HomeMy WebLinkAboutTT 22393 APARTMENTS - MAGNESIA FALLS 1987 Q P.O. BOX K
G CO LA QU►NTA, 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 requ"est 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 [ �
DAN: lm I V
V
r
June 21, 1988
A XMTE CIURAL REVIEW CU44 SSION ACTION
CASE NO: PP 87-11
APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. , P.O. Box 300,
La Quinta, CA 92253.
NATURE OF PROJBCT/APPROVAL SOUGH: 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 co►nnission 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 C1TS: 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.
!,.1 !
MINUTES ;.:. S�� J
PALM DL'SMr ARaIrIMURAL IitVI S I O TO
1UMDAY - J� 14, 1988 Imo... SIi�N
12:00 P.M. CNN wly SERVICES OCNFE ,24CE ROCM
73-510 Rum WARiNG DRIVE
I. The meeting was called to order at 12:00 pm.
Cninission Members Current Meeting Year to Date
Present Absent Present Absent
Ron Gregory, Chairman X 9 2
Mazy Drury X 10 1
Russell McCrea X 8 3
Rick Holden X 9 2
Steve Sullivan X 10 1
Others Present: Catherine Sass
Frankie Riddle
Steve Smith
Ken Weller
Phil Drell
Brent Conley
It was moved by CaTInissioner Sullivan, seconded by Commissioner Holden to
approve the minutes of May 24, 1988, subject to amendment on Case No. 1460 SA
- That 'the case was denied, because of incompatibility in shape and color with
the adjacent awning; Case No. PP 87-20 - clarify that the reduction of glazing
was on the commercial building. Carried 3-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining).
II- MDved by Oaffl sai,cir� Drury, seea-)ded by oma -3si rr,r�r Sullivan to appmave
the following cases by minute matian. 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 PROJEer/APPROVAL SOUQrr• Change in approved color scheme
for Center Sign Program,
LOCATION: Pad 5, 111 Town Center.
ZONE: PC (3) S.P.
Approved with the condition that the quotation marks around TCBY be
deleted.
MINUTES
ARCIITECIURAL CX.MvIISSICN
SUBJECT TO
JUNE 14, 1988 t � Ef��'�` �t�"' �:.,�
� �� REVISION
2. CASE NO- PP 87-11
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. , P.O.
Box 300, La Quinta, CA 92253.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOMIT: 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 C MTMY CLUB, C/O ASL CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, 960 E. Tahquitz Way, Suite 204, Palm Springs, CA 92262.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Golf Course Attendant
buildings (Gazebo, restio , 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 SOMTr: Preliminary Approval for Pad
9 at 111 Town Center.
LOCATION: Highway 111 and Town Center Way.
ZONE. PC-3
(Chairman Gregory abstained. )
2
�I
• 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE(619)346-0611
May 17, 1988
ARCEIITEUIURAL REVIEW CUK4ISSICIN ACTION
CASE NO: PP 87-11
APPLICANT (ARID 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
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
ARN-TECZU L QNMISSICN ?
MAY 10 1988 � T"
S'' FCT TO
2. CASE NO: 1321 SA
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NUTCRACKER SWEETS, 73-560 El Paseo,
Palm Desert, CA 92260.
NATURE OF PROJDLT
the approved sign/ Approval of modifications to
LO ATICN: 73-560 El Paseo
ZONE: C-1
3• CAS_E NO: PP 88-5
APPLICANT (AID ADDRESS): DAVID NELSON, P.O.
CA 92253. Box 300, La Quinta
NATURE OF ,
architectural/A�RNAL S��'' Preliminary
and landscape plans for triplex. Approval of
LO T_ Southwest corner of Deep Canyon Road and Driftwood St.
ZONE: 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 ch
Project site plan and they have precedence over the anges to the
plans. architectural
(Chairman Gregory abstained. )
III. CASES:
A. Final Drawings;
1' CASE NO: PP 87-11
APPLICANT (AID ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT CavjpANy� INC. , 74-831
Velie Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final working
king
LOCATION: Magnesia Falls Drive, a
Tortola Avenue. approximately 700 feet east of
2
MINUTES + 1 "'"",� ""
ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION }., r. L . - S l 15J ECT TO
MAY 10 1988 ='
ZONE: PR-7
The oc mission 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.
Cannissioner 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.
C.camissioner 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.
Recc nendations of the ccalmission are: That the material and color
of the awnings be submitted to the conrdssion 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
deparhnent approval.
It was noted that the landscape changes can be approved by staff.
It was motioned by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner
Drury to approve this case subject to the above conditions. Carried
4-0.
2. CASE NO: 1387 SA
APPLICANT (ARID ADDRESS): ALLISON INTERNATIONAL, 73-425 E1 Paseo,
Space 21-A-B, Palm Desert, CA 92260.
NATURE OF PRU.7ECI'/APPR0VAL SOUGHT: Approval of modifications to
the approved sign program.
LOCATION: 73-425 El Paseo
ZONE: C-1
3
11
AGENDA ITEM NO: III-A-2
DATE: MAY 10, 1988
ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION
CASE NO: PP 87-11
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., 74-831 Velie Way,
Palm Desert, CA 92260.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPRORM SOUGH: Approval of final working drawings.
LOCATION: Magnesia Falls Drive, approximately 700 feet east of Portola Ave.
ZONE: PR-7
DISCUSSION:
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.
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 1
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Re: PAP 87-11 ND 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 BY 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.
e
- •
s
r
RAMON A. DIAZ, SECR TA ,�
PALM DESERT PLANNING CC MISSION
RAD/tm
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1215
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:
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.
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
44
RAMON A. DIAZ, Secreta y
/tm
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1215
I�
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
i
3
. PLANNING COMMISSION RE ITION 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
1 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.
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. i
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' iT1ON 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
Li8. 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
I
I�
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 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 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
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:`PF 87-II AND 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
i
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 CCBR'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-I1 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
PC STAFF REPORT
PP 87-11 AND TT 2.2393
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
r
PC STAFF REPORT
PP 87-11 AND TT 22393
APRIL 21, 1987
Code Requirement Provided
Open space 40% min. 547.
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' cmp. 8 112 x 15'
11x20' end spaces
I11 . 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 pantina 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 he 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 —C • Jc..J-.-✓.�
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 plz--fis.
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.
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 subdivision or the type of improvements is
not likely to caiise 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:
ATTEST: RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman
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
PIrANNING 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.
2 W street, as shown on the tentative map shall be private.
23.' Applicant shall provide street improvements along the north side of
�-J 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
a,
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.
t •
---------------------- - -=--------
RAMON A. DIAZ DATE
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
/tm
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
=\'LOuntrf'Lluo jk
jjCount
)Fort la q 't..
Ea
. Pta�C
ftal
I-To
FF
A, FIRM
i
f71 i n�
.:I .11111till1111MIllillill �•_/'.b i
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
'��
-�
�� � ro
i
I �
-- i
�', � j `� —
� `ro
— —
J
I
�/-�"
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: APRIL 21 , 1987
CASE NOS: P 87-11 and TT 22393
(,f___--
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
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'x20'/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 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 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 pantina 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 rode
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 1s 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 1s 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 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 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.
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 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.
II . 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:
I . 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
(D
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.
RAMON A. DIAZ DATE
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
/tm
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
ouncrp iuo'1 ;r I n i
Fortola
cc
T
, cc
F - -- - - - 146N all
® ® I
on w r
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
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
Negative Declaration NOV 10 1987
cOMMUNITY DLYELOPMENT DEf 8H IMENf
-10: (X) Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) Secretary V effeMA ces
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 submitted): N/A
Contact Person: Catherine Sass
Project Location: PR-7 zone on Magnesia FaIIs 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. ut- SVrtmvf,-�vr<a
Signature Title NOV C 91987
Date Received for Filing CLERK Of thL,BOARD OF SUPER`ISOR0
Cwrty of R varside,state of cafitcmi;
f�j
Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope.
p
�� AON t'561
03AIIIPI
Nelson Development Co.Inc.
78-060 Calle Estado
P.O. Box 300
Nelson La Quinta, CA 92253
Developmel-it
company inc.
Ar- i 1 19, 19S8
City ,-f Palm Desert
77-710 F7r-E-d War-,-nq 1-;-r-.
c',klrj, Deser-t, CA 9226-C-)
Attn: Catherine Sass
Re: Case No: PIP, 87-1 1 & TT 22393
Tear Catherine,
This I et t er is to c,c-ri f i r rn 0 Q r d i SCLISS i on on Apr-i 1 113, 1989, i
regards to setbacks ::,ri the above referenced project.
Enclosed is a copy showing the setbacks as we discussed. Unless
we heat, other-wise, we will procee(i or, oui- working plarss, which
w i 11 show the set back-, as 1)e r- the attached sheet
d i SCUSS i-Dri.
ncer-e I y,
DAV I D i-4. NELSON
DAN/f a
183S30 WIVA 10 1413
Eric I r-'sur-e MIWJNvdja IWIW13�311 WOHIA401
H61 6 T Vj e-jV
i� .'•''!`'''�1 •, +�� if.S+iii,•,�jI4 A'si+,iar�, �. r�r
W F—t-
c4u
Y
2
0
Q
N "
0 N `
N
h �
u
r '
t
>.,.. S ru,,M •d L Oy �j, s w ti �a
t 4
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.=GAUGUH
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.
i
�JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH
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 APR 10 PM 3 35
County of Riverside
CITY CLERKS
am a citizen of the United States and a CITY OF PALM DES
ERT
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. I --- —�
am the principal clerk of the printer of the ••GAS .• p•�•ti f� •�••$•�•��•�•�a `�••��••2z3.9.3...
a_
DESERTPOST ..........................................................
.. .• ..............................
CITY OF PALM DESERT
................................................. LEGAL NOTICE
•a news a er of enerai circulation, printed CASE NOS.PP87.11 AND TT22393
P P g NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held be-
fore the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request
B i-week 1 y••••••• by NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., to construct a 44
and published ............ 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 ..............................C... 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,
paper has been ad'ud ed a news a er 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,California, at which time
I g P P 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
r delivered to the planning commission(or city Council)at,or prior
California, under the date 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:
.............. ....................................
all in the year 19..8.Z.
1 certify (or declare) under penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Dated at..J?a1.fQ..P.e.gA:r.t.....................
California ot
this., n•_dayof...Apr19 .,9.7.
• •• -•T.eT•( i .Y�law�i••.
•Sig atur
Free copies of this blank form maybe secured Irom r
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.
'� l .i
��,��..
';'
CASE No
'i1�0iYtIENT�, SERVI
INITI CES DEPT.
ElYPIR0Y3�YT�L � STUDY
ALU�ITIOPI CHECKLIST
r,
NOTE: The availabilit
below shall fo nyn °f data necessary to address the topics listed
the basis of a decision as to whether the
application is considered complete for purposes
assessment, of environmental
ENV IRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all
y
measures and comments are and "maybe' answers
Provided on attached possible mitigation
sheets) .
1 • Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes
Ma,�be No
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
9eo1091c substructures?
b' Disruptions , displacements , compaction
overcovering of the soil ? or
c• Change in
features? topography or ground surface relief
d. The destruction
Of any unique covering, or modification
geologic or physical features? _
e• Any increase in wind or water soils, either on or off ero
the site?
sion of
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a• Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors? -L
c. Alteration of air movement,temperature , or any chan moisture , or
either locally or regionalIin climate,
Zt
Y_ Maybes No
3• Water• Will the proposal result in:
a.... Changes . in currents , 'or the course or
1 direction of water' movements?
b. Changes in-absorpt�nn rates , drainage
patterns, or the rate and- amoU'nt of
surface water runoff?
C. Alterations to the course or flow of
flood waters?
d. Alteration of-the direction or rate of
flow of ground waters?
e. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or with- J
drawals , or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
f. Reduction in the amount of water other-
wise available for public water supplies?
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species , or
numbers of any species of plants
(including trees , shrubs , grass , and
crops )?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique , rare,
or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into
an area , or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
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 habitzt'2
3.
6, Natural Resources. WillY. s M�be p�o
the proposal result in:
a. Increase in .the rate of use of any natural
resources?
b. Depletion of an n
resource?
y on renewable natural
1. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? _
b. Demand upon existing sources of en e
quire the.development of new ' or re-
energy? sources of
8. Risk of Upset. - ' Does the proposal involve
risk of an explosion or the release of ,
a
hazardous substances (including, but not limited
to, pesticides ,' oil , chemicals, or radiation) in
the event of an accident or upset conditions?
- 9• E^ononic Loss. Will the \
Proposal result in:
a. A change in -the value of
Property
improvements endangered by flo flooding?
b. A change in the value of property and
improyerien is exposed to geologic hazards
_ beyond accepted coM;unity risk standards?
10. Noise. W i 1 1 *_
he proposal increase existing
noise levels to the point at which accepted
corrrnunity noise and vibration levels are
exceeded?
• ii. Use
Land 'use. Will the
as and on of the proposal result in the
nt
planned land use of ran ea redeveloped or
12. Ooen Soace. Will the
decre- proposal
the -amountof t
designated open
space?
13. Population. Will the proposal result in:
a. Alteration or the location, distribution,
density, or growth rate of the human
Population of the City?
b. Change in the population distribution by
aye, income, religion, racial , or ethnic
group, occupational class , household type?
f
4.
Yes_ Maybe No
14. Emolovment. Will the proposal result in
ad tiona new long-term jobs provided , or a
change in the number and per cent employed,
unemployed, and underemployed?
15. Housing. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in number and per cent of housing
units by type (price or rent range,
zoning category, owner-occupied 9nd 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?
lb. Transportation/Circulation.
result Will the proposal
�n:
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 movement of people and/or goods?
e. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles ,
bicyclists , or pedestrians?
17 . Public Services . Will the proposal have an effect
upon , or resu t in a need for, new or altered
governmental services in any of the following
areis:
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? _ T
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal ? '
20. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. The creation of any health hazard or
Potential health hazard?
b. A change in th
care provided?e level of community health
21 . Social Services. Will the proposal result in
an increased demand for provision of general
_ social services?
ZZ. Aesthetics . Will the proposal result in:
a. Obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public?
b. The creation of an aesthetically
site open to public view? . offensive
c. Lessening of the overall neighborhood
(or area ) attractiveness , pleasantness ,and uniqueness? XX
23. Licht and Glar`. Will the proposal produce L
ne:v ,ght or g are?
24 . Archeolocical/Historical . Will the
proposal .�
resu t in an a teration of a significant
archeological or historical site, structure ,
object, or building?
6
Yes Maybe No
25. Mandatory Findings of Signi`Picance.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment or to curtail
the diversity in the environment?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental 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: C___�cJ�
!' t
I a
\
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
�u ountr a iUo
]Fort laCo
�
�/ it
cc
MAGNESIA FG LLS DRiV
_ o)M NUNITY
OES[.1 Si..
i� 1 al• -y: J -
o
Ell. o
lan
^ _ CITY OF IND"WELLS o+,Ua
Y O t I
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
1 i
Off 311ra s
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 NEI-SON 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
ountr3' Ium=1_
�;oun ort la
CC
O
F1r°
E ---- ---- •-• - - - MAGNESIA FALLS DRIvJAR 9
1 1 - - CONNUNITY `\\
A.
J •
it
-y J
\ i
o A.
^ y "n�,�... l .
No,"WES
I I It I I I 1
1 71
1, 11 I I1
..
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. DIA7_, Secretary
April 10, 1987 Palm Desert Planning Commission
(YI 0\�Q 00� �o CICA-t+
�C,��O-wd Co n c re�e
�p
T on 'e4r�
Gad s
e 10�
_ W,�O Cars �D` d 6-1 OA r„� - �-O c,,O ISO ICAIO- k
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 UNITS
PER ACRE ) TO PR-7 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL SEVEN
UNITS PER ACRE FOR 6.. 2 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE (_)F 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 l : 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,
j California, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
( adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this llth
day of 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
3
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES;A rrj. C, SAAS
FROM : DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORTS
SUBJECT: T,f �ZZ393 J P P
DATE : k pall. 2 APR 3 1987
i,DMMUNI 'ARTMEN I
The following should be considered conditions of approval :
1 ) 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 .
07 )'
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
f i na l map) perm; t ss-uance4 .
8 ) Landscaping maintenance on R44"r:pf T7A".1- D&Ivjf
shall be provided by the ( homeowner ' s association ) -e�
,awner )
9) Existing utilities iw►
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 Traffic safety striping on A4M_514 6411 5- L)Rlv4
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 .
01) Dedication of feet of right-of-way on
sha 1 1 be done prior to issuance of any
permits and approval of plans .
130 Installation of curb and gutter , matching paving and
s i d e w a l k on Z:)/z(v F-
14 Wa i v e r of access to /Jit tvE- 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 ) ,
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) I nsta 1 1 at i on of one-ha 1 f 1 andscaped med i an i n 4(4465114 )C4CLS
-DRtvF 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.
C2O )\ 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 .
0
Complete
'f`P-a�) (tract ) map (-jc� sha 1 1 be submitted as
required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of
any permits .
2 )) 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 )
�A,�
Z 8) N STnF E T� as s/�b•v..) c�K Tit. ris.�n4 r�v.� �rsyz L r3f PnT��r+E
2 9) Am,C G4,&X- S/ 'f'L l_ proy yl Loc ST/:f.4i
A L r_7 Jgc T/f�- ictcv2 ft/ S/( re.G .f an/EJiA ��![•tS IAA!V F f�ii.�
j?f/_ 1%F"7XrZ1_2' �/�.pf2T`� Len> Tea 7H.E /N1bltSEeTio..l of DEEP
1;1i Y" rzP- 7U 7-61-E orc T-1514_ 01 ec b.�
Tam Pvo�rc
(tea Tzh;S.
Richa 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
%S AT ER ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGtNCY
O/STRIC�
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
POST OFFICE BOX 1o58•COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(619)398-2651
DIRECTORS OFFICERS
RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS,PRESIDENT THOMAS E.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER
TELLIS CODEKAS,VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDI N E SUTTON,SECRETARY
JOHN P.POWELL KEITH H.AINSWORTH,ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER/AUDITOR
PAUL W.NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS
THEODORE J.FISH
March 31, 1987
File: 0163. 1
APR b 1987
Department of Environmental Services
City of Palm Desert COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMtNT
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
■Sfoil
''j.Y?:._'.�'J.'''•.1 )1 ::oaf"'-5}!c: Y frl t.T
tUUCP•-
1d.1 Cd oh 01=10p:0011 a:s:ty$3UyC; ,nin 001,
;'a-L, r,t mum-Vic, `.S.Q!ll S':vww!It".'As =11 SUP bgl5bko770n ad 71m bnr Proud ,
.l:y.•:�rtu:t s,�I
I _.i', d',i•.R'<. ,.;'i now n•1f3FiYtlr':7.T Jt70j'; jb7:ibAw •-n s._ max fay_}F,MPIK 01 n— In
in
-•) 7-'ii'.. _ ,'atj g1filub j 9.`!'.... . 1 mu:"'U.' 0 ,01 {.'rt, NJ 10 OcAnly -d ;on ''
__Ma Foxi 'iJiTlu yo . - 311UP{rJ. 9':`i.. i: 'f+k t. , 1:,.'�J:.W .:if31, :[�.. . firm .r. n
"1w J'�..^. als i . �aLi.`•;_t C i.r3d.i3-nod :ida w J);',. J.l.fitdw
.1: `7 +`t �.1i�`�j ^.5'4 C. .�•,,{r...."}•ia...1 r•. r+;fy n! 3g"nnfh•, ^1: ..iaw. ..rd1 Ar. •,)�:*"r• ,
9j:1 'I#-JI, ?.r.sups! :sk,'
. ill n1 '<?:3t3'J_l:. .:E<lr![OIC� r,1 �1j :):�'1 :t W :m
Si l".Jll7fi& 'SnJ ..i':ail Miiflm 3 `naf7ouplav i an X'.F IA" T1 .1a 1'l4019'. 'y
�119 ICf ;'$LJ`-I'; ? { SM .t:614U r1o_.:.##mulinnoo inn 13 nuqq lot-rin-e -7m
ir:3 .t'.i.: :.i'I.GF In, „'t, :Ul?rJ-inPFl _Sp�T "Tana IiL3 :"4sye,4.: Jf, YeAq ;�•.'' 151:.
Ci";SrS ul I+{'1.! 11113 OU
iU vaol:talpg`.+y j"011..,1 `✓s i i w wsac)•Yamb
Ji On 0. AMe: ,D yd 006n A. 0051 -£I3;j un 10 unmInq •'1 101 Ohl Volq
-
}
Department of Environmental Services -2- March 31, 1987
This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 54 and 80 of
Coachella Valley Water District for sanitation service.
Yours very truly,
Tom Levy
General Manager-Chief Engineer
CS:lmf
cc: Don Park
Riverside County Department
of Public Health
46-209 Oasis Street
Indio, California 92201
w
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 VeIie 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
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% l gallon.
Carried 5-0
6
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION
MARCH 24, 1987 SUBJECT ro
R V1S14N
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
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
?311W4fM
140 t C,'!IMD JA%1.J i1 ±N.J4A
18P f .►', HNAM
Xqjg*d AAVU999A\f J_3r QU 19 "ilk_ 3 j�
(,,t tit Il(71 Y 's ; it(t7lF
I(A :MOLTA )J
.C,10 1py 1'-, t E;v, !�4 i
3WA
IM
, + ? �? tCi (!� . (.+: +, 11 '3Cr :3 . �j;!} ✓F>W9\+i y`' tt1�!it 1 e,.i
tW av t�yrt t 11 E cast i wr) t: t ! E, b'1 bits t) To :'+!+ 01 y 1kt,O
i'( 9r.i !t:,I'o-Ili.1 i'j�+ q f t t,+..i `j {V, Mrq + o )W
ia3:t ?tj0{ ( QUE_ *t , .I fit.).^a t Iso I t' Im
its' -
!" '• m _+!(it. lovF,t vW', 176i! Vile t+rlt ilr` c't+l +' `i(t%hJI "Vy�+ Jfl�'.)t�• "A'
t, !' 1r!yd f►fi ;) ti i00 1r,"s si4 ;f t(1 flfltlC,'t iJ 9f U + lrlt, .'i +11f ft)C f;
�' 't t 1•,!E• -' I 1iCtL}>�:)YC)rfEit b'st J 7 ! k,t!# c, ti) ? r�C F> 9r1:2 ri.,
Y£?1 ''•! : it) 411':T NW I v 111 tr1( 1 t. 1.1 -ill t !lJ!li ) i!(fw
�01 ,�i 4cK) ' T9t1C?� .,,'IwKY 1'-,
it _, t-',It,1 .04161 + 1 t h19i 3 W" 9'1
q+" + ", .'�, t 0 tot ity fE`„+ ! -1 i i. ':9 t v li.))>` i ;sEi+ll
!,:�,N ' • a �r � + 1t.,1' -a(it 1t-::' r �t! I I�;�f� �°;nt�! T tnrrt<
tli�•:, , '�i; +'t tr> F >9t-i?_t`r !� �>'+' 9ii� #Uv"lE� yLt J+{ta4.!rii% :.IaW t1C3' :+��!s,1ts '�+ti
j I (s-) 'it `3C✓F,'1F-P b1`10 B�5~F ,Mt t,-. 90 u tL>I�_f
''i 11'. -ICIt. rt+l?1`W >i'M 3EsE5ityy Jrl t -wo,:, tri 1 if o f )t,
I+ +w ' i iw) 1 s ',it,.' ie h(iF dwc—, TES) "w1 inc
"t+:��,'1; ar(i �1r7f 7 �?':g ;.af B'+�E+ ;tt ;` .hr• 'I+a
.- i�k,`(kirl`-,�.. 't_7 '!�!• It>I- 411� �E:''' tlq�t''�{'.�r)Ur; ?1Utr�' ��i!�(11 IfTlki+( -
+ i r,,,k�r (,T •.,•,, sir' f�. !�+'�iW 1<.)k1 VF,WS�1 EW T K:,'1 ,�' r t
!d t vi;< _P It`Ji I(i'lt df4
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 Ill .
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
�'31ClNlM
t W 1 .$►S N-w1AM
1.i N u 'We ;etch r"Ibf-'mf r..r .`1
i . ,, 't: 3r4t
. "..9 it 7i7 1 )1-1&1\YGWt'/f It
r f 1, 4 1 ' ! 9 tFA 109btA tbf i I
�4�h
r,E..:,
.. 1 -Si yi .? t-.,(lf _ �,I.i ,�1 a i +_. ! 7 Jl 111 I !
++ (Mx) 1#431 J49A
1/1VOft1�1'I 1 i 3�,( "q i0 Jqu!A1M
.__.. _
fail t+nr., Yt,lw r: .) tw . ;•' �wr't•foo iHUITA)0.1
E
'fit 1?•�fy l t; f7..y I r i r11 i!"
-04.)' 'ifit .
`"+1+; s T it'f .1n: :i' rTF. �, t ;,,3;�',R •, r.,r3 i}t:+,, i t i
i� t'a t rii 1) 16 1 fib ,-jOJ !fir! Ci1UAJW �'3ioQ 41il fe(tJ ? ; t flat J11m
+lt.1 tay^t -(, .r, tr}F,)t irtQ13 '3Jt7 f+`t rt ?' k}S i't,�t
t
i'3#' tl F4fa(.?+ j=t 71Pf1C).+ �`Cj b5�fh3:7°3,' .Vs n,' ) E`i t'TfF , V� tY-+vr>t+! c'bM !
on,n i r Ud 911 I glfivZ 30 i Ei'.';r'. y a •yi th,, 41fr,r i' t
}
:e"3T1 0401,--,c'U')e10 .VI
rA
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 ##l , 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 --J
Ms. Sass explained that there was spffie concern from staff regard i ng���o
the straight driveways. T44-s i would 9eenr-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. He 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
c2):ff :::e�ILI=
,. 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 CHECKI
DEVELOPMENT: I y e N
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.
91 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.
l
Page two. . . —
HANDICAPPED:
Site requirements per handicapp standards.
PARKING:,-
Qhow
how umber of stalls required.
Re se parking stall locations to allow main entry access.
E2X
Q Sow ternational logo, loading and unloading zone requirements.
Ramp from parking lot to sidewalk not shown on plans.
BUILDING ACCESS:
Doors all be minimum 32" clear in width.
P v de 18" space on the swing side of doors.
ElOn �p ns, show height of all bathroom accessories.
Handicapp 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:
i Architectural Drawings and Details.
Structural Drawings and Calculations.
Complete Electrical , Mechanical and Plumbing Plans and Specifications.
i
Title 24 Energy Conservation Documentation Forms.
COMMENTS:
Lk H fu
yin K o (4-W C&A-c-
LLER
PRINCIPAL PLANS EXAMINER
RIVERSIDE COUNTY `p1E of CALIp
FIRE DEPARTMENT >9
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
COUNTY ,'rs CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY o
RIVERSIDE ,,.4,7. ,— RAY HEBRARD �rvE
MT OF
FIRE CHIEF 210 WEST 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 S7-11 Applicant: NI MIN P VELOPMEWr
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 2_`�GPM fire flow from any fire
hydrant for a 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 than7.50 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 ,2 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't( 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 over40— square feet require an approved fire sprinkler system.'0 if I-4-4r tt 1& 44
Very truly yours,
RAY HEBRARD
Fire Chief By u,%. X
MIKE MCCONNELL
Fire Marshal
,3a C�o�� oV p�a0 o 0 o m
• 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE(619)346-0611
PLANNING COMMISSION 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 Commission 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 EfiI'MION By MINUTE MOTION. CARRIED 3-0.
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, SECRET&SSION
PALM DESERT PLANNING
RAD/tm
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
MINL)TES
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 Commissioner 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 INVFSZMEN S, 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 E1 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 recommended approval and adoption of
the resolution.
Vice Chairman Richards opened the public testimony and asked if the
applicant wished to address the commission.
MR. CLEMENTE TRANCOSO, 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
Ccnuissioner 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 Commission 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 IRECPOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
/tm
Nelson Development Co.Inc.
7
Nelson 78-060 Calle Eslado
P.O. Box 300
Development La Quinta, CA 92253
company nc.
February 23, 19B8
.Tanning Department
Attention: Ray Diaz
City of Palm Desert
73--510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 922
Re: Planning Commission Resolution 01215
Dear Ray Diaz :
This letter is to request a one year extension, to April 21 ,
1989, on the above referenced case.
The extension is requested since building of the project was
postponed due to a sizable amount of uncompact ed fill dirt which
wa m found in a portion of the acreage. A solution to this problem
Has been found and we are proceeding with development plans.
Sincerely,
DAV I D A. NELSON
DAN/fa
� t8 26 1988
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMFNI DEPARIMENI
CITY OF PALM OESERI
Nelson Development Co.Inc.
7 78-060 Calle Estado
P.O. Box 300
Nelson vevelopme -it La Quinta, CA 92253
company inc.
February 23, 1988
DepartrnerfL
(attention: Ray Diaz
City of Palm Desert
—3, '-'1 --10 Fred Waring, Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Re: Planning Corwilission ResOlUtior, #IL215
Dear Ray Diaz :
This letter is t C, req'-w-it a cine year extension, to April $2-A ,
1989, on the Ab,:-we i-eferersced case.
The f-0-erisior, is r-E-?qUested since b1ii 1 d i nq of t h I- P rr_�,i e(-t w a-7,
post:pr-,ried due tl::- -A Si lab le aroc--unt ---f Urloorn Pact ed fill dirt vjhi(:h
was found in a pc-o-tiorj of the acreage. A solution to thieq problem
I-as beer) fourd arid we are proceeding with developnic-,rit r.)larJ7�.
rfcL-re I y,
DAVID A. NFI-SON
D(v,i/ta
26 1988
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARIMENJ
CITY OF PALM DESERT
74-831 Velie Way, Suite 1
Nelson Palm Desert, CA 92260
Development (619) 341-2997
company nc.
Fehrunry 12, 19A7
Planning Commission
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 922E.O
Re : Triangular shaped property on Magnesia Palle Drive
Dear Planning Commission:
This letter- is a request for- a review of our- plane for- the above ,
property at your neal. study session an lurch 3. 1987.
We appreciate yoour time, and look forward tot seeing you then.
Sincerely,
David A. Nelsor,
DAN/ fe
i'
I
fI
Leo
3 F
I
-- - --�s -- - ---� �- - 4 =
�---' - ...................... .
001,
i �d --
_TZ
,` `'
�r
\\
.�
\,\\ \
�\�
.\
T 6 U 3 '-::-I P U T ()'�P.P.F, t K I '4,Aasan E'JTV-.--1 O-;D;=n F, U 3 '4,405an LIJTA:'-?.-I
0 F,;3 x o a rl ri a-At-I af3paTI. rIH A(I T,71f'4i
j P,AeL.10T}j M Gtat4da4F.--, ut a q--,A E'li U a-I a'A a T E)t 4
1 C).-P/ T-'7;:�q
El C)-.2 L T-+,r;-! ly 47 P
(`) P r-l!F, H'1 4 a f3 t-A T W -:'.-L.1 C.)Gt IL- oq;-'Ri=. t-m ',-i,.tasan LIJTX- .-i (7),3a;7-.F, t)o lg,,Aasa(T LuTe,-.[
Pd .A)--GIL'H 4(1 p 1:3 C,M I.A 0•'1.11-1 i-T T+.,(-)!;'47
,:)d,4y,8 TTarl H tuTr Aa.qam t-j PAVLJDI}j
0()-El L I-'7 P(i I-47,P rl T-47PC)
t-J-1 .I,Aasacl vile'-i H-1 '9.,AaSan WTV,1 (1 9;D a C,: t)3 li,Aasan LUTEnrl
'A([ UJ.AW'E,A0jE) A(T P-DCDMI.AlDa4l-iR JX-j PCIOMIAIDIal-IR
SLIJV-'TTTIM,-)W d uaAa-I.q XaTL4,-)eTR I UL,10f- SIAaMF) H T C1,4e"I
L;2 o 2L T clP C) P/ T-+.,,-L!q q;::!C) I..-+.Y;:�!q
Tr-.-,i()F. t-m 'AaH Tan eltT,AeW
(--.T'4 ICJH WItT,AVLJ L"CA !; i-,rl47 UJTl--.-j
,A a LA 3 A L�,-j I-A-1 L'JeBTVR IPU4i
p al AT 'I Ul V-4 U I a:ISI.A I aM AaATTn qv.Auan
uj 'J'Aasa(.1 VJTL-,-J a'A a s a(T LIJ T Uri o q -:3 Cs u q I a-A a s a(I m-I-er I
U-1 L,JVSjv4Ej U-1 IIJ'L�s T V R 1 R C)r-+j, U-1 LIJQS'j'V--hj
I
zadcrl j kA:jaqez'ET'-1 IAL-L4eJ.AL-T-IZ)W I.V-_JR, -1 IAULIJMat\l n I.A L
0 L I-ti 2 q F.T() R/ I q 9 T C)--.-I/ T-+jr;-n cl
c i Ljj 'J. ,Aasaa WTUH QoCZoF. t .1 1 o,: 6 u
IL-j IIJU5 1V�3 aAJj ,tA,ALjjVIj AV--m P-AvmA-,i-; ;-7Ru,�
:j4alA,Al-lG f A,AuaN lAat,Aqn ti w5rii-4 IBVT,::,R W PTENACin
L T -tr-E!q q I 1-+)"-nq r-I I -p/ I--17 17!r:)
Uj lor-idVIO-1 H'I '3,,Aasan uJTL-,-i U-1 'j.,Aasa(T I.IITI--,-1
4 ; U L44-40N 1-A-1 aa-tj )IT *iF, Tq(-)y-+, I-A1 aa-Al 'MTlc;
IACI:I,Alz,N P T UJAINT I-AefiL-'AeT -4 (- Sit9LIJOL41 P'.Aal5iAM,:-oj R UJL=TTTIM
()I C)-P/ I--+lr.-:!rl
TI.P0F. H.'I 'sTTTH AT,AaAaR LOT T F, H-1
F, wi lal:le,AtW C)LADIAUH 'L-lAaPL-SL',-j
9ToT )<,::,a C) .1 PATR a,ATk4sTTM TOCR ACI I.AcIALAV3 L-CTaIAUI,l
0- N AaT,Alt4.c; A�A,A x--I-q.1 41.AaElld-::#jaAa(j --I M I IJL-T I W AaTF:3T[.4 T
E F o-1;-2 1--+7 1-4 IP 1--.+Y.-7q I R I-+,Pr-I
1(-),f C6 U3 le-l'tapuse.-I ocvl;-11; t-l-I laAasa(l LIJTvt-I oLaa6 U3 laBe-ATW DWOUL.N
ant-j ltk--.,sP'-'H S a94,r I a 1C) I I I Alem(4 Fj I H o tiR-,!/ ql(')T XCIR FI --I
,AaA,D,:,Fi 3 'AL4or BIACDW-1 JATC41::1j4 CITA I-AaTTFJ
IDE(-)-T---!I-+Iaq 1:4,f,()-I P I-+I-R C) IR I-47Pq
+,T 9 1.,C-, U P I.A L-f'ki U f I L.-I ':I Aasa{-f UJTL-,-i 't4M,A)-lLj-
.1 STTV-4
T -4 WIR 4.c:; YC()i.), XCIR r) -I a*,jT.-j 5-Anqsaa-I I();=!q
-1
PVI cil:),A,-i saflv-4s3 sa4x',At,-i A,AaL4:IaN UtaAL-W (I IIIX aq Sa4x-2Tz3,'"SSH 'lTt-i'q
Ilp re I f--+/,_-! P.9'C)-I -"I-i7.P r-) ()91 C)-I p T--+Y P rl
I C)G-C F LIJT
pl; H-1 ':L,4asa(T L::',--i O,3C- ;36 tjq IZ,Aasan LIJTL-,-i Uj -1i IA v q A ri R (YIP
ID(-)F. L-3al.AaM 'E"A OPR eoaua?.j eTA CUP
L"(WAaPej :J-Aa(10 4 slma-I H TautjoxW S,AaTTTM Cl IA3DSTP'=1
EIED 0--T En T--41`q o-I t--!T-+i P c4 /T 0-I t--,!I-+),-.-!q
be4-leU-U0l bd4-120-003
4un King Homeowners Assn cVCWD
4enzo branzte PI P. O. Box 1058
Palm Desert, CA 92260 Uoachella, CA vadab
bd4-l�0-U0��
uesert bands unztzed
School Dist
800+0 Hvenue +b
Indio, UP jW201
be+-121-003
Hzentze Hbdelaziz Martin Irvin Mart Hobert N Smrosbree
eun Via |/ucon e/n Via pucon dbb Via Puron
Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, UP "nabV Palm Desert, UP
be+-121-0U4 bE*-ldi-V0b beq-121-006
Hobert J. Uondon Leonard Kossott imperial Bank
14 / /n bw *zlchis b4W0 Maryland Ur Jb47 Belle River
Beaverton, UR 97007 Los Hngeles, UP A00+e Hacienda Heights, U
yz /45
be4-141-00/ bt4-121-008
Roger K. Hanson Ron Boozell
10/5 Burgess [zrc1e 438 S. Grand Hve.
Placentia, UP ydb/0 Urange, CA 92666
b24-lel-001:1 b24-121-010
Warren Hammers Franklin D Hatridge
Jn4/ Belle River Ur 5470 Fela Ave
Hacienda Heights, UP 01 /40 Long Beach, CA 9omo&
b24-121-013
Willis 8 Matlock Donald J Young Rita Cocalis
&0db *oszta l&K14 Woozi1ey Hve 15950 Via Descanso
Burbank, UP 91504 uranada Hills, UP 01044 ban Lorenzo, CA y+00U
Uhar1es K Daugherty beorge M Lezthe beorge H Klose
800/ Kzttyhawk Ave d/V Via pucon 280 Via Pucon
Los ongeles, UA 90045 Palm Desert, UP yddbV palm Desert, CA unewV
be4-1E1-U1 / be4-121-0lU b24-121-019
Edward o nanuier, Malcolm N Patterson Ernest E Debs
&0/y Prosser Ave 1119 Harbery p/ 44837 Oro Grande :ir
Los Hngeles, UP 90025 port Moody, Uanada VON OYb Indian Wells, CA wan)
B24-121-022
Larry M Lzeuallen Douglas W Johnson Hill R Clark
/bd Dickens Ln bUA/ Malachite a32 Poinsettia
La Verne, U* 91750 Pita Loma, UP yz /oz Brea, CA 92621
b24-121-025
John x Emret Jr Edwin U Furnee Edward A Handler
1+01 uescanso Dr, 116 preszdzo PI K079 Prosser ove
La canada, UP 91011 Palm Desert, UP naaba Los Angeles, CA nova-tj
oc*-/ /c-vso QC*-1 /0-os/ b0*-1 /K-oM
U1ga YurKew Mzchard J Avery Uity of Palm Desert
/5b4U Joshua | ree /Vebb El Paseo No tD Uzty Clerks Office
Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, UH WHOM 45275 Prickley pear Ln
Palm Desert, CA Wdeb0
Property Line
T�
M
2 O ,
a
Meandering Sidewalk —.•-Z m N
Y
Optional Contact Joint
in Expansion '
cD Paper / : F--�—�Curb Sidewalk
/ ►, �. Expansion Paper
Curb Line I ; Depressed Curb
3 12' Min.- 30' Max. Residential 3'
20'Min.-30 Max. Commercial Gutter
PLAN
Driveway Curb Opening
Depressed Curb
Bottom of Curb 12'�R (Typ)
ELEVATION
Edge of Sidewalk
`I Normal Rise
1/4"per foot
Single Family Residential-6
All Others-8" 2 R l � above Gutter
SECTION
NOTES :
I. 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 - roof _ Residential
joints evenly spaced. (Commercial)
r.. Driveway
_ Date: 12-20-82
REVISIONS
[EA1-
�16.4 ]OPM
CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS CITY ENGINEER
NDTE5 5/65 STD. DRAWING N0
MAX'. R�/a, i� ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY nF aei u nraror
• wiorYl ivrrt. 65 105
COTY DD aLN DCSEG FORN me.
r 73-510 Fred Waring Dr.. Palm Desert. Ca. 92260
PRECISE PLAN
APPUCATUCH FORM : Dept.of Planning and Community Development
NFT.Cl1N DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TNC
Applicant (please print)
7A—R-11 VF.T,T-P WAV., ST)TTF. 1 Fl 'apt,
—9y97
Mailing Address Telephone
PALM DESERT, CA 92260
City State Zip-Code
REQUEST: (Descrtbe 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, 2—GROSS ACRES UN NURTB SIDE OF MAGNESIA FALLS, DRIVE.,
APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET EAST OF PORTOLA
ASSESSOR'S 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" t HI' 9 of this, application.
Signature Date
Agreement absolving the City of Palm Desert of all liabilities relative to any deed restrictions.
1 00 BY MY SIGNATURE ON THIS AGREEMENT, Absolve to City of Palm Desert of all liabilities regarding any deed restrictions
that may be applicable to the property described herein.
Signature Date
Applicant's Sig atur
3 7
Sign ture Date
(FOR STAFF USE ONLY) Environmental Status Accepted by:
❑ Ministerial Act E.A. No.
❑ Categorical Exemption (�/18F. Ho.
❑ Negative Declaration �vVV(r,� �J�J
s r
❑ Other Reference Case No.
ENVIR001MENT L SERVICES ATs 5-47-62
E):PLANATION OF ITEMS I 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.
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%2" x 13"
maximum size.
w
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.
Signature
300 RADIUS M,4)
CASE NCL
FOR, (APPUCANT'S MALE)
(ADDRESS)
(PION E)
3
zoo"
000
b
SQN PE D� ST,
O VACANT
O S~AM CN -
a N G
s. l
M4.1� OE LANE - O RUSSELL. AVE.
lea" Lil
fV�
i WZ 0
pet
z
�LEGEND _
Kam- Ta CvvNCR L-47
S4�: PARCEL ,4L�Urt�s
i
I
i
1
i
I
i i
4
1
--- .__.___ . _. .�..__...__..__._._._..�__._...,__. .��__...._�__W.._._..__.�._.___._._ ..._.. .�.____________
4
f
i
i
i
1
i
i
• 1 �
O F FAl, L H D IF:
"�� I ,e�o�• (Sid r71wwuu Isar Lzn( 9l'_,MELu9 lStaaa
SUB DIVISION MAZ
'UPUC A uC H PCEW ®nt� ®mod:�sa a �pua�and� d dddc��
NELSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY INC.
Appimant ( please print)
74-831 VELIE WAY, SUITE 1
Mailing Aaaress i ele none
PALM nyczyRT ya 99260
City State Zip-Goae
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 unoersigned states that they are the owner(s) of the property described herein and hersoy give autt
izatton for�thefI7, of mfs appl' lore.
J
�-
-- nasur Date
Agreement aosoivi q the Ci of Palm Desert of all uabilitfas relative to arty deed restrictlons.
1 00 BY MY RE ON THIS AGREEMENT, Absdve the CItY of Palm Desert of all liabilities regarding any deed restrictio
at may be applicable to the property described herein.
- Signature Date
Applicant's Slgnanfre
Siq ture Date
(FOR STAFF USE ONLY) Environmental Status Accepted by-
❑ Ministerial Act E.A. No.
❑ Categorical Exemption
❑ Negative Declaration aratiort (� Ha.
a
❑ Other Reference Case No.
C"RONYENTIL SERVICES/A7s 8.47-42
CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST
AF=11WIT
STATE OF CALIF�R��lL4 )
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.
(signed) 1
f ,
(
CASE NO. PP 8� Il
0,nA T`T aa3�3
Environmental Assessment Form �;'�-��� �• �
TO THE APPLICANT: 9/ 7
�►-;�1R 1 0 1987
Your cooperation in completing this form and supplying the information
requested will expedite City review of your application pursuaEfft-"toY `'PALME"TERPnRTMtr�r
Y Df PNIM 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) : PARR VILLAGE
4. Project location (stteet 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 projects (describe
how this project relates to other activities , phases , and develop-
ments planned, or now underway) : THIS PROJECT Tg SIMILAR TO
DRIFTWOOD OASIS EXCEPT AT A MUCH LESS DENSITY AND ONLY SINGLE STORY
8. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals
required for this project, to go for,iard, including those required
by the City, Regional , State and Federal agencies (indicate sub-
sequent approval agency name, and type of approval required) :
EXISTING CONMITIONS :
9. Project site area: 6 .3 GROSS ACRES
(Size of property in sq. ft. or acreage)
10. Present zoning:_ pR 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.)rth, 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:—,,,,
18. Describe any cultural , historic, or scenic aspects of the project
s i to: 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 of unit sizes : 825 SQ FT & 993 SQ FT
C. Number of stories 1
Height APPROX: 15 ' feet.
D. Largest single building (sq. ft 0 h t.
( 9 )�5
E. Type of household size expected uTation projection for the
project) : AyF.RAr,E• 7 PEOPLE PER I MTT OR
- RR PEOPLE TOTAL
F. Describe the number and type of recreational facilities :
1 POOL., 1 PO OT BLDG 2 COMMON OPEN SPACE LOTS
G. Is there any night 1 ighting of the project: YES, GROUND LIGHTS
THROUGHOUT AND FLOOD LIGHTS IN DRIVES
SALES PR CE $300,00 O 310 ,000
H. Range of sales -prices or rents : _695 .00_/MO o �Q 00lnic�
I. Percent of total project devoted to: (NET AREA)
Building . . . . .. 15 . . . .
Paving, including
g streets. `
Landscaping, Open, Recreation Area . _ It5 S4 gQ q �Z
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
• ,o
Paving, including streets. . . . . . . . . .
Landscaping and Open Space (Recreation). . . a
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 ti0
33. Generates controversy based on aesthetics or
other features of the project. X
[ ] Additional explanation of "yes" answers attached.
CERTIFICATIO: 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.
_NELSON DEVELOPMENT CO � TNC
Name tPrint or Type For
Signatu - MARCH 10 1987
Date
INITIAL STUDY FEE : $30. 00
(Make check payable to the
City of Palm Desert and sub-
mit with this form. )
vsrerr4 Co rely
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
)39
CASE NO(S) : PP 8�'7 -H Crud T7 ac
PROJECT:
`� snc.• �7� - �31 Ue.\�e Wa�� 1
APPLICANT: NQ\soi-, Z)Q-\400�ne CO
Enclosed please find materials descr;i�bing a project for which the fo llowing is
being requested. ��'
Su�di� i�Slon o (p. 3 cccre-s 3 ICA3 . -sleveh 1 s
W,kkk Con.ko6n one how oe� �)aO) L",o \ohs uo,\O be (-Om M-0y) 04,reaS.
S�c�c,�u�e.s vim,\� be one.-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()r'�g n , in order to be discussed by the
land division committee. Th lie and 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 x
Attachments
PLEASE,..RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS
t,-
Pr"`
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO(S) : P c�r1d TT 0a393
PROJECT: AC1aaE'.,
APPLICANT: N\C\SOfN ZA,Ve� I11� CO SnL• �"t " 83l U�`1e Watt I
� 1
Enclosed please find materials describing a project for which the foljowing is
being requested: �d i J 1 lOr1 0` (), 3 �tC_re5 1 r\'ro I a IoAS , F—I even WO
W•�k� CORD lin One �,00 0e� C�GACI , "TLk)O US\0 be cOrit1ay) Clmrz,
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. it 1) 19 6� , in order to be discussed by the
land division committee. The l� d 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 C v
/tm
Attachments
PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS
v � �
O
VD
Ar-
�
r '
t V-,
4
VIA
W IV
PO
pv
NAV
-�
<'t` .,
4..' _ _
,.
i
L�'� i
i
_ �., ��'
f
O
1
I�
II
�I
l
I�
1
'�
li
l'
(I
i
(4 WY U. �Kvz (3,Z�56 n
�. a9b, OV
Wv ndcx-O
0 % u .� ajc �C
0
1
&rmLxsk nc s 'I)( �( a csr� . canc\
� �Y\cty dQ d U
L
V)
�y Z walj�
OK
C
m gnmm w RING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA s @
fJ154691. 04ZISy82
2 } (|]ENC
�§ pEp]RN TO :NDER
_§
® . NOVr:D LEFT NO |)DR ;S
-
� �
x � � /-~ Robin Cheng
\ 72840 Highway lil Ste 317
z § Palm Desert, CA 92660
S le San Bernardino
I y0 R.di..& 62/
0 �v MORON60
Los VALLEY
Angeles Riverside Ip Beaumont
9
6 ✓' Bannlnq
iJ (t7V \ II Ip 0 I 2 3 4 5 Mile
REDON \ Z43 T116ufORd
!EACH \ Palm Palms S C A L E
i on IB Id Wild Springs CATCITY
an ho
74 4 7a
s4►N Beac Hemet PAL TO PHOENIX
.EDIRO HUNTINOTON DESERT Wells io
MACH
La Ou iMa INS
NWE BEACH I 5 I Anm 74
74 a 195 III
71
_ g k soItton�
v�
Sea
Bene p
Gelled 2 = cL
IdIwA � �1-
76
i
la
o�.dr,re.
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
Lj Pioved-Left No Address oradly Away
F rl!w i r MR e r
rvp;rnd
j ^ t� irr pill Address ❑Va:ant
00 n:: -o ',,!,.,mber
cn Ej Other
Known
cy,
(/' wtlah—4
E'3 qnLv Nunbtr
c\j L
Shirley N Mi larii
8501 Wilshire Blvd
Beverly Hi I Is, CA 90211
IB San Bernardino
i ID Redlands 62/
MORONW
VALLEY
IO/lam VALLEY
gR Riverside
Angeles 10 Beaumont
9
!j Banning
5
:• 15 79 \ if 10 Thausand Q 2 3 4 5 Miles
REDON 243 Palms S C A L E
BEACH Paim
Springs GTCITY
on IB 74 4 Idyllrilld Rancgoo
SANAo Be�c� Hem r PAL Leas id TO PHOENIX
Is
BEACH
7 DESERT
La Ouln,a
NEW 74
BEACH I 5 r w I Anza
74 K,:1 e 0 195 II I
l,�,• 71
9 �saiton\
- K Sea
aama a p` y �
C Island Z �6'�•
IMe ( Z
i 76 v
15
M�..w.iAw
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
f rG
Weinstein Fame
rn jW 414?, Via Marir!a (Apt�61 r tr!er
T Marina Del Rey, CA 9i)`91
w�
114
11!111lit It 1!1 i sit!!!!1}it t!!
ss
I Ia Son Bernardino
10 R.dlana. 62/
�v YORONOO
10 Loa VALLEY
Angeles Riverside
10 Beaumont
5I Banning II
IJ (( 1;
� \ 10 �16uf011d Q 2 3 4 S Miles
BEACH 1 E \ 2a3 PBlmf S C A L E
! ` PGI
15 > Sp CATMED rings CITY ncn°
on 74 4 Id Wild as
�N Beac Hemet PAL I„6a TO PHOENIX
►EDflO HUNTI N7TON Wells
BEACH
7 DESERT Laauinto
NEW
BEACH 1 Is I Anza T4
74 rea nl
71
g saiton\
soa
Banta O y \\
GNlla. Z 4= \
76 79
S j
la
ocfan.lde
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
cr)
2
2 chi
ptfTUp?A,
ro Douglas W Johnson
1)
L 6097 Malachite
rdbf qr,Nor', Alta Loma, CA 91701 Fj;f
LAD411*1 %6
1111 It 11 111
S IP Son Berne rd Ina
I ro Rrdbnda •2/
IO �V YORON90
Loy VALLEY
Angeles Riverside
10 Beaumont
\ II 10 Thaws Rd
REDON Palm
!EACH I ..+` Palm S C A L E
CA7H EO
on IB 74 4 Id Mid Springs uT°n 9
Beac Hemet • TO PHOENIX
PAN w,° -�
PE DRO NUNTiN9TON
PAL
PEACH 7 DESERT La Quinta i0
NEW
MACH 1 Ana 74
74 s5 nl
71
-- 9 alto
Sao
S9o��
GMllea Z Z
O 76 �
i
la
Ocranald•
� e Q� , coo -�-�
� e���� P��, s
�� �o . �Q �� � � �