HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 99-1 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL PARKING 1999 ORDINANCE NO. 909
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT TO SECTION 25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL PARKING LOTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE
WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL (O.P.) ZONES AND CONSISTENT WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS OF A SPECIFIC PLAN.
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22nd
day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a zoning ordinance
amendment to Section 25.16.030 to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional
use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional (O.P.) zones and
consistent with recommendations of a specific plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 1919 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.
97-18," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the project is 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 and reasons to exist to approve the zoning ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment implements specific recommendations of the Palma
Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and will not threaten the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 council in this case.
2. That it does hereby approve ZOA 99-1 as provided in the attached exhibit
labeled Exhibit "A."
ORDINANCE NO. uno
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 27th
day of may , 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Benson, Crites, Ferguson, Kelly, Spiegel
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
���,�IC ROBERT A. S yor
HIS
I,
i
SHEILA R. %L4GAN, Cipf Clerk
City of Palm esert, CaMornia
2
;�_
ORDINANCE NO. 909
i
EXHIBIT "A"
i
25.16.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be permitted subject to a
conditional use permit:
A. Boardinghouses androominghouses;
B. Churches, convents, monasteries and other religious institutions;
C. Day nurseries and nursery schools;
D. Fire stations;
E. Private recreational facilities such as country clubs, tennis and swim clubs,
golf courses, with incidental, limited commercial uses which are commonly
associated and directly related to the primary use;
F. Private schools and colleges, not including art, business, or trade schools or
colleges;
G. Public educational institutions;
H. Public utility and public service facilities. (Ord. 94 §1 (part
), 1975: Exhibit A
§25.10-30.)
I. Commercial parking lots when directly adjacent to the C-1 General Commercial
zone and consistent with recommendations of an adopted specific plan;
J. Professional office parking lots when directly adjacent to the O.P. office
professional zone and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted
specific plan.
I
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 25.16.030 of the Palm
Desert Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional parking lots
as a conditional use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to
office professional zoned property and consistent with the
recommendations of an adopted specific plan.
III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
IV. CASE NO: ZOA 99-1
MEETING DATE
V. DATE: April 22, 1999 I CDNT!NUEC TC
VI. CONTENTS: 0 PASSED TO 2NU READING
A. Staff Recommendation
B. Discussion
C. Draft Ordinance No. 909
D. Planning Commission Minutes involving Case No. ZOA 99-1
E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1919
F. Planning Commission Staff Report dated 4 vniFfr,-4 9
G. Related maps and/or exhibits rsc ETI
NG GATE
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: :bL '`ScU 10 2ND READIN6
Waiver further reading and pass Ordinance No. 909 to second rea mg.
B. DISCUSSION:
1 . BACKGROUND:
The Palma Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans recommended that
certain R-1 areas directly adjacent to Highway 111 general commercial zones be
made available for public parking.
The Palma Village Plan also recommended that R-2 areas adjacent to OP zoned
sites be made available for office parking. The plan also promotes the creation
of sufficiently sized office sites without impacting on the R-1 neighbors.
Previously the city enacted amendments to facilitate parking in the R-1 zone
when adjacent to the C-1 zone and in the R-2 zone when adjacent to the O.P.
zone. At this time the code does not permit parking in the R-1 zone when
adjacent to O.P.
i
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 25.16.030 of the Palm
Desert Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional parking lots
as a conditional use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to
office professional zoned property and consistent with the
recommendations of an adopted specific plan.
III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
IV. CASE NO: ZOA 99-1
V. DATE: April 22, 1999
VI. CONTENTS:
A. Staff Recommendation
B. Discussion
C. Draft Ordinance No. 909
D. Planning Commission Minutes involving Case No. ZOA 99-1
E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1919
F. Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 6, 1999
G. Related maps and/or exhibits
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Waiver further reading and pass Ordinance No. 909 to second. reading.
B. DISCUSSION:
1. BACKGROUND:
ZThe Palma Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans recommended that
"pertain R-1 areas directly adjacent to Highway 111 general commercial zones be
made available for public parking.
The Palma Village Plan also recommended that R-2 areas adjacent to OP zoned
sites be made available for office parking. The plan also promotes the creation
of sufficiently sized office sites without impacting on the R-1 neighbors.
J J66 Previously the city enacted amendments to--facilitate parking in the R-1 zone
when adjacent to the C-1 zone and in the R-2 zone when adjacent to the O.P.
zone. At this time the code does not permit parking in the R-1 zone when
adjacent to O.P.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
APRIL 22, 1999
These code amendments were implemented in 1990. At that time staff
presented Planning Commission/City Council with three options from which to
implement the policy:
a. Adding commercial/office parking as a conditional use in the R-1 and R-2
zones when consistent with a specific plan.
b. Rezone to R-3 which already allowed parking as a conditional use.
C. Create a new parking lot zone.
The commission recommended using option "a" above and the City Council
ultimately passed both amendments.
These amendments did not take into account office parking lots in the R-1 zone
when adjacent to O.P. zoned property.
2. ANALYSIS:
This amendment is necessary at this time in order that the Kearney office
building project can be completed. The proposed amendment would permit
office professional parking lots as a conditional use in the R-1 zone when directly
adjacent to office professional zoned property and consistent with the
recommendations of an adopted specific plan. This amendment will aid in the
implementation of the Palma Village Specific Plan and will be consistent with the
two similar amendments processed in 1990.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposed amendment at its meeting of
April 6, 1999 and recommended its approval on a 5-0 vote.
Z o icC 1'ro dibzJ oe o
4. CEQA REVIEW: cd L �'/G Ice
The proposed amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for the purposes
of CEQA/and
no further documentation is necessary.
Prepared by: i 1
teve Smith
Reviewed and Approved
Philip Drell
/tm
2
ORDINANCE NO. 909
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT TO ' SECTION 25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL PARKING LOTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE
WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL (O.P.) ZONES AND CONSISTENT WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS OF A SPECIFIC PLAN.
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22nd
day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a zoning ordinance
amendment to Section 25.16.030 to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional
use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional (O.P.) zones and
consistent with recommendations of a specific plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 1919 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.
97-18," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the project is 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 and reasons to exist to approve the zoning ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment implements specific recommendations of the Palma
Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and will not threaten the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 council in this case.
2. That it does hereby approve ZOA 99-1 as provided in the attached exhibit
labeled Exhibit "A."
ORDINANCE NO. gna
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 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ROBERT A. SPIEGEL, Mayor
ATTEST:
SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
ORDINANCE NO.
EXHIBIT "A"
25.16,030 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be permitted subject to a
conditional use permit:
A. Boardinghouses and roominghouses;
B. Churches, convents, monasteries and other religious institutions;
C. Day nurseries and nursery schools;
D. Fire stations;
E. Private recreational facilities such as country clubs, tennis and swim clubs,
golf courses, with incidental, limited commercial uses which are commonly
associated and directly related to the primary use;
F. Private schools and colleges, not including art, business, or trade schools or
colleges;
G. Public educational institutions;
H. Public utility and public service facilities. (Ord. 94 §1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A
§25.1040.)
I. Commercial parking lots when directly adjacent to the C-1 General Commercial
zone and consistent with recommendations of an adopted specific plan;
J. Professional office parking lots when directly adjacent to the O.P. office
professional zone and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted
specific plan.
3
MINUTES A
SUBJECT TO
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION b ' " e REVISION
APRIL 6, 1999 T
FT
VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Case No. PMW 99-4 - ROYCE INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS CO.,
INC., Applicant
Request for approval of a lot line adjustment to conform to
approved project.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell,
approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0.
Vill. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising
only those issues he/she or someone else raised at the public hearing described
herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the'Planning Commission at,
or prior to, the public hearing.
A. Case Nos. PP/CUP 99-3 and VAR 99-1 - SEAN KEARNEY, Applicant
Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact, precise plan of design and front setback variance for a
two story 7,500 square foot office building at the southwest
corner of Fred Waring Drive and Acacia Drive.
Mr. Smith noted that this application should be considered in conjunction with
the second public hearing item, Case No. ZOA 99-1 . He indicated that the
property was located at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and
Acacia. The site plan and colored elevations were on display. The property
comprised two lots with 120 feet of frontage on Fred Waring and 154 feet on
Acacia for a total of 18,896 square feet. The north lot was zoned Office
Professional. The south lot was zoned R-1 single family residential. The site
was currently vacant and had recently been-_graded clear. The building would
be two stories and a total of 22 feet high. He described the architecture as
2
SUBJECT TO
MINUTES
D FT REVISION
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 6, 1999
contemporary and indicated that the building was completely located on the
northerly lot, the office professional zoned lot. The parking lot to support the
use was proposed on the R-1 lot to the south. Part of the application was a
variance request on the front yard setback. The request was to reduce the
setback from 15 feet to 3 feet and at some points zero. The variance request
was based on the exceptionally wide parkway between this lot and Fred
Waring Drive. He noted that there were remnant parcels located adjacent to
Fred Waring Drive when it was originally widened and that resulted in the
excess setback. The buildings to both the east and west were granted similar
setback variances. Relative to parking, the applicant would provide a total of
26 spaces which was consistent with the ordinance for a building this size.
As previously noted, the parking lot would be located on the R-1 zoned lot.
Currently the ordinance did not permit parking in an R-1 zone. As indicated in
the next case, the Palma Village Plan when it was adopted in 1990
encouraged the creation of these office professional uses along Fred Waring
Drive with parking in the back. Two zoning ordinance amendments were
done. One was when adjacent to the C-1 zone, the provision under which
Walgreens proceeded, and the other was when adjacent to the R-2 zone.
Staff did not proceed with the zoning ordinance change to allow it as a
conditional use in the R-1 zone at that time because there were no pending
applications. The building would be two stories high, but only a portion of the
building had a second floor. On the first floor there was approximately 6,000
square feet and on the second floor 1 ,444 square feet. The parking for the
facility was based on the general office use only. No medical office uses
would be permitted and there was a condition prohibiting medical and dental
offices in this building, noting that the parking standard was recently increased
for medical and dental offices. Earlier office professional buildings could go in
and have up to 2,200 square feet of medical use without providing the higher
parking amount. Staff received three letters which were distributed to
commission. Two of the letters, from Peggy Ames and Frank Miller, expressed
concern with the architecture and parking. Both noted that the buildings on
either side had a southwestern style while the proposed one was
contemporary. They also asked that the commission be confident that there
was enough parking. Staff felt that with a condition prohibiting medical and
dental uses that parking would be adequate. The third letter received was
from Mr. Swenson, the property owner immediately to the south. He
requested the inclusion of a seven-foot wall. The typical standard was six
feet. Staff had no problem with conditioning the seven-foot wall and did so
in the draft resolution. Mr. Smith felt that the commission could adopt a
3
` SUBJECT TO
MINUTES D `/ . REVISION
F
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Dr
APRIL 6, 1999
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and recommended approval
subject to the conditions. He noted that in the conditions this approval was
subject to the approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 99-1 . He asked for
any questions.
Commissioner Finerty asked where Acacia was blocked off right now in
relation to where this project was proposed. Mr. Smith noted that Acacia was
blocked off on the north segment approximately across to where Mike
Homme's building was under construction last summer. Since that time
diverters were installed which prohibited left turn movements from Acacia
onto Fred Waring from either the north or south side. Mr. Greenwood
explained that currently there were no closures on Acacia but there was a
median on Fred Waring across Acacia so someone could turn left from Fred
Waring onto Acacia but they couldn't turn left or go through if they were on
Acacia at Fred Waring.
Commissioner Lopez asked if the wall next to the proposed southerly wall was
also seven feet high. Mr. Smith said he thought it was six feet. He indicated
they would probably step the wall down from the seven feet and transition it
to the six-foot wall, but the main concern was the wall to the south. Upon
questioning by Commissioner Campbell, Mr. Smith explained that there was
an existing fence along the south and a combination of wood fence and wall
to the west. He pointed out that the split face wall material being asked for
was used here at city hall.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if ARC considered a southwest design as opposed
to contemporary. Mr. Smith indicated they weren't presented with a
southwestern design, but a contemporary which was deemed acceptable and
was given preliminary approval. To his recollection the subject wasn't
addressed specifically. Chairperson Jonathan noted that in the letter from Mr.
Miller he asked about the inclusion of an elevator. Chairperson Jonathan asked
what the current status was on requiring elevators and if this application
would be conditioned on that. Mr. Smith noted that the Building Department
did not call it out as a requirement in their comments. Chairperson Jonathan
asked if Mr. Smith knew in general or as a matter of policy if the City required
it or if there were other governmental agencies that due to handicap
requirements provide for an elevator when a building was two stories. Mr.
Smith explained that requirement was, enforced through the Building
Department but he didn't know who they were doing it on behalf of. Mr.
4
MINUTES .; _ SUBJECT TO
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION D R , i € FT REVISION
APRIL 6, 1999
Hargreaves indicated that generally speaking, if a business was open to the
public they would be required to be handicap accessible. Chairperson
Jonathan asked if the building standards should incorporate that requirement
or if it was already done on a defacto basis by other agencies. Mr. Smith
thought it was part of the adoption of the ADA requirements. Chairperson
Jonathan asked if it was, if it was an oversight that there wasn't a condition
of approval or if it was just an assumption that there would be an elevator.
He assumed it had not been included in any of the plans the City received. Mr.
Smith said that was correct and suggested that Mr. Holden address that issue.
From the Building Department's perspective they would assume it wasn't
necessary until they find that the building was open to the public. At this
point the tenancy was not determined so if they were going to use the second
floor area as storage it might not be required. Chairperson Jonathan thought
it might be wise to have a condition in the same way we prohibit medical use
we could prohibit public access to the second floor unless an elevator was
installed. He indicated he wouldn't burden this application with the issue,
although he would ask the applicant about it, but he requested a brief report
at the next meeting as to what the City's current procedures were with regard
to elevators and two story structures that appear to be available to the public.
Mr. Smith concurred. Chairperson Jonathan noted that the north elevations
indicate that the windows were high up and therefore would not intrude into
the privacy of the residential neighbors. He asked if that was accurate or if he
should ask the applicant. Mr. Smith said staff assumed the windows were not
above 5'6" and included a condition requiring that it be visually obscured
either with the use of glass block, etched glass or something that would
eliminate the problem. If in fact the windows were above 5'6" that condition
would be waived per the ordinance. Chairperson Jonathan noted that they
discussed the seven-foot wall but the letter also asked for tan coloring as well.
He asked if that was addressed and if it would be acceptable to be consistent
with the building to the west. Mr. Smith felt the applicant should address that
issue.
Chairperson Jonathan opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to
address the commission.
MR. RICK HOLDEN, Holden and Johnson Architects at 44-267
Monterey Avenue, indicated he was present to answer questions.
Regarding the question of a southwestern design being considered by
ARC it wasn't and as they were designing the project they felt no
5
MINUTES R !TT
SUBJECT TOPALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REVISION
APRIL 6, 1999
I
provisions to design it southwest. There was no deed restriction or city
requirement that it be southwest and when they did a couple of
buildings for Mike Homme and Wes Oliphant next to them they did kind
of a one story little mexican village next to their two story
contemporary and they hadn't had any complaints about that offending
anyone. He thought a mixture of architecture helped. He didn't know
that they wanted everything to be the same. It wasn't meant to look
like a condominium development and he thought this one actually had
a little more relief than the two story pueblo building that came into
their parking lot on the other side of Acacia. They were able to pull
things back a bit. One of the things the commission asked about was
the glass on the second floor. Realistically, if they had been inside their
building, this was kind of the same way. What happened on the second
floor was that there were offices on both sides adjacent to Acacia and
adjacent to the other building. There was only a bridge between those
offices and it was a two story space on the inside. That glass was not
adjacent to the bridge but free floating. The bridge was open to a
mezzanine on the first floor and the glass was above. It was high and
shouldn't bean intrusion. Regarding elevators, Mr. Holden explained
that ADA didn't require elevators based on the size limitation of the
second floor. The second floor was only 1 ,000 feet compared to the
first floor at 6,000 square feet and it wasn't a requirement.
Chairperson Jonathan noted that one of the requirements of ADA was if there
was a second floor bathroom they did require grab rails and the width for
wheelchairs.
Mr. Holden indicated that just like hotels or whatever, even if they had
them it was a percentage of the space that was required. Someday it
might be but right now it wasn't. Right now there were no plans for an
elevator. During the course of their work they run their jobs through the
City before they turn them in for ADA requirements because they
change constantly. That was checked out before they turned in the job.
Chairperson Jonathan noted that one of the respondents indicated not only a
request for a seven-foot split face block wall but also that the color be tan.
He asked if a tan color was acceptable and if it was consistent.
6
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DPRt� !TT REVIS ONE
APRIL 6, 1999
Mr. Holden confirmed that the tan would be the same color used in the
building. He noted they were also trying to screen the motor home
behind the wall.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was
closed. Chairperson Jonathan asked for commission comments.
Commissioner Campbell said if Mr. Holden was in favor of raising the wall to
seven feet or even higher to shield the motor home and change the color of
the masonry blocks and agreed with all the conditions of approval, she would
be in favor of the project.
Commissioner Beaty felt it was a very attractive rendering and moved for
approval.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Chairperson Jonathan felt the
project was not only attractive, but was the exact design intended under the
Palma Village Plan with the unobtrusive transition from Fred Waring into
residential. He was in favor and called for the vote. Motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1918, recommending to City
Council approval of PP/CUP 99-3 and VAR 99-1 , subject to conditions ,as
amended. Motion carried 5-0.
B. Case No. ZOA 99-1 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for approval of an amendment to Chapter 25.16.030 of
the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional
parking lots as a conditional use within the R-1 zone when
directly adjacent to office professional zoned property and
consistent with the recommendations of an adopted specific
plan.
7
SUBJECT
MINUTES E
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION r REVISION
APRIL 6, 1999
Mr. Smith noted that most of this was covered during the previous report and
he would not repeat that other than to say that this would be consistent with
the provisions of the Palma Village Plan and consistent with the other two
zone changes done in 1990 and it would allow the previous application to
proceed. He indicated it was a Class 5 categorical exemption for the purposes
of CEQA and staff was recommending that Planning Commission recommend
approval of the amendment to City Council.
Chairperson Jonathan opened the public hearing, noted that the City was the
applicant, and asked in anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to
this matter. There was no one and the public hearing was closed.
Chairperson Jonathan asked for commission comments.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Finerty,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Finerty,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1919, recommending to City
Council approval of ZOA 99-1 . Motion carried 5-0.
C. Case No. PP 98-9 - JOHN STEIGERWALDT FOR MARK MOSCROP,
Applicant
Request for approval of a precise plan of design to construct an
outdoor storage yard, outdoor display garden and a 720 square
foot sales office located on the north side of 42nd Avenue 1 ,000
feet west of Cook Street.
Mr. Alvarez noted that landscaping, elevations and site plans were on the wall.
The project was located in the service industrial district and fronted on 42nd
Avenue. There was vacant property to the west, service industrial to the east,
and Waste Management property to the north. As indicated, the project
consisted of three categories of uses. An open air storage area which would
contain materials which the property owner sells, manufactures and installs.
The second area consisted of an outdoor display garden which had an eight-
foot concrete meandering path meandering thFough the site to various concrete
pads for outdoor display areas. The landscaping plan was approved by the
8
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
TO SECTION 25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE PROFESSIONAL
PARKING LOTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE R-1
ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OFFICE PROFESSIONAL
(O.P.) AND CONSISTENT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF AN
ADOPTED SPECIFIC PLAN.
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 6th day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a zoning ordinance
amendment to section 25.16.030 to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional
use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional (O.P.) zone and
consistent with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan; 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. 97-18," 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 recommend approval of a zoning
ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment implements specific recommendations of the Palma
Village Specific Plan.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and will not threaten the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 Amendment 99-1 as provided in the attached
Exhibit "A".
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BEATY, CAMPBELL, FINERTY, LOPEZ, JONATHAN
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
SABBY ZRAYHAN, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Stephen R. Smith, Acting Secretarl
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
EXHIBIT "A"
25.16.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be permitted subject to a
conditional use permit:
A. Boardinghouses and roominghouses;
B. Churches, convents, monasteries and other religious institutions;
C. Day nurseries and nursery schools;
D. Fire stations;
E. Private recreational facilities such as country clubs, tennis and swim clubs,
golf courses, with incidental, limited commercial uses which are commonly
associated and directly related to the primary use;
F. Private schools and colleges, not including art, business, or trade schools or
colleges;
G. Public educational institutions;
H. Public utility and public service facilities. (Ord. 94 §1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A
§25.10-30.)
I. Commercial parking lots when directly adjacent to the C-1 General Commercial
zone and consistent with recommendations of an adopted specific plan;
J. Professional office parking lots when directly adjacent to the O.P. office
professional zone and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted
specific plan.
3
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: April 6, 1999
CASE NO: ZOA 99-1
REQUEST: Approval of an amendment to Chapter 25.16.030 of the Palm Desert
Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional parking lots as a
conditional use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office
professional zoned property and consistent with the recommendations
of an adopted specific plan.
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
I. BACKGROUND:
The Palma Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans recommended that
certain R-1 areas directly adjacent to Highway 111 general commercial zones be
made available for public parking.
The Palma Village Plan also recommended that R-2 areas adjacent to OP zoned sites
be made available for office parking. The plan also promotes the creation of
sufficiently sized office sites without impacting on the R-1 neighbors. This proposal,
while it does result in parking in the R-1 zone, assures that there is no office building
in the R-1 zone.
These code amendments were implemented in 1990. At that time staff presented
Planning Commission with three options from which to implement the policy:
1 . Adding commercial/office parking as a conditional use in the R-1 and R-
2 zones when consistent with a specific plan.
2. Rezone to R-3 which already allowed parking as a conditional use.
3. Create a new parking lot zone.
The commission recommended using option one above and the City Council
ultimately passed both amendments.
These amendments did not take into account office--parking lots in the R-1 zone when
adjacent to O.P. zoned property.
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
APRIL 6, 1999
II. ANALYSIS:
The proposed amendment would permit office professional parking lots as a
conditional use in the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional zoned
property and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan. This
amendment will aid in the implementation of the Palma Village Specific Plan and will
be consistent with the two similar amendments processed in 1990.
Ill. CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for the purposes of
CEQA and no further documentation is necessary.
IV. RECOMMENDATION:
That Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of a zoning ordinance
amendment to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional use permit in the
R-1 zone when directly adjacent to the O.P. (office professional) zone and consistent
with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan.
V. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Comments from city departments and other agencies
D. Plans and exhibits
Prepared by: _
teve Smith
Reviewed and Approved
Phil Drell
Am
2
1
CITY 0f P LM DESERT
73-510 PRED WAKING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346-061 I
TAX: 760 341-7098
info@palm-desert.org
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: April 7, 1999
CITY OF PALM DESERT
Re: ZOA 99-1
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken
the following action at its meeting of April 6, 1999:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZOA
99-1 BY ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 1919. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Community
Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen 115) days of the date of the decision.
E HEN R. SMITH, CTING SECRETARY
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
PD/tm
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
TO SECTION 25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE PROFESSIONAL
PARKING LOTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE R-1
ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OFFICE PROFESSIONAL
(O.P.) AND CONSISTENT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF AN
ADOPTED SPECIFIC PLAN.
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 6th day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a zoning ordinance
amendment to section 25.16.030 to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional
use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional (O.P.) zone and
consistent with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan; 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. 97-18," 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 recommend approval of a zoning
ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment implements specific recommendations of the Palma
Village Specific Plan.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and will not threaten the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 Amendment 99-1 as provided in the attached
Exhibit "A".
�A
i
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BEATY, CAMPBELL, FINERTY, LOPEZ, JONATHAN
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
SABBY A-THAN, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Stephen R. Smith, Acting Secretarl
Palm Desert Planning Commission
I
I
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
EXHIBIT "A"
25.16.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be permitted subject to a
conditional use permit:
A. Boardinghouses and roominghouses;
B. Churches, convents, monasteries and other religious institutions;
C. Day nurseries and nursery schools;
D. Fire stations;
E. Private recreational facilities such as country clubs, tennis and swim clubs,
golf courses, with incidental, limited commercial uses which are commonly
associated and directly related to the primary use;
F. Private schools and colleges, not including art, business, or trade schools or
colleges;
G. Public educational institutions;
H. Public utility and public service facilities. (Ord. 94 §1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A
§25.10-30.)
I. Commercial parking lots when directly adjacent to the C-1 General Commercial
zone and consistent with recommendations of an adopted specific plan;
J. Professional office parking lots when directly adjacent to the O.P. office
professional zone and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted
specific plan.
3
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is Spam for County CIeA�i3 Filia¢Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P)
rn
� _ I
T
n C
rn rn
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Riverside
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of ICI
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 Berk of a -
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation,
printed and published in the city of Palm Springs,
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the - -
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of
California under the date of March 24,1988.Case
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the PALat
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller q
than non panel,has been published in each regular
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: 's
April loth
i • j� Edtt�'q w .t#§
Pa e9eft p snthe%7aa.�. 10 be i titgnus", Ifii•,6ifdSFry� 3t wti hmna�
pe d
All in the year 1999 �e�cc �{. riy t eP e
" erf t FM .
I n•c`-cemingit a"ro d -d-'i- Et andYor
I amity(or declare)ender penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct
12th
Dated at Palm Springs,California this day
April
of p ,1999 r
Signature
i
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 25.16.030 of the Paln
Desert Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional parking lots
as a conditional use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to
office professional zoned property and consistent with the
recommendations of an adopted specific plan.
III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
IV. CASE NO: ZOA 99-1
V. DATE: April 22, 1999
VI. CONTENTS:
A. Staff Recommendation
B. Discussion
C. Draft Ordinance No.
D. Planning Commission Minutes involving Case No. ZOA 99-1
E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1919
F. Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 6, 1999
G. Related maps and/or exhibits
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Waiver further reading and pass Ordinance No. to second reading.
B. DISCUSSION:
1. BACKGROUND:
The Palma Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans recommended that
certain R-1 areas directly adjacent to Highway 111 general commercial zones be
made available for public parking.
The Palma Village Plan also recommended that R-2 areas adjacent to OP zoned
sites be made available for office parking. The plan also promotes the creation
of sufficiently sized office sites without impacting on the R-1 neighbors.
Previously the city enacted amendments to facilitate parking in the R-1 zone
when adjacent to the C-1 zone and in the R-2 zone when adjacent to the O.P.
zone. At this time the code does not permit parking in the R-1 zone when
adjacent to O.P.
�I
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
j CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
APRIL 22, 1999
i
These ,code amendments were implemented in 1990. At that time staff
presented Planning Commission/City Council with three options from which to
implement the policy:
i
a. Adding commercial/office parking as a conditional use in the R-1 and R-2
zones when consistent with a specific plan.
b. Rezone to R-3 which already allowed parking as a conditional use.
C. Create a new parking lot zone.
The commission recommended using option "a" above and the City Council
ultimately passed both amendments.
These amendments did not take into account office parking lots in the R-1 zone
when adjacent to O.P. zoned property.
2. ANALYSIS:
This amendment is necessary at this time in order that the Kearney office
building project can be completed. The proposed amendment would permit
office professional parking lots as a conditional use in the R-1 zone when directly
adjacent to office professional zoned property and consistent with the
recommendations of an adopted specific plan. This amendment will aid in the
implementation of the Palma Village Specific Plan and will be consistent with the
two similar amendments processed in 1990.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposed amendment at its meeting of
April 6, 1999 and recommended its approval on a 5-0 vote.
4. CEOA REVIEW:
The proposed amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for the purposes
of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary.
Prepared by:
t ve Smith
Reviewed and Approved _ y �^
Philip Drell
Am
2
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT TO SECTION 25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL PARKING LOTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE
WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL (O.P.) ZONES AND CONSISTENT WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS OF A SPECIFIC PLAN.
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22nd
day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a zoning ordinance
amendment to Section 25.16.030 to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional
use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional (O.P.) zones and
consistent with recommendations of a specific plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 1919 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.
97-18," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the project is 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 and reasons to exist to approve the zoning ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment implements specific recommendations of the Palma
Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and will not threaten the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 council in this case.
2. That it does hereby approve ZOA 99-1 as provided in the attached exhibit
labeled Exhibit "A."
i
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.
j PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this
day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ROBERT A. SPIEGEL, Mayor
ATTEST:
SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
MINUTES
SUBJECT TO
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION ' ' ®
REVISION
APRIL 6, 1999 X
VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Case No. PMW 99-4 - ROYCE INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS CO.,
INC., Applicant
Request for approval of a lot line adjustment to conform to
approved project.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell,
approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0.
Vlll. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising
only those issues he/she or someone else raised at the public hearing described
herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at,
or prior to, the public hearing.
A. Case Nos. PP/CUP 99-3 and VAR 99-1 - SEAN KEARNEY, Applicant
Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact, precise plan of design and front setback variance for a
two story 7,500 square foot office building at the southwest
corner of Fred Waring Drive and Acacia Drive.
Mr. Smith noted that this application should be considered in conjunction with
the second public hearing item, Case No. ZOA 99-1 . He indicated that the
property was located at the southwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and
Acacia. The site plan and colored elevations were on display. The property
comprised two lots with 120 feet of frontage on Fred Waring and 154 feet on
Acacia for a total of 18,896 square feet. The north lot was zoned Office
Professional. The south lot was zoned R-1 single family residential. The site
was currently vacant and had recently been graded clear. The building would
be two stories and a total of 22 feet high. He described the architecture as
2
_ SUBJECT TO
MINUTES r , REVISION
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 6, 1999
contemporary and indicated that the building was completely located on the
northerly lot, the office professional zoned lot. The parking lot to support the
use was proposed on the R-1 lot to the south. Part of the application was a
variance request on the front yard setback. The request was to reduce the
setback from 15 feet to 3 feet and at some points zero. The variance request
was based on the exceptionally wide parkway between this lot and Fred
Waring Drive. He noted that there were remnant parcels located adjacent to
Fred Waring Drive when it was originally widened and that resulted in the
excess setback. The buildings to both the east and west were granted similar
setback variances. Relative to parking, the applicant would provide a total of
26 spaces which was consistent with the ordinance for a building this size.
As previously noted, the parking lot would be located on the R-1 zoned lot.
Currently the ordinance did not permit parking in an R-1 zone. As indicated in
the next case, the Palma Village Plan when it was adopted in 1990
encouraged the creation of these office professional uses along Fred Waring
Drive with parking in the back. Two zoning ordinance amendments were
done. One was when adjacent to the C-1 zone, the provision under which
Walgreens proceeded, and the other was when adjacent to the R-2 zone.
Staff did not proceed with the zoning ordinance change to allow it as a
conditional use in the R-1 zone at that time because there were no pending
applications. The building would be two stories high, but only a portion of the
building had a second floor. On the first floor there was approximately 6,000
square feet and on the second floor 1,444 square feet. The parking for the
facility was based on the general office use only. No medical office uses
would be permitted and there was a condition prohibiting medical and dental
offices in this building, noting that the parking standard was recently increased
for medical and dental offices. Earlier office professional buildings could go in
and have up to 2,200 square feet of medical use without providing the higher
parking amount. Staff received three letters which were distributed to
commission. Two of the letters, from Peggy Ames and Frank Miller, expressed
concern with the architecture and parking. Both noted that the buildings on
either side had a southwestern style while the proposed one was
contemporary. They also asked that the commission be confident that there
was enough parking. Staff felt that with a condition prohibiting medical and
dental uses that parking would be adequate. The third letter received was
from Mr. Swenson, the property owner immediately to the south. He
requested the inclusion of a seven-foot wall. The typical standard was six
feet. Staff had no problem with conditioning the seven-foot wall and did so
in the draft resolution. Mr. Smith felt that the commission could adopt a
3
`: SUBJECT TO
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION '`1 REVISION
FT
MIUTES D
APRIL 6, 1999
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and recommended approval
subject to the conditions. He noted that in the conditions this approval was
subject to the approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 99-1 . He asked for
any questions.
Commissioner Finerty asked where Acacia was blocked off right now in
relation to where this project was proposed. Mr. Smith noted that Acacia was
blocked off on the north segment approximately across to where Mike
Homme's building was under construction last summer. Since that time
diverters were installed which prohibited left turn movements from Acacia
onto Fred Waring from either the north or south side. Mr. Greenwood
explained that currently there were no closures on Acacia but there was a
median on Fred Waring across Acacia so someone could turn left from Fred
Waring onto Acacia but they couldn't turn left or go through if they were on
Acacia at Fred Waring.
Commissioner Lopez asked if the wall next to the proposed southerly wall was
also seven feet high. Mr. Smith said he thought it was six feet. He indicated
they would probably step the wall down from the seven feet and transition it
to the six-foot wall, but the main concern was the wall to the south. Upon
questioning by Commissioner Campbell, Mr. Smith explained that there was
an existing fence along the south and a combination of wood fence and wall
to the west. He pointed out that the split face wall material being asked for
was used here at city hall.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if ARC considered a southwest design as opposed
to contemporary. Mr. Smith indicated they weren't presented with a
southwestern design, but a contemporary which was deemed acceptable and
was given preliminary approval. To his recollection the subject wasn't
addressed specifically. Chairperson Jonathan noted that in the letter from Mr.
Miller he asked about the inclusion of an elevator. Chairperson Jonathan asked
what the current status was on requiring elevators and if this application
would be conditioned on that. Mr. Smith noted that the Building Department
did not call it out as a requirement in their comments. Chairperson Jonathan
asked if Mr. Smith knew in general.or as a matter of policy if the City required
it or if there were other governmental agencies that due to handicap
requirements provide for an elevator when a building was two stories. Mr.
Smith explained that requirement was enforced through the Building
Department but he didn't know who they were doing it on behalf of. Mr.
4
i
I
I
MINUTES D P, SUM To
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REVISION
APRIL 6, 1999
i
I
I '
i
Hargreaves indicated that generally speaking, if a business was open to the
public they would be required to be handicap accessible. Chairperson
Jonathan asked if the building standards should incorporate that requirement
or if it was already done on a defacto basis by other agencies. Mr. Smith
thought it was part of the adoption of the ADA requirements. Chairperson
Jonathan asked if it was, if it was an oversight that there wasn't a condition
of approval or if it was just an assumption that there would be an elevator.
He assumed it had not been included in any of the plans the City received. Mr.
Smith said that was correct and suggested that Mr. Holden address that issue.
From the Building Department's perspective they would assume it wasn't
necessary until they find that the building was open to the public. At this
point the tenancy was not determined so if they were going to use the second
floor area as storage it might not be required. Chairperson Jonathan thought
it might be wise to have a condition in the same way we prohibit medical use
we could prohibit public access to the second floor unless an elevator was
installed. He indicated he wouldn't burden this application with the issue,
although he would ask the applicant about it, but he requested a brief report
at the next meeting as to what the City's current procedures were with regard
to elevators and two story structures that appear to be available to the public.
Mr. Smith concurred. Chairperson Jonathan noted that the north elevations
indicate that the windows.were high up and therefore would not intrude into
the privacy of the residential neighbors. He asked if that was accurate or if he
should ask the applicant. Mr. Smith said staff assumed the windows were not
above 5'6" and included a condition requiring that it be visually obscured
either with the use of glass block, etched glass or something that would
eliminate the problem. If in fact the windows were above 5'6" that condition
would be waived per the ordinance. Chairperson Jonathan noted that they
discussed the seven-foot wall but the letter also asked for tan coloring as well.
He asked if that was addressed and if it would be acceptable to be consistent
with the building to the west. Mr. Smith felt the applicant should address that
issue.
Chairperson Jonathan ooened the public hearing and asked the applicant to
address the commission.
MR. RICK HOLDEN, Holden and Johnson Architects at 44-267
Monterey Avenue, indicated he was present to answer questions.
Regarding the question of a southwestern design being considered by
ARC it wasn't and as they were designing the project they felt no
5
FTMINUTES x _ SUBJECT toPALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION s $ REVISION
j APRIL 6, 1999
provisions to design it southwest. There was no deed restriction or city
requirement that it be southwest and 'when they did a couple of
buildings for Mike Homme and Wes Oliphant next to them they did kind
of a one story little mexican village next to their two story
contemporary and they hadn't had any complaints about that offending
anyone. He thought a mixture of architecture helped. He didn't know
that they wanted everything to be the same. It wasn't meant to look
like a condominium development and he thought this one actually had
a little more relief than the two story pueblo building that came into
their parking lot on the other side of Acacia. They were able to pull
things back a bit. One of the things the commission asked about was
the glass on the second floor. Realistically, if they had been inside their
building, this was kind of the same way. What happened on the second
floor was that there were offices on both sides adjacent to Acacia and
adjacent to the other building. There was only a bridge between those
offices and it was a two story space on the inside. That glass was not
adjacent to the bridge but free floating. The bridge was open to a
mezzanine on the first floor and the glass was above. It was high and
shouldn't bean intrusion. Regarding elevators, Mr. Holden explained
that ADA didn't require elevators based on the size limitation of the
second floor. The second floor was only 1,000 feet compared to the
first floor at 6,000 square feet and it wasn't a requirement.
Chairperson Jonathan noted that one of the requirements of ADA was if there
was a second floor bathroom they did require grab rails and the width for
wheelchairs.
Mr. Holden indicated that just like hotels or whatever, even if they had
them it was a percentage of the space that was required. Someday it
might be but right now it wasn't. Right now there were no plans for an
elevator. During the course of their work they run their jobs through the
City before they turn them in for ADA requirements because they
change constantly. That was checked out before they turned in the job.
Chairperson Jonathan noted that one of the respondents indicated not only a
request for a seven-foot split face block wall but also that the color be tan.
He asked if a tan color was acceptable and if it was consistent.
6
MINUTES DF T_ SUBJECT TO
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REVISION
APRIL 6, 1999
Mr. Holden confirmed that the tan would be the same color used in the
building. He noted they were also trying to screen the motor home
behind the wall.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was
closed. Chairperson Jonathan asked for commission comments.
Commissioner Campbell said if Mr. Holden was in favor of raising the wall to
seven feet or even higher to shield the motor home and change the color of
the masonry blocks and agreed with all the conditions of approval, she would
be in favor of the project.
Commissioner Beaty felt it was a very attractive rendering and moved for
approval.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Chairperson Jonathan felt the
project was not only attractive, but was the exact design intended under the
Palma Village Plan with the unobtrusive transition from Fred Waring into
residential. He was in favor and called for the vote. Motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1918, recommending to City
Council approval of PP/CUP 99-3 and VAR 99-1, subject to conditions as
amended. Motion carried 5-0.
B. Case No. ZOA 99-1 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for approval of an amendment to Chapter 25.16.030 of
the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional
parking lots as a conditional use within the R-1 zone when
directly adjacent to office professional zoned property and
consistent with the recommendations of an adopted specific
plan.
7
SUBJECT TD
MINUTES DRi7_*1 - REVISION
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 6, 1999
Mr. Smith noted that most of this was covered during the previous report and
he would not repeat that other than to say that this would be consistent with
the provisions of the Palma Village Plan and consistent with the other two
zone changes done in 1990 and it would allow the previous application to
proceed. He indicated it was a Class 5 categorical exemption for the purposes
of CEQA and staff was recommending that Planning Commission recommend
approval of the amendment to City Council.
Chairperson Jonathan opened the public hearing, noted that the City was the
applicant, and asked in anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to
this matter. There was no one and the public hearing was closed.
Chairperson Jonathan asked for commission comments.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Finerty,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Finerty,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1919, recommending to City
Council approval of ZOA 99-1 . Motion carried 5-0.
C. Case No. PP 98-9 - JOHN STEIGERWALDT .FOR MARK MOSCROP,
Applicant
Request for approval of a precise plan of design to construct an
outdoor storage yard, outdoor display garden and a 720 square
foot sales office located on the north side of 42nd Avenue 1,000
feet west of Cook Street.
Mr. Alvarez noted that landscaping, elevations and site plans were on the wall.
The project was located in the service industrial district and fronted on 42nd
Avenue. There was vacant property to the west, service industrial to the east,
and Waste Management property to the north. As indicated, the project
consisted of three categories of uses. An open air storage area which would
contain materials which the property owner sells, manufactures and installs.
The second area consisted of an outdoor display garden which had an eight-
foot concrete meandering path meandering through the site to various concrete
pads for outdoor display areas. The landscaping plan was approved by the
8
i
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
TO SECTION 25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE PROFESSIONAL
PARKING LOTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE R-1
ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OFFICE PROFESSIONAL
(O.P.) AND CONSISTENT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF AN
ADOPTED SPECIFIC PLAN.
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 6th day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a zoning ordinance
amendment to section 25.16.030 to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional
use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional (O.P.) zone and
consistent with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan; 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. 97-18," 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 recommend approval of a zoning
ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment implements specific recommendations of the Palma
Village Specific Plan.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and will not threaten the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 Amendment 99-1 as provided in the attached
Exhibit "A".
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BEATY, CAMPBELL, FINERTY, LOPEZ, JONATHAN
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
SABBY dORATHAN, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Stephen R. Smith, Acting Secretarl
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1919
EXHIBIT "A"
25.16.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be permitted subject to a
conditional use permit:
A. Boardinghouses and roominghouses;
B. Churches, convents, monasteries and other religious institutions;
C. Day nurseries and nursery schools;
D. Fire stations;
E. Private recreational facilities such as country clubs, tennis and swim clubs,
golf courses, with incidental, limited commercial uses which are commonly
associated and directly related to the primary use;
F. Private schools and colleges, not including art, business, or trade schools or
colleges;
G. Public educational institutions;.
H. Public utility and public service facilities. (Ord. 94 §1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A
§25.10-30.)
I. Commercial parking lots when directly adjacent to the C-1 General Commercial
zone and consistent with recommendations of an adopted specific plan;
J. Professional office parking lots when directly adjacent to the O.P. office
professional zone and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted
specific plan.
3
i
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
I
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: April 6, 1999
CASE NO: ZOA 99-1
REQUEST: Approval of an amendment to Chapter 25.16.030 of the Palm Desert
Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional parking lots as a
conditional use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office
professional zoned property and consistent with the recommendations
of an adopted specific plan.
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
1. BACKGROUND:
The Palma Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans recommended that
certain R-1 areas directly adjacent to Highway 111 general commercial zones be
made available for public parking.
The Palma Village Plan also recommended that R-2 areas adjacent to OP zoned sites
be made available for office parking. The plan also promotes the creation of
sufficiently sized office sites without impacting on the R-1 neighbors. This proposal,
while it does result in parking in the R-1 zone, assures that there is no office building
in the R-1 zone.
These code amendments were implemented in 1990. At that time staff presented
Planning Commission with three options from which to implement the policy:
1 . Adding commercial/office parking as a conditional use in the R-1 and R-
2 zones when consistent with a specific plan.
2. Rezone to R-3 which already allowed parking as a conditional use.
3. Create a new parking lot zone.
The commission recommended using option one above and the City Council
ultimately passed both amendments.
These amendments did not take into account office parking lots in the R-1 zone when
adjacent to O.P. zoned property.
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
APRIL 6, 1999
11. ANALYSIS:
The proposed amendment would permit office professional parking lots as a
conditional use in the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional zoned
property and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan. This
amendment will aid in the implementation of the Palma Village Specific Plan and will
be consistent with the two similar amendments processed in 1990.
III. CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed amendment is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for the purposes of
CEQA and no further documentation is necessary.
IV. RECOMMENDATION:
That Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of a zoning ordinance
amendment to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional use permit in the
R-1 zone when directly adjacent to the O.P. (office professional) zone and consistent
with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan.
V. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Comments from city departments and other agencies
D. Plans and exhibits
Prepared by: '
teve Smith
Reviewed and Approved.
Phil Drell
Am
2
City of Palibesert
Council Agenda Request
g q
p
Meeting of a 999
1. To be considered under:
Consent Calendar Rums Ordinances— /Now Bn®ese_
Old Business_ lahr�Oml hme_ Public Heignap_/ 0tber_
2 Item Tide Consideration of an amendment to Chapter 25.16.030 of the PaM
Desert Zoning Ordinance to allow office professional parking lots
as a conditional use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to
office professional zoned property and consistent with the
recommendations of an adopted specific Ian. 5 J
3. Financial: P P P C.0 � � zv/,�F �7
(a) AocnantlAole t s (b) Amount PApated
(c) 1n the Current Budget? (c) Apprapdadon gegdmd7
Approved by Director ofF nance-
ti
4. Submitted by: E
. 4
3. Approvals: Delmuneut City
4
r y3 73.510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE(619)346-0611
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
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 to permit office professional
parking lots to be located in the R-1 zone district when directly adjacent to the O.P. zone,
subject to approval of a conditional use permit.
Post-it®Fax Note 7671 Date #of
To 1 7 pages
From
Co./Dept. Co. -
Phone# Phone#
Fax# -770 -`
�� Fax#
SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, April 22, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk
April 10, 1999 City of Palm Desert, California
ISM I SS I C) REPO IF 3E 3E 3E
APR-07-99 10: 50 ID: 7603417098 CITY OF PALM DESERT
.J08 114"ME3 ER 026
I I-IP C3 R MAT I (Z) COI7E OK
TELEPHONE NUMBER 7784731
NAME( ID NUMBER) 76077e4731
START TIME APR-07-99 10:49
PAGES TRANSMITTED 001 TRANSMISSION MODE G3
RESOLUTION STD REDIALING TIMES 01
SECURITY OFF MAILBOX OFF
MACHINE ENGAGED - 00 .47
THIS TRANSMISSION IS COMPLETED_
I
LAST SUCCESSFUL PAGE 001
73 510 FREO WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,GALIFORNIA 92280
TELEPHONE(619)346-0cil l
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO: ZOA 99-1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Mesert City
Council to co nsidar an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to permit office professional
parking loss to be located in the R-1 .one district when directly adjacent to the O.P. zone,
subject to approval of a conditional use permit.
I
POCFiC Faz Notp 7671 b / � �e _
colcoP�. Cna. L
I•�ronu a
C7 TO/�- PG/n!1/iN)aI
I
SAID public haaring will be Held on Thursday, April Z2, 1999, at 7:Oa p-m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Oesart,
California, at v hich'Time and place all Imarested parsons are invited to attend and Be heard.
Written comments concern inp all items covered by this public haarino nonce shall be
RECEpvp rj
MAR 17 1999
COMMUN"DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CRY OF PALM DESERT
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Cnunt+of Riverside
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of
the County aforesaid; 1 am over the age of eighteen
years,and not a party to or interested in the
above-entitled matter. 1 am the principal clerk of a
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation,
printed and published In the city of Palm Springs, rho:Da3z
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been DIryLEGALANOTIICE ERT
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the CASE NO. zOA 99-1
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held before the Palm Desert Plannlng Com-
California under the date of March 24,1988.Case mission to consider an amendment to thegioning
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the Ordinance to permit office professional parkingg lots
to be located in the R-1 zone dlstnct when tlirectly
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller adjacent to the O.P.zone,subject to approval of a
than non pariel,has been published in each regular conditional use permit.
SAID ublic hearing will be held on Tuesday.April,
and entire issue of sold newspaper and not in any s. 1e�s. a+ roe p.m. m tits Coancu chamber m
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: the Pelm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring
Drive, Pelm Desert mla, at which time enC
place ell Interested .......s arent Invited attend
March 12[h and be heard. Written commes conceror ning all-.
Items covered by this public hearingg notice shall
infor-
mation c n rn to the date of the roject nd/or
concerning the proposed project antl/orI
negative etian is available far review in the
Departmentnt of of Community Development at the
above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m.and
m' Mends throuah I'd tlay. if you challenge
cn the proposed eons in court, you may be limited
All in the year 1999 to ralsing only those Issues you or someone else
y raised at the public hearn g described In this no-
tice, or in written correspondence delivered to the
certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the Planning Commisslon at, or prior to, the public
foregoing is true and correct hearing. PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Sth Palm Desert Planning Commission
Dated at Palm Springs,California this day _ PUB: March 12. toga
March
of ,I99�
Signature
I
3E�E "I'IZ iSM I SS I OM REDO T 3E 3E 3E
MAR-08-99 09:43 ID: 7603417098 CITY OF PALM DESERT
,J0E3 III"MB ER B33
I 1-4 IP OI2 MAT I OIII CODE OK -
TELEPHONE NUMBER 77134731
NAME( ID NUMBER) 7607784731
START TIME MAR-06-99 09:42
PAGES TRANSMITTED 001 TRANSMISSION MODE G3
RESOLUTION STD REDIALING TIMES 00
SECURITY OFF MAILBOX OFF
MACHINE ENGAGED 00 .46
THIS TRANSMISSION IS COMPLETED-
LAST SUCCESSFUL PAGE 001
73-510 FREO WAKING nRIVE, PALM UESEHT,GALIFORNIA 822B0
TELEPHONE(fi 18)346-OBI t
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. 201ft 99-1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing Will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider an amandmant to the Zoning Ordinance to permit office
profassional parking lots to be located in the R-1 zone district when directly adjacent to the
O_P_ zone, subject to approval of a conditional usa permit-
Pos[-ir Faac Nota 7571 ^.3
Fum -
o V--Oc.ii 6
rC fT O is r'<R/✓N IN�j' _
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 6, 195g, at 700 p_m_ in the Council
Chamber ax the Pa1m Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, ax Which time and place all interested persons are invited T. attend and be heard_
Written comments con cernin9 all items c vnrad by this public hearing notice shall be
73.510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE(619)346-0611
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to permit office
professional parking lots to be located in the R-1 zone district when directly adjacent to the
O.P. zone, subject to approval of a conditional use permit.
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 6, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard.
Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall ,be
accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or
negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development
at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public
hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
March 12, 1999 Palm Desert Planning Commission
ORDINANCE NO. 909
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT TO SECTION 25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL PARKING LOTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE
WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OFFICE
PROFESSIONAL (O.P.) ZONES AND CONSISTENT WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS OF A SPECIFIC PLAN.
CASE NO. ZOA 99-1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22nd
day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a zoning ordinance
amendment to Section 25.16.030 to allow office professional parking lots as a conditional
use within the R-1 zone when directly adjacent to office professional (O.P.) zones and
consistent with recommendations of a specific plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 1919 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.
97-18," in that the Director of Community Development has determined the project is 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 and reasons to exist to approve the zoning ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment implements specific recommendations of the Palma
Village and Commercial Core Area Specific Plans.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and will not threaten the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 council in this case.
2. That it does hereby approve ZOA 99-1 as provided in the attached exhibit
labeled Exhibit "A."
ORDINANCE NO. ono
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 27th
day of may , 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Benson, Crites, Ferguson, Kelly, Spiegel
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ROBERT A. SA59Wyor
4SHEILA
. f`
R. GAN, Ci Clerk
al Desert, C ornia
2
ORDINANCE NO. 909
EXHIBIT "A"
25.16.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be permitted subject to a
conditional use permit:
A. Boardinghouses and roominghouses;
B. Churches, convents, monasteries and other religious institutions;
C. Day nurseries and nursery schools;
D. Fire stations;
E. Private recreational facilities such as country clubs, tennis and swim clubs,
golf courses, with incidental, limited commercial uses which are commonly
associated and directly related to the primary use;
F. Private schools and colleges, not including art, business, or trade schools or
colleges;
G. Public educational institutions;
H. Public utility and public service facilities. (Ord. 94 §1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A
§25.10-30.)
I. Commercial parking lots when directly adjacent to the C-1 General Commercial
zone and consistent with recommendations of an adopted specific plan;
J. Professional office parking lots when directly adjacent to the O.P. office
professional zone and consistent with the recommendations of an adopted
specific plan.
3
MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 13, 1999
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Spiegel then presented a proclamation from the City of
Palm Desert, expressing the City's pride in such an outstanding young man.
XVI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.16.030 OF THE PALM
DESERT ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW OFFICE PROFESSIONAL PARKING LOTS
AS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO
OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONED PROPERTY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF AN ADOPTED SPECIFIC PLAN Case No. ZOA 99-1 (City
of Palm Desert, Applicant) (Continued from the meeting of April 22, 1999).
Mr. Steve Smith, Planning Manager, noted the subject consideration was continued from the
last meeting at the request of the Applicant for Public Hearing Item B, the case necessitating
said ordinance amendment. He summarized the staff report for the case, noting that Zoning
Ordinance Review Committee considered the matter at its April 28, 1999, meeting and
concurred with the Planning Commission recommendation. He reported that staff
recommended approval.
Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing Qpen and invited testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING
the subject zoning ordinance amendment. With no testimony offered, he declared the public hearing
closed.
Councilman Ferguson moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 2Q9 to second
reading, approving a zoning ordinance amendment to Section 25.16.030 to allow office professional
parking lots as a conditional use within the R-1 Zone when directly adjacent to Office Professional (O.P.)
Zones and consistent with Recommendations of a specific plan. Motion was seconded by Mayor
Pro-Tempore Crites and carried by unanimous vote.
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, PRECISE PLAN
AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A TWO STORY 7,500 SQUARE FOOT
OFFICE BUILDING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FRED WARING DRIVE AND
ACACIA DRIVE Case Nos. PP/CUP 99-3 and VAR 99-1 (Sean Kearney, Applicant)
(Continued from the meeting of April 22, 1999).
Mr. Steve Smith, Planning Manager, called Council's attention to the drawings displayed in
the Chamber for the subject project, noting this case instigated Public Hearing Item A's zoning
ordinance amendment. He then highlighted the points of interest from the staff report and
stated that the Applicant's architect was in attendance to answer questions. Additionally, Mr.
Smith noted a letter was received from Mr. Edwards at 72-896 Sonora Drive, expressing
concern for the two-story nature of the development.
32
R
MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 27, 1999
Mayor Spiegel moved to continue the revised valet parking regulation indefinitely with Mayor Pro-
Tempore Crites and Councilman Kelly to be included in the review process prior to its return for full
Council consideration. Motion was seconded by Mayor Pro-Tempore Crites and carried by unanimous
vote.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 915 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.40 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO RECREATION VEHICLES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
Mr. Hart Ponder, Jr., reported the subject ordinance resulted from direction given at the
May 13, 1999, meeting to amend the current regulation for recreational vehicles on private
property. He noted the increased width from eight feet to 102 inches had been included in
the ordinance.
Councilman Kelly moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 211 to second reading.
Motion was seconded by Councilman Ferguson and carried by unanimous vote.
C. ORDINANCE NO. 916 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,
CALIFORNIA, REGULATING LASER POINTERS AND ADDING CHAPTER 9.69 OF
THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT.
Mrs. Gilligan stated the subject item was presented to the Public Safety Commission by the
Police Department, and it had been through several different meetings there and revisions
by the City Attorney. Additionally, she said participants in the Student Government Day
were also asked for their input, and each of them supported this type of regulation.
Therefore, staff recommended introduction of the ordinance.
Councilman Ferguson moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. M to second
reading. Motion was seconded by Councilman Kelly and carried by unanimous vote.
For Adoption:
A. ORDINANCE NO. 909 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION
25.16.030 TO ALLOW OFFICE PROFESSIONAL PARKING LOTS AS A
CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE WHEN DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO
OFFICE PROFESSIONAL (O.P.) ZONES AND CONSISTENT WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS OF A SPECIFIC PLAN Case No. ZOA 99-1 (City of Palm
Desert, Applicant).
Mr. Diaz noted no changes had been made since the ordinance's introduction, adoption was
recommended.
9
1�
MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 27, 1999
Councilman Kelly moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2Q2. Motion was
seconded by Councilmember Benson and carried by unanimous vote.
VIL NEW BUSINESS
A. R_FQUF_ST FOR APPROVAi.TO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF VEHICLE NO. 15 FOR
ONE YEAR TO COLLECT RECYCLABLES FROM PALM DESERT BUSINESSES.
Mayor Spiegel understood Foundation for the Retarded would perform the collection, but
he asked for a description of Vehicle No. 15.
Ms. Lisa Constande, Environmental Conservation Manager, stated it was a cab vehicle with
flatbed that was not used as frequently now that much of the park maintenance work was
performed under contract. She noted it would only be used for one year, and then it would
return to the City's fleet. In further response to Mayor Spiegel, she said the grant
application had requested two vehicles; however, only one was approved.
Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize transfer of ownership of subject
vehicle to the Foundation for the Retarded of the Desert. Motion was seconded by Councilman Kelly and
carried by a 4-0-1 vote with Councilman Ferguson ABSTAINING.
B. REQUEST FOR DONATION OF SURPLUS VEHICLES.
Mr. Diaz said staff recommended donation of the two excess vehicles rather than selling
them to the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District. In response to Councilman
Kelly, Mr. Folkers replied they were two S-10 Chevy pick-up trucks.
Councilman Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize the donation of two of the City's
surplus vehicles to the Coachella Valley Parks and Recreation District. Motion was seconded by
Councilman Kelly and carried by unanimous vote.
C. RFQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -- TRACT 25373
STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION (Don Norris, Applicant).
Mayor Pro-Tempore Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, enter into a Reimbursement Agreement
and authorize the Mayor to execute same. Motion was seconded by Mayor Spiegel and carried by
unanimous vote.
10
F".F:C.f_ mr¢-y`: n a m..\-3:..s � •y: iF�cs: n �amS9�ro.o
000 GOP as a c 0
-- �I I
1 v •
Ii 1 � •l
NDP
'- �va®:.•. Z C �# ,:wnfli�tR=.z::tLxs:a' nxc-"fn�— f/- __
9
- --_ O t 1 b. mll•
- -- y /l �` r`(lI ❑ : t A fAr ^`�^ �i�
t� ii•
p� 1
IJUI 6 s g I
u
O A li
-13
e I
t ♦v _ �_ _
I r
A
G I r
t-
Po LIL AVENUE—
t•v� ' � I ! 1 ��- r 1 — N
rl
r
`o0 One
( ...� J•L1VlY Ana, ` 1. �_� -� S�rn .Ptf rn /
•�'!im�.:a.+JL�-:tt::tu-a_9 dwxn- n'�4 F- L_
Y
PROJECT INFORMATION , '
APN ADDRESS
EXISTING ZONE
CASE NO(S) 7n 9�j
APPLICANT(S) (name, address & phone number)
DESCRIPTION CooPm iQeila.,DerJ� -ra PPv.,ei f nl'e,� Bw'f o(lt��
SQUARE FT. MIN. SQ. FT.
PARKING MAX. SQ. FT.
NO. OF LOTS AVG. SQ. FT.
SETBACKS: FRONT SIDES REAR
ACTIONS AN40,
D HEARINGS
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
OATS ff
ACTION, ,. V(17E':
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL
z
Rt W"T�oN No.i
DATE ACTION ORDINANCE NO
RECORDED IN GIS DATA BANK BY DATE:
ZONING MAP CORRECTED BY DATE:
FINAL INSPECTION DATE BY PROJECT PLANNER: