Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT/HILLSIDE AREA GPA 85-1 1984
PRECISE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT ZONE CHANGE _ PARCEL MAP VARIANCE - -C C.U.P. ------ _� REFFR 10:. - 2 �APPUCANT— LOCANON i11--1 lis —_ REQUESJ' _- 9ax=ti& CANA ;O N Pp- -- _ EXISTING ZONE:— PREPARATION PROGRESS DATE BY COMMENTS _APPLICATION RECEIVED 10 LEGAL PUBLICATION SENT NOTICES SENT _FIELD INVESTIGATION _ DEPTS. NOTIFIED BUILDING ENGINEERING --- j-IRE '------ - --POL ICE_---- _ RECREATION & PARKS _ SCHOOL DISTRICT _ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS — —FLOOD CONTROL i PRELIMINARY MEETING _ I , STAFF REPORT— — FINAL. PLAN APPROVAL PRECISE PLAN (6) I LANDSCAPING PLAN (5) PI-AN. DIRECTOR MOD. (6) HEARINGS & ACTIONS _ 1 I DATE ACTION VOTE I REVIEW BOARD HEARING I P.C. HEARING PUBLISHED _ P.C. PUBI-IC HEARING APPLICANT NOTIFIED C.C. PUBI-IC HEARING ORDINANCE NO. I RESOLUTIONNO. i EFFECTIVE DATE I RECORD_EP_FOR DATA BANK ZONING MAP CORRECTED _ ERE IJPG 4 OI❑80 1 I li I 1 1 I t 1 1 CD a cc/ .77 � M \ \ mk [ ) �§ ; ^ � / k e / QJ ) Ig � I / ) a ) � � cau / ( to < Ln = i m � \_ \ \ \ \ 3 r A`\\ > , —_ _ 3 / \\ 0 it d]® } $) \ � e �� : k � ) to 10 � a _ - � ! , !2 . - a - - ■ � ! � @ , ¥ .- , . _ - U � k � �� February 15, 1985 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE Case Nos. GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres (on land a conditional use permit request by Donald McMillan was denied), located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-002-003 I 3 C- I _ --_ P.R.— ., �.1��,� 'rd ' AHD S.P. PR. 22 L (4), hRUXS OW n P.C. S.P. - �1yy R. • (4)♦ 121, s -- -- FRED WARINGJ DRIVE S—� � ; l R (aic I I[ I ' P. 6, S.P. F . P.C. (4)1 c '� (•4.11 ? � C h SAID Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 5, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission PUBLISH: Desert Post February 22, 1985 /tm 9fi - N D Y m 0 f n _a z N /,z a m ' T D r •O m N� m . c O1 o z 11 N v 0 z a . - o 1n �9 10 7_ r - J 3 �7 z 6•.. •G+ rn Om cn ' z > ^• z !vJ MI s -r._- : i; A A1IRIe/R'R�l A• k t C... • r • _ 9 s P 7 � N e O �• e 9 & e \ e 3 W • ii am a W E` p hoc • y � v � g S 5 3 c b m $ o n s do � n p NV D y 09��0 O �► c � n m rc on yg Q O h 3 Y J ' J 4 b u o1 m O J 'i February 15, 1985 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE Case Nos. GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres (on land a conditional use permit request by Donald McMillan was denied), located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-002-003 i W LL e, ... :.:....ice - `C-I °u P.R. R. � • � �k.hs` AHD S.P. RR. 22 l_f I4), i=FU�NOooDA P.C. S.P. - I -- R (4). JIAN�ANIiA . 12� 1 5- -- - FRED WX ING� 1 DRIVE S . I 4 C( I R I ' P. I1. 6, S.P. P.C. (4), _ 4 SAID Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 5, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission PUBLISH: Desert Post February 22, 1985 Am RESOLUTION NO. 84-108 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF SAID CITY OF A QUESTION RELATING TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE HILLSIDE AREAS OF SAID CITY. WHEREAS, under the provisions of the laws relating to General Law Cities in the State of California, THE City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did, by Resolution No. 84-86 adopted on the Sth day of Jam, 1984, call and give notice of the holding of a General Municipal Election to be held in said city on Tuesday, November 6, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Council of said City also desires to submit to the qualified electors of said city at said election the question relating the commercial development of the hillside areas of Palm Desert, hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1: That said City Council, pursuant to its right and authority'so to do, does hereby determine that there shall be and there is hereby ordered submitted to the qualified electors of said city at said regular General Municipal Election the following question, to wit: Shall the people of the City of Palm Desert, California, repeal the ordinance allowing commercial use and/or development under the present Palm Desert Hillside YES Zoning Ordinance in the hillside areas of Palm Desert? Hillside area is defined as the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains located west of the Palm Valley Channel and southwest of Highway 111. This proposition shall be binding on the City Council of Palm Desert. INO A cross W placed in the voting square after the word "YES" in the manner hereinbefore provided shall be counted in favor of the adoption of the question. A cross W placed in the voting square after the word "NO" in the manner hereinbefore provided shall be counted against the adoption of the question. SECTION 9: That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall enter the same in the book of original Resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City, in the Minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, on this 26th day of July, 1984, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Jackson, Kelly, Puluqi, Wilson do Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None WALTER H. SNYDER, MAYOR ATTEST: i HEILA R. GIL AN, CITY ERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA FORlYI OF STATEMENT TO BE FILED BY AUTHOR OF ARGUMENT All arguments concerning measures filed pursuant to Division 5. Chapter 3 (beginning with Section 4000)of the Elections Code shall be accompanied by the following form statement. to be signed by each author of 1t e argur4ej:0 The undersigned author(s) of the rebuttal argument--against ballot proposition E at Genera 1 i t fprRik/febuttall (in favor ofragainst) Iname or number) the ii election for the 7 Ydtoffb"e held on_1116/84 hereby state that such argument is true and correct Ibtle o elect n) Qunsdictionl Idatei to the best of their knowledge and belief. V— i 4 5? �tg d v Date \ < <a'Nrt�0 A• DicK .SPF�,e115) � � R,s�eL 1 Vote NO on this measure because: 1 . This is the ONLY PARCEL (2-1/2 acres usable) of commercially zoned property like it in Palm Desert. Therefore, it CANNOT set a precedent• for hillside development. All prop- erty above this site is zoned Agricultural Open Space. It cannot be commercially developed. 2. Twelve professional city officials out of 15 want to preserve this panoramic view site FOR YOU . �UktXROtXIXO(tk$[IXX9(XXYXO(RRXC(XXXXXTAkBXXIXAWAXXRRONXXONX 3. If this measure is passed, it will mean multi-million dollar lawsuits against the City of Palm Desert. Any multi-million dollar damages would be PAID BY YOU, the taxpayer. 4. YOU WOULD BE DENIED THE RIGHT to take visitors to this panoramic vista viewpoint of Palm Desert and the beautiful Coachella Valley. 5. The proposed public restaurant development would remove the Present blight entering Palm Desert on Highway 111 from Rancho Mirage. 6. The proposed development for PUBLIC USE would contribute an estimated $50,000 annually to your City in taxes. 7. The mountain backdrop behind Palm Desert rises 8,000 feet. The proposed PUBLIC RES- TAURANT USE development is only 240 feet. Ironwood is 600 feet. 8. The proposed PUBLIC restaurant would be built of natural stone and wood blending with the surrounding environment. 9. Now only the privileged few can afford valley view residential sites. This site would provide THIS VIEW TO YOU and help pay your taxes as well . 10. As written, this measure COULD STOP RESIDENTIAL BUILDING also. Residential landowners take notice! be taken In conclusion, don' t let XllaYA(Yd(i(0VMt(XtYi4 d(i(4(jXX4( " your right to a beautiful viewAaway from you. IT CAN BE YOURS! You can have both the unblemished beautiful view of the mountains as well as a panoramic view of the valley. Vote NO on Measure E nm N CMVman Cu 2131 euov as LWh w ,Ca 90712 41M Zia 426 s,i Form K I ARGUMENT FOR PASSAGE OF PROPOSITION E Your YES vote on Measure "E" will protect the hillsides and hilltops on the west side of Palm Desert above Highway 111 from scarring by commercial development. Palm Desert was incorporated November 23, 1973. In June, 1975 the voters in a referendum overwhelmingly approved a General Plan and the hillsides and hilltops on the west side were zoned as "Open Space" in accordance with this plan, to protect them against mutilation or defacement through commercial development. By state law, zoning ordinances must conform to the City' s General Plan. In June, 1983 the City Council, while considering an overall zoning for the Santa Rosa Mountain range within city limits, allowed 13 . 1 acres to be rezoned "Commercial. " This rezoning does not conform to the General Plan and was done without ample or adequate notification of hearings to the voters. This admittedly unintentional action by the City Council surfaced when an application was recently received to commercially develop the 13. 1 acres. Measure "E" is designed to restore the "Open Space" protection on these 13 .1 acres for our hillsides and hilltops. Your YES vote will insure the future high quality of that area of Palm Desert. The hillside is an important natural feature within Palm Desert and its preservation increases the overall visual quality of Palm Desert by enhancing visual identity, diversity and interest of the area. The General Plan further statas, that it shall be an implementation policy of said General Plan to "Make the preservation of scenic vistas an integral factor in all land development decisions over which the City has jurisdiction. " YES on Measure "E" will let us continue to develop our city in a quality fashion and leave these scenic priceless vistas unscarred for everyone' s enjoyment versus the visual blight of hillside commercial development. We urge you to vote YES to preserve our natural beauty. STATEMENT BY AUTHORS OF ARGUMENTS (Section 5350 of the Elections Code and 5456 of the Education Code requires that all arguments concerning measure sham �aaccompanied by the following form statement, signed by eac�a�titio Nthe argu- ment.) The undersigned author(s) of the Pnmary argument In Favor primary or rebuttal ballot proposi-t-id \5 n favor of or against name or letter at the designation) title of election) for the City of Pa11lm Desert istrict or jurisdiction) to be held on Nov. 6, 1984 hereby state, under penalty of per- jury, that such argument is true and correct to the best of Their knowledge and belief. is er t eir Author's Signature: City: Date: Palm Desert, Ca. 8/17 1. 8/20 Henry Clark 2. 8/17 ME= Mullins, ir 3. �i Palm Desert, Ca. 8/16 Marian Henderson e 4, Palm Desert, Ca. 8/17 5. . i Palm Desert, Ca. 8/19 Jean M. Benson 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 NOTICE TO ELECTORS OF DATE AFTER WHICH NO ARGUMENTS FOR OR AGAINST A CITY MEASURE MAY BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the General Municipal Election is to be held in the City of Palm Desert on Tuesday, November 6, 1984, at which there will be submitted to the qualified electors of the City the following measures: Shall the people of the City of Palm Desert, California, by initiative ordinance, provide that only the owner of property may establish the price for which such property may be sold, transferred, or exchanged in accordance with the ordinance as proposed? Shall the people of the City of Palm Desert, California, repeal the ordinance allowing commercial use and/or development under the present Palm Desert Hillside Zoning Ordinance in the hillside areas of Palm Desert? Hillside is defined as the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains located west of the Palm Valley Channel and southwest of Highway 111. This proposition shall be binding on the City Council of Palm Desert. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 3, Division 5 of the Elections Code of the State of California, the legislative body of the City, or any member or members thereof authorized by such body, or any individual voter or bona fide association of written argument,t not sto exceed 300 words In length, for or against 9 or any combination of such voters and sthe1City measure. a NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that, based upon the time reasonably necessary to prepare and print the arguments and sample ballots for the election, the City Clerk has fixed 5:00 p.m. Tuesday, August 21, 1984, as a reasonable date prior to such election after which no arguments for or against the City measure may be submitted to her for printing and distribution to the voters as provided in Article 4. Arguments shall be submitted to the City Clerk at the Civic Center, Administrative Services Building, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California. Arguments may be changed or withdrawn until and including the date and time fixed by the City Clerk. THE ABOVE NOTICE IS GIVEN b this 26th day of Jam, 1984. SHEILA R. GILLIGA CITY CLERK FILE COPY IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE"E" Impartial analysis of the initiative measure by the City Attorney showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure,is as follows: Under the present Palm Desert zoning ordinances, in a CA Zone, the following types of development are possible in the hillside areas of the City of Palm Desert west of the Palm Valley Channel and southwest of Highway III above the base of the hillsides: 1. Medical offices and clinics; 2. Offices: governmental,professional,administrative,and general business; 3. Other commercial uses as determined by the Planning Commission which are deemed to enhance the character of the community; 4. Personal services including but not limited to barber or beauty shops, tailors, and dressmaking shops; 5. Retail uses,including but not limited to,apparel,furniture,appliances and other major household articles, variety goods, sporting goods, stationery, toys,art goods, flowers and other plants, and boutiques. Subject to Conditional Use Permit: 1. Automobile service stations; 2. Amusement and recreation establishments including but not limited to theater and amusement arcades; 3. Grocery stores; 4. Hospital; 5. Hotels, not exceeding twenty-four units per acre; 6. Liquor stores; 7. Mortuary; 8. Public utility installation; and 9. Restaurants,except for drive-in or drive-through. If a vote is cast in favor of this measure,then hillside commercial use and/or development will not be permitted in the area of Palm Desert, California, stated above. If a vote is cast against this measure, development will be permitted in accordance with the existing C-I Zone in the area stated above. NOTE: This is a copy for your files of the material you submitted for Sample and/or Official Ballot. FILE COPY ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE"E" Your YES vote on Measure"E"will protect the hillsides and hilltops on the west side of Palm Desert above Highway I I I from scarring by commercial development. Palm Desert was incorporated November 23, 1973.In June, 1975 the voters ' in a referendum overwhelmingly approved a General Plan and the hillsides and hilltops on the west side were zoned as"Open Space"in accordance with this plan, to protect them against mutilation or defacement through commercial development. By state law, zoning ordinances must conform to the City's General Plan. In June, 1983 the City Council,while considering an overall zoning for the Santa Rosa Mountain range within city limits, allowed 13.1 acres to he rezoned"Commercial."This rezoning does not conform to the General Plan and was done without ample or adequate notification of hearings to the voters. This admittedly unintentional action by the City Council surfaced when an application was recently received to commercially develop the 13.1 acres. Measure"E"is designed to restore the"Open Space"protection on these 13.1 acres for our hillsides and hilltops.Your YES vote will insure the future high quality of that area of Palm Desert. The hillside is an important natural feature within Palm Desert and its preservation increases the overall visual quality of Palm Desert by enhancing visual identity, diversity and interest of the area. The General Plan further states,that it shall be an implementation policy of said General Plan to"Make the preservation of scenic vistas an integral factor in all land development decisions over which the City has jurisdiction." YES on Measure"E"will let us continue to develop our city in a quality fashion and leave these scenic priceless vistas unscarred for everyone's enjoyment versus the visual blight of hillside commercial development. We urge you to vote YES to preserve our natural beauty. s/Henry B. Clark s/Edward Mullins,Jr. s/Marian Henderson s/Joseph A. Reino s/Jean M. Benson NOTE: This is a copy for your files of the material you submitted for Sample and/or Official Ballot. FILE COPY ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE"E" This is the ONLY PARCEL (2-1/2 acres usable) of commercially zoned property like it in Palm Desert.Therefore,it CANNOT set a precendent for hillside development. All property above this site is zoned Agricultural Open Space. It cannot be commercially developed. Twelve professional city officials out of 15 went to preserve this panoramic view site FOR YOU. If this measure is passed, it will mean multi-million dollar lawsuits against the City of Palm Desert. Any multi-million dollar damages would be PAID BY YOU,the taxpayer. YOU WOULD BE DENIED THE RIGHT to take visitors to this panoramic vista viewpoint of Palm Desert and the beautiful Coachella Valley. The proposed public restaurant development would remove the present blight entering Palm Desert on Highway I I I from Rancho Mirage. The proposed development for PUBLIC USE would contribute an estimated $50,000 annually to your City in taxes. The mountain backdrop behind Palm Desert rises 8,000 feet.The proposed PUBLIC RESTAURANT USE development is only 240 feet. Ironwood is 600 feet.The proposed PUBLIC restaurant would be built of natural stone and wood blending with the surrounding environment. Now only the privileged few can afford valley view residential sites. This site would provide THIS VIEW TO YOU and help pay your taxes as well. As written, this measure COULD STOP RESIDENTIAL BUILDING also. Residential landowners take notice! In conclusion,don't let your right to a beautiful view be taken away from you. IT CAN BE YOURS! You can have both the unblemished beautiful view of the mountains as well as a panoramic view of the valley.Vote NO on Measure E. s/George Berkey s/Dick Sparks s/Donald Driskel NOTE: This is a copy for your files of the material you submitted for Sample and/or Official Ballot. I 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 i TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 a August 2, 1984 Mr. Donald McMillan P.O. Box 1139 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Dear Mr. McMillan: This is to advise you that the last day to file argument either for or against any City ballot measure is 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, August 21, 1984. I am attaching a copy of the legal notice, which establishes this time and date as the deadline. In accordance with the elections code, any argument shall be limited to a maximum of 300 words. If you know of other people who may file an argument expressing a similar opinion to yours, you may want to get together with them and consolidate.your efforts inasmuch as the elections code provides for only one argument for and one argument against. If you have any questions or would like more information relative to this filing, please let me know. Sincerely, . li SHEILA R. GILLIGAN CITY CLERK SRG:mpf Enclosure (as noted) 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 July 30, 1984 Mr. Frank Johnson Deputy Registrar of Voters County of Riverside 4175 Main Street Riverside, California 92501 Dear Frank: I am enclosing a certified copy of Resolution No. 84-108 which places a measure dealing with hillside development on the November ballot. This makes two measures from our city. I am also enclosing a copy of my Notice of Election which includes the City Attorney's synopsis for both this measure and the measure dealing with the repeal of rent control. If you need these two synopses on a different form or in a different format, please let me know. Thanks for you help. Sincerely, SHEILA R. GILLIGAN CTIY CLERK /me Enclosures (as noted) WAGNER-STANFORD CONSL-iANTS LIEUULud OF U I�Dt QMMUL 201 East Yorba Linda Blvd. PLACENTIA, CALIFORNIA 92670 DwT (714) 993-4500 wT ENTi N RE: TO CL77 - dF Ar„�n �6JEef 144*-j 73-6/D 6eed i4M.QIA , PAun L7Es r- ca �Z?.CaO WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION tS 6 G6 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO SIGNED: rmwcltut ®�.am�am nlm If enclosures an not as noted, kindly notify us at on e. J ' HILLSIDE GRADING FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR DONALD McMILLAN - PALM DESERT SITE BY WAGNER-STANFORD CONSULTANTS OCTOBER 11, 1985 JOB NO. 341-01-83 I. Introduction The feasibility study was prepared to determine the ability to develop residential lots on the hillside property located on Highway III , southerly of the Magnesia Falls storm drainage channel in the city of Palm Desert. II. Basis 9.f Study The project site is located in an area labeled as a hillside overlay designation by the city of Palm Desert city zoning ordinance. Due to the hillside designation, special hillside grading ordinances must be followed during development of residential projects. The hillside grading requirements are outlined in the Palm Desert city zoning ordinance section 25.15.000, ordinance No. 3221 "Exhibit A - hillside planned residential district." The hillside grading ordinance consists of four design options that are to be analyzed to determine the appropriate density for the site based on the site topography and the existence of plateaus or foothills. III. Analysis A. Option No. 1 - Parcel Average Slope Method. This option is based on the actual contours that define the site topography and determines the average slope of the project using the following formula: S = (0.00229) (I) (L) A Where: S = Average Percent Slope of Site I = Contour Interval of Topography = 5 ' (used in study) L = Summation of Contour Length (in feet) = 53,660 ft. (determined in study) A = Area of Parcel in Acres, of Ownership Being Considered = 13.1 Acres (total project area) Therefore S = (0.00229) (5' ) (53 .660' ) - 46.9% (13.1 Acres) 1 Based upon the design criteria under Option No. 1, the minimum acreage per dwelling unit on the property will have to be 5.00 acres. Option No. 1 requires that 95% of the project site (based on an average slope of 36% or greater) be left in a natural state. Otherwise stated, grading on the site for development of building pads is restricted to an area equal to 58 of the total 13.1 acres, or 0.655 acres (28,500 sq. ft. ) . The area required for grading an access road to the building pads is not included in the 58 of the allowable grading area. In accordance with the requirements of Option No. 1, the project site can be developed into two parcels of 5.00 acre minimum size and with a combined graded area of 0.655 acres. B. Option No. 2 - Toe of Slope Option No. 2 provides for the development of areas adjacent to a valley floor. Design conditions require a minimum parcel area of 0.33 acres and a minimum width of 100 ' . The site topography shows a "flat" toe of slope area adjacent to Highway III which could be considered a building site but which in fact is not large enough to satisfy the conditions of the grading ordinance Option No. 2. Option No. 2 is, therefore, non-applicable for the project site. C. Option No. 3 - Dwelling Unit Building Site Option No. 3 provides for the development of certain areas within a project site where the natural topography is sloped 20% or less. Because there are no areas within the project site with an average 20% or flatter slope, Option No. 3 does not apply to the project site. D. Option No. 4 - Preferred Development Area Option No. 4 applies only to projects within areas designated "Preferred Development" according to the Palm Desert city zoning ordinance in order to increase the available density in hillside areas. The project site does not lie in a preferred . development area and therefore, cannot follow the guidelines of Option No. 4. 2 3Y, Study Conclusion The feasibility study indicates that in accordance with the city of Palm Desert hillside grading ordinance, the project site can be developed with two residential parcels having a minimum area of 5.00 acres per dwelling unit and ' that grading can occur on the site only to the extent that only 5% of the entire site (13.1 acres) or 0.655 acres is affected by the grading of the building sites.. 3 . \L « 'g . . // $ C42 � (D \ ■ \ � ®E o � \ � \\ # . 7 E . � { . ( ( 2jR � / &Q , yg \ 7 / E \ . \ E : e \ p\ } . J 4 > .. aR LO »/ cr) E : | ! I | _ r • � % •1" �i�f\� �1 .� �2, � �� 1 f j w. �l D SpNTq �l � � -- t r t�/ 66 LZ6 � rr ^ � tR . s � ai � � r � � � � I pp � � 4 �� � r b � A 1, M F 'I � t 1 i J y NOTICE OF DETERMINATION Negative Declaration TO: (X) Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) Secretary for Resources County of Riverside 1416 Ninth St., awt Mrt7 4080 Lemon Street Sacramento CAZ939T4 Riverside, CA 92502 ' FROM: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 ENVI?ONiY;LM'AL SF V!Cc CITY OF PALM DESERT SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the public resources code. Project Title/Common Name: C/Z 85-1 arZ GPq g5_1 Date of Project Approval: April 11, 1985 State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted): N/A Contact Person: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Project Location: West side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path. Project Description: General plan land use element change from core area commercial to hillside planned residential and change of zone from C-1 (general commercial) to HPR (hillside planned residential). This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project ( ) will, (X) will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2._ An environmental impact report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the environmental impact report may be examined at the above city hall address. X A negative declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the negative declaration may be examined at the above city hall address. 3. Mitigation measures (X) were, ( ) were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4.A statement of overriding considerations ( ) was, (X) was not, adopted for this project. su;;:{RV;SoF_ Title y—,CIKG Signature Tile J h ii 2 4 1985 Date Received for riling _.,.., Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION 130ARD OF SUPERVISORS Negative Declaration TO: W Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) Secretary for Resources MAY 0 61985 County of Riverside 1416 Ninth St., Rm 1311 4080 Lemon Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Gen Riverside, CA 92502 LER^of the nu^ cts (nCounty o{f,RiVLr SPttdo,!k"c 'n,e 1;Y 4��{ [V �a'Q{"G//11Lfsr Hj:IFi2f::' FROM: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the public resources code. Project Title/Common Name: G A5 Name: C/Z 85-1. RD IT,C 2 aj!35D Date of Project Approval: March 28, 1985. `n < PJ9AY 71985 State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted): N/A ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Contact Person: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner CITY OF PALM DESERT Project Location: West side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path. Project Description: General plan amendment to Hillside Planned Residential and change of zone to HPR Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres. This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1.The project ( ) will, (A) will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An environmental impact report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the environmental impact report may be examined at the above city hall-address. x A negative declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the negative declaration may be examined at the above city hall address. 3. Mitigation measures ( ) were, (x) were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4.A statement of overriding considerations ( ) was, (x) was not, adopted for this project. Signature Title .2 � Date Received for Filing Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope. 4- RESOLUTION NO. 85-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST—OF PAINTERS PATH. CASE NO. GPA 85 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 28th day of March, 1985, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a general plan amendment to change the land use desiggnation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-020-003 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89," in that the director of environmental services has determined that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment and a negative declaration has been prepared. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said city council did find the following facts to to exist to justify their actions: 1. Change of general plan designation would conform with intent of city measure passed in November, 1984, precluding commercial use and/or development in hillsides. 2. Hillside Planned Residential designation would permit viable use of ' property. 3. Hillside Planned Residential designation would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. W THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED b the City Council of the City of Palm NOW, E E, y y y Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the council in this case. 2. GPA 85-1 (exhibit "A") and a negative declaration of environmental impact are approved. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council held on this 28th day of March, 1985, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: JACKSON, KELLY, WILSON, AND SNYDER NOES: BENSON ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONI�`JJ� C l��1 ,1 u ' MAY 2 3 19$5 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES WAL�ERH. SNYDER, MayorSNYDER, Mayor 4i CITY. OF PALM DESERT ATTEESS'TT- JSHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City C rk City of Palm Desert, Calif is /tm - ) > - 1 I Q -COUNT , Y---CLUB—DRIVE- I HOVLEY LANE / • /A i W. J I SST .•�• P;.:':`rf.l .; L:rq, Ji=/(' :.) .;1: Il:mm NPR i air P � •.�• ,.'; COLLEGE PARK VIEW DR. - .}I airq q'�•li: of THE DESERT C.0 Of (FREO WARING DR: - : • n-v., OFF P,W .11 I • \%° 1;�,,0°Y d'p'�. ;d°\`.,,r,a'^^„� � 'aul.\s�. , •,a=n°' Ali is-: •124 EL PASEO R.C. ...:..... :;.. .:u H.P.R. i �rj_1� ` ' ,.n;;,���� .•' �"' ' '.',B ,1 i 'u,�� QFf. P.n'i:cl;'.\ � i 25 3 PF �► 28 H.PR. `os -N HAYSTACK a t + + + t + F _ .F., 't + + + + + + + if- 4- + F 1, 4 1 4 • I' �1„�)�1/� Y.\V •' 'O .r .1'If Zj1'�= II. .11 � \•i J. :` it, 11 ��\':I_ nP pp II �-,.'.11- 11'�' 1':�\.:'� � II,\:.. �•��;2; ..il`� + + t + + + i L + th + L _ /'a' , ,!- fl,`,I'. - •/: - ��\l'1\ I\-%; .:`' \ .It :n- .L . 4 + + +3C + + + + ., . ;I. J i IZ•,tL,1,\,' : .''' 32'1/ \\° ,: _ 33 '+ + } + } + t } + A- + + + V Y\j''119u:.` �,._..!.:'•. '. .Ir.'. -1 ;.' ...,..,\\,� /!1; pu if 4 h + t + jta.i. '.\.f/`1•. I+ i + + } + + + + 1 a + t .l .',.. .1' >'II',I�. II- 4'.1. 'iFa 1\,.,{• _ I 5 4 :ITY OF PALM DESERT Gen . (plan Amend . 85 -1 CITY COUNCIL /� RESOLUTION N0, ss-ze I d,� C70 o Eu A DATE MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 1985 � � r • a +� a r • a r • • • • r • � +� r s e � n u u n n n n n n n For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO. 425 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 107, THE PALM DESERT ZONING MAP, BY CHANGING THE ZONE FROM C-1 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) TO HPR (HILLSIDE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL) ON 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1119 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERS PATH. CASE NO. C/Z 85-1. Mr. Altman reported that no input had been received since the first ' reading of the ordinance. Upon motion by Kelly, second by Wilson, Ordinance No. 425 was adopted by a 3-1-1 vote with Councilmember Benson voting NO and Councilmember Jackson ABSENT. XI. CO aN.' _ff-Ems-HEbD-AVER REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION for Installation of a Multi-Way Stop ' at the Intersection of Country Club Drive and Portola Avenue. Mr. Altman reported that Supervisor Larson and her staff had been uccessful in getting a commitment from the County of Riverside for 1 25% share of signalization costs for this intersection. He re mmended Council direct staff to proceed with the signal eng eering and approve a change order on an existing engineering contr ct for this work. He advised that the County had requested its Transp tation Committee be allowed an opportunity to review and approve he installation of a four-way stop at this corner but that the Committ would not be meeting until May. Councilman Kelly oved to approve a change order to the Basmaciyan- ?1 Darnell, Inc. engineering contra t in the amount of $5,347 plus 10% contingency for signal design of the Portola Avenue/ untry Club Drive intersection. Councilman Wilson seconded the motion. Motion carri d by unanimous vote of the Councilmembers present. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, conditionally authorize the installation of a four-way stop at th intersection of Country Club Drive and Portola Avenue with the condition that design ork for a traffic signal at this intersection be underway before installation of the fou way stop is performed and pending approval of the Riverside County Transportation Co ittee. Mayor Snyder seconded the motion. Motion carried by unanimous vote of the Co ncilmembers present. XII. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR REFUND B NATIONAL MORTGAGE AND LAND COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT $19,714.81. Councilman Wilson moved to, by Min\Re otion, approve the request and authorize a refund from prior year's revenuthe amount of $19,714.81.'' Councilmember Benson seconded the motion. Morried by unanimous vote of the Councilmembers present. ' B. RE UEST FOR ASSISTANCE THE FAMILY Y OF THE DESERT PALM DESERT YOUTH R PLAY PROGRAM. Mr. Altman recommended apprf . his request with additional direction to staff to work with thRe reation and Park District to come up with some money to in he funding of this PLAY Program and to the Family Yh C ter to charge a higher registration fee to non-Palm Desth.Councilmember Benson moved to, by Motion, pprove the request and authorize the payment of $15,000 with additional direction tort Staff and the Family-' Y/Youth Center as outlined by the City Manager. Councilman Kelly., seconded the motion. Motion carried by unanimous vote of the Councilmembers present. - 5 -4- v1 . • MINUTES MARCH 28, 1985 F, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING • • * r r r a • • • r a • +r • +� r • a � n r n n ff +o- a n o �t n o ff C. CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO C M OC A GE TFrErXITO HILLSIDE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL AND A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM C-1 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO HPR (HILLSIDE PLANNED `V RESIDENTIAL) AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ' OF �1F ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS IT PERTAINS THERETO FOR 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERS PATH. „ Mayor Snyder declared the Public Hearing Open. Mr. Diaz reviewed the staff report and Planning Commission ent direction from the November recommendation that would implem 1984 election that commercial development be prohibited in the hillside areas of Palm Desert. He reviewed viable alternative uses for the property including the recommended single-family residential use. Mayor Snyder invited input in FAVOR of the request, and none was offered. He invited input in OPPOSITION to the request. MR. RICHARD ROEMMER, Attorney for the Hilltop Restaurant and Mrs. Jan Mitchell, owner of the property, inquired about the access road behind the property and improvements required by Caltrans. Mr. Diaz responded that the improvements required for the restaurant by Caltrans would not be required for residential units. Upon question by Mr. Roemmer, Mr. Diaz responded that the number of residential lots available would be determined by what section of the Hillside Overlay Ordinance under which the applicant chose to develop. Mayor Snyder declared the Public Hearing Closed. . , Upon motion by Jackson, second by Kelly, Resolution No. 85-26 was adopted and Ordinance No. 425 passed to second reading by a 4-1. vote of the Council with Councilmember Benson voting NO. N51.9l A*ION—BY—iHE REVOCATION OF A BUSINESS LICENSE FOR COUNTRY CLUB CONSTRUCTION. May Snyder declared the Public Hearing Open. Altman reported that the holder of this particular license no longer ha a valid contractor's license which was a requirement of the lice ing process.. Mayor Snyder ' vited input in FAVOR of the revocation, and none was offered. He invited inpu in OPPOSITION to the revocation, and none was offered. He declared the Pub Hearing Closed. Councilman Wilson oved to, by Minute Motion, revoke the business license of Country Club Construction, Ac unt No. 7822, in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.04.160(B) of the Muni 'pal Code. Councilman ,Kelly seconded the motion. Motion carried by unanimous vote o the Council IOR E. ASSOCIATIONREQUEST R AND STHERATION FAMILY Y/OUTHBY COVE OCENTERIEFOR LATHE r , ISSUANCE OF A BING PERMIT. Mayor Snyder declared the Publi Hearing Open. Mr. Allen reviewed staff's eport and recommendation to approve the request. ` Mayor Snyder invited input in FAVOR f�the request. MR. RICHARD KITE, 73-051 Skye rd Way, Palm Desert, spoke in favor noting that the room to be used would hold 90-100 people. Games s would be held at 6:30 p.m. to 10:00 m. each Tuesday. ORDINANCE NO. 425 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 107, THE PALM DESERT ZONING MAP ' BY CHANGING THE ZONE FROM C-1 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) TO HPR (HILLSIDE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL) ON 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERS PATH. CASE NO. C/Z 85-1 The City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, as follows: SECTION 1: That a portion of Ordinance No. 107 referencing Section 25.46.1 of , the Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Map (Chapter 35.46 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code) is hereby amended to read as shown on the attached Exhibit "A". SECTION 2: That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is hereby certified. SECTION 3: The city clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this llth day of April, 1985, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: KELLY, WILSON, AND SNYDER NOES: BENSON ABSENT: JACKSON ABSTAIN: NONE i WALTER H. SNYDER, Maya TEST: l � �SHEILA R. G IGAN, U# Clerk City of Palm Desert, Gadfornia Am ORDINANCE NO. 425 EXHIBIT "A" P' I� (-- M_ AUNESIA ."_,.FAL L 5 -- . r " _ ` 1 .PAHD ]7, - rJJJBBB P.R. 22 ... R P.0 .I �_i . t�. S.P. I2 " (4)• Y- ✓'ANZ ANITA r� 1 _ FRED WARING DRIVE S-1 -- F PC. v (4), P 61 S.P. A P C. (4), ' PC. Ul P.R.-6, S.P. P.C. ( 3) , S.P. . . H.PR. D E L I P.R.- 6 R-1 CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL 009 BQM�Kf- ;: ORDINANCE NO. 425 �� ��-�� • 85-1 i DATE A9ri1 11, 1985 - YjATEp ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY °/sTRlcj I iA 1 3 1985 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ENVIRONML-'NTAL SERVICES POST OFFICE BOX 1058•COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(619)V0450F PALM DESERT DIRECTORS OFFICERS RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS,PRESIDENT LOWELL O.WEEKS,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TELLIS OODEKAS,VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON,SECRETARY JOHN P.POWELL KEITH H.AINSWORTH,ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGERIAUDITOR PAUL W.NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS STEVE D.BUXTON March 8, 1985 File: 0163.11 0421.1 0721.1 City of Palm Desert Post Office Box 1977 Palm Desert, California 92261 Gentlemen: Subject: General Plan Amendment 85-1 and Change of Zone 85-1, Portion of SW14, Section 18, T5S, R6E, S.B.M. This area lies west of Highway 111 and is considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. However, runoff from the adjacent mountains can cause damage to improvements. Provisions to handle runoff should be included in on-site facilities. This area is designated Zone C on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this District. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 54 and 80 of Coachella Valley Water District for sanitation service. Yours very truly, yf Lowell 0. Weeks e eral Manager-Chief Engineer CS:ra cc: Riverside County Department of Public Health, Indio TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 5, 1985 Commissioner Downs indicated that a trial period of one year had already been placed on the developer to mitigate noise. Chairman Crites asked if Mr. Ritchey had designated specific months for summer and winter. Mr. Ritchey had not at that time. Chairman Crites asked if anyone else wished to speak in regard to the project. Commissioner Richards asked that staff word the motion for Saturday deliveries. Mr. Patterson noted that refrigeration trucks have changed and noise on top of the roofs might create a problem. He felt that a condition of a one year trial period for tenants to come back would be acceptable with the protection for using the added wall height and landscaping. Chairman Crites stated that the Saturday deliveries could be stopped if there were problems. Commissioner Richards explained that is why the two issues should remain separate. Mr. Patterson then indicated that commission should specify the conditions and what they would apply to. Mr. Diaz noted that the motion should be to instruct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption approving the terms and time lines set forth in the communication received and that a six month trial period be in effect. Action: Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, instructing staff to prepare a resolution for approval at the March 19, 1985, meeting. Carried 5-0. C. CASE NOS G� PA 8�d C/Z 85-1 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for consideration of a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres, located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path. Mr. Sawa reviewed the background of the case and the staff report. He indicated that staff was recommending that commission adopt the findings and resolution. Commissioner Wood asked Mr. Patterson what the legal implications would be on such an approval. Mr. Patterson replied that the planning commission action would be an initial action which would require approval by the city council. He felt that the commission could deal with this item without concern about impact on the litigation. Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the case. MR. RICHARD ROMER, counsel for Mrs. Mitchell, the property owner, and Mr. McMillan, stated that this was the one year anniversary for the start of the project. Mr. Romer indicated that bound by what the city does regarding the zoning and the impact on the lawsuit determined at that time, the court ruled on the city's motion to dismiss denying that motion and affirming the fact that Mr. McMillan and Mrs. Mitchell have stated a cause of action for a taking of this property in the event that it is determined that there is no economic use of the property. He explained that the court went on to say that even if the property were rezoned residential, if that rezoning action is not economically feasible it can be considered a taking. He felt that the citizens voting on Measure E were not in favor of any type of building and asked the commission to seriously consider whether the rezoning to residential is not just delaying the inevitable and developing further problems by not having the proper use of this property. He indicated -3- MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 5, 1985 that he was not just trying to set himself up for a lawsuit that would say you have taken the property, now pay us. He did not want to see his clients to go through another measure and election. He stated that he was not advocating a decision in favor of one way or another and if the commission could come up with a plan that was economically feasible, his clients' intent was to develop the property. He asked that the commission consider whether this is what the citizens want. Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the case. Mr. Frank Little, 72-949 Bel Air, stated that he felt that the citizen's in the city who voted to pass Measure E would be opposed to any type of development and that it would detract from Palm Desert. He stated his opposition and felt that other people would also. MS. KAY CRAIG, 72-992 Bel Air, indicated that she was a 12 month resident. She stated that she was against any type of development and indicated that possible hillside slippage could be dangerous. She did not want to see Palm Desert become a little Hong Kong. Chairman Crites closed the public testimony. Commissioner Richards noted that the applicant could have initially proposed a variety of types of developments. Mr. Diaz indicated that the applicants would still have had to go through the public hearing process. Commissioner Richards indicated that the hillside site was visible from many locations. Mr. Diaz noted that residential zoning requires different findings than a restaurant. Mr. Diaz noted that some voters might be opposed to any type of development, but stated that it could not be presupposed. He indicated that if a group of citizens try to put another issue on the ballot to stop any building on the hillsides, it would have to be considered. Commissioner Richards asked about the possible impacts on adjacent hillside property owners and if rezoning would keep the zonings consistent. Mr. Diaz indicated that the zoning would have to conform to the amended hillside ordinance. Commissioner Erwood noted that the voters told the commission what they wanted the land to be rezoned as. Commissioner Wood stated that he could sympathize with Mr. Romer on whether the land would be developable or not. He felt that in this case the responsible thing to do would be to approve the rezone and move the case up to the city council. The attorney stated that at that time the city council could approve this. Chairman Crites indicated that the voters did not want commercial, but that nothing else could be presumed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to approve the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 1030, recommending to city council approval of GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1. Carried 5-0. D. Case No. ZOA 85-1 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for consideration of an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code (Chapter 25, Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance) by adding a new code section which would prohibit development or use in commercial or industrial zones in hillside areas that are an average 10% or greater in slope. -4- ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 107, THE PALM DESERT ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONE FROM C-1 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) TO HPR (HILLSIDE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL) ON 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERS PATH. CASE NO. C/Z 85-1 The City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, as follows: SECTION 1: That a portion of Ordinance No. 107 referencing Section 25.46.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Map (Chapter 35.46 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code) is hereby amended to read as shown on the attached Exhibit "A". SECTION 2: That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is hereby certified. SECTION 3: The city clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this day of by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: WALTER H. SNYDER, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California Am 1�— MA6NES.I.n._._ _. FALLS -: e C-I r�4L P.R: .. AHD S'P I P.R. 22 P ��nv4Yil.ovo'o `� (4 ), - _ F S.P. _ (4).• \ _ \MAN�ANitA[ e, 12 \ FRED WARING DRIVE —.. — --- R I S-I PC. VIA (4), P. 61 S.P, r P. C. (4), �� ;e ` I� �, Iq •� � •� 111 P.R.-6, S.P. •; • P.C. ( 3) , S.P. I1.{? R. , D EL P.R.-6 R-I CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL CZE� E�U(25,M (O Tl�P E- D L-\ fM ORDINANCE NO. 85-1 , 7�,�E o EEO A DATE GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 Continued commercial development the city does not know what they would accept on the property, if anything. After this discussion, on a motion by Mr. Richards, seconded by Mr. Wood, the planning commission unanimously adopted the findings and resolution recommending the general plan amendment and change of zone. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERS PATH. CASE NO. GPA 85-1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 28th day of March, 1985, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a general plan amendment to change the land use desilgnation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-020-003 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89," in that the director of environmental services has determined that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment and a negative declaration has been prepared. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said city council did find the following facts to to exist to justify their actions: 1. Change of general plan designation would conform with intent of city measure passed in November, 1984, precluding commercial use and/or development in hillsides. 2. Hillside Planned Residential designation would permit viable use of property. 3. Hillside Planned Residential designation would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the council in this case. 2. GPA 85-1 (exhibit "A") and a negative declaration of environmental impact are approved. regular meeting of the Palm Desert City APPROVED and ADOPTED at a g PASSED g r Council held on this day of , 1985, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: WALTER H. SNYDER, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California Am > j - -- COUNT , .Y...-CLUB-9RIVE-' 1 HOVLEY LANE I ? T P A.H.D. 13 � . •�••. COLLEGE PARK VIEW DR. OF THE o,,: 95,=>; •'�,; • I•• c�Q�i� DESERT . 777 iFRED WARING DR: � v ?� :% -:v< � �<'„�P"'::•:.i�• '_ .;;i��;;i"r?'', ;,_ �_ • ,�r-;'d OFF-.P,`�o'" ="n a.�i`� � ,';' PF. l „{1\I �y�� ! `=:`•`�_''a ::., u.' T , vli/qi- _ R.C. :d:JPjf 1.: Ilp!L➢ihjilej11 ! �f�lln' i^ilnlinl� 241 R.C. ::::•}i:. y EL Pl1SE0 P_P'? '?I:F I ,rd';:+i:h '(rt?? rtnM i'�i II�III1 11'IIII • H.RR• :j❑I�.`'' ,` `,� 1/� �• �,.i�•,U .r • --- `:,.,,-".', �.,/ III c�P.f. Yw•ww•••q•11•w••w••••1' � _ nC.n!Cn�',�r.pr p_R 11 age 28 25 3 PF t1.hR' P HAYSTACK ih + + + + + tt + + + + r + c4 Ir + + + + t + + • + + + L + IF + h th .t +. t .t t .t + + , _ - q N•: . 'n I 1 I 1 Ir t + .t + t + + t tr _F F + + Jj ` 6r�II 11 1I + ., °.'., 3 ; /,;. L'. 33 I• 'ji + i1:- ,; jar Ir + . + + + � � + .I- a + + i .;iiu(.ilsufi.��. -.p,';. �;.,;I` nl.�•'.;:i•'. 11;� ' L + + n- + a .t + i ' I Z 5 4 � `— ' �.. .• _.__ __-------------g00000�ooeeeeeeee CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL Gen . flan Amend . RESOLUTION NO. dj,�Uo c im A DATE CITY OF PALM DESERT TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council REQUEST: Consideration of a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres, located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path. APPLICANT: CITY OF PALM DESERT CASE NOS: GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 DATE: MARCH 28, 1985 CONTENTS: A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. B. DISCUSSION. C. DRAFT RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE NO. D. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES INVOLVING CASE NOS. GPA 85-1 AND C/Z 85-1. E. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1030. F. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED MARCH 5, 1985. G. RELATED MAPS AND/OR EXHIBITS. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. , approving GPA 85-1. 2. Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. approving C/Z 85-1 to second reading. B. DISCUSSION: The general plan amendment and change of zone were initiated by the city council as a result of the November 6, 1984, election. At that time voters in the City of Palm Desert passed a city measure disallowing any commercial use and/or development in the hillside areas. This property is the site that Don McMillan was denied a conditional use permit for a restaurant in August, 1984. The general plan presently indicates the property and surrounding area as Core Area Commercial. As such, the property is zoned C-1 (General Commercial) in order to be in conformance with the general plan. Proposed is an amendment to the general plan land use designation from General Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential. This would implement the city measure prohibiting commercial development and/or use in the hillside areas, by eliminating the commercial designation. Along with the general plan amendment, a change of zone to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) is proposed which would implement the amendment. The planning commission at their meeting of March 5, 1985, reviewed this item. The property owner's attorney spoke and questioned whether residential zoning is economically feasible. He also indicated that he hoped that residential development would not instigate another initiative on his clients property. Two other Palm Desert property owners spoke and indicated an objection to any type of hillside construction. The planning commission generally felt that approval of the item was substantiated for various reasons. Mr. Richards felt that the HPR zone would provide the necessary protection of the hillsides. Mr. Erwood felt the voters had voiced their opinion. Mr. Wood felt the change should go to the city council for their action. Chairman Crites felt that while the citizens have indicated they do not want r PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1030 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERS P -, CASE NOS GPA 85-t,and C/Z 85-1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 5th day of March, 1985, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres located on the west side of Highway Ill, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-020-003 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89", in that the director of environmental services has determined that the project will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of environmental impact has been prepared; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of this request: General Plan Amendment: 1. Change of general plan designation would conform with intent of city measure passed in November, 1984, precluding commercial use and/or development in hillsides. 2. Hillside Planned Residential designation would permit viable use of property. 3. Hillside Planned Residential designation would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. Change of Zone: 1. The Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) zoning would be in conformance with the general plan land use designation proposed by GPA 85-1. 2. The HPR zoning would permit land uses and densities which would be the same as those permitted in other similar hillside areas. 3. The HPR zoning would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in these cases; 2. That the planning commission does hereby recommend to the city council approval of a general plan amendment from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential per attached exhibit 'A.' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1030 3. That the planning commission does hereby recommend to the city council approval of a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to Hillside Planned Residential per attached exhibit 'B.' 4. That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is hereby recommended for approval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of March, 1985, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: DOWNS, ERWOOD, RICHARDS, WILSON, AND CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: . ' NONE B FO CRITES, Chairman ATT W+':�ZP/ RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Am -2- w- -- COUNT T . Y---CLUB—DRIVE-- aF I HOVLEY LANE LLJ P I /O h-% 7! N.O. � ':,,;,r: . ::r., CC cc o=u", c.lc(2=';",� I \ � L 1 PARK VIEW DR: ; — .....: COLLEGE o THE OF y'' DESERT C.C! , ;,,",<l;; IFRED WARING DR: ♦..�/. .i.a,a: !OFF P"a..n,��k - ;;OP:P.,.,l',�_ �;r"_ "- "�„"^'`• :'_.:' � ;i�- _ i r0is �n:p.,d:r'ar,�,..ln `yvu4 ll`.SIC•G SCu, • "' R.C. ''%,d(�„��r�i1! ., ,�;: -. • .,ur:-.r _ii/i; it %G`11'IC• ?Vll�h!LI! lili,i!�r 241 R.C. ` EL PA S E cJ •1 :a, < , _ : . _. • ..�,. •,,.; ..n "1'dd'F'b`.......... :'..... \. • h{.P.R. � •,'�;',r,•`,�:;::;-,:"rC G;;=-;�r;,�u aS'iSCun�i��.�i.�r I• ,1 ; 1117, erF P ,1 • — I[. I I c P F-ll 4f n vw•ww...ww..wa+wwl �—htl1� . 11�. ! p-" n-ir,.�., 25 3 rF 28 P HAYSTACK I V' �5;�'�;'. 'Ulf�'p �'11!,'1',''j\'•�'''I'.,::�,i. it F + } f f r f } !• 1 :,cir. 3t!�oii- Il'_.:n=``P•:• I.:r. ';'o :Icl4\\\.\�1...;�,'`'�'_ }3(" + + } + f . / ' n na 33 it r 5 4 : I : I CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION Gen . Plan Amend . RESOLUTION NO. /2-30 ���� o �u DATE MI�R� H Si IgSS (— M A 6 N E Si A F A L L S 0 � 11 if aiC_, , �� � 1 to -1 c-( P.t. L PP HPq rrr "� a ,�.er .. AHD S P. --�--P P.R. 22 tJ 1l -�BNVg11W000_Q R c i " (PC. S.P. F LF F - --- FRED WARING DRIVE S-I P. C. R r (4), P. 3. 6, S.P. a ! P. C. (4) 1 . 1,1 ' . ;'; '•.. "mot '„ — '� P,R.-6, S.P. P.C. ( 3) , S.P. FI.PR. , D EL P.R.- 6 CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION ' OM O� RESOLUTION NO 1030 ��8� o �� DATE LJRei+ s� 19gS � 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1030 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERSPAI CASE NOS.//GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 5th day of March, 1985, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-020-003 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89", in that the director of environmental services has determined that the project will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of environmental impact has been prepared; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of this request: General Plan Amendment: 1. Change of general plan designation would conform with intent of city measure passed in November, 1984, precluding commercial use and/or development in hillsides. 2. Hillside Planned Residential designation would permit viable use of property. 3. Hillside Planned Residential designation would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. Change of Zone: 1. The Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) zoning would be in conformance with the general plan land use designation proposed by GPA 85-1. 2. The HPR zoning would permit land uses and densities which would be the same as those permitted in other similar hillside areas. 3. The HPR zoning would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in these cases; 2. That the planning commission does hereby recommend to the city council approval of a general plan amendment from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential per attached exhibit 'A.' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1030 3. That the planning commission does hereby recommend to the city council approval of a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to Hillside Planned Residential per attached exhibit 'B: 4. That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is hereby recommended for approval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of March, 1985, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: DOWNS, ERWOOD, RICHARDS, WILSON, AND CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE B FO CRITES, Chairman ATT -q t - of v t RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Am -2- - -- - -COUNT . Y--CLUB-DRIVE- / �F ;mil i.� • j , HOVLEY LANE • j � W �p , / 1„' till, AAA `'_-P'•;:. ,i // f1.11.0. 11=11` �C:1�Cli:`i•11�//Vi_ II IF1 I138, `�1H• �"°/'j1 ;, `�"'.••pro = n�n �I. )::i 1 T HPR a;;.:',;;: ESP ���.. COLLEGE PARK VIEW DR: •nr� - , ,,ny';n: OF TIIE a _ • S{/ Ly DESERT C.0 iFRED WARING DR: - ,oFF P. 4 ill,' •1;"�r/.1\�!�I'�=11� !Op'F�''.,� _ "••,,.., , ,;;,I:II,: , • - .\�1•JI,\I. 1O>I, 11_•p n.Ln V�-11'I�_ll Y}IO•, � •1 �: 111- - .n l'^; _ . :://•./I�'�I r•. _I,tel: I/�\ R.C.d. l� l' ;Yhll��!LII!Llimn�i' hjlil!In,!�LI!1!t,il(i 24 : L,�I11� —RC _ ..:•. II. EL PASEO it ' : .. ..... �alr ; • • '_ - '!` :I ✓,,.J .,I. 1 III. P.F u'� :: .d u(r n.; � , I I : 1 I;•' I I : 11.6R. �1 `.fin�;1r,�;7 rev SNP 25 3 PC HAYSTACK os N r It + + t } + + + } + } + h } fDF I' "- II:.11':::"SY�IVI' .• .1'tl=C:;II � /,y.'._'T.':q. IF t 'h ( t + + �4 + f 4 -! 4 • _ .I''.�"q=�IL,,•�\`,;.. : y�a�'.�`,i 11�R/•�\\11;\\" ;�..�, ;. ,4 + + 4 4 �4 4 4 4 f F 4 4 1 p.r_� j�l�p/�i II -_�'.Il�f.11'•},L;r`,�.��.`;1=111\`\.\`1;.;,�,_:1, i• 4 + 4 L I. i C 4 + 4 .4 + 1 .iii l'' ' tG\,`il ::II : 3J;:,,,;.;`. ,.. 33 I• 4 .« �4 t 43 C� � + 4 + ., , � .. J I,���•a ::1,_•, � �.1',.�.: /_ 'll � I,�� �• Il.'-' i• f a } + + l } + 1- 1 ♦ } .1 j/ Plr'11911 1 1: 11"\11 - \ J .11 i 1. 4 + ♦ 1 / n-.�`'.II>'.' %':.'C� . 1l.'J" .' `•\t:'�l i��/ I4 + + + + 4. 4 + J. + 4 + + I .�,.,: . 1'/:y�11=:11'':;'il ;!. �\'(:.:-•��'S i\`'S1'.%�.'. - _.__.__.__.._—.__ r � 5 4 I 1 - ; 8 ' _ . Oo.e000000®ooe oo ' CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION Gen . Flan Amend . RESOLUTION NO. /0- O DATE i"idRCH Si IgSS J (-- MAUNE51A FALLS C-,. C-I P.R.- ,. P AHD --L--P- J�L7J .1 O 3 P.R. 22 J l q c. (4 ), lenu4 i.000 o PC. S.P. _L _L (4). 12 F — --- FRED WARING DRIVE S- I R P. C. r (4), P. 61 S.P. P. C. (4), r ,.r ,n n r •n s s - 2 — ::., +4 P.R.-6, S.P. P.C. ( 3) , S.P. i IRR. , D EL P.R.- 6 cl ) CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION (Mp RESOLUTION NO. .) QZQ_ o (u D85- 1 DATE MIS i9gS City of Palm Desert Department of Environmental Services Staff Report TO: Planning Commission DATE: March 5, 1985 CASE NO: GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 REQUEST: Consideration of a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres, located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path. INITIATED BY: CITY OF PALM DESERT I. BACKGROUND: A. GENERAL: The general plan amendment and change of zone were initiated by the city council as a result of the November 6, 1984, election. At that time voters in the City of Palm Desert passed a city measure disallowing any commercial use and/or development in the hillside areas. While the measure was written for all hillside areas, the impetus for the measure was the conditional use permit request by Don McMillan for a restaurant on this property. B. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: C-l/VACANT SOUTH: C-I/PART VACANT WITH SOME COMMERCIAL EAST: C-I/VACANT WEST: AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE AND PD-C (RANCHO MIRAGE) /VACANT C. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Core area commercial and related uses. D. PREVIOUS RELATED CASES: CUP 84-1, DON McMILLAN - 12,000 square foot restaurant denied by the city council on August 9, 1984. H. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROPOSED CHANGES: A. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING: The general plan presently indicates the property and surrounding area as Core Area Commercial. As such, the property is zoned C-1 (General Commercial) in order to be in conformance with the general plan. A zoning history of the property was repared for the city council during the McMillan consideration and is attached for your perusal. B. PROPOSED CHANGES: Proposed is an amendment to the general plan land use designation from General Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential. This would implement the city measure prohibiting commercial development and/or use in the hillside areas, which passed in November, 1984, by eliminating the commercial designation. Pr STAFF REPORT CONTINUED MARCH 5, 1985 Along with the general plan amendment, proposed is a change of zone to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) which would implement the general plan amendment. This zoning would permit residential uses based upon four options with a minimum density of one unit per five acres of land. III. ANALYSIS: A. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 1. Change of general plan designation would conform with intent of city measure passed in November, 1984, precluding commercial use and/or development in hillsides. 2. Hillside Planned Residential designation would permit viable use of property. 3. Hillside Planned Residential designation would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. B. REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR CHANGE OF ZONE: 1. The Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) zoning would be in conformance with the general plan land use designation proposed by GPA 85-1. 2. The HPR zoning would permit land uses and densities which would be the same as those permitted in other similar hillside areas. 3. The HPR zoning would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. C. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The director of environmental services has determined that the proposed general plan amendment and change of zone would not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration has been prepared. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff feels that this proposal as initiated is acceptable and recommends: A. Adoption of the findings; B. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. , recommending to the city council approval of GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1. V. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolutions B. Legal Notice C. Negative Declaration and Initial Study D. Zoning History E. Plans and Exhibits Prepared by S.F • Reviewed and Approved by /tm -2- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR 13.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF PAINTERS PATH. CASE NOS. GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 5th day of March, 1985, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto, for 13.1 acres located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-020-003 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89", in that the director of environmental services has determined that the project will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of environmental impact has been prepared; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of this request: General Plan Amendment: 1. Change of general plan designation would conform with intent of city measure passed in November, 1984, precluding commercial use and/or development in hillsides. 2. Hillside Planned Residential designation would permit viable use of property. 3. Hillside Planned Residential designation would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. Change of Zone: 1. The Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) zoning would be in conformance with the general plan land use designation proposed by GPA 85-1. 2. The HPR zoning would permit land uses and densities which would be the same as those permitted in other similar hillside areas. 3. The HPR zoning would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of adjacent properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in these cases; 2. That the planning commission does hereby recommend to the city council approval of a general plan amendment from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential per attached exhibit 'A.' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3. That the planning commission does hereby recommend to the city council approval of a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to Hillside Planned Residential per attached exhibit 'B.' 4. That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is hereby recommended for approval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of March, 1985, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BUFORD CRITES, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Am -2- LAJ -- -----COUNT Y--CLUB—DRfVE-- a HOVLEY LANE /"/ P Lu �I;,,,�_, :�.11:�,;., C\\ /\.�, -..... - ri I�rIC'Ir_`:�..�-:`:'��=1 Jrl.,\'.,II zd,• II�`Z•,s... ,1, HPH v = '.rlli l' ES P p Ms PARK VIEW DR. •••• co�cECE 'x'. :I .`o:,,••@� OF THE i • . .`n,"nv DESERT C.0 ..C. • L ,��Ir°!lc;Y-,� ,• ,;, s'=�:' '1';. jFRED WARING DR.- J. a -OFF.P``.I I i �:\\,, a .,,o,/r>I�,,.,.,1:IL r` an.:" :yi;•. �,���:..yll:i n',.,::". R it gird _ Ada •I li,�_'_`\;\n 111\C' �hi,yill_r'. '_er.-" Qi,P,"�.'.`If:,OIi,G • "•' R•C. ' t LmLmlilnefm; i;I..... f..... - 24 :I .S„ R.C. f EL PASEO :>:::..::::•:•. ;.li.;•.,i,;.,'. , •, 'n' .a';•po��PF 11� r:• -ddJJt,1YJT! .W:: j: •lill'.I l:, �I•�'I • , c' ,'�c''Ira '.,P ';L;:r'r.! F' _"` i, - iil : ::IIII!I'I!II��I �'i \ • H.P.R. � ,:n�' .,i_ ... :�p: ,:vi,oi'n,n;" .ryi-, .• .I! l : ::r � I , �• - � . .��•'� � psi ' . �'p , PF 25 3 PF /A 28 H.P.R. os N P HAYSTACK h + + + + + + h + + + ar + F F — •' _ Ih + + + 4 h h F } + + + h + .o ii;l .. :.\t,(:Jj�(t� ',•'.}, ,`I;:rli,�,l�'II�cC,I•,P11.•,:,� Ir + 'h t ,. + + h + + + + I \AI! L + + + .} uy I \\ /❑ III ,\1 1 L , + 1- 1 + a i IL + h + + :nr t.1••, Ifs —A 7!.//�.\�'1 .. '} 33 + a + I` + + } + 1 1 F .L L + +I} + + + + +. r,.,: ��it''•: I1 ���/: 'ip,(''- .'•,;%.�7'. _ r 5 4 CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION Gen . flan Amend . 85-1 RESOLUTION NO. ADATE -- r— ( MAUNES �_�_ .-_. FALLS ' l 4 ----- : , C-I T� LI Lu P.R.- P r f0 c—, W • TItY - 1 -71 oL. T .' T -. AHD r --�--p PR RR. L T j S s J q (4 )' �BBU�1100D P.C. ,.--� -i S.P. — --- 12 FRED WARING DRIVE S-1 R P C. v� (4), P. 6, S.P. P. C. (4) IT n i . r n ., ".• . .. n of P.R.-6, S.P. P.C. ( 3) , S.P. H.PR. , D E P.R.- 6 R-I - CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 0y 2Z02-'U Tff 1 RESOLUTION NO. ���� o �85- 1 DATE February 15, 1985 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE Case Nos. GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres (on land a conditional use permit request by Donald McMillan was denied), located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: 0).0 APN 640-902-003 .s. .I A H D S.P. L P.R. 22 I P.C. S.P. �� -y�I ' _ �, --- - R. s L -- FRED WARING DRIVE S-I I n s PC. L r (4) - ' I ' P. 6, S.P. ,. •' P C'sl PC ILI C. (4), E �411 ti 9 ,e SAID Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 5, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission PUBLISH: Desert Post February 22, 1985 Am :v N 1 f� 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NOS: GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: CITY OF PALM DESERT PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: General plan amendment from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painter's Path. The director of the department of environmental services, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the initial study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. RAMON A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES /tm INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. GPA 85-1, C/Z 85-1 Environmental Evaluation Checklist Comments and Possible Mitigation Measures (Categories pertain to attached checklist) 11. LAND USE With the proposal, the presently planned core area commercial and C-1 zoning would be changed to Hillside Planned Residential, which would preclude any commercial use and/or development. MITIGATION MEASURES: None are required since change would not create adverse environmental impact. *NOTE: This Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is based upon the proposed general plan amendment and change of zone. Since no physical changes to the land are proposed there are no adverse impacts at this time. When a plan for construction on this site is submitted further environmental review will be required. 7.,• �., CASE NO. aQQ 9-!�- C/Z 5"Ss EN7I80N2,IEXTAL SERVICES DEPT. INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION CHECKLIST NOTE: The availability of data necessary to address the topics listed below shall form the basis of a decision as to whether the application is considered complete for purposes of environmental assessment. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers , possible mitigation measures and comments are provided on attached sheets ) . Yes Maybe No 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? — — b. Disruptions, displacements , compaction, or overcovering of the soil ? — — — c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? �- d. The destruction, covering., or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? �. b. The creation of objectionable odors? _ — c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? �; 2. Yes Maybe No 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a_ Changes . in currents , 'or the course or 1' direction of water' movements? 4 . b. Changes in-absorpt-fon rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and-amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Alteration of_the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? e. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? f. Reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? _ \ 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of plants (including trees , shrubs , grass , and crops )? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? . C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area , or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? S. Animal. Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds , land animals including reptiles , or insects)? v b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? V C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing wildlife 'habitat? 'a 3. Yes No 6. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in :.the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? 7. Eneray. Will the proposal result in: \. a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? _ b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or re- quire the.development of new' sources of energy? 8. Risk of Upset: Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, pesticides , oil , chemicals , or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 9. Economic Loss. Will the proposal result in: a. A change in the value of property and improvements endangered by flooding? v b. A change in the value of property and impro•4erients exposed to geologic hazards beyond accepted community risk standards? _ V 10. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels to the point at which accepted community noise and vibration levels are exceeded? 11. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the a tT ation of the present developed or planned land use of an area? 12. Open space. Will the proposal lead to a decrease in the amount of designated open space? 13. Population. Will the proposal result in: v a. Alteraticn of the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of the City? b. Change in the population distribution by age, income, heligion, racial , or ethnic \ h group, occupational class , household type? v 4. Yes Maybe No 14. Emolo ent. Will the proposal result in new w long-term jobs provided, or a change in the number and per cent employed, unemployed, and underemployed? 15. Housing. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in number and per cent of housing units by type (price or rent range, zoning category, owner-occupied and rental , etc. ) relative to demand or to number of families in various income classes in the City? b. Impacts on existing housing or creation of a demand for additional housing? 16. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing transportation systems? _ v d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? _ e. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists , or pedestrians? _ — - 17. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon , or resu t in a need for, new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? _ — b. Police protection? c. Schools? _ — d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? f. Other governmental services? Yes Maybe No 18. Public Fiscal Balance. Will the proposal result in a net change in government fiscal flow (revenues less operating expenditures and annualized capital expenditures)? 19. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems , or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications system? _ c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal ? 20. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. A change in the level of community health care provided? 21. Social Services . Will the proposal result in _ an increased denand for provision of general — social services? 22. Aesthetics . Will the proposal result in: a. Obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive \ site open to public view? c. Lessening of the overall neighborhood (or area ) attractiveness , pleasantness , and uniqueness? 23. Light and Glar:. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 24. Archeolooical/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, ^ object, or building' a 6. Yes Maybe No 25. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment or to curtail the diversity in the environment? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goats? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small , but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings , either directly or indirectly? V Initial Study Prepared By: Gt A C91_Q_ - INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Environmental Services SUBJECT: Zoning History of the Top of the Desert DATE: July 29, 1984 Restaurant Site. 1973 - On the county zoning map, three acres of the subject property located on the lower slopes were zoned C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial). The remaining ten acres including the proposed restaurant site on the top of the hill was zoned W-2, a general holding zone where specific use is determined when an application is submitted. 1975 - On the original Palm Desert Zoning Map, the three acres on the lower slope were retained as general commercial and the upper area was rezoned PR-1,H. 1979 - Pursuant to the Palm Valley Specific Plan, the upper ten acres were rezoned to open space. The three acres of commercial were retained. 1983 - After the discovery of gross inaccuracies in the slope analysis which formed the basis of the Palm Valley Specific Plan open space zoning recommendation, a new specific plan was initiated. The city attorney advised the Hillside Subcommittee that hillside overlay and open space zoning which does not provide property owners with any viable use could result in invalidation of all hillside development regulations or a successful inverse condemnation lawsuit. Since the city did not have accurate topographic data necessary to pinpoint appropriate developable sites, all open space not in public ownership was to be rezoned. Areas adjacent to existing residential zoning was rezoned residential; areas adjacent to commercial zoning to commercial. While it was agreed that the vast majority of the hillside acreage would ultimately be maintained in open space, appropriate sites for development were to be determined when accurate topographic surveys were submitted with hillside development plans, precise plans, or conditional use permit applications. On the subject property, the three acres zoned for commercial development on all maps prior to 1983 actually represents the steepest portion of the site and the area least appropriate for development. If the upper portion had been rezoned residential instead of commercial, then the city ran the risk of seeing both commercial development or the exposed steep slope and two residential units on the proposed restaurant site. 11{Vy I.l i� 9 LRF�; City of RANCHO MIRAGE .......0'" 69-825 HIGHWAY 111 RANCHO MIRAGE CALIFORNIA 92270 TELEPHONE (619) 324-4511 February 27, 1985 1 . Ramon Diaz I 1 �4h Director of Environmental Services ENVIRu;r„g r)rilt City of Palm Desert c)T1 GF FnLA1 pE3ER�E5 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 - Request for Comments Dear Mr. Diaz: The proposed zone change to Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) for the entire 13. 1 acres would be desirable over the existing Core Area Commercial (C-1) designation now in place. Anv residential development, presumably at very low density (1 DU/2-1/2 - 1 DU/5 acres) , would not generate a significant amount of traffic as the present commercial zoning might. The main concern of the City regarding residential development at the site would pertain to unsightly scars which might result from necessary road and pad cuts. Appropriate architecture and landscape screening of each residence would also be of concern to Rancho Mirage residents. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this proposal. Sincerely, 7 David J. Abrams, AICP Director of Planning DJA:JM:dko NO 2 Z/ CO 2.02,4c .l: Lot 33 jo P�4 K)A- I.EYACNI 65 "o 4,. TIA Lo 12.554c of n /bl. 2 .3 95,4C.M. AA �78 3f 24 04rA:G4 0 SrArCHWrill 986584 MAP SK 640 pGO2 RIVEI-7510E COUNTY, CALIF December 13 , 1984 Mr. Donald A. McMillan Post Office Box 1139 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Re : Your undated letter addressed to City of Palm Desert, Attn: Ray Diaz, Director of Environmental Services Dear Mr. McMillan: In the view of the City of Palm Desert, the initiative passed by the voters in Palm Desert precludes commercial zoning on your property. There appear to be two alternatives available through the zoning process to be applied to the property, one being open space and the second being hillside planned residential . The Staff has, on the instructions of the City Council, started the process for the rezoning of matter and, in so o Zrg the Staff has recommended t hi11G ' �7P planned residenti for the property. Pen n action on suc zoning, any application filed would, of necessity, not be determined prior to a resolution of the zoning on the property. Certainly, if you wish to file an application knowing that it will be processed but held from the hearing stage until such time as the zoning is determined, you may do so. If you have any further questions, please contact me. Yours very truly, DAVID J. ERWIN DJE/vcd CC : Richard R. Terzian Richard Romer Ray Diaz, City of Palm Desert \ I � I 1 , J _ � I o ` � o 905 \ i f� I - .d SERT --�---liH �--- O ----RANCHO N \ s cr •'�yQ,.� err---__._��__ '� � m C n w • \�' - --=�z R 2 7000 o _-.• _.,+;_,RAROARA_--- I.'P '— o R-3- 0 n S1rL` .N z �R I N o MIMOSA 0f vl _A ''J', 0_ _—_— p ( VU��� / ice•—' ARBOLEDA \ \ Ire i I BPl151,,v 1717T' :IP R 2 GLORIANA I i r �T p R R- I � TNoo_ - (` R.Z. 7000 i .WpPA 'JR. m SAN—NY�000 5,ERPc :ISiA ROCATALIN r, OR. 7000 GOADALI ';P ANOE � RDO R \ �.5 ;S \�•. R-Z � GP5 7000 o \ c S w-2 4 L r J L 4 In C 6000 aO U ED L 0��.nV- Oi a� by / �4 h4V�� Sr i �. r• w k4 y F ° RrAIL —_Sr ) ny c o� 4 o HFaFHa '- _ ` J ' F /Y) \ R 2 - o $� 6000 M R - 1 v (� 7 . RI� P ` '"� 1 11 ffRAPEVINE, -- - - —P P - I - 10 i r000 ;9 R J Q i - 10,0 Ir _ . ��_...__ PVRSE Po-_. own am \ CITr oI PALM DESEG P.R-7, SP. i I lop Q I — 1 � � I I _— - �I j c R-1 p R-I 1g7wC R C.(d 5. P 12,000 (- R-1 tt,o0c u — 3 r U I BNI,�aN�• CO I p.C. IR-i L � + (4),S.P. MANZANI AOR � SP., y�,,.... , ,. .,mw .a.I ti R-f R-1 Ia,oQo PC. (4), S. P. R-I 00 ' I T P.C. (4), S. R-1 f O Q 1 w P.C. i o (4) R- 1 R:} V U � R } P.R: 6, S. P. , P.C. (3 ), 5. P. I r„ PR - I, H P. C. (3), S. P. P.C.(3) ' EL PASEO P PR.-6 BASE DISTR..I> -- -_"-- r)VERLAY QIST oyn 4 AGRICULTURAL- R-N M'1H.Lf NUM, I - . ., ,• , S.I. � SERVICE I " AINAGEWAY, FLOOD PL SIN DUSTRIAL WATERCOURSE R-E , RESIDENTIAL EST4'F I P. R. PLANNED I PLA-.ED RESEARCH! l RESIDENTIAL I P'I' .NDUSTRIAL PARK S.H I SEISMIC HAZARD R_ I I RESIDENTIAL ' SINGLE FAMILY C - I GETIAL NERAL COMMERCIAL P PUBLII' N I NATURAL FACTORS RESIINS,ITUrIUNAL RESTRICTED DEVELOPME? R-2_� SINGLENAMII.Y S STODl H HILLSIDE R-3 RESIDENTIAL vLANNEC -.- .... MULTIPLE FAMILY _ COMMERCIAL O.S. OPEN SPACE S.p, SCENIC PRESERVATION - M 4 V !v C RANCHO NIRARE wslAiL,�II -- .-- . IYr O�OAloilw�' - / i C-i ,SCP aft 1 � , fi... R-2 (6), S.P. Lrr9'1 h•��.. �.... f �rit (4�S.P. WNLAM A00 1 P.R-7 S.P R- " S&P- S.I. 44TH AVENUE -WAR PC , P.R.-6 , S.P. TAMPICO ON. S.P \ R 1 R-I C l's' _• 'Y1+ ;7 \ RANCHO R N IV S.P.\*\ f� �\ P.R. - 3 \ d, h PR-6. S P P.C. (3 ), S. P. lM Y ���. .:.W'�♦ t { P. C. (3), S.P. * P.C.(3�: r � ; 21 ,C EL PAdEO P.R. - 2 d , h P ";. PR - 6 S1. R-1 Via;._'• ..�.�..�� R-I "111;.,;+'`f :•s•; P.R.- 3 d, Ba3E DISTRICTS OVERLAY DISTRICTS CONVENTIONAL SINGLE A AGRICULTURAL R-I-M FAMILY/MOBILE HOME S I SERVICE D ORAINA6 EWAY, FIA00 Pl RES.DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL ;WATERCOURSE i r �ANCHU MIRAGE C, c- .-. ( ITI OF PA�jj D `Y aV'0 O N P.R.-7, _ kl_ c -- . r��ICW - JR 9 O I C-I ->.='W P.R. - r r r t- 1. -�, .:� ��'.:.• e� AHD S. P` 4 a P. 3 PR.y ) �RR6 NSV�QD u - P - PC. 5 P r I 1 :121'0It (4). - yM4N�gNILc • r m 12 L RI IG N R- _ I 0 o --- __ _ 8. 2 S FRED WARING DRIVE S- --- �- -- (4), I ) 'A� l7SP. {4. 1 I `IQ3 y ' . . R-.1 . TAM co OR;VE R; a l �nNCNO R N \ \\ IPR.-6, S.P. P.C. (3), S.P. I P.C. ( 3) , S.P. I' P.C. H PR A. !' l 04SEO . � i P 1 1 Zoning History of the Top of the Desert Restaurant Site It was determined that more control could be exercised if only one use was allowed on the property. Since the area was surrounded by commercial and service industrial zoning, the area was designated C-1 with final site selection occurring as part of the precise plan or conditional use permit process. ATTACHMENTS: Zoning maps for 1973, 1975, 1979, and 1983 RAMON A. DIAZ DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES RAD/tm 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NOS: GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: CITY OF PALM DESERT PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: General plan amendment from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painter's Path. The director of the department of environmental services, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the initial study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. RAMON A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES /tm City of RANCHO MIRAGE q 69-825 HIGHWAY 111 RANCHO MIRAGE CALIFORNIA 92270 TELEPHONE (619) 324-4511 D February 27, 1985 �� Ramon Diaz 2 8 1.9$q City oofr of PalmEDesertmental Services E��ryDOF F TAB SERVICES 73-510 Fred Waring Drive PALM DESERT Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 - Request for Comments Dear Mr. Diaz: The proposed zone change to Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) for the entire 13. 1 acres would be desirable over the existing Core Area Commercial (C-1) designation now in place. Any residential development, presumably at very low density (1 DU/2-1/2 - 1 DU/5 acres), would not generate a significant amount of traffic as the present commercial zoning might. The main concern of the City regarding residential development at the site would pertain to unsightly scars which might result from necessary road and pad cuts. Appropriate architecture and landscape screening of each residence would also be of concern to Rancho Mirage residents. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this proposal. Sincerely, David J. Abrams, AICP Director of Planning DJA:JM:dko February 15, 1985 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE Case Nos. GPA 85-1 and C/Z 85-1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres (on land a conditional use permit request by Donald McMillan was denied), located on the west side of Highway Ill, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: 010 APN 640-CN-003 3 C-I ;l-')nu P.R. \ I �r r AHD S.P. P.R. 22 _ L( \BPUSIIWU_ P (4), P.C. S.P. yF I — - R. (4). \ _.1A14N_IPNITA( u '- ' 12, u _. \ _1 _ \ fil g i.- -- - FRED WARING DRIVE S-I s PC. j R v (4), P. 6 S.P. �� s I P.C. (4), °. E f'�C_ SAID Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 5, 1985, at 7:00 pwp�.,in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission PUBLISH: Desert Post February 22, 1985 Am vG PALK DESE rM PORN a®, � 43 273 P ICkOb Pam L aneg Pagmm Baewt q Ca. CrHANG! W BONE APPLOC AInCH PORN : 86"Oe®s a P02wn6mtg �anB�Bmno a GI—f V OF -PAL- M ?96,W-r Applicant (please print) Mailing Address Telephone City State Zip-Codo REOUEST! (Describe specific nature of approval requested). oi-- z©o-5 --neeo AN, C-I To H f< PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Aem W o - ooQ - oo 3 ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. EXISTING ZONING G— ' Property Owner Authorization The undersigned states that they are the owner(s) of the property described herein and hereby give author ization for the filing of this application. ionature Date Agreement absolving the City of Palm Desert Of all liabilities relative to any dead restrictions. 1 DO eY MY SIGNATURE ON THIS AGREEMENT, Absolve the City of Palm Desert of all liabilities regarding any deed restrictions that may be applicable to the property described heroin. Signature Date Applicants Signature Pen G CoU hJGI L- l K-15rCa'fz,h( Signature Date (FOR STAFF USE ONLY) Environmental Status Accepted by+ ❑ Ministerial Act E.A. No. ❑ Categorical Exemption ❑ Negative Declaration CnSIE MOO C)z I S— ❑ Other Reference Case No. ST5--t 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO(S): CnPA, g5—I .AND GIZ $S— I PROJECT: C4V-1015a&L PLAe� .MAD GI J Orib CDT-- LNG APPLICANT: GI Ty 01=9 P,4( A4_ 0* �-r Enclosed please find materials describing a project for which the following is being requested: a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Core Area Commercial to Hillside Planned Residential and a change of zone from C-1 (General Commercial) to HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) for 13.1 acres (on land a conditional use permit request by Donald McMillan was denied), located on the west side of Highway 111, 200 feet northwest of Painters Path, more particularly described as: APN 640-002-003 The attached data was prepared by the applicant and is being forwarded to you for comments and recommended conditions of approval. The city is interested in the probable impacts on the environment (including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, noise objects of historical or aesthetic significance) and recommended conditions of approval based on your expertise and area of concern. Your comments and recommended conditions of approval must be received by this office prior to 4:30 p.m. ,3—1— SS , in order to be discussed by the land division committee. The land division committee (comprised of director of environmental services, city building official, city engineer, fire marshal and a representative of CVWD) will discuss the comments and recommended conditions of approval and will forward them to the planning commission through the staff report. Any information received by this office after the receipt deadline will not be discussed by the land division committee. Sincerely, RAMON A. DIAZ DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES RD/lr Attachments PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS F . Z9a=5 y O n\ IF.35 1.25Ac.i ,( o \ a \ k \ 4p ,..�o 78�x - - - - - - -- - & Po/m C2sel1 V C,LS Na 2 0 �3 13//Ac.i l20Aci ° a 10" 202Acr v a d Lot 8 vPoy 4 v 4 129ACNt 4 as V I eaS IS��y 6 9a i V O 6 Q I E 1 a i9"3o �� o e ; P 256.30 M O IL//AcNI. V) � ( p /255.4ci us ea Aug I m O 2 : S 395Ac.M ZFJ LS y 6 n par/ s� I i4 5 /33ACM. /3 C� A - a 24 ;19 1 RED < ,. DAM:6GA O8 SMTE HWY/// 9665Be - ASSESSOR'S MAP BK 640 P6O2 C RIVERS/OE COUNTY, CALIF HP Supporting Data: 1. Name of Applicant 2. This request is made for property described as: Exact legal description 3. Total area of site: if more than 1 zone requested, give subtotal fbr each 4. Existing Zoning : describe here or attach map 5. Proposed Zoning: describe here or attach map 6. Assessor's Parcel No. : 7. The property is located at street address between and street street 8. The present use of the property is 9. General Plan Designation: 10. The applicant offers the following reasons to justify the request for a Change of Zone