Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 01-83 OFF-STREET PARKING 1983 l✓E -j iED �� !`. ��T tuCi- uef-D N126 I-IE,jL r1-4- S vp�5_ � _.S6,)rol _c, 7Iz �- JsW�� C ��c7 �q ���NG u wlI-L_ L PiecfEAJ ?ZD ALo Q G- W (7El STjAjj -TcDl, Squc� /7 �O5�TioK1 s A-'r--rc-F _SE069J i- J d4l cp Z4 _tl N\ m 1�2 ORDINANCE NO. 335 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT, AMENDING SECTION 25.59.310 AND ADDING SECTIONS 25.04.832 AND 25.58.312 CONCERNING THE OFF- STREET. PARKING SCHEDULE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT. CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 I WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 12th day of May, 1983, hold a duly noticed public hearing, to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 concerning the off-street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements. WHEREAS, the Palm Desert Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 849 has recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, said application has complied with requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-8911, in that the director of environmental services has determined 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 persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts to justify its action 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 and affected specific plans. 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 City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the considerations of the council in this case. 2. That it does hereby approve a zoning ordinance text amendment, as provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A", to amend the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.58.310 and adding Sections 25.58.312 and 25.04.832. 3. The city clerk is directed to publish this ordinance once in the Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert and shall certify to the passage of adoption of this ordinance and the same shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 26th day of May, 1983, by the following vote to wit: AYES: Jackson, Kelly, Puluqi and Wilson NOES: Snyder ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None OMEO S. PUL , Mayor ASH ZEI ZLA R. IGAN, • Clerk City of Palm Desert, C§fffornia /pa ' :! CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE N0. 335 EXHIBIT "A" CASE N0. ZOA 01-83 Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule (amended) Section 25.04.832 Valet parking (added) Section 25.58.312 Valet parking (added) AMENDED SECTIONS: Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule. The following land uses shall provide off-street parking in conformity with the following requirements unless otherwise specified in any approved planned development district: USE MINIMUM PARKING STALLS REQUIRED A. Commercial and Industrial Uses. ....beauty parlors and barber shops One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area. C. Health Uses. ....dental clinics.or offices and medical clinics or offices One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area for offices less than 2200 square feet and one for each 200 square feet for offices 2200 square feet or larger. D. .Manufacturing Plants and ' Kindred Uses. ....industrial uses of all types except a structure used exclusively for warehouse purposes Two for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area. Loading spaces may be counted as part of the required parking at a rate not to exceed one per 2500 gross square feet. E. Places of Assembly. ....restaurants (take-out restaurants) and other eating establishments including lounges for the consumption of food and beverages Ten minimum and ten for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area for restaurants up to 3000 square feet and fifteen spaces for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 3000 square feet of gross floor area. SECTIONS ADDED: Section 25.04.332 Valet parking. Whenever a parking attendant is utilized to park cars in an assigned area that is not available to the general public. Section 25.58.312 Valet parking. Valet parking is subject to review and approval either at the time the predominant use is approved through a conditional use permit with insurance provisions or later as a specfic item by the city traffic engineer or technical traffic committee under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 10.12.020 Powers and duties of city traffic engineer and Section 10.12.040 Duties of traffic committee but not until one year after occupancy resulting from the conditional use permit. Existing commercial uses utilizing valet parking must have an approved valet parking plan which includes provisions for insurance for the patrons to the satisfaction of the city attorney. /pa April 8, 1983 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA O1-83 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request by the CITY OF PALM DESERT for an amendment to the Municipal Code, Chapter 25.58 concerning the off-street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements. SAID public hearing will be held on April 28, 1983, at 7:00 P.M., in the council chamber at Palm Desert City Hall, 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California PUBLISH: Desert Post April 15, 1983 /pa MINUTES , PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 5, 1983 Mr. Diaz further stated, that the smaller condominium units reflected the commission's recommended polity to council contained in the report A Housing Study-Strategies for Palm Desert. That policy called for the minimum size of condominiums to be reduced to meet city apartment standards. He concluded that in the past, projects were approved subject to revisions in the zoning ordinance. Mr. Diaz stated that the commission could approve this case with a clear understanding that the commission is not prejudging the amendment that will be before them at the next meeting to change condominium sizes to be the same as apartment sizes. Commissioners Wood and Crites discussed the possibility of continuing this matter until the issue of the zoning ordinance amendment relating to unit sizes is resolved. Commissioners Kryder and Richards disagreed feeling that the condition attached would address the concern with the statement Mr. Diaz suggested going on record. Moved by Commissioner Crites, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, to adopt findings as recommended by staff; carried 3-1 (Commissioner Wood voting Nay). Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, to adopt Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 846, 847, 848, approving C/Z O1-83, PP 01-83 and TT 19074 respectively, subject to conditions; carried 3-1 (Commissioner Wood voting Nay). B. - Continued Case No. ZOA 01-83 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Amendment to Municipal Code Chapter 25.58, concerning off-street parking. Mr. Joy reviewed the proposed amendments for the various uses which also included valet parking regulations. Staff recommended approval. Chairman Wood opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to S^eak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this amendment. Those who spoke in FAVOR of the amendment were: MR. JIM FOX, 73-111 El Paseo MR. LORI SPEAR, 45-120 San Pablo Chairman Wood closed the public hearing and asked for the pleasure of the commission. Moved by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 849, recommending to the City Council approval of ZOA 01-83; carried unanimously 4-0. C. Case No. ZOA 03-83 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicants Amendment to Municipal Code to add Chapter 25.21, concerning second unit senior housing. Mr. Drell reviewed the staff report and stated that this code amendment would be implemented with the restriction that the unit would be occupied by persons 60 years of age or older. Chairman Wood opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this matter. There being none, the public hearing was closed. There was some discussion on the requirement for a 2-car carport or garage; it was determined that the city should impose this requirement. Chairman Wood expressed concern that the ordinance as written would circumvent a requirement of the state by requiring 2-car garages. Mr. Diaz responded that the state requirement was one that properly belonged at the local level and had the -4- 9 City of Palm Desert Staff Report TO: Planning Commission DATE: April 5, 1983, continued from March 15, 1983. CASE NO: ZOA 01-83 PROPOSED AMENDMENT:Zoning ordinance amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 concerning the off-street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements for parking. INITIATED BY: City of Palm Desert I. BACKGROUND: This amendment was initiated by the planning commission as the result of processing numerous conditional use permits for medical offices, beauty parlors, etc., due to a code requirement that a conditional use permit be required for any use in the C-1 zone requiring more than one parking space per 250 square feet of floor area. Other proposed changes result from numerous inquiries to staff concerning standards for industrial developments and valet parking that presently are inappropriate to serve the needs of the community. II. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: The director of environmental services has determined that the proposed amendment for CEQA purposes is a class five categorical exemption. III. DISCUSSION: The conditional use permit requirement as mentioned in the background section, was created by ZOA No. 04-81 to replace the variance as the only zoning tool to grant parking modifications. The findings necessary to grant approval of a conditional use permit stress whether the use proposed is appropriate at the location proposed while the findings necessary to grant approval of a variance stress hardships that a property possesses that are not common to other properties in the same vicinity or zone. Most shopping centers in the general commercial zone meet parking requirements only if all the suites of the center are used for general retail or office space which require one parking space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area. Uses that require only a small increase in this ratio are enough to make the center deficient in the required number of spaces, though in most circumstances only a small deficiency of possibly one or two parking spaces. A detailed discussion of each of these uses is contained in the next section of this report. It is important to keep in mind when evaluating the parking schedule for commercial zoning that there is a significant amount of on-street parking available throughout the general commercial zone such as along El Paseo where customers/tourists look first for on- street parking before utilizing off-street parking. A. Medical Offices: The code requires one parking space for each 200 square feet of floor area for this type of use compared to one for each 250 square feet for a general office use. This ratio and difference in standards for the two different uses are common to other cities. A small medical office will have only a slight impact on a center's required number of spaces but presently still requires a conditional use permit. Staff proposes to alter the parking schedule for medical offices in a fashion similar to retail food stores. As soon as a medical office requires more than eight parking spaces then a conditional use permit will be required or in other words "the parking schedule for a medical office of - 1 - CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 APRIL 5, 1983 A. Medical Offices (continued): less than 2000 square feet shall be one parking space for each 250 square feet of floor area; medical offices of 2000 square feet or more shall provide a ratio of one parking space for each 200 square feet of floor area". B. Beauty Parlors/Barber Shops: Through a recent code amendment, the requirements read, "two parking spaces per station plus an additional two spaces. This usually results in a ratio exceeding the one per 250 square foot retail standard. A survey of cities revealed that most cities do not differentiate between beauty/barber shops and general retail in terms of parking space requirements; therefore, staff proposes the same requirements for beauty parlors and barber shops as general retail. C. Restaurants: Palm Desert's parking requirements differ from other cities' requirements in terms of calculation. Other cities count the number of seats or calculate public service areas only, rather than the gross area of the entire restaurant in order to establish parking requirements with the exception of the City of Riverside. Riverside calculates parking in a manner similar to Palm Desert. but requires ten spaces per 1000 square feet compared to fifteen per 1000 square feet in Palm Desert. Using a typical floor plan, other cities average eleven to fourteen parking spaces per 1000 square feet using fifty percent of floor area as seating for a standard. The Southern California Restaurant Association was contacted and a manager of numerous chapters of the association endorses the ten per 1000 square foot figure. Staff also recommends approval of this same ten per 1000 square foot figure with a possible modification requiring a higher ratio for larger restaurants that will have either a greater ratio of public serving area or entertainment. This figure will occur over 3000 square feet of floor area and staff proposes that the present fifteen spaces per 1000 square feet be retained for any square footage over this 3000 square foot figure. D. Industrial: The present code section for industrial developments is vague in the sense that the number of employees are used as a basis for establishing requirements (two spaces for each three employees). This is difficult for staff to determine when the future tenants in a building are not known, let alone the number of employees each tenant will employ. It is true that some allowances should be made for warehouse type uses; however, in the case of a large warehouse, nothing prevents an individual from converting some of this warehouse space to office space. Staff proposes a blanket standard to cover industrial and warehouse space at the rate of two spaces per 1000 square feet of floor area. This is an increase from the minimum standard for industrial buildings of one space per 1000 square feet. Staff proposes that one-fifth space per 1000 square feet be allowed as a designated loading space on the site plan and counted as part of the required parking at the owner's option. - 2 - CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 APRIL 5, 1983 E. Valet Parking: This is an issue that staff is concerned about for two reasons: 1. Traffic congestion that results either directly or indirectly from valet parking situations. 2. Fire lane obstructions created by the valet parking operators. When discussing valet parking situations the question always arises as to whether or not a restaurant proprietor's valet parking should be limited. Recently a valet parking ordinance was presented by the La Quinta City Council which would require any restaurant that has valet parking to provide equal parking spaces for attendant and self-parking. This ordinance further stated that the two different parking areas shall each be subtantially as convenient to the entrance of the establishment. This ordinance would only be appropriate when a new parking lot is being designed for a restaurant since very few existing parking lots could accommodate such an arrangement. A corollary issue that is of equal or possibly greater importance is the blockage of fire lanes. Staff proposes the following three implementation measures: 1. That existing restaurants providing valet parking be sent a letter explaining business license requirements for the valet operators (which in most cases are separate from the restaurant) and fire accessway requirements and the results of noncompliance. 2. Existing restaurants and valet operators be given a six month period to obtain clearance from the technical traffic advisory committee or city traffic engineer relating to traffic circulation. 3. Any future restaurant initially be denied valet parking unless a valet parking plan is approved at the same time the restaurant is approved through the conditional use permit process. If a restaurant does not initially request valet parking at the time of their conditional use permit approval, application may be made to the city traffic engineer or technical traffic advisory committee for purposes of review and approval but not within one year after occupancy. The intent of this amendment relating to valet parking is not to outlaw or limit the extent of the operation, instead it intends to regulate valet parking in terms of public safety and traffic circulation. IV. EXISTING PROVISIONS TO BE REVISED: A. Dental clinics or offices; medical clinics or offices. One for each 200 square feet of floor area exlusive of stairways, elevators, landings and mechanical rooms, not exceeding 15 percent of the gross floor area. B. Beauty parlor: Two per station plus two. C. Restaurants, taverns, lounges and other establishments for the sale and area consumption on the premises of food and beverages: Ten minimum or 15 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. - 3 - CASE NO. ZOA O1-83 APRIL 5, 1983 IV. EXISTING PROVISIONS TO BE REVISED (CONTINUED): D. Take-out restaurants: Ten minimum or 15 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. E. Industrial uses of all types except a building used exclusively for warehouse purposes. Two for each three employees plus one for each vehicle operated from and stored on the property but in no event less than one for each one thousand square feet of gross floor area. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend to the commission that it adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. , recommending approval of ZOA 01-83. "A resolution of the planning commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, recommending to the city council that it approve Zoning Ordinance Amendment 01-83, amending Section 25.58 and adding Sections 25.04.832 and 25.58.312 concerning off-street parking street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements". VI. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Legal Notice 2. Exhibit "A" Prepared by: Reviewed and approved by: /pa - 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 01-83, AMENDING SECTION 25.58.310 AND ADDING SECTIONS 25.04.832 AND 25.58.312 CONCERNING THE OFF-STREET PARKING SCHEDULE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT. CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 WHEREAS, the planning commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 15th day of March, 1983, hold a duly noticed public hearing and continued hearing on April 5, 1983, to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 concerning the off-street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements. WHEREAS, said section complies with the requirements of the City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No 80-8911, in that the director of environmental services has determined the project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering the 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 and affected specific plans. 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, 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 Exhbit "A" to amend Municipal Code, Chapter 25.58.310, and adding sections 25.58.312 and 25.04.832 . PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of April, 1983, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RALPH B. WOOD, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /pa PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT "A" CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule (amended) Section 25.04.832 Valet parking (added) Section 25.58.312 Valet parking (added) AMENDED SECTIONS: Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule. The following land uses shall provide off-street parking in conformity with the following requirements unless otherwise specified in any approved planned development district: USE MINIMUM PARKING STALLS REQUIRED A. Commercial and Industrial Uses. ....beauty parlors and barber shops One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area C. Health Uses. ....dental clinics or offices and medical clinics or offices One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area for offices less than 2200 square feet and one for each 200 square feet for offices 2200 square feet or larger D. Manufacturing Plants and Kindred Uses. ....industrial uses of all types except a structure used exclusively for warehouse purposes Two for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area. Loading spaces may be counted as part of the required parking at a rate not to exceed one per 2500 gross square feet E. Places of Assembly. ..restaurants (take-out restaurants) and other eating establishments including lounges for the consumption of food and beverages Ten minimum and ten for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area for restaurants up to 3000 square feet and fifteen spaces for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 3000 square feet of gross floor area. SECTIONS ADDED: Section 25.04.832 Valet parking. Whenever a parking attendant is utilized to park cars in an assigned area that is not available to the general public. - 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Section 25.58.312 Valet parking. Valet parking is subject to review and approval either at the time the predominant use is approved through a conditional use permit or later as a specific item by the city traffic engineer or technical traffic committee under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 10.12.020 Powers and duties of city traffic engineer and Section 10.12.040 Duties of traffic committee but not until one year after occupancy resulting from the conditional use permit. - 3 - BAY A'EA RESTAURANT ASSOIATION REPRESENTING THE FOOD AND ALCOHOL BEVERAGE SERVICE INDUSTRIES OF CALIFORNIA D A CHAPTER OF THE CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION p 721 Santa Monica Blvd.,Santa Monica,California 90401 / (213) 393-7195 14 March 1983 OFFICERS - PRESIDENT Elizabeth Burns VICES Bob Burns City Council ist VICE PRESIDENT 45275 Prickly Pear Lane F. MfrITAL cay OFiptom EpAI-� flESERT _ Bob Rogers City of Palm Desert, CA 92260 The Warehouse 2nd VICE PRESIDENT Fred Altman Zucky's SECRETARY-TREASURER In answer to your inquiry concerning parking require- Dean Williams ments for restaurants , you will need to look at the Dolores West location and their hours of business . CHAPTER MANAGER Gerald Breitban A free standing building on its own lot with or DIRECTORS without valet parking would have ample spaces using Douglas Bittenbender 10 cars per 1000 square feet of gross floor space, Bittenbender's Jane Cohen Bratskellars of America A restaurant located in a regional or large shopping Sam Engelman center would probably not need any additional park- Nibblers Larry Gellman ing requirements over your present retail requirements . La Grange Aux Crepes Richard Hedenskog Ristorante Marco Polo A restaurant in a small shopping center, where' it is Joseph LaBarbera the major tenant, would probably need 5 cars per 1000 LaBarbera'e square feet in addition to your present retail require- Oavid Letchworth q Pancho&Wong's ments . Greg Naylor Cindy's John Oldrale Cyrano-Marina Louis Bellei Sincerely, The Belle-Vue � Marvin Saul LOis SchIndel The Lettuce Patch _ Richard Settle - Gerald Breitbart Pick's Gerald Siegel Manager Miramar-Sheraton Harold Stern Stern's Famous Barbecue GB/esg Madeline Tigner The Lair A. GORON REYNOLDS, M.D., F.A.C.S. GYNECOLOGY DIPLOMATE AMERICAN BOARD 73-1 11 SUITE 2H EL PASEO OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 (619) 340-1887 a� 1�v1-r�eu w� P R 51883 I ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF. PAW D SERr ')Lp � u i i J I V � U G�1/✓�- l V 'I City of Palm Desert Staff Report TO: Planning Commission DATE: April 5, 1983, continued from March 15, 1983. CASE NO: ZOA 01-83 PROPOSED AMENDMENT:Zoning ordinance amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 co ncerning the off- street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements for parking. INITIATED BY: City of Palm Desert I. BACKGROUND: This amendment was initiated by the planning commission as the result of processing numerous conditional use permits for medical offices, beauty parlors, etc., due to a code requirement that a conditional use permit be required for any use in the C-1 zone requiring more than one parking space per 250 square feet of floor area. Other proposed changes result from numerous inquiries to staff concerning standards for industrial developments and valet parking that presently are inappropriate to serve the needs of the community. II. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: The director of environmental services has determined that the proposed amendment for CEQA purposes is a class five categorical exemption. III. DISCUSSION: The conditional use permit requirement as mentioned in the background section, was created by ZOA No. 04-81 to replace the variance as the only zoning tool to grant parking modifications. The findings necessary to grant approval of a conditional use permit stress whether the use proposed is appropriate at the location proposed while the findings necessary to grant approval of a variance stress hardships that a property possesses that are not common to other properties in the same vicinity or zone. Most shopping centers in the general commercial zone meet parking requirements only if all the suites of the center are used for general retail or office space which require one parking space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area. Uses that require only a small increase in this ratio are enough to make the center deficient in the required number of spaces, though in most circumstances only a small deficiency of possibly one or two parking spaces. A detailed discussion of each of these uses is contained in the next section of this report. It is important to keep in mind when evaluating the parking schedule for commercial zoning that there is a significant amount of on-street parking available throughout the general commercial zone such as along El Paseo where customers/tourists look first for on- street parking before utilizing off-street parking. A. Medical Offices: The code requires one parking space for each 200 square feet of floor area for this type of use compared to one for each 250 square feet for a general office use. This ratio and difference in standards for the two different uses are common to other cities. A small medical office will have only a slight impact on a center's required number of spaces but presently still requires a conditional use permit. Staff proposes to alter the parking schedule for medical offices in a fashion similar to retail food stores. As soon as a medical office requires more than eight parking spaces then a conditional use permit will be required or in other words "the parking schedule for a medical office of - 1 - CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 APRIL 5, 1983 A. Medical Offices (continued): less than 2000 square feet shall be one parking space for each 250 square feet of floor area; medical offices of 2000 square feet or more shall provide a ratio of one parking space for each 200 square feet of floor area". B. Beauty Parlors/Barber Shops: Through a recent code amendment, the requirements read, "two parking spaces per station plus an additional two spaces. This usually results in a ratio exceeding the one per 250 square foot retail standard. A survey of cities revealed that most cities do not differentiate between beauty/barber shops and general retail in terms of parking space requirements; therefore, staff proposes the same requirements for beauty parlors and barber shops as general retail. C. Restaurants: Palm Desert's parking requirements differ from other cities' requirements in terms of calculation. Other cities count the number of seats or calculate public service areas only, rather than the gross area of the entire restaurant in order to establish parking requirements with the exception of the City of Riverside. Riverside calculates parking in a manner similar to Palm Desert. but requires ten spaces per 1000 square feet compared to fifteen per 1000 square feet in Palm Desert. Using a typical floor plan, other cities average eleven to fourteen parking spaces per 1000 square feet using fifty percent of floor area as seating for a standard. The Southern California Restaurant Association was contacted and a manager of numerous chapters of the association endorses the ten per 1000 square foot figure. Staff also recommends approval of this same ten per 1000 square foot figure with a possible modification requiring a higher ratio for larger restaurants that will have either a greater ratio of public serving area or entertainment. This figure will occur over 3000 square feet of floor area and staff proposes that the present fifteen spaces per 1000 square feet be retained for any square footage over this 3000 square foot figure. D. Industrial: The present code section for industrial developments is vague in the sense that the number of employees are used as a basis for establishing requirements (two spaces for each three employees). This is difficult for staff to determine when the future tenants in a building are not known, let alone the number of employees each tenant will employ. It is true that some allowances should be made for warehouse type uses; however, in the case of a large warehouse, nothing prevents an individual from converting some of this warehouse space to office space. Staff proposes a blanket standard to cover industrial and warehouse space at the rate of two spaces per 1000 square feet of floor area. This is an increase from the minimum standard for industrial buildings of one space per 1000 square feet. Staff proposes that one-fifth space per 1000 square feet be allowed as a designated loading space on the site plan and counted as part of the required parking at the owner's option. - 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 849 Section 25.58.312 Valet parking. Valet parking is subject to review and approval either at the time the predominant use is approved through a conditional use permit or later as a specific item by the city traffic engineer or technical traffic committee under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 10.12.020 Powers and duties of city traffic engineer and Section 10.12.040 Duties of traffic committee but not until one year after occupancy resulting from the conditional use permit. C - 3 - "` i CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 APRIL 5, 1983 E. Valet Parking: This is an issue that staff is concerned about for two reasons: 1. Traffic congestion that results either directly or indirectly from valet parking situations. 2. Fire lane obstructions created by the valet parking operators. When discussing valet parking situations the question always arises as to whether or not a restaurant proprietor's valet parking should be limited. Recently a valet parking ordinance was presented by the La Quinta City Council which would require any restaurant that has valet parking to provide equal parking spaces for attendant and self-parking. This ordinance further stated that the two different parking areas shall each be subtantially as convenient to the entrance of the establishment. This ordinance would only be appropriate when a new parking lot is being designed for a restaurant since very few existing parking lots could accommodate such an arrangement. A corollary issue that is of equal or possibly greater importance is the blockage of fire lanes. Staff proposes the following three implementation measures: 1. That existing restaurants providing valet parking be sent a letter explaining business license requirements for the valet operators (which in most cases are separate from the restaurant) and fire accessway requirements and the results of noncompliance. 2. Existing restaurants and valet operators be given a six month period to obtain clearance from the technical traffic advisory committee or city traffic engineer relating to traffic circulation. 3. Any future restaurant initially be denied valet parking unless a valet parking plan is approved at the same time the restaurant is approved through the conditional use permit process. If a restaurant does not initially request valet parking at the time of their conditional use permit approval, application may be made to the city traffic engineer or technical traffic advisory committee for purposes of review and approval but not within one year after occupancy. The intent of this amendment relating to valet parking is not to outlaw or limit the extent of the operation, instead it intends to regulate valet parking in terms of public safety and traffic circulation. IV. EXISTING PROVISIONS TO BE REVISED: A. Dental clinics or offices; medical clinics or offices. One for each 200 square feet of floor area exlusive of stairways, elevators, landings and mechanical rooms, not exceeding 15 percent of the gross floor area. B. Beauty parlor: Two per station plus two. C. Restaurants, taverns, lounges and other establishments for the sale and area consumption on the premises of food and beverages: Ten minimum or 15 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. - 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 849 EXHIBIT "A" CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule (amended) Section 25.04.832 Valet parking (added) Section 25.58.312 Valet parking (added) AMENDED SECTIONS: Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule. The following land uses shall provide off-street parking in conformity with the following requirements unless otherwise specified in any approved planned development district: USE MINIMUM PARKING STALLS REQUIRED A. Commercial and Industrial Uses. ....beauty parlors and barber shops One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area C. Health Uses. ....dental clinics or offices and medical clinics or offices One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area for offices less than 2200 square feet and one for each 200 square feet for offices 2200 square feet or larger D. Manufacturing Plants and Kindred Uses. ....industrial uses of all types except a structure used exclusively for warehouse purposes Two for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area. Loading spaces may be counted as part of the required parking at a rate not to exceed one per 2500 gross square feet E. Places of Assembly. ..restaurants (take-out restaurants) and other eating establishments including lounges for the consumption of food and beverages Ten minimum and ten for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area for restaurants up to 3000 square feet and fifteen spaces for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 3000 square feet of gross floor area. SECTIONS ADDED: Section 25.04.832 Valet parking. Whenever a parking attendant is utilized to park cars in an assigned area that is not available to the general public. - 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 849 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 01-83, AMENDING SECTION 25.58.310 AND ADDING SECTIONS 25.04.832 AND 25.58.312 CONCERNING THE OFF-STREET PARKING SCHEDULE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT. CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 J � WHEREAS, the planning commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 15th day of March, 1983, hold a duly noticed public hearing and continued hearing on April 5, 1983, to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 concerning the off-street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements. WHEREAS, said section complies with the requirements of the City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No 80-8911, in that the director of environmental services has determined the project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering the 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 and affected specific plans. 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, 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 Exhbit "A" to amend Municipal Code, Chapter 25.58.310, and adding sections 25.58.312 and 25.04.832 . PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of April, 1983, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: CRITES, KRYDER, RICHARDS, WOOD NOES: NONE ( ABSENT: DOWNS 9 ABSTAIN: NONE c 9 RALPH B. WOOD, C airman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /pa CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 APRIL 5, 1983 IV. EXISTING PROVISIONS TO BE REVISED (CONTINUED): D. Take-out restaurants: Ten minimum or 15 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. E. Industrial uses of all types except a building used exclusively for warehouse purposes. Two for each three employees plus one for each vehicle operated from and stored on the property but in no event less than one for each one thousand square feet of gross floor area. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend to the commission that it adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. , recommending approval of ZOA 01-83. "A resolution of the planning commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, recommending to the city council that it approve Zoning Ordinance Amendment 01-83, amending Section 25.58 and adding Sections 25.04.832 and 25.58.312 concerning off-street parking street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements". VI. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Legal Notice 2. Exhibit "A" Prepared by: Reviewed and approved by:� /pa - 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 01-83, AMENDING SECTION 25.58.310 AND ADDING SECTIONS 25.04.832 AND 25.58.312 CONCERNING THE OFF-STREET PARKING SCHEDULE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT. CASE NO. ZOA 01-83 WHEREAS, the planning commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 15th day of March, 1983, hold a duly noticed public hearing and continued hearing on April 5, 1983, to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 concerning the off-street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements. WHEREAS, said section complies with the requirements of the City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No 80-8911, in that the director of environmental services has determined the project to be a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering the 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 and affected specific plans. 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, 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 Exhbit "A" to amend Municipal Code, Chapter 25.58.310, and adding sections 25.58.312 and 25.04.832 . PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of April, 1981, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RALPH B. WOOD, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /pa PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT "A" CASE NO. ZOA O1-83 Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule (amended) Section 25.04.832 Valet parking (added) Section 25.58.312 Valet parking (added) AMENDED SECTIONS: Section 25.58.310 Commercial and industrial off-street parking schedule. The following land uses shall provide off-street parking in conformity with the following requirements unless otherwise specified in any approved planned development district: USE MINIMUM PARKING STALLS REQUIRED A. Commercial and Industrial Uses. ....beauty parlors and barber shops One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area C. Health Uses. ....dental clinics or offices and medical clinics or offices One for each 250 square feet of gross floor area for offices less than 2200 square feet and one for each 200 square feet for offices 2200 square feet or larger D. Manufacturing Plants and Kindred Uses. ....industrial uses of all types except a structure used exclusively for warehouse purposes Two for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area. Loading spaces may be counted as part of the required parking at a rate not to exceed one per 2500 gross square feet E. Places of Assembly. ....restaurants (take-out restaurants) and other eating establishments including lounges for the consumption of food and beverages Ten minimum and ten for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area for restaurants up to 3000 square feet and fifteen spaces for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 3000 square feet of gross floor area. SECTIONS ADDED: Section 25.04.832 Valet parking. Whenever a parking attendant is utilized to park cars in an assigned area that is not available to the general public. - 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Section 25.58.312 Valet parking. Valet parking is subject to review and approval either at the time the predominant use is approved through a conditional use permit or later as a specific item by the city traffic engineer or technical traffic committee under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 10.12.020 Powers and duties of city traffic engineer and Section 10.12.040 Duties of traffic committee but not until one year after occupancy resulting from the conditional use permit. - 3 - 1 i MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 1983 Commissioner Kryder asked about the overall height of the antenna; he was concerned that 14 feet was too high and that in the R-1 area should have a lower height. Mr. Diaz responded that staff was attempting to set a maximum height limit consistent with present height limitations. Commissioner Crites stated the size of dish was related to the distance from Omaha, Nebraska, which was the central dispensing point of television signals received from satellites. Chairman Wood opened the hearing and asked for testimony in FAVOR or OPPOSITION; no one wishing to speak, the hearing was closed. Chairman Wood asked for comments by the commission. He stated he was concerned about allowing such antennas without some kind of public hearing or review. Commissioner Richards stated he had problems with some of the restrictions. Commissioner Kryder felt the commission should receive a presentation on the limits of sizes of antennas to determine proper height restrictions. He also stated that more information was needed to make a proper decision. Commissioner Crites stated that he wasn't sure if any ordinance could be written to cover all concerns. Chairman Wood asked if anyone could prohibit the installation of dish antennas. Mr. Diaz replied that the antennas could not be prohibited absolutely. Chairman Wood stated that he did not wish approvals without adjoining property owners being notified. Mr. Diaz responded that to create a hearing process would result in problems, because such antennas couldn't be prohibited but just controlled; and this could result in further frustrations. Commissioner Crites requested that: 1. The secretary receive an opinion from the city attorney if the antennas could be prohibited. 2. Those commissioners desiring further information could request staff for clarification before the next hearing. 3. Staff revise the ordinance to cover aesthetic considerations and criteria. Commissioner Richards asked that the design review board study the matter and the secretary report their findings to the commission. Chairman Wood wanted information why public hearings shouldn't be held. Moved by Commissioner Crites, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, to continue this matter to April 19, 1983, with staff to respond to the above items; carried unanimously 4-0. B. Case No. ZOA 01-83 - INITIATION BY CITY OF PALM DESERT Amendment to Municipal Code Chapter 25.58, concerning off-street parking. Mr. Diaz stated that since the amendment was scheduled for hearing further concerns relating to current industrial and senior citizen housing parking requirements have arisen. He recommended that the hearing be opened and continued to April 5, 1983. -2- MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 1983 Chairman Wood opened the hearing. 1 Moved by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to continue the case to meeting of April 5, 1983; carried unanimously 4-0. C. Case No. ZOA 02-83 - INITIATION BY CITY OF PALM DESERT Creation of Chapter 25.37 setting forth procedures and requirements for development agreements. Mr. Drell delivered the staff report. He stated that the ordinance change was generated by the West Hills Specific Plan and the recommendation of the joint commission and council Hillside Committee II. Mr. Drell summarized the salient points of the ordinance, pointing out that the agreement constituted a contract between the developer and the city. Mr. Drell stressed that the ordinance does not in and of itself approve an agreement but establishes the procedure. Mr. Drell also stated that any agreement could be placed on a referendum. Commissioner Crites asked if this was selling zoning? Mr. Drell said no. Commissioner Crites expressed concern that commissions and councils could act contrary to the public interest. Mr. Diaz responded that any agreements could be put to a referendum and was not absolved from the initiative process. Chairman Wood opened the hearing for public testimony; there being no one wishing to testify the public testimony portion of the hearing was closed. Chairman Wood stated this was not a "gimmick" but a tool that has been available for years. Commissioner Richards stated that the matter had been studied extensively and this was an attempt to resolve to a sensitive problem Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 845, recommending to the city council approval of ZOA 02-83, creating Chapter 25.37 - Development Agreements; carried 3-1 (Commissioner Crites voting Nay). VIII. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS Preliminary plan approvals by the design review board at its meeting of March 8, 1983, requiring planning commission confirmation. A. Case No. 242 MF - EDWARD F. REED TRUST Preliminary approval of plans for a three unit apartment on the west side of Las Palmas Avenue between Alessandro Drive and San Gorgonio Way. Mr. Sawa gave the report. Moved Commissioner Crites, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to approve design review board's action; carried unanimously 4-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS - NONE X. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS XI. COMMENTS Commissioner Crites asked staff to look into the issue of required solar findings on tentative tract maps. -3- 1 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (TI4) 346-06I1 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE ZOA 01-83 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by the CITY OF PALM DESERT for an amendment to the Municipal Code, Chapter 25.58 concerning the off-street parking schedule and conditional use permit requirements. SAID public hearing will be held on March 15, 1983, 2:00 p.m. in the council chambers in the Palm Desert City Hall, 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission PUBLISH: Desert Post March 4, 1983 i PROOF U.- PUBLICATION (20101 2015 .5 CCP) PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF �G e;-s PLANNING COMMIS \4`31a� Q P ID LO A-0 1-b3G\� I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid* I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of THE DESERT POST, TWFWxLM'5E—S­MTr— a a newspaper, of general circula- LEGAL NOTICE ZAL NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIV- tion, printed and published weekly EN that « toIc hearl w.wlkk be held before the Pal in the city of Riversides County sort Plannino Cd MISS[ t of Riverside, and which newspaper I Chapter 25..58 the MconCerrn has been adjudged a newspaper of ` aft-street parking u schedule 1 and conditional parka use.schedule, ...I requirements. general circulation by the held brchearl1g .2:ill e held on March 15 1963, 2:06 Superior Court of the County of p m in the covncA,chamber $• Riverside, State of California« Prl I P.darrL49.. Palm Desert, Cd1 V&nl r at under date of October 5, 19649 which time and placea111nter- ested persons oreinvited:to at- Case number 93658: that the $end and be heard. RAMON A. DIAZ .k. notices of which the annexed is Secretary Palm Desert Planning a printed copy, has been published I Commission POP-9/4 in each regular and entire .issue L of said newspaper, and not .in any Supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit : 03/4 ,1983 I Certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated {March 41 1983 at Riverside, California CITY OF PALM DESERT