITYCOUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA,APPROVING FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS
FOR THE PALM SPRINGS CONVENTION CENTER
PARKING LOT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CALLE
EL SEGUNDO AND ANDREAS ROAD (PRAIRIE
SCHOONER), R-4 V-P ZONE, SECTION 14
WHEREAS,on May07,2003,the City Council approved a General Plan Policy and Planned
Development District No. 164A,and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the expansion of the
Palm Springs Convention Center and related site improvements; and
WHEREAS,as partof the environmental reviewforthe expansion project,the Cityincluded
the Prairie Schooner property as a future parking lot location with 475 parking stalls; and
WHEREAS,the Tribe is proposing to fund and develop the Prairie Schooner property as a
parking lot with 475 parking spaces, adequate environmental review of the proposed site
under the California Environmental Quality Act has been achieved; and
WHEREAS,an Architectural Approval application was submitted bythe City of Palm Springs
and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians for architectural approval forthe parking lot;
and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed parking loton September 10,
2003,and has made recommendation to approve the proposed parking lotwith conditions
stated herein; and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission found that the parking lot is of the highest quality of
design and materials; and
WHEREAS,the City Council is in agreement with the review and comment of the Planning
Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Palm Springs,
California, has reviewed the proposed parking lot and approves with conditions herein
attached by reference (Exhibit A).
ADOPTED this 10th day of September , 2003,
AYES: Members Mills, Oden, Reller-Spurgin and Mayor Kleindienst
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Member Hodges
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
City Clerk City Manager
Reviewed and Approved as to Form:
Resolution 20737
Page 2
EXHIBIT A
Case Nos. 5.0344 PD-164A
Prairie Schooner Parking Lots
September 10, 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 ortheir designee,depending on which
department recommended the condition.
Any agreements,easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved bythe City
Attorney.
PLANNING
1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm
Springs Zoning Ordinance,Municipal Code,or any other City Codes,ordinances and resolutions which
supplement the zoning district regulations.
2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Cityof 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 Cityof Palm Springs, its
legislative body,advisory agencies,oradministrative officers concerning Case 5.0667 and 5.0344. The
Cityof Palm Springswill promptly notify the applicant of any such claim,action,or proceeding against
the Cityof Palm Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and paythe 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 Cityof 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 orabandon a matter following
an adverse judgement orfailureto appeal,shall not cause a waiverof 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.
PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
4. The AquaCalienteBandofCahuillaIndianstaffshallworkwiththeCitytoestablishfutureimprovement
plans along the easterly parking lot boundary (Calle Alvarado).
5. Up to 475 parking spaces, inclusive of handicap spaces, shall be provided.
6. Final design is subject to staff review and approval, including meandering sidewalks, lighting, and
landscaping, shall be compatible with the Convention Center northerly parking lot. Upgraded
meandering sidewalks(exposed aggregate with flagstone edging)is preferred if economically feasible.
Copy of plans have been provided for comparison purposes.
Resolution 20737
Page 3
7. Submit a construction bid for the following sidewalk material alternatives: a) upgraded sidewalk
construction detail shown on Planting Plan for the northerly Convention Center Parking Lot produced
by Michael Buccino Associates;and b)standard colored concrete sidewalks as specifies in condition
of approval number 26 herein. Bids shall be submitted for City review and approval for the specific
sidewalk to be constructed.
8. 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".
9. 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 accessibilityto the
building due to the future grading plans for the property.
10, Compact and handicapped spaces shall be appropriately marked per Section 93.06.00.C.10.
11, 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.
12, A photometric plan shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Zoning for review and
approval. Said plan shall be consistentwith lighting level approved for the Convention Center northerly
parking lot(approximate average of one(I)to two(2)footcandle),including lighting standard height and
specifications.
13. Parking lot light fixtures shall align with stall striping and shall be located two to three feet from curb
face.
14. 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.
15, 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.
16. 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.
17. Tree wells shall be provided within the parking lot and shall have a planting area of six feet in
diameter/width.
ENGINEERING
Please complete all Engineering Conditions of Approval listed below and return a copyof this list, along with
the requested information to the Engineering Division. The conditions are in compliance with requirements
contained in the City of Palm Springs Municipal Codes. Any questions pertaining to these conditions should
be referred to the City of Palm Springs Engineering Division,Private Development Plan Check,(760)323-8253
x8742.
Before final acceptance of the project,all conditions listed below should be completed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
Resolution 20737
Page 4
STREETS
18. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit.
19. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the.EngineeringDivision.
The plan(s) should be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building
permits.
PRAIRIE SCHOONER PARKING LOT
CALLE EL SEGUNDO
20. Construct a 28 feet wide commercial driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Standard Drawing No. 205.
21. Construct TypeCcurbramps,oneithersideofdriveway,meeting current California State Accessibility
standards and in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 214.
22. The existing curb and gutter should remain in place except for curb cuts necessary for driveway
approaches.
ANDREAS ROAD
23. Construct a 6 inch curb and gutter,32 feet south of centerline along the entire frontage in accordance
with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200.
24. Construct a 28 feet wide commercial driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Standard Drawing No. 205.
25. Construct Type C curb ramps,on either side of driveway,meeting current California State Accessibility
standards and in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 214.
26. Construct a 6 feet wide meandering sidewalk behind the curb along the entire project frontage in
accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210, or per construction detail for
Convention Center expansion project. The sidewalk shall be colored Portland cement concrete with
an admixture of Desert Sand, Palm Springs Tan, or an equal color approved by the Engineering
Division. The exact layout and configuration of the meandering sidewalk shall be as required and
consistentwith related landscaping plans and shall be approved bythe Directorof Planning and Zoning.
27. Construct 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 a clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire Andreas Road frontage in
accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 325. If an alternative pavement
section is proposed, the proposed pavement section should be designed by a California registered
Geotechnical Engineer using "R"values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for
approval.
DRAINAGE
28. All stormwater runoff across the property shall be accepted and conveyed in a manner acceptable to
the City Engineer and released to the existing drainage system in Calle Alvarado. Storm Drain
improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
29. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks, T wide and 6"deep, to keep
nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters.
Resolution 20737
Page 5
GRADING
30. Submit Precise Grading Plan prepared by California registered Civil Engineer or qualified Architect
to the Engineering Division for review and approval. A PM10(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 should be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building
permits.
31. 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 all project
sites greater than one acre in size. A copy of the executed permit shall be provided to the City
Engineer prior to approval of the Grading Plans.
32. The area in which this project is situated is indicative of desert soil conditions found in many areas of
Palm Springs. The Engineering Division does not require a soils report. This does not mean that
subterranean conditions unknown at this time may not affect construction done on this site.
33. Contact the Building Department to get information regarding the preparation ofthe PM1 0(dust control)
plan requirements.
34. In cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the California Department of
Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project,applicants for grading permits involving a grading
plan and involving the export of soil will be required to present a clearance document from a
Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved"Notification of Intent To
Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside,and Los Angeles Counties"(RIFA
Form CA-1)prior to approval of the Grading Plan.The California Department of Food and Agriculture
office is located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert(Phone: 760-776-8208).
GENERAL
35, In accordance with Chapter 8.04.401 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, all existing and
proposed electrical lines of thirty-five thousand volts or less and overhead service drop conductors,and
all gas, telephone, television cable service, and similar service wires or lines, which are on-site,
abutting, and/or transecting, should 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 along Andreas Road meetthe requirementto be installed underground.
It is recommended that an investigation be made of the nature of these utilities, the availability of
undergrounding these utilities with respect to adjacent and off-site properties.
ON-SITE
36. The minimum pavement section for all parking areas is 2-1/2 inch asphalt concrete pavementover4-
inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal. If
an alternative pavement section is proposed,the proposed pavement section should be designed by
a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using"R"values from the project site and submitted to
the City Engineer for approval.
37. Any utilitytrenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets
required by the proposed development should be backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of
Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115.
Resolution 20737
Page 6
38. All proposed utility lines should be installed underground.
39. The original improvement plans prepared for the proposed development and approved by the City
Engineer should 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 should be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to
construction.
40. Nothing should 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 Section 93.02.00, D.
41. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the publicsidewalk and/or curb
should have City approved deep root barriers installed per Cityof Palm Springs Standard Drawing No.
904.
TRAFFIC
42. A minimum of 48 inches of sidewalk clearance should be provided around all street furniture, fire
hydrants and other above-ground facilities for handicap accessibility. Minimum clearance should be
provided through dedication of additional right-of-way or widening of the sidewalk.
43. All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends and striping associated with the proposed
development shall be replaced as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
44. 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 should be in accordance with State of California, Departmentof Transportation,"Manual
of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones"dated 1996,or subsequent additions
in force at the time of construction.