Desert Hot Springs council gives first reading to 64‑unit affordable housing project and agrees to long‑term impact‑fee deferral

The Desert Hot Springs City Council on May 6 gave first reading approval to a package of entitlements for a proposed 64‑unit deed‑restricted affordable housing project, Crossing on Camino Campanero, and later voted to defer the project's impact fees to help the developer meet financing deadlines.

Patricia Deomez, the city's principal planner, told council the request includes a general plan amendment, development permit and design review for a vacant 5‑acre site about 600 feet east of Palm Drive. She said the proposal would change the site from residential high density to residential medium density and deliver a 100% affordable development with a mix of one‑, two‑ and three‑bedroom apartments and a single‑story 3,986‑square‑foot community building with amenities including a pool, community garden and tot lot. Deomez said the project requests one concession allowed under state density bonus law to reduce minimum unit sizes for one‑ and two‑bedroom apartments to 614 and 849 square feet respectively.

Mark Irving of Blue Companies, the project applicant, spoke in support and answered council questions about site design and pedestrian access. A nearby resident asked whether a walkway to an adjacent park would be preserved; staff said no walkway was currently designed but the issue could be considered.

Council voted unanimously to approve the entitlements and give the ordinance its first reading; the ordinance is scheduled to return May 20 for second reading and adoption.

Later in the meeting the council considered a separate administrative item in which the applicant requested a 55‑year deferral of city impact fees for the project. Staff calculated the impact‑fee total at roughly $651,136 (about $10,748 per unit). Developer Mark Irving described the requested mechanism as a loan secured by a lien on the property, noting the deferral would allow the project to capture additional tax‑credit equity and to meet a May financing timeline. Council members debated public‑safety and park funding implications if fees are deferred.

Council approved the 55‑year deferral motion with one dissenting vote (Mayor Pro Tem Gardner opposed). The city attorney clarified the action on the agenda is a deferral request, not a flat waiver. Council directed staff and the developer to finalize the deferral paperwork so the project can meet upcoming tax‑credit application deadlines.

Next steps: the zoning ordinance will return for a second reading and formal adoption on May 20. The developer and staff will finalize the deferral agreement and lien language for council review and recordation.