Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutANNEXATIONS COOK STREET/WHTEWATER STORM CHANNEL NO 24 FILE 1 1988 NOTICE OF DEIEIC4MTION Negative Declaration TO: (X) Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) Secretary for Resources County of Riverside 1416 Ninth St., Rm 1311 4080 Lemon Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Riverside, CA 92502 FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title/Common Name: C/Z 88-1 Date of Project Approval: April 14, 1988 State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted): N/A Contact Person: Philip Drell Project Location: 203 acres on the east side of Cook Street between Whitewater Sorm Channel and 42nd Avenue. Project Description: Preannexatiton change of zone. This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has made the following detezuinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project ( ) will, (X) will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared in connection with this project pursuant to the provisions of CE]QA. X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration may be examined at the above city hall address. 3. Mitigation measures (X) were, ( ) were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations ( ) was, (X) was not, adopted for this LAC, OFac:r. ..ti`Jr Signa e Title Q Qa E J Date Received for Filing MAY 0 41988 M1+M . Na.. Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope. c_ERRm�amaLRoanoYI. of iIV1Ls:r�Rvi:.• 'Aunty of.Rimside.State a• 1 NOTICE OF DETEEC-IMTICN Negative Declaration TO: . (X) Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) Secretary for Resources County of Riverside 1416 Ninth St., Rm 1311 4080 Lemon Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Riverside, CA 92502 FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. 1 Project Title/Camion Name: C/Z 88-1 Date of Project Approval: April 14, 1988 State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted): N/A Contact Person: Philip Drell Project Location: 203 acres on the east side of Cook Street between Whitewater Sorm Channel and 42nd Avenue. Project Description: Preannexation change of zone. This is to advise that the Cityof Palm Desert has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project ( ) will, (X) will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared in connection with this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CV.QA. A copy of the Negative Declaration may be examined at the above city hall address. 3. Mitigation measures (X) were, ( ) were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations ( ) was, (X) was not, adopted for this�j ro eiU OF S:,?. �(-- - s�tug ��a�,���, y 2 IL JE ! Signatu e Title MAY 0 4 1988 Date Received for Filing ERK of tha BOARD OF SJ?ERV:3 ,5nm ,d Riv fide.Sate e-^+N- Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope. f� r 1 ORDINANCE NO. 534 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY ODUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND PRE-ANNEXATION ZONING FOR APPROXIMATELY 203 ACRES EAST OF COOK .STREET BETWEEN 42ND AVENUE AND THE WHITEWATER STORM CHANNEL. CASE NO. C/Z 88-1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 24th day of March, 1988, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and pre-annexation zoning of approximately 203 acres east of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined that the project will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of environmental impact has been prepared; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said city council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify their approval: 1. The proposed pre-zoning is consistent with the current county zoning and development patterns, the Palm Desert General Plan and the proposed North Sphere Specific Plan. 2. The proposed pre-zoning protects the public health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the council in this case. 2. That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, Exhibit "A", and C/Z 87-12 Exhibit "B" is hereby approved. 3. The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Palm Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. i ORDINANCE NO. 534 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert city Council, held on this 14th day of April, 1988, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: CRITES, FILLY, SNYDER, WILSON, BENSON NOES: NONE- ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE a JEAN M. BENSON, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk /t 2 J ORDINANCE NO. 534 EXHIBIT "A" Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NIIPTIVE DECLARATION CASE NO: C/Z 88-1 APPLICANT/PRWECT SPONSOR: City of Palm Desert PROUE)CP DESWWION/IOCATICN: Approximately 197 acres east of Cook Street between 42nd Avenue and the Whitewater Storm Channel. The Director of the Department of Ccnuwdty 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. i Z�e4�4� RAMON A. DIAZ i 04DAT8 LIn DIRECTOR OF ca+uNITY smgr /tm 3 1 � I y .H 16 3 n I E R-1—M t E f ♦ i .-r 144* ' r £ ■ li I os e ' P.R. 5 N I T B•I (. �' a V r4 �� � 61 LIit P.R.-T ■ -Rob- •. ov '••• CITY OF PALM DESERT Case No.CiZ88-1 CITY COUNCIL �0 � �n(p), � Oq ORDINANCE NO. ss Chang) [EKw O D Q7 B Date APRIL 14 tan8 - -JI { CITY OF PRIM DESERT TRANSMITTAL LETTER I. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council II. REQUEST: Negative declaration of environmental impact and pre-annexation zoning of service industrial (S.I. ), public institutional (P) and open space (O.S. ) and application for annexation of approximately 203 acres on the east side of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert RECEIVED IV. CASE N0: C/Z 88-1 Annexation No:.F241NG A V. DATE: 912 March 24, 1988 A - ='..^>> - --- -- - VI. CONTENTS: A63'LAI:f: VERIFIED B' - -- -- --_. A. Staff Recommendation. Original. oil F�1' c• :;it:i Ci�y Cl�r;: 's (5 B. Discussion. C. Draft Ordinance No. 5�4 D. Draft Resolution No. 88-33 E. Planning 'Cmvn'ssicn Minutes involving Case No. C/Z 88-1. F. Planning Com dssicn Resolution No. 1281. G. Planning Ccamission Staff Report dated March 1, 1988. H. Related maps and/or exhibits. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. STAFF RECaMMENIDATION: 1. C/Z 88-1: Waive further reading and pass to second reading. Ordinance 534 2. Adopt Resolution No. 88-33, initiating Annexation No. 24. B. DISCUSSION: The proposed prezoning is preparatory to Annexation No. 24 which will complete the inclusion of the Cook Street industrial area into the City of Palm Desert. Properties on Cook Street will be zoned service industrial; the CyWD sewage treatment plant to the east will be public institutional and the storm channel open space. The zoning is consistent with the existing land use, the general plan and the proposed North Sphere Specific Plan. • c CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT I C/Zi 88-1 MARCH 24, 1988 All Property owners and tenants in the area have been contacted through a legal notice and letter explaining the implications of annexation. To date staff has not received any objections. Prepared by:- Reviewed and Approved by: PD/tm { OM1024CE NO. 914 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OaMIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND PRE-ANNEXATION ZONING FOR APPROXIMATELY 203 ACRES EAST OF COOK STREET BETWEEN 42ND AVENUE AND THE WHIT94ATER STORM CHANNEL. CASE M. C/Z 88-1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 24th day of March, 1988, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider approval of a negative declaration of envixornental impact and pre-annexation zoning of approximately 203 acres east of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Fhvircrmiental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined that the project will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of envirorm mtal impact has been prepared; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said city council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to Justify their approval: 1. The Proposed pre-zoning is consistent with the current county zoning and development patterns, the Palm Desert General Plan and the Proposed North Sphere Specific Plan. 2. The proposed pre-zoning protects the public health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the council in this case. 2. That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, Exhibit "A", and C/Z 87-12 Exhibit "B" is hereby approved. 3. The City Cleric of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Palm Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. t ORDINANCE NO. 534 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this day of 1988, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JEAN M. BENSON, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN ,City Clerk /tm 2 l H 16 I 1 R-1-Mr 7 ' AVE • ,` S y r f 1 �Y e 3 � � f • o , , � t.� it t1, a "��'r� +YO \� � r p s r PR. 5,N -4 � ae�. � Il �pl� n i LI Qom' _ P.R.-7 �► .� . ao �P. CITY OF PALM DESERT Case NO.CiZ88-1 CITY COUNCIL C h s Oq 70nn ORDINANCE NO. Date RESOLUTION No. 88-33 A RES( )N OF APPLICATION BY THE C40p PALM DESERT REQUESTING THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION Oa4aSSION TO TAKE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CHANGE OF ORGANIZATION KNOWN AS PALM DESERT ANNEXATION NO. 24. RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, that WHEREAS, City of Palm Desert desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985, Division 3, commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code, for annexation; and WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is inhabited and a description of the boundaries of the territory is set forth in Exhibit "A"attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein: and WHEREAS, this proposal is consistent with the City of Palm Desert: and sphere of influence of the WHEREAS, the reasons for this proposed annexation are as follows: 1• The Proposed territory to be annexed is adjacent to and substantially surrounded by te City logical expansionh of Palm Desert and therefore represents a of the city's boundary, 2. level The area is predominately urban in character and requires a higher l of urban services then are currently offered by the County of Riverside. The City of Palm Desert can provide three services. NOW, THEREFORE, this Resolution of Application is hereby adopted and approved by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert and the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County is hereby requested to take proceedings for the annexation of territory as described in Exhibit "A", according to the terms and conditions stated above and in the by the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985.manner Prided PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City (regular meeting thereof, held on the day o£ of Palm 988a acing vote, to wit: . the AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: JEAN M. BINSON, Mayor SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk /tm .H - - 16 5 1 t �'i rr • `6.I� R-1-M ■ ..r I � .')'r' f. y ' i ..r.'� r 'ii � i • v • p 3 ' �•OI i ' t -. � ue Y�.�ta ur-L �a n.lul r' r AV 0 3 � IN, f4. :1 FM r )• r r z.�J'{��>y'�tx��c• �� � iq 'S r: 4 s'.: ( it '� Y+T4..� pp) �n. • r , . .. a•` _ /1• y 4>rt' ! a p• ; i Y•Tarp l{t• :� P.R. 6,N 4 II I r I.\U�J I P.R.-7 ■ see , ^� CITY OF PALM DESERT Case No.CZ88_1 PLANNING COMMISSION � ��� 0� ��� ' RESOLUTION NO. �u ULn�W o 13 Date t ORDIIN9NCE NO. E=IT "A" Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO: C/Z 88-1 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: City of Palm Desert PROJECT DFSCRIPPIONAOCATIM Approximately 197 acres east of Cook Street between 42nd A'and the whitewater Storm Channel. The Director California of the Department of Ccwunity Development, City of Palm Desert effect onthe has fame that the described PrOJont will not have a significant document ant. A copy of the Initial Study has been attached to included h t e reasons in w measures support of this finding. Mitigation meare if any, foundm"clu attached. PrOJont to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be RAM N A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF 0a44jNITy DEVELOpMW /tm 3 YL-1"Nl1`4U UA11[1L1b61UN [tt LVPIuN ilu. _ t A ON OF THE PLANNING M44I: OF THE CITY 0 ALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, REaTVENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND PRFANNEXATION ZONING FOR APPROXIMATELY 197 ACRES EAST OF COOK STREET BETWEEN 42ND AVENUE AND THE WHITEWATER STORM CHANNEL. CASE NO. C/Z 88-1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commmissicn of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 1st day of March, 1988, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and preannexation zoning of approximately 197 acres east of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue; and WHEREAS, said application has ommmplied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined that the project will not have an adverse impact on the environment and a negative declaration of environmental impact has been prepared: and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning comaission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify a recommendation of approval: 1. The proposed pre-zoning is consistent with the current county zoning and development patterns, the Palm Desert General Plan and the proposed North Sphere Specific Plan. 2. The proposed pre-zoning protects the public health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the ocffission in this case. 2. That a negative declaration of environmental impact, Exhibit "A", and C/Z 87-12 Exhibit "a" is hereby recommended for approval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of March, 1988, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /tm I _ _ PLANNING CON41SSION RESOLUTION NO. E} IT "A" Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO: C/Z 88-1 APPLICANT/PROJEOr SPONSOR: City of Palm Desert PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Approximately 197 acres east of Cook Street between 42nd Avenue and the Whitewater Storm Channel. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. ---------------------------------------- RAMON A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF CCtICNITY DEVELOPMENT /tm J CASE :NO • _C?2_ . i L'XTRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPT. INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION CHECKLIST NOTE: The availability of data necessary to address the topics listed below shall form the basis of a decision as to whether the application is considered complete for purposes of environmental assessment. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers , possible mitigation measures and comments are provided on attached sheets) . Yes Maw No 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a . Unstable earth conditions or in changes in _ ✓ geologic substructures? i*a b. Disruptions , displacements , compaction, or overcovering of the soil ? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction , covering ,, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ _ L/- e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of f soils , either on or off the site? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c✓ c . Alteration of air movement , moisture , or, temperature , or• any change in climate , either locally or regionally? — -- - 1 Yes Maybe No/ 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? _ b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? _ ✓ d. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? ✓ e. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? f. Reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? _ ✓ 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of plants (including trees , shrubs , grass , and crops )? b. Reduction'of the numbers of any unique , rare, or endangered species of plants? ✓ c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area , or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _ 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a . Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds , land animals including reptiles , or Insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals Into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing wildlife habitat? 3. Yes May No 6. Natural Resources . Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural / resources? b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? 7. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? !/r b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or re- quire the development of new sources of energy? 8. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, pesticides , oil , chemicals , or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? _ 9. Economic Loss . Will the proposal result in: a . A change in the value of property and improvements endangered by flooding? b. A change in the value of property and improvements exposed to geologic hazards beyond accepted community risk standards? 10. Noise. Will- the proposal increase existing noise levels to the point at which accepted community noise and vibration levels are — — exceeded? 11 . Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present developed or planned land use of an area? 12. Open Space. Will the proposal lead to a decrease in the amount of designated open space? Ll 13. Po_Eulation. Will the proposal result in: . . a . Alteration of the location, distribution , density, or growth rate of the human / population of the City? ✓ b. Change in the population distribution by ` age , income, religion, racial , or ethnic group, occupational class , household type? 1 40 5, Yes Maybe No 18. Public Fiscal Balance. Will the proposal result in a net change in government fiscal flow (revenues less operating expenditures and annualized capital expenditures )? 19. Utilities . Will the proposal result in a need for new systems , or alterations to the following utilities : a . Power or natural gas? V/ b. Communications system? _ ✓ c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? / f. Solid waste and disposal ? �✓ 20. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a . The creation of any health hazard or Potential health hazard? b. A change in the level of community health care provided? 21 . Social Services . Will the proposal result in an increased denand for provision of general social services? 22. Aesthetics . Will the proposal result in: ✓ a . Obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? L' c. Lessening of the over-all neighborhood (or area ) attractiveness , pleasantness , and uniqueness? — rf 23. Li ht and Glara. Will the proposal produce new ig it or glare? 24. Arch�eoiogical/Historical . Will the proposal result in an a teration of a significant archeological Or' historical site , structure, object , or building? N 4. Yes Maybe No 14. Employment. Will the proposal result in additional new long-term jobs provided, or a change in the number and per cent employed , unemployed, and underemployed? 15. Housing. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in number and per cent of housing 9 P s g units by type (price or rent range, zoning category, owner-occupied and rental , etc. ) relative to demand or to number of families in various income classes in the City? b. Impacts on existing housing or creation of a / demand for additional housing? 16. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a . Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? _ c. Impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists , or pedestrians? 17. Public Services . Will the proposal have an effect upon , or result in a need for, new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas : a. Fire protection? b. Police protection' c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities , including — roads? f. Other governmental services? 1 6. Yes Ma be No 25. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment or to curtail - the diversity in the environment? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) c. Does the project have impacts which are indi - vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small , but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) d/ d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings , either directly or indirectly? z= - Initial Study Prepared By:--- `='�� 1_ . _..... .. ------ -:i Ur ep-LI ] Dki:;L P j . ARISlESJT OF COMMLWITY DEVELOPT STAFF REPORT 1. TO: Planning C-<mnission DATE: March 1, 1988 CASE NO: C/Z 88-1 REQUEST: Negative declaration of environmental impact and Preannexation zoning of service industrial (S.I. ), public institutional (P) and open space (O.S. ) for approximately 197 acres on the east side of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert I. BACKGROUND: The Proposed Prezoning is preparatory to Annexation No. 24 which will complete the inclusion of the Cook Street of Palm Desert. industrial area into the City Properties on Cook Street will be zoned service industrial; the L<14JD sewage treatment plant to the east will be public institutional and the storm channel open space. The zoning is consistent with the existing land use, the general plan and the proposed North Sphere Specific Plan. II. REOOMMENDAT-T : Staff recommends: A. Adoption of the findings; B. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. approval of C/Z 88-1 to city council. recommending Prepared Reviewed and Approved by /tm �\\lll.,�� � e `�.ArF `�t'c� ••,,(1?"+rJ t .. ��/� �Y: ar7� �j' f��� Mr. Samuel Russel . , ``Y,od ?" � a � Gook Street Protect ' P.O. . Box 2056 ' r - Mr. James McPherson Palm Desert,. CA 9226i P.O. Box 1356 ,Palm Desert, CA 92261 Mr. William Keener Mr. Leo Boyatian Mr. Louis Llebowitz. ; 20 Loring Avenue 102 Tail Pine Lane.- ND.2,105 ;'�. ,' c/o Simon Glazer Mill Valley, CA 94941 Napies; FL 33942 617 Doheny Drive y7 �;.Beverly Hills, CA 90210 ,f� r Mr. Louis Llebowltz i Mr. Harold Alexander %Pamela: Smallwood c/o Laski and Gorden West Coast Properties,,inC 71-111 La Paz Road 2049 E. Century Park 760 1260 15th Street's '' '; ; `;;.Rancho Mirage, CA' 92270 Los Angeles, CA 90067 , :; .Santa Monica, CA 90404 , William Bone IRobertson Homes 75-005 Country Club Drive. 16653 Embarcadero Drive ' '1 Palm Desert, CA 92260 ; Stockton, CA i I I { I , i i jl ; I � I M]NUIES PALM DESERT PI"MG Oa4-aSSION MARCH 1, 1985 Mr. Diaz stated that it wasn't staff's intention to delay the matter, but based on past experience felt that approval by the Palm Desert Property Owners Association was necessary. Commissioner Richards requested that representatives from the homeowners association and architectural commission attend the next meeting to express their opinions. Commissioner Ladlow concurred. Ccmmissioner Downs stated that he would vote yes in the spirit of unity, but felt the secretary's opinion was wrong. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Ladlow, continuing PP 88-22 too March 15. Carried 5-0. C. Case No'C/\ Z 88-1- CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request four approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and pre-annexation zoning of service industrial (S.I. ), public institutional (P) and open space (O.S. ) for approximately 197 acres on the east side of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue. Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report and noted that staff had not heard from the Coachella Valley Water District. Staff recommended approval to city council and ultimate approval of the application for annexation. Commissioner Ladlow asked for and received clarification on housing impact analysis. Commissioner Downs commented on negative comments received and Mr. Drell explained that Mr. Berkly of Palm Desert Glass and Mr. Milibrand of Desert Business Machines were concerned about doing business as they are presently. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Dooms, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. 6 MINVPES PALM DESERT PLANNING, OOMIISSION MARCH 1, 1988 Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1281, recommending approval of C/Z 88-1 to city council. Carried 5-0. CHAIRMAN ERWOOD CALLED A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS AT 8:15 P.M. D. Continued Discuss cn cn the North Sphere Specific Plan and Draft Etwiruw ental Impact Report - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for consideration of the North Sphere Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report for the area generally located south of Interstate 10, west of Washington Street, north of 42nd and the Whitewater Channel, and east of Monterey Avenue. Mr. Diaz summarized the findings of the commission and indicated that rather than shifting or lowering density, the committee ittee retained the overall present zoning, which would allow latitude to develop single family, hotels, and country clubs per development agreements. The next area the cc mittee studied was the greenbelt and Mr. Diaz explained that the control district had changed its policy and would not allow individuals to retain three days on site of a 100-year storm. He indicated that ocnmercial/industrial zoning would be in the noise impacted areas and open for possible residential housing with appropriate mitigation measures. He stated that north of Gerald Ford an application has been filed for annexation, and a portion of land for a park would be designated and the city allowed to purchase it over a ten-year period from in-lieu fees from developments and acquire the park land or relocate the park closer to the noise impact area. He noted that while the wind-belt concept was good, under present ordinance the city already requires developers to provide some protection and that establishing a straight line was virtually impossible because of varied property lines. Mr. Diaz stated that an area of 50 feet from the curb has been set by staff, so the city will receive 35 to 40 feet of open space landscaped and would not count toward in-lieu fees, with the developer installing and maintaining it for two years and bonding for one year after project completion. He indicated that for long-term planning the city would be looking at the area-wide landscaping and maintenance and total acreage of greenbelt would be 79 acres plus an additional 25 to 30 acres added as development occurs north of Monterey and along Dinah Shore. 7 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 March 3, 1988 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. C/Z 88-1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider preannexation zoning of Service Industrial (S. i . ) , Public Institutional (P) , Open Space (O.S. ) and a negative declaration of environmental impact and annexation application for approximately 197 acres on the east side of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue. A portion of the west 112 of section 15 T5S R6E. H I I 11 16 5 SA ....11LL111.J ... R-1-M ' -IL V AYE ;• _ref 4 } jfr k P.R. 5,N I �,� p,. f��l„I�i�Ii� I�I •� � � .�.� �: .-4 P.N' P.R.-7 .000 AINn DR. ...411AM SAID public hearing will be held on, Thursday, March 24, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising on 1 y those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council ) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk March 11 , 1988 City of Palm Desert, California 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 February 11 , 1988 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. C/Z 88-1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider preannexation zoning of Service Industrial (S. 1 .) , Public Institutional (P) , Open Space (O.S. ) and a negative declaration of environmental impact for approximately 197 acres on the east side of Cook Street between the Whitewater Storm Channel and 42nd Avenue. A portion of the west 1/2 of section 15 T5S R6E. Iv R-1-M �f t .'` ULU 3 a •YE r a 3. ej ift i P.R. 5,N I ti�J(� 3 7 i`r'1 I CP I, n i � '. ©� � 7 � L � P.R.- •• . I P. •, FIREQ WASING DR.] SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 1 , 1988,, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all Interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. if you chaIIenge the proposed actions 1n court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council ) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary February 19, )988 Palm Desert Planning Commission �I I V � George J. Ritter Associates March 11, 1988 Architects A.I.A. Mr. Raymond Diaz 1988 Director of Community Development CITY OF PALM SPRINGS COMMurriri D seiurm;r ar Dl r4ia7MtNr 73-510 Fred Waring Drive CITY Or PALM DISEai Palm Desert, California 92260 - i Re: Case No.C/Z 88-1 Dear Sir: I own thre lots, #6,7, & 8, Parcel Map No. 17191, County Assay Parcel No. 63412006,7, & 8, which are located in the proposed annexation as described in Case No. C/Z 88-1. On August 20, 1987, I received a plot plan approval, Case #9869, and an environmental assessment No. 3107 from Riverside County. This permit is good for two years. The project is a phased service industrial office type development on three separate but adjoining lots. Once we begin substantial construction of the first phase, the site plan approval permit has no termination date. The County plot plan review process approves the plot plan, landscape, building footprint, exterior elevations and colors. The total approval process is as complete as the City's but different and some standards are different. The major difference which would affect my presently approved project are parking place sizes and planting requirements. The County parking spaces are 18' X 9' wide and 2' of the spance may overhang the planting strip. (That overhang space may not count toward landscape space. ) The County requirement for landscape is 10% of the total site, my plan has 13%. The City requirement is 15% of the parking lot area. The County has a 5' setback for the parking lot to the property line. To date the working drawngs are half completed andi have spent a great deal of time and expense getting this project to this point. I do not wish to start over on the approval process for this project. In the event this property is annexed to the City of Palm Desert, I wish a guarantee that I may proceed on my original approval,especially in those areas where the County requirements are less restrictive than the City's. 73 899 Highway One-Eleven, Palm Desert, California 92260-4068 • Area Code 619 346-8661 George J. Ritter Associates March 11, 1988 Architects A.LA. Mr. Raymond Diaz, Director of Community Develoment CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Page two of two Please give me the procedure I must follow in order to have the City adopt the g P Y P County's approval of this project if it is annexed to the City. Sincerely yours, l / / George Ritter GJR:cr 73 899 Highway One-Eleven, Palm Desert, California 92260-4068 • Area Code 619 346-8661 KBKB Service Mr. Samuel Russel Cook Street Project 6107 W. Olympic P.O. Box 2056 Mr. James McPherson Los Angeles, CA 90048 Palm Desert, CA 92261 P.O. Box 1356 Palm Desert, CA 92261 Mr. William Keener Mr. Leo Boyajlan Mr. Louis Llebowitz 20 Loring Avenue 102 Tall Pine Lane ND 2105 1 c/o Simon Glazer Mill Valley, CA 94941 Naples, FL 33942 617 Doheny Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Mr. Louts Liebowitz I Mr. Harold Alexander Pamela. Smallwood c/o Laski and Gorden West Coast Properties Inc. 71-111 La Paz Road 2049 E. Century Park 760 1260 15th Street Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Santa Monica, CA 90404 William Bone Robertson Homes 75-005 Country Club Drive 6653 Embarcadero Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Stockton, CA I I I ' I I i I i i I I I ' i i 1 1 „.tom I I