HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.B. - 394 - Staff Powerpoint - RevisedPP/CUP/EA 22-0006
Appeal of 394-Unit Apartments
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 26, 2023
1/26/2023 CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.1
Vicinity Map
Highway 111
Larkspur LaneCC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.21/26/2023
Project Description
•Project Applicant: Hayes Dietrich, LLC.
•Project Overview
•Precise Plan (PP) –A Precise Plan for a 394-Unit on an 18.31-acre site located at the southwest corner
of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue.
•13 three-story, residential buildings, 816 parking spaces
•Site amenities including clubhouse, pools, parking, offsite improvements
•Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
•Environmental Assessment (EA) –Initial Study (IS) and Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance
with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
•Planning Commission adopted Resolutions No. 2826 approving the project. On December 6,
2022.
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.31/26/2023
Project Compliance
•Zoning Designation –Planned Residential –22 Dwelling Units per Acre.
•General Plan –Town Center Neighborhood (7 to 40 dwelling units per acre).
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.41/26/2023
STANDARD PR-22 ZONE PROJECT CONFORMS
Height 40’-0”33’ to 37’ (tower 40’)Yes
Front Setback -20’ to 46’Yes
Rear Setback -24’ to 60’Yes
Street Side Setback -22’ Yes
Parking 788 Onsite Spaces 816 Onsite Spaces Yes
Density 22 units per acre 21.5 units per acre Yes
Lot Coverage Maximum 50%24%Yes
Open Space Minimum 20%29%Yes
Density per acre 22 units 21.5 units Yes
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.51/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.61/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.71/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.81/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.91/26/2023
CEQA -Process Overview
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.10
1/26/2023
1. Is the action a
Project?
2. Is the project
exempt from
further CEQA
Review?
3. Prepare an
Initial Study (IS)
to assess
potential
environmental
impacts on 21
factors
4. If project will
have no impacts
prepare a
Negative
Declaration (ND)
or Mitigated
Negative
Declaration
(MND)
5. If project will
have impacts,
prepare an
Environmental
Impact Report
(EIR)
1. 394 is a Project
2. Project did
not qualify for
exemption
3. Project
prepared Initial
Study
4. IS concluded
project would
have less than
significant
impacts with
mitigation and a
MND was
prepared
5. EIR not
required as
project had no
significant
impacts that
could not be
mitigated
CEQA -Process Overview
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.111/26/2023
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation/Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Project Overview Timeline
•December 6, 2022 –Planning Commission adopts Resolution 2826 approving the project and
adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration in a 4-0 vote (Commissioner Gregory recused).
•December 8, 2022 –City of Palm Desert files a notice of determination (NOD) with the
Riverside County Clerk.
•December 21, 2022 –Palm Desert City Clerk Receives a request for appeal from Don Mess
(Appellant).
•December 28, 2022 –Palm Desert Planning requests the Appellant provide additional
supporting documentation for the appeal by January 10, 2023
•January 11, 2023 –Staff did not receive supporting documentation for the appeal request.
None received prior to City Council meeting.
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.121/26/2023
Appeal Procedures
•Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.60.080
•The City Council is the appeal authority for Planning Commission decisions
•15 days to appeal the decision
•Request for appeal and fee
•All appeals must specifically state the basis of grounds for appeal
•Hearing on the appeal must be heard within 40 days
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.131/26/2023
Action Date Required Date Completed
Date of Planning Commission
Approval (Resolution No.
2826)
-December 6, 2022
Deadline to file appeal (15
Calendar Days per PDMC
25.60.080 (A))
December 21, 2022 December 21, 2022
Date to schedule public
hearing for appeal (40
calendar days of filing appeal
per PDMC 25.60.080 (D) (2))
January 30, 2023 January 26, 2023
Appeal Request
Request for appeal states:
“The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the “Frank Sinatra and Portola Multifamily
Development”(the “Project”)violates the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”),and an
Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”))needed to be prepared for the Project instead because substantial
evidence supports fair arguments that the Project will result in potentially significant and unmitigated
impacts in several areas.”
No substantial evidence was provided to support the request.
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.141/26/2023
Appeal Response
•An Initial Study prepared and analyzed 21 environmental factors
•Mitigated Negative Declaration
•Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
•No new substantial evidence was presented by the Appellant
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.151/26/2023
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation/Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
California Housing Accountability Act (HAA)
The California Housing Accountability Act (HAA),Government Code Section 65589.5,establishes limitations to a local government’sabilitytodeny,reduce the density of,or make infeasible housing development projects that are consistent with objective localdevelopmentstandardsandcontributetomeetinghousingneed.Both affordable and market-rate development are protected by thecomponentsoftheHAA.Objective,as used in the Act,means involving no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and beinguniformlyverifiablebyreferencetoanexternalanduniformbenchmarkorcriterionavailableandknowablebyboththedevelopmentapplicantorproponentandthepublicofficial.
When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable,objective general plan,zoning,and subdivision standards andcriteria,including design review standards,in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete,but the local agencyproposestodisapprovetheprojectortoimposeaconditionthattheprojectbedevelopedatalowerdensity,the local agency shall baseitsdecisionregardingtheproposedhousingdevelopmentprojectuponwrittenfindingssupportedbyapreponderanceoftheevidenceontherecordthatbothofthefollowingconditionsexist:
•The housing development project would have a specific,adverse impact upon the publichealthorsafetyunlesstheprojectisdisapprovedorapprovedupontheconditionthatthe project be developed at a lower density.
•There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact,other than the disapproval of the housingdevelopmentprojectortheapprovaloftheprojectupontheconditionthatitbedevelopedatalowerdensity.Feasible meanscapableofbeingaccomplishedinasuccessfulmannerwithinareasonableperiodoftime,taking into account economic,environmental,social,and technological factors.
A “specific,adverse impact”means a significant,quantifiable,direct,and unavoidable impact,based on objective,identified writtenpublichealthorsafetystandards,policies,or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.Pursuant toGovernmentCodeSection65589.5 (a)(3)it is the intent of the Legislature that the conditions that would have a specific,adverse impactuponthepublichealthandsafetyariseinfrequently.
An example of a condition that does not constitute a specific adverse impact,as indicated by the Department of Housing andCommunityDevelopment,would be criteria that requires a project to conform with “neighborhood character.”Such a standard is notquantifiable;therefore,would not meet the conditions set forth under the HAA.
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.161/26/2023
Recommendation
Adopt a Resolution denying the appeal and confirming the Planning Commission’s approval of
Precise Plan/Conditional Use Permit/Environmental Assessment 22-0006,and thereby approving
the development of a 394-unit multifamily apartment development at the southwest corner of
Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue.
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.171/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.381/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.391/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.401/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.411/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.421/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.431/26/2023
CC -AGENDA ITEM 3.B.441/26/2023