22 This early Shulman view shows the warmth of the interior filled with light from the numerous glass doors/windows.
(J. Paul Getty Trust. Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles (2004 R.10))
23 Original Hardscape and Landscaping
In its first iteration, the Chambers Residence had extremely limited external embellishments. Much of the lot was left in its natural state. Chambers used two principal planting features, oleander hedges and canebrake, which he employed as definers of outdoor rooms as well as helping to provide a modicum of privacy to the largely glass facades along Warm Sands and Sunny Dunes Road. A few other plants, including palms, several of which remain today, were also added. Originally, there was also a small grassy space on the east front and along a section of the south side. Over time, this inched its way outward as budget allowed.
Original images from 1948 show almost no hardscaping other than concrete pavers at the dining patio and around the entrance. This too would change over the course of time. Chambers had created four outdoor courts around the house, which were defined by the wings extending from the façade and/or landscaping. The most notable were the dining patio off the east façade and the sunbathing patio, opening off the master bedroom and guest room/living room. On the north side, which was reserved as the service area, there was a drying yard , wood storage and incinerator. It was also the location of the cesspool.
Chambers House – Design Highlights
Completed by the end of 1946, the Chambers Residence achieved the goals the architect had set out to accomplish, which included:
• Modest cost
• Flexibility of space
• Construction materials adaptable to temperature extremes • Built for year-round living
• Designed to allow ease of future expansion
• Oriented to the views
• Indoor-outdoor living
Construction Materials Employed
• Concrete slab flooring
• Wood frame
• Flexboard panels, 4’x8’ attached to framing with screws • Corrugated aluminum bent and used as fascia
• Glass, both sliding and fixed form
• Pumice stone for fireplace
Chambers was understandably pleased with his design and sought to use it to draw attention to his work. He was fortunate to engage noted architectural photographer Julius Shulman to do a series of images that beautifully captured the home from both
24 its earliest stages and a few years after its construction. It may have been these photos that caught the eye of Esther McCoy. McCoy (1904-1989), who would go on to become one of the most important figures in California modern architecture as both a critic and historian, was in the first few years of her legendary career when she became intrigued by the design of Chambers’ house. McCoy took a specia l interest in promoting the house and would write about it on several occasions including major pieces in the Los Angeles Times and Architectural Record . It was due to her efforts that Chambers’ modest desert dwelling gained national and even international attention for its innovative design and use of materials.
1950 Addition
Chambers had designed his home in anticipation of starting a family with Helen and his plans reflected this scenario. By 1950, it had become a reality with a son, Alexander, followed in a few years by another, Douglas. When it came time to expand, Chambers had only to pull out his original plans and complete the designs he had mapped out four years earlier. He did make certain modifications/updates, but the end result was largely as originally envisioned. The work involved a new master bedroom, enclosing the dining patio and a new carport/storage. The cost of the work was $4,000.
Master Bedroom
A major part of the new work was a new master bedroom added onto the west side of the house. This bedroom would also include an en suite master bath with separate dressing room with built-in wardrobes. In the new addition, Chambers carried over part of the 1946 work, which was a narrow floor-to-ceiling window on th e north end of the west wall. Originally, to shield the window from the harsh western afternoon light, he had placed a louvered hanging screen on the outside. In the new addition, he made the louvered screen part of the window itself, allowing it to be adj usted from the inside. He also matched the eaves and their corrugated aluminum fascia as well as adding the same style floor -to-ceiling sliding glass doors as found elsewhere. Chambers also followed through on his original design by making the west wall a wing wall which extended outwards 8’ to the south. This served the double purpose of helping to define part of the sun patio space as well as providing a partial wind break. This wing extension was a “bookend” of the one found on the east wall of the house.
Dining Room
The original outdoor dining patio was fully enclosed during the 1950 addition, although Chambers sought to keep the outdoor feeling by making the new walls almost entirely out of glass. However, to provide privacy, Chambers made the panels obscure glass.
The original pavers were removed and a concrete floor, identical to the rest of the house, was installed. The original 3” diameter pipe column was also retained in the new design.
25 Carport
On the north side of the house, Chambers added a carport with tw o covered spaces.
He cleverly divided the two spaces by a storage wall 3’x18’ with built-in cabinets. The addition of the carport was not only a convenience, it helped to shelter the north portion of the lot from the street, providing additional privacy.
A major part of Chambers’ 1950 additions was to enclose the dining patio using floor-to-ceiling glass panels. Note the steel pipe and fin wall still in situ. Also, an unidentified boy and girl may be spotted. Compare with image on page 18.
(J. Paul Getty Trust. Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles (2004 R.10))
Additional work
During the 1950 additions, Chambers also added certain exterior elements, most notably a 6’ high redwood and aluminum fence at the southern side to provide privacy for the sun patio and bedrooms.
26 Children play happily out on the newly-enclosed and expanded sun patio. View is looking west from living room. Note the palm trees, which still remain but have grown to great heights.
Julius Shulman photograph.
(J. Paul Getty Trust. Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles (2004 R.10))
1956 Additions
In 1956, Chambers made one further addition to the house, adding a patio and new laundry room on the north side. At the same time, he also remodeled the kitchen with new cabinets/wall & ceiling finishes at a reported cost of $1,000.
Later Alterations/Additions Post-Chambers
In 1961, after some 15 years in residence, Robson and Helen Chambers sold 695 Warm Sands and relocated to a new house the architect had designed for the family at 275 Camino Buena Vista (destroyed by fire in 1981).
In the decades following the Chambers’ departure from 695 Warm Sands up to today, certain additions and alterations have been made to the house by subsequent owners.
27 Fortunately, very little has been done to diminish the home’s integrity with most work involving systems upgrades and interior remodeling.
The Chambers Residence has sustained only one major exterior change – a 192 sq. ft. addition to the living room, which was done in 1973. This addition, which was originally described as a “recreation room” extended the living room out southwards. It follows the width of the original living room space and subsumes, on the eastern side, the original wing wall. An attempt to integrate the addition to the original work was made by matching the aluminum eaves and walls of sliding glass doors. The latter are not exact, but are similar in style.
One other major addition was done on the exterior when a pool and surrounding hardscape was added in 1966.
The current owners are passionately dedicated to restoring the house to as much of its original appearance and spirit as possible. Most notably, they replaced a 32-ft section of fascia which a previous owner installed, which was both in the wrong gauge and made of fiberglass rather than aluminum. They also repaired rotted wood on the exterior wing walls. Further, they have constructed a new block perimeter wall surrounding the property and are replacing non-original flagstone patio hardscaping with more period appropriate concrete blocks similar in style to original Chambers versions. Most recently, they have replaced the front door with a glass door approximating the 1946 Chambers original. The kitchen door was also replaced with a more period appropriate design.
Current Landscaping and Grounds
From 1946 to today, the landscaping and hardscaping surrounding the Chambers Residence has changed considerably. Originally, only small grassy pad s on the east and south sides with canebrake and oleander hedging, the surrounding grounds evolved over the lo ng tenure of Robson & Helen Chambers until it contained patios, pathways and a 6-ft privacy wall on the south side shielding the sun patio and bedrooms from the street. After the 1966 pool addition, much of the original Chambers features disappeared and to day, much of the grass has now been replaced by desert landscaping. The original canebrake and oleanders have been replaced by the new perimeter wall. However, a major original element still remains – the Washingtonia robusta palms, now grown to great heig hts – three next to the southwestern corner of the house (master bedroom) – and 2 others at the southeastern corner of Sunny Dunes and Warm Sands.
28 Character Defining Features of the Chambers Residence
The Chambers Residence is an exceptional example of a custom-designed midcentury Modern house and one of the earliest of the type in Palm Springs. It exhibits numerous character-defining features including:
• Flat roof
• Distinctive deep overhanging eaves highlighted by corrugated aluminum sheets bent to form the fascia.
• Blending of indoor and outdoor spaces
• Extensive use of glass in both fixed and sliding forms • Integrated carport
• Use of low -cost desert -adaptable materials including aluminum, plywood, concrete, Flexboard, and locally-produced pumice blocks
Contributing Elements
• Residence and attached carport
• Five Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan) Palm Trees
Non-Contributing Elements
• 1966 Swimming pool
• Hardscaping
• Perimeter walls
Local Architectural Context
The Chambers Residence should be viewed within the context of the period Post World War II (1945-1969), a boom period that left Palm Springs with what many consider the largest and finest concentration of mid -20th century modern architecture in the United States. A s noted in the Historic Resource Group’s [Palm Springs] Citywide Historic Context Statement & Survey Findings , “by 1951 the city’s winter population swelled to almost 30,000 from a permanent population of 7,660 - coincided with the peak of Modernism’s popularity. The population growth accelerated in the 1950s, bringing a demand for civic necessities such as schools, libraries, museums, a city hall and police headquarters, as well as offices, stores, and housing. Though Palm Springs was a smaller municipality, this economic climate provided many opportunities for locally-based architects, as well as several Los Angeles architects, to ex plore and develop a wide range of architectural types and ideas, sometimes influenced by sophisticated global design trends. These conditions and the architects' talents led to the development of an exceptional group of Modern buildings which later came to be identified as ‘Palm Springs Modernism’ or ‘The Palm Springs School.’ The Chambers Residence is one of the earliest surviving examples of Desert Modernism. It was created by Chambers, not only for his own home, but as a prototype of how year -round homes could be produced in Palm Springs at low cost. The Chambers Residence bears
29 numerous stylistic and philosophical similarities attributed to Albert Frey’s pioneering Frey House 1 and his 1945 house and guest house for Raymond Hatton in Rancho Mirage. Frey House 1 has been demolished and the Hatton house has been altered beyond recognition, leaving the Chambers Residence as the only one remaining largely as originally designed.
Site Description
Location. The Chambers Residence is located on a prominent corner in the Warm Springs Park tract, one of the desert’s most historic and exclusive residential districts.
The topography of the square-shaped lot is flat and borders on the east with Warm Sands Drive and on the south with Sunny Dunes Road. Desert sustainable landscaping has recently replaced much of the older grass and non -native plantings. Five Washingtonia robusta palms, a feature from the days of Robson Chambers, remain. A swimming pool, added in 1966, is also a feature of the property.
30
N
----2.
10. s
oo •
3 .
15. ,
q /,
I
I.
f....
1 ?1 6.
0 \ 0
14. I
Photo Key
Robson & Helen Chambers
Residence
13. 31
Photo 1: East elevation showing 1950 dining room addition including the recent (2020) concrete block perimeter wall.
(Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
Photo 2: Facing west showing 1950 carport and portion of glass-walled dining room. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
32 Photo 3: East elevation. Note 1946 wing wall extending to the door’s right and 1946 steel pillar at far right. Non-original front door has since been replaced. See Photo 15. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
Photo 4: East elevation. Looking south. Note recent hardscape and landscape. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
33 Photo 5: View looking northwest showing southern elevation. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
Photo 6: View showing southern elevation.
(Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
----
34 Photo 7: South elevation looking east into living room. Note 1973 addition on right. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
Photo 8: Looking to the northeast showing 1966 swimming pool in relation to the house. (Author photo. June 2021)
35 Photo 9: South elevation looking to west elevation. Note the three original palm trees and the extending wing wall of the west elevation, a 1950 addition. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
Photo 10: West elevation detail of Flexboard attached with screws and portion of louvered bedroom window.
(Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
36 Photo 11: North elevation showing Flexboard sheathing. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
Photo 12: View to west from carport overlooking northern portion of lot. (Author photo. June 2021)
37 Photo 13: View to north showing view from Sunny Dunes Road. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
Photo 14: Looking north showing 2020 perimeter wall along Warm Sands Drive. (Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. June 2021)
38 Photo 15: October 2021 view showing newly-installed front door created to approximate the 1946 original. See photo on page 22 for comparison.
(Courtesy Carlos Serrao + Monica May. October 2021)
39 BACKGROUND / HISTORIC CONTEXT
The relatively short history of Palm Springs can be organized into several distinct periods, as defined by the Historic Resources Group’s Citywide Historic Context Statement & Survey Findings. These include the following:
• Native American Settlement to 1969
• Early Development (1884-1918)
• Palm Springs between the Wars (1919-1941)
• Palm Springs during World War II (1939-1945)
• Post-World War II Palm Springs (1945-1969)
It is within the context of the period “Post-World War II Palm Springs” that the Chambers Residence will be evaluated. Specifically, the Chambers Residence’s period of significance are the years 1946-1961 when it was home to the architect and his family.
EVALUATION:
Criterion 2: Significant Persons. Criterion 2 recognizes properties associated with the lives of persons who made meaningful contributions to the national, state or local history. Robson Chamber s, AIA, both individually and through his long -time partnership with Albert Frey and John Porter Clark, was one of the most prominent architects in Palm Springs during the heyday of Desert Modernism . The work of this partnership is included among the finest, most important and influential architecture built in the desert during the Mid-century era. Hence, the Chambers Residence qualifies for listing as a Class 1 Historic Resource on the local registry under Criterion 2.
ARCHITECTURE (Criteria 3 – 6)
Criterion 3: (That reflects or exemplifies a particular period of the national, state or local history). The Chambers Residence, completed in 1946, with additions by Chambers in 1950 and 1956, exhibits many stylistic markers which place it directly in the historic context of Post-World War II Palm Springs. The private residence is one of the earliest surviving e xamples of Desert Modernism and represents a prime and largely intact example of the midcentury modern style, for which Palm Springs has gained a worldwide reputation. As such , the Chambers Residence may be viewed as an important component of the historic trends that have come to define Palm Springs’ image as a center of important Modern architecture, i.e., an historic trend that exemplifies a particular period of the national, state or local history. The Chambers Residence qualifies for listing as a Class 1 Historic Resource on the local registry under Criterion 3.
Criterion 4: (That embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; or) Type, Period, and Method of Construction: "Type, period, or method of construction" refers to the way certain properties are related to one another by cultural tradition or function, by dates of construction or style, or by choice or availability of
40 materials and technology. To be eligible under this Crit erion, a property must clearly illustrate, through "distinctive characteristics" a pattern of features common to a particular class of resources. "Distinctive characteristics" are the physical features or traits that commonly recur in individual types, pe riods, or methods of construction. To be eligible, a property must clearly contain enough of those characteristics to be considered a true representative of a particular type, period, or method of construction.
Characteristics can be expressed in terms su ch as form, proportion, structure, plan, style, or materials.
The Chambers Residence is eligible under the theme of Modern architecture because it possesses distinctive characteristics that embody the midcentury modern style such as overall horizontality, expression of structure, expansive amounts of glass, a blend between indoor and outdoor spaces , etc. Further, its construction was the result of an attempt by Chambers to create a low-cost dwelling that could be used on a year-round basis. Chambers built the house entirely of materials such as Flexboard, corrugated aluminum, extensive amounts of glass, plywood and concrete, which had proven their ability to handle desert temperature extremes. The Chambers Residence is one of the earliest surviving examples of Desert Modern architecture and an extraordinary link to the origins of the Palm Springs School of Architecture. As such, the Chambers Residence is eligible under this criterion because it represents an important example of building practices in Palm Springs during the post-World War II period. The Chambers Residence qualifies for listing as a Class 1 Historic Resource on the local registry under Criterion 4.
Criterion 5 : (That (a): represents the work of a master builder, designer, artist, or architect whose individual genius influenced his age; or (b): that possesses high artistic value).
5a: Work of a Master: In the case of the Chambers Residence, the work of Robson Chambers, AIA, can certainly be described as the “work of a master” in view of his history of architectural excellence throughout a career that spanned from the 1940s into the 1980s (see appendix VI).
5b: Properties possessing high artistic values: High a rtistic values may be expressed in many ways, including areas as diverse as community design or planning, engineering, and sculpture. As an exceptional example of midcentury modern architecture, the Chambers Residence certainly articulates the best of what has made Modern architecture so popular throughout the Coachella Valley to a level of excellence and confidence that, in total, could easily be considered an aesthetic ideal. For its high artistic values, t he Chambers R esidence qualifies for listing as a Class 1 Historic Resource on the local registry under Criterion 5.
Criterion 6: (That represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack indi vidual distinction). This Criterion was created to address the reso urces contained within a potential historic district and as such it does not apply to this nomination. Hence, the residence does not qualify under Criterion 6.
41 ARCHEOLOGY
Criterion 7: (That has yielded or may be likely to yield information important to the national, state or local history or prehistory). The Chambers Residence is not likely to yield information important to the national, state or local history or prehistory. Hence, the residence does not qualify under Criterion 7.
FINDING 2: The site, structure, building or object retains one or more of the following aspects of integrity, as established in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. Provide a written description for each element as listed: Design; Materials; Workmanship; Location; Setting; Feeling; and Association.
INTEGRITY
Integrity is the ability of a proper ty to convey its significance. To be listed in the local registry, a property must not only be shown to be significant under the criteria, but it also must have integrity. The evaluation of integrity is sometimes a subjective judgment, but it must always be grounded in an understanding of a property's physical features and how they relate to its significance. Historic properties either retain in tegrity (that is, convey their sig nificance) or they do not. The definition of integrity includes seven aspects or qualities. To retain historic integrity a proper ty will always possess several, and usually most, o f the aspects. The retention of specific aspects of in tegrity is paramount for a property to convey its significance. Determining which of these aspects are most important to a particular property requires knowing why, where, and when the property is significant. The following sections define the seven aspects and explain how they combine to produce integrity.
LOCATION
Location is the place where an historic property was constructed or the place where an historic event occurred. The relationship between the property and its location is often important to understanding why the property was created or why something happened.
The actual location of a historic property, complemented by its setting, is particularly important in recapturing the sense of historic events and persons. Except in rare cases, the relationship between a property and its historic associations is destroyed if the property is moved. The Chambers Residence remains in its original location and therefore qualifies under this aspect.
DESIGN
Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. It results from conscious decisions made during the original conception and planning of a property and applies to activities as diverse as community planning, engineering, architecture, and landscape architecture. Design includes such elements as organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and materials. A property’s design reflects historic functions and technologies as well as aesthetics. It includes such considerations as the structural system; massing;
42 arrangement of spaces; pattern of fenestration; textures and colors of surface materials; type, amount, and style of ornamental detailing. The Chambers Residence’s essential characteristics of form, plan, space, structure, and style have survived largely intact. Similarly, the structural system; massing; arrangement of spaces; pattern of fenestration; and the type, amount, and style of detailing have survived largely intact.
SETTING
Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place in which the property played its historical role. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to surrounding features and open space. Setting often reflects the basic physical conditions under which a property was built and the functions it was intended to serve. In addition, the way in which a property is positioned in its environment can reflect the designer’s concept of nature and aesthetic preferences. The setting of the Chambers Residence continues to reflect the architect’s original design relationship of site and structure.
MATERIALS
Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. The choice and combination of materials reveals the preferences of those who cr eated the property and indicate the availability of particular types of materials and technologies.
The Chambers Residence’s exterior surface materials, which consist primarily of Flexboard, pumice block, corrugated aluminum and glass, both windows and doors, have remained essentially intact and continue to express the physical elements as designed during the building’s period of significance; the pattern and configuration that today forms t he residence and contributing structures survives intact.
WORKMANSHIP
Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans’ labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site. Workmanship can apply to the property as a whole or to its individual components. It can be expressed in vernacular methods of construction and plain finishes or in highly sophisticated configurations and ornamental detailing. It can be based on common traditions or innovative period techniques. Workmanship is important because it can furnish evidence of the technology of a craft, illustrate the aesthetic principles of a historic or prehistoric period, and reveal individual, local, regional, or national applications of both technological practices and aesthetic principles. Examples of workmanship in historic buildings include tooling, carving, painting, graining, turning, and joinery . The workmanship of the Chambers Residence is evidenced by the visible hand of its architect/builder with many of the original screws used to attach the Flexboard
43 siding to the framing still intact. The Chambers Residence is a testament to the far-sighted thinking of its architect who wanted to create a house of low cost that could be lived in year-round and, thanks to the type of materials of construction, one that required virtually no maintenance. These original materials including Flexboard, corrugated aluminum, poured concrete slab, pumice block, and extensive glass in both fixed and sliding forms, are all in situ and performing their original functions. The Chambers Residence continues to express a high degree of contemporary period workmanship.
FEELING
Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, t aken together, convey the property’s historic character. For example, a rural historic district retaining original design, materials, workmanship, and setting will relate the feeling of agricultural life in the 19th century . The Chambers Residence is site d on a prominent corner lot which takes advantage of panoramic views of the surrounding desert and mountain ranges just as it did when completed in 19 46. Accordingly, the residence retains its original integrity of feeling.
ASSOCIATION
Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property’s historic character. For example, a Revolutionary War battlefield whose natural and man -made elements have remained intact since the 18th century will retain its quality of association with the battle. Because feeling and association depend on individual perceptions, their retention alone is never sufficient to support eligibility of a property for the National Register. The Chambers Residence is an important example of a custom - designed midcentury modern private residence in Palm Springs. Accordingly, it continues its association with a pattern of events that have made a meaningful contribution to the community.
INTEGRITY SUMMARY: The Chambers Residence appears to be in excellent condition partially due to the use of construction materials suitable for th e harsh desert environment. This integrity analysis confirms that the building and site of the Chambers Residence still possesses all seven aspects of integrity. In summary, the Chambers Residence possesses a high degree of integrity sufficient to qualif y for designation as a Class 1 Historic Resource.
44 Bibliography
Attached is a list of books, articles, and other sources cited or used in preparing this application and other documentation that may be relevant.
Books
Gebhard, David, Ed. Myron Hunt 1868-1952: The Search for a Regional Architecture.
Santa Monica, CA; Hennessey & Ingalls, Inc. 1984.
Hess, Alan and Andrew Danish: Palm Springs Weekend: The Architecture and Design of a Midcentury Oasis. San Francisco, CA; Chronicle Books, 2001.
Koenig, Gloria. Albert Frey 1903-1998: A Living Architecture of the Desert. Köln, Germany; Taschen GmbH. 2008.
McAlester, Virginia & Lee. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York, NY; Alfred A. Knopf. 1998.
Palm Springs City Directory. Long Beach, CA; Western Directory Co., Various dates.
Rosa, Joseph. Albert Frey, Architect.
New York, NY; Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1990.
Treasury of Contemporary Houses, A: Selected by the Editors of Architectural Record New York, NY; F.W. Dodge Corporation, 1954.
Collections
American Institute of Architects Archives
Robson Chambers Papers, Architecture and Design Collection, University of California, Santa Barbara
Albert Frey Papers, Architecture and Design Collection, University of California, Santa Barbara
Julius Shulman Collection, J. Paul Getty Museum
Magazines and Significant Newspaper Articles
“Architect’s House Built in Two Stages.” Architectural Record, December 1952
Imber, Robert. “The Third Man.”
Palm Springs Life, July 15, 2015.
45 McCoy, Esther. “In Defiance of the Desert.”
Los Angeles Times, January 14, 1951
Newspapers
Various issues of:
Desert Sun
Los Angeles Herald-Examiner
Los Angeles Times
New York Times
Times-Advocate (Escondido)
Internet Resources
Accessingthepast.org
Ancestry.com
Findagrave.com
Pspreservationfoundation.org
Realtor.com
Interviews
Monica May & Carlos Serrao
Other Sources Consulted
Palm Springs Historical Society
City of Palm Springs (Planning and Building Departments) Historic Resources Group. City of Palm Springs Citywide Historic Context Statement; Survey Findings. Pasadena, 2015 (Final Draft, December 2018).
Riverside County Assessor’s Office
46 Appendix I
Owner’s Notarized Letter of Support
City of Palm Springs
Historic Site Preservation Board
3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Dear Honorable Board,
November 12th, 2021
As the current owners of the Robson & Helen Chambers Residence located at 695 South Warm Sands Drive in Palm Springs, California, we enthusiastically support the Class I Historic Resource designation of our property by the city of Palm Springs. We have asked the Palm Springs Preservation Foundation to assist us in the preparation of the required nomination paperwork.
If you have any questions, please contact us at [email protected] and [email protected].
Sit
Carlos Serrao
47
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that docwnent.
State of California }
County of Los Ange les
On 1/U :2 / rl O ,;;_ I . before me, R. J. Anderson, Notary Public, Ir I /) personally appeared L,4-lo v11 °{'1J,., l )&, C / e.,. r /4111.Aff= aml uw:los fa.6 lo c) ertf't. 0 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 acknow ledged 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, exec uted the instrument.
I certify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
~············1 R. J. ANDERSON
: HcUry Public• C.liforni• •
I Los .,, .. 1., County s
Commlnion f 2377476 -
My Comm. upl,., Oct 21, 202~
PLACE NOTARY SEAL ABOVE
Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the docwnent and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document.
Description of attached document
Title or type of document: ah /hoVt 2 a ~ ~ //-er
Document Date:._:..../'-+//--'-/-~__,_/_;;i_c,_ol-/--'--____ __ Number of Pages: ____ _ _ _ Signer(s) Other than Named Above:. ______ _ ____ _________ _
48 Appendix II
Grant Deed
Branch :O25,User :DESL
RECOR DING REQUES TED BY:
WFG National Tille company of California
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS ANO
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Carlos Serrao and Monica May
530 Molino Strool #201
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Escrow No.: 18-161156
Order No.:
Comment: Station Id :C47E
DOC # 2018-0285688
07/16/2018 11:38 AM Fees : $20.00
Reoorded in Offlcial Records
County of Riverside
Peter Aldana
Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
"'T his documenl was electronically st.Omitted
to the County of Riverside for record ing ..
Receipted by: MARY #420
APN: 508-216-002-0 SPACE ABOVE THIS UNE FOR RECORDER'S USE <77cJI 0(/,,--0(}..3 GRANT DEED
THE UNOERStGNED GRANTOR(S) DECLARE(S):
DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX~ ;.seao=·:c.oo,_ _____ _ CITY TAX ""so"'.o""o __________ _ [;83 computed on full value ol property conveyed, OI'
O computed on full value less liens and encumbrances remaining al time of sale, O UninOOfP()fatod aroa ~ City of ~P•=lm~Spn~·~ng~•--------- ' and FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Martin I Lieberman, a singlo man and Potor Coho n, a single man, as Joint Tenants hereby GRANT{$) to Carlos Serrao , a singlo man and Monica May, an unmarried woman I as joint tenants, the following described rea! properly in the City of Palm Springs, County of Riverside, State of California:
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A"
The prope rly more commonly known as : 695 South Warm Sands Drive, Palm Springs, CA 92264 Daled: ""7 . "t ' l
~°'~ Martin I Lieberman
Pe
RIYERSIDE,CA Page I of3 Printed on7/ 16/20213:0 !:0 I PM Document: DD 2018.285688
49
Branch :O25,Uscr :DESL Comment: Station Id :C47E
DOC #2018-0285688 Page 2 of 3
A notary public or olher officer completing this certificate verifies only tho idontity of the individual who signed the document to which lhis certificate is allached. and not the truthfulness, accurac or validil of that document.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
couNrv oF -~f<.~i~\~re~G~s=1~· i~)~-e __ _
} ss.
On :J:u \ '-I q I 2 0 I g- . before mo, CJ Cl I td / a So {orz:,'j-N() . a Notary Public, personall y appeared YY\f\:(t(t,l .'.L, ! 1e6er m.c..10 A.V\D Pe;-0 CoherJ
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s)~'1aro subscribed to the within instrument and acknow ledged to mo that he/sher/they executed tho same in hiilllw /their authorized capacily (ies), and that by his/her/thei r slgnature(s) on the Instrument the person{s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s} acted , executed the Instrument.
I certify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official scat.
Signat ure
RIVERSIDE,CA
Document: DD 20 t 8.285688
1········ ····1 CLAUDIA SOI..OR2.A.NO
: Not,uy Public • Cali'o,ni.l
I Ri¥tfside-County f
Comn1is1ion• 2214122 -
My(c:n,m.Expiic10ct 12. 2021
MAIL TAX STAT EMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE
50
Branch :O25,User :DESL Comment: Station Id :C47E
DOC #20 18-0285688 Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT "A"
LOT 4 1 OF WARM SANDS PARK, IN THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE , STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 20, PAGE(S) 65, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
APN : 508-216-002-0
RIVERSIDE,CA Page 3 of3 Printed on 7/16/2021 3 :0 I :02 PM Document: DD 20 18.285688
51 Appendix III
Assessor’s Map
~~ j
,_n• ~- ..• - • ,· .. i~ • . l
0 . .
..
.11~ ",,,
. "
II
u
~
;f-
[fJ
E_J
i :,:,
!I:
(/)
l>
z
0 "'<>
"'-'!)/1,,~
~~
( I I
....
1----1 ,.11 l"'n
""
,.,. I "'a
'
'"""~
~ '---
~
i1ii
12 ..
CI
iiU: i~~iJ
217
~
I< l
IP''
L___
_,__
I
~
I
..
COR RAMON - -L•=•~' .. "
LOT A 1' WI .. I G.t ROAD
- 3- - - - - .,. - - .!W2t.~ _
- ,... ~\, .. :"
@
I ,. .
11~1M. ii Cl
"
I - 1: ·• I
IIIM l* __ I: 2
' -- WAR '-" LOT8 II TRA 011.-0 .,, 1'.!
- ..
I I • : ;,:
-- . ~ : i ti @ ___ ..._o
•@ I IS • •
\ .. .
..
@) ~. ®
1 @)
~r--
'211')
@)
' @)
CAMJ,~P : PAROCELA
! 1,_f H
LOTE LOTC
1• @)
" @ . @) : , .....
• "';, ~i
•@ ;
1-----t@·
2A
I I j ~ '.-'::-. -~:"~ C \ '° T1'A ou.oo, •
'·~ C/J t @1 I - • ., • .: • ®
" I @) ,J'
•'
. - -PARaf [LA • PLACE "
,.---..--
I
ii .... !
: 105'«:M I
J!,, ~ i --
I @)
... ;:
~ -"
~f
,..,
- .
WARM SANDS ' cT
LOTG If
- ,.,. 4,·;:
., ....
I @)
.. • @) @)
" 6-i2')---:@) y @
.. 10
I
§
:,:,
m m z
~ r r
, @) 1@ l
__(216) - C :,:,
@) ® , ~
~ 0 ..
Ii < m 1: .. • " . ! J
I !! !l !i!llf
i @)
l I - ! .. t
@
,t
, -·
@) ,,. .
LOTH W
DUNES
LOTII
±ROAD
i 3 1 l
I
w . ~;
i!"' ?ii
1:i _____,,H r 16Q>
,~· ~ii =~i ~ii M.
~i~
~-· m
l~~ . ,
" (/) - m :;/ ('")
0 N
~"" 'II --i
~ ,.
,:: (/)
!g :,:,
"' ,. z m
~
\_
!1~
u
.. t : ..
' ' I
Ef•i; r
~
I I I 11{
r f!!H , I : '• ! • HJ
!!!l)! U1
ffi8i~
~ r:.,
~ ......
52 Appendix IV
Site Plan
0 0
j
,
N
s
Site Plan
Robson & Helen Chambers
Residen ce
Robson Cole Chambers
d ark & Frey
1946
With additions by the archit ect in 1950 and 1956.
-D
D
-
L946 · Original Structu re
1950 · Maste r Bedroo m/ Dining
Add ition
l 956 · Laundry Room/Pa tio
Extension
1973· Recreat ion Room/ Living
Room Extension
(Non- Chambers)
D L a ndscape(Non Coutributing)
00 ~,=~
D Hard scape (Non Contributing)
D D r i veway <Non Contribut ing)
--- Perimeter Walls (Non-Contrib ming.)
0 Washingto nia robusta Palm
Trees (5) !Comrlbutlng)
53 Appendix V
Google Earth Image
54 Appendix VI
Chain of Ownership/Permit History
July 11, 1946
Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association to Robson C. Chambers and Helen S. Chambers
March 20, 1961
Robson C. Chambers and Helen S. Chambers to Alice Sachs Jacobsen August 3, 1966
Alice Sachs Jacobsen to Ruth H. Lambek, as joint tenants December 21, 1966
Ruth H. Lambek to Alice Sachs Jacobsen
October 8, 1968
Alice Sachs Jacobsen to Ruth H. Lambek
October 14, 1968
Settlement of Estate of Alice Sachs Jacobsen, Deceased
Ownership divided in equal ½ parts to Jurgen G. Jacobsen and Ruth H. Lambek July 14, 1969
Jurgen G. Jacobsen and Ruth H. Lambek to Thomas F. Reniewich, Jr. & Joy Ana Reniewich, as joint tenants
August 27, 1969
Ruth H. Lambek to Thomas F. Reniewich, Jr. & Joy Ana Reniewich April 25, 1972
Thomas F. Reniewich, Jr. & Joy Ana Reniewich to Vincent J. Pastere February 20, 1973
Vincent J. Pastere to George J. Janis
July 21, 1975
George J. Janis to Robert O. Pfleger & Martha E. Pfleger, as joint tenants December 7, 1988
Robert O. Pfleger & Martha E. Pfleger, as joint tenants to Ronald Jesser August 31, 1990
Ronald W. Jesser to Ronald W. Jesser and Mitchell Samuels as joint tenants May 28, 1991
Ronald W. Jesser and Mitchell Samuels as joint tenants to Donald Michael Samuels and Sally Florence Samuels, husband and wife, as joint tenants October 17, 1991
Donald Michael Samuels and Sally Florence Samuels, husband and wife, as joint tenants to Paul Timothy Hood
December 26, 1991
Deed of Trust made between Paul Timothy Hood, a single man and Countrywide Title Corporation (Note: This document was not included as part of the COT. Its existence was referenced in the subsequent document of May 14, 1997. It appears the property went into foreclosure with Paul Timothy Hood’s rights in the property transferred to CTC Foreclosure Services Corporation, formerly known as Countrywide Title Corporation.)
55 May 14, 1997
Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale CTC Foreclosure Services Corporation to Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
July 23, 1997
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation to David W. Bradshaw, a single man July 1, 1999
David Bradshaw, a single man, to David Bradshaw and Gary J. Lacy, as joint tenants
March 25, 2002
David Bradshaw and Gary J. Lacy, as joint tenants to Lionel D. Cunningham and Garin L. Bakel, as joint tenants
June 24, 2010
Lionel D. Cunningham and Garin L. Bakel, as joint tenants to Sam A. Cardella, a single man
November 16, 2011
Sam A. Cardella, a single man to Mar tin I. Lieberman and Peter Cohen as joint tenants
July 9, 2018
Martin I. Lieberman and Peter Cohen as joint tenants to Carlos Serrao and Monica May
Permit History
The following is a digest of permits provided by the Palm Springs Department of Building & Safety related to 695 South Warm Sands Drive. It may not be complete but represents all available permits located at the time of this nomination:
August 23, 1946 – Permit No. 7817 (Residence) – Owner: Robson and Helen Chambers. Contractor: Illegible. Cost: $7,157.00.
September 24, 1946 – Permit No. 8726 (Plumbing) – Owner: Robson Chambers.
Contractor: Arthur J. Coffey.
August 9, 1950 – Permit No.4430 (Addition. Bedroom, Bath, Carport and Enclose Porch) – Owner: Robson Chambers. Contractor: Arthur J. Coffey. Cost: $4,000.00.
August 11, 1950 – Permit No. 4013 (Plumbing) – Owner: Robson Chambers.
Contractor: Wayne Stringer.
(Month obscured), 25, 1950 – Permit No. 3560 (Electrical) – Owner: Robson Chambers.
Contractor: McLaughlin Electric.
February 8, 1954 – Permit No. 6616 (Furnace) – Owner: Robson Chambers. Contractor:
Ray Greene. Cost: $500.00.
September 18, 1956 – Permit No. 8949 (Addition. Laundry Room.) – Owner: Robson Chambers. Contractor: Arthur J. Coffey. Cost: $1,000.00.
56 October 31, 1961 – Permit No. B-2477 (Gas Outlet) – Owner: Alice Sachs Jacobsen.
Contractor: Otto Gelson.
May 16, 1966 – Permit No. B -09125 (Swimming Pool, 15’x30’ gunite pool) – Owner:
Alice Sachs Jacobsen Contractor: Owner/Builder. Cost: $3,000.
September 14, 1966 – Permit No. B-09434 (Air-Conditioning Unit) – Owner: Alice Sachs Jacobsen. Contractor: Lake Air Conditioning. Cost: $1,354.00.
June 27, 1973 – Permit No. B-6392 (Addition. Recreation Room. 192 sq. ft. addition to living room) – Owner: George Janis. Contractor: Prince. Cost: $1,000.00.
July 17, 1973 – Permit No. A-6683 (Electrical) – Owner: George Janis. Contractor: Palm Springs Electric.
July 23, 1973 – Permit No. M -2675 (Air Conditioning Work) – Owner: George Janis.
Contractor: Professional Air Conditioning.
November 8, 1975 – Permit No. A -3854 (Sewer) – Owner: (Illegible) Young. *** Contractor: Owner. Cost: $105.00. ***Note: As George Janis was owner at the time, this may actually be the name of person doing the work.
January 28, 2019 – Permit No. 2019-364 (Perimeter Wall, Front Yard) – Owner: Carlos Serrao. Contractor: Lucas McQueen. Cost $8,000.
April 30, 2019 – Permit No. 2019-1662 (Re-Roofing) Owner: Carlos Serrao. Contractor:
Western Pacific Roofing. Cost: $11,765.00.
57 Appendix VII
Robson Chambers, AIA
Robson Chambers in his office at UC Santa Barbara.
(Courtesy Robson Chambers Collection,
Architecture & Design Collection, University Art Museum, University of California Santa Barbara )
In 2015, architectural historian and educator Robert Imber wrote an article on Robson Chambers for Palm Springs Life, which he entitled, “The Third Man.” The title perfectly captured the position Chambers has held in relation to Albert Frey and John Porter Clark, his much better-known architectural collaborators. Although he worked alongside Frey (1946-1966) and Clark (1946-1956) for decades, helping to design some of Palm Springs’ most iconic landmarks, Chambers’ contributions often do not receive the same attention as his partners. Chambers, however, appears to have been happy being the “Third Man,” content with the work itself and not showing much interest in self - promotion. And while Frey justifiably deserves the lion’s share for the collective oeuvre of the trio with Clark a respectable second, Chambers too deserves to receive more attention and exploration of his contributions in a career that spanned four decades.
Chambers was born on March 4, 1919 in Los Angeles, California, however, he was to grow into adulthood in the community of Banning in Riverside County where his father
58 ran the local pharmacy. Chambers was no stranger to Palm Springs, having ventured through the San Gorgonio Pass on numerous visits and was evidently intrigued by what he saw. Graduating from Banning High School in 1936, Chambers enrolled at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles (USC), where he planned to study architecture. Chambers was no stranger to the professio n. His uncle Harold C.
Chambers (1885 -1971) was one of Southern California’s most prominent architect/engineers as part of the venerable firm of Myron Hunt and H.C. Chambers.
The University of Southern California was kn own for its highly -regarded program in architecture and Chambers excelled at the curriculum, graduating with honors in 1941.
As part of the ceremony, Chambers was singled out for an award by the American Institute of Architects for his scholarship.
Upon graduation, Chambers was offered a position in his uncle’s firm. While it is unknown what specific projects he may have been involved with in these first pre -war months of 1941, it appears he was already working on some of the firm ’s construction projects for the U.S. military , which only continued in greater intensity once war was declared in December. Between 1941-1942, Chambers served as an architect-planner on Army cantonments and hospitals in Medford, Oregon; Pearl Harbor, Territory of Hawaii; Marysvil le, California; Fort Huachuca, Arizona; and at Camp Pendleton in Oceanside, California.
By its very nature, military design and construction needed to be fast, efficient and produced using the simplest, cheapest materials available. This proved to be a g reat training ground for Chambers’ later post-war work in designing cost-efficient housing in Palm Springs including that of his own home.
In 1942, Chambers left the direct employ of Hunt and Chambers and joined the United States Marine Corps where he attained the rank of Technical Sergeant. The bulk of his time was spent heading a small architectural section at Camp Pendleton near Oceanside in San Diego County. It was during this time, Chambers met and fell in love with his future wife Helen Snow (1916-2004), a graduate of Wells College in New York, who was described in the Escondido Times-Advocate as coming from one of Vista’s most prominent families. The pair were married on June 12, 1943.
War’s end brought a return to civilian projects, but it was soon clear that Chambers would need to make a change in firms as Myron Hunt, nearing 80 and in poor health, was heading to retirement. It was then that an opportunity rose in the form of Albert Frey who offered him a junior position at the Palm Springs fir m of Clark & Frey. Chambers welcomed the chance to work with a fellow modernist and fulfill his long -held wish to design structures in a desert environment.
In 1946, the year he joined Clark & Frey and built his own desert home, Chambers was officially licensed as an architect (C -709) by the state of California. He began as an employee of the firm, but within a few years had distinguished himself to such a degree that in January 1948 he was elevated to full partnership under the newly-created firm of Clark, Frey & Chambers. This would last until Clark’s departure at the end of 1956 when
59 the firm would be renamed Frey and Chambers. This would mark a period of great creative output which would produce some of the firm’s most important work. As Joseph Rosa wrote in his book on Frey, “During the partnership of Frey and Chambers, their larger buildings developed a greater fluidity, with each project expressive of its function.”
Because of the collaborative nature of partnerships, it is not always easy to determi ne the degree of each contribution. However, in 1973, Chambers sketched out some of the major projects where he was a principal:
Schools in Palm Springs, Needles and Banning; three buildings for a new junior college in Palm Desert (College of the Desert) ; and Social Science and Humanities Building at UC Riverside. Palm Springs City Hall, Desert Hospital; Desert Museum; Palm Springs Aerial Tramway terminal buildings; fire stations, etc.
He also listed unspecified “commercial buildings. Hotels, apartments, shopping centers, banks, restaurants,” as well as the Red Cross building in Riverside, U.S. Post Office in Blythe, and the Banning Public Library. His accounting focused on commercial and civic projects and neglected to mention the firm’s extensive residen tial commissions which included such important designs as the Cree House II (1955 -1956), the Carey Residence (1956); and Frey’s own Frey House II (1964), among others.
While he did not list them, Chambers was also involved with a number of other important commissions with Frey including the North Shore Yacht Club (1958), St. Michael’s -by- the-Sea Church in Carlsbad (1959), the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway Valley Station (1963), and the Tramway Gas Station (1965).
In 1966, Frey and Chambers amicably dissolved their 20-year partnership, a remarkable association that gave Palm Springs some of its most notable Mid-century landmarks.
For Chambers, it meant opening a new chapter, leaving his beloved Palm Springs and starting a new phase of his career as a campus architect for the University of California, Santa Barbara. It was an exciting period for the development and expansion of the campus in which Chambers played a major role. From 1966 -1973, he served as Assistant Campus Architect, however, over this time, his responsibilities continued to expand until he became Acting Campus Architect. In 1973, he was officially named to the post and would serve with distinction for the next decade.
While the position of Campus Architect was managerial in scope , Chambers was nonetheless actively involved in the design process of a number of new structures built during the school’s late 1960s -1970s construction “boom.” He also served as project architect, along with Jay And erson, on several campus projects including Kerr Hall (Marquis & Stoller, executive architects. 1975) and the Santa Ynez Apartments (A.
Quincy Jones & Associates, executive architects. 1981)
In 1982, Chambers began another phase of his long and varied car eer. Desiring to return to active practice, he and Helen moved to the desert community of Borrego
60 Springs. Between 1982 and 1995, Chambers found ready work in the burgeoning community with a steady flow of commissions that ranged from residences to commercial projects. His most notable later work was the St. Barnabas Episcopal Church (1986).
Chambers returned to Santa Barbara in 1998 and it was there he passed away at the age of 80 on June 18, 1999. His obituary in the Desert Sun read in part, “The homes (Chambers) designed, unique and timeless, are a testimony to his love of the desert environment and his grace and vision as an architect.”
Night at 695 Warm Sands Drive late 1940s. Robson Chambers tends to the barbeque. (© J. Paul Getty Trust. Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles (2004.R.10) and Robson Chambers papers, Architecture and Design Collection. Art, Design & Architecture Museum; University of California, Santa Barbara.)
ATTACHMENT D
HISTORIC
SITE
PRESERVATION
BOARD
STAFF
REPORT
DATE:
May
4,
2022
PUBLIC
HEARING
SUBJECT:
AN
APPLICATION
BY
CARLOS
SERRAO
AND
MONICA
MAY,
OWNERS
FOR
HISTORIC
DESIGNATION
OF
"THE
ROBSON
CHAMBERS
RESIDENCE"
LOCATED
AT
695
SOUTH
WARM
SANDS
DRIVE,
(APN
#508-216-002),
CASE
HSPB
#143.
(KL).
FROM:
Department
of
Planning
Services SUMMARY
The
owners
are
seeking
historic
designation
of
the
Robson
Chambers
residence.
The
home
was
designed
by
Chambers
as
his
family
home
and
constructed
in
1946
with
additions
by
Chambers
in
1950
and
1956.
The
Chambers
family
lived
in
the
home
from
1946
until
1961.
The
proposed
period
of
significance
reflects
the
time
during
with
the
Chambers
family
lived
in
the
home.
If
designated
as
a
historic
resource,
the
property
would
be
subject
to
the
regulations
outlined
in
Section
8.05 of
the
Palm
Springs
Municipal
Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
1 .
Open
the
public
hearing
and
receive
public
testimony.
2. Close
the
public
hearing
and
adopt
Resolution
HSPB
#143,
"A
RESOLUTION
OF
THE
HISTORIC
SITE
PRESERVATION
BOARD
OF
THE
CITY
OF
PALM
SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
DESIGNATE
"THE
ROBSON
CHAMBERS
RESIDENCE"
LOCATED
AT
695
SOUTH
WARM
SANDS
DRIVE,
AS
CLASS
1 (LANDMARK)
HISTORIC
RESOURCE
HSPB
#143,
SUBJECT
TO
CONDITIONS
(APN
508-216-002)."
BACKGROUND
AND
SETTING:
A
historic
resources
report
dated
November,
2021
(Revised),
prepared
by
Steven
Vaught
in
association
with
the
Palm
Springs
Preservation
Foundation
for
the
owners
("the
report")
and
a
site
inspection
are
the
basis
of
this
staff
report.
Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report:
HSPB-143 -The Robson Chambers Residence
· Related Relevant Cit Actions b HSPB, Plannin , Fire, Bui/din , etc ...
December 2021 HSPB members received the Historic Resources Re ANALYSIS:
May 4, 2022
Historic Preservation activities in Palm Springs are regulated under Municipal Code Section 8.05 ("Historic Preservation'). The purpose of the Historic Preservation Ordinance is:
" ... to stabilize and improve buildings, structures or areas which are
Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report:
HSPB-143 -The Robson Chambers Residence
May 4, 2022
considered to be of historical, architectural, archaeological or ecological value, to foster civic beauty, to strengthen the local economy and to promote the use of historic resources for the education and welfare of the citizens." Standard Conditions that apply to Historic Resources
The following shall apply to a Class 1 or 2 Historic Site or Resource:
1. It shall meet the definition of a Class 1 or 2 historic resource as outlined in Municipal Code Section 8.05.020 including the findings outlined in Section
8.05.070 (C).
2. An archival file shall be maintained on the property by the City.
3. It may be qualified as 'historic' at the federal, state, and/or county level.
4. A marker explaining the historic nature of the site may be installed at the site in a location viewable from the public way.
5. Compliance with all rules and regulations for Historic Resources and Historic Districts under Chapter 8.05 of the Municipal Code.
6. If designated, the findings in support of designation shall be stated in a resolution of the City Council that shall be recorded with the County Recorders' office within 90 days of the effective date of the Council's resolution.
Evaluation of the Application. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 8.05.070 (C, 1,a), the HSPB shall evaluate the application and make findings in conformance with the following criteria:
Criteria for the Designation of Class 1 Historic Resources. A site, structure, building or object may be designated as a Class 1 historic resource, provided both of the following findings ("a" and ''b'J are met:
a. The site, structure, building or object exhibits exceptional historic significance and meets one or more of the criteria listed below:
The Chambers Residence reflects the modernist tenets of architecture widely applied in Palm Springs in the mid twentieth century. It reflects the design talent of an architect who is widely recognized for his collaboration with master architects Albert Frey and John Porter Clark. Its construction is unique in the manner in which Chambers utilized plain, utilitarian materials such as corrugated sheet metal and plywood for exterior surfaces. (Criterion 1) The resource is associated with events that have made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community; The report does not list any events associated with the home that contributed to the nation, state or community. Thus, it does not qualify under Criterion 1. (Criterion 2) The resource is associated with the lives of persons who
Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report:
HSPB-143 -The Robson Chambers Residence
made a meaningful contribution to national, state or local history; May 4, 2022
The report asserts that the· site should be deemed historic for its association with the life and work of architect Robson Chambers. The report notes that Chambers made a meaningful contribution to local history based on the many architectural commissions he participated in while in partnership with Albert Frey from 1946 until 1966.
In 1966, Chambers left Palm Springs and began a new phase in his career as campus architect for the University of California, Santa Barbara, a role he played until 1982 when he moved to the desert community of Borrego Springs where he had a steady flow of commissions until his return to Santa Barbara in 1998 and it was there he passed away at age 80 in 1999.
The report lists some of the many architectural comm1ss1ons on which Chambers collaborated with Frey and many of these co-designed buildings have been recognized as part of the basic collection that became known as "Desert Modernism" or "The Palm Springs School of Architecture" was formulated. Thus Chambers was not only a person of significance because of the quantity of commissions for which he was associated, but for the influence these commissions had in the emergence of a particularly unique form of Modern architecture -one that was both influenced by and responsive to the harsh climate of the desert. For these reasons, the site qualifies as a historic resource under Criterion 2.
(Criterion 3) The resource reflects or exemplifies a particular period of national, state or local history;
As noted in the report, the many buildings that Chambers designed in collaboration with Frey collectively reflect the post-World War II period in which Modernist architecture was embraced enthusiastically by residents, business owners, school districts and civic leaders for its forward-looking style and material simplicity and efficiency of construction.
The minimalistic designs from this period seemed to reflect the casual, simple leisure lifestyle that many families in the post-war period embraced. For these reasons, staff concurs that the site qualifies as a historic resource under Criterion 3. (Criterion 4) The resource embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction;
The Chambers residence, with its simple forms and open flexible floor plan lent itself to simple materials. The scarcity of many types of building materials, coupled with the efficiency of construction that could be achieved with large thin sheets of corrugated metal and recent mass-production techniques of products like plywood and laminated plastics gave architects in the post War era a new palette of materials with which to design and build. The Chambers residence is quite unusual in its use of plywood and cement board panels for exterior wall surfaces; using rough, raw materials as the finished surface. This
Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report:
HSPB-143 -The Robson Chambers Residence
May 4, 2022
"honesty of materials" and visibly exposing the fasteners and structure can be considered similar to the tenet of Modern architecture of structure becoming the ornament on the building. Thus, staff would assert that it is eligible as a historic resource relative to Criterion 4.
(Criterion 5) The resource presents the work of a master builder, designer, artist, or architect whose individual genius influenced his age, or that possesses high artistic value;
Robson Chambers work, in collaboration with Frey and Clark represented a departure from traditional architectural style and use of materials. The expansive use of glass, generous eaves, exposed simple materials all contribute to the particular style of Modern architecture that has recently been referred to as "Desert Modern". Chambers work contributed to this unique, regional style for which Palm Springs is known. Current designers and architects who embrace the characteristics of Desert Modern are influenced by the simplicity and straight-forward designs of Chambers and his peers.
Thus staff would agree that the building qualifies as a historic resource based on Criterion
5. (Criterion 6) The resource represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction, as used in evaluating applications for designation of historic districts, for parcels on which more than one entity exists; or
The report does not assert that the Chambers residence qualifies under Criterion 6. (Criterion 7) The resource has yielded or may be likely to yield information important to national, state or local history or prehistory.
No information has been provided in the historic resources report on any pre-historic significance of the site.
Analysis of Integrity. (PSMC 8.05.070 (C, 1,b). The site, structure, building or object retains one or more of the following aspects of integrity, as established in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards: integrity of design, materials, workmanship, location, setting, feeling, or association.
The Chambers residence is evaluated in terms of its historic integrity as follows:
1. Location:
The Chambers residence remains in the same location that it was constructed, thus it retains integrity of location.
Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report:
HSPB-143 -The Robson Chambers Residence
2. Design:
May 4, 2022
The· design of the Chambers residence was one of flexible use of space and spatial volumes designed to accommodate growth and expansion of the home as the family grew. The additions made after the period of significance, such as the swimming pool and air conditioning (1966), the addition to the living room (1973) and the perimeter garden wall (2019) do not materially impair the design integrity of the home.
The home has a good degree of design integrity.
3. Setting:
The report does not provide information about the nature of the surrounding neighborhood at the time the home was constructed, however staff believes it is reasonable to assume that a the time of construction, the residence was one of the first homes built in the vicinity and the area was mostly open desert. Today the neighborhood is fully built out, thus the setting of the home has changed from that of open desert to a neighborhood of single family residences.
4. Materials:
The simple exterior materials used in the exterior of the home remain mostly intact and thus material integrity remains.
5. Workmanship:
The home is of average workmanship common for the era of the 1950's although the creative use of industrial materials such as curved corrugated steel panels for soffit and fascia reflect a talented craftsman. Rough materials were well-crafted to become finished surfaces that have survived the test of time.
6. Feeling:
The residence retains its feeling as a modest home from the 1950's. Its unique use of common materials for finished surfaces continues to draw attention thus retains integrity of feeling.
7. Association:
The Chambers residence continues to reflect and convey its association with the mid twentieth century period in Palm Springs when young architectures were experimenting with simple materials in creative ways to create modest affordable and interesting dwellings.
In summary, the home retains sufficient integrity to qualify as a Class 1 ("Landmark")
Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report:
HSPB-143 -The Robson Chambers Residence
historic resource.
DEFINING HISTORIC CHARACTERISTICS
May 4, 2022
In considering a recommendation for historic resource designation it is important to distinguish those physical elements that are original or from the period of significance that contribute to the resource's historic significance from alterations, additions or features that were added at a later time that may be sympathetic to the original character, but which may create a false sense of historicity. Distinguishing original character-defining features from non-original elements aids the HSPB when it is tasked with evaluating future alterations to the historic resource.
Character-defining features of the home are as follows:
• Flat roof
• Deep eaves and overhangs constructed of curved corrugated metal panels. • Large expanses of floor to ceiling glass.
• Open carport.
• Low cost "industrial" material such as Flexboard, corrugated metal, plywood and pumice blocks for the fireplace.
• Simple form and massing with no ornament or decorative elements.
Non-contributing elements:
• The swimming pool.
• The hardscape and landscape.1
• The perimeter walls.
• The screening around the rooftop mechanical equipment.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The proposed historic resource designation is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical changes to the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to section 8.05.140 of the Municipal Code of Palm Springs, all residents within five hundred (500) feet of the subject property have been notified and notice was 1 The report suggests the Washingtonia Robustas on the site as contributing, however it was not clear from the report photos that these trees were from the period of significance.
Historic
Site
Preservation
Board
Staff
Report:
HSPB-143-The
Robson
Chambers
Residence
Page
8 of
8 published
in
a
newspaper
of
general
circulation.
CONCLUSION:
May
4,
2022
The
Chambers
residence
meets
the
definition
of
a
historic
resource
based
on
Criteria
2,
3,
4 and
5 of
the
Palm
Springs
Historic
Preservation
Ordinance.
The
home
has
a
good
degree
of
historic
integrity.
As such
the
property
qualifies
as
a
Class
1 historic
resource.
Ken
Lyon,
RA,
Principal
Planner
Historic
Preservation
Officer
Attachments:
1. Vicinity
Map
2. Draft
Resolution
Da
idNewell,
AICP
Assistant
Director
of
Planning
Services
3. Application,
related
background
materials,
photos
(under
separate
cover).
I Jill
-CAMINO·PAROCEl:A
Department of Planning Services
Vicinity Map
?( I j
"\
/
/ ,
--CA IWNO·PAROCEL:A- I\ ,......
f
) '==['' \/---
.........
~r-,
r---
~ ~ APAROCEl:A-P..-'-! I -c'-
~
D:
g: I 01
..:,
o / i ~ z
I I
fl)
:E :E z
----c(
I "
D: 1H
\
I) . c( D:
····y·~-WARM SANDS·C:'f-3: C,
I I / ·-
--
.-----· '-·-- ~
-
SUNNY-Dl NES·RD
j
I
....
l
~\ J I
I l ! \
,.I ) \.
"' SAN-LUCAS-RD
~
I If
"-,
I ~I I I I YI I
l I
I I / /
Legend I
I Ir-+ I -r1 I I D 500-Ft Buffer I
~:'.RtvERSIDE·DR
~Site
c=J Parcel
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
I
HSPB #143 -"The Chambers Residence"
696 South Warm Sands Drive
• W.E
s
-
-·-·-
i-----
r---
...---
i-----
~
. l
~
C
< (I)
0 - :E
D:
w :c
\_ J
I
~
l~ < fl)
0 :IE
D:
w
,, i"
EXCERPTS OF MINUTES
At the Historic Site Preservation Board meeting of the City of Palm Springs, held May 4, 2022, the Historic Site Preservation Board took the following action:
2.A. APPLICATION BY CARLOS SERRAO AND MONICA MAY, OWNERS FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF “THE ROBSON & HELEN CHAMBERS
RESIDENCE” LOCATED AT 695 SOUTH WARM SANDS ROAD, (APN #508 - 216-002), CASE HSPB #143 (DN).
Principal Planner Lyon summarized the staff report.
Discussion followed regarding implications of identifying t he palm trees as character defining features.
Chair Hough opened the public hearing.
Carlos Serrao and Monica May, applicants, thanked the HSPB for its consideration; provided a brief history of their research efforts and discussed use of post-war materials.
Steven Vaught, author of the historic resource report spoke about the importance of the architectural history of the residence; discussed use of post -war materials and noted its integrity has remained through the years.
There were no other public comments Chair Hough closed the public hearing.
Member Hansen spoke in support of the nomination and spoke about expansion of the residence being included in the original plans.
Vice Chair Nelson thanked the applicants for their restoration efforts, includ ing close attention to details; noted the existing palm trees are part of the original historic landscape and recommended including them as character defining features.
Principal Planner Lyon asked the board: in considering including the trees as charact er- defining features, would removal of the trees impair the historic significance of the home? If the house is historically significant with or without the trees, then they should not be included.
Mr. Serrao left the decision regarding the trees up to the Board. He agreed to replace them in the future if necessary.
Member Hansen agreed with staff that removing the palm trees will not impact the historical significance of the residence.
Chair Hough commented on the significance of preserving an architect's own home.
Motion by Kiser, seconded by Nelson, to recommend Class 1 designation to the City Council.
I, JOANNE BRUGGEMANS , Administrative Secretary for the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that the above action was taken by Historic Site Preservation Board of the City of Palm Springs on the 4th day of May, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: Miller, Nelson, Kiser, Hansen, Hough, Rosenow.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Rose
ABSTAIN: None
_________________________
Joanne Bruggemans
Adminstrative Secretary
RESOLUTION NO: 143
A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION
BOARD OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNICL DESIGNATE “THE
ROBSON CHAMBERS RESIDENCE” LOCATED AT 695 SOUTH
WARM SANDS DRIVE , AS CLASS 1 (LANDMARK) HISTORIC
RESOURCE HSPB #14 3, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS (APN 50 8-
216-002).
THE HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION BOARD FINDS AND DETERMINES AS FOLLOWS:
A. WHEREAS, Chapter 8.05 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code allows for the designation of historic sites and districts; and
B. WHEREAS, Carlos Serrao and Monica May, owners, submitted an application to the City seeking historic site designation of The Robson Chambers Residence located at 695 South Warm Sands Drive, Case HSPB #143; and
C. WHEREAS, in April, 2022, members of the Historic Site Preservation Board (HSPB) and City staff conducted site inspections of the proposed historic resource; and
D. WHEREAS, on May 4, 2022, a noticed public hearing of the Palm Springs Historic Site Preservation Board to consider Case HSPB #14 3 was held in accordance with applicable law ; and
E. WHEREAS, at said hearing, the HSPB carefully reviewed and considered all the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including, but not lim ited to, the staff report and all written and oral testimony.
THE HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION BOARD OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS RESOLVES:
SECTION 1: FINDINGS – PART “A”, CRITERIA FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES.
Evaluation of the Application. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 8.05.070 (C,1,a), the HSPB shall evaluate the application and make findings in conformance with the following criteria:
Criteria for the Designation of Class 1 Historic Resources. A site, structure, building or object may be designated as a Class 1 historic resource, provided both of the following findings (“a” and “b”) are met:
a. The site, structure, building or object exhibits exceptional historic significance and meets one or more of the criteria listed below:
The Chambers Residence reflects the modernist tenets of architecture widely applied in Palm Springs in the mid twentieth century. It reflects the design talent of an architect who is widely
HSPB Resolution No.143
recognized for his collaboration with master architects Albert Frey a nd John Porter Clark. Its construction is unique in the manner in which Chambers utilized plain, utilitarian materials such as corrugated sheet metal and plywood for exterior surfaces.
(Criterion 1) The resource is associated with events that have made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community;
The report does not list any events associated with the home that contributed to the nation, state or community. Thus, it does not qualify under Criterion 1.
(Criterion 2) The resource is associated with the lives of persons who made a meaningful contribution to national, state or local history;
The report asserts that the site should be deemed historic for its association with the life and work of architect Robson Chambers . The report notes that Chambers made a meaningful contribution to local history based on the many architectural commissions he participated in while in partnership with Albert Frey from 1946 until 1966.
In 1966, Chambers left Palm Springs and began a new phase in his career as campus architect for the University of California, Santa Barbara, a role he played until 1982 when he moved to the desert community of Borrego Springs where he had a steady flow of commissions until his return to Santa Barbara in 1998 and it was there he passed away at age 80 in 1999.
The report lists some of the many architectural commissions on which Chambers collaborated with Frey and many of these co -designed buildings have been recognized as part of the basic collection tha t became known as “Desert Modernism” or “The Palm Springs School of Architecture” was formulated. Thus Chambers was not only a person of significance because of the quantity of commissions for which he was associated, but for the influence these commissions had in the emergence of a particularly unique form of Modern architecture – one that was both influenced by and responsive to the harsh climate of the desert. For these reasons, the site qualifies as a historic resource under Criterion 2.
(Criterion 3) The resource reflects or exemplifies a particular period of national, state or local history;
As noted in the report, the many buildings that Chambers designed in collaboration with Frey collectively reflect the post -World War II period in which Moder nist architecture was embraced enthusiastically by residents, business owners, school districts and civic leaders for its forward- looking style and material simplicity and efficiency of construction.
The minimalistic designs from this period seemed to ref lect the casual, simple leisure lifestyle that many families in the post-war period embraced. For these reasons, the HSPB finds that the site qualifies as a historic resource under Criterion 3.
(Criterion 4) The resource embodies the distinctive charac teristics of a type, period or method of construction;
HSPB Resolution No.143
The Chambers residence, with its simple forms and open flexible floor plan lent itself to simple materials. The scarcity of many types of building materials, coupled with the efficiency of construction that could be achieved with large thin sheets of corrugated metal and recent mass- production techniques of products like plywood and laminated plastics gave architects in the post War era a new palette of materials with which to design and build. The Chambers residence is quite unusual in its use of plywood and cement board panels for exterior wall surfaces; using rough, raw materials as the finished surface. This “honesty of materials” and visibly exposing the fasteners and structure can be considered similar to the tenet of Modern architecture of structure becoming the ornament on the building. Thus, the HSPB asserts that it is eligible as a historic resource relative to Criterion 4.
(Criterion 5) The resource presents the work of a master builder, designer, artist, or architect whose individual genius influenced his age, or that possesses high artistic value;
Robson Chambers work, in collaboration with Frey and Clark represented a departure from traditional architectural style and use of materials. The expansive use of glass, generous eaves, exposed simple materials all contribute to the particular style of Moder n architecture that has recently been referred to as “Desert Modern”. Chambers work contributed to this unique, regional style for which Palm Springs is known. Current designers and architects who embrace the characteristics of Desert Modern are influen ced by the simplicity and straight -forward designs of Chambers and his peers. Thus the HSPB finds that the building qualifies as a historic resource based on Criterion 5.
(Criterion 6) The resource represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction, as used in evaluating applications for designation of historic districts, for parcels on which more than one entity exists; or
The report does not assert that the Chambers residence qualifies under Criterion 6.
(Criterion 7) The resource has yielded or may be likely to yield information important to national, state or local history or prehistory.
No information has been provided in the historic resources report on any pre-historic significance of the site.
SECTION 2: PART “B” ANALYSIS OF HISTORIC INTEGRITY.
Analysis of Integrity. (PSMC 8.05.070 (C,1,b). The site, structure, building or object retains one or more of the following aspects of integrity, as established in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards: integrity of design, materials, workmanship, location, setting, feeling, or association.
The Chambers residence is evaluated in terms of its historic integrity as follows:
HSPB Resolution No.143
1. Location:
The Chambers residence remains in the same location that it was constructed, thus it retains integrity of location.
2. Design:
The design of the Chambers residence was one of flexible use of space an d spatial volumes designed to accommodate growth and expansion of the home as the family grew. The additions made after the period of significance, such as the swimming pool and air conditioning (1966), the addition to the living room (1973) and the perim eter garden wall (2019) do not materially impair the design integrity of the home.
The home has a good degree of design integrity.
3. Setting:
The report does not provide information about the nature of the surrounding neighborhood at the time the home was constructed, however It is reasonable to assume that a t the time of construction, the residence was one of the first homes built in the vicinity and the area was mostly open desert. Today the neighborhood is fully built out, thus the setting of the home has changed from that of open desert to a neighborhood of single-family residences.
4. Materials:
The simple exterior materials used in the exterior of the home remain mostly intact and thus material integrity remains.
5. Workmanship:
The home is of average workmanship common for the era of the 19 40’s although the creative use of industrial materials such as curved corrugated steel panels for soffit and fascia reflect a talented craftsman. Rough materials were well -crafted to become finished surfaces that have survived the test of time.
6. Feeling:
The residence retains its feeling as a modest home from the 1940’s. Its unique use of common materials for finished surfaces continues to draw attention thus retains integrity of feeling.
7. Association:
The Chambers residence continues to reflect and convey its association with the mid-twentieth century period in Palm Springs when young architects were experimenting with simple materials in creative ways to create modest affordable and interesting dwellings.
In summary, the home retains sufficient int egrity to qualify as a Class 1 (“Landmark”) historic
HSPB Resolution No.143
resource.
SECTION 3: DEFINING HISTORIC CHARACTERISTICS
In considering a recommendation for historic resource designation it is important to distinguish those physical elements that are original or from the period of significance that contribute to the resource’s historic significance from alterations, additions or features that were added at a later time that may be sympathetic to the original character, but which may create a false sense of historicity. Distinguishing original character -defining features from non -original elements aids the HSPB when it is tasked with evaluating future alterations to the historic resource.
Character-defining features of the home are as follows:
• Flat roof
• Deep eaves and overhangs constructed of curved corrugated metal panels. • Large expanses of floor to ceiling glass.
• Open carport.
• Low cost “industrial” material such as Flexboard, corrugated metal, plywood and pumice blocks for the fireplace.
• Simple form and massing with no ornament or decorative elements.
Non-contributing elements:
• The swimming pool.
• The hardscape and landscape.
• The perimeter walls.
• The screening around the rooftop mechanical equipment.
SECTION 4: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The proposed historic resource designation is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical cha nges to the environment, directly or indirectly.
SECTION 5: CONDITIONS THAT APPLY TO CLASS 1 HISTORIC SITES.
According to Section 8.05 of the Municipal Code, the following shall apply to a Class 1 Historic Resource:
1. It shall meet the definition of a Class 1 historic site as outlined in Municipal Code Section
8.05.020.
HSPB Resolution No.143
2. An archival file on the property shall be maintained by the City.
3. It may be qualified as ‘historic’ at the federal, state, and/or county level.
4. The structure/site may not be modified nor objects removed without following the procedures outlined in Municipal Code Section 8.05.110 “Demolition or Alteration of Class 1 and Class 2 Historic Resources – Certificate of Appropriateness”.
5. A marker explaining the historic nature of the site may be installed at the site in a location viewable from the public way.
6. Compliance with all rules and regulations for Historic Sites and His toric Districts under Chapter 8.05 of the Municipal Code shall be required.
7. The site shall not be further subdivided.
8. The City Clerk shall submit the Council Resolution to the County recorder for recordation within 90 days of the effective date of the Council’s resolution.
Based upon the foregoing, the Historic Site Preservation Board hereby recommends that the City Council designate “T he Robson Chambers residence” located at 695 South Warm Sands Drive, a Class 1 (Landmark) Historic Resource (Case HSPB #143).
ADOPTED THIS FOURTH DAY OF MAY 2022.
AYES: Hough, Nelson, Kiser, Miller, Rosenow, Hansen.
NOES: (none.)
ABSENT: Rose.
ABSTAIN: (none.)
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
David A. Newell, AICP
Assistant Director of Planning
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
09/29/2022 3. A.
City Clerk -
SUBJECT
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF VACATION RENTAL WORKGROUP
RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to staff for drafting vacation rental ordinance revisions.
Attachments
Item 3A
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2022 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF VACATION RENTAL WORKGROUP
RECOMMENDATIONS
FROM: T eresa Gallavan, Interim City Manager
BY: Special Program Compliance
SUMMARY:
The purpose of this staff report is to give City Council the opportunity to review and discuss the recommendations of the Vacation Rental Work Group. Additionally, if City Council finds it appropriate, provide direct ion to staff for vacation rental ordinance revisions to bring forward for a public meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to staff for drafting vacation rental ordinance revisions.
BACKGROUND:
On March 29, 2022, the City Council held a Special Study Session to discuss the state of vacation rentals in the City. A comprehensive report was presented to Council outlining various data metrics for vacation rentals. Following a presentation by staff, Council discussed the current state of vacation rentals, and staff subsequently created a working group to review additional data and draft recommendations to allow policy choices.
The group review ed data and discuss ed impacts to the City relating to vacation rental density, ancillary use, and housing prior to drafting recommendations. The group consists of real estate professionals, vacation rental industry stakeholders, ONE -PS members, and community members randomly selected after applying; a total of 124 applications were received. Group members actively participate d in the discussions, abided by the Rules of Engagement, worked hard on the issues, and provided feedback.
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 -- Page 2
Vacation Rental Workgroup Recommendations
STAFF ANALYSIS:
City Council directed staff and the working group to address the following issues:
• Vacation Rental Density
• Vacation Rentals as an ancillary use or secondary use of one’s property • Impacts on Housing Supply
The work group makes the following recommendations to City Council:
• 2,500 Citywide vacation rental permit s cap, with the stipulation that all submitted permit applications will be processe d as well as applications for properties that have an escrow closing date within 30 days of the adopted ordinance. • 10% neighborhood cap.
Attached hereto as ATTACHMENT “A” is a report providing an overview of the vacation rental work group and outlining their recommendations.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
REVIEWED BY:
Department Director: Veronica Goedhart
Interim City Manager: Teresa Gallavan
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Vacation Rental Work Group Overview and Recommendations
Attachment “A”
RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
• Each workgroup will have a facilitator.
• Each workgroup member should attend all meetings for the entire term of the workgroup.
The workgroups will adhere to the agreed upon timeline and produce work products in a timely fashion.
Participants will agree to ground rules to facilitate the quality of the communication, including:
Ground rules for an effective and respectful communication
• Only one person may speak at a time.
• Resist defending positions; rather look for common ground and areas of agreement. • Agree on what important words mean.
• When speaking explain the reasons behind your statements and ask for feedback from the group.
• Speak to be understood, not to win.
• Ask questions to understand the rationale and data behind the position of others. • Test your assumptions and inferences by asking questions. • Don’t assume motives behind the statement of others. Assume positive intent. • Be sensitive to differences in perspectives.
• Avoid debating issues (discussion, not debate) and assigning blame. • Do not interrupt others or monopolize the communication. Raise your hand to speak and the facilitator will keep a list with the order (all members are expected to participate with their perspective).
• Avoid personal attacks, cheap shots or loaded questions. Use open-ended questions. • K eep discussion focused.
• Keep the focus on agenda items.
• When speaking be brief and to the point (try to give examples). Attend all meetings. • Be on time for meeting.
Ground rules for decision-making
The Working Group will use the procedure of Consensus with Qualification to make decisions.
Here consensus does not m ean 100 percent agreement on everything by all participants, it means that each individual is able to accept a proposal or idea of the majority of participants and are willing to completely accept a proposal or idea. It also means is that all concerns have been addressed and everyone has been heard and understood. Thus, consensus can be defined as a state of m utual agreement am ong members of a group where all legitimate concerns of participants have been addressed to the satisfaction of the group. Consensus with qualification works like this:
An agenda is developed in advance containing three types of topics:
• Reports (recent events of work)
• Open Discussion (problem solving and brainstorming)
• Proposals (for group decision)
Proposals are presented and clarified to the group. Participants grade the proposal as:
• Completely agree
• Can live with it
• Have legitimate concerns (possible consequences of the proposal that are contrary to the goals of the group)
Concerns are listed and addressed by the group. Changes can be introduced to the proposal.
If there isn’t consensus, participants will clarify their objections while searching for areas of agreement. The goal is to reach consensus or a broad majority wherever is possible. However, staff reports given to the City Council will also outline the points of significant disagreement or alternatives as appropriate.
After each meeting staff will prepare a summary of the meeting, which will be made available to participants before the next meeting if at all possible.
Roles
Facilitators: Help participants and the group to follow ground rules, identify, clarify and reframe issues, test parties’ assumptions / inferences, help resolve disputes, make presentations.
Participants: Actively participate in the discussion, follow the ground rules, work hard on the issues not the people, and provide feedback on reports and future agendas.
----
Attachment “B”
Neighborhood Household 7.28.22 VR Count %VR to HH 3%
Bla
nk 5% 6% 7%
Blan
k2
Over/Un
der 8% 9% 10% 15% 20%
Racquet Club Estates 540 208 38.52 16.2 27 32.4 37.8 ‐170.2 43.2 48.6 54 81 108 Sunmor 142 40 28.17 4.26 7.1 8.52 9.94 ‐30.06 11.36 12.78 14.2 21.3 28.4 Twin Palms 329 90 27.36 9.87 16.45 19.74 23.03 ‐66.97 26.32 29.61 32.9 49.35 65.8 El Rancho Vista Estates 114 31 27.19 3.42 5.7 6.84 7.98 ‐23.02 9.12 10.26 11.4 17.1 22.8 El Mirador 158 37 23.42 4.74 7.9 9.48 11.06 ‐25.94 12.64 14.22 15.8 23.7 31.6 Desert Park Estates 465 102 21.94 13.95 23.25 27.9 32.55 ‐69.45 37.2 41.85 46.5 69.75 93 Movie Colony East 773 166 21.47
23.19 38.65 46.38 54.11 ‐111.89 61.84 69.57 77.3 115.95 154.6 Tahquitz River Estates 613 126 20.55 18.39 30.65 36.78 42.91 ‐83.09 49.04 55.17 61.3 91.95 122.6 Ranch Club Estates 360 64 17.78 10.8 18 21.6 25.2 ‐38.8 28.8 32.4 36 54 72 Gene Autry 608 108 17.76 18.24 30.4 36.48 42.56 ‐65.44 48.64 54.72 60.8 91.2 121.6 Sunrise Park 705 125 17.73 21.15 35.25 42.3 49.35 ‐75.65 56.4 63.45 70.5 105.75 141 The Movie Colony 199 34 17.09 5.97 9.95 11.94 13.93 ‐20.07 15.92 17.91 19.9 29.85 39.8 Vista Las Palmas 419 69 16.47 12.57 20.95 25.14 29.33 ‐39.67 33.52 37.71 41.9 62.85 83.8 Demuth Park 683 101 14.79 20.49 34.15 40.98 47.81 ‐53.19 54.64 61.47 68.3 102.45 136.6 Deepwell Estates 451 66 14.63 13.53 22.55 27.06 31.57 ‐34.43 36.08 40.59 45.1 67.65 90.2 Little Beverly Hills 178 25 14.04 5.34 8.9 10.68 12.46 ‐12.54 14.24 16.02 17.8 26.7 35.6 Lawrence Crossley 79 11 13.92 2.37 3.95 4.74 5.53 ‐5.47 6.32 7.11 7.9 11.85 15.8 Vista Norte 1069 143 13.38 32.07 53.45 64.14 74.83 ‐68.17 85.52 96.21 106.9 160.35 213.8 The Mesa 277 37 13.36 8.31 13.85 16.62 19.39 ‐17.61 22.16 24.93 27.7 41.55 55.4 Indian Canyons 452 53 11.73 13.56 22.6 27.12 31.64 ‐21.36 36.16 40.68 45.2 67.8 90.4 Racquet Club West 858 97 11.31 25.74 42.9 51.48 60.06 ‐36.94 68.64 77.22 85.8 128.7 171.6 Warm Sands 479 50 10.44 14.37 23.95 28.74 33.53 ‐16.47 38.32 43.11 47.9 71.85 95.8 Oasis del Sol 562 56 9.96 16.86 28.1 33.72 39.34 ‐16.66 44.96 50.58 56.2 84.3 112.4 Little Tuscany 690 68 9.86 20.7 34.5 41.4 48.3 ‐19.7 55.2 62.1 69 103.5 138 Old Las Palmas 408 38 9.31 12.24 20.4 24.48 28.56 ‐9.44 32.64 36.72 40.8 61.2 81.6 Los Compadres 516 44 8.53 15.48 25.8 30.96 36.12 ‐7.88 41.28 46.44 51.6 77.4 103.2 Araby Cove 109 7 6.42 3.27 5.45 6.54 7.63 0.63 8.72 9.81 10.9 16.35 21.8 Tahquitz Creek Golf 1150 71 6.17 34.5 57.5 69 80.5 9.5 92 103.5 115 172.5 230 Sonora Sunrise 1678 85 5.07 50.34 83.9 100.68 117.46 32.46 134.24 151.02 167.8 251.7 335.6 Midtown 1036 51 4.92 31.08 51.8 62.16 72.52 21.52 82.88 93.24 103.6 155.4 207.2 Upper Westside 1247 55 4.41 37.41 62.35 74.82 87.29 32.29 99.76 112.23 124.7 187.05 249.4 Historic Tennis Club 518 16 3.09 15.54 25.9 31.08 36.26 20.26 41.44 46.62 51.8 77.7 103.6 Araby Commons 732 19 2.60 21.96 36.6 43.92 51.24 32.24 58.56 65.88 73.2 109.8 146.4 Andreas Hills 753 19 2.52 22.59 37.65 45.18 52.71 33.71 60.24 67.77 75.3 112.95 150.6 Whitewater Club 211 5 2.37 6.33 10.55 12.66 14.77 9.77 16.88 18.99 21.1 31.65 42.2 Desert Highland/Gateway 480 11 2.29 14.4 24 28.8 33.6 22.6 38.4 43.2 48 72 96 Baristo 1147 25 2.18 34.41 57.35 68.82 80.29 55.29 91.76 103.23 114.7 172.05 229.4 Rogers Ranch 431 9 2.09 12.93 21.55 25.86 30.17 21.17 34.48 38.79 43.1 64.65 86.2 Canyon Palms 445 7 1.57 13.35 22.25 26.7 31.15 24.15 35.6 40.05 44.5 66.75 89 Melody Ranch 826 10 1.21 24.78 41.3 49.56 57.82 47.82 66.08 74.34 82.6 123.9 165.2 Canyon Corridor 1063 10 0.94 31.89 53.15 63.78 74.41 64.41 85.04 95.67 106.3 159.45 212.6 N/A 8709 55 0.63 261.27 435.45 522.54 609.63 554.63 696.72 783.81 870.9 1306.35 1741.8 Gateway 584 1 0.17 17.52 29.2 35.04 40.88 39.88 46.72 52.56 58.4 87.6 116.8 Four Seasons 538 0 0.00 16.14 26.9 32.28 37.66 37.66 43.04 48.42 53.8 80.7 107.6 Escena 587 0 0.00 17.61 29.35 35.22 41.09 41.09 46.96 52.83 58.7 88.05 117.4 West Gate PS 319 0 0.00 9.57 15.95 19.14 22.33 22.33 25.52 28.71 31.9 47.85 63.8 Rimrock 61 0 0.00 1.83 3.05 3.66 4.27 4.27 4.88 5.49 6.1 9.15 12.2 Mountain Gate 509 0 0.00 15.27 25.45 30.54 35.63 35.63 40.72 45.81 50.9 76.35 101.8 Palm Springs Villa II 461 0 0.00 13.83 23.05 27.66 32.27 32.27 36.88 41.49 46.1 69.15 92.2 Total 35721 2445 0.07 1071.6 3 1786.05 2143.26 2500.47 2857.68 3214.89 3572.1 5358.1 5 7144.2 Single Family 22,210 666.3 1110.5 1332.6 1554.7 1776.8 1998.9 2221 3331.5 4442 Condo 13,511 405.33 675.55 810.66 945.77 1080.88 1215.99 1351.1 2026.65 2702.2 Vacation Rental Neighborhood Information
I
Neighborhood Household Dec 2017 VR Count Dec 2018 VR Count Dec 2019 VR Count Dec 2020 VR Count 2021 VR Count 2.1.22 VR Count 7.28.22 VR Count Sparkline Total Unit Change % Change %VR to HH Gene Autry 608 45 54 63 66 91 93 108 63 140.0 0 17.76
Demuth Park 683 38 47 61 66 91 89 101 63 165.79 14.79
Vista Norte 1069 81 81 99 106 120 124 143 62 76.5 4 13.38 Desert Park Estates 465 44 52 68 79 93 98 102 58 131.82 21.9 4 Racquet Club Estates 540 153 155 174 180 189 198 208 55 35.95 38.52 Ranch Club Estates 360 32 37 48 51 63 58 64 32 100.0 0 17.78 Sunrise Park 705 96 102 101 112 119 122 125 29 30.21 17.73 Movie Colony East 773 139 137 143 138 161 149 166 27 19.42 21.47 Upper Westside 1247 32 28 30 32 46 48 55 23 71.88 4.41
Racquet Club West 858 74 87 101 92 98 95 97 23 31.08 11.31 Tahquitz Creek Golf 1150 51 42 47 47 60 61 71 20 39.22 6.17 Tahquitz River Estates 613 106 102 119 113 126 128 126 20 18.87 20.55 Little Tuscany 690 51 48 48 53 60 60 68 17 33.33 9.86
Twin Palms 329 73 75 83 78 90 91 90 17 23.29 27.36
El Mirador 158 23 22 27 27 33 33 37 14 60.87 23.42
Oasis del Sol 562 42 40 43 40 52 53 56 14 33.33 9.96
Desert Highland/Gateway 480 1113 9 1 0 11 10 1000.00 2.29 Deepwell Estates 451 57 51 58 57 64 63 66 9 15.79 14.63 Lawrence Crossley 79 2248 9 1 0 11 9 450.00 13.92
The Mesa 277 30 35 34 33 34 32 37 7 23.33 13.36
Andreas Hills 753 12 13 16 15 17 18 19 7 58.33 2.52
Little Beverly Hills 178 18 18 23 24 24 27 25 7 38.89 14.0 4 El Rancho Vista Estates 114 25 24 28 25 26 27 31 6 24.00 27.19 Melody Ranch 826 4447 1 0 1 0 10 6 150.00 1.21
Sonora Sunrise 1678 80 56 68 65 76 76 85 5 6.25 5.07
Araby Commons 732 14 14 15 15 14 15 19 5 35.71 2.60
Sunmor 142 35 37 40 42 40 42 40 5 14.29 28.17
The Movie Colony 199 30 31 30 33 33 43 34 4 13.33 17.09 Warm Sands 479 48 45 46 42 43 44 50 2 4.17 10.4 4
Los Compadres 516 42 28 32 32 38 44 44 2 4.76 8.53
Canyon Palms 445 6776 5 5 7 1 16.67 1.57
Rogers Ranch 431 8646 7 7 9 1 12.50 2.09
Araby Cove 109 6 6 15 7 7 7 7 1 16.67 6.42
Four Seasons 538 0000 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Escena 587 0010 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Gateway 584 1111 1 1 1 0 0.00 0.17
Whitewater Club 211 5322 4 5 5 0 0.00 2.37
Canyon Corridor 1063 10 6 7 10 9 11 10 0 0.00 0.94
West Gate PS 3191000 0 0 0 ‐1 ‐100.00 0.00
Rimrock 61 1000 0 0 0 ‐1 ‐100.00 0.00
Vista Las Palmas 419 70 73 77 73 71 72 69 ‐1 ‐1.43 16.47 Mountain Gate 509 2100 0 0 0 ‐2 ‐100.00 0.00
Old Las Palmas 408 41 39 41 53 37 37 38 ‐3 ‐7.32 9.31
Indian Canyons 452 56 56 57 57 56 55 53 ‐3 ‐5.36 11.73
Midtown 1036 57 50 52 47 49 49 51 ‐6 ‐10.53 4.92
Baristo 1147 31 24 25 22 24 25 25 ‐6 ‐19.35 2.18
Historic Tennis Club 518 25 24 22 19 18 18 16 ‐9 ‐36.00 3.09 N/A 7782 71 49 38 42 51 45 55 ‐16 ‐22.54
0.71 Palm Springs Villa II 461 19 1 1 0 0 0 0 ‐19 ‐100.00 0.00 Total 34794 1888 1814 2004 2026 2268 2298 2445
Vacation Rental Neighborhood Information
----------
-------- ~
___,,,.--
----- -~
----
------------------,,,-
~
-- ---
~ -
--------~
~ , _________
/
~
/ '-.
.__ _ /
' ----- -----
/
._ ~
/'---._
/'---._
·-------
/'
'- -----'-
'-
----------
--------~
---
---- -
'--
-----"-- ~
'-
12 14
18 7
16 12
14 16 16
12 13
88 25
18 10
15 24
15 16
10 10
11 16
15 9
14 10
11 12
11 11
10 11
13 19
21 15
10 25
17 12
10 12
17 19
15 9
11 15
11 22
15 16
23 24
11 6
19 6
4 8
4 6
0 14
7 11
4 9
5 19
4 8
19 0
19 1
10 12
9 3
8 6
55 3
4 8
6 2
4 1
333
9 1
5 0
14 7
5 2
3 8
77 7
6 4
2 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
New Applications Change Week over Week
Total Received Closure
Month Year Activty + Activity ‐ Net Agency Registrants Activity + Activity ‐2 Net3 Individual Total Activity + Total Activity ‐ Total Registrants Change Apr‐17 2017 44.00 (42.00) 2.00 1011.00 70.00 (25.00) 45.00 1124.00 114.00 (67.00) 2135.00 May‐17 2017 11.00 (50.00) (39.00) 972.00 14.00 (23.00) (9.00) 1115.00 25.00 (73.00) 2087.00 (48.00) Jun‐17 2017 4.00 (7.00) (3.00) 969.00 21.00 (38.00) (17.00) 1098.00 25.00 (45.00) 2067.00 (20.00) Jul‐17 2017 32.00 (19.00) 13.00 982.00 4.00 (29.00) (25.00) 1073.00 36.00 (48.00) 2055.00 (12.00) Aug‐17 2017 14.00 (18.00) (4.00) 978.00 13.00 (25.00) (12.00) 1061.00 27.00 (43.00) 2039.00 (16.00) Sep‐17 2017 5.00 (8.00) (3.00) 975.00 22.00 (32.00) (10.00) 1051.00 27.00 (40.00) 2026.00 (13.00) Oct‐17 2017 24.00 (33.00) (9.00) 966.00 50.00 (40.00) 10.00 1061.00 74.00 (73.00) 2027.00 1.00 Nov‐17 2017 4.00 (17.00) (13.00) 953.00 13.00 (42.00) (29.00) 1032.00 17.00 (59.00) 1985.00 (42.00) Dec‐17 2017 32.00 (30.00) 2.00 955.00 16.00 (17.00) (1.00) 1031.00 48.00 (47.00) 1986.00 1.00 Jan‐18 2018 19.00 (26.00) (7.00) 948.00 37.00 (22.00) 15.00 1046.00 56.00 (48.00) 1994.00 8.00 Feb‐18 2018 5.00 (14.00) (9.00) 939.00 26.00 (21.00) 5.00 1051.00 31.00 (35.00) 1990.00 (4.00) Mar‐18 2018 28.00 (54.00) (26.00) 913.00 19.00 (44.00) (25.00) 1026.00 47.00 (98.00) 1939.00 (51.00) Apr‐18 2018 21.00 (53.00) (32.00) 881.00 15.00 (22.00) (7.00) 1019.00 36.00 (75.00) 1900.00 (39.00) May‐18 2018 28.00 (72.00) (44.00) 837.00 24.00 (59.00) (35.00) 984.00 52.00 (131.00) 1821.00 (79.00) Jun‐18 2018 17.00 (42.00) (25.00) 812.00 17.00 (26.00) (9.00) 975.00 34.00 (68.00) 1787.00 (34.00) Jul‐18 2018 21.00 (32.00) (11.00) 802.00 20.00 (19.00) 1.00 976.00 41.00 (51.00) 1778.00 (9.00) Aug‐18 2018 9.00 (20.00) (11.00) 791.00 18.00 (16.00) 2.00 978.00 27.00 (36.00) 1769.00 (9.00) Sep‐18 2018 11.00 (8.00) 3.00 794.00 11.00 (21.00) (10.00) 968.00 22.00 (29.00) 1762.00 (7.00) Oct‐18 2018 26.00 (16.00) 10.00 804.00 22.00 (22.00) 0.00 968.00 48.00 (38.00) 1772.00 10.00 Nov‐18 2018 25.00 (5.00) 20.00 824.00 11.00 (15.00) (4.00) 964.00 36.00 (20.00) 1788.00 16.00 Dec‐18 2018 60.00 (35.00) 25.00 849.00 62.00 (26.00) 36.00 1000.00 122.00 (61.00) 1849.00 61.00 Jan‐19 2019 33.00 (21.00) 12.00 861.00 30.00 (28.00) 2.00 1002.00 63.00 (49.00) 1863.00 14.00 Feb‐19 2019 10.00 (12.00) (2.00) 859.00 9.00 (11.00) (2.00) 1000.00 19.00 (23.00) 1859.00 (4.00) Mar‐19 2019 21.00 (13.00) 8.00 867.00 28.00 (8.00) 20.00 1020.00 49.00 (21.00) 1887.00 28.00 Apr‐19 2019 20.00 (12.00) 8.00 875.00 37.00 (4.00) 33.00 1053.00 57.00 (16.00) 1928.00 41.00 May‐19 2019 19.00 (34.00) (15.00) 860.00 33.00 (15.00) 18.00 1071.00 52.00 (49.00) 1931.00 3.00 Jun‐19 2019 28.00 (29.00) (1.00) 859.00 31.00 (17.00) 14.00 1085.00 59.00 (46.00) 1944.00 13.00 Jul‐19 2019 18.00 (18.00) 0.00 859.00 18.00 (11.00) 7.00 1092.00 36.00 (29.00) 1951.00 7.00 Aug‐19 2019 31.00 (24.00) 7.00 866.00 30.00 (21.00) 9.00 1101.00 61.00 (45.00) 1967.00 16.00 Sep‐19 2019 18.00 (25.00) (7.00) 859.00 6.00 (19.00) (13.00) 1088.00 24.00 (44.00) 1947.00 (20.00) Oct‐19 2019 42.00 (16.00) 26.00 885.00 31.00 (16.00) 15.00 1103.00 73.00 (32.00) 1988.00 41.00 Nov‐19 2019 32.00 (16.00) 16.00 901.00 16.00 (10.00) 6.00 1109.00 48.00 (26.00) 2010.00 22.00 Dec‐19 2019 10.00 (9.00) 1.00 902.00 8.00 (11.00) (3.00) 1106.00 18.00 (20.00) 2008.00 (2.00) Jan‐20 2020 36.00 (19.00) 17.00 919.00 35.00 (20.00) 15.00 1121.00 71.00 (39.00) 2040.00 32.00 Feb‐20 2020 29.00 (11.00) 18.00 937.00 30.00 (13.00) 17.00 1138.00 59.00 (24.00) 2075.00 35.00 Mar‐20 2020 20.00 (17.00) 3.00 940.00 18.00 (19.00) (1.00) 1137.00 38.00 (36.00) 2077.00 2.00 Apr‐20 2020 10.00 (34.00) (24.00) 916.00 13.00 (34.00) (21.00) 1116.00 23.00 (68.00) 2032.00 (45.00) May‐20 2020 7.00 (20.00) (13.00) 903.00 4.00 (24.00) (20.00) 1096.00 11.00 (44.00) 1999.00 (33.00) Jun‐20 2020 11.00 (13.00) (2.00) 901.00 36.00 (5.00) 31.00 1127.00 47.00 (18.00) 2028.00 29.00 Jul‐20 2020 2.00 (11.00) (9.00) 892.00 21.00 (22.00) (1.00) 1126.00 23.00 (33.00) 2018.00 (10.00) Aug‐20 2020 18.00 (7.00) 11.00 903.00 10.00 (17.00) (7.00) 1119.00 28.00 (24.00) 2022.00 4.00 Sep‐20 2020 16.00 (23.00) (7.00) 896.00 34.00 (27.00) 7.00 1126.00 50.00 (50.00) 2022.00 0.00 Oct‐20 2020 34.00 (26.00) 8.00 904.00 47.00 (26.00) 21.00 1147.00 81.00 (52.00) 2051.00 29.00 Nov‐20 2020 16.00 (15.00) 1.00 905.00 24.00 (12.00) 12.00 1159.00 40.00 (27.00) 2064.00 13.00 Dec‐20 2020 15.00 (21.00) (6.00) 899.00 31.00 (25.00) 6.00 1165.00 46.00 (46.00) 2064.00 0.00 Jan‐21 2021 17.00 (19.00) (2.00) 897.00 30.00 (17.00) 13.00 1178.00 47.00 (36.00) 2075.00 11.00 Feb‐21 2021 15.00 (16.00) (1.00) 896.00 29.00 (7.00) 22.00 1200.00 44.00 (23.00) 2096.00 21.00 Mar‐21 2021 32.00 (10.00) 22.00 918.00 18.00 (13.00) 5.00 1205.00 50.00 (23.00) 2123.00 27.00 Apr‐21 2021 24.00 (12.00) 12.00 930.00 38.00 (16.00) 22.00 1227.00 62.00 (28.00) 2157.00 34.00 May‐21 2021 11.00 (7.00) 4.00 934.00 14.00 (10.00) 4.00 1231.00 25.00 (17.00) 2165.00 8.00 Jun‐21 2021 49.00 (19.00) 30.00 964.00 49.00 (19.00) 30.00 1261.00 98.00 (38.00) 2225.00 60.00 Jul‐21 2021 24.00 (20.00) 4.00 968.00 40.00 (35.00) 5.00 1266.00 64.00 (55.00) 2234.00 9.00 Aug‐21 2021 31.00 (15.00) 16.00 984.00 22.00 (16.00) 6.00 1272.00 53.00 (31.00) 2256.00 22.00 Sep‐21 2021 30.00 (23.00) 7.00 991.00 39.00 (31.00) 8.00 1280.00 69.00 (54.00) 2271.00 15.00 Oct‐21 2021 16.00 (39.00) (23.00) 968.00 19.00 (7.00) 12.00 1292.00 35.00 (46.00) 2260.00 (11.00) Nov‐21 2021 22.00 (23.00) (1.00) 967.00 24.00 (17.00) 7.00 1299.00 46.00 (40.00) 2266.00 6.00 Dec‐21 2021 31.00 (34.00) (3.00) 964.00 44.00 (19.00) 25.00 1324.00 75.00 (53.00) 2288.00 22.00 Jan‐22 2022 24.00 (14.00) 10.00 974.00 30.00 (11.00) 19.00 1343.00 54.00 (25.00) 2317.00 29.00 Feb‐22 2022 14.00 (15.00) (1.00) 973.00 15.00 (12.00) 3.00 1346.00 29.00 (27.00) 2319.00 2.00 Mar‐22 2022 21.00 (13.00) 8.00 981.00 26.00 (6.00) 20.00 1366.00 47.00 (19.00) 2347.00 28.00 Apr‐22 2022 17.00 (7.00) 10.00 991.00 12.00 (10.00) 2.00 1368.00 29.00 (17.00) 2359.00 12.00 May‐22 2022 83.00 (66.00) 17.00 988.00 36.00 (18.00) 18.00 1386.00 119.00 (84.00) 2374.00 15.00 Agency Individual Total
Apr‐17, 2135.00
Sep‐18, 1762.00
Mar‐20, 2077.00
May‐20, 1999.00
Jun‐21, 2225.00
May‐22, 2374.00
1400.00
1600.00
1800.00
2000.00
2200.00
2400.00
2600.00
To ta l registrants 4/2017‐05/22
114.00
74.00 17.00
52.00 22.00
122.00
19.00 61.00
73.00 18.00
11.00 81.00
62.00 25.00
98.00 64.00
53.00 69.00
35.00 46.00
75.00 54.00
29.00 47.00
29.00 119.00
(67.00)
(73.00)
(59.00)
(131.00)
(29.00)
(61.00)
(23.00)
(45.00) (32.00)
(20.00)
(44.00)
(52.00)
(28.00)
(17.00)
(38.00)
(55.00)
(31.00)
(54.00)(46.00)(40.00)
(53.00)
(25.00)(27.00)(19.00)(17.00)
(84.00)
(150.00)
(100.00)
(50.00)
0.00 50.00
100.00
150.00
Apr‐17
May‐17
Jun‐17
Jul‐17
Aug‐17
Sep‐17
Oct‐17
Nov‐17
Dec‐17
Jan‐18
Feb‐18
Mar‐18
Apr‐18
May‐18
Jun‐18
Jul‐18
Aug‐18
Sep‐18
Oct‐18
Nov‐18
Dec‐18
Jan‐19
Feb‐19
Mar‐19
Apr‐19
May‐19
Jun‐19
Jul‐19
Aug‐19
Sep‐19
Oct‐19
Nov‐19
Dec‐19
Jan‐20
Feb‐20
Mar‐20
Apr‐20
May‐20
Jun‐20
Ju
l‐20
Aug‐20
Sep‐20
Oct‐20
Nov‐20
Dec‐20
Jan‐21
Feb‐21
Mar‐21
Apr‐21
May‐21
Jun‐21
Jul‐21
Aug‐21
Sep‐21
Oct‐21
Nov‐21
Dec‐21
Jan‐22
Feb‐22
Mar‐22
Apr‐22
May‐22
Registrants Increase / Decrease by Month
Series1
Series2
Vacation Rental Application Information
Status Active
Property Type (Multiple Items)
Total Beds
Count of HOA Mgmt Co Column Labels Condo HOA Count 40
Row Labels 1 2 3 4 Grand Total Total 1 Bedroom 142 142
247 W Stevens HOA 1 1 2 Total 2 Bedroom 199 398
Club Condominiums 3 4 1 8 Total 3 Bedroom 34 102
Coco Cabana 3 4 1 8 Total 4 Bedroom 2 8
Colony Palms 1 1
Desert Seville HOA 1 1 Total VR Condo 377
Estados South 1 1 3 5 Total VR Condo Beds 650
Little Tuscany Townhouse Two 1 1
Los Pueblos Association 6 4 10
Mesquite CC 9 64 73
Mountain Shadows 1 11 2 14
Oasis Villa 9 9
Oceo Master & Condo Assoc 1 1
Ocotillo Lodge 43 1 44
Palm 2150 2 2 4
Palm Canyon Villas 4 21 1 26
Palm Murray HOA 2 2
Palm Springs Biarritz 25 25
Palm Springs Biltmore 1 1 2
Palm Springs Country Club 1 1
Palm Springs Deauville 10 2 12
Palm
Springs Villa Hermosa 3 1 4
Palm Springs Villas I3 3
Plaza Villas 8 20 28
Racquet Club Colony 2 2
Racquet Club Cottages West 1 5 6
Racquet Club Garden Villas 2 2
Ranch Club Palm Estates 4 1 5
Rancho El MIrador 2 2
Sandstone Villas 2 5 7
Sophia HOA 1 2 3
Sundance II 7 1 8
Sundance Villas 10 1 11
Sunkist Villas 2 2
Sunrise Racquet Club 4 4
The Desert Star 6 6
The Palms 1 1 2
Vacation Internationale 1 1
Ventana Del Sol 8 1 9
Villas de Las Flores 8 8
Zanjero Residences, Inc 1 1
Pending Entry 6 5 3 14
Grand
Total 142 199 34 2 377
Vacation Rental Condominium Information
Coachella Valley Hotel Room Existing Planned
Cathedral City 719 100
Coachella 250
DHS 561
Indian Wells 1,484 152
Indio 1,331 93
La Quinta 1,095 608
Palm Desert 2,282 536
Palm Springs 5,684 527
Rancho Mirage 1,728
Total 14,884 2,266
719 561 1,484 1,331 1,095 2,282 5,684 1,728
100
250
152 93
608
536
527
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Cathedral City Coachella DHS Indian Wells Indio La Quinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Coachella Valley Hotel Rooms ‐ 2019 desert Sun Reporting Existing
Planned
Coachella Valley Hotel Information
occ ADR
2018 January City of Palm Sprinos, CA+ Total 62.4% $154.21 February City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 75.9% $183.12
March City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 85.8% $209.66
April City of Palm Sprinos, CA+ Total 74.4% $237.49
May City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 60.8% $165.58
June City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 52.8% $130.43
July City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 52.7% $116.75
Auqust City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 48.3% $118.14
September City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 54.3% $136.62 October City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 58.3% $155.19
November City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 65.3% $168.75
December City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 59.3% $155.65
2019 January City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 61.2% $161.66 February City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 73.5% $186.19
March City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 83.7% $219.57
April City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 74.8% $237.43
May City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 65.7% $170.95
June City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 57.2% $132.26
July City of Palm Sprinos, CA+ Total 53.6% $121.45
Auqust City of Palm Sprinos. CA+ Total 52.4% $124.47
September City of Palm SprinQS, CA+ Total 55.5% $136.98 October City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 60.9% $158.69
November City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 62.8% $167.50
December City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 52.9% $153.20
2020 January City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 63.5% $163.35 February City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 74.2% $194.98
March City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 34.1% $181.34
April City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 21.4% $88.71
May City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 29.1% $88.62
June City of Palm Sorinqs, CA+ Total 34.1% $126.11
July City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 40.4% $134.52
Auqust City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 42.0% $132.33
September City of Palm SprinQS. CA+ Total 44.9% $144.90 October City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 46.3% $159.86
November City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 43.8% $154.36
December City of Palm SprinQs, CA+ Total 28.5% $120.12
2021 January City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 31.8% $109.98 February City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 48.4% $149.96
March City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 59.8% $176.98
April City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 65.2% $206.56
May City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 59.4% $200.66
June City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 55.8% $162.40
July City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 54.5% $154.98
Auoust City of Palm Sorinqs, CA+ Total 50.0% $147.83
September City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 51.6% $166.99 October City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 63.6% $208.35
November City of Palm Sorinos. CA+ Total 68.7% $202.18
December City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 62.4% $187.08
2022 January City of Palm Sprinos. CA+ Total 58.7% $182.27 February City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 71.7% $241.23
March City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 77.1% $262.81
April City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 75.1% $309.50
May City of Palm Sorinqs, CA+ Total 60.9% $220.81
June City of Palm Sprinqs, CA+ Total 52.9% $162.00
Attachment “C”
Registered Vacation Rental Properties by Council District
---- -
Count of Vacation Rentals District % Total VR Council Representative 202 l 8.26% Grace Garner
922 2 37.69% Dennis Woods
551 3 22.53% Geoff Kors
287 4 11.73% Christy Holstege
484 s 19.79% Lisa Middleton
2446 ·-
1 8/22/2022
Office of Special Programs
•' . . . .
t.•� " nu.. _. ....w,,.,.._ .. ,,._ ..... �
..,, .. :�};:i � .. "�-t; �,. . � 5 .,�•• �
,.
• ••• • :., • I
•t.- I ..... ,�--·
.... ( � • ... • ... _ i;;
. .,,.-. . ' . .. ...-� ,. .. ,-.. . .. . ••• , I ,, "\ i .. ,,-�·
• •: .
..
J•
.. .. .
•• I
! •
., ·, Rancho Mirage
0 0 1.5
Thousand
Palms
1:139,332
2 3
4mi
6km
Loma Linda University. Agua calieme Band of
Indians. County of Riverside,
Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Ga1Tnin, USGS. EPA, NPS, Esri, Registered Vacation Rental Properties by Council District
Attachment “D”
While the ultimate interpretation of a statute is an exercise of judicial power, when an administrative agency is charged with enforcing a particular statute, its interpretation of the statute will be accorded great respect by the courts and will be followed if not clearly erroneous (No Oil vs. City of Los Angeles ( 1987) 196 Cal. App. 3d 223, 245-246). Given the great deference to be given to the City's historical interpretation of its own zoning ordinance, the Court finds there is no abuse of discretion, and denies the Petition in that regard. The Court finds that the City's adoption of the 2008, 2014, 2016 and 2017 Ordinances reflect its long-standing and consistent interpretation of its Zoning Code that the STRs are not a prohibited "commercial" use of residential property. That interpretation is entitled to deference, and Petitioner has failed to establish that it is clearly erroneous (No Oil, Inc. vs. City of Los Angeles ( 1987) 196 Cal. App. 3d 223, 245- 246).
Petitioner also argues that City abused its discretion because there is nothing in Ordinance No. 1918 to ensure or require that the SRTs are actually ancillary or secondary uses of the residential properties. In response, City notes that Ordinance 1918 does not require STRs to be "ancillary and secondary" to the residential use of a property: the Ordinance reaffirms the City's longstanding determination that STRs are ancillary and secondary uses of the properties (AR 754; 3266). Accordingly, the Court finds Petitioner's demands that the STRs have a ownership residency requirement to be without merit.
Finally, Petitioner argues that Ordinance No. 1918 and City's policy is inconsistent with Palm Springs' General Plan Policy HS 1.8 (AR 0558), which directs the City to "Protect established single-family residential neighborhoods from the transition, intensification, and encroachment of uses that detract and/or change the character of the neighborhood." Petitioner argues the widespread conversion of residential dwellings to SRTs results in intensification of uses that can cause profound changes in the character of residential neighborhoods. 6 Attachment “E”
•
•
• • •
•
•
• •
•
•
•
• •
•
• •
•
• •
• • •
•
•
•
•• •
•
• •
,
•
•
• ••
• •
•
• •
•
• • •
•
•
.,
•
• • •
•
•
•
• •
•
• ••�,,./ . .,. •• !IJ •
. , .. ,. -,. • • •• •• ••!) j • • •• . .
... J.t cl •
An reas
Hills
• •
•
•
•
•
'----------,�2021 CALIP R
•• • • I
•
Rimrock
Color I(ey:
Map layers
D 2022 Neighborhoods
] 2020 Census Block
Water Area
-
I 11 II
Pipeline Power Line
Railroad
River
Streets
2nd Homes That Are Not
Vacation Rentals
Colors: Official neighborhood boundaries
Blue dots: Vacant Households (not including STR)
in each Census Block scattered in each Census Block.
National Demographics Co1poration, {__ gust 30, 2022
• • • • ••
•
• •
• •
'
Side ~
•
-
7 • ----- 111
2010 to 2020 Housing by Type of Use
Source: National Demographics Corp - 2010 2020 Census/ACS Neighborhood
2010
Housing
Units
2020
Housing
Units
2010
Owner
Occupied
2020
Owner
Occupied
2010
Housing
Full Time
Rental
2020
Housing
Full Time
Rental
2010
Vacant
Units
2020
Vacant
Units
Citywide Totals 34,791 35,184 13,458 15,263 9,287 8,649 12,046 11,004 Change in # of Units 393 1,805 -638 -1,042
% Change 2010 to 2020 1.1% 13.4% -6.9% -8.7%
% of Total Housing 38.7% 43.9% 26.7% 24.9% 34.6% 31.6%
0 2022
The Department of Special
Program Compliance
Department of Special Program Compliance
Vacation Rental and Homeshare Work Group
1 Table of Contents
Summary ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Vacation Rental Work Group – Overview ......................................................................................................................... 3 Workgroup Sessions and Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 6 Additional Concerns ........................................................................................................................................................ 10
2 Summary
At the March 29, 2022, Council Study Session, City staff presented to City Council a comprehensive report on the State of Vacation Rentals. The report included data compiled by staff at the request of City Council.
The report included:
Maps
• Printed, detailed, with visual representation of vacation rental numbers and saturation • Breakdown by neighborhood or council district
• Density/impact of short-term vacation rentals (STVR)
Permits
• Growth by year and by neighborhoods
• What percentage of housing are used for STVR
• Breakdown of permits held by single family residences (SFR), Condos, Estate properties • Total permits processed by month
• Track and report original and renewal permit dates
• Information that would track trends – are new permits similar or different than older ones Contract Summaries
• Average number of contracts (agency and individual)
• Average length of stay
TOT
• History of STVR TOT
• STVR TOT by month and year
• How is STVR TOT utilized
Citations
• Breakdown by neighborhood and type
• Breakdown by year/month
• Percentage of complaints that result in citations
• Total number of suspensions and properties deemed permanently ineligible to operate Hotline
• Complaints – Nuisance vs non-nuisance
• Complaints – Registered STVR vs non-STVR
Following a presentation by staff, Council discussed the current state of vacation rentals and staff subsequently created a work group to review additional data and draft recommendations to allow policy choices.
3 Vacation Rental Work Group – Overview
On July 6, 2022, the City of Palm Springs released a press release and utilizing the City’s social media platforms announced the recruitment of working group members to participate in a rounded discussion and generate balanced recommendations on vacation rental policies . The group consists of 11 volunteers. Members included real estate professionals, vacation rental industry stakeholders, ONE-PS members, and community members. A total of three members were selected and the remaining eight members were randomly selected. A total of 124 applications were received.
Members volunteered to assist with discussion items around the Vacation Rental Ordinance and provide recommendation for future policy considerations. The work group mission is to:
• Provide input on items regarding
o Vacation Rental density
o Vacation Rentals as an ancillary or secondary use of one’s property o Impacts towards housing supply
• Encourage public participation from the community
• Create consensus and provide recommendations
Work group members were advised of required time commitment, Rules of Engagement and Ground rules for an effective and respectful communication and decis ion making 1, Attachment “A” .
Participants included:
Michael Flannery
I Moved to Palm Springs in 2002, after 12 years in Silicon Valley in Tech Sales & Marketing. I found a new home; I love Palm Springs. Upon arrival, I began flipping homes, eventually became a general contractor, founding Solterra Builders. Solterra went on to be become synonymous with Mid Century revitalization projects, as well as one of the largest residential for hire builder in the Valley from 2007 to 2013. In 2009, I founded Acme House Company, with the idea that responsible vacation rental management was needed and marketable. By 2013 I downsized the construction & development, focusing all my time on Acme which had grown to over 100 homes under management. Today we manage 170 luxury properties valley wide, employing a team of over 50, providing an average salary of $70,000. I was instrumental in working with the city for ordinance changes during 2016/17, while President of the industry group Vacation Rental Tourism Association, which I helped roll into VRON in 2018. I now hold a board seat on VRON. I am also a board member of Palm Springs Hospit ality Association. In 2019 I renovated the old B of A building at 750 N Palm Canyon Dr. into a mixed thriving project called the Flannery Exchange. At the Flannery Exchange, we run an events business on the rooftop deck, offer co working, daily office rentals, conference rooms and business events space, and office leases, as well as being home to 5 retailers and restaurants. With my wife, we own Cafe La Jefa and Bar Chingona in the Flannery Exchange.
1 City of Palm Springs Rules of Engagement and Ground Rules for Communication and Decision Making, Attachment “A”.
4 Jim Gazan
Homeowner; Resident. Jim Gazan has lived as a full-time resident in palm springs for twelve years. In that time, he has volunteered and held positions in marquee events such as the Palm Springs International Film Festival, Modernism Week and held positions on his neighborhood board, OnePS and the Measure J Commission.
Jim feels strongly in moderation as it relates to the Short-Term Rental Industry. Now that Palm Springs is one of the remaining cities in the Valley to permit STR’s it is critical to put a limit on rentals before the industry takes over neighborhoods.
Jim has been impacted positively and negatively from neighboring STR’s, and lives in a neighborhood with one of the highest concentrations of rentals. He knows first had the loss of community that rental saturation can have on a neighborhood.
Bruce Hoban
Homeowner, Resident, President, Co-Founder and Board of Directors of VRON -PS, On the Board of Directors for Palm Springs Hospitality Association, Palm Springs Resorts, and Plaza Theater Foundation Bruce Juenger
Bruce Juenger lives in the Miralon development and is on the Board of Directors for the Miralon Community Corporation (Homeowners Association). His background is in Real Estate Asset Management. He has resided in Palm Springs either full or part time since 1990.
Jeffrey Mauk
A San Francisco California resident for 30 years before moving to the Palm Springs Escena community in 2019 with my husband of 25 years. I am a member of the Escena Neighborhood Organization, and current Vice Chairperson, under the One-PS community group. A graduate of the Mayo Clinic School of Physical Therapy, I am now a semi-retired Physical Therapist. I have a 5 decade-long career in health care management, electronic medical record content development and direct patient care. Spanning across MN, OH, TX and CA. Including 23 years practicing as a community home health Physical Therapist in San Francisco. With a strong focus on home safety assessments for homebound clients and their unique living environments. I have owned homes when living in San Francisco and now Palm Springs, both cities with strong tourism-driven economies. And thus have a strong interest in the city’s need for managing the seasonal tourism economy, while at the same time, respecting and sustaining the quality of life for all permanent residents who exist here year-round.
Shannon Metcalf
Shannon Metcalf is the owner of a boutique Co-hosting & Concierge business, Host with the Most since the end of 2016 and is a full time Palm Springs resident. Shannon has served on the Board of Directors of Ocotillo Lodge HOA and Twin Palms Neighborhood Organization, is a member of VRON and has been a volunteer for Modernism Week events since 2014.
5 James O’Keefe
Homeowner, Resident, Works in Realty.
Hank Plante
Hank Plante is a TV and print journalist who spent three decades reporting on California issues for the CBS TV stations in San Francisco and Los Angeles. Hank's work has received several honors, including six Emmy Awards and broadcasting's highest honor, the George Foster Peabody Award. Hank and his husband have been Palm Springs homeowners for more than 20 years.
Gregory Roberts
After living in many cities around the country, there is no doubt that Palm Springs is home. The life blood of our city is its residents, businesses, tourists, public services, and resident volunteers. I am committed to the betterment of Palm Springs, so I volunteer and serve on a City Commission and on my neighborhood HOA. I am proud to be a member of the Vacation Rental & Homeshare Workgroup.
Visitors and tourists are key drivers of our economy, and it is crucial that we understand and balance our hospitality with the peaceful enjoyment of our neighborhoods and residents. As a part of this Workgroup, I will do my best to make sure that all the stakeholders are heard, and I will do my best to influence and formulate recommendations to the City Council that serve the greater good in keeping Palm Springs the vibrant and robust city that it is and can be.
Chris Ruetz
Six-year resident of Palm Springs who decided to rent his primary home for ancillary income due to the onset of the Covid pandemic. Now operates a boutique property concierge service for vacation rentals, along with serving on various boards. (VRON, OnePS, and the Movie Colony East NOrg as President) Joe Wild
I am an 18-year full time resident of Palm Springs. The advent of STVRs has drastically changed the landscape of housing opportunities in our village. Single family homes are too expensive for typical families with children. Our “snowbird” population finds it difficult to locate affordable seasonal housing.
And, most importantly, we can do something about it. That is why I am volunteering my time to serve on the task force
.
The work group was facilitated by Interim City Manager, Teresa Gallavan; Director of Special Programs, Veronica Goedhart; and, Executive Program Manager, Patrick Clifford.
6 Workgroup Sessions and Recommendations
Work group sessions were held to elicit feedback and recommendations. Recommendations were made utilizing the rule of majority consensus.
VACATION RENTAL DENSITY
What started as general discussion quickly morphed into very specific data mining as members asked to learn more details on vacation rental properties . Some important topics rose to the surface that specifically had the potential to be addressed in the Vacation Rental Ordinance when reviewed and updated.
In researching the effects of vacation rentals on the community , multiple conflicting issues come into play. How land-use policy comes up against the need for revenue. How property rights square up with neighbor’s rights. How a lucrative hospitality industry, when introduced into a neighborhood of family homes, can potentially impact the quality of life for those who live there year -round. This seems true especially when vacation rentals are not managed in accordance with the rules and regulations as set forth in the City’s ordinance.
The quality-of-life issues mentioned above seemed to be primarily focused on noise and parking issues.
Aside from the household that does not like strangers in their neighborhoods, those are the top two complaints. The City’s strict rules and enforcement has assisted in mitigating these issues for many neighborhoods.
The other issue that looms large not just in our region, but across the globe, is how any increase in vacation rentals invariably removes housing stock from a community. That in turn can be a factor in driving up housing prices and drive out working-class people. Affordable housing is a big issue for Palm Springs.
The inaugural meeting on July 19, 2022, focused primarily on data sources and statistics for vacation rental properties in the City. Local data compiled by City staff was presented to the workgroup for their review and comment. The group unanimously determined that a vacation rental cap was needed; however, requested additional information prior to discussing numbers.
At the August 9, 2022, meeting, the group received additional data regarding updated Vacation Rentals numbers in neighborhoods, an accepted number of households in Palm Springs based on the Housing Element Study, growth of Vacation Rental Applications, condominium data, and statistics on hotels, Attachment “B”2.
On August 9, 2022, after review and discussion, the group voted on a city-wide vacation rental permit cap of 2,5003. Four (4) members voted in favor, two (2) members voted for a lower number and four (4)
2 Attachment “B” includes multiple data points. Vacation Rentals by organized neighborhood is as of July 28, 2022. Household unit count was sourced from the City of Palm Springs Housing Element Study. Vacation Rental application growth and condominium data was sourced from the Department of Special Program Compliance. Statistics on hotels was sourced from a 2019 Desert Sun Report and Visit Greater Palm Springs
3 The current number of vacation rental permits is 2,477 with 200 pending new applications. The group recognizes that the cap will be exceeded upon adoption of the revised Ordinance.
7 voted for a higher cap number (One (1) member was absent). The group recommends that all submitted applications would be processed as well as properties that closed escrow within 30 days of the adoption of the ordinance.
At the August 16, 2022, meeting the group requested a second vote on a city-wide cap of 2,500 based on the additional data presented, this vote resulted in 9 members in favor and 1 member abstaining (1 member was absent).
The group also addressed the over-saturation of vacation rentals in specific neighborhoods throughout the City. The group specifically addressed concerns relating to the question, is there a maximum percentage of vacation rental properties in a “neighborhood” that neighbors can still feel they are in a residential community as opposed to a commercial district. The group discussed various methods to address neighborhood saturation, including a neighborhood percentage cap based on housing stock, district percentage cap based on housing stock, and mandatory separation distances between rentals.
Additional information was requested by the group, including a map with vacation rental s by council member district4, Attachment “C”. The discussion proved to be the most challenging for the group with the discussion tabled pending additional data and information. On August 30, 2022, the group reached a majority consensus, without a vote, to include a neighborhood density percentag e. The group determined that a percentage cap by district would not address the immediate problem of neighborhood saturation and opted to vote on a percentage cap to be implemented for every identified neighborhood.
The percentages presented to the group for discussion ranged from 6% to 20%. Two votes were conducted, the first for a neighborhood cap of 10% with 6 members voting in favor and 3 against; the second vote was for a 20% neighborhood cap, with 3 members voting in favor and 6 against. (Tw o members were not present to vote).
Work Group Recommendation
Based on majority consensus , the group recommends a 2,500 city -wide vacation rental permit cap .
Additionally, a 10% neighborhood density cap within the 2,500 permit limitations was recommended.
VACATION RENTALS AS AN ANCILLARY USE OR SECONDARY USE
The group reviewed the data presented, such as, Ordinance 1918 – 5.25.020 Findings, Vacation Rental Contract Summary Data from the March 29, 2022, study session, Ordinance 1918 restrictions with conditions, covenants, or restrictions, and discussed topics regarding annual contract limits per Vacation Rental, minimum night stays, and owner occupancy requirements. The group was presented by a work group member, Judge Chad Firetag’s Protect Our Neighborhoods v. City of Palm Springs, et al., Decision5 in which the Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court's finding that the City of Palm Springs' short- term rental ordinances were consistent with the City's Zoning Code, Attachment “D” . The section provided specifically addressed the ordinance language of ancillary and secondary use of homes. It was
4 District data was provided utilizing the cities GIS system, Attachment “C” 5 Work group member Bruce Hoban presented to the group a page of California Fourth District Court of Appeals, Honorable Chad Firetag’s Opinion, Attachment “D”.
8 represented by the work group member that the ruling determined that the issue of secondary and ancillary use has withstood judicial litigation and therefore a moot issue6. There was minimal discussion occurring prior to the determination to not make a recommendation for changes to the current ordinance.
Specific concerns addressed by the group included limitations on how the city could enforce an owner occupancy requirement. The group agreed that that the limitation on contracts annually encourages a minimum night stay and ancillary use as owners are unable to rent a property more than a maximum 36 times a year.
Work Group Recommendation:
Based on majority consensus the group recommended no changes to the present language in Ordinance 1918 regarding secondary and ancillary use.
IMPACTS ON HOUSING SUPPLY
The rise and growth of vacation rental platforms such as Airbnb, HomeAway and Flipkey has created plenty of debate amongst local governments, the hotel industry, the real estate lobby, housing activists and residents about the impact of such rentals on the availability of long-term rental housing. Given that the vacation rental industry continues to grow, people are concerned about the industry’s impact on the affordability and availability of long-term rental housing.
The group reviewed a variety of data sources and articles 7 from both staff and group members on this subject. Articles were presented on both sides of the argument of the impact of vacation rentals on housing. The group discussed the need for affordable housing stock in the City citing those new developments in the City are simply not affordable for the working class. The group agreed that vacation rental homes should continue to be an ancillary and secondary use with continued enforcement against corporate investment vacation rental properties; however, no specific recommendation was reached on this. As stated best by one group member, “All opinions could be supported if you look hard enough”.
The articles and references reviewed on impacts of the housing supply are listed below:
• From Forbes: "The Airbnb Effect on Housing & Rent"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/garybarker/2020/02/21/the-airbnb-effect-on-housing-and- rent/?sh=7b99799e2226
6 This represents information directly related to the Palm Springs Ordinance language; however, there are other legal opinions in other municipalities and States with differentiating opinions. 7 Articles and reports reference in discussion: The Effect of Homes-Sharing on House Prices and Rents: Evidence from Airbnb, (2019) Barron, Kung, Proserpio; The economic costs and benefits of Airbnb, (2019) Economic Policy Institute, Bivens; Staying Power: The Effects of Short-Term Rentals on California’s Tourism, Economy and Housing Affordability (2022), Milken Institute, Dubetz, Horton, Kesteven; The Airbnb Effect on Housing & Rent (2020) Forbes.com; Research: When Airbnb Listings in a City Increase, So Do Rent Prices (2019), Barron, Kung, and Proserpio.
9 • From the Economic Policy Institute (a non-partisan think tank):
https://www.epi.org/publication/the-economic-costs-and-benefits-of-airbnb-no-reason-for-local- policymakers-to-let-airbnb-bypass-tax-or-regulatory-obligations/
• From the Harvard Business Review
https://hbr.org/2019/04/research-when-airbnb-listings-in-a-city-increase-so-do-rent-prices
• From the Milken Institute
https://milkeninstitute.org/report/short-term-rentals-california-tourism-housing
Work Group Recommendation:
Based on majority consensus the group recommends a 2,500 city-wide vacation rental permit cap and a 10% neighborhood cap.
10 Additional Concerns
During work group discussions, several issues were raised by the group, which had not been directed by the City Council to be looked at. A summary is provided below:
• Ancillary and Secondary Use: While no recommendation was made, the concern regarding owners who use their vacation rental properties as investment properties is inconsistent with the findings of the Ordinance.
• Impacts on Housing Supply: The group discussed the shortage of affordable housing in Palm Springs. While no recommendation was made, the sentiment of primary concern is availability for affordable housing, the solution should start with the construction of more affordable housing, such as multi-family housing.
• American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”): Some members of the working group asked wh ether vacation rental properties are required to be ADA compliant. Based on a review of the applicable ADA regulations, it appears that a short-term rental of a single-family residence is not required to be ADA compliant if it does not contain more than five rooms for rent and is occupied by the owner of the establishment as his/her residence. If the short -term rental is not owner-occupied or there are more than five rooms, the analysis must be applied to determine if the short -term rental would be considered a place of lodging subject to the ADA. However, regardless of whether residential property owners are, or are not, required to make their properties ADA compliant, the City’s current regulatory approach does not impose any legal requirements or liability on the City. If the City Council would like to investigate this issue further, the Council can instruct the City Attorney to conduct further research into the matter.
• Loss of Community: During the discussion, a working group member presented a pinhead map demonstrating the number of second homes in Palm Springs that are not permitted vacation rentals. As explained by the group member, the intent of the introduction of the map was demonstrate that the number of second homes vary greatly by neighborhood, with some neighborhoods having a large number that may contribute to the “loss of community”.
ATTACHMENT “E”
8. 8 Work group member Bruce Hoban presented to the group a map prepared by National Demographics Board, prepared at the request of Vacation Rentals Owners and Neighbors Palm Springs. The map demonstrates second homes in Palm Springs that are not permitted as vacation rentals. Permitted vacation rentals are a subset of the consensus defined “vacant” second homes.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
09/29/2022 3. B.
City Clerk -
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION OF THE PARKLET PROGRAM AND OUTDOOR DINING
REQUIREMENTS
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss policies related to parklets and outdoor dining and provide direction to Staff.
Attachments
Item 3B
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2022 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF THE PARKLET PROGRAM AND OUTDOOR DINING
REQUIREMENTS
FROM: Teresa Gallavan, Interim City Manager
BY: Flinn Fagg, Deputy City Manager
SUMMARY:
This a request for City Council direction on the continuation of the parklet program, and a discussion of parking requirements for outdoor dining.
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss policies related to parklets and outdoor dining and provide direction to Staff.
BACKGROUND:
Related Relevant City Actions
March 2020
City staff began to issue temporary Land Use Permits for outdoor dining on private property and on public sidewalks in response to COVID-19 restrictions on indoor uses.
08/20/20
The City Council discussed the issue of outdoor dining in the Palm Canyon Drive corridor and directed staff to proceed with a temporary closure of the street for a three-block area to allow dining in the street right-of-way via a temporary Land Use Permit (parklets). This three- block area was later re-opened to two lanes of traffic, while still allowing outdoor dining in the on-street parking spaces.
08/27/20 Staff began issuing temporary Land Use Permits for parklets in public rights-of-way in accordance with the City Council action. 06/10/21
The City Council discussed the issue of continuing t he parklet use, subject to the implementation of design standards, fees for parklet use, locational standards, and other operational aspects for parklets. 07/22/21
Staff sought additional direction from City Council regarding the continuation of the parkl et use, including the fee for parklet use, minimum hours of parklet use, and other operational standards.
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 -- Page 2
Parklet Program
Related Relevant City Actions
August
2021
At the direction of City Council, a workgroup was established to assist in the development of design guidelines for parklets. Workgroup meetings were open to the public; members of the Main Street organization, the Greater Palm Springs Bar and Restaurant Association, and various restaurant owners provided input and assisted in the development of the design guidelines.
09/09/21
The City Council adopted design guidelines for parklets based on the recommendations of the workgroup, extended the parklet use through the end of December 2022, and adopted a monthly rental fee of $1.85 per square foot for use of the public right-of-way.
The City of Palm Springs allowed the establishment of “parklets,” defined as seating areas within curbside parking spaces, in August of 2020 to allow restaurants to use public space in response to emergency orders related to the COVID pandemic. While int ended as a temporary measure, the parklets have proved successful in providing expanded outdoor seating areas for patrons concerned about indoor dining.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The following paragraphs describe the issues related to parklets and outdoor dining. The graphic above is intended to show the differences between parklets, outdoor dining on public sidewalks, and outdoor dining on private property.
STREET
PARKLET
• In the public R .O.W. ,
located in a n on-street
park in g space
• Monthly fee required
• No additional parking
spaces requ ired
• Requires approval of LUP
PARKLET
OUTDOOR
DINING
(Sidew alk)
• In the public
R .O .W .,
located on the
sidewalk
• No month ly fee
required
• Add itional
parking spaces
required
• Requires
approval of
LUP
O UTDOOR
D IN ING
OUTDOOR
DINING
(Pr ivate Property)
• Located on private
property
• No monthly fee
(priv ate property)
• Add itional parking
spaces required
• Requires approval
ofLUP
OUTDOOR
DINING /
PARK ING LOT
SECTION VIEW
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 -- Page 3
Parklet Program
Continuation of the Parklet Use:
Based on City Council action in September 2021, the parklet use was allowed to continue through the end of 2022, subject to conformance to the adopted parklet design guidelines and payment of a monthly rental fee for use of the public right-of-way. A total of ten parklet owners submitted applications at the beginning of 2022 to request approval of their parklet design and to extend their parklet use through the December 31, 2022. One of the ten parklets has recently been removed, leaving a total of nine active parklets. The Land Use Permits (LUP) issued for the parklet use expire at the end of this year; unless extended by the City Council, all parklets will need to be removed by January 1, 2023 and the on- street parking spaces restored to their original condition.
Parklet owners have generally expressed an interest in continuing the parklet use for the 2023 calendar year. Due to the continued propagation of COVID variants, there continues to be a demand for outdoor dining by restaurant patrons . Consequently, it may be appropriate to allow the parklet use to extend through 2023 to address continued concerns related to COVID.
City staff met with agents of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) to determine if alcohol service would continue to be permitted in parklet areas if the parklet use were continued through 2023. ABC confirmed that alcohol service would be allowed in parklets, provided the City grants approval (through a Land Use Permit) for use of the parklet area and that the parklet area remains contiguous with the restaurant.
Outdoor Dining:
Outdoor dining regulations are established as a use that is permitted in most commercial districts upon approval of a Land Use Permit (LUP); these regulations have been in place in their current for mat since the early 1990’s. The zoning code allows outdoor dining in the public right-of-way on sidewalks, and also allows outdoor dining on private property.
Unlike parklets, the zoning code requires that parking spaces be provided for outdoor dining based on the number of outdoor seats.
Applications for outdoor dining increased during the early phases of the COVID pandemic, similar to the requests for parklets. This included applications for outdoor dining in public sidewalk areas, as well as outdoor dining in parking lots. One of the issues associated with outdoor dining in parking lots is that restaurant owners must account for the loss of parking spaces as well as the additional parking spaces that are required for the outdoor seating. Parking requirements pose challenges for restaurant owners and can prevent some owners from providing outdoor dining for patrons.
Per City Council direction on the matter in September 2021, Planning staff has worked to accommodate restaurant owners in providing solutions to the parking issue. Within the boundaries of the Downtown Parking Combining Zone, restaurant owners may pay a fee in lieu of providing the required parking, which is currently $2,567 per required space for existing construction. Outside of the Downtown Parking Combining Zone, restaurant owners may apply for approval of Off-Site Parking [PSZC Section 93.06.00(B)(5c)], Joint
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 -- Page 4
Parklet Program
Use of Off- Street Parking Facilities [PSZC Section 93.06.00(B)(7)], or Specific Parking Plans [PSZC Section 93.06.00(B)(11)] to address the added outdoor seats and loss of any on-site parking spaces. While these code provisions have been helpful to address parking requirements, staff is seeking direction from City Council regarding the continuation of this practice, or if the parking requirements for outdoor dining should be amended.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
:
This discussion and possible direction does not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as it is merely a discussion and direction regarding the continuation of an administrative program and possible ordinance amendments. If any ordinance amendment is brought forward, the City will analyze such ordinance in accordance with CEQA.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:
The parklet and outdoor dining uses are not related to any current priorities identified by the City Council. This item is being brought forward to the City Council due to the imminent expiration of Land Use Permits for existing parklets and questions from parklet owners as to whether the use may be continued.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Fees charged for use of the parklet space will continue to assist the City in recovering the costs of maintenance and utilities related to the parklet use. The parklet rental program generates approximately $9,200 per month in rental fees. Continuation of the program through the end of 2023 will generate approximately $110,000 in rental fees for the 2023 calendar year, provided the same number of restaurant owners continue to participate in the parklet program.
CONCLUSION:
Staff is seeking direction from the City Council on the following two issues relative to parklets and outdoor dining:
a) Whether to extend the parklet use for the 2023 calendar year b) Whether to continue to apply liberal parking policies relative to outdoor dining on public sidewalks and private property.
REVIEWED BY:
Deputy City Manager: Flinn Fagg
Interim City Manager: Teresa Gallavan
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 -- Page 5
Parklet Program
ATTACHMENTS:
A. List of Approved Parklets
B. Public Correspondence
ATTACHMENT A
List of Approved Parklets
# Name Address Status
1 Blackbook 315 E. Arenas Rd. Active
2 El Patron 101 S. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
3 Fame Cigar and Wine 155 S. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
4 Fusion Five 285 S. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
5 Las Casuelas Original 368 N. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
6 Las Casuelas Terraza 222 S. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
7 Revel Public House 140 S. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
8 TacQuila 415 N. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
9 Trio 707 N. Palm Canyon Dr. Active
10 Workshop Kitchen 800 N. Palm Canyon Dr. Removed
ATTACHMENT B
September 15, 2022
Members of the Palm Springs City Council,
I am writing in support of, and asking you to vote for, a yearlong extension of the restaurant parklet program. There are many reasons for the continuation of this program, but the clearest benefits to our city are for two main reasons:
1. Our guests love the feeling of safety and freedom of being outdoors. Many of our regular guests and repeat seasonal visitors are still uncomfortable dining indoors – even during the very hot and less busy summer months. The investment the parklet participants have put into these safe spaces makes the experience feel safe and enjoyable.
2. It activates our sidewalks and elevates the downtown dining experience. Our guests love to be in the middle of our bustling sidewalks, and the excitement of having activated sidewalks draws many people to our wonderful downtown district. Come dine during Villagefest for the best experience and see for yourself. Our outdoor lifestyle is one of our biggest assets as a community.
This program has elevated our city’s dining experience and profile, and it has made our citizens and visitors feel safe in the process.
I’m proud to be joined by other parklet participants who are also lifting the profile of our beautiful city.
Sincerely,
Patrick Service
Owner, Las Casuelas Terraza
~i12ce 1958
~E,RRAZA
September 19, 2022
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Palm Springs
3200 East Tahquitz Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Re: Continuation of Parklet Program
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
415 N. Palm Canyon Drive
Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 417-4471
We are writing to express our support for the continuation of the Parklet Program in Palm Springs. Since we developed our parklet almost two years ago, we have become aware of a number of unexpected benefits.
A. Many of our residents and v1S1tors have a continuing concern about COVID infection. As a result, they strongly prefer outdoor dining. Even in the warmer months the parklet has remained busy and allowed us to retain a high earning staff.
B. Dining outdoors on a busy city street like Palm Canyon Drive creates an energy that cannot be replicated indoors. This energy is compelling irrespective of the outdoor temperatures and adds to the vibrant brand that Palm Springs enjoys.
C. The parklet in front of our restaurant has energized a quiet stretch of Palm Canyon Drive ( due to the unfinished hotel) and has created connection between the pedestrians on the sidewalk and the diners in our restaurant , resulting in a European cafe feel. The parklet has also created synergy with other nearby businesses, which is a benefit to all.
For these and other reasons , we strongly support a continuation of the Parklet Program .
Palm Springs is a unique city and the proliferation of well executed parklets can only enhance the City's image .
Very truly yours,
0 020-019 -- 3778753.1
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
09/29/2022 3. C.
City Clerk -
SUBJECT
CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE ADJUSTING CITY COUNCIL AND MAYORAL SALARIES AND A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN AUTOMOBILE STIPEND
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider Introduction (First Reading) of an Ordinance entitled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS
2.04.020 AND 2.04.021, AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 2.04.022, OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, MODIFYING COMPENSATION FOR THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.”
1. Consider adoption of a Resolution entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR AN AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCE FOR CITY COUNCILMEMBERS," establishing an automobile allowance.
2. Attachments
Item 3C
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2022 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE INTRODUCTION OF AN
ORDINANCE ADJUSTING CITY COUNCIL AND MAYORAL SALARIES
AND A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN AUTOMOBILE STIPEND
FROM: Teresa Gallavan, Interim City Manager
BY: Jeffrey S. Ballinger, City Attorney
SUMMARY:
This agenda item is a continuation of a discussion on increasing City Council Member salaries and creating a City Council Member vehicle stipend as measures to reduce barriers to running for and working on City Council. This is a follow up to direction given by City Council to Staff at the July 14, 2022 and September 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meetings.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Consider Introduction (First Reading) of an ordinance entitled,
“AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING SECTIONS 2.04.020 AND 2.04.021, AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 2.04.022, OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE,
MODIFYING COMPENSATION FOR THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL.”
2. Consider Adoption of a resolution establishing an automobile allowance.
BACKGROUND:
In 2018, the City Council created a California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) Working Group.
The Working Group was tasked with advising City Council on transitioning to district - based City Council elections and other changes to policies and practices meant to better align with the CVRA. One of the areas the Working Group was tasked with was to identify ways to reduce barriers to running for City Council and working on City Council.
The Working Group made several recommendations to reduce barriers including:
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 – Page 2
City Council Compensation and Vehicle Stipend
• Increase the salary of City Council Members to better reflect workload and enable residents to reduce their reliance on other full-time or part-time work while serving on City Council.
• Provide adequate staffing to alleviate some of the burden on Council Member’s time. Personal Assistants or shared Legislative Analysts are examples of positions that could reduce the workload of Council Members.
• Provide a vehicle stipend/ allowance to help compensate Council Members for wear/ tear and other costs associated with using their own vehicles to travel to places to conduct City business.
• Provide childcare through existing service providers or at City Hall with subsidized rates. This could also provide service to City Staff.
At the July 12, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting, Council identified short and long-term goals for reducing barriers to running for and working on City Council.
For short -term changes, Council directed Staff to analyze an adjustment to Council Member compensation, considering increases to Consumer Price Indexes , and to analyze options for a vehicle stipend. Council also directed Staff to consider the potential to add additional staff as a means of reducing the workload to Council Members so they could more easily balance the commitment to serve on City Council with needs to work or provide family care. For long-term changes, Council expressed interest in providing childcare to Council Members and potentially staff.
At the September 1, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council discussed these issues and directed City staff to bring back options regarding adjusting City Council salaries as well as an automobile stipend/ allowance. This agenda item provides an opportunity for the Council to consider these two issues. City staff will continue to investigate the remaining issues, such as additional staff, childcare, and a contingency fund policy.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
City Council Salary Ordinance
The City’s Charter provides that the City Council may, by ordinance, establish and adjust the compensation received by the Council (including an additional amount for the Mayor). (Palm Springs Charter, § 304.) The City’s Municipal Code currently contains two (2) sections dealing with City Council and Mayoral compensation , Palm Springs Municipal Code sections 2.04.020 and 2.04.021.
In accordance with the discussion that occurred at the September 1, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Attorney has drafted a proposed ordinance that would amend these two existing code sections.
More specifically, as discussed at the September 1 Council meeting, City S taff analyzed City Council salaries from the perspective of changes to CPI since the last time salaries were adjusted in 2007. Based on that adjustment, the current Councilmember
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 – Page 3
City Council Compensation and Vehicle Stipend
compensation would be $41,600 per year, or $3,467 per month. This is the amount included in the draft ordinance, although it is entirely within the Council’s discretion to set this amount at a higher or lower amount.
As further directed by the Council on September 1, the proposed ordinance also contains a separate salary for the Councilmember while serving as Mayor, as authorized by the City Charter. The proposed differential is set at twenty percent (20%). Based on a City Councilmember salary of $3,467 per month, a 20% differential would equate to an additional $693 per month, for a total of $4,160 per month ( or $49,924 per year). Again, this percentage may be set higher or lower, in the City Council’s discretion.
Below is the language for the proposed ordinance amendments regarding salaries:
“2.04.020 Compensation of City Councilmembers.
Each member of the City Council shall receive a salary of Three Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty-Seven Dollars ($3,467) per month for each full month in office, or pro rata portion thereof for a partial month in office.”
“2.04.021 Compensation for Mayor.
The Mayor shall receive a salary of Four Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Dollars ($4,160) per month for each full month in office, or pro rata portion thereof for a partial month in office.”
In addition to updating the Council salary based on the C onsumer Price Index (CPI) applicable since the last update in 2007, the draft ordinance contains an optional new Municipal Code section, which (if adopted) would provide for a process for an annual adjustment of these dollar amounts. The proposed language reads:
“2.04.022 Annual Adjustments.
Unless the City Council determines otherwise, prior to or as part of the annual budget adoption, the amounts set forth in Sections 2.04.020 and
2.04.022 shall automatically be adjusted on July 1 of each fiscal year, based on the amount set forth in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA for the prior 12 months; provided however, that any such adjustment shall not exceed three percent (3%) or be less than zero percent (0%).”
This language provides that, in future years, the amounts would be automatically adjusted, although the City Council would have the opportunity to forgo the automatic adjustment by way of a Council vote, at or before the annual budget process (usually, in June of each year).
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 – Page 4
City Council Compensation and Vehicle Stipend
The proposed language establishes the local Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the prior twelve (12) months as the amount that the compensation could be increased by, with a proposed cap of three percent (3%) and a proposed floor of zero percent (0%).
As discussed at the September 1 Council meeting, there are options other than the automatic salary adjustment that the Council might choose with regard to future adjustments. Other options include:
o The Council could choose to not adopt any language at all concerning future adjustments. This would result in future adjustments being subject to an ordinance adopted by the City Council.
o The Council c ould choose to adopt an adjustment section, but expressly provide that the adjustment would apply based on an affirmative City Council vote, perhaps during the annual budget process. This would still require an affirmative vote by the Council; just not the adoption of an ordinance, which requires two readings and is effective 30 days following the second reading.
o The Council could also choose to adopt an adjustment section by affirmative Council vote that would occur every two or three years rather than annually as part of the budget process.
With regard to the possible automatic adjustment provision, a question was raised at the September 1 Council meeting as to whether Government Code section 36516’s prohibition against automatic future salary adjustments applies to the City of Palm Springs. The answer is no. Because the City is a charter city, Government Code section 36516’s prohibition against automatic future increases does not apply. The California Supreme Court has affirmed that the compensation of officers and employees of charter governments, such as City Councilmembers, constitutes a “municipal affair”, which is not subject to the general laws of the State, such as Section 36516. ( Sonoma County Organization of Public Employees v. County of Sonoma et. al., (1979) 23 Cal.3d 296, 314-317.) Therefore, the City has the legal authority to provide for automatic increases.
As mentioned in the September 1 staff report, the City Charter allows updated compensation to be applied to all Councilmembers following a municipal election.
However, per the discussion at the September 1 Council meeting, the proposed ordinance has been drafted so that any adopted increases would apply only to Councilmembers who start a new term of office after the November 2022 Municipal Election. That would mean that the ordinance, if adopted, would not apply to Mayor Middleton or, should she remain on Council, Councilmember Holstege. Otherwise, the ordinance would apply to those individuals who are elected to the other three Council
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 – Page 5
City Council Compensation and Vehicle Stipend
seats at the November 2022 election, including any re- elected incumbent, and to any individual elected or appointed to fill a vacancy caused by Councilmember Holstege’s election to the Assembly.
Automobile Stipend/ Allowance
The City’s Charter, in addition to authorizing the City Council to provide for Council compensation, authorizes the City Council to provide for reimbursement for Council authorized expenses, such as travel expenses. Unlike Council compensation, the Charter does not specify that such reimbursement must be established or adjusted by way of ordinance. Instead, this is something that could be established and adjusted by way of resolution.
Therefore, as directed at the September 1 Council meeting, the City Attorney has drafted a resolution establishing a monthly automobile stipend. Staff reviewed survey data collected in 2020 of Southern California communities and the vehicle stipends provided to Council Members. The survey rev iewed 21 communities in Southern California that provide a vehicle stipend for Council Members and/or the Mayor. For the 20 communities that provide a stipend to Council Members (one community only provides a stipend to the Mayor), the amount ranges from $150/month to $750/month, with most between $350- $500/month. A stipend at $400/month equates to mileage reimbursement for 640 miles/month at the current rate of reimbursement of $.625/mile. This stipend amount would be intended to cover all business travel around town, throughout the Coachella Valley, and the frequent meetings throughout Riverside County and Southern California.
The proposed stipend is set in the amount of Four Hundred Dollars ($400.00) for each month, or pro rata portion thereof for a partial month in office, that any Councilmember serves. As with the salary proposal, this amount could be set at any amount, higher or lower, that the Council reasonably determines is the approximate amount that Councilmembers incur in traveling for their official City duties. This automobile allowance would be in lieu of any other travel reimbursements for any official duties performed within the boundaries of the City. However, the allowance would be in addition to any travel related expenses incurred outside of the boundaries when travel for official City business by means other than automobile is reasonable and necessary . So, for example, if a Councilmember needed to fly to Sacramento for a League of California Cities meeting, the Councilmember would still be able to seek reimbursement for actual air and automobile-related expenses for that trip. Such reimbursement would, of course, need to be in accordance with the City’s adopted reimbursement policy.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:
This item is consistent with Council’s Strategic Priority under the Good Governance Section. Specifically, this staff report addressed item 4C – Reduce Barriers to Participation.
City Council Staff Report
September 29, 2022 – Page 6
City Council Compensation and Vehicle Stipend
FISCAL IMPACT:
Fiscal impact is dependent on Council direction. An increase in Council member compensation and approval of a vehicle stipend would require a budget appropriation, which Staff would bring back to Council for approval at a future meeting.
REVIEWED BY:
Interim City Manager: Teresa Gallavan
City Attorney: Jeffrey S. Ballinger
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Ordinance re Council Salary
2. Proposed Resolution re Auto Stipend
55575.18000\40692888.2
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS ,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 2.04.020 AND
2.04.021, AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 2.04.022, OF
THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, MODIFYING
COMPENSATION FOR THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL
City Attorney’s Summary
Section 304 of the City Charter provides that the City Council establishes its salary by ordinance. The City Council
ordinance adjusting salaries was last updated in 2007. This ordinance provides an update to the compensation paid to Councilmembers, including the Mayor, of the City of Palm Springs.
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Constitution Article, XI, section 5, the City of Palm Springs has plenary power to provide for the compensation of the City’s municipal officers, including that of the City Councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said authority, the voters of the City of Palm Springs have adopted Section 304 of the City of Palm Springs Charter, which provides that the members of the City C ouncil shall receive such compensation for their services as may be established by ordinance and that the M ayor may receive compensation in addition to any compensation received as a member of City Council; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 304 of the City of Palm Springs City Charter, the City Council desires to update the compensation of the City Council, including the Mayor.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 2.04.020 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“2.04.020 Compensation of city councilmembers.
Each member of the city council shall receive a salary of Three Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty Seven D ollars ($3,467) per month for each full month in office, or pro rata portion thereof for a partial month in office.”
SECTION 2. Section 2.04.021 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
55575.18000\40692888.2
Ordinance No. _____
“2.04.021 Compensation for mayor.
The mayor shall receive a salary Four Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Dollars ($4,160) per month for each full month in office, or pro rata portion thereof for a partial month in office.”
OPTION #1
[DO NOT ADOPT AN ESCALATOR PROVISION AS SECTION 3, BELOW]
OPTION #2
SECTION 3. A new Section 2.04.022 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows:
“2.04.022 Annual Adjustments.
Unless the City Council determines otherwise, prior to or as part of the annual budget adoption, the amounts set forth in Sections 2.04.02 0 and
2.04.022 shall automatically be adjusted on July 1 of each fiscal year, based on the amount set forth in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI -U), Riverside-San Bernardino- Ontario, CA for the prior 12 months; provided however, that any such adjustment shall no t exceed three percent (3%) or be less than zero percent (0%).”
SECTION 4. If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any provision or circumstances, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisio ns of this Ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after adoption. However, pursuant to Palm Springs City Charter Section 304, the increase in the members of the City Council and of the Mayor’s compensation as provided herein shall only apply to those persons who commence a new term of office on City Council (whether by election or appointment) following the November 8, 2022 General Municipal Election.
55575.18000\40692888.2
Ordinance No. _____
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PALM SPRINGS CITY
COUNCIL THIS _____ DAY OF ___________________, 2022.
LISA MIDDLETON
MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA PREE
CITY CLERK
55575.18000\40692888.2
Ordinance No. _____
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, BRENDA PREE, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. ____ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was introduced at a regular meeting of the Palm Springs City Council on _________ and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on __________ by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this ______ day of ______________, 2022.
BRENDA PREE
CITY CLERK
55575.18000\40693090.1
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS , CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR AN
AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCE FOR CITY
COUNCILMEMBERS
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Constitution Article, XI, section 5, the City of Palm Springs has plenary power to provide for the compensation of the City’s municipal officers, including that of the City Councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said authority, the voters of the City of Palm Springs have adopted Section 304 of the City of Palm Springs Charter, which provides that each member of the City Council shall receive reimbursement on order of the City Council for Council-authorized traveling and other expenses when on official duty; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that it is normal and customary for a City Councilmember to use his or her personally owned vehicle while performing official duties; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has also determined that the most efficient and cost effective method of travel for a City Councilmember while performing official duties is through the use of his or her personal vehicle; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that using personal vehicles while performing official duties as Council members adds to the already high costs of operating an autom obile, including additional fuel or energy costs, insurance costs, added maintenance costs for additional wear and tear, as well as further depreciation of the automobile’s value; and
WHEREAS, in recognition of these additional costs and pursuant to Section 304 of the City of Palm Springs City Charter, the City Council desires to establish an automobile allowance in order to reimburse the City Councilmembers for their travel expenses while performing official City duties , by means of a flat, monthly automobile allowance.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. T hat the foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Palm Springs does hereby establish an automobile allowance for each Councilmember in the amount of Four Hundred Dollars ($400.00) for each month, pro rata portion thereof for a partial month in office, that such Councilmember serves as a City Councilmember for the City of Palm Springs.
Said allowance shall be in lieu of any other travel reimbursements for any official duties performed within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Palm Springs. However,
55575.18000\40693090.1
Resolution No. _____
said allowance shall be in addition to any travel related expenses incurred outside of the jurisdictional boundaries when travel for official City business by means other than automobile is reasonable and necessary (for example, by air travel, train, or boat), which expenses shall be reimbursed based on actual expenses incurred in accordance with the City’s reimbursement policy.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately, provided however that, pursuant to Palm Springs City Charter Section 304, the increase in the members of the City Council and of the Mayor’s compensation as provided herein shall not take effect until after the City Council declares the result of the November 8, 2022 General Municipal Election..
ADOPTED THIS 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022.
TERESA GALLAVAN
INTERIM CITY MANAGER
ATTEST:
BRENDA PREE
CITY CLERK
55575.18000\40693090.1
Resolution No. _____
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, Brenda Pree, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Resolution No. ____ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on September 29, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this 29th day of September, 2022.
BRENDA PREE
CITY CLERK