HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/19/2002 - STAFF REPORTS (28) DATE: June 19, 2002
TO: City Council
FROM: Director of Planning & Building
CASE 5.0804-PD (PD 254) APPLICATION BY TAHQUITZ VENTURE, LLC. AND CT REALTY
CORPORATION, FORMERLY BERGHEER,CALIFORNIA INC., FORA PRELIMINARY PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM 29077), FOR THE
SUBDIVISION OF A 6.8 ACRE PARCEL INTO 50 LOTS AND A SEVEN COMMON AREA LOTS,
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GATED 50-UNIT MULTI FAMILY CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL
COMMUNITY, LOCATED TO THE SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF TAHQUITZ
CANYON WAY AND MUSEUM DRIVE, R-2 AND R-3 ZONES, SECTION 15.
SUMMARY:
On June 5, 2002, the City Council voted 4-1 to recommend denial of the project. A resolution
denying the project is attached to this report.
The City Council may wish to reconsider this item, direct staff, the developer and neighboring land
owners to work towards a resolution of the remaining items and continue this item to its meeting
of July 3, 2002. There has been discussion with the developer, key neighbors and the City to
resolve and address the issues raised by the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
Staff has discussed and evaluated the actions taken by the City Council. The following items are
submitted to the City Council for its consideration. Based on meetings with the developer, certain
neighbors, and staff, the developer agrees to these conditions and several of surrounding property
owners have indicated that they will support the project with these revisions.
Revisions are as follows:
1A. That the area designated for units 1-5 shall be approved for three single family residences.
The lot configuration shall be shown on the Final Planned Development District and
approved by the Planning Commission prior to Final Tentative Tract Map approval.
1 B. Each lot shall be developed with a custom single family residence. Approval of each
custom single family residence shall be processed in accordance with Section 94.04.00,
(Architectural Approval) of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance. Each custom home shall
be designed to be compatible architecturally with the existing single family homes located
to the north. Architectural compatibility shall include building design/style,windows, plaster,
roof tile, and landscaping. The maximum building height shall be 18 feet and single story.
The minimum setback from the north property line shall be 25 feet. The minimum front yard
setback shall be 20 feet to the garage, unless side loaded and two parking spaces provided
in front of the garage, and 10 feet to the rest of the house. Side yard setback shall be a
minimum of 10 feet. No modifications are permitted
�744�4
1C. The newly created lots — 1, 2, and 3 — shall be provided access through the project and
shall be included in the homeowners association.
2. The proposed onsite retention basins shall be redesigned to minimize the area adjacent to
West Tahquitz Canyon Way. The retention areas shall be fully landscaped and designed
for and available for passive and active recreation.
3. The applicant will submit a revised statistical analysis calculation showing site and
percentage of total site:
Retention areas
Decorative Paving onsite only
Tribal Dedication Site
Building Coverage
Parking and Drives
4. The Tahquitz Flume and existing rock wall adjacent to Tahquitz Drive and along east
property line shall be protected in place. Any damage to this wall shall be fully restored and
repaired by the developer. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the entire wall shall be
photographed and its condition documented by the project architect. Photographs and field
notes shall be provided which fully document the wall's existing condition.
5. Construction hours shall be limited from January through April to Monday through Friday
from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and no construction activity permitted on weekends or holidays.
Additionally, the developer will prepare, publish, and deliver to adjacent property owners a
construction phasing and construction activity schedule.
6. That the Le Vallauris trash facilities shall be relocated to the south and adjacent to the
kitchen exit door.
If the City Council is supportive of an alternative action, the City Council should continue the item
to its July 03, 2002 meeting.
Staff is asking adjacent property owners who support this proposal to do so in writing so that City
Council sees community support.
OA1
er�ectorr of �fanning andwilding I I
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution of Denial
Martha Edgmon
From: Peter Dixon &Gary Dick [dick.dixon@verizon.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2002 9:03 PM
To: deyna hodges
Subject: Tahquitz Villas Project
Thank you for your thoughtfulness in not approving Tahquitz Villas as currently proposed. As a Tennis Club resident my
primary concern is density. I understand that the proposed project will create an additional 500 auto trips per day through our
neighborhoodl
Aside from the density issue this site provides an opportunity for Palm Springs to create something special on this site rather
than what seems to me to be just another condo complex.
Thanks again for encouraging a more creative solution for this site. Its great to see you back on City Council
Sincerely, Peter Dixon
I
6/19/02 ad"
�111
Martha Edgmon
From: Ron Oden
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 9:11 PM
To: Martha Edgmon
Subject: FW. Tahquitz Villas
From: Peter Dixon & Gary Dick[SMTP:DICK.DIXON @VERIZON.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 9 14:58 PM
To: ran oden
Subject: Tahquitz Villas
Auto forwarded by a Rule
I just wanted to thank you for encouraging a more creative development solution for this special site than the
proposed, somewhat generic, condo complex.
As a neighbor I have an interest in seeing higher quality and less dense development there.
As someone who currently enjoys hiking across that property, it would be sad to see it destroyed by a clutter of unimaginative
buildings which do not celebrate the virtues of that parcel.
Thanks again for your thoughtfulness, Sincerely, Peter Dixon. ,
6/19/02 '7
Martha Edgmon
From: SherylHamlin [shery[hamlin@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 11:45 AM
To: WIIIK@ci.palm-springs.ca.us
Cc: jean ners@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; DeynaH@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; ChrisM@ci.palm-springs.ca.us;
rono@ci.palmspri ngs.ca.us
Subject: RE' Tahquitz Villas Project
RE: Tahquitz Villas Project
I recently had Sunday brunch at the Ingleside Inn, where we enjoyed not only the continually excellent food and service, but
also the charming views of the different styles of villas, the palm trees with vines climbing to the tops, the topiary and the rose-
studded walkways, its 50 foot pool where guests and neighbors meet and the winding road through the property. One has the
feeling of serenity and isolation within a property located minutes from downtown Palm Springs.
Then 1 started to see this project elsewhere in Palm Springs. What if one could just pick up the Ingleside Inn and move it to the
Tahquitz property? A developer could build a similar project and not even have to add a restaurant because the Vallauris is
right next door. What a win-win for everyone!
Hypothetical, of course, however, the idea jogs the mind about what other uses might be made of this excellent property in the
heart of old Palm Springs.
I urge you to approve the motion to deny on Wednesday June 19t]l and let the developer resubmit a new plan taking into
consideration the points made at the council meeting on June Vh.
i
i
Sincerely,
I
Sheryl Hamlin
I
565 West Santa Rosa Drive
I
I
Palm Springs, California
92262 ;
r
6/18/02 rJ
Palm Springs
Eoana 0.-vc4Wmcnt Corpor+ n JUN 19 2002 \f'
A Non-P&I Puhlk lmm1n.\CnQ Mlon \ /
.Tune 19, 2002
Mayor Will I5leindienst and Members of Council
City of Palm Springs
HAND DELIVERED
Re: Tahquitz Ventures
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
On behalf of the Board of Directors ofPSEDC, I write to express frustration at the Council's
rejection of the Tahquitz Ventures project. Mostly we are concerned with the failure of the
process and the message it sends to the wider business and investment community.
During its two and one-half years in the approval process, this project was approved three times
by the Planning Commission and passed design review. To then be rejected by the Council,
despite staff support, is shocking. If serious concerns existed about the project they should have
been raised and resolved during the process—before it ever reached Council.
Decisions such as the one made here by the Council make a mockery of the process. The
Planning Commission becomes irrelevant. The DOGS meetings become useless. Is this the
message we want to send to those who want to invest is our community? It certainly seems to
contrast with the claims of being `business friendly"that we hear regularly from Council
Members.
Although we support the project on its merits and recognize that a much higher density
(apartments,low-income housing or a 350-zoom hotel)project could be built by right of zone,
our particular(castration is about the process. When Council rejects a project at this stage after
all issues should be resolved, it makes it extremely difficult for organizations like PSEDC to
encourage new investment with good faith.
We hope the Council will consider our comments seriously.
Sincerely,
!�
ohn Stiles
President
cc: David Ready, John Raymond, Doug Evans
Poo 011ieo Box 3205, Palm Springs, CA 92263 / 7BO-326-1925 / Fax: 700-325-6117
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CASE 5.0804-PD
(PD 254), A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP# 29077, A SUBDIVISION TO CREATE
A GATED 50-UNIT MULTI FAMILY, CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL
COMMUNITY LOCATED SOUTH WEST OF THE INTERSECTION
OF TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY AND MUSEUM DRIVE, R-2 AND R-
3 ZONE, SECTION 15.
WHEREAS, Tahquitz Venture, LLC. and CT Realty Corporation, (the"Applicants"),filed an application
with the City pursuant to Sections 9403.00 and 9402.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for a Planned
Development District and Preliminary Development Plan for a 50-unit multi family cluster residential
project for the property located on Tahquitz Drive between Tahquitz Canyon Way and Arenas Road,
east of Cahuilla Road, R-2 and R-3 Zones, Section 15; and
WHEREAS, the Tahquitz Venture, LLC. and CT Realty Corporation, (the "Applicants"), filed an
application with the City pursuant to Section 9.62.00 et.seq. of the Municipal Code for a Tentative Tract
Map for the subdivision of a 6.5 acre parcel into a 50 numbered lots and an number of lettered lots for
the property located on Tahquitz Way, west of Museum Drive, R-2 and R-3 Zones, Section 15, and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to
consider an application for a Tentative Tract Map and a Planned Development District 5.0804(PD 254)
was issued in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS,said Planned Development District and Tentative Tract Map were 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, on September 12, 2001 and September 26,2001, a public hearing on the application was
held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on September 26, 2001 the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City
Council approve said project; and
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2001, a public hearing on the application was held by the City Council in
accordance with applicable law, and at that meeting the City Council voted to refer the case back to the
Planning Commission to further evaluate the site plan, surrounding land uses and project compatibility,
building design, building materials, setbacks, design of West Tahquitz Canyon Drive, and in general
overall project design; and
a07AS
WHEREAS, the applicant has revised the project plans, increased the amount of usable open space,
reduced the project density from 66 units to 52 units to 50 units, eliminated two-story buildings and
substituted single story buildings adjacent to Tahquitz Canyon Way and the R-1-A zoned properties,
added additional guest parking, eliminated bay parking and increased the size of the landscape median
along Tahquitz Canyon Way and the City Council finds that the proposed changes do not satisfy the
City Council's concerns about the project design; and
WHEREAS, on January 9, 2002 and April 24, 2002, a public hearing on the application 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 written and
oral testimony presented; and
WHEREAS, on April 24, 2002, after lengthy discussion and debate the Planning Commission voted by
a five to zero vote with two abstentions to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed
project, subject to the attached conditions of approve; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to consider the
subject applications was issued in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on June 5, 2002, a public hearing on the application was held by the City Council
Commission in accordance with applicable law;
WHEREAS, the City Council carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in
connection with the hearing on the project, including but not limited to the staff report, all written and oral
testimony presented; and
WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution of denial for the project for its
meeting of June 19, 2002.
THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
Section 15273 of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)Guidelines ,the City
Council finds that, because the City Council intends to deny said project, a CEQA
finding not required under state law.
Section 2: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 9402.00, the City Council finds that:
a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is not properly one for which a
Planned Development District is authorized by the City's zoning ordinance.
Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, multi-family residential is a permitted usewithin boththe R-2
and R-3 zones. The City Council finds that the land use is consistent with the underlying zoning
but that the site plan and overall project design are unacceptable in that there is inadequate
useable recreation and open space amenities, that the retention areas are not adequately
located and designed to compliment the site design or surrounding properties, that proposed
buildings block views and overlook adjacent properties, and that the overall site design is
adequate for the subject property.
b. The said use and project design is not necessary or desirable for the development of the
community, and is not in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan,
and is detrimental to the existing or future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the
proposed use is to be located.
The proposed project consists the subdivision of 6.54 acres into 50 lots and the development
of a 50 unit, one and two story, attached and detached, multi-family cluster residential
development. The use is not consistent with the objectives of the General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance in that the proposed project has inadequate usable recreation and open space
amenities (only one pool for 50 units and most open space is devoted to drainage/retention
facilities),that the proposed pool and pool area does not provide sufficient recreation area,that
the balance of on-site recreation/open space is in narrow unusable yards, that the retention
areas are not designed adequately and do not relate to surrounding properties, that the
proposed building design blocks views, creates privacy issues between on-site units and with
surrounding properties, and that the overall project design does not meet the needs of the
community or surrounding properties, General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The project will
therefore be detrimental to the existing or future uses permitted in the zone in which the use is
located.
C. The site for the intended use is not adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use,
including yards, setbacks,walls or fences, landscaping and other features required in order to
adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood.
The applicant has revised the project and reduced the number of units, eliminated two-story
buildings from Tahquitz Canyon Way and abutting R-1 zoned properties, increased the amount
of guest parking, provided fora greater range of building separation,eliminated bay parking and
increased the size of the landscape median on Tahquitz Canyon Way. However,the basic site
plan and building design flaws and differences still remain and that the project design is
inadequate and does not address neighborhood compatibility.
d. The site for the proposed use does not relate to streets and highways properly designed and
improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use.
The proposed project includes a number of off-site improvements to Tahquitz Canyon way,
including a planted landscaped median, on street parallel parking and entry monuments.
Additional on-site improvements include colored paving, additional landscaping, sidewalks
and an area for vehicles to turn around. No turn around area currently exists, and thus is a
problem in the area.The proposed improvements are not consistentwith General Plan Policy
3.4.7, W. Tahquitz Canyon Way.
e. There are no conditions which could be imposed which would adequately protect the public
health,safety and general welfare,of the existing neighborhood in which this project is situated.
There are no conditions which could be imposed which would bring the project into compliance
with applicable zoning, building, and other regulations to protect the public health, safety, and
general welfare of the existing site design neighborhood in which this project is located and that
the applicant may re-submit a new application at any time.
Section 3: Pursuant to 9.62.010 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code and Section 92.01.00 et. sec.
of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council finds that:
a. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is not consistent with all applicable general and specific
plans.
The proposed Tentative Tract Map is not consistent, as noted herein, with the goals and
objectives of the H43/30,High Density Residential,General Plan designation which governsthe
subject property as well as all property adjacent to the subject site.
b. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map are not consistent with the
R-2 and R-3 zones within which the property is located.
The Zoning Ordinance allows a density of one dwelling unit per 3,000 square feet and 2,000
square feet of lot area, respectively. The proposed project is not consistent with existing
development in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project, particularly the existing
residences located directly north of the site across Tahquitz Canyon Way and multi family
residential development located directly to the south of the property. The adjacent residential
development to the north of Tahquitz Canyon Way are single family residential units and a
historic resort property. These existing multistory residences to the north of the project site
feature ground level parking and garage areas, ground level residential uses with no view
corridors, elevated second floors with limited views and third floor residences with views to the
south of Tahquitz Canyon.
C. The site is not physically suited for this type of development.
Although significant slopes exist adjacent to the subject property, the project site is level and
each lot contains adequate developable building area. There are no bodies of water, ravines,
or significant topographic features on the subject property.
d. The site is not physically suited for the proposed density of development.
The site is not physically suited for the proposed number of lots, and the density of the
subdivision is consistent with that allowed by the General Plan. The proposed lots and
configuration thereof are not adequately designed and do not meet the Zoning Ordinance
Standards and the site has inadequate on-site recreation and open space amenities..
e. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or their habitats.
The Initial Study prepared for the project determined that the project is an in-fill development
and surrounded by development. All utilities and services are available on site. The site is
vacant and contains sparse vegetation. The site was previously developed with single family
residents and apartments and inhabited. Prior to that, the site was developed with a portion of
a golf course.There are no bodies of water on the subject property and therefore no fish will be
disturbed. The project will have no impact to endangered species of their habitats. Therefore,
the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife, as defined in
Section 711.2 of the California Fish and Game Code, and therefore a De Minimus impact
finding is appropriate.
a07
f. The design of the subdivision or 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.
The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through or use of the
property.A number of easements,which are not plottable, transect the property; however,the
proposed subdivision will not interfere with these easements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby
denies Case No. 5.0804-PD-254, (Planned Development District # 254), and Tentative Tract Map
29077,without prejudice, and that the developer may resubmit a new application at any time within one
year without paying new application filing fees.
ADOPTED this 19th day of June, 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
City Clerk City Manager
REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM AA
a7,85--