HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 05-01 EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS 2005 i
ORDINANCE NO. 1098
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT,
SECTIONS 25.56, 25.72 AND 25.73.
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the
25�h day of August, 2005, hold a dully noticed public hearing to consider
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. 2344, has
recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the `City of
Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 05-52," in that the Director of Community Development has determined
that the project is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council
did find the following facts to justify their approval as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public
health, safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings
of the City Council in this case.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit "A" is hereby approved.
3. The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to
publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general
circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California,
and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption.
ORDINANCE NO. 1098
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this 81h
day of September. 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BENSON, FERGUSON, KELLY, SPIEGEL, and CRITES
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
BUFORD'A. CRITES, Mayor
ATTEST:
CHELLE D. KLAS EN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
-r
7
ORDINANCE NO. 1098
EXHIBIT "A"
That Municipal Code Section 25.73.019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence
which reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of
substantial character taken or is such construction should lapse for more
than six months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
"25.56.491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects.
In phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance
or adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall
expire one year following the final approval by the City Building
Department of the most recent phase of the project unless an extension of
time is requested by the applicant and approved by the Planning
Commission. Planning Commission may approve up to a one year
/ extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is issued
and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site
which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of occupancy is
issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit application, or
the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of occupancy is required;
provided that a use permit for a public utility installation my be valid for a longer period
is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of the permit, the
applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with the Planning
Commission.
3
Ordinance No. 1098
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: Approval of an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to
expiration;of application approvals on phased projects.
SUBMITTED BY: eve Sith;Planning-Manager
MEETING DATE
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert El CONTINUED TO
CASE NO: ZOA 05-01 t!1 PASWTO2NDREADING C�-
DATE: August 25, 2005Passed Ord. No. 1098 to second reading, as amen e
reflect a one-year expiration (instead of two years).
CONTENTS: 44=1 (Ferguson No)
Staff Recommendation
Background and Discussion
Draft Ordinance No. 1098
Planning Commission Minutes of July 19, 2005
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2344
Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 19, 2005
Staff Recommendation:
Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 1098 to second reading
approving Case No. ZOA 05-01.
Background:
June 7, 2005 Planning Commission directed staff to process a code amendment to
clarify how time extensions should be handled on phased projects and to insert an
omitted line of text into Municipal Code Section 25.72.110.
A public hearing was held by Planning Commission July 19, 2005. No one spoke
in favor or opposition to the amendment. Commission on a 4-0 vote (Commissioner
Lopez absent) adopted its Resolution No. 2344 recommending to the City Council
approval of the amendment.
Ordinance No. 1098
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 2
August 25, 2005
HISTORY OF RELATED CODE AMENDMENTS:
In April 1981 the City amended the Municipal Code as it related to time extensions
for conditional use permits, variances and adjustments deleting the requirement for
new public hearings at time of extension consideration.
In 1982 the City enacted the "precise plan" section of the Municipal Code which
includes its own separate provisions relating to expiration of approvals.
In 1982 the City also enacted a "catch all" code section (Municipal Code Section
25.56.490)which had the effect of joining together all applications submitted for an
individual property for the purposes of determining expiration dates. This was
necessary because the Municipal Code provides different periods of time before a
decision expires for different applications (i.e., tentative maps - two years;
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments - one year).
Municipal Code Section 25.56.490 reads:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this code
related thereto, the anniversary date of any application
approvals shall be tied to the effective approval date of the
tentative tract map as processed for that property. When there
is no tentative tract map application involved with a particular
property, the anniversary date for determining the expiration of
any application approvals shall be tied to the effective approval
date of the most recently approved application. When there is
only an individual application relating to a particular property,
then the expiration date of the application shall be as set forth
in the code relating to that application. (Ord. 304 (part), 1982)
These amendments have generally worked well. Unfortunately, each of these
sections, except for the precise plan, are vague with respect to how time extensions
should be processed for phased projects. When phase one has been completed,
how long should an applicant have between phases without obtaining a time
extension? Forever? Two years? One year?
• Ordinance No. 1098
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 3
August 25, 2005
Also, it was noted that in Section 25.72.110 the language in the code inadvertently
omits a line of text from that originally recommended by the Planning Commission
April 15, 1981.
Discussion:
This proposed amendment will not alter the current initial time limits. Tentative
maps, pursuant to state law, will continue to have an initial two-year approval
window. Any conditional use permit, precise plan, variance or adjustment
application which is associated with a tentative map will, by virtue of Municipal Code
Section 25.56.490, also continue to have an initial two-year approval.
Conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments not associated
with a tentative map will continue to have an initial one-year approval.
The proposed amendment will address expiration of application approvals in phased
projects because, except for in the precise plan section, the Municipal Code is silent
with respect to phased projects where the first part is built and construction on the
overall project halts for a period of time.
The precise plan code (Section 25.73.019-A) currently voids a precise plan if
construction lapses for more than six months.
Staff proposes to establish a two-year maximum period between phases, otherwise,
a time extension granted by the Planning Commission would be required.
The rational for the two-year period is that at this point the developer has a
significant stake in the project. He has acquired the property and has completed at
least a part of the project. Time extensions would generally be expected to be
granted unless the zoning of the site was changed. Two years from the date of the
final Building Department approval of the previous phase seems to provide a
reasonable protection for the property owner and for the City.
Ordinance No. 1098
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 4
August 25, 2005
CONCLUSION:
Staff proposes the following amendments:
A. Amend Municipal Code Section 25.73.019-A to delete the last sentence
which reads, "If the city should find that there has been no construction of
substantial character taken or if such construction should lapse for more than
six months, the precise plan shall be void."
B. Add Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 to read:
"25.56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased
projects. In phased developments any precise plan, conditional
use permit, variance or adjustment applicable to any remaining
undeveloped phases shall expire two years following the final
approval by the City Building Department of the most recent
phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by
the applicant and approved by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission may approve up to a one year extension
of time per request."
C. That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit
shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on
which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration
of one year a building permit is issued and construction is
commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site
which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the
use permit application, or the site is occupied if no building
permit or certificate of occupancy is required; provided that a use
permit for a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period
is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of the
permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by
filing with the Planning Commission.
Ordinance No. 1098
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 5
August 25, 2005
CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed code amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for purposes
of CEQA. No further environmental review is necessary.
Submitted by: Department Head:
Ste'Q Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
Approval• Approval:
72v
Ho er CrEyq Carlos L. Ortego
ACM for QWelopment Services City Manager
(WpdomVmisA 0607.w)
ORDINANCE NO. 1098
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT,
SECTIONS 25.56, 25.72 AND 25.73.
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the
25th day of August, 2005, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. 2344, has
recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 05-52," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the
project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find
the following facts to justify their approval as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the City Council in this case.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit "A" is hereby approved.
3. That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby
directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of
general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert,
ORDINANCE NO. 1098
California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its
adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this
day of 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
BUFORD A. CRITES, Mayor
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
ORDINANCE NO. 1098
EXHIBIT A
That Municipal Code Section 25.73-019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence which
reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of substantial
character taken or is such construction should lapse for more than six
months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
"25.56.491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects. In
phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance or
adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall expire two
years following the final approval by the City Building Department of the most
recent phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission
may approve up to a one year extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility installation
may be valid for a longer period is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to
the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
3
CITY UE P H I M DESERT
73-5lo FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DEsERT,CALIFORNIA 9226o-2578
TEL: 760 346—o6I I
FAX: 76o 341-7099
infoRprlm-drlen.og
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City
Council to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, August 25, 2005, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
August 12, 2005 City of Palm Desert, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2344
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 25.56, 25.72 AND 25.73.
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 19th day of July, 2005, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amendments to
the Municipal Code Sections 25.56, 25.72 and 25.73; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 05-52," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the
project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission
did find the following facts to justify their recommendations as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment as provided in the
attached Exhibit "A°.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2344
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 19th day of July, 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: CAMPBELL, RNERTY, JONATHAN, TSCHOPP
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: LOPEZ
ABSTAIN: NONE
—DAVID E. TSC OPP, Chairpeksbi
ATTEST:
STEPHEN R. SMITH, Acting Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2344
EXHIBIT A
That Municipal Code Section 25.73-019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence which
reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of substantial
character taken or is such construction should lapse for more than six
months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
"25 56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects. In
phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance or
adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall expire two
years following the final approval by the City Building Department of the most
recent phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission
may approve up to a one year extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility installation
may be valid for a longer period is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to
the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
fl
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: July 19, 2005
CASE NO: ZOA 05-01
REQUEST: Recommendation to the City Council of an amendment to the
Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of application approvals on
phased projects.
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
I. BACKGROUND:
June 7, 2005 Planning Commission directed staff to process a code amendment to
clarify how time extensions should be handled on phased projects and to insert an
omitted line of text into Municipal Code Section 25.72.110.
II. HISTORY OF RELATED CODE AMENDMENTS:
In April 1981 the City amended the Municipal Code as it related to time extensions
for conditional use permits, variances and adjustments deleting the requirement for
new public hearings at time of extension consideration.
In 1982 the City enacted the "precise plan" section of the Municipal Code which
includes its own separate provisions relating to expiration of approvals.
In 1982 the City also enacted a 'batch all" code section (Municipal Code Section
25.56.490)which had the effect of joining together all applications submitted for an
individual property for the purposes of determining expiration dates. This was
necessary because the Municipal Code provides different periods of time before a
decision expires for different applications (i.e., tentative maps - two years;
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments - one year).
Municipal Code Section 25.56.490 reads:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this code
related thereto, the anniversary date of any application
approvals shall be tied to the effective approval date of the
tentative tract map as processed for that property. When there
is no tentative tract map application involved with a particular
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
JULY 19, 2005
property, the anniversary date for determining the expiration of
any application approvals shall be tied to the effective approval
date of the most recently approved application. When there is
only an individual application relating to a particular property,
then the expiration date of the application shall be as set forth
in the code relating to that application. (Ord. 304 (part), 1982)
These amendments have generally worked well. Unfortunately, each of these
sections, except for the precise plan, are vague with respect to how time extensions
should be processed for phased projects. When phase one has been completed,
how long should an applicant have between phases without obtaining a time
extension? Forever? Two years? One year?
Also, it was noted that in Section 25.72.110 the language in the code inadvertently
omits a line of text from that originally recommended by the Planning Commission
April 15, 1981.
III. DISCUSSION:
This proposed amendment will not alter the current initial time limits. Tentative
maps, pursuant to state law, will continue to have an initial two-year approval
window. Any conditional use permit, precise plan, variance or adjustment
application which is associated with a tentative map will, by virtue of Municipal Code
Section 25.56.490, also continue to have an initial two-year approval.
Conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments not associated
with a tentative map will continue to have an initial one-year approval.
The proposed amendment will address expiration of application approvals in phased
projects because, except for in the precise plan section, the Municipal Code is silent
with respect to phased projects where the first part is built and construction on the
overall project halts for a period of time.
The precise plan code (Section 25.73.019-A) currently voids a precise plan if
construction lapses for more than six months.
Staff proposes to establish a two-year maximum period between phases, otherwise,
a time extension granted by the Planning Commission would be required.
2
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
JULY 19, 2005
The rational for the two-year period is that at this point the developer has a
significant stake in the project. He has acquired the property and has completed at
least a part of the project. Time extensions would generally be expected to be
granted unless the zoning of the site was changed. Two years from the date of the
final Building Department approval of the previous phase seems to provide a
reasonable protection for the property owner and for the City.
IV. CONCLUSION:
Staff proposes the following amendments:
A. Amend Municipal Code Section 25.73.019-A to delete the last sentence
which reads, "if the city should find that there has been no construction of
substantial character taken or if such construction should lapse for more than
six months, the precise plan shall be void."
B. Add Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 to read:
"25.56.491 Expiration of application approvals on phased
projects. In phased.developments any precise plan, conditional
use permit, variance or adjustment applicable to any remaining
undeveloped phases shall expire two years following the final
approval by the City Building Department of the most recent
phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by
the applicant and approved by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission may approve up to a one year extension
of time per request."
C. That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25,72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit
shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on
which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration
of one year a building permit is issued and construction is
commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site
which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the
use permit application, or the site is occupied if no building
permit or certificate of occupancy is required; provided that a use
3
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
JULY 19, 2005
permit for a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period
is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of the
permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by
filing with the Planning Commission.
V. CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed code amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for purposes
of CEQA. No further environmental review is necessary.
VI. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of an
amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to the expiration of application
approvals on phased projects by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No.
and Exhibit A attached thereto.
VII. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Comments from city departments and other agencies
D. Plans and exhibits
Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by:
Steve Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Directorof Community Development
Review and Concur:
Homer Croy
ACM for Development Services
/tm
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 25.56, 25.72 AND 25.73.
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 19th day of July, 2005, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amendments to
the Municipal Code Sections 25.56, 25.72 and 25.73; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 05-52," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the
project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission
did find the following facts to justify their recommendations as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment as provided in the
attached Exhibit "A".
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 19th day of Jul, 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DAVID E. TSCHOPP, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
EXHIBIT A
That Municipal Code Section 25.73-019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence which
reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of substantial
character taken or is such construction should lapse for more than six
months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
"25.56.491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects. In
phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance or
adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall expire two
years following the final approval by the City Building Department of the most
recent phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission
may approve up to a one year extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility installation
may be valid for a longer period is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to
the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
H
ORDINANCE NO. 260 Page Two F
EXHIBIT "A"
CHAPTER 25.72
CO I I NA US S
25.72.110 La se of Conditional Use Permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse a—nU—shall become voild one year fo owing the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on
the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility install-
ation may be valid for a longer period if specified by the Planning Commission.
Prior to the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month
time extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
CHAPTER 25.78
VARIAN ES ANC JJ 4ENTS
25.78.110 La se of Variance or Ad ustment. A variance or adjustment shall
lapse an sha become void one year fo owing the date on which the variance or
adjustment became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building
permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward comple-
tion on the site which was the subject of the variance or adjustment application,
or a permit is issued authorizing occupancy of the site or structure which was the
subject of the variance or adjustment application, or the site is occupied if no
building permit or certificate of occupancy is required. Prior to the expiration
of a permit, an applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with
the Planning Commission.
. - 4
• PLAMMIND MISSION RESOMOR Ila. page Two
EtN181T -A-
CNAPIER 25.72
tn"^111714Al USES
2s.72.1:J e peewit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse a�ii "aria ecoae vo one year Lapse of conditional use
TTng the date on which the use permit
baeame effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building permit
is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use peewit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit I
application, or the site is ocapied if no building permit or certificate of II
occupancy is required: provided, that a use peewit for a public utility install-
ation way be valid for a longer pe►iod if specified by the planning commission.
Prior to the expiration of the permit, the applicant way request a twelve-month
time extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
CMPTER 25,78
VARIANCES AND MUSTMENTS
25.78.110 l.epse of variance or adjustment. A variance or adjustment shall
lapse an I a come vo one yea— r7oo wing the date on which the variance or
adjustment became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building
permit is issued and construction Is commenced and diligently pursued toward comple-
tion on the site which was the subject of the variance or adjustment application.
or a peewit is issued authorising occupancy of the site or structure which was the
subject of the variance or.adjustment application, or the site Is occupied If no
building permit or certificate of occupancy is required. Prior to the expiration
of a permit, an applicant ray request a twelve-month time extension by filing with
the Planning Commission.
• t
OM W. Ilnvrllll�
L
1 '
1 25.72.050
1
1 and shall receive pertinent evidence concerning the proposed an appeal has been filed with the city council. (Ord. 99
use and proposed conditions under which it would be § I (part), 1975: Exhibit A 125394.08)
1 operated or maintained.(Ord.99§ I(part),1975:Exhibit
1 A§ 25394.05) 25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit
25.72 060 Action of the planning commission
A conditional use permit shall lapse and shall become
1 void one year following the date on which the use permit
1 The
commission may grant a conditional use permit became effective,unless prior to the expiration of one year,
as permit was applied for or in modified form,or the a building permit is issued and cousutuxion is commenced
1 application may be dented A conditional use permit may and diligently pursued toward completion on the site which
D subject
geared fora limited time period or may be granted was the subject of the use permit application,or a ate
wbject to sreL conditions as the commission may prescribe• of occupancy is required;provided, that a use permit for
D Conditions may include,but shall not be limited to,payment a public utility instapatim may be valid for a longer period
1 of drainage fees; requiring special yards, open spaces, if specified by the planning commission. prior to the
buffers fences and walls requiring instadation and maintr expirationofthepermit,theapplicantmayrequestatwelve
D nance of lZXIscaping7 requiring street dedications and month time extension by tiling with the phmmmng commis.
improvements; regulation of points of vehicular ingress sion. (Ord. 260 (part), 1981: Ord. 99 § 1 (part), 1975:
and egress;regulation of traffic circulation;regulation of Exhibit A § 2539-4.11)
D signs; regulation of hours of operation and methods of
operation,control ofpoteatial nuisances;presrnbmg star- 25.72.120 Modification of conditionaf use.
darns for maintenance of buildings and grounds;ptesumptiou Sections 25.74.020 duougb 25.74.060 of this title shall
D of development schedules and development standards;and apply m an application formodtficellon,expansion,or other
D such other conditions as the commission deems necessary change in a conditional use;provided,that minor revisions
to insure compatibility of the use with surrounding develop- or modifications may be approved by the director of envi-
D ments and uses and to preserve the public health, safety ronmeatal services if he determines that the changes would
D and welfare.A conditional use permit may grant variances not affect the findings prescribed in Section 25.72.070 and
Of adj==ts to the regulations prescribed by this title the application for revision Of modification is filed within
p for which vRIOante and adjustment procodmes are prescribed one year from the date the original conditional use permit
D by Chapter 25.78. (Ord 99 § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A becomes final,does not change the use designated in the
D § 2539.4.06) original conditional use permit does not increase,reduce,
25.72.070 Fiodirtgs. or alter the size or shape of the premises to which the
D
The planning commission shall make the folio originaleaaditional use permit pertained, and does not
D findings before R'in8 exte�the time in which the actual establishment of the
granting a conditional use permit conditional use pit or the commencement dconstruction
D A. That the proposed location of the conditional use under the conditional use permit shall tale place. (Ord
is in accord with the objectives of this tide and the purpose 99 § 1 (Dart), 1975:Exhibit A § 2539.4.12)
of the district in which the site is located;
D B. That the proposed location of the conditional use
and the conditions under which it would be operated or
D maintained will net be detrimental to the public health,
D safety,or welfare,or be materially injurious to properties
Of improvements in the vicinity;
D C. That theproposed conditional use will comply with
D each of the applicabi:provisions of this title,except for
approved variances or adjustments;
D D. That the proposed conditional use wmpiies with
D the goals,objectives,andpolicies of thecity's general plan.
D (Ord. 99 11 (part), 1975. Exhibit A§ 2539-4.07)
D 25.72.oso Effective date of the use permit.
The decision of the planning commission shall be final
within fifteen days from the date of the decision unless
1
D
457 MWM Defte 10 00)
1
/
1
1
25.73.019 railure to utilize a precise plan. Page 1 of 1
Palm Desert California Municipal Code
^ Up « Previous >> Next - Main TOC ?Search
25.73.019 Failure to utilize a prease Ica an•__
A. Failure to utilize a precise plan within one year of its effective date(unless extended by action of the
planning commission)Will automatically void such precise plan. In the event construction work is involved, such
work must actually commence within the stated period and be diligently pursued. If the city should find that
there has been no construction of substantial character taken or if such construction should lapse for more than
six months, the precise plan shall be void.
B. Extension of time up to a maximum one year may be granted from the date of expiration of the precise
plan by the planning commission when extenuating circumstances can be clearly shown by the applicant. The
request for same shall be submitted to the planning commission in writing prior to the expiration date and shall
clearly state the reasons why construction has not commenced.
C. The commission may grant additional time extensions up to a maximum of one year providing that
there has not been adopted any changes to zoning regulations that would impact said precise plan. (Ord. 299
(part), 1982)
http://www.codemanage.com/palmdesert/index.php?topic=25-25_73-25_73_019 6/21/2005
r 25.56.390
r
1 25.56.390 Automobile service stations— meat The use of lighted teanis courts and the use of lights
Lighting. in commercial developments will be
r All lighting fixttrres shall be located so as to shield di- (Ord.98 I I Y reviewed
rest rays from adjoining properties.Luminaries shall be of § )• 975.Exhibit A§2532-9.03)
1 a low level,indirect diffused type and shall not exceed the 25.96.480 Truk handling alternative.
r height ofthe building.(Ord.98§ I(Part), 1975:Exhibit A An alternative to a trash enclom m shall include the
1
§25.32-9.01(7)) Placement of a trash bur in a concrete or metal Tined Pit
/ 25 56 400 Use,location and design ofthe trash handling facility shall
bays.Automobile service atatioos--Service be reviewed and approved by the local disposal service
r bays.Service bay entrances shall not front upon a public and the city.(Ord.293, 1992)
/ street (Ord. 98 § 1 (Part), 1975: Exhibit A 25.56.490 Expiration dates of application
1 §25.32-9.01(8)) approvals.
r 25.56 410 Automobile service stations—Wall. Notwithstanding
�o�provisions of�s�� re-
A six foot masonry wall shall be required along all inte- brted iIMtO,s shall the anniversary date of an the
r Provals shall be tied to me effective approval
r rior property(Aid lines
m98 and 1 Three-foot-high wall along the tentative tract map as processed for that property, of the
(part), 1975: Exhibit A there is no tentative tract map application involved with a
Particular Ir'oPatY,the anniversary date for determining
25-%420 Tkke-out restaurants. the expiration ofany application approvals shall be tied to
The site shall be of sufficient size and me effective approval date of the most recently approved
satisfy all requirements for off-street configmatton to application When these is only an individual application
r satisfy
cats, walls Wig, rek�8toa particular property,then the exphnrtion date of
vided is this title.landscaping
and refuse storage as pro- the application shall be as set forth in the code relating to
§ ded in this t)) ( § �), 1975: Exhibit A that aPPliMdOn.(Ord.304(pact), 1992)
r 25.56.430 Take-oat restaurants- Setbacks. Hotel development standards.
Ile All hotel developments shall comply with the follow-
Alarming commission may establish setbacks more ing:
restrictive than those required by the regulations for the A The minimum guest room/suite sill for any hotel
ll b
district in which the proposed use would be located if it shall three hundred thirty square feet Hotel projects
determines they are necessary or desirable for the Protec- shall have an overall average guest room/suite size of at
tion of the public health, safety and welfare or to insure least three hundred seventy-five square feet
compatibility with uses on contiguous Properties.(Ord.98 B. All hotels shall provide a mull-Irurpose (three
§ t (part), 1975:Exhibit A§25.32-9.02(2)) meal)restaurant either within the building itself;attached
25 56 440 lake out restaurants—Curb cuts or a4acent to the building,together with room service for
hot
guests
m
The size and location of curb cuts for drivewa shall the d thoree (a continental beeaklHst may Constitute one of
Ys the meals):
be determined by standards development by the depart- C. All hotel developments shall utilize central air
Mont ofenvironmental services.(Ord.98§ I(pett).1975: conditioning systems or vertical fen coil systems,or other
Exhibit A§25.32-9.02(3)) specifically approved systems.Window or wall installed
25.56.450 Takeout restaurants--Landscaping. air�ft�Vftm we prohibi &(Ord.872§2(Ex-
Not less than PmP, titbit A), 1998;Ord.459§2, 1986)
be twenty Percent of the total site area shall
devoted to landscaped.planting areas. (Ord. 98 § 1 25.56.510 Conversion of abandoned public
(Part), 1975:Exhibit A§25.32-9.02(4)) utility well ekes,
25 56 470 Lighting standards in all zones Abandoned public utility well sites may be approved
E development forcoavasiontoa private water export irrigation well site
°ceurring in any zone in the city subject to approval of a conditional use permit Use of
shall be critically reviewed relative to
r live impacts from lighting proposed as a�nogf develce� m vate water export irrigation well sites shall not result in
/ P P- increase is ambient noise levels measured prior to the
r'
423
r (Alm I)mrri Sapp.No.3,a-03)
�i
CIIY 0E P 0 [ M OESERI
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346—o6II
FAX:760 341-7098
infe4Prlmdoert.org
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public
hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
July 7, 2005 Palm Desert Planning Commission
�y Cc �sT
ORDINANCE NO.
EXHIBIT A
That Municipal Code Section 25.73-019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence which
reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of substantial
character taken or is such construction should lapse for more than six
months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
"25 56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects. In
phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance or
adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall expire one
year following the final approval by the City Building Department of the most
recent phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission
may approve up to a one year extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25 72 110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall lapse
and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit became
effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is issued and
construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site which
was the subject of the use permit application,or a certificate of occupancy is issued
forthe structure which was the subject of the use permit application,orthe site
is occupied if no building permit or certificate of occupancy is required;provided
that a use permit for a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period is
specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of the permit, the
applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with the Planning
Commission.
3
;ounces Agenda Request
1 To be considered under:
Consent Caler da-,
Resolutons Crdinances New J_si ess
'—' Information— -items Pubfc Hearings Other
Old Business -
2. Item Cei
of an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates o
of application approvals on phased projects. 2oi9 06'-
3. Financial: (Ccmplete if applicabie)
(a) Account!P o. e+ct# __-_-- _._._. ,o) Arnnwit Requested
(c) In the CuI en+,:Budge t? _ _ j1 Ap-rop iation Req red
Approved by he Dlrec-or of Finance _ - - -- -- -- —
� 1
4. Submitted by:., C1Q i Y✓t ' n
cc ErC�.�
5. Approvals: pa tmenr He
_ - 7MiNor Developr!ent Se Ps
Phil 5=i
Ci°v Manager: --
Carlos L. O ega
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: Approval of an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to
expiration of application approvals on phased projects.
SUBMITTED BY: Steve Smith, Planning Manager
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
CASE NO: ZOA 05-01
DATE: August 25, 2005
CONTENTS:
Staff Recommendation
Background and Discussion
Draft Ordinance No.
Planning Commission Minutes of July 19, 2005
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2344
Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 19, 2005
Staff Recommendation:
Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. to second reading
approving Case No. ZOA 05-01.
Background:
June 7, 2005 Planning Commission directed staff to process a code amendment to
clarify how time extensions should be handled on phased projects and to insert an
omitted line of text into Municipal Code Section 25.72.110.
A public hearing was held by Planning Commission July 19, 2005. No one spoke
in favor or opposition to the amendment. Commission on a 4-0 vote (Commissioner
Lopez absent) adopted its Resolution No. 2344 recommending to the City Council
approval of the amendment.
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 2
August 25, 2005
HISTORY OF RELATED CODE AMENDMENTS:
In April 1981 the City amended the Municipal Code as it related to time extensions
for conditional use permits, variances and adjustments deleting the requirement for
new public hearings at time of extension consideration.
In 1982 the City enacted the "precise plan" section of the Municipal Code which
includes its own separate provisions relating to expiration of approvals.
In 1982 the City also enacted a "catch all" code section (Municipal Code Section
25.56.490) which had the effect of joining together all applications submitted for an
individual property for the purposes of determining expiration dates. This was
necessary because the Municipal Code provides different periods of time before a
decision expires for different applications (i.e., tentative maps - two years;
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments - one year).
Municipal Code Section 25.56.490 reads:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this code
related thereto, the anniversary date of any application
approvals shall be tied to the effective approval date of the
tentative tract map as processed for that property. When there
is no tentative tract map application involved with a particular
property, the anniversary date for determining the expiration of
any application approvals shall be tied to the effective approval
date of the most recently approved application. When there is
only an individual application relating to a particular property,
then the expiration date of the application shall be as set forth
in the code relating to that application. (Ord. 304 (part), 1982)
These amendments have generally worked well. Unfortunately, each of these
sections, except for the precise plan, are vague with respect to how time extensions
should be processed for phased projects. When phase one has been completed,
how long should an applicant have between phases without obtaining a time
extension? Forever? Two years? One year?
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 3
August 25, 2005
Also, it was noted that in Section 25.72.110 the language in the code inadvertently
omits a line of text from that originally recommended by the Planning Commission
April 15, 1981 .
Discussion:
This proposed amendment will not alter the current initial time limits. Tentative
maps, pursuant to state law, will continue to have an initial two-year approval
window. Any conditional use permit, precise plan, variance or adjustment
application which is associated with a tentative map will, by virtue of Municipal Code
Section 25.56.490, also continue to have an initial two-year approval.
Conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments not associated
with a tentative map will continue to have an initial one-year approval.
The proposed amendment will address expiration of application approvals in phased
projects because, except for in the precise plan section, the Municipal Code is silent
with respect to phased projects where the first part is built and construction on the
overall project halts for a period of time.
The precise plan code (Section 25.73.019-A) currently voids a precise plan if
construction lapses for more than six months.
Staff proposes to establish a two-year maximum period between phases, otherwise,
a time extension granted by the Planning Commission would be required.
The rational for the two-year period is that at this point the developer has a
significant stake in the project. He has acquired the property and has completed at
least a part of the project. Time extensions would generally be expected to be
granted unless the zoning of the site was changed. Two years from the date of the
final Building Department approval of the previous phase seems to provide a
reasonable protection for the property owner and for the City.
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 4
August 25, 2005
CONCLUSION:
Staff proposes the following amendments:
A. Amend Municipal Code Section 25.73.019-A to delete the last sentence
which reads, "If the city should find that there has been no construction of
substantial character taken or if such construction should lapse for more than
six months, the precise plan shall be void."
B. Add Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 to read:
1125 56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased
projects. In phased developments any precise plan, conditional
use permit, variance or adjustment applicable to any remaining
undeveloped phases shall expire two years following the final
approval by the City Building Department of the most recent
phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by
the applicant and approved by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission may approve up to a one year extension
of time per request."
C. That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25 72 110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit
shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on
which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration
of one year a building permit is issued and construction is
commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site
which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the
use permit application, or the site is occupied if no building
permit or certificate of occupancy is required; provided that a use
permit for a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period
is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of the
permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by
filing with the Planning Commission.
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 05-01
Page 5
August 25, 2005
CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed code amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for purposes
of CEQA. No further environmental review is necessary.
Submitted by: Department Head:
Ste`Q Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
Approvv Approval:
Ho er Cro Carlos L. Ortega
ACM for elopment Services City Manager
(WpdouMmW{ma0S01.cc)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT,
SECTIONS 25.56, 25.72 AND 25.73.
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the
25th day of August, 2005, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. 2344, has
recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 05-52," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the
project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find
the following facts to justify their approval as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the City Council in this case.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit "A" is hereby approved.
3. That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby
directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of
general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert,
ORDINANCE NO.
California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its
adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this
day of 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
BUFORD A. CRITES, Mayor
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
ORDINANCE NO.
EXHIBIT A
That Municipal Code Section 25.73-019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence which
reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of substantial
character taken or is such construction should lapse for more than six
months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
1125 56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects. In
phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance or
adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall expire two
years following the final approval by the City Building Department of the most
recent phase of the project unless-an extension of time is requested by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission
may approve up to a one year extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25 72 110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility installation
may be valid for a longer period is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to
the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
H
3
CIIY 0f P R [ M 0 Lj� i
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 9]160-1578
TEL: 760 346—o6I I
PAX: 760 341-7098
infoPp.lm-deun.ors
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City
Council to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, August 25, 2005, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
August 12, 2005 City of Palm Desert, California
6
lank
CITY OF PALM DESERT g
TRANSMITTAL LETTER ° t
1. TO: Honorable wyor and City Council
rt. REOUESi: Amendment to Muntetpal Code to modify time extension
procedures in certain Toning matters.
ill. APPLICANT: CiTY OF PALM DESERT
IV. USE NO: ZOA 06-81
• a
Y. MITE: April 1S, 19el
Y1. CORTERTS:
A. Staff Recommendatlon
u 8. Discussion
° C. Draft Ordinance No. 260
q 0. Planning Commission R1•nutes involving Case No. ZOA D6-81. °
E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 703 . of
v o- F. PlanningCommission Staff Report dat�bDr11 15, 1981.
G. Related maps and/or exhibits.
1 �
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
� M
O
e a Waive further reading and pass Ordinance tk. 260 to second reading. �u9sr'
" 4P 8. DISCUSSION:
0 �� 'o This amendment was reviewed and unanimously recom w ded for approval
(a-O, wy the Planning Commission at its April
O y 'y 15, 1881 meeting. During theith McLachlan absent) b hearing no one from the audience spoke in A
favor''or Apposition to the proposed amendment.
vi-
v x
A4 i Staff initiated this proposed amendment at the March 3, 1981, Planning
Commission
10n meeting. The intent Dung to eliminate the cost of holding
another public hearing and reduce the staff Lima required to prepare 6Ld1SL�sr�,; _
a hearing notices, reports, agendas and resolutions, Public input at time 6d.b4't' 3
(i extension hearings in the oast has been very nisi^al. Future Lire ez- ,t
1,� tensions will be reviewed by Planning Commission as a part of the consent
i
9j" 1h -:alendar unless the Planning Commission or staff have so" Questions in
° , y which case the City would have the right of full review. �•"
uOi6 The above method simplifies the time extension procedure white stilt
providing the City the right of review.
p °
ApPN?OVED BY CITY COUNCIL �° o
CI' ° w ON O '
a o
y 4
VERIFIED 8": qt,
Drimna1 on file with Citf Clerk's CMfice wo u
o Atr
° C
• MINUTES 's•
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
APRiL iS. 1981 Page Four x
Vt. PUBLIC HEARINGS (cant.)
° There was discussion regarding conc ns over the gas station location and
availability to the public as well as ers. Mr. Diaz stated that since a
Development Plan is required for the 9 station details of the design and location
could be reviewed then.
Notion was wade by Comiss er Richards, seconded by Commissioner McLachI
to recommend approval to the Cl Council of Case Nos. C/Z 02-81. TT 15633. and
• IT 15610, by adoption of Pis 9 Commission Resolution Nos. 697, 6" and 699• and ;
approve Case Nos. DP 02-81. 03-81 and PM 17474 by Planning Commission Re ution
Nos. 700. 701 and 702. sub t to conditions. Carried unanimously (5-0) i
a A FIVE MINUTE RECESS W CALLED AT 4:00 P.M. - MEETING RECONVENED AT :05 P.M. Y
v COR41SSIONER MCL11C WAS EXCUSED FROM THE MEETING.
a 0. Case . ZOA 04-81 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Appli nt
R est for consideration of change in Cit rking requirements. {
�. Mr, fez presented this case reviewing the aff report and recommending
approval''. nt•.�
his item was discussed by Connisst nd staff and because further study
a
was essary„it was decided t0 continue a matter to May S. 1981.
a rJ Motlon was made by Cormissicne .1chards, seconded by Commissioner B
-•o; Continue this case to May S. 198 , for further study. Carried unanl. ly (a-0). ytw o
E. Case No. ZOA 05-8 - CITY OF PALM DESERT and RITTER ASSOCIATES,
Applicants r�
Q0
O Mr. Sawa present this case reviewing the request d stated that staff
would like a six mont trail period to see how it work in the Presidents' Plaza 6•
' N
parking lot.
V
� o � Camnf ssl er Kryder asked if staff obsery any problems so far. Mr. Sawa � 4,
a $ o n a noted that tr was being put on the ground and the bins. .�
Rk a ,J
90 � Mo n was made by Commissioner Be ey, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, to
% �,� continue his case for six months. a ed vnanirously (e-0).
,b F. Case No. ZOA 06-8' - CiTT OF PALM DESERT, Applicant a
R
Request for modification of Time Extension Procedures.
a® Mr. Diaz reviewed the staff report stating that the amendment would delete
the re quirement of a Public Hearing for time extensions. He noted that public q,
input in the past had been very minimal. Stiff suggested that future time exten-
sions be hand:sd as part of the consent calendar. . 4•
va �' .AW Motion was mode by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Cormisstoner Berkey,
„� to approve this amendment by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution ft. 703.
n .o " ep Grcied unanimously (0-0).
n VEn@
P °° OLD BUSINESS .� .
A. Case No. GPA 0 (continued} - CITT OF P DESERT a
. Applicant �%F
ma j moo!__ V item was continued t he mueetln9 of May S.
1981. A
y
Lk,
�' 4
m o ,
ILL
MEN
v ,
1
� a
� D
CiTY OF PALM DESERT
STAFF REPORT
i
° 110: Planning CaxndSflOn
° o
Director 01 Emtmsemenut Services
SUBJECT: ZOA 0641 aiadlflcaLlon of Time Extension Procedures °
DATE: April 15. 1981 ,
a BACIW M4 AND ANALYSIS:
staff was
° - the acessary�amendmention to thetPalm De of sertN 3.Zoning81ord7 ante deleting the requitrIucted to reement p,• .,.•
u for a public hearing on a time extension request for zoning cases.
° a
This direction was based on a staff request. in the pest these requests for time °�'
-0 extensions to utilize approved variances, development plans, or conditional use
perwits,•have resulted in:
tf
w 1. added cost to file for public hearing;
added staff time to prepare nsary public notices,
eces
staff reports, agendas, and resolutions. u
°p - -� ° _ Since November, not one person other than the applicant has appeared at a hearing
on a time extension. Staff believes that a requested time extension should be r
handled as part of a consent calendar. In this manner, should the Commission have
k 6 o wA any questions regarding the time extension, the matter can be called up and the
applicant questioned. But as is the case in the vast majority of instances, if $ .41
� - there are no questions or concerns the time extension would be granted. v
eo „ o:a
The above method simplifies the time extension procedure. arhile sill giving the ,
City the right of review.of sych requests. $ A
07
STAFF RUVVIENDATION:
a Stafl,doulE recommend to the Cmnmission that it adopt Planning Commission Resolution
yip o a:,a Na. •�. . 4 6
D
"A Resolution the Planning Commission of the
_ City of Palm Desert.
ert. California, recommending `•y17
Ordi-
67
.F,_ f 3 to the City Council that iiainptthenpnrocedur!
° n - ramie Aniendnen c tf
. modifying
: �• tY" for granting time extensions to certain zoning
°o matters." 4 ,i
`g 7'
0g .P
° 0Y
CD
.O• O�y'�ada,
0
ti a �
A
R ° o F
',�
Oil
a j o
� ° a
a
w
�€. , ", .a
btu i • '.i'i;11,. .t °r. 4..;,i.�r-. . .�...e r ..'+,t6 -
g
tl .a a
u D
tl
v
PROOF aP PUal IG1IIDa ;
0
(2010, 1015.5 CCP) '
0
a
PROOF Of PU"t(CATION OF
p c a k
D
III 02-RI
IDEa2-91
o p I as a eitieen of the Unites
States and a resident of in-
a Gounly tt,rvsaid; I •• or.r the �a .e a -„c
oar of .idht..n y.arsf anA "at a - ADe b
• .arty to or lnl.resl-d in the
pall
princ
ipal clerk
wafter. I -. in,
? pp G
loaf clerk of taw pointer t} ' G11
of eslR DE SEPT s,,7:Tr a nerDaO-r of t 1 O ar,f
Gen.ral cl rculat leaf DN ate!
m
. a and pu e blishd daily In in.
e �
city ef . Rlr.rsldee County et
p9 Rlr.rsld.s and retch ne.snaD-r IN a
e a has been Adjuda.d a aersoappr of a ` P
Qpneral Circulation by the ter. �~ 1 ��
Superior Gourt of the County of o' pEu
Rlr.rsides ilate of C.1lifernl-+s x. .4�
V 7@
und.r dale of Dcta7-r It
cafe ,,o-r 91sse: that the �ay ".
G
hellcee of rh ieh the ana-red Is f�Doork 5
a has been rubllsh-d 4
- • printed ceDri eanawf
In each regular and entire issue
eT sale n. thee and not in any 9 �p
' pY fuDDleee M thereof on the roll Delay V
° dates• to-wit:
Q 'u 04I9 919e1
Q cR
o 0 1 Certify (or declare) under O
penalty of perjury that the $ $• i
foreoei"S is true and correct. a '"I� a
a v o . Ogled April 91 1991 d � �nA
at Riaersid.e California
06 Akio
p a =
o Yp ySy
•c a y Clty 6 P►ls OESEei
s
,7 1 :VM4s!f r
O A
o p , �. w �1• • '
-` •:'_
• PLANNING, VR"ISSIO4 RESOLUTIM wn. 701
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM o U
DESERT
CALIFORNG.^^RE�'^y'?'P'M!rK AveoOVAL TO THE C!' !"' •-• °
LF A LN„�W VnV,�VY,IL W�L..�nL�i• .F I ��Y Imp run
GRANTING TIME EXTENSIONS IN CERTAIN ZONING MATTERS.
CASE NO. ZM 06-81 - ❑
r
WHEREAS, the ►tanniny Commission of the City of Palm Desert, toTiforn0 consider
did on the ISth day of#pri1, t981, hold a duly noticed public hearing
proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment 06-61L "
( WHEREAS, at sold hearing the Planning Commission did consider all relevant -
testimony in this regard;
WHEREAS, studies and investigations made on behalf of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission have shown that: Gk o
N= ° Y
R 1. The present method of requiring public hearings to grant
time extensions on variances, conditional use Permits-
0 ° and development plans causes applicants undue delays and ' a•. �.�� !
hardships;
The present time extension procedure causes undue waste
.0
of Staff time 1n .preparation of notices, staff reports, ye a• i]
agendas, and resolutions: ° -(
3, A Procedure should be created which allows the City the •
.�vg'a • o•� right to review time extension reouests, yet s1:±pilftes S f10,
the procedure for City staff and applicants; "C!
02 . o
4. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 05-01 establishes a procedure
^ as set forth in Item 3; and,
WHEREAS. the proposed amendnent is a minor alteration to land use limita-
e GO u�
tt ons and therefore categorically exempt from the rMufrerents of the California aEYs 't7
v Environmental Quality Act. C.�
° c NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission Of the City of 0p, M
Palm Desert, California, recommends to the City Council that it adopt Zoning Ordinance _xG
�r
q Amendment 06-81. attached hereto as Exhibit 'A'. '45
9
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert ,
n� w. Planning Commission on the 15th day of April, 198I, by .the following vote, to wit:
q: 1
AYES: BERXEY, KRYDER, RICHARDS, MILLER
a „ HOES: NONE n`"
o ABSENT: KLACKLA14 "m (age „ q}
ABSTAIN: NONE e� .. ❑ e�
4)
Chairman
a ATTEST-
n p o�o.aa�
RAMON
°4 re ary
<
tca
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VIII . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
C. CASE NO. .C/Z 01-81 (Continued)
Mayor Wilson invited input from the applicant .
MS. PATRICIA MARTIN, Ballew McFarland, 74-075 E1 Paseo ,
- Palm Desert , addressed Council on behalf of the applicant . -
She indicated her client ' s concurrence with Staff' s recom-
mendation as well as the Planning Commission recommendation. Il
However, she asked for .clarification or more specific guide-
lines relative to Condition No. 7 dealing with the amount
of landscaping to be required. Mr. Diaz responded that the
type of landscaping required would depend on the type of
development put in by the applicant. He pointed out this
was an item that could be worked out between staff and the
applicant.
Mayor Wilson invited input in FAVOR of the request , and none was
offered. He invited input in OPPOSITION to the request , and none
was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed.
Upon motion by Snyder -and second by McPherson, Ordinance No. 259
was unanimously passed to second reading.
D. CASE NO. TT 14081, DAVID MOSS AND WAGNER-STANFORD CONSULTANTS ,
PPLICANTS : CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A
SIX-MONTH TIME EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ONE-YEAR
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 28 LOT TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP FOR 24 CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON APPROXIMATELY 5 ACRES
IN THE PR-5 ZONE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HOVELY LANE ,
APPROXIMATELY 1, 600 FEET EAST OF MONTEREY AVENUE.
Mayor Wilson declared the Public Hearing open. and asked for Staff' s
report .
Mr. Diaz reviewed the report in detail indicating that Staff
recommended approval of the request by adoption of Resolution
No. 81-66.
Mayor Wilson invited input in FAVOR of the request , and none was
offered. He invited input in OPPOSITION to the request , and none
was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed.
Upon motion by Newbrander and second by McPherson, Resolution No.
81-66 was unanimously adopted.
E. CASE NO. ZOA 06-81, CITY OF PALM DESERT, APPLICANT : CONSI-
ERATION OF AN AMEND NT TO MUNIC AL CODE TO MOD FY TIME
EXTENSION PROCEDURES IN CERTAIN ZONING MATTERS .
Mayor .Wilson declared the Public Hearing open and asked for Staff ' s
report.
Mr. Diaz reviewed the report indicating that the amendment
had been proposed by Staff with the intent being to eliminate
the cost of holding. another Public Hearing and also to reduce
Staff time required to prepare hearing notices , reports and
agendas , and resolutions . Public input at time extension
hearings in the past has been very minimal. Future time
extensions will be reviewed by the Planning Commission as
a part of the Consent Calendar unless the Commission or
Staff have questions . In this case, the City would have
the right of full review. The new method would simplify
the time extension procedure while still providinn the
City the right of full review.
Mayor Wilson invited input in FAVOR of the request , and none was
offered . He invited input in OPPOSITION to the request , and none
was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed.
May 14, 1981 Paee 4
Page 1 of 2
f
' Monroe, Tonya
From: Moeller, Charlene [CMOELLER@palmspri.gannett.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 8:30 AM
To: Monroe, Tonya
Subject: RE: Legal Notice for Publication
Hi, received ad. Will run on date requested ;)
Charlene Moeller
Desert Sun CfassifiedLeppals Dept.
(760)778-4578,Fn(760)778-4731
My hours are Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 pm.
legals@thedesertsun.com
-----Original Message-----
From: tmonroe@ci.palm-desert.ca.us [mailto:tmonroe@ci,palm-desert.ca.us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 8:23 AM
To: Charlene.moeller@thedesertsun.com
Subject: Legal Notice for Publication
Here's a new legal notice for publication. Thanks!
Tonya Monroe
City of Palm Desert
Department of Community Development
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
(760) 346-0611, Ext. 484
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City
Council to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, August 25, 2005, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at
which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments
concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the
hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for
review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to,
08/09/2005
Page 2 of 2
i
the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City
Clerk
August 12, 2005 City of Palm Desert, California
08/09/2005
CIIV Of P �1A DESERT
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
_ PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346—o6: 1
FAX: 760 341-7o98
info LA palm-desert.org
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City
Council to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, August 25, 2005, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
August 12, 2005 City of Palm Desert, California
CIIY Of P [ILM OESERI
7i-510 FREU WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 9226o-2578
TEL: 760 346-o6i 1
FAX: 760 341-7o98
info@palm-deserL.org
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public
hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
July 7, 2005 Palm Desert Planning Commission
C11Y OF P n I M DESERI
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEi: 76o 346—o6ii
FAX: 760 341-7098
info@palm-desca.org
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: July 20, 2005
City of Palm Desert
Re: ZOA 05-01
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and
taken the following action at its regular meeting of July 19, 2005:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF CASE NO. ZOA 05-01 BY ADOPTION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2344. MOTION CARRIED 4-0
(COMMISSIONER LOPEZ WAS ABSENT).
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk, City of Palm
Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.
Stephen R. Smith, Acting Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
AM
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
J,
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2344
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 25.56, 25.72 AND 25.73.
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 19th day of July, 2005, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amendments to
the Municipal Code Sections 25.56, 25.72 and 25.73; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 05-52," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the
project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission
did find the following facts to justify their recommendations as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment as provided in the
attached Exhibit "A".
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2344
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 19th day of July, 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: CAMPBELL, FINERTY, JONATHAN, TSCHOPP
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: LOPEZ
ABSTAIN: NONE
—DAVID E. TSC OPP, C-hairpekshi
ATTEST:
STEPHEN R. SMITH, Acting Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
S
JS.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2344
EXHIBIT A
That Municipal Code Section 25.73-019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence which
reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of substantial
character taken or is such construction should lapse for more than six
months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
"25 56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects. In
phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance or
adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall expire two
years following the final approval by the City Building Department of the most
recent phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission
may approve up to a one year extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25 72 110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility installation
may be valid for a longer period is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to
the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 19. 2005
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner
Finerty, directing staff to prepare a resolution of approval and continuing
Case No. PP 05-08 to August 16, 2005. Motion carried 3-1 (Chairperson
Tschopp voted no).
F. Case No. ZOA 05-01 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for recommendation to the City Council of an
amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals on phased projects.
Mr. Smith reviewed the staff report and recommended that the Planning
Commission recommend approval of ZOA 05-01 to the City Council.
Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished
to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one and the public
hearing was closed. Chairperson Tschopp asked for Commission comments.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2344, recommending
to City Council approval of Case No. ZOA 05-01. Motion carried 4-0.
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Oral Status Report on Outdoor Music at Augusta Restaurant
Mr. Smith advised that Code Compliance ran some numbers on Saturday,
June 18. The numbers they recorded before 10:00 p.m. were in compliance
and at 10:00 p.m. the band went inside.
28
• CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: July 19, 2005
CASE NO: ZOA 05-01
REQUEST: Recommendation to the City Council of an amendment to the
Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of application approvals on
phased projects.
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
I. BACKGROUND:
June 7, 2005 Planning Commission directed staff to process a code amendment to
clarify how time extensions should be handled on phased projects and to insert an
omitted line of text into Municipal Code Section 25.72.110.
II. HISTORY OF RELATED CODE AMENDMENTS:
In April 1981 the City amended the Municipal Code as it related to time extensions
for conditional use permits, variances and adjustments deleting the requirement for
new public hearings at time of extension consideration.
In 1982 the City enacted the 'precise plan" section of the Municipal Code which
includes its own separate provisions relating to expiration of approvals.
In 1982 the City also enacted a 'batch all" code section (Municipal Code Section
25.56.490) which had the effect of joining together all applications submitted for an
individual property for the purposes of determining expiration dates. This was
necessary because the Municipal Code provides different periods of time before a
decision expires for different applications (i.e., tentative maps - two years;
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments - one year).
Municipal Code Section 25.56.490 reads:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this code
related thereto, the anniversary date of any application
approvals shall be tied to the effective approval date of the
tentative tract map as processed for that property. When there
is no tentative tract map application involved with a particular
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
JULY 19, 2005
property, the anniversary date for determining the expiration of
any application approvals shall be tied to the effective approval
date of the most recently approved application. When there is
only an individual application relating to a particular property,
then the expiration date of the application shall be as set forth
in the code relating to that application. (Ord. 304 (part), 1982)
These amendments have generally worked well. Unfortunately, each of these
sections, except for the precise plan, are vague with respect to how time extensions
should be processed for phased projects. When phase one has been completed,
how long should an applicant have between phases without obtaining a time
extension? Forever? Two years? One year?
Also, it was noted that in Section 25.72.110 the language in the code inadvertently
omits a line of text from that originally recommended by the Planning Commission
April 15, 1981.
III. DISCUSSION:
This proposed amendment will not alter the current initial time limits. Tentative
maps, pursuant to state law, will continue to have an initial two-year approval
window. Any conditional use permit, precise plan, variance or adjustment
application which is associated with a tentative map will, by virtue of Municipal Code
Section 25.56.490, also continue to have an initial two-year approval.
Conditional use permits, precise plans, variances and adjustments not associated
with a tentative map will continue to have an initial one-year approval.
The proposed amendment will address expiration of application approvals in phased
projects because, except for in the precise plan section, the Municipal Code is silent
with respect to phased projects where the first part is built and construction on the
overall project halts for a period of time.
The precise plan code (Section 25.73.019-A) currently voids a precise plan if
construction lapses for more than six months.
Staff proposes to establish a two-year maximum period between phases, otherwise,
a time extension granted by the Planning Commission would be required.
2
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
JULY 19, 2005
The rational for the two-year period is that at this point the developer has a
significant stake in the project. He has acquired the property and has completed at
least a part of the project. Time extensions would generally be expected to be
granted unless the zoning of the site was changed. Two years from the date of the
final Building Department approval of the previous phase seems to provide a
reasonable protection for the property owner and for the City.
IV. CONCLUSION:
Staff proposes the following amendments:
A. Amend Municipal Code Section 25.73.019-A to delete the last sentence
which reads, "If the city should find that there has been no construction of
substantial character taken or if such construction should lapse for more than
six months, the precise plan shall be void."
B. Add Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 to read:
"25 56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased
projects. In phased developments any precise plan, conditional
use permit, variance or adjustment applicable to any remaining
undeveloped phases shall expire two years following the final
approval by the City Building Department of the most recent
phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by
the applicant and approved by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission may approve up to a one year extension
of time per request."
C. That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25 72 110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit
shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on
which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration
of one year a building permit is issued and construction is
commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site
which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the
use permit application, or the site is occupied if no building
permit or certificate of occupancy is required; provided that a use
3
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
JULY 19, 2005
permit for a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period
is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of the
permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by
filing with the Planning Commission.
V. CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed code amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for purposes
of CEQA. No further environmental review is necessary.
VI. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of an
amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to the expiration of application
approvals on phased projects by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No.
and Exhibit A attached thereto.
VII. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Comments from city departments and other agencies
D. Plans and exhibits
Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by:
Steve Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
Review and Concur:
Homer Croy
ACM for Development Services
/tm
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 25.56, 25.72 AND 25.73.
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 19th day of July, 2005, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amendments to
the Municipal Code Sections 25.56, 25.72 and 25.73; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 05-52," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the
project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission
did find the following facts to justify their recommendations as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment as provided in the
attached Exhibit "A".
I _
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 19th day of Jam, 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DAVID E. TSCHOPP, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
EXHIBIT A
That Municipal Code Section 25.73-019-A be amended by deleting the last sentence which
reads:
If the city should find that there has been no construction of substantial
character taken or is such construction should lapse for more than six
months, the precise plan shall be void.
That Municipal Code Section 25.56.491 shall be added as follows:
"25 56 491 Expiration of application approvals on phased projects. In
phased developments any precise plan, conditional use permit, variance or
adjustment applicable to any remaining undeveloped phases shall expire two
years following the final approval by the City Building Department of the most
recent phase of the project unless an extension of time is requested by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission
may approve up to a one year extension of time per request."
That Municipal Code Section 25.72.110 be amended to read:
25 72 110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate of
occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility installation
may be valid for a longer period is specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to
the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
f
ORDINANCE NO. 260 Page Two
EXHIBIT "A"
CHAPTER 25.72
CONDITIONAL USES
25.72. 110 La se of Conditional Use Permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse an s a become void one year fol owing the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on
the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility install-
ation may be valid for a longer period if specified by the Planning Commission.
Prior to the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month
time extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
CHAPTER 25.78
VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS
25.78.110 Lapse of Variance or Adjustment. A variance or adjustment shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the variance or
adjustment became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building
permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward comple-
tion on the site which was the subject of the variance or adjustment application,
or a permit is issued authorizing occupancy of the site or structure which was the
subject of the variance or adjustment application, or the site is occupied if no
building permit or certificate of occupancy is required. Prior to the expiration
of a permit, an applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with
the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 703 Page Two
EXHIBIT "A"
CHAPTER 25.72
CONDITIONAL USES
25.72.110 La se of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit. shall
lapse an sha ecome void one year fol owing the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building permit
is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is required; provided, that a use permit for a public utility install-
ation may be valid for a longer period if specified by the planning commission.
Prior to the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month
time extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
CHAPTER 25.78
VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS
25.78.110 La se of variance or adjustment. A variance or adjustment shall
lapse and s al become void one year following the date on which the variance or
adjustment became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building
permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward comple-
tion on the site which was the subject of the variance or adjustment application,
or a permit is issued authorizing occupancy of the site or structure which was the
subject of the variance or adjustment application, or the site is occupied if no
building permit or certificate of occupancy is required. Prior to the expiration
of a permit, an applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with
the Planning Commission.
` II
� I
V � _
o
- Q7I�
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. fo+ Page Two
EXHIBIT W 4�
- CHAPTER 25.72
rmI^T9NAL USES 1;
2S.72.1:J lapse of_c rml
-onditional use ptt. A Conditional use permit shall 1
O lapsed s� clime ome wTa one year following the date on which the use Permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building Permit u N
Is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate C
v of occupancy is Issued for the structure which was the subject of the use permit -!
application, or the site Is occpied if na building permit or certificate of �� a
occupancy is required; provided, that a use permit for a public utility install-
ation may be valid for a longer period if specified by the planning commission.
Prior to the expiration of the Permit, the applicant my request a twelve-month
time extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
e
a
CHAPTER 25.78
R' R VARIANCES AIM ADJUSTMENTS ti
go
25.78.110 Lapse of variance or adjustment. A variance or Adjustment shalla�
o P O lapse ana—$Xan become vo d one yea�llowing the date on which the variance or _
'v, adjustment b►came effective unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building 1w. 7 '
co permit is issued and construction is COMMenced and diligently pursued toward comple- V � .� (eh
_ tion on the site which was the subject of the.variance or adjustment application. QIG 0
or a permit is issued authorizing occupancy of the site or structure which was the 6iav ,..�
subject of the variance or.adjustment application, or the site is occupied if no
951) building permit or certificate of occupancy is required. Prior to the expiration
wn o of a permit, an applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with o %i"
the Planning Commission. V
r •4 .
c "R
u e
y :p79
0 1
a ?j
Q c �
ado
a C
cc
p
p m u 4
O S7
v � mod° - '�a:�
0 0
tl
i
}
S �+r eM\♦�_'�yr"T iw '�f- rwS:f. �. . .. ..ty,. �.. � K�: ;•Y� ._.:.yf `.. /`' � "..
1
' 25.72.050
i .
' and shall receive pertinent evidence concerning the proposed an appeal has been filed with the city council. (Ord. 99
use and proposed conditions under which it would be § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A §2539.4.08)
operated or maintained.(Ord.99§ I (part),1975:Exhibit
' A § 25394.05) 25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit.
A conditional use permit shall lapse and shall become
25.72.060 Action of the planning commission. void one year following the date on which the use permit
' The commission may grant a conditional use permit became effective,unless prior to the expiration of one year,
as the permit was applied for or in modified form,or the a building permit is issued and construction is commenced
application may be denied A conditional use permit may and diligently pursued toward completion on the site which
be granted for a limited time period, or may be granted was the subject of the use pemtit application,or a certificate
subject to such conditions as the commission may prescribe. of occupancy is required;provided,that a use permit for
Conditions may include,but shall not be limited to,payment a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period
of drainage fees; requiring special yids, open spaces, if specified by the planning commission. Prior to the
buffers,fences,and walls;requiring installation and main, expiration of the permit,the applicant may request a twelve
' nance of landscaping; requiring street dedications and month time extension by filing with the planning commis-
' improvements; regulation of points of vehicular ingress Sion. (Ord 260 (part), 1981: Ord. 99 § 1 (part), 1975:
and egress;regulation of traffic circulation;regulation of Exhibit A § 25.394.11)
signs; regulation of hours of operation and methods of
operation,control of potential nuisances;prescribing scan- 25.72.120 Modification of conditional use.
dards for maintenance of buildings and grounds;prescription Sections 25.74.020 through 25.74.060 of this title shall
r of development schedules and development standards;and apply to an application for modification,expansion,or other
such other conditions as the commission deems necessary change in a conditional use;provided,that minor revisions
to insure compatibility of the use with surrounding develop- or modifications may be approved by the director of envi-
meats and uses and to preserve the public health, safety ronmental services if he determiner that the changes would
and welfare.A conditional use permit may grant variances not affect the findings prescribed in Section 25.72.070 and
or adjustments to the regulations prescribed by this title the application for revision or modification is filed within
i for which variance and adjustment procedures are prescribed one year from the date the original conditional use permit
r by Chapter 25.78. (Ord 99 § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A becomes final,does not change the use designated in the
§ 25.39-4.06) original conditional use permit,does not increase,reduce,
or alter the size or shape of the premises to which the
25.72.070 Findings. original conditional use permit pertained, and does not
The planning commission shall make the following extend the time in which the actual establishment of the
findings before granting a conditional use permit conditional use permit or the commencement of construction
A. That the proposed location of the conditional use under the conditional use permit shall take place. (Ord
is in accord with the objectives of this title and the purpose 99 § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A§ 25.39-4.12)
of the district in which the site is located;
' B. That the proposed location of the conditional use
and the conditions under which it would be operated or
maintained will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety,or welfare,or be materially injurious to properties
or improvements in the vicinity;
C. That the proposed conditional use will comply with
each of the applicable provisions of this title, except for
approved variances or adjustments;
P D. That the proposed conditional use complies with
the goals,objectives,and policies of the city's general plan.
(Ord. 99 § I (part), 1975: Exhibit A§ 2539-4.07)
25.72,090 Effective date of the use permit
The decision of the planning commission shall be final
within fifteen days from the date of the decision unless
` 457 (Palm Dec 10.00)
r
25.73.019 Failure to utilize a precise plan. Page 1 of 1
Palm Desert California Municipal Code
^ Up <s Previous » Next - Main TOC ?Search
25.73.019 Failure to utilize a recise Ian. _
A. Failure to utilize a precise plan within one year of its effective date(unless extended by action of the
planning commission) will automatically void such precise plan, In the event construction work is involved, such
work must actually commence within the stated period and be diligently pursued. If the city should find that
there has been no construction of substantial character taken or if such construction should lapse for more than
six months, the precise plan shall be void.
B. Extension of time up to a maximum one year may be granted from the date of expiration of the precise
plan by the planning commission when extenuating circumstances can be clearly shown by the applicant. The
request for same shall be submitted to the planning commission in writing prior to the expiration date and shall
clearly state the reasons why construction has not commenced.
C. The commission may grant additional time extensions up to a maximum of one year providing that
there has not been adopted any changes to zoning regulations that would impact said precise plan. (Ord. 299
(part), 1982)
http://www.codemanage.com/palmdesert/index.php?topic=25-25_73-25_73_019 6/21/2005
1 •
25.56.390
25.56390 Automobile service stations— ment.The use of lighted tennis courts and the use of lights
Lighting. in commercial developments will be particalarly reviewed.
r All lighting fixtures shall be located so as to shield di- (Ord.98§ 1 (part), 1975:Exhibit A§2532-9.03)
' re"rays from adjoining properties.Luminaries shall be of
a low level,indirect diffused type and shall not exceed the 25.56.480 Trash handling alternative.
height of the building.(Ord.98§ I(part),1975:Exhibit A An alternative to a trash enclosure shall include the
' §25.32-9.01(7)) placement of a trash bin in a concrete or metal lined pit.
r Use,location and design ofthe trash handling facility shall
25.56.400 Automobile service stations—Service be reviewed and approved by the local disposal service
r bays. and the city.(Ord 293, 1982)
Service bay entrances shall not front upon a public
Suva (Ord. 98 § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A 25.56.490 Expiration dates of application
§25.32-9.01(8)) approvals.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this code re.
25.56.410 Automobile service stations—Wall. fated thereto,the anniversary date of any application ap-
A six foot masonry wall shall be required along all robe- provals shall be tied to the effective approval date of the
rior property lines and a three-foot-high wall along the tentative tract map as processed for that property. When
r street. (Ord. 98 § I (part), 1975: Exhibit A there is no tentative tract map application involved with a
' §25.32-9.01(9)) particular property,the anniv
ersary date for determining
the expiration of any application approvals shall be tied to
25 56 420 Take-out restaurants the effective approval date of the most recently approved
The site shall be of sufficient size and configuration to application.When there is only an individual application
satisfy all requirements for off-street parking, setbacks, relating to a particular property,then the expiration date of
curb cuts, walls, landscaping and refuse storage as pro- the application shall be as set forth at the code relating to
vided in this title. (Ord. 98 § I (part), 1975: Exhibit A that application.(Ord.304(part), 1992)
r 25-%SM Hotel development standards.
25.56.430 Take-out restaurants—Setbacks. All hotel developments shall comply with the follow-
The planning commission may establish setbacks more ing:
restrictive than those required by the regulations for the A. The minimum guest room/suite size for any hotel
district in which the proposed use would be located if it shall be three hundred thirty square feet. Hotel projects
determines they are necessary or desirable for the protec- shall have an overall average guest room/suite size of at
tion of the public health, safety and welfare or to insure least three hundred seventy-five square feet.
compatibility with uses on contiguous properties.(Ord.98 B. All hotels shall provide a multi-purpose (three
§ I (part), 1975: Exhibit A§25.32-9.02(2)) meal)restaurant either within the building itself;attached
or adjacent to the building,together with room service for
25.56.440 Hake-out restaurants—Curb cuts. hotel guests(a continental breakfast may constitute one of
The size and location of curb cuts for driveways shall the three meals);
be determined by standards development by the depart- C. All hotel developments shall utilize central air
ment of environmental services.(Ord.98§ 1(part), 1975: conditioning systems or vertical fan coil systems,or other
Exhibit A §25.32-9.02(3)) specifically approved systems.Window or wall installed
air conditioning systems are prohibited.(Ord 872§2(Ex-
25.56.450 Take-out restaurants—Landscaping, hibit A), 1998;Ord 459§2, 1986)
Not less than twenty percent of the total site area shall
be devoted to landscaped planting areas. (Ord. 98 § 1 25.56.510 Conversion of abandoned public
(part), 1975:Exhibit A§25.32-9.02(4)) utility well sites.
Abandoned public utility well sites may be approved
25.56.470 Lighting standards in all zones. for conversion to a private water export irrigation well site
Every development occurring in any zone in the city subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Use of
shall be critically reviewed relative to mitigating any nega- private water export irrigation well sites shall not result in
tive impacts from lighting proposed as a part of develop- an increase in ambient noise levels measured prior to the
423 (palm Daat Sapp.No.3.803)
� IIV 0f PO M OESEI� f
^ 73-510 FREO WARING DRIVE
PALM DESURT,CALIFORNIA 9]26o-3578
TEL: 760 346—o6i I
FAX: 76o 347-7098
infoepdm-deun.org
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of
application approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73:510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public
hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
July 7, 2005 Palm Desert Planning Commission
:rtCEIVED
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
PAL!i DESERT, CA
IL005 JUL 18 AM 10: 28
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Riverside
I am a citizen of the United Slates and a resident of Proof of Publication of
the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen ------------
years,and not a party to or interested in the
above-entitled matter. 1 am the principal clerk of a
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, No.06-6, - — —"- -
printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, CITY OF PALM DESERT
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been LEGAL NOTICE
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the CASE NO. zOA 05 01
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
California under the date of March 24, 1988.Case will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider an amendment to the
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the Municipal Code as It relates to expiration of appll-
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller cation approvalsfor phased projects.
than non pariel,has been published in each regular Sg D ub1et hear6:00 p m.illnbe held c Tuesday,July
J at
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any the Palm Desert Civic Center,73-510 Fred Waring
Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: place all Interested persons are invited to attend
antl be heard.Written comments concerning all
1 items covered by this public hearing notice shall
m ,be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Infer-
July 7 ,2005 matron concerning the proposed project antl/or
---—---—___—_—_—_—_^___— I negative declaration Is available for review In the
Department of Community Development at the
above address between the holus of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you
------ ---'---'-- r challenge tb a proposed actions n court,you may
All in the year 2005 be limited to raising only those Issues you or
Y someone else raised at the public hearing de-
I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the r scribed In this notice, or In written correspon-
dence delivered to the Planning Commission at,
foregoing is true and correct. or prior to, the public hearing.
PHI LIP DRELL, Secretary
Dated at P*gs, alifornias--14th—day Palm Ded t Pla uly ar Ina&mmluion
2005—
r Page 1 of 3
f
Monroe, Tonya
From: Moeller, Charlene [CMOELLER@palmspri.gannett.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:09 AM
To: Monroe, Tonya
Subject: RE: New legal notices for publication
Hi Tonya, I receive three ads for the 7th, all pasted to one email.
They will run on requested date O
Cha&ne 91foeller
(Desert Sun CfassifwdGegafs(Dept.
(760)778-4578.Fax(760)778-4731
My hours are Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 pm.
legals@thedesertsun.com
-----Original Message-----
From: tmonroe@ci.palm-desert.ca.us [mailto:tmonroe@ci.palm-desert.ca.us]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 4:24 PM
To: Charlene.moeller@thedesertsun.com
Subject: New legal notices for publication
Please publish the following three legal notices. Thanks!
Tonya Monroe
City of Palm Desert
Department of Community Development
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
(760) 346-0611, Ext. 484
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO.ZOA 05-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code as it relates to expiration of application
approvals for phased projects.
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the
Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all
interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by
this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the
proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community
Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you
or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
07/05/2005
Page 2 of 3
1
July 7, 2005 Palm Desert Planning Commission
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. PP/CUP 05-08
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert
Planning Commission to consider a req nest by Delgado/Rodriguez for approv al of a precise
plan/conditional use permit to raze the existing restaurant/retail buildings and construct a two-
story restaurant/retail/office complex with parking adjustment on property located at 73-703
Highway 111.
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at
which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments
concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the
hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for
review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at,
or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
July 7, 2005 Palm Desert Planning Commission
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. PP 05-11
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert
Planning Commission to consider a request by Prest/Vuksic Architects for approval of a precise
plan for a 2,813 square foot Jack in the Box restaurant(with drive thru) located on the west side
of Cook Street 210 feet north of Gerald Ford Drive, 36-555 Cook Street.
07/05/2005
Page 3 of 3
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at
which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments
concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the
hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for
review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at,
or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
July 7, 2005 Palm Desert Planning Commission
07/05/2005
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Steve Smith, Planning Manager
DATE: June 7, 2005
SUBJECT: Initiation of code amendment to clarify process for time extensions of
conditional use permits, variances and adjustments, Municipal Code
Sections 25.72.110 and 25.78.110.
I. BACKGROUND:
In April 1981 the City amended the Municipal Code as it related to time extensions for
conditional use permits, variances and adjustments deleting the requirement for new
public hearings at time of extension consideration.
These amendments have generally worked well. Unfortunately, each of these sections
are vague with respect to how time extensions should be processed in phased projects.
When Phase 1 has been completed, how long should an applicant have between phases
without obtaining a time extension? Forever? Two years? One year?
Also, it should be noted that in Section 25.72.110 the language in the code
inadvertently omits a line of text.
Section 25.72.110 should be amended as follows:
25.72.1 10 Lapse of conditiog use permit. A conditional use permit
shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on
which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the
expiration of one year, a building permit is issued and construction
is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site
which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of
the use permit application, or the site is occupied if no building
permit or certificate of occupancy is required; provided, that a use
permit for a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period
if specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of
the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
IL RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission direct staff to initiate a Zoning Ordinance amendment
clarifying time extensions of conditional use permits, variances and adjustments for
projects built in phases and inserting the omitted line of text into Section 25.72.110.
INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
REGARDING TIME EXTENSIONS
JUNE 7, 2005
III. ATTACHMENTS:
- Municipal Code Sections 25.72.1 10 and 25.78.110
- Planning Commission Resolution No. 703 Exhibit A
- City Council Ordinance No. 260 Exhibit A
Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by:
Steve Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
Review and Concur:
Homer Croy
ACM for Develop nt Services
/tm
CIIy Uf P H I M DESERT
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346-o6n
FAX: 760 341-7098
info@palm-deserc.org
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: June 8, 2005
City of Palm Desert
Re: Zoning Ordinance Initiation Request
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken
the following action at its regular meeting of June 7, 2005:
PLANNING COMMISSION, BY MINUTE MOTION, DIRECTED STAFF TO
INITIATE A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CLARIFYING TIME
EXTENSIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, VARIANCES AND
ADJUSTMENTS FOR PHASED PROJECTS. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk, City of Palm
Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.
11.E-�
Phillip Drell, Se retary
p
Palm Desert PI nning Commission
Am
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
naimox,[mwrw
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 7, 2005
how they had it designed originally. He said there really wasn't much
difference.
Mr. Drell asked Mr. Ricciardi to point out the cut back area.
Mr. Ricciardi did so.
Commissioner Campbell said she liked the revised version better.
Commissioner Finerty agreed. She also noted that in the staff report under
background it said at the public hearing neighbors expressed concern with
respect to a two-story building proposed at the center of the property.
Accordingly, Planning Commission imposed two conditions to limit the impact
of it. She asked how they could go back on that? Mr. Drell said they would
have to reopen the public hearing.
Chairperson Tschopp said that Mr. Ricciardi could work with staff and get it
on an agenda and have a public hearing. Commissioner Campbell noted that
otherwise, he already had a motion and a second.
Mr. Ricciardi said he would go ahead with the Commission approving
it and would think about it later. He thanked them.
Chairperson Tschopp noted that there was a motion and a second and
called for the vote. Motion carried 5-0.
D. Request for Initiation of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to
Clarify Time Extensions for Conditional Use Permits, Variances
and Adjustments for Phased Projects
Mr. Smith explained that staff was requesting that Commission direct staff to
initiate a change to allow the clean up of the language with respect to time
extensions on conditional use permits, variances and adjustments. The
concern is with respect to phased projects. Currently the code is vague or
silent and they would like to come up with something to cover it. As well,
while they were doing a little bit of research on this it was noted that two and
a half lines were left out. The Planning Commission recommended the one
version and somehow two and a half lines were left out of the version that
went to the Council. So staff wanted to add that back in. So staff was asking
that Commission direct staff to initiate the amendment. Mr. Drell said they
28
f
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 7, 2005
haven't exactly figured out time. The next item on the agenda was a case in
point, which really prompted this. They might want to talk about it now, too.
Commissioner Jonathan asked that they be kept separate. Mr. Drell said that
was fine.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner
Finerty, by minute motion, directed staff to initiate a zoning ordinance
amendment to clarify time extensions for conditional use permits, variances
and adjustments for phased projects. Motion carried 5-0.
E. Case No. CUP 99-7 -TEMPLE SINAI, Applicant
Request for approval of a one-year time extension for the
unbuilt portion of the CUP 99-7 approval.
Mr. Drell noted that they have the request. It was his understanding that it
was a financial issue. They would build it tomorrow if they had the money.
They are starting a capital campaign this fall. If a big donor comes along and
gives them money, they would hopefully build it. They were asking for
another year. They would like more, but staff took the most conservative
interpretation of the current code. Yes, they did need extensions and at a
certain point in time their initial vesting based on their completion of phase
one eventually evaporates.
The question he wanted to ask about their previous action is what their
thoughts were on the question they left open in the background discussion.
How much did someone have to do? If they finished three quarters of it, is
that enough to vest them for the last quarter forever? If they finish less of it,
is there a period where they want to see it back? He asked if the
Commission had any guidance or suggestions. At what point and what
degree of completion should the extension be required?
Commissioner Campbell felt like this was a different category. She would
grant an extension for this one. It is different when a developer builds phase
one and then he runs out of money to build phase two. But this being a
church, to her she put it in a different category. Mr. Drell said it wasn't
29
r
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Steve Smith, Planning Manager
DATE: June 7, 2005
SUBJECT: Initiation of code amendment to clarify process for time extensions of
conditional use permits, variances and adjustments, Municipal Code
Sections 25.72.110 and 25.78.110.
I. BACKGROUND:
In April 1981 the City amended the Municipal Code as it related to time extensions for
conditional use permits, variances and adjustments deleting the requirement for new
public hearings at time of extension consideration.
These amendments have generally worked well. Unfortunately, each of these sections
are vague with respect to how time extensions should be processed in phased projects.
When Phase 1 has been completed, how long should an applicant have between phases
without obtaining a time extension? Forever? Two years? One year?
Also, it should be noted that in Section 25.72.110 the language in the code
inadvertently omits a line of text.
Section 25.72.1 10 should be amended as follows:
25 72 1 10 Lapse of conditions use oermit. A conditional use permit
shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on
which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the
expiration of one year, a building permit is issued and construction
is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site
which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of
the use permit application, or the site is occupied if no building
permit or certificate of occupancy is required; provided, that a use
permit for a public utility installation may be valid for a longer period
if specified by the Planning Commission. Prior to the expiration of
the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month time
extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
H. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission direct staff to initiate a Zoning Ordinance amendment
clarifying time extensions of conditional use permits, variances and adjustments for
projects built in phases and inserting the omitted line of text into Section 25.72.110.
INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
REGARDING TIME EXTENSIONS
JUNE 7, 2005
III. ATTACHMENTS:
- Municipal Code Sections 25.72.110 and 25.78.110
- Planning Commission Resolution No. 703 Exhibit A
- City Council Ordinance No. 260 Exhibit A
Prepared by: c Reviewed and Approved by:
Steve Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
Review and Concur:
Homer Croy
ACM for Develop nt Services
/tm
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 703 Page Two
EXHIBIT "A"
CHAPTER 25.72
CONDITIONAL USES
25.72.110 Lapse of conditional use permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building permit
is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion
on the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is issued for the structure which was. the subject of the use permit
application, or the site is occupied if no building permit or certificate of
occupancy is. required; provided, that a use permit for a public utility install-
ation may be valid for a longer period if specified by the planning commission.
Prior to the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month
time extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
CHAPTER 25.78
VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS
25.78.110 La se .of variance or adjustment. A variance or adjustment shall
lapse and shal Sec
void one year following the date on which the variance or
adjustment became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building
permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward comple-
tion on the site which was the subject of the variance or adjustment application,
or a permit is issued authorizing occupancy of the site or structure which was the
subject of the variance or adjustment application, or the site is occupied if no
building permit or certificate of occupancy is required. Prior to the expiration
of a permit, an applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with
the Planning Commission.
l
ORDINANCE NO. 260 Page Two
EXHIBIT "A"
CHAPTER 25.72
CONDITIONAL USES
25.72.110 La se of Conditional Use Permit. A conditional use permit shall
lapse an sha become void one year following the date on which the use permit
became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building permit is
issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on
the site which was the subject of the use permit application, or a certificate
of occupancy is required; provided that a use permit for a public utility install-
ation may be valid for a longer period if specified by the Planning Commission.
Prior to the expiration of the permit, the applicant may request a twelve-month
time extension by filing with the Planning Commission.
CHAPTER 25.78
VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS
25.78.110 Lapse of Variance or Adjustment. A variance or adjustment shall
lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the variance or
adjustment became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building
permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward comple-
tion on the site which was the subject of the variance or adjustment application,
or a permit is issued authorizing occupancy of the site or structure which was the
subject of the variance or adjustment application, or the site is occupied if no
building permit or certificate of occupancy is required. Prior to the expiration
of a permit, an applicant may request a twelve-month time extension by filing with
the Planning Commission.