In considering an architectural review application, the approval authority shall evaluate the application and make findings for conformance to the following criteria:
1. The architectural treatment is consistent on all four sides of the proposed building(s), unless otherwise approved by the ARC;
The architectural treatment is generally consistent on all 4 sides.
2. The design of accessory structures, such as carports, cabanas, and similar accessory structures, shall be consistent with the form, materials and colors of the principal building(s), unless otherwise approved by the ARC;
The proposed building is an accessory to the main building on the site and is generally consistent.
3. The fa<;ade elements and fenestration are composed in a harmonious manner; The fayade elements and fenestration are harmonious.
4. The proposed materials are consistent with the context of the site, adjacent buildings, and the desert environment;
and
5. The proposed color scheme is appropriate to the desert environment and consistent with the site context;
The materials and colors are harmonious with existing commercial building on the site.
6. Shading devices and sun control elements, excluding landscape materials, are provided to address environmental conditions and solar orientation; The existing steel canopy provides some degree of shade control for the proposed building.
7. The proposed landscape plan is consistent with the requirements of PSMC Chapter
8.60; and
Item 3B - Page 96
City of Palm Springs -Department of Planning Services
Case AR-2024-0046; 1100 S Palm Canyon Drive
8. The proposed landscape plan is consistent with all applicable zoning requirements, including any streetscape requirements, landscape buffer requirements, and screening requirements;
No landscaping is proposed. Screening of the off-street parking is required either via the use of landscape material or decorative walls pursuant to Zoning Code 93.06.00.
9. The shading for pedestrian facilities on the subject site or abutting public right(s)-of-way is adequate
There are no shading devices abutting the public ROW. Shade may be able to be provided as part of the shading requirement for the off-street parking.
10. The proposed lighting plan is consistent with the requirements of PSZC Section
93.21.00, and the proposed lighting will not materially impact adjacent properties; No exterior lighting is proposed. Any exterior lighting proposed in the future must conform to the City's outdoor lighting ordinance (PSAC 93.21.00).
11. Appropriateness of signage locations and dimensions relative to the building fa<;ade(s), or appropriateness of the site location for any freestanding signage, as may be warranted for the development type;
No signage is proposed or approved as part of this application. A separate sign permit is required conforming to the City's Sign Ordinance. (PSZC 93.20.).
12. Screening is provided for mechanical equipment and service yards, so as to screen such facilities from view from public rights-of-way and abutting properties; Mechanical equipment is not shown. All mechanical equipment must be screened pursuant to PSZC 93.00.
13. The proposed application is consistent with any adopted design standards of an applicable specific plan, planned development district, or other applicable adopted design standards and regulations.
(Does not apply.)
Based on the above findings, the project is hereby APPROVED with the following conditions of approval:
Planning Department Conditions of Approval:
PLN 1. Off-street Parking. Required pursuant PSZC 93.06.00.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, a plan showing the location of off-street parking compliant with PSZC 93.06.00 shall be submitted for approval.
Item 3B - Page 97
City of Palm Springs -Department of Planning Services
Case AR-2024-0046; 1100 S Palm Canyon Drive
PLN 2.
PLN 3
Trash enclosure. Required pursuant PSZC 93.07.02.
A trash enclosure is required for all uses in all zones except single family zones.
A trash enclosure conforming to zoning code standards must be shown on the site plan.
Siqnage. No signage is included in this approval. Signs conforming to the City's sign ordinance require a separate sign application, processed by the Planning Department.
Engineering Department Conditions of Approval:
STREETS
ENG 1.
ENG 2.
APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF AN ENCLOSURE BENEATH AN EXISTING CANOPY LOCATED AT 1100 S PALM CANYON DRIVE, (APN 508-292-001), SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 4 S, RANGE 4 E, S.B.M., PLANNING CASE #AR- 2024-0046, BLDG. P.C. NO. BLDC-2024-0728, ENG. FILE NO. 4857.
The Engineering Services Department recommends that if this application is approved, such approval is subject to the following conditions being completed in compliance with City standards and ordinances.
Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
All Grading Plans, Improvement Plans, Required Studies and Documents listed below, must be submitted to Engineering Services Department for review and approval.
The Engineering Services Department recommends deferral of off-site improvement items (identified as "Deferred') at this time due to lack of full improvements in the immediate area. The owner shall execute a street improvement covenant agreeing to construct all required street improvements upon the request of the City of Palm Springs City Engineer at such time as deemed necessary. The covenant shall be executed and notarized by the property owner(s) prior to approval of the Grading Plan or issuance of grading or building permits. A current title report; or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. A covenant preparation fee in effect at the time that the covenant is submitted shall be paid by the applicant.
Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. All improvements are subject to inspection and a 48-hour inspection notification is required.
SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE
Item 3B - Page 98
City of Palm Springs -Department of Planning Services
Case AR-2024-0046; 1100 S Palm Canyon Drive
ENG 3.
ENG4.
ENG 5.
ENG6.
ENG7.
ENG8.
Dedicate an additional 10 feet to provide the ultimate half street right-of-way width of 50 feet along the entire frontage, together with a property line -corner cut-back at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 105. A current title report; or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. A right-of-way plan check fee shall be paid by the applicant in effect at the time that the dedication is submitted.
The owner shall apply for an Encroachment Agreement from the Engineering Services Department and a Land Use Permit (From Planning Department) to allow the existing canopy and corner marquis sign along the frontage of the subject property to be maintained within that portion of the property to be dedicated as required for additional right-of-way. The agreement shall be executed by the owner prior to issuance of a grading, encroachment, or building permit. A current title report or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. A preparation fee in effect at the time that the application is submitted shall be paid by the applicant.
The existing driveway approach location is in violation of Section 93.06.00 C(15)d of the City of Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance. It calls for a minimum separation between the driveway and rear or side lot line of 6 feet. Section 93.06.00 C(15)c also states that no driveway shall be nearer than 30 feet to the ultimate right-of way of the intersecting street (Palo Verde Avenue -Local Street). Remove the existing driveway approach and construct a new driveway approach that is at least 14 feet wide in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201 or 201A. An on-site vehicular turnaround area (hammerhead or similar configuration) shall be constructed and/or provided, in accordance with Zoning Code 93.06.00 C (8).
Remove the existing curb & gutter and construct an 8 inch curb and gutter, 38 feet east of centerline along the entire frontage, with a 35 feet radius curb return and spandrel at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200, 206, and 340. Deferred.
Remove the existing cross gutter & spandrel and construct the south half of an 8 feet wide cross gutter and spandrel at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue with a flow line parallel with and located 38 feet east of the centerline of South Palm Canyon Drive in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200 and 206. Deferred.
Construct a driveway approach that is at least 14 feet wide in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201 or 201A. An on-site vehicular Item 3B - Page 99
City of Palm Springs -Department of Planning Services
Case AR-2024-0046; 1100 S Palm Canyon Drive
ENG 9.
ENG 10.
ENG 11.
ENG 12.
ENG 13.
turnaround area (hammerhead or similar configuration) shall be constructed and/or provided, in accordance with Zoning Code 93.06.00 C (8). Deferred.
Remove the existing sidewalk and construct a 8 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. Deferred.
Remove and construct a Type-A curb ramp meeting current California State Accessibility standards at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 212 and 212A. Deferred.
Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 5 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 340. (Additional pavement removal and replacement may be required upon review of existing pavement cross-sections, and to ensure grade breaks of the pavement cross-section do not occur within a travel lane.) If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Deferred.
Remove and replace existing asphalt concrete pavement where required, in accordance with applicable City standards.
All broken or off grade street improvements along the project frontage shall be repaired or replaced.
PALO VERDE AVENUE
ENG 14.
ENG 15.
ENG 16.
ENG 17.
Remove the existing curb cuts and construct a driveway approach with a minimum width of 14 feet in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201 or 201A.
Construct an 8 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210.
Remove and replace existing asphalt concrete pavement where required, in accordance with applicable City standards.
All broken or off grade street improvements along the project frontage shall be repaired or replaced.
SANITARY SEWER
Item 3B - Page 100
City of Palm Springs -Department of Planning Services
Case AR-2024-0046; 1100 S Palm Canyon Drive
ENG 18.
GRADING
ENG 19.
ENG 20.
ENG 21.
ENG 22.
ENG 23.
DRAINAGE
ENG 24.
All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. The existing sewer service to the property shall be used for new sanitary facilities. New laterals shall not be connected at manholes.
In accordance with an approved PM-10 Dust Control Plan, temporary dust control perimeter fencing shall be installed at the limits of grading and/or disturbed areas.
Fencing shall have screening that is tan in color; green screening will not be allowed. Temporary dust control perimeter fencing shall be installed after issuance of Grading Permit, and immediately prior to commencement of grading operations.
Temporary dust control perimeter fence screening shall be appropriately maintained. as required by the City Engineer. Cuts (vents) made into the perimeter fence screening shall not be allowed. Perimeter fencing shall be adequately anchored into the ground to resist wind loading.
Within 10 days of ceasing all construction activity and when construction activities are not scheduled to occur for at least 30 days, the disturbed areas on-site shall be permanently stabilized, in accordance with Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 8.50.022. Following stabilization of all disturbed areas, perimeter fencing shall be removed, as required by the City Engineer.
In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.022 (h), the applicant shall post with the City a cash bond of eight hundred dollars ($800) (if there is disturbance of 5,000 square feet or more) at the time of issuance of grading permit for mitigation measures for erosion/blowsand relating to this property and development.
In cooperation with the California Agricultural Commissioner and the California Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project, applicants for grading permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of soil will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved "Notification of Intent To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties" (Revised -RIFA Form CA-1) prior to approval of the Grading Plan (if required). The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at 6819 East Gage Avenue, Commerce, Ca 90040 (Phone (760)782-3271, (562)505-6415), [email protected].
All stormwater runoff across the property shall be accepted and conveyed in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer and released to an approved drainage system. Stormwater runoff may not be released directly to the adjacent streets Item 3B - Page 101
City of Palm Springs -Department of Planning Services
Case AR-2024-0046; 1100 S Palm Canyon Drive
ENG 25.
GENERAL
ENG 26.
ENG 27.
ENG 28.
ENG 29.
TRAFFIC
ENG 30.
ENG 31.
ENG 32.
without first intercepting and treating with approved Best Management Practices (BMPs).
The applicant shall accept and convey all stormwater runoff across the property and conduct the runoff to an approved drainage structure. On-site retention may be allowed on that portion of the property where historically, stormwater runoff is conveyed. All on-site grade slopes shall not be less than 0.5%. If onsite retention is utilized, retention basin calculations shall be provided to the City Engineer. This information required prior to site plan approval.
Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development shall be backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115.
All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground.
Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any intersection or driveway which does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section
93.02.00, D.
All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904.
A minimum of 48 inches of clearance for accessibility shall be provided on public sidewalks. Minimum clearance on public sidewalks shall be provided by either an additional dedication of a sidewalk easement if necessary and widening of the sidewalk, or by the relocation of any obstructions within the public sidewalk along the frontage of the subject property.
All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends, traffic control devices, signing, striping, and street lights, associated with the proposed development shall be replaced as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided during all phases of construction as required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
As a minimum, all construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be in accordance with Part 6 "Temporary Traffic Control" of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), dated November 7, 2014, or subsequent editions in force at the time of construction.
Item 3B - Page 102
City of Palm Springs -Department of Planning Services
Case AR-2024-0046; 1100 S Palm Canyon Drive
Fire Department Conditions of Approval:
FID1. These Fire Department conditions may not provide all requirements. The Owner/developer is responsible for all applicable state and locally adopted fire codes. Detailed plans are still required for review. Conditions are subject to final plan check and review.
FID2. Fire Department Conditions were based on the 2022 California Fire Code as adopted by City of Palm Springs, Palm Springs Municipal Code, PSFD Appendix "T" Development Requirements and latest adopted NFPA Standards.
FID3. Conditions of Approval -"Conditions of Approval" received from the Palm Springs Planning Department must be submitted with each plan set. Failure to submit will result in a delay of plan approval.
FID4. Plans and Permits (CFC 105.1):
Permits and scaled drawings are required for this project. Plan reviews can take up to 20 working days.
FID5. Access During Construction (CFC 503): Access for firefighting equipment shall be provided to the immediate job site at the start of construction and maintained until all construction is complete. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13'-6". Fire Department access roads shall have an all-weather driving surface and support a minimum weight of 73,000 lbs.
FID6. Fire Extinguisher (CFC 906): Fire Extinguishers shall be installed every 75' of travel and be placed in a conspicuous location clearly visible and unobstructed.
END OF CONDITIONS
Appeal. The decision of the director shall be final unless appealed to the ARC within 15 days following the date that the director issues notification to the applicant of the decision.
Please feel free to contact me if there are further questions.
Respectfu I ly,
Christopher Hadwin, Director
Department of Planning Services
EXHIBIT - C -
Item 3B - Page 103
Item 3B - Page 104
Item 3B - Page 105
I
Item 3B - Page 106
i
I
' I
I
I
I
Item 3B - Page 107
i
'
I
•
•
Item 3B - Page 108
Item 3B - Page 109
Item 3B - Page 110
r-----
r'
-
,
. .
\
(
Item 3B - Page 111
Item 3B - Page 112
H-F
•
I
'
EXHIBIT - D -
Item 3B - Page 113
Item 3B - Page 114
' ' --------- ---------------- ---- ---------~
Irr--------------------------------------
;
I
I
1 i
'
I I
0 ~LJ
< rn
I
~~
'-'
-c--
l\ \
--
-"".'-,· ___ , _
_ \\
-r~'~
·1>--v
•
•
-'-·•-~--
T 1
' l <::i~
' ,~
t
i!,?_ .,
li~
'f~
@1
:ci lijl& n •i! i!?f
Ji '
·ii. --
m'!. !I
-. !I 11!
(111
I,;
l?b:\LO VERDE AVEf\JUE
I
---1--
(
i
" ~
II 'I
~
,
18'-0"
r
-------·
ll
I' 1I
•
•
i
I
II,
I ' " jl
ii ,,
i 1
!l
' Ii
--
Ii': '
-·- ;i
..
N ---.- -
-G.F.KlisaK· _
• 2822 Auburn ct. E 211 . •
: Palm Springs,CA 92262
, tel/fax 760-325 J717
cell 760-831 4594
-
•
r
I I
I
•
•
I
..
I
EXHIBIT - E -
Item 3B - Page 115
Item 3B - Page 116
EXHIBIT – F –
Item 3B - Page 117
Item 3B - Page 118
-
•
•
-----
,. I
r..
2...
,
(
EXHIBIT - G -
Item 3B - Page 119
Item 3B - Page 120
I
. I
\\
.....
n,e,
:us•
w :) _,_,,_,,,/ ,/ w --<1 w 0 cc w ~ ---0 _J <lJ··· OJ
i '
I I ! I ' I I l ! I
I • • I I I • •
..
·r·----·-·-,. "'-(
·····
~r.4 '
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ •
r
•
(~)
f
&u
i vj1 1J:· '
•
,
,......
~·
·,
.,er""''!,,
_.-
✓
,<>""'\-
_;.,.-·
J;'·-"
//
~;"·
r"r..tJ"'t:?
t/"
• • I
•
1£111111-
OIi
12'
108E\'ISIII.ECJN
WtnEOOLOR
BEC.1121M-1
..... ,
'
'
~
'.,,-·
"/
... THIS
PROJECT
SHALL
COMPLY
WITH: ..................................
···••·
...................
······
......
' ..
,.,
' ....................
"
.. .
2022
California
Building
Code
..........
Based
on
the
2018
lntemational
Building
Code
.
2022
California
Residential
Code
......
Based
on
the
2018
lntemational.Residenllal
Code
2022
California
Electrical
Code
........
Based
on
the
2017
National
Electric
Code
2022
California
Plumbing
Code
........
Based
on
the
2018
Unlfonn
Plumbing
Code
2022
California
Mechanical
Code
......
Based
on
the
2018
Unifonn
Mechanical
Code
2022
California
Green
Buildlng
..........
Califarnia
Building
and
Standards
Commlaslan
2022
California
Energy
Code
.............
Califomia
Energy
Commission
REVISIONS
BY
Drawn
.,<.J; n
,
Job
1 ltants
Item 3B - Page 121
REVISIONS
BY
I '
3,
--------~-----
~•=-----,----
j ' l
·-
<
___
.,.,,~--~·---
~G
---•-•-•~""··
••••
, ••••
i I ' l ' if I
! I
·"~
\
l
.. ;,;
, -"~•""<
-
·t
•
•
~.
,~·
•
-" .
.
Job
l \
.....
Item 3B - Page 122
I
.....
\
I L
i
\
\J
!
.
//
,cl,
\
4',,_
•
;(
\
/a
_.t_,:p~
~/
'•i
fl'\_
'
'~-
i NOTES: i CONCRETE:
2000
PSI
riJ1 d'
.J
w
~ j\
....
t:
>\
1·
\'j
\·
' ~,
] A,!!.:
518"
• 10
WW•
3"
• 0.229"
WASHERS
O
48"
O.C.
MAX
• SILL
PLATES·
2 • P.T.D.F.
1 HOLOOWNS·
BY
SIMPSON-
TO
BE
PLACED
PRIOR
FOUNDATION
.INSPECTION
! ROOF
SHEETING·
1/2"CD~PLWD\C
12 as
153
Q
l SHEER
WALL:
SEE
SCHEDULE
1, ~-
Tl&"
llY
EJI.Pjl,KOS)WITl'.LV."\"\-\,
Wltl-11
\lf,AA!I..S,
1.f>>I
11W
t'.OS,
\NI
114"
fURR\00
i
/ I
I
' l I
I I
I I J I •
i ✓,f',.,
I
UVISION8
BY
I
r
-
\
SHEAR
PANEL
SCHEDULE:
I
~
I 2··
PLYWOOD.
'-;TRL:CH.:RAL
GRAOf.
!.
Bl.OU\,
ALI.
EDGE'S
255
PLF
BX·
tod
AT
6"
O.C..
f-X,
0 !0d.
~ij
12"
O.C..
SILL
NAU.ING-
•• 16d
,g
4·•
0.C.,
S!Lt
BOLT~~-
5 8~
AT
48"
0.C.
2X
Slf.L.
-
A3S
~fi
16''
0.t'.
-'ii;
l'OPPLATI
6 1,2"
l'I.YWOOO.
!,TRtC.
TeRAl.
GRADr.
I.
l:U.(JCK
ALL
f.I)(Jf,S
299
PLF
.
BN=lOdAT
.r·
O.C
.. fN""IOd
ft
12"0,C
.. SILL=l6d@
3".
SIU.
BOI.TS,.
5 8" AT
36"
O.C.
2X
SII.L
AXD
ST['DS
'E
Pl.YWOOD
S}t-1.ICE.
A31
g
16''
<l.C,
~t
TOPPI.ATE,
.
Ji2"
PLYWOOD.
STRLcn:RAL
GRADE
I. BLOCK
ALL
EDGES
500
PLF
&
B~-
IOd
ATJ"
O.C..
f-:-:
!0d1l
12"
O.C..
Sill
AtTACH~tE~T3
8'
!
OX6"'
LAG
'iJ
6"
O.C,._~ILL80LTS
0 ··3
S"
AT.24"
O.C..
3X
SILL
A!',;DSTt:'DS
ti
PLYWOOD
SPLICE.AH
·ff
IO"
o.c.,g
!OPPI..ATE.
.
' I
~
1,2"
PLY\\'00D.
STRl.'CtURAL
GRADE
t. BLOCK
ALL
EDGES
650
PLF
'
BN'-·
lOdATl"
0.C
.. FS·--lOd
'l!'
12°'
O.C.,
SILLATTACH\1E~T3,S'•
0X6
LAG-~4",Q.C
.. SILLBOLTS
S 8"
AT
16 .. O.C
.. 3X
SILL
Job
l
A);D'sTCD'S
il'l."'i"«DOD!.PUCE.
A33
gs··
O.C.1fTOY.ptATt.
EXHIBIT – H –
Item 3B - Page 123
From: William Priest <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 5:29 PM
To: Eve Brackmann <[email protected]>
Cc: Georgiana Nikias <[email protected]>; Christopher Hadwin <[email protected]>; Ken Lyon <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Appeal of Directors Decision - Case APPL-2024-0001 - 1100 SPCD, xref case AR- 2024-0046
[External]
Good evening Eve. After talking with staff further about this matter, the City offers the following compromise and explanations to resolve this matter without further appeal or litigation:
PLN 1: The project would still be required to provide parking per PSZC 93.06.00. Under section 93.06.00(D)(19), a “self-storage” or “mini-warehousing” use requires a minimum of 6 parking spaces per complex. The Code doesn’t distinguish based upon size or type of the complex. Further, based upon the conceptual parking plan, it appears that bay parking will be provided and largely realigned along the Palo Verde Avenue side of the site since the new building will be taking away other parking space on the site. However, there appears to also be three parking spaces planned along Palm Canyon Drive. So, there’s more going on with this project then just floating a 715 sq. ft. building in isolation and the City maintains there is sufficient nexus to require Code compliant parking spaces. Section 93.06.00 further states that the parking must be provided for “all uses” on the site. The condition requires submittal of a more detailed parking plan prior to issuance of building permits, including curbs, dimensions, landscaping and shade trees.
PLN 2: The project must still provide a Code-complaint trash enclosure. For clarification purposes, placing trash in the enclosed yard does not meet the Code requirement under PSZC
93.07.02. There must be a dedicated enclosure. The City would require this of any new commercial development, regardless of size, and we maintain that the activities on the site provide enough nexus to justify a trash enclosure.
ENG 1: The City is willing to reflect in this covenant that certain conditions are deferred until a change of use happens – see Condition ENG 3.
Item 3B - Page 124
ENG 2/ENG 4: The City would still require the project to secure an encroachment permit for the gas station canopy structure and monument sign. While we understand that Mr. Praner’s intention is to “float” the new building under the canopy structure, that canopy structure is currently supported by two columns. The plans Mr. Praner submitted indicate that the building will encompass the two columns. The construction will therefore have to wrap around both columns, providing flashing and roofing to secure the interior of the new building from moisture and other outside elements. Therefore, the new building will alter, add or expand the canopy structure since they will touch, thereby eliminating its legal non-conforming status and requiring compliance with current Code (See PSZC 94.05.03(A)). Because the canopy encroaches into the current public right of way (not including the 10’ additional dedication we have been discussing), and will have lost its legal non-conforming building status, the City may require the project to secure an encroachment permit to continue operating in the current public right of way.
ENG 3/ENG 6 – 11: The City is willing to amend these conditions along these lines: The 10’ right of way dedication and street pavement/curb/gutter improvements along South Palm Canyon Drive will not be required at this time for this specific storage/warehouse project. Rather, if the project should change its use in the future (such as changing to a general commercial/retail use) the owner/applicant will have to come back to the City for an amended minor architectural permit and the City will, at that time, assess whether to require the 10’ right of way dedication and P/C Drive improvements to offset traffic impact. That may require amendment of the encroachment agreement at that time as well. In any event, this condition would not be deferred until the City chooses to widen P/C Drive, but instead upon the change of use by Mr. Praner or his successor.
ENG 5: While the City would be willing to defer the other street, sidewalk, curb and gutter improvements on the Palm Canyon Drive side, the City would still require improvements to the driveway approach(es) of the site to be current with Code and ADA regulations, which we cannot waive. Again, the City is not requiring this in isolation. While the new building may have limited occupancy, it is creating something of a “cascade effect” by taking parking from one area and relocating it elsewhere on the site – there will be improvement throughout more of the site than just the storage/warehouse building.
ENG 12 & 13: The City maintains that these improvements can be required now as a function of the new project (which includes both the new building and parking spaces) in that it only requires the replacement/repair of existing asphalt concrete pavement where required and broken/off grade existing improvements along the project frontage. It is simply a requirement to update and fix any pavement on the site that is broken or not up to current Code. These are not Item 3B - Page 125
improvements well into the street, but within the immediate vicinity of required driveway approaches, sidewalks, etc.
ENG 14/ENG 15: While the City would be willing to defer improvements on the Palm Canyon Drive side, the City would still require curb cuts, driveway approaches, and sidewalks on the Palo Verde side of the site to be current with Code. Again, the City is not requiring this in isolation. While the new building may have limited occupancy, it is creating something of a “cascade effect” by taking parking from one area and relocating it elsewhere on the site – there will be improvement throughout more of the site than just the storage/warehouse building. For example, the proposed parking spaces along Palo Verde Avenue are likely to cause the removal of the current curb and gutter there, requiring these improvements.
ENG 16/ENG 17: The City maintains that these improvements can be required now as a function of the new project, just as with ENG 12 & ENG 13.
ENG 18: Based upon what has been presented in the application, it does not appear that the storage/warehouse building will have restroom or sanitary facilities. Therefore, the City would be willing to defer this condition like ENG 3. If the use should change to a general commercial/retail use that would require sewer improvements, they would be required at that later time.
ENG 22: At this point, it is unclear from the plans just how much grading/ground disturbing activity the project will entail. The construction of the new building will necessarily entail digging to install footings, trenching to run electrical lines to the building, and the parking lot improvements. This will require some grading to establish proper drainage/retention of stormwater on the parking lot. I note that this condition just requires posting of a bond that would be refunded after the improvements are completed and this is only triggered if 5,000 sq. feet of land is disturbed, which may or may not be the case here.
ENG 23: We have included this condition because there is likely to be some grading on the site due to the parking improvements. I note that this condition only applies if there is export of soil. If there will not be, then this condition will not be effective and need not be addressed.
That said, the City wishes to keep this in just in case and to comply with State regulations on these issues.
ENG 24/ENG 25: The City will still require that a stormwater runoff system be installed given that a new building will be constructed and parking lot improvements are being required due to Item 3B - Page 126
new development. This is a Regional Water Board requirement if the drainage pattern on the site is altered. This project is a significant change to the site and, therefore, the City maintains there is sufficient nexus to require these improvements.
ENG 26: The City would still require this. This condition simply requires that all utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement be backfilled and repaired per City specs. As noted above, it appears that there will be at least some trenching and excavation work done for this project due to the new building and parking improvements. And this condition just requires the project to clean up any issues created by trenching and excavation.
ENG 27: Same thing here. If utility lines are going to be installed (which we assume will provide power to the new building), they must be installed underground. The City requires this of all new construction.
ENG 28: The City intends to keep this in. As long as the project improvements aren’t constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any intersection or driveway, or it meets height limits if located therein, then there will be compliance.
ENG 29: To the extent that any tree plantings related to parking improvements fall within the public right of way or within 10 feet of a public sidewalk, the root barrier requirement will apply. However (and I will defer to staff on this one when they see a more complete application), Mr. Praner may be able to locate shade trees in the parking area such that it doesn’t trigger this requirement.
ENG 30: This is an ADA accessibility requirement and the City does not believe it can waive this requirement. This is also required given that the parking along Palo Verde Avenue will likely impact the location of the sidewalk, curb cuts, etc.
ENG 31: This condition requires that all damaged, destroyed or modified pavement legends, traffic control devices, signing, striping and street lights be replaced or fixed. Given that the City is not, at this time, requiring right of way dedications or improvements going well into streets, it is unlikely that this condition will apply to this project. That said, the City wants to keep this in here in case some damage gets into the street and needs to be repaired.
Item 3B - Page 127
That should sum it up. Please feel free to review this proposal and let me know your thoughts.
Take care.
Jim Priest.
William J. (Jim) Priest
Of Counsel
T: (909) 483-6648
|
C: (909) 576-9203
bbklaw.com |
Item 3B - Page 128
BBK
8EST BEST & KRIEC ER"'
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
HD @
EXHIBIT – I –
Item 3B - Page 129
Direct Dial:
310-855-3314
E-mail:
[email protected]
A Limited Liability Partnership Dallas Austin Houston Waco Los Angeles Boca Raton/Miami Orlando www.munckwilson.com
October 15, 2024
VIA E-MAIL
William J. Priest, Esq.
Best Best & Krieger LLP
2855 E. Guasti Rd., Suite 400
Ontario, California 91761
Re: Appeal of Directors Decision - Case APPL-2024-0001 - 1100 SPCD, Case No.
AR-2024-0046 – Joseph Praner (Pranevicius)
Dear Mr. Priest:
This letter responds to your email of October 3, 2024, which provided the first detailed response we have received from your client, the City of Palm Springs, since our August 13, 2024 Letter of Appeal, on which you also were copied. That October 3 email also followed multiple requests from me in emails to you for such correspondence, beginning September 20, 2024. I have also been asking for the City’s exhibits or other submissions for the hearing but have received none to date, and am informed that we will not receive them until this Thursday.
Although the hearing before the City’s Architectural Review Committee is scheduled for this coming Monday, October 21, 2024, I hope that we will nonetheless be able to resolve these issues informally this week and thus avoid the hearing. However, if we are unable to do so, my client is not willing to postpone the hearing.
Our appeal includes (as set forth in detail in my August 13 letter , which has also now been submitted to the City in advance of Monday ’s hearing, along with our exhibits) , the following conditions: PLN 1, PLN 2, ENG1 -18, and 22 -31. Your October 3 email addresses each of these, which we do appreciate.
Our response to each one is as follows . For reference, please see the enclosed three-page diagram that we received today from the architect, George Klisak (an experienced architect, who has worked on projects in the City of Palm Springs for decades, and who designed this improvement). Please note that Mr. Klisak is available by teleph one to answer any questions about these diagrams or the project in general, and also plans to attend the hearing on Monday (unless we are able to resolve these issues and avoid the hearing) . The d iagram includes the following three sheets:
Item 3B - Page 130
~ MUN CK WILSON MANDALA
---------- Trtals. rransacuons. Technology.
2 • Sheet 1: Revised parking plan. Parking removed from Palo Verde Avenue by Building B (house). The original 6 p arking spaces are shown undisturbed, next to buildings A (office) and C (overhang). • Sheet 2: Proposed plan for construction of the free-standing improvement underneath the Canopy (Building C) —shows there is no connection to overhang columns or canopy.
• Sheet 3: Details of Building C—Foundation Plan, and Framing Plan.
Here are our specific responses to your notes regarding each of the at-issue conditions:
• PLN 1. As you mentioned in your October 3 email, the project must provide parking per Palm Springs Zoning Code § 93.06.00. We dispute your categorization of the use as “self -storage” or “mini -warehousing,” since the use will be for the owner’s private business’ own storage needs and not open to the public. Notwithstanding, the requirement for “a minimum of 6 parking spaces” is satisfied by the existing 6 spaces , and the additional three spaces on the Palo Verde Avenue side by B uilding B on the original plan submitted will not be added. Please refer to Sheet 1 on t he enclosed. Do you agree that t his resolves the Code requirements for parking on the site?
• PLN 2. Mr. Praner will provide a diagram/plan for a Code -compliant trash enclosure in the yard of the house, where the current unenclosed trash is located.
Do you agree that this resolves the trash-enclosure issue? • ENG 1, 3, and 6-11. We would like some clarification. It appears that the City is willing to amend these conditions such that the 10 -ft. right of way dedication (“ROW”) and pavement/curb/gutter improvements along South Palm Canyon Drive will not be required at this time for this specific minor architectural project.
This is without prejudice to any change of use in the future, at which time the City will require an amended minor architectural permit and will revisit the ROW requirement and the offsite improvement requirements. This sounds very acceptable to us, and is the crux of what we have been requesting, and if so then we truly appreciate the City’s willingness to compromise in this regard. Can you please confirm that the City is willing to remove the ROW easement condition at this time?
• ENG 2/4. There appears to still be a misunderstanding about the nature and design of the plans. Please refer to sheets 2 and 3 on the enclosed, showing that the imp rovement is not attached in any way to the canopy columns or canopy itself, and that the improvement will not need to have flashing and roofing attached to the columns (or canopy) as you state in your notes. Likewise, there is no “cascade effect” of altering, adding to, expanding, or otherwise modifying the canopy structure in any way , and its legal non -conforming status will thus not be eliminated. As a result, no encroachment permit as to the current public right of Item 3B - Page 131
3 way should be required. If you would like to discuss this further with Mr. Klisak, I can try to arrange a telephone conference. Please let me know. • ENG 5. As noted above, there is no cascade effect and Mr. Praner will change the plans so that he is not adding any parking, and will just have the current 6 spaces, which meets code requirements. Do you agree that this satisfies this condition? • ENG 12, 13, 16, and 17 . Mr. Praner will agree to repair existing asphalt and concrete where required on site only (not on the City’s sidewalks/property), and assure that all of the hardscaping is to current code. Do you agree that this will satisfy this condition?
• ENG 14 & 15. As noted above, Mr. Praner will not modify the parking or add any additional parking along Palo Verde. Do you agree that this satisfies these two conditions?
• ENG 18. Agreed.
• ENG 22. The project will not come near to disturbing 5,000 sq. feet o f land, and in fact the estimate is 250 sq. ft. Thus, it should not require the bond. Do you need to speak further with Mr. Klisak about this, and/or will the City agree to remove the bond requirement based on the current plans? • ENG 23. No export of soil is anticipated. Can you please confirm that as long as no soil is exported, this condition will not be required? • ENG 24 & 25. The drainage pattern onsite will not be affected. The parking lot will not be modified, and there will be no export of soil or grading. As seen from Mr. Klisak’s notes on Detail No. 5, t he new freestanding floating structure will not be touching any existing structure and will be completely inset back under the existing canopy. Do you need to speak further with Mr. Klisak about this, and/or will the City agree to remove these conditions, given the foregoing? • ENG 26. Agreed. (Although I note again that there will now be no parking lot improvements, only repairs.)
• ENG 27. This does not apply. There are existing underground power lines, already, and no new ones will be added. Will the City agree to remove these conditions, given the foregoing?
• ENG 28. Agreed.
• ENG 29. Agreed.
• ENG 30. There will be no parking lot modifications, as noted above. Does this satisfy this condition?
Item 3B - Page 132
4 • ENG 31. Agreed.
I look forward to discussing the foregoing with you at your earliest convenience. Please give me a call or send me an email with a proposed time for us to discuss.
Thank you.
Best regards,
MUNCK WILSON MANDALA, LLP
Eve A. Brackmann
Encl.
Item 3B - Page 133
ATTACHMENT E
ARC SR Dated 3-17-25
w/minute excerpt
Item 3B - Page 134
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEMORANDUM
DATE: MARCH 17,2025 NEW BUSINESS
SUBJECT: AN APPEAL BY JOSEPH PRANEVICIUS AND THE CARNELIAN RED TRUST DTD 6/6/2018 , OWNER S / APPELLANT S, OF CERTAIN
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RELATED TO A DECISION OF THE
PLANNING DIRECTOR APPROVING CASE AR -2024-0046, A MINOR ARCHITECTURAL APPLICATION PROPOSING A ROUGHLY 715 -
SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SHADE CANOPY
STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 1100 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE, (APN 508-292-001), ZONE C -1, GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION, TOURIST RESORT COMMERCIAL (“TRC”) CASE APPL -2024-0001 of CASE 2024-0046. (KL)
FROM: Department of Planning Services
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The appellant has filed an appeal pursuant to Zoning Code Section 94.04.00 (D,2,c) (Appeal of a decision of the Planning Director). The appeal seeks to remove or amend most of the conditions of approval associated with the Director’s approval dated July 30, 2024 of a Minor Architectural application (“MAA”), Case AR-2024-0046.
An appeal of a decision of the Planning Director is heard by the City’s Architectural Review Committee (“ARC”). The decision of the ARC shall be final unless further appeal is made to the City Council pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2.05 (“Appeal to the City Council”).
RECOMMENDATION:
Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Director.
ISSUES:
• Most of the Conditions of Approval that the Appellant is demanding be removed are required for the project to conform to the Zoning & Municipal Codes as well as certain State and Federal regulatory requirements and thus cannot be removed.
Item 3B - Page 135
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 2 of 17
BUSINESS PRINCIPAL DISCLOSURE:
The property is co-owned by Mr. Pranevicius and the Carnelian Red Trust DTD 6-6-2018.
A public integrity disclosure form for the Trust is attached.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Related Relevant City Actions
7-22-15 Vacant Building registration (expired)
5-14-19 HSPB approved demolition of all three buildings on the site. 10-28-20 Planning approval of Case MAA 3.2161 to repaint / repair fire damaged former automobile service station building and adjacent dwelling (Related Bldg. Permit #2020-2066-95794.)
2020 Several expired residential building permits related to the dwelling on the parcel (addressed as 111 E Palo Verde Av) for a reroof, plumbing, mechanical and electrical.
8-1-22 Planning approval of Case MAA 3.2161 to modify the existing shade canopy to enclose most of the area beneath it for “Merchandise Display use”, based on drawings dated 4 -2022. Later rescinded due to encroachment issues (requiring an encroachment permit for the canopy).
4-24-24
Planning reviewed building permit application #BLDC -2024-0728 to modify the existing shade canopy to enclose most of the area beneath it (based on drawings dated 3 -29-24 & 4 -1-24) and rejected the application, noting encroachment issues and requirement for MAA approval prior to Bldg. Permit.
5-29-24
The appellant submitted a revised Minor Architectural Application (Case AR-2024-0046) to modify the existing shade canopy structure to enclose most of the area beneath it.
6-14-24
Engineering reviewed building permit #BLDC-2024-0728 and placed a hold on the permit pending incorporation of Engineering Conditions of Approval.
7-30-24
Planning approval of Case AR -2024-0046 with conditions (based on drawings dated 3-29-24 & 4-1-24) to modify the existing shade canopy structure to enclose most of the area beneath it.
8-13-24 Applicant submitted an a ppeal request of the Planning Director’s approval of Case AR-2024-0046 approval dated 7-30-24.
11-27-24
Planning Staff met with Appellant’s architect to clarify project scope and requirements of the Zoning Code for off -street parking and trash enclosures. (Summary of this meeting is attached here).
The project site is 0.24 acres in size, located at the southeast corner of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue. There are three existing structures on the site Item 3B - Page 136
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 3 of 17
that have been vacant for many years : a single-family residence, a commercial building built as an automobile service station around 1959, and a steel shade canopy structure located where the gasoline fueling pumps were located ( pumps were removed many years ago).
From research conducted in 2018, the current commercial building (a former gas station) was built around 1959 for a Mr. Floyd Bigley who purchased the property around 1946.
The Bigley family apparently lived in the single-family dwelling on the eastern half of the site. Photos of the site from the Palm Springs Historical Society taken around 1942 show a smaller gas station building previously existed on the site and the single-family dwelling east of the gas station was extant at that time.
The buildings have been vacant since at least the early 2000’s according to code enforcement records. The applicant / appellant has not maintained the code-required vacant building registration and therefore is out of compliance with that section of the Municipal Code.
The steel shade canopy structure encroaches into the existing ROW of South Palm Canyon Drive approximately 3 to 4 feet. There is no encroachment permit on file for this structure.
As noted above on August 1, 2022, the appellant submitted a Minor Architectural Application (“MAA”) (Case MAA 3.2161) to enclose most of the area beneath the shade canopy for commercial uses (“Merchandise Display”) . The proposed building was designed with large display windows on three sides. The application was approved “over the counter”, by the Planning Department, however rescinded shortly thereafter due to information provided by the Engineering Department that the existing shade canopy structure currently encroaches into the Palm Canyon Drive right-of-way.
On April 14,2024 the appellant submitted a building permit application (BLDC-2024-0728) to enclose most of the area beneath the shade canopy structure and during the plan check process the permit was stopped by the Engineering Department (placed on hold) due to unresolved ROW encroachment issues and lack of valid architectural approval from the Planning Department. The proposed building shown on the building permit submittal was again designed with large display windows on three sides similar to that which was rescinded by Planning , but this time the applicant ’s project justification letter asserted the building was for “private personal storage”.
On May 29, 2024 the appellant submitted a revised Minor Architectural application (Case AR-2024-0046) to enclose most of the area beneath the shade canopy structure. This application was approved with conditions by the Planning Director on July 20, 2024. Most of the conditions associated with this approval are the subject of the appeal.
The materials that comprise the basis of the appeal are as follows ( and attached to this staff report):
Item 3B - Page 137
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 4 of 17
• Appeal Letter from Eve Brackmann of Munck, Wilson, Mandala, LLP to Christopher Hadwin, Director of Planning Services dated August 13, 2024 along with the following exhibits:
• Exhibit “A” – Project Documents 2024-08-13-v1.pdf
• Exhibit “B” – 2024-07-30 Approval w Conditions AR -2024-0046 1100 S Palm Canyon-2024-08-13_v1.pdf
• Exhibit “C” – 1100 S Palm Canyon Dr Before and After Photos-2024-08013_v1.pdf • Exhibit "D” – 1100 S Palm Canyon – Parking Plan-2024-08013_v1.pdf • Exhibit "E” – Overhead Image of 1100 S Palm Canyon Dr-2024-08-13_v1.pdf • Exhibit "F” – Detail #5 with Architect’s Notes.pdf
• Exhibit "G” – Updated Plan re (1) Parking, (2) Building C (no Connection to existing overhang), (3) Foundation and Framing Details
• Exhibit “I”- Letter re Conditions workout
BASIS OF THE APPEAL & STAFF ANALYSIS:
Section III “Appealed Conditions of Approval”, of the appeal letter dated August 13, 2024, which begins on page 4, identifies the specific conditions being appealed and the remedy sought which are outlined below with staff’s response to each. (This appeal letter can be found in attachment #2 under this staff report.)
The conditions of approval referenced here can be found in the July 30, 2024 Planning approval letter (Exhibit “B” attached).
Condition of Approval PLN 1: Off-street Parking . Required pursuant PSZC
93.06.00. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a plan showing the location of off-street parking compliant with PSZC 93.06.00 shall be submitted for approval.
Appeal demand of PLN 1. The off-street parking requirements are not specified in Ex. B. A parking plan is included as Exhibit D to the Compendium.
Response to Appeal demand and parking plan submitted in Exhibit D: PLN 1 does specify the parking requirements noting that “…off -street parking is required pursuant to PSZC
93.06.00.” and it states that “…a plan showing the location of off-street parking compliant with PSZC 93.06.00 is required.” The sketch in Exhibit D does not p rovide adequate information and much of what is provided appears to be non-compliant.
The following are examples of information that is missing or in error: certain dimensions (example, end spaces not correct, distance from front of spaces to buildings, width of spaces not correct, required curbs and minimum turning radii of curbs at corners are not shown, delineation of new and existing curb and gutter not shown, the specifications for the decorative paving in the proposed bay parking, landscape peninsulas and parking lot screening, shade trees, dimensions from parking spaces to adjacent buildings, sidewalks Item 3B - Page 138
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 5 of 17
between buildings and parking spaces, location and dimensions of perimeter sidewalks along the public streets, ADA path of travel and separation of pedestrian and vehicular movement, absence of a drive aisle and screening along Palm Canyon to prevent vehicles backing out into the ROW, a corrected table showing evidence that parking is provided for all proposed uses on the site, evidence that grades are adequate to convey drainage accordance with current stormwater regulations, parking lot lighting in accordance with PSZC 93.21.00. Wheel stops are shown which are prohibited. The condition is required to ensure the applicant provides drawings showing the off-street parking conforms to the zoning code. This condition has not been met and must remain.
In her most recent letter, the appellant’s attorney appears to take the position that the applicant is not changing any of the “six existing parking spaces that are already on the site”, however other than one ADA-designated parking space, there are no other parking spaces demarcated on the paved areas of the site . From that, the letter suggests that the project can meet Code by merely maintaining what exists. However, this ignores two key facts. First, the Code requires evidence that parking is provid ed for all proposed uses on the site, not just the new building (PSZC 93.06.00 (B,1). There currently exist on the site a commercial building and a single -family residence that do not have adequate parking under the Code and are currently legal non -conforming. Now that the site is being substantially improved, parking must be brought up to current Code for all proposed uses on the parcel. More importantly, the applicant proposes altering the existing shade canopy structure in the parking lot by enclosi ng most of the space beneath for a new building. The proposed enclosure of the space beneath the canopy structure interferes with on-site vehicular circulation including proper a ccess to parking spaces proposed.
Staff disagrees with any suggestion that this project does not now trigger compliance with parking requirements.
Staff met with the appellant’s architect on November 27, 2024 to further discuss code - required off -street parking requirements. Minutes and summary of that meeting are attached which identify the level to which the proposed parking is deficient.
Condition of Approval PLN 2: Trash enclosure. Required pursuant PSZC
93.07.02. A trash enclosure is required for all uses in all zones except single family zones.
A trash enclosure conforming to zoning code standards must be shown on the site plan.
Appeal demand of PLN 2. The trash enclosure requirement is unclear.
Mr. Praner seeks clarification that the trash -enclosure requirement is met by placing all trash in the enclosed yard, as seen in the aerial view attached to the Compendium as Exhibit E.”
Response to Appeal demand regarding PLN 2. This condition clearly states a trash enclosure is required pursuant to PSZC 93.07.02 for this commercial site. That section of the zoning code provides the physical requirements for the trash enclosure. There is no indication of a trash enclosure on the aerial photo in Exhibit E. The holding of trash in Item 3B - Page 139
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 6 of 17
an enclosed back yard until pick-up by Palm Springs Disposal Service as proposed in the Appellant’s letter does not constitute a code-compliant trash enclosure.
The City notes that Exhibit G, received October 15, 2024, has a trash enclosure sketched in on sheet 1 at the southeast corner of Building “A” and a plan view sketch on sheet 3 of a trash enclosure comprised of chain link fence with some type of “slats”. This enclosure does not conform to the requirements of PSZC 93.07.02 because the code states the enclosure shall be of masonry block or decorative block or other durable material with texture and color that blends with the architecture of the building. Chain link fence with slats of unknown material (wood? plastic?) is not durable. Texture and color , which are to blend with the architecture; are not noted. Generally, chain link fence also does not blend with the architecture of the building. There is no clear paved path denoted for waste disposal service to retrieve or return the dumpsters to the enclosure from the street to the far corner of the back yard . There is no apparent provision for organic waste, as well as recyclable material and trash as only two squares presumed to be dumpsters are shown within the trash enclosure sketch . The condition must remain to ensure an adequate trash enclosure is provided as required by the zoning code.
Condition of Approval ENG 1: The Engineering Services Department recommends deferral of off-site improvement items (identified as “Deferred”) at this time due to lack of full improvements in the immediate area. The owner shall execute a street improvement covenant agreeing to construct all required street improvements upon the request of the City of Palm Springs City Engineer at such time as deemed necessary. The covenant shall be executed and notarized by the property owner(s) prior to approval of the Grading Plan or issuance of grading or building permits. A current title report; or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. A covenant preparation fee in effect at the time that the covenant is submitted shall be paid by the applicant.
Appeal demand of ENG 1. Mr. Praner should not be required to construct any off -site street improvements as a result of the subject project. Further, Mr. Praner has not received a copy of the “Covenant” stated in this condition.
Response to Appeal demand to remove condition ENG 1 : This condition simply outlines that some conditions are denoted as “deferred” and that a covenant for those that are deferred will not be required at the present time. This is a standard condition that applies to all projects for which conditions are imposed now but deferred for implementation later.
This condition is required any time a condition is “deferred” , and unless the applicant wishes to implement all the conditions at this time, this condition must remain.
Condition of Approval ENG 2: Any improvements within the public right -of-way require a City of Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. All improvements are subject to inspection and a 48-hour inspection notification is required.
Item 3B - Page 140
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 7 of 17
Appeal demand of ENG 2. As discussed above, there is no encroachment into the public right-of-way and thus no Encroachment Permit should be required.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 2 : Again, this is a standard condition. In the event there is damage caused to existing improvements in the ROW as a result of construction of the project, the repair of such requires an encroachment permit. Also, as noted above, the relocation of vehicular access onto the site and provision of code - required parking spaces will require improvements of curb, gutter and sidewalk and asphalt repair in the ROW. This standard condition must remain. Encroachment permits are for any new work or modification to existing street improvements (curbs, sidewalks, driveways, ramps, etc.). An encroachment permit has nothing to do with the canopy unless being modified. The encroachment permit indemnifies the City for work occurring in the public right of way.
The following COA’s specifically relate to impacts of the project to Palm Canyon Drive.
Condition of Approval ENG 3: Dedicate an additional 10 feet to provide the ultimate half street right-of-way width of 50 feet along the entire frontage, together with a property line - corner cut-back at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue, in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 105. A current title report; or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. A right-of-way plan check fee shall be paid by the applicant in effect at the time that the dedication is submitted.
Appeal demand of ENG 3. This “dedication” for the ROW appears to be an easement requirement which (as discussed above) the City lacks sufficient nexus to require.
Response to Appeal demand to remove Condition ENG 3 requires that the applicant provide a 10-foot right of way dedication / easement along South Palm Canyon Drive for street widening purposes. That condition requires the dedication at the present time but implementation of that easement would not occur until the City widened the street.
As part of efforts to resolve this matter prior to an appeal hearing, the City proposed to defer the 10’ right of way dedication/easement requirement until such time as a change in use for the proposed storage building occurs that causes increased traffic impact to the site (such as changing the existing storage building to a retail or other general commercial use).
The applicant’s description of the intended use of the proposed building has changed throughout the City’s processing of this application. Initially it was denoted as a “Proposed Display Structure” in the submittal dated August 1, 2022 , which indicates a more commercial/retail use. Later submittals denote it as “Proposed Storage”, while on Item 3B - Page 141
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 8 of 17
other submittals it is referred to as “Personal Storage” and then merely as “Proposed Structure”. In all iterations of the elevations of the building, it continued to be comprised very large display windows on three of the four sides, suggesting that the use may serve as commercial display space rather than personal storage. This has limited the City’s ability to settle and resolve outstanding matters. In light of this Staff and the appellant were unable to agree on a resolution prior to this hearing.
That said, Staff maintains the City has the legal right (the “nexus”) to secure the 10 -foot right-of-way dedication at the present time, with implementation deferred until future street widening occurs. (NOTE: This response applies to several other conditions listed below.)
Condition of approval ENG 4: The owner shall apply for an Encroachment Agreement from the Engineering Services Department and a Land Use Permit (From Planning Department) to allow the existing canopy and corner marquis sign along the frontage of the subject property to be maintained within that portion of the property to be dedicated as required for additional right-of-way. The agreement shall be executed by the owner prior to issuance of a grading, encroachment, or building permit. A current title report or a copy of a current tax bill and a copy of a vesting grant deed shall be provided to verify current property ownership. A preparation fee in effect at the time that the application is submitted shall be paid by the applicant.
Appeal demand of ENG 4. As discussed above, the existing canopy is not being modified, and thus it maintains its legal non -conforming status (i.e. it is “grandfathered”). Thus, there is no trigger for requiring an encroachment agreement nor a land use permit.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 4: The existing condition of encroachment of the canopy into the ROW represents a hazard to public safety and welfare. The liability of privately-owned structures encroaching into a public ROW requires an encroachment agreement. This condition cannot be waived or deferred. Furthermore, the monument (“Marquis”) sign is abandoned and is required to be removed pursuant to the City’s sign ordinance (PSZC 93.20.10 (A,6,b). This condition must remain.
And, as noted above with Condition PLN 2, Staff disagrees with the appellant’s assertions that the canopy will not be modified and will remain a legal non-conforming structure that is not required to secure an encroachment permit. The appellant contends that the steel shade canopy structure has existed on the site for many years and enjoys legal non - conforming structure rights. He further contends that because he is not “altering”, “adding to” or “enlarging” the canopy structure, an encroachment permit is not required to maintain this existing structure where it is. However, the Code provides that for a legal non - conforming structure, “any addition, alteration or enlargement thereto shall comply with all provisions of the zone.” (PSZC 94.05.03(A)).
From all available plans submitted by the applicant, the proposed new storage building will surround/enclose the two columns of the canopy. The applicant has also admitted Item 3B - Page 142
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 9 of 17
that existing electrical service to the canopy will be modified to provide electricity to the proposed addition beneath. The addition to the canopy is proposed within the footprint of the canopy structure. The canopy structure is being altered from an open parking shade structure to an enclosed building – regardless of the clever attempts to detail the building around the columns claiming to “not touch” the existing canopy columns or the underside of the canopy itself. The intent of the project is to alter the canopy structure and its use, from being an open parking lot shade structure to a n enclosed storage or merchandise display building. The proposed project is an alteration and addition to the existing shade canopy structure that has the effect of terminating the structure’s “grandfathered” status.
As such, the entire structure (canopy and new storage building) must secure an encroachment permit to legalize the altered structure which extends into the existing public right of way.
Condition of Approval ENG 5: Remove the existing curb & gutter and construct an 8 inch curb and gutter, 38 feet east of centerline along the entire frontage, with a 35 feet radius curb return and spandrel at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200, 206, and 340. Deferred.
Appeal demand of ENG 5. The project has no impact on ingress or egress, and creates no basis to require modification of the existing driveway.
Response to appeal demand to remove: ENG 5 is related to the dedication of easement for future street widening noted in ENG 3. It is not related to ingress or egress of the existing driveway. It is deferred because it is related to ENG 3.
It should be noted that t he project does have impact on vehicular ingress and egress because the amount and location of off-street parking is being modified by the proposed addition. Bay parking is proposed along Palo Verde Avenue which significantly impacts vehicular access and requires curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements. T he proposed addition interferes with on -site vehicular circulation leaving insufficient space for a drive aisle and landscape screening for vehicles parking in the spaces that take access from Palm Canyon Drive to turn around on site and head forward into the public street as required by Code (PSZC 93.06.00 (C,8). The added building square footage increases the amount of off-street parking required on the site. The sketches recently provided do not show a code-compliant on-site parking lot design. This condition must remain. The driveway approach and vehicular turnaround requirements of this condition are vital to ensure proper vehicular access and movement on the site.
Further, Staff disagrees with the app ellant’s attempt to minimize the impact of the proposed addition on the site. The project involves the construction of a new building and parking code requires code-compliant off-street parking for all of the uses thereon. The improvements to this site are significant and fully justify the parking/circulation improvements required.
Item 3B - Page 143
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 10 of 17
Condition of Approval ENG 6: Remove the existing cross gutter & spandrel and construct the south half of an 8 feet wide cross gutter and spandrel at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Palm Canyon Drive and Palo Verde Avenue with a flow line parallel with and located 38 feet east of the centerline of South Palm Canyon Drive in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200 and 206. Deferred.
Condition of Approval ENG 7: Construct a driveway approach that is at least 14 feet wide in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201 or 201A. An on-site vehicular turnaround area (hammerhead or similar configuration) shall be constructed and/or provided, in accordance with Zoning Code 93.06.00 C (8). Deferred.
Appeal demand of ENG 6. Through 11: Likewise, although “Deferred” none of these requirements can be imposed by the City given the size, nature, and scope of the Project. The City lacks sufficient nexus to require these improvements, all or most of which appear to be off-site improvements that the City improperly seeks to impose upon a private property owner, Mr. Praner, in exchange for approval of a 715 sq. ft. storage structure that falls entirely on his own property and i s not in any way open to the public.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 6, 7, & 9; See response to Appeal demand of ENG 3.
Condition of Approval ENG 8 Remove the existing sidewalk and construct a 8 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. Deferred.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 8 : The Code requires sidewalks in commercial zones to be a minimum of eight feet in width. The existing sidewalk does not meet this minimum standard. This condition is not required to be implemented until such time that the roadway widening outlined in ENG 3 is undertaken. For this reason, this too is proposed to be deferred as part of the scope of ENG 3.
Note: The proposed parking shown to take access from Palm Canyon Drive may require this condition to be implemented without deferral. T he proposed building interferes with vehicular circulation and parking on the site. Providing on-site turn-around for the parking spaces that are proposed to take access from Palm Canyon Drive is a code requirement.
This condition can only be deferred if the applicant can demonstrate provision of adequate parking elsewhere on the site such that the three spaces shown to take access from Palm Canyon Drive are not required at this time . The applicant must also demonstrate the project can provide adequate code-compliant off-street parking for all proposed uses on the site. According to the plans submitted, no such alternative parking is provided and the three spaces are presumed to be required along Palm Canyon Drive to support all Item 3B - Page 144
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 11 of 17
uses on the site. Alterations to existing street improvement to ensure safe and code - compliant vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress to off -street parking from Palm Canyon Drive are required.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 9 : See response to Appeal demand of Condition ENG 3.
Condition of Approval ENG 10: Construct pavement with a minimum pavement section of 5 inches asphalt concrete pavement over 4 inches crushed miscellaneous base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of propose d gutter to clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 340. (Additional pavement removal and replacement may be required upon review of existing pavement cross -sections, and to ensure grade breaks of the pavement cross -section do not occur within a travel lane.) If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section shall be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R" values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Deferred.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 10: See response to Appeal demand of Condition ENG 3 Again, this relates to the required specification for roadway asphalt when / if the City requires widening of the roadway some time in the future.
Condition of Approval ENG 11: Remove and replace existing asphalt concrete pavement where required, in accordance with applicable City standards.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 11: Off-site street improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk and asphalt as noted above. Cutting of the existing asphalt in the roadway to install the new curb, gutter and sidewalk necessitated by the change in vehicular access to the off -street parking must be replaced according to City standards as outlined in this condition. This condition must remain. See also response to Appeal demand of ENG 3.
ENG 12. Through 17. Like the conditions in ENG 6-11, the City lacks a basis to require these, given the size, nature and scope of the Project. These Conditions, however are not “deferred” and are being immediately required.
The City lacks sufficient nexus between these improvements and the Project to require these conditions of approval.
Staff disagrees with the appellant’s attempt to minimize the site improvements to indicate insufficient “nexus” to require that these conditions be fulfilled. The project involves altering the existing open shade canopy structure to create an enclosed building. It causes interruptions in the on-site vehicular circulation and parking, requiring new parking to be created elsewhere on the site and replacing rolled curb with standard 8-inch curb to prevent vehicles from driving onto the site and potentially hitting the proposed building. It Item 3B - Page 145
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 12 of 17
requires the addition of off-street parking spaces to meet the parking requirements of all uses on the site including the uses in the new enclosed building beneath the canopy. The relocated and new parking spaces which include new bay parking spaces along Palo Verde require modification of curb, gutter, sidewalk, replacement / patching of asphalt in the roadway ROW abutting the new bay parking and replaceme nt of very deteriorated asphalt on site. It also requires modification to curbs, sidewalks, and driveways on Palm Canyon Drive to provide proper vehicular access onto the site and prevent users of the proposed parking spaces there from backing out onto Palm Canyon Drive. There is clear nexus for the conditions imposed on this project.
Condition of Approval ENG 12: All broken or off grade street improvements along the project frontage shall be repaired or replaced.
Response to Appeal demand of ENG 12: The asphalt concrete on the site is very old , deteriorated and poorly maintained. Where it is severely deteriorated it must be replaced for the safe use of the lot by the public. This condition requires the applicant to remove and replace the damaged / deteriorated asphalt and existing damage to street improvements. Maintenance of typical street improvements is the responsibility of the owner of the property in front of which the improvements exist. This condition must remain.
Conditions 13 to 16 relate specifically to project impacts along PALO VERDE AVENUE
Condition of Approval ENG 13: Remove the existing curb cuts and construct a driveway approach with a minimum width of 14 feet in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 201 or 201A.
Response to Appeal demand of ENG 13: The proposed building addition interferes with vehicular circulation and parking on the site. The current rolled curb along the Palo Verde frontage of the lot would does not conform in that it allows vehicular access to the site closer to the intersection of Palm Canyon and Palo Verde that code allows (PSZC
93.06.00(C,15,c). Furthermore, allowing the rolled curb to remain while allowing the vehicular circulation space beneath the canopy to be eliminated and replaced w ith the proposed building creates a dangerous condition that allows vehicles to enter the site without adequate space on the site to turn around or maneuver or even potentially hit the proposed building. The condition is required to protect public safety and create safe, code-compliant vehicular access and movement on the site. (Note: the proposed addition of bay parking along Palo Verde in Exhibit D, will require this condition to be modified to a driveway approach wide enough to provide access to the parking spaces there.)
Condition of Approval ENG 14: Construct an 8 feet wide sidewalk behind the curb along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210.
Item 3B - Page 146
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 13 of 17
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 14: With the establishment of bay parking along Palo Verde Avenue, an accessibility -compliant public sidewalk along the entire frontage is required to be installed.
Condition of Approval ENG 15: Remove and replace existing asphalt concrete pavement where required, in accordance with applicable City standards.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 15: The existing pavement on the site is very deteriorated and poses a potential public hazard to those accessing the site.
Furthermore, the proposed creation of bay parking along Palo Verde Avenue to replace the parking and circulation eliminated b y the proposed alteration enclosing the shade canopy will require removal of existing asphalt pavement and replacement with decorative pavement. This condition is required.
Condition of Approval ENG 16: All broken or off grade street improvements along the project frontage shall be repaired or replaced.
Condition of approval ENG 17: All broken or off grade street improvements along the project frontage shall be repaired or replaced.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 16 and ENG 17: Like ENG 11 the relocation and reconfiguration of off-street parking will require pavement in the ROW to be removed, curb and gutter around parking areas to be installed, which in turn means the existing deteriorated asphalt and existing broken street improvements will need to be repaired or replaced. This condition must remain.
SANITARY SEWER
Condition of Approval ENG 1 8: All sanitary facilities shall be connected to the public sewer system. The existing sewer service to the property shall be used for new sanitary facilities. New laterals shall not be connected at manholes.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 1 8: Staff again disagrees with the appellant’s attempt to minimize the impact on the site caused by the proposed improvements. Although there are no sanitary facilities shown in the proposed new building, if they were to be added, they would need to be connected to the public sewer system in the manner outlined in this condition. This condition would be in effect now , but for practical purposes, would not be implemented until a change of use results in sanitary facilities being installed in the building.
Appeal demand to remove ENG 22 through 25 These conditions highlight the lack of understanding on the part of the City with regard to the nature and scope of the Project. There is no grading involved, whatsoever, nor (as a result) any issue with the changing runoff, with the project a nd thus these conditions should be removed.
Item 3B - Page 147
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 14 of 17
Condition ENG 22: In accordance with City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, Section 8.50.022 (h), the applicant shall post with the City a cash bond of eight hundred dollars ($800) (if there is disturbance of 5,000 square feet or more) at the time of issuance of grading permi t for mitigation measures for erosion/blowsand relating to this property and development.
Condition 23: I n cooperation with the California Agricultural Commissioner and the California Department of Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project, applicants for grading permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of soil will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved “Notification of Intent To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties” (Revised - RIFA Form CA-1) prior to approval of the Grading Plan (if required). The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at 6819 East Gage Avenue, Commerce, Ca 90040 (Phone (760)782 - 3271, (562)505-6415),
[email protected].
DRAINAGE
Condition 24: All stormwater runoff across the property shall be accepted and conveyed in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer and released to an approved drainage system. Stormwater runoff may not be released directly to the adjacent streets without first intercept ing and treating with approved Best Management Practices (BMPs).
Condition 25: The applicant shall accept and convey all stormwater runoff across the property and conduct the runoff to an approved drainage structure. On -site retention may be allowed on that portion of the property where historically, stormwater runoff is conveyed. All on-site grade slopes shall not be less than 0.5%.
If onsite retention is utilized, retention basin calculations shall be provided to the City Engineer. This information required prior to site plan approval.
Response to Appeal demand to remove conditions ENG 22 through 25. Staff again disagrees with the app ellant’s attempt to minimize the site improvements to indicate insufficient “nexus” to require that these conditions be fulfilled. The project involves altering an existing open shade canopy structure creating an enclosed building. T he creation of the enclosed building will require more parking to be added to the site. The proposed building interferes with the existing parking and vehicular circulation on the site.
The improvements to this site are significant and fully justify the required improvements set forth below.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 22. This is a standard condition on any project where there are existing paved areas removed, where new off -street parking is proposed and where new structures require trenching and excavation for footings. This Item 3B - Page 148
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 15 of 17
condition will only apply if 5,000 square feet or more of soil is disturbed by the project. At the present time, it is unclear how much of the site would be disturbed. As noted above, this project will involve more ground -disturbing activity than just erecting a 715 -square foot building. The project will require additional parking and fundamentally alter the vehicle circulation patterns on the site. There will also need to be substantial improvements to the lot’s deteriorated pavement. This condition must remain in order to address what could be substantial grading and ground-disturbing activity at the site.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 23. This is enforcement of regional and state regulations. The condition must remain. Again, we note that this condition will only apply if there is export of soil from the site. From communications with the applicant’s attorney, that is not anticipated.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 24. The existing asphalt which was most likely installed in the 40’s when the gas station was constructed may not meet current stormwater drainage requirements. The on -site improvements require that storm water be properly accepted and conveyed to meet current environmental codes and regulations.
This condition must remain.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 25. If grading and grade elevations of the surrounding paved area is altered to construct the proposed new building, proper handling and conveyance of stormwater is required. This condition must remain.
Appeal demand to remove ENG 26 through ENG 29 . Likewise these conditions do not apply given the nature and scope of the Project.
They should be removed, as well.
Condition ENG 26: Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development shall be backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115.
Condition ENG 27: All proposed utility lines shall be installed underground.
Condition ENG 28: Nothing shall be constructed or planted in the corner cut -off area of any intersection or driveway which does or will exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section 93.02.00, D.
Condition ENG 29: All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb shall have City approved deep root barriers installed in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 26: This is a standard condition for all projects. Staff understands from the applicant’s attorney that there is an existing underground power line to the canopy structure that would be utilized by the new building.
Item 3B - Page 149
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 16 of 17
Therefore, trenching and backfilling may not be required for this project, at which point this condition will have no practical effect. However, in the event that t here will be trenching to either connect the proposed new building to the existing electrical system or to improve or enlarge the existing underground line, it is appropriate to require that trenching and backfilling be done properly to City standards to avoid future differential settling of parking areas or sidewalks. This condition is valid and must remain.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 27 : Undergrounding utilities is a requirement of the City’s Municipal Code for any new construction of this nature. Based upon representation of the applicant’s attorney, the proposed utilities to the new building are already underground so this condition would have no practical impact on the immediate project. However, should additional utilities be installed, they mu st be undergrounded and this condition must remain.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 28 : The limitations of structures or landscape in the corner cut -off area at an intersection are standard throughout the City pursuant Zoning Code Section 93.02.00 (D). When a project of this nature is implemented on a parcel, these are standard conditions to which a developer must follow. Included in this condition must be the removal of the existing abandoned monument sign which is in the corner visibility cut -back area pursuant Zoning Code Section 93.20.10 (A,6,b) Freestanding sign structures shall be allowed to remain unused for a period not to exceed one year, after which such sign structure shall be removed . This sign has been unused for a period longer than one year.
Response to Appeal demand of ENG 29 : This is again, standard any time new landscaping is proposed in or around a public ROW. This condition must remain.
Appeal Demand to remove ENG 30 and ENG 31 . Likewise these conditions do not apply given the nature and scope of the project.
They should be removed, as well.
Condition ENG 30: A minimum of 48 inches of clearance for accessibility shall be provided on public sidewalks. Minimum clearance on public sidewalks shall be provided by either an additional dedication of a sidewalk easement if necessary and widening of the sidewalk, or by the relocation of any obstructions within the public sidewalk along the frontage of the subject property.
Condition ENG 31: All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends, traffic control devices, signing, striping, and street lights, associated with the proposed development shall be replaced as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 30; Sidewalks must conform to the ADA in terms of width, slope and cross slope as well as proper details where sidewalks meet a street corner. If the project proceeds, these existing non-conforming conditions must be brought into compliance; this is standard for all projects of this scale and larger anywhere Item 3B - Page 150
Architectural Review Committee Memo
Case #APPL-2024-0001: Appeal of Director’s decision – Addition at 1100 S. Palm Canyon Drive March 17, 2025 – Page 17 of 17
in the City. This condition must rema in, and as noted above, this project involves substantial alterations to the site and justifies these conditions.
Response to Appeal demand to remove ENG 31 This is a standard condition. If existing off-site improvements in the ROW are damaged as a result of the construction of the proposed building and relocation / reconfiguration of parking, the applicant must be responsible for its replacement. This condition simply requires the applicant to clean up when they damage existing improvement in the process of building the project. “Nexus” clearly exists for this condition.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
The proposed project which is the subject of this appeal is considered a “project” pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The action to approve the proposed project on July 30, 2024 has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303(a) of the CEQA Guidelines (Class 3, New construction or the conversion of small structures).
CONCLUSION:
Staff asserts that the conditions included in the approval of the project (Case AR -2024- 0046) dated July 30, 2024, are necessary, fair, reasonable and proportionate given the scope and impacts of the proposed project. The proposed project impacts vehicular circulation and access on and around the site and displaces vehicular circulation and access to paved areas where parking could be established. In displacing vehicular circulation and parking on the parcel, alternative access to parking areas from Palm Canyon Drive must be established in a code-compliant manner. The creation of new bay parking along Palo Verde Drive must also conform to the minimum requirements of the parking ordinance. The project creates significant impacts and there is clear nexus for requiring the Conditions of Approval. It is recommended that the ARC deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Director.
PREPARED BY: Ken Lyon, RA, Principal City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Christopher Hadwin, Director of Planning Services REVIEWED BY: William J “Jim” Priest, Deputy City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Appeal letter dated 8-13-24 with attached exhibits “A” through “I”.
3. Public Integrity Disclosure Form
4. Case 3.2161 MAA Approval 9-1-22 Rescinded (denied)
5. Lyon to Klisak e mail dated 12-10-24 summarizing meeting of 11 -27-24 w/attached site plan date stamped 11-27-24.
Item 3B - Page 151
Architectural Review Committee Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2025
City of Palm Springs
EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR: Items removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion are considered at this time.
2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
3. NEW BUSINESS:
A. AN APPEAL BY JOSEPH PRANEVICIUS AND THE CARNELIAN
RED TRUST DTD 6/6/2018, OWNERS / APPELLANTS, OF
CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RELATED TO A
DECISION OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR APPROVING CASE
AR-2024-0046, A MINOR ARCHITECTURAL APPLICATION
PROPOSING A ROUGHLY 715-SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO
AN EXISTING SHADE CANOPY STRUCTURE LOCATED AT
1100 SOUTH PALM CANYON DRIVE, (APN 508-292-001), ZONE
C-1, GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION, TOURIST
RESORT COMMERCIAL ("TRC") CASE APPL-2024-0001 of
CASE 2024-0046. (Ken Lyon)
RECOMMENDATION: Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Director.
Principal Planner Ken Lyon presented the staff report and answered questions of the committee.
Planning Director Christopher Hadwin spoke and answered questions of the committee.
The applicant was not present at the meeting.
Member Castro commented that there are not sufficient grounds for appeal as the requirements in the Conditions of Approval are prescribed by law. The Conditions of approval were imposed because the full required scope of the project was not sufficiently shown on the plans (that were part of the application).
Member Castro moved, seconded by member Thompson to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Director.
Ayes: O’DONNELL, BASTIN, MACDONALD, THOMPSON, WALSH, CASTRO Excused: THOMAS
ARCHITECTUAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORTS, REQUESTS AND COMMENTS: Principal Planner Lyon provided an update regarding the recruitment of new committee members.
PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT: Director Hadwin mentioned that the Zoning Code Team will be attending local outreach events on March 31stt and April 1st. Draft Zoning Maps and draft Zoning Districts are available for review, and Urban Design Guidelines are being drafted.
Item 3B - Page 152
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 10, 2025 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: A REQUEST BY THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS FOR ADOPTION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE (4/5
TH VOTE REQUIRED) AND FIRST READING
OF A REGULAR ORDINANCE TO AMEND PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL
CODE SECTIONS 2.05 AND 2.06 TO CLARIFY COUNCILMEMBER
REVIEW OF DECISIONS OF VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
AND ASSOCIATED TIMEFRAMES
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY:
This is a request for the adoption of an urgency ordinance and first reading of a regular ordinance to implement amendments to the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code (PSMC) to:
1. C orrect a loophole that precludes the City Council from initiating a Councilmember review of decisions made by non-Council appointed boards or commissions, such as the City’s Architectural Review Committee; and
2. Clarify the statutory period that an appeal or Councilmember review can be initiated after such decision is made.
The City Council directed staff to bring these ordinances forward at its meeting of July 9, 2025.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) W aive the full reading of the Ordinance text in its entirety, read by title only, and adopt urgency Ordinance No. _____, “ AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 2.06.030(a) AND (D) AND 2.05.040 OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING CITY COUNCIL’S AUTHORITY TO
REVIEW DECISIONS BY CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHOSE
MEMBERS ARE NOT APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, ALLOWING
NOTICE OF DECISIONS TO BE SERVED BY ELECTRONIC MAIL, AND Item 3C - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 2
Ordinance - Councilmember Call-Up of Board and Commission Decisions
ESTABLISHING A CONSISTENT 15 DAY DEADLINE BY WHICH TO APPEAL A DECISION BY A BOARD OR COMMISSION TO THE CITY COUNCIL”
2) I ntroduce by title only and waive further reading of Ordinance No. _____, “ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 2.06.030(a) AND (D) AND 2.05.040 OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING CITY COUNCIL’S
AUTHORITY TO REVIEW DECISIONS BY CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
WHOSE MEMBERS ARE NOT APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL,
ALLOWING NOTICE OF DECISIONS TO BE SERVED BY ELECTRONIC MAIL, AND ESTABLISHING A CONSISTENT 15 DAY DEADLINE BY WHICH TO
APPEAL A DECISION BY A BOARD OR COMMISSION TO THE CITY
COUNCIL.”
BACKGROUND:
PSMC Section 2.0 6.030 currently allows any member of the City Council to initiate a “review of any decision or action of a City Council appointed commission or board”. When initiated, such review sets aside the decision of the board or commission and elevates the item to the Council for review and decision.
During review of several projects currently under consideration by City boards and commissions, it was determined that the Code’s current language precludes City Councilmembers from initiating a review of decisions that are adjudicated by bodies that are not directly appointed by the Council – namely the Architectural Review Committee (ARC), which is appointed by the Planning Commission. In part, this omission stems from changes the City Council made in 2021 when it restructured the ARC and gave them additional decision- making authority that had previously been held by the Planning Commission. The PSMC was not updated in conjunction with those changes to account for their additional responsibility. These ordinances would restore authority to the City Council to initiate review of all decisions made by any subsidiary body within the City organization, regardless of whom they are appointed by.
In addition, the ordinances would clarify the statutory timeframe within which an appeal or Councilmember review can be initiated. PSMC 2.05.040 currently requires that an appeal or Councilmember review be filed within ten days of any notice being mailed to an applicant or within fifteen days where no notice is required. This has led to confusion about when and how appeals are filed. This amendment would provide a standard fifteen- day period from the date of decision within which an appeal or review could be filed.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Item 3C - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 3
Ordinance - Councilmember Call-Up of Board and Commission Decisions
In order to ensure that the City Council is afforded the appropriate level of oversight over the actions of all City boards and commissions, staff have recom mended a two -step approach to implementing the requested revisions.
First, City Council is being asked to adopt an urgency ordinance with immediate effect that will be in place for 45 days and provide the Council with immediate ability to initiate a review of decision of any City Council -created commission or board. This is being requested as an urgency item to avoid any situation where a decision of a subsidiary and appointed body is unable to be reviewed by the duly elected City Council of the City of Palm Springs while the regular ordinance is under consideration. The urgency ordinance requires adoption by a 4/5
th majority of the City Council.
Second, City Council is being asked to introduce and conduct first reading of a “regular” ordinance that would make these amendments permanent. If introduced at tonight’s meeting, the regular ordinance will require a second reading at a future meeting, and an additional 30 days after that in order to take effect, hence the need for the urgency ordinance.
The associated changes being requested to the appeal timeframe will correct a confusing differentiation in statutory timeframes within which an appeal or review can be initiated that has led to inconsistent timeframes being communicated and implemented. Providing a standard 15-day period will err on the side of providing the greatest time possible to the public and to the City Council to consider the options available to them under the PSMC.
The requested amendments are summarized below:
PSMC
Section
Proposed Revisions
2.06.030(a) Any member of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs may initiate a review of any decision or action of a City Council appointed created commission or board that is not otherwise before the City Council by giving notice thereof to the City Clerk. The Notice of Review shall be submitted to the City Clerk no later than fifteen days following the date of the action which is the subject of the review. The Notice of Review shall not be deemed an appeal of a commission or board decision or action and the hearing thereon shall be conducted pursuant to the provisions of this Section.
2.06.030(d) The action of the council appointed created commission or board shall be set aside and the City Council shall conduct a public hearing de novo on the review. All persons shall have the right to be heard by the City Council either in person, in writing, or by representative. Technical rules of evidence shall Item 3C - Page 3
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 4
Ordinance - Councilmember Call-Up of Board and Commission Decisions
not apply in proceedings under this Section. No party shall have the right to cross-examine any other party or witness except for good cause shown to the satisfaction of the City Council.
2.05.040 The notice required by Section 2.05.030 shall be filed no later than ten fifteen days following the date of mailing to appellant of written notice of the action from which the appeal is taken. If written notice of an action is required, such notice may be provided by any legal means, including electronic mail. or, if there is no such mailing and/or none is required, no later than fifteen days following the date of the action which is the subject of the appeal. The city clerk shall furnish a copy of the appeal to the respondent within five days after filing.
In sum, these changes will provide the City Council the appropriate level of oversight to ensure that the actions of all City commissions and boards reflect the broader goals and objectives set by the Council and will provide greater clarity on statutory t imeframes to initiate an appeal or review of board and commission decisions.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
:
The proposed amendments are 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 15061(b)(3) (that CEQA applies only to pr ojects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.) 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. The Amendments will result in policy and code changes providing additional oversight to the elected City Council for the City of Palm Springs over the actions of their appointed bodies.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
REVIEWED BY:
Department Director: Christopher Hadwin
Deputy City Manager: Flinn Fagg
City Attorney: Jeffrey Ballinger
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft Urgency Ordinance
B. Draft Ordinance
Item 3C - Page 4
ATTACHMENT A
Item 3C - Page 5
55575.18145\44062110.2
INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTIONS 2.06.030(a) AND (D) AND 2.05.040 OF THE
PALM SPRING S MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING CITY
COUNCIL’S AUTHORITY TO REVIEW DECISIONS BY CITY
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHOSE MEMBERS ARE
NOT APPOINTE D BY THE CITY COUNCIL, ALLOWING
NOTICE OF DECISIONS TO BE SERVED BY ELECTRONIC
MAIL, AND ESTABLISHING A CONSISTENT 15 DAY
DEADLINE BY WHICH TO APPEAL A DECISION BY A
BOARD OR COMMISSION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
(four-fifths (4/5) vote required)
City Attorney’s Summary
This urgency ordinance addresses a procedural loophole
unintentionally created with the formation of the Architectural Review Committee as an adju nct to the Planning
Commission, authorizes notice of decisions to be served by electronic mail, and ensures consistent application of the deadline by which to appeal a decision to the City Council .
City Council finds that it should have the same ability to review decisions of city boards and commissions whose members it does not appoint as it has to review the decisions of boards and commissions whose members it does appoint . This
Urgency Ordinance eliminates the distinction between boards and commission based on how its members are selected and affirms City Council authority to review all such decisions that are not otherwise before it.
WHEREAS, the City of Palm Springs is a charter city organized pursuant to Article XI of the California Constitution and pursuant to the authority so granted, the City has the power to make and enforce within its limits all ordinances and regulations with respect to municipal affairs not in conflict with its own charter. Such police powers include without limitation the ability to adopt regulations pertaining generally to the protection and promotion of the public health, safety, and welfare.
WHEREAS, City of Palm Springs Municipal Code (PSMC) Section 2.06.30(a) of Chapter 2.06 allows any member of the City Council to initiate a review of any decision or action of a City Council appointed commission or board that is not otherwise before the City Council by giving notice to the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, when Section 2.06.030 was enacted, the City Council appointed all members of all city boards and commissions;
WHEREAS, in 2021, the City Council created the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) to, among other things, issue decisions on Major Architectural Review applications as an adjunct to the City’s Planning Commission and whose members are appointed by the Planning Commission; and
Item 3C - Page 6
55575.18145\44062110.2
INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. _____
2 WHEREAS, Section 2.06.030 effectively precludes the City Council from reviewing decisions of members of boards or commissions that they do not directly appoint, which was not the intention of the section; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that decisions of all City boards and commissions, regardless of how its members are selected, have the ability to effect public health, safety, and welfare, and therefore cannot be delegated without the opportunity for review by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also finds that the manner in which notices of decisions of City boards and commissions are communicated to those entitled to such notice should include electronic mail to avoid unnecessary delay; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also finds that the deadlines by which to appeal a decision by City board or commission to the City Council should be the same for applicants and for members of the public to eliminate risk of confusion or inconsistent application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on this proposed Urgency Ordinance, including, but not limited to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that approval of this Urgency Ordinance would accomplish the following:
1. Update the City’s Municipal Code to eliminate a non-substantive distinction between City boards and commissions based on who appoints their members.
2. Ensure that decisions made by all City boards and commissions are subject to review by the publicly elected members of the City Council.
3. Update the manner by which the City may provide required notice of decisions to include electronic mail.
4. Standardize the deadlines by which an appeal or a request to review a decision by a City board or commission must be filed.
WHEREAS, City Council finds that closing the identified loophole and eliminating the risk of ambiguous or inconsistent deadlines is important to protect the public health, safety and welfare and should be addressed at City Council’s earliest opportunity; and
WHEREAS, t he proposed Interim Urgency Ordinance is not s ubject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15061(b)(3) (that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the Item 3C - Page 7
55575.18145\44062110.2
INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. _____
3 environment.) 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. The Amendments will result in policy and code changes providing additional oversight to the elected City Council for the City of Palm Springs over the actions of their appointed bodies.;
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The findings and determinations reflected above are true and correct and are incorporated by this reference as the cause and foundation for the action taken by and through this Urgency Ordinance. The City Council hereby finds that this Urgency Ordinance is necessary for the current and immediate protection of the public health, safety and welfare of the City and its residents so that, SECTION 2. Amendment to PSMC. P SMC Chapter 2.06 , BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS – GENERAL PROVISIONS, is amended as follows:
Section 2.06.030, Councilmember review of decisions
(a) Any member of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs may initiate a review of any decision or action of a City Council appointed created commission or board that is not otherwise before the City Council by giving notice thereof to the City Clerk. The Notice of Review shall be submitted to the City Clerk no later than fifteen days following the date of the action which is the subject of the review.
The Notice of Review shall not be deemed an appeal of a commission or board decision or action and the hearing thereon shall be conducted pursuant to the provisions of this Section.
. . .
(d) The ac
tion of the council appointed created commission or board shall be set aside and the City Council shall conduct a public hearing de novo on the review.
All persons shall have the right to be heard by the City Council either in person, in writing, or by representative. Technical rules of evidence shall not apply in proceedings under this Section. No party shall have the right to cross-examine any other party or witness except for good cause shown to the satisfaction of the City Council.
SECT
ION 3. Amendment to PSMC. PSMC Chapter 2.05, APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL, is amended as follows:
Section 2.05.040 Time of filing
The notice required by Section 2.05.030 shall be filed no later than ten fifteen days following the date of mailing to appellant of notice of the action from which the appeal is taken. If written notice of an action is required, such notice may be provided by any legal means, including electronic mail. or, if there is no such mailing and/or none is required, no later than fifteen days following the date of the Item 3C - Page 8
55575.18145\44062110.2
INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. _____
4 action which is the subject of the appeal. The city clerk shall furnish a copy of the appeal to the respondent within five days after filing.
S
ECTION 4. Interim Urgency. This Ordinance is an interim urgency ordinance adopted pursuant to the authority granted to the City of Palm Springs by Government Code Section 65858, and is for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare. The facts constituting the urgency include:
1. The risk of a board or commission making a decision before a new ordinance closing the identified loophole would become effective and that would therefore not be subject to City Council review.
2. The City finds and declares that this interim urgency ordinance is a reasonable and necessary measure designed to protect the important public purpose of the preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare.
SECTION 5. Compliance with CEQA . Th e City Council finds that this In terim Urgency Ordinance 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 15061(b)(3) (that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.) 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. The Amendments will result in policy and code changes providing additional oversight to the elected City Council for the City of Palm Springs over the actions of their appointed bodies.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any sente nce, clause, or phrase of this Interim Urgency Ordinance, or any part thereof , is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentence, clause, or phrase be declared unconstitutional.
SECTION 7. Effective Date . This Interim Urgency Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption if adopted by at a least four -fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council and shall be in effect for forty-five (45) days from the date of adoption, unless extended by the City Council as provided for in the Government Code.
SECTION 8. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Interim Urgency O rdinance and cause it, or a summary of it, to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published within the City of Palm Springs.
SECTION 9. Report. City staff is instructed to notify members of the City Council of any decisions made by a City board or commission whose members are not selected by the City Council, which notice will serve as a report referenced by Government Code Section 65858(d) describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition that led to this Ordinance’s adoption.
Item 3C - Page 9
55575.18145\44062110.2
INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. _____
5 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PALM SPRINGS CITY COUNCIL THIS ___TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025.
RON deHARTE
MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA PREE, MMC, CERA
CITY CLERK
Item 3C - Page 10
55575.18145\44062110.2
INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. _____
6 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 c
ertify that Ordinance No. ____ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on SEPTEMBER xx, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
N
OES:
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 ______________, 2025.
Brenda Pree, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
Item 3C - Page 11
■
ATTACHMENT B
Item 3C - Page 12
55575.18145\44115803.1
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 2.06.030(a) AND
(D) AND 2.05.040 OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL
CODE, REGARDING CITY COUNCIL’S AUTHORITY TO
REVIEW DECISIONS BY CITY BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS WHOSE MEMBERS ARE NOT
APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, ALLOWING NOTICE
OF DECISIONS TO BE SERVED BY ELECTRONIC MAIL ,
AND ESTABLISHING A CONSISTENT 15 DAY DEADLIN E
BY WHICH TO APPEAL A DECISION BY A BOARD OR
COMMISSION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
City Attorney’s Summary
This ordinance addresses a procedural loophole
unintentionally created with the formation of the Architectural Review Committee as an adju nct to the Planning
Commission, authorizes notice of decisions to be served by electronic mail, and ensures consistent application of the deadline by which to appeal a decision to the City Council .
City Council finds that it should have the same ability to review decisions of city boards and commissions whose members it does not appoint as it has to review the decisions of boards and commissions whose members it does appoint . This
Ordinance eliminates the distinction between boards and commission based on how its members are selected and
affirms City Council authority to review all such decisions that are not otherwise before it.
WHEREAS, the City of Palm Springs is a charter city organized pursuant to Article XI of the California Constitution and pursuant to the authority so granted, the City has the power to make and enforce within its limits all ordinances and regulations with respect to municipal affairs not in conflict with its own charter. Such police powers include without limitation the ability to adopt regulations pertaining generally to the protection and promotion of the public health, safety, and welfare.
WHEREAS, City of Palm Springs Municipal Code (PSMC) Section 2.06.30(a) of Chapter 2.06 allows any member of the City Council to initiate a review of any decision or action of a City Council appointed commission or board that is not otherwise before the City Council by giving notice to the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, when Section 2.06.030 was enacted, the City Council appointed all members of all city boards and commissions;
WHEREAS, in 2021, the City Council created the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) to, among other things, issue decisions on Major Architectural Review applications as an adjunct to the City’s Planning Commission and whose members are appointed by the Planning Commission; and
Item 3C - Page 13
55575.18145\44115803.1
ORDINANCE NO. _____
2 WHEREAS, Section 2.06.030 effectively precludes the City Council from reviewing decisions of members of boards or commissions that they do not directly appoint, which was not the intention of the section; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that decisions of all City boards and commissions, regardless of how its members are selected, have the ability to effect public health, safety, and welfare, and therefore cannot be delegated without the opportunity for review by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also finds that the manner in which notices of decisions of City boards and commissions are communicated to those entitled to such notice should include electronic mail to avoid unnecessary delay; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also finds that the deadlines by which to appeal a decision by City board or commission to the City Council should be the same for applicants and for members of the public to eliminate risk of confusion or inconsistent application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on this proposed Ordinance, including, but not limited to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that approval of this Ordinance would accomplish the following:
1. Update the City’s Municipal Code to eliminate a non-substantive distinction between City boards and commissions based on who appoints their members.
2. Ensure that decisions made by all City boards and commissions are subject to review by the publically elected members of the City Council.
3. Update the manner by which the City may provide required notice of decisions to include electronic mail.
4. Standardize the deadlines by which an appeal or a request to review a decision by a City board or commission must be filed.
WHEREAS, City Council finds that closing the identified loophole and eliminating the risk of ambiguous or inconsistent deadlines is important to protect the public health, safety and welfare and should be addressed at City Council’s earliest opportunity; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") ( Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15061(b)(3) (that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.) 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. The Item 3C - Page 14
55575.18145\44115803.1
ORDINANCE NO. _____
3 Amendments will result in policy and code changes providing additional oversight to the elected City Council for the City of Palm Springs over the actions of their appointed bodies;
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The findings and determinations reflected above are true and correct and are incorporated by this reference as the cause and foundation for the action taken by and through this Ordinance.
SECTION 2. Amendment to PSMC. P SMC Chapter 2.06 , BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS – GENERAL PROVISIONS, is amended as follows:
Section 2.06.030, Councilmember review of decisions
(a) Any member of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs may initiate a review of any decision or action of a City Council appointed created commission or board that is not otherwise before the City Council by giving notice thereof to the City Clerk. The Notice of Review shall be submitted to the City Clerk no later than fifteen days following the date of the action which is the subject of the review.
The Notice of Review shall not be deemed an appeal of a commission or board decision or action and the hearing thereon shall be conducted pursuant to the provisions of this Section.
. . .
(d
) The action of the council appointed created commission or board shall be set aside and the City Council shall conduct a public hearing de novo on the review.
All persons shall have the right to be heard by the City Council either in person, in writing, or by representative. Technical rules of evidence shall not apply in proceedings under this Section. No party shall have the right to cross-examine any other party or witness except for good cause shown to the satisfaction of the City Council.
S
ECTION 3. Amendment to PSMC. PSMC Chapter 2.05, APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL, is amended as follows:
Section 2.05.040 Time of filing
The notice required by Section 2.05.030 shall be filed no later than ten fifteen days following the date of mailing to appellant of notice of the action from which the appeal is taken. If written notice of an action is required, such notice may be provided by any legal means, including electronic mail. or, if there is no such mailing and/or none is required, no later than fifteen days following the date of the action which is the subject of the appeal. The city clerk shall furnish a copy of the appeal to the respondent within five days after filing.
Item 3C - Page 15
55575.18145\44115803.1
ORDINANCE NO. _____
4 SECTION 4. Compliance with CEQA. The City Council finds that this Or dinance 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 15061(b)(3) (that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.) 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. The Amendments will result in policy and code changes providing additional oversight to the elected City Council for the City of Palm Springs over the actions of their appointed bodies.
SECTION 5. Severability. If any sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance, or any part thereof , is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this o rdinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentence, clause, or phrase be declared unconstitutional.
SECTION 7. Effective Date . This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days following its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PALM SPRINGS CITY
COUNCIL THIS ___TH DAY OF ________________ 2025.
RON deHARTE
MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA PREE, MMC, CERA
CITY CLERK
Item 3C - Page 16
55575.18145\44115803.1
ORDINANCE NO. _____
5 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 c
ertify that Ordinance No. ____ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on SEPTEMBER xx, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
N
OES:
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 ______________, 2025.
Brenda Pree, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
Item 3C - Page 17
■
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: S EPTEMBER 10, 2025 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ADVANCE WORK ON THE PALM
SPRINGS CONVENTION CENTER MODERNIZATION PROJECT AND
DIRECT STAFF TO CONTINUE WITH PROJECT PLANNING
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Wayne Olson, Chief Economic Development Officer
SUMMARY:
The Palm Springs Convention Center (PSCC) Modernization Project (Project) is generating significant activity and staff resources . This report summarizes that activity and seeks approvals as described below.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. A uthorize the City Manager to continue advancing work on of the Palm Springs Convention Center Modernization Project and direct staff to continue with Project planning; and,
2. Find that the recommended actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15262 and 15301, Class 1.
BUSINESS PRINCIPAL DISCLOSURE:
None required.
BACKGROUND:
The PSCC Modernization Project (the “Project”) includes two major elements: 1) The design, renovation, expansion and construction of the PSCC facility ; and 2) the design and construction of the “urban connectors” between downtown and the PSCC. To date, these project elements have been reviewed by Council in concept. As the project moves from the conceptual phase to the implementation phase, the demand on City resource s (e.g. staff time and administrative resources) ramps up. T his report seeks Council approval to continue with the implementation of the Project.
For the sake of clarity, any and all future actions that are required by law, regulations and local code will continue to come to Council for review and consideration throughout the lifecycle of the Project. This action serves as a check-in with Council as the project moves Item 3D - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 2
Palm Spring Convention Center Modernization Project
into a more involved, technical implementation phase. As the Project progresses, s taff will continue to return with updates.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
30-60 Day Outlook
The next immediate steps in the project schedule is issuing the RFQ for the Owner’s Representative contract and present to the Council for review and consideration in November 2025. In addition, the RFQ for the Architecture/Engineering contract will be issued for the Council’s review and consideration also in November of 2025. Later in September, staff will issue the RFQ for the Urban Design and Distract Brand Development contract with a targeted review date by Council in December 2025.
Additional detail on these RFQs can be found below.
City Manager Stakeholder and Working Groups
Since January of 2025, the City Manager’s Stakeholder Group has been meeting to oversee the broad conceptualization of the overall PSCC District and Facility modernization plans. In recent months, the group has begun to focus on the specifics of implementation.
In establishing the Stakeholder Group, several working groups were created as follows:
1. The Capital Improvements Working Group – responsible for advising the City on the Convention Center building itself as well as the grounds surrounding the Convention Center (East Lot, and Jackie Lee Houston Plaza, east lawn).
2. The Urban Design and Connectivity Working Group – responsible for advising the City on the Urban “connectors” between downtown and the Convention Center.
This includes advising the City on urban design as well as the development and branding of the district identity.
3. The TID Working Group – responsible for researching and exploring using a Tourism Infrastructure District (TID) as a potential revenue source for bond debt financing.
4. The Public Finance Working Group – responsible for the interface of all working groups and financing of the project, modeling sources and uses, and sound fiscal oversight of City resources in support of the project.
The Stakeholder group continues to meet monthly, and the working groups meet between the larger group meetings (except for the August break). At its most recent meeting on September 3, 2025, several initiatives were recommended by the working groups as the project moves from concept to implementation summarized below.
Item 3D - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 3
Palm Spring Convention Center Modernization Project
The Capital Improvements Working Group
The Capital Improvements working group has met several times and reviewed the previous capital improvements schedules, worked with the City’s convention center consultant, Conventional Wisdom, OVG, ASM Global and staff to update the convention center improvements and begin work on hiring an Owner’s Representative (Owner’s Rep) and the Architect of record for the convention center facility itself.
The Capital Improvements Working Group has endorsed the solicitation of an Owner’s Rep and Architect for oversight of the PSCC Modernization Project. They will continue to assist the City’s Economic Development and Engineering Departments in managing the selection process, community involvement, and will continue to act as liaison between the City, the Stakeholder Group and the greater community. Both the Owner’s Rep and Architect RFQ’s are further outlined below.
The Urban Design and Connectivity Working Group
The Urban Design and Connectivity Working G roup also met several times. The main focus was a walking tour of the district with a consultant who then helped design the scope of the Urban Design RFQ, further detailed below. The walking tour, along with review of historic urban design plans for district development, yielded several areas of focus for the Urban Design team.
The Urban Design working group has endorsed the solicitation of an Urban Design team, which would possess experience with several urban design disciplines, as well as expertise to identify, develop and create brand identity and marketing assets for future use once the improvements and district modernization is finalized. And like the Capital Improvement working group, this team will continue to assist the City’s Economic Development and Engineering Departments in managing the selection process, community involvement, and will continue to act as liaison between the City, the Stakeholder Group and the greater community.
The TID Working Group
The TID Working Group was tasked with researching the possible formation of a tourism infrastructure district (TID). PS Resorts has hired Civitas, a well-known finance consulting firm, to assist with this study . There are several steps to the formation of such a district that still require additional study, research and Council review.
Public Finance
The Public Finance working group was tasked with proposing financial models for the project, and developing the sources and uses more fully as the project evolves. To date, the working group has analyzed the affordability using an estimated $125M project budget. Additional details are provided below in the Fiscal Impact portion of this report.
Item 3D - Page 3
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 4
Palm Spring Convention Center Modernization Project
Staff will provide updates and seek authorizations from Council as the financing model of the project matures.
The Public Finance group has recommended continued evolution of the financial models, working with Kristopher Mooney, City Finance Director and Suzanne Harrell, of Harrell and Associates, the City’s Financial Advisor.
Communications
The City’s Communications team will be developing a communications strategy in support of the Convention Center Modernization & Connectivity Project. The plan will need to include a coordinated stakeholder and community engagement campaign for the Convention Center's renovation, expansion, and connectivity improvements. Together, these efforts will help ensure broad awareness and provide meaningful opportunities.
Owner’s Representation, Architecture and Urban Design Solicitations
Based on the pace of the Project, as well as with endorsements from the Stakeholder Group, the City is in the process of issuing three Request for Qualifications in relation to the Project. They are summarized below:
1) Request for Qualifications 13- 25 Convention Center Renovation and Expansion Project - Owner’s Representative
The City of Palm Springs is seeking to contract with a firm to provide owner representative services for the PSCC Renovation and Expansion Project that is expected to be delivered in multiple stages. The sequence of the work is structured so that renovations and repairs can be bundled, issued for solicitation, and executed quickly. Subsequent stages will design a more challenging expansion to the east side of the complex and ultimately update the PSCC master plan, both of which are more time intensive and w ill require public engagement. A further advantage of the multistage implementation strategy is its alignment with the funding program. The award target for this RFQ is November of 2025.
The posting of this RFQ was on September 4th, 2025. The goal date for review by Council and award of this RFQ is in November of 2025.
2) Request for Qualifications 16- 25 Convention Center - Architectural and Engineering Services
The City of Palm Springs seeks to obtain professional architectural and engineering services to provide design and construction administration services for the Palm Springs Convention Center Renovation and Expansion Project that is expected to be delivered in three stages.
Item 3D - Page 4
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 5
Palm Spring Convention Center Modernization Project
The scope of work is to conduct an evaluation of the existing facility and work with facility management to update the previous capital improvements program. This effort will identify additional building areas, systems and equipment requiring updates or replacement. The selected architect will also develop an updated design palette, integrate updates into the existing complex and set new design standards for future development.
The expansion project will focus on the East Expansion, aimed at increasing the facility’s capacity and enhancing its functionality to better accommodate large- scale events and future growth. This expansion is intended to remain within the existing property boundaries on which the current building resides and may or may not include a terrace and landscape improvements. In addition, this stage will focus on updating the facility’s long-range Master Plan to guide future development, integration with surroundi ng districts, and alignment with broader city planning goals.
The posting of this RFQ was on September 4th, 2025. The goal date for review by Council and award of this RFQ is in November of 2025.
3) Request for Qualifications 14- 25 Urban Design Services for Convention Center Connector
The City, together with its hospitality stakeholders, has expressed the intent to establish an identifiable, branded “Convention District” that links the PSCC with adjacent properties and the downtown core while enhancing the pedestrian experience, resolving traffic conflicts, and providing graphic continuity through placemaking and wayfinding.
The City of Palm Springs is soliciting qualifications from urban design and landscape architecture teams, along with brand and marketing teams, to lead the planning and design of a district scale urban connectivity strategy that links the PSCC with adjacen t properties and the downtown core and identifies the PSCC District in harmony with the world class destination of Palm Springs.
The firm would be responsible for developing a comprehensive design vision and implementation strategy for an urban connector that enhances pedestrian, bicycle, and multimodal access between the PSCC and its surrounding downtown context. In addition, a major component of work product will include branding and marketing specialists integrated with the urban design and project team that establishes a convention center district identity that will visually connect the user and the PSCC from the facility to downtown.
The posting of this RFQ is targeted for September 25th, 2025. The goal date for review by Council and award of this RFQ is in December of 2025.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The proposed approval of further studies to implement the Palm Springs Convention Center Modernization Project is a request for planning studies of a future project.
Item 3D - Page 5
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 6
Palm Spring Convention Center Modernization Project
Planning and feasibility studies are statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, section 15262 – Feasibility & Planning Studies. Under this exemption, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions that an agency has not approved, adopted, or funded does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration. Here, the action before the City Council merely directs staff to undertake studies to determine the feasibility and potential impacts (including environmental impacts) of the Convention Center Modernization Project. Undertaking these studies is not a commitment to adopt this or any other Modernization Project, and the stud ies themselves will not lead directly to the implementation of any specific project. The action taken only directs staff to study and review the potential for a possible future approval of the project. Undertaking these studies will have no legally binding effect on later activities. As such, this action is exempt from CEQA pursuant to this exemption. Should the proposed studies be initiated, all subsequent actions related to the proposed Modernization Project would be subject to the appropriate CEQA review.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:
Approval of this action supports City Council priority for Economic Development to support a vibrant economy, including tourism.
FISCAL IMPACT:
City Consultant Costs
The City continues to engage Conventional Wisdom and its communications consultant, Daley Strategies in support of the PSCC Modernization Project. As project contractors ramp up in the next few years, participation by both Conventional Wisdom and Daley Strategies is expected to continue.
In FY 2026 staff has budgeted roughly $300,000 for the scope of work conducted by Conventional Wisdom and Daley Strategies. Project specific consultants will be funded through a variety of sources including General Fund, Measure J and other sources.
Sources that are eligible to be reimbursed by any future debt issuance will be reimbursed once the financing is triggered for the Project (approximately late CY2026 = FY27).
To summarize, the team of consultants includes the following:
Item 3D - Page 6
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 7
Palm Spring Convention Center Modernization Project
Table 3 – Consultant Contracts
Topic Company Est. FY 26 Budget
Program Management Conventional Wisdom $150,000
Community Outreach Daley Strategies TBD
TID Research Civitas Paid by PS Resorts
Owner’s Representation – PSCC TBD – RFQ Pending TBD
Architect – PSCC TBD- RFQ Pending TBD
Urban Design and Branding TBD – RFQ Pending TBD
City Financial Advisor Harrell & Co. Advisors Ongoing contract City bond underwriter TBD TBD
Design and Construction Costs
The preliminary budget that City staff has been working with is $125M for the entire modernization project, which includes modernization of the PSCC, its grounds, and the “urban connectors.” As the project evolves from concept to implementation to construction, the costs will increase or decrease relative to project discoveries, existing conditions, and other typical variations in a project of this scope. The $125M is inclusive of design and a 10% contingency on both portions of the project.
The PSCC facility portion of the project is contemplated to be completed in two serial phases (including an update to the Master Plan). The urban connectors will be completed during the same time. All phases are targeted to be completed by late 2027/early 2028.
The table below illustrates the approximate costs of the overall project:
Table 1 – Project Financial Overview
Phase Estimated Budget Anticipated Source
Design $9.9M Measure J (reimbursed
by future debt issuance)
PSCC Renovations $38.5M Bonds
PSCC Expansion $52.8M Bonds
Urban connectors design and construction $24.2M Bonds
Total $125.5M
Sources for these costs continue to be analyzed, but will likely include General Fund, Measure J and potential revenue capture models. Funds expended by Measure J will be reimbursed by future debt issuance.
As the overall financial model evolves, staff will return to Council with updates and for the Council’s review and consideration.
SUMMARY:
This report summarizes the various activities that are transpiring as a result of the Modernization Project. Therefore, the report is requesting that the City Council to continue Item 3D - Page 7
City Council Staff Report
September 10, 2025 -- Page 8
Palm Spring Convention Center Modernization Project
advancing work and Project Planning of the Palm Springs Convention Center Modernization Project.
All future actions required by law, regulations and local code will continue to come to Council for their review and consideration throughout the lifecycle of the Project.
REVIEWED BY:
Procurement and Contracting Manager: Tabitha Richards
Director of Finance: Kristopher J. Mooney
Chief Economic Development Officer: Wayne Olson
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Item 3D - Page 8