The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/16/2002 - STAFF REPORTS (19) DATE: October 16, 2002 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning & Zoning TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29886-APPLICATION BY JOHN SANBORN, THE OWNER IS THE PRESERVE GOLF COMPANY, LLC., TO SUBDIVIDE 18.23 ACRES INTO 17 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE LETTERED LOT FOR USE AS PRIVATE STREET AND ONE CONSERVATION LOT, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER VIA MONTE VISTA AND CRESCENT DRIVE, ZONE R-1-B, SECTION 10. RECOMMENDATION: At it's October 9, 2002 meeting, the Planning Commission voted 6-0, with one member absent, to recommend that the City Council adopt a mitigated negative declaration and approve the tentative map with conditions. The officers of Preserve Golf Company, LLC. are Fred N. Grand, President, and William H. McWethy, Jr., Chief Executive Officer. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE: At the hearing a number of issues were raised by the applicant with regards to the draft conditions. These issues included grading and pad elevations, construction of a masonry wall, demolition of existing golf course improvements, landscaping, internal and external sidewalks, type of curbs, and collection of the drainage acreage fee. Although a number of community members had visited the Planning Department following receipt of the hearing notices, no community members spoke at the hearing in regard to the project. The Planning Commission revised the conditions to allow a grading plan with finished floor elevation at or below those exiting to the north (# 9), affirm the requirement to construct a block wall on the north property line (# 18), require that the grading plan be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to allowing mass grading _(#19), defer construction of sidewalks along Via Monte Vista by covenant #57), eliminate the requirement for interior sidewalks (#61), and allow the option of wedge curb (# 62). The Planning Commission also directed the City Engineer to review drainage acreage fee requirements with the City Attorney, prior to the City Council hearing. Additional agency correspondence has been received regarding the Environmental Assessment since preparation of the initial City Council report. Correspondence from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians requests that, in addition to an archeological monitor, a Native American cultural resource monitor be present during all phases of grading (Condition #48). A letter was also received from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) outlining the agency's concerns. The soils report, which will be prepared when the grading plan is prepared, will identify any known or potentially contaminated sites and address the remaining issues raised by the DTSC (Condition#19). There is no evidence or reports that any previous or current use on the site resulted in any release of hazardous wastes/substances on the site. /W DOUGLAS . EVANS Director of Planning and Zoning City Manager Attachments: Correspondence Revised Conditions TRIBAL PLANNING , BUILDING & ENGINEERING RECEIVED CNHUI��P OCT 4 2002 October 1, 2002 L Mr. Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner � I"I N ,_a I_.�1�, � ��' DIVISION City of Plam Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 Re: Tentative Tract Map No. 29886 Dear Mr. Meyerhoff, The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Planning, Building, and Engineering Department is in receipt of your Initial Study for the above referenced project. The Department has reviewed the Tentative Tract Map No. 29886 and recommends the fallowing condition: ze "During grading operations of the site a Native American Cultural Resource Monitor be present during all phases of grading." If vnu have any estions please feel free to call me at (760) 325-3400 ext. #207. Michael J. Atencio Associate Planner AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS mja C: CADocuments and Settings\matencic\Desktop\PBE Letter.doc l y1�3 650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY • PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 (760) 325-3400 FAA: (760) 325-6952 Department of Toxic Substances Control ,CN Edwin F. Lowry, Director 5796 Corporate Avenue Winston H. Hickox Cypress, California 90630 Agency Secretary Gray DavisGovernor California Environmental Protection Agency October 1, 2002 RECEIVED OCT - 7 2002 Mr. Alex Meyerhoff PLANNING DIVISION City of Palm Springs 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29886, PRESERVE ESTATES - SCH # 2002091034 Dear Mr. Meyerhoff: The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your Negative Declaration (ND) for the above-mentioned Project. Based on the review of the document, DTSC's comments are as follows: 1) The ND needs to identify and determine whether current or historic uses have resulted in any release of hazardous wastes/substances at the site. 2) The ND needs to identify any known or potentially contaminated site within the proposed Project area. For all identified sites, the ND needs to evaluate whether conditions at the site pose a threat to human health or the environment. 3) The ND should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation for any site that may require remediation, and the government agency to provide appropriate regulatory oversight. 4) An environmental assessment should be conducted in the project area to evaluate whether the project area is contaminated with hazardous substances from the potential past and current uses including storage, transport, generation, and disposal of toxic and hazardous waste/materials. Potential hazard to the public or the environment through routine transportation, use, disposal or release of hazardous materials should be discussed in the ND. i F)f r The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site at www.dtsc.ca.gov. ® Printed on Recycled Paper Mr. Alex Meyerhoff October 1, 2002 Page 2 5) The project construction may require soil excavation and soil filling in certain areas. Appropriate sampling is required prior to disposal of the excavated soil. If the soil is contaminated, properly dispose the soil rather than placing it in another location. Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) may be applicable to these soils. Also, if the project is planning to import soil for backfilling the areas excavated, proper sampling should be conducted to make sure that the imported soil is free of contamination. 6) Any hazardous wastes/materials encountered during construction should be remediated in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. Prior to initiating any construction activities, an environmental assessment should be conducted to determine if a release of hazardous wastes/substances exists at the site. If so, further studies should be carried out to delineate the nature and extent of the contamination. Also, it is necessary to estimate the potential threat to public health and/or the environment posed by the site. It may be necessary to determine if an expedited response action is required to reduce existing or potential threats to public health or the environment. If no immediate threat exists, the final remedy should be implemented in compliance with state regulations and policies rather than excavation of soil prior to any assessments. 7) The ND does not indicate whether there are any schools within one-quarter mile of the project area. Human health and the environment of students and faculty members should be protected during the construction or demolition activities. A study of the site should be conducted to provide basic information for determining if there are, have been, or will be, any threatening releases of hazardous materials that may pose a risk to human health or the environment. 8) The project site may have prior vegetation and agricultural use. Onsite soils could contain pesticide residues and the site may have contributed to soil and groundwater contamination. Proper investigation and remedial actions should be conducted at the site prior to the new development. As long as the proposed project is for the development of residential dwellings, proper environmental studies should be conducted to evaluate the health risks associated with these chemicals. 9) The ND needs to address household hazardous waste management. It is evident that the proposed project will increase household hazardous wastes. 10) If during construction of the project, soil and/or groundwater contamination is suspected, construction in the area should cease and appropriate Health and Safety procedures should be implemented. If it is determined that contaminated soil and/or groundwater exist, the ND should identify how any required investigation and/or remediation will be conducted, and the government agency to provide appropriate regulatory oversight. 1Or Mr. Alex Meyerhoff October 1, 2002 Page 3 DTSC provides guidance for the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) preparation and cleanup oversight through the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). For additional information on the VCP, please visit DTSC's web site at www.dtsc.ca.gov. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Ms. Rania A. Zabaneh, Project Manager at (714) 484-5479. Sincerely, Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E. Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812-3044 Mr. Guenther W. Moskat, Chief Planning and Environmental Analysis Section CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 I DATE: October 16, 2002 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning & Zoning TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29886-APPLICATION BY JOHN SANBORN, THE OWNER IS THE PRESERVE GOLF COMPANY, LLC., TO SUBDIVIDE 18.23 ACRES INTO 17 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE LETTERED LOT FOR USE AS PRIVATE STREET AND ONE CONSERVATION LOT, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER VIA MONTE VISTA AND CRESCENT DRIVE, ZONE R-1-13, SECTION 10. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission will review this project at it's meeting on October 9, 2002. The City Council will receive a supplemental report following that meeting which contains the Planning Commission's recommendation.The officers of Preserve Golf Company, LLC.are Fred N. Grand, President, and William H. McWethy, Jr., Chief Executive Officer. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this item on October 9, 2002. The subject property is designated by the General Plan as L2 (Low Residential 2 Units/Acre) and is zoned R-1-13 (Single Family Residential) with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. The application includes the subdivision of 18.23 acres into 17 parcels, one lettered lot for use as a private street and one conservation parcel, ranging in size from 14,810 square feet to 32,234 square feet, with Lot#18 at 4.89 acres and Lot #10 at 5.18 acres in area. The proposed project would create a gated community with 17 single family residences. No architecture is proposed at this time. The proposed map is located east of the spillway of the Tachevah Dam, and a portion of the project incorporates steep hillside slopes. The applicant has proposed a building limit line, which would limit development of the hillside on seven hillside lots. In working with the applicant, the project design has evolved to include a large conservation lot, on which all future development would be prohibited. The project site was formerly proposed to be utilized for casitas for the Mountain Falls Golf project The applicant of the proposed project is the same applicant as the Mountain Falls project. The applicant has submitted a letter to the City formally withdrawing its earlier application for the Mountain Falls Golf Course project. Three of the proposed parcels do not meet all of the R-1-13 zone requirements for lot sizes and dimensions.All lots are reasonable and staff supports minor adjustments to lot size and dimensions. Lot #2, at 14,810 square feet, is substandard in area by 190 square feet (1.2%). Lots #15 and 17 are substandard in width, while a lot width of 120' is required, lot #15 measures 112' in width and is substandard by 7.1%. Lot#17 is 111 feet in width and is substandard by 7.5%. Pursuant to Section 94.06.01.A.4, an applicant may apply for an Administrative Minor Modification to allow reductions in lot area, width or depth by a maximum of 10%. Adjacent lots to the north are also zoned R-1-13 and range from 14,336 square feet to 18,480 square feet in area. The proposed lot sizes and dimensions are therefore consistent with property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Pursuant to Section 93.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, a reduction of lot area, and lot dimensions, by not more than ten percent is permitted through the AMM process Staff recommends approval of the lots as proposed. / Vfi7 The 18.23 acre site is commonly referred to as the former Coler estate. The site contains a large main residence, a guest building, a swimming pool, and a tennis court. The site previously contained a three hole golf course.The existing residence and its improvements will be contained with the proposed Lot #10. The remainder of the site was previously developed as a private golf course and is located directly east of the Tachevah Dam. As proposed, Lot 9 would be a flag lot and lot # 16 and 17 would share a 25' driveway easement. The flat, developable portion of the site slopes gently to the east at an overall gradient of two to three percent and ranges in elevation from 541.3 to 519.5. The overall differential in elevation is approximately 22.3 feet. The proposed road ranges from 533 to 519. The elevation of the hillside portion of the project range from 530 feet at the proposed building limit line to an elevation of of approximately 770 above sea level. Hillside slopes averaging between fifty to seventy percent are common on this site. Pad heights have not been proposed. A grading plan has not been prepared. Given the general topography of the area, the proposed pad heights for lots# 1 - 9 will be controlled through the conditions of approval, and would be conditioned to be within 18" of the elevations of top of the curb at the private street. The conditions include as provision for minimum graded slopes of 0.5% for drainage, 1% has been the City standard. Slopes in excess of 0.5% shall be prohibited forthe purposes of site drainage and pad development. The intent is to minimize elevational differences for built-up slopes and residential pads during site grading operations. With two exceptions the existing elevations of the proposed lots are one to two feet below the pad heights of the existing residences to the north. Lot #1 has some topographical features, such as berms, swales, sand traps and greens from the site's former golf course and varies in elevation from 519 to 525, whereas lot #42 directly the north ranges from 520 to 521. Lot#8 ranges in elevation from 536 to 538, while lot #35 to the north is 537. Through the conditions of approval, staff will recommend the imposition of conditions of approval which would ensure that these pad elevations are below the heights of existing residential development to the north. The site is noted for an abundance of non-native vegetation. The top soil on site is coarse and underlain with sand. There are outcroppings of granitic rocks on the upper portion of the site. The site has been altered by previous grading activities. Section 9313.00 and Section 9406.01, Minor Modifications, of the Ordinance, allow for building height up to 30 feet in hillside areas. This is typically only done in response to topographic issues. Staff recommends that the Commission allow the City's architectural approval process to guide future development of the hillside lots 10-16, within the project site. However, based on existing topography, staff does not feel two story from grade houses would be appropriate. Based upon the City's architectural approval process, and the established procedure of sending courtesy notices to abutting property owners when any single family residential development being proposed in hillside areas, future conflicts can be reduced to a level acceptable within the community. The staff also recommends that the applicant submit codes, covenants, and restrictions ("CC&R's")to the Director of Planning and Zoning for approval prior to final map approval. The CC&R's will include project design guidelines, landscape requirements, slope restoration, building height standards, walls, building materials and require multi-level homes conforming to existing topography. SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: I �� North: R-1-B (Single Family Residential); single family homes South: 0-20 (Open Space); Vacant East: R-1-A (Single Family Residential);single family homes West: 0-20 (Open Space) and W (Watercourse); Debris basin, dam and vacant ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND NOTIFICATION: An Environmental Assessment/Initial Study has been prepared for the project and routed to the appropriate agencies. A number of environmental studies originally prepared for the Mountain Fall Gold Course Environmental Impact Report (EIR) were incorporated into the study. These special studies include: Final Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan Update; Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse #97111049, prepared by Smith Peronii & Fox, a division of Dudek & Associates, 1998; Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties Mountain Falls Golf Preserve, CRM Tech, December 17, 1997; Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Traffic Impact Analysis, Endo Engineering, December 1997; Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Air Quality and Noise Impact Analysis, Endo Engineering December 1997; Hydrology report for the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve, Harold Vance, PE,August 1997; Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Earth Systems, November25, 2997; Soils report prepared for the Mountain Fall Golf Resort Project; Geotechnical report prepare for the Mountain Falls Golf Resort Project; and Biological Survey of the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Site, Lilburn Corporation March 1998. The study identified a number of areas of potential impact including land use and zoning, geologic, water, air quality, transportation, biological resources, hazards, public services, and cultural resources. The environmental assessment concluded that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, the project will not result in a significant environmental impact because of the mitigation measures described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The City received two responses regarding the Initial Study (attached). Correspondence from the Palm Spring Unified School District outlines school fee requirements. Correspondence from the California Department of Fish and Game requests that the standard bighorn sheep exclusion fence needs to be 8' in height to be effective. A 6'fence had been recommended. Staff has revised the mitigation measures to require that, should bighorn sheep become a problem on the site, the proposed 6' fence would be augmented with an additional 2' of iron fence, for a total of 8' of fence. Biological studies of this and other sites have indicated that San Jacinto Mountain Peninsular Bighorn Sheep (PBS) do not frequent existing development for forage or water purposes. No PBS have been sighted on the subject property and the portions of the site proposed for development does not contain any PBS habitat. PBS in the Santa Rosa Mountains are known to frequent developed areas. As of this date, PBS in the San Jacinto Mountains for not exhibit similar behavior. Recently, the Bighorn Institute (BI), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) released sheep into the San Jacinto Mountains. These sheep were relocated from the Santa Rosa Mountains and the BI. City staff raised questions regarding this capture and augmentation program with regards to the possibility that released sheep could change the behavior patters of the existing San Jacinto Mountains herd. To date the BI, FWS and CDFG have not responded to the City's letter and concerns. The applicant conducted an informational meeting on the project on June 6, 2002. Approximately 20 people attended the meeting. lq#49 The public hearing was noticed in accordance with established City procedures. Four residents have inquired about the project at City Hall. As of the writing of this report, no correspondence from neighbors has been received. DOUGLASA EVANS Director of Planning and Zoning City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Environmental Assessment 3. Correspondence 4. Resolution 5. Conditions of Approval NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL Tentative Tract Map 29886 Subdivide 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences, located southwest of the corner of the intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive. Section 10, Zone R-1-B, 0-20, Name of Applicant: John L. Sanborn Property Owner: Preserve Golf Company, LLC. 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 16, 2002, The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an application for a tentative tract map for single family residential purposes. The project does not include any golf course facilities. The proposed project is the subdivision of 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences. Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. At this meeting, the City Council is expected to take action on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed map, Initial Study and related documents are available for public review daily, between 8 am and 5 pm at the City of Palm Springs in the Planning and Zoning Department, located at 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. If any individual or group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearings described in this notice or in written correspondence at or prior to the Council meeting. Notice of Public Hearing is being sent to all property owners within four hundred (400) feet of the subject property.An opportunity will be given at said hearings for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner, Department of Planning & Zoning, (760) 323-8245. Patricia Sanders YA/1 City Clerk VICINITY MAP I . I o CRESCENT DR. $ 0 I s CHINO.,pR. ALEJO RD S/TE O'DONNELL GOLF COURSE 'w AMADO TAHOUITZ CANYON DR. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO. Tentative Tract Map 29886 DESCRIPTION Subdivide 15.23 acres of land into l7 single family residential Name of Applicant: John L. Sanborn lots,ranging in size from 0.34 to 5 18 acres In area,one Property Owner: Preserve Golf Company, LLC. conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street,for future development as single family residences. Section 10,Zone R-1-6,0-20 s Form A Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal FSCH Mail to: State Clearinghouse,PO Box 3044, Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 916/445-0613 Project Title: Tentative Tract Map 29886, Preserve Estates Lead Agency: City of Palm Springs Contact Person: Alex Meverhoff Street Address: 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way Phone: (760)323-8245 City: Palm Springs CA Zip: 92263-2743 County: Riverside ------ -- -- -- -- --------------------------- Project Location: County Riverside City/Nearest Community: Palm Springs Goss Streets: Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive Zip Code: 92262 Total Acres: 18.23 Assessor's Parcel No. 505-130-015 -016 Section: 10 Twp. 43 Range: 4E Base: SBBM Within 2 Miles: State Hwy#: 111 Waterways: Tachevah Dam Airports: Palm Springs Railways: UPRR Schools: Yes --------------- -------------------------- Document Type: CEQA: NOP Supplement/Subsequent FIR NEPA: NOI Other: Joint Document Early Cons (Prior SCH No.) EA Final Document Neg Dec Other Draft EIS Other -Draft FIR FONSI --------------- ------------------- ------- Local Action Type: General Plan Update - Specific Plan Rezone Annexation General Plan Amendment Master Plan Prezone Redevelopment General Plan Element -Planned Unit Development Use Permit Coastal Permit Community Plan Site Plan N Land Division(Subdivision, etc.) Other - - -- -- - - -- ------------------------------- Development Type: 0 Residential: Units 17 Acres-1 8.23 Water Facilities: Type MGD Office- Sq.ft Acres Employees Transportatioir Type Commercial: Sq.ft. Acres Employees Mining: Mineral Industrial: Sq.-ft. Acres Employees Power: Type Watts_ Educational Waste Treatment: Type Recreational Hazardous Waste: Type Other: --- ------------ ------------------- ------- Funding(approx.): Federal $ State $ Total $ ---- ------------------------------------- Project Issues Discussed in Document: Aesthetic/Visual -'Flood Plain/Flooding Schools/Universities Water Quality Agricultural Land 0 Forest Land/Fire Hazard Septic Systems Water Supply/Groundwater Air Quality N Geologic/Seismic Sewer Capacity Wetland/Riparian Archeological/Historical Minerals Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading N Wildlife Coastal Zone Noise Solid Waste -Growth Inducing F Drainage/Absorption N population/Housing Balance Toxic/Hazardous Landuse Economic/Jobs N Public Services/Facilities 0 Traffic/Circulation Cumulative Effects Fiscal Recreation/Parks Vegetation Other -- -- --- - - --- - --------------------- ------- Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Designation: Single family residence, vacant/R-1-B (Single Family Residential)/0-20 (Open Space)/L2 (Residential Low), C (Conservation) ---- ---------------------------------- --- Project Description: Subdivide 18,23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences. Revised 3-31-99 ' YA 145 23 Reviewing Agencies Checklist Form A, continued KEY _Resources Agency S=Document sent by lead agency Boating &Waterways X=Document sent by SCH Coastal Commission ✓= Suggested distribution Coastal Conservancy Colorado River Board Environmental Protection Agency Conservation Air Resources Board Fish &Game California Waste Management Board Forestry&Fire Protection SWRCB: Clean Water Grants Office of Historic Preservation SWRCB:Delta Unit Parks &Recreation SWRCB:Water Quality Reclamation Board SWRCB: Water Rights S.F. Bay Conservation&Development Commission Regional WQCB# ( ) Water Resources (DWR) Youth &Adult Corrections Business,Transportation & Housing Corrections Aeronautics California Highway Patrol Independent Commissions & Offices CALTRANS District# Energy Commission Department of Transportation Planning(headquarters) Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission Housing&Community Development Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy _Food &Agriculture State Lands Commission Health &Welfare Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Health Services State &Consumer Services Other General Services OLA(Schools) ------------ ---- ------------------------- Public Review Period(to be filled in by lead agency) Starting Date September 44,22002 Ending Date October 4, 2002 Signature Date September 4, 2002 - -- ----------- --------------------------- Lead Agency (Complete if applicable): For SCH Use Only: Consulting Firm: Dale Received at SCH Address: Date Review Starts City/State/Zip: Contact: Dale to Agencies Phone: ( ) Date to SCH Clearance Date Notes: Applicant- John L. Sanborn Address: 1227 S. Gene Auty Trail, Suite "C City/State/Zip: Palm Springs, CA 92264 p1lone: (760 ) 325-9426 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING INITIAL STUDY Application No(s:): Tentative Tract Map No. 29886 Date of Completed Application: May 22, 2002 Name of Applicant: John L. Sanborn Property Owner: Preserve Golf Company, LLC. Project Description: Subdivide 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences. All future residences will be reviewed individually through the building permit process. Lots 14-17 will be subject to the architectural review process, per Section 94.04 of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Architectural Review. The existing on-site and landscape improvements, including the former private golf course, water features, berms, tees and greens, will be removed and the site will be re-graded. The project is located on the eastern portion of the former Mountain Falls Golf Course project site, to the east of the Tachevah Dam and spillway. The proposed project does not address the remainder portion of the larger site west of the dam. No golf course is proposed as part of this project. The City of Palm Springs has received a letter from the applicant formally withdrawing the previous application for a golf course from consideration and substituting this application in its place. Location of project: APN # 505-130-015, -016; south and west of intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive. General Plan Designation(s): L2 (Low Density Residential, Maximum of 2 du/acre) and C (Conservation). Proposed General Plan Designation(s): No change proposed Present Land Use(s): Vacant Existing Zoning(s): R-1-13 (Single Family Residential)/ 0-20 (Open Space). Proposed Zoning(s): No change proposed 1 I ywr I. 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 the same area, cumulative impact should be considered). zYes ❑No Il. If "yes" above, does the project fall into any of the Emergency Projects listed in Section 15269 of the State CEQA Guidelines? []Yes ®No III. If"no" on II., does the project fall under any of the Ministerial Acts listed in Section 15268 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines? ❑Yes zNo IV. If"no" on III., does the project fall under any of the Statutory Exemptions listed in Article 18 of the State CEQA Guidelines? ❑Yes zNo V. If "no" on IV., 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 effect due to special circumstances, a categorical exemption does not ❑Yes ®No apply). VI. Project Description: The applicant proposes to subdivide 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots ranging in size from ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one 4.89 acre lot for dedication to the City of Palm Springs as a conservation easement lot and one letter lot for development as a private cul-de-sac street, for future development as single family residences. The property is located south and west of the intersection Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive, in the City of Palm Springs. The subject site is currently zoned R-1-B (Single Family Residential) and 0-20 (Open Space). The R-1-B zone requires a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. The proposed lots will gain vehicular access from a private cul-de- sac accessed at the intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive, which are existing public streets. Only grading forthe street improvements and removal of the existing private golf course improvements will be conducted in conjunction with the subdivision; precise grading plans for each individual lot will be required in conjunction with every proposed residence. The site is zoned R-1-13 and has a General Plan designation of L2 (Residential Low Density). The Tentative Tract Map will be considered by the Planning Commission and the City Council as required by the Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance. Lot#2, at 14,810 square feet, is substandard in area by 190 square feet (1.2%). Lots#13, 15 and 17 are substandard in width, while width of 120' is required, lot#13 measures 113' in width, and is substandard by 5.8%. Lot# 15 measures 112' in width and is substandard by 7.1%. Lot#17 is 111 feet in width and is substandard by 7.5%. Pursuant to Section 94.06.01.A.4, an applicant may apply for an Administrative Minor Modification to allow lots substandard in area, width or depth by a maximum of 10%. In this case, all lots are substandard by less than 10%. Therefore, he applicant will be required to apply for an AMM as a 2 � y�� condition of approval, prior to approval of the final map. Site Description: The 18.23 acre site is commonly referred to as the former Coler estate. The site contains a large main residence, a guest building, a swimming pool, and a tennis court. The site previously contained a three hole golf course. The existing residence and its improvements will be contained with the proposed lot#10. The remainder of the site was previously developed as a private golf course and is located directly east of the Tachevah Dam. As proposed, Lot 9 would be a flag lot and lot# 16 and 17 would share a 25' driveway easement. The flat, developable portion of the site slopes gently to the east at an overall gradient of two to three percent and ranges in elevation from 541.3 to 519.5. The overall differential in elevation is approximately 22.3 feet. The proposed road ranges from 533 to 519. The elevation of the hillside portion of the project range from 530 feet at the proposed building limit line to an elevation of of approximately 770 above sea level, with an elevation gain of approximately 250 across the entire site. Hillside slope averages between fifty to seventy percent are common on this site. Pad heights have not been proposed. Given the general topography of the area, the proposed pad heights for lots # 1 - 9 will be controlled through the conditions of approval, and would be conditioned to be within 18" of the elevations of top of the curb at the private street. The project will include minimum slopes of 0.5% for drainage. With two exceptions the existing elevations of the proposed lots are one to two feet below the pad heights of the existing residences to the north. Lot #1 has some significant topographical features and varies in elevation from 519 to 525, whereas lot#42 directly the north ranges from 520 to 521. Lot#8 ranges in elevation from 536 to 538, while lot#35 to the north is 537. Through the conditions of approval, staff will recommend the imposition of conditions of approval which would ensure that these pad elevations are below the heights of existing residential development to the north. The site is noted for an abundance of non-native vegetation. The top soil on site is coarse and underlain with sand. There are outcroppings of granitic rocks on the upper portion of the site. The site has been altered by previous grading activities. VI I. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: North: R-1-13 (Single Family Residential); single family homes South: 0-20 (Open Space); Vacant East: R-1-A (Single Family Residential);single family homes West: 0-20 (Open Space) and W (Watercourse); Debris basin, dam and vacant 3 / /� Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact VIII. Surrounding General Plan: North: L2 (Low Density Residential, maximum 2 du/ac) South: C (Conservation) East: L2 (Low Density Residential, maximum 2 du/ac) West: W (Watercourse) IX. Is the proposed project consistent with: If answered yes or not applicable, no explanation is required) City of Palm Springs General Plan ®Yes []No ❑N/A Applicable Specific Plan []Yes []No EN/A City of Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance ®Yes ❑No ❑N/A South Coast Air Quality Management Plan ®Yes ❑No ❑N/A Airport Part 150 Noise Study ❑Yes ❑No EN/A Draft Section 14 Master Development Plan ❑Yes ❑No EN/A The proposed Tentative Tract Map has been determined to be consistent with the City of Palm Springs General Plan. X. Are there any of the following studies required? 1. Soils Report ®Yes []No 2. Slope Study ❑Yes ENo 3. Geotechnical Report EYes ❑No 4. Traffic Study EYes ❑No 5. Air Quality Study EYes ❑No 6. Hydrology EYes []No 4 / YA /8 7. Sewer Study ❑Yes NNo 8. Biological Study ®Yes ❑No 9. Noise Study NYes ❑No 10. Hazardous Materials Study [-]Yes NNo 11. Housing Analysis [-]Yes NNo 12. Archaeological Report NYes ❑No 13. Groundwater Analysis ❑Yes NNo 14. Water Quality Report ❑Yes NNo 15. Other ❑Yes NNo XI. Incorporated herein by reference are the: Final Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan Update; Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse #97111049, prepared by Smith Peroni & Fox, a division of Dudek & Associates, 1998; Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties Mountain Falls Golf Preserve, CRM Tech, December 17, 1997; Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Traffic Impact Analysis, Endo Engineering, December 1997, Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Air Quality and Noise Impact Analysis, Endo Engineering December 1997; Hydrology report for the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve, Harold Vance, PE, August 1997; Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Earth Systems, November 25, 2997; Soils report prepared for the Mountain Fall Golf Resort Project; Geotechnical report prepare for the Mountain Falls Golf Resort Project; and Biological Survey of the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Site, Lilburn Corporation March 1998. 5 I VA19 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community(including a low-income or minority community)? ❑ ❑ ❑ 1 a, d- e)NO IMPACT. The General Plan designation of project site is Residential,Very Low Density"L2."This designation permits two dwelling units per acre and accommodates various types of low density residential development,including large estate lots and traditional single family homes.The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan.The project site is zoned R-1-13,Single Family Residential The R-1 zones are intended to provide for low density housing types and neighborhoods which enhance the natural and urban setting.The proposed project is consistent with the zoning ordinance. The biological study prepared for the Mountain Falls Golf Resort,the Biological Survey of the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Site, Lilburn Corporation March 1998 was utilized for this analysis.The study looked for flora and fauna species identified by the General Plan as likely to be present in the Creosote Scrub community The biological study noted that the project site is characterized by non-native vegetation On the larger Mountain Falls Golf Resort Site,atotal of one-hundred and ten plant species were identified. However,no plant species listed as endangered or threatened by federal or state agencies or listed as sensitive by the CNPS, CDFG or USFWS were observed A number of native plant,exotic plant,avifauna and mammal species were found on site during the field surveys.Native plants found on the larger site are listed in AppendixA of the report.Vertebrate species found on the larger site are listed in Appendix B Please refer to the Biological resources discussion in Section 7. The biological study forthe project indicates thatthe hillside portion of the project site,located to the south of the existing storm drain and the proposed residences and private roadway, is located in essential habitat for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep.The proposed development is located adjacent to the San Jacinto Mountains, wh ich have been designated as essential habitat for the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep(PBS). The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has approved two documents dealing with bighorn sheep, the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Recovery Plan,and the Critical Habitat for the Endangered Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Both documents include maps and general habitat descriptions. The proposed project is a residential subdivision,similar to adjacent land uses.There are no agricultural resources in the area of the project The site is located adjacent to an established residential neighborhood, to the west and south of existing single family neighborhoods. The proposed project does not include architectural approvals All proposed residences are subject to Zoning Ordinance requirements. A number of the lots, including lots 11-17, will be subject to Section 93.13, the Hillside Development Ordinance and Section 94 04 the Architectural Approval Ordinance. For these lots, a courtesy notice will be mailed to adjacent property owners, when applications are submitted to the City forArchitectural Approval.The Architectural Approval process will include careful a evaluation oftopography,proposed grading and building design.The proposed project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community upon build out Therefore,there should be no impacts to planning as a result of the project. 1 b)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.The hillside portion ofthe project site is located in critical habitat area forthe Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. The hillside areas of the project are to be dedicated for open space or shall have open space easements. Please refer to the discussion in Section 7, Biological Resources. 6 / Yhdo I c.)POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED.The proposed development was formerly utilized as a three hole golf course.The topography of the site has been modified to facilitate use of the golf course. The site is heavily landscaped with non- desert vegetation, including hedges and trees An existing fence separates the established residential properties to the north from the project site. The existing residences on Crescent Drive feature limited viewsheds to south New residences will comply with the 18' maximum building height,building envelope,15 foot rear setback provisions of the R-1 zone.Lots with a slope of 10%or greater,lots 10- 17,will be subject to additional architectural approval and hillside ordinance provisions. Pad heights have not been proposed.Given the general topography of the area,the proposed pad heights for lots#1 -9 will be controlled through the conditions of approval, and would be conditioned to be within 18"of the elevations of the top of curb of the adjacent private street The project will include minimum slopes of 0.5%for drainage.With two exceptions the existing elevations of the proposed lots are one to two feet below the pad heights of the existing residences to the north.Lot#1 has some significant topographical features and varies in elevation from 519 to 525,whereas lot#42 directly the north ranges from 520 to 521.Lot#8 ranges in elevation from 536 to 538,while lot#35 to the north is 937. The existing on-site and landscape improvements, including the former private golf course, water features, berms, tees and greens, will be removed and the site will be re-graded. Through the conditions of approval, staff will recommend the imposition of conditions of approval which would ensure that these pad elevations are below the heights of existing residential development to the north. Mitigation measures will include the recordation of building limit lines on Lots#10-16 and 18 and the dedication and record of conservation easements on Lots# 10 and#18. The project will include minimum slopes of 0 5%for drainage. The applicant will be required to construct a decorative block wall along the north property line The developer will also be required to remove some of the existing non-native landscaping. In addition,future owners will be prohibited from planting or constructing any other improvements on the hillside areas MITIGATION MEASURES' 1 Mass grading shall be prohibited for lots 11-17,as part of the project.Contour and terrace grading shall be required for development of these individual lots within the project.Split level pads and yards shall be required which step development and create grade transitions 2.A courtesy notice shall be provided to properties adjacent to lots#11-17,with each single family residence application 3.Prior to approval offcal map pad elevations for lots 1-13 shall be established and approved by the Director of Planning and Zoning and the Director of Public Works 4. Residences on lots#1-9 and 11-13 shall be limited to a single story,with a maximum height of 18' 5 The developershall record building limit lines on Lots#10-16 and 18 and shall dedicate and record of conservation easements on Lots #10 and#18. 6.The project shall include maximum slopes of 0.5%for drainage for individual lot grading 7.The developer and future owners will be prohibited from planting or constructing any other improvements on the hillside areas above the building limit lines or slope protection boundary. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension or directly or indirectly (e.g through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 a-c)NO IMPACT The application includes the proposed subdivision of a limited number(17)of residential lots.The proposed project is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan.The project site is located on vacant property that is adjacent to an existing developed residential neighborhood Since the site is vacant,displacement of existing housing will not occur. Therefore,there should be no impacts to population and housing as a result of the project 7 IVACV 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Seismic ground shaking? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Seiche,tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Landslides or mudflows? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading and fill? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Subsidence of the land? ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Expansive soils? ❑ ❑ ❑ 1) Unique geologic or physical features? ❑ ❑ ❑ j) Is a major landform, ridgeline, canyon, etc. involved? ❑ ❑ ❑ 3.a,c-d, r-j)NO IMPACT,A Hydrology report for the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve, Harold Vance, PE,August 1997, has been prepared for the project. The subject site is located downstream of the Tachevah Dam, at the base of the foothills of the San Jacinto Mountains. With the future development of single family residences within the subdivision, the project will involve grading of the existing terrain Geological hazards such as ground rupture, liquefaction,seismically induced flooding and landslides are considered low or negligible on this site There is no known potential of seiche,tsunami, volcanic hazard or mudflows on site. Limited grading for utilities, streets and drainage will be permitted as part of this project. Mass grading of lots#11-17 will be prohibited.The project will feature individual grading for each future residences. 3,b,e)POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED The project site is located in an area where the primary geologic hazard is sever ground shaking from earthquakes originating on nearby faults.A major earthquake above magnitude 7 originating on the local segment of the San Andreas fault zone would be the critical seismic event that may effect the site within the design life of the proposed development. Engineered design and earthquake-resistant construction increase safety and allow development in seismic areas Based upon data obtained from a review of selected literature and the site evaluation,the Geotechnical report for the project concluded that,with recommended mitigation,the site is suitable for the proposed project. There are no known geological hazards present on the site other than ground shaking potential associated with earthquakes,and the site is not located within any Alquist-Priolo or City adopted special study zone. There are no known unstable earth conditions associated with the project site based on review of the Seismic Safety Element of the City of Palm Springs General Plan and Geotechnical Report. The future development of housing on the site will be designed to comply with the Uniform Building Code which mandates requirements for seismic safety construction The developer will be required to submit a precise grading plan and soils report for each lot along with a soils report for review and approval of the City prior to the issuance of building permits The soils report(s)for each single family residence will address subsidence of land and the possibility of expansive soils on the property,and the grading plan will be required to be in compliance with the soils report.Therefore,there will be no significant geologic impacts as a result of the development of this project and the proposed subdivision of the land The issue of hillside stability was addressed in an earlier geotechnical report conducted for the Mountain Falls project The Mountain Falls Final EIR recommended that proposed buildings be located a minimum of 15 feet from the toe of the slope. Hillside stability is a concern for lots 10-16 MITIGATION MEASURES 1 All construction debris on site shall be excavated, removed and replaced with compacted fill. 2.The minimum seismic design of all future residences shall comply with the Uniform Building Code Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact _ Incorporated Impact 3 All future residences shall employ engineered design and earthquake resistant construction. 4.The developer shall submit a precise grading plan and soils report for each individual lot as part of the architectural approval or building permit process. 5. For lots#10-16,the City Engineer shall approve all individual grading plans and building pad locations 4. WATER Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns, or rate and amount of surface runoff? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ c) Discharge into surface waters or other alternation of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available forpublicwater supplies? ❑ ❑ ❑ SJ j) Are there any on-site or any proposed wells? ❑Yes ®No 4. a, b) POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED The majority of the 18.23 acre subject site is vacant and sporadically covered with non-native vegetation The development of the proposed 17 residential lot project will increase the amount of hard surface and will,therefore,result in additional storm water run-off.Therefore the project may result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or rate and amount of runoff.These impacts may result in the exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding. A Hydrology report for the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve, Harold Vance,PE,August 199 While the impact is anticipate to be negligible,the study recommends that a mitigation measure was incorporated into the project 9 1 VA010 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact MITIGATION MEASURE 1 The developer shall prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and revise the SWPPP as necessary as construction conditions change 4 c-j) NO IMPACT. Based upon a review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps (Community Panel No.060257 0004-D, Revised July 7,1999)and the knowledge of the Planning and Building Department and the City Engineer,the site is designated as Flood Zone C,areas of localized flooding. Due to the nature of the project and its location,the project will not create a change in the course or direction of water movements,the quantity of ground waters,alter the flow of ground water, and there are no wells on the subject site.Therefore,the project will not be impacted by water and flood related issues nor create impacts on water related issues. The hydrology study notes that the hydrologic impact of the proposed development,downstream of the dam,will be negligible and that any impact will be accommodated in the existing adequate downstream flood control system. 5. AIR QUALITY Would the proposal a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ❑ z ❑ ❑ c) Alter air movement, moisture,or temperature,or cause any change in climate? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Create objectionable odors? ❑ ❑ ❑ 5.a-lb.)POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations for the property. Due to the small number of average daily trips that will be generated by the future development of this subdivision,there will not be a significant impact related to air quality on a local or regional scale. The City of Palm Springs is located in a federal non- attainment area for the pollutant PM-10. Due to future project construction and grading activities, short term impacts to air quality could occur.To minimize construction activity emissions,the project applicant will be required to comply with the City's Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Ordinance. Compliance with this Ordinance will reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance.This is administered through the standard conditions of approval,which ensures compliance with City Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance and submittal of a dust control plan MITIGATION MEASURES, 1 Mass grading of lots#11-17 will be prohibited. 2. The proposed project shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 6.50 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code which established minimum requirements for construction activities to reduce fugitive dust and PM-10 emissions.A plan to control fugitive dust through implementation of reasonably available dust control measures shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Palm Springs for approval prior to the issuance of any grading permits associated with the project.The plan shall specify the fugitive dust control measures to be employed. 3 SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to insuring the clean up of construction generated dust particulates. 4.A suitable dust control deposit will be required and made prior to permit issuance. 5.Grading operations shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 MPH per the PM10 SIP 6.Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for off-peak hours and shall minimize construction of through traffic lanes 10 ! / 44 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 5 c-d)NO IMPACT The project will be located on a site that is adjacentto an established residential neighborhood,a hillside and a dam Short term impacts,such as odors and pollution created bydiesel engines of large equipment during construction and grading operations, may occur as a result of the development of the site.Therefore, no impact will occur as a result of this project to sensitive receptors and the current climate. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Would the proposal result in: a) Estimated Average Daily Trips generated by the project? (S.F= 10; M F. = 6; or from ITE): ❑ N ❑ ❑ b) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ❑ ❑ N ❑ c) Hazards to safety from design features(e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? ❑ ❑ ❑ N d) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ❑ ❑ ❑ N e) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off- site? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ❑ ❑ ❑ N h) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? ❑ ❑ ❑ N 6 a)POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED.The Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Traffic Impact Analysis, Endo Engineering,December 1997 was utilized in this analysis.The report indicates that this subdivision will create approximately 170 daily 2-way trips or 340 vehicle trips per day.The project will take access from the existing full drive on Via Monte Vista,that will be widened to meet city standards.With the overall ACT anticipated with development of this site with fifteen single family residences,all streets in the immediate neighborhood can still operate at a level of service(LOS)A,which equates to an unimpeded traffic flow. Nevertheless,the study recommends that a series of mitigation measure be incorporated into the project. MITIGATION MEASURES 1 The developer shall construct a minimum 5 foot wide sidewalk along the entire Via Monte Vista street frontage. 2 The developer shall construct an intersection of the private street with Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive,with curbOreturns, cross gutter, access ramps and removal and relocation of existing improvements 3. The developer shall provide a stop sign to control exiting site traffic Clear unobstructed sight clearances shall be provwded.at the driveway. 4 Entry monumentation that does not interfere with sight distance or turning movements shall be incorporated in the project entry Landscaping shall be provided that is appropriate to the entry but will not interfere with sight distances or turning movement operations. The final design for the project entrance ands corresponding entry lighting shall be reviewed by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 5.The developer shall contribute traffic impact mitigation fees, as specified by the TUMF program. b)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The future development of this subdivision will create approximately 170 daily 2-way trips or 340 vehicle trips per day. With the overall ADT anticipated with development of this site with fifteen single family residences,all streets in the immediate neighborhood can still operate at a level of service(LOS)A,which equates to an unimpeded traffic flow. The City's General Plan Street System Element Report indicated that a two-lane surface can carry up to 9,600 vehicles per day and still be considered LOS A The project impacts to the existing vehicular circulation system are considered less than significant and will not cause any additional traffic congestion in the immediate area. Therefore,the subdivision will not have a significant impact on the overall circulation patterns within this area of the City. 6.c- h)NO IMPACT As a result of the proposed subdivision, unsafe ingress or egress will not be created. Access has been designed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and will allow for sufficient emergency access and passing movement in emergencies, as necessary. Access to nearby uses,hazards for pedestrians and/or bicyclists will not result from development of the proposed project,nor will it conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. The proposal will not impact rail,waterborne or air traffic. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the proposal result in impacts to a) Endangered,threatened,or rare species or their habitats (Including but not limited to plants,fish, insects,animals, and birds)? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ b) Locally designated species? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Locally designated natural communities(e.g oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Wetland habitat (e.g marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? ❑ p ❑ e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Is consultation with the California Fish and Game or the Department of Fish and Wildlife Service, as a trustee agency, required? ®YES ❑NO 7. a) POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED, The project site is located at the base the San Jacinto Mountains The flat portion of the site exhibits evidence of significant human disturbance including the deposition of debris, and the construction improvements including a large residence and related appurtenant uses. Existing residential development is located to the north and east of the site There is no evidence of water on site.The hillside portion of the site is bisected by a segment of the Lykken Trail, a popular hiking and equestrian trail.With the exception of the trail,the hillside is undeveloped and has very little disturbance. The Palm Spring General Plan,Environmental Resources Section 2 (Page II-10)indicates that the Creosote Scrub Community exists in three somewhat different substrates within the area. In regards to flora on the alluvial fans emanating from the mountain canyons, the creosote bush grows amongstthe rocks and large boulders that are washed out ofthe canyons during severstorms.Along with the creosote bush,encelia,burro bush,beaver tail cactus, jumping cholla,the Creosote scrub community also exists on rocky hillsides below 300 feet in elevation. In these areas barrel cactus,trixis and pygmy cedar may also be found.The General Plan includes a list of Sensitive Plant Species(Page II-12) which may be found in this community, including Salton milk vetch,ayenia,spurges,ribbed crypantha,ditaxis,rock cress and barrel cactus, The General Plan, Environmental Resources Section 2(Page II-15) also identifies Sensitive Animal Species that may be found in the Creosote scrub community and therefore have the potential to be present on the project site.These include the peninsular bighorn sheep, S D. horned lizard, flat tailed horned lizard,desert tortoise, P.S. ground squirrel and L.A pocket mouse. 12 iy�a� Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact The General Plan, Environmental Resources Section 2(Page II-15) also identifies Sensitive Animal Species that may be found in the Creosote scrub community and therefore have the potential to be present on the project site.These include the peninsular bighorn sheep, S.D. horned lizard,flat tailed horned lizard,desert tortoise, P.S.ground squirrel and L.A.pocket mouse. The biological study prepared for the Mountain Falls Golf Resort,the Biological Survey of the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve Site,Lilburn Corporation March 1998 was utilized for this analysis.The study looked for flora and fauna species identified by the General Plan as likely to be present in the Creosote Scrub community. The biological study noted that the project site is characterized by non-native vegetation. On the larger Mountain Falls Golf Resort Site, a total of one-hundred and ten plant species were identified. However, no plant species listed as endangered or threatened by federal or state agencies or listed as sensitive by the CNPS, CDFG or USFWS were observed. A number of native plant, exotic plant, avifauna and mammal species were found on site during the field surveys Native plants found on the larger site are listed in Appendix A of the report Vertebrate species found on the larger site are listed in Appendix B. The proposed development is located adjacent to the San Jacinto Mountains, which have been designated as essential habitat for the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep(PBS).The Biological Survey indicates that hillside portions of the project site are within the lower elevational limits of the potential bighorn habitat.The habitat ranges from the lower elevation limit,which is generally recognized by urban land use and infrastructure,with an upper elevational limit of 4,000 feet The study indicates that the habitat occurs in an elevational band that averages approximately two miles in width. No water sources are located within the vicinity of the project site Bighorn sheep are known to exist in adjacent mountainous areas to the west The proposed project would result in a very minor loss of habitat which has been highly disturbed by human activity in the area over the years and no development is proposed on the hillside portions of the site. Due to the site location and poor quality of habitat,replacement habitat is not recommended as part of this project and the loss of habitat is not considered significant.The hillside portions of the site will either be designated on the tentative and final map as Lot#10,conservation easement and Lot#18,a conservation easement lot.The hillside portion of Lot#10 will remain with lot#10.so that a future buyer,will have the ability to purchase an estate sized property.The remainder to the hillside,with be included in lot#18,which will be designated as a conservation easement The map also includes a building limit lime which will prohibit future property owners from building up the hillside. Because the site, an ecotone of the Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub community, is located at the urban-wildland interface, additional biological information was reviewed.The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service(FWS)has approved two documents dealing with bighorn sheep, the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Recovery Plan, and the Critical Habitat for the Endangered Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. Both documents include maps and general habitat descriptions. City staff recommends that,with mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study and applying the information from applicable biological analysis to this subdivision, it can be concluded that the areas that will potentially be improved with new residences are not expected to have significant adverse impacts on the biota of the region and specifically,the project would not cause a significant impact upon Bighorn sheep. Despite the low quality of the habitat and the minimal opportunity for sighting the PBS on this property,staff has determined that the following mitigation measures should be imposed to ensure that no negative impacts will occur to the biota of the region with the future development of 16 residences on the property. 7b- 0NO IMPACT. The site consists primarily of hillside areas covered in rock outcroppings or native scrub vegetation The development of the site,which will be limited to small pad areas,will not have a significant impact on any locally designated plant or animal species or natural communities. No wetland or riparian areas exist on the property that could be impacted by the project development MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. If blasting is determined to be necessary as part of the excavation operation for any of the future residences on the property,the timing of such a procedure shall be planned with the assistance of a biologist. If the biologist determines that the location and extent of blasting is Iikelyto affect sheep lambing,breeding,orwatering,blasting should be done during a period when the auditory impacts will be negligible A biological monitormay also be necessary priorto and during blasting events to halt blasting immediately ifsheep are present in the area. While the biologist will determine the final implementation techniques, it is anticipated that the biologist will be positioned at the higher elevations of the site equipped with a spotting scope and radio and would conduct visual surveillance before and during blasting. 2. Any additional landscaping or landscape alteration outside of fenced areas shall consist of plant species that are native to the immediate area. No oleanders shall be planted on the project perimeter or within areas open to undeveloped areas, as they have been implicated in Peninsular Bighorn Sheep deaths through poisoning. 3. The final design or any perimeter fencing orwalls shall be reviewed bythe Planning and Building Departments as part of the Arch itectural Review process for each residence within the subdivision The fencing shall be of a height, location, and design as to not create a .trap" for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep that could potentially wander to the fringe of the subdivision 13 / Y/47 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 5. The developer shall be responsible for compliance with the State Endangered Species Act and Federal Endangered Species Act prior to the issuance of grading permits, if deemed necessary by the applicable resource agencies 6. Lot#18 shall have a conservation easement recorded which prohibits any and all development of the property, including structures, landscaping, lighting and recreational use,with the exception of the North Lykken Trail.A trail easement for the North Lykken Trail shall be noted in the conservation easement.The conservation easement shall be granted in favor of the City of Palm Springs. Lot#18 shall also be dedicated to the City of Palm Springs. 7. Lot#10 shall have a conservation easement recorded which prohibits any and all development of the property, including structures, landscaping, lighting and recreational use,with the exception of the North Lykken Trail.A trail easement for the North Lykken Trail shall be noted in the conservation easement.The conservation easement shall be granted in favor of the City of Palm Springs, 8. Lots#11-16 shall have conservation easements recorded for all areas above the no-build line. 9.The developer shall prepare and cause to be recorded CC&R's which shall address conservation easements and no build restrictions The no build restrictions shall include provisions against the construction of structures,trails,pools,landscaping,and hillside lighting,etc ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES g Would the proposal create: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of a future value to the region and the residents of the State? ❑ ❑ ❑ 8. a-c) NO IMPACT. Due to the size and nature of the proposed subdivision, the project will not conflict or interfere with an energy conservation plan and will not use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner. Therefore,the project should not result in a negative impact on energy and mineral resources 9. HAZARDS Would the proposal: a) Be a risk of accidental explosion or release substances(including , but not limited to: oil, pesticides,chemicals, or radiations ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Create possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Create any health hazard or potential health hazard? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Create exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Increase the risk of fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,grass or trees? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ 14 I ��V Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 9,a-d)NO IMPACT. In thejudgment of the Department of Planning&Building,there are no aspects of the proposed project or of future project construction which would involve explosives,pesticides,radiation,chemicals,or other hazardous substances Access to the newly created lots will be provided via the construction of the private cut de sac off of Via Monte Vista, to a width satisfactory to the Fire Department and City Engineer,to serve the property in question in case of emergency.The majority of the site is currently vacant and no hazardous materials are known to be existing on the property,buried underground,orto be used in conjunction with the proposed residential use. Therefore,there would be no risk of a release of or exposure to hazardous materials which would result in a potential for a significant impact on the environment. 9 e)POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED.Due to the proposed developments location on the urban- wild land interface,there are significant concerns related to an increase risk of fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,grass ortrees. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1.The developer shall design ands construct all water mains,fire hydrants and on-site circulation in accordance with City of Palm Springs Fire Department rules and regulations prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. The developer shall create and implement , with consultation and approval from the City of Palm Springs Fire Department, a fuel modification plan which provides fire safety buffer treatments between natural and open space and planned buildings,which provided for long term maintenance of the buffer,priorto issuance of occupancy permits Maintenance underthe plans shall continue for the life of the project 3.Automated fire sprinklers per the City of Palm Springs Fire Departments,will be required for all new structures associated with the project This will be verified by the Fire Departments 4. The construction of this project shall utilize, to the extent feasible, non-combustible exterior building materials, and fire resistant ornamental vegetation,subject to Fire Department approval prior to issuance of building permits. 10. NOISE Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Will the project be compatible with the noise compatibility planning criteria according to Table 6-F of the Palm Springs Municipal Airport F.A.R. Part 150 Noise Compatibility study? ®YES ❑NO 10.a, b)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. The proposed residential subdivision is expected to generate noise levels that would be typical for residential development Construction activities on site will result in short term increases in noise levels.In the evaluation of the Department of Planning&Building, noise levels will not exceed the noise levels stated within the Palm Springs Municipal Code, Chapter 11 74 The project is likely to result in temporary construction noise.However construction hours are governed by the municipal code and construction noise is anticipated to be less than significant The project site is not located within the Airport F.A.R. Part 150 Noise Compatibility study Therefore, no potentially significant impacts to the environment would result from noise. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of 15 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 11. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Distance to nearest fire station(0 8 miles) b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ z c) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ❑ ❑ ❑ z e) Other governmental services? ❑ ❑ ❑ z 11. a) POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED The proposed project is within the City's five minute response time for fire service and within reasonable proximity of the Police station Fire sprinklers will be required as part of this project. However,the project, due to its location on the urban-wildlife interface, may be subject to threat from wildfire.As a result a number of mitigation measure are proposed. Please refer to Section g above for mitigation measures. 11. b-e)NO IMPACT. The project will be adequately serviced by other public services as well,and school fees are required for all new construction to mitigate any potential impacts to the school district. Therefore,there should be no impacts to public services as a result of this project.As discussed above in Section 6 Transportation/Circulation,the construction of Sanborn Way as part of this project will be required to minimize the environmental impact of this project to a level of less than significant,as a project mitigation measure. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Communications systems? ❑ ❑ ❑ z c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ❑ p ❑ d) Sewer or septic tanks? ❑ ❑ ❑ z e) Storm water drainage? ❑ ❑ z ❑ f) Solid waste disposal? ❑ ❑ ❑ z g) Local or regional water supplies? ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 a-c,f-g)NO IMPACT. Due to the nature and small size ofthe project,there should be no impacts to power,natural gas,communication systems,local or regional water quality facilities,storm water drainage facilities,solid waste disposal or water supplies,service or systems as a result of the project. The existing sewer main is located to the east of the project site.The applicant understands that they will be required to extend sewer service to the site,from its location in the street at the intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive. 16 /TI 12 e.) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, The Tachevah Dam and spillway are located directly to the west fo the project site The Tachevah storm drain,which connects the dam and spillway to the city's storm drain network at Avenida Caballeros,runs directly beneath the proposed private street The existence of the storm drain eliminates the need for the applicant to provide for on-site retention of storm water. 13. AESTHETICS Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Create light or glare? ❑ ❑ ❑ 13 a, c)NO IMPACT.The protect will not affect a scenic vista or highway The project,which must adhere to the City lighting ordinance, is not anticipated to create an demonstrable increase in light or glare,Therefore, there should be no impacts to aesthetics as a result of the project. 13 b)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. A portion ofthesite,with slopes ion excess of 10%will require architectural approval forsingle family residences. Plans for each of the four future residences will be subject to the City's Architectural Review process.When plans are submitted, a courtesy notice will be sent to adjoining property owners As described above in Land Use, Section 1, relevant mitigation measures are included. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Disturb archaeological resources? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ c) Affect historical resources? ❑ ❑ d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ❑ ❑ 0 2 e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ❑ ❑ ni 14,a,c-a)NO IMPACT.An Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties Mountain Falls Golf Preserve,CRM Tech, December 17, 1997 was prepared for the larger project.The report indicated that,while a number of sensitive sites were found on the larger golf course project site,none of the historic or cultural resources were discovered within the boundaries of the project area The field assessment did not indicate the presence of any recorded prehistoric or historic resources 14.1b) POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED.Despite the absence of artifacts on the surface ofthe site, the project location has the potential for surface and subsurface artifacts. An on site archeological monitor shall be present during all grading operations.A report shall be submitted by the monitor to the City following observation of grading operations MITIGATION MEASURE: 1. An on-site archeological monitor shall be present during all grading operations.An archeological report shall be submitted by the monitor to the City following observation of grading operations. 15. RECREATION Would the proposal: 17 / YA3/ Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ❑ ❑ S ❑ 15.a-b)LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project includes a segment of the North Lykken Trail,a popular hiking and equestrian trail. Since the project entails future construction of 17 single-family residences, there should not be a significant impact on existing recreational facilities. Therefore,there should not be an impact to recreation as a result of this project. 16. PUBLIC CONTROVERSY a) Is the proposed project or action environmentally controversial in nature or can it reasonably be expected to become controversial upon disclosure to the public? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 16.a). LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project entails the subdivision of 18.23 acres into 17 residential lots. The project is consistent with both the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance upon approval of the Tentative Tract Map. In the judgment of the Department of Planning & Building, the application is not known to be environmentally controversial, nor is it reasonable expected to become controversial upon disclosure to the public. However, the proposed project occurs on a portion of the site of a prior, more controversial project. In order to establish good communication with adjacent property owners and community members, the applicant conducted a neighborhood information meeting ion June 6,2002 Adjacent owners may have concerns about development and construction of the proposed project.The project is consistent with neighboring land use and development patterns. Mitigation regarding future single family residential development on hillside lots includes notice to adjacent property owners,see Section 1,Land Use However,the project has the potential to result in concerns about the subdivision and future single family residences from existing property owners in the area 17, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project 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 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 the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) 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 effects of probable future projects) ❑ ❑ ❑ 18 I �� Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Affect environment(Cultural Resources) ❑ ® ❑ ❑ f) Environmental Consequences - 1 Summary of impacts(Include a table summarizing the potential impacts by alternative As much as possible, quantify the impacts. All of the BLM "critical elements'must be addressed whether or not they are affected by the proposal.Affected elementswill be discussed in further detail in the following section. ❑ ❑ ❑ 17. a) POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED The project will result in the minor loss of marginal has the potential for habitat for the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep as discussed under Section 7 of this environmental assessment Mitigation measures have been provided which reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance. 17 b)-d, f) NO IMPACT This conclusion is based on responses of this environmental assessment discussed previously. 17 e) POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The project has potential to impact archaeological resources A mitigation measure requiring the presence of an archaeological monitor during earth-moving activities reduces this potential impact to a level of insignificance. 18 LISTED BELOW THE PERSON OR PERSONS WHO PREPARED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY: Alex P Meyerhoff, Principal Planner Douglas R Evans, Director of Planning&Building David Barakian,City Engineer Marcus Fuller,Senior Engineer 19. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 1 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 of the mitigation measures described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration ❑ 1 find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project is consistent with the Program EIR on: Z)9w"9�/�-/th September 4, 2002 Douglas RAvans Date Director of Planning &Building ATTACHMENTS: 1. Tentative Map 29886 19 f TfT 33 STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS,Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Eastern Sierra & Inland Deserts Region 4775 Bird Farm Rd. RECEIVED 7 Chino Hills, CA 91709 (909) 597-5043 SEP 2 6 2Q02 PLANNING DIVISION 25 September, 2002 Mr. Doug Evans Director of Planning and Building City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92263 Dear Mr. Evans: The California Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Preserve Estates, Tentative Tract Map 29886, SCH # 2002091034. The project consists of subdividing 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, one conservation lot, and one lot for development as a private street. The project is located on an existing private golf course which will be removed and regraded. The project is located south and west of the intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive, in the City of Palm Springs. It is located on the eastern portion of the former Mountain Falls Golf Course project site, to the east of the Tachevah Dam and spillway. Mitigation Measure 4, under Section 7, Biological Resources should be changed to an 8' fence (or functional equivalent), rather than a 6' fence. The standard bighorn sheep exclusion fence needs to be 8' in height to be effective. The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Questions regarding this letter should be directed to Mr. Eddy Konno, Associate Biologist, at (760) 771-0375. Sincerely, Glenn Black Senior Environmental Scientist Eastern Sierra — Inland Deserts Region cc: Guy Wagner, USFWS, Carlsbad 1 vx3y rc FrCv_ PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 980 EAST TAHOUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92262-0119 (760) 416-6000 FAX (760) 416-6015 WILLIAM E: DIEDRICH, Ph,D.,,,Superin'tendent of: Schools BOARD OF EDUCATION:DONALD T.AIKENS,President—MICHAEL McCABE, Clerk ANDREW GREEN,Member—MEREDY SHOENBERGER,Member— STEWART, Member September 12, 2002 RECEIVED Douglas R. Evans SEP 16 2002 Director of Planning & Building 1 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS �LA NI'4iNG DIVISION P. O. Box 2743 Palm Springs, CA 92263 RE: Tentative Tract Map No. 29886 Dear Douglas: The schools that would serve this subdivision are: Enrollment Capacity Katherine Finchy Elementary 603 707 Raymond Cree Middle School 1151 1329 Palm Springs High School 1821 1875 Utilization at all elementary schools, almost equals capacity. Although the utilization and capacity numbers indicate that there is available utilization, there may be no capacity for a particular grade level. This year, the district has closed specific grade levels (i.e., K, 1 and 2 grades) at many elementary schools. New incoming students may be bussed to alternative schools with available space. The developer fee for residential units is $2.14 per square foot; commercial/industrial is $.034 per square foot. New developments will adversely impact the school district in the K-5 grade levels, at least. Si t Director, Facilities Planning & Development / (64 35" RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A Tentative Tract Map 29886 Preserve Estates 555 North Via Monte Vista (APN 505-130-015, 016), Section 10, T 4 S, R 4 E, S.B.B.M. October 16, 2002 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. 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 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 oremployees to attach,set aside,void or annul, an approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative officers concerning TM 29886. 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 matterfollowing an adverse judgement orfailure to appeal,shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 3. The project is located in an area defined as having an impact on fish and wildlife as defined in Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game Code; therefore a fee of$1,328.00 plus an administrative fee of$50.00 shall be submitted by the applicant in the form of a money order or a cashier's check payable to the Riverside County Clerk prior to Council action on the project. This fee shall be submitted by the City to the County Clerk with the Notice of Determination. Action on this application shall not be final until such fee is paid. I y�� 4. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, conservation easements, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalks,conservation 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 forthe property if required by the City. 5. The mitigation measures of the environmental assessment shall apply. The applicant shall submit a signed agreement that the mitigation measures outlined as part of the negative declaration will be included in the plans prior to Planning Commission consideration of the environmental assessment. 6. Final landscaping, irrigation, exterior lighting, gates and fencing plans and an entry plan shall be submitted for approval by the Department of Planning and Building prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office prior to submittal. 7. 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 Building for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Refer to Chapter 8.60 of the Municipal Code for specific requirements. 8. 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. 9. 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. The plan shall include the elimination of all topographic features associated with the former golf course. All lakes, berms, tees and greens shall be removed. The plan shall include pad and finish floor elevations at or below those of the adjacent residences to the north. 10. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks - 3' wide and 6" deep. The irrigation system shall be field tested prior to final approval of the project. Section 14.24.020 of the Municipal Code prohibits nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways or gutters. 11. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs Engineering specifications. (1037 12. The applicant, prior to Final Tract Map approval, shall submit a draft declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC&R's") to the Director of Planning and Building for approval in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 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, and the establishment of a permanent conservation easement over lots#17 and 18. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Springs, a deposit in the amount of $2000, for the review of the CC&R's by the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall include project design guidelines, landscape requirements, slope restoration, building height standards,walls, building materials and require multi-level homes conforming to existing topography. The CC&R's shall include a provision requiring that the developer construct a fence orwall at least 6(six)feet high around the perimeter of the subdivision for the purpose of keeping bighorn sheep out of the area of development and to prohibit residents from access to the conservation lot or easement areas. Should the six foot fence prove ineffective at excluding sheep,the developer shall install an additional 2' of iron fence, for a total of 8' of fence. 13. 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. 14. 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 & Building prior to the issuance of building permits for future single family residences and entry way improvements. Manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior and landscape 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. No lighting of the hillside is permitted. 15. Priorto the issuance of grading permits, locations of all utility service, including but not limited to telephone, electrical boxes, transformers etc., must be indicated on the grading plans and must be completely located in a below ground vault. 16. An Administrative Minor Modification shall be granted for Lot # 2 (substandard lot area), Lot#15 (substandard lot width) and Lot # 17 (substandard lot width) prior to approval of a final map. 17. Lots#11-17 shall be subject to Architectural Approval(Section 94.04)and the Hillside Development Ordinance (93.13). 18 The applicant shall construct a decorative masonry wall along the entire north property line. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM 19. A preliminary grading plan and soils report shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Contour and terrace grading shall be required for development of lots 11 - 17. Split level pads and yards shall be required which step development and create grade transitions. The soils report prepared with the grading plan shall address the concerns stated in the DTSC letter dated October 1, 2002. / (IAV 20. A courtesy notice shall be provided to properties adjacent to lots# 11-17, with each single family residence application. 21. Prior to approval of final map pad elevations for lots 1-13 shall be established and approved by the Director of Planning and Zoning and the Director of Public Works. 22, Residences on lots#1-9 shall be limited to a single story, maximum height of 18'. 23. The developer shall record building limit lines on Lots #10-16 and 18 and shall dedicate and record of conservation easements on Lots#10 and#18.These building limit lines limit the area of construction and are intended to limit the development of the parcels to the downslope areas. No structures, landscape, lighting,waterfeatures or any other type of construction would be allowed past these building limit lines. 24. For lots # 1-9, the project shall include minimum slopes of 0.5% for drainage for individual lot grading. Slopes in excess of 0.5% shall be prohibited for the purposes of site drainage and pad development 25. The developer and future owners will be prohibited from planting or constructing any other improvements on the hillside areas above the building limit lines or slope protection boundary. 26. All landscape, golf course improvements and construction debris on site shall be excavated, removed and replaced with compacted fill. 27. The minimum seismic design of all future residences shall comply with the Uniform Building Code. 28. All future residences shall employ engineered design and earthquake resistant construction. 29. The developer shall submit a precise grading plan and soils report for each individual lot as part of the architectural approval or building permit process. 30. For lots#10-16,the Director of Planning and Zoning and City Engineer shall approve all individual grading plans and building pad locations. 31. The developer shall prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and revise the SWPPP as necessary as construction conditions change. 32. Grading operations shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 MPH per the PM10 SIP. 33. Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for off-peak hours and shall minimize construction of through traffic lanes. 34. The developer shall construct an intersection of the private streetwith Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive, with curb returns, cross gutter, access ramps and removal and relocation of existing improvements. 35. The developer shall provide a stop sign to control exiting site traffic. Clear unobstructed sight clearances shall be provided at the driveway. IV043Y 36. Entry m on unnentation that does not interfere with sight distance or turning movements shall be incorporated in the project entry. Landscaping shall be provided that is appropriate to the entry but will not interfere with sight distances or turning movement operations.The final design forthe project entrance ands corresponding entry lighting shall be reviewed by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 37. If blasting is determined to be necessary as part of the excavation operation for any of the future residences on the property, the timing of such a procedure shall be planned with the assistance of a biologist. If the biologist determines that the location and extent of blasting is likely to affect sheep lambing, breeding, or watering, blasting should be done during a period when the auditory impacts will be negligible. A biological monitor may also be necessary prior to and during blasting events to halt blasting immediately if sheep are present in the area. While the biologist will determine the final implementation techniques, it is anticipated that the biologist will be positioned at the higher elevations of the site equipped with a spotting scope and radio and would conduct visual surveillance before and during blasting. 38. Any additional landscaping or landscape alteration outside of fenced areas shall consist of plant species that are native to the immediate area. No oleanders shall be planted on the project perimeter or within areas open to undeveloped areas, as they have been implicated in Peninsular Bighorn Sheep deaths through poisoning. 39. The final design of any perimeter fencing or walls shall be reviewed by the Planning and Building Departments as part of the Architectural Review process for each residence within the subdivision.The fencing shall be of a height, location, and design as to not create a "trap" for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep that could potentially wander to the fringe of the subdivision. 40. The developershall be responsible for compliance with the State Endangered Species Act and Federal Endangered Species Act prior to the issuance of grading permits, if deemed necessary by the applicable resource agencies. 41. Lot #18 shall have a conservation easement recorded which prohibits any and all development of the property, including structures, landscaping, lighting and recreational use,with the exception of the North Lykken Trail.A trail easement for the North Lykken Trail shall be noted in the conservation easement. The conservation easement shall be granted in favor of the City of Palm Springs. Lot#18 shall also be dedicated to the City of Palm Springs. 42. Lot #10 shall have a conservation easement recorded which prohibits any and all development of the property, including structures, landscaping, lighting and recreational use,with the exception of the North Lykken Trail.A trail easement for the North Lykken Trail shall be noted in the conservation easement. The conservation easement shall be granted in favor of the City of Palm Springs. 43. Lots#11-16 shall have conservation easements recorded for all areas above the no- build line. 44. The developer shall prepare and cause to be recorded CC&R's which shall address conservation easements and no build restrictions. The no build restrictions shall include provisions against the construction of structures, trails, pools, landscaping, and hillside lighting, etc. is YO 45. The developer shall design ands construct all water mains, fire hydrants and on-site circulation in accordance with City of Palm Springs Fire Department rules and regulations prior to the issuance of building permits. 46. The developer shall create and implement , with consultation and approval from the City of Palm Springs Fire Department, a fuel modification plan which provides fire safety buffer treatments between natural and open space and planned buildings, which provided for long term maintenance of the buffer, prior to issuance of occupancy permits. Maintenance under the plans shall continue for the life of the project. 47. The construction of this project shall utilize, to the extent feasible, non-combustible exterior building materials, and fire resistant ornamental vegetation, subject to Fire Department approval prior to issuance of building permits. 48. An on-site archeological monitor shall be present during all grading operations. An archeological reportshall besubmitted bythe monitortothe Cityfollowing observation of grading operations. In addition to an archeological monitor, a Native American cultural resource monitor be present during all phases of grading. POLICE DEPARTMENT: 49. Developer shall comply with Section 11 of Chapter 8.04 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES: 50. The location of the trash enclosure is acceptable subject to approved construction details approved by the Director of Building and Safety consistent with approved City details. ENGINEERING The Engineering Department recommends that if this application is approved, such approval is subject to the following conditions being completed in compliance with City standards and ordinances: 51. The developer shall submit a final soils report and hydrology study with recommendations to the City Engineer with the first submittal of a grading plan. 52. Dedicate an easement for sewer and public utility purposes with right of ingress and egress over the private street. The easement shall be the width of the travel way from back of curb to back of curb. Provide the City with Key or card (whatever access mechanism is used) for access to the development for sewer maintenance purposes. 53. The developer shall comply with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District requirements placed on this project, and approved by the City Engineer. � y*41� Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. STREETS 54. Any improvements within the street right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. 55. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the Engineering Department. The plan(s) shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Minimum submittal shall include the following, IF applicable: A. Copy of signed Conditions of Approval from Planning Department. B. All agreements and improvement plans approved by City Engineer, IF applicable. C. Proof of processing dedications of right-of-way, easements, encroachment agreements/licenses, covenants, reimbursement agreements, etc. required by these conditions. VIA MONTE VISTA 56. The existing fire hydrant shall be relocated out of the main entry and a blue marker shall be placed in the street opposite the relocated fire hydrant, per Fire Department standards. 57. " Construct a minimum 5 foot wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. 58. Developer shall construct an intersection of the Private Street with Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive, complete with curb returns, cross-gutter, access ramps, and removals and relocation of existing improvements. The intersection design shall be shown on the Street Improvement Plans for the Private Street and be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. The maintenance driveway along the east property line shall be redesigned to intersect with the private street. 59. All broken or off grade CURB, GUTTER AND AC PAVEMENT shall be repaired or replaced. Indicates conditions to be deferred by covenant. PRIVATE STREET 60. All centerline radii shall be a minimum of 130 feet. 61. The right-of-way width of the private street shall be 37 feet. I VA Val 62. Construct a Type B-1 curb and gutter, or other curb configuration (wedge curb) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, 18 feet both sides of centerline along the portions of the street with on-street parking and 12 feet both sides of centerline along the portions of the street with no on-street parking per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. 63. Deleted. 64. Construct minimum 10 wide driveway approaches at approved locations to each lot, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201. 65. See Condition No. 83 for gated entrance requirements for Main Entries that are proposed to be gated. 66. The curb radius throughout the cul-de-sac bulb shall be a minimum of 43 feet. 67. Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 2-1/2 inch asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, OR equal, from edge of proposed gutter to edge of proposed gutter along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110. The pavement section shall be designed, using "R" values, by a licensed Soils Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. SANITARY SEWER 68. Connect all sanitary facilities to the City sewer system. Lateral shall not be connected at manhole. 69. Developer shall construct an 8 inch sewer main across the entire PRIVATE STREET frontage and connect to the existing sewer system manhole at the intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive. 70. All sewer mains constructed by the developer and to become part of the City sewer system shall be televised by the developer prior to acceptance of said lines. 71. Submit sewer improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the Engineering Department. The plan(s) shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Minimum submittal shall include the following: A. Copy of signed Conditions of Approval from Planning Department. B. Proof of processing dedications of right-of-way, easements, encroachment agreements/licenses, covenants, reimbursement agreements, etc. required by these conditions. C. Sewer Study/Report, IF required by these conditions. 72. Stamp an "S" on the top of curb where all laterals cross to each lot. VA Y3 GRADING 73. A copy of a Title Report prepared/updated within the past 3 months and copies of record documents shall be submitted to the City Engineer with the first submittal of the Grading Plan. 74. Submit a Grading Plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer to the Engineering Department for plan check. A PM 10 (dust control) Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division prior to approval of the grading plan. The Grading Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Minimum submittal includes the following: A. Copy of signed Conditions of Approval from Planning Department. B. Copy of Site Plan stamped approved and signed by the Planning Department. C. Copy of Title Report prepared/updated within past 3 months. D. Copy of Soils Report, E. Copy of Hydrology Study/Report. F. Copy of the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board (Phone No. 916 657-0687) to the City Engineer prior to issuance of the grading permit. 75. 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. 76. Developer shall obtain a General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board (Phone No. (916)-657-0687) and provide a copy of same, when executed, to the City Engineer prior to issuance of the grading permit. 77. 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. 78. A soils report prepared by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer shall be required for and incorporated as an integral part of the grading plan for the proposed site. A copy of the soils report shall be submitted to the Building Department and to the Engineering Department along with plans, calculations and other information subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the grading permit. VA VV The previous Soils Report required that proposed buildings be constructed a minimum of 30 feet from the toe of steep, rocky slopes. A catchment area shall be constructed between the toe of slope and buildings. The height and width of the retention walls shall be determined by the Soils Report and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. An alternate design for the catchment area may be proposed by a Geotechnical Engineer subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. If any changes are to be made to the mitigation measures of the previous report, said report shall be revised to mitigate the new site conditions. 79. Contact the Building Department to get information regarding the preparation of the PM10 (dust control) Plan requirements. 80. 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 import or 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 prior to 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 81. The developer shall accept all stormwater runoff passing through and falling onto the site and conduct this runoff to an approved drainage structure (if available). On-site retention/detention or other facilities approved by the City Engineer shall be required if off-site drainage structures are unavailable or cannot contain the increased stormwater runoff generated by the development of the site. Provide a hydrology study to determine if the increased stormwater runoff due to development of the site exceeds the capacity of offsite drainage structures (if any exist), and to determine required stromwater runoff mitigation measures for this project. 82. The project is subject to flood control and drainage implementation fees and/or construction of drainage facilities (Line 14) according to the approved Master Plan of Flood Control and Drainage. Validated costs incurred by the developer for design and construction of storm and/or drainage improvements adjacent to such development as shown in said Master Plan shall be credited toward the drainage fee otherwise due or in the event such cost exceeds the fee otherwise due, the City will enter into a reimbursement agreement with developer to reimburse him for such excess costs from drainage fees collected from other development. The acreage drainage fee at the present time is $9.212.00 per acre per Resolution No. 15189. This condition shall be complied with, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to filing any final map or issuance of the building permit. ON-SITE 83. The following requirements for a gated entry shall be met to provide adequate setbacks and turning movements for vehicles entering the primary parking facilities of this project: A. Provide a minimum 50 foot setback to the access gate control mechanism. IM19T B. Provide a turnaround after the mechanism for vehicles unable to enter the project. C. Security gates shall be a minimum of 15 feet clear width in each direction. GENERAL 84. Any utility cuts in the existing off-site pavement made by this development shall receive trench replacement pavement to match existing pavement plus one additional inch. See City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115. Pavement shall be restored to a smooth rideable surface. 85. All existing and proposed utility lines that are less than 35 kV on/or adjacent to this project shall be undergrounded. The location and size of the existing overhead facilities shall be provided to the Engineering Department along with written confirmation from the involved utility company(s) that the required deposit to underground the facility(s) has been paid, prior to issuance of a grading permit. All undergrounding of utilities shall be completed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy requested for this project. 86. All proposed utility lines (service drops) on/or adjacent to this project shall be undergrounded prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 87. 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. The approved original grading/street plans shall be as-built and returned to the City of Palm Springs Engineering Department prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy requested for this project. 88. The developer is advised to contact all utility purveyors for detailed requirements for this project at the earliest possible date. 89. The developer shall take every precaution needed to "Protect -in-Place" any existing Whitewater Mutual Water Company water line(s) that may traverse his project. 90. Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any driveway which does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code 93.02.00 D. 91. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed per City of Palm Springs Engineering specifications. MAP 92. 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 Department, 93. The Final Map shall be prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor or qualified Civil Engineer and submitted to the Engineering Department for review. Submittal shall be made prior to issuance of grading or building permits. / YA 94. A reciprocal access easement agreement between Lot 15, Lot 16 and Lot 17 shall be indicated on the Final Map, or recorded as a separate document prior to issuance of grading or building permits. TRAFFIC 95. The developer shall provide a minimum of 48 inches of sidewalk clearance around all street furniture, fire hydrants and other above-ground facilities for handicap accessibility. The developer shall provide same through dedication of additional right-of-way and widening of the sidewalk or shall be responsible for the relocation of all existing traffic signal/safety light poles, conduit, pull boxes and all appurtenances located on the VIA MONTE VISTA frontage of the subject property. 96. Street name signs shall be required at each intersection in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 622 and 623. 97. A 30 inch "STOP" sign and standard "STOP BAR" and "STOP LEGEND" shall be installed per City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing Nos. 620-625 at the following locations: Via Monte Vista and Private Street Crescent Drive and Via Monte Vista The "STOP" sign at the northeast corner of Crescent Drive and Via Monte Vista shall include a warning sign indicating that cross traffic on Via Monte Vista does not stop. 98. The developer shall provide and install a 9,500 lumen high pressure sodium vapor safety street light with glare shield on a marbelite pole on the NORTHEAST corner of CRESCENT DRIVE and VIA MONTE VISTA with the mast arm over VIA MONTE VISTA. The developer shall coordinate with Southern California Edison for required permits and work orders necessary to provide electrical service to the street light. As an alternative, other decorative landscape and entryway lighting which adequately illuminates the project entry may be considered. 99. 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. 100. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee based on the RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ITE Code B land use. FIRE 101. Access During Construction: Access for fire fighting equipment shall be provided to the immediate job site at the start of construction and maintained until all construction is complete. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 14'6". Fire department access roads shall have an all weather driving surface and support a minimum weight of 67,500 lbs. (Sec. 902 CFC) / YAV7 102. Fire Apparatus Access Plans: Plans for fire apparatus access road shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to construction. Plans shall include certification from a Registered Professional Engineer stating the roads are of all weather construction and capable of supporting fire apparatus weighing 67,500 lbs. G.V.W. (901.2.2.1 CF). 103. Water Systems and Hydrants: Where underground water mains are to be provided, they shall be installed, completed, and in service with fire hydrants or standpipes (or combinations thereof located as directed by the fire department) not later than the time when combustible materials are delivered to the construction site. (Sec. 903 CFC) 104. Residential Fire Hydrants: Residential fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with DWA specification and standards. No landscape planting, walls or fencing are permitted within three (3) feet of fire hydrants, except ground cover plantings. 105. Site Plan: Provide the fire department with two (2) copies of an approved site plan. Approved locations for fire hydrants will be marked on this site plan, with one (1) copy being returned to the applicant. The second copy will be retained by the fire department. 106. Fire Hydrant Systems: Following fire department selection of hydrant locations, plans and specifications for fire hydrant systems shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to construction. (901.2.2.2) 107. Building or Complex Gate Locking Devices: Gate(s) shall be equipped with a KNOX key switch device or key box. Contact the fire department for a KNOX application form. 108. Residential Smoke Detector Installation: Provide residential smoke detectors. Detectors shall receive their primary power from the building wiring and shall be equipped with a battery backup. (310.9.1.3 CBC) 109. Site Fire Protection: Provide a garden hose or hoses on construction site equipped with an adjustable spray nozzle capable of reaching all combustible construction. 110. Premises Identification: Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. 111. Fire Department Access Road Dimensions: Provide a minimum of 20 feet unobstructed width. If parking on access road is desired, provide an eight (8) foot parking lane with opposing curb marked red with appropriate signage for a total of 28 feet in width. Provide an additional eight (8) feet for parking on both sides of access road for a total of 36 feet width. 112. Vertical Fire Apparatus Clearances: Palm Springs fire apparatus require an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than14'6". I ` A 46 113. Fire Flow Determination: Provide information on the size of the proposed buildings and type of construction. This is necessary to determine fire flow requirements. All residences located at toe of slope will require automatic fire sprinklers. All other residences may be required to have automatic sprinklers, depending on size and type of construction. 114. Distance From Water Supply: It appears that portions of buildings to be constructed on several lots could be more than 150 feet from a water supply on a public street. This may require the construction of additional on-site fire protection facilities. (903.2 CFC) 1 gAqg 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 Tentative Parcel Map 29886, to subdivide 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, located southwest of the corner of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive, Preserve Golf Company, LLC, was mailed to each and every person set forth on the attached list on the 27th day of September, 2002. A copy of said Notice is attached hereto. Said mailing was completed by placing a copy of said Notice in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 27th day of September, 2002. a PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL Tentative Tract Map 29886 Subdivide 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0,34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences, located southwest of the corner of the intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive. Section 10, Zone R-1-13, 0-20. Name of Applicant: John L. Sanborn Property Owner: Preserve Golf Company, LLC. 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 16, 2002. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an application for a tentative tract map for single family residential purposes. The project does not include any golf course facilities. The proposed project is the subdivision of 18,23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences. Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. At this meeting, the City Council is expected to take action on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed map, Initial Study and related documents are available for public review daily, between 8 am and 5 pm at the City of Palm Springs in the Planning and Zoning Department, located at 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. If any individual or group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearings described in this notice or in written correspondence at or prior to the Council meeting. Notice of Public Hearing is being sent to all property owners within four hundred (400) feet of the subject property An opportunity will be given at said hearings for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner, Department of Planning & Zoning, (760) 323-8245. Patricia Sanders City Clerk VICINITY MAP I . CRESCENT DR 1 3i I a CHINO.pR. I I ALEJO RD SI TE O'DONNELL GOLF COURSE • AMADO TAHOUITZ CANYON DR. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO. Tentative Tract Map 29886 DESCRIPTION Name ofA Applicant: John L. Sanborn Subdivide 1823 acres of land into 17 single family residential Pp lots,ranging in size from 0.34 to 5 18 acres in area,one Property Owner: Preserve Golf Company, LLC, conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street,for future development as single Family residences. Section 10,Zone R-1-13,0-20 09/26/2002 11:42 FAX 760 322 8332 Palm SprinBS City Clerk Z 661 y: TX REPORT x.mm FN OK 1405 TEL 94169690 ID 09/26 11:41 00'56 3 RESULT OK e� � AIh� NCity of Palm Springs Office of the Clry Clerk3200TihquirtGnyonWy • P.IsnSprings,r.rrurnia 42262 SC f F0 RN\ TEL(7607 323.8204 •1=i(760)W-027 OUR VAX NO. (760) 322-8332 DATE: TIME: fJ j;j T0: FAX i NAME: FIRM: FROM : NAME; DEPT: PH # 3A3 -S'z--6 MESSAGE r � g Smooth Feed SheetsTM nn17,7 Use template for 51600 505-144-003 505-145-006 505-144-008 TALLAHAN MR JAMES O RICHARDSON ARVON & DELORES AGREN 2201 16T" AVENUE EAST PO BOX 22582 3010 WEST GARFIELD STREET SEATTLE WA 98112 SEATTLE WA 98122 SEATTLE WA 98199 MR JOHN SANBORN SAMBORN INC PRESERVE GOLF COMPANY RIVERSIDE CNTY FLOOD CONTROL SUITE C 11839 SORRENTO VALLEY ROAD 1995 MARKET STREET 1227 SOUTH GENE AUTRY TRAIL SAN DIEGO CA 92121 RIVERSIDE CA 92501 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 Applicants are: John Sanborn Following 8 are members of the MR BOB SEALE Preserve Golf Company Neighborhood Coalition 280 CAMINO SUR PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 MS CHRISTINE HAMMOND MR JOHN HUNTER MR PHILIP TEDESCO 1155 SOUTH CAMINO REAL PO BOX 2824 1303 WEST PRIMAVERA DRIVE PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 MR FRANK TYSEN ` MR TIM HOHMEIER CASA CODY MR BOB WEITHORN 1387 CALLE DE MARIA 175 SOUTH CAHUILLA ROAD 261 SOUTH BELARDO ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 922264 MS JANE SMITH 928 AVENIDA PALMAS PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 �� AVERYo Address Labels I r "ITM W,096S Jasel 191n S o L slagej ssaippV ®AU3A V Qj/ 505-143-008 505-144-001 505-144-002 Ysaac & Cira Ross Robert L Brackey Ann & Lois Allen 616 N High Rd 615 N Via Monte Vista 665 N Via Monte Vista Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-144-004 505-144-005 505-144-007 Patricia M Riccio Sidney S Bryan Arnold D & Audrey Berk 781 N Via Monte Vista 788 N Dry Falls Rd 666 N Dry Falls Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-145-001 505-145-005 505-145-007 Marvin L & Phyllis Bryan George C & Ivan Thomson Susan B Dale 925 W Crescent Dr 769 W Crescent Dr 707 W Crescent Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-291-001 505-291-002 505-291-004 Molly M Christal Joseph E & Lisa Luisi June L Linthicum 780 N Via Monte Vista 696 N Via Monte Vista 500 W Crescent Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-291-005 505-294-002 505-311-008 Carol J Scarioni David L Schneider Robert R & Julie Finegan 701 N Patencio Rd 465 W Merito Pl 588 N Patencio Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-312-004 505-312-008 505-143-0D3 Kenneth B Shellan O Donnell Golf Club Charles R Record 591 N Patencio Rd 301 N Belardo Rd 733 N Dry Falls Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-292-002 513- 60-001 513-070-012 Albert T & Dorothy Milauskas City Palm Springs Robert W & Patricia Greer PO Box 2809 PO B 743 2638 S Kings Rd E Palm Springs, CA 92263 Pal Spr' gs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92264 505-312-012 505-142-004 505-294-001 Joan E Davis Don A Lupinetti Charles & Susan Schridde PO Box 1299 23852 Bothnia Bay 30662 Hunt Club Dr j Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Dana Point, CA 92629 San Juan Cap, CA 92675 505-143-005 505-142-006 505-142-001 Margaret Forster Margaret A Forster Mary T Delgado 428 Liberty St 359 Cumberland St PO Box 63700 San Francisco, CA 94114 San Francisco, CA 94114 San Francisco, CA 94163 505-144-006 505-142-007 505-291-003 Bonds Scott W Carl H Hitchner William T Beeks 900 Kearney St 8 Laurina Rd 1401 E Harrison St El Cerrito, CA 94530 Mill Valley, CA 94941 Seattle, WA 98112 . 09LS iol aleldwal asn "q/� -i 9r'"411rniir N1j0965 laseq 9 -4� slagej ssa1ppV @AU3AV Qj/ 505-312-002 505-3 -005 50 312-01 Harold Matzner Harold atzner Harol tzner 50 Eisenhower Dr 50 Eise wer Dr 50 Ei ower Dr Paramus, NJ 07652 Param s, N 07652 Par us, 07652 505-145-008 505-145-003 505-312-010 William G Butler Eugene J Potente Hnm Investments Inc PO Box 1430 914 60Th St PO Box 97797 Olivebridge, NY 12461 Kenosha, WI 53140 Las Vegas, NV 89193 505-294-003 505-141-002 505-145-004 Lily Tomlin Robert ,R & Alice Silvers Roy C & Fumiko Machida PO Box 27700 243 S Rockingham Ave 636 Hanley Ave Las Angeles, CA 90027 Los Angeles, CA 90049 Los Angeles, CA 90049 505-292-003 505-141-001 505-291-006 Ronald Wilson Dorothy M Lail Beverly E Adair 1235 Tower Rd 1610 Carla Rdg 1268 Lago Vista Dr Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 505-292-001 505-291-007 505-145-002 Gerald & Joanna Greenberg Adah Duncan Jack & Sherry Sidney 149 S Rodeo Dr 2820 The Strand 112 20Th St Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 505-145-009 505-130-010 505-312-007 Daisy P Pascher Preserve Golf Co Security 1234 Richard Pl 550 W B St 400 925 B St F15 Glendale, CA 51206 San Diego, CA 92101 San Diego, CA 92101 505-130-015 505-141-003 505-141-004 Preserve Golf Co Patrick & Maria Delia I V Michaels 11975 El Camino Real 201 727 N Rose Ave 783 N Rose Ave San Diego, CA 92130 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-142-002 505-142-003 505-142-005 Kellie Greene Helen Ruvelas *M* Nathan W Heibeck 673 N High Rd 729 N High Rd 780 N Rose Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-142-008 505-143-001 505-143-002 Lobue Michael J Volpe Joe W & Shirley Hammer 620 N Rose Ave 611 N Dry Falls Rd 677 N Dry Falls Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-143-004 505-143-006 505-143-007 Keith G & Desley Mccormick John T & Ann Heavey Wilson E Haas *M* 787 N Dry Falls Rd 722 N High Rd 644 N High Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 --091S 10}a;eldwo4 ash uir�ur- PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) No.2433 CITY nc PALM "RINGS NOTICE Or PUBLIC HEARINC PLANNYNG COMMISSION Tentative Tract Map 29886 Subdivide 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential STATE OF CALIFORNIA lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5,18 __ __ ___ __ - - - --- acres in area, one conservation lot - County mRiverside - - and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences, located southwest of the corner of the Intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Orive Section 10, Zone 11-1-13, 0-20 Name of Applicant: John L. Sanborn Property Owner: Preserve Golf Company, LLC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning commission of the City of from Springs, cater- ma, will hold a pubbc hearing at its meeting of I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of October 9,2002,The Planning commission meet- begins at 1.30 p Ill., (Public Hearings begin at the County aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen NO pm)in the City council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquhz Canyon Way, Palm Spnngs, years,and not a party to or interested in the California. above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a The purpose of the hearing is to consider an ap- printeC of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING pheatron for a tentative tract map far single family residential purposes.The project does not include COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, any golf course facilities. printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, The proposed project is the subdivision of 1a23 acres of land into 17 single family residential Tots, County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been ranging in size from 0.34 to 5 18 acres In area, one conservation-lot ami IedzJoj_fordsvel� adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the opment as a private street, for future develop, Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of ment as single family residences. California all the date of March 24, 1988.Case VICINITY MAP Number 191236;that the notice,of which the , annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller than nor pariel,has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the fallowing dates,to wit: September Bit' ----------------------------_----------------------------- ----------------------___________________ All in the year 2002 I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the crrr or=n�m sanrnos foregoing is true and correct. Ste Pursuant to Section 15063 of the Cahfomia Enw- Dated at Palm Springs,California this--------------clay r-onmental Quality Act, a Mitigated Negative Dec- laration has been prepared. At this meeting, the September Planning Commission is expected to make a rec- ommendation on the proposed Mitigated Negative of_______________________________________2002 Declaration The proposed map, Initial Study and related doc- /,Irf)'/, �F _ umerns are available for public review daily, be- '��(`I`. tween 6 am and 5m at the City of Palm Springs in the Planning and Zcnln Department, located ---------------� - at 3200 l"ahyurtz Canyon ay Signature IF any [ndiviclua[or group challenges the action in court, issues raised mayy be limbed to only those issues raised at the im he hearings described in this notice or in written correspondence at or pro- orto the Commission meeting. Notice of Public Hearing is bean?sent to all prop- erty owners within foul hundred Off) feet of the subject property An opportunity will be given at said hearings far all interested persons to be heard Questions regarding this case may be di- rected to Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planna, Do- partment of Planning &Zoning, 760)323-8245 ' Planning R.Evans Director of and Zoning �63r27g3. so, ka 2z, - Pp & rhv gOZ 0 o e C Ya n e 9 t Las V9 s �� 8g.z 9,3 SOS e22p M-002 4y `_%!,%'i(;TPalm N Via hr1sta SAri MOnte2 i :, 8s C ��Sta o s 505-142-007 n Carl H Hitchner 8 Laurina Rd Mill Valley, CA 94941 Proof of Publication In Newspaper STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside Laura Reyes says: 1. I am a citizen of the United States, a - — -- — resident of the City of Indio, County of Riverside, State of California, and over NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING the age of 18 years. CITY COUNCIL 2. 1 am the Office & Production Manager Tentativento 1729EB6 g Subtlrvitle 1623 acres of lanndd into 1]single family residential of The Public Record, a newspaper of lots,ranging in size Ircm 0.34 to 5.19 acres in area,one con- general circulation printed and published in arms[,cf lot and one letter lot for development Tamil as a encase M Y s[reeL for Tulare development as single lamely residences, the City of Palm Springs, County of located southwest of the comer of the intersection of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive. Riverside, State of California. Said The Section 10,Zone R-1-B,0-20 Public Record is a newspaper of general BaneOwner.ticeservearrt John Sanborn newspaper Properly Owner.Preserve Golf Company,LLC circulation as that term is defined in NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Ccuncil of Palm Government Code section 6000 its Springs,16,20 ,wilThe cisold a public hearing at Its meeting of October California 2002.The City public raringmeetin begins at 7:0 f status as such having been established p.m, in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E. by judicial decree of the Superior Court of ThepuzCanoftWhearinmGtocon Californiarp The eve tract of the hearing m to consider an application for a the State of California in and for the project map for eagle family residential purposes The II project does not include any golf course facilities. County of Riverside in Proceeding No. Th.proposad project is the subdimsmn of 1623 acres of land Indio 49271, dated March 31, 1987, into 1]single nfamilyarea residential Ions,ranging In sizone from 0.34 to 5.17 acres In area,one censl lots, a IOI and one letter lot far entered in Judgment Book No. 129, development as a private street,[Or future development assIn- page 355, on March 31, 1987. gle family residences Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental 3. The Public Record is a newspaper of Quality Act, i Mitigated Negative CounciDeclarl has been pre- take pared. At This meeting,the Gary CouncJ is expected to lake general circulation ascertained and action on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. established in the City of Palm Springs in The proposed map,InitialStudy and related docuand par at to available proposed for public review daily,u between 6 ed and 5 pm at the the County of Riverside, State of City of Palm Springs In the Planning and Zoning Department, located at 3200 Tahqultz Canyon Way. California, Case No. RIC 358286, Filed If any individual or group challenges the action in court,Issues June 8, 2001. raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearings described in this notice or In written correspondence 4. The notice, of which the annexed is a at or prior to the Council meeting. Notice of Public Hearing is being sent to all property owners true printed copy was published in the within four hundred(400)feet of the subject property.Anopper- newspaper on the following publication lenity will be given at said hearings for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to date ! s to wit: Alex MeyerhoR,Principal Planner, Department of Planning& October 1, 2002 Zoning,(760)323-8245. /a/Patricia Sanders City Clerk I certify under penalty of perjury that the October 1,2002 above is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 1st VICINITY MAP day of October, 2002. ON>R 5YTE aa°i mw..r a a Reyes 'ice & Produc n anager 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 5th day of September, 2002, 1 served the within (NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING)on PLANNING COMMISSION TM 29886 to consider an application fora tentative tract map for single family residential purposes. The project does not include any golf course facilities. The proposed project is the subdivision of 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot, and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences, Section 10, Zone R-1-13, 0-20 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 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. �—�oreo D. Moffett Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 5'h day of September, 2002. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION Tentative Tract Map 29886 Subdivide 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots, ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences. Section 10, Zone R-1-13, 0-20. Name of Applicant: John L. Sanborn Property Owner: Presence Golf Company, LLC. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of October 9, 2002. The Planning Commission meeting begins at 1:30 p.m., (Public Hearings begin at 2:00 pm) in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an application for a tentative tract map for single family residential purposes. The project does not include any golf course facilities. The proposed project is the subdivision of 18.23 acres of land into 17 single family residential lots„ ranging in size from 0.34 to 5.18 acres in area, one conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street, for future development as single family residences.. Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. At this meeting, the Planning Commission is expected to make a recommendation on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed map, Initial Study and related documents are available for public review daily, between 8 am and 5 pm at the City of Palm Springs in the Planning and Building Department, located at 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. If any individual or group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearings described in this notice or in written correspondence at or prior to the Commission meeting. Notice of Public Hearing is being sent to all property owners within four hundred (400) feet of the subject property.An opportunity will be given at said hearings for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner, Department of Planning & Building, (760) 323-8245. Douglas VEvans Director of Planning and Zoning VI CINI TY MAP CRESCENT DR. a 9 CHINO.pR. I I ALEJO RD SITE O'DONNELL GOLF COURSE A►AADO � CL g 0 TAHOUITZ CANYON DR. s. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO. Tentative Tract Map 29886 DESCRIPTION Name of Applicant: John L. Sanborn Subdivide 1823 acres of land into 17 single family residential pp lots,ranging in else from 0 34 to 5.18 acres in area,one Property Owner. Preserve Golf Company, LLC. conservation lot and one letter lot for development as a private street,for future development as single family residences Section 10,Zone R-1-13,0-20 Public Hearing Notices Notification Information Case No. �� Fy4f44 i � Applicant Name: F,�E'�"�� . �Ar'! T]drvD '��"� �"''= �'� �`� � (.L C. Address: Z 7 �, � v+f' 5 �c c F s-��"(�S Project Location & Description: ". Ck1�� hszd l t u � /7 5 r1Q,,. �+.�✓ I !( d4 ! Yi-.c11�t.�.4 V 7f�5�7'f� � �r �.� x- le� r+� Assigned Planner: ' i M-ps 0 Labels Prepared by Certification to _ City Clerk Date: _ ��-- s Property Owners/Groups/ Date Number Organizations Notices Notices Mailed Mailed Applicant/Sponsors p '" 1 Property Owners Land Owner (master lessor) Master Lessor (sub-lessor) Sub-lessee (unit owner) , Indian Land Owners _-- �- Neighborhood Coalition ®2,— Homeowners Association --�— —� ONIPP TOTAL NUMBER MAILED �� °505-144-003 et 05-145-006 505-144-008 Tallahan James O Richardson Arvon & Dolores Agren 2201 16Th Ave E PO Box 22582 3010 W Garfield St Seattle, WA 98112 Seattle, WA 98122 Seattle, WA 98199 Sanborn A/E, Inc Preserve Golf Company *** 63 Printed *** 1227 S . Gene Autry Trl C 11839 Sorrento Valley RD Palm Springs, CA 92264 San Diego, CA 92121 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD (/ U 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE CA 92501 f505-312-002 �505-312-005 �5-312-013 Harold Matzner Harold B Matzner Harold Matzner 50 Eisenhower Dr 50 Eisenhower Dr 50 Eisenhower Dr Paramus, NJ 07652 Paramus, NJ 07652 Paramus, NJ 07652 I505-145-008 >505-145-003 :/505-312-010 William G Butler Eugene J Potente Hnm Investments Inc PO Box 1430 914 60Th St PO Box 97797 yOlivebridge, NY 12461 Kenosha, WI 53140 Las Vegas, NV 89193 % S05-294-003 1505-141-002 ✓505-145-004 Lily Tomlin Robert R & Alice Silvers Roy C & Fumiko Machida PO Box 27700 243 S Rockingham Ave 636 Hanley Ave Los Angeles, CA 90027 Los Angeles, CA 90049 Los Angeles, CA 90049 r. ✓505-292-003 ,r'S 05-141-001 ` ;505-291-006 Ronald Wilson Dorothy M Lail Beverly E Adair 1235 Tower Rd 1610 Carla Rdg 1288 Lago Vista Dr Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 '4'505-292-001 , /505-291-007 „505-145-002 Gerald & Joanna Greenberg Adah Duncan Jack & Sherry Sidney 149 S Rodeo Dr 2820 The Strand 112 20Th St Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 505-145-009 4505-130-010 /505-312-007 \�Daisy P Pascher Preserve Golf Cc Security 1234 Richard PI 550 W B St 400 925 B St F15 Glendale, CA 91206 San Diego, CA 92101 San Diego, CA 92101 err 1505-130-015 ^5' y 505-141-003 ./505-141-004 Preserve Golf Co Patrick & Maria Delia I V Michaels 11975 El Camino Real 201 727 N Rose Ave 783 N Rose Ave San Diego, CA 92130 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 ,505-142-002 ,` 505-142-003 V'SO5-142-005 Kellie Greene Helen Ruvelas *M* Nathan W Heibeck 673 N High Rd 729 N High Rd 780 N Rose Ave Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 /` 505-142-006 '%505-143-001 /505-143-002 Lobue Michael J Volpe Joe W & Shirley Hammer 620 N Rose Ave 611 N Dry Falls Rd 677 N Dry Falls Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-143-004 ,U505-143-006 :' 505-143-007 Keith G & Desley Mccormick John T & Ann Heavey Wilson E Haas *M* 787 N Dry Falls Rd 722 N High Rd 644 N High Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 ,,505-143-008 505-144-001 5,05-144-002 Ysaac & Cira Ross Robert L Brackey Ann & Lois Allen 616 N High Rd 615 N Via Monte Vista 665 N Via Monte Vista Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 `r505-144-004 ,r505-144-005 0505-144-007 Patricia M Riccio Sidney S Bryan Arnold D & Audrey Berk 781 N Via Monte Vista 788 N Dry Falls Rd 666 N Dry Falls Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 /505-145-001 505-145-005 'S 05-143-007 Marvin L & Phyllis Bryan George C & Ivan Thomson Susan B Dale 925 W Crescent Dr 769 W Crescent Dr 707 W Crescent Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 J 505-291-001 ,,sbs-291-002 ; 505-291-004 Molly M Christal, Joseph E & Lisa Luisi June L Linthicum 780 N Via Monte Vista 696 N Via Monte Vista 500 W Crescent Dr Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 505-291-005 -' 505-294-002 ,�°'S05-311-008 ° Carol J Scarioni David L Schneider Robert R & Julie Finegan 701 N Patencio Rd 465 W Merito P1 588 N Patencio Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 i,- 505-312-004 (1r505-312-008 505-143-003 Kenneth B Shellan 0 Donnell Golf Club Charles R Record 591 N Patencio Rd 301 N Belardo Rd 733 N Dry Falls Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262 1%�505-292-002 ,r513-060-001 /513-070-012 Albert T & Dorothy Milauskas City Of Palm Springs Robert W & Patricia Greer PO Box 2809 PO Box 2743 2638 S Kings Rd E Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Palm Springs, CA 92264 w"''505-312-012 27'1'505-142-004 s505-294-001 Joan E Davis Don A Lupinetti Charles & Susan Schridde PO Box 1299 23852 Bothnia Bay 30662 Hunt Club Dr Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Dana Point, CA 92629 San Juan Cap, CA 92675 j 505-143-005 /505-142-006 y/505-142-001 Margaret Forster Margaret A Forster Mary T Delgado 428 Liberty St 359 Cumberland St PO Box 63700 San Francisco, CA 94114 San Francisco, CA 94114 San Francisco, CA 94163 505-144-006 ✓�05-142-007 /505-291-003 Bonds Scott W Carl H Hitchner William T Reeks 900 Kearney St 8 Laurina Rd 1401 E Harrison St E1 Cerrito, CA 94530 Mill Valley, CA 94941 Seattle, WA 98112 N110965 ®A -VA I Neighborhood Coalition Labels Bob Seale Christine Hammond John Hunter 280 Camino Sur 1155 S. Camino Real P.O. Box 2824 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Philip Tedesco Tim Hohmeier Frank Tysen 1303 West Primavera Drive 1387 Calle De Maria Casa Cody Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 175 South Cahuilla Road Palm Springs, CA 92264 Bob Weithorn Jane Smith 261 South Belardo Road 928 Avenida Palmas Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs; CA 92262 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29886, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS STATED,TO SUBDIVIDE 18.23 ACRES INTO 17 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE LOT FOR DEVELOPMENT AS PRIVATE STREET AND ONE CONSERVATION LOT, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VIA MONTE VISTA AND CRESCENT DRIVE, R-1-13 ZONE, SECTION 10. WHEREAS, the Preserve Golf Company,. LLC., (the "Applicant") has filed an application with the City pursuant to the Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 9.60 for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 18.23 acres into 17 single family residential lots, one lot for development as private street and one conservation lot at the southwest corner of Via Monte Vista and Crescent Drive, R-I-B Zone, Section 10; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed Tentative Tract Map 29886 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 a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider Applicant's application for Tentative Tract Map 29886 was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on October 9, 2002, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 29886 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the Project, including but not limited to the staff report, all environmental data including the initial study, the proposed Negative Declaration and all written and oral testimony presented; and WHEREAS, on October 9, 2002 the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the proposed tentative tract map, subject to conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2002, a public hearing on the application for Tentative Tract Map 29886 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 29886 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 Subdivision represents the balance of these respective needs in a manner which is most consistent with the City's obligation pursuant to its police powers to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and I q emoo WHEREAS,the proposed Subdivision,Tentative Tract Map29886, is considered a"project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA"), and a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project, 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 hearing on the Project, including but not limited to the staff report, all environmental data including the initial study,the proposed Negative Declaration and all written and oral testimony presented. THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council finds as follows: The final Negative Declaration was completed in compliance with CEQA,the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA procedures contained in the City's CEQA Guidelines. The City Council finds that it has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration and finds that it adequately discusses the significant environmental effects of the proposed Project, and that, on the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public review process, there is no substantial evidence that there will be any significant adverse environmental effects as a result of the approval of this Project. The City Council finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. 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, policies and general land uses and programs provided in the City's General Plan and any applicable specific plan; and Section 3: Pursuantto Government Code Section 65567,the City Council finds that the proposed subdivision and the provisions for its design and improvements are compatible with the objectives, policies and general land use provided in the City's local open space plan; and Section 4: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474, the City Council finds that with the incorporation of those conditions attached in Exhibit A: a. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable general and specific plans. b. The design orimprovements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan. C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development contemplated by the proposed subdivision. d. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development contemplated by the proposed subdivision. e. The design of the subdivision or improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 14C"o Z f. The design of the subdivision or improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. g, 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 the property within the proposed subdivision. h. A nexus and rough proportionality have been established for the requirement of the dedication of the additional right- of-way to the City and the off-site improvements as related to this tentative tract map application. i. The off-site improvements related to this tentative tract map application are required to comply with the City of Palm Springs General Plan designations for Via Monte Vista. Section 5: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.6,the City Council determines that the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council approves Tentative Tract Map 29886 subject to those conditions set forth in the in Exhibit A on file in the City Clerks office,which are to be satisfied prior to the issuance of a Building Permit unless other specified. ADOPTED this 161" day of October, 2002. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA By: City Clerk City Manager REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM 6' 1 YC - 3