Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Res 04-18 TT 31969 and PP 03-24 Terminate DA 99-3
&3-DD� CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: Consideration of approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, a precise plan of design, a tentative tract map to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single-family lots, modified setbacks for dwellings on the 64 lots, and termination of the existing development agreement (DA 99-3, Ordinance No. 932). Property is located on the south side of Park View Drive between One Quail Place apartments and Fairhaven Drive, more particularly known as 72-755 Park View Drive and APN's 640-040-001 , 011 , 012, 013, 014 and 015. SUBMITTED BY: Steve Smith, Planning Manager APPLICANT: Mert Issacman Southern Sun Construction Co. Inc. 17775 Main Street, Suite B Irvine, CA 92614 The Keith Companies, Inc. 73-733 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100 Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NOS: TT 31969 and PP 03-24 DATE: February 26, 2004 CONTENTS: Recommendation Background and Discussion Draft Resolution No. 04-18 Legal Notice Comments from City Department and Other Agencies Planning Commission Resolution No. 2249 Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 3, 2004 Plans and Exhibits Staff Report Case Nos. TT 31969 and PP 03-24 Page 2 February 26, 2004 Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 04-18 approving TT 31969 and PP 03-24 subject to conditions and authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the property owner to terminate DA 99-3. Background: December 9, 1999 the City Council approved a series of applications and a development agreement related to a 250-unit continuing care retirement community on this property on the west side of Fairhaven Drive south of Park View Drive. That project was a three-story 25-foot high structure which took its main access from Park View Drive. That project has proved to be unfeasible to construct. The applicant wishes to terminate those approvals and obtain approval of a 64 single family lot tentative tract map. The property slopes down from west to east and from south to north. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North: Rancho Mirage / single family dwellings South: PR-7 S.P. / church East: PR-7 and R-1 12,000 / single story apartments and single family dwellings West: PR-22 / two-story One Quail Place Apartments General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning: Medium Density Residential 5-7 dwelling units per acre. PR-7, 7 units per acre. Planning Commission Action: Planning Commission considered this matter at its February 3, 2004 meeting. Several area property owners spoke in favor of the new development proposal. A petition signed by 27 area residents was submitted in support of the application. No one spoke in opposition. Commission determined that with some modification the plan could be recommended for approval to the City Council. Accordingly, Planning Staff Report Case Nos. TT 31969 and PP 03-24 Page 3 February 26, 2004 Commission on a 4-0-1 vote (Commissioner Lopez absent) adopted its Resolution No. 2249 recommending approval of a 63-lot project subject to conditions. Specifically, Planning Commission added a condition requiring that a community swimming pool facility be added. Commission assumed that the applicant would need to eliminate one lot in order to provide the pool. The condition requires that the applicant return to commission showing where and how the pool facility would be achieved. At that time if the applicant can demonstrate that the pool facility can be provided without removing a lot, then Commission could reinstate the deleted lot. Project Description: Municipal Code Section 25.24.010 details the purpose of the PR zone district as follows: "It is the purpose of the PR district to provide for flexibility in development, creative and imaginative design..." Later it states: "The PR district is also established to give a land developer assurance that innovative and unique land development techniques will be given reasonable consideration for approval." Section 25.24.310 allows Planning Commission/City Council to modify code standards as part of the map review process. The applicant proposes to create 64 single family lots which would range in size from 3,677 square feet to 7,294 square feet. The breakdown of lot sizes is shown in the table below: LOT SIZE BREAKDOWN # of lots less than 4,000 square feet = 3 # of lots between 4,000 and 4,500 square feet = 35 # of lots between 4,500 and 5,500 square feet = 17 # of lots greater than 5,500 square feet = 9 All of the lots have at least 46 feet of lot width. Typical lot depth is 92 feet. On these 64 lots the applicant proposes to construct a mix of one story (4) and Staff Report Case Nos. TT 31969 and PP 03-24 Page 4 February 26, 2004 two-story single family dwellings (60). The one story units will be 1 ,271 square feet. The two-story units range in size from 1 ,860 square feet to 2,268 square feet. Discussion/Analysis: The property has been zoned PR-7 for more than 20 years. The PR-7 zoning allows seven residential units per gross acre. The tract map indicates the property is 9.75 acres which permits up to 68 residential units. This site could be used for up to 68 residential condominiums, apartments or single family units. The request is for 64 single family lots on which 64 detached single residences are to be constructed. At a density of seven units per acre the PR zone contemplated an attached multi plex (4-8 units per building) condominium product with coverage up to 40%. As an alternative to an attached product, the applicant has proposed this "smaller lot" tract with modified development standards to facilitate the detached product at the same density. The detached product meets the demands of the current marketplace and the neighbors around the site. The PR code prescribes development standards for two-story detached units. Unfortunately, these standards were created for large lot developments in the 3.5 unit per acre range. The code offers these two development alternatives (attached multi-unit buildings or large lot two-story units), but does not provide standards for a small lot single family subdivision with two-story units. It seems incongruous that the code would accept a two-story multi unit per building project (3, 4 or 6 plexes), but not accommodate similar sized/quality units on their own lots with 10 feet of side yard separation. The applicant is requesting approval of a small lot tract map which complies with the general plan and zoning densities which have been in effect for more than 20 years. Staff Report Case Nos. TT 31969 and PP 03-24 Page 5 February 26, 2004 The typical lot size will be 4,232 square feet. The PR zone does not prescribe a minimum lot size, but allows for approval of lot sizes consistent with zoning and general plan densities. Sixty of the lots will have two story 24-foot high units. Four (4) lots adjacent to Fairhaven Drive will have single story, maximum 18 feet high units. The single story units as designed and laid out comply with existing code requirements except for the coverage limit (39.5% versus 35%). The two story units will provide the following setbacks: Provided Front Setback 16 feet - 20 feet to garage Rear Setback 15 feet minimum (15 feet to 28 feet) Side Yard Setback 5 feet minimum Minimum Separation Between 2nd Story Elements 10 feet Coverage 32.2% - 39.3% The building site plans are designed to maximize the size of rear yards. Based on the average 92 feet of lot depth and minimum 16 foot front yard / 20 feet to garage, the rear yards for the two-story units will range from 20 feet to 24 feet. Prescribing a minimum rear yard of 15 feet will accommodate odd shaped lots and early purchasers who wish an extra deep front yard. Access - Circulation: The proposed map provides for the main access from Park View Drive directly opposite the access to The Estates and Ridgeview on the Rancho Mirage side. Two secondary emergency access points are provided onto Fairhaven Drive to the east. The south end of Fairhaven at Fred Waring is closed to through traffic. The gated community will have private streets, 36 feet wide curb to curb which is typical in private residential communities. Behind the curb the applicant shows an eight-foot public utility easement with a four-foot sidewalk. The access to and circulation within the project are adequate. Staff Report Case Nos. TT 31969 and PP 03-24 Page 6 February 26, 2004 Architecture: The applicant proposes 60 two-story dwellings and four (4) one-story homes. The one story units are required per code within 100 feet of the R-1 zone to the east. The architecture includes Tuscan, Spanish and Italian. There are three plans for each. All roofs will be tile with a blend of colors ranging from terra cotta to brown to dark brown. Most of the units will have hip roofs, but the Tuscan plan provides a gable roof. The two-story units will be 24 feet in height and the single story units 17 feet. The architecture for the one and two story units was given preliminary approval by ARC at its January 27, 2004 meeting. 1 . Perimeter Walls The project will be required to construct six foot perimeter block walls along all sides of the subdivision. The wall along Park View Drive is required to have a 20-foot setback from face of curb. This will allow for a meandering sidewalk and landscaping. 2. Landscape Design The project's perimeter landscaping has been approved by ARC. All perimeter landscaping will be consistent with the City's standards for a desert landscape theme. Conclusion: The previously approved retirement community project was approved with the grudging acceptance of the residential community around it. It was considered too large, too massive and incompatible with the neighborhood. Throughout the processing of that project we constantly heard, "why can't this property be single family lots?" The owner heard those pleas and is now requesting approval of a single family tract. While the lot size may be smaller than the lots around it (north and east), this project at 6.56 units per acre represents a logical transition between One Quail Place (22 units/acre) and the single family areas to the north and east (three units per acre). The two story, 24 foot units comply with the PR code limit. The proposed architecture is attractive, well designed and has been given preliminary approval by ARC. Staff Report Case Nos. TT 31969 and PP 03-24 Page 7 February 26, 2004 Given the long standing seven units per acre designation on the site, staff feels that it is appropriate to allow a project of that density on the site. A seven unit per acre, two-story multi plex project is not what the market wants at this time (i.e., difficult to finance) and was never requested by the neighborhood. Considering the market conditions, project design and desires of the neighborhood, it seems appropriate to modify the two story development standards to accommodate the project as proposed. On this basis staff and Planning Commission recommend approval of the tentative tract map and code modifications necessary to implement the project (see Exhibit C to the draft resolution). Existing Development Agreement: The City Attorney advises that the development agreement executed in 1999 needs to be terminated if the proposed map is to be approved. Approval of the map then necessitates an action to terminate the development agreement (DA 99-3, Ordinance No. 932). Environmental Review: For purposes of CEQA, the proposed project will not have a significant negative impact on the environment and staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. Submitted by: Departm nt Head: Stev Smith ) Phil Dre Planning Manager Director of Community Development Appro . Approval. Homer Croy Carlos L. Ort a ACM for Devel ment Se'kc PROVED COU CIL,ACT �VIDENIEgeD RECEIVED ✓ OTHER MEETI E AYES: lii 1Pc NOES: (Wpdocs\tm\sr\tt31969.cc2) ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VERIFIED BY: 'r ri l p 4tk1 ('4♦-.s n1»r1,1 , RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 9.75 ACRES INTO AS MANY AS 64 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND MODIFIED SETBACKS FOR DWELLINGS ON THE 64 LOTS, AND TERMINATION OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA 99-3, ORDINANCE NO. 932). PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARK VIEW DRIVE BETWEEN ONE QUAIL PLACE APARTMENTS AND FAIRHAVEN DRIVE MORE PARTICULARLY KNOWN AS 72-755 PARK VIEW DRIVE AND APN'S 640-040-001, 011 , 012, 013, 014 AND 015. CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 26th day of February, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of SOUTHERN SUN CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 2249 has recommended approval of the applications; 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. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project will not have a negative impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be 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 City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the tentative tract map and precise plan of design: 1 . That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans, as amended. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 5. 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. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 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. 8. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not restrict solar access to the property. WHEREAS, in the review of this tentative tract map the City Council has considered the effect of the contemplated action on the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing these needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of Palm Desert and its environs, with available fiscal and environmental resources; and WHEREAS, the property is currently subject to a development agreement adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 932 which needs to be terminated if this tract map is to proceed; and WHEREAS, a previously approved 250-unit continuing care retirement community project has proved to be infeasible to construct. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case. 2. That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, Exhibit A attached, be certified. 3. That Precise Plan 03-24 and the above described Tentative Tract Map No. 31969 be approved, subject to the conditions, Exhibit B attached. 2 RESOLUTION NO, 04-18 4. That certain provisions of Municipal Code Section 25.24 PR Planned Residential District be modified for this property only, as shown on Exhibit C attached. 5. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement with said property owner to terminate Development Agreement 99-3. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this day of , 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT A. SPIEGEL, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California 3 RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 EXHIBIT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NOS: TT 31969 and PP 03-24 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: Mert Issacman Southern Sun Construction Co. Inc. 1 7775 Main Street, Suite B Irvine, CA 92614 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: A Precise Plan of Design, a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 9.75 acres into no more than 64 single family lots, and modified setbacks for dwellings on the lots (Negative Declaration determination was based on a total of 64 lots). Property is located on the south side of Park View Drive between One Quail Place Apartments and Fairhaven Drive, more particularly known as 72-755 Park View Drive and APN's 640-040-001, 011, 012, 013, 014 and 015. 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. PHILIP DRELL DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4 RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Recordation of the final map shall occur within 24 months 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 Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department 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. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to Architectural Review Commission submittal. 6. All onsite utilities shall be underground. 5 RESOLUTION NO. 04=18 7. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape plan. 8. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, TUMF and School Mitigation fees. 9. That the applicant shall obtain approval from the Architectural Review Commission for all exterior block walls, driveway gates, perimeter landscaping, typical front yard landscaping, and single-family homes. A six-foot block wall (measured from finished grade of each proposed lot to top of wall) shall be constructed along the perimeter of the tract. All walls visible from a public street shall be decorative block or stucco. 10. On Park View Drive the applicant shall provide a minimum of 20-foot setbacks from face of curb to the perimeter block walls. 11 . That per Municipal Code Section 25.24.321 the four dwellings on the lots adjacent to Fairhaven Drive shall be single story with height not to exceed 18 feet. 12. The access points to Fairhaven Drive shall be emergency access only and shall be redesigned to the minimum width necessary to provide Fire Department access. 13. That the map be amended to provide for 63 lots with the provision of a community pool. Applicant to return to Planning Commission with plan for the community pool and may request the addition of one lot at that time. 14. That within the development the applicant shall provide minimum four-foot sidewalks. 6 RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 Department of Public Works: 1 . Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Palm Desert Ordinance Number 653, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. 2. Any drainage facility construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to start of construction. The project shall be designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase in developed versus undeveloped condition for a 100-year storm. 3. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79- 17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. 4. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards including the following: • Improvement of Park View Drive with an 18' parkway with a total half- street section of 50', retaining the 6' curbside sidewalk. • Improvement of Fairhaven Drive with a 6' curbside sidewalk. 5. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvements and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to recordation of final map. Such offsite improvements shall include, but not be limited to, curb and gutter, asphalt paving and concrete sidewalk in an appropriate size and configuration. "As-built" plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the City. 6. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to project final. 7 RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 7. All public improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. 8. Landscaping maintenance on Park View Drive, Fairhaven Drive, and the "Retention Basin", shall be provided by the homeowners association in addition to all other common areas. Landscape treatment shall be water efficient in nature and shall be in accordance with the City of Palm Desert landscape design standards. Applicant shall be responsible for executing a declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions, which declaration shall be approved by the City of Palm Desert and recorded with the County Recorder. The declaration shall specify; (a) the applicant shall oversee the formation of a property owners association; (b) the property owners association shall be formed prior to the recordation of the map; and (c) the aforementioned landscaping and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property owners association. • Landscaping plans shall be submitted for review simultaneously with grading plans. 9. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. An offsite grading authorization letter is required prior to grading issuance for offsite grading on adjacent property. 10. Traffic safety striping shall be installed 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 prior to the placement of any pavement markings. 1 1 . Full improvements of interior streets based on residential street standards in accordance with Section 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code shall be provided. Applicant shall be responsible for acquiring all necessary easements for off-site roadway improvements. 12. Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits. 13. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. 8 RESOLUTION NO. o4-18 14. 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 the issuance of a grading permit. 15. Pad elevations, as shown on the tentative map, are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 16. Waiver of access to Park View and Fairhaven Drives, except at approved locations, shall be granted on the final map. 17. Applicant shall comply with provisions of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 24.13, Fugitive Dust Control, as well as Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. 18. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall submit satisfactory evidence to the Director of Public Works of intended compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit for stormwater discharges associated with construction. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . The Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC, and CBC or any recognized Fire Protection Standards: The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all buildings per UFC article 87. 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow of: 1 ,500 gpm for single family dwellings 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4" x 2% " x 21/2" located not less than 25 feet nor more than: 9 RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 200 feet from any portion of a single family dwelling measured via vehicular travelway. 5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the water system will produce the required fire flow. 6. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall not be less than 24 feet of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street, the roadway must be 36 feet wide and 32 feet wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45 foot radius turn-around 55 feet in industrial developments. 7. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width shall be 16" with a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6". 8. A dead-end single access over 500 feet will require a secondary access, sprinklers, or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no circumstances shall a dead end over 1 ,300 feet be accepted. 9. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an adjoining development. 10. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the City. 1 1 . Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinance, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within 12 months. // 10 RESOLUTION NO. 04-18 EXHIBIT C MODIFIED PR STANDARDS FOR TT 31969 Section 1 - Single Story Dwellings Front Setback 15 feet - 20 feet to garage door Rear Setback 15 feet Side Yard Setback 5 feet - minimum 10 foot separation between structures Street Side Yard Setback 10 feet Maximum Height 18 feet Maximum Lot Coverage 40% Section 2 - Two Story Dwellings Front Setback 15 feet - 20 feet to garage door Rear Setback 15 feet Side Setback 5 feet - minimum 10 foot separation between structures Street Side Setback (Corner Lots) 10 feet Maximum Height 24 feet from finished grade Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 11 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: February 3, 2004 CASE NOS: TT 31969 and PP 03-24 REQUEST: Consideration of a recommendation to the City Council of an approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, a precise plan of design, a tentative tract map to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single- family lots, modified setbacks for dwellings on the 64 lots, and termination of the existing development agreement (DA 99-3, Ordinance No. 932). Property is located on the south side of Park View Drive between One Quail Place apartments and Fairhaven Drive, more particularly known as 72-755 Park View Drive and APN's 640-040-001 , 011 , 012, 013, 014 and 015. APPLICANT: Mert Issacman Southern Sun Construction Co. Inc. 17775 Main Street, Suite B Irvine, CA 92614 The Keith Companies, Inc. 73-733 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100 Palm Desert, CA 92260 I. BACKGROUND: December 9, 1999 the City Council approved a series of applications and a development agreement related to a 250-unit continuing care retirement community on 10.3 acres on the west side of Fairhaven Drive south of Park View Drive. That project was a three-story 25-foot high structure which took its main access from Park View Drive. That project has proved to be unfeasible to construct. The applicant wishes to terminate those approvals and obtain approval of a 64 single family lot tentative tract map. The property slopes down from west to east and from south to north. A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: Rancho Mirage / single family dwellings South: PR-7 S.P. / church STAFF REPORT CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 East: PR-7 and R-1 12,000 / single story apartments and single family dwellings West: PR-22 / two-story One Quail Place Apartments B. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND ZONING: Medium Density Residential 5-7 dwelling units per acre. PR-7, 7 units per acre. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes to create 64 single family lots which would range in size from 3,677 square feet to 7,294 square feet. Most of the smaller lots are 4,232 square feet. All of the lots have at least 46 feet of lot width. Typical lot depth is 92 feet. On these 64 lots the applicant proposes to construct a mix of one and two-story single family dwellings The one story units will be 1 ,271 square feet. The two-story units range in size from 1 ,860 square feet to 2,268 square feet. A. DISCUSSION: The property has been zoned PR-7 for more than 20 years. The PR-7 zoning allows with the approval of the tentative tract map up to seven residential units per gross acre. The tract map indicates the property is 9.75 acres which permits up to 68 residential units. The code does not specify different densities for different housing types. This site could be used for up to 68 residential condominiums, apartments or single family units. The request is for 64 single family lots on which 64 detached single residences are to be constructed. B. ACCESS - CIRCULATION: The proposed map provides for the main access from Park View Drive directly opposite the access to The Estates and Ridgeview on the Rancho Mirage side. Two secondary emergency access points are provided onto Fairhaven Drive to the east. These access points are secondary due to the circuitous routing to an arterial street (i.e., south end of Fairhaven at Fred Waring is closed to through traffic). 2 STAFF REPORT CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 Streets in the project will be private, 36 feet wide curb to curb which is typical in private residential communities. The 36-foot wide street allows for parking on one side only per code. Behind the curb the applicant shows an eight-foot public utility easement. The access to and circulation within the project are adequate. C. ARCHITECTURE: The applicant proposes 60 two-story dwellings and four (4) one-story homes. The one story units are required per code within 100 feet of the R-1 zone to the east. The architecture includes Tuscan, Spanish and Italian. There are three plans for each. All roofs will be tile with a blend of colors ranging from terra cotta to brown to dark brown. Most of the units will have hip roofs, but the Tuscan plan provides a gable roof. The two-story units will be 24 feet in height and the single story units 17 feet. The architecture for the one and two story units was given preliminary approval by ARC at its January 27, 2004 meeting. 1 . Perimeter Walls The project will be required to construct six foot perimeter block walls along all sides of the subdivision. The wall along Park View Drive is required to have a 22-foot setback from face of curb. This will allow for a meandering sidewalk and landscaping. 2. Landscape Design The project's perimeter landscaping has been approved by ARC. All perimeter landscaping will be consistent with the City's standards for a desert landscape theme. D. CODE REQUIREMENTS IN CHART FORM: Code Requirement Provided Minimum Lot Size As approved 3,677 to 7,294 sq.ft. Interior Street Width 30 feet 36 feet (allows parking on one side) Parking 2 covered spaces/home 2 spaces (garage) plus driveway Maximum Density 7 units/gross acre 6.56 units/gross acre 3 STAFF REPORT CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 Code Requirement Provided Perimeter Setback to Park View Drive 20 feet 25 feet - 15 feet setback, plus 10' landscape easement SETBACKS Two Story Units Code Requirement Provided Front Setback 20 feet 16 feet - 20 feet minimum to garage Rear Setback 25 feet 15 feet plus Side Yard 15 feet each side 5 feet each side - minimum 12 feet separation Minimum Separation Between 2nd Story Elements 30 feet 12 feet Coverage 25% 32.2% - 39.3% One Story Units Code Requirement Provided Front Setback 20 feet 20 feet Rear Setback 15 feet 16 + feet Side Yard Setback 14 feet combined, 5 feet and 11 feet minimum 5 feet Coverage Max 35% 32% - 39.5% III. ANALYSIS: The PR zone permits a range of attached and detached housing. At a density of seven units per acre the PR zone contemplated an attached two-story condominium product with coverage up to 40%. Units in such a project would be in the size range of 1 ,100 to 1 ,400 square feet. The PR code also prescribes development standards for two-story detached units. Unfortunately, these standards were created for large lot developments in the 3.5 unit per acre range. 4 STAFF REPORT CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 The code offers these two development alternatives, but does not provide standards for a small lot single family subdivision with two-story units. In an effort to be compatible with the single family neighborhoods to the east and north and in response to market demand, the applicant has proposed this detached single family project. It seems incongruous that the code would accept a two-story multi unit per building project (3, 4 or 6 plexes), but not accommodate similar sized/quality units on their own lots with 12 feet of side yard separation. The applicant is requesting approval of a small lot tract map which complies with the general plan and zoning densities which have been in effect for more than 20 years. The lots in the tract will be smaller (3,677 - 7,294 square feet) than the usual R-1 tract (8,000 square feet). The PR zone does not prescribe a minimum lot size, but allows for approval of lot sizes consistent with zoning and general plan densities. Sixty of the lots will have two story 24-foot high units. Four (4) lots adjacent to Fairhaven Drive will have single story, maximum 18 feet high units. The single story units as designed and laid out comply with existing code requirements except for the coverage limit (39.5% versus 35%). The two story units require modification of code requirements as follows: Code Requirement Provided Front Setback 20 feet 16 feet - 20 feet to garage Rear Setback 25 feet 15 feet minimum Side Yard Setback 15 feet each side 5 feet minimum Minimum Separation Between 2nd Story Elements 30 feet 12 feet Coverage 25% 32.2% - 39.3% The above code standards were established based on an assumed minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. If we are to allow smaller lots at a density provided for in the general plan and zoning, then in order to have dwellings which are compatible in size and quality with the neighboring homes, modification of the standards is needed. 5 STAFF REPORT CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 Section 25.24.310 allows Planning Commission/City Council to modify code standards as part of the map review process. IV. CONCLUSION: The previously approved retirement community project was approved with the grudging acceptance of the residential community around it. It was considered too large, too massive and incompatible with the neighborhood. Throughout the processing of that project we constantly heard, "why can't this property be single family lots?" The owner heard those pleas and is now requesting approval of a single family tract. While the lot size may be smaller than the lots around it (north and east), this project at 6.56 units per acre represents a logical transition between One Quail Place (22 units/acre) and the single family areas to the north and east (three units per acre). The two story, 24 foot units comply with the PR code limit. The proposed architecture is attractive, well designed and has been given preliminary approval by ARC. Given the long standing seven units per acre designation on the site, staff feels that it is appropriate to allow a project of that density on the site. A seven unit per acre, two-story multi plex project is not what the market wants at this time (i.e., difficult to finance) and was never requested by the neighborhood. Considering the market conditions, project design and apparent desires of the neighborhood, it seems appropriate to modify the two story development standards to accommodate the project as proposed. On this basis staff recommends approval of the tentative tract map and code modifications necessary to implement the project (see Exhibit C to the draft resolution). V. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: The City Attorney advises that the development agreement executed in 1999 needs to be terminated if the proposed map is to be approved. A recommendation of approval of the map then necessitates a recommendation to terminate the development agreement (DA 99-3, Ordinance No. 932). 6 STAFF REPORT CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 The staff recommendation will include the recommendation to terminate the present development agreement concurrent with the map approval. VI. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: For purposes of CEQA, the proposed project will not have a significant negative impact on the environment and staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. VII. RECOMMENDATION: Approve findings and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. recommending to the City Council approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, Precise Plan 03-24, Tentative Tract 31969 to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single family lots and modified setbacks for dwellings on the 64 lots, subject to conditions, and termination of DA 99-3, Ordinance No. 932. VIII. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution B. Legal notice C. Comments from city departments and other agencies D. Plans and exhibits Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by: 77- Steve Smith P it Drell Planning Manager Director of Community Development Reviewe and Appro ed by: Homer Croy ACM for Develo ent Services /t m 7 ATTACHMENT "A" TO STAFF REPORT FINDINGS NECESSARY FOR APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP: 1 . That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans, as amended. • The proposed tract map is consistent with the general plan designation of medium density residential (5-7 units per acre). 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. • All streets will be maintained and improved. Sufficient drainage facilities will be provided in conformance with the general plan guidelines and City ordinances. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. • The 9.75-acre site is physically suitable for residential development. The existing property conditions do not create any significant problems. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. • The project will have a total of 64 units. The proposed density (6.56 units per acre) is under the maximum allowed seven units per acre. The project is physically suitable for the proposed development density. 5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantial and avoidable injury to fish, wildlife or their habitat. • For purposes of CEQA a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The design of the project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat since the surrounding area has been developed with similar densities. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. • The design of the subdivision will be in compliance with applicable health, safety and building codes. The site can be served by respective utilities, will provide adequate traffic circulation, and is designed in compliance with all city codes. ATTACHMENT "A" 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. • All subdivision improvements will not conflict with any public easements. 8. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not restrict solar access to the property. • The project meets all code requirements. The design of the subdivision will not impact solar access to adjacent properties or the subject property. All single-family homes shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 9.75 ACRES INTO 64 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, MODIFIED SETBACKS FOR DWELLINGS ON THE 64 LOTS, AND TERMINATION OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA 99-3, ORDINANCE NO. 932). PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARK VIEW DRIVE BETWEEN ONE QUAIL PLACE APARTMENTS AND FAIRHAVEN DRIVE MORE PARTICULARLY KNOWN AS 72-755 PARK VIEW DRIVE AND APN'S 640-040-001, 011 , 012, 013, 014 AND 015. CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of February, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of SOUTHERN SUN CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.; 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. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project will not have a negative impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be 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 approval of the tentative tract map: 1 . That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans, as amended. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 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. 8. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not restrict solar access to the property. WHEREAS, in the review of this tentative tract map the planning commission has considered the effect of the contemplated action on the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing these needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of Palm Desert and its environs, with available fiscal and environmental resources; and WHEREAS, the property is currently subject to a development agreement adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 932 which needs to be terminated if this tract map is to proceed; and WHEREAS, a previously approved 250-unit continuing care retirement community project has proved to be infeasible to construct. 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 a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, Exhibit A attached, be recommended to the City Council for certification. 3. That Precise Plan 03-24 and the above described Tentative Tract Map No. 31969 be recommended for approval to the City Council, subject to the conditions, Exhibit B attached. 4. That certain provisions of Municipal Code Section 25.24 PR Planned Residential District be modified for this property only, as shown on Exhibit C attached. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the existing development agreement, DA 99-3, Ordinance No. 932, be terminated. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 3rd day of February, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NOS: TT 31969 and PP 03-24 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: Mert lssacman Southern Sun Construction Co. Inc. 17775 Main Street, Suite B Irvine, CA 92614 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: A Precise Plan of Design, a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single family lots and modified setbacks for dwellings on the 64 lots. Property is located on the south side of Park View Drive between One Quail Place Apartments and Fairhaven Drive, more particularly known as 72-755 Park View Drive and APN's 640-040-001, 011, 012, 013, 014 and 015. 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. February 3, 2004 PHILIP DRELL DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. 31969 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Recordation of the final map shall occur within 24 months 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 Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department 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. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to Architectural Review Commission submittal. 6. All onsite utilities shall be underground. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape plan. 8. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, TUMF and School Mitigation fees. 9. That the applicant shall obtain approval from the Architectural Review Commission for all exterior block walls, driveway gates, perimeter landscaping, typical front yard landscaping, and single-family homes. A six-foot block wall (measured from finished grade of each proposed lot to top of wall) shall be constructed along the perimeter of the tract. All walls visible from a public street shall be decorative block or stucco. 10. On Park View Drive the applicant shall provide a minimum of 20-foot setbacks from face of curb to the perimeter block walls. 11 . That per Municipal Code Section 25.24.321 the four dwellings on the lots adjacent to Fairhaven Drive shall be single story with height not to exceed 18 feet. 12. The access points to Fairhaven Drive shall be emergency access only. Department of Public Works: 1 . Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Palm Desert Ordinance Number 653, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. 2. Any drainage facility construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to start of construction. The project shall be designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase in developed versus undeveloped condition for a 100-year storm. 3. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79- 17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. 4. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards including the following: • Improvement of Park View Drive with an 18' parkway with a total half- street section of 50', retaining the 6' curbside sidewalk. • Improvement of Fairhaven Drive with a 6' curbside sidewalk. 5. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvements and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to recordation of final map. Such offsite improvements shall include, but not be limited to, curb and gutter, asphalt paving and concrete sidewalk in an appropriate size and configuration. "As-built" plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the City. 6. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to project final. 7. All public improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. 8. Landscaping maintenance on Park View Drive, Fairhaven Drive, and the "Retention Basin", shall be provided by the homeowners association in addition to all other common areas. Landscape treatment shall be water efficient in nature and shall be in accordance with the City of Palm Desert landscape design standards. Applicant shall be responsible for executing a declaration of 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions, which declaration shall be approved by the City of Palm Desert and recorded with the County Recorder. The declaration shall specify; (a) the applicant shall oversee the formation of a property owners association; (b) the property owners association shall be formed prior to the recordation of the map; and (c) the aforementioned landscaping and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property owners association. • Landscaping plans shall be submitted for review simultaneously with grading plans. 9. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. An offsite grading authorization letter is required prior to grading issuance for offsite grading on adjacent property. 10. Traffic safety striping shall be installed 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 prior to the placement of any pavement markings. 11 . Full improvements of interior streets based on residential street standards in accordance with Section 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code shall be provided. Applicant shall be responsible for acquiring all necessary easements for off-site roadway improvements. 12. Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits. 13. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. 14. 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 the issuance of a grading permit. 15. Pad elevations, as shown on the tentative map, are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16. Waiver of access to Park View and Fairhaven Drives, except at approved locations, shall be granted on the final map. 17. Applicant shall comply with provisions of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 24.13, Fugitive Dust Control, as well as Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. 18. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall submit satisfactory evidence to the Director of Public Works of intended compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit for stormwater discharges associated with construction. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . The Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC, and CBC or any recognized Fire Protection Standards: The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all buildings per UFC article 87. 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 -hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow of: 1 ,500 gpm for single family dwellings 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4" x 21/2 " x 2%2 " located not less than 25 feet nor more than: 200 feet from any portion of a single family dwelling measured via vehicular travelway. 5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the water system will produce the required fire flow. 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall not be less than 24 feet of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street, the roadway must be 36 feet wide and 32 feet wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45 foot radius turn-around 55 feet in industrial developments. 7. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width shall be 16" with a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6". 8. A dead-end single access over 500 feet will require a secondary access, sprinklers, or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no circumstances shall a dead end over 1 ,300 feet be accepted. 9. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an adjoining development. 10. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the City. 11 . Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinance, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within 12 months. // 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT C MODIFIED PR STANDARDS FOR TT 31969 Section 1 - Single Story Dwellings Front Setback 15 feet - 20 feet to garage door Rear Setback 15 feet Side Yard Setback 5 feet - minimum 12 foot separation between structures Street Side Yard Setback 10 feet Maximum Height 18 feet Maximum Lot Coverage 40% Section 2 - Two Story Dwellings Front Setback 15 feet - 20 feet to garage door Rear Setback 15 feet Side Setback 5 feet - minimum 12 foot separation between structures Street Side Setback (Corner Lots) 10 feet Maximum Height 24 feet from finished grade Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 11 CITY OF PALM DESERT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Department of Community Development/Planning Attention: Steve Smith FROM: Mark Greenwood, City Engineer SUBJECT: TT 31969 Revised TKC Southern Sun Construction Co. DATE: January 27, 2004 The following should be considered conditions of approval for the above-referenced project: (1) Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Palm Desert Ordinance Number 653, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. (2) Any drainage facility construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared bya registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to start of construction.The project shall be designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase in developed vs.undeveloped condition for a 100 year storm. (3) Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos.79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. (4) Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards including the following; • Improvement of Parkview Drive with an 18'parkway with a total half-street section of 50', retaining the 6' curbside sidewalk. • Improvement of Fairhaven Drive with a 6' curbside sidewalk. (5) As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44,complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to recordation of final map. Such offsite improvements shall include,but not be limited to,curb and gutter,asphalt paving and concrete sidewalk in an appropriate size and configuration. "As-built" plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the city. (6) 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 project final. (7) All public improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. (8) Landscaping maintenance on Parkview Drive, Fairhaven Drive, and the "Retention Basin", shall be provided by the homeowners association in addition to all other common areas. Landscape treatment shall be water efficient in nature and shall be in accordance with the City of Palm Desert landscape design standards. Applicant shall be responsible for executing a declaration of Conditions,Covenants and Restrictions, which declaration shall be approved by the City of Palm Desert and recorded with the County Recorder. The declaration shall specify: (a)the applicant shall oversee the formation of a property owners association;(b)the property owners association shall be formed prior to the recordation of the Map;and(c) the aforementioned landscaping and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property owners association. • Landscaping plans shall be submitted for review simultaneously with grading plans. (9) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. An offsite grading authorization letter is required prior to grading permit issuance for offsite grading on adjacent property. (10) Traffic safety striping shall be installed 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 prior to the placement of any pavement markings. (11) Full improvements of interior streets based on residential street standards in accordance with Section 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code shall be provided. Applicant shall be responsible for acquiring all necessary easements for off-site roadway improvements. (12) Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits. (13) Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. (14) 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 the issuance of a grading permit. (15) Pad elevations, as shown on the tentative map are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. (16) Waiver of access to Parkview and Fairhaven Drives, except at approved locations, shall be granted on the final map. (17) Applicant shall comply with provisions of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 24.12, Fugitive Dust Control as well as Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. (18) Prior to the start of construction,the applicant shall submit satisfactory evidence to the Director of Public Works of intended compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)General Construction Permit for storm waterdischarges sso fated with co truction. Mark Greenwood, P.E. G:IPubWorks\Conditions of ApprovaATMAPSITT 31969RevisedTKC Southern Sun-Parkview.wpd YUNIW� I�IVLI�SIUI: 1y►NI WIIMf/ 1 ,„„fit venur.,M\ U N"I 1 ¼", FIRE D EPA R 1MENT — fr\ �r�•uu cr„r�� in Cooreratinn \\'Irll the (;alifornia Deivrtnient 1)1 I'I,r(;t1) ;i nl I rrc I'r1,i1.1 IIIn1 MI210 West San Jacinto Avenue • Perris. California 92'',70 • (flflq) 0.10-6900 • FAX 009) f140-1;910 • HMI ' N•u1r1•, • • Tom Tisdale Fire Chief Cove Fire Marshal's Office Proudly serving the 73710 Fred Waring Drive//222 unincorporated Palm Desert CA 92260 areas of Riverside (760)346-1l 70 County and the cities of: Banning TO: s- - ,1"' .� DAT►?: i .y /,/�' Beaumont - 0 rT 3 Isl; 7 0(.10-A Calimesa REF: + Canyon Lake If circled, conditions apply to project Coachella f• With respect Desert Hot Springs to the conditions of approval regarding the above 4. referenced project, the fire department recommends the following fire Indian Wells protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Indio I Code, NFPA, CFC, and CBC or any recognized Fire Protection '• II Standards: • Lake Elsinore The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the Y La Quinla I (0 remodel or construction of all buildings per UPC article 87. 4. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual Moreno Valley .s. pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed Palm Desert on the job site. Perris Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a t gpm flow of: Rancho Mirage (C) 1500 gpm for single family dwellings 4. San Jacinto 4. 2500 gpm for multifamily dwellings f 5 3000 gpm for commercial buildings Temecula The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Ilydrant (s) 4"x 2 Yi" x 2 %:", located not less than 25' nor more than: bi 200' from any portion of a single family dwelling measured vra Board of Supervisors vehicular travelway Bob Buster 7. 165' from any portion of a multifamily dwelling measured via District 1 vehicular travelway John Tavaglionr. 8. 150' from any portion of.a commercial building measured via District 2 vehicular travelway Jim Venable Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include District 3 verification that the water system will produce the required fire flow. Roy Wilson 10. Please be advised the proposed project may not be feasible since the District 4 existing water mains will not meet the required fire flow. Tom Mullen District 5 • 11. Install a complete NFI'A 13 fire sprinkler system. This Applies lrr :ill buildings with a 3000 square foot total cumulative lionr area. .Hu. fire Marshal shall approve the locations of all post indicator ‘'alves And fire department connections. All valves and connections \II:III nI)t hr less than 25' from the building and within 50' of an approval hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings. .. 12. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and Water-flow switches shall he monitored and alarmed per • UBC Chapter 9. 13. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UM: C.'h:rptcc .',. 14. Install portable fire extinguishers per NITA 111, but not less II ill one 2A10BC extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over w:rlkin ; distance. A "K" type fire extinguisher is required in all commercial kitchens. 15. Install a I lood/Duct automatic fire extinguishing „.„ten, per ,N I I'-\ ')6 in all public and private cooking operations except single-la iii Iv residential usage. 16. Install a dust collecting system per UFC Chapter 76 if conclnctin!,. an • operation that produces airborne particles. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extrrrrlin„ to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walk of the Iirsl story. The roadway shall not be less than 24' of unobstructed width :End . 13' 6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required oil • • both sides of the street the roadway must be 36' wide and 12' Ns Ide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of I50' shall be provided with a minimum 45' r;td.us turn-around 55' in iudrnlri:rl developments. IR Whenever access into private property is controlled Ihrou; lr rr',c of • gates, barriers or other means provisions shall he made to inw:rll :r "Knox Box" key over-ride system to allow for emergency vehiclr access. Minimum gate width shall be 16" with a rninin►unr vcrtic:rI clearance of 13'6". ID A dead end single access over 5011' will require a secondary :reel',\, sprinklers or other mitigative Incas('res approved by the f ire Marshal. Under no circumstance shall a dead end over 1 3ltlt' hr accepted. • )h v ():t`� � A second access is required. This can be accomplished I tl by two main access points from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an eDw adjoining development. 21. This project may require licensing by a state or county agency, to facilitate plan review the applicant shall prepare and submit to thr Fire Marshal a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage and 0 occupancy type. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 23. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately to the Fire Marshal for approval prior to construction. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, • glo laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should he referred to the Fire Marshal's Office at (760)346-1870 in Palm Desert. Location: 73710 Fred Waring Drive #222, Palm Desert CA 92260 Other: Acte-e5 -- • Sincerely, David A. Avila Fire Marshal ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1 . Project Title: Paseo Village 2. Lead Agency and Name and Address: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 3. Contact person and Phone Number: Stephen R. Smith, Planning Manager Department of Community Development (760) 346-0611 ext. 486 4. Project Location: South side Park View Drive between Joshua Road and Fairhaven. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Southern Sun Construction Co., Inc. 17775 Main Street, Suite B Irvine, CA 92614 6. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential, 5-7 units/acre 7. Zoning: PR-7 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.) 64 single family lots on 9.75 acres. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.) NORTH: single family dwellings SOUTH: church EAST: apartments and single family dwellings WEST: apartments 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None CITY/RVPUB/1999/313785 PAGE 1 OF 14 FORM "J" ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality O Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources 0 Geology/ Soils 0 Hazards & Hazardous Materials 0 Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning • ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise 0 Population/Housing 0 Public Services 0 Recreation 0 Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/ Service Systems 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION(To be completed by the Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: FI find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. O I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant or"potentially significant unless mitigated"impact on the environment,but at least one effect 1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 0 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,because all potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed roject,nothing further is required. Signature 1— g 'r- U S/ 41 & Date 5fl Printed Name For CITY/RVPUB/1999/313785 FORM "J" Page 2 of 14 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact"answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A"No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved(e.g_ the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g_ the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level,indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur,then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation,or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact"is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more"Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a"Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII,"Earlier Analyses,"may be cross- referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(cX3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis_ c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are"Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts(e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances) Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form,and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,lead agencies should normally address the questions form this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected CITY/RVPUB/1999/313785 FORM „I„ Page 3 of 14 q) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold,if any,used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. SAMPLE QUESTION Lass Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Issues: Mitigation Significant No Imp+ Impact Significant Incorporated Impact i I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a su bstantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 Cl 0 .r tgl b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not 0 0 0 limited to,tress,rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? � � C c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality ❑ of the site and its surroundings? � CFI C d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which 0 would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agncultural resources are significant environmental effects,lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland, or Farmland of 0 Statewide Importance(Farmland), as shown on the maps I prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring , Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- ' agricultural use? i b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ 0 0 Williamson Act contract? j I tt 1 1 FORM"T, CITY/RVPUB/1999/313785 Page 4 of 14 Lcss Than Significant Issues- ' Potentially With Less Than ,xi '1 Significant Mitigation Significant No In 4 Impact Incorporated Impact c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, 0 D0 5 ,-,-.- .iir due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? 2."' III AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable 0 0 Xi C air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially 0 0 tg C to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any O O VI 0 criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of 0 0 El El people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through 0 O �dS habitat modifications, on any species identified as a �t candidate, sensitive,or special status species in local or regional plans,policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? CIT Y/RVPUB/1999/313785 FORM "r' Page 5 of 14 Less Theo ISSueS: Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Imp Impact Incorporated Impact b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or ❑ 0 0 . other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected 0 O 0 gi wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,marsh, vernal pool,coastal, etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native 0 0 ❑ IX resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting 0 ❑ 0 54 biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 0 r.gl0 Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a ❑ ❑ 0 El historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ 0 0 VI archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological D 0 0 El resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside ❑ ❑ 0 of formal cemeteries? CITY/RVPUB/1 999/3 1 3 7 85 FORM "I" Page 6 of 14 Less Than Issues: Significant r' Potentially With Less Than sa. Significant Mitigation Significant No Im Impact Incorporated Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS —Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 0 0 14 0 effects,including the risk of loss,injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the ❑ ❑ ❑ most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ 0 0 0 ui Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 0 0 ❑ g iv Landslides? 0 0 ❑ gi b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 0 0 0 0 c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that ❑ 0 0 0 would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of ❑ 0 ❑ El the Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 0 ❑ ❑ Er through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? CITY/RVPUB/1999/313785 FORM "I" Page 7 of 14 Less Than ISSUCS: Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Imp Impact Incorporated Impact b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 0 0 0 ig through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely 0 0 0 51 hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous 0 0 0 !l materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ 0 0 IM where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would 0 0 0 El the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an 0 0 ❑ IZ adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ 0 Rf injury or death involving wildland fires,including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 0 ❑ 0 El requirements? CITY/RVPUB/1 999/3 1 3785 FORM "T Page 8 of 14 Less Than Issues: Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Irr Impact Incorporated Impact b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ❑ ❑ El C substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or ❑ ❑ fil C area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or ❑ ❑ iglC area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the ❑ 0 56 0 capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted nmoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as 0 mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which ❑ 0 0 14 would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, 0 ❑ ❑ 631 injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami, or mudflow? 0 0 0 VI CITY/RVPUB/1 999/3 1 3 7 8 5 FORM "T' Page 9 of 14 Less Than Issues: Significant • I Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Iml Impact Incorporated Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0ig b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or 0 0 0 g regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including,but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program,or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or 0 0 0 fi6 natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 0 0 D EZI resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important 0 Cl mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in 0 0 excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 0 groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in 0 Cl 0 gl the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? CITY/RVPUB/1999f313785 FORM "I" Page 10 of 14 Less Than Issues: Significant .:-,..0,:'- Potentialy With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No irr Impact Incorporated Impact e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 0 0 0 g where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would ❑ ❑ ❑ al the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,either. ❑ 0 0 0 directly(for example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension of road or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, 0 ❑ ❑ IJ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the 0 ❑ ❑ 0 construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ 0 gi 0 Police protection? ❑ 0 El 0 Schools? • ❑ ❑ rg 0 CITY/RVPUB/1999/313785 FORM "I" Page 11 of 14 Less Than . Issues: Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Im! Impact Incorporated Impact Parks? ❑ 0 181 0 Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ El ❑ XIV. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional 0 ❑ ® 0 parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require 0 0 0 the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation ❑ 0 El 0 to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system(i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a level of ❑ 0 V.q 0 service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either ❑ 0 0 til an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ❑ ❑ 0 lig (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 0 51 C IT Y/R VPUB/1999/313 7 8 5 FORiv1 "T' Page 12 of 14 M3' Less Than :0 . Significant �" Issucs Potanially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Im Impact Incorporated Impact P :-''t''' 1 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ 0 ig ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies,plans,or programs 0 0 0 supporting alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 0 0 0 applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ❑ 0 0 01 wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water ❑ ❑ 0 KI drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ 0 0 XI project from existing entitlements and resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment 0 0 ❑ 4 provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity ❑ ❑ 0 to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal,state, and local statutes and 0 0 0 Egi regulations related to solid waste? CITY/RVPUB/1999/313785 FORM "I" Page 13 of 14 Less Than Issues: Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Imp Impact Incorporated Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality ❑ ❑ D (� of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat or a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually 0 0 ❑ limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will ❑ 0 ❑ cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? • • CITY/RVPUB/1 999/3 13785 FORM "F' Page 14 of 14 INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION CHECKLIST COMMENTS AND POSSIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES (CATEGORIES PERTAIN TO ATTACHED CHECKLIST) AESTHETICS a, b, c. The site has a scenic vista to the mountains to the west. Park View Drive is not a scenic highway. There are no trees or rock outcroppings on the site. The site in the present condition can be termed as aesthetically offensive due to blow sand problems. The proposed development must be approved by the Palm Desert Architectural Commission. d. New light will be produced, but the project will be required to prevent lighting spill over. In addition, the requirement for an engineered lighting plan per Ordinance No. 826 will assure that this condition is fulfilled. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES a, b, c. The site is vacant desert with minor amounts of native desert vegetation. The site has never been used for agricultural purposes nor shown on maps as agricultural. III. AIR QUALITY a & b. During construction, particularly grading, a potential dust problem is a short- term impact. Requiring that the ground be moistened during days in which grading occurs will mitigate this problem. This is required by City of Palm Desert Grading Ordinance. Because the site is already an urbanized setting, its development will not result in an overall deterioration of ambient air quality. Completed development of the site will result in less dust leaving the site then currently occurs with the site's vacant condition. c. Development of this site will not result in any climatic changes. This is due to its size and identified uses. INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 d. The proposed development does not call for uses which would create substantial pollutant concentrations. e. The proposed development does not call for any odorous land uses. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a. The property is not in the designated area of the Coachella Valley Fringe- Toed Lizard. A multi species habitat conservation plan is being prepared by CVAG which will establish preserves and conservation practices to insure the future survival of dune species. The project may be subject to mitigation requirements of the MSCHP which may be in effect at the time of development. b. No riparian habitat present on site. c. No wetlands habitat present on site. d. No migratory fish or wildlife present on site. e. No local policy or ordinance protecting biological reserves other than that delineated in item (a) above. f. See (a) above. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES a-d. The cultural resource study performed as part of the General Plan Update found no evidence of any cultural, archeological or historical significance on this site. In addition, state law requires that should any evidence be found during construction, construction must cease and the site cleared. 2 INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS a (i-iv). The area is subject to earthquakes and seismic shaking. Various studies have concluded that with proper building design which is required by the Uniform Building Code people will not be exposed to substantial adverse effects. MITIGATION MEASURES The City of Palm Desert grading and building permits procedures required detailed geotechnical reports addressing grading specifications and the settlement and expansive characteristics of onsite soils. All structures must be designed to UBC requirements to insure that buildings are constructed within the acceptable level of risk set forth herein for the type of building and occupancies being developed. b. Development will reduce blow sand erosion. There is no top soil present. c. See mitigation measure above. d. See mitigation measure above. e. Sandy soil is capable of supporting septic tanks, but they will not be used as sewers are available. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a. Site and immediate area are not subject to routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. b. Project will not create health hazards or potential health hazards. c. There is no school within 1/4 mile of the site. d. The site has not been identified on the list of hazardous materials sites. e. Site is not within two miles of a public airport. 3 INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 f. No private airstrip in area. g. Project will not interfere with City's emergency response or evacuation plan. h. Project will not increase the fire hazard in area with flammable brush, grass or trees. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY While any development results in the use of water and therefore reduces the amount otherwise available for public water supplies, the Coachella Valley Water District assures that there is sufficient water supplies to accommodate this growth. In addition, the Coachella Valley Water District plans to construct additional water facilities in the Palm Desert area to accommodate current and future development. a. Project will be required to comply with Palm Desert Master Plan of Drainage and the grading ordinance. b. Project will use water provided by CVWD and will not interfere with groundwater recharge. c, d, e. Water will be redirected to drainage facilities designed and constructed to accept the water from the site. f. Project will not substantially degrade water quality. g. Site is not within a 100-year flood hazard designated area. h. See (g). Area is not subject to flooding. j. Area is flat desert land not subject to seiche, tsunami or mud flow. 4 INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING a. The site is zoned for residential use and that is what is proposed. b. Project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning. c. Property is not subject to habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan, other than that discussed in Section IV (a1). X. MINERAL RESOURCES a. No known mineral resources. b. No locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on local general plan. Xl. NOISE a, b, c, d. Construction and subsequent use for residential housing will increase ambient noise level. The increase is not expected to create an annoyance to adjacent residential properties. All uses on the site will be required to comply with the city noise ordinance. MITIGATION MEASURES Strict adherence to construction hours and days will be required. Additional measures to mitigate traffic and operational noise will be required. Noise to be mitigated so that noise levels set in the General Plan Noise Element are not exceeded. e & f. Project is not within two miles of a public airport or in the vicinity of a private airstrip. 5 INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING a-c. The project is a 64-lot tract map for 64 residential lots. The 64 lots to be created are consistent with general plan and zoning intensities and densities. The site is currently vacant so the project will not displace people. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES The property is presently vacant and serves no productive use. A commitment to urban uses was made as the area surrounding the study area has been developed and the general plan and zoning maps designated for residential development. Infrastructure improvements (i.e., streets, utilities) have been made and are adequate to serve the proposed development. The proposed land use would increase the economic productivity of the land in terms of land efficiency and greater economic return generated from these uses, versus the current state of the land. The project will result in a net increase on fiscal flow to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency and the City of Palm Desert. All property tax generated on the site after 1979, including those generated by the improvement of this project, will go to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency. Fire and Police Protection Police and fire services have indicated that they can service the proposed project. Schools The project will be required to pay school mitigation fees per state law at time of building permit issuance. Parks The project is a residential development of 6.5 units per acre which will generally be family oriented. Existing and proposed parks will be adequate to serve these families. 6 INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 Other Public Facilities Libraries and other public facilities are adequate to serve the project. XIV. RECREATION The project is consistent with general plan densities and as a result the population generated was considered as part of the recreation element. Onsite recreation facilities will be limited to those on single family lots and are not expected to have an adverse physical effect on the environment. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC a-b. Projected trip generation per single family dwelling unit per day is ten for a total of 640 trip ends. As part of the conditions of approval the applicant shall be required to provide road improvements as provided by the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Except for additional vehicular movements discussed above, the project should not generate additional demands on existing transportation systems. Current circulation systems have sufficient capacity to accept any additional traffic produced by the proposed residential project. The project will not deteriorate LOS on Park View Drive. Principal access to the project area will be via Park View Drive which is designed to handle vehicular traffic for this type of use. c. Project will not change air traffic patterns. d. Street design and intersections will be designed to meet all city standards and the project will not include incompatible uses. e. Emergency access will be acceptable. f. There will be a demand for additional parking facilities which will be supplied by the project on site in compliance with city code. g. Off-street sidewalks will be provided for pedestrians and bicyclists. Street improvements will minimize traffic hazards to motor vehicles. 7 INITIAL STUDY CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 FEBRUARY 3, 2004 XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a. Project will not exceed limits. b. CVWD has indicated ability to serve this project. c. Construction of said facilities are currently under review. They will occur with or without this project. d. See (b) above. e. See (b) above. f. Landfill space is available in the immediate area and long term will be available at Eagle Mountain. g. City will enforce these statutes through Community Development Department. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. None. b. None. c. None. 8 ' ITV Of PHEf! OEE - 1 -4Ij. -. 7j-510 FRED WARING DRIVE b h Iy PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 260-2 5 78 •. �i 7/✓•. TEL: 760 346-061 I FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.ors CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO.:TT 31969 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Keith Companies / Southern Sun Construction Company for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact,a tentative tract map to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single-family lots and modified setbacks for dwellings on the 64 lots. Property is located on the south side of Park View Drive between One Quail Place apartments and Fairhaven Drive more particularly known as APN's 640-040-001,011,012;013,014 and 015. I _ _7,/. iiv hr j , i $ i. 11111= ICI.■ �ill1IkiIIWtu 1 Vl- I�1 PAR,-VIEW-D S ' - P.R.-7, R I . 1 P.R.-7\ S.P. : zoa S.P. iirf t s\. ..\ Emma' ,emo,09" zit;2).1 \'fin. 111 M o P.R.-22 `•oN�r�•'s 'ra �Ri - ,� .-_- PA-7 7:T ■ — O.P., S.P. = 1200q i' R-1 12000 S.P. '' SIR O.P. DR dj0. . P.C. (31, S.P. i r�l 3 ...� L i1 car°f rafts Desert LOCATOR MAP .+' 1111 oa en u�-2 S4 f,,, SAID public hearing will be held at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday,February 3,2004 in the Council Chamber in the Palm Desert City Hall,73-510 Fred Waring Drive,Palm Desert,California,at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m.and 5:00 p.m.Monday through Friday. 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 at,or prior to,the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL,Secretary January 23,2004 Palm Desert Planning Commission SITE SUMMARY GROSS AREA 9.98 AC. _ D DETENTION BASIN D NUMBER OF UNITS 64 D.U. _ - --- .10 ACRES -,,•, -zrr,,.t « -rJT' RECREATION AREA/ 0.70 AC. —-VIEW DRIVE _ _ _ m GREENBELT - PARK -- 11] DETENTION BASIN 0.10 AG _ — — a I T U1 GROSS DENSITY 6.54 D.U./AC - I I n Q P ry `�iCI( C°-�I MAIN PROJECT ENTRY LI '/, "Mr 1 i # A �' .GATE II 1 I Nam-+ 1141" LCCI N •LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT �J_ -y—=_ �� .. �'— {-� ""'"���7I11 --,I!_ • 01 — - - j1 Cri ? I * k J PLAN 1 PLAN 2 PLAN 3 PLAN 4 oo 1 1_1 _ F 1 TYPICAL LOT LAYOUT cnI LA- 1 I"-ID'-4• OPEN SPACE — I t i C7'�ivr r� t r -II1 !1 . Cx U` IIRECREATIONARCA 13 .Tor-wr I1 ' llJ ' ' r•HBO � , zA �I 1 I I D A Ps li I Ill co — li L iL . at O me n N - SECTION A-A N.; li jpr_ 6'PERIMETER WALL co NM ILIA __ /� ro.uutina III ) ) --I, PL PL A AVERAGE LOT SIZE I — S'LANDSCAPE DUFFER . x (TYPICAL) —I •64 TOTAL LOTS — — imIli _ ._ I I i ft I- z T .44..1 ..w 18' ID 1, Ia• 1 6' 94L 4.1 m ~ f `I > SECONDARY PROJECT i 36' H R.OW. m ' •GATE I ism i •LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT 03 r I lD PASEO VILLAGE 4111101frilea""" 1.0 A PALM DESERT,CA , " , $ ,' A oo CD SOUTHERN SUN CONST. CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN ,11111 RN M- -•-'-0.��x--�ioN o e..r ..A o IU - . O D m rt.) 0 PALM ,...ZSERT POLICE DEPAR'..ENT Served by the pyy1/4 D EsFp Riverside County Sheriffs Department '3 !.... �� .....:., Bob Doyle, Sheriff-Coroner � .?. 73520 Fred Waring Drive POLICE Palm Desert,CA 92260 (760)836-1600 Fax(760)836-1616 January 13, 2004 City of Palm Desert Planning Department 'I 73510 Fred Waring Dr. Palm Desert, CA 92260 ATTN: Tony Bagato, Planning Technician RE: TT 31969 Dear Mr. Bagato, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the tentative tract map to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single-family lots, recreation area and a retention basin. The property is located on the south side of Park View Avenue. APNs 640-040-001, 640-040-011, 640-040-012, 640-040-013, 640-040-014, and640-040- 015. Pre-Construction& Construction Phases: 1. Current Planned Design: The proposed design presents several issues, which should be discussed for security reasons, and issues of public safety: A. Exterior Lighting Plan: (Refer to Post-Construction Comments) B. Park View Avenue Access: Due to the existing heavy traffic on Park View Avenue, a traffic control signal device should control the access to the tract. The access into the tract for westbound Park View Ave. traffic should be via a left turn pocket, also controlled by the aforementioned signal device. C. Landscaping: The landscape design should be based on the use of planted items, which will not Overgrow any areas near the residences or on the retention areas. For example, trees or shrubs should not be planted directly adjacent to the residences, nor should they be planted in a manner, which will obstruct observation into or out of the residences. Cacti are recommended for placement near the residences, due to their security and low maintenance advantages. They may also be used along the exterior facings of perimeter block walls, as a deterrent to graffiti. 2. Construction Site: Prior to construction on any structure, a material storage area should be established and enclosed by a six (6) foot chain link fence to minimize theft of materials and/or equipment. It is recommended that a list of serial and/or license numbers of equipment stored at the location be maintained both, at the site and any off-site main office. The public and non-essential employees should be restricted in access to the construction areas. Current emergency contact information for the project Page 2 Should be kept on file with the Riverside County Sheriffs Department, Palm Desert Station. The developer and/or builder's name, address and phone number should be conspicuously posted at the construction site. Visibility into the construction site should not be intentionally hampered. Areas actually under construction should be lit during hours of darkness. All entrances and exits should be clearly marked. The construction site should have a clearly designated point of contact, such as a construction trailer or office. Post the emergency and non-emergency phone numbers for the fire department(CDF), ambulance service(AMR) and, the Palm Desert Police Department near any local site phone. The address for the facility should be posted near the above phones at the site. Any phones at the site that is blocked for outgoing calls should not be blocked from dialing 9-1-1. The parking areas and commercial areas on the premises should be accessible to emergency vehicles at all times with paved pathways of sufficient width to accommodate such vehicles. Post Construction&Project Completion: 1. Lighting: The current proposal does not include an exterior lighting plan for the tract or the individual residences. All exterior lighting standards and fixtures should be resistant to vandalism and tampering. The standards should be of a height to reduce any tampering or damage. It is recommended that high: pressure sodium type lighting be used for the reasons of color rendition and increased visibility(i.e. less glare). It is also recommended that all residences display a backlighted address on the front of each residence, clearly visible to emergency response personnel. 2. Graffiti Issues: Prior to occupancy, the surface of walls, fences,buildings, logo monuments, etc. should be graffiti resistant either through surface composition, applied paint type and/or planned shielding by landscaping or plants. 3. Public Safety: When completed, the Riverside County Sheriffs Department will serve this housing tract,Palm Desert Police contract. Current staffing levels at the Palm Desert Police Department are adequate,however, this housing tract will increase the full-time residential population of Palm Desert. Therefore, in conjunction with a significant rise in both planned and current residential and commercial development in the city,there is a high probability that a degradation of police services will occur, unless the project is programmed with development funds for public safety services. The Palm Desert Police Department requests specific mitigation to provide service. We request that as a condition of approval, a recurring revenue stream be identified as specific law enforcement cost mitigation for the project. During the build-out of the project, the law enforcement cost mitigation revenue should be proportionate to the estimated population that will be occupying the proposed project. If the planning commission,planning project representative, developer and/or construction staff have any questions regarding these issues, contact Deputy James Costello at(760) 836-1671. Respectfully submitted, James Costello Deputy Sheriff, ID #2249 Palm Desert Police Dept Crime Prevention INTEROFFICE MEMORADUM City of Palm Desert TO: TONY BAGATO, ASSISTANT PLANNER FROM: FRANKIE RIDDLE, MANAGEMENT ANALYST SUBJECT: TT 31969: KEITH COMPANIES/SOUTHERN SUN CONSTRUCTION CO. DATE: DECEMBER 4, 2003 The Precise Plan has been reviewed to determine the need for a bus shelter/stop at the project location. This project is not located within or on an approved SunLine Transit Bus Route; therefore, a bus shelter/stop will not be conditioned as part of this project. Trash Enclosures: Since this project is proposed as 64 single-family lots, there is no requirement for trash enclosures for the individual homes, as they will have private trash service or HOA paid service with pickup at individual residences. However, the clubhouse and/or recreation facilities, if proposed would be required to meet the Trash Enclosure Ordinance. The issues that would need to be addressed are (1) location of trash enclosures need to provide for waste trucks, (2) size and design of trash enclosures, and (3) required number of trash enclosures to properly meet tenants (complex) needs. Therefore, plans should address size, location, disposal needs for complex in order to determine number of trash enclosures required, and traffic circulation for Waste Management trucks. Construction of trash enclosures shall be consistent with PDMC, Chapter 8.12 and identified disposal needs. To determine the location, circulation needs of disposal (waste) trucks, and number of enclosures contact Jennifer at Waste Management of the Desert. T FRANKIE RIDDLE MANAGEMENT ANALYST vJ AT ER ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY kV, STaOG COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058•COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE (760) 398-2651 • FAX (760) 398-3711 DIRECTORS OFFICERS. JOHN W.McFADDEN,PRESIDENT STEVEN B.ROBBINS, PETER NELSON,VICE PRESIDENT GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TELLIS CODEKAS MARK BEUHLER, RUSSELL KITAHARA ASST.GENERAL MANAGER PATRICIA A.LARSON December 19, 2003 JULIA FERNANDEZ,SECRETARY DAN PARKS,ASST.TO GENERAL MANAGER REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS File: 0163.1 �v . iQ421.1 0030721.1 ENT DEPARTM Department of Community Development , r)Fcp,r City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Gentlemen: Subject: Tentative Tract Map No. 31969 This area is protected from regional stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes, and may be considered safe from regional 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 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. This project is adjacent to the Palm Valley Stormwater Channel. Nuisance flows or other nonstormwater generated runoff may not be discharged into the Palm Valley Stormwater Channel. Since t e stormwater oter of this development localthe District.. .�to^1;.Ju,.... issues are drainage, does not need to review drainage design further. The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this District. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 54 and 80 of the District for sanitation service. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY Department of Community Development City of Palm Desert -2- December 19, 2003 Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. If you have any questions please call Dan Charlton, Stormwater Engineer, extension 2316. Yours very truly, Dan Farris Director of Engineering cc: Jeff Johnson Riverside County Department of Public Health 82-675 Highway 111, CAC Building, Second Floor, Room 209 Indio, California 92201 DC:j l\eng\sw\dec\ttm-31969 050618-4 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT cr, TF - I N • MIkfiGC on 7iN.--2.:, iI December 26, 2003 RECEIVED R C V JAN 0 5 2004 JA 2 2 4 Mr. Tony Bagato "OMMUN EVE OP NT DE TMENT Assistant Planner C'OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF DESERT CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Re: TTM 31969-Southern Sun Const Co. Dear Mr. Bagato: Your request for comments sheet indicated that the comments were due on this project on Sunday December 28 by 5:00 pm. Lot Size We understand the project consists of a small lot subdivision in the medium-high density zone; 9.75 acres into 64 single family lots with an average lot size of approximately 4,200 square feet. However, the typical lot setback exhibit on the tract map indicates that required lot size is 8,000 square feet. The typical proposed lot size is 46' x 92' or 4,232 square feet. The buildable area respecting the setbacks would yield a rectangle of 57' x 46' or 1,938 square feet. Removing a 400 square foot garage, the living area would be only be a maximum of 1,538 square feet, and that is if the house is designed as a perfect rectangle with little or no architectural interest. With only 34 feet of buildable width minus a 20 foot wide garage, leaves only 14 feet for exterior living area architectural design. The small narrow lots are likely to create a homogenous streetscape with little variety. Notwithstanding the high density zoning of the site, land use compatibility should be of primary importance. For the project to be more compatible with the existing single family neighborhood to the east, you may wish to direct the applicant to enlarge the lots on the east side of the main north/south interior roadway. From a Rancho Mirage perspective, the lots are less than half the size of the lots on the north side of the street. While the neighbors in that project will not likely be pleased with the small lots in this project, we have to keep in mind it appears to be much more palatable than the 2 and 3 story monstrosity previously proposed or I believe approved on the site (senior assisted living facility). Mr. Tony Bagato Page 2 December 26, 2003 Given the Palm Desert lot coverage allowances and setback requirements, it seems that the design of homes for these lots would be quite a challenge. You may wish to direct the applicant to submit a precise plan to indicate the housing type expected. You may also wish to condition that the applicant set aside some percentage of the lots for moderate income households (inclusionary housing) if the city is in fact going to compromise its normal standards for detached single family homes. Pad Heights It appears that most if not all pads are proposed to be artificially raised above existing elevation, yet the plan only indicates 20,000 cubic yards of fill. Ask the engineer to explain this. To promote land use compatibility, you may wish to direct the applicant to lower the pads along the east side; they are at least several feet higher than the existing neighborhood, and the wall cross section on Fairhaven, although not shown the plan, is expected to include a retaining wall with a 6 foot tall perimeter wall on top, not a pretty site from the existing neighborhood. It is possible that the pads are all artificially raised in order to drain the entire project to the northeast corner. If one lot is removed in another location and converted to a retention basin perhaps the pad heights can be made to conform closer to the existing flatter topography. Parkway Landscaping Suggestion: condition the applicant to landscape and maintain the parkway along Fairhaven Drive, like they will need to do on Park View Drive. Please require at least a 25 foot wide landscaped parkway along Park View considering that some of those the pads proposed adjacent to the street are raised 3 feet above the street. Circulation The cross section of Park View Drive does not match either the Community Collector or Secondary Arterial cross section in your General Plan. You may want the engineer to explain this. It would seem that if Park view is going to have a raised landscape median or a left turn lane in the middle, then the entrance to this project and the single family home community to the north ought to line up opposite one another. As shown on the plan it is just offset, but it looks like the engineer can change it relatively easily, unless there is a specific reason it is offset. A similar comment is that it seems the southern east/west street segment ought to line up with Arboleda Street. Mr. Tony Bagato Page 3 December 26, 2003 There are four dead-end street segments proposed in the project design. While we understand the project proponent's desire to maximize density in the PR-7 zone, commonly accepted street configurations even in gated communities would dictate that proper cul-de-sacs ought to be provided. As proposed, U-turns and other vehicle maneuvers are compromised at best and certainly would not contribute to the quality of life that future property owners in a brand new detached dwelling located in the city of Palm Desert would expect to be provided with. Enlarging the lots, on these dead-end streets, would at once accommodate culs and promote land use compatibility at adjacent neighborhoods. Thank you for requesting our comments on this project on the boundary between Rancho Mirage and Palm Desert. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments and hope you will forward these concerns to the applicant for serious consideration. Please let us know if the project is redesigned, or if not, the date and time of the public hearing when the project is scheduled. Sincerely, CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE Randal Bynder Planning Manager cc: Robert Brockman, Director of Community Development +f40 MY Of PALM D { Sf " T 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE 0, t!Ail ti t PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-0611 :t. ..C'. FAX: 760 341-7098 nnfo@palm-deserr.org CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. TT 31969 AND PP 03-24 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request by Keith Companies / Southern Sun Construction Company for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, a tentative tract map to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single family lots, modified setbacks for dwellings on the 64 lots, and termination of the existing development agreement. Property is located on the south side of Park View Drive between One Quail Place apartments and Fairhaven Drive, more particularly known as APN's 640-040-001, 011, 012, 013, 014 and 015. I d *,,, # ... ..- ��- — mil Ii II I %l ri > ,- —P.R. 7, S.P,� NI ,. .0, 111All Pl jA■■ In 1B it till!1IIt 111 PARK--MEW DR\ _ P.R•7 P' 7 P.R.-7, 0 R1 •��::��• S.P. 2001 S.P. s:Ps N \ V'` ° c P.R-22 NsP:\ ....1•1 �-- o � F:R-1 12001 -P:R:.7,1 R-ies•ie-r:cl O.P., S.P. * 12000, •- R-1 12000 S.P. S.P - O.P. VAR/N6 DR =P.Cs, S IC).S~~R P.C.-(31r S.P. 107 ► ■., rar I I I 3 , � N■ --1 SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, February 26, 2004, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. 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 City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk February 10, 2004 City of Palm Desert, California eCITY OF PALM OE BEFIT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE Or CALII•ORN1A ` (• , , OF � rN g TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31969 R �, R A f AMN 0F THE SOUTHEAST 00477ThR CY SECIXW 14 700‘511°5 5011714 RNt'.E 6 EA57,SW flOWIROINC 845£MO I EIMISW TENTA77VE . TRACT MAP / ern•1r:1 AL \ ` NO.31959 1 " M / wawa i 01001111011 ma _ IBM10 0' g N N MAmy rtrrY aat4Y1 INOMERIalatiffigeMIS we EARIAMILDRIM ILIA .,,[ MMyy ������,(,,�� 9/ fIl 'S.§ I • ar \ I `NYiY-46MMYIV ` 1 ....e- OMf .... .. rw w _ Af'Y > Yam"- '� - n -_- ! w • .` iW�Fi[0/S rRl ed • ZONA "►- fig, ..M .. 1M u,.:r•...�• # E,{, a . ,< . . • MIN r.oQm ANC-PA-I ii u �(y� I OW EMI II Or NY 00 0 4 w.m/if III ! xca• °a arw OWN in � ,.,., .. �... ' I o ` tiliali" J } ! LOT mall l41_1 h uo • NI.OK ma.w 3 !at_ T /a V q. c., ` !i u ma zo 11 .� •yr v _.. "�\..-,.. a „ 7211 omn lt4;E. 1�C.I j (0001.4°,�, 0011019 MOW MI6 —#§§ ,h?S '1 7:11' uZi �(.n. V IL.I I ` _ 6- TYPICAL _ f9 IV n ru ir • \ LCi ETDAORA `/ f06'n►s� Mi▪t 010 VI 4,... 0 7, j • a� 1 'MMM" _—'i' ....aw..r a aan s s .'v si.r ..r 40011179 NOiraE(NW.fima aw-9141 `' ^. r .+ >�..J: s a m i a{mow s w• 'ir.11•10 9000 ay.' - ibii. - -, a,." ...Ai j r v.: _ ` pscrse B-11 9 w Sr .sn ui> '�Fs r� ` 47-06 a>a. [� s ` p 1:. dj lip ; iel F D{M F I tIY F 4 �r /�.y nr�re If ,' 1 L� 4{.F lR! s WF 001 al�T Y iW F V�Sr ,,,, !I f/ -U<Y.NriaOlA61 a*m .1“./a4IF a AIM yy, �M )I W N YI5 J F M URIX .,,,,.IROWNJ / f •�i V .� V'I ' a.... r ama a amF c s Renaw_ �i..r�r.av ./r : N 4ECt a a, [ {@F Saa�IM f-ee[I1YI).arlt MOM glirr,MAW APN 840-04 00 r v`+. 1 ` \ V / n u.s a u a ` fi: �`r�e,:'.�mmr,.r am q ` / u euF a. s i�mv ae we a-maw wr P.A.-7 i roromArin'' a wn's w,wi i I s _ .� MS - I PAD ELEVATION} ;y.1. ':al. L......., WP PIIMONValdena ,3 1 I I /fir l.... mimmi _ mulimuminimo aimumilmmosomme ' immemminummimmimm '_ - -' - SITE to , , ,, .... , i ;.on�.a ay swn.wa.a l.aa roFi APN 840-04-018 I 1 ins.� w• ....In c.moNn.�^ memn.real P.A.-7 ova IV asew mca 0 e amwa All 2 n. r....a Iwa w.a..AO.sa.. �l�yb 1 SOW er Dealt a,.a aCwlaf OW •a \,....Oe® VICINITY MAP J mcaMaa 1o0i Erf#1**7 L j Ir- 4it* — -- - . --- - - — -- --, 2"iiilig1:- N t " #1 Es— _ P.R.-7, S.P.— — ° i:hlr'lw ILL _ RI -VIEW D PARK � P.R.-7, R-1 P.R.-7, P�RZ-7,� p� 12000 , , S.P. �, S.P. S:P':, S:O: k'\ . ,S . 'V =.. ,\- , Isse totiL !-.Q 4 R 7 R=1 12000 k — SY.; IP** ; • P A A " a P.R.-22 \si i, O Subject ‘44,----- o R-1 1200( lii Property -P.-R:-7 R 1 O.P. S.P. Z--1-2000,--, R-1 1200� � � S.P. S.P. xi O.P. I/ARIAIG DR 1 :P. --;o u Q P.C.- 3 S.P. R-� ))).S. ( )� Lai 1 olliMPA A Au Q City of Palm Desert LOCATOR MAP W.F' E 1kari-\ 0 300 S Date: 1-21-2004 Feet CITY O RANCI-IO MIRH?E January 30, 2004 Via Fax and Mail City of Palm Desert Attn: Steve Smith,Planning Manager 2U 4 Tony Bagato, Assistant Planner 73-510 Fred Waring Drive >MMUN!TI Palm Desert, CA 92260 __ Re: TTM 31969-Keith Companies/Southern Sun Const Co. Dear Steve and Tony, This is our second comment letter on this project, in response to a revised tract map routed to us on January 16,2004 asking for comments by January 30, 2004. As our previous letter stated we are concerned about land use incompatibilities this project may cause to existing residential development in Rancho Mirage on the north side of Park View Drive. Our issues included lot size,pad heights, and parkway landscape width. Our previous letter was in response to only the tentative tract map, it was not disclosed at the time that the total project includes a development plan which accompanies the subdivision project. This new transmittal also only suggests that the project consists of a subdivision map. It was only after speaking with Phil in an unrelated meeting did we find that the project includes a development plan with two story homes. We hereby add two story homes to the list of concerns. It appears that two of our comments made previously have been addressed: Lining up the entrance to match the project on the north side of Park View, and providing cross sections. Lot size and pad heights have not changed, and continue to be a concern for their impacts, along with the potential for two story units, on the views and compatibility with residential development across the street in Rancho Mirage. So we can understand the full scope of the project,please forward a site plan, floor plans and elevations of the development plan to accompany the tentative tract map we now have for review. Thank you for requesting our comments on this project on the boundary between Rancho Mirage and Palm Desert. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments and hope you will forward these concerns to the applicant for serious consideration. ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCE HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC LIBRARY PUBLIC WORKS Tel. (760) 324-4511 Tel. (760)328-2266 Tel. (760) 770-3207 Tel. (760) 770-3210 Tel. (760) 341-7323 Tel. (760) 770-3224 Fax. (760) 324-8830 Fax. (760)324-9851 Fax. (760)324-0528 Fax. (760) 770-3261 Fax. (760) 341-5213 Fax. (760) 770-3261 69-825 HIGH-WAY 111 /RANCH-0 MIRAGE, CA 92270 www.ci.rancho-mirage.ca.us TTM31969 Page 2 Please let us know if the project is redesigned, or if not, the date and time of the public hearing when the project is scheduled. Sincerely, 4 e *- — CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE Randal Bynder Planning Manager C Robert Brockman,Director of Community Development Date: February 20, 2004 RECEIVED To: Palm Desert City Co �'��a' 7 3 2004 From: David Morehead 1� Southern Sun Construction I' 'IMMUNITY OF to M DESERT ARTMENT J Subject: Minor Change in Site Plan Last Wednesday afternoon while preparing documents for escrow regarding the subject property, we discovered that the dimensions the title company provided to our civil engineers, (The Keith Companies), did not match our escrow file. The net result was that the title company neglected to show the effect of a lot line adjustment that we had purchased from the adjacent church back in 1999. The lot line adjustment added about a half acre to the subject property. This changed the proposed tract map from 64 lots with an average square footage of 4642, to 65 lots with an average square footage of 4805 with a swimming pool. Since the added square footage is minor relative to the size of the property and since the majority of the lots will increase only 2 feet in width and 5 feet in length, it was determined by the Planning Department and the City Attorney that the property and proposed tract map are"substantially similar" to the previously proposed map reviewed by the department and the Planning Commission. The changes make a better project. In fact one of the concerns of the Commission was the small 20ft back yards. They therefore required a community swimming pool. The Commission did not mandate where the pool was to go and left the ultimate number of lots unanswered, giving us the possibility of incorporating the pool into the plan without loosing a lot. However, since the discovery of the additional square footage, almost every lot is larger with backyards, as much as 25% deeper. Also, we have included a community swimming pool as directed by the Planning Commission. It should be pointed out that due to the shape of the property and because the half acre was added to the southern end of the property, square footage could not be added to the northwesterly lots. However, most lots have backyards that are now larger, (example 20 feet deep to 25 feet deep). The additional 5 feet may not seem like much but it makes the back yards much more useable. We have discussed the project with a majority of the neighbors between Fairhaven and Monterey and they overwhelmingly support the project. We feel minor change in lot size makes the project much more marketable and significantly better than the Senior Center it will replace. Also, it will be significantly better for the community than the condominium project that was the other option. We also feel that this will allow the residents of Palm Desert a"step up" single family residence close inside the city. These homes will be first class and will add value to the existing homes near Fairhaven with larger lots. RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S PALM DESERT,OFFICE CA 2004 FEB 24 PM 12: 50 ;$---ROM : FAX NO. : Jan. 31 2004 05:57PM P1 RECEIVED PASEO VILLAGE 2004 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES EN1 As a resident of the neighborhood east of Fairhaven and West of Monterey in Palm Desert I support the development of Single Family Homes instead of the permitted and approved Senior Project of 250 units. I understand the proposed Single Family Home project to be as follows: • 64 Homes, average sales price aprox. $350,000 • Small lots approximately 4600 Square Feet • 2 Story Homes between 1800 and 2100 Square Feet ,/,, • The three Homes adjacent to Fairhaven to be Single Story and aprox. O ' 1200sgft. ✓,;u � S�c�4�. ✓ 1. X. Cf'�CQt ��ti'l. �9L� LG��{ < C b�1 o-Fcl 1,1 '' 2. x) b (Ch YDSor1 3. � c({ e `f 3 3-kt 1/2114t1 pe"-- v.4. a(.. '1 L — h'`� O 1( PJ. 5. l �l fr61/1 7 Z-7 6 ik A146 /e cl4 6. i3oNN %c +-A ct pp-7 27 C V S J`"r^ () V/ 7. 44e).2- 403 j/R/9/U 4/3-g20 / C_/16-//-) 0/7 r)P 8. ) , (� ��� rVu 11P bkietiAS 9. F� ( L s"I-57 /7//2N, PkPl, 10. a pV� 111 }mac ,abr. J kv 72-- ,✓roi ROM FA>; NO. Jan. 31 2004 05:57PM P1 liiF-11 PASEO VILLAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES • As a resident of the neighborhood east of Fairhaven and West of Monterey in Palm Desert I support the development of Single Family Homes instead of the permitted and approved Senior Project of 250 units. ::, understand the proposed Single Family Home project to be as follows: o 64 Homes, average sales price aprox. $350,000 o Small lots approximately 4600 Square Feet © 2 Story Homes between 1800 and 2100 Square Feet o The three Homes adjacent to Fairhaven to be Single Story and aprox. 1200sgft. 7 13. - ; ;� n_e ,l:yz.-c-)k , l Z '1 ev Ste. M,ems 9 ( 1 „ I I-- Y‘ .4a-zi-c-t a;c,,ix..., , / - --, 7 i . . 1 •)--. \\-- l‘,-,,,.A:4,- ..,.!.4_,,,7f 77/i/a,,, -•c7)- ,4)/(-//7//7/ rcf.. . , , r� . /, lr-i I --)20/ 6-.(( '43 ‘‘, 70 ..fv. D,z 90 NOT 1 NGs^ 7r1A-r--1- I_ l ry 7H-i s &l e-r1--4-.t ,,2, 2) w (7 l'.$. 7492-4 e r fja-- ._ 1"-t—v- i'42- _S il (.1;1 -z__ S27 41-40 (1 ,i--4- k1/401c tAil*--, ; 1-- 1 ( 1:.r .• ,1la7HI I -J itAD6 i., s 73 ?l `i .- 7,3ei e _).-f 7,)-f 2. I°. (Z AL I L( OQ 'Z- �,2- S L 10 Ai 1901-t (ip- D ( _ - 1.0.ivvo rt-)-kvi-Dip. tr 7 11 q C /r e,t,4 Po. (2A" 2 2 rs‘' } `E-'`.. 4_]�IU•�, NI lit l Y s 2 i , i\, • c �] - _e• 1 . Imo,,. � i•IG Y� - ` T ROM FAX NO. Jan. 31 2004 05:57PM P1 PASEO VILLAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES As a resident of the neighborhood east of Fairhaven and West of Monterey in Palm Desert I support the development of Single Family Homes instead of the permitted and approved Senior Project of 250 units. I understand the proposed Single Family Home project to be as follows: O 64 Homes, average sales price aprox. $350,000 a Small lots approximately 4600 Square Feet O 2 Story Homes between 1800 and 2100 Square Feet O The three Homes adjacent to Fairhaven to be Single Story and aprox. 1200sgf. R II 1 ''' - , , .e.„6.6;z_c_ fo-7-r-29-z„. 7,2,905 cIOR(lw4,6749a5C--7). AiD NC 4,/ IAA fir c hec rj A j�i4O t `,C . '72 _ S77 2 ' fa. - -r/es- d f , f nth S 1�-� c)t -14 p. B • 2 7 4' j 7,z�� "83 h-Gi�r h, 7 PI/ 5. 6. 7. 8. • 9. 10. SITE SUMMARY __....__------- _ __GROSS AREA 10.3 AC. _ --- - _ — BASIN "" *' NUMBER OF UNITS 70 D.U. _ ppRK VIEW DRIVE -- .......DETENTION _ ETENTION -GROSS DENSITY 6.80 D.U.:AC. _ _— _ or■.,�e.o Ir—� I 6 7I 8 �I , 4 5 — ' ® 1, 3 h •MAIN GATE PROJECT ENTRY _ 9 ita IMNirk iii _di = 1 f / -_. 11 __ 61 62 63 I 64 i 1 .":37- l..� _..F'S. V' , 59 60 ■■M.ri.M."' 121 PLAN PLAN 2 PLAN 3 PLAN 4 6 SS e I f ,; - ' I {`1 TYPICAL LOT LAYOUT OPEN SPACE 1 65 t. 13 /"-20'-0" = — - r RECREATION AREA-----r r- Il , 52 51 50 4' 48q 47 ' �3h .CABANA � :� I 1 15 l6 111 Ig h r. .fit .POOL ■F. x Isd i tIG,+� Ulf1 c •r , t 44 ' /' 21 20 12 j _ ,.5'. 1-STORY UNIT 1 11' ,5 J FAIRHAVEN DRIVE ..o Me L u« AM BMA 43 : 1 / \ SECTION A-A 42 i / 6'PERIMETER WALL RECEIVED _ 22 23 � / 41 - k , 1 I ORIVF.12 FEB in' .,6 x 92'(TYPICAL) 40 _,' 1 I i 5'LANDSCAPE BUFFER PL PL 2 4 2004 AVERAGE LOT SIZE r z .65 TOTAL LOTS 25 R 24` ' �� 1 , y 39 4 26 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A _— ' CITY OF PALM DESERT ;- ; n ;, q..._....._._._ 3 � f fi 5' 4' J 8' , 10' , 1 8, * _3y II „ ' I I ' ____ SECONDARY PROJECT ENTRY y" ," I 1 27 28 I ■ .GATE 36 # ;I' ^ — .LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT ROW. -i29 L:- 1 L — •• -'.' as---�--yam+--�'--,.A 11#1 PASEO VILLAGE 35 sa 33 3z 31 " ! L_. > '�"'"- PALM DESERT,CA I ; o Ixwax�ssocw us ARCHITECTURE PLAN" n SOUTHERN SUN CONST. COI'�10EPTUAL SITE 'LAN T ,�, a.�., rt `pY]2A�m F.Mury y,]OW EI CITY CLERKS OFFICE PAL@l DESERT, CA 7004 FEB 24 PH 2: 33 i .. :.. ••I • .. . _swl,wtw«rww» 444tr«wwwww i «wwwr. w 4.��:.........:..:.iii.�r f 'N. ► 111 o M 7. '7iili/. l/ C Z////i' a � - �` 4. �w • w►za r iih '' t ` M'�A"` lays E } ! � x li , 1r1 _. . ..: to ` . ' i'�`` , a • ;' E :...•:"- ii : „I � tx III F\ ri • A ;�: . N € s • .7,/#1. 1 =..:. _,.. . . .• ... ' 1.4,..- liii- imr i . 4:4741 141.4. . ...* --- .... ill ir • 0. IN Nil. _ ' fer . • Y, (j iii A 1,. 1 `'ray/ v> ; ' II ,a,wwRs�wrt,waNtctWw� "' .... o11'.,....:9!w°ro".Y rr :..". S { ., .. y S. t.Ss6 fif(�liYMUybsM _ ` , , 1N If x Ioil 4. . . .. 43 ., ' 111111111 1. .. ...ii • 148L :mow.✓:irw.. -«+,.r.r • �/J!,may.. �w\,..r. — 4,." MM••••,. •wSMww_ //W isr .. yy{ _{ i�.�/{"S" ti.?. 06 •.. ..:.i ..