HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes 03-24 and Ord 1038 PP 02-20 DA 97-2 Amend 1 - Wonder Palms Master Plan CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: Approval of a precise plan of design for a 32,910 square foot
office/industrial building, a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact
and an amendment to Development Agreement 97-2 allowing service
industrial uses in Planning Area 2 of the Wonder Palms Master Plan.
SUBMITTED BY: Tony Bagato, Planning Technician
APPLICANT: Prest/Vuksic Architects
74-020 Alessandro Drive, Suite C
Palm Desert, CA 92260
CASE NOS: PP 02-20 and DA 97-2 Amendment 1
DATE: February 13, 2003
CONTENTS: Staff Recommendation
Executive Summary
Discussion
Draft Ordinance No.103g
Draft Resolution No.03-24
Legal Notice
Comments from departments and agencies
Copy of Development Agreement 97-2
Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 21, 2003
Planning Commission Minutes
Plans and Exhibits
Recommendation:
That the City Council pass Ordinance No.1038 approving the amendment to
Development Agreement 97-2 to second reading; and adopt Resolution No.03-24
approving Precise Plan 02-20 and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact,
subject to conditions attached;
Executive Summary:
The proposed 32,910 square foot office/industrial building is located west of Cook
Street north of Gerald Ford adjacent to the railroad tracks. The Wonder Palms Master
Plan and Development Agreement established Planning Area 2 with the development
standards and uses as Regional Commercial. The amendment will allow Service
Industrial in Planning Area 2, which is an appropriate use adjacent to the railroad tracks
Staff report
Case Nos. PP 02-20, DA 97-2 Amendment 1
Page 2
February 13, 2003
and 1-10. The precise plan complies with all the Regional Commercial development
standards. Both the Architectural and Planning Commission unanimously approved and
complimented the design of the project.
Discussion:
BACKGROUND
WONDER PALMS MASTER PLAN
In April 1997, the City Council approved Development Agreement 97-2 for 270 +/-
acres in the vicinity of the Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive intersection. The
development plan established 8 planning areas with commercial, industrial and
residential uses (see attached master plan).
The subject property is located in Planning Area 2, described as 50.7 gross acres
west of Cook Street between Gerald Ford Drive and the Southern Pacific Rail/I-10
corridor. The land use emphasis is Regional Commercial which includes retail, office
and residential with a conditional use permit.
Service industrial use is currently not a permitted use in Planning Area 2.
PM 30042
In March 2001, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map 30042
subdividing 134.3 gross acres into 20 lots at the northwest and southwest corners of
Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive. The plan also created Technology Drive and
required shared access for parking and circulation with reciprocal easements.
The map has not recorded.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The vacant property totaling 87,115 square feet is located 720 +/- feet north of Gerald
Ford Drive, east of the Cook Street interchange.
Staff report
Case Nos. PP 02-20, DA 97-2 Amendment 1
Page 3
February 13, 2003
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Site: Planned Community Development (PCD)
North: PCD/ Planning Area 2, Regional Commercial (vacant)
South: PCD/ Planning Area 2, Regional Commercial (vacant)
East: Cook Street Interchange
West: PCD/ Planning Area 2, Regional Commercial (vacant)
GENERAL PLAN
District Commercial
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Planning Area 2 is defined as Regional Commercial and permits a wide range of
services including commercial, major financial instates and administration center,
entertainment, and cultural uses. Service industrial is currently not permitted. The intent
of the Wonder Palms Specific Plan was to create a mixture of compatible land uses.
This specific location is located along the Railroad/I-10 corridor. Service Industrial is
an appropriate land use adjacent to railroad tracks and freeway and will create a
buffer for commercial, office and residential uses to the south.
PRECISE PLAN
The proposed precise plan will allow construction of a two-story, 32,910 square foot
office/industrial building and 99-space parking lot. The first story will be comprised of
16,320 square feet of industrial use and 9,540 general office uses. The second story will
be 7,050 square feet of general office use.
The building's architectural is desert contemporary. The building will be stuccoed in
seven different earthtone colors. A colored elevation and material board will be
available at the hearing.
The strong contemporary architectural details from the front of the building are carried
through to the rear effectively disguising the rollup doors necessary for industrial use.
Staff report
Case Nos. PP 02-20, DA 97-2 Amendment 1
Page 4
February 13, 2003
The proposed roof height is 35' the maximum allowed by the Regional Commercial
standards. The building's parapet and a screen wall will conceal all roof-mounted
equipment from public view.
In addition, the landscape plan includes trees planted along the offramp slope that will
provide additional screening from the freeway.
1. CODE REQUIREMENTS
STANDARDS REGIONAL COMMERCIAL PROJECT
Lot Coverage 40% 38%
Front Setback 30' from street 76'
Side Setbacks *0/0 56'/ 70'3"
Rear Setback *0 50'
Parking 99 (33 industrial/66 office) 99
Landscaping 15% 20%
* Setbacks in Regional Commercial are 30' from any street. There are no
streets on the side or rear of this project.
The proposed project complies with all the development standards of the
Regional Commercial zone for Planning Area 2.
2. GRADING
The grading plan for PM 30042 will raise the current elevation by 9 feet. The
new grade height for Technology Drive is required to maintain a positive flow to
the existing sewer line on Gerald Ford Drive.
3. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION (ARC)
On November 26, 2002, the ARC endorsed the project and by minute motion
granted preliminary approval. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Vuksic
abstaining and Commissioner Lopez absent.
Staff report
Case Nos. PP 02-20, DA 97-2 Amendment 1
Page 5
February 13, 2003
4. PLANNING COMMISSION
On January 21, 2002, the precise plan was presented to the Planning
Commission. Commissioner Jonathan had some concerns about the visibility of
the building from the interchange. Staff explained that the proposed landscape
plan and creative architectural design would adequately conceal the rollup doors.
Commissioner Jonathan asked the applicant if he had any other mitigation
measures. The applicant suggested that a 2' high wall could be installed on the
interchange behind the sidewalk to completely screen the rollup doors.
Commissioner Jonathan agreed and also suggested that the applicant move
some of the trees to a higher location along the berm. The applicant agreed.
The project was approved with a condition to install a 2' high wall behind the
sidewalk along Cook Street, and that the applicant work with staff in regards to
the placement of trees on the berm. Motioned carried 4-0, with Commissioner
Lopez absent.
Upon further investigation, it was found that the suggested 2' high wall would be
located within the CalTrans right of way. Approval from CalTrans will be difficult.
On February 4, 2003, the Planning Commission reexamined the required 2' high
wall and determined that given the superior architecture and landscaping the wall
was unnecessary.
CONCLUSION:
Service Industrial is an appropriate land use along the Railroad/I-10 corridor and will
create a buffer for commercial, office and residential uses allowed in the Wonder Palms
Master Plan. The precise plan of design complies with all the development standards for
Regional Commercial. The superior architecture and landscaping addresses the typical
visual concerns associated with industrial rear elevations. Both the Architectural Review
Commission and Planning Commission have unanimously approved the project and
complimented the architecture.
Staff report
Case Nos. PP 02-20, DA 97-2 Amendment 1
Page 6
February 13, 2003
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
For the purposes of CEQA, the Director of Community Development has determined
that the proposed project will not have a significant negative impact on the environment
and staff has prepared Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact.
Submitted By: Depa ent Head:
Tony Ba ato Phil Drell
Planning Technician Director of Community Development
Approval:
1/%1,7/7
City Manager
ACM for Deve m nt Services CITY COUNCIL,ACTION:
APPROVED ✓ DENIED
RECEIVED OTHER
MEETING DATE
AYES: liAeS/ 9u5Wi, -5i, . idyl Tie c0,r..
NOES: iU Drl e_
ABSENT: 'Ono
ABSTAIN: iUoA
VERIFIED BY: R LL/�
Original on File with City ' lerk' s Office
RESOLUTION NO. 0324
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN FOR A 32,910
SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
CASE NOS. PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1:
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, established on the
13th day of February, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by
PREST /VUKSIC for approval of the above noted; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 2181 has recommended
approval; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution
No. 02-60, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project will
not have a significant negative impact on the environment and staff has prepared Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the
following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of said request:
1. With the Amendment to the Development Agreement, the proposed location of
the office/industrial complex as conditioned is in accord with the objectives of
the zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which the site is located.
2. The proposed precise plan will comply with each of the applicable provisions of
this title, except for approved variances or adjustments.
3. The proposed location of the office/industrial complex and the conditions under
which it will be operated and maintained will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
4. The proposed precise plan complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of
the city's adopted general plan.
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
Council in this case.
2. That approval of Precise Plan 02-20 is hereby granted, subject to conditions
attached.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 0324
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City
Council, held on this 13th day of February, 2003, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JEAN M. BENSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 0324
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NOS. PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
Department of Community Development:
1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with
the department of community development/planning, 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 Commission
City Fire Marshal
Public Works Department
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. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas.
Said placement shall be approved by applicable waste company and Department of
Community Development and shall include a recycling program.
6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in Section
25.58 of the zoning ordinance.
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
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 0324
Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape
plan.
8. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works
prior to architectural review commission submittal.
9. 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.
10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney, a mutual access easement with the properties to
the north and south.
11. The applicant shall submit a tenant improvement plan for review by the
Community Development Director.
12. 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.
Department of Public Works:
1. 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. The project shall be
designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase in developed vs.
undeveloped condition for a 100-year storm.
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.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 0324
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 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 provided 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.
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 for review 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 concrete sidewalk on Technology Drive.
Rights-of-way necessary for the installation of the above referenced improvements
shall be dedicated to the city prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
13. This project shall be limited to two driveways on Technology Drive, which will be
located on the northerly and southerly property boundaries and shared with the
adjacent properties. The future project located directly north of PP 2-20 shall also be
limited to two driveways, one on each property boundary and shared with adjacent
properties. 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. Driveways shall be 30' minimum, 40' maximum in width. No driveways will be
allowed on Cook Street. The property owner shall enter into reciprocal access
agreements with all adjacent property owners.
14. No permits associated with this project shall be issued prior to recordation of the map
on which the subject project is located.
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03?4
Riverside County Fire Department:
1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check,
Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in
accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Article 87.
A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20-psi residual operating
pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the
job site.
2. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per
minute flow of:
a) 3000 for commercial structure.
3. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant 4"x2-1/2"x2-
1/2"), located not less than 25' nor more than 150' from any portion of a commercial
building measured via vehicular travelway.
4 Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the
water system will produce the required fire flow.
5. Install a complete NFPA 13R fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with a
3,000 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' from the building and within 50' of an approved
hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings.
6. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water-flow
switches shall be monitored as required by the UBC Chapter 9.
7. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, 10, but not less than 2A10BC extinguisher
per 3,000 square feet and not over 75' walking distance. A "K" type fire extinguisher is
required in all commercial kitchens.
9. All buildings 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 be not less than 24' of
6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 0324
unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed,
the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 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). Fountains or garden islands placed in the
middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City
standards may be more restrictive.
10. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city.
11. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be
submitted separately for approval prior to construction.
12. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when
building permits are not obtained within twelve months.
7
CITY Of Pflll DESf " t
i 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
VI kli ? it PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA �226ai 7$
25
tom '
+ - . ti, TEL: 76o 346-0611
•
'- t••, FAX:76o 341-7098
info@palm-desert org
I
CITY OF PALM DESERT
CORRECTED LEGAL NOTICE '
CASE NOS. PP 02-20, DA 97-02 AMENDMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City
Council to consider a request by Wilson Johnson Commercial Real Estate for approval of a
precise plan of design for a 32,910 square foot office/industri I building, a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact and an amendment to Devel pment Agreement 97-2
allowing service industrial uses in Planning Area 2 of the Wonder palms Master Plan. The
property is located 800' feet north of Gerald Ford, west of Cook Street, also known as lot 14 &
15 of Technology Drive.
I
I
1
THOUSAND VICINITY MAP
D I NAH \ NOT TO SCALE
SHORE DR. IrVT�, PALMS
• A��sT9T '
' 10 Srl,
PAR w GERALD FORD : 14 pIG'� 16 I
RANCHO < W \'
M I RAGE ` ��" \�,
/ < `e
.s.yFRANK / SINATRA DRIVE �
k< W
laJ
I IX
WI
O
I 6 PALM Y
DESERT g
COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE LL
SAIDpublic hearingwill be held on Thursday, February13, 2003, a 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California,
at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written
comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to
the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative
declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above
address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you
challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the Planning Commission(or city council)at,or prior to,the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk
January 19, 2003 Palm Desert City Council
M-Elk...).L.11 'E
<<C'_ J 'f L00'
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Department of Community Development/Planning
Attention: Tony Bagato
FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: PP 2-20, PRESTNUKSIC BUILDING ON TECHNOLOGY DRIVE
DATE: November 21, 2002
The following should be considered conditions of approval for the above-referenced
project:
(1) 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.
The project shall be designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase
in developed vs. undeveloped condition for a 100 year storm.
(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.
(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 to be
approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the
installation of required offsite improvements prior to permit issuance.
9
(8) Landscape installation on the property frontages as well as on-site shall be
drought tolerant in nature and maintenance shall be provided 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.
(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 for review 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 concrete sidewalk on Technology Drive.
Rights-of-way necessary for the installation of the above referenced improvements
shall be dedicated to the city prior to the issuance of any permits associated with
this project.
(13) This project shall be limited to two driveways on Technology Drive, which will be
located on the northerly and southerly property boundaries and shared with the
adjacent properties. The future project located direct north of PP 2-20 shall also be
limited to two driveways, one on each property boundary and shared with adjacent
properties. 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. Driveways shall be 30' minimum, 40' maximum in width. No driveways will
be allowed on Cook Street. The property owner shall enter into reciprocal access
agreements with all adjacent property owners.
(14) No permits associated with this project shall be issued prior to recordation of the
map on which the subject project is located.
JOSEPH S. GUSH-, P.E.
G.`Pub.!orkslCond'lions of Approval\PPLANS PP 2-20 Prest Vuksic bldg on Technology Dr I V
°01(111 110 RIVERSIDE C(,,r. . FY .
°; 4 FIRE DEPARTMENT
r,rt{T,
In Cooperation will) the
scut .,oar c. ,,.
.- California Department of Foreqry and Fire I'rtrti•r•t: in
210 West Sin Jacinto Avenue • t rreri r!4 11Ier 7- rl"'.rt:.7 479, ct'i`I.1t1•i;900 • 1-/\X Irnr•lt •t.ti ;910
wr
.t...�rl.r Cove Fire Marshal's Office DEC 0 3 2002
Tom Tisdale 70801 Highway I l l
Fire Chief Rancho Mirage CA 92270 COMMMIY DEVELOPMENT nP .1-r.:!£N L
j(760)346-1870 CITY Sr PALM DESERT. / 62.
Proud►y serving the
unincorporated
areas of Riverside TO. _ 1�' ✓ r 7
County and the '
cities of: Z
Banning•: REF: f- e, ,2_
Beaumont
Calimesa If circled, conditions apply to project
Canyon Lake 47 _ With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above
Coachella referenced project, the fire department recommends the following lire
•. • protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal
Desert Hot Springs Code, NFPA, UFC, and UBC or any recognized Fire Protection
Indian Wells Standards:
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the
Indio remodel or construction of all buildings per UR_article 87.
Lake Elsinore 'el-
"C ?� A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual
La••oulnla pressure must be available before any combustible material is place
•. on the job site.
Moreno Valley Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a
Palm Desert gpm flow of:
•• 3. 1500 gpm for single family dwellings
Perris
4. 2500 gpm for multifamily dwellings
Rancho Mirage 3000 gpm for commercial buildings
San Jacinto The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super
Hydrant (s) 4"x2 '/2"x2 'A", located not less than 25' nor more Ibart:
Temecula 6. 200' from any portion of a single family dwelling measured via
vehicular travelway
7. 165' from any portion of a multifamily dwelling measured via
Board of Supervisors vehicular (ravelway
Bob Busier Oi 150' from any portion of a commercial building measured via
District 1 vehicular travelway
John Tavaglione 0 Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include
District 2 verification that the water system will produce (he required lire Ilow.
Jim Venable 10. Please be advised the proposed project may not he feasible since the
District 3
existing water mains will not meet the required fire flow.
Roy Wilson
District 4
Tom Mullen
District 5 (l
1 1-- \
Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all
(j,,I
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 he
less than 25' from the building and within 50' of an approved
hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings.
12 All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler
systems and Water-flow switches shall be monitored and alarmed per
UBC Chapter 9.
t �..
1 ,. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UIIC Chapter 3.
4. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one
2AIOBC extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75' walking
distance. A "K" type fire extinguisher is required in all commercial
kitchens.
15. Install a Hood/Duct automatic fire extinguishing system per NIT.NITA 96
in all public and private cooking operations except single-family
residential usage.
16. Install a dust collecting system per UFC Chapter 76 if concur tint, ,►n
operation that produces airborne particles.
`. 17. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending
to within ISO' 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 he 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".
i r ' A dead end single access over 500' will require a secondary access,
p)
measures approved by the I.ire
sprinklers or other mitigative
Marshal. Under no circumstance shall a dead end over 1300' be
accepted.
la
•
20. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two ni:i in
access points from a main roadway or an emergency gate from :in
adjoining development.
21. 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.
gt All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a sirs approved by
the city.
All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and Valarm
plans must be submitted separately to the Fire Marshal for approval
prior to construction.
• 240 Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances,
laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve
months. .
All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to
the Fire Marshal's Office at (760) 346-1870 Location: 7040I l lighw av I II,
Rancho Mirage CA 92270
Other:
771-CO-J-, — - ___
Sincerely,
Michael 11. Wilson
Fire Marshal
13
\pIATER
ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY
i)/STRIC-C
COACHELLA WI; ' INATER DISTRICT
POST OFFICE BOX 1G53° COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 •TELEPHONE i760,398-2651
DIRECTORS
JOHN W.McFADDEN.PRESIDENT OFF CEE
THOMAS E LEVY GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEB
RUSSELL KITAHARA.VICE PRES:DENT • JULIA 7ERNAN2cZ SECRETARY
TELLIS COOEKAS November27 2002 STEVEN B.ROBBINS.ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
PATRICIA A.CARBON RED WINE AND SHERR!_L ATTORNEYS
PETER NELSON
File: 0163.1
040633-1
Department of Community Development 91•,
•
City of Palm Desert �`
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, California 92260
Gentlemen:
Subject: Precise Plan 02-20
This area is designated Zone C on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at
this time by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Drainage from this area is contributory to the Mid-Valley Stormwater Project. The city shall
require mitigation measures to be incorporated into the development to prevent flooding of
the site or downstream properties. These measures shall include on-site retention of water
from the 100-year storm, dedication of right-of-way for regional flood control facilities or
other participation in the financing of regional flood control facilities.
Since the stormwater issues of this development are local drainage, the district does not need
to review drainage design further.
The district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with
the current regulations of this district. These regulations provide for the payment of certain
fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change.
Additional domestic water and sewer pipelines will have to be installed by the subdivider in
order for the district to provide service to all parcels.
This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 58 and 81 of the district for
sanitation service.
TRUE CONSERVO r IOf I
USE WATER WISELY t
Department of Community Development
City of Palm Desert -2- November 27, 2002
Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the district for
review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management.
If you have any questions please call Dan Charlton, stormwater engineer, extension 316.
Yours very truly,
7
V'l Torn Levy
General Manager-Chief Engineer
cc: Don Park
Riverside County Department of Public Health
82-675 Highway 111, CAC Building, Second Floor, Room 209
Indio, California 92201
DC:j l\eng`sw\nov\pp02-20
COACHEL LA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 15
t y
:'�":�rn RECEIVED
City of Palm Desert .111N 2`5 1997
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 2 2. .8_
R
c`����;l:�,�..,o?►�_;:-D.pnc:l
TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 •FAX (619)340-0574•httpJ/www.palm-desert.org
June 19, 1997
Mainiero, Smith and Associates
for David Freedman& Company
777 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 301
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Gentlemen:
Subject: Development Agreement DA 97-2. Wonder Palms Commercial Center
As approved by City of Palm Desert Ordinance No. 838
At its regular meeting of April 24, 1997, the Palm Desert City Council, by Minute Motion, approved
the subject development agreement in its Ordinance No. 838 and authorized the Mayor to execute
same.
The fully-executed Development Agreement has been officially recorded by the County of Riverside,
No. 179687 on May 22, 1997. A recorded copy is enclosed for your records.
If you have any questions or require any additional information regarding this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely, ; 7'
`z SHEILA R. G LIGAN, C
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS/CITY CLERK
SRG:rdk
Enclosure (as noted)
cc: Department of Building & Safety
Department of Community Development
Department of Public Works
Recycled
Paper
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: January 21, 2003
CASE NOS: PP 02-20 and DA 97-2 Amendment 1
REQUEST: Approval of a precise plan of design for a 32,910 square foot
office/industrial building, a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact
and an amendment to Development Agreement 97-2 allowing service
industrial uses in Planning Area 2 of the Wonder Palms Master Plan.
APPLICANT: Prest/Vuksic Architects
74-020 Alessandro Drive, Suite C
Palm Desert, CA 92260
I. BACKGROUND:
A. WONDER PALMS MASTER PLAN
In April 1997, the City Council approved Development Agreement 97-2 for 270
+/- acres in the vicinity of the Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive intersection.
The development plan established 8 planning areas with commercial, industrial
and residential uses (see attached master plan).
The subject property is located in Planning Area 2, described as 50.7 gross
acres west of Cook Street between Gerald Ford Drive and the Southern Pacific
Rail/I-10 corridor. The land use emphasis is Regional Commercial and
encourages retail, office and residential with a conditional use permit.
Service industrial is not a permitted use in Planning Area 2.
B. PM 30042
March 2001, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map 30042
subdividing 134.3 gross acres into 20 lots at the northwest and southwest
corners of Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive. The plan also created
Technology Drive and requires shared access for parking and circulation with
reciprocal easements.
Currently the map has not recorded and these lots do not exist.
i
STAFF REPORT
PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
JANUARY 21, 2003
C. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The vacant property totaling 87,115 square feet is located 720 +/- feet north of
Gerald Ford Drive, east of the Cook Street interchange.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed precise plan provides a two-story office/industrial building and 99 parking
spaces. The total building area is 32,910 square feet with 16,320 industrial use and
9,540 general office on the first level and 7,050 general office on the second.
The building's architectural design is desert contemporary with stucco in various
colors. The proposed roof height is 35'.
A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Site: Planned Community Development (PCD)
North: PCD/ Planning Area 2, Regional Commercial (vacant)
South: PCD/ Planning Area 2, Regional Commercial (vacant)
East: Cook Street Interchange
West: PCD/ Planning Area 2, Regional Commercial (vacant)
B. GENERAL PLAN
District Commercial
C. CODE REQUIREMENTS
STANDARDS REGIONAL COMMERCIAL PROJECT
Lot Coverage 40% 38%
Front Setback 30' from street 76'
Side Setbacks *0/0 56'/ 70'3"
Rear Setback *0 50'
Parking 99 (33 industrial/66 office) 99
Landscaping 15% 20%
2
d'1
STAFF REPORT
PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
JANUARY 21, 2003
* Setbacks in Regional Commercial are 30' from any street. There are no
streets on the side or rear of this project.
D. GRADING
The grading plan for PM 30042 will raise the current elevation by 9 feet. The
new grade height for Technology Drive is required to maintain a positive flow to
the existing sewer line on Gerald Ford Drive.
E. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION (ARC)
On November 26, 2002, ARC endorsed the project and by minute motion
granted preliminary approval. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Vuksic
abstaining and Commissioner Lopez absent.
III. ANALYSIS
The recording of PM 30042 will create 20 lots west of the Cook Street interchange
south of Interstate 10. The precise plan of design complies with all the development
standards of Master Plan.
Amendment to the Development Agreement:
Service industrial is currently not allowed in Planning Area 2. The intent of the Wonder
Palms Specific Plan was to create a mixture of compatible land uses. Allowing Service
Industrial along the Railroad/I-10 corridor will create a buffer for commercial, office and
residential uses allowed in the Wonder Palms Master Plan.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
For the purposes of CEQA, the Director of Community Development has determined
that the proposed project will not have a significant negative impact on the environment
and staff has prepared Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact.
V. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. recommending approval of
Precise Plan 02-20 amending Development Agreement 97-2 to allow service industrial
3
STAFF REPORT
PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
JANUARY 21 , 2003
in Planning Area 2, and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact to City Council,
subject to conditions attached;
VI. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution
B. Legal Notice
C. Comments from other departments and agencies
D. Initial Study
E. Development Agreement 97-2
F. Plans and Exhibits
Prepared by • - -
Tony Bagato,-
Planning Technician
Reviewed and Approved by •
Phil Drell,
Community Development Director
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2181
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN FOR A 32,910 SQUARE FOOT
OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT 97-2 ALLOWING SERVICE INDUSTRIAL IN PLANNING AREA 2
OF THE WONDER PALMS MASTER PLAN.
CASE NOS. PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the
21st day of January, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by
PREST / VUKSIC ARCHITECTS for approval of the above noted; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution
No. 02-60, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project will
not have a significant negative impact on the environment and staff has prepared Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact; 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 recommending to City Council
approval of said request:
1 . With the Amendment to the Development Agreement, the proposed location of
the office/industrial complex as conditioned is in accord with the objectives of
the zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which the site is located.
2. The proposed precise plan will comply with each of the applicable provisions of
this title, except for approved variances or adjustments.
3. The proposed location of the office/industrial complex and the conditions under
which it will be operated and maintained will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
4. The proposed precise plan complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of
the city's adopted general plan.
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.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2181
2. That approval of Precise Plan 02-20 is hereby recommended to City Council,
subject to conditions attached.
3. That approval of Amendment 1 of Development Agreement 97-2 attached hereto
is herby recommended to City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 2151 day of January, 2003, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: CAMPBELL, JONATHAN, TSCHOPP, FINERTY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: LOPEZ
ABSTAIN: NONE
CINDY FINERTY, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2181
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NOS. PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
Department of Community Development:
1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with
the department of community development/planning, 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 Commission
City Fire Marshal
Public Works Department
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. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas.
Said placement shall be approved by applicable waste company and Department of
Community Development and shall include a recycling program.
6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in Section
25.58 of the zoning ordinance.
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
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2181
Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape
plan.
8. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works
prior to architectural review commission submittal.
9. 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.
10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney, a mutual access easement with the properties to
the north and south.
11. The applicant shall submit a tenant improvement plan for review by the
Community Development Director.
12. 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.
13. Applicant shall install a two-foot block wall adjacent to the existing sidewalk along the
east boundary of the project.
14. To maximize screening, landscaping placement shall be installed to the satisfaction of
the Director of Community Development and Landscape Department.
Department of Public Works:
1. 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. The project shall be
designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase in developed vs.
undeveloped condition for a 100-year storm.
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.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2181
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.
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 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 provided 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.
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 for review 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 concrete sidewalk on Technology Drive.
Rights-of-way necessary for the installation of the above referenced improvements
shall be dedicated to the city prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
13. This project shall be limited to two driveways on Technology Drive, which will be
located on the northerly and southerly property boundaries and shared with the
adjacent properties. The future project located directly north of PP 2-20 shall also be
limited to two driveways, one on each property boundary and shared with adjacent
properties. 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
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2181
permit. Driveways shall be 30' minimum, 40' maximum in width. No driveways will be
allowed on Cook Street. The property owner shall enter into reciprocal access
agreements with all adjacent property owners.
14. No permits associated with this project shall be issued prior to recordation of the map
on which the subject project is located.
Riverside County Fire Department:
1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check,
Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in
accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Article 87.
A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20-psi residual operating
pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the
job site.
2. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per
minute flow of:
a) 3000 for commercial structure.
3. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant 4"x2-1/2"x2-
1/2"), located not less than 25' nor more than 150' from any portion of a commercial
building measured via vehicular travelway.
4 Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the
water system will produce the required fire flow.
5. Install a complete NFPA 13R fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with a
3,000 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' from the building and within 50' of an approved
hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings.
6. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water-flow
switches shall be monitored as required by the UBC Chapter 9.
7. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2181
8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, 10, but not less than 2A10BC extinguisher
per 3,000 square feet and not over 75' walking distance. A "K" type fire extinguisher is
required in all commercial kitchens.
9. All buildings 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 be not less than 24' of
unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed,
the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 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). Fountains or garden islands placed in the
middle of these tum-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City
standards may be more restrictive.
10. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city.
11. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be
submitted separately for approval prior to construction.
12. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when
building permits are not obtained within twelve months.
7
...................
CITY Of PRI -1 E ) IRI
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
• 1 y PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92 260-2 5 78
TEL: 760 346-061 1
Rryr FAX 76o 341-7098
info6pr:m-desert.urR
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. PP 02-20
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to consider a request by Wilson Johnson Commercial Real Estate for approval of
a precise plan of design for a 32,910 square foot warehouse building and a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact as it relates to. The property is located 800' feet north of
Gerald Ford,west of Cook Street, also known as lot 14 & 15 of Technology Drive.
DINAH THOUSAND VICININT �CAL AP
E
SHORE DR. ii1/7> PALMS
tt
• A 'T
SITE
o
GERALD FORD 14 & 15
RANCHO
MIRAGE o,,�F
FRANK / SINATRA DRIVE
W
141
J Cr:
o 6 PALM in
2 a DESERT g
U W
COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 21, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California,
at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written
comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to
the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative
declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above
address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you
challenge the proposed actions in court,'you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence
delivered to the Planning Commission (or city council)at,or prior to,the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHIL DRELL, Secretary
December 30, 2002 Palm Desert Planning Commission
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
PP 02-20 and DA 97-2, University Business Center
2. Lead Agency and Name and Address:
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Tony Bagato, Planning Technician (760) 346-0611
Community Development Department
4. Project Location:
West side of the Cook Street Interchange, 750 +/- feet north of Gerald
Ford Drive, Palm Desert, Riverside County, CA
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address
Prest/Vuksic Architects
74-020 Alessandro Drive, Suite C
Palm Desert, CA 92260
6. General Plan Designation:
District Commercial
7. Zoning:
Planned Community Development/Wonder Palms Master Plan
8. Description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not
limited to the later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site
features necessary for its implementation. Attached additional sheet(s) if
necessary.)
Approval of a precise plan of design for a 32,910 square foot
office/industrial building, a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact
and an amendment to Development Agreement 97-2 allowing service
industrial uses in Planning Area 2 of the Wonder Palms Master Plan.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.)
North: Vacant/ Planned Community Development/ Wonder Palms Master Plan
South: Vacant / Planned Community Development/ Wonder Palms Master Plan
East: Cook Street Interchange
West: Vacant / Planned Community Development/ Wonder Palms Master Plan
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval,
or participation agreement).
Riverside County Fire Marshal, Coachella Valley Water District
Z
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
D Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/ Soils
❑ Hazards&Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality 0 Land Use/ Planning
❑ Mineral Resources 0 Noise Cl Population/Housing
❑ Public Services • El Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic
•
❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant or "potentially significant unless
mitigated"impact on the environment, but at least one effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
El I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
,//,5 %r_
Signature / / Date `
y
Printed Name For
CITY/RVPUB/2002/313785 FORM "J"
Page 2 of 15
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
I) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact"answers that are adequately supported by
the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer
is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not
expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as
well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers
must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than
significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made, an
EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"to a "Less than Significant
Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be
cross-referenced). •
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a
brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of
and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document
should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies
should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects
in whatever format is selected.
CITY/RVPUB/2002/313785 FORM "J"
Page 3 of 15
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by
the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"answer
is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not
expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). •
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as
well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers
must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than
significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made, an
EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Lmcorporated" applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant
Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be
cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a
brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of
and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document
should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies
should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects
in whatever format is selected.
C1TY/RVPUB/2002/3 1 3 785 FORM "J"
Page 3 of 15
Less Than
Issues: Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitieation Significant No Im
Impact Incorporated Impact
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, ❑ ❑ ❑
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the
following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑
air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially ❑ ❑ ❑
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any ❑ ❑ ❑
CSr
criteria pollutant for which the project region is
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ (11
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ❑ ❑ ❑
of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through ❑ ❑ t2f ❑
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife •
Service?
CITY/RVPUB/2002/313785 FORM "J"
Page 5 of 15
Less Than
Issues: Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No In
Impact Incorporated Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS --Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial ❑ ❑ ❑
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the ❑ 0 ❑
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑
iv) Landslides? ❑ (11 ❑ egi
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ❑ ❑ ❑ JJ
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of ❑ ❑ ❑
the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ❑ ❑ ❑
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the
project:
CITY/RVPUB/2002/3I3785 FORM "J"
Page 7 of 15
Less Than
Issues: Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Im
Impact Incorporated Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ❑
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ❑ ❑ ❑
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site ❑ ❑ ❑
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site ❑ ❑ ❑
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the ❑ ❑ ❑
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
0 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ❑ ❑ El
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which ❑ ❑ El
would impede or redirect flood flows?
CITY/RVPUB/2002/313785 FORM "J"
Page 9 of 15
Less Than
Issues Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Im
Impact Incorporated Impact
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in ❑ ❑
the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient ❑ ❑ ❑
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ g.
where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ❑ ❑ ❑ trA
the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ ❑ 0
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses)or indirectly(for example, through extension
of road or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
CITY/RVPUB/2002/313785 FORM "J"
Page 11 of 15
Less Than
Issues: Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Imi
Impact Incorporated Impact
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ❑ 0 ❑
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either ❑ ❑ ❑
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ❑ ❑ ❑
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ❑ ❑ ❑
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ❑
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ❑ ❑ ❑
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water ❑ ❑ ❑
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
CITY/RVPUB/2002/313785 FORM "T'
Page 13 of 15
Less Than
Issues: Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Im
Impact Incorporated Impact
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will ❑ ❑ ❑
ca..: e substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
•
C!TY/RVPUB/2002/313785 FORM "1"
Page 15 of 15
INITIAL STUDY
CASE NO. PP 02-20
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION CHECKLIST COMMENTS AND POSSIBLE MITIGATION
MEASURES (CATEGORIES PERTAIN TO ATTACHED CHECKLIST)
AESTHETICS
c. The site in the present condition can be termed as aesthetically offensive due to
blow sand problems. The Palm Desert Architectural Commission must approve
the proposed development.
d. New light will be produced but the project will be required to prevent lighting
spill over. In addition, the requirement for an engineered lighting plan per
Ordinance No. 826 will assure that this condition is fulfilled.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
a, b, c.
The site is vacant desert with minor amounts of native desert vegetation. The
site has never been used for agricultural purposes nor shown on maps as
agricultural.
III. AIR QUALITY
a & b.
During construction, particularly grading, a potential dust problem is a short-
term impact. Requiring that the ground be moistened during days in which
grading occurs will mitigate this problem. City of Palm Desert Grading
Ordinance requires this.
Because the site is already an urbanized setting its development will not result
in an overall deterioration of ambient air quality. This conclusion is supported
by the discussions relating to air quality contained in a draft environmental
impact report prepared for the North Sphere Specific Plan. Completed
development of the site will result in less dust leaving the site then currently
occurs with the site's vacant condition.
c. Development of this site will not result in any climatic changes. This is due to
its size and identified uses.
d. The proposed development does not call for uses that would create substantial
pollutant concentrations.
e. The proposed development does not call for any odorous land uses.
INITIAL STUDY
PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. The property is in the designated area of the Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed
Lizard. This project will eliminate all fringe-toed lizards within the project
boundaries. Pursuant to the Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard Habitat
Conservation Plan, the loss of lizards and habitat can be mitigated by payment
of a $600 per acre fee for each acre developed. Project will be conditioned to
pay said fee. Mitigation fee will be used by Nature Conservancy to purchase
land in special preserves. The Coachella Valley Preserves which will create
suitable habitat for lizards as well as other species.
The site may contain other dune species, which are of statewide concern (i.e.,
Coachella Valley Milk Vetch). A multi species habitat conservation plan is being
prepared by CVAG, which will establish preserves and conservation practices
to insure the future survival of these dune species.
b. No riparian habitat present on site.
c. No wetlands habitat present on site.
d. No migratory fish or wildlife present on site.
e. No local policy or ordinance protecting biological reserves other than that
delineated in item (a) above.
f. See (a) above. The dune species of concern are not migratory in nature. The
site has been designated for development with mitigation fees within the
Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a-d. The cultural resource study performed as part of the North Sphere Specific Plan
found no evidence of any cultural, archeological or historical significance on this
site. In addition, state law requires that should any evidence be found during
construction, construction must cease and the site cleared.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a (I-iv).
The area is subject to earthquakes and seismic shaking. Various studies have
concluded that with proper building design, which is required by the Uniform
Building Code, people will not be exposed to substantial adverse effects.
INITIAL STUDY
PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
MITIGATION MEASURES
The City of Palm Desert grading and building permits procedures required detailed
geotechnical reports addressing grading specifications and the settlement and
expansive characteristics of on site soils. All structures must be designed to UBC
requirements to insure that buildings are constructed within the acceptable level of risk
set forth herein for the type of building and occupancies being developed.
b. Development will reduce blow sand erosion, which is common in this area.
There is no topsoil present.
c. See mitigation measure above.
d. See mitigation measure above.
e. Sandy soil is capable of supporting septic tanks but they will not be used as
sewers are available.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a. Site and immediate area are not subject to routine transport, use or disposal of
hazardous materials.
b. Project will not create health hazards or potential health hazards.
c. There is no school within 1/4 mile of the site.
d. The site has not been identified on the list of hazardous materials sites.
e. Site is not within two miles of a public airport.
f. No private airstrip in area.
g. Project will not interfere with city's emergency response or evacuation plan.
h. Project will not increase the fire hazard in area with flammable brush, grass or
trees.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
While any development results in the use of water and therefore reduces the amount
otherwise available for public water supplies, the Coachella Valley Water District
assures that there is a sufficient water supply to accommodate this growth. In
INITIAL STUDY
PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
addition, the Coachella Valley Water District plans to construct additional water
facilities in the Palm Desert area to accommodate current and future development.
a. Project will be required to comply with Palm Desert Master Plan of Drainage
and the grading ordinance.
b. Project will use water provided by CVWD and will not interfere with groundwater
recharge.
c, d, e.
Water will be redirected to. drainage facilities designed and constructed to
accept the water from the site.
f. Project will not substantially degrade water quality.
g. Site is not within a 100-year flood hazard.
h. See (g).
Area is not subject to flooding.
j. Area is flat desert land not subject to seiche, tsunami or mudflow.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a. The site is zoned for the proposed use.
b. Project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning.
c. Property is not subject to habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan, other than that discussed in Section IV (a1).
X. MINERAL RESOURCES
a. No known mineral resources.
b. No locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on local general
plan.
Xl. NOISE
a, b, c, d.
LI
INITIAL STUDY
PP 02-20 AND DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1
Construction of the project will increase ambient noise level. The increase is
• not expected to create an annoyance to adjacent residential properties. All
uses on the site will be required to comply with the city noise ordinance.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Strict adherence to construction hours and days will be required. Additional measures
to mitigate traffic and operational noise will be required. Noise to be mitigated so that
noise levels set in the General Plan Noise Element are not exceeded.
e & f.
Project is not within two miles of a public airport or in vicinity of a private airstrip.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a-c. The proposed project is for an office/industrial building. No new residents from
the project.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
The property is presently vacant and serves no productive use. A commitment to
urban uses was made as the area surrounding the study area has been developed,
and the general plan and zoning maps designated for a planned community
development. Infrastructure improvements (i.e., streets, utilities) will be installed by the
developer. The proposed land use would increase the economic productivity of the
land in terms of land efficiency and greater economic return generated from these
uses, versus the current state of the land.
Fire and Police Protection
Police and Fire service has indicated that they can service the proposed project.
Schools
The project will be required to pay school mitigation fees per state law at time of
building permit issuance.
Parks
The project will not impact parks.
Other Public Facilities
Libraries and other public facilities are adequate to serve the project.
5
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21 , 2003
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by
Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings as presented
by staff. Motion carried 4-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by
Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2180, approving Case No. CUP 02-27,
subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0.
B. Case Nos. PP 02-20 and DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1 -
PREST / VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, Applicant
Request for approval of a precise plan of design
for a 32,910 square foot office / industrial
building, a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact and an amendment to Development
Agreement 97-2 allowing service industrial uses
in Planning Area 2 of the Wonder Palms Master
Plan.
Mr. Drell noted that the commission was distributed a
Miscellaneous item relative to a parcel map waiver. He said
they would consider that along with this public hearing
since they were associated.
Mr. Bagato stated that in April of 1997 the City Council
approved Development Agreement 97-2 which allowed for
a master plan for 270 +/- acres around the vicinity of Cook
Street and Gerald Ford. The development plan established
eight planning areas. He explained that the subject property
is located in Planning Area 2. The master plan land use
emphasized this as regional commercial. Service Industrial
is not currently a permitted use in the master plan for
Planning Area 2 in that agreement.
In March Parcel Map 30042 was approved. It subdivided
134.3 acres into 20 lots and created Technology Drive
7
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JAN UARY 21 , 2003
located at the northwest and southwest between Gerald
Ford and Cook Street.
The project site plan provides for a two-story office industrial
building with 99 parking spaces. The total building area
would be 32,910 square feet with 16,324 square feet for
industrial use, 9,540 general office on the first level and
7,050 of general office on the second floor.
Mr. Bagato stated that the building elevation design was
desert contemporary architecture with various stucco colors.
The proposed roof height is 35 feet, the maximum allowed
in the zone. All the code requirements were outlined in the
staff report and the project complies with them.
For the purpose of Parcel Map 30042, and Mr. Bagato said
it was brought up for this project because it is the first
building to be approved on Technology Drive, there would be
for grading purposes an additional nine feet of pad height
that was brought in for all of Technology Drive and that
purpose was to maintain the positive flow for the sewer line
on Gerald Ford Drive.
On November 26, 2002, the Architectural Review
Commission endorsed the project and granted preliminary
approval by minute motion. Staff supported the project
because of the great design along with complying with all
the code standards for the development area of the master
plan. Service Industrial was currently not allowed, but staff
was recommending the amendment to DA 97-2 because
they felt Service Industrial would be a good buffer along the
1-10 and railroad corridor to separate it from the other
commercial, residential and office areas within the master
plan.
For purposes of CEQA, staff determined that the project
would not have a significant impact on the environment and
staff prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact.
8
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21 , 2003
Staff recommended that Planning Commission adopt the
resolution recommending approval of PP 02-20 and DA 97-2
Amendment to City Council, subject to the conditions.
Commissioner Jonathan said he had a couple of questions.
The amendment to the development agreement, which
would allow service industrial, applies to not just this project
but all of Planning Area 2. Mr. Bagato said that was correct.
On the map Mr. Bagato passed out, Commissioner Jonathan
asked which portion that referred to specifically. Mr. Bagato
asked if he meant for this project. Commissioner Jonathan
said no and clarified that the change to the development
agreement was for all of Planning Area 2. Mr. Bagato said
that was correct. Commissoner Jonathan asked what part of
the drawing was Planning Area 2. Mr. Bagato said it was
outlined mainly between the Cook Street and Gerald Ford
area right along 1-10 between Gerald Ford and the railroad,
134 acres. The map he passed to Commissioner Campbell
was labeled Planning Area 2. He thought it was different
from the one in the commission packets. When Parcel Map
30042 was created it kind of divided that area with
Technology Drive. He said he could pass that around as well.
Looking at the other Planning Areas, particularly 4, 1 and 6
along the railroad tracks, Commissoner Jonathan asked if
they didn't provide for Service Industrial either. Mr. Bagato
said they do. Commissioner Jonathan asked if it was
somehow only Planning Area 2 that didn't. Mr. Bagato said
that Planning Area 2 was Regional Commercial which would
be more like Desert Crossing. For this area long the free 4hey
thought Service Industrial would be permittable in that zone
as well. Commissioner Jonathan noted that Planning Areas
4, 1 and 6 are also along the railroad tracks, so they envision
Service Industrial, but for some reason Planning Area 2
didn't. Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Commissioner
Jonathan said that this would bring Planning Area 2 in line
with the other Planning Areas along the railroad tracks. Mr.
Bagato said that was correct.
9
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21 , 2003
Commissioner Jonathan noted that Mr. Bagato didn't
address the issue of the visual impact from the offramp
coming off of 1-10 and the fact that it is substantially higher
for this particular building. He asked if staff would address
that. Mr. Drell asked if he meant relative to screening the
rooftop equipment from above. Commissioner Jonathan said
the rooftop and the general industrial use because as he
understood it they would be looking at the rear. So they
were looking at the area with the roll up doors, the trucks
and the potential waste and so forth. And the rooftop
equipment as well.
Mr. Bagato indicated that the full set of plans were included
in the commission packets. There was a full line of sight
design prepared by the architect that staff was comfortable
with. All of the rooftop equipment would be completely
screened based on a screen wall that was added.
Commissioner Jonathan asked if the screen wall would be
along the top of the hill. He asked where the screen wall
would be. Mr. Bagato said that the screen wall was actually
in front of the equipment. There was a parapet and an
additional screen wall on the roof. On the elevation it created
a new plane to give it more architectural detail. The roll up
doors they didn't see as a concern because the architecture
of the building was really well done. There would be
landscaping on the berm as well that the applicant would
install and was responsible for maintaining. It would be City
land and with that landscape plan they would try to
incorporate some of that design to help, but from the overall
architecture and Architectural Commission's endorsement,
staff was pretty satisfied with the roll up doors the way they
are because of the architecture which does a good job of
screening them. Mr. Drell said they were similar to the roll
up doors on the back of Tweeters. The repetition of the
rectangular forms tended to make the roll up doors just
another rectangular detail on the back of the building.
Commissioner Jonathan said he had some concerns about
the visibility of that whole situation, but he would address
10
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21 , 2003
that with the applicant. He thought they perhaps had already
been mitigated.
Commissioner Campbell asked for the height of the doors.
Mr. Bagato said they are 14 feet.
Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked the
applicant to address the commission.
MR. JOHN VUKSIC, Prest Vuksic Architects at 73-030
Caliandra in Palm Desert, addressed the commission.
To address Commissioner Jonathan's question, he
stated that he went out to the site and took a good
hard look at it a couple of times recently and was
actually surprised how little he could see over the bank
because the cars are set in quite a ways. There is a
sidewalk and then a parking aisle and then the closest
most lane for driving. The bank is very steep. He said
he took a few photographs and passed out one he
thought showed the angle of sight the best. Then he
had a smaller line of sight diagram that he could pass
around as well that he thought pretty accurately
depicts car location to the bank and building. He said
the photograph was taken from the street parked in the
parking aisle, not in the drive aisle. He said that from
the left side they could see Technology Drive which is
on the front of the property. It gave them a pretty good
sense of how little they could really see looking down
in there. He said he did a line of sight diagram which
actually, in his opinion, to fully block the roll up doors
they would need a barrier about two feet high along
the sidewalk, which he showed in the sight section he
passed around. So he thought that would mitigate that
concern.
Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Vuksic was suggesting
some kind of a retaining wall or two foot wall along there.
Mr. Vuksic said yes. It wouldn't be a retaining wall, it
would just be a low wall. He said he would prefer to do
11
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21 , 2003
something a little more artful, but he realised there was
no space there. There is a sidewalk and then it just
drops off. It was so steep they couldn't really add any
soil or anything.
Commissioner Jonathan asked if in conjunction with that if
Mr. Vuksic investigated the possibility of moving some of
these trees and landscaping a little further up the hill so that
they were higher sooner.
Mr. Vuksic thought the sight section actually showed
how effective that would be. He put the trees down
low and they could see pretty much over those trees
unless they are up higher on the bank. He agreed with
Commissioner Jonathan on that.
Commissioner Jonathan asked if that was feasible to move
some of that landscaping up the hill as opposed to having it
down at the bottom. He asked if they could be planted up
there and irrigation pipes put in there.
Mr. Vuksic thought it could. It would involve creating
some wells for those trees and retaining on the back
sides of those wells in some way. But it was feasible.
Chairperson Finerty asked if Mr. Vuksic had anything else he
wanted to add.
Mr. Vuksic introduced Matt Johnson of Wilson
Johnson real estate, the owner of the project. He said
they were available to answer any other questions.
There were no questions and Chairperson Finerty asked if
anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the
proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was
closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for commission
comments.
Commissioner Jonathan stated that the project is an
awesome design. He continues to be impressed with Mr.
12
11
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21 , 2003
Vuksic's creativity and ability to do nice things with
otherwise pedestrian type uses. So he thought this was an
example of the kind of thing that can be accomplished. The
type of quality that can be accomplished. He was concerned
about the rooftop equipment and so forth, but he thought if
they could add, and if staff concurs, add that two foot wall
and just ask the applicant to spread some of that
landscaping up the hill that would break up that line of sight
more effectively and sooner. It takes a while for landscaping
to mature. With that he thought this was an appropriate use
so he was certainly in favor of the amendment to the
development agreement and he was in favor of the project.
He said he would be prepared to move for approval.
Commissioner Campbell concurred with Commissioner
Jonathan. She thought every project we have seen coming
from Mr. Vuksic has been exceptional. She felt this was a
perfect location for that and the architecture is wonderful.
The colors would blend in well with the landscaping. She
said she would second that motion.
Commissioner Tschopp concurred. He thought the
architecture is very good and hoped it would set the trend
for other buildings to come in that would be as compatible
and comparable as this. He said he would like some
clarification on how much landscaping they were talking
about moving up the hill or how they wanted to handle that.
Commissioner Jonathan said it was his intent to leave it to
staff and the applicant to work out. They could trust them to
work out the most effective means. He thought the goal was
shared by both the applicant and the staff to create as
effective a buffer to the line of sight. He would trust them to
work out that detail.
Chairperson Finerty concurred. She thought the architecture
was outstanding and that it made sense to have Service
Industrial out there.
Action:
13
Ia
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21 , 2003
It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by
Commissioner Campbell, approving the findings as
presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by
Commissioner Campbell, adopting Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2181 , recommending to City Council approval
of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, PP 02-20,
and amending DA 97-2 to allow service industrial uses in
Planning Area 2, subject to conditions as amended. Motion
carried 4-0.
Chairperson Finerty asked about PMW 03-04. Mr. Drell said
the commission also wanted to talk about that item. It was
a Miscellaneous item. Chairperson Finerty asked if they
would be asking Mr. Bagato to address that. Mr. Drell
thought the person who could best explain it was the
applicant, Mr. Johnson.
X. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Case No. PMW 03-04 - LOST HORSE MOUNTAIN,
LLC/MATTHEW V. JOHNSON, Applicant
Request for approval of a parcel map
waiver to allow for a lot line
adjustment to align parcel with Parcel
Map 30042 and facilitate construction
of Technology Drive. Property is
generally located at south of the
railroad tracks between Cook and
Portola.
MR. MATT JOHNSON, 73-134 Bel Air in Palm Desert,
addressed the commission. He explained that there
was a request for a parcel map waiver which is an
adjustment of the parcel lines underlying this property
and others that they are purchasing in the area. The
purpose of the request is to facilitate the financing of
the project. They had the seller of the property, Mr.
14
I