Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPP 87-11 APARTMENTS-MAGNESIA FALLS 1987 P.O. BOX K Pi CO LA QUINTA, CA 92253 Investments, Inc. 619/564-4400 August 30 , 1988 Attn: Cathryn Sass Palm Desert Planning Department City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: Tract #22393 (Park Village) Dear Cathryn, This letter is to request a name for the private street in Tract #22393 , commonly known as "Park Village" . Our first choice for the name is "Park Place" and second choice would be "Village Way" . If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, David A. N lson 2f DAN: lm V r Nelson Nelson Development Co.Inc. 7 78-060 Cagle Estado 300 DevelopmeTit P.O. Box La Quinta, CA 92253 company inc. q CXINFIRMA 10114._0F TFf E_.-EPHOW CGt VERSAT I ON TO: cather-itle Sass FROM: David A. Nelson DATE: APV-il 28)1 1988 SUBJECT : PUblic Sidewalk at par-P. villarge CONVERSATION DATE: Apr,il 28, IWIS This i :; to rC,nfit,rjj that a 6 foot rfle,--1 sidewalk will be? LISPU aS APrPosed t-z- art 8 f,::.r.t. The sidew' w i n o t a raeander west of the Private- ;tr-pet and will he hF4)irld CLtr-b it" 01'der to tie !,rito e>%istirjq si(4-walk.. V--L 6 4-6 June 21, 1988 ARCHITBCTURAL REVIOA 0NNIISSION ACTION CASE NO: PP 87-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. , P.O. Box 300, La Quinta, CA 92253. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGU: Approval of materials and colors. LOCATION: Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola Avenue. ZONE: PR-7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission approved this case by minutes motion. Date of Action: June 14, 1988 Vote: Carried 4-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STAFF COVMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. Upon receiving final approval it is your responsibility to submit the plans approved by the architectural commission to the department of building and safety. CONTINUED CASES: In order to be placed on the next meetings agenda, new or revised plans must be submitted no later than 9:00 a.m. the Monday prior to the next meeting. DES 3g� scaccT TO PAIM DESERr ARCi1r1MLJRAL Cmt=Tq I4 REVISION ZUESDAY - JUNE 14, 1988 12:00 P.M. cm NUNny SERVICES cmFERENM ROCM 73-510 FRED wmjir, DRivE I. The meeting was called to order at 12:00 pm. CaTudssion Menbers Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman X 9 2 Mary Drury R 10 1 Russell McCrea X 8 3 Rick Holden X 9 2 Steve Sullivan X 10 1 Others Present: Catherine Sass FYankie Riddle Steve Smith Ken Weller Phil Drell Brent Conley It was moved by Catmissioner Sullivan, seconded by Cannissioner Holden to approve the minutes of May 24, 1988, subject to amendment on Case No. 1460 SA - That the case was denied, because of incanpatibility in shape and color with the adjacent awning; Case No. PP 87-20 - clarify that the reduction of glazing was on the cc niiercial building. Carried 3-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining). II. Moved by Counissicner Drury, seconded by C mu -ni r ne r Sullivan t a approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 4-0. 1. CASE NO: 1341 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): TCBY YOGURT, 44-491 Town Center Way, Unit B, Palm Desert, CA 92260; JEFF WARD, 28764 Live Oak Rd. , High Land, CA 92346. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SCIM": Change in approved color scheme for Center Sign Program. LOCATICN: Pad 5, 111 Town Center. ZONE: PC (3) S.P. Approved with the condition that the quotation marks around TCBY be deleted. MINUTES fLLf 1 _ tiYy IMI' Y ' JUNE 1TECTURAL 19ss °CI , SUBJECT TO REVISION 2. CASE NO: PP 87-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMEIr COMPANY, INC. , P.O. Box 300, La Quinta, CA 92253. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUCUr: Approval of materials and colors. LOCATION: Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola Avenue. ZONE: PR-7 3. CASE NO: PP 88-1 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LAKES COUNTRY CLUB, C/O ASL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, 960 E. Tahquitz Way, Suite 204, Palm Springs, CA 92262. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPRWAL SOUCIiT: Golf Course Attendant buildings (Gazebo, restroccis, starter shack, pump house). LOCATION: New 9 hole golf course at the Lakes Country Club. ZONE: PR-4 4. CASE NO: 306 C - PAD 9 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JOHN ASH A. I .A. ASSOCIATES, 3600 Wilshire Blvd. , Suite 420, Los Angeles, CA 90010. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOMrr: Preliminary Approval for Pad 9 at 111 Town Center. LOCATION: Highway 111 and Town Center Way. ZONE: PC-3 (Chairman Gregory abstained. ) 2 o in 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 May 17, 1988 ARCHITDCIURAL RE� CU4VIESSICN AC.TICN CASE ND: PP 87-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., 74-831 Velie Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PRCk7EC,r/APPROVAL SOIJCfT: Approval of final working drawings. LOCATION: Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola Avenue. ZONE: PR-7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission approved this case subject to conditions (see attached minutes). Date of Action: May 10, 1988 Vote: Carried 4-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. Upon receiving final approval it is your responsibility to submit the plans approved by the architectural commission to the department of building and safety. CONTINUED CASES: In order to be placed on the next meetings agenda, new or revised plans must be submitted no later than 9:00 a.m. the Monday prior to the next meeting. MINUTES ARCHITBCIURAL CCt4'4ISSICN MAY 10, 1988 TO rVjS f, ref J 2• CASE NO: 1321 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NUTCRACKER SWEETS, 73-560 E1 Palm Desert, CA 92260. Paseo, NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOLjGjjT: the approved sign program. Approval of modifications to LOCATICN: 73-560 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 3• CASE NO: PP 88-5 APPLICANT (AND DAVID NELSON, P.O. Box 300, La Quinta CA 92253. , NATURE OF PROTECT/APPROVAL SO((.GM: Preliminary architectural and landscape Plans for triplex. A PProval of LOCATICN= Southwest corner of Dee -- P Canyon Road and Driftwood St. 7CNE: R-3 (3) Note: The size of the pool to be built is 12x28 which is shown in the landscape plans. The landscape Plans reflect the changes to the Project site plan and they have precedence over the architectural plans. (Chairman Gregory abstained, ) III. CASES A. Final Drawings: 1- CASE NO: PP 87-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON D Velie Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260 EVEIOFT�r CANY, INC. , 74-831 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUC rr:drawingApprovalApp �al of final working LOCATION: Magnesia Falls Drive, a Portola Avenue. PPronately 700 feet east of 2 DILNUTES ARCHITECTURAL C1 r VaSSION S U 5J i=GT TO MAY 10, 1988 �.• (s+_ ' ";i V ZONE: PR-7 The ccnmission reviewed the required changes: The addition of a sliding glass door in bedroom two; awnings providing for solar protection; redesign of the garages to allow for a larger recreational area. Commissioner Drury asked the location of the air conditioning units. The air conditioning units have been placed on the ground. Additionally, small parapets have been placed around the roofs. It was indicated the wrought iron fencing could be used around the project, but should be added to the plans. CamLissioner Holden ask about the type and color proposed for the awnings. The awning material will be a vinyl type material and the color has not been selected. Reoanrendations of the commission are: That the material and color of the awnings be submitted to the carmission for approval, prior to the issuance of a building permit; material on the landscape plan to be increased in size as follows: Shrubs and vines be 5 gallon, except the day lily; at least one-third of all trees 24" box or larger and 10 trees be added on the perimeter of open space areas; add island with 36" box tree in col de sac, subject to fire department approval. It was noted that the landscape changes can be approved by staff. It was motioned by Calniissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Drury to approve this case subject to the above conditions. Carried 4-0. 2. CASE NO: 1387 SA APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): ALLISON INTERNATIONAL, 73-425 El Paseo, Space 21-A-B, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SWUM Approval of modifications to the approved sign program. LOCATION: 73-425 E1 Paseo ZONE: C-1 3 AGENDA ITEM NO: III-A-2 DATE: MAY 10, 1988 ARCHITECTURAL C)CtMSSION CASE NO: PP 87-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. , 74-831 Velie Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final working drawings. LOCATION: Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola Ave. ZONE: PR-7 DISCUSSION: The architectural ccmmission granted preliminary approval of the architecture and landscape plan on March 25, 1987, conditioned that : 1. The use of landscape medians be implemented into the driveway/parking areas. 2. Adequate size parking spaces be provided as required by code. 3. A patterned concrete be used rather than asphalt. 4. A legal exiting area be provided for the bedrooms exiting into the garage. 5. Study of solar protection primarily on the east and west elevations. 6. Minimum tree size to be 15 gallon and shrubs to be 60% five gallon and 40% one gallon. The final working drawings reflect the changes that address these concerns. Additionally a second bathroom is provided on the two bedroom units. CS/fr _1. • 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF ACTION Date: April 23, 1987 Mr. David Nelson 74-831 Velie Way, Suite I Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: PP 87-IGAND TT 22393 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of April 21 , 1987. APPROVED 8Y ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 1215. CARRIED 5-0. Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen ( 15) days of the date of the decision. RAMON A. DIAZ, SEC ! TA .> PALM DESERT PLANNING C MISSION RAD/tm PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1215 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A i PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 6. 3 ACRES INTO THIRTEEN LOTS TO CONSTRUCT ELEVEN FOUR-PLEX APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN THE PR-7 ZONE ON MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE , APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET EAST OF PORTOLA. CASE NOS. PP 87- 11 AND TT 22393 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission .of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 21st day of April , 1987, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. for the above described project; and 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 community development has determined that the project will not - have a significant environmental impact and a negative declaration is hereby certified; 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 granting approval of said precise plan and tentative tract: I i 1 . The design of the precise plan will not substantially depreciate property values in the vicinity. 2. The precise plan will not unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity by the occupants thereof for lawful purposes. 3. The precise plan will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. 4. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 5. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 6. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. f 7. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 8. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. PLANNING COMMISSION RESuLuTION NO. 1215 9. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 10. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case; 2. That approval of Precise Plan 87- 11 and TT 22393 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 21st day of April , 1987, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: DOWNS, LADLOW, RICHARDS, WHITLOCK, AND ERWOOD NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ATTEST: RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman RAMON A. DIAZ, Secreta y /tm 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1215 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 Department of Community Development/Planning: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of community development/planning, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null , void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval , the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Palm Desert Water & Services District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Trash provisions shall be approved by applicable trash company and city prior to issuance of building permit. 6. Project shall pay fees as determined by Desert Sands Unified School District. 7. The applicant will pay fees to Comply with the requirements of Article 2648 of the City of Palm Desert Subdivision Ordinance. - In return, the city agrees to use said fees for park purposes in conformance with an adopted master plan within five (5) years of the recordation of the final map. 8. Project shall be subject to Art in Public Places fee per Ordinance No. 473. i 3 . PLANNING COMMISSION RE 1TION NO. 1215 9. Installation of eight foot meandering sidewalk/bikepath along the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive connecting the Whitewater Channel Bikeway. 10. Pyramid roofs will be placed on all end units. 11 . Car stalls shall be upgraded to comply with city code. 12. Landscaped islands and patterned/colored concrete will be used at driveway entrances and/or access points to Magnesia Falls Drive. 13. 1 Street 'A' will be private and area gained will be redistributed between buildings for additional landscaped open space. 14. All driveways will measure 24 feet or as approved by the director of community development. 15. All conditions contained herein shall be complied with prior to permit issuance or recordation of the final map, whichever occurs first. 16. Setbacks may be modified, per discussion, to the satisfaction of the community development director. Department of Public Works: 1 . Drainage and signalization fund fees, as required by city ordinance, shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. , 2. Drainage facilities shall be provided, per Ordinance No. 218 and the Master Drainage Plan, to the specifications of the director of public works. 3. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the department of public works. 4. Full public improvements, including traffic safety lighting, as required by ordinance and the director of public works, shall be installed in accordance with city standards. 5. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the department of public works prior to the project final . 6. Complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the director of public works, for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the city. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1215 7. All private streets, driveways and parking lots shall be Inspected b the r Y engineering department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 8. Landscaping maintenance on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be provided by the homeowner's association. 9. Existing utilities shall be undergrounded per each respective utility district's recommendation. If determined to be unfeasible applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. 10. Traffic safety striping on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be provided to the specifications of the director of public works. A traffic control plan must be submitted to and approved by the director of public works before placing pavement markings. 11 . Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the director of public works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any,permits. 12. Dedication of 44 feet of right-of-way on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be done prior to issuance of any permits and approval of plans. 13. Installation of curb and gutter, matching paving and sidewalk on Magnesia Falls Drive. 14. Waiver of access to Magnesia Falls Drive except at approved locations shall be granted on the final map. 15. Offsite improvement plans to be approved by public works department and a surety posted to guarantee the required offsite improvements prior to recordation of the final map. 16. Full improvement of interior streets based on 60 foot residential street standards as established in accordance with Chapter 26, Section 26.40.040, C.P.D. Code. 17. Installation of one-half landscaped median in Magnesia Falls Drive or cash payment for one-half the cost of landscaped median at the option of the director of public works. 18. Installation of sewers to serve this 'project. 19. Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the director of public .works for checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of any permits. I 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RE' �TION NO. 1215 20. Any and all off-site improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permit(s) by the department of public works. 21 . A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the department of public works prior to issuance of the grading permit. City Fire Marshal : 1 . Install a water system capable of delivering 2500 GPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a two hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation shall be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways. a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow, and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. C. hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the fire marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the building department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in PP 87-11 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the fire marshal ." 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . 7. All driveway turns to have 40 foot minimum turning radius. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1215 I { 8. All portions of all buildings to be within 75 feet of a fire extinguisher. Planning Commission: 1 . It is the intent of the commission that public improvements be designed in cooperation between the applicant and the city in such a manner as to achieve the ultimate balance of the needs of the city and assure development quality. r I l� 7 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION Negative Declaration TO: (X) Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) Secretary for Resources County of Riverside 1416 Ninth St. , Rm 1311 4080 Lemon Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Riverside, CA 92502 FROM: CITY OF PALM UESERF 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: Park Village, PP 87-11 Date of Project Approval : April 21 , 1987 State Clearinghouse Number ( if submitted) : N/A Contact. Person: Catherine Sass Project Location: PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive, 700 feet east of Portola. Project Description: Construction of eleven 4-plex apartments. 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 in connection with this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 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. Signature Title Date Received for Filing Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 4. APRIL 21 , 1987 Mr. Sanders stated that while he had not been aware of the future plans, it would be to the credit of Palm Desert to keep this site looking better. Chairman Erwood indicated that this concern would be communicated to the Coachella Valley Parks and Recreation department. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case No. PP 87-10 - MIRALESTE INVESTMENT CORP. , Applicant Request for approval of a negative declaration and precise plan of design to allow construction of a professional office building in the office professional zone on property located on the west side of Monterey Avenue, 250 feet south of Sonora Drive (vacated) . Mr. Diaz reviewed the staff report and outlined staff concerns and recommended that staff be - instructed to prepare a resolution of denial . Commissioner Downs asked if this had been before the architectural commission. Mr. Diaz replied yes, but noted that it did not receive architectural approval . Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. There being no response, Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one, Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, directing staff to prepare a resolution of denial for the May 5, 1987 meeting. Carried 5-0. B. Case Nos,, Pig `87 11APlD TT 22393 - NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Applicants Request for approval of a precise plan of design, a negative declaration of environmental impact and tentative tract map to subdivide 6.3 acres into thirteen lots to construct eleven 4-plex 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 21, 1987 apartment buildings in the PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the staff report. Staff indicated that the applicant was requesting a waiver of setback requirements for the two eastermost buildings, which he would address. Staff also indicated that public works conditions #22 and 23 would be stricken, and condition #15 would be added to community development conditions stating, "Applicant shall install landscaping along the bikeway route along the east side" and also #16 that, "All conditions contained herein shall be complied with prior to permit issuance or recordation of the final map, whichever occurs first." Mr. Diaz felt that A street would remain private and staff noted that it had been added to community development conditions. Commissioner Downs felt that with an eight foot sidewalk, street widening in some places might be impossible. Commissioner Richards agreed and asked public works for some general cost figures for installing a meandering sidewalk. Mr. Folkers responded that it would be $20 to $30 per run foot plus, depending on landscaping and curb and gutter additions. Mr. Folkers stated that it would be desirable to have curb and gutter along that side. Commissioner Richards asked about provision in the capital improvement project budget to form some type of cooperation. Mr. Diaz informed commission that staff had been critized in the past as to whether the development was being charged for improvements. Mr. Diaz stated that the question that needed to be answered was, "Are we requiring improvements that the project is demanding?" Commissioner Richards indicated that in this case the school district was building a school to create a demand and questioned if they should be a party to put up some money for the demand and felt that some study should be put into this concept. Mr. Folkers indicated that other factors were involved regarding the curb and gutter because of property owned by the water district and having to obtain an easement. He stated that if it were approved, the city would be responsible for $10, 000 to $ 15, 000 for improvements in the area. Commissioner Richards indicated that down-zoning has occurred plus new ways being added. He also felt there was a safety problem for youngsters in the area. Commissioner Downs asked where the street would be widened and why. Mr. Diaz stated that it might be that an eight foot meandering sidewalk may not be possible, but that we ask for the maximum and public works can allow for it to be lower if needed. Mr. Folkers 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION ► APRIL 21 , 1987 stated that applicant shall work with staff to get some type of curb and gutter, sidewalk and some street widening. Commissioner Ladlow expressed concern regarding erosion of the wash. Mr. Diaz explained that certain requirements had to be met that dealt with that specific concern. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. DAVID NELSON, 74-606 Driftwood Drive #1 , stated that he would like the the street to be public, saying that setbacks are increased for private streets. He indicated that the greenbelts would be the same and felt that they have complied with all the other conditions for entrances and pyramid roofs. Regarding the Whitewater Channel he indicated that they would be cementing the side of the bank. Commissioner Downs asked Mr. Nelson why he wanted a public street. Mr. Nelson indicated that if it remains private, half the lots would be public, half private. He felt there would be problems with some residents paying for the private street. Mr. Diaz felt the city should not have to maintain what was essentially a large access drive and suggested the use of CC&R's to mitigate the concern. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. MR. KEN NELSON asked for and received clarification regarding added condition #16. Mr. Nelson expressed opposition to the street remaining private due to the fact that 100 percent of the lot owners would have to pay and only 50 percent would actually have use. MR. ED MALATTI , 385 Via Sorno-Wedgewood Glen, indicated that now was the time to development this property and felt this project was viable. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Commissioner Richards asked staff about creating findings. Mr. Diaz explained that if the majority of the commission feels that because of the special circumstances associated with the history of this site and feels the demands for off-site improvements are not warranted to be born by this particular development in regards to equity, some solution could be worked out between the city and the developer. 5 • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 21, 1987 Commissioner Richards stated that would eliminate his concern. Commissioner Downs agreed. Commissioner Richards stated that he would like to make the motion to include the necessary findings that would waive the off-site requirement for property that heads east and asked staff to change one of the conditions of approval to assure: 1 ) meandering sidewalks of some size is installed; and 2) if not practicle to widen street, city and public works will come up with a solution, even if temporary, assure safety and allow staff and public works the ability to make changes they might need that are not exactly spelled out in these conditions. Mr. Diaz stated that there would be added a planning commission condition of clarification stating that it is the intent of the planning commission that public improvements be designed in cooperation between the applicant and the city in such a manner as to achieve the ultimate balance of the needs of the city and assure the quality of the development and design would be both before the commission for approval . Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1215, approving PP 87-11 and TT 22393 subject to conditions as amended. Carried 5-0. C. Case No. PP 87-13 - MIRALESTE INVESTMENT CORP. , Applicant Request for approval of four single-story apartment units located on the south side of Shadow Mountain Drive, 500 feet west of Portola Avenue. Mr. Diaz outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended approval subject to the addition of a condition for a six foot masonry wall . Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. There being no response, Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one, Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. 6 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 21 , 1987 CASE NOS: PP 87-11 and TT 22393 REQUEST: Approval of a precise plan of design, a negative declaration of environmental impact and tentative tract map to subdivide 6.3 acres into thirteen lots to construct eleven 4-plex apartment buildings in the PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. APPLICANT: Nelson Development Company, Inc. 74-831 Velie Way, Suite 1 Palm Desert, CA 92260 I . BACKGROUND: A. DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The 6.3 acre site is vacant with little topographic change. The property forms a right triangle along the Whitewater Storm Channel . B. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: Whitewater Storm Channel SOUTH: P and R-1 (Community park and single family dwellings) EAST: Whitewater Storm Channel WEST: PR-5, Wedgewood -Glen condominium development C. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: The property is designated medium density residential (5-7 du/ac) in the general plan. In addition the housing element adopted November 8, 1984 identified this site as a potential high density area. II . PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. SITE DESIGN, CIRCULATION AND PARKING: The proposal is to create thirteen lots. Eleven of the lots will contain a fourplex apartment. Two lots will be common areas, one of which contains a pool and pool building. Four curb cuts will be made on Magnesia Falls Drive. The floor plan of the fourplex is such that garages are to one side. Access is by "driveways" perpendicular to Magnesia Falls Drive. Parking is r P� STAFF REPORT PP 87-I1 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21 , 1987 provided in attached garages with additional guest parking located at the ends of driveways. B. ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING: An eclectic, low profile architecture is used combining mediterranean and contemporary styles. The design provides a minimum of detail and occasional pyramid roofs. It should be noted that these roofs will not be placed on interior units. A pool is provided with access by pedestrian walkways. An eight-foot meandering sidewalk connecting to the Whitewater Channel Bikeway would be required as it has been of projects previously approved on this property. The architectural commission granted preliminary approval of the architecture and landscape plan on March 25, 1987 conditioned that: 1 . The use of landscape medians be implemented into the driveway/parking areas. 2. Adequate size parking spaces be provided as required by code. 3. A patterned concrete be used rather than asphalt. 4. A legal exiting area be provided for the bedrooms exiting into the garage. 5. Study of solar protection primarily on the east and west elevations. 6. Minimum tree size to be 15 gallon and shrubs to be 60% five gallon and 40% one gallon. C. CODE PROVISION IN CHART FORM: Code Requirement Provided Minimum project area 10 acres 6.3 acres Perimeter setback 20 ft. 10 ft. Maximum density 7 du/ac 7 du/ac Height 22/24 ft. max. 15 ft. Parking 2 spaces/du 2 covered 1 covered spaces/du 2 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21, 1987 Code Requirement Provided Open space 40% min. 54% Building coverage 50% max. 31% Building separation 20 ft. min. 20 ft. Setback from local street 20 ft. 15 ft. Driveway width 20 ft. min. 20 ft. Car stalls 9'x20'/8'xl7' r_mp. 8 1/2 x 15' 11x20' end spaces III. STAFF CONCERNS: A. CODE REQUIREMENTS: The site in question provides substantial design constraints due to its shape. The proposed project does not meet code requirements of area and building setbacks . Car stalls, those shown as guest parking, are substandard. The dedication of the street furthest west would require 20 feet of building setback from the property line. The street provides access for 40 resident cars potentially impacting the bedroom location of five units. Privatization of this street would provide 18 feet of property that could be evenly distributed as six feet additional landscaped area between building 4, 5, and 6, 7 and 8, and 9 and 10. Staff finds an exception to the perimeter setback standard appropriate along the Whitewater Storm Channel , however, the streets should remain protected. B. VISUAL IMPACT: Straight driveways to access the garages of units are at right angles to Magnesia Falls Drive. Staff finds this arrangement is visually unappealing from the street and adjacent properties. This concern can be mitigated by the placement of a island type median planter in each drive and using a patterned and/or colored concrete. Alternatively a through street could he designed on the interior of the parcel . This alternative would solve the potential for backing 3 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21, 1987 to occur onto the street, though it would increase the number of cars driving by a unit. The architectural renderings indicate a copper panting on the chimney and as window accent. The the color is repeated as awning color over windows. The pyramid roofs are presented as "occasional ." Staff finds the building could be very plain without the artist's "license. " The applicant advised staff that the placement of pyramid roofs will be on the street, with interior units having flat roofs. Staff recommends that all units have these roofs as the look would remain "occasional " due to the flat roof of the garages. C. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: This parcel has a history of applications for apartment and condominium type projects . Prior projects were conditioned to complete improvements needed in the area including full street improvements along Magnesia Falls Drive, curb and gutter tie-in paving, center median and eight foot meandering sidewalk connecting to the Whitewater Channel Bikeway. Staff report PP 86-8 suggested that the prior applicant extend curb and gutter tie-in paving and limited landscaping east to Deep Canyon Road adjacent to the bikeway in cooperation with CVWD which owns the property. Staff finds the improvements are still needed at this location and any approved development should provide them. IV. ANALYSIS: A. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN: 1 . The design of the precise plan, as conditioned, will not substantially depreciate property values nor be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Justification: The design of the project, as conditioned, is acceptable, has architectural preliminary approval , and meets applicable code requirements for this type of facility. 2. The conditioned precise plan will not unreasonably interfere with the use of and enjoyment of property in the vicinity by the occupants thereof for lawful purposes. 4 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21 , 1987 Justification: The surrounding zoning is for the same use as proposed and adjacent owners would not be deprived the use of their land or be negatively impacted by this development. 3. The conditioned precise plan will not endanger the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare. Justification: The project is designed and conditioned in a manner that will not endanger the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare due to compliance with code requirements and compatibility with surrounding properties. B. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP: 1 . That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Justification: The general plan in this area designated the land as low density planned residential 4 du/acre. The project as proposed is permitted on the property as zoned and, therefore, is consistent with the general plan. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Justification: All public streets will be dedicated and improved and sufficient drainage facilities will be provided in conformance with the general plan guidelines and city ordinances. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. Justification: The 19.25 acre site is sufficiently large to allow the project as proposed. The relatively flat terrain, access to major streets, and amount of open space insure that the site is physically suitable for the project. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5 PG STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21, 1987 Justification: The design of the project indicates that the site is suitable for the proposed density of development because the site can be served by respective utilities, the city, and existing or proposed circulation system. 5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Justification: The design will not cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because it will be constructed in compliance with applicable regulations and the proposed Negative Declaration has determined that any adverse environmental impacts will be mitigated. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Justification: The design will not cause serious public health problems because it will be in compliance with applicable health, safety and building codes. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public_ at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Justification: There have been no easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. C. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The director of community development has determined that the proposed project, as conditioned, will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of environmental impact has been prepared. 6 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21 , 1987 V. CONCLUSION: The lower density and one story height of this proposal make it the most compatible project presented for this site. The city has discussed and approved apartments on this site and found that development of this site would help to control the area by providing a barrier to the flood control channel and hopefully help to self-police the community park. Staff finds that a design that fits the site is needed and can be achieved. The conditions imposed by staff have been advised to the applicant as well as the above described code violations within the site plan. Staff finds compliance desirable and easy to attain. The applicant is willing to adjust the design to meet setback criteria where the shape constraints of the parcel allow. Staff recommends a waiver of the setback requirement for the two eastern buildings. The applicant has further advised that the suggested mitigation measures discussed above, specifically the islands, patterned concrete, additional pyramid roofs, and eight foot meandering sidewalk will be provided. Therefore, staff recommends: A. Adoption of the findings. B. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. approving PP 87-11 and TT 22393. VI . ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution. B. Negative declaration. C. Legal notice. D. Exhibits Prepared by C �c•�� Reviewed and Approved by /tm 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 6. 3 ACRES INTO THIRTEEN LOTS TO CONSTRUCT ELEVEN FOUR-PLEX APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN THE PR-7 ZONE ON MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET EAST OF PORTOLA. CASE NOS, PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 21st day of April , 1987, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. for the above described project; and 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 community development has determined that the project will not have a significant environmental impact and a negative declaration is hereby certified; 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 granting approval of said precise plan and tentative tract: 1 . The design of the precise plan will not substantially depreciate property values in the vicinity. 2. The precise plan will not unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity by the occupants thereof for lawful purposes. 3. The precise plan will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. 4. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific pldhs. 5. That the design or improvement of the proposed ,ubdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 6. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. 7. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 8. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 9. That the design of the subdivisinn or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 10. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 9. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 10. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case; 2. That approval of Precise Plan 87-11 and TT 22393 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert. Planning Commission, held on this 21st day of April , 1987, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /tm 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 Department of Community Development/Planning: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of community development/planning, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null , void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval , the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Palm Desert Water & Services District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Trash provisions shall be approved by applicable trash company and city prior to issuance of building permit. 6. Project shall pay fees as determined by Desert Sands Unified School District. 7. The applicant will pay fees to comply with the requirements of Article 2648 of the City of Palm Desert Subdivision Ordinance. In return, the city agrees to use said fees for park purposes in conformance with an adopted master plan within five (5) years of the recordation of the final map. 8. Project shall be subject to Art in Public Places fee per Ordinance No. 473. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 9. Installation of eight foot meandering sidewalk/bikepath along the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive connecting the Whitewater Channel Bikeway. 10. Pyramid roofs will be placed on all end units. 11 . Car stalls shall be upgraded to comply with city code. 12. Landscaped islands and patterned/colored concrete will be used at driveway entrances and/or access points to Magnesia Falls Drive. 13. Street 'A' will be private and area gained will be redistributed between buildings for additional landscaped open space. 14. All driveways will measure 24 feet or as approved by the director of community development. Department of Public Works: 1 . Drainage and signaliz_ation fund fees, as required by city ordinance, shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 2. Drainage facilities shall be provided, per Ordinance No. 218 and the Master Drainage Plan, to the specifications of the director of public works. 3. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the department of public works. 4. Full public improvements, including traffic safety lighting, as required by ordinance and the director of public works, shall be installed in accordance with city standards. 5. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the department of public works prior to the project final . 6. Complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the director of public works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the city. 7. All private streets, driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 8. Landscaping maintenance on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be provided by the homeowner's association. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 9. Existing utilities shall be undergrounded per each respective utility district's recommendation. If determined to be unfeasible applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. 10. Traffic safety striping on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be provided to the specifications of the director of public works. A traffic control plan must be submitted to and approved by the director of public works before placing pavement markings. 11 . Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the director of public works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. 12. Dedication of 44 feet of right-of-way on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be done prior to issuance of any permits and approval of plans. 13. Installation of curb and gutter, matching paving and sidewalk on Magnesia Falls Drive. 14. Waiver of access to Magnesia Falls Drive except at approved locations shall be granted on the final map. 15. Offsite improvement plans to be approved by public works department and a surety posted to guarantee the required offsite improvements prior to recordation of the final map. 16. Full improvement of interior streets based on 60 foot residential street standards as established in accordance with Chapter 26, Section 26.40.040, C.P.D. Code. 17. Installation of one-half landscaped median in Magnesia Falls Drive or cash payment for one-half the cost of landscaped median at the option of the director of public works. 18. Installation of sewers to serve this project. 19. Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the director of public works for checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of any permits. 20. Any and all off-site improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permit(s) by the department of public works. 21 . A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the department of public works prior to issuance of the grading permit. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2 'A' street, as shown on the tentative map shall be private. 23.E Applicant shall provide street improvements along the north side of Lit Magnesia Falls Drive from the easterly property line to the intersection of Deep Canyon Road to the satisfaction of the director of public works. City Fire Marshal : 1 . Install a water system capable of delivering 2500 GPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a two hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation shall be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways. a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow, and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. C. hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the fire marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the building department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: " I certify that the design of the water system in PP 87-11 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the fire marshal ." 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . 7. All driveway turns to have 40 foot minimum turning radius. 8. All portions of all buildings to be within 75 feet of a fire extinguisher. 6 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: PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: Nelson Development Co. , Inc. 74-831 Veiie Way, Suite 1 Palm Desert, CA 92260 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Eleven four-plex apartment buildings in the PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. The Director of the Department of Community Development, 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 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /tm F. 1 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 April 2, 1987 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public •hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., to construct a 44 unit apartment project on 6.3 acres on the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola, also described as: APN 624-120-006 oun[r} u,tuo Fort lakyta 177� i Il0 I I - 111111 I I^ .0 I yA un as wo-.n wcus o, SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 21, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-51.0 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at whlch time and place all interested persons are Invited to attend and be heard. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ., Secretary April 10, 1987 Palm Desert Planning Commission J 1 i � r i i " ` CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 21 , 1987 CASE NOS: 87-11 and TT 22393 REQUEST: Approval of a precise plan of design, a negative declaration of environmental impact and tentative tract map to subdivide 6.3 acres into thirteen lots to construct eleven 4-plex apartment buildings in the PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. APPLICANT: Nelson Development Company, Inc. 74-831 Velie Way, Suite I Palm Desert, CA 92260 I . BACKGROUND: A. DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The 6.3 acre site is vacant with little topographic change. The property forms a right triangle along the Whitewater Storm Channel . B. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: Whitewater Storm Channel SOUTH: P and R-1 (Community park and single family dwellings) EAST: Whitewater Storm Channel WEST: PR-5, Wedgewood Glen condominium development C. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: The property is designated medium density residential (5-7 du/ac) in the general plan. In addition the housing element adopted November 8, 1984 identified this site as a potential high density area. II . PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. SITE DESIGN, CIRCULATION AND PARKING: The proposal is to create thirteen lots. Eleven of the lots will contain a fourplex apartment. Two lots will be common areas, one of which contains a pool and pool building. Four curb cuts will be made on Magnesia Falls Drive. The floor plan of the fourplex is such that garages are to one side. Access is by "driveways" perpendicular to Magnesia Falls Drive. Parking is PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21, 1987 provided in attached garages with additional guest parking located at the ends of driveways. B. ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING: An eclectic, low profile architecture is used combining mediterranean and contemporary styles. The design provides a minimum of detail and occasional pyramid roofs. It should be noted that these roofs will not be placed on interior units. A pool is provided with access by pedestrian walkways. An eight-foot meandering sidewalk connecting to the Whitewater Channel Bikeway would be required as it has been of projects previously approved on this property. The architectural commission granted preliminary approval of the architecture and landscape plan on March 25, 1987 conditioned that: 1 . The use of landscape medians be implemented into the driveway/parking areas. 2. Adequate size parking spaces be provided as required by code. 3. A patterned concrete be used rather than asphalt. 4. A legal exiting area be provided for the bedrooms exiting into the garage. 5. Study of solar protection primarily on the east and west elevations. 6. Minimum tree size to be 15 gallon and shrubs to be 60% five gallon and 40% one gallon. C. CODE PROVISION IN CHART FORM: Code Requirement. Provided Minimum project. area 10 acres 6.3 acres Perimeter setback 20 ft. 10 ft. Maximum density 7 du/ac 7 du/ac Height 22/24 ft. max. 15 ft. Parking 2 spaces/du 2 covered 1 covered spaces/du 2 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21 , 1987 Code Requirement Provided Open space 40% min. 54% Building coverage 50% max. 31% Building separation 20 ft. min. 20 ft. Setback from local street 20 ft. 15 ft. Driveway width 20 ft. min. 20 ft. Car stalls 9'x2O'/8'xl7' cmp. 8 1/2 x 15' 11x20' end spaces III . STAFF CONCERNS: A. CODE REQUIREMENTS: The site in question provides substantial design constraints due to its shape. The proposed project does not meet code requirements of area and building setbacks . Car stalls, those shown as guest parking, are substandard. The dedication of the street furthest west would require 20 feet of building setback from the property line. The street provides access for 40 resident cars potentially impacting the bedroom location of five units. Privatization of this street would provide 18 feet of property that could be evenly distributed as six feet additional landscaped area between building 4, 5, and 6, 7 and 8, and 9 and 10. Staff finds an exception to the perimeter setback standard appropriate along the Whitewat.er Storm Channel , however, the streets should remain protected. B. VISUAL IMPACT: Straight driveways to access the garages of units are at right angles to Magnesia Falls Drive. Staff finds this arrangement is visually unappealing from the street and adjacent properties. This concern can be mitigated by the placement of a island type median planter in each drive and using a patterned and/or colored concrete. Alternatively a through street could be designed on the interior of the parcel . This alternative would solve the potential for backing 3 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21 , 1987 to occur onto the street, though it would increase the number of cars driving by a unit. The architectural renderings indicate a copper panting on the chimney and as window accent. The tile color is repeated as awning color over windows. The pyramid roofs are presented as "occasional ." Staff finds the building could be very plain without the artist's " license. " The applicant advised staff that the placement of pyramid roofs will be on the street, with interior units having flat. roofs. Staff recommends that all units have these roofs as the look would remain "occasional " due to the flat roof of the garages. C. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: This parcel has a history of applications for apartment and condominium type projects. Prior projects were conditioned to complete improvements needed in the area including full street improvements along Magnesia Falls Drive, curb and gutter tie-in paving, center median and eight foot meandering sidewalk connecting to the Whitewater Channel Bikeway. Staff report PP 86-8 suggested that the prior applicant extend curb and gutter tie-in paving and limited landscaping east to Deep Canyon Road adjacent to the bikeway in cooperation with CVWD which owns the property. Staff finds the improvements are still needed at this location and any approved development should provide them. IV. ANALYSIS: A. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN: 1 . The design of the precise plan, as conditioned, will not substantially depreciate property values nor be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Justification: The design of the project, as conditioned, is acceptable, has architectural preliminary approval , and meets applicable code requirements for this type of facility. 2. The conditioned precise plan will not unreasonably interfere with the use of and enjoyment of property in the vicinity by the occupants thereof for lawful purposes. 4 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21, 1987 Justification: The surrounding zoning is for the same use as proposed and adjacent owners would not be deprived the use of their land or be negatively impacted by this development. 3. The conditioned precise plan will not endanger the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare. Justification: The project is designed and conditioned in a manner that will not endanger the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare due to compliance with code requirements and compatibility with surrounding properties. B. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP: 1 . That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Justification: The general plan in this area designated the land as low density planned residential 4 du/acre. The project as proposed is permitted on the property as zoned and, therefore, is consistent with the general plan. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Justification: All public streets will be dedicated and improved and sufficient drainage facilities will be provided in conformance with the general plan guidelines and city ordinances. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. Justification: The 19.25 acre site is sufficiently large to allow the project as proposed. The relatively flat terrain, access to major streets, and amount of open space insure that the site is physically suitable for the project. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21 , 1987 Justification: The design of the project indicates that the site is suitable for the proposed density of development because the site can be served by respective utilities, the city, and existing or proposed circulation system. 5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Justification: The design will not cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because it will be constructed in compliance with applicable regulations and the proposed Negative Declaration has determined that any adverse environmental impacts will be mitigated. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Justification: The design will not cause serious public health problems because it will be in compliance with applicable health, safety and building codes. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Justification: There have been no easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. C. ENVIRONMENTAL. REVIEW: The director of community development has determined that the proposed project, as conditioned, will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of environmental impact has been prepared. 6 PC STAFF REPORT PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APRIL 21 , 1987 V. CONCLUSION: The lower density and one story height of this proposal make it the most compatible project presented for this site. The city has discussed and approved apartments on this site and found that development of this site would help to control the area by providing a barrier to the flood control channel and hopefully help to self-police the community park. Staff finds that a design that fits the site is needed and can be achieved. The conditions imposed by staff have been advised to the applicant as well as the above described code violations within the site plan. Staff finds compliance desirable and easy to attain. The applicant is willing to adjust the design to meet setback criteria where the shape constraints of the parcel allow. Staff recommends a waiver of the setback requirement for the two eastern buildings. The applicant has further advised that the suggested mitigation measures discussed above, specifically the islands, patterned concrete, additional pyramid roofs, and eight foot meandering sidewalk will be provided. Therefore, staff recommends: A. Adoption of the findings. B. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. approving PP 87-11 and TT 22393. VI . ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution. B. Negative declaration. C. Legal notice. D. Exhibits Prepared by (I- - -S Reviewed and Approved by /tm 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 6. 3 ACRES INTO THIRTEEN LOTS TO CONSTRUCT ELEVEN FOUR-PLEX APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN THE PR-7 ZONE ON MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET EAST OF PORTOLA. CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 21st day of April , 1987, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. for the above described project; and 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 community development has determined that the project will not have a significant environmental impact and a negative declaration is hereby certified; 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 granting approval of said precise plan and tentative tract: 1 . The design of the precise plan will not substantially depreciate property values in the vicinity. 2. The precise plan will not unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity by the occupants thereof for lawful purposes. 3. The precise plan will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. 4. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific pl8hs. 5. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 6. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. 7. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. B. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 9. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 10. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 9. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 10. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case; 2. That approval of Precise Plan 87-11 and TT 22393 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 21st day of April , 1987, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /tm 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 Department of Community Development/Planning: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of community development/planning, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null , void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval , the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Palm Desert Water & Services District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Trash provisions shall be approved by applicable trash company and city prior to issuance of building permit. 6. Project shall pay fees as determined by Desert Sands Unified School District. 7. The applicant will pay fees to comply with the requirements of Article 2648 of the City of Palm Desert Subdivision Ordinance. In return, the city agrees to use said fees for park purposes in conformance with an adopted master plan within five (5) years of the recordation of the final map. 8. Project shall be subject to Art in Public Places fee per Ordinance No. 473. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 9. Installation of eight foot meandering sidewalk/bikepath along the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive connecting the Whitewater Channel Bikeway. 10. Pyramid roofs will be placed on all end units. 11 . Car stalls shall be upgraded to comply with city code. 12. Landscaped islands and patterned/colored concrete will be used at driveway entrances and/or access points to Magnesia Falls Drive. 13. Street 'A' will be private and area gained will be redistributed between buildings for additional landscaped open space. 14. All driveways will measure 24 feet or as approved by the director of community development. Department of Public Works: 1 . Drainage and signalization fund fees, as required by city ordinance, shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 2. Drainage facilities shall be provided, per Ordinance No. 218 and the Master Drainage Plan, to the specifications of the director of public works. 3. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the department of public works. 4. Full public improvements, including traffic safety lighting, as required by ordinance and the director of public works, shall be installed in accordance with city standards. 5. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the department of public works prior to the project final . 6. Complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the director of public works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the city. 7. All private streets, driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 8. Landscaping maintenance on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be provided by the homeowner's association. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 9. Existing utilities shall be undergrounded per each respective utility district's recommendation. If determined to be unfeasible applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. 10. Traffic safety striping on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be provided to the specifications of the director of public works. A traffic control plan must be submitted to and approved by the director of public works before placing pavement. markings. 11 . Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the director of public works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. 12. Dedication of 44 feet of right-of-way on Magnesia Falls Drive shall be done prior to issuance of any permits and approval of plans. 13. Installation of curb and gutter, matching paving and sidewalk on Magnesia Falls Drive. 14. Waiver of access to Magnesia Falls Drive except at approved locations shall be granted on the final map. 15. Offsite improvement plans to be approved by public works department and a surety posted to guarantee the required offsite improvements prior to recordation of the final map. 16. Full improvement of interior streets based on 60 foot residential street standards as established in accordance with Chapter 26, Section 26.40.040, C.P.D. Code. 17. Installation of one-half landscaped median in Magnesia Falls Drive or cash payment for one-half the cost of landscaped median at the option of the director of public works. 18. Installation of sewers to serve this project. 19. Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the director of public works for checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of any permits. 20. Any and all off-site improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permit(s) by the department of public works. 21 . A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the department of public works prior to issuance of the grading permit. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 22. 'A' street, as shown on the tentative map shall be private. 23. Applicant shall provide street improvements along the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive from the easterly property line to the intersection of Deep Canyon Road to the satisfaction of the director of public works. City Fire Marshal : 1 . Install a water system capable of delivering 2500 GPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a two hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation shall be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways. a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow, and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. C. hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the fire marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the building department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in PP 87-11 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the fire marshal ." 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . 7. All driveway turns to have 40 foot minimum turning radius. 8. All portions of all buildings to be within 75 feet of a fire extinguisher. 6 1. 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: PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: Nelson Development Co. , Inc. 74-831 Velie Way, Suite 1 Palm Desert, CA 92260 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Eleven four-plex apartment buildings in the PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. The Director of the Department. of Community Development, 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. • ----------------------r�--------------- RAMON A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /tm F I - i 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 April 2, 1987 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., to construct a 44 unit apartment project on 6.3 acres on the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola, also described as: APN 624-120-006 ountry%,tuo ]tort la ro r muo pule LL��r� 8\ 0J l'.ra � I rtJ \JIB a . 1 I }{— y arc a inpan wtLas Or,L� I cl rll ill. Ri..� �t It SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 219 1987, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-51D Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary April 10, 1987 Palm Desert Planning Commission NOTICE OF DETERMINATION NOV 10 1987 Negative Declaration T c,OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEf WOMENT "TO: (X) Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) SecretaryCtfib Pfeso U�Ices County of Riverside 1416 Ninth St. , Rm 1311 4080 Lemon Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Riverside, CA 92502 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: Park Village, PP 87-11 Date of Project_Approval : April 21 , 1987 State Clearinghouse Number ( if submi_tt td N/A Contact Person: Catherine Sass Project Location: PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive, 700 feet east of Portola. Project Description: Construction of eleven 4-plex apartments. 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 in connection with this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 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. SUr°tmvl:�� . -, II ED t� �_J J L 1 Signature Title NOV 0 91987 Date Received for Filing CLERK ofth-BOARD' SUPER`/ISOR0 Courty of Rivarside,State of Calilorni;: Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope. ou EIRA/fiAPT OF IM NOV elson Nelson Development Co.Inc. NP.O. B x 30lle Estado ntP•O. Box 3110 La Quinta, CA 92253 Developmecompany nc. A; i 1 i'J, 19S8 City of Palra Desert 73-510 -red War xrig ;.)r-. Pa 1 ri: Desert, CA 9226 ) Attri: Catherine Sass Re: Case No: PP 87-1 1 R TT I�L..'.13-9..l Pear Catherine, This letter is to corifirrn OUr diSci_ISSion on April 19, 1989, iri regards to setbacks on the ab-lve referenced pr�iject. Enclosed is a copy show i nn the setbacks as we discussed. Uri l ess we {-sear otherwise, we wi 11 proceeo on our working plans, which will show the setbacks as per the attached sheet ;-,od d i s c i_I s s i I--I ri. S i ricere 1 y, i� DAV I D i-1. NELSON DAN/fa 183M W1Yd 10 A10 Eric hIsi_;re !N W]Od30 IWV013AM A1101.41401 8861 6 j (Hd-V i ...� ... .... ..:............. : i:T3�" p 0 W � N 0 A J ` 0 c N h h `r x e it i .q<pw i INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Catherine Sass, Associate Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -- P.P. 87-11, T.T. 22393 DATE: April 17, 1987 Based upon discussions with the City Attorney, please delete the following conditions for the above-noted project: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS No. 28) "A" Street, as shown on the tentative map, shall be private. No. 29) Applicant shall provide street improvements along the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive from the easterly property line to the Intersection of Deep Canyon Road to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. JOSEPH S. GAUGU rH JSG/ms INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Catherine Sass, Associate Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -- P.P. 87-11, T.T. 22393 DATE: April 17, 1987 Based upon discussions with the City Attorney, please delete the following conditions for the above-noted project: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS No. 28) "A" Street, as shown on the tentative map, shall be private. No. 29) Applicant shall provide street improvements along the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive from the easterly property line to the intersection of Deep Canyon Road to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. JOSEPH S. GAUGU5H JSG/ms PROOF OF PUBLI( ION This space is for the C Clerk's Filing Stamp (2015.5 C.C.P.) RECEIVED STATE OF CALIFORNIA, '87 APR1�J Pi1 35 County of Riverside CI3'Y CLERI:S I am a citizen of the United States and a CITY OF PALM DESERT resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to Proof of Publication of or interested in the above-entitled matter. 1 am the principal clerk of the printer of the ••��� •• o�,;,,P,�„$,�,�,a„a ,c „��;.,223.9�... DESERTPOST ...................................................... .................................................... .... CITY OF PALM DESERT ...........................................:..... LEGAL NOTICE •a newspaper of general circulation, printed CASE NOS.PP87.11ANDTT22393 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held be- fore the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request and published ..Bi weekly.•••••..•••••..., by NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., to construct a 44 p ••••• unit apartment project on 6.3 acres on the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive,approximately 700 feet east of Portola,also described Pa l m D es e r t as:APN 624-120-006 In the City Of ..............................`... SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday,April 21, 1987 at 7:00 County of Riverside, and which news- p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,California,at which time paper has been adjudged a newspaper and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. of general circulation by the Superior If you challenge the proposed actions in court,you may be limited State of to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the pub- Court of the County of Riverside, lic hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence , delivered to the planning commission(or city Council)at,or prior California, under the date of„?,0/5, 19 64 , to,the public hearing. RAMON A.DIAZ,Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 3 6 5.8 (Pub.D.P.Apr.10,1987) Case Number .8...............� that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire Issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: 4/1 ............. ...0........0.....0......0............ all in the year 19..8.7. 1 certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at..RA1n..P.QAAr.t..................... California,this., o tn..day of...ARr,'i'9 ,,9•7, "-ii� tur�e.� Free copies of this blank form maybe secured from t CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPER SERVICE BUREAU, INC. Legal Advertising Clearing House 120 west Second St., Los Angeles, Calif. 90012 Telephone: (213) 625-2541 Please request GENERAL Proof of Publication when orderina this form. . CASE No 'P �� ,fy ®O OIYtIMlTAL, SERVICES DEPT. INITIAL STUDY E1YVIROYylElVTAL EVALUATION CHECKLIST NOTE: The availability of data necessary below shall form the basis of a decision to dasstotwhetopics listed application is considered complete for purposes of whether assessment. environmental ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (E-xplanations of all " measures and comments y and "maybe" answersore Provided on attached sheets) .ossible mitigation I . Earth. Will the proposal result in: Y_ M�lZbe No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in . geologic substructures? b. Oisruptions , 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: _ 4 a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? 4— c. Alteration f o air movement,temperature , or any change i moisture , or n climate, either locally or regionally? 3• Water. Will the proposal result in: Yes- Maybe No a_ Changes - in currents , 'or the course or 1 direction of water' movements? b. Changes in—absorpt-lnn rates , drainage patterns, or the rate and" amount of surface water runoff? C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? _ s 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? a. 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 u or endangered species of plants? pique , rare, c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area , or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 5. 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 )? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? 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 1 3. 6. Natural Resources. Wi Y. s M�be No 11 the proposal result in: a. Increase in *.the rate of use of any natural 'resources? b. Depletion of an resource? y non-renewable natural 7. En,_cY• 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 U set. - Does the proposal involve risk o an explosion or the release of . a hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, pesticides ,* of 1 , chemicals, or radiation) in • the event of an accident or upset conditions? k 9. E-ononic loss. Will 1 the proposal result in: a. A change in -the value of Prert improvements endangered byflo ding?d b. A change in the value of property and impro•,erien.-s exposed to geologic hazards beyond accepted cornwnity risk standards? 10. Noise. Will *. — •`�e proposal increase existing noise levels to the point at which accepted co.;nunity noise and vibration levels are exceeded? 11. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the a tT erat on of the present developed or planned land use of an area? 12. Ooen Soace. Will the proposal decrease in the -amountof designatedtopen space? 13. Population. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration or the location, distribution , density, or growth rate of the human Population of the Citv? b. Change in the population distribution by aye, income, religion, racial , or ethnic group, occupational class , household type? 4. Y_ MaybeNo 14. Emolovment. Will the proposal result in ad ona ne%q long-term jobs provided, or a cha-nge 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. Transoortation/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? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or mcvement 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 pubiic facilities , including roads? f. Other governmental services? C 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? . 4— d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 20. Human Health. 41— 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 4 — care provided? 21 . Social Services. Will the proposal result in an increased demand 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 aestheticallys site open to offensive public view? . c. Lessening of the overall neighborhood (or area ) attractiveness , Pleasantness ,and uniqueness? 23. Licht and Glar`. Will the new i�ht or g are?new produce 24. Archeological/Historical . Will the resu t in an IIEeration of a significanposal archeological or historical site, structure , object, or building? 6 Ye6 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? X b. Does the T— project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (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 �C on human beings , either directly or indirectly? / Initial Study Prepared By: 3 � 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 April 2, 1987 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. , to construct a 44 unit apartment project on 6.3 acres on the north side of _Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola, also described as: APN 624-120-006 \Lollntr 'LAUD Fort la CIO cc �2r 2 11 _ It -_1 - �vf�MO 1 r � t4 E ---- _ _-------.--__- MAGNE514 FAILS LRIV - CDMAIUNITY Fl— .. PARK "' \ Sir �+ o r D Critio/ _ n CITY IK INDIAN WELLS Pry Um } I t pp (r f S F71 I I I •I I I IE I I jll. ��•�,:� SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 21 , 1987, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-5.1.0 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council ) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary April 10, 1987 Palm Desert Planning Commission 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 April 2, 1987 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. PP 87-11 AND TT 22393 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. , to construct a 44 unit apartment project on 6.3 acres on the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola, also described as: APN 624-120-006 untr} iuo=1 . 1 �°•�;,.�L.r...—....�J.�,�-sue ]Fort la 1 fir`\ i 0 �rf+:io/' IIY Prajec� E, .� - -•- MAGNESIA FALLS GRIV 1 1 OOMMUNITY PARK [T7 H Ili I i !I i I r ��-- e+ _ x -yy a n° t 1 ® ® I H I I I or.•'rs•. than H111 I I I I L I !! !! i - Gltt OF INWAN NEUS dlf L° .. 111t1!Y'1 I I II .oir. 11 1 1 11 I(177 SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 21 , 1987, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-51.0 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council ) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary April 10, 1987 Palm Desert Planning Commission P J a qua(� { uo ' a h a � u ) p �� i ORDINANCE NO. 485 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 PR-5 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL FIVE KNITS PER ACRE ) TO PR-7 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL SEVEN UNITS PER ACRE FOR 6.. 2 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE AT RUTLEDGE WAY. CASE NO. Q Z 86-4 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: The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Palm 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 11th day of December, 1986, by the following vote, to wit:. AYES: CRITES, SNYDER, WILSON, BENSON NOES: NONE ABSENT: KELLY ABSTAIN: NONE ICHARD S. KELLY, Mayor by JEAN M. BENSON, MAYOR PRO TEMPORE A EST: SHEILA R. GILL AN, City C k City of Palm Desert, Cal ' rnia /tm .a INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERV I CES;A'noi• C. SSA AS FROM : DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORK, SUBJECT: T. t • "2.z393 J P P. /! DATE : A Pail. 21 I ff/ APR 31987 DEVELC DEPARTMENT The following should be considered coffdltion�S' of approval : 0 Drainage and signalization fund fees , as required by City ordinance , shall be paid prior to ( recordation of the final map) ) . 2O Drainage facilities shall be provided , per Ordinance No . 218 and the Master Drainage Plan , to the specifications of the Director of Public Works . 0 Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the Department of Public Works . 40) Full public improvements , including traffic safety lighting , as required by ordinance and the Director of Public Works , shall be installed in accordance with City standards . 5) Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to the project final . 0 Complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted , as required by ordinance , to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced . The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the City . C7 )') All private ( streets ) (driveways and parking lots ) shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to ( recordation of the final map) ❑armit as-suance4 . 8 ) Landscaping maintenance on /�r:jw.4 F*4&,Ls DIv* shall be provided by the ( homeowner ' s association ) 9) Existing utilities mow, shall be undergrounded per each respective utility dis- trict ' s recommendation . If determined to be unfeasible applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district . 1 0 Traff i s safety str i p i ng on ►''lA4M4,5/4 ro14-S f%,2w4 shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works . A traffic control plan must be submitted to and approved by the Director of Public Works before placing pavement markings . 11 ) Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submit- ted , as required by ordinance , to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits . 1 2 ) Dedication of 'M feet of right-of-way on MA-4.yx;v,y- ,D1L1-'J - sha 1 1 be done prior to issuance of any permits and approval of plans . C13.� Installation of curb and gutter , matching paving and s i d e w a l k o n r"&Ve 3./* s D/z I v,E 14 Waiver of access to except at approved locations shall be granted on the final map . 15 ) Close unused driveway with full height curb and gutter . 16) Offsite improvement plans to be approved by Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the required offsite improvements prior to ( recordation of the final map) 49rsa ; ..9 17 Full improvement of interior streets based on ( 60 ' residen- tial ) ( street standards as established in accordance with Chapter 26 , Section 26 . 40 . 040 , C . P . D . Code . 18) Installation of one-half landscaped median in %4r^grZ51.4 ).AILS titvF or cash payment for one-half the cost of landscaped median at the option of the Director of Public Works . 19) Traffic analysis to be prepared for the project to address the specific impacts on existing networks ( street and intersections ) and the proposed mitigation measures recom- mended for approval by the City. 20� Installation of sewers to serve this project . 21 ) Size , number and location of driveways to Public Works specifications with only driveway approach (es ) to be allowed to serve this property . 22 ) No ( new) requirements . (Original conditions apply) 23 ) Grading permit issuance shall be subject to the waiver of parcel map first being approved and recorded . Z4 ) Comp 1 ete tp-a�) (tract ) map (-,ir:) sha 1 1 be subm i tted as required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of any permits . 25 ) Any and all off-site improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permit ( s ) by the Department of Public Works . D26 ) A complete preliminary soils investigation , conducted by a registered soils engineer , shall be submitted to and approv- ed by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of the grading permit . 27 ) Applicant shall secure reciprocal ingress and egress access easements from the owner ( s ) of lot ( s ) Ca % �fA 28 /� STn F E.T A S 6/1aw..� cw Titer r�5'.�rn,7'i y.�e1 .�r✓t�9z L Tdf pR l��}TE 2 9) /4PPLc ctx� S/y+'�'L L Pnv✓/dE s lri�ec..�E.— i..-,.�i�.v.�..-�.c v�--� _A4ywJl. T/fiz .cerr2sr! 5/4je- r�1c .ft�/EsiA ��1�-l.S aRfVF Fro'" T/t/ _F.�sf 3 1 �/�.af2t� Lens Tc� 7+�F /NTbJl s.Ec T•r►� e,� Dzr c P . 9:/ s•. yu^-J IZ,I>. 7t> Th� Spry"lSfiici/a.. oF- 714- O!Izecrvr o P084ir_ We, Richapq J . Folk rs P.E . RA/ Rev . 7/25/86 CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Catherine Sass FROM: Brent Conley RE: 87-11 TT 22393 The plan as proposed could possibly have parking problems on the dedicated road because of residents parking in cul-da-sac in order to use the pool . A possibility to prevent this problem might be to move pool area east , toward middle of complex allowing people to walk to pool and ability to see pool by additional residents in units six and seven. The use of solid core doors on both entry and garage doors, along with dead bolts locks and 190 degree door viewer on entry doors is essential . Also, the use of locking devices on top and bottom of sliding windows and locks on sliding doors should be used. The use of addressing consistant with east/west street should be used. It might be possible to number north/south residences with 2, 3 , 4, or A, B, C, after the address to allow quick response from emergency vehicles. This would be for units designated as 6-10. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at ext 303. Brent Conley Crime Prevention Officer BC/rrt .ri ATEq ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGtrvcY DiSTRIC' COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058•COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(619)398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS,PRESIDENT THOMAS E.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TELLIS CODEKAS,VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON,SECRETARY JOHN P.POWELL KEITH H.AINSWORTH,ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGERIAUDITOR PAUL W.NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS THEODORE J.FISH March 31, 1987 File: 0163. 1 APR 6 1987 Department of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert COMMUNITY aEV[I.OPMENT OEPRRTM[N1 73-510 Fred Waring Drive CITY Of PALM DESERT Palm Desert, California 92260 Gentlemen: Subject: Tentative Tract 22393, Portion of Northwest Quarter, Section 16, Township 5 South, Range 6 East, San Bernardino Meridian This area is protected from stormwater flows by the Whitewater River Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone B on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. There may be erosion of the banks of the stormwater channel during periods of unusual rainfall and discharge. Plans for concrete slope protection shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Water District for review. A portion of this area is adjacent to the right-of-way of the Whitewater River Stormwater Channel. We request that the developer be required to install suitable facilities to prohibit access to this right-of-way. The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any construction within the right-of-way of the Whitewater River Stormwater Channel. This includes, but is not limited to, surface improvements, drainage inlets, landscaping, and roadways. 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. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY v _F ITS: w M 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 March 26, 1987 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: PP 87-11 and TT 22393 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC, 74-831 Velie Way #1 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architecture and landscape plan for 44 unit project. LOCATION: North side of Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. ZONE: PR 7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission granted preliminary approval subject to conditions. Date of Action: March 24, 1987 Vote: Carried 5-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen ( 15) days of the date of the decision. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION MARCH 24, 1987 It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Drury to approve signs B and C and amend sign A to be identical to sign C. The letter size to be 10" maximum. Carried 5-0 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 87-9 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : FRED VEIGA, 640 N. Tustin Avenue #105, Santa Ana, CA 92705; BILL ROSSWORN, 41530 Woodhaven Drive E, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of two 2-story fourplex apartments. LOCATION: Southwest corner Shadow Hills and Driftwood Drive. ZONE: R-3 Commission had concerns regarding the setback on Driftwood which appeared to be only 10 feet from the street and with the roof overhang would only be about four feet. Applicant was not available for questions. It was moved by Chairman Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Holden to continued this case. Carried 5-0 2. CASE NO: PP 87-11 and TT 22393 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC, 74-831 Velie Way #1 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architecture and landscape plan for 44 unit project. LOCATION: North side of Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. ZONE: PR 7 Ms. Sass explained that there was some concern from staff regarding the straight driveways. The site design would also encourage street parking. She presented a site plan showing an alternative which would provide for a street through the project. Mr. Dave Nelson, applicant, indicated that he had spoken with the adjacent development residents and they had only favorable comments about the proposed development. He presented a plan which was done 5 I MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION MARCH 24, 1987 on the advise of staff that provided for landscaped islands that would block the straight in view of the driveways. Commissioner Cook felt that the plan proposed by the applicant would be more controllable and practical . He liked the use of landscaping in the driveway/parking areas. Chairman Gregory preferred that another type of surface be used rather than asphalt. Commissioner Holden noted that the parking spaces provided were too small to meet the requirements of code. The question was brought up about the legal aspect of the bedroom that utilized the atrium area and garage as its only exit. Mr. Weller indicated that they would have to provide another type of access than through the garage. Mr. Nelson advised that he would be willing to provide a one car garage and one carport which would provide for an open area to exit into the carport. Commissioner Cook suggested that the garages be separated to provide a three foot walkway between each garage. This would then permit the two car garage to remain as proposed. He also recommended that the applicant study the solar protection on the units concentrating on the east and west elevations. It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Cook to grant preliminary approval subject to the following conditions. 1 . That the use of landscape medians be implemented into the driveway/parking areas. 2. That adequate size parking spaces be provided as required by code. 3. That a pattern concrete be used rather than asphalt. 4. That legal exiting area be provided for the bedrooms exiting into the garage. 5. Study of solar protection primarily on the east and west elevations. 6. Minimum tree size is 15 gallon and shrubs to be 60% 5 gallon and 40% 1 gallon. Carried 5-0 6 ! [y MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION MARCH 24, 1987 ® �(JBJECT to EV/S fok 2. CASE NO: PP 87-I1 and TT 22393 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC, 74-831 Velie Way ##1 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architecture and landscape plan for 44 unit project. LOCATION: North side of Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. ZONE: PR 7 Ms. Sass explained that there was some concern from staff regarding the straight driveways. The site design would also encourage street parking. She presented a site plan showing an alternative which would provide for a street through the project. Mr. Dave Nelson, applicant, indicated that he had spoken with the adjacent development residents and they had only favorable comments about the proposed development. He presented a plan which was done on the advise of staff that provided for landscaped islands that would block the straight in view of the driveways. Commissioner Cook felt that the plan proposed by the applicant would be more controllable and practical . He liked the use of landscaping in the driveway/parking areas. Chairman Gregory preferred that another type of surface be used rather than asphalt. Commissioner Holden noted that the parking spaces provided were too small to meet the requirements of code. The question was brought up about the legal aspect of the bedroom that utilized the atrium area and garage as its only exit. Mr. Weller indicated that they would have to provide another type of access than through the garage. Mr. Nelson advised that he would be willing to provide a one car garage and one carport which would provide for an open area to exit into the carport. Commissioner Cook suggested that the garages be separated to provide a three foot walkway between each garage. This would then permit the two car garage to remain as proposed. He also recommended that the applicant study the solar protection on the units concentrating on the east and west elevations. 5 ilk "!ji. :If fM 1 )"Iul I I OL! ft$t:s -it Pr, wi 0C, Ili, I,'01C I`ECi i�)%. 0."', MOO It 4 1P.4r(, ILVIA !1L 9LXA, A 4 -11 nj i%L, .4LG9 J 4k.'34JG J fj!') jf_ '.If f:, G I k­t)i 1 1 LCAIWU I. 0I rI,. IVII 0 ouk, 40 1 f­f•J­ Me,I G10 I , G"I 'Af 14W04,f,,f ' 1) CjAe -41 (JG LW)t C r C lk I L i f 9C o 90--i E)f-'I L 4 1 C 9 146 k 1(4,',. ,GAMIl? Rl M 'J04 Mt_',( A-4-141 I(I pInC 11 f.pl; elf�j 4 1 J�If !LI A I tP t�1(-, )U fiJJ46 W 4%J, -C. 04 - a. 4 �4.11.), t L ,I li.,Q ! of-] c,4hg,!4 Ai �AIPO n j 4 t!t, t`i A)(Alk.0 ;4F,t*,�,j fit OU9 U+ r" c4 1 9u V.)j '4CI f4(;A,-I OMW.1, L.72 . Aft fUll 6'1;t,A A 4.4 j 1\01, .4i I j 4 Wk 0612CWt" 3bb i 1­9(J4 lUgl; 4 j c.--,' t pc! 1,14" "O(A -t. W A I q(s p f L06 uql P': 1 l.Id W G.?1PiUf.6q I i kr, t?j'10 c',JQJ`A I 1,C] 3 1't94- Mi. Mc 4. .16L,r- #4171: .( UP E-4'. [101 00t JJ V41,1,fi- 1 .4 -0 f.'!0-4 'AL44 i 11 Ol Air,U40G L 1 4u j, L3 *bw-ir*-t TV-it) WAit,3�30"i it W I f113vu C(*W I C*1 w W)LEio MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION MARCH 24, 1987 It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Cook to grant preliminary approval subject to the following conditions. 1 . That the use of landscape medians be implemented into the driveway/parking areas. 2. That adequate size parking spaces be provided as required by code. 3. That a pattern concrete be used rather than asphalt. 4. That legal exiting area be provided for the bedrooms exiting into the garage. 5. Study of solar protection primarily on the east and west elevations. 6. Minimum tree size is 15 gallon and shrubs to be 60% 5 gallon and 40% 1 gallon. Carried 5-0 3. CASE NO: 306 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : AHMANSON DEVELOPMENT, 1001 Commerce Drive, Building E2, Irwindale, CA 91706. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of satellite buildings. LOCATION: Northwest corner Town Center Way and Highway 111 . ZONE: PC 3 Mr. Smith explained that the applicant is proposing a lighting plan which includes 30' light poles. He noted that the town center has 24' light poles. He indicated that he had concerns and suggested that the plan be returned to the applicant for restudy. Commission felt that the poles would be too tall and therefore referred it back to the applicant for restudy. It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Holden to continue the request for approval of satellite buildings upon the request of the applicant. Carried 5-0 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 6 r MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION MARCH 24, 1987 2. CASE NO: PP 87-11 and TT 22393 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC, 74-831 Velie Way ##1 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architecture and landscape plan for 44 unit project. LOCATION: North side of Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. ZONE: PR ?5A ­J Ms. Sass explained that there was sp4e concern from staff regarding the straight driveways. T i v would 9eern to encourage street parking. She presented a site plan showing an alternative which would provide for a street through the project. Mr. Dave Nelson, applicant, indicated that he had spoken with the adjacent development residents and they had only favorable comments about the proposed development. He presented a plan which was done on the advise of staff that provided for landscaped islands that would block the straight in view of the driveways. Commissioner Cook felt that the plan proposed by the applicant would be more controllable and practical . He liked the use of landscaping in the driveway/parking areas. Chairman Gregory preferred that another type of surface be used rather than asphalt. Commissioner Holden noted that the parking spaces provided were too small to meet the requirements of code. The question was brought up about the legal aspect of the bedroom that utilized the atrium area and garage as its only exit. Mr. Weller indicated that they would have to provide another type of access than through the garage. Mr. Nelson advised that he would be willing to provide a one car garage and one carport which would provide for an open area to exit into the carport. Commissioner Cook suggested that the garages be separated to provide a three foot walkway between each garage. This would then permit the two car garage to remain as proposed. Fie also recommended that the applicant study the solar protection on the units concentrating on the east and west elevations. 5 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION MARCH 24, 1987 It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Cook to grant preliminary approval subject to the following conditions. 1 . That the use of landscape medians be implemented into the driveway/parking areas. 2. That adequate size parking spaces be provided as required by code. 3. That a pattern concrete be used rather than asphalt. 4. That legal exiting area be provided for the bedrooms exiting into the garage. 5. Study of solar protection primarily on the east and west elevations. 6. Minimum tree size is 15 gallon and shrubs to be 60% 5 gallon and 40% 1 gallon. Carried 5-0 3. CASE NO: 306 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : AHMANSON DEVELOPMENT, 1001 Commerce Drive, Building E2, Irwindale, CA 91706. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of satellite buildings. LOCATION: Northwest corner Town Center Way and Highway 111 . ZONE: PC 3 Mr. Smith explained that the applicant is proposing a lighting plan which includes 30' light poles. He noted that the town center has 24' light poles. He indicated that he had concerns and suggested that the plan be returned to the applicant for restudy. Commission felt that the poles would be too tall and therefore referred it back to the applicant for restudy. It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Holden to continue the request for approval of satellite buildings upon the request of the applicant. Carried 5-0 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 6 CD 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 Date DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF PLANS THIS IS NOT A PLAN CHECK! DEVELOPMENT: e-1^ rE I � ega The comments below are based on the following assumptions and code groups: 1985 Uniform Building Code 1985 Uniform Plumbing Code 1985 Uniform Mechanical Code 1984 National Electrical Code Title 24 Handicapp / Accessibility Standards Title 24 Energy Conservation Standards Title 24 Multi-Family Adaptability Standards Code Assumption: Building Classification Type of Construction Sprinklered v Allowable Floor Area: Basic Allowable Setbacks Sprinklered Multi-Story Factor Total Allowable Sq.Ft. CHECKLIST Plans shall be prepared by a licensed California architect. Show current number on plans. Submit a list of features proposed that show compliance to the multi- family handicapp regulations. Use a maximum cap of $740.00 per adapt- able dwelling unit. t Page two. . . - HANDICAPPED: Site requirements per handicapp standards. PARKING: Q how umber of stalls required. Re se parking stall locations to allow main entry access. S ow ternational logo, loading and unloading zone requirements. URamp from parking lot to sidewalk not shown on plans. BUILDING ACCESS: Doors all be minimum 32" clear in width. Provide 18" space on the swing side of doors. ElOn ns, show height of all bathroom accessories. Handicap bathroom layout does not conform to current standards. Before further comments can be made, additional plans and specifications are needed for review. The following plans must be submitted to the Department of Building & Safety for plan review: Architectural Drawings and Details. Structural Drawings and Calculations. Complete Electrical , Mechanical and Plumbing Plans and Specifications. Title 24 Energy Conservation Documentation Forms. COMMENTS: UiAj ck(l CLtAl- k-WELLER PRINCIPAL PLANS EXAMINER E RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1p��of cAuF°�y� FIRE DEPARTMENT IN COOPERATION WITH THE COUNTY d•4 ' CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRYOt o �� RIVERSIDE.��. �� RAY HEBRARD r of I° �._ FIRE CHIEF 210 W EST SAN JACINTO AVENUE APR I L 7117V PERRIS,CALIFORNIA 92370 TELEPHONE:(714)657.3183 Ramon Diaz Planning and Community Development Director 73510 Fred Waring Palm Desert, CA 92260 Reference: pP %7-11 Applicant: NI�LSON #CVEL-OPMfKT- Dear Mr. Ramon Diaz The following fire protection requirements are in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code and Life Safety Code standards. 1 . Install a water system capable of delivering Z5 OGPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a 2. hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation shall be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than?.50 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways . a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow, and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. c. hydrants shall not be located closer than 7,5 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the Fire Marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the Building Department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: "I( certify that the design of the water system in PP '%7'11 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Fire Marshal ." 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . 7. All buildings over 4o— square feet require an approved fire sprinkler system. Very truly yours, RAY HEBRARD ,,Firnne Chief Q MIKE MCCONNELL Fire Marshal �I 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 PLANTING COMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF ACTION Date: March 17, 1988 Nelson Development Co. Inc. P.O. Box 300 La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: PP 87-11 and TT 22393 The Planning Ccndssion of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of March 15, 1988. APPROVED A ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION By MTNTII'E NOTION. CARRIED 3-0. Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Canmanity Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. �^� RAMON A. DIAZ, SECR 'I" PALM DESERT PLANNING SSION RAD/tm cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 1988 B. Case Nos. PP 87-11 and TT 22393 - NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., Applicant Request for approval of a one-year time extension for a previously approved project consisting of 11 four-plex apartment buildings on Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola. Mr. Diaz explained that staff was recommending that PP 86-45 be denied the time extension. Commission removed Item A from the consent calendar and explained that it would be discussed further under miscellaneous items. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Caiinissioner Whitlock, approving Item B of the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 3-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case No. PP 88-2 - MARVIN-DAVID INVESTMENTS, Applicant Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan for a 21,200 square foot retail commercial building to be constructed on the north side of El Paseo between Sage Lane and Highway 74. Mr. Diaz explained that PP 88-2 was continued to allow the applicant to receive approval from the Palm Desert Property Owners Association, which it did and also received approval from the Palm Desert Architectural Commission. He reoctinended approval and adoption of the resolution. Vice Chairman Richards opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. CLSvENi'E TRANOOSO, 1900 E. Tahquitz McCallum Suite B4 in Palm Springs, stated that he concurred with the staff report. He explained that in order to allow individuality of the stores, the individual store owners would be allowed to design their own store fronts. Upon a request for clarification from Commissioner Whitlock, Mr. Trancoso explained that window 2 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Planning Commission FROM: Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development DATE: March 15, 1988 SUBJECT: PP 87-11, TT 22393 - Request for Time Extension Planning Caimission approved this project April 21, 1987. The project consists of 11 four-plex apartment buildings in the PR-7 zone on Magnesia Falls Drive approximately 700 feet east of Portola. It was discovered after approval that there was a soil compaction problem on the property that the applicant has been attempting to solve with C.V.W.D. A letter requesting the one-year time extension is attached. 4 RAMON A. DIAZ ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER IRECTOR OF CUA14UNITY DEVELOPMENT /tm 7 Nelson Development Co.Inc. Nelson P.O. B x lle30 Estado P.O. Box 300 Development La Quinta, CA 92253 company nc. February 23, 1988 Planning Department (attention: Ray Diaz City of Palm Desert 73--510 Freed Waring I:)rive Palm Desert, CA 9 260 Re: Planning Commission Resolution 01215 Dear Ray Diaz : This letter is to requeot a one year extension, to April 21 , 19891 on the above referenced case. The extension is requested sincF building of the project was postponed due to a sizable amount of uncompact ed fill dirt which wam found in a portion of the acreage. A solution to this problem has been found and we are proceeding with development plans. Sincerely, j / , ���✓ 1 / l DAV I D A. NELSON DAN/fa FtH 26 1988 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENI DEPARIMENI CITY of PALM DESERT 7 Nelson Development Co.Inc. Nelson P.O. B Estado P.O. Boxx 30 300 Development La Quinta, CA 92253 companync. February 23, 1988 .'larinioF.1 Depar^trnerfL Ottenti or,: Ray Diaz City of Palm Desert Fred Waring Dt-ive Pa It rn Desert, CA Re: Planning Commission Rea011-ttior, #t1215 Dear, Ray Diaz : this letter, is-, to r^equpt 3t a orie year extension, to April c'1 , 1989, on the ab, -ve referenced case. TttF- exlerisiori is requested -since- bl.ti1dirig C.f the pr-c'Ject was past:pored d ue tc, a s i:able arm.:uri t of uriccirnpact ed fill dirt wh i c,h; was fOUnd :.n a portior, of the A 1501Ltti0r, to this probl.ern has beer, fo urid and we are proceeding with deve l c:,prnerit p l aril. Ci.r,cere1y, l DAV I D A. NFl.ON ail � F t 8 2 6 1988 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARIMENL C111 OF PALM DESERL Nelson 74-831 Velie Way, Suite 1 Deve260 lopment Palm Desert, CA -2997(619) 341-2997companync. February 12, 19-87 Planning Commission City of Palm Desey t 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: Triangular- shaped py-coperty on Magnesia Falls Drive Dear Planning Commission: This letter• is a request far- a review of our- plans far- the above , property at your next study session an March 3, 1987. We appreciate ycour time; and look forward tort seeing you then. Sincerely. /l �z 7��z David A. Nelsor, DAN/ fa i i)A i b24--121--029 Edison v Wlllers Michael H Lewis Hebert Iadevai.a i_/l) V i a Heneca d8Q V i a Henec a 'fit)6 Prov i denc 1 a Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, UH YddbO Burbank, CA 91501 b34--ldl--020 b24-'-121-033 EPIC Nssoc 1 at es 82 XIII 0 martin Net hery Pirates Estates Prop Ltd b&Q 1 Leesburg Pike #16C)U P U Box 4Qb/ 1677 Oakport at 'fit h F- 1 Falls Church, VA 22041 Palm Desert, Ua yedb 1 uak.l and, CA 94614 bd4-131•--s J4 b :4_1dI_Q..•b b24-121-036 Hilen ylp Robin uheng John C Hoover P U Box lulb /'cti' U Highway Ill Ste Al / 465 S Hudson nve Rancho mirage, CA 92270 Palm Desert, ljn 'aabbo Pasadena, CA 91101 bc4-121•-05/ b&4•--1L-'1--QJ8 E.24•--121-039 Harry 1 Higley Shirley N Milani W E Development c , W044 Kinne1oa Canyon Dr 8b )1 Wilshire Blvd P 0 Box 1016 Pasadena, L;H V1107 Beverly Hills, UH 00ell Rancho Mirage, CR s.:.'ato b34--1 /t_-•-UV'3 b&4-1 t&--Q I Q b 24~•-172-01 1 William B I ownsend 1 homas J Flanagan Donald Norton 40080 bilk I ree Ln 4JQ81 bilk I ree Ln 1 124 North A tit Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, UH YeebU Lompoc, CA 93436 b34--i to--Olb bc4-1 /&-t)1b b24-172-017 Donald M Bolas Hugh H Ubr i en Henry J Burnett: 111 bi_' Skyward Way &.5.=1JJ Kathryn hryn Five 43042 Balsam Ln Palm Desert, CA 92260 I orrance, Un s(.):on Palm Desert, CA yi'ab(.) b24-172-020 Stan D Newman L- Scott McClanahan Elizabeth C Lopez 4AU4 1 Ba I snm Ln 41081 Balsam Ln 43101 Balsam Ln Palm Desert, CA 92 260 Palm Desert, UH VddbU Palm Desert, CA wi-abu b44-1 /2-•-021 be4~1 ld-Od4 Dennis Uliver Weinstein Family Ltd 451&1 Balsam Ln Partner Palm Desert, UA 92260 4140 Via marina Hpt b 1'-J Marina Del Hey, UH ' Q&j 1 b&4-11&-Oi_b b&4-172 -027 Carol R Uwens John I 81achley Steven R McWilliams 1 100 But t onwood Ln 4�08Q Hut t onwood Or /&B92 G l or i.ana Dr Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, UR Yd&bU Palm Desert, UP A&i:U() b&4-1 ILA-(-).:0 Richard H Weber Jim H Pell Hobert Burpo 4A 141 Huttonwood Dr 45081 Huttonwood or /1bO1 Ha1gar" Rd Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, L R VdebU Rancho Mirage, 1.R odd/O bi:4--1 /e--054 b&4-172-035 Helene nenga Koher, Stephen W Cotton Richard P Chamberlain 451el Buttonwood Dr 461HO Rutledge Hve P U Box 298 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, 1.R 'fie.dbu Indio, CA 92201 qpnov UJ Isalauuu Sol PqSPn on 'Wasan WUH 11016 on 'WouUej w1 aAH aasSOOd WV;! TH OTPISOad qIT wa 05uvisan Iqui OaIPUeH U POVMPq a0uAnA R ulmw-_,l Or aaam m uwar Soo-131-vaq NPO-IPT-opq TPO-1pi-spq 109m U3 WOR TO/ on QW01 e4TH 09LIP on QuOaA al W14qusul0d 904 041w"Tew /AOq ul suaAmin pq/ AaWT3 8 TTTR uosuqor M SUTUnOCT UaTTunall W Annul aa0-TaT-Qcq IPO-Ipl-hpq OpO-IpT-KRq OTPPP Uj 'SlIaM UUTPUT qAP WIA W.UUM 'APOOW 400H 9a006 Un 'SaTa5uH Sol 011 aPUVAS OAO LF91+y TH AaaqOeR PITI aAU aaSSOOH sqaG 3 4saunq u0sOalWH N WTOOTUW OaTPUeH H POUMP-� 610-TaT-yaq fait)-IRT-opq / 10-lpl-hpq OWSP U3 '40aSaa WTUH OWPI on 'WaSaa WTUH 91006 U1 'SaTWUH Sol uoand MA OW:! uannH MA OIP aAU qmewAaaxy /OOR asOIA H aGOOaq aw4lal H abaoaR A40aq5nen Y SaTOUQ-1 9TO-Tal-haq WO-TRT-hPq NIO-Tpi-hpq OpqqP U3 lowavol uwq **PIP on 'STTIH VPVUeO!:1 0001A on 'WUUqO%-T osuemsaa em omgi aAH AaTTZOOM bIPPI W21som qR01=! a; je=3 ezx?4 UunoA r PTUUOCT A30TWW R SITTIM ETO-Ial-vaq PIO-Ipi-hpq TIC)-1pi-spq POR06 UJ lqoeae Guol W/ IA on 'SIU51aH UPUWOW .4 OAU u10J OLY' an JOATH aTTaR /*l`/q.,P allPIOIuH U ulllueOA SOaWWWH Ua"AeM 010-TaT-12q AOO-TRT-bpq 99906 U3 IaHuewn wqm on letwaavTH 'QAH PUVAD 'S qF+j aTOA11 s5abanR I/ql 1jazoog uo�j UOSUeH 'Y OaBOH 900-Tal-vpq /00-1pi-opq So/ TA SWUM epualmeH ROOnA on 'saTaNUH Sol LOOM Hn W040aAVaR AAAT8 011OU tbq!;' On PueTAOUW OP*q STqQTTW MR Q/ /N'l juva IvIoadmT 440SSOY POMOWI uopuon -r aaaqoH nqRpv on Wasaa mieH nqPPA on Wasan WTeM 09FOS U3 Wasan wTe.-I uojnd ejA qqR uOOna e'A q/P U00na e1A qRP aaAqs0awS N laaq= 4aWW UlAaT WWOW zjzejapqH azjuaxT-j E00-Tal-bW POO-1pi-opq Ion-171-bRq IOPPO on '01PUT qu anUOAH ANOTO 4sTn TOOWOR P014TUn spuvq joasa(-1 qnppn 09aaG UO 4wasan WTV-1 9401 "ou '0 Id a4iuvaR Ojqpij C 1(1,-)A."I UssU Saar mOaWOH feu IM unc, E00-081-Wq TOO.ORI.bpq =c°-I 'c-vuo Mw*-IM-v6/ be*-I /d-n6u u1ga vurxew wzchard J Hvery uity of Palm Desert /Jb+o Josmua | ree /6ebb El Paseo No b Uzty Clerks Office Palm Desert, CA 92260 palm Desert, U* WOW 45275 Prickley pear un Palm Desert, CA ydebo Property Line a `o = Meandering Sidewalk _ Optional Contact Joint ' Expansion (D Paper / : F--r—�Curb Sidewalk / ,• �. Expansion Paper Curb Line Depressed Curb 12' Min.- 30� Max. Residential 3 Commercial Gutter P+20'Min.-30' Max. r PLAN Driveway Curb Opening Depressed Curb 1 '' Bottom of Curb 12' R (Typ.) ELEVATION Edge of Sidewalk zl III Normal Rise 1/4' per foot Single Family Residential-6" 2" R I�� above Gutter All Others-8 it SECTION NOTES : 1. Min. 22' required between driveways in commercial zone. .2. All concrete shall be 520-C -2500. . 3. Weakened plane joints required on driveway for LEGEND ON PLANS driveways 12' to 20' wide, driveways wider than -20' to 30' wide shall have two weakened plane - Hof , Residential joints evenly spaced. (Commercial) Driveway Date: 12-20-82 REVISIONS 4 N�TMN -7/°A- $ID"' CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS �oM CITY ENGINEER EN. TE5 51 8oM STD. DRAWING N0. MA lQF71-, 1�� SSG. ENGINFFRINri r1FDAPTKA9rNT r ry ne n. .. ....---- 105 73-510 Fred Waring Dr.. Palm Desert. Ca. 92260 PRECISE PLAN IPPLOCATOGN DORM : Dept.of Planning and Community Development MVT.gQN IIFVFT.QPMFNT CQMPANY TNC- Applicant (please print) 7A—R-11 VF.I.TF WAV., -iITTF. 1 Fil C /-1dl —7A97 Mailing Address Telephone PALM DESERT, CA 92260 C)ty State Zip-Code REQUEST' (Describe specific nature of approval requested). SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY INTO 13 LOTS. 11 LOTS WILL EACH HAVE A 4-PLEX APARTMENT BUILDING. ( 44 UNITS TOTAL) , TWO LOTS WILL BE A COMMON AREA PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: A RIGHT TRIANGULAR SHAPED PROPERTY ON 6 . 3— GR.02S ACRES UN NURTE STUB UP MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE., APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET EAST OF PORTOLA ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 624-120-006 EXISTING ZONING PR-7 Property Owner Authorization The undersigned states that they are the owner(s) of the property described herein and hereby give author- ization fa/ It fill g of this application. Signature Date Agreement absolving the City of Palm Desert of all liabilities relative to any deed restrictions. 1 DO BY 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 herein. Signature Dote Applicants Signature 3 � Sign ture Date (FOR STAFF USE ONLY) Environmental Status- Accepted by. ❑ Ministerial Act E.A. No. ❑ Categorical Exemption (�� [E ❑ Negative Declaration VGzI .H UVo ❑ Other I Reference Case No. 0WRONYCNTAL SCMCIII AT! 4-17-e2 EXPLANATION OF ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 1. Applicant's Environmental Information Form The Environmental Information form must be submitted with the filing o application, so that an environmental determination can be made. Shou Environmental Impact Report be required, the application will not be accept processed until one has been submitted. 2. Filing Fee Resolution 79-7 of the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code requires a filin dependent upon the type of development. 3. Application The attached application must be completed as indicated on the form authorization of legal owner to process the Precise Plan. (Notarization) 4. Supporting Statements This is to show justification for this application. 5. Legal Description Application will not be considered complete until legal description is approv the Environmental Services Department. (The information from deed of r will suffice) 6. 300-Foot Radius Map The 300-foot radius map must be prepared to the attached specifications folded to 8Y2" x 13" maximum size. 7. Property Owner's List The property owner's list must be typed in duplicate on gummed labels available in the Department of Environmental Services. This list must have the names and mailing addresses of all property owners within or partially within the 300-foot radius map. It must be prepared from the latest equalized assessment rolls of the Riverside County Assessor. All names must be numbered to correspond wit' numbers on the required radius map. The 3rd list does not have to be on gur labels. 8. Precise Plan Precise Plan drawings must be prepared to the following specifications and f to maximum 8Y2" x 13" size. I. Format A. Title as follows: Name, address, and phone number of applicant. J INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING A PRECISE PLAN 1. Layout and dimensions of all parking stalls. 2. Dimensions of all access ways, turnaround areas, driveways, alleys, and walks. 3. Off-street loading space and facilities. 4. Surface type. 5. Screening and landscaping (including curbs). L. Proposed grading. IV. Map Legend A. Net acreage of parcel. B. Gross floor area for all buildings. C. Percentage of land covered by structures. D. Number of permanent seats, square footage dwelling units (including size of each unit) or whichever is applicable in the computation of the parking requirements. E. Proposed off-street parking. F. Required off-street parking. G. Percentage of landscaping for-total site. 9. Elevation Plans (typical Structure) Elevation plans of front, sides, and rear of the proposed developments shall be submitted together with the application. Plans must be drawn to scale and should be large enough to be used for display purposes. Prints to be folded to 8%" x 13" maximum size. • i INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING A PRECISE PLAN B. North arrow and scale (drawings shall be oriented to the north and shall not be less than 1" = 30" in scale, unless approval has been granted by the Environmental Services Department to reduce the scale. C. Legend for the plan shall include all the items in Section IV. II. Parcel Specifications A. Fully dimensioned subject parcel boundaries. B. Abutting street information: 1) Name of street(s) 2) Existing and proposed street width(s) and centerlines 3) Parkway width(s) 4) Sidewalk dimensions 5) Access and driveway dimensions 6) :Median strips and traffic islands C. Name, location and width of closest intersecting street. D. Existing contours and water courses, for subject property and adjacent property. E. Location and dimensions of all existing or proposed easements. III. Proposed Development and Modification A. All existing and proposed structures and physical features. B. Exterior building dimensions. C. Setbacks with dimensions. D. Distances between buildings. E. Height of structures. F. Treatment of open spaces, including landscaped areas. G. Walls and fences. H. Trash areas. I. Use of building. J. Parkway trees. K. Parking area CERTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS LIST (To be filled out by applicant) CITY OF PALM DESERT Department of Environmental Services 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Subject: Gentlemen: I, do hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the attached list sets forth the names and addresses of the following persons as they appear on the last equalized assessment roll of the Riverside County Assessor. Sincerely, Printed Name Address Phone Number Dated in the City of , California. l Signature • :300' RAOIUS MA1 CASE NQ FOR, (APPUCANT'S NAME) (AXRE55) (PHCN E? 3 Ag © I� A A lima SAN P DR- ST. C _ 5T. O VACANT warn cz g"X TI oN IWO o O � p m . LAN 9 -Russ DI I� I Put"* _ Laity I a z - ILI . ,.,,00, LEGEND C'WNCR L 47 ,4P- PARCEL ALY�rt � . � f � I � , � � i � � i � ' i � i I � � I � i � I f � 1 � � � � � I i � � � � � �� ��� � ° � C i i � � t i 1 r ' i 1 � i � � } � � � � _ . t � � ! � � � ! �, i i � j 1 t ! f. i i � i � r �..�� +. ` ! � i 4 I i � - : i F � � � : � i s t 4 t .. 3 r � � i D .y S aPPL (1 7 C H PCC R 1 : nmznm� NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,- INC. Applicant ( please print) 74-831 VELIE WAY, SUITE 1 Mailing Aaaress 2��7 ele none PATIN npgRnm rA 97 �n City - State Zip-Code REQUEST: (Descrrbe specific nature of approval requested). SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY INTO 13 LOTS. 11 LOTS WILL EACH HAVE A 4—PLEX APARTMENT BUILDING. (44 UNITS TOTAL). TWO LOTS WILL BE A COMMON AREA. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: A RIGHT TRIANGULAR SHAPED PROPERTY ON 6 .3 GROSS ACRES NO NORTH SIDE OF MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET EAST OF PORTOLA ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 624-120-006 EXISTING ZONING PR-7 Property Owner Authorization The unaersiQned states that they are the owner(s) of the property described herein and hereby give autt izatfon for the fIi' of this appl' ton. n awl D a'e Agreement absolvi g the 90rof Palm Desert all Ifabfiitfes relative to any deed restrictions. l DO BY MY RE ON THIS AG EEMENT, Absolve the Clty of Palm Desert of all liabilities regarding any deed restrictio at may be applicable to the property described herein. i - Signature Date Applicant's Signati Sig-furs Date (MR STAFF USE ONLY) Envimnmental Status Accepted by: Ministerial Act E.A.No. Categor❑ Negative al Exemption C/� �� HO ❑ Negative Declaration (� o �C> ❑ Other Reference Case No. C"RO"WeNTILL SERVICES/♦rs a-a-a2 CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST AF=iDAVIT STATE OF CALIF-RNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF PALM DESERT ) I, hereby certify that the attached list contains the names and addresses of all persons to whom all property is assessed as they appear on the latest available assess- ment role of the County within the area described on the attached application and for a distance of three hundred (300) feet from the exterior boundaries of the property described on the attached application. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (Sign.ed) (I CASE N0. PP ara� TT aA,593 ! J c HIV `✓.�� ��.��i� a�Y.+�V� �l..s_ Environmental Assessment Form W` W, D TO THE APPLICANT: . I►-;aR 1 0 1987 Your cooperation in completing this form and supplying the information requested will expedite City revie%-i of your application pursualft, " JL'ILOIPhiENTDEPIRTMENT Y U PALM DESERT the California Environmental Quality Act. The City is required to make an environmental assessment on all projects which it exercises discretionary approval over. Applications submitted will not be considered complete until all information necessary to make the environmental assessment is complete. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1 . Name, address , and telephone number of owner, applicant or project sponsor: NELSON DEVELOPMENT CO. , INC. 74-831 VELIE WAY, #1 , PALM DESERT, CA 92260 — 619/341-2997 2. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted con- cerning the project (such as architect, engineer, or other repre- sentative) : SAME AS ABOVE 3. Common name of project (if any) : PARK VILLAGE 4. Project location (street address or general location) : NORTH SIDE OF MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 700 ' EAST OF PORTOLA 5. Precise legal description of property (lot and tract number, or meets & bounds) : SEE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP #22393 6. Proposed use of the site (project for which the form is filed; describe the total undertaking, not just the current application approval being sought) : SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY INTO 13 LOTS. 11 LOTS WILL EACH HAVE A FOUR—PLEX APARTMENT BUILDING ( 44 UNITS TOTAL) AND TWO LOTS WILL BE A COMMON AREA. 7. Relationship to a larger project or series of ro r• bases , and dvelo be how this project relates to other activities , p s..cts (de evelo ments planned, or now under,.vap- y) :-THIS PROTECT TS SIMILAR TO DRIFTWOOD OASIS EXCEPT AT A MUCH LESS DENSITY AND ONLY SINGLE STORY 8. List and describe any other related permits and other l required for this project, to go for,iard, including those requ required by the City, Regional , State and Federal agencies (indicate sub- sequent approval agency name, and type of approval required) : EXISTING CONDITIONS : 9. Project site area : 6.3 GROSS ACRES (Size of property in sq. ft. or acreage) 10. Present zoning:_ R 7 (Proposed zoning) : PR 7 11 . General Plan land use designation: 12. Existing use of the project site: VACANT 13. Existing use on adjacent properties: (Example -South, Single Family Dwellings; East, Vacant, etc.). Shopping Center; NORTH WHITEWATER CHANNEL; EAST, BIKE PATH; WEST, CONDOMINIUM PROJECT; SOUTH, COMMUNITY PARK & SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 14. Site topography (describe) : FLAT 15. Are there any natural or manmade drainage channels through or adjacent to the property? NO_ YES ADJACENT TO THE NORTH 16. Grading (estimate number of cubic yards of dirt being moved) : 17. List the number, size and type of trees being removed: NONE 18. Describe any cultural , historic, or scenic aspects of the project Site: NONE 19. Residential Project (if not residential do NOT answer) A. Number and type of dwelling units (Specify no. of bedrooms ) : 22 — 2 BD MS, 1 BATH 22 — 2 BDRMS, 2 BATH + DEN B. Schedule o unit sizes : 825 SQ FT & 993 SQ FT C. Number of stories 1 Height APPROX: 15 ' feet.OF D. Largest single building (sq. ft7(h t. )�5 E. Type of household size expected ation projection for the project) AVF.RAf F- 7 pED21TF PER TiNTT 0 RR pF(1pTF' TnTAL F. Describe the number and type of recreational facilities : 1 POOL , 1 POOL BLDG 2 COMMON OPEN SPACE LOTS G. Is there any night lighting of the project: YES, GROUND LIGHTS THROUGHOUT AND FLOOD LIGHTS IN DRIVES N. Range of sales prices o A rent PRCE $300 ,000310,000 6yS.00/MO o 4 A0 I. Percent of total project devoted to: (NET AREA) Building . . . . .` J'.�v . . . . . . . . . . Paving, including streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 a ni % 2-" Landscaping, Open, Recreation Area . TOTAL NET AREA------- 100.00% 20. Commercial , Industrial , Institutional or Other Project: A. Type of use(s) and major function(s) ( if offices, specify type & number) : B. Number of square feet in total building area : C. Number of stories Height feet. D. Largest single building (Sq. Ft. ) (Hgt. ) E. Number of square feet in outdoor storage area: F. Total number of required parking spaces number provided ' G: Hours of operation: H. Maximum number of clients, patrons , shoppers , etc. , at one time: I. Maximum number of employees at one time: J. If patron seating is involved, state the number: K. Is there any night lighting of the project: Yes No L. Percent of total project devoted to: Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % Paving, including streets. . . . . . . . . . ia Landscaping and Open Space (Recreation) . , 0 Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects : Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary) . YES NO 21 . Change in existing features of hillsides , or substantial alteration of ground contours. X 22. Change in the dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in the project vicinity. X 23. Subject to or resulting in soil errosion by wind or flooding. X 24. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. X 25. Change in existing noise or vibration level in the vicinity. Subject to roadway or airport noise (has the required acoustical report been submitted?) X 26. Involves the use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances , flammables or explosives. X 27. Involves the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy. X 28. Changes the demand for municipal services (police, fire, sewage, etc. ) 29. Changes the demand for utility services , beyond those presently available or planned in the near future. X 30. Significantly affects any unique or natural features, including mature trees. X 31 . Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public land or public roads. X 32. Results in the dislocation of people. YES r10 33. Generates controversy based on aesthetics or other features of the project. x [ ] Additional explanation of "yes" answers attached. CERTIFICATITI: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation, to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my,knowledge and belief. NE SON DEVELOPMENT CO � INC, -Name Print or Type)-- For Signatu MARCH 10,Date INITIAL STUDY FEE: $30. 00 (Bake check payable to the City of Palm Desert and sub- mit with this form. ) t �)rerc Co �a\ c e 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO(S) : PP 8�'7 -ll Cana TT ac PROJECT: Pw lf, V O\QG qe, V _# I APPLICANT:APP �e� ��\ ��'C>Z. CO� �'flL• �]� " C:)31 V�`1C, WA�SOf\ Enclosed please find materials de.scrtbing a project for which the foljowing is being requested: Si. Iq I'Slon 0 �+ 1p 3 �tcrCs IY1AO 1 3 \0k5 . �—=(,eVEY1 �AS W'\kl CoR�aln onP. �Owoe�, (�)c,,Cn . Zv,�o \0�5 well be comm-0n oaeaS. ,S�r�c,�u�e.s vim,\� be. on@.-S�oc�(• 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. Q ig n , In order to be discussed by the land division committee. Thb land division committee (comprised of director of community development, 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 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING /tm z. Attachments PLEASE,..,RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS r 1 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO(S) : PP "? -I< Cnd TT PROJECT: � Inc.• �� -831 U�\�e Ways I APPLICANT: Ne\Soi-\ Pa\r►� \use r� � C � `���O Enclosed please find materials descri,bing a project for which the following is 1 being requested: ��d i J 1 S IOrI O (Q. 3 cio-es 1 y-Ao I \ok5 . FI even 10V5 W,6' coRko,'�r, one poi�42� c�c.�ch - ��0 10�5 will be COM M.0h aMC S, S�r uc�u�e s v,,A\ be. cane -S�oc�(• 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. t, lg n , in order to be discussed by the land division committee. The land division committee (comprised of director of community development, 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, _ si - ---- == --- ----------------- �a\ ce \�SU� RAMON A. DIAZ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING C v D ) /tm Attachments PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS u► .� - UD S�ac1o�U� U� sMAY, vcm� sU!%-�Uo -�;Uo e �-foj upw ivoc saY,ajd S Q L 1'Y.m l Q f-C1 P9l � .7 E'.:. ` �= - - s y : i ;�, ..- i _ �� 0 i �. �:� I .. � i �I �. i �. f� ,I ,�.. u ,3-ab Wk.% ��)Kvz t,�,Z�50 �w-oi-� \t,� C) �A�l �-k 0 \-�C� wa"o &m�k nc s 10( c� cswv\ . COY18 U L 7' �Q2 � C�' 15�M\ 1\ 4o' aAWY\3 aV Q:-. OAAP) fA,v OK 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 y CFII �It:� "-"i i6 91 co LM, ��� t�iCl4'i:::i'� I...l'::I��•�T' �,IC1 a,I:jI:;�F�'C::`3":; p r ;T 72840 Highway 111 Ste 317 Palm Desert, CA 92660 a IB San Bernardino I 10 Redlands 62/ i0 MORON90 VALLEY Loa Angeles Riverside 10 Beaumont 9 !S #� � Bonninq IS ((( \ II 10 0 I 2 3 4 3 Mile° REOON \ 243 !EACH ` Palm Palms S C A L E 1 °n i6 74 4 Id Illlild Springs cA CITY Qe uN Beac Hem ct PAL ' ndia PIEHUNTI NOTCH DESERT Int, ru PHOENIX B iO --♦ EACH ' La Ou into ME B[ACN I rs Anza 74 74 I 195 �11 71 _ g k 3alton\ Sea L �•.$�> `tin" si�'.-� Bade p Catalina z Iele.d 4 �2 76 5 7 j Tg la o�..eeta. 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 v Moved-Leff No Address C!?emporarily Away ,.� ❑ Eo. +arL � � Ty !����""����r Rddress CJ`Ia:ant a- � o ❑r'o u.,c+.^'�,�ber C?<o,r,aii ItV evia w ��., Other xttera�:.�., �t Kn/own G C7T z o (y o Q41_L9 Runber (( v `i =a Shirley !�i Milarli -" 8501 Wilshire Blvd • Beverly Hills, CA 90211 5 la San Bernardino I 10 Redlands 62MORONOO \\"/ Los VALLEY Riverside Angeles 10 Beaumont 9 a Banning 15 II 10 Th6usond o i z a s 5 Mdes REDON t`\ 243 Palms I !EACH ) PQIm S C A L E Springs �TCT° on 15 74 4 Id 11Mild Ranchgo UN�o Bead Hemet PAL ' Irdalls a TO PHOENIX. BEACH 7 DESERTME La Dulnla BEACH I 5 1 Anm 74 74 �;1' a 9s uI s 71 9 Salton\ N O Sea Dana GMllse s - Z �2— Island 0 76 5 r� 79 15 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 f'- =r Weinstein Farill co %Ltd Plat-trier, cn 414,31 Via Marina Apt 61,9 Marina Del Rey, CA 90291 FS FS 5 13 Son Bernardino i 10 R.dbnN 82/ �v MORONW 10 Los VALLEY Angeles Riverside 10 Beaumont ON 5 Banning 15 ((t`79 li 10 Thbutond Q I 2 3 4 3 M,I.4 REDON ` 243 PQim Po 1.. S C A L E BEACH 1 �Tc T Springs Y on i' 74 q Id (wild "°:oa 9A Beoc Hemet PAL a �e is TO PHOENIX PEDRO HUNNSTOM EACH T DESERT La OufMa NEW EACH 1 Is 1 Anza T4 74 a 195 II1 71 9 k saftton� Soo A.I Gtell" Z -s..I- btwd < \ • Tg 5 7 79 15 oceondd• 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 =n o¢ cL r U ►p D,::s u g 1 as W Johnson E097 Malachite rib# Alta Loma, CA 917 01 T L %6 _ 5 la San Bernardino I 10 R.dland. 62/ M0R0N60 10 VALLEY Angeles eles Riverside 10 Beaumont 5 ° Banning 79 15 II 10 rnausand q z s a s M,Ie. REDON `43 Palma BEACH Palm S C A L E annul i on 15 Id IMrild Spring,: GTC CITY Bon T4 4 Yl go EAN Hemet PAL India TO PHOENIX PEDRO HUNTING« 7 DESERT Wells 10 BEACH La Ouinte ME BEACH 1 5 I Anzo 74 74 a iss Ill 71 9 k saiton\ ` Sea Bella p� 2 GNIIea 2 Island 1 76 Q`- 5 76i 79 15 (]rinwdA• 62/- 40, 44 T R. A. 180/ 624 - l2 POR. W I/2 SEC. 16 T55. R. 6 E. SNE�T I OF 2 POR. CITY OF PALM DESERT . io �7 G I hYq�-E-R New Cl/ NBn 'T by i W /7.67AC 200 LOT m yt7 0 I I \ v N A� I 6..3A. c\v l�-��.s. � . � - O 00 I 1 w c — — 7/=AC. i New R p �6 ti ss l 2�b2l I I2 I Z ° v 1 O . Z3G GZ BK. a C 2— c• _ — — — !i7 qB LOT — J c I e Gis.v� _ _—-7• 622 T� TPP. 169s2- _i39�. — i 3 1 7 9 5i 3 5 � e��sz�3s"E 890 �I G23Ac Z61.67 t 0.73Ac v c� ti O c \ b o LINCOLN SCHOOL PALM DESERT OEx MIDDLE SCHOOL ly � 27.42Ac a Goto N.a»/sr w we Sri+.s /-/2-B2 Af. B. /2//67-68 TR. 169 42-/ CM..38//30- I39 6454 +, *+ DATE OLD NO I NEW NC 9/e/ N L r. ASSESSORS MAP BK.624 PG. /2 �59._ -4 lvF — - 19 RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIF. 624 - 1T POR. S W I/4 SEC. 16 , T 5 S. R. 6 E POR. CITY OF PALM DESERT i LV/ N5 wp9 55 w' J I `4 /p `` l_ S r In 2`�_ • te.vRi tJ ,64 16/ I _ 152 x !7/ `+' l Lot C ' Lot D 127 IV c i a <.3 I /6 h 65 ff uJ Gv 155 a� , .� cp SA Z6 0 /70 �_j5 ^ O I b ^ti /E 41 Mb 5 '? 11 a 'ZsI 12 2g Zo 2BG O /29 2 c to �1 44 W T _ r o 173 .ZB ' za ,: I � J \ 0 0 Z: 23 n J 23;Z3 p + j 23�23 •! /4 7 25-,9c.,ti'• Y /68 y /67 /58 T � /57 iJ !49 � /3U :3/ v ,24 , b h 9 b u i � � mil• 06.G i d �G I N ^1-40 1- QJ6 ✓B9• 53 ',j5'' /1 I C N TO �.�'tf� 305.Z Lot 9 l /23 50 /2 N � c aG s3 r� O NI ✓2 P /�? it /�5/ H t 2 P !^ /45 /46 /47 /48 32 ;4? /4? /4 4 a v c I c o _ y /2 4 .�i 53 c // /2 /•3 ( /4 /5 !6 /7 t�,t , D7/By � ? O 33 00 1 /05 j 25 I Z5 ri 52 44 Li a t ti ` v o 4 !J6 a 4/ NO l39 i 138 37 /36 /35 \J �.;eZ i v, OAFE OtD vc , Ss r1 L o t F w �T-ON Woo 170 * si/o O7_j �4G. 46 i a w "r' B 92/3-5 Tract No 5237 624- /2 I O ► � I ► o /O 2Z 23 O i I I 24 i I 33 5 I I /2 I 1 L I 1 a L , I 35 Lot / J I 36 6.43 Ac.Nf� VIA _ TEMuco _ - + I © 37 38 4 I I 20 I/4 26 } I I I i v O 2-1 ► � /9 o I I I I ❑ I I /5 /8 I I 27 l 30 2 I I ffi 29� I Q / 1 I /6 I /7 I I Q O MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE 6454 ,_/2.82 Al B. 121167, 68 Troc> No. 16942- / C/y.38/I30 -/39 OP, 4� }=_ F /3 c� iT 4'.0 11 N V {� /?7 <_.o:5 .N 5' I g�. yo• �a � I p � v D r\ I 00r- ,� L 4- �o zo. ate' i /p QD � � I y ic.3 a I y l i I t.7Z --- - 1 I I MAGNESIA FALLS DR.