HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUPPTL INFO - CZ/PP 08-191 & TPM 36000 ___ � x � pc� n �o �+ � � � O n � 3 Onn n � o A � �
0 0 ,� � o A m � w � �r f� � a �o °'• z a�i � � a 5 � � °, -°o
a � �' z w � � H 3 �o -°e R o � 3 � en o K � 3. -o' � • A m
3 N. 3 � rr Z fP � 't ,y. � 7 R �p � A � � �• 3 � , �
a o'c .^z �0 70 3 n r f° "�� o ' ' ,�,� ,� '° o A �* : m n o
-a � eo e � o � m � � m n �n � � � O � � w � .t � D
� A 3 n � '. � A p ' � », '� a K � A a � „ - .. � a $
A y ,,�� - A � o� N c � 3 � a �y � 11 n �n [> > `° N-
3 � � � N '4 �C f0 � � O y N N �. 17
N � n A � � � O N N N N y 3
� T �^
� ; � 3 A H
pp H � 4 O
A �
3 �
� Q
n O N e��!
d � � � � �
� a
..
� �
o � u°, N ° � ° o.
� a N �, w a a
�► t,n en bn sA �n f» en r�n �a �n sn tn tw v+ v+ in �n �n tn t,n d► v� bn vi in v+ en en tn w in
T � �
� � � �
J
O W � W N � OD
OD �O � A w w P W O
O V � '`� � ao v !"+ �O A
�O N � � _ j w �
� N � � � � �
, FR �69 d9 (r4 iA 4A 6oA i!1 V/ (N tA M EA M d� VI fA 1A 69 4N M H 4R ffl fA i9 ER 6N d� lA iIf N
y� A 3
� • -� . � C�
� J J
� V O v N OD N w � D
�O A ;G A � W Q+ p � rf
p� W y O � w O 'O
� � O O � � twi+ w �
� 10 OD N �O
� �
(p EA (!t fA (A iA iR �A f!1 (A !d1 ffl fp fA fp �4A 1A f9 iA fA b9 fA iA f�9 69 4'1 (�4 4� iA Vf foA 44 v
�. . T � fD
� i
� — =� n+ o n, — p �
O Oo ,0 � .o — � N �.Dp �
� N � A1 p Np ,C�D A OD ap �
A V � O O�D � .VA
J
(q l,H iA i9 df iI� !oN !df iA idi {�f fA ifl fA fA iA V1 fA 4n ifl iA M (a9 V1 fA �r9 !oH foN iA +df (fl iA
T .A T
� � �
� � � �
O1 W _ y �
o — O � y�'✓ wq ,vp N
3 N � N m 't q Ov
N N {n O
(q fA fiA 6H {e9 iA fiA �,9 iA iA 69 iA M ER EA V1 i�9 69 4n iq 4A V! {/1 tfl �4H 4N M di Vf ir9 M H9
� T T T
_ .� � '�
i N W N W N
�
W � bd w C` �p q� W
N � � V V
p � i �
fA iH M iA H EA VI N iA 4f (A iA fA fR ffl fA lA Vi M ffl iA fH V/ !oH fA (A !oH iA M iA M i9
00 � O O � ap �pp p� v� O K
3 A��1 V w �.. w . .W — Oo v+ V t�i� N
4,1 � pvp � OD t70 A
o v � `+I .p O'� y Np� t"�
W Vi � W a ? �
z � ao a
r � v -+
n � m
= e�o '� to �
i � i
�o
0
� m � a a
� �
� � o` ° `a
° m � m �
p s• � •s �
S
� Z Z
� � !�'r
� a c.
<
0
n w
0 0
0
� o i
0 1D '
� p O O
T m
m
» 3
r = � p G1 f1 �o � � v► �v p a 70 3 O n n a',Q o ,o � -�o
0 o n � o m ee z w � � A � °� -fDa °'• s w � � a �. 3 A o 0
a � � a o � � w � o s . 3 o eo � �. � 3 M � � �
C N � N � A � Z •''�G 17 A
1'r
� V—' � � K '�s � =. � � 'S � ^ � 11 fp � � � n 3, � '7 � �
A or�c � � 70 3 n r m 'i� ° � K � � o m `'* : � � o
-e � A o � o � m � � o n tn � 3 � O � � � ,�, '* � D
� A 3 o A '. w A p ' "� � " �, �; � ; Q � „ ,� .. � � „
� D K ^— � � � N � � � � w n � (1 n � n 3 � �.
� '" • � N ,� .p n � � o N � N � ;t
'^ fD 3 f7p � �, lD O N N '^ �; . �P 0
rt f3C � C END N 'n 3
n ' �-
� N � a o
� �
� c
� Q
� N
m 01 � � � �
A D �
� �
-� c p o p c o �
0 3 H � K o K a
� a �, u� a a w
y� tA en sn En in Fn tn t,n en �n dn y4 tfl fn v� in e, tn +n d+ tn t,n tn �n ba fn t,n Fn fn tn �n
�1 •n T
"( � '� '�
�
� W � � N � OD
00 1O � � W w CN
� r w O
� J A OD -� w `� �
`�a' `� 1 ."'_o in .'t'i u' O
� � � � � ' N ' � � � � � � N . . . � . O O '!' N
(p 49 iA 1A 4A iq t�H EA iA b9 tfl 4H (p fA (q (� 69 M 1fl ir9 V� tp �iA M iA b9 iA iA iR d1 4A id1 N
A �
� T /yy�
� � • i � v~
� r 0 J N � N W � D
�o i� ;o A � W c� rr
o �o�i o � � � m � o 'G
N O � � U W �
� � � N � �
y fA H fA N iA iR fA {fl fA iA (fl ER fA !R iA {A fA ffl 4A i,9 fA fA iA df (A (A 69 fA iA iA iA �
� � � N
� � � � —
v � �
V — N p N � � �
O OD .� N `� N v�i N d �
� N � IV p N 00 ? O�D ap �
W W W � � b V
V V � OD .P A
y� (�H fA i�N iA foH 49 f!i i�A V1 V/ !a9 i�N f!� fR � � i/i Vf i.9 {A fA (�A fH V1 iA ffl �iA f�9 M fR fA
� .A T
� � �
n � � � �
O1 ,p �
� — O N � y�,i w y N
� N � N A Q O
N tn �
� 49 iA iR iA 1A GH fd1 4A 1fl Vi iR fq M W (� iA 4� iA doHi iA fA 49 69 {fl (fl M 69 4� (A M �(09
� � � T
_ '` "( �
i N w N W .yp N
Of W � �p�. j. .0�+ V1
a W 00 � — � V
� � �
o ' � � . � . . � � � � � ' ' � . .. � . .
�/► iA t�A Vi df foH il� M i�A iA M iJf ER d1 fA N M iA a!s t!+ �in f/4 fA forl iA 69 iA iH M d1 tA (A
w � — � �
� � O � N ap +D O� tn Q �
N w "� w — O�D V� V t�n �
A1 V OO OD A
W
0
3 W � � N _
N
W . W � 0 O�o � a W
.� dp GD O+ O OD C` •A .t'
�
m � D m
" ' 3
� � 3 �
o °' � �o 0
� � � _ 'a
� ' �
� � L � Y�
� � Y�f � N
_ " A " �
� � �
o � �
n G, p,
<
n w
0
0
� � i
o w �
" A O O
T o
.. 3
���
� �( ���
_.._...._.------...__..._
�������
t(JMM(C;til"f�l���
March 27, 2009
Ms. Lauri Aylaian
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92660-2578
Dear Lauri:
This letter will serve as notice that we are withdrawing our request for funding for The Crossings
at Palm Desert at this time.
Best Regards,
(��f,�`r,f�
✓� .
�
John Bigley
�.`;}tt. s (��3:� If ..���:::r'� `'. J��t4i+�.. ,r'. t'iE3f i.i ^..�'�i, .." .......'L�r. i.Gi..�1 + ti 5:,.�:� ..,�: �l,t :�1�a�T . .. .�..:�=.
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
Attn: Janet Moore, Director of Housing
[Space Above For Recorder's Use Only]
The undersigned declares that this Housing Agreement is exempt from Recording Fees
pursuant to California Government Code Section 27383.
HOUSING AGREEMENT
By and Between
THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
And
URBAN HOUSING COMMUNITIES, LLC
DATED AS OF APRIL_, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION..................................................2
1.1 Definitions .............................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.2 Rules of Construction...........................................................................................3
ARTICLE 2. ONGOING APARTMENT PROJECT OBLIGATIONS..............................3
2.1 Affordable Units....................................................................................................3
2.2 Residential Rental Property..................................................................................4
2.3 Income Qualified Households...............................................................................4
2.4 Allowable Rent .....................................................................................................5
2.5 Rent Increases.....................................................................................................5
2.6 Income Recertification of Affordable Units............................................................5
2.7 Lease Provisions..................................................................................................6
2.8 Household Income Certification............................................................................6
2.9 Security Deposits .................................................................................................6
2.10 Additional Information; Books and Records..........................................................6
2.11 Specific Enforcement of Affordability Restrictions.................................................6
2.12 Audit.....................................................................................................................7
2.13 Management Agent..............................................................................................7
2.14 Material Breach ....................................................................................................7
2.15 Binding for Term...................................................................................................7
ARTICLE 3. TERM AND RECORDATION...................................................................7
3.1 Term of Housing Agreement.................................................................................7
3.2 Agreement to Record ...........................................................................................7
3.3 Early Termination of Restrictions..........................................................................7
ARTICLE 4. DEFAULT; REMEDIES............................................................................8
4.1 An Event of Default ..............................................................................................8
4.2 City's Option to Lease ..........................................................................................9
4.3 Specific Performance ...........................................................................................9
4.4 Action at Law; No Remedy Exclusive ...................................................................9
ARTICLE 5. GENERAL PROVISIONS.......................................................................10
5.1 Limitations on Recourse.....................................................................................10
5.2 Maintenance, Repair, Alterations........................................................................10
5.3 Notice.................................................................................................................10
5.4 Relationship of Parties........................................................................................11
5.5 No Claims...........................................................................................................11
5.6 Conflict of Interests.............................................................................................11
5.7 Non-Liability of City Officials, Employees and Agents.........................................11
5.8 Unavailable Delay; Extension of Time of Performance.......................................11
5.9 Title of Parts and Sections..................................................................................12
5.10 Hold Harmless....................................................................................................12
5.11 Rights and Remedies Cumulative.......................................................................12
5.12 Applicable Law...................................................................................................12
5.13 Severability.........................................................................................................12
5.14 Legal Actions......................................................................................................13
5.15 Binding Upon Successors ..................................................................................13
5.16 Time of the Essence...........................................................................................13
5.17 Approval by the City ...........................................................................................13
5.18 Complete Understanding of the Parties..............................................................13
5.19 Burden and Benefit.............................................................................................13
5.20 Counterparts ......................................................................................................14
i
HOUSING AGREEMENT
THIS HOUSING AGREEMENT (the "Housing Agreement") is dated for reference
purposes as of April _, 2009, and is by and between the CITY OF PALM DESERT, a
municipal corporation (the "City"), and URBAN HOUSING COMMUNITIES, LLC, a
California limited liability company (the "Owner").
RECITALS
This Housing Agreement is predicated upon the following facts:
A. Owner is owner of certain real property located within the City of Palm
Desert, California, which property is described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a
part hereof (hereinafter "Property"). In consideration of the Property Owner entering
into this Agreement, City has granted approval of a change of zone from a Planned
Community Development Overlay zone (PCD) to a Planned Residential/14 dwelling
units per acre zone (PR-14), a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM), a precise plan of design
(PP) including a height exception, to allow construction of 144 apartment units, as
defined in Article 1 below, with a location for a future a child care facility on 11.8 +/-
acres.
B. City has approved a change of zone from a Planned Community
Development Overlay zone (PCD) to a Planned Residential zone with a permitted
density of 14 dwelling units per acre on the condition that the Owner enter into this
Housing Agreement with respect to that portion of the Property upon which a 144 unit
apartment complex shall be constructed (the "Apartment Site" as defined in Article 1
below). That portion of the Property designated as the "Child Care Site", as defined in
Article 1 below, is not subject to this Housing Agreement.
C. As a condition of said approval (Ordinance No. (change of zone)
and Resolution No. 09- , (TPM/PP 08-191)), Owner shall set aside 20% of the total
Units, as defined in Article 1 below and continuously make such units available for rent
at affordable rental rates to persons and families of very low, and low income earning no
more than 50% and 80% of area median income (AMI), respectively, as defined in
Article 1 below. D. The purpose of this Housing Agreement is to create such
conditions, covenants, restrictions, liens, servitudes, and charges in favor of the City
upon the Apartment Site, with which occupancy, leasing, renting, or combination
thereof, shall conform. The provisions of this Housing Agreement shall run with title to
each and every portion of the Apartment Site and shall inure to and pass with each and
every portion thereof and shall apply to and bind any successors-in-interest of Owner.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and undertakings
set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which is hereby acknowledged, the City and the Owner hereby agree as follows:
1
ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION
1.1 Definitions Capitalized terms used herein shall have the following meanings
unless the context in which they are used clearly requires otherwise.
"Affordable Housing Cost" shall mean a housing cost which is calculated
pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5, as amended from time
to time, and for the purposes hereof, the term "housing cost" shall have the meaning
ascribed to such term in Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations Section 6920, as
such regulations may be amended from time to time.
"Affordable Unit" shall mean each of the apartment dwelling units in the
Apartment Project designated for occupancy by Very Low or Low Income Households
pursuant to applicable provisions of this Housing Agreement.
"AMI" shall mean the area median income for Riverside County as published by
the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, or if such agency
shall cease to publish such an index, then any comparable index published by any other
federal or state agency which is approved by the Agency. The AMI shall be adjusted for
family size in accordance with the state regulations adopted pursuant to California
Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5.
"Apartment Site" is the portion of the Property on which the approximately 144
unit multi-family residential apartment complex described in the Recitals hereto,
together with structures, improvements, equipment, furniture, fixtures, other personal
property owned by the Owner, and all functionally related ancillary facilities, will be
located.
"Apartment Project" is the proposed construction of the Units on the Apartment
Site authorized by the Entitlements.
"Child Care Site" is that portion of the Property designated as a future location of
a child care facility, as described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference.
"City" shall mean the City of Palm Desert.
"County" shall mean the County of Riverside, California.
"Entitlements" shall mean a change of zone from a Planned Community
Development Overlay zone (PCD) to a Planned Residential zone with a permitted
density of 14 dwelling units per acre, approved by Ordinance No. , and a tentative
tract map and precise plan as approved by Resolution No. 09-
"Gross Income" shall have the meaning ascribed to such term in Title 25 of the
California Code of Regulations Section 6914, as such regulations may be amended
from time to time.
2
"Income Qualified Household" shall mean a person or household whose total
household income does not exceed the limits established by the Agreement and who
has provided documentation as required herein to demonstrate he, she or it is qualified
to occupy an affordable unit.
"Low Income Households" shall mean persons and families whose income does
not exceed the qualifying limits for lower income households set forth in California
Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5 and Title 25 of the California Code of
Regulations, Section 6910, as such statute and regulations may be amended from time
to time.
"Project" consists of the Apartment Project Site and development of the Child
Care Site in accord with the entitlements.
"Units" shall mean the approximately 144 apartment units contemplated for the
Apartment Site.
"Very Low Income Households" shall mean persons and families meeting the
income qualification limits set forth in California Health and Safety Code Section 50105
and Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations Section 6910, et seq., as the case or
context may require, as such statutes and regulations may be amended from time to
time.
1.2 Rules of Construction
1.2.1 The singular form of any word used herein, including the terms
defined herein shall include the plural and vice versa. The use herein of a word of any
gender shall include correlative words of all genders.
1.2.2 Unless otherwise specified, references to Articles, Sections, and
other subdivisions of this Housing Agreement are to the designated Articles, Sections,
and other subdivisions of this Housing Agreement as originally executed. The words
"hereof," "herein," "hereunder," and words of similar import shall refer to this Housing
Agreement as a whole.
1.2.3 All of the terms and provisions hereof shall be construed to
effectuate the purposes set forth in this Housing Agreement and to sustain the validity
hereof.
1.2.4 Headings or titles of the several articles and sections hereof and
the table of contents appended to copies hereof shall be solely for convenience of
reference and shall not affect the meaning, construction, or effect of the provisions
hereof.
ARTICLE 2. ONGOING APARTMENT PROJECT OBLIGATIONS
2.1 Affordable Units. During the term of this Housing Agreement, Owner shall
allocate 20% of the total Units constructed in the Apartment Site to Very Low and Low
3
Income Households whose incomes do not exceed 50% and 80% AMI, respectively,
and whose rents shall not exceed an Affordable Housing Cost.
Such units shall be rented at an Affordable Housing Cost. Owner will be required to, and
will, set aside 50% of the Affordable Units for occupancy by Very Low Income
Households and 50% of the Affordable Units for Low Income Households. Such units
shall be comprised of a mix of two bedroom units and three bedroom units, to be
reasonably agreed to by the City and the Owner and such Affordable Units shall, to the
extent possible, be dispersed evenly throughout the development.
Owner agrees that, to the extent possible, "Affordable Units" will not be underutilized
(vacant bedrooms) nor overutilized (more than three persons per bedroom).
2.2 Residential Rental Propertv. Owner represents, warrants, and covenants to
operate the Apartment Site as residential rental property. Affordable Units in the
Apartment Site will be held and used for the purpose of providing residential living, and
Owner shall own, manage and operate, or cause the management and operation of, the
Apartment Site to provide such affordable rental housing. Owner will not knowingly
permit any of the Affordable Units to be used on a transient basis and will not rent any
such apartment units for a period of less than thirty (30) consecutive days.
2.3 Income Qualified Households.
2.3.1 Income Qualification. Affordable Units will be exclusively occupied
or available for occupancy by Income Qualified Households on a continuous basis.
Income Qualified Households are only those who qualify to occupy Affordable Units
pursuant to the income guidelines and limitations established by this Housing
Agreement. Owner will advise the City in writing on an annual or other periodic basis as
reasonably requested by the City of occupancy of Affordable Units by Income Qualified
Households by delivery to the City of a certificate in a form specified by the City. Owner
will also obtain and maintain on file Certifications of Household Eligibility in substantially
the form attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by reference for each
Income Qualified Household, and shall provide copies of same to the City at such times
as the City may, from time to time, require. Owner shall make a good faith effort to
verify that the income provided by an applicant in an income certification is accurate
pursuant to Title 25 by taking any one or more of the following steps as part of the
verification process for all household members over the age of 18:
(i) Obtain a pay stub for the most recent pay period;
(ii) Obtain an income tax return for the most recent tax year;
(iii) Obtain an income verification form from the applicant's
current employer;
(iv) Obtain an income verification form from the Social Security
Administration and/or the State Department of Social Services, or its equivalent, if the
applicant receives assistance from either of those agencies;
4
(v) If the applicant is unemployed and has no tax return, obtain
another form of independent verification; or
(vi) Obtain such other documentation as may be reasonably
acceptable pursuant to Title 25 to verify income.
Owner will prepare and submit to the City, at such periodic frequency as it might
require, a Certificate of Continuing Compliance in substantially the form attached hereto
as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by reference and stating: (i) the percentage of
dwelling units in the Apartment Project which were occupied by Income Qualified
Households or held vacant and available for occupancy by Income Qualified
Households during such period; and (ii) that to the knowledge of the Owner, no default
has occurred under the provisions of this Housing Agreement.
Owner will also prepare and submit to the City each year for the preceding
calendar year a report in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the City,
summarizing the vacancy rate of the Affordable Units and of the Apartment Project on a
month-to-month or other periodic basis for such calendar year.
2.3.2 Participation in Federal Proqrams. Owner will accept as tenants of
the Apartment Project, on the same basis as all other prospective tenants, Income
Qualified Households who are recipients of Federal certificates and/or vouchers for rent
subsidies pursuant to an existing program under Section 8 of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 or its successor, and shall not apply selection criteria to Section 8 certificate
holders that are more burdensome than the criteria applied to all other prospective
tenants.
2.4 Allowable Rent. A monthly rent shall be charged (taking into account a
reasonable allowance for utilities) to the occupants of Affordable Units which shall be no
greater than an Affordable Housing Cost.
2.5 Rent Increases. Except as provided in Section 2.7 below, rents for Affordable
Units may be increased only once per year. The rents charged following such an
increase, or upon a vacancy and new occupancy by an Income Qualified Households,
shall not exceed the allowable rent calculated in compliance with 2.4 above. Owner
shall give proper written notice to tenants of all rent increases, and upon written request
provide City with reasonable detail concerning the amount of and rational for such rent
increases.
2.6 Income Recertification of Affordable Units .
2.6.1 Annually, on the anniversary date of occupancy of an Affordable
Unit by an Income Qualified Household, Owner shall re-certify the financial
qualifications of the person or persons residing within the Affordable Income Unit.
2.6.2 If, upon recertification pursuant to Section 2.6.1, the Owner
determines that the household income of the occupants of an Affordable Unit has
increased above the designated AMI affordable percentage adjusted for family size,
5
then such Affordable Unit may be redesignated as a market unit provided there is a unit
of equal size and composition to designate as an Affordable Unit and treated by the
Owner as an Affordable Unit available for occupancy by an Income Qualified Household
at the previously designated AMI. If no such unit is available for redesignation at the
time the household income of the occupants of said unit has increased above the
designated AMt, then the next market unit that becomes available of equal size and
composition shall be redesignated as an Affordable Unit.
2.7 Lease Provisions. The form of lease or rental agreement used by the Owner for
the lease or rental of Affordable Units shall be that which is reasonable and customary
in residential leasing. Each lease or rental agreement for an Affordable Unit shall
provide that the tenants of such Affordable Unit shall also be subject to annual
certification or recertification of income and subject to rental increases in accordance
with Section 2.6 of this Agreement. Each lease or rental agreement shall also provide
that, the Owner will not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, national
origin, ancestry, religion, marital status, disability or receipt of public assistance or
housing assistance in connection with a rental of a Affordable Unit in the Apartment
Project, or in connection with the employment or application for employment of persons
for operation and management of the Apartment Project, and all contracts, applications
and leases entered into for such purposes shall contain similar nondiscriminatory
clauses to such effect.
2.8 Household Income Certification. The Owner will obtain and maintain on file
complete Certificates of Household Eligibility from each Income Qualified Household as
required by the provisions of Section 2.3 above. Copies of such certificates shall be
made available for review by the City, upon request and upon reasonable notice.
2.9 Security Deposits. The Owner may require security deposits on Affordable Units
in amounts which are consistent with applicable law.
2.10 Additional Information; Books and Records. Owner shall provide any additional
information concerning the Affordable Units reasonably requested by the City. The City
shall have the right to examine and make copies of all books, records or other
documents maintained by Owner or by any of Owner's agents which pertain to any
Affordable Unit.
2.11 Specific Enforcement of Affordabilitv Restrictions. Owner hereby agrees that
specific enforcement of Owner's agreement to comply with the allowable rent and
occupancy restrictions of this Article 2 is one of the reasons for the approval of the
Entitlements and that, in the event of Owner's breach of such requirements, potential
monetary damages to the City, as well as to prospective Income Qualified Households,
would be difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate and quantify. Therefore, in addition to
any other relief to which the City may be entitled as a consequence of the breach
hereof, Owner agrees to the imposition of the remedy of specific performance against it
in the case of any event of default by Owner in complying with the allowable rent,
occupancy restrictions or any other provision of this Article 2.
s
2.12 Audit. The City shall have the right to perform an audit of the Apartment Project
to determine compliance with the provisions of this Housing Agreement. Such audit
shall not be undertaken more often than once each calendar year. All costs and
expenses associated with the audit shall be paid by the Owner.
2.13 Management Aaent. Owner and/or the management agent (if not the Owner)
shall operate the Apartment Project in a manner that will provide decent, safe and
sanitary residential facilities to the occupants thereof, and will comply with provisions of
this Housing Agreement. Upon the written request of the City, the Owner shall
cooperate with the City in the periodic review of the management practices and financial
status of the Affordable Units in the Apartment Project. The purpose of each periodic
review will be to enable the City to determine if the Affordable Units within the
Apartment Project are being operated and managed in accordance with the
requirements and standards of this Housing Agreement. Results of such City review
shall be provided to Owner, and City shall have the authority to require Owner to make
modifications necessary to ensure the objectives of this Agreement are met.
2.14 Material Breach. Owner agrees to provide in the leases or occupancy
agreements for all Affordable Units within the Apartment Project a provision whereby
each occupant will agree that it shall be a substantial and material breach of such lease
or occupancy agreement which will permit Owner to immediately terminate tenancy
thereunder if one or more of the person or persons occupying such Affordable Unit have
misrepresented any fact material to the qualification of such persons or any other
person to occupy an Affordable Unit.
2.15 Binding for Term. It is intended by the parties hereto that the provisions of this
Housing Agreement shall apply to the Apartment Project throughout the entire term
hereof, as established in Section 3.1 below. The parties agree that in the event of a
default by Owner which is not remedied, within any time periods for such remedy or
cure which are specified herein, the City shall be entitled to all relief to which it would be
entitled by virtue of a default under any of the provisions hereof.
ARTICLE 3. TERM AND RECORDATION
3.1 Term of Housing Apreement. This Housing Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect for a period of fifty-five (55) years from the date on which the City issues the
certificate of occupancy for the Apartment Project, unless the Owner and the City agree,
in writing, to terminate this Housing Agreement. The parties intend that the provisions
and effect of this Housing Agreement, and specifically of Article 2 hereof, shall remain in
full force and effect for the entire term hereof.
3.2 Agreement to Record. Owner represents, warrants, and covenants that this
Housing Agreement will be recorded in the real property records of Riverside County.
3.3 Earlv Termination of Restrictions. Notwithstanding the generality of the foregoing
provisions of this Article 3 or any other provisions hereof, this Housing Agreement and
all of the terms and restrictions contained herein shall terminate and be of no further
�
force and effect in the event of either (i) foreclosure or delivery of a deed in lieu of
foreclosure whereby a third party lender with a lien senior to this Housing Agreement
becomes the owner of the Project, or (ii) involuntary noncompliance as a result of
unforeseen events such as fire or act of God which leaves the entire complex
uninhabitable, or a change in a federal or state law or an action of a federal City or of
the State after the date of recordation hereof that prevents the City or any other public
City from enforcing the provisions of this Housing Agreement, or a condemnation or a
similar event. Upon termination of this Housing Agreement, the parties hereto or their
successors, as applicable, agree to execute, deliver and record appropriate instruments
of release and discharge of the terms hereof; provided, however, that the execution and
delivery of such instrument shall not be necessary or a prerequisite to termination of this
Housing Agreement in accordance with its terms.
ARTICLE 4. DEFAULT: REMEDIES
4.1 An Event of Default. Each of the following shall constitute an "Event of Default"
by the Owner under this Housing Agreement:
4.1.1 Failure by the Owner to duly perform, comply with and observe any
of the conditions, terms, or covenants of any agreement with the City concerning the
Project, or of this Housing Agreement, if such failure remains uncured thirty (30) days
after written notice of such failure from the City to the Owner in the manner provided
herein or, with respect to a default that cannot be cured within thirty (30) days, if the
Owner fails to commence such cure within such thirty (30) day period or thereafter fails
to diligently and continuously proceed with such cure to completion. However, if a
different period or notice requirement is specified under any other section of this
Housing Agreement, then the specific provision shall control.
4.1.2 Any representation or warranty contained in this Housing
Agreement or in any application, financial statement, certificate, or report submitted by
Owner to the City proves to have been incorrect in any material respect when made.
4.1.3 A court having jurisdiction shall have made or rendered a decree or
order (i) adjudging Owner to be bankrupt or insolvent; (ii) approving as properly filed a
petition seeking reorganization of Owner or seeking any arrangement on behalf of the
Owner under the bankruptcy law or any other applicable debtor's relief law or statute of
the United States or of any state or other jurisdiction; (iii) appointing a receiver, trustee,
liquidator, or assignee of the Owner in bankruptcy or insolvency or for any of its
properties; or (iv) directing the winding up or liquidation of the Owner, providing,
however, that any such decree or order described in any of the foregoing subsections
shall have continued unstayed or undischarged for a period of ninety (90) days.
4.1.4 The Owner shall have assigned its assets for the benefit of its
creditors or suffered a sequestration or attachment or execution on any substantial part
of its property, unless the property so assigned, sequestered, attached, or executed
upon shall have been returned or released within ninety (90) days after such event
(unless a lesser time period is permitted for cure hereunder) or prior to sale pursuant to
s
such sequestration, attachment, or execution. If the Owner is diligently working to
obtain a return or release of the Property and the City's interests hereunder are not
imminently threatened in its reasonable business judgment, then the City shall not
declare a default under this subsection.
4.1.5 The Owner shall have voluntarily suspended its business or
dissolved.
4.1.6 The condemnation, seizure, or appropriation of all or, in the opinion
of the City a substantial part of the Apartment Project, except for condemnation initiated
by the City.
4.1.7 There should occur any default declared by any lender under any
loan document or deed of trust relating to any loan made in connection with the
Apartment Project, which loan is secured by a deed of trust or other instrument senior to
this Housing Agreement.
4.2 Citv's Option to Lease. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, and to
cause the Apartment Project to meet the requirements of this Housing Agreement,
Owner hereby grants to the City the option to lease up to all of the Affordable Units in
the Apartment Project as necessary to achieve compliance with the provisions of Article
2 of this Housing Agreement, for the purpose of subleasing such apartment units in
accordance with the requirements of this Housing Agreement. Any net rental paid
under any such sublease shall be paid to the City without obligation to pay any such
rent to Owner during the pendency of Owner's default.
4.3 Specific Performance. The City shall have the right to mandamus or other suit,
action or proceeding at law or in equity to require the Owner to perform its obligations
and covenants under this Housing Agreement or to enjoin acts or things which may be
unlawful or in violation of the provisions hereof.
4.4 Action at Law; No Remedv Exclusive. The City may take whatever action at law
or in equity as may be necessary or desirable to enforce performance and observance
of any obligation, agreement or covenant of the Owner under this Housing Agreement.
No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved by the City is intended to be exclusive of
any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every such remedy shall be
cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this Housing
Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law, in equity or by statute. No delay or
omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such
right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver of such right or power, but any such
right or power may be exercised from time to time and as often as City may deem
expedient. In order to entitle the City to exercise any remedy reserved to it in this
Housing Agreement, it shall not be necessary to give any notice, other than such notice
as may be herein expressly required or required by law to be given.
9
ARTICLE 5. GENERAL PROVISIONS
5.1 Limitations on Recourse. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in
this Housing Agreement, except in the event of fraud, waste, illegal acts or gross
negligence, or with regard to any indemnity obligations imposed upon Owner under the
terms of this Housing Agreement, (i) no officer or director of Owner (each, an "Owner
Affiliate") shall have any direct, indirect or derivative personal liability for the obligations
of Owner under this Housing Agreement, and (ii) the City shall not exercise any rights or
institute any action against any Owner Affiliate directly, indirectly or derivatively for the
payment of any sum of money that is or may become payable hereunder.
5.2 Maintenance, Repair, Alterations. Owner shall maintain and preserve the
Apartment Project in good condition and repair and in a prudent and businesslike
manner. Owner shall comply with all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, covenants,
conditions, restrictions, and orders of any governmental authority now or hereafter
affecting the conduct or operation of the Apartment Project and of Owner's business on
the Apartment Project or any part thereof or requiring any alteration or improvement to
be made thereon. Owner shall not commit, suffer, or permit any act to be done in,
upon, or to the Apartment Project or any part thereof in violation of any such laws,
ordinances, rules, regulations, or orders. Owner hereby agrees that the City may
conduct from time to time through representatives, upon reasonable notice, on-site
inspections and observation of: (i) the maintenance and repair of the Apartment Project,
including a review of all maintenance and repair programs and practices and all reports
and records pertaining thereto, including records of expenditures relating thereto; and
(ii) such other facilities, practices, and records of Owner relating to the Affordable Units
of the Apartment Project as the City reasonably deems to be necessary or appropriate
in order to monitor Owner's compliance with the provisions of this Housing Agreement.
5.3 Notice. All notices (other than telephone notices), certificates or other
communications (other than telephone communications) required or permitted
hereunder shall be sufficiently given and should be deemed given when personally
delivered, when sent by telegram, or when sent by facsimile (if confirmed by sending a
copy of such transmission by mail the same calendar day), or forty-eight (48) hours
following mailing by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, or twenty-four hours
following transmission of such notice by express mail, Federal Express or similar
commercial carrier, addressed as follows:
If to the City:
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
Attn: Janet Moore, Director of Housing
Phone: (760) 346-0611
Fax: (760) 341-6372
�o
If to the Owner:
Urban Housing Communities, LLC
2000 E Fourth Street, Suite 205
Santa Ana, CA 92705
Attn: Douglas R Bigley, President
Phone: (714) 835-3955
Fax : (714) 835-3275
5.4 Relationshiq of Parties. Nothing contained in this Housing Agreement shall be
interpreted or understood by any of the parties, or by any third persons, as creating the
relationship of employer and employee, principal and agent, limited or general
partnership, or joint venture between the City and the Owner or the Owner's agents,
employees or contractors, and the Owner shall at all times be deemed an independent
contractor and shall be wholly responsible for the manner in which it or its agents, or
both, perform the services required of it by the terms of this Housing Agreement for the
operation of the Apartment Project. The Owner has and hereby retains the right to
exercise full control of employment, direction, compensation and discharge of all
persons assisting in the performance of services hereunder. In regards to the on-site
operation of the Project, the Owner shall be solely responsible for all matters relating to
payment of its employees, including compliance with Social Security, withholding and all
other laws and regulations governing such matters. The Owner agrees to be solely
responsible for its own acts and those of its agents and employees.
5.5 No Claims. Nothing contained in this Housing Agreement shall create or justify
any claim against the City by any person the Owner may have employed or with whom
the Owner may have contracted relative to the purchase of materials, supplies or
equipment, or the furnishing or the performance of any work or services with respect to
the operation of the Project.
5.6 Conflict of Interests. No member, official or employee of the City shall make any
decision relating to this Housing Agreement which affects his or her personal interests
or the interests of any corporation, partnership or association in which he or she is
directly or indirectly interested. No officer or employee of the Owner shall acquire any
interest in conflict with or inimical to the interests of the City.
5.7 Non-Liability of Citv Officials, Employees and Aqents. No member, official,
employee or agent of the City or the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palm Desert
shall be personally liable to the Owner, or any successor in interest, in the event of any
default or breach by the City or for any amount which may become due to the Owner or
successor or on any obligation under the terms of this Housing Agreement.
5.8 Unavoidable Delav; Extension of Time of Performance. In addition to specific
provisions of this Housing Agreement, performance by either party hereunder shall not
be deemed to be in default where it is due to an "Unavoidable Delay." "Unavoidable
Delay" means a delay due to the elements (including unseasonable weather), fire,
earthquakes or other acts of God, strikes, labor disputes, lockouts, shortages of
11
construction materials experienced generally in the construction industry in the local
area, acts of the public enemy, riots, insurrections or governmental regulation of the
sale or transportation of materials, supply or labor; provided, however, that to the extent
a delay is caused by any other reason that Owner reasonably believes is beyond its
control, Owner may request, on a case-by-case basis, that City excuse any such delay
as an Unavoidable Delay and City shall make its determination as to whether such
delay constitutes an Unavoidable Delay using its reasonable judgment.
5.9 Title of Parts and Sections. Any titles of the parts, sections or subsections of this
Housing Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be
disregarded in construing or interpreting any part of its provision.
5.10 Hold Harmless. Owner shall defend the City and the Agency (as defined in
section 5.17.3 below) and all officials, employees and agents of City and Agency(with
counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City or Agency, as the case may be) against any
claims or litigation of any nature whatsoever brought by third parties and directly or
indirectly arising from the Owner's ownership or operation of the Project, or the Owner's
performance of its obligations under this Housing Agreement, and in the event of
settlement, compromise or judgment hold the City and Agency free and harmless
therefrom.
5.11 Riqhts and Remedies Cumulative. Except as otherwise expressly stated in this
Housing Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative, and the
exercise or failure to exercise one or more of such rights or remedies by either party
shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same time or different times, of any right or
remedy for the same default or any other default by the other parry. No waiver of any
default or breach by the Owner hereunder shall be implied from any omission by the
City to take action on account of such default if such default persists or is repeated, and
no express waiver shall affect any default other than the default specified in the waiver,
and such wavier shall be operative only for the time and to the extent therein stated.
Waivers of any covenant, term, or condition contained herein shall not be construed as
a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same covenant, term or condition. The
consent or approval by the City to or of any act by the Owner requiring further consent
or approval shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary the consent or
approval to or of any subsequent similar act. The exercise of any right, power, or
remedy shall in no event constitute a cure or a waiver of any default under this Housing
Agreement, nor shall it invalidate any act done pursuant to notice of default, or prejudice
the City in the exercise of any right, power, or remedy hereunder or under any
agreements ancillary or related hereto.
5.12 Applicable Law. This Housing Agreement shall be interpreted under and
pursuant to the laws of the State of California.
5.13 Severabilitv. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Housing
Agreement is held in a final disposition by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,
void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect
12
unless the rights and obligations of the parties have been materially altered or abridged
by such invalidation, voiding or unenforceability.
5.14 Leqal Actions. In the event any legal action is commenced to interpret or to
enforce the terms of this Housing Agreement or to collect damages as a result of any
breach thereof, the party prevailing in any such action shall be entitled to recover
against the parry not prevailing all reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in such
action (including all legal fees incurred in any appeal or in any action to enforce any
resulting judgment).
5.15 Bindinp Upon Successors. This Housing Agreement shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the permitted heirs, administrators, executors, successors in
interest and assigns of each of the parties. Any reference in this Housing Agreement to
a specifically named party shall be deemed to apply to any successor, heir,
administrator, executor or assign of such party who has acquired an interest in
compliance with the terms hereof or under law.
5.16 Time of the Essence. In all matters under this Housing Agreement, time is of the
essence.
5.17 Aqproval bv the Citv.
5.17.1 Any approvals required under this Housing Agreement shall be
made by the City Manager or his or her designee, and shall not be unreasonably
withheld or made, except where it is specifically provided that another standard applies,
in which case the specified standard shall apply.
5.17.2 Except as otherwise provided in this Housing Agreement, whenever
this Housing Agreement calls for approval by the City of a proposed document to be
submitted by the Owner, the approving entity shall notify the Owner of approval or
disapproval within ten (10) business days after receipt of the proposed document, and
failure to respond within said ten (10) business day period shall not disapprove a
proposed document without giving specific reasons for its disapproval.
5.17.3 The City shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to delegate its
rights and or obligations under this Agreement, in whole or in part, to the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palm Desert, a public body, corporate and politic
(the "Agency").
5.18 Complete Understandina of the Parties. This Housing Agreement may be
executed in multiple originals, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. This
Housing Agreement and the attached Exhibits constitute the entire understanding and
agreement of the parties with respect to the matters described herein.
5.19 Burden and Benefit. The City and the Owner do hereby declare their
understanding and intent that (i) the burden of the covenants, reservations, restrictions,
and agreements set forth herein touch and concern the Apartment Site and the Project,
in that Owner's legal interest in the Project is rendered less valuable thereby, (ii) the
13
covenants, reservations, restrictions, and agreements set forth herein directly benefit
the Apartment Site and the Project (a) by enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and
use of the Project by certain Affordable Income Households, (b) by making possible the
obtaining of advantageous financing for the Apartment Site and the Project, and (c) by
furthering the public purposes advanced by the City, and (iii) the covenants,
reservations, restrictions and agreements set forth herein shall run with the Apartment
Site and shall be binding for the benefit of and enforceable by the City and its
successors and assigns for the entire term of this Housing Agreement.
5.20 Counterparts. This Housing Agreement may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which shall constitute one and
the same instrument.
WHEREFORE, the undersigned has executed this Housing Agreement as of the
date first-above written.
OWNER:
URBAN HOUSING COMMUNITIES, LLC,
a California limited Liability Company
By:
Name: DOUGLAS R BIGLEY
Its: President
CITY:
CITY OF PALM DESERT,
A Municipal Corporation
By:
Name:
Its:
14
State of California )
)SS.
County of )
On , 2009 before me, , a Notary Public,
personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and
that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. (Seal)
Signature
State of California )
)SS.
County of )
On , 2009 before me, , a Notary Public,
personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and
that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. (Seal)
Signature
15
EXHIBIT A
[Legal description of the Property]
That certain real property located in the County of Riverside, State of California, more
particularly described as follows:
PARCEL ' OF PARCEL MAP NO. ' ', AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK
PAGES TO ` ,; OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
APN:
P6402-0201\1111412v3.doc EXhlblt A-1
EXHIBIT B
[Legal description of the Child Care Site]
That certain real property located in the County of Riverside, State of California, more
particularly described as follows:
TBD
APN:
P6402-0201\1111412v3.doc Exhibit B-1
EXHIBIT C
HOUSEHOLD INCOME CERTIFICATION
Effedive Data:
HOUSEHOLD INCOME CERTIFICATION Move In Dete:
. . (M!D/YWY).
u Initial Certification _Recertification _Other
Property name:
Address: Unit No. #Bedrooms:
Pursuent to e Housing Agreement wiM the Ciry of Palm Desert,Pafm Desert Redevelopment Ageney,or tha Housing Authorily,Program Eligibiliry
end Aftadability venficetlons fa Low end Maderete Income Hausehdds shell be perfortned es required by Title 25 subject to etigibility verification
procedures and requirements described tBerein,end es amended fram time to time.The idlaving outlines how annual income is celculated to
determine househdd incane eligibility,which is required pria to the hasehold residing in an effordeble hasing un�t and every yeer thereefter for the
canpliance pariod. ;�y
fi
��>
The tdlrnving questions will assist you in completing the HOUSEHOLD INCOME CERTIFICATION.Wher� ering the questions answer°Yes"if
any oi the inTortnation requested a incane source pertains�to any tenant,co-tenent,a eduR indiv�d4��ber of the�sehold(individuels 18
years end dder)during the 12 months fdlanving the dete of the certificetian ar recertifcatim. �,\ y�
INCOME INFORMATION
YES NO (all sources are to be dfsclased be/ow un/ess otherwise excluded by 14�1THLY G ROSS I�JCOME
Title 25 Section) f ��� �'
�
U U Ilwe am self employed.(Listnature of self employment) �,�, (use net�me ft�1 business}
, $ ,
� � �'
,
;: >;�„
�� � .
Ll L1 I/we have a job and receive wages,salary overtirn�,�yF�ission��
tips,bonuses,andlor other compensatron List E��iusinesse��dlor � �
companies that pay you: �' -�� ����
Name of Employer, �� \� rpss income;amount
1) � ���` be�`ore any pay deductions}
�;
� TOTAL I�OME(BOX A) $
\�\ ���
❑ ❑ Uwe receive periodic social security paym�is ' � ����.�� $
� �
❑ ❑ I/we receNe Supple tal Security Income�Sl), �� $
;� �;
' TOTAL INCOME(BOX B) $
: � ��
n I� IMie receNe cash contributio�i5�of gifts inC��nt or utility payments,on
an ong� g basis from person$I�tpt livmg with mefus. $
� � I/we rec Assistance InctNfle
Other
aie e i t� $
TOTAL INCOME(BOX C) g
IJ Ll I/we receNe uc1#�nployment benefits. $
� ,� I/we erve Ve�n's Administration.GI Bill,or NaGonal GuardlMilitary
����: $
J ❑ The housel�re�eives uneamed income from family members age 17 or
under(exar�e:Social Security,foster care,etc.) $
v LJ I/�,rec�periodic disability or death benefits other than Social 5ecurity. $
n !l I/we'am entitled to receive child suppod payments,but am not currently
receiving payments.
IJ LI ��am currently receNing child supportpayments.
If yes,from how many persons do you receive support? $
J IJ Ilwe receNe alimony/spousal support payments $
J U Ihve receive periodic payments from trusts,annuities,inheritance,retirement
funds or pensions,insurance policies,wnrkers compensation and
seveiance,interest and dividends,or lottery winnings.
If yes,list sources:
1) $
Rew 2J28(10C�A
P6402-0201\1111412v3.doc Exhibit C-1
HOUSEHOLD INCOME CERTIFICATION
PAGE 2 OF 3
U U Ilwe receive income from rental,real or personal property. $
� � Any other income? Describe source: $
TOTAL INCOME(BOX DJ $
YES NO ASSET INFORMATION CASIT YALUE
J U Ilwe have a checking account �
If yes,list bank ,••��
�
5��
.......t;�
1) j '�
� � I/we have a savings account ��, .�������
If yes,list bank �•q�
>,3 r„ _.
l} $ ��
U U I/we have a revocable trust ��' y a�;:
If yes,list bank ��, ��:
��
1 � �� '�''�%'im.
) � $
\�w � �,
� n I/we own real estate: � ��
If yes,provide description � � ��
;�.
\�
i7 � Ilwe own stocks,bonds,or Treasury�s
If yes,list sources/bank names \\
�,
�) ,,,,� ��,�,, '��,� $
I/we have Cert'rficates of De osit CD or "° e A+h�
I� LJ p ( ) �? Y �Accaunf ''
If yss,list sourceslbank names � /�
�\�
1) ��� $
,�
I 1 (1 I/we have an IRAlLump Stt1'1�PensiCrtit���t A�ounU401 K
If yes,Iist bank "•
�� ��� �
U � I/we hav���whole/ �nee poli���:.,
If yes many����:; " $
� I/we have drsAc�s���assets(i e gave away moneylassets)for less than
�i� the fair marke�,Y,�h�1e in the past 2 years
If yes,list iteE�ls and date disposed:
� t
Y � �,��� "'�� $
n � �f�^� I/we recer�g�ther�eirms of capital investments.
If yes,desc�'{�#e source: $
YES MO STUD���TATUS
n n `�� p
Does the household consist of ersons who are all fuli-time studenis
(Examples:College/Unrversity,trade school,etc:)
n n Is student receiving financial aid(public or private,not including student
loans) $
n n Is student married and filing a joint tax return
U U Is student a single parentwith a dependentchild orchildren and neither you
nor your chiid(ren)are dependent of another individual
TOTAL INCOME(BOX F) I$
Rev 2i28G.00P
P6402-0201\1111412v3.doc Exhibit C-2
HOUSEHOLD INCOME CERTIFICATION
PAG E 3 OF 3
PART I.HOUSEHOLD COMPOSiTIOhI
HH �est Neme First Neme Reletionship to Dete of Birth y�udent Sacial Secudty
Mbr# &Mtldle Initiel Head of Househdd (NllD/YYYY) Y�N or Nien Req.No
Self
�.,:�,.
...��
TOTAL I10U5 D M �: #
PART IL GROSS ANNUAL INGON{E(USE ANNUAL AMOUN7S)
HH �q) (8) {(3 (�) ,,,;.
Mbr# Employment a Weges Sociel Security/pensions Public�4 nce `��Other I�C�'ita�e
1. �\ ���.
��i�ro��� �.
�,s, _.�:
��`` .. � ��3
`� �'
�yy, a� 'i a ,� ^z.
�, ,��
_.3,:
Addtdels hrough(D)""� TOTRLINCOME: (E)
PART III-INCOME FROM ASSETS
HH �F) v 3 (GI � ,� (H) (�)
Mbr# Type ofPass� C/I .� ash Velue ofAsset Mnual Income fiam Asset
ALL $SOOOAssetWaiver
�:�
�, ,�
,\ `�`- �_:
� TOTALS:
�;"
Enter�trYin(H)Total ��)
IfEt�aer$5,000 $ �•,x X 10.00°k = Imputed Income
� ,.
Er�hetotal olcdu�q,{J),or impUM�;d Incame(Jj,whichever is greater. TOTAL INCOME FROM ASSETS: (K)
" - „ #� ��otal Annual Household Income from all Sources[Add(E►+(K�]: (L)
HOWSEHOLQ'CERTIFICATION 8.SIG NATURES'
The infwmation an this form wil4 Nd�'used to determine mazimum income eligibility.I/we have provided each person(s)set forth in Part I acceptabla
verificetion af current anticip�t Bnnual incame.IiY✓e agree to notify the lendlord immedietely upon eny member of the household moving out of
the unit or any new mi��' ving in.Ilwe agree to notiiy the landlord immediately upon any member becoming a full-time student.
Unde�penalry of perjury of the laws of the State of California,I/we certity that the information presented in the Certification is true and accurete to
the best of my/our knmvledge end belief.The undersigned further understands thet providing felse representfltions herein constitutes an act pf
fraud.False,misleading or incomplete information may result in the termination of the lease agreement.
Signeture Date � Signature Dete
Signeture Date Signature Date
Re�zrze��noa
Exhibit C-3
EXHIBIT D
CERTIFICATE OF CONTINUING COMPLIANCE
OWNER'S GERTIFICATE OF CONTINUWG COMPLIANCE
To: City of Palm Desert Redevelopmerrt Agency
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert,CA 92260
Attn: Director of Housing
Certification Dates: From: To:
Project Name:
Project Number:
Project Address:
Tax Id#of Odvnership Er�tity:
The undersigned on behalf of
("the Owner",hereby ceRifies that
❑No buildings have been Placed in Service
❑Other
1. The project meets the minimum requirements of:
❑
❑
2. There has been change!no changefor any building in the project:
❑ NO CHANGE ❑ CHANGE
If"Change,"please list:
3. The owner has received annual Tenant Income Certification from all low-income households and
documentation to support that certification.
❑ YES ❑ NO
4. All low-income units in the project have been rent-restricted under the terms of Agreement No.:
❑ YES ❑ NO
5. Ali low-income units in the project have been and are being for used by the general public on a non-transient
basis:
❑ YES ❑ NO
6. No finding of discrimination under the Fair Housing Act,42 U.S.0 3601-3619,has occurred for this project.
A finding of discrimination includes an adverse final decision by the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Developmerit(HUD),24CFR 180.680,an adverse final decision by a substarrtially equivalent state or local
fair housing agency,42 U.S.0 3616a(a}(1),or and adverse judgment from a federal court:
❑ YES ❑ NO
List Finding if occurred:
G�RGAV'TACI KO�BECMI.ESSICAC-ONy4�E5\OY'NER'S CERTI�IfqTE OF CON7INUIN�-rOMPLIANrE-EXHIBI7 D.DOC
P6402-0201\1111412v3.doc EXhlblt D-1
7. Each building and low-income unit in the project is and has been suitable for occupancy,taking into account
local health,safety,and building codes(or other habitability standards),and the state oriocal govemmerrt'
unit responsible for making building wde inspections did not issue a report of a violation for any building or
low-income unit in the project:
❑ YES II NO
If"No"state nature of violation: Attach
a copy of the violation report as required 6y 26 CFR'I.42-and any documerrtation of correction.
8. All tenant facilities, such as swimming pools, othe� recreationaf facilities, parking areas, washer/dryer
hookups, and appliances were pcovided on a comparable basis, without charge, to all tenants in the
buildings
❑ YES ❑ N�
9. If arry of the low-income units in the project has been vacant during the year,reasonable attempts were or
are being made to rent that unit or the next available unit of comparable size to households having a
qualifying income before arry units were or will be rented to tenants nqt having a qualifying income:
❑ YES ❑ NO
10. If the income of a househoid of a low-income unit in ariy building increased above the qualifying limit allowed
by the Agreement NQ the next available unit of comparable size in that building was or will be
rer�ted to tenants having a qualifying income:
❑ YES ❑ Nq
11. There has been change b no change in the ownership or management of the project:
❑ NO CHANGE ❑ GHANGE
If"Change,"attach a copy detailing information ofthe changes in ownership or management of the project.
Note:Failure to complete this form in its errtiretywill result in non-compliance with program requirements.
In addition,any individual otherthan an owner or general partner of project is not permitted to sign this form,
The project is othenvise in compliance with Agreement No. and all other applicable
laws,rules and regulations. This Certification and any attachments are made UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY of
the Laws of the State of Califomia.
(Ownership Entry)
By:
T�ie:
Date:
Place:
G:�FDA\STACI KOLBECK�,.ES'SICA GONZALES�OU+1�1F.R'S^ERTIFICA7E t;F CONTINUIMG COh1PL'ANC.E-EXHIHR Ci DOC
Exhibit D-2
� City of Palm Desert/Ado ted 3.l 5.04 �
P
'� Comprehensive General Plan/Land Use Element
l
� PO�ICy g
Low income/affordable housing shall not be located within one area of the community, but shall
be dispersed where feasible, appropriate, and compatible with surrounding land uses.
Program 8.A
The City shall monitor the amount of low income housing available and make best efforts to
;;�;, meet State requirements for providing such housing types.
a� Responsible Agency: City Council, Planning Commission, Community Development
�:
�`�
Department; Redevelopment Agency
.;
Schedule: Continuous !
Policy 9
Within the University Park planning area, the City shall uniformly apply a "High Density
Overlay" designation to all lands designated for Medium Density Residential (R-M)
development to provide the opportunity to develop at R-H densities in compliance with specific
performance criteria.
Program 9.A
The "High Density Overlay" development standards assigned to allow development of R-H
(High Density Residential, 10-22 du/ac) on any R-M lands within the University Park planning
area shall be further elaborated and incorporated into the City Zoning/Development Code and
shall be consistent with the following performance criteria.
1. The percentage of residential units, whether single or multi-family, that shall be �
available for homeownership. �
2. High density residential neighborhoods shall be located in proximity and have
convenient access to public transportation.
3. High density residential development shall be located in proximity to schools, parks
and commercial services, which shall be accessible by means of non-motorized
vehicle routes.
4. The percent of proposed high-density units to be reserved to meet the affordable
housing needs of the community.
5. Adequacy and usability of landscaped open space planned internal and integral to the
design of high-density developments.
6. Development plans reflecting creative and innovative design in site planning,
building design and landscape treatment, consistent with the General Plan
Community Design Element.
7. Development proposals with high-density residential units shall include analyses of
the potential fiscal impacts of the development.
Responsible Agency: City Council, Planning Commission, Community Development
Department; Redevelopment Agency
« Schedule: 2004; On-going
�;,.
t,..
;�.
�� Land Use Element
�' III-30
�;;
�
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16. 200
Commissioner S. Campbell concurred with the other Commissioners. With
the hours of operation from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., no one would be there
to oppose the noise and she was also in favor of the project. She made a
motion to approve.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner S. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Limont, approving the findings as presented by staff.
Chairperson Tanner wanted to address the conditions of approval and the
requirement for review by the Architectural Review Commission. He asked
if this was something they could eliminate from the conditions. Mr. Bagato
said yes, it was just kind of a general condition for all projects and this
project didn't need to go there, so it could be eliminated.
Chairperson Tanner said the second issue was the maximum of 18 team
members at the approved site at any one time. They heard that there
might be a maximum of 24 and he asked if that was something they could
amend.
Commissioner S. Campbell amended her motion to allow up to 30 and
eliminated Condition of Approval No. 2. Ms. Aylaian asked the case
planner if there was sufficient parking for the increased number since the
project was analyzed using 18. Ms. Grisa said yes; she counted 30 plus
spaces just immediately adjacent to the building, in addition to many stalls
located farther away. Commissioner Limont seconded the amended
motion. Motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Commissioner S. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Limont, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2494, approving
Case No. CUP 08-444, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried
5-0.
� C. Case Nos. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191 - URBAN HOUSING COMMUNITIES,
LLC, Applicant
(Continued from December 2, 2008)
Request for a recommendation to the City Council for
approval of a change of zone from Planned Community
Development (PCD) to Planned Residential 14 dwelling units
per acre (PR-14), a tentative parcel map to subdivide an
11.8-acre parcel into two lots to accommodate a future
childcare facility not a part of the project, a precise plan of
7
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16. 2008
design to allow the construction of 144 affordable housing
units with amenities, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact as it relates to the proposed project.
The proposed project is located at 73-500 35th Avenue on
the south side of 35th Avenue between Gateway Drive and
Cortesia Way (C Street), also known as APN 694-130-005.
Ms. Schrader reviewed the staff report. She corrected a couple of
typographical errors on the draft resolution, correcting the spelling of the
word Council, changing The Living Desert to Urban Housing, LLC, and
noted that Public Works Condition of Approval No. 10 should say Chapter
27, not Chapter 26. She also added Community Development Condition
No. 12, "Prior to final approval of the change of zone, the applicant shall
enter into a housing agreement with the City of Palm Desert establishing
the percentage of housing units in the project that shall be maintained as
affordable to households with incomes between 25% and 60% of the area
median income. The affordability percentage shall be 100% as proposed
by the applicant, unless a lesser percentage is deemed acceptable by the
City Council. However, in no event shall the affordability percentage be
less than 20%. The agreement shall also establish the terms of
affordability, and include provisions requiring recordation of the
affordability restrictions against the subject property." Staff recommended
that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and the Resolution as
amended recommending to the City Council approval of Case Nos. CZ /
TPM / PP 08-191, subject to the conditions.
Commissioner R. Campbell asked if they were to deny this change, what
effect that would have on the applicant as far as how many units the
applicant could build. Ms. Aylaian explained that they were recommending
a change of zone to get to a certain density of residential units per acre.
Mr. Bagato further explained that the current zoning is PCD, which
requires a master planned project, which could be anything under the
General Plan. The General Plan allows anywhere from four to 22 units per
acre, but under the General Plan, four to nine units per acres is allowed
without having to meet the eight criteria of the high density overlay.
Anything above ten units requires the eight criteria for high density, so
either way the change of zone would be required under the PCD zone no
matter what type of project. Ms. Aylaian said that would get them roughly
99 units at nine units per acre using 11 acres.
Commissioner R. Campbell indicated that the problem he was faced with,
and the other members might not agree with him, but the City basically at
this point in time has about a 10% differential between owned and rental
and he felt they should be closer to 5% and 7%. If they looked at the one
8
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16. 2008
statement under B, it says in the University Park area 80% to 90% of the
residential units would be for purchase. That made it between 20% and
10%. The problem he was looking at is they are slowly increasing more
and more and more so he felt the rental units were getting too high versus
how many are purchased, and that's where his concern is and was his
question.
Commissioner Limont said it is to get us up to our requirement for
affordable housing. Ms. Schrader said yes, these are rental units.
Commissioner Limont said it was to help meet our affordable housing
requirement as opposed to simply being rentals; Ms. Schrader concurred.
Commissioner Limont noted that the City is mandated to have a certain
amount of affordable housing and this was going down that path. Ms.
Aylaian explained that this project could be anywhere from 20% affordable
to 100% affordable, so what it does provide is an assemblage of rental
units that would be appropriate for market rate or for subsidized affordable
housing units. But yes, they do try to maintain a balance of rental units to
ownership units, and in particular in the north sphere or University Park
planning area, they thought it was appropriate that there be more rental
units than perhaps in other parts of the city, because of the proximity of
the university and because of the proximity to some of the jobs and the big
box retail type jobs that would be there. So they were trying to maintain a
balance and a proximity between our workforce, housing and actual jobs
they would be filling.
Commissioner R. Campbell said that basically what they were saying to
him is that this type of project is almost a set aside project and it cannot be
used in the calculations for the City as a whole which he is concerned
with. Because if they are mandated, then they've said to him that he
doesn't have any choice; he has to have a higher percentage than they
would normally allow or want. Ms. Aylaian said they don't put a limit on the
number of rental or ownership units in the city as a whole. They do look for
strategic locations to locate rental versus ownership units and this
particular location is one staff felt would be ideal for rental units.
Commissioner R. Campbell said if he wanted to do that calcutation and felt
they were having too many rentals, he would have to basically set that
aside and not count that in as the city of Palm Desert where the federal
government or anyone else was involved. Ms. Aylaian said no, it was
appropriate if he had a concern and felt we have too many rental units in
the city; she thought it was appropriate for him to state his concern as a
policy issue. Nonetheless, the State of California does mandate, and is
passed down through our RHNA allocation for affordable housing units
and housing units of all types, moderate income as well as affordable, a
9
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16. 2008
certain number of housing units that need to be made available in the city.
In order to produce that, the City is obligated to produce a large number of
affordable housing units and those almost by definition need to be rental
units. They have found that for some people of moderate or slightly above
moderate income, it is appropriate that they be homeowners and they do
provide them owner units like at Desert Rose, or Falcon Crest. But in
general, they've had greater success making affordable units be rental
type units for rental tenancy. Because of this particular location, staff felt
this was an appropriate location for rental units. If the Commission or the
Council in general were concerned that they were ending up with too
many rental units in town, she would propose that other locations not as
fortuitously situated be considered for ownership to readjust that balance,
because if they are looking for a place appropriate for rentals, staff
believed this was an ideal location.
Commissioner Schmidt said it was a little confusing because on the plat
buildings were identified numerically, and then on the rendering it talked
about 16-plex Building A. She asked how many of these buildings would
exceed the 25-foot height limit. Ms. Schrader explained that there are
eight 16-plex buildings and they start at 24 feet and they progress with
almost five different roof pitches all the way to 29, but the portion that
exceeds the 24 is only 21%. The rest of it, 79%, was under the 24-feet or
at 24 feet. If they looked at the site plan at the buildings along 35t", these
larger buildings were the 16-plex buildings. There are two 8-plex buildings,
Building No. 4 and Building No. 8. The remainder of the buildings was the
16-plexes. They were two stories with eight units on each floor.
Of the ten structures, Commissioner Schmidt said that eight of them have
this roof. Ms. Schrader showed a rendering with the varying roof pitches.
Commissioner S. Campbell asked if this would be a gated community.
She didn't see any gates on the plan on 35th Avenue. Ms. Schrader didn't
see a gate on 35th; there was, however, a gate on the west side on
Gateway. She thought that might be conceptual and might be something
they were still deciding. She would imagine there would be a gate, but was
something they could ask the applicant.
Commissioner Schmidt asked if the parcel that was set aside for future
daycare use was owned by the same group that owns the rest of the
property. Ms. Schrader said it is right now.
There were no other questions for staff. Chairperson Tanner opened the
public hearing and asked the applicant to address the Commission.
10
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16. 2008
MR. MARK IRVING, Urban Housing Communities, 2000 E. Fourth
Street, Suite 205, in Santa Ana, California, 92705, said he had a
few things. One thing that wasn't mentioned in terms of noting into
the record was that UHC is actually the owner of the property now.
He thought the initial staff report had the previous owner. In terms
of the project, just to address some of the questions they had about
it, it is a gated community. Secondly, the daycare facility was
designed initially on the corner of Gateway and 35th. The City asked
that it be relocated to its current location. The thought of the
daycare center was also an idea of the City's, so they included it
and that's why they were asking for a subdivision of the parcels.
In terms of the conditions, he mentioned that regarding Condition
No. 12, they believed it should read as per code, which was
essentially that somebody would go into a housing agreement and
that would be based on the requirements of the housing in the area.
It was their full intention to have it as 100% affordable, but their
understanding was the entitlements and the economics were
separate and this condition combined the two. So they believed that
the section regarding the affordability, the income levels, should not
be part of it. He asked for any questions.
Commissioner S. Campbell noted that with the economy the way it is
going, if they have approval for this project, how far down the line it would
be built.
Mr. Irving replied that the process of affordable projects is to utilize
tax credits and bonds. Upon approval of the project, the project
would then apply for the bonds and then the tax credits. They would
anticipate that through that process they would be looking at a start
time of approximately August-September of 2009.
Chairperson Tanner asked if they anticipated because of the location that
they would be renting in the future to college students aged 18-22. He
asked if demographically that was what they were heading for or trying to
get.
Mr. Irving couldn't say they have ever sat down and said they were
going to target it to college students. If they applied and then
showed the documentation pursuant to the relative income levels,
they would qualify. He wasn't a legal expert on that, but thought if
someone was qualified, regardless of their age, they couldn't say
no, they weren't going to rent to them. Their thoughts were that it is
a multi-family project. It would be adjacent in the future, and due to
11
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16� 2008
the slowdown in the economy maybe a little bit further in the future,
but it is adjacent to an elementary school. They find that a very
important element to the affordable housing community because
families make multiple trips a day to a school. Wasn't it best if kids
walk to school and parents can walk with them and they could then
go off to work and come home and the kids are able to come home
and they don't have to worry about that as opposed to going back
and forth from work and so forth. So it was actually ideal in the fact
that they don't have a reduction in traffic relative to this project
because it will be close to the school and close to the amenities:
the Costco, Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, and that was important to them
too because it makes life better for the people that live there.
Commissioner R. Campbell said he had a couple of questions. He learned
yesterday that the City has a project and they had a fire in a unit and they
were using a new type of stops and because of that, the fire was
contained to that one section, which was important. He asked if something
like that was built into this project.
Mr. Irving said they are all designed to the California codes and in
2007 they did increase the firewall requirements between the units.
As well, the units will have sprinklers in them. Each unit will have
that in the event of a fire, and they would like to think that it would
be contained within that unit, preferably in that little space before it
got too big.
Commissioner R. Campbell noticed that because of the height changes on
the plans, on some of these buildings they would take dirt out and drop
them down. He asked if that was part of the reasoning to make the roofline
user friendly for the city.
Mr. Irving said that the user friendliness came from the Architectural
Review Board. They had initially had a prairie style design and the
roof was level, it fit within the height requirement, and Architectural
Review said they didn't like that roof and to come back with a
different roof style. And they actually came back with a completely
different architectural style and with the variations in the roof, which
then did break up the plane of the building. In the process, the
architecture was approved and it wasn't until after the fact that it
came to light that the elements of the roof were higher than the
code. As far as the site itself, the site actually does slope 50 feet
from one end to another. He said it didn't appear to be that way
when you're on the corner of C Street and 35th. When you look
there, you don't realize that you do have that kind of fall in there.
12
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16. 2008
There would be some excavation of dirt because there was a fair
amount of fall overall on the site.
Commissioner R. Campbell thanked him and said he liked the new design.
Chairperson Tanner asked for any testimony in FAVOR of or in
OPPOSITION to the proposed project. There was no one and the public
hearing was closed. Chairperson Tanner asked for Commission
comments.
Commissioner Limont had trouble that the answer to architectural
questions or concerns is to go up; to go six feet up from 24 to basically 30.
She just had difficulty with that. She was in favor of the project and in favor
of addressing our needs for affordable housing. She thought it was in the
right place in the city. She thought it also fell in line with regard to the bike
lanes that Parks & Recreation are working on and a lot of different issues
with regard to transportation. She thought it was a perfect spot for this
type of project. But the architecture didn't do a lot for her.
Commissioner S. Campbell had no objection to the height as shown. She
thought the different buildings were strategically placed on the location
and it gave it more movement rather than having a flat roof or looking the
same. She had no objection to that and they (Architectural Review
Commissioners) are architects and knew better than they did.
Commissioner R. Campbell also had no problem with the height. In talking
with someone in the past here he was expressing the type of concern that
Commissioner Limont had and they reminded him that was part of the
reason why the code was written as it is written, to give them some
flexibility. As long as it slopes and they are sitting it down, that wasn't
going to be a large concern for him.
Commissioner Schmidt stated that she had the same concern as
Commissioner Limont. They seemed to agree on this, but for this project
in that place, she would not object to the height. But it was curious to her
that apparently the applicant came in within the restrictions of the 24-foot
height limit and Architectural Review Commission said let's make it higher.
She had trouble with that and thought maybe they should have a joint
meeting or something and kind of talk it through, but she felt it was a good
project in a good, needed place and she would not object to it.
Chairperson Tanner also agreed with comments that had been made. He
was not opposed to the 29.5 or 30-foot parapet. It gave a nice break to it.
Again, it was in a location that was something that was going to be
13
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16� 2008
needed for the appearance. He moved to approve the applicant's
submission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner R. Campbell.
Action:
It was moved by Chairperson Tanner, seconded by Commissioner R.
Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff.
Mr. Bagato noted that the applicant brought up the issue of Condition No.
12. As Mr. Irving stated, the finance approval was separate from the
planning approval of the site plan, but until the financing was worked out,
staff wanted to make sure it addressed a minimum of 20% low income.
That was a pretty standard condition on any kind of housing/apartment
project.
Ms. Aylaian said it was also appropriate for the application of the criteria in
the General Plan, so they were looking at a land use issue that says in
order to get the high density overlay, you need to meet certain criteria,
including that a percentage be made available for affordable housing.
Therefore, they wanted to keep in the criteria a requirement of a minimum
of 20% of affordability.
Commissioner Schmidt noted that a revised resolution was given to them
that evening. She asked if what they were talking about was included in
that resolution. Ms. Aylaian said yes. That resolution was the same one
that was in the packet with the exceptions that Ms. Schrader read into the
record, which included that one new condition and the three minor typos.
Commissioner Schmidt stated that she just wanted to make sure she was
comparing apples to apples.
Chairperson Tanner noted that there was a motion and a second as it
stands.
Mr. Irving wanted to ask a question about that because pursuant to
the questions that went back and forth on Condition 12, they
weren't saying it shouldn't note 20%, they were just saying per the
code, and that would be 20%. They were just saying that the
additional language in it related to affordable housing 100% should
be separate from the condition.
Commissioner Schmidt thought they should look at it. Ms. Aylaian asked
Janet Moore, the Director of Housing, to address the issue.
Ms. Moore stated that the applicant had made a comment that this issue is
separate from the financing from the Planning approval. However, as part
14
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16� 2008
of the General Plan high density overlay, there is a requirement for
affordable units within the development of any housing project. This
project, although it is being proposed as 100% affordable, the applicant is
seeking financing. If he is unable to obtain that financing, he may decide
to reduce the number of affordability in the project. In the event he does
that, he would come back to the City Council for approval of a reduced
amount so that the City Council could review the financial aspects of that.
However, she believed that the applicant was requesting that the 20%
requirement be placed in as a condition, however, she would ask the
applicant if what he is challenging or requesting is the level of affordability
that was put into the words within Condition No. 12.
Ms. Aylaian also added that this project would have to go to the City
Council for approval and they could always make minor modifications in a
particular condition subject to discussion and working out details with the
applicant and legal counsel before getting to the City Council.
Mr. Irving said in answer to the question, Ms. Moore was correct.
They were asking in terms of the specific language regarding the
affordability 25% to 60%, 100% affordable, not be part of the
condition. Just have the condition standards as if it were just any
project coming before them. That was what they were saying.
There would be certainly a time when they would be discussing the
housing agreement and all that language would be going into the
housing agreement at that time.
Ms. Moore explained that staff's concern was that staff had not been able
to, based on a simple 20% affordability requirement, had not had an
opportunity to review a project with only 20% as far as the proforma and
the financial feasibility of the project. It was reviewed with 100%
affordability with respect to all of the amenities that they have seen, the
child care facility, etc., and they have reviewed it as a 100% affordable
project, however, as a condition of approval with a requirement between
20% and 100%, there has been no evaluation of those conditions. So for
staff to recommend a percentage of that 20% to be anywhere from very
low to low, she would need further time to review that with the applicant in
order to insure they are asking for the correct number of affordable units
within the feasibility of the finances of the project.
Chairperson Tanner noted that there was a motion and a second and
asked if there was any further discussion.
Commissioner Schmidt said she was unclear as to what they would be
approving. What she heard was that the condition was sort of set to meet
15
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16� 2008
the criteria of low income housing as they view it in the city. What she
heard the applicant just say is that he would like that restriction set aside
and verbalized another way. In her view, with a change of zone they
couldn't really just have that up in the air. They were either going to have it
that way or not. She was in favor of what she just saw and read. She was
not in favor of opening the door to it not being affordable housing and she
needed some clarification on that.
Mr. Hargreaves recommended that it go forward and be approved as is.
This was an issue that just came up within the last day or so and this was
a recommendation to the City Council and would give them time to sit
down and work through it. Nothing that happened tonight was going to be
binding and he didn't want to hold up the project based on this aspect of it.
If they were satisfied with it from a zoning / planning kind of perspective,
they could work out the affordability between now and the time it got to the
City Council. Commissioner Schmidt clarified without changing the
resolution as written. Mr. Hargreaves concurred, without changing the
modified resolution before them.
There was no further discussion; Chairperson Tanner called for the vote.
Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Limont voted no).
It was moved by Chairperson Tanner, seconded by Commissioner R.
Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2495,
recommending to the City Council approval of Case Nos. CZ/TPM/PP 08-
191, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Limont voted
no).
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
None.
X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES
A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
Commissioner S. Campbell indicated that the next meeting would
be December 17, 2008.
B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE
Commissioner Limont said the next meeting would be in January.
16
r
(�� �
� � C I 1 V 0 F P������n L �1 D E S E R 1
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
� PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-257a
� �
TEL: 760 346—o6tt
Fnx: 76o 34�-7oq8
info@palm-desert.org
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: December 17, 2008
Mark Irving David Dietterle
Urban Housing, LLC Lundstrom & Associates
2000 E. Fourth Street, Suite 205 1764 San Diego Avenue, Suite 200
Santa Ana, California 92705 San Diego, California 92110
Re: CZ/TPM/ PP 08-191
73-500 35th Avenue
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and
taken the following action at its regular meeting of December 16, 2008:
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF CASE NOS. CZ/TPM/PP 0&191 BY ADOPTION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2495, SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED 4-1 (COMMISSIONER
LIMONT VOTED NO).
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk, City of Palm
Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. This item is tentatively
scheduled for the January 22, 2009 City Council meeting.
Lauri Aylaian, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
/tm
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
�
y,111M1l0 ON IE(r(tfU MIEI
� � � �
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2495
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY URBAN HOUSING LLC, FOR
A CHANGE OF ZONE (CZ), A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TPM), AND A
PRECISE PLAN (PP) OF DESIGN TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF
144 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WITH AMENITIES. THE
PROPOSAL WILL CHANGE THE ZONE FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT (PCD) TO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL 14 DWELLING
UNITS PER ACRE (PR-14) AND SUBDIVIDE AN 11.8 ACRE PARCEL
INTO TWO (2) LOTS TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE CHILDCARE
FACILITY NOT A PART OF THE PROJECT. THE PROPOSED PROJECT
IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 35T" AVENUE BETWEEN
GATEWAY DRIVE AND CORTESIA WAY (C STREET), ALSO KNOWN
AS APN 694-130-005. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
RESULTING FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT
TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) HAS
BEEN PREPARED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND IS ON FILE IN
THE CIN OF PALM DESERT PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
CASE NOS. C71rPM/PP 08-191
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did
on the 16th day of December, 2008, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
request by Urban Housing, LLC, for approval of the above noted; 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. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined
that the project as mitigated will not have a significant impact on the environment and a
Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared (See Resolution Exhibit A); 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 said
Change of Zone that:
In acco�dance with the Palm Desert Municipaf Code 25.24, an appficant may
request a change of zone to a PR zone by filing a petition along with a precise
plan and supporting documentation, in accordance with Section 25.24.060 of the
Municipal Code. If, after a public hearing, the Planning Commission approves the
petition, the change of zone and precise plan are subject to approval by the Ci�
Council.
In accordance with Municipal Code Section 25.84.060 Action by the planning
commission, the Planning Commission shall make a specific finding as to
pLANNING COMMISSI4.. RESOLUTION NO. 2495 ( � �
whether the change is consistent with the objectives of the zoning ordinance and
shall recommend that the application be granted, granted in modified form, or
denied. The denial of the request by the planning commission shall be
considered final unless appealed.
Staff finds that a change of zone from the currently prescribed Planned
Community Development (PCD) zone to the requested Planned
Residential zone of 14 dwelling per acre is consistent with the objectives
of the zoning ordinance with respect to its proposed density, height,
architecture, parking, and recreational open space requirements, as
specified in the analysis portion of the staff report. (See Resolution Exhibit
A "Change of Zone").
While the development proposes a medium to high density to be
constructed on the property, it conforms to the restriction of the PR zone
of providing at least 40% of useable recreational open space. An exhibit
illustrating the calculations for the proposed hardscape, building footprints
and parking versus the remaining areas that are at 13% grade or less is
attached to this report as an exhibit. (See Resolution Exhibit C "Area
Comparison Plan").
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 in accordance with Title 26 Subdivisions of the Municipal Code as
per Section 26.20.100 the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of said
Tentative Parcel Map that:
1. The subdivision will be consistent with the applicable general plan, as it
meets the findings for land use designation Policy 9, for the University
Park planning area and the findings for the "High Density Overlay Zone".
Also it provides a housing product type in an area of the city where it can
meet the needs for the workforce responding to the commercial, industrial
and university uses in proximity.
2. The design and improvements are consistent with the general plan. The
design accommodates an affordable density while remaining in harmony
with the types of businesses and community plans approved for the area.
3. The site is physical/y suitab/e for this type of development. The site is a
gently sloping area which is suitable for the stepped aspect of the
buildings.
4. The site is physically suitab/e for this type of proposed density. The site
is capable of carrying this type of compact housing product as it abuts the
commercial Monterey Avenue corridor and is planned adjacent to a K-8
school.
2
�
PLANNING COMMISSIGN RESOLUTION NO. 2495 �
5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. A Mitigated Negative
Declaration is attached to the request which concludes that there are no
significant impacts to the environment.
6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not
like/y fo cause serious public health problems. A Mitigated Negative
Declaration is attached to the request which concluded that there would
be no significant public health problems associated with the approval of
the project.
7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not
contlict with recorded public easements, for access through, or use of,
property within the subdivision. The following recorded access-ways
apply: 18-foot city right-of-way on 35th avenue, 18-foot right of way on
Gateway Drive, and 12-foot right of way on Cortesia Street. There are
existing water mains and sewer lines down the center of Gateway and 35tn
Avenue. The project has been analyzed by the City's Public Works
Department, the Coachelta Valley Water District, and the County's Fire
and Police Departments.
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 said
Precise Plan Request that:
1. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 25.73 Precise Plan, the
Planning Commission may find that if the proposed precise plan would
substantially depreciate property values in the vicinity; or would endanger
the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, such plan shall be
rejected or shall be so modified or conditioned before adoption as to
remove said objections.
The proposed plan, as designed and as conditioned, would
upgrade rather than depreciate the appearance of the current
vacant lot and would create desired housing for the work force. The
proposed architectural style would be refreshing and add visual
variety to the streetscape. New plant materials in the landscape
would formalize the site and create compatibility with the adjacent
surroundings.
2. The Planning Commission may also consider the exterior architectural
design, general exterior appearances, landscape, color, te�ure of surface
materials and exterior construction, shape and bulk, and other physical
characteristics including location and type of public utility facilities. If the
3
PLANNING COMMISSI�� RESOLUTION NO. 2495 �._.- �
Planning Commission were to find that the proposed precise plan of
design, including the considerations enumerated in the Code would
interfere with the orderly development in the vicinity of the precise plan
area, it could reject or modify the precise plan or condition its approval as
to remove the objections.
The proposed architectural style exhibits a variety of modulated
spaces. Maximum attention is given to the detailing of the
architectural language so as to provide a lasting positive
contribution to the built environment. Where there are roof pitches
up to 29'S" feet in height, the maximum roofline height occupies
only 21% of the entire appearance. The added height relieves the
"long-box" horizontality of the buildings. The proposed materials
and forms will render a unique and aesthetic appearance to the
surrounding streetscape.
The proposed trim, fascia and wall surface colors are muted so as
to not detract from the desert environment. The proposed
combination of landscape and architecture, rather than interfere,
would add versatility to the development of the vicinity.
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 it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Change of
Zone, Tentative Parcel Map, Precise Plan 08-191, subject to conditions
attached.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 16th day of December, 2008, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: CAMPBELL, CAMPBELL, SCHMIDT, TANNER
NOES: LIMONT
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
�
� VAN G. ANNER, Chairperson
ATTES • / ��
�- = ��
;
LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
4
.
r,.
PLANNING COMMISSIGN RESOLUTION NO. 2495
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NOS. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
Deaartment of Communitv Develoament:
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. Construction of said project shall commence within one (1) year from the date of
final approval unless an extension of time is granted, otherwise said approval shall
become null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by
this approval, the applicant shall �rst 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.
4. 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.
5. Applicant shall comply with each mitigation measure as identified in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration prepared November 12, 2008, summarized in the Staff Report
prepared for the Planning Commission meeting of December 2, 2008, and stated in
detail within the attached Initial Study comments.
6. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building
permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Coachella Valley Multiple
Species Conservation Plan, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees.
7. A detailed outdoor path and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for
approval, subject to applicable lighting standards. The plan must be prepared by a
qualified lighting engineer.
5
PLANNING COMMISSI�.. RESOLUTION NO. 2495 `
8. The project is subject to the Art in Public Places program per Palm Desert Municipal
Code Chapter 4.10.
9. All conditions of approval shall be recorded with the Riverside County Clerk's office
before any building permits are issued. Evidence of recordation shall be submitted to
the Department of Community Development/Planning.
10. The proposed size and enclosures for trash must accommodate at minimum one
trash and one recycle bin.. Construction of all trash/recycling enclosures must meet
Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 8.12 standards. The City and Burrtec must
review and sign off on the ptans in relation to the placement and number of
trash/recycling enclosures. Review of the plans by Burrtec will ensure that vehicle
circulation for its trucks is adequate to service the complex.
11. A bus pad will be required at a minimum of 10 feet wide and 15 feet long for a bus
shelter at the southeast corner of Gateway and 35�h Avenue as per the Director of
Special Programs.
12. Prior to final approval of the change of zone, the applicant shall enter into a
housing agreement with the City of Palm Desert establishing the percentage of
housing units in the project that shall be maintained as affordable to households
with incomes between 25% and 60% of the area median income. The
affordability percentage shall be 100% as proposed by the applicant, unless a
lesser percentage is deemed acceptable by the City Council. However, in no
event shall the affordability percentage be less than 20%. The agreement shall
also establish the terms of affordability, and include provisions requiring
recordation of the affordability restrictions against the subject property.
Department of Public Works:
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. All landscape maintenance shall be performed by the property owner and the
applicant shall enter into a landscape maintenance agreement with the City for the
life of the project, consistent with the Municipal Code provisions and the approved
landscaped plan.
2. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer,
shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Pubfic Works prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.
BONDS AND FEES
3. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17
and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permit.
4. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF).
6
f� . - _ . .
PLqNN�NG C�M �`� _ _ �
, MISSI�,��'RESp � � � � �
LUTIpN N�, 2495
�
PaYment of said fees shap pe
5' A standard ins at the time o f buildin
s Aection fee shali be 9 pe�mit issuance.
Drainage fees pa�d p��Of to issu
shail be � �n accordance ance of gradin
pa�d P►'►or to issuance of�th Section 9 Perm�ts.
�ESIG 26.49 o f the P Dese
N REQUIREMENrs 9►'ading permits. a�m ►t Munici
� pal Code
A�Y storm drain
�ep►tme b d9 s ered�COnstruction
Y a re shall be
nt of Pub��� works �V�� engineer that �S contingent upon a
8. prior to start of construction.wed and d�amage study
Comp►ete gradin approved b
the Director 9 and improve Y the
perrnits. �f PUb�i� Works fot chep�k n and specification
9, 9 and S shall be sub
AnY and aPprova� pr�o� to issuance o ed to
� all offsite im f any
issuance of valid encroachrne nts shall be
10, nt perm�ts b preceded by the a
Pad elevations Y the Department o�proval of p►ans
of the pa�m are subject to review ublic and the
Desert Munic; and rr�odification �n w�rks.
11. Pa� Code, accordance
Landscape installation W�th Cha
C��'S Water E�cient Shali be drou pter 27
Landsca ght tolerant in
�2• Landsca pe Ordinance nature and ;n
Pe plans �24•04), accordance with the
shall be subrnitted for review co
13. Fu�� pub��� �m ncurrentl
Code, shall be instal ed in�a�S re Y with gradin
quired by Section 26 g p�ans.
cordance W�th C� of the Pa1
' Installation tY standar m �esert
• of 6-foot ds including: Municipal
Rights sidewalk with
�►�prove f W ay necessary for the �n dedication ement
ments shall be stallation ��Eas
perrnits associated W�th�h s��ated to the °f the above
C�NST r ' C�tY prior to referenced
RUCT�pN RE p o1ect. the issuance
QUIREMENrS of any
14. fllP rivate grading and
ublic Works paving irr� r
have been comp�eted.nO °ccupan y Ae m t Shall all be inspected p
1 5. q pp���ant shall comp� b e 9►'a n ted until the hm�epartment
Fu git i v e D u s t y W�t h p�ove r r�e n t s
Dischar C�ntrol as p r o visions of pa�m
9� C o n t r o l. We 1 1 a s Secfion 24D�e rt Munici de
16. . Storrn w a� C0 section
Pr'Or to the ater Mana 24•12,
the Director o f P°f �onstruction, the gement and
ublic I/V o r k s o f intended co t s h a f 1 s
ubmit satisfacto '�
7 ►�p l i a n c e wi t h the Nati nal VPol�Ce tO �
utant
�
PLANNING COMMISSI�.. RESOLUTION NO. 2495 `- ' �`
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit for storm water
discharges associated with construction. Developer must contact Riverside County
Flood Control District for informational materials.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
17. Complete parcel map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of
Public Works and for checking and approval, and recorded conveying day care site
to the city, prior to the issuance of any permits.
18. Applicant shall show good faith effort to coordinate grading and fencing issues with
the Palm Springs Unified School District for their southerly property line.
19. Access onto Gateway Drive shall have emergency entrance only, and exit only
for residents with appropriate signage.
Buildina & Safetv Department:
1. Project must conform to the current State of California Codes adopted at the time of
plan check submittal. The following are the codes enforced at this time:
2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (Based on 2006 IBC)
2007 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (Based on 2006 UMC)
2007 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (Based on 2006 UPC)
2007 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (Based on 2005 NEC)
2007 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE
2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
2. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed as required per the
City of Palm Desert Code Adoption Ordinance 1145.
3. Compliance with Ordinance 1124, Local Energy Efficiency Standards. The
requirements are more restrictive than the 2007 California Energy Code. Please
obtain a copy of the Ordinance for further information.
4. A disabled access overlay of the precise grading plan is required to be submitted to
the Dept of Building and Safety for plan review of the site accessibility requirements
as pef 2007 CBG Chapt�rs 11A & B (as applicable) and Cha�ter 10..
5. All exits must at common area facilities shall provide an accessible path of travel to
the public way. (CBC 1024.6 & 1127B.1)
6. Detectable warnings shall be provided where required per CBC 11336.8 and
1127B.5 (7). The designer is also required to meet all ADA requirements. Where an
ADA requirement is more restrictive than the State of California, the ADA
requirement shall supercede the State requirement.
8
f
° PLANNING COMMISSIG� RESOLUTION NO. 2495 �`-
7. Provide an accessible path of travel to the trash enclosures.
8. Public pools and spas must be first approved by the Riverside County Dept of
Environmental Health and then submitted to Dept of Building and Safety. Pools and
Spas for public use are required to be accessible.
9. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business
License prior to permit issuance per Palm desert Municipal Code, Title 5.
10. All contractors and/or owner-builders must submit a valid Certificate of Worker's
Compensation Insurance coverage prior to the issuance of a building permit per
California Labor Code, Section 3700.
11. Address numerals shall comply with Palm Desert Ordinance No. 1006 (Palm Desert
Municipal Code 15.04.110 through 15.04.160). Compliance with Ordinance 1006
regarding street address location, dimension, stroke of line, distance from street,
height frorn grade, height from street, etc. shall be shown on all architectural building
elevations in detail. Any possible obstructions, shadows, lighting, landscaping,
backgrounds or other reasons that may render the building address unreadable shall
be addressed during the plan review process. You may request a copy of Ordinance
1006 from the Department of Building and Safety counter staff.
12. Please contact Debbie Le Blanc, Land Management Specialist, at the Department of
Building and Safety (760-776-6420) regarding the addressing of all buildings and/or
suites.
Riverside Countv Fire Deaartment:
1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced project,
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 �re 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 in job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow of:
a. 2500 gpm for multi family dwellings
b. 5000 gpm for commercial buildings (recreation house)
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super hydrant (s) 4" x 2 '/"
x 2 '/Z " , located no more than:
9
PLANNING COMMISSI��.. RESOLUTION NO. 2495 (- �
a. 165 feet from any portion of a multifamily dwelling measure via vehicular
travelway.
b. 150 feet from any portion of a commercial building measured via vehicular
travelway.
5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshall and include verification that the
water system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with a
3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The Fire Marshall shall approve the
locations of all post indicator valves and fire department connections. All valves and
connections shall not be less than 25 feet form the buildings and within a 50 of an
approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings.
7. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water flow
switches shall be monitored and alarmed per CBC Chapter 9.
8. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
9. All buildings 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 feet 6 inches 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.
10. Whenever access in private property is controlled thought use of gates barriers or
other means provisions shall be made to install a "Knox-Box" key override system to
allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width shall be 16 feet with a
minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches.
11. A dead end single access over 500 feet will require a secondary access, sprinklers
or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshall. Under no circumstance
shall a dead end over 1300 feet be accepted.
12. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points
from a main roadway or an emergency gate form an adjoining development.
13. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city.
14. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be
submitted separately to the Fire Marshall for approval prior to construction.
15. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances laws, or when
buildings permits are not obtained within finrelve months.
16. Sprinkler systems installed shall be NFPA 13R in living space and NFPA 13 in all
attic spaces.
10
r
`; . �_
,
PLANNING COMMISSIt�N RESOLUTION NO. 2495
Coachella Vallev Water District:
1. Plans for grading, landscaping, and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the
District for review to ensure efficient water management.
2. Additional comments from Coachella Valley Water District are included as last
attachment.
11
�,� �`
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: Recommendation to the City Council of Palm Desert to
approve a request by Urban Housing LLC, for approval of a
Change of Zone (CZ), a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM), and a
Precise Plan (PP) of Design to allow the construction of 144
affordable housing units with amenities. The proposal will
change the zone from Planned Community Development
(PCD) to Planned Residential 14 dwelling units per acre
(PR-14) and subdivide an 11.8-acre parcel into two (2) lots
to accommodate future Childcare Facility not a part of the
pro�ect. The proposed project is located on the south side of
35t Avenue between Gateway Drive and Cortesia Way (C
Street), also known as APN 694-130-005. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration resulting from an Environmental
Assessment pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) has been prepared for the proposed
project and is on file in the City of Palm Desert Planning
Department.
SUBMITTED BY: Renee Schrader, Associate Planner
APPLICANT: Mark Irving
Urban Housing, LLC
2000 E. Fourth Street, Suite 205
Santa Ana, CA 92705
REPRESENTATIVE: David Dietterle
Lundstrom & Associates
1764 San Diego Avenue Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92110
PROPERTY OWNER: MacLeod-Couch Land Company LLC and Baxley Properties
777 S. Pacific Coast Highway Suite 204
Solana Beach, CA 92705
CASE NO(s): CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
DATE: December 16, 2008
� �
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 2 of 14
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Recommendation to the City Council for the approval of Change of Zone would
allow the applicant to change the existing zone, which is currently a Planned
Community Development (PCD) Overlay zone, to a Planned Residential zone.
The purpose of the PCD Overlay zone is to allow large areas of the city, of 100-
acres or more, the versatility to develop a mix of residential product types. The
project proposes to change the PCD zone to more capably address density
requirements that would apply to an affordable housing community. Therefore,
the applicant is requesting a change to a "Planned Residential/14 dwelling units
per acre" zone (PR-14), which is in accordance wi t h t he general plan land use
designation for this property. An analysis providing findings in accordance with
the general plan for the requested change of zone are included later in the staff
report.
The approval of a Change of Zone (CZ) would also allow the developer to
request approval for a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) and a Precise Plan (PP) to
subdivide an 11.82-acre site into two lots. The Precise Plan for Lot 2 would
consist of a housing development of 144 affordable two and three bedroom
units, with associated drives, parking, landscape, water infiltration and recreation
areas. The subdivided project includes the future development of a 4,000 square
foot childcare facility proposed for Lot 1.
Finally, the developer is requesting an exception so that the two-story buildings
may be allowed to exceed the 24' multi-family residential building height. The
additional height results from direction from the Architectural Review
Commission to mitigate the horizontal effect of the two-story buildings. The
approval of a height exception would allow the developer to construct 21 percent
of the 8-plex building roofline at a height of 26'7". It would also allow 21 percent
of the roofline of the 16-plex buildings to be constructed at a height of 29'5".
II. BACKGROUND:
A. Property Description:
The 11.82 acre property is currently vacant. It is located in a portion of the
city's burgeoning northwest section that has steadily developed into
commercial, industrial, and university service uses. The Falling Waters
residential development is directly to the north of the subject property is
located. To the south is a vacant property owned by the Palm Springs
Unified School District. The 11.82 acre property is sloped towards the
northeast. The property is generally surrounded by other residential uses,
with a commercial segment to the west along Monterey Avenue.
� �
� Staff Report
Case No. CZJTPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 3 of 14
B. Zoning and General Pian Designation:
Zone: PCD Planned Community Development
General Plan: M/R-HO Medium Density/High Density Overlay (4-22 du/ac)
C. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North: PR-13 Planned Residential 13/ Falling Waters
Condominiums
South: PCD Planned Community Development/Vacant
East: PCD Planned Community Development/Vacant
West: PCD Planned Community Development/Vacant
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Proposed development includes a complete master plan for 144 affordable
housing units residing in ten buildings proposed to be constructed on Lot 2. The
configuration of the residential development includes two 8-plex and eight 16-
plex buildings. The buildings are proposed to be two-story. There would be 92
two-bedroom/two-bath units and 52 three-bedroom/two-bath units. The largest
single building is proposed to be 9,872 square feet and portions of it are
proposed to be 29'5" in height.
The development proposes parking, landscape, water infiltration, and recreation
areas. The water infiltration area would be sod-covered to provide additional play
area during the dry season. Two recreation areas are proposed for Lot 2. The
main recreation area is located at the center of the project site and consists of a
pool and a recreation building. In addition, a tot lot is proposed in front of
Building 10. The development of Lot 1, the future site of a childcare facility, is not
a part of this review.
A. Site Plan:
The proposed rectangular buildings are arranged along the perimeter of the
site, with vehicular circulatior� and parking traversing the interior. The
proposed residential development on Lot 2 would be gated. A centralized
two-lane entry decorated with a landscaped median is the primary access,
opening onto 35�' Avenue. A primary monument sign would be located in
the median. A secondary emergency access opens on the west side of the
site to Gateway Drive, which would serve as egress-only for residents.
Perimeter and interior plant materials are proposed. From the property line
there are 10 and 15-foot setbacks in the front and on the street sides. An
additional 18-foot right of way extends from the property line to the face of
(_ �
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 4 of 14
the curb, where a meandering sidewalk and landscape is proposed. An
infiltration basin is projected for the northeast corner of the site. Access to
the childcare facility for the residents of The Crossings is conceptually
proposed as pedestrian. The project has been conditioned to include an
entry gate that would provide a safe, handicap accessible path of travel for
children attending the future K-8 school abutting the southerly boundary of
the housing project.
B. Building Description:
The proposed two 8-plex and eight 16-plex residential buildings would be
two-story and would house floor plans in the following sizes: 951, 1,029 and
1,135 square feet. Each building displays a variety of roof pitches. Each unit
would have an outdoor patio or balcony. The recreation building emulates
the style and materials of the residential buildings.
C. Architecture:
The proposed architectural style endeavors for something different than
the Spanish Revival, Contemporary, and Mid-century Revival styles
abundantly duplicated throughout the desert. The proposed architecture is
in a Prairie Revival style. The style is characterized by horizontality and
rectilinear modulations.
The color palette includes tan and brown tones as illustrated in the
distributed packet materials. The buildings would display simulated
decorative stone (ProStone Ledgestone "Glacier Valley") at the bases
where balconies and windows are located. A simulated slate shingle
material called "Eagle Roofing": Bel Air in 4626 Rancho Cordova blend
would cover the different pitches of the roof. The building surfaces would
be painted exterior plaster. TREX is proposed for railing and the windows
would be surrounded in vinyl.
IV. ANALYSIS:
The Crossings conforms to all zoning regulations, with the exception of the
height request discussed later in the staff report. The following information
analyzes the project's expected impact on the site.
A. Parking:
Covered parking is provided on site for the residential units. The spaces
are supplied along the internal vehicular roadways which route
automobiles in a circular pattern within the property. The developers have
/
� �f_
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/Pp 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 5 of 14
provided 13 more parking spaces than are required by the zoning
ordinance.
REQUIRED
90--2 BEDROOM UNITS C� 2.00/unit 180 s aces
54--3 BEDROOM UNITS C� 2.00/unit 108 s aces
TOTAL 288 s aces
PROVIDED
COVERED 144 s aces
STANDARD BAY 149 s aces
DISABLED 8 s aces
TOTAL 301 s aces
B. Height:
The project proposes to build 10 two-story residential buildings and 1 one-
story recreation building. The residential buildings are each designed with
multiple-pitched roofs to soften the long horizontality that accommodates
the proposed density. The roofs are also designed to cover patios on both
floors. The Architectural Review Commission requested that the applicant
modulate the rooflines as much as possible to break the mass of the
building's "long-box" feeling.
In a PR zone the heights are limited to either the approved values as
appraised by the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City
Council or by the limits as set forth in the zoning ordinance for the
appropriate building type (i.e. Multi-family residential R-2 or R-3). The
multi-family residential height limit is 24'. The added height is a method to
visually lessen the bulk of the 8 and 16-plex buildings.
Considering the numerous roof pitches, viewed from the longest elevation
of the two 8-plex buildings, a total of five differing heights can be
observed. The roofline of the proposed 8-plex building begins at 21'9" and
rises incrementally to the foltowing heights: 23'1", 24'2", 25'11" and 26'7".
Of these heights, 79% of the building is 24' or lower, and 21% of the
building is above 24'.
The eight 16-plex buildings are also proposed to have numerous pitches
with heights growing incrementally from 24' to 24'2", 25'2", 25'11" and
29'S". Of these heights 79% of the building roofline is 24' and 21% is
above 24'.
��� �-
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 6 of 14
As a policy of the City, height exceptions are reviewed by the City Council.
The Architectural Review Commission found that the decorative aspects
and modulations of roof pitches enhance the overall appearance of the
building.
C. General Plan High Density Overlay Requirements:
The proposed density is 14 units per acre. The density is in conformity
with the General Plan designation, which allows for medium to high
density in the district (10-22 dwelling units per acre). It also provides a
much needed product type for the community. However, the general plan
land use element program 9.A (copy attached) requires that projects
involving a change of zone in excess of ten units per acre be evaluated
and found consistent with eight (8) performance criteria (1-8) below.
1. The aercentaqe of residential units whether sinqle or multi familv.
that shall be available for home ownershi .
While one hundred percent of The Crossings project will be
affordable rental units, a rental project is appropriate for the
following reasons:
a. Numerous projects within proximity to the proposed project
have been approved for purchase. For example, to the north
of the project site is a 247-unit condominium project known
as "Falling Waters", which is an attached product featuring
units for sale. To the south is the Dolce development, which
was approved to subdivide 238.05 acres into 159 single
family lots. On the northwest corner of Portola Avenue and
Gerald Ford is the Ponderosa homes development;
approved to subdivide 87.45 acres into 237 single-family
lots.
b. In the University Park area 80% -90% of the residential units
will be "for purchase".
c. A mix of housing types is desirable.
2. Hiqh density residential neiqhborhoods shall be located in,�rox_ imitv
and have convenient access to qublic transqortation.
Currently the Sunline Bus Service has two routes that would
accommodate this area: Route 50 and Route 32. The stops to
access these routes are still quite a long walking distance from the
�� �-
� Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 7 of 14
proposed housing community. Although Sunline Transit's long
range service plan has not been completed for this area,
preliminary discussions indicate that service along Monterey
Avenue or Gerald Ford Drive may be the most likely expansion of
their routes.
3. Hiph densitv residential develoqment shall be located in proximitv
to schools. parks and commercial services which shall be
access�ble bv means of non-motorized vehicles routes. �
a. Schools: The property abuts the future location of a Palm
Springs Unified School District K-8 elementary school. A
safe path will be provided for student access.
b. Parks: The property will also abut a park that would be a
shared space with the school access in the safe manner as
referenced above. In addition, the city has planned other
parks in the nearby area.
c. Community Services: The project would be near commercial
services along Monterey and other retail, hotel and
convenience services along Gerald Ford near the University
Park area. These listed uses will provide convenient
shopping and employment opportunities.
4. The ercenta e of ro osed hi h densi units to be reserved to
meet the affordable housinq needs of the communitv.
a. The Crossings project, if approved, is 100% affordable.
b. The project would target 25% - 60% of the area median
income.
c. Net rents would range from $363.00 to $932.00 a month.
5. AdeQuacv and usabilitv of landscaped open saace planned internal
and inte ral to the desi n of hi h densi develo ments.
a. The project proposes a 2,887 square foot on-site recreation
center, which includes a 30' x 60' pool for the residents. On
The Crossings property two tot-lots would be available. The
water infiltration area, which is designed to collect
(� �
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 8 of 14
stormwater runoff, would be dry for most of the year and is
proposed to be covered with lawn as a play area.
b. As per the requirements of the zoning ordinance for a
Planned Residential (PR) zone, at least 40% of the area
must be useable open space, defined as follows:
An attached exhibit was prepared by city staff to represent the
calculated areas of open space, which comply with the above
definitions. (See attached Resolution Exhibit C Area "Comparison
Plan").
6. Development plans reflecting an innovative design in site planning,
building design and landscape treatment consistent with the
General Plan Community design element.
a. Architecture for the project has been given preliminary
approval by the Architecture Review Commission. A copy of
the October 16, 2008 minutes and action letter are attached.
b. Landscape treatment will be to the satisfaction of the City's
Landscape Specialist and the aesthetic standards that have
been maintained throughout the University Park district.
c. The project will comply with the City's energy and water
efficiency policies.
7. Analysis of potential fiscal impacts of the development.
a. Affordable housing projects are exempt from the payment of
property taxes. However, the project is designed to pay a
per unit "Payment of In-lieu of Taxes" (PILOT) fee. The
PILOT fee, which is paid annually to the City, would total
$165,000. This is a fee that is projected for the not-for-profit
aspect of the project.
b. The following sources of will be utilized to fund the project:
Tax Exempt Bonds, Deferred Development Fee Note, loans
from the City's Redevelopment Agency City and Federal Tax
Credit Proceeds.
�� �,
Staff Report �
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP pg-1 g1
December 16, 2008
Page 9 of 14
8. Project energy conservation measures.
a. The units are proposed to be designed in conformance with
the city's Title 24 energy standards, which are considered
stricter than the state of California's energy requirements.
D. Landscape Design:
The Crossings project underwent several reviews and meetings with the
City's landscape staff. Its current iteration functions to serve the project
and satisfies the preliminary approvals required to be presented before
the Planning Commission. The type of plant material and the specified
size and location would be compatible with the housing type and its
architecture.
E. Findings of Approval for a Change of Zone:
In accordance with the Palm Desert Municipal Code 25.24, an applicant
may request a change of zone to a PR zone by filing a petition along with
a precise plan and supporting documentation, in accordance with Section
25.24.060 of the Municipal Code. If, after a public hearing, the Planning
Commission approves the petition, the change of zone and precise plan
are subject to approval by the City Council.
In accordance with Municipal Code Section 25.84.060 Action by the
lanninq commission, the Planning Commission shall make a specific
finding as to whether the change is consistent with the objectives of the
zoning ordinance and shall recommend that the application be granted,
granted in modified form, or denied. The denial of the request by the
planning commission shall be considered final unless appealed.
Staff finds that a change of zone from the currently prescribed
Planned Community Development (PCD) zone to the requested
Planned Residential zone of 14 dwelling per acre is consistent with
the objectives of the zoning ordinance with respect to its proposed
density, height, architecture, parking, and recreational open space
requirements, as specified in the analysis portion of the staff report.
(See Resolution Exhibit A "Change of Zone").
While the development proposes a medium to high density to be
constructed on the property, it conforms to the restriction of the PR
zone of providing at least 40% of useable recreational open space.
An exhibit illustrating the calculations for the proposed hardscape,
building footprints and parking versus the remaining areas that are
��� �. �
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 10 of 14
at 13% grade or less is attached to this report as an exhibit. (See
Resolution Exhibit C "Area Comparison Plan").
F. Findings for a Tentative Parcel Map;
A. Under Title 26 Subdivisions of the Municipal Code as per Section
26.20.100, the Planning Commission shall deny any map that does not
meet the requirements or conditions of the zoning ordinance or the
subdivision map act. The Planning Commission may also waive
technical or inadvertent irregularities that do not materially affect the
validity of the map.
To approve the map, the Planning Commission must find that the
proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. According to
Section 26.20.100 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission
shall deny approval of the tentative map, as required by the Map Act, if
it makes any of the following findings:
1. That the density of the proposed subdivision is not
consistent with applicable general and specific plans;
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision
is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans;
3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of
deve%pment;
4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed
density of deve%pment;
5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat;
6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements is likely to cause serious public health
problems;
7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will conflict with recorded public easements,
for access through, or use of, property within the proposed
subdivision. However, the map can be approved if alternate,
equivalent easements are provided.
( �
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 11 of 14
In response to the above findings staff concludes that:
1. The subdivision will be consistent with the applicable
general plan, as it meets the findings for land use
designation Policy 9, for the University Park planning area
and the findings for the "High Density Overlay Zone". Also it
provides a housing product type in an area of the city where
it can meet the needs for the workforce responding to the
commercial, industrial and university uses in proximity.
2. The design and improvements are consistent with the
general plan. The design accommodates an affordable
density while remaining in harmony with the types of
businesses and community plans approved for the area.
3. The site is physically suitable for this type of development.
The site is a gently sloping area which is suitable for the
stepped aspect of the buildings.
4. The site is physically suitab/e for this type of proposed
density. The site is capable of carrying this type of compact
housing product as it abuts the commercial Monterey
Avenue corridor and is planned adjacent to a K-8 school.
5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements
is not like/y to cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached to the
request which concludes that there are no significant
impacts to the environment.
6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements is not likely to cause serious public health
problems. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached to
the request which concluded that there would be no
significant public health problems associated with the
approval o# the project.
7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will not conflict with recorded public
easements, for access through, or use of, property within the
subdivision. The following recorded access-ways apply: 18-
foot city right-of-way on 35th avenue, 18-foot right of way on
Gateway Drive, and 12-foot right of way on Cortesia Street.
There are existing water mains and sewer lines down the
center of Gateway and 35th Avenue. The project has been
�.
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 12 of 14
analyzed by the City's Public Works Department, the
Coachella Valley Water District, and the County's Fire and
Police Departments.
G. Findings for a Precise Plan
1. ln accordance with Municipal Code Section 25.73 Precise Plan, the
Planning Commission may find thar if the proposed precise plan
would substantially depreciate property values in the viciniry; or
would endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare,
such plan shall be rejected or shall be so modified or conditioned
before adoption as to remove said objections.
The proposed plan, as designed and as conditioned, would
upgrade rather than depreciate the appearance of the
current vacant lot and would create desired housing for the
work force. The proposed architectural style would be
refreshing and add visual variety to the streetscape. New
plant materials in the landscape would formalize the site and
create compatibility with the adjacent surroundings.
2. The Planning Commission may also consider the exterior
architectural design, general exterior appearances, landscape,
color, texture of surface materials and exterior construction, shape
and bulk, and other physical characteristics including location and
type of public utility facilities. If the Planning Commission were to
find that the proposed precise plan of design, including the
considerations enumerated in the Code would interfere with the
orderly development in the vicinity of the precise plan area, it could
reject or modify the precise plan or condition its approval as to
remove the objections.
The proposed architectural style exhibits a variety of
modulated spaces. Maximum attention is given to the
detailing o# the arehitectural language so as to provide a
lasting positive contribution to the built environment. Where
there are roof pitches up to 29'5" feet in height, the
maximum roofline height occupies only 21% of the entire
appearance. The added height relieves the "long-box"
horizontality of the buildings. The proposed materials and
forms will render a unique and aesthetic appearance to the
surrounding streetscape.
�� �
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 13 of 14
The proposed trim, fascia and wall surface colors are muted
so as to not detract from the desert environment. The
proposed combination of landscape and architecture, rather
than interfere, would add versatility to the development of
the vicinity.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for The Crossings
affordable housing community. Due to its location in an urbanized infill setting, it
has been determined that Mandatory Findings of Significance are less than
significant with the exception of incorporating the following mitigation measures:
• The collection of the mitigation fees established by the Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan to provide conservation for biological
resources for which mitigation fees will be applied. (See Initial Study IV.
a).
• The requirement of a Native American Archeological monitor to be
present during the excavation phase of the project. (See Initial Study V.
a-d).
• The City of Palm Desert grading and building permits procedures require
detailed geotechnical reports addressing grading specifications and the
settlement and expansive characteristics of on site soils. All structures
must be designed to the 2007 California Building Code 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.
(See Initial Study VI a (i-iv)).
• Strict adherence to construction hours and days will be required.
Additional measures to mitigate traffic and operational noise will be
required. Noise levels will be mitigated so that the General Plan Noise
Element limits are not exceeded. (See Initial Study XI. a-d)
VI. PUBLIC NOTICE
A legal notice for the project was published in The Desert Sun and it was mailed
to properties within a 300 foot radius on November 12, 2008. The project
proponents advised staff that a continuance would optimize a more thorough
analysis of the project information. On December 2, 2008 the Planning
Commission continued the public hearing to the December 16, 2008 meeting, at
which time the public hearing was left open. At the time of the publishing of the
staff report, no comments, negative or positive, have been received.
� �� �,
Staff Report
Case No. CZ/TPM/PP 08-191
December 16, 2008
Page 14 of 14
VII. CONCLUSION:
The Crossings conforms to all zoning regulations, with the exception of the
proposed height of the buildings. The density impact would be minimal. In
addition, the site has been chosen to effectively co-locate its affordability with the
• surrounding commercial, industrial and university uses. A childcare facility is
proposed for the future, which it is anticipated would be welcomed by the entire
area. The Palm Springs Unified School District, which is the southerly abutting
property, is working with the developers to integrate any grading and fencing in
order to provide a safe way of travel for the children who would reside at The
Crossings and attend the K-8 school.
VIII. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the findings and adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. , recommending to the City Council approval
of CZ/TPM/PP 08-191, subject to conditions attached.
IX. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution and the following Resolution attachments:
1. Change of Zone (Resolution Exhibit A)
2. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study (Resolution Exhibit B)
3. Area Comparison Plan (Resolution Exhibit C)
B. Legal Notice
C. General Plan Land Use Program 9A
D. Architectural Review Commission Notice of Action and Minutes
E. Plans
Submitted by: Departm ea �
�
Renee Schr r Lauri Aylaian
Associate Planner Director of Community Development
Appr .
Homer Croy
ACM for Develo ment Services
CITY 0
f PHI �I DESERT
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-257$
TEL: 760 346—o6ti
Fnx: 760 34t-7oq8
info@palm-desert.org
October 16, 2008
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION
CASE NO: PP/TPM 08-191
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS)• URBAN HOUSING COMMUNITIES, LLC, Attn:
Mark Irving, 2000 E. Fourth Street, Suite 205, Santa Ana, CA 92705
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of 144 affordable
apartment units; The Crossings.
LOCATION: 73-500 35th Avenue
ZONE: PCD
Upon reviewing the plans and presentations submitted by staff and by the
applicant, the Architectural Review Commission granted approval subject to: 1)
the applicant shall experiment with the application of a stone based veneer below
the wainscoting; 2) design private driveway B so that the street is less straight
with more curvature to lessen the effect of the straight view across the top of the
parcel; 3) consider closing the railing so that clutter is less visible from the
balcony; 4) give more attention to the left side elevation for Building B; 5) present
alternatives that utilize solar as roofing material and create a greater visible
texture; 6) create more green space by the addition of sod in the retention basin;
7) review the berms to decrease slope to no greater than two-to-one ratio; 8)
create breaks in the fascia to eliminate the massing of the building; 9) wrap
decorative veneer around buildings; 10) consider metal as railing material in lieu
of Trex material; 11) submit changes to staff prior to construction drawings; and
12) landscape subject to review by Landscape Specialist.
Date of Action: October 14, 2008
Vote: Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner DeLuna
abstaining and Commissioner Touschner absent
(An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the
City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. Any
amendments to this approved plan would need to be re-submitted to Commission
for approval.)
�
G)niNrto o��tacuo run
� _ �����
ARCHITECTURAL R���EW COMMISSION
MINUTES October 14, 2008
6. CASE NO: MISC 08-244
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS)• RED CARPET CARWASH, 44-
440 Town Center Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of
a new monument sign, repainting a portion of exterior building, and
the addition of awnings to rear of property; Red Carpet Carwash.
LOCATION: 44440 Town Center Way
ZONE: PC 3 SP
This item was not presented.
ACTION:
No action was taken on this item.
B. Preliminary Plans:
1. CASE NO: PPlTPM OS-191
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS)• URBAN HOUSING
COMMUNITIES, LLC, Attn: Mark Irving, 2000 E. Fourth Street,
Suite 205, Santa Ana, CA 92705
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of
144 affordable apartment units; The Crossings.
LOCATION: 73-500 35th Avenue
ZONE: PCD
Ms. Schrader presented the project and stated the applicant has
added a considerable amount of detail to the prairie design style they
are going for and because it is 144 units, which is the density that is
required for affordabfe housing, there are eight-plexes and sixteen-
plexes. They have responded to the Commission's concerns
regarding modulating the roof lines with the grade so that it is not one
big stretch of building. There were comments made at the last
meeting regarding the roofing materials and today Ms. Schrader
expressed that in her opinion it has substantially been upgraded and
reworked. They have preliminary approval of the landscape with the
city Landscape Specialist and mentioned that they had a meeting
with the landscape company. It was stated that there is not enough
lawn or green area and mentioned that there was a retention basin
G?PlanningWarone JudyWord Files�A Minutes�20081AR081014.mm.doc Page 7 of 18
r I
ARCHITECTURAL REv1EW COMMISSION ��
MINUTES October 14, 2008
that the Staff would like to see sod covered and access be made to it
in the play area to add additional lawn and green.
Mr. Alan Scales, Architect for KTl'Y, stated that they took another
look at the architecture and hearing the comments from the first
round they came back from the study session with what was
presented today. He stated that this was a little bit more flushed out
and was a complete version of what we had in our study session.
Their main charge and what they were really focused on was
articulating the building fa�ade as well as the ridge line. They had a
lot more of a monochromatic and even roof line. So they went back
to the drawing board and looked at the roof plan. They took the
comments into consideration regarding the A/C condensers and
placement. They were in the landscape so they brought them into
the common area roof well, which is shown on the roof plan. What
that did was help them greatly articulate the mass of the building and
break it down into components; with a larger volume in the middle
stepping down towards the ends. That allowed them to rotate the
building a little in terms of how they worked the roof plan, which
comes off quite a bit better. Beyond that, in just terms of massing,
they looked at just adding material. So they added fiber cement
siding. They used that along with exterior plaster to articulate different
facades, different colors and finished materials. They atso looked at
the decks and opened those up rather than having them closed in
with stucco walls. Currently they are showing a composite wrapped
material on the columns of the decks as well as Trex or equal
composite material for the rails themselves knowing full well that the
sun will take its toll on any wood products. They also have louvered
awnings on some of the feature windows, mostly in the bedrooms.
Since the decks screen the living spaces, they didn't have that same
sort of screening to the bedrooms so they used an awning material;
louvered Bahamas or Bermuda shutter. They are going towards the
Bahamas style shutter, which is a little more resortesque, but it lends
itself well to provide for shade to the units.
The Commission discussed their concerns regarding the use o# Trex
for the railing. They stated that because of the elements here in the
desert it becomes soft and has a lot of expansion and contraction and
just hasn't worked here in the desert. Mr. Scales stated that they
have discussed this issue with the product manufacture, most
specifically on the siding and the manufacture stated that they have
plenty of experience with the use of this material.
Commissioner Vuksic stated that he liked the roofline and how it goes
up and down. He had some concerns with the fascia line and stated
that at the last meeting the Commission was looking at the common
building and the kind of detailing and articulation that it had and it
G:`�PlanningUanine Judy\Word filesW Minutes�20p8�AR081014.min.dce Page 8 of 18
f ( �
ARCHITECTURAL REr iEW COMMISSION �'
MINUTES October 14, 2008
looks like they incorporated more of that into the fascia line, which is
good. The fascia is the same height everywhere on all the buildings
and that is something that he didn't see in the common building; all
the nice ups and downs. The wainscoting that they are showing now
is a different color and is basically a two-by-six piece of foam and
stated that it would be great if that was a stone base. It would work
with the style that they have and it would create the kind of
substantial layer that they want at the bottom.
Commissioner Vuksic discussed the comment made at a previous
meeting regarding the flatness and the buildings being about the
same distance back from the street. He stated that the buildings
have a lot of undulation in them and if they were pulled back from the
street they would be giving up too much landscape space. He felt
that they had to hold on to as much green space as they can.
Commissioner Vuksic thought that the private driveway that paratlels
35"' is really straight and felt that they could kick that street up a bit to
the north so that it has a bit more of an elbow at the center where the
common building is. He also had some concerns with clutter on the
balconies since you can see through them.
Commissioner Vuksic liked the site sections and stated that they
were great in helping to see what was going on regarding the grades
and what they had to deal with. He stated that the berms look to be
about a two-to-one slope and wondered if this was something that
they reviewed with the City and if it would be a problem. Mr. Scales
stated that there were three-to-one as well as two-to-one and nothing
has come up to date regarding the berms.
Commissioner Vuksic mentioned the condensing units on the roof
and the air handlers being in the attics and asked if they were below
the parapets. Mr. Scales indicated that they have about a 42-inch
parapet and stated that they would choose units that would fit below
the parapet wall.
Commissioner Vuksic stated that left side elevation for Building B
needed a little more attention, but the other elevations have come
together pretty nicely.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the roofing material sample on the
material board was the same thickness of the roofing material. Mr.
Scales stated that it was indicative to one layer. He presented a
� sample board of a section of the roof and pointed out what it would
look like. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that originally they had
proposed concrete tile and now they have gone to a flat cheap
looking roof. Commissioner Lambell pointed out that previously there
GP�PlanningUanine JudylWord Fites�A Minutes\2008�.4R081014 min.doc Page 9 of 18
� ("" ,
ARCHITECTURAL ReJiEW COMMISSION
MINUTES October 14, 2008
was talk of solar up on the roof. Mr. Scales stated that it wouldn't be
on the actual roofing itself; it would be within the roof wells. Mr. Mark
Irving, Urban Housing Communities, LLC, stated that the original
roof had a full pitch southem exposure for a vast majority of the
building, but when they redesigned the roof with the roof wells they
asked a solar consultant about the solar panels who stated that they
have the capacity to either do panels within the roof wells and the
carports or there would be enough on the roof itself.
The Commission discussed the trash bins and talked about their
locations. Mr. Scales stated that they have to provide an accessible
route to the bins and that they have to look at their proximately to the
units for ease of use.
The Commission once again brought up the issue of the solar panels
on the roof and the quality standard. Commissioner Lambell stated
that there was talk previously about the solar panels being
incorporated into the roof tile and now they have gone to a flat
composition that isn't very good looking. They felt that they have lost
the solar opportunity except in the roof well and the other was really
cutting edge and a terrific idea.
The Commission discussed the idea of the retention basin being
used as a play area. Mr. Irving stated that he would be glad to put
turf in there, have a separate parcel and dedicate it to the city,
because it becomes an issue of liability with the kids playing in a
retention basin. Ms. Schrader stated that they would want to discuss
this further with the city officials and see how they feel about that
because we know there is not enough green there now.
Commissioner Gregory mentioned the two-to-one slopes and asked
Ms. Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist if she had any comments
on the plans. She indicated that she was reviewing the plans and
has been in conversation with the applicant. Mr. Bagato stated that in
his experience anything higher than two-to-one would not be
acceptable. He stated that if there were any three-to-one they would
have to take another look at them.
Mr. Scales addressed the comments made regarding the railings and
stated that they were open to changing the material. Their intent
wasn't to overdo material so they intentionally didn't use any sort of
stone. He agreed that it would look nice, but they have to keep costs
under wraps in this kind of development. In terms of the ups and
downs in the eave line, he stated that there are some opportunities to
do that. He knows that the redesign of the roof to get the ridge to
move up became more of an expense to the developer. He
explained that they are articulating the roof much more dynamically at
G:'�Planning�Janine Judy\Word Files`A Minute5�2008WR081014.min.doc Page 10 of 18
t ( �� �
ARCHITECTURAL RcJIEW COMMISSION
MINUTES October 14, 2008
the recreation facility that is the main feature as you enter the
community and stated that there were a number of layers that will be
within this community. Commissioner Vuksic stated that when he
looks at a building that is as long as this one, he felt that it needs a
break in the eaves. Mr. Scales stated that it has some dimension to it
and stated that if you look at the plans themselves it is broken into
segments.
Commissioner Hanson reviewed an axonometric elevation that was
presented by the applicant. She informed Mr. Scales not to apply
textures to the face of the building and then not wrap them around the
corner. Mr. Scales indicated that the intent was that outside comers
should be the same color and the same material and the inside
corners are where you make color or material change.
The Commission discussed the asphalt shingles. Mr. Scales stated
that they have a certain shape and dimension to them and aren't just
simple rectangular or flat sheets of asphalt roofing. There is some
dimensional quality to them. There are certainly other products on the
market that are composition that take it to another level in terms of
dimension. The thickness and some of the shape gets a little more
dynamic and has more shadow play and feels more like a shake roof.
He stated there could be some alternatives and in his opinion, there
is a way to do a comp roof that looks nice. He expressed that
throwing it out is not the best way to go. Commissioner Vuksic stated
that any style is okay as long as it is done well and felt that what was
discussed today was ways of making this a quality project that really
pulls the style details together. Mr. Scales stated that they want to
provide a quality project and expressed that they were not just
throwing stucco boxes up there. He felt they were going in the right
direction and clarification will help.
Commissioner Vuksic made a motion to continue with comments.
Commissioner Gregory asked if there were any other questions or
comments.
Mr. Irving wanted to further clarify the issues regarding the railing on
the balconies and stated that wood is certainly not an option and
addressed the question of sagging. He stated that if they go the
route of eliminating those materials then they are back to square one.
He asked for some direction on the materials. Commissioner Vuksic
stated that he liked the siding material presented because it adds a
nice texture to the building and was disappointed that the
Commission wasn't happy with it. Commissioner Van Vliet wanted
to clarify his earlier comments regarding the siding because he wasn't
familiar with that particular product, but if they could get it to work out
here and it's a high quatity product and if it's not going to bend or
G:`PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesVl Minutes�2008�qR081014.min.doc Page 11 of 18
r (
ARCHITECTURAL R�WIEW COMMISSION
MINUTES October 14, 2008
have warping problems due to the heat, then its fine. Commissioner
Hanson suggested that they use a metal detailing that would look
nice. Mr. Scales stated that they were open to that idea.
Commissioner Hanson was aware that Commissioner Vuksic made a
motion to continue with comments and asked him if it could be
approved with comments because she felt there weren't that many
comments to justify a continuance. The Commission discussed the
recommendation. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he was happy if
Staff wants to take a look at the changes and show them to the
Commission if there is a need. Commissioner Gregory stated that
they could approve it subject to some conditions that need to be
brought back and the Commission could just look at those items. Mr.
Bagato indicated that the changes would be in the construction
drawings and suggested that they email him with changes for his
review prior to submitting the construction drawings.
AC. T_
It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner
Hanson to grant approval subject to: 1) the applicant shall experiment with
the appfication of a stone based veneer below the wainscoting; 2) design
private driveway B so that the street is less straight with more curvature to
lessen the effect of the straight view across the top of the parcel; 3)
consider closing the railing so that clutter is less visible from the balcony;
4) give more attention to the left side elevation for Building B; 5) present
alternatives that utilize solar as roofing material and create a greater
visible texture; 6) create more green space by the addition of sod in the
retention basin; 7) review the berms to decrease slope to no greater than
two-to-one ratio; 8) create breaks in the fascia to eliminate the massing of
the building; 9) wrap decorative veneer around buildings; 10) consider
metal as railing material in lieu of Trex material; 11) submit changes to staff
prior to construction drawings; 12) landscape subject to review by
Landscape Specialist; and 13) provide alternate roofing material samples
which have more thickness and depth for review and approval; more like
concrete tile originally proposed. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with
Commissioner DeLuna abstaining and Commissioner Touschner absent.
G:\PlannmgWanine Judy',Word Files\A Minutes�2008WR081014.min dce Page 12 of 18
/l
l �,v
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. Name or description of project: � The Crossings
� Approval of a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide an 11.82 acre site into two
� lots for the purpose of the development of a Precise Plan and Architectural
;
' Review on Lot 2 for "The Crossings at Palm Desert", a housing
� development consisting of 144 affordable two and three bedroom units;and
; for the future development a 4,000 square foot Childcare Facility proposed
; for Lot 1.The project site is located on the corners of 35`�Avenue,Gateway
' Drive and"C"Street
2. Project Location—Identify street � The project site is located on the corners of 35 Avenue,Gateway Drive
address and cross streets or attach a I and"C"Street.APN
map showing project site(preferably �
a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical �
map identified by quadrangle name): �
3. Entity or Person undertaking project: j Urban Housing,LLC
� Attn:Mazk Irving
� 2000 E.Fourth Street,Suite 205
� Santa Ana,CA 92705
The Planning Commission, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written
comments received prior to the public meeting of the Planning Commission, including the recommendation of the City's
Staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project, as mitigated, will not have a significant effect on the
environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the Planning Commission's findings are as follows:
Any construction, improvement and development impacts such as those categories delineated in the Initial Study,
especially those including Noise,Air Quality,Traffic,Biological,Cultural or Aesthetic,shall be mitigated with the stated
conditions of approval affirmed in the Planning Commission resolution which shall be recorded with the Riverside
County Clerk.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A
copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at:
The City of Palm Desert Planning&Community Development Department
Phone No.:760-776-6486 �
The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declaration are as follows:
City of Palm Desert Planning&Community Development Department
Phone No.:760-346 06 1 1 i
Date Received
for Filing:
Staff
SACRAMENTOUTB�21603.1\CITl'�2006 FORM"E"
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF PALM DESERT
INITIAL STUDY FOR
CZ/PP 08-191 and TPM 36000 "THE CROSSINGS"
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION:
Change of Zone (CZ) Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) and Precise Plan (PP) of design to allow
the construction of 144 affordable housing units with amenities. The proposal will change the
zone from Planned Community Development (PCD) to Planned Residential 14 dwelling units
per acre (PR-14) and subdivide an 11.8 acre parcel into two (2) lots to accommodate future
Childcare Facility not part of the project. The proposed project is located on the south side of
35th Avenue between Gateway Drive and Cortesia Way (C Street), also known as APN 694-
130-005.
DATE:
November 12, 2008
PREPARED BY
Renee Schrader
Associate Planner
PREPARED FOR
City of Palm Desert
Planning & Community Development Department
73510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA, 92260 (760) 346-0611
REVIEWED BY
Independently reviewed, analyzed and exercised judgement
in making the determination, by the Planning & Community Development Department on 16
December 2008, pursuant to Section 21082 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
IS 1
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the preparation of an Initial Study when a
proposal must obtain discretionary approval from a governmental agency and is not exempt from
CEQA. The purpose of the Initial Study is to determine whether or nor a proposal, not exempt from
CEQA, qualifies for a Negative Declaration or whether or not an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
must be prepared.
1. Project Title: The Crossings
2. Lead Agency Name: City of Palm Desert
Address: 73510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
3. Contact Person: Renee Schrader, Associate Planner
Phone Number: 760-346-0611
4. Project Location: 73500 35th Avenue, bounded on the west by Gateway Drive on the
east by Cortesia Way.
5. Project Sponsor: Urban Housing Communities
Address: 2000 E. Fourth Street #205
Santa Ana, CA 92705
6. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential/High Density Overlay
(R-M/R-HO)
7. Current Zoning: Planned Community Development (PCD)
8. Description of Project: The Crossings project proposes to subdivide an 11.82 acre site
into two lots for the purpose of the development of a Precise Plan on Lot 2 for `The Crossings at
Palm Desert", consisting of a housing development of 144 affordable two and three bedroom
units; with associated drives, parking, landscape, water infiltration and recreation areas. The
project includes the future development a 4,000 square foot Childcare Facility proposed for Lot 1.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The project site is vacant land is surrounded by residential uses, with commercial development to
the northwest at Monterey Avenue.
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, finance approval, or participation
agreement):
Coachella Valley Water District, Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency
IS 2
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
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 ImpacY' as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/ Soils
❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/Water ❑ Land Use / Plannin
Materials Quality g
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Population/ Housing
❑ Noise ❑ Transportation /Traffic
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation
❑ Utilities/ Service ❑ Mandatory Findings of
Systems Significance
On the basis of this Initial Study, the City of Palm Desert Planning & Community Development
Department finds:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
� 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.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant im acY' or "
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 earfier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
❑ 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 EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation
,
m�asures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
• �-
Signature N4V� / 2 ��
,
Date
/L�iv.Ec— SG�r,��'Z, Cj T� ur�- /'�c..� ,O�S�T'
Printed Name For
IS 3
�._ �
. CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than Less
Potentially Significant Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation �mpact
Incorporation
I. AESTHETICS —Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ ❑ �
scenic vista as identified in the City's
General Plan?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, ❑ ❑ ❑ �
including but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ ❑ �
character of quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or ❑ ❑ ❑ �
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime view in the area?
e) Other: ❑ ❑ ❑ �
Discussion:
a) The project as proposed will not present adverse visual impacts to the City's scenic vistas
as identified in the City's General Plan. The proposed new structures will be designed to
be in keeping with the high standards currently set forth by the City of Palm Desert's
Architectural Review Commission.
b) The project will not substantially damage scenic resources.
c) The project does not propose to create circumstances which would in any way degrade the
existing visual character of the site and its surroundings.
d) The lighting standards proposed by The Crossings housing project conform to the city's
policies. New lighting that is adverse is not proposed. The new project would continue to
comply with the requirements of low lighting. Any new light that will be produced by 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.
IS 4
( �_
CITY OF PALM DESERT 4
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant �mpact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, ❑ ❑ ❑ �
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to a non-
agricultural use?
b) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a-b) The project site itself 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.
The City of Palm Desert does not contain any agriculture uses. Therefore, the project
would not impact such uses.
IS 5
��� . ��_.
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant �mpact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
III. AIR QUALITY—Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ❑ ❑ � �
the applicable air quality plan? (South
Coast Air Basin)
b) Violate any air quality standard or ❑ � � �
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation based on the •
thresholds in the SCAQMD's "CEQA Air
Quality Handbook?"
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net ❑ � � �
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment 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 concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ � � �
substantial number of people based on the
information contained in Project Description
Form?
f) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a & b) During construction, particularly grading, a potential dust problem is a short-term impact.
Requiring that the ground be watered during days in which grading occurs will mitigate
this problem. City of Palm Desert Grading Ordinance requires this.
Because the site is located in an area that is a developed setting, its construction will
not result in an overall deterioration of ambient air quality. This conclusion is supported
by the discussions relating to air quality contained in the Draft Environmental Impact
Report (SCH#2003051103) prepared for the City of Patm Desert September 2003.
Completed development of the site will result in less dust leaving the site then currently
occurs with the site's vacant condition.
IS 6
._
� �
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUN S�NGSV NIOTIAL STUDYPARTMENT
"THE CROS
c. Development of this site will not result in any climatic changes. This is due to its small
size and identified residential uses.
d. The proposed development does not call for uses that would create substantial pollutant
concentrations.
e, While the existing land is vacant, no objectionae lex ected tohbe generated dur ng or
associated with any new construction pro�ect, a p
post construction.
IS 7
l� �`
' CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant �m act
Impact Mitigation Impact p
Incorporation
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES —Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either ❑ � � �
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or
by the California Department of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any ❑ � � �
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on ❑ � � �
federally protected 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 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 the provisions of an adopted ❑ � � �
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
IS 8
(� ("
CITY OF PALM DESERT,
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact �mpact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Continued Incorporation
f) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a. The property is in the designated area of the Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard. This
project will eliminate all fringe-toed lizards within the project boundaries. Pursuant to the
Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan and Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan the loss of lizards and habitat can be mitigated by the
applicable per acre fee for each acre developed at the time of obtaining permits. Project
will be conditioned to pay said fee. The mitigation fee will be collected and paid to the
Coachella Valley Conservation Commission and used to purchase land in special
preserves. The preserved lands will create suitable habitat for lizards as well as other
biological species in the multiple species habitat conservation plan.
The site may contain other dune species, which are of statewide concern (i.e., Coachella
Valley Milk Vetch). A Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan has been prepared by
CVAG and adopted by the City of Palm Desert City Council, which establishes preserves
and conservation practices to insure the future survival of these dune species.
The applicant has provided a Biological Assessment and Impact Analysis which are on
file with the Department of Planning and Community 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. The dune species of concern are not migratory in nature. The site has
been designated for development with mitigation fees within the Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan.
IS 9
, � �-
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the �ncorporation
project:
a) Be developed in a sensitive archaeological ❑ � � �
area as identified in the City's General
Plan?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ [] � �
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5 of CEQA?
c) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ � � �
significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5 of CEQA?
d) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique � � � �
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
e) Disturb any human remains, including � � � �
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
f) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a-d. The cultural resource study performed as part of the City of Palm Desert General Plan
Environmental Impact Report found no evidence of any cultural, archeological or
historical significance on this site. However, a Natiue Americar� archeologieal monitor
shall be required to be present during the site grading process, which entails earth cut
and fill. In addition, state law requires that should any evidence be found during
construction, construction must cease and the site cleared. Construction would be
reactivated upon the expert advice of a qualified archeologist.
IS 10
� ���'
� �
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant �m act
Impact Mitigation Impact P
Incorporation
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS —Would the project:
a) Involve earth movement (cut and/or fill) ❑ � � �
based on information included in the
Project Description Form?
b) Expose people or structures to potential ❑ [] � �
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death?
c) Be located within an Alquist-Priolo ❑ � � �
Earthquake Fault Zone?
d) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss ❑ ❑ � �
of topsoil?
e) Be located within an area subject to ❑ � � �
landslides, mudslides, subsidence, or other
similar hazards as identified in the City's
General Plan?
f) Be located within an area subject to ❑ [� � �
liquefaction as identified in the City's
General Plan?
g) Modify any unique physical feature based ❑ ❑ � �
on a site survey/evaluation?
h) Result in erosion, dust, or unstable soil ❑ � � �
conditions from excavation, grading, fill, or
other construction activities?
i) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
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 2007 California
Building Code, people will not be exposed to substantial adverse effects. The following
mitigation measures are imposed as routine for proposed construction:
IS 11
�-� . �__
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
MITIGATION MEASURES for Geoloqv and Soils a (i-iv)
The City of Palm Desert grading and building permits procedures require detailed
geotechnical reports addressing grading specifications and the settlement and
expansive characteristics of on site soils. All structures must be designed to the 2007
California Building Code 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, which is common in this area.
There is no topsoil present.
c. See mitigation measure a.i-iv. above.
d. See mitigation measure a.i-iv. above.
e. Sandy soil is capable of supporting septic tanks but they will not be used, as
sewers are available.
f. For General Site grading an on-site pre-job meeting with the developer, the
contractor and soils engineer shall occur prior to all grading operations. Grading
of the site shall be performed at a minimum in accordance with these
recommendations and with applicable portions of the 2007 California Building
Code.
IS 12
� �� CITY OF PAL f
M DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Im act
Impact Mitigation Impact p
Incorporation
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
—Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the � � � �
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ � � �
environment 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 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 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, 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) Impair implementation of or physically interfere ❑ � � �
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evaeuation plar�2
g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk � � (� �
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
IS 13
� �_
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Im act
Impact Mitigation Impact p
Incorporation
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
— Continued
h) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
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. The abutting properly to the south is slated for future development in 5 to 6 years by the
Palm Springs Unified School District to be a K-8 School and Park. The Crossings project is
not anticipated to generate any hazardous materials that would impact the learning
institution.
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.
f. No private airstrip in area.
g. Project will not interfere with the City's emergency response or evacuation plan.
h. Project will not increase the fire hazard in area with flammable brush, grass or trees.
IS 14
�. �
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑ � � �
waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies ❑ ❑ � �
or interfere 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 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 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 capacity of existing or
pfanned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff, such as from areas of
material storage, vehicle or equipment
maintenance (including washing or
detailing), waste handling, hazardous
materials handling or storage, delivery
areas, loading docks, or other outdoor
areas?
IS 15
�._ �_
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—
Continued
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ❑ �
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood ❑ ❑ ❑ �
hazard area as 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 would impede or redirect
flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a ❑ ❑ ❑ �
significant risk of loss, 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?
k) Other: ❑ ❑ ❑ �
Discussion:
a. Project will be required to comply with Palm Desert Master Plan of Drainage and the
Stormwater Management and Discharge control section of the municipal ordinance.
b. Project will use water provided by CVWD and will not interfere with groundwater recharge.
c-e. Water will be redirected to drainage facilities designed and constructed to accept the water
from the site.
f. Project will not substantially impact water quality and therefore will not substantially degrade
water quality.
g. The site is not within a 100-year flood hazard.
IS 16
�..,. �
. CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
h. See (g).
i. The area is not subject to flooding. The site is located in FEMA flood zone X which
corresponds to a less than 1% chance of annual shallow flooding. While this area is
designated an area of minimal flooding it is also north of the white water channel which
provides additional protection.
j. Area is flat desert land not subject to seiche, tsunami or mudflow.
IS 17
���� ( .
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than Na
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING —Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established ❑ � � �
community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, ❑ ❑ � �
policy, or 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 natural community
conservation plan?
d) Be developed within the Hillside ❑ � � �
Management Overlay District?
e) Be developed within a Fire Zones? ❑ � � �
f) Be developed within any Airport Influence ❑ ❑ � �
Area?
g) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a. The proposed project is not anticipated to physically divide an established community.
b. The site is zoned for residential uses. Currently it is zoned PCD Planned Community
Development Overlay zone. The purpose of the overlay zone allows a large area of 100
acres or more to be given a chance to develop with a mix of residential product types. The
project proposes to change the zone to be more specific to the density that would
accommodate an affordable hosing community. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
change to a "Planned Residential/14 dwelling units per acre" zone, (PR-14), which is in
accordance with the general plan land use designation for this property.
IS 18
�- �.�
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
c. Property is not subject to habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan,
other than that discussed in Section IV(a).
d. The proposed The Crossings Precise Plan would not be developed within a hillside overlay
zone.
e. The proposed Crossings Precise Plan would be developed within Fire Severity zone "Urban
Un-zoned", which occurs in the City of Palm Desert Local Responsibility Area (LRA). The
response is covered by our local Fire Department team.
f. The proposed project will not interfere or be developed within an airport influence zone.
IS 19
� ��
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Im act
Impact Mitigation tmpact p
Incorporation
X. MINERAL RESOURCES —Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ � � �
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of a locally-important ❑ � � �
mineral resource recovery site delineated on
a local general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
c) Be located in a Mineral Resource Zone as ❑ ❑ � �
adopted by the State Mining and Geology
Board and identified in the City's General Plan?
Discussion:
a. No known mineral resources are located on the project site.
b. No locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on local general plan.
c. The project site is not located in a Mineral Resource Zone as adopted by the Sate Mining
and Geology Board and/or identified in the City's General Plan.
IS 20
,., �_
�
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Im act
Impact Mitigation Impact p
Incorporation
XI. NOISE —Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ❑ ❑ � �
levels in excess of standards established in
the City's General Plan or Development
Code, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of ❑ � � �
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundbourne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient ❑ ❑ � �
noise levels in 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?
e) For a project located within an airport land ❑ � � �
use plan or Airport Influence Area, would the
project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a, b, c, d. Construction of the project will increase ambient noise level. The increase is not
expected to create an annoyance to adjacent residential properties. Post construction
all uses on the site will be required to comply with the City Noise Ordinance. Ample
setbacks are proposed including the distance from the recreation areas and dining
facilities to the adjacent residences, which should mitigate any disturbances.
MITIGATION MEASURES for XI a-d.
Strict adherence to construction hours and days will be required. Additional measures to mitigate
traffic and operational noise will be required. Noise levels will be mitigated so that the General Plan
Noise Element limits are not exceeded.
e &f.
Project is not within two miles of a public airport or in vicinity of a private airstrip.
IS 21
C_ �__
CITY OF PALM DESERT �
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant �mpact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING —Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an ❑ ❑ � �
area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Remove existing housing and displace ❑ � � �
substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a-c. The proposed project is for the construction of work force housing to affordably
accommodate employees who would be working for the existing and future commerce
and industry in the city. Because the project would allow 144 new residential units to be
occupied, it can be concluded that overall population growth would minimally increase
as a result of the specific proposed housing project. The proposed project does not
remove or change the existing location of housing in the general area in such a manner
that existing residents would be displaced.
IS 22
�f �
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than Na
Significant With Significant Im act
Impact Mitigation Impact p
Incorporation
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project 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, including medical aid? ❑ ❑ � �
Police protection?
Schools? ❑ 0 � �
Parks or other recreational facilities? ❑ ❑ � �
Other governmental services? ❑ ❑ ❑ �
b) Other: � � � �
Discussion:
a) The Crossings is a housing development proposed to serve families. The project involves a
future day care facility which, while potentially funded by the City, would be administered by
a private agency. The proposed 11.82—acre project is presently a vacant land. Level of
Service to respond to this new installation would not increase in demand as the area has
since been allocated services.
Infrastructure improvements (i.�., interior d�ives, utf{ities) wiEl be added to the devetopment
by the developer. The proposed land use would increase the economic productivity of the
land in terms of land efficiency and greater economic return would be generated from the
project installation, versus the current state of the land. Public services would not be
impacted by the proposed development.
Fire and Police Protection
Police and Fire services have indicated that they can service the proposed project.
IS 23
� �_.
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Schools
The project will be required to pay school mitigation fees per state law at time of building
permit issuance.
Parks
The Crossings and the childcare facility will not impact parks.
Other Public Facilities
Libraries and other public facilities are adequate to serve the project. .the increase in housings
stock under this project is not sufficient to require new public facilities.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of ❑ ❑ ❑ �
existing neighborhood and regional 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 the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
c) Other: ❑ ❑ ❑ �
Discussion:
a-b. Construction of The Crossings will not substantially increase the use/requirement of
current parks or recreational facilities within the area. The project proposes on-site
recreational opportunities as well as adjacency to a future park.
IS 24
� �.
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentialiy Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant �mpact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
XV. TRANSPORTATIONlTRAFFIC —Would the
project:
, a) Cause an increase in traffic which is ❑ ❑ � �
substantial in relation 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 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 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 (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ � �
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ � � �
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ � �
programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
h) Other: � � � �
IS 25
� . J.
�
• CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Discussion:
a-b. 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. The proposed circulation
systems have sufficient capacity to accept any additional traffic produced by the
proposed residential project. Principal access to the project area will be through 35"'
Avenue, which is designed to handle vehicular traffic for this type of use.
According to the Traffic Impact Analysis provided by the applicant, the development's
ambient growth level has been approved by the City of Palm Desert Transportation
Department. The traffic generation would be accommodated by the current facilities.
Level of Service would not increase to impact levels.
c. Project will not change air traffic patterns.
d. Street design and intersections are currently 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 are provided for pedestrians and bicyclists on Monterey Avenue.
IS 26
�.-� �F.
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ �
requirements of the Santa Ana Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ �
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which would cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ �
new storm water 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 project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in determination by the wastewater ❑ ❑ ❑ �
treatment 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 Q ❑ ❑ �
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local ❑ ❑ ❑ �
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
h) Other: ❑ ❑ ❑ �
IS 27
( ,� (..
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY_
Discussion:
a. Project will not exceed limits.
b. A letter is on file with the project from CVWD has indicating ability fully 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 the Community Development/Planning
Department.
IS 28
�,,. �-��
. CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to ❑ ❑ ❑ �
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce fhe habitat of 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 major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ❑ ❑ �
individually 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
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental ❑ ❑ ❑ �
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
IS 29
(,�._ �.
. CITY OF PALM DESERT
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
"THE CROSSINGS" INITIAL STUDY
Discussion:
a. Mandatory Findings of Significance are less than significant with the exception of
incorporating the following mitigation measures:
• The collection of the mitigation fees established by the Multiple Species Habitat
Consenration Plan to provide conservation for biological resources for which
mitigation fees will be applied. (See Initial Study IV. a).
• The requirement of a Native American Archeological monitor to be present during
the excavation phase of the project. (See Initial Study V. a-d).
• The City of Palm Desert grading and building permits procedures require detailed
geotechnical reports addressing grading specifications and the settlement and
expansive characteristics of on site soils. All structures must be designed to the
2007 California Building Code 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. (See Initial Study VI a (i-iv)).
• Strict adherence to construction hours and days will be required. Additional
measures to mitigate traffic and operational noise will be required. Noise levels
will be mitigated so that the General Plan Noise Element limits are not
exceeded. (See Initial Study XI. a-d)
b. None.
c. None.
REFERENCES. The following references cited in the Initial Study are on file in the
Development Services Department.
1. City of Palm Desert General Plan
2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Land Use Plan/Zoning Districts Map
3. City of Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance (Title 25 of the City of Palm Desert Municipal
Code)
4. City of Palm Desert Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey
5. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones Map
6. South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook
7. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps
8. Public Works Standard Requirements —Water
9. Public Works Standard Requirements — Grading
10. Phase I Environmental Assessment Prepared by EMG November, 2007
11. Biological Assessment and Impact Analysis Prepared by James W. Cornett November
2007
IS 30
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR CZ/PP 08-191 AND TPM 36000 THE CROSSINGS
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared pursuant
to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, which requires adoption of a MMRP for
projects in which the Lead Agency has indentified mitigation measures to avoid those
"less than significant" environmental impacts detailed in the Initial Study. The City of
Palm Desert (City) is the lead agency for "The Crossings" proposed project and is,
therefore, responsible for administering and implementing the MMRP. The decision-
makers must define specific reporting and/or monitoring requirements to be enforced
during project implementation prior to final approval of the proposed project. The
primary purpose of the MMRP is to ensure that the mitigation measures identified in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and any subsequent changes in the mitigation measures
included in this document are implemented, thereby minimizing identified environmental
effects.
The MMRP for The Crossings would be in place throughout all phases of the project,
including during design (pre-construction), construction*, and operations (post
construction both prior to and post-occupancy). The Department of Community
Development shall be responsible for administering the MMRP activities via staff, other
City departments (e.g., Department of Building and Safety, Department of Public Works,
etc.), consultants, and contractors. Furthermore, the Community Development
Department will also ensure that monitoring is documented through reports and that
deficiencies are promptly corrected. The designated environmental monitor (e.g., City
building inspector, project contractor, certified professionals, etc., depending on the
provisions specified below) will track and document compliance with mitigation
measures, note any problems that may result, and take appropriate action to remedy
problems.
Included in this Monitoring Plan are the mitigation measures cited in The Crossings
Initial Study. The Initial Study prepared for the December 2, 2008 Planning Commission
meeting details the category or environmental topic (e.g., air quality, biology, etc.), for
which a "less than significant impact" needing mitigation has been identified. The
following list identifies the responsible agency and the chronology of inethods for the
monitoring:
• The enforcement agency;
• The monitoring agency;
• The monitoring phase (i.e., the phase of the project during which the measure
should be monitored);
* For the purposes of this document, construction is defined as grading, excavation, framing, siding, roofing,
landscaping, installation of doors and windows, and any interior work that utilizes pneumatic tools or
compressors that would be located outside the proposed expansion project.
City of Palm Desert The Crossings
CUP/PP 08-191 and TPM 36000
Page 1
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan April 2009
o Pre-construction
o Construction*
o Post-construction (prior to and post-occupancy)
• The monitoring frequency; and
• The action indicating compliance with the mitigation measure(s).
A. AIR QUALITY
Mitigation Measure 111. (c,d): Water three times daily or apply non-toxic soil
stabilizers, according to manufacturers' specifications, as needed to
reduce off-site transport of fugitive dust from all unpaved staging areas
and unpaved road surfaces. Additionally, install AQMD approved
track-out prevention devices for construction vehicles leaving the
project site.
Enforcement Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Public Works
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Public Works
Monitoring Phase: Construction
Monitoring Frequency: Throughout construction during field
inspection.
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s):
Quarterly compliance certification report
submitted by project contractor.
Mitigation Measure 111. (c,d): All private streets shall be swept as needed
during construction, but not more frequently than hourly, if visible soil
material has been carried onto adjacent paved roads.
Enforcement Agency: South Coast Air Quality Management
District
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Public Works
Monitoring Phase: Construction
Monitoring Frequency: Throughout construction during field
inspection
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s):
Quarterly compliance certification report
submitted by project contractor.
City of Palm Desert The Crossings
CZ1PP 08-191
Page 2
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan April 2009
Mitigation Measure 111. (c, d): Construction equipment shall be visually
inspected prior to leaving the site and loose dirt shall be washed off
with wheel washers as necessary.
Enforcement Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Public Works
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Public Works
Monitoring Phase: Construction
Monitoring Frequency: Throughout construction during field
inspection
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s):
Quarterly compliance certification report
submitted by project contractor.
Mitigation Measure III. (c, d): All construction equipment shall be properly
tuned and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's
specifications.
Enforcement Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Building and Safety
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Building and Safety
Monitoring Phase: Construction
Monitoring Frequency: Throughout construction during field
inspection.
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s):
Quarterly compliance certification report
submitted by project contractor.
Mitigation Measure III. (c, d): General contractors shall maintain and operate
construction equipment so as to minimize exhaust emissions. During
construction, trucks and vehicles in loading and unloading queues shall
have their engines turned off when not in use, to reduce vehicle
emissions. Construction activities should be phased and scheduled to
avoid emissions peaks and discontinued during second-stage smog
alerts.
Enforcement Agency: South Coast Air Quality Management
District
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Building and Safety
Monitoring Phase: Construction
City of Palm Desert The Crossings
CZJPP 08-191
Page 3
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan April 2009
Monitoring Frequency: Throughout construction during field
inspection
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s):
Quarterly compliance certification report
submitted by project contractor.
B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation measure IV. (a, e): The property is in the designated area of the
Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard. This project will eliminate all
fringe-toed lizards within the project boundaries. Pursuant to the
Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan and
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan the loss of lizards and
habitat can be mitigated by the applicable per acre fee for each acre
developed at the time of obtaining permits. Project will be conditioned
to pay said fee. The mitigation fee will be collected and paid to the
Coachella Valley Conservation Commission and used to purchase land
in special preserves. The preserved lands will create suitable habitat
for lizards as well as other biological species in the multiple species
habitat conservation plan.
Enforcement Agency: US Fish and Wildlife Service, and California
Dept of Fish and Game
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of Building
and Safety
Monitoring Phase: Fees collected at grading permit stage
Monitoring Frequency: Pre-construction and Post-construction
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s):
Approval by Department of Building and
Safety; Issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
The site may contain other dune species, which are of statewide
concern (i.e., Coachella Valley Milk Vetch). A Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan has been prepared by CVAG and adopted by the
City of Palm Desert City Council, which establishes preserves and
conservation practices to insure the future survival of these dune
species.
City of Palm Desert The Crossings
CZ/PP 08-191
Page 4
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan April 2009
C. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure VI. (a, d): The cultural resource study performed as part of the City
of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Impact Report found no
evidence of any cultural, archeological or historical significance on this
site. However, a Native American archeological monitor shall be
required to be present during the site grading process, which entails
excavation. In addition, state law requires that should any evidence be
found during construction, construction must cease and the site
cleared. Construction would be reactivated upon the expert advice of a
qualified Archeologist.
Enforcement Agency: City of Palm Desert, Appropriate Local Tribal
Government Agency
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of Building
and Safety
Monitoring Phase: Excavation of each phase of the construction
and grading permits.
Monitoring Frequency: Continuous during grading operations.
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s):
Approval by Department of Building and
Safety; Issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
City of Palm Desert The Crossings
CZIPP 08-191
Page 5
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan April 2009
D. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Mitigation Measure VI(a, h) : The area is subject to earthquakes and seismic
shaking. Various studies have concluded that with proper building
design, which is required by the 2007 California Building Code, people
will not be exposed to substantial adverse effects. The following
mitigation measures are imposed as routine for proposed construction:
The City of Palm Desert grading and building permits procedures
require detailed geotechnical reports addressing grading specifications
and the settlement and expansive characteristics of on site soils. All
structures must be designed to the 2007 California Building Code
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. General Site grading: an on-site pre-job
meeting with the developer, the contractor and soils engineer shall
occur prior to all grading operations. Grading of the site shall be
performed at a minimum in accordance with these recommendations
and with applicable portions of the 2007 California Building Code.
Enforcement Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Community Development, and Department of
Public Works.
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Community Development
Monitoring Phase: Pre-construction
Monitoring Frequency: Prior to Project Approval
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s): Receipt/
Report of compliance by appropriate
regulatory agency.
E. NOISE
Mitigation Measure XI. (d): Construction equipment shall be fitted with
residential grade mufflers, where readily available in the construction
equipment fleet that regularly serves the City of Palm Desert area.
Prospective contractors shall demonstrate a good faith effort to locate
such construction equipment for use throughout the duration of project
construction.
Construction activities shall be limited to between the hours of 6:00
a.M. and 7:00 P.M., Monday through Friday from July 1 St through
September 30t" and between the hours of 7:00 a.M. and 6:30 P.nn.,
Monday through Friday from October 1 St through December 31 St. On
Saturdays, construction activities shall be limited to between the hours
of 8:00 ,a.M. and 5:00 P.nn. No construction shall be allowed on
City of Palm Desert The Crossings
CZJPP 08-191
Page 6
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan April 2009
Sundays, Federal holidays or during the January through June lambing
season. Such limitation shall be placed as a condition on the grading
permit in a manner meeting the approvals of the City Engineer and the
Building Official. Engine idling from construction equipment such as
bulldozers and haul trucks shall be limited, to the extent feasible.
Enforcement Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Community Development
Monitoring Agency: City of Palm Desert, Department of
Community Development
Monitoring Phase: Construction
Monitoring Frequency: Periodic field inspections
Action Indicating Compliance with Mitigation Measure(s): Periodic
field inspection sign-off and quarterly
compliance certification report by the
applicant or contractor.
City of Palm Desert The Crossings
CZJPP 08-191
Page 7