Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd 1081 GPA 04-01 CZ 04-03 and PP 04-02 11-28-2004 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: Consideration of approval of a general plan amendment and a change of zone from low density residential (R-1, 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre) to office professional (OP), and precise plan of design to allow two, one-story professional office buildings with a combined floor area of 6,500 square feet on a .9-acre project site located at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. SUBMITTED BY: Francisco J. Urbina, Associate Planner APPLICANT: William J. Worzack C� C� 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 106 MCI► DATE /J ' / ( 0 ` Palm Desert, CA. 92211 /89 4 CONTINUED TO.. I -6) PROPERTY OWNERS: 0 PASSED TO 2ND READING Simonds Ents 75-587 Camino De Paco * Cases Continued to the meeting of November Indian Wells, CA. 92210 18, 2004, with Councilmembers Ferguson and Kelly appointed to work with the Applicant Simonds 1993 Trust on the potential for an alternative 71-890 Eleanora Lane configuration prior to the next public Rancho Mirage, CA. 9227dearing. 5-0 Kenneth W. Simonds & Sarah R. Simonds 74-403 Desert Bajada Trail Indian Wells, CA. 92210 Kathleen M. Walker 26532 Houston Trail Laguna Hills, CA. 92653 ARCHITECT: Habitat- Guy Dreier Designs Attn: Guy Dreier 41-995 Boardwalk, Suite D Palm Desert, CA. 92211 CASE NOS: GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 (Continued from October 14, 2004) DATE: October 28, 2004 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft City Council Resolution No. 04-115 (GPA 04-01) B. Ordinance No. 1081 (CZ 04-03) C. Draft City Council Resolution No. 04-116 (PP 04-22) D. Planning Commission minutes, September 21, 2004 E. Planning Commission staff report, September 21, 2004 Recommendation: 1. That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 04-115 approving GPA 04- 01. 2. That the City Council pass Ordinance No. 1081 to second reading approving Change of Zone 04-03 from R-1 (Residential Single Family) to OP (Office Professional). 3. That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 04-116 approving PP 04-22. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The .9-acre vacant project site is located at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. Neighboring land uses include a golf course and maintenance yard to the south, one-story single family homes to the west, a commercial building to the north and vacant Service Industrial zoned property to the east. General Plan Amendment 04-01 proposes to amend the General Plan land use designation for the site from Low Density Residential, Study Zone Overlay to Office Professional. Change of Zone 04-03 proposes to change the zoning map designation for the site from R-1 (Residential Single Family) to OP (Office Professional). Precise Plan 04-22 proposes the construction of two, single-story professional office buildings with a combined floor area of 6,500 square feet. The buildings will be residential in character with setbacks and height (17 feet) similar to that of single family homes in the R-1 zone. The project complies with OP zone development standards and also meets most R-1 zone development standards. The project is compatible with nearby single family homes because the proposed one-story office buildings have a quality 2 1 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 architectural design, generous landscaping, and are set back a minimum of 121 feet from the closest single family home to the west. An Office Professional land use and zoning designation at the project site would be more appropriate than the existing residential single family designation because Cook Street is a busy arterial street where 26,602 vehicle trips per day (October 30, 2003) generate noise levels in excess of 70 decibels. The General Plan Noise Element discourages residential uses in areas where noise levels exceed 65 decibels. Noise impacts on the project site from Cook Street traffic will increase over the next 20 years based on General Plan projections that traffic volume on Cook Street will increase to 39,520 vehicle trips per day. On September 21, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended 4-0-0-1, with Chairperson Jonathan abstaining, that the City Council approve case nos. GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03, and PP 04-22. The Architectural; Review Commission granted preliminary approval (7-0) on the project on August 10, 2004. II. BACKGROUND: The vacant 39,000 square foot project site consists of four parcels. The westerly end of the project site contains a paved 24-foot wide driveway over an easement that provides access to the golf course to the south. A 29-foot wide landscaped buffer area exists between this driveway and the westerly property line of the project site that is adjacent to a single family home. The project site is currently zoned R-1 (Residential Single Family) and is designated Low Density Residential with Study Zone overlay on the new General Plan Land Use Map which was adopted by the City Council on March 15, 2004. The City Council determined that the project site should have a Study Zone overlay designation to allow for the possibility of a change in the site's land use designation from Low Density Residential to Office Professional once a development application for the site was prepared. A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: OP / single-story office building and one-story single family homes South: R-1 / Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District golf course and golf course maintenance facility East: SI / Cook Street and vacant land West: R-1 / one-story single family homes 3 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 B. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential with Study Zone overlay III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant seeks approval of a general plan amendment and change of zone from Low Density Residential to Office Professional to facilitate approval of a precise plan to allow construction of two residential scale, one-story office buildings. The project virtually meets all of the development standards of the R-1 zone. The westerly building has a setback of 121 feet from the closest single family home to the west. The existing 28-foot wide landscaped setback from this home to the existing golf course access driveway will remain unchanged. Site Plan, Access & Parking: Site Plan/Access: The project site plan shows a 3,500 square foot office building (Building #1) on a 170 foot wide by120 foot deepparcel with frontage on Sheryl � 99 Avenue and a Cook Street easterly street side yard. Access to the Building #1 parcel will be from Sheryl Avenue on one 24-foot wide driveway. Building #1 will have a 20-foot front yard setback and a 15-foot minimum street side yard setback from Cook Street. A trash enclosure will be located at the southerly end of the parking lot. Building #2 is a 3,000 square foot office building on a 160-foot wide by 120-foot deep parcel. Access will be from Sheryl Avenue on one 24-foot wide driveway. A trash enclosure will be located at the southerly end of the parking lot. Parking: Based on Zoning Ordinance off-street parking requirements for professional office uses of one parking space per 250 square feet of gross floor area, Building #1 requires 14 parking spaces. The parking lot for Building #1 provides 15 spaces. Building #2 requires 12 parking spaces. The parking lot for Building #2 provides 12 parking spaces. 4 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 OP Zone Development Standards: The project complies with OP zone development standards as outlined in the following table. STANDARD O.P. DISTRICT PROJECT Building Height 25 feet Varies from 11'-6"and 17'-0" Front Setback 12 foot minimum, 20 feet, measured (Sheryl Avenue) 15 foot average from Sheryl Avenue property line Rear Setback 20 feet average for buildings up to 18 feet in 27'average setback height when adjacent to single-story for both Buildings 1 residential zones (properties to the south are and 2 zoned R-1) Actual setback 0 setback when adjacent to two-story varies from 10 feet multifamily or commercial zones, or setback to 44 feet standard of adjacent zone,whichever is greater *Note: To avoid architectural monotony, the planning commission may require setbacks to vary plus or minus five feet around the required average Street Side Yard 12 foot minimum, Building 1 (adjacent Setback 15 foot average to Cook Street) (Cook Street) easterly side yard: setback varies from 15 feet to 17 feet Interior Side 20 feet average for buildings up to 18 feet in Building 1 westerly Yard height when adjacent to single-story interior side yard: residential zones (properties to the south are 62' zoned R-1) Building 2 easterly 0 setback when adjacent to two-story side yard: 5'-6" multifamily or commercial zones, or setback standard of adjacent zone, whichever is Building 2 westerly greater side yard: 121 feet Parking 1 space per 250 square feet of gross floor 27 parking spaces area: 26 parking spaces required provided Landscaping 15% Bldg 1 lot: 15% (Parking Lot Bldg 2 lot:48% Area) 5 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 Architecture: The two buildings have a "contemporary" architectural style. The buildings have a combination of sloping grey metal seam roofs and flat roofs with heights varying from 11'-6" to 17'-0". Each building will have an angled 18'-6" high architectural projection with slate veneer finish. The building walls are offset, and the shape and footprints of the buildings avoid a "box-like" design. Exterior colors will be in dark beige and light beige. Building materials will consist of exteriors walls coated in a "Akrotique" material that resembles a smooth sandstone finish, slate veneer on architectural projections, brown tinted glass with anodized aluminum trim, and beige stained re-sawn wood soffits underneath roof overhangs. Each building will have two courtyards with 5-foot high walls with an "Akrotique" material finish to match adjacent exterior building walls. Walkways will have decorative brown paving. The Architectural Review Commission granted preliminary approval of the project on August 10, 2004. IV. ANALYSIS: General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone Noise impacts, in excess of 70 decibels, generated by 26,602 vehicle trips per day on Cook Street make the project site incompatible for single family homes. The General Plan Noise Element discourages residential uses in areas where noise levels exceed 65 decibels. This excessive noise would negatively impact the outdoor peace and enjoyment of residents if the site were developed with single family homes. Offices at the project site would be a logical land use extension of the existing OP zoned property to the north. Designating the project site for office uses would provide a desirable land use buffer between a busy arterial street (Cook Street) and single family residential homes to the west. There are no residents to the south that would be impacted by the project. Developing the project site for office uses instead of residential uses would fulfill general plan goals and polices that encourage the location of professional offices along arterial streets because offices provide an appropriate transitional land use 6 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 and noise buffer between high traffic volume streets (i.e. Cook Street) and residential properties. Precise Plan: The proposed residential scale office buildings meet the development standards of the Office Professional (OP) zone and will be compatible with adjacent OP, R- 1, and SI zoned properties. The proposed buildings have quality contemporary designs that were approved by the Architectural Review Commission. Development of the project site for office uses would not negatively impact the one-story, single family residential neighborhood to the west because the setbacks and one-story height of the two proposed office buildings are similar to those of the R-1 zone. The office buildings' minimum 121-foot setback from the closest single family home to the west, effectively isolates the buildings from residents. Since most of this setback is landscaped, it creates a generous and attractive buffer between the office buildings and the residential neighborhood to the west. Therefore, the findings for approving a precise plan can be affirmed. These findings are included in the City Council resolution attached to this staff report. Neighborhood Concerns: Brett Picano, the owner/resident of a single family home four lots west of the project site at 74-857 Sheryl Avenue, spoke in opposition to the proposed project at the Planning Commission hearing. Mr. Picano said he opposes the project because it would create extra traffic in a residential area, extra air pollution in the area, and loitering around the proposed office buildings. The applicant responded that his commercial-industrial real estate firm, which would occupy one of the two office buildings, typically sees only three people per day. Guy Dreier, owner of Guy Dreier Designs, who would occupy the other office building in the project responded that he does not have people do not come to his office every day. Therefore, the amount of traffic generated by the project would be minimal. If three single family homes were developed on the 39,000 square foot site, they would generate 29 vehicles trips per day based on trip generation data (9.57 trips per day, per home) provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual. By comparison, the ITE manual states that 6,500 square feet of offices would generate 72 vehicles trips per day. The estimated 43 additional 7 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 vehicle trips per day trips generated by offices versus single family homes would have a negligible air pollution impact on the neighborhood since 26,602 vehicles per day already travel on Cook Street (projected to increase to 39,520 vehicle trips per day). Most vehicle trips generated by the project will exit and access the site using the shortest route to and from Cook Street, thereby avoiding a longer circuitous route if vehicles leaving the site headed into the interior of the residential neighborhood to the west, then north to Merle Drive, and then east to Cook Street. The applicant and staff do not think that loitering will occur at the project site, but if it did, the applicant would immediately take action to eliminate it. Mr. Picano did not give a reason why he thinks the project might create a loitering problem. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: For purposes of CEQA, staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from further environmental review per Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines. VI. CONCLUSION The general plan amendment and change of zone from Low Density Residential to Office Professional is appropriate for the project site for the reasons stated in the analysis section of this staff report. The precise plan as proposed is consistent with the OP zone development standards. The proposed buildings have a residential scale due to their one- story, 17-foot height, high quality architectural design, generous landscaping, and setbacks that meet R-1 zone standards. The buildings' 121-foot minimum setback from the closest single family home to the west and the generous 51% of project site area landscaped make the office development compatible with nearby single family homes. 8 Staff Report William J. Worzack GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 October 28, 2004 Submitted by: Department Head: • 1/1 44/le t• t )/t6. 0411 Francisco J. Uri). a Philip Drell Associate Planner Director of Community Development Approv I: Homer Croy Assistant City a ger for Development Services rl s L. Ortega City Manager 9 RESOLUTION NO.04-115 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE PROFESSIONAL FOR A .9-ACRE SITE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND SHERYL AVENUE. CASE NO. GPA 04-01 WHEREAS, the City Council of the Cityof Palm a m Desert, California, did on the 14th day of October, 2004, and on the 28th day of October, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of William J. Worzack for a general plan amendment as described above; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 2295 has recommended approval of GPA 04-01; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures 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 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) Categorical Exemption; and WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council finds the following facts and reasons to justify its actions, as described below: 1. A Low Density Residential land use designation with a Study Zone overlay was applied to the site when the City Council adopted a new General Plan on March 15, 2004,. The Council anticipated that general plan amendment and change of Zone applications would be filed to change the land use designation and zoning to Office Professional once a development plan for the project site was prepared and filed. 2. The property at the northwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue is designated on the General Plan as Office Professional, zoned OP. 3. The General Plan Noise Element discourages residential uses adjacent to streets with high traffic volumes such as Cook Street due to traffic noise that would negatively impact the outdoor peace and enjoyment of residents. City Council Resolution No.o4-115 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case. 2. That the City Council hereby approves GPA 04-01 as shown on Exhibit A (attached).. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 28th Day of October, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT SPIEGEL, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California 2 i oc y"r < I , r.c..i ( Q MERLE-DR J _cx -5' cc z-17,' Q J. AVE h iil I-, 1 1 Z I`,' 0 ,Z. CG iu 70 la ti < viu r-, Q 1 \= V � ^ I z V SH ERYL AVE- SUBJECT PROPERTY i QProposed GPA Low Density Residential To Office Professional 1 City of Palm Desert Case No. GPA 04-01 CITY COUNCIL a[c7, a!!N. * GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. 04-115 i EXHI I: IT A Date: CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 1081 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 107, THE PALM DESERT ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY) TO O.P. (OFFICE PROFESSIONAL) FOR A .9-ACRE SITE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND SHERYL AVENUE. CASE NO. CZ 04-03 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, as follows: SECTION 1: That a portion of Ordinance No. 107 as amended is hereby amended to read as shown on the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 2: The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to public 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 effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 28th Day of October, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT SPIEGEL, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California S.I. S./. •-- I 04 oG 2 S.I. j \ la MERLE DR J _. Q � w R-1 S.I. J Mira EINEM -"z.--Pli VIm0.___ AVE F- c+7 z �; Cr �% z v,_ 1761/ En:, R-3(4) Q J oc O - z Q J u, tom O.P— .- .— n SHERYL AVE- -, S.I. �R-1 •1 ,..JK, SUBJECT S.I. PROPERTY 1 R-1 S.1. 1 ' S.I. Q 0.S. • Proposed Zoning Change O.S. R-1 To O.P. City of Palm Desert Case No. C/Z 04-03 CITY COUNCIL ATA,.; CHANGE OF ZONE ORDINANCE NO. lose x EXHI JI IT A Date: RESOLUTION NO. 04-116 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN TO CONSTRUCT TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS WITH A TOTAL OF 6,500 SQUARE FEET ON A .9-ACRE SITE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND SHERYL AVENUE. CASE NO. PP 04-22 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 14th day of October, 2004, and on the 28th day of October, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of William J. Worzack for approval of a precise plan as described above; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 2295 has recommended approval of PP 04-22; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures 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 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) Categorical Exemption; and WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to justify its actions, as described below: 1. The precise plan is well designed with quality residential scale architecture. 2. The precise plan implements the following goals and objectives of the General Plan Office Professional land use designation: a. The Office Professional designation is assigned to lands that provide comparative advantages for office developments, with use characteristics that enhance compatibility with residential and other sensitive land uses. b. Professional office lands serve as effective buffer or transitional uses between commercial and residential neighborhoods, and provides convenient professional office services to surrounding residents and businesses. c. Office use is appropriate along arterial roadways, integrated with commercial development, and as stand-alone business parks. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04-116 3. The site was identified for potential office professional use when the City Council adopted a new General Plan on March 15, 2004. 4. The precise plan complies with zoning ordinance requirements. 5. The design of the precise plan will not depreciate property values in the vicinity, nor be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 6. The precise plan will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the property in the vicinity by the occupants thereof for lawful purposes. 7. The precise plan will not endanger the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case. 2. That the City Council hereby approves PP 04-22. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 28th Day of October, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT SPIEGEL, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California 2 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04-U6 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. PP 04-22 Department of Community Development: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Waste Management of the Desert Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Applicant shall participate in a commercial recycling program as determined by the City and applicable Waste Disposal Company. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and Department of Community Development. The applicant shall submit a site plan with trash enclosure locations noted and trash enclosure construction details to Waste Management of the Desert for review and issuance of an approval letter. A copy of said approval letter shall be furnished to the Planning department prior to issuance of building permits. 3 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04-116 5. A detailed parking lot and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval, subject to applicable lighting standards, plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting engineer. 7. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape plan. 8. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. 9. All roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened by a parapet wall that is at least as high as the highest piece of mechanical equipment. Construction drawings submitted for plan check shall include a roof plan showing locations of any roof-mounted mechanical equipment and cross-section drawings showing parapet wall heights as well as heights of roof-mounted mechanical equipment. 10. Related Parcel Map Waiver No. 04-15, which proposes to merge the four project site parcels into two parcels, shall be approved and recorded prior to the issuance of building permits for the proposed office buildings. Department of Public Works: 1. Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 653, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. The project shall be designed to retain nuisance waters onsite. Any drainage facility construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to start of construction. 2. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of any permits associated with this project. 3. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). 4 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04-116 Payment of said fees shall be at the time of building permit issuance. 4. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 5. All public and private improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. 6. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works, and shall be completed prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the project. 7. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans are to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to permit issuance. 8. Landscape installation on the property frontages as well as on-site shall be drought tolerant in nature and maintenance shall be performed by the property owner. 9. Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 24.12, Fugitive Dust Control and Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. Developer shall contact the Riverside County Flood Control District for informational materials. 10. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading plans/site improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. Preliminary landscape plans shall be submitted concurrently with grading plans. 11. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 12. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm 5 City Council Resolution No. 04-116 Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards and the city's Circulation Network. Those improvements shall include, but not be limited to the following: a. Installation of a 6' wide concrete sidewalk on Sheryl Avenue. b. Dedication of 11 feet on Cook Street, 55' from centerline. Rights-of-way and/or easements necessary for the installation of the above referenced improvements shall be conveyed to the city prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 13. This project shall be limited to two driveways. Driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the Public Works Department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Riverside County Fire Marshal: 1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced project, the fire department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, UFC, and UBC or any recognized Fire Protection Standards: The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all buildings per UFC article 87. 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure must be available before anycombustible material isplaced on the job site. 1 3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providinga gpm flow of: Y P 3000 gpm for commercial buildings 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4 x2 -1/2 x2-1/2 , located not less than 25 feet nor more than: 150' from any portion of a commercial building measured via vehicular travelway. 5. Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the water system will produce the required fire flow. 6. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with a 3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The Fire Marshal shall approve the locations of all post indicator valves and fire department 6 City Council Resolution No. 04-116 connections. All valves and connections shall not be less than 25 feet from the building and within 50 feet of an approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings. 7. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water- flow switches shall be monitored and alarmed per UBC Chapter 9. 8. Install a fire alarm system as required by UBC Chapter 3. 9. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one 2A1OBC extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75 feet walking distance. A "K" type fire extinguisher is required in all commercial kitchens. 10. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall not be less than 24 feet of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street the roadway must be 36 feet wide, and 32 feet wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45-foot radius turn-around, 55 foot in industrial developments. 11. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key or over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width shall be 16' with a minimum vertical clearance of 13'-6". 12. This project may require licensing by a state or county agency. To facilitate plan review, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Marshall a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage and occupancy type. 13. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 14. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately to the Fire Marshal for approval prior to construction. 15. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained with twelve months. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 0► C. Case Nos. GPA 04-01, C/Z 04-03 and PP 04-22 - WILLIAM J. WORZACK, Applicant Request for approval of a general plan amendment and change of zone from low density residential (R-1 , zero to four dwelling units per acre) to office professional (O.P.) and a precise plan of design for two one-story office professional office buildings with a combined floor area of 6,500 square feet on a .9-acre site located at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. Mr. Urbina outlined the salient points of the staff report, noting that there was an amended page 3 for the Planning Commission resolution and recommended approval of the project. On page 4 of the staff report under project parking, Commissioner Finerty noted that it said that the total parking places said 27 and on page five it talked about 25 spaces for Building 1 and Building 2 requiring 12 spaces, which would be a total of 37. Mr. Urbina agreed that wasn't correct and indicated that Building 1 would have 15 parking spaces and Building 2 would have 12 parking spaces, which was a total of 27. Commissioner Finerty asked if on page 5 where it said the parking lot for Building 1 provides 25 spaces, that should read 15 spaces and that Building 1 requires 14 rather than 24. Mr. Urbina said that was correct. Referring to the colored rendering that was distributed to the commission, Commissioner Finerty asked if it would be as white as it was showing in the print out or if it was another color. Mr. Urbina thought the rendering turned out lighter than the true colors proposed. He circulated the material sample board to the commission. He stated that the material board more truly reflected the true proposed colors of the exterior of the buildings. Commissioner Lopez asked if it was truly going to be a white building and then off colors on the various walls. Mr. Urbina said the exteriors were supposed to be more of a light beige and dark beige, like the materials board. 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 Commissioner Campbell noted that Building No. 1 was the largest building with quite a few offices and more square footage then Building No. 2, yet BuildingNo. 1 onlyhad one restroom and BuildingNo. 2, the smaller building, had two. Mr. Urbina said she was correct in that Building No. 1 showed only one restroom and Building No. 2 showed two. He suggested that the project architect could explain the reason. On the home to the west of the driveway, Commissioner Campbell asked if it was a new home or if it was just having a new facade put on. She asked if those were all new homes on that side of the street, because they looked gorgeous. Mr. Urbina confirmed that some of the homes were constructed within the last two years. Commissioner Campbell thought they were impressive and that this building would blend right in with the homes. Mr. Urbina indicated that staff thought that would be the case. There were no further questions of staff and Vice Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. WILLIAM WORZACK, 46-520 Arapaho Terrace in Indian Wells, addressed the commission. He thanked the commission for hearing them tonight. He noted that Mr. Guy Dreier was the applicant and one of the investors in the project. He said they weren't speculative real estate ventures, this would be the home of their corporate headquarters. Building No. 1 , Industrial West, their firm, has been in business in the city of Palm Desert for 26 years. Mr. Dreier has also been in business in Palm Desert for quite a long time. At this time they desire to have a single-tenant corporate identity like that. He apologized for the pictures that showed the stark white color. He thought that Mr. Dreier wanted to address that. MR. GUY DREIER, 74-105 Mockingbird Trail in Indian Wells, addressed the commission and also apologized. He said he didn't like to do computer renderings, he preferred doing models like with the previous case. He said the building would be all taupe with slate columns and a real champagne-colored roof. He said the material board is what they would have. He said it was an acid 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 wash stucco that has a really nice, leathery warm color to it. That is the majority of the building. Then the columns holding up the entry structure would be slate. Then the bottom side of that would be the stained taupe wood. So it would be tone on tone and really warm. Regarding the bathrooms, he pointed out the area that was supposed to be a bathroom, it just wasn't shown. Commissioner Campbell noted that they would have a long line otherwise with all those offices. There were no further questions for the applicant. Vice Chairperson Tschopp asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this matter. MR. BRETT PICANO, 74-857 Sheryl Avenue, addressed the commission. As Commissioner Campbell alluded to, he said there are five brand new or year old homes along Sheryl Avenue. The one just to the west of the project is an existing home just having the facade and a lot of work redone. He said his home was actually in the middle of the brand new five custom homes, so he was just about four homes down from this. His opposition to this is that it would create extra traffic in the area with there already being an inordinate amount of traffic because almost everything that comes off the back streets behind Sheryl came down from Sheryl. Down and around through Sheryl. The extra pollution it would create in the area, and the loitering around office buildings was something they shouldn't have around the residential community. With the high density across the street, he didn't know if they were condos or apartments, but they seemed to have a lot of traffic coming in and out of there. With this building and with the building across the way, he thought it would be an inordinate amount of traffic coming down Sheryl Avenue. That was his main opposition. Vice Chairperson Tschopp asked if the applicant wanted to make any rebuttal comments. 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 To address Mr. Picano's concerns, Mr. Worzack said that their firm probably sees three people a day and Mr. Dreier sees none. That's why he said these weren't speculative. This wouldn't be lease for income, these would be their corporate homes. It was Mr. Dreier's corporate address, too. They virtually generate no traffic whatever being a commercial real estate firm. They see four cars a day, maybe. He didn't think Mr. Dreier saw any. They wouldn't be generating traffic and that's why Mr. Dreier was with them. They wanted a project that looked like a single family residence, rather than a commercial building. Mr. Dreier said they could see the house he did on the previous case and they do three or four of them a year, so his clients were mostly gone and they have very little traffic. Commissioner Campbell asked if their hours of operation would be 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. five days a week. Mr. Worzack said yes. They are an administrative office and they don't see people there. The people they do see are on the project sites. Commissioner Campbell asked if they had employees, a secretary. Mr. Worzack said yes, they do. Mr. Dreier said he has three employees. And they might see his car working on a Sunday afternoon. He would be the only one there on the weekends. Vice Chairperson Tschopp closed the public hearing and asked the commission for comments. Commissioner Lopez thought it would be an improvement to the area. He was concerned about some of the office buildings across the street, but other than that, he thought it was a great looking project. He wasn't aware that it was going to be their offices and thought that was wonderful. He moved for approval. Commissioner Finerty concurred. She noted that it was a tough area to find something that would fit and with this building just being a little over 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 16 feet, it would fit in nicely. She also liked the colors that were chosen and the materials used. She thought there wouldn't be that much traffic compared to what it could be with a typical office dwelling, so it seemed to be the perfect fit. Commissioner Campbell concurred. She thought it was a great place to have it and didn't think it would have as much traffic as regular homes would. She was also very impressed with the architecture. She liked the roof line and hoped they would see it more often. Vice Chairperson Tschopp also concurred. He said it would be a nice buffer from the residential. He didn't think it would increase traffic that much and might actually channel some down the other lane. Regarding the comment on loitering, he thought that the applicant would be as happy as the homeowner if they called the police department when there are problems. He thought it would be a good project. He asked for a second to Commissioner Lopez's motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0- 0-1 (Chairperson Jonathan abstained). It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2295 as amended, recommending to City Council approval of Case Nos. GPA 04-01 , C/Z 04-03 and PP 04-22, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0-0-1 (Chairperson Jonathan abstained). Chairperson Jonathan rejoined the meeting. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. 19 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: September 21, 2004 CASE NOS: GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03 and PP 04-22 REQUEST: Approval of a general plan amendment and change of zone from low density residential (R-1, 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre) to office professional (OP), and precise plan of design to two one-story professional office buildings with a combined floor area of 6,500 square feet on a .9-acre project site located at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. APPLICANT: William J. Worzack 41-865 Boardwalk, suite 106 Palm Desert, CA. 92211 PROPERTY OWNERS: Simonds Ents 75-587 Camino De Paco Indian Wells, CA. 92210 Simonds 1993 Trust 71-890 Eleanora Lane Rancho Mirage, CA. 9 Kenneth W. Simonds & Sarah R. Simonds 74-403 Desert Bajada Trail Indian Wells, CA. 92210 Kathleen M. Walker 26532 Houston Trail Laguna Hills, CA. 92653 ARCHITECT: Habitat— Guy Dreier Designs Attn: Guy Dreier 41-995 Boardwalk, Suite D Palm Desert, CA. 92211 I. BACKGROUND: The project site is vacant and is located on the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. The 39,000 square foot project site consists of four parcels. Cook STAFF REPORT PP 04-22 September 21, 2004 Street is a busy arterial street with a daily traffic volume of 26,602 vehicle trips per day (October 30, 2003). Surrounding land uses include Sheryl Avenue, an office building constructed in 2001 and a one-story, single family home to the north, Cook Street and vacant Service Industrial zoned property to the east, a Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District golf course and golf course maintenance yard to the south, and one-story single family homes to the west. The westerly end of the project site contains a paved 24-foot wide driveway over an easement that provides access to the golf course to the south. A 29-foot wide landscaped buffer area exists between this driveway and the westerly property line of the project site that is adjacent to a single family home. The project site is currently zoned R-1 (Residential Single Family) and is designated Low Density Residential with Study Zone overlay on the new General Plan Land Use Map which was adopted by the City Council on March 15, 2004. The City Council determined, however, that the project site should have a Study Zone overlay designation to allow for the possibility of a change in the site's land use designation from Low Density Residential to Office Professional once a development application for the site was prepared. The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the project be designated Office Professional on the new General Plan land use map. A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: OP / single-story office building and one-story single family homes South: R-1 / Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District golf course and golf course maintenance facility East: SI / Cook Street and vacant land West: R-1 / one-story single family homes B. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential with Study Zone overlay II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. General Plan Amendment 04-01 The applicant proposes to amend the General Plan land use designation for the site from Low Density Residential to Office Professional to accommodate the construction of two, one-story professional office buildings. 2 STAFF REPORT PP 04-22 September 21, 2004 B. Change of Zone 04-03 The .9-acre site is currently zoned R-1 (Residential Single Family). The applicant proposes to change the zoning district from R-1 to OP (Office Professional). C. Precise Plan 04-22 The precise plan proposes the construction of two, one-story, 17-foot high, professional office buildings with a combined floor area of 6,500 square feet. The applicant concurrently filed Parcel Map Waiver No. 04-15 which seeks approval to merge the four project site parcels into two parcels. The two proposed office buildings would be located on two separate parcels. Each building would have its own driveway and parking lot. The easterly Building #1, which is closest to Cook Street, will have 3,500 square feet and a 15-space parking lot with its own driveway access from Sheryl Avenue. The westerly Building #2, which will be located 175 feet west of Cook Street, will have 3,000 square feet and a 12-space parking lot with its own driveway access from Sheryl Avenue. Building #2 is set back 121 feet from the westerly property line of the project site, which borders a single family home. 3 STAFF REPORT PP 04-22 September 21, 2004 The following table outlines the required and proposed development standards for the Office Professional zone. STANDARD O.P. DISTRICT PROJECT Building 25 feet Varies from Height 11'-6" and 17'-0" Front Setback 12 foot minimum, 20 feet, measured (Sheryl 15 foot average from Sheryl Avenue) Avenue property line Rear Setback 20 feet average for buildings up to 18 27' average feet in height when adjacent to single- setback for both story residential zones (properties to the Buildings 1 and 2 south are zoned R-1) Actual setback 0 setback when adjacent to two-story varies from 10 multifamily or commercial zones, or feet to 44 feet setback standard of adjacent zone, whichever is greater *Note: To avoid architectural monotony, the planning commission may require setbacks to vary plus or minus five feet around the required average Street Side 12 foot minimum, Building 1 Yard Setback 15 foot average (adjacent to Cook (Cook Street) Street) easterly side yard: setback varies from 15 feet to 17 feet Interior Side 20 feet average for buildings up to 18 Building 1 Yard feet in height when adjacent to single- westerly interior story residential zones (properties to the side yard: 62' south are zoned R-1) Building 2 easterly 0 setback when adjacent to two-story side yard: 5'-6" multifamily or commercial zones, or setback standard of adjacent zone, Building 2 whichever is greater westerly side yard: 121 feet Parking 1 space per 250 square feet of gross 27 parking spaces floor area (26 parking spaces required) Landscaping 15 % Bldg 1 lot: 15% (Parking Lot Bldg 2 lot: 48% Area) 4 STAFF REPORT PP 04-22 September 21, 2004 Site Plan, Access & Parking: Site Plan/Access: The project site plan shows a 3,500 square foot office building (Building #1) on a 170 foot wide by 120 deep parcel with frontage on Sheryl Avenue and a Cook Street easterly street side yard. Access to the Building #1 parcel will be from Sheryl Avenue on one 24-foot wide driveway. Building #1 will have a 20-foot front yard setback and a 15-foot minimum street side yard setback from Cook Street. A trash enclosure will be located at the southerly end of the parking lot. Building #2 is a 3,000 square foot office building on a 160-foot wide by 120-foot deep parcel. Access to the Building #1 parcel will be from Sheryl Avenue on one 24-foot wide driveway from Sheryl Avenue. A trash enclosure will be located at the southerly end of the parking lot. Parking: Based on Zoning Ordinance off-street parking requirements for professional office uses of one parking space per 2500 square feet of gross floor area, Building #1 requires 24 parking spaces. The parking lot for Building #1 provides 25 spaces. Building #2 requires 12 parking spaces. The parking lot for Building #2 provides 12 parking spaces. Architecture: The architecture of the two buildings can be described as "contemporary". The buildings will have both sloping grey metal seem roofs and flat roofs with heights varying from 11'-6" to 17'-0". Each building will have an angled 18'-6" high architectural projection with slate veneer finish. The building walls are offset and the shape and footprints of the buildings avoid a "box-like" design. Exterior colors will be in dark beige and light beige. Building materials will consist of exteriors walls coated in a "Akrotique" material that resembles a smooth sandstone finish, slate veneer on architectural projections, brown tinted glass with anodized aluminum trim, and beige stained re-sawn wood soffits underneath roof overhangs. Each building will have two courtyards with 5-foot high walls with an "Akrotique" material finish to match adjacent exterior building walls. Walkways will have decorative brown paving. The Architectural Review Commission granted preliminary approval of the project on August 10, 2004. 5 STAFF REPORT PP 04-22 September 21, 2004 III. ANALYSIS: General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone It would not be desirable to place single family homes on the project site because Cook Street is a busy arterial street that generates substantial traffic noise. This noise would negatively impact the outdoor peace and enjoyment of residents. Approval of the proposed general plan amendment and change of zone applications would facilitate development of professional offices on the project site, which would be a logical land use extension of the existing office use on the property to the north. Designating the project site for office uses would provide a good land use buffer between a busy arterial street (Cook Street) and single family residential homes to the west. There are no residents to the south that would be impacted by project since existing land uses on the property to the south are a golf course and maintenance facility. An office professional land use designation at the project site would be compatible with adjacent land uses as this would fulfill the following goals and objectives of the General Plan Office Professional land use designation: a. The Office Professional designation is assigned to lands that provide comparative advantages for office developments, with use characteristics that enhance compatibility with residential and other sensitive land uses. b. Professional office lands serve as effective buffer or transitional uses between commercial and residential neighborhoods, and provides convenient professional office services to surrounding residents and businesses. c. Office use is appropriate along arterial roadways, integrated with commercial development, and as stand-alone business parks. Precise Plan: The proposed office buildings meet the development standards of the Office Professional (OP) zone and will be compatible with adjacent OP, R-1, and SI zoned properties. The proposed buildings have quality contemporary designs that were approved by the Architectural Review Commission. Development of the project site for office uses would not negatively impact the one-story residential neighborhood to the west because the setbacks and one-story height of the two proposed office buildings are similar to those of the R-1 zone. Building #2 will be located 121 feet from the closest single family home to the west. The existing 29-foot wide landscaped area between the existing golf course access driveway and the 6 STAFF REPORT PP 04-22 September 21, 2004 closest single family home to the west would remain. The location of the office buildings, a minimum of 121 feet east of the closest single family home to the west, effectively isolates the buildings from residents. Therefore, the findings for approving a precise plan can be affirmed. These findings are included in the draft Planning Commission resolution attached to this staff report. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: For purposes of CEQA, staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from further environmental review per Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines. V. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. recommending approval to the City Council of Case Nos. GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03, and PP 04-22. VI. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Legal notice C. Comments from city departments and other agencies D. A.R.C. minutes dated August 10, 2004 E. Project Plans Prepared by' /11-1-r-t410--1 Francisco . Urbina Associate Planner Reviewed and Approvedeby: Philip Dr II Director of Community Development Homer Croy Assistant City Manager for Development Services 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE PROFESSIONAL, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 TO OP AND A PRECISE PLAN TO CONSTRUCT TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS WITH A TOTAL OF 6,500 SQUARE FEET AT THE SOUHWEST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND SHERYL AVENUE. CASE NOS. GPA 04-01, CZ 04-03, PP 04-22 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 23rd day of September, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to a consider a request by WILLIAM J. WORZACK for the above mentioned; 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 in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is a Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) 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 actions, as described below: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND CHANGE OF ZONE: 1 . When the City Council applied a Study Zone overlay designation to the Low Density Residential Land Use designation for the project site on March 15, 2004, the Council anticipated that a general plan amendment and change of Zone applications would be filed to change the land use designation and zoning to Office Professional once a development plan for the project site was prepared and filed with the City for review. 2. Since, the adjacent property at the northwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue is designated on the General Plan as Office Professional, zoned OP, and is developed with an office building, changing the land use designation zoning classification on the project site to office professional would facilitate development of a similar and compatible land use. 3. It is not generally desirable to have single family homes adjacent to a busy thoroughfare street such as Cook Street due to traffic noise that would negatively impact the outdoor peace and enjoyment of residents. 4. The site is adequately designed to ensure compatibility with adjacent land q Y 9 p Y J uses. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN: 1. The precise plan is well designed with quality architecture. 2. The precise plan implements the following goals and objectives of the General Plan Office Professional land use designation: a. The Office Professional designation is assigned to lands that provide comparative advantages for office developments, with use characteristics that enhance compatibility with residential and other sensitive land uses. b. Professional office lands serve as effective buffer or transitional uses between commercial and residential neighborhoods, and provides convenient professional office services to surrounding residents and businesses. c. Office use is appropriate along arterial roadways, integrated with commercial development, and as stand-alone business parks. 3. The precise plan complies with zoning ordinance requirements. Adequate on-street parking exists to meet the short term requirements of the project. The applicant shall participate financially in the long term parking solution as described in the General Plan. 4. The design of the precise plan will not depreciate property values in the vicinity, nor be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 5. The precise plan will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the property in the vicinity by the occupants thereof for lawful purposes. 6. The precise plan will not endanger the public peace, 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 approval of the Precise Plan 04-07 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 23rd day of September 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SABBY JONATHAN, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. PP 04-22 Department of Community Development: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Waste Management of the Desert Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Applicant shall participate in a commercial recycling program as determined by the City and applicable Waste Disposal Company. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and Department of Community Development. The applicant shall submit a site plan with trash enclosure locations noted and trash enclosure construction details to Waste Management of the Desert for review and issuance of an approval letter. A copy of said approval letter shall be furnished to the Planning department prior to issuance of building permits. 6. A detailed parking lot and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval, subject to applicable lighting standards, plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting engineer. 7. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape plan. 8. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. 9. All roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened by a parapet wall that is at least as high as the highest piece of mechanical equipment. Construction drawings submitted for plan check shall include a roof plan showing locations of any roof-mounted mechanical equipment and cross-section drawings showing parapet wall heights as well as heights of roof-mounted mechanical equipment. 10. Related Parcel Map Waiver No. 04-15, which proposes to merge the four project site parcels into two parcels, shall be approved and recorded prior to the issuance of building permits for the proposed office buildings. Department of Public Works: 1. Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 653, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. The project shall be designed to retain nuisance waters onsite. Any drainage facility construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to start of construction. 2. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of any permits associated with this project. 3. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at the time of building permit issuance. 4. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 5. All public and private improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. 6. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works, and shall be completed prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the project. 7. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans are to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to permit issuance. 8. Landscape installation on the property frontages as well as on-site shall be drought tolerant in nature and maintenance shall be performed by the property owner. 9. Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 24.12, Fugitive Dust Control and Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. Developer shall contact the Riverside County Flood Control District for informational materials. 10. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading plans/site improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. Preliminary landscape plans shall be submitted concurrently with grading plans. 11. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 12. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards and the city's Circulation Network. Those improvements shall include, but not be limited to the following: a. Installation of a 6' wide concrete sidewalk on Sheryl Avenue. b. Dedication of 11 feet on Cook Street, 55' from centerline. Rights-of-way and/or easements necessary for the installation of the above referenced improvements shall be conveyed to the city prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 13. This project shall be limited to two driveways. Driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the Public Works Department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Riverside County Fire Marshal: 1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced project, the fire department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, UFC, and UBC or any recognized Fire Protection Standards: The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all buildings per UFC article 87. 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow of: 3000 gpm for commercial buildings 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4"x2"-1/2" x2-1/2", located not less than 25 feet nor more than: 150' from any portion of a commercial building measured via vehicular travelway. 5. Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the water system will produce the required fire flow. 6. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with a 3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The Fire Marshal shall approve the locations of all post indicator valves and fire department connections. All valves and connections shall not be less than 25 feet from the building and within 50 feet of an approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings. 7. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water- flow switches shall be monitored and alarmed per UBC Chapter 9. 8. Install a fire alarm system as required by UBC Chapter 3. 9. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one 2A10BC extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75 feet walking distance. A "K" type fire extinguisher is required in all commercial kitchens. 10. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall not be less than 24 feet of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street the roadway must be 36 feet wide, and 32 feet wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45-foot radius turn-around, 55 foot in industrial developments. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key or over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width shall be 16' with a minimum vertical clearance of 13'-6". 12. This project may require licensing by a state or county agency. To facilitate plan review, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Marshall a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage and occupancy type. 13. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 14. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately to the Fire Marshal for approval prior to construction. 15. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained with twelve months. 8 • CI ' Of PHE (il DESERT 7 RED WARING DRIVE ' '-, f2 PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 9 2 260-2 5 7 8 - • ' 4C -- : TEL:760 946-061, ti: t<�' FAX 760 341-7098 ..... ,n(oPpalm-d orE CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. GPA 04-01, C/Z 04-03, PP 04-22 AND PMW 04-15 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by WILI_IAM J. WORZACK for approval of a general plan amendment from low density residential to office professional, a ch4nge of zone from R-1 to O.P. (office professional)a precise plan of design for two (2) single story office buildings (6,500 square feet total) and a parcel map waiver to consolidate four lots into one lot. Said property is located at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue, 74-999 Sheryl Avenue. ■i■i%i7 `_'g■ur \■i■■li■■■%, -x. sTatIM■ ■�1!'1t�n - aour ■i■Al PIII\l ID■■\p eliawft.,...'e,,. •iliiiii1i 1111 i PROJECT 51 ■ F - 1 a Pill riliiuurr m r'P _ ItlMO SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, September 21, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. in he 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 September 7, 2004 Palm Desert Planning Commission CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Department of Community Development/Planning Attention: Steve Smith FROM: Mark Greenwood, City Engineer SUBJECT: PP 4-14 Worzack Office Complex on Sheryl Avenue DATE: August 5, 2004 The following should be considered conditions of approval for the above-referenced project. (1) Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Ordinance No.653,shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. The project shall be designed to retain nuisance waters onsite. Any drainage facility construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to start of construction. (2) Signalization fees,in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos.79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of any permits associated with this project. (3) The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees(TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at the time of building permit issuance. (4) A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by,the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of a grading permit. (5) All public and private improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. (6) Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works, and shall be completed prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the project. (7) As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans are to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to permit issuance. (8) Landscape installation on the property frontages as well as on-site shall be drought tolerant in nature and maintenance shall be performed by the property owner. (9) Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 24.12, Fugitive Dust Control and Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. Developer shall contact the Riverside County Flood Control District for informational materials. (10) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44,complete grading plans/site improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. Preliminary landscape plans shall be submitted concurrently with grading plans. (11) Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. (12) Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code,shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards and the city's Circulation Network. Those improvements shall include,but not be limited to the following: ► Installation of a 6' wide concrete sidewalk on Sheryl Avenue. ► Dedication of 11 feet on Cook Street, 55' from centerline. Rights-of-way and/or easements necessary for the installation of the above referenced improvements shall be conveyed to the city prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. (13) This project shall be limited to two driveways. Driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the Public Works Department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Valiffl A l/ Mark Greenwood, P.E. G:\PubWorks\Conditions of Approval\PPLANS\PP 4-15 Worzack-Sheryl.wpd r`EPROTE"� RIVERSIDE ,JUNTY PP�MENT of FpgrS p`cs{1RE PR07ECIi\ C FIRE DEPARTMENT AXES,IN ,..E In cooperation with the AFIRE F 6. .u,5. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection A 210 West San Jacinto Avenue • Perris, California 92570 • (909)940-6900 • FAX (909)940-6910 ME DEPARTMENT Tom Tisdale Fire Chief Cove Fire Marshal's Office 73710 Fred Waring Drive #102 Proudly serving the Palm Desert CA 92260 unincorporated areas of Riverside (760) 346-1870 County and the cities of: Banning TO: DATE: //7'4/Y71 w Beaumont 1 Calimesa REF: �f © �� ©Vf 3? V Canyon Lake If circled, conditions apply to project ••v Coachella •:‘ 0 With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above Desert Hot Springs referenced project, the fire department recommends the following fire Indian Wells protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal 4. Indio Code, NFPA, CFC, and CBC or any recognized Fire Protection + Standards: Lake Elsinore The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the La•Quints remodel or construction of all buildings per UFC article 87. APA fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual Moreno Valley pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed Palm Desert on the job site. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a Perris gpm flow of: Rancho Mirage 3. 1500 gpm for single family dwellings 4. 2500 gpm for multifamily dwellings San Jacinto Q 3000 gpm for commercial buildings Temecula The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant (s) 4"x 2 %z" x 2 %z", located not less than 25' nor more than: 6. 200' from any portion of a single family dwelling measured via Board of Supervisors vehicular travelway 7. 165' from any portion of a multifamily dwelling measured via Bob Buster vehicular travelway District 1 3150' from any portion of a commercial building measured via John Tavaglione District 2 vehicular travelway Jim Venable 9 Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include District 3 verification that the water system will produce the required fire flow. 10. Please be advised the proposed project may not be feasible since the Roy Wilson District 4 existing water mains will not meet the required fire flow. Tom Mullen District 5 11 Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with a 3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The Fire Marshal shall approved the locations of all post indicator valves and fire department connections. All valves and connections shall not be less than 25' from the building and within 50' of an approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings. ® All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and Water-flow switches shall be monitored and alarmed per CBC Chapter 9. (Th _133j Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3. 14. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one 0 2AIOBC extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75' walking distance. A "K" type fire extinguisher is required in all commercial kitchens. AVInstall a Hood/Duct automatic fire extinguishing system per NFPA 96 , , in all public and private cooking operations except single-family r / ` residential usage. I 16. Install a dust collecting system per CFC Chapter 76 if conducting an operation that produces airborne particles. 17 All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall not be less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13' 6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street the roadway must be 36' wide and 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around 55' in industrial developments. • 18. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers or other means provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width shall be 16" with a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6". 19. A dead end single access over 500' will require a secondary access, sprinklers or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no circumstance shall a dead end over 1300' be accepted. 20. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an adjoiningdevelo ment. r21. This project may require licensing by a state or county agency, to facilitate plan review the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Marshal a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage and (-- occupancy type. 2 All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the ci . 23. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately to the Fire Marshal for approval ( ____p rior to construction. 24 Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. 25. All elevators shall be minimum gurney size. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Marshal's Office at (760) 346-1870 in Palm Desert. Location: 73710 Fred Waring Drive #222, Palm Desert CA 92260 Other: Sincerely, David A. Avila Fire Marshal '• .. CITY OF PALM DESERT A 3111— ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 4 i INTEROFFICE ME, e;- £NCIlV ■�*}I{ry'� 9 20011 C�Ty1MUNp1' DME DEPARTMENT To: Steve Smith, Planning Manager CITY OFEVELOP PALM DESERTNT From: Deborah Schwartz, Public Art Coordinator °LJ Date: 07/27/04 Subject: WM J. Worzack Office Complex (Case N. PP 04-15) The Art In Public Places Department recommends that the public art fee for the WM J. Worzack office complex project located at 74-898 Sheryl stay in the Public Art Fund. We estimate that the total fee is $2,600, which will not allow for a significant project unless the developer would like to add additional funds to the fee amount. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 2004 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Oppenheim moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell for approval. Motion carried 7-0. B. Preliminary Plans 1. CASE NO.: GPA 04-01, C/Z 04-03, PP 04-22, PMW 04-15 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WILLIAM J. WORZACK, 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 106, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of new office complex. LOCATION: SW corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue ZONE: R-1 Mr. Urbina stated that4bis is a vacant site-of-the- southwest-corner-of- Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. There's a driving range maintenance facility immediately south of the site. The main issue with the site plan at this time is that the Public Works Department is requesting an additional 11' of right-of-way for a 55' half street width from center line to the property line. The project does involve a general plan amendment change of zone from residential to office professional. Staff thinks that it will not be an issue accommodating the additional 11' feet of right-of-way. The building shows a 20' setback from the Cook Street property line. The OP zone allows a 15' setback. There's additional room to squeeze the buildings together. The applicant had commented to Mr. Urbina that he could redesign the site plan to accommodate the additional right-of-way. Staff is concerned about the east elevation of building one, which would be visible from Cook Street. There's a wall in that location that would enclose a courtyard. Staff suggested that the applicant stagger the walls. Mr. Drell commented that the trees on the elevation and the trees shown on the landscape plan are different. Commissioner Van Vliet asked about the material used on the wall. Guy Dreir, architect, was present and stated that it would be stucco and 14' in height. He tried to keep the architecture very simple and classic with a courtyard and a big overhang. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR040810.MIN 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 2004 MINUTES Commissioner Vuksic commented that the trees really help in the elevation. It's hard to pick on the building because it's nice. The commission has to take the landscape aside and can't count on the trees always being there and being healthy. Mr. Drell commented that the landscape plan doesn't show all the trees. Commissioner Vuksic commented that the Cook Street elevation looks pretty plain. Mr. Dreir stated that he could angle the wall and if he could get some extra offset he could stagger the walls and put some glass in between them to get some depth. Mr. Drell asked about signage locations for the buildings. Mr. Dreir stated that there won't be any signs on the building. They are proposing two monument signs which are 14' in length, but could be reduced. Mr. Steve Metzler commented that they met with Public Works and they didn't ask for the additional right-of-way originally. They're already setback and if Public Works takes another 11', they're going to be so far in from the Parks & Recreation District that it's a problem. Mr. Drell commented that the City is dealing with the Parks & Recreation District site. The general plan shows Cook Street being six lanes. Someday there will be a bridge going across Cook Street--Mr- —---- Metzler stated that he's worried about people being able to find his building if it's set back too far. It's already 20' back and now Public Works is asking for another 11'. Mr. Drell stated that this is a discussion that would be appropriate at Planning Commission. Mr. Metzler stated that you're going to be looking right down Cook Street at the water tower. Mr. Drell stated that everything on the site plan is going to have to be moved down 5' and then make up 6' within the project. Mr. Dreier stated that he'll have to take the driveway out to reconfigure the parking spaces. Mr. Drell stated that in theory, the 15' is really an average 15' in terms of the setback off Cook Street. Commissioner Vuksic asked about the thickness of the walls. Mr. Dreier stated that he's going to go up on top of the roof and frame them at 18". The applicant asked for comments on the landscape. Ms. Hollinger stated that she submitted written comments on the landscape plan and offered to make a copy of them for the applicant. On the whole, the plan needs work. It may not meet the water calcs because they're proposing some very heavy water use plants. G:Planning\Donna Ouaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR040810.MIN 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 2004 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic for preliminary approval subject to altering the wall on the Cook Street elevation. Motion carried 7-0. 2. CASE NO.: PP 04-20, C/Z 04-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHRIS McFADDEN, 72-925 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a 14,115 square foot office building. LOCATION: 44-277 Portola ZONE: R-1 Mr. Smith stated that staff will be going forward with a code amendment to limit office buildings on non-arterial streets to single story. Staff feels that this -will be--the only way--to- create—residential scale project. Consequently, the commission is in a position to indicate that as a general office building this might be acceptable but given that it's now going to be in an area where the City is limiting buildings to one story and 18' in height, obviously this proposal does not comply with that. Mr. Drell stated that the ARC's action will be a recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Vuksic asked if the arterial streets are Cook Street and Monterey. Mr. Drell stated that the streets that are going to six lanes are considered arterial streets. This section of Portola is not going to be six lanes. Commissioner Gregory asked what the commission is supposed to do if the building is indicated at two stories. Mr. Drell stated that they're being asked to comment on the building as a recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Gregory stated that he felt that the ARC did that at their last meeting by commenting that it's an attractive building, but it has some neighborhood problems. Mr. Drell stated that after the last meeting they thought that it was going to be taken immediately to the City Council during their study session. Upon consulting with the City Manager, it was made clear that the Council has already given their direction and the proposal should be taken through the normal process of Planning Commission and then to the G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR040810.MIN 7 0 7,, 5- _ -i 8 5 1 co ,` , Q• SEGO LN J ]ONI DR 1 cce-L3? n E- oC Li I u' >�// ��// i) //J� MERLE-DR_ L.uNL fig / a�,....... , J \ / rCe �-� 21 " -___;fc r ��t iii' imin SUBJECT 3 7 Loci III DOOM m LESLIEAVE ,� PROPERTIES n \ I I I � �o L Z n � z, cc n Q. O (Cis>i r �AV E a`v F-; .... Q a _: I 'a i i . Ul J , SHERYL AVE Ifj il 1->7. ,COWERS IR 4 — "E RLI LY CIR — r� Ali City of Palm Desert LOCATOR MAP µ+l: ��nUYp� S ,�, APNs 624-241-016 thru -019 o — 400 Date: 8-26-2004 Feet THIS MAP IS FOR T.P.A. 0/8-/46 624 — 24 ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY POR NE//4 SEC. /6 T. 5 S. R.6E. 0/8-/47 62/-42 0/8-/49 I SHT/of 2 O/B-/50 ® 0/B-163 .- 0/8-202 1 J 0/8-188 21 R :as tr .✓Bf'49'/S-f ios .rs LESLIE - ,.] AVE. 0 /47 TO ,�ro 1.1 Lot K 72 ,. 7L 7[ B .... rr rt 3t1 Tao s( /39 Sf.� •• TRA TRA 0/B-l46 62 63 64 65 . 66 �'� 4, L•r 4 L.r 1'I to do TRA D/B-/50 .. I J ]L Jo 7� r7 6 /38 /2) Lot F o- _..�/ - t. h° ® v 243 /49 0 /'s /ao Lot T 75 /4 A .y 7O 6B -59 >`^ 9r o �/ TRA 0!B-/SO W 24i h IRA OIB-/46 J Q b iso 70 y a /50 Q 'o l7 216AC.f /37 � 3 > 7L 7L 7 V O` TR4 ® 69 v d Lot / W o O ` ti O r° // /O 9O1. ; ®CMn018-2fkJ 1 34 73 72 7/ 70 = 5/8 Ac. Gr. /5/ ,/ \`42�O R 11 �c 9L _t_____ 5./7Ac.N/. /36 Lot M °w J t ___ 6ARY- AVE. 3 744 0/S.L41 O3 $ Q • /2 s /52 rww o/e-•./47- .0, v sf "S.]s do 7 TRA 0/8- /88 a o k v i. "i o //5 1/6 a //7 . //8 0 //9 % y o O Q O /35 V. W O O O m O ® e O b 30��o n /53 3 `' o m 24,zo- . v p 6 90 coy-� 79 .. c‘t 10 Jo �0 �{ to so it 70J 0 © /20 y „ /54 ® n P O /34 v <.74.¢ P. ulrs L.• C. TRA O/7_I46 ro .Q a �. Ir4.D3 .794 04Po rae.3. I 7 ,I 0 C F S//ERYL AVE 9 :` - - /6 7. O /2/-Ri kO6I ,� Lot N „ , o.At, w r�raL '6.44 ...14,7C.or So 4 0 /22 1 Sp Pp ® 24\/23; /24 ' /25 /26 /27 /28 /29 /30 /3/ /32 /33 a • O /� ® 0 /3 0 ® 0 ' /9 +4 44 $7 60 . - _ cc�-ice: Nbf•4f'79'"6 74, - 04r(oLo we.mew ma /6 �� r+r-s /s,lr 6PA 04-0(, Ci 0 -03, .ter rot-s /4 sr z4x3,+1 PP0 . 2 Z "5 24ztn,Ls1 n I I //` •/SO NJ. 1 443-1 ASSESSOR'S MAP 8K 624 PG 24 M.B.40/9 // Country Club Vi//oge No./ pgo E • 5I. 471/ 243.t TII-J-SA RIVERS/OE COUNTY, CALIF MB 2////5-/6 Trod No. 22528 R.G. (CM 77/196-203 /44976 4-p_90) S£P. '80 . GPI 0 A"-D( ) CZ 0q-()' PP 04- 22 "` t - w+.r't'W .+ItR:aJ...,sx f-.- " -41 .n t '. ` >w R ' PP 04-22. Looking west at the .9-acre project site located at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. A Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District golf course driving range and golf course maintenance facility yard are located south of the project site. A newer office building is located at the northwest corner of Cook and Sheryl. Y* 1 .-_ --i, .\ma' _am: - f' gliii. ,. i 4 Illk _ : It �1 �_ IluGtnlcaNlllt I /�yR --___..,;r., __. •t' \I PSI�I U �I I `... ?- 74-945 SHERYL ,..,,..,..-.. r PP 04-22project site. Looking west at westerly end of project site. An existing paved driveway can be seen between the date palms. This driveway is located over an easement that provides access to three parcels to the south that are essentially landlocked because they do no have direct access from Cook Street. The driveway will remain. Rr fNrkTa ., r.. ale... • PP 04-2Z project site. Looking southeast at project site from Sheryl Avenue. • jiziet Looking east along southerly property line of PP 04-22 project site. The driveway to the left provides access from Sheryl Avenue to the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District golf course driving range. At the end of the driveway to the right is the golf course maintenance facility yard. Q i L" 1 i 1 Vag ef'6Wli ;, r7 l%Tr ill 7. , (1, �+} 1�Qa ..:;:tit.., t44` .. 4,,,t, 14 - 4.....J ,„111 ZIL . .� e _. __ 1 ',..,/ r t 1 - ,, i- `yL. '(.., t�('r,?/)"t�/f/.�,.. ,��. • L' :�_ - -t ft•. i " `,ir•l. .. 116 �(i'`r. .^' �' . • a'� /71jy-��"���,y(1�/� • 1 .f1l7,'ft-;` . y sy ,.. < < ?rp;j �l �►: k,. I I f 'QW_4 I - I I _. .- I illp tobd 1 , 1 4.0 i V I A Ai A AAAJAid),AALdbq ji,i i a I AA A I 1 alai ti t t l A:.f u.4.4.4 ,�l... I//1 ELEVATION east k BUILDING #1 building 1 iindustrial west(cook st.side) EAST ELEVATION, FACING COOK STREET 24 II.'• t o kcr CO yO r"' :: .,... •-,,,, --'sCHio 6 lee* % i .,.. ' .....® lit i fill ) 1 1 1'111, ,II , t .i., ../". id%t... . g. ..........,......E....::............7_ ELEVATION north BUILDING #1 building 1 lndustnal west(cook Si.side) • NORTH ELEVATION, FACING SHERYL AVENUE winuengl... ...... _ ti a jam, r i tl,• t.yt ,. ,ti J. } p, 1 .P1pip , ,,,.:. • , , ''\ • ,'. P , , i. 4 ,,,A . ,,, ..... ,,,, .' - A. ' 'ti - ' ' j ' '1',b.i .0' 1) . 1 '.r. . I , 1 , 1loitiL , I BUILDING #2 — uiy"'"A' EAST ELEVATION NL ' I yt : b lf i " R. ' , . , n. ...v. BUILDING #2 myAis»t NORTH ELEVATION, ta ..., k_ • - --- FACING SHERYL AVENUE v 1 i.t+ 4 b .4 i ,,.L_ y , ` , T �, .,-7-7-,---v.... ..-:.,:4,... gf.':,•:„.;,..;,- • .' '' — --- '' i ilf141-''y ..; .: ���Sj' `irk 1 .. ' Ldr l: I SADIL iL L , I A a BUILDING UI & BUILDING #2 jaz„ss SOUTH ELEVATION °'-- . saimir• - 30 �. . .. p vas, �I : 7.- ', - E `7) I- f 1 / l+ uK MeV 4. ,••` C G. p' r '''1?r,��, ':�_�lrt !i�; BUILDING #1 \`!' ` BUILDING #2 MONUMENT SIGN, '► , ,; ` �►*"y' • ' �� ;c; MONUMENT SIGN 3-FOOT HEIGHT 'T �''k a.• , k+ 3-FOOT HEIGHT r ' k • ` i., I TYPICAL.N(xX Pt AN mMrwtli bgaM. -. 1— I (�` • s I 4 it' TI-,. ' •'/. ` j TYPICAL ROOF PLAN ti - --'. :„. ,, ,,ppfiitl j, Ace. 3 T � ��y7 I �ti r �1� • • •e�- I ,,, • . �..��s� 1'T_tj'6'�t,1 jt�ttta'::1• ,.l . ''`., . �.,.'-.-1 ' , 3Z ...AL...[L',_ ��y tr..^_; 'si'"_Aft' L . m �; iicsaa" .._�:LatnL '' - i i' o oar cal- ELEVATION . `'"' "fe "' 2 " "°nT BUILDING #1 & BUILDING #2 • WILDING? ••+•lim+o WEST ELEVATION METAL ROOF C Z 6�G 3 WOOD SOFFIT P P• • ?Mwc4-n • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PAVER COL O' • AKROTIQUE WING WALLS SLATE COLS INDUSTRIAL WEST/G.D.D.COMPLEX GLASS TINT sheryl ave & cook street e +° C I Ci J... , .I'...'...... .-.. .............. ...........r.. ..,.W.. ..........,....,..........a _ .'.. ..-. . ... -7:: ' -- . ..... .. . • „. . .-' -• ,-' - ,. -..- ,..AO • -....a' .' ,., ..... .•.' ..•' „ ., .,. •' , '', . ''.''',','': Ag.'14' ' . '' 7 t... .;''''4•,1 V'' A. ..•' '' ..... ; • '.. .,'.5. . . " _. ....- ' A . , .,. 4 • 1 ''''''S• ' . . . ''' ..,....... 16 ... r ,. . ; I,.. . ' • ": • JriffiV411111 '''11 1 ' 1 . .., . . . , * 11111111141 ''',.. .. , lai .....20.,.... • .. i. ... , • ... .. .... _. __ , -----r ---..,-.'" it----,...-- __ . , -it ----,--. \ , . ,. ., ,..i • - ...."--irl.11 „..................„______,,- ... . .., . ...... ,, .... . .:„.. ,, •. ..... . .. . , ,. .._ .. 1 . , ., . . . . .. ..,,..,•- . .,....,, igh*:. 440-4 • ir ,. '' \ I ,r f i 4., 1 ,, :4.2,--,,,..,, -r-- , ..,:-..,'..''.4 ' 'kl:-!,,' --::11 A it.... ) .'..- . ' S i V.,Z ' rAwh-er: ., , € : III16.----ael :I , k !R t ! R S Sn