Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 02-04 OFFICE BUILDING HEIGHT 2002 ORDINANCE NO. 1022 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.25 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONE AS IT RELATES TO HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED. CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 12th day of September, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amending the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.25, Office Professional zone, as it relates to maximum building height and how building height is measured; and . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. 2146, has recommended approval of the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is considered a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony arguments, if any, of all interested 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 ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the consideration of the City Council in this case. 2. That ZOA 02-04 as delineated in the attached Exhibit "A" is hereby ordained. ORDINANCE NO. 1022 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. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this 26th day of September , 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: BENSON, CRITES, SPIEGEL, KELLY NOES: FERGUSON ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE RICHARD S. KEL Y, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE D. KLASS City Clerk` City of Palm Desert, California 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1022 1 EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 : That Section 25.25.016 E be added to read: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. l 3 w ' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2146 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.25 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONE AS IT RELATES TO MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AND HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED. CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 20th day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.25 as described above; 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. 02-60," 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 Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation 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; and 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" to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.25. PLANNING COMMISSION r(ESOLUTION NO. 2146 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 2002, by the following. vote, to wit: AYES: CAMPBELL, JONATHAN, LOPEZ, TSCHOPP, FINERTY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE CIND FINERT , Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, ecretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 ~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2146 EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read as follows: HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality. Section 2: That Section 25.25.016 E be added to read as follows: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential,lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. 3 CIIY 0r P1IIM OESERI 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-o6i i FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.org PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF ACTION Date: August 22, 2002 CITY OF PALM DESERT Re: ZOA 02-04 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of August 20, 2002: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZOA 02-04 BY ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2146 AS AMENDED. 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. Philip Drell, Se etary Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal CITY 0 P „ 1M OESERI 73-5 10 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346—o61 I FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.org PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF ACTION Date: August 22, 2002 CITY OF PALM DESERT Re: ZOA 02-04 The Planning Commission of.the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of August 20, 2002: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZOA 02-04 BY ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2146 AS AMENDED. 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. Philip Drell, Se etary Palm Desert Planning Commission Am cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal nnornm,Een,n PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2146 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.25 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONE AS IT RELATES TO MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AND HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED. CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 20th day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.25 as described above; 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. 02-60," 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 Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation 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; and 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" to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.25. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2146 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 2002, by the following. vote, to wit: AYES: CAMPBELL, JONATHAN, LOPEZ, TSCHOPP, FINERTY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE CIND FINERT , Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, ecretary Palm Desert Pla ning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2146 EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read as follows: HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality. Section 2: That Section 25.25.016 E be added to read as follows: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. ZOA 02-04 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for a recommendation to City Council to approve an Amendment to Chapter 25.25, the Office Professional zone, as it relates to maximum building height and how building height is measured. Chairperson Finerty asked for the staff report. Mr. Drell requested that the next public hearing be opened as well since the cases were associated. B. Case No. PP 02-08 - PREST / VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, Applicant (Continued from July 16, 2002) Request for a recommendation to City Council to approve a precise plan of design for a 14,802 square foot office building on the east side of San Pablo Drive 1 ,100 +/- feet north of Highway 1 1 1 , also known as 44-530 San Pablo Drive. Chairperson Finerty asked for the staff report for both items. Mr. Drell noted that a couple of meetings ago when the commission first reviewed the office building, the Planning Commission wanted to approve the project but the ordinance wouldn't let them so Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would give them the flexibility without having to make the variance findings. Staff prepared some height exception language that "the Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on the finding of the Architectural Commission that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements below 25 feet resulting in superior architectural quality." He explained that our goal is not to simply raise the "shoe box" up to 28 feet high, but if buildings incorporate both unique roof design and variation in roof design, the goal is to break up that continuous horizontal. If they use the additional height to create variation and in general the architecture merits it, staff felt the project should be rewarded. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 The second issue that staff has been dealing with for a while with a couple of the large projects had to do with where they measure height from. On the smaller projects it's currently measured from the adjacent curb height. Buildings are 25 to 30 feet away from the curb. The grading ordinance requires a positive drainage to the curb which meant effective heights of 25-foot buildings were actually 23.5 feet for a typical building. A large lot that's 600 feet deep that positive drainage situation as it continues to rise would practically preclude any two-story buildings the farther you get from the street because they were still measuring it from this curb height. So staff was suggesting that once you get 50 feet away from the street, they would start measuring building height from the minimum pad required by the City Engineer to achieve a positive drainage under our grading ordinance. For all the typical small lots that front streets like on Fred Waring, it wouldn't apply since all those buildings had to be pushed as close to the street as possible. So they would still be measured from curb elevation. On larger sites like the office buildings on Fred Waring with the various layers or the project on Country Club that was a five-acre parcel extending all the way back, those would then be measured from minimum adjacent grade. That would reward good design and encourage greater setbacks. Mr. Drell thought that right now we punish greater setbacks because it forces people to build lower buildings the further away they get from the street. He asked for any questions on the ordinance amendment. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the language said that the Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding of the Architectural Commission that the project incorporates unique design, etc. He suggested striking the words "Architectural Commission" in case ARC didn't feel that condition existed, but Planning Commission did. Mr. Drell said that would be fine. Commissioner Jonathan thought the existing wording tied the Planning Commission's hands. Mr. Drell said the good news was that it would allow them to rest on the opinion of the Architectural Commission. By taking that out, it would still allow the Architectural Commission to express their opinion, but it would leave the decision up to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Jonathan said that is what he wanted. He didn't want the Planning Commission to be limited to the ARC conclusion. That would be his suggestion. Mr. Drell said he had no problem taking that wording out. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 Commissioner Tschopp asked for clarification. On "significant roof elements below 25 feet" he asked if the Architectural Review Commission looked at this and had any input on it. The reason he was asking was to know if there might be an instance when they might have something occurring on the roof that they would want to be above the 25 feet. Mr. Drell said they could have it and if they looked at the building under discussion, it incorporated that. It has a curved roof so it goes up to about 27.5 feet. On the front of the roof the eave goes to about 23.5 feet, plus it would have a one-story section. He said if they looked at the buildings that are most interesting, some of them have a variety of one and two stories or a significant difference between the roof elements. The Vuksic building probably varied in height. It had a one story element at about 13 feet and a curved roof where the eave starts at 23 feet then the top of the arch is at 27.5 feet. This forced or encouraged that sort of variety. It didn't preclude significant elements above 25. The assumption was that they were permitting it. They were allowing 28-foot high buildings, but when they include both 28 feet and 23 feet or in this case 28 feet and 13 feet. Commissioner Tschopp explained that his comment was based on the interpretation that someone might make and how it might be in question later on. If the intent was very clear, there wouldn't be a problem. Mr. Drell thought that if it was unclear, it should be changed. Commissioner Jonathan suggested deleting the words "below 25 feet." It would just say "unique design and .significant roof elements resulting in superior architectural quality." Commissioner Tschopp said he just knew how some people could interpret it and take the extremes and it wouldn't be good to get into an argument about it later on about where the architectural element lies, either below or above. Mr. Drell indicated that obviously there were architectural elements below and above. He said it might be more clear by adding the words "above and" below 25 feet resulting in superior architectural quality. He asked what they thought about that. The first sentence says they can go up to 28 feet. What they would be saying is that part of the objective is to get some variety. They want to see height variances above and below the ordinance nominal height limit which is 25 feet. Commissioner Jonathan asked what would happen if they had a situation with a flat roof that was exactly 25 feet and a design comes in and the developer says they want to add some interest and make it curve up. But if it was 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 dropped and they had a three-foot curve, they couldn't do it because the stories were too short so the only thing unique was that there was a curved roof starting at 25 feet and going up three feet. The way the ordinance read that would not quality because there was nothing significant below the 25. Mr. Drell concurred. Looking at Mr. Vuksic's building; the eave starts at 23.5 feet. Even if they were to chop off the front element, his building would meet this definition because his roof goes from 23.5 feet to 27.5 feet. Commissioner Jonathan suggested pretending for a moment that it went from 25 to 28 and the applicant said that if they didn't let him do it, he'd do the building with a flat roof. Mr. Drell said that if the commission wanted to have more latitude to make that decision, this kind of described a very specific objective, which was limiting. It told the architect right off that this is our objective and they didn't want them to start at 25 feet and go to 28, the tradeoff was getting some lower elements. If they wanted to retain the ability to approve buildings that start at 25 and go to 28 or argue with someone who wanted to do that and the commission didn't like it, it all depended on the commission's ultimate objective. Commissioner Tschopp thought they all agreed on the objective. But if they gave an inch, an applicant would take the three feet. It had to be in the verbiage tying down that the exception is only granted in very unique situations. Mr. Drell concurred. He said they wanted to make it clear where "unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior architectural quality." Commissioner Lopez stated that he liked that because it gave the commission the ability to look above and below the 25 feet and gave the applicant the flexibility to work in those guidelines without tying the commission's hands. He thought that was a good compromise. Commissioner Tschopp said they were talking about significant roof elements and were limiting it to that and not the whole building going to 28 feet. To summarize, Chairperson Finerty stated that they were striking the words .of the Architectural Commission" and adding roof elements "above and" below 25 feet. Chairperson Finerty asked if there were any other questions. There were no questions. Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked if Mr. Katz wished to address the commission. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 MR. KATZ asked for permission to pass the floor to his architect, John Cody, first and then he would come back. MR. JOHN CODY, 74-277 Highway 111 in Palm Desert, stated that when he heard about this he came to plead for it for the simple reason they would be building a building that has passed through the architectural committee, the City Council and the Planning Commission. He said there was a problem with the spans because the building is a general office building and could be used for large areas, so their spans were about 32 feet which necessitated 16-inch beams and trusses to allow air-conditioning in through there. The problem with the 24-foot height for them, although they could probably make it work, was that their ceiling heights on the floor areas would be less than nine feet and that was a typical office floor. They were beginning to squeeze and compress the building down to get it in and that was kind of bad. The other thing was the roof tile. Because of the height restrictions, they had to go to 2.5 and 12 which wouldn't even drain. It has a roof under it, a membrane, so it would be all right and would work, but it was a detriment. They would really like to see this simply because it would make it a more viable structure for them. He thanked the commission for their time. MR. KENNETH KATZ, 77-587 Ashbury Court in Palm Desert, informed the commission that he is not an architect or engineer and didn't really understand any of these things except as a layman. But since the last meeting last month, he went back to designing the floor for the doctor and the medical equipment and sitting down with the air-conditioning engineers and the electrical and plumbing, and all he heard was moaning and groaning about not being able to get things done like not getting the drainage because they need more angles, someone could not get the air- conditioning in because of the beams and they constantly heard these things. So he came in to see Mr. Smith to ask for a variance to get some additional height so they could remove the frustrations that they have architecturally and put in the equipment they need. Those people who were building knew it could be very frustrating. Also, for the roof angles, it would be much nicer to have a higher degree of slope. He 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 thanked the commission and said he just wanted to share his view on it. Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for commission comments. Commissioner Lopez asked if the comments were for both. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Mr. Drell noted that two separate resolutions would be needed. Commissioner Campbell indicated they would talk about the first one, the ordinance. Commissioner Tschopp noted that they were really looking at this from an exterior stand point and what the building would look like architecturally on the outside. He suggested inserting that in the language, "resulting in superior exterior architectural quality." The reason he said that was they weren't as interested in what was happening inside as the appearance on the outside. Commissioner Campbell agreed that they look at a building and the height from the outside. Mr. Drell said they really only look at the outside. But they should be concerned about the inside. Commissioner Tschopp said just to be argumentative for when architects come before them in the future and argue that the interior dictates that the building be 28 feet, he thought the argument back would be that they are interested in the exterior. That's why he thought that should be clarified and to say what they were really looking for. Mr. Drell said that if it avoids confusion, he had no problem with saying "exterior" architecture. Commissioner Campbell thought that logically they would be thinking about the exterior as being interesting. Mr. Drell concurred since they were talking about roof heights and differences in roof heights and architectural features. He didn't think it would hurt the ordinance to insert that word. Commissioner Campbell agreed and said that if the commission wanted to add exterior that was fine with her. Commissioner Jonathan said he was okay with adding it and understood Commissioner's Tschopp's point. He concurred that they would have applicants coming in asking for more room to fit in equipment or because it was superior architecturally and that it resulted in higher ceilings, so he agreed that it should be clarified to say that would not be an issue in considering 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 height exception. Commissioner Tschopp stated that they wanted something approved on the exterior of the building to justify the exception. Chairperson Finerty concurred. Commissioner Jonathan said he was okay with adding that. Commissioner Lopez also concurred. Commissioner Campbell stated that she would also add that change to the motion. Commissioner Jonathan asked for clarification that the wording they would end up with would be, "The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality." Commission concurred. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2146, recommending to City Council approval of ZOA 02-04 incorporating the changes to read, "The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality." Motion carried 5-0. With regard to the second item, Chairperson Finerty asked if there was a staff report. Mr. Drell said that staff went through it last time. He noted that staff made some of the corrections that came out of the last meeting relative to the easement situation. They had given options of the City having easements and that had been deleted from the conditions. Mr. Bagato was here to answer any other questions. Otherwise, the building and the proposal were unchanged from the last hearing. Chairperson Finerty noted that the commission was in favor of the project except for this one thing that the commission just took care of. Mr. Drell concurred. He explained that before they couldn't make the finding that it was consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. Chairperson Finerty asked if they needed to ask if anyone wished to speak for or against the project. Mr. Drell said that the public hearing was kept open, so yes. 9 i MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the project. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Drell said that since it was attached to an ordinance that was going to Council, when they have one part of a relevant part of a project going to Council, the action on the precise plan would also be a recommendation of approval to Council. Both would go to the Council together. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2147, recommending to City Council approval of PP 02-08, subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. C. Case Nos. GPA 02-02, C/Z 02-02 and PP 02-06 - NBNA UNIQUE PROPERTIES, LLC, Applicant (Continued from August 6, 2002) Request for a recommendation to City Council to approve a general plan amendment and change of zone from low density residential (PR-5) planned residential five dwelling units per acre to office professional (O.P.), a precise plan of design allowing up to 33,310 square feet of office professional use and Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto for 3.90 acres at the northwest corner of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. Mr. Smith explained that the matter was continued from the last meeting at the request of the applicant. In 1998 the City looked at a request to do an office complex on approximately nine acres at the northwest corner of Frank Sinatra and Portola. At that time there was considerable input from nearby residents in the Kaufman and Broad project to the west and it was eventually rejected. The five-acre parcel to the west at Daisy Lane had been developed most recently with single family dwellings. 10 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: August 20, 2002 CASE NO: ZOA 02-04 REQUEST: Amendment to Chapter 25.25, Office Professional zone as it relates to maximum building height and how building height is measured. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert I. BACKGROUND: On July 16, 2002 in connection with discussion of a proposed two-story office building, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an amendment to the O.P. zone allowing approval of limited height exceptions to encourage architectural creativity and diversity. The O.P. zone was created in 1981 to provide for compatible transitional buildings and uses between major arterials and residential zones. Heights were established allowing two story buildings with a maximum height of 25 feet measured from average curb height. Strict adherence to these standards has often resulted in unimaginative "shoe box" designs with minimal eight-foot interior ceiling heights and inadequate screening of roof top equipment. Roof designs are limited to single height parapets with continuous horizontal lines. The original height standards which set heights according to curb elevation were designed to address view concerns for buildings close to the street on shallow lots adjacent to single story residential zones. The City's grading and drainage requirements make the curb height standard impractical on large pads when buildings are hundreds of feet from the street or adjacent residential uses. II. DISCUSSION: A. BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION For typical O.P. buildings set 20 to 30 feet from the street, the grading ordinance requires pads to be a minimum of 12 inches above the curb. With STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 AUGUST 20, 2002 a six-inch slab, the effective building height is reduced from 25 to 23.5 feet. Assuming a nine-foot ceiling and two-foot structural sections between floors, the minimum building height without parapets is 22 feet. A 1 .5 foot parapet cannot screen roof top equipment. Reducing ceilings to eight feet still results in inadequate equipment screening. Any attempt to enhance screening and break the continuous horizontal parapet line will exceed the 25 foot (23.5 foot) limit. The Planned Commercial and Planned Residential zones contain provisions which allow the Planning Commission to approve exceptions to general development standards based on design merit. A similar but more limited provision should be added to the O.P. zone allowing heights up to 28 feet for buildings with significant roof elements below the 25-foot standard which result in superior architectural quality consistent with the intent of the zone. B. HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS - LARGE LOTS The current method of measuring building heights from curb was designed for shallow lots adjacent to single-story residential zones where buildings are set back 20 to 30 feet from the street. This method becomes impractical and counterproductive when applied to buildings on large lots set back hundreds of feet from streets and adjacent properties. Positive drainage provisions of the City's grading ordinance required pads 300 feet from a street to be three feet above curb reducing effective building height to below 22 feet. Instead of encouraging greater setbacks, the current code discourages them. On large lots where building pads are more than 50 feet from the curb line and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, heights should be measured from the minimum pad height prescribed by the City Engineer to achieve positive drainage. This provision will eliminate the penalty for large lot developments, encourage greater setbacks and minimize grading. III. CONCLUSION: The following amendments to the O.P. zone height standards are recommended to encourage architectural quality and greater setbacks consistent with the intent of the O.P. zone. Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read: 2 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 AUGUST 20, 2002 HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding of the Architectural Commission that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements below 25 feet resulting in superior architectural quality. And that Section 25.25.016 E be added to read: Section 2: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. IV. RECOMMENDATION: A. Adoption of the findings. B. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. recommending to City Council approval of Case No. ZOA 02-04. V. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution B. Legal notice P . Drell Director of Community Development /tm 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.25 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONE AS IT RELATES TO MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AND HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED. CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 20th day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.25 as described above; 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. 02-60," 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 Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation 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; and 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" to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.25. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read as follows: HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding of the Architectural Commission that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements below 25 feet resulting in superior architectural quality. Section 2: That Section 25.25.016 E be added to read as follows: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. 3 " IIY Of p 0 [ M gESE " i � . 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 260-2 5 7 8 TEL: 760 346-o61 I - Fnx: 760 34I-7098 info®p.Im-desert.org I CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE - ZOA 02-04 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider an amendment to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 25.25(office professional)zone as it relates to maximum building height and how height is measured. SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday,August 20,2002,before the Palm Desert Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m.in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert City Hall,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 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 August 6,2002 Palm Desert Planning Commission _ 2, 8' 2' SCALE: 1/4"- 1'0" e' 6' N N P' 9' 2' SCALE: 1/4"- 1'0" 91 ORDINANCE NO. 1 I EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 : That Section 25.25.016 E be added to read: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. 3 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT I. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council II. REQUEST: Consideration of an amendment to Chapter 25.25, Office Professional zone as it relates to maximum building height and how building height is measured. III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert IV. CASE NO: ZOA 02-04 V. DATE: September 12, 2002 VI. CONTENTS: A. Staff Recommendation B. Discussion VII. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Ordinance No. B. Planning Commission Minutes C. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2146 D. Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 20, 2002 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. to second reading. B. DISCUSSION: 1. BACKGROUND: On July 16, 2002 in connection with discussion of a proposed two-story office building, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an amendment to the O.P. zone allowing approval of limited height exceptions to encourage architectural creativity and diversity. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 August 20, 2002 staff presented the code amendment proposal to Planning Commission. Two persons (Kenny Katz and John Cody) spoke in support of the proposed "height exception." Commission discussed the matter at length and approved the following height exception to read: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality. The second part of the amendment involves how height is measured on large O.P. lots. Recent reviews of projects on large O.P. zoned sites revealed that current code actually discourages larger setbacks. Grading provisions encourage positive drainage. The further from the street the building pad, the higher it must be. Measuring height from the average curb elevation discourages greater setbacks. Section 2 of the proposed amendment provides that on large lots where building pads are more then 50 feet from the curb line and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height will be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Planning Commission recommended this portion of the amendment without comment. At the same meeting the commission recommended approval of the two- story office building which necessitated this amendment, Case No. PP 02-08 also on this City Council Agenda. 2. HISTORY: The O.P. zone was created in 1981 to provide for compatible transitional buildings and uses between major arterials and residential zones. Heights 2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 were established allowing two story buildings with a maximum height of 25 feet measured from average curb height. Strict adherence to these standards has often resulted in unimaginative "shoe box" designs with minimal eight-foot interior ceiling heights and inadequate screening of roof top equipment. Roof designs are limited to single height parapets with continuous horizontal lines. The original height standards which set heights according to curb elevation were designed to address view concerns for buildings close to the street on shallow lots adjacent to single story residential zones. The City's grading and drainage requirements make the curb height standard impractical on large parcels when buildings are hundreds of feet from the street or adjacent residential uses. 3. BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION: For typical O.P. buildings set 20 to 30 feet from the street, the grading ordinance requires pads to be a minimum of 12 inches above the curb. With a six-inch slab, the effective building height is reduced from 25 to 23.5 feet. Assuming a nine-foot ceiling and two-foot structural sections between floors, the minimum building height without parapets is 22 feet. A 1 .5 foot parapet cannot screen roof top equipment. Reducing ceilings to eight feet still results in inadequate equipment screening. Any attempt to enhance screening and break the continuous horizontal parapet line will exceed the 25 foot (23.5 foot) limit. The Planned Commercial and Planned Residential zones contain provisions which allow the Planning Commission to approve exceptions to general development standards based on design merit. A similar but more limited provision should be added to the O.P. zone allowing heights up to 28 feet for buildings with significant roof elements above and below the 25-foot standard which result in superior exterior architectural quality consistent with the intent of the zone. 3 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 4. HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS - LARGE LOTS: The current method of- measuring building heights from curbywas . designed for shallow lots adjacent to single-story residential zones where buildings are set back 20 to 30 feet from the street. This method becomes impractical and counterproductive when applied to buildings on large lots set back hundreds of feet from streets and adjacent properties: Positive drainage provisions of the City's grading ordinance can require pads 300 feet from a street to be three feet above curb reducing effective building height to below 22 feet. Instead of encouraging greater setbacks, the current code discourages them. On large lots where building pads are more than 50 feet from the curb line and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, .heights should be measured from the minimum pad height prescribed by the City Engineer to achieve positive drainage. This provision will eliminate the penalty for large lot developments, encourage greater setbacks and minimize grading. C. CONCLUSION: The following amendments to the O.P. zone height standards are recommended to encourage architectural quality and greater setbacks consistent with the intent of the O.P. zone. Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read: HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality. And that Section 25.25.016 E be added to read: 4 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 Section 2: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved: STEVE SMITH PH LIP DRELL PLANNING MANAGER DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Review and oncur: Review and Concur: 1. 0 CROY CARLOS L. ORTEGA ACTING ASSIS CITY MANAGER CITY MANAGER OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES /tm 5 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.25 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONE AS IT RELATES TO MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AND HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED. CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 12th day of September, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amending the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.25, Office Professional zone, as it relates to maximum building height and how building height is measured; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. 2146, has recommended approval of the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is considered a Class 5 Categorical Exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony arguments, if any, of all interested 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 ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and . constitute the consideration of the City Council in this case. 2. That ZOA 02-04 as delineated in the attached Exhibit "A" is hereby ordained. ORDINANCE NO. 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. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this day of 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RICHARD S. KELLY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California 2 ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read: HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality. And that Section 25.25.016 E be added to read: Section 2: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots:where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. 3 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT 1. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council 11. REQUEST: Consideration of an amendment to Chapter 25.25, Office Professional zone as it relates to maximum building height and how building height is measured. III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert IV. CASE NO: ZOA 02-04 V. DATE: September 12, 2002 VI. CONTENTS: A. Staff Recommendation B. Discussion VI1. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Ordinance No. B. Planning Commission Minutes C. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2146 D. Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 20, 2002 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. to second reading. B. DISCUSSION: 1. BACKGROUND: On July 16, 2002 in connection with discussion of a proposed two-story office building, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an amendment to the O.P. zone allowing approval of limited height exceptions to encourage architectural creativity and diversity. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 August 20, 2002 staff presented the code amendment proposal to Planning Commission. Two persons (Kenny Katz and John Cody) spoke in support of the proposed "height exception." Commission discussed the matter at length and approved the following height exception to read: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality. The second part of the amendment involves how height is measured on large O.P. lots. Recent reviews of projects on large O.P. zoned sites revealed that current code actually discourages larger setbacks. Grading provisions encourage positive drainage. The further from the street the building pad, the higher it must be. Measuring height from the average curb elevation discourages greater setbacks. Section 2 of the proposed amendment provides that on large lots,where building pads are more then 50 feet from the curb line and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height will be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Planning Commission recommended this portion of the amendment without comment. . At the same meeting the commission recommended approval of the two- story office building which necessitated this amendment, Case No. PP 02-08 also on this City Council Agenda. 2. HISTORY: The O.P. zone was created in 1981 to provide for compatible transitional buildings and uses between major arterials and residential zones. Heights 2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 were established allowing two story buildings with a maximum height of 25 feet measured from average curb height. Strict adherence to these standards has often resulted in unimaginative "shoe box" designs with minimal eight-foot interior ceiling heights and inadequate screening of roof top equipment. Roof designs are limited to single height parapets with continuous horizontal lines. The original height standards which set heights according to curb elevation were designed to address view concerns for buildings close to the street on shallow lots adjacent to single story residential zones. The City's grading and drainage requirements make the curb height standard impractical on large parcels when buildings are hundreds of feet from the street or adjacent residential uses. 3. BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION: For typical O.P. buildings set 20 to 30 feet from the street, the grading ordinance requires pads to be a minimum of 12 inches above the curb. With a six-inch slab, the effective building height is reduced from 25 to 23.5 feet. Assuming a nine-foot ceiling and two-foot structural sections between floors, the minimum building height without parapets is 22 feet. A 1 .5 foot parapet cannot screen roof top equipment. Reducing ceilings to eight feet still results in inadequate equipment screening. Any attempt to enhance screening and break the continuous horizontal parapet line will exceed the 25 foot (23.5 foot) limit. The Planned Commercial and Planned Residential zones contain provisions which allow the Planning Commission to approve exceptions to general development standards based on design merit. A similar but more limited provision should be added to.the O.P. zone allowing heights up to 28 feet for buildings with significant roof elements above and below the 25-foot standard which result in superior exterior architectural quality consistent with the intent of the zone. 3 J CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 4. HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS - LARGE LOTS: The current method of measuring building heights from curb was designed for shallow lots adjacent to single-story residential zones where buildings are set back 20 to 30 feet from the street. This method becomes impractical and counterproductive when applied to buildings on large lots set back hundreds of feet from streets and adjacent properties: Positive drainage provisions of the City's grading ordinance can require pads 300 feet from a street to be three feet above curb reducing effective building height to below 22 feet. Instead of encouraging greater setbacks, the current code discourages them. On large lots where building pads are more than 50 feet from the curb line and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, heights should be measured from the minimum pad height prescribed by the City Engineer to achieve positive drainage. This provision will eliminate the penalty for large lot developments, encourage greater setbacks and minimize grading. C. CONCLUSION: The following'amendments to the O.P. zone height standards are recommended to encourage architectural quality and greater setbacks consistent with the intent of the O.P. zone. Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read: HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements above and below 25 feet resulting in superior exterior architectural quality. And that Section 25.25.016 E be added to read: 4 r CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 Section 2: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved: STEVE SMITH VPHLIPDRELL PLANNING MANAGER DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Review and oncur: Review and Concur: W0,14WEROY CARLOS L. ORTEGA ACTING ASSIS CITY MANAGER CITY MANAGER OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AM 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: August 20, 2002 CASE NO: ZOA 02-04 REQUEST: Amendment to Chapter 25.25, Office Professional zone as it relates to maximum building height and how building height is measured. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert I. BACKGROUND: On July 16, 2002 in connection with discussion of a proposed two-story office building, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an amendment to the O.P. zone allowing approval of limited height exceptions to encourage architectural creativity and diversity. The O.P. zone was created in 1981 to provide for compatible transitional buildings and uses between major arterials and residential zones. Heights were established allowing two story buildings with a maximum height of 25 feet measured from average curb height. Strict adherence to these standards has often resulted in unimaginative "shoe box" designs with minimal eight-foot interior ceiling heights and inadequate screening of roof top equipment. Roof designs are limited to single height parapets with continuous horizontal lines. The original height standards which set heights according to curb elevation were designed to address view concerns for buildings close to the street on•shallow lots adjacent to single story residential zones. The City's grading and drainage requirements make the curb height standard impractical on large pads when buildings are hundreds of feet from the street or adjacent residential uses. IL DISCUSSION: A. BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION For typical O.P. buildings set 20 to 30 feet from the street, the grading ordinance requires pads to be a minimum of 12 inches above the curb. With ti STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 AUGUST 20, 2002 a six-inch slab, the effective building height is reduced from 25 to 23.5 feet. Assuming a nine-foot ceiling and two-foot structural sections between floors, the minimum building height without parapets is 22 feet. A 1 .5 foot parapet cannot screen roof top equipment. Reducing ceilings to eight feet still results in inadequate equipment screening. Any attempt to enhance screening and break the continuous horizontal parapet line will exceed the 25 foot (23.5 foot) limit. The Planned Commercial and Planned Residential zones contain provisions which allow the Planning Commission to approve exceptions to general development standards based on design merit. A similar but more limited provision should be added to the O.P. zone allowing heights up to 28 feet for buildings with significant roof elements below the 25-foot standard which result in superior architectural quality consistent with the intent of the zone. B. HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS - LARGE LOTS The current method of measuring building heights from curb was designed for shallow lots adjacent to single-story residential zones where buildings are set back 20 to 30 feet from the street. This method becomes impractical and counterproductive when applied to buildings on large lots set back hundreds of feet from streets and adjacent properties. Positive drainage provisions of the City's grading ordinance required pads 300 feet from a street to be three feet above curb reducing effective building height to below 22 feet. Instead of encouraging greater setbacks, the current code discourages them. On large lots where building pads are more than 50 feet from the curb line and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, heights should be measured from the minimum pad height prescribed by the City Engineer to achieve positive drainage. This provision will eliminate the penalty for large lot developments, encourage greater setbacks and minimize grading. III. CONCLUSION: The following amendments to the O.P. zone height standards are recommended to encourage architectural quality and greater setbacks consistent with the intent of the O.P. zone. Section 1 That Section 25.25.019 be added to read: 2 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 AUGUST 20, 2002 HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding of the Architectural Commission that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements below 25 feet resulting in superior architectural quality. And that Section 25.25.016 E be added to read: Section 2: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. IV. RECOMMENDATION: A. Adoption of the findings. B. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. recommending to City Council approval of Case No. ZOA 02-04. V. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution B. Legal notice _ I P ' Drell Director of Community Development Am 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AP PROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.25 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONE AS IT RELATES TO MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AND HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED. CASE NO. ZOA 02-04 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 20th day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.25 as described above; 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. 02-60," 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 Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation 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; and 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 PP g Exhibit "A" to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.25. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 : That Section 25.25.019 be added to read as follows: HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS: The Planning Commission may approve building heights up to 28 feet based on a finding of the Architectural Commission that the project incorporates unique design and significant roof elements below 25 feet resulting in superior architectural quality. Section 2: That Section 25.25.016 E be added to read as follows: E. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection "D" above, on large lots where the building pad is more than 50 feet from the street (curb line) and 100 feet from adjacent single story residential lots, building height shall be measured from the prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. Director of Public Works shall consider the provisions of Municipal Code 27.12 in determining minimum necessary pad height. 3 CIIIf Of PHIM DESERT 73-5io FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92]60-2378 TEL: 760 346-o61 i FAX:760 341-7o98 �_', Toro Qs palm-dans.oag C�C t . CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE ZOA 02-04 - I I NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider an amendment to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 25.25(office professional)zone as it relates to maximum building height and how height is measured. I i SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday,August 20,2002,before the Palm Desert Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m.in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert City Hall,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 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. i PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL,Secretary August 6,2002 Palm Desert Planning Commission I n 6' ro N 6' 2' 8' SCALE: 1/4"— 1'0" e• r 6' N N 2' 9' 2' SCALE: 1/4'- 1'0' 9' 2514160 25.14160 Minimum separation between sides of provides for adequate off-street parking facilities. (Ord buildings. 94 § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A § 25.14-6.02 (11)) For single-story,single-family detached buildings there shall be a minimum of ten feet between sides. 25.24301 RV park standards. For two-story.single-family detached buildings there The following standards apply to recreational vehicle shall be a minimum of thirty feet between two-story ele- parks: ments. (Ord 665 (Exhibit A (part)), 1992: Ord. 94 § 1 A. Minimum project size of five acres; (part), 1975: Exhibit A § 25.14-6.02(7)) B. Maximum density of twelve spaces per acre; C. Minimum space area of one thousand five hundred 2S.24.270 Minimum common open space- square feet,minimum dimension thirty feet by fifty feet; A Projects of less than seven dwelling units per ace D. Minimum forty percent common open shall have a minimum common open space of fifty percent spacchureation area; of the net area E. Front project setback adjacent ro public street of B. Projects of seven to eighteen dwelling wits per twenty-five fee-with combination of six-foot masonry wall acre shall have a minimum common open space of forty and landscaping to screen all recreation vehicles; percent of the net area. F. Interior property lines to be bounded by six-foot C. At least fifty percent of all required common open masonry wall and at least ten feet of landscaping; space shall be approximately level,defined as not rums G. Projects may be single-use or developed as part than thirteen and one-half percent grade. of a larger resort or residential development: D. The common open space shall be land within the FL RV parks shall be taxed as a transient occupancy total development site used for recreational.including build- use; ings used for recreation purposes,parka or environmental 1. Permitted Accessory Uses. Private recreational purposes for enjoyment by occupants of the development facilities and fimited commercial directly associated with and their guests,or dedicated to the city for public parks. primary use as approved by planning commission.(Ord E. Common open space shall not include public or 445 § 2, 1985) private streets, driveways. private yards, or patios and parking areas. (Ord. 94 § 1 (part). 1975: Exhibit A § 2524310 Exceptions. 25.14-6.02(g)) The standards of Sections 25.24.120 through 25.24.300 shall be required unless modified by the development plan. 2524.280 Building height. (Ord. 94 § 1 (pan), 1975: Exhibit A § 25.14-6.02(12)) The maximum building height in a PR district shall be twenty-four feet or two-story,whichever is less.(Ord.665 25.24320 Building setbacks from the planned (Exhibit A (part)),1992:Ord.94§ I (part),1975:Exhibit street line. A § 25.14-6.02(9)) The minimum setback in all residential developments within the PR district shall be the designated distances from 2S24.290 Maximum dwelling units per building. the ultimate right-of-way line of the streets specified in The maximum number of dwelling units per building . this title unless otherwise provided in this section: shall he as approved. (Ord 94 § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A. Freeway,fifty feet A § 25.14-6.02 (10)) B. Arterial,thirty-two feet; C. Secondary, thirty-two feet; 25.24300 Required width of private roads. D. Collector, twenty feet; With no parking,the private roads shall be thirty feet E. Lod,twenty feet(Ord 94§ 1 (part),1975:Exhibit wide. A § 25.14-7) With parking on one side,thirty-two feet wide. With parking on two sides,forty feet wide.The roadways shall 25.24321 Two-story, single-family detached be a minimum of asphaltic concrete with concrete curbs building setbacks from project and gutters as approved by the director of environmental perimeter. services.Standards of design and construction of roadways, A. The minimum setback from the project perimeter both public and private,within the project may be modified for two-story single-family detached buildings shall be one as is deemed appropriate by the city,especially where it hundred feet or one lot depth, whichever is more. is found that the development plan provides for the separa- tion of vehicular and pedestrian circulation patterns and 383 (wm D x i-w) RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERT. CA 2002 AUG —9 AM 10: 08 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 States 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 z2as above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of a No. CITY OF PALM DESERT printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING LEGAL NOTICE COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, ZOA 02-04 printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Flamm.ng County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been Commission to consider an amendment to Zonin Ordinance Chapter 25.25 (office profession" adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the ,no as it relates to maximum building height an eight Is measured. Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of how hp qq I, California under the date of March 24,1988.Case SguslO2o bzo02 aeafore will be held on Palm Desert day.Planning Number 191236;that the notice,of which the Commission at 7:00 p m.in the Councu Chamber', at the Palm Desert City Hall,73-510 Fred woring annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller Drive,all interested persons are invited to attend Palm Desert, California. at which time and than non pan place el,has been published in each regular and be heard.written comments cooncerning all', and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any ye accepted e up to tithe is pdatla of thenhcaring. Infoall' supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: motion concerning the proposed project antlter negative declaration Is available for review in the August 6" 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 i be limited to raising only, those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing do- scribed in this notice, or in written correspon- All in the year 2002 dence delivered to the planning commission at,or 1 certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the prior to, the public hearing. foregoing is true and correct. PHILIP DRELL, Secretary g g Palm Desert Planning Commission 6th PUB: August 6, 2002 Dated at Palm Springs,California this day August 20022/f Signature i �i ��� � � � � J �� i � � / 1 �i / �_ / _'ice � � I � i L r «/ � � � J/ / � � i / ii % , � �% � � � , ii � i a � , I ,� � � i i /� � �� � �. t d 'lilil 7 o a �� ,2- _ v au�l f _ CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Telephone: 760-346-0611 Fax: 760-341-7098 info@palm-desert.org FACSIMILE Date: July 31, 2002 To: Desert Sun Company: Fax No.: 778-4731 Phone No.: No. of Pages (including cover sheet) From: Donna Quaiver, Phone: (760) 346-0611 x483 Notes: 5+,e CITY OF PALM DESERT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OP Code Amendment Outline Request: Height amendment: Building height and how building height is measured on large lots. Background: 1. Planning Commission directed staff to process amendment. 2. OP standards established in 1981. 3. Current code provisions relating to height. Discussion: Three areas of concern: 1. Need to increase basic height from 25' to 26.5'. • Building and seismic code changes. • Truss design changes. • Minimal floor to floor sections. • Unimaginative roof design. 2. Exceptions: Need to provide height exception for unique, creative roof designs. 3. Height measurement - Large lots: • Explain current provisions. • Counterproductive to lower buildings the further back they are on the lot. • Where pads are more than 100' from a public street or 100' adjacent to single story residential lots, height shall be measured from prescribed minimum pad height necessary to achieve adequate drainage as determined by the Director of Public Works. 4. CEQA - Class 3 category exempt. CIIY OE PHIM DESERI k 73-5io FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346—o6f I FAX: 760 341-7098 info @palm-desen.org CITY OF PALM DESERT, LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. 02-04 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Chapter 25.25 Office Professional zone as it relates to maximum building height and how height is measured. SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, September 12, 2002, 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 Planning Commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun SHIELA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk August 23, 2002 Palm Desert City Council CIIV 01 P 0 1 M OESERI 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 260-2 5 78 TEL: 760 346—o6i i FAX: 760 341-7098 info@paim-desert.org CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE ZOA 02-04 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider an amendment to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 25.25 (office professional) zone as it relates to maximum building height and how height is measured. SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August 20, 2002,before the Palm Desert Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert City Hall, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Pahn 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 date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed proi.ect 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 August 6, 2002 Palm Desert Planning Commission I CIIY OE P 0 1 m DESERT ic. 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-061 I FAX: 760 341-7098 info @palm-dcscrt.org IPA\X '7[ RA\NSMISSION TO: 7Cz3Be DATE:_ COMPANY: ✓7FSCl SUN FAX: 77d` 73 FROM: TONY BAGATO DEPr.: Planning Dept. Message: C2 14fr„9L lVoT/Cegs lt�X USG/f T7oi/ T 01Z #of Pages Including (Cover Page):_ C: 2530230 (/ (part), 1979; Ord. 95 § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A $ 3. Setbacks from streets shall be a minimum of G 25.18.5.05) twenty-five feet from the planned street lime. E. the maximum height for all buildings shall be 2530240 Resort center development standards. twenty five feet or two stories,whichever is less. ( The resort center concept is established to provide A The entire area along Ia street between the limp. r for the development of low-rise bungalow scale hotel, arty line and the setback line shall be landscaped to a entertainment, and restaurant facilities with related minimum depth of ten feek Landscaping in thew arm ( commercial uses particularly for that area along High- shall consist of an effective combination of street trees, way III,westerly of the Palm Valley Channel.A devel- trees, ground covet and shrubbery and may include opment in the PC(4)zone district shall conform to the such items as sidewalks, access driveways,flagpoles, following development standards: fountains,and other similar appurtenances.(Ord.95§ A. The minimum site size shall be four acres 1(part),1975:Exhibit A 125.18 5.02) B. The front yard setback shall be thirty feet C. The rear yard setback shall be twenty feet 2530260 Ezeeptliam D. The side yard setback shag be fifteenfeet The standards outlined in Sections 25.30220 a H The maximumbmldingheight shall bethirty-five through 2530250 shall be required unless modified by ® feet;within one hundred feet of single-family resider- the approved precise plan.(Ord 299(part),1982;Ord tial zoned property,the height limit shall remain thirty 95§I(pa41975:Exhibit A§25.18-6) w feet F. Forhotels,aminimumoffortypercentofthesite 2530.270 Building setbacks from the planned area shall be developed as usable landscaped open street line. space and outdoor living and recreation area with an The minimum setbackw thinthePC&-tridshallbe adequate irrigation system. ` G. For other uses,a minimum of twenty percent of the designated distances fr6m the ultimate rightof-way the total site shall be in landscaping.(Ord line ofthestrectshereinafte 355(part). qmcffiedunlessotherwise 1983:Ord 279,1981;Ord.227§3,1980:Ord 95§1 provided in this section orin the approvedprecisepban: ` (part),1975:F-TJuWt A§25.18-5.03) A. Freeway,fifty feet; B. Major,thirty-two feet; 2530.250 Specialty commercial center standards. C. Arterial,thirty-two feet; Specialty centers are established to provide the spe- D. Collector,twenty five feet; 4 cialized needs of locations in the city created by their d. Local,I(twenty-five ads (Ord.25. (part), 1982; proximity to particular land uses.A specialty commer- Ord.95§i(part),1975:F�ibit A§2s.18-7) cial center has the following development standards: A. The minimum site size shall be four acres and 2530.280 Modifications the maximum site size shall be ten acres The planning commission and/or city council may B. Maximum budding site coverage shall be forty approve a precise plan only after finding that the re- ` per cent of the net area of the site. quaements of this title and other ordinances affecting C. Maximum budding area for any one commercial the property have been satisfied In granting such cep enterprise shall be thirty thousand square feet. pro xi,the city council may impose and enforce such D. A minimum twenty-foot budding setback shall specific conditions as to site'development,phasing and bemaintained from aflpropertylineswiththefollcrwng building construction.maintenance and operation asit exceptions; deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this title 1. If the subject site is adjacent to a commercially or and the general plan. industrially zoned parcel,no setback shall be required All development within the PC district shall comply between the parcels subject to the requirements of the with the precise plan as approved and adopted by the city budding code. city council.(Ord 299(part), 1982;Ord.95 1 1(part), 2 No commercial structure shall be located closer 1975:F-Aubit A§25.18-8) to an adjacent residentially zoned parcel than a dis- .?s 290 A �N�ejj OKz> ty tance equal to twice the height of the commercial .7 7 Z _ structure. 394 r l�