Palm Desert staff, consultants propose numeric 'objective' standards to protect hillsides; council urges ridgeline clarity

Consultants for the City of Palm Desert told the City Council on March 27 they are preparing objective design standards for hillside residential areas to replace subjective code language that currently leaves key decisions to discretionary review. "Objective design standards are measurable and they're quantifiable," said John Kalisky of John Kalisky Architects, who led the presentation with consultant Ami Bhatt and planning staffer Nick Maloney.

Kalisky said the goal is to create clear, numerical benchmarks that applicants and decision makers can apply consistently. He highlighted areas for possible standards: grading and limits on cut-and-fill, definition and treatment of ridgelines, pad size and coverage limits, maximum dwelling size, access-road standards and landscape and lighting controls to limit visual impact.

The consultants used the city GIS to map privately and publicly owned hillside parcels and noted that "we know that there are a couple of 100 sites" that are privately owned, though staff said not all are buildable because of access, slope and lack of public roads. Kalisky called out a conflict in the city's rules: a 35% pad-coverage allowance can, on large pads, produce very large building footprints that are inconsistent with a commonly discussed 4,000-square-foot dwelling cap. "We need to reconcile those two," staff said.

Council members pressed for clarity on several points. One council member asked that the West Hills be a priority and said protecting the ridgeline should be "better defined" rather than left to subjective interpretation. Another asked whether the council could remove the precise-plan discretionary exception while the city develops objective standards; staff responded that removing that process would require an ordinance amendment and city attorney review and warned that a broad prohibition could be perceived as a moratorium under state housing law.

Staff also discussed the possible effects of state law changes. "Senate Bill 9 does allow for administrative subdivisions," staff said, explaining that SB 9 can enable urban lot splits but that eligibility depends on factors such as access to a legal dedicated right of way. A city official added that litigation over SB 9's reach to charter cities is pending and being watched.

Questions about private roads arose: staff explained many West Hills roads were privately constructed and maintained under historic small-tract subdivisions; building new private roads or upgrading access would have to meet any city standards the council adopts and would be evaluated for grading and disturbance impacts.

Members repeatedly referenced the Hagedorn House as an example of a large hillside project and asked how master-planned communities like Bighorn and Stone Eagle — which operate under their own design guidelines — will be treated; staff said those existing design guidelines would be respected while the hillside standards are reconciled.

No formal action or votes were taken; staff said they will proceed with technical work, produce a testing of buildable lots, coordinate field tours that comply with Brown Act rules, and return with drafts as part of the Unified Development Code update.

The council's direction was procedural and guidance-focused: protect view sheds and ridgelines where council prefers it, tighten grading and coverage rules, reconcile numeric limits (coverage vs. square footage), and have staff and consultants further analyze constraints and legal issues before any ordinance changes are proposed.

The study session moved on after the presentation; staff will return with more detailed recommendations and draft ordinance language for future council consideration.