HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes 03-54 APN 628-120-013 Southcliff Rd CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: Approval of construction of a driveway and 12,819 square foot
building pad on a 5.12 acre lot in the Hillside Planned Residential
District west of the storm channel, south of Southcliff Road, APN 628-
120-013.
SUBMITTED BY: Steve Smith, Planning Manager
APPLICANT: Dori Cree
P.O. Box 25
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
CASE NO: HPR 03-01
DATE: April 24, 2003
CONTENTS:
Draft Resolution No. 03-54
Planning Commission Minutes involving Case No. HPR 03-01
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2194
Planning Commission Staff Reports dated March 4, March 18 and April 1, 2003
Related maps and exhibits
Staff Recommendation:
That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 03-54 approving HPR 03-01,
subject to conditions.
Executive Summary:
The property has an existing single family dwelling located on a flat
section of land at the east end of the lot. The applicant proposes to
remove the existing residence, renaturalize this pad area and create a
new building pad in a higher, more westerly location.
Staff Report
Case No. HPR 03-01
Page 2
April 24, 2003
The westerly portion of the lot encompasses steeper mountain slopes
with elevations ranging from 515 to 610. Toward the center of the lot
a somewhat flatter plateau area exists with elevations ranging from 538
to 562.
The applicant proposes to grade the westerly portion of this plateau area
and create a 12,819 square foot pad site at elevation 561 .
The second part of the request involves the creation of a 12-foot wide by
380+/- foot long driveway extending from the east lot line (existing
driveway) through steep slope areas to the proposed pad.
The plan as submitted includes a driveway section with a 18% grade.
The Fire Department requires a pull-out half way up the driveway to allow
two vehicles to pass. This has been shown on the revised plan.
November 14, 2002 the City Council initiated an amendment to the
Hillside Planned Residential District (discussed previously). In that report
staff presented two new code alternatives. This project will be evaluated
for conformance with both these alternatives as well as the current
Hillside Ordinance.
Discussion:
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning Commission at the conclusion of its first hearing March 4, 2003
requested the applicant to stake out the area on the property to show how much fill
would be required on the location which was being proposed.
When the applicant saw the actual location and how much fill would be required, she
directed the surveyors to stake out a second pad further to the west where it would
be less obtrusive and require less fill. Staff and individual members of the Planning
Commission who visited the site concurred that the more westerly proposed pad
location would be preferable.
Staff Report
Case No. HPR 03-01
Page 3
April 24, 2003
The applicant submitted a revised proposal which was considered by Planning
Commission at its April 1 , 2003 meeting. That revised plan for a 12,819 square foot
pad set at elevation 561 with a 6,415 square foot driveway was recommended for
approval on a 4-1 vote with Commissioner Finerty voting nay based on her preference
for Alternative B which would limit the pad and driveway area to a maximum of
13,000square feet total 10 000 square footpad and 3 000 square foot driveway).
( q q y)
ANALYSIS:
The project at this time does not include home plans. The applicant advises that she
intends to implement this approval and sell the pad. The purchaser will then process
home plans through the complete public hearing process.
The pad location is superior to the original one presented to Planning Commission
March 4, 2003. Even though the pad is proposed nine feet above the previous one
(561 vers 552), the pad is not set at the edge of a ridge line which was the case in
the first request and is setback further from the view corridor on Highway 74. In this
location the ridge line to the northeast will serve to screen the future residence from
the view from below.
CURRENT STANDARDS:
The applicant has calculated the average slope on the lot at 34.0%. Under Option 1
of the current Hillside Ordinance, lots with between 31 % to 35% average slope are
entitled to a maximum of one unit for every 2.50 acres and building pad disturbance
cannot exceed 7.5% of the lot area. For a 5.12 acre lot, the current code would permit
16,727 square feet of disturbed area for the two pads and a maximum of two units.
Fully renaturalized areas and roadways are excluded. The applicant has indicated that
the approximately 6,500 square feet of the existing residence area will be
renaturalized. If this area is not renaturalized, this 6,500 square feet will need to be
accounted for in total permitted pad grading on the property.
The applicant has indicated that the proposed driveway will be surfaced with
decomposed granite to blend in with the surrounding terrain and the cut and fill slopes
will be renaturalized. As such, its area would not be included in the "disturbed area"
total.
Staff Report
Case No. HPR 03-01
Page 4
April 24, 2003
If the existing home is demolished and the pad renaturalized, the pad as proposed
complies with the current ordinance.
ALTERNATIVE A:
This alternative limits areas with less than 10% slope to one lot per acre and areas of
great than 10% slope to one lot per five acres. Permitted grading is limited based on
average slope of the property plus 3,000 square feet for driveway access.
At 34% average slope the 5.12 acre site is limited to one dwelling unit so the existing
unit would need to be removed and renaturalized and the 5.12 acre (223,027 square
feet) site would be permitted 16,727 square feet of graded disturbed pad area. This
alternative requires the driveway to be located so as to blend in to the greatest
practical extent into the natural terrain. The location shown will require considerable
cut and fill in the hillside and renaturalization of the cut and fill slopes. A preferable
driveway location could be achieved with cooperation of the property owner to the
south. If the cooperation could be obtained, the driveway would be located at the toe
of slope on a diagonal across that lot removing the necessity for much of the hillside
disturbance.
The proposal will comply with this Alternative if the existing residence is removed and
that pad totally renaturalized.
ALTERNATIVE B:
This alternative requires a minimum of five acre lots and limits grading to 10,000
square feet for the pad and 3,000 square feet for the driveway. This plan proposes a
12,819 square foot pad and 6,415 square foot driveway. In order to comply with this
alternative, the existing residence would need to be removed and renaturalized, and
the total pad and driveway area reduced to 13,000 square feet.
Staff Report
Case No. HPR 03-01
Page 5
April 24, 2003
COMPLIANCE MATRIX
Current
Project Ordinance Alt A Alt B
Permitted Number 2 1 1
of Lots
Permitted Grading:
Building Pad 12,819 sq.ft. 16,727 16,727 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft.
Access Driveway 6,415 sq.ft. Not defined 3,000 sq.ft. 3,000 sq.ft.
Total 19,234 sq.ft. 19,727 sq.ft. 13,000 sq.ft.
Existing Residence 6,500 sq.ft.
25,016 sq.ft.
CONCLUSION:
Our conditions of approval will be oriented to bring the project into compliance with
Alternative A. If the City Council enacts a less or more restrictive ordinance, the
resolution and conditions will need to be amended accordingly.
The plan as presented will comply with the current ordinance if the proposed building
pad area is reduced to a maximum of 10,272 square feet or if the existing residence
is removed and that area renaturalized.
The plan as presented will be in compliance with Alternative A provided the lot has a
maximum of one unit and total disturbed area does not exceed 19,727 square feet
(pad plus driveway). This has been met (19,234) if the following actions are
undertaken:
1 . Remove existing residence and totally renaturalize this pad area.
2. Renaturalize driveway (decomposed granite proposed).
3. Renaturalize cut and fill slopes on driveway.
Staff Report
Case No. HPR 03-01
Page 6
April 24, 2003
The plan as presented will comply with Alternative B if the existing residence is
removed, the existing pad is renaturalized, the proposed pad is reduced to a maximum
6,585 square feet and the driveway does not exceed 6,415 square feet (i.e., total
13,000 square feet).
Submitted by: Department Head:
Steve Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
Approval: Approval:
H mer Croy Carlos L. Ort
ACM for Dev ment Services City Manager
Adopted Resolution No. 03-54, CITY COUNCIICTION:
approving Case No. HPR 03-01, APPROVED ✓ '''' DENIED
subject to conditions. RECEIVED OTHER
3-0(Crites, Spiegel ABSENT) MEETIN DATE
AYES: Y1S0Y1
(Wpdocs\lm\sr\hpr03-01.cc) NOES: i
ABSENT: ) ` T'► l
ABSTAIN: A (
VERIFIED BY• i �.
)riainal on File with pity Clerk' s Office
RESOLUTION NO. 03-54
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOWING GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 12,819 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING
PAD, A 6,415 SQUARE FOOT ACCESS DRIVEWAY
THERETO ON A 5.12 ACRE LOT IN THE HILLSIDE
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL ZONE WEST OF THE STORM
CHANNEL, SOUTH OF SOUTHCLIFF ROAD, APN 628-120-
013
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the
24th day of April, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of
DORI CREE to permit grading of a 12,819 square foot building pad and 6,415 square
foot access driveway on a 5.12 acre site within the Hillside Planned Residential zone
generally located west of the Palm Valley Storm Channel, south of Southcliff Road,
more particularly described as APN 628-120-013; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 2194 has
recommended approval of HPR 03-01 ; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of
Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has
determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council
did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its actions, as described
below:
1 . The proposal as conditioned is consistent with the adopted Palm Desert
General Plan and West Hills Specific Plan as amended, Option 2 of
Municipal Code Chapter 25.15 Hillside Planned Residential District and
with the recommended Hillside Amendment Alternative A.
2. The proposed site grading, as conditioned, complies with the intent and
specific requirements of the Hillside Planned Residential District to blend
with the natural terrain to the greatest possible extent.
3. The proposal as conditioned will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-54
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings
of the City Council in this case.
2. That City Council does hereby approve HPR 03-01 , subject to the
conditions attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
City Council, held on this 24th day of April , 2003, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: FERGUSON, KELLY, BENSON
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: SPIEGEL, CRITES
ABSTAIN: NONE
JEAN M. BENSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
RESOLUTION NO. 03-54
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
Department of Community Development:
1 . The development of the property described herein shall conform to approved
exhibits on file in the Department of Community Development and shall be
subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition
to all the requirements, limitations and restrictions of all municipal ordinances
and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force.
2. That the applicant shall demolish the existing residence and totally renaturalize
this area prior to commencement of grading proposed under this approval.
3. That the applicant shall submit and receive approval by the Architectural Review
Commission of a plan to renaturalize the proposed driveway, cut slopes and fill
slopes.
4. That the total disturbed area on the 5.12 acre lot for the building pad and
driveway shall not exceed 19,727 square feet (i.e., 16,727 square feet plus
3,000 square feet allotted to driveway).
5. That future landscaping and dwelling plans shall be approved through the public
hearing process required in the code.
Department of Public Works:
1 . In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
2. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in
accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Site grading
design shall include consideration of existing topography.
3
RESOLUTION NO. 03-54
3. Any storm/detention area design and construction shall be contingent upon a
drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works.
4. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.15, all
manufactured slopes shall be planted or otherwise protected from the effects
of storm water runoff and erosion with thirty days of completion of grading.
6. Access drive grades shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal. Access
drive and pad/parking area shall be paved or sealed to conform to PM 10
regulations.
7. Prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project, applicant shall
provide evidence of legal access rights.
8. Further conditions may be applied when plans are submitted and reviewed for
a home on the site.
Riverside County Fire Department:
1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced
project, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC and CBC or
any recognized Fire Protection Standards:
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all buildings per UFC article 87.
2. A fire flow of 1 ,500 gpm for a one hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure
must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow
of 1 ,500 gpm for single family dwellings.
4
RESOLUTION NO. 03-54
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4"x
2'/2 "x 2'/2 ", located not less than 25 feet nor more than 200 feet from any
portion of a single family dwelling measured via vehicular travelway. (*See
comments under Other at the end)
5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that
the water system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings
with a 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 feet from the
building and within 50 feet of an approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two
family dwellings.
7. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within
150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall
not be less than 12 feet or unobstructed width and 13 feet 6 inches of vertical
clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street, the
roadway must be 36 feet wide and 32 feet wide with parking on one side.
Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45 foot
radius turn-around, 55 feet in industrial developments.
Turnout has been provided. No parking allowed.
8. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates,
barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key
over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width
shall be 16 inches with a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches.
9. A dead end single access over 500 feet will require a secondary access,
sprinklers or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no
circumstances shall a dead end over 3,000 feet be accepted. Provide turn
around incorporated with driveway.
10. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the City.
1 1 . Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws or
when building permits are not obtained within 12 months.
5
RESOLUTION NO. 03-54
Other:
* Fire hydrant will be located prior to driveway.
* Should incorporate turn around within driveway. County Fire specs.
6
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
every spot of land was developed in Palm Desert and hillsides were one of
the few areas they had left. She didn't feel allowing five units was appropriate
and was opposed to the subdivision application.
Chairperson Campbell thought the map was consistent with the current
ordinance and these lots were really not considered hillside developments,
they were on the slope on the ground. She thought they probably had a
disadvantage to have homes in front there to look at Homme Park and
maybe the applicant would call them the Homme Park Estates when she
decided to build. She hoped the City did something with the park to make it
better than what it is right now. She was in favor of the project.
Mr. Drell suggested that if there was a motion, the motion should include the
condition requiring a conservation easement to be applied to Lot 7.
Commissioner Lopez noted that since there was a recommendation for
continuance, there was no resolution before them. Mr. Smith said it would be
appropriate for the commission to direct staff to prepare a resolution for
adoption at the next meeting.
Chairperson Campbell asked for a motion.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp,
by minute motion approving Case No. TT 31135 and directing staff to
prepare a resolution of approval. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Finerty
voted no).
�A^17 D. Case No. HPR 03-01 - DORI CREE, Applicant
Request for approval to construct a driveway and 15,043
square foot building pad on a 5.12 acre lot in the Hillside
Planned Residential District west of the storm channel, south
of Southcliff Road, APN 628-120-013.
Mr. Smith explained that this was a five-acre lot located south of Southcliff
Road. The property has an existing single family dwelling located on a flat
section of land at the east end of the lot. On the map he pointed out the
39
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
location of the existing residence, Southcliff Road, and the driveway to the
existing residence.
The westerly portion of the lot encompassed steeper mountain slopes. The
elevations ranged from 515 to 610. Toward the center of the lot there was a
somewhat flatter plateau area. The applicant proposed to grade the plateau
area and create a 15,043 square foot pad at an elevation set at 552. The
second part of the request involved the creation of a 12-foot wide by 289-foot
long driveway extending from the east lot line westerly to approximately the
mid point of the proposed lot where it would provide access into the pad.
The driveway proposed a section with a 20% grade in it. The Fire
Department couldn't get up a hill at 20% grade. They indicated they could
provide service at 18%. As well, the Fire Department requested a pull out on
the driveway approximately midway up and it could be provided. That would
allow two vehicles to pass on the driveway. The alteration to the slope the
applicant indicated could be provided without altering its alignment and the
pull out could be provided in the fill area adjacent to the pad.
Similar to the last project, at this time they were being asked for approval of
the grading to create the pad and the driveway. He said staff didn't have
home plans to evaluate that and it would follow under a separate process.
Mr. Smith said that staff evaluated this proposal pursuant to the current
standards and the two alternatives. Average slope on the entire five-acre lot,
34% under Option 1, lots between 31% and 35% average slope were entitled
to a maximum of one unit for every two and a half acres, hence two units.
Building pad disturbance was not to exceed 7.5%. The 5.12 acre lot would
permit a total disturbed area of 16,727 square feet and a maximum of two
units. Staff calculated the area of the existing residence to have
approximately 6,500 square feet of disturbed area. So in order to comply
under the current ordinance, they would have to reduce the pad area from
the 16,727 by the 6,500 square feet. If they wanted to retain that existing
dwelling unit and pad. Were they to eliminate the residence and renaturalize
this area, then the 16,727 pad size would comply.
In discussions with the applicant, it was staffs understanding that they were
not opposed to removing the existing residence and renaturalizing the area.
40
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
In that case the proposed pad at 15,043 square feet would comply with the
current ordinance. If they wanted to retain it, then the pad needed to shrink.
Relative to Alternative A, the lot would be entitled to one unit. They wouldn't
have a choice of removing the existing residence if they wanted to create a
second one. The amount of disturbed area stays the same at 16,727, plus
3,000 square feet for the driveway area. The driveway in this case exceed
the 3,000 square feet. Any overage would then be subtracted from 16,727.
He noted in this discussion on Alternative A that there was a preferable
driveway location on the adjacent lot to the south. The driveway the applicant
proposed involved considerable cut and through a ridge area. It was possible
they could take a driveway across on the diagonal on that lot to the south
below the toe of slope or on the toe of slope which would eliminate much of
the necessary cut through the ridge area. That would require the cooperation
of the property owner to the south and he wasn't sure that was available,
however a driveway in that location was definitely preferable if it could be
achieved. Staff concluded that the proposal was consistent with Alternative
A if the existing residence were removed and the pad was totally
renaturalized.
Mr. Smith said that Alternative B was somewhat similar in that one unit on
the lot with the pad limited to 10,000 square feet, the driveway to 3,000
square feet, and any overage on the driveway being subtracted from the
10,000 square foot pad.
The pad was proposed to be set at an elevation of 552. Looking at where the
driveway comes in, the contour lines were at approximately 542. So what
would happen was they would end up filling the southern portion of the lot to
get up to 552. He said it could be preferable to set the pad height at 545 or
something in that range so that on the pad itself, they wouldn't solely be
importing fill. They would be able to offset it. The discussion earlier was to
try to keep the visibility of these units to the minimum. By lowering the pad
approximately seven feet, it would take that much out of the height of the
unit. It probably wouldn't be as desirable from the applicant's perspective;
however, it was something that commission might want to consider.
The recommendation in the staff report was to recommend approval of this
proposal, subject to conditions consistent with Alternative A. He asked if
there were any questions.
41
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
Commissioner Jonathan noted that approval could be given under current
standards if the applicant would agree to eliminate the other existing
residence and reestablish the terrain. Mr. Smith said that was one direction.
Or they could reduce the proposed pad by the 6,500 square feet, because
under the current ordinance they are entitled to two units within the 16,727.
If they assumed the 6,500 it would be approximately 10,000. Commissioner
Jonathan indicated this could be done to gain approval under current
standards. Mr. Smith said that was correct.
Chairperson Campbell indicated there was also a break in the ridge and
some steps there. She asked if that was where staff proposed the driveway
location. Mr. Smith said yes. Chairperson Campbell asked if staff or the
applicant worked with the other property owner to the south to allow a
driveway to go in there since Mr. Smith recommended that as the best
solution. Mr. Smith believed that Mr. Drell had discussions with the owner of
that property. Mr. Drell thought the applicant had discussions with the owner
as well. It was his understanding that the property owner was not particularly
enthusiastic about that idea. And that was an understatement. Chairperson
Campbell said they should disregard that as an option then. Mr. Drell
concurred. Unless that property owner was cooperative, it would be a difficult
task to put the road there. He said it was not necessarily an easily
accomplishable or realistic goal. Chairperson Campbell said that actually
they would be looking at the driveway over that little bridge. Mr. Drell
concurred.
Commissioner Jonathan noted that under current standards, the total
disturbed area was 16,727. He asked if that included the driveways as well
as building pads. Mr. Smith said the ordinance wasn't clear. Mr. Drell said
that historically they haven't counted driveways as required to gain access
to an approved pad. They were clarifying that in the new ordinance and they
looked at the reasonable lengths of driveways and that was how they came
up with 3,000 square feet. A 12-foot driveway allowed for 250 feet of
driveway, which reasonably got someone to most areas of one of these lots.
Commissioner Jonathan said that was why staff came up with allocating the
16,727. If it was between the two, there was existing at 6,500 which left
10,272 for the new one. That was why the driveway didn't figure into that
calculation. Mr. Smith said it would be reduced by another 473 to account for
the overage in the driveway.
42
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to
address the commission.
MR. CHRIS SCHULTZ addressed the commission. He felt that Mr.
Smith did an excellent job describing the hillside development permit
application. He explained that the existing structure was somewhat
encumbered by Southcliff Road and the existing easements. So there
was very little room for adding on or enhancing the existing structure.
It was such a small area they thought it was unreasonable to be
restricted to that one small pad, thus the application to provide a
larger pad on the five acres. He said Mrs. Cree agreed to restore this
area and remove the structure in order to get a larger pad structure.
As far as the access, the Fire Marshal indicated that he would prefer
a flatter driveway approach. As a mutual benefit, he said that they
would put the fire hydrant to serve the new pad and it would also
benefit the existing structure. He noted that there were portions of
Southcliff Road that didn't fall within existing easements. He wasn't
sure if the City Attorney could elaborate on the legality of varying
outside the easements that were set back when the parcels were
created. He asked if there was an unwritten authority that they could
veer off the easement.
Mr. Hargreaves said he didn't want to opine on something he wasn't aware
of the facts. Generally, if there was an easement out there and they use it,
over a time someone could acquire prescriptive rights. But he didn't know
enough about the circumstances to elaborate.
Mr. Schultz said that short of pursuing this access, that was the only
legitimate access they had to the new pad. It was feasible roads like
this, especially in hillside areas, were not that uncommon. It was
constructible. They had a soils engineer verify the cut slopes so it was
just a matter of finalizing the design for Public Works approval and
hiring a qualified contractor to grade the slope and restore the slope
after it was constructed.
Commissioner Tschopp asked if the applicant was in agreement to remove
the existing house to receive permission for the new lot.
43
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
Mr. Schultz said that was correct. The larger pad would more than
warrant the removal of the existing structure.
Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION. There being none, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Tschopp noted that the applicant stated that they would be
permitted under the current ordinance to do this. In addition, if Alternative A
was adopted they would be permitted under that ordinance and under
Alternative B they would be very close. So he was in favor of the proposal.
Commissioner Jonathan concurred. He said he was basing his approval
upon current standards and based on a condition of approval that would
require the removal and restoration of the existing 6,500 square feet to
facilitate the larger pad of up to 16,727 square feet less the 473 square foot
driveway.
Commissioner Lopez also concurred. Under the current ordinance it worked
very well and he also wanted the existing structure to be removed and
renaturalized. He was in favor.
Commissioner Finerty stated that she had real concerns with this because
it seemed this proposal would fly right in the face of the intent of the
ordinance. The ordinance said that they were to require the retention of
natural landmarks and features including vistas and the natural skyline. By
adding the fill to get it from the 540 to 552, they would basically eliminate the
skyline and it would disappear because it would be just about the same as
the ridge line. They talked about the visibility of units in the hillside and the
whole idea was to try to hide them so that they didn't see them from the flat
land. Again, by adding the fill that was exactly what they were doing. They
were elevating the pad high enough so that the house would stick out like a
sore thumb. She noted that there was a nice view at the existing house and
she was hopeful that house could be expanded if the issue was the view. But
according to Mr. Schultz, he felt there was little room to expand. But it looked
to her that they could expand toward the elevation 515 toward Southcliff
where there was a little space, as well as behind the existing house. She
believed this application totally negated the intent of the hillside ordinance
and she was opposed.
44
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
Chairperson Campbell said she looked at the property that day. She didn't
think there was room to add to the existing home, which was very small. She
also noted that they had to look for it because it was really behind trees and
was very well camouflaged. She agreed with the other commissioners that
it fell within the current ordinance and since that present building would be
removed and the land renaturalized, she was also in favor of the project.
Commissioner Lopez thought Mr. Smith brought up a good point with regard
to the grading of the lot and perhaps doing something to better hide the
building. He asked him to elaborate. Mr. Smith suggested that if they set the
pad at some number between 540 and 552, they could balance the amount
of fill and amount of cut going on at the site and at the same time by
whatever amount they would lower the pad, they would be reducing the
visibility of any residence by that amount.
Commissioner Lopez said he would make the recommendation that they
incorporate that somehow into the requirements. Mr. Drell said that could be
a condition. It would be to set a specific pad grade relative to the height of
the ridge. Set it at a maximum pad height. That was well within the
commission's rights under the current ordinance or proposed ordinances.
Commissioner Jonathan agreed with the concept and the objective of what
they were trying to do, but he thought setting a specific pad height had some
significant repercussions. He wasn't sure staff had studied it sufficiently to
determine the correct number.
Commissioner Finerty asked why they couldn't set the pad height at 540, the
existing grade level. Mr. Drell said they could do that.
Commissioner Jonathan said they might do that and it might end up that
way, but there might be engineering limitations or complications that might
make that feasible or unfeasible. Mr. Drell said that to evaluate it they might
want to have the engineer prepare various exhibits showing it at 540 and 545
and showing what increased cuts and reduced fills result from those and
maybe the engineer had some comments.
Chairperson Campbell pointed out that the staff report said the areas exist
with elevations ranging from 538 to 552. Mr. Drell clarified that the applicant
45
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
proposed fill all the way up to 552 and he was able to accomplish that purely
by filling and not cutting. That was his understanding of the plan.
Mr. Schultz stated that was correct. The pad was entirely a fill pad.
Even if they lowered it, there was still no offset of cut and fill. The only
cut they had was for the roadway going through the knoll and the
entire pad was a totally filled pad.
Mr. Drell pointed out that as they lower the pad, there was a slope coming
into it and to maintain the same area and the same perimeter, they had to
cut it as they lowered it to a certain degree at the edge.
Mr. Schultz said that was not necessarily the case. If they went to the
550 contour, to maintain the same pad area it would actually push it
out to the south.
Mr. Drell noted that they could do it by pushing out, but they were limited to
how much they could push out because they would run up against another
property line.
Mr. Schultz said that was correct.
Mr. Drell said that if the decision was 545, that would push it out considerably
more. His understanding was that it was substantially rock under a couple
feet of dirt so there could be a steep cut depending on the nature of that soil.
But they might want to see the engineering ramifications of the pads at
varying elevations.
Mr. Schultz said they would also like to at least maintain some views
to the north. If they lowered the pad significantly, any view to the north
would be obstructed. He thought they could lower it a few feet, but if
they were talking about 10 feet, it defeated the purpose of setting the
pad in the area they selected.
Commissioner Jonathan thought that maybe they could say that the
applicant would work with staff to achieve the least amount of disruption and
least amount of fill as possible within the objectives the applicant was
seeking. Commissioner Finerty said she wasn't comfortable with that. Mr.
Drell said he wasn't either. Commissioner Finerty didn't think the commission
46
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
should place their duty onto staff and that wasn't right. As well, they have an
ordinance they're supposed to follow where they are supposed to minimize
disturbance and visibility and they have an applicant asking for an additional
12 feet of fill when there was no real reason why this unit could not be built
at the 540 level.
Mr. Schultz disagreed. He pointed out the location of the 540
elevation and said that to get any sizeable pad would be encroaching
within the access easement and very close to the property line. They
would have a very minimal pad area and it would be somewhat
unreasonable to do that type of work for a 5,000 or 6,000 square foot
pad. In order to achieve a reasonable pad size for five acres, the pad
elevation had to be set far enough up the hill to maximize pad area.
Commissioner Finerty indicated that the intent of the ordinance was not to
use fill to raise the height of the pad. Mr. Drell said it wasn't required that
they create a pad purely by adding fill. They could cut in the back at the
same time they were filling the front and keep the pad at exactly the same
location at the same size and reducing it in elevation.
Mr. Schultz thought it was much more difficult to restore a cut slope
than to mitigate a fill slope.
Mr. Drell disagreed. He had seen them both done very effectively.
Commissioner Campbell was opposed to the house at 552. She was in favor
of 540 as long as the applicant was willing to eliminate the existing house.
Commissioner Jonathan noted that the pad was essentially tilted and to get
it flat they either had to fill it all up or fill it part way and cut into the rest of it.
He wasn't sure what one was better and what the exact pad height should
be. If they were going to set a limit, which he didn't think was appropriate.
The ordinance didn't address setting a pad height or specifying whether a flat
pad was to be achieved by filling or cutting. He didn't think that was specified
under the current standards. He thought it was wrong for them to even
venture into the area. But if they were going to, he thought they needed to
continue the matter and understand what they were doing, what the
alternatives were, and what was acceptable to the applicant and to staff.
With regard to some of the earlier comments, he stated that he was equally
47
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
concerned and appreciated the beauty and value of the hillside. One of the
important qualities and objectives of the hillside ordinance was that it sought
to not just protect the hillsides, but balance the importance of our hillsides
with the rights of property owners who do own property and have some
expectation of development. For example, to limit development to one unit
per five acres was something that was not replicated anywhere else in the
city and it was fairly extreme. That was an example of a reasonable
compromise and balancing between the rights of an owner and the needs of
the environment. So he felt they needed to evaluate this application and
others on the basis of that balance and compromise. In that regard he
thought this application met the standards and objective.
With regard to this application, Commissioner Tschopp concurred with
Commissioner Finerty's comments that the idea was to try to screen
development on the hillsides as much as possible so that the line of sight
was not so visible from the outside. Given that though, he didn't feel
comfortable setting a pad height. He noted he wasn't an engineer and it
wasn't his field. He asked what would be the appropriate next step. Mr. Drell
suggested going out on the site and have the engineer mark where the
various elevations were and maybe they could go out and get an idea of
what views various pad heights would result in. Grading and the character
of grading was an important part of the ordinance. The nature of the
disturbance was half of what the ordinance was all about.
Commissioner Jonathan said he wasn't comfortable without more
information. He thought Mr. Drell's idea was excellent and might edify them
about what would be more damaging, to add dirt or to cut into the
mountainside. He could only make that evaluation by standing there on the
pad and looking at it and he would be willing to do that.
Commissioner Lopez also thought it was a good idea. He wouldn't know
what number to pick, but if they went up there and looked at it, that would
help. He suggested a continuance until they do that knowing that they are
considering it under the current ordinance and that they will have the
opportunity to reevaluate how that lot would impact not only their views, but
the line of sight from the rest of the valley. He was in favor of a continuance.
Chairperson Campbell concurred with the other commissioners regarding
setting a number for the elevation of the pad. That wasn't in front of them
48
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 2003
and didn't apply to the present conditions of approval. She was in favor of
having some balloons put up there to see them. Mr. Drell said they wouldn't
necessarily be balloons, but some markers or stakes delineating the
elevations in that area so they could somewhat visualize it. He noted there
are other more sophisticated ways through computer visualizations which
could show what the graded pads would look like. But they could make that
judgement. Chairperson Campbell noted that some of the other places on
the hillside were so unsightly that she didn't think they should be too picky
with one at this location that would be camouflaged more so than anything
else up there.
Commissioner Lopez made a motion to continue this item. Mr. Drell noted
the applicant indicated they could have it done as soon as possible and
wanted a continuance to the next meeting. Chairperson Campbell noted that
date was March 18. Commissioner Jonathan expressed concern. In addition
to getting the property ready, they would need to schedule no more than two
commissioners at a time to go up there and he thought the applicant would
want to show them what they were looking at. He was concerned that two
weeks might not be enough. He didn't mind scheduling it on the 18th, but an
additional continuance might be necessary. He suggested the first meeting
in April, but would leave it up to the applicant. The applicant requested the
next meeting.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp,
by minute motion continuing Case No. HPR 03-01 to March 18, 2003. Motion
carried 5-0.
E. Case No. TPM 31056 - NELBECK LLC, Applicant
Request for approval of a tentative parcel map to subdivide a
5.84 acre lot into three residential hillside parcels located west
of the storm channel adjacent to Calle De Los Campesinos,
south of Chapel Hill Road, APN 628-140-004.
Mr. Smith explained that the 5.84 acre site is south of Chapel Hill Road and
a portion of it wraps around the recent CVWD booster station. He showed
the commission where Upper Way West cut through the property. The other
49
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 18, 2003
tandem parking spaces by mobile homes. She was curious why that wasn't
brought up by staff.
She was very discouraged at these inconsistencies in the staff report and
she was hoping more oversight would be built in somehow so that the
Planning Commissioners would have accurate information on which to base
their decisions. She thanked the commission.
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Case No. PP 01-27 - RICK JOHNSON COMPANIES, Applicant
Request for approval of a first one-year time extension for a
precise plan of design to convert three single family dwellings
into professional offices and parking lot. The project is located
at the west end of Guadalupe Avenue at Monterey Avenue,
73-026, 73-031, 73-040 and 73-041 Guadalupe Avenue.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez,
approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0.
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising
only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing
described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning
Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing.
N A. Case No. HPR 03-01 - DORI CREE, Applicant
�"� (Continued from March 4, 2003)
Request for approval to construct a driveway and 15,043
square foot building pad on a 5.12 acre lot in the Hillside
Planned Residential District west of the storm channel, south
of Southcliff Road, APN 628-120-013.
3
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 18, 2003
Chairperson Campbell noted that the public hearing was still open and asked
for a staff report.
Mr. Smith informed commission that that afternoon staff received a revised
proposal moving the proposed pad westerly. For those on the site last week,
they looked at that location and submitted a revised proposal and asked for
a two-week continuance to allow staff to review it and come back with a
recommendation at that time.
Commissioner Finerty asked if in view of the change in the application if the
applicant was going to have some sort of signage out there where they could
look at the elevation at 560 or where Ms. Cree was proposing the new pad
to go. Mr. Smith said it was staked off out there, at least it was last Tuesday
when he was out there. He confirmed it was at the 560. Commissioner
Finerty asked if it would remain that way until the next meeting. Mr. Smith
said he didn't ask that question, but they were just stakes in the ground with
the number written on them, so he didn't think it would be an issue.
Commissioner Jonathan stated that his appointment with Mrs. Cree was
canceled because she knew she was going to be continuing the matter. He
asked if she would be contacting the commissioners who did not have an
opportunity to see the site so that they could do so. Mr. Smith said he would
talk with her.
Chairperson Campbell noted that there was an article in the Desert Sun on
March 15 regarding the stringent dust regulations on the Valley's horizon.
She asked what that would do to the road on the west side of the channel
that is presently all dirt. Mr. Diercks indicated he hadn't seen that article.
Chairperson Campbell stated that Aurora Kerr, CVAG's Director of Air
Quality, just brought this up that all cities should be conforming to new
construction and to the present dirt roads we have in the valley cities, as well
as in parks. She pointed out that the Homme Park parking lot didn't have any
asphalt and created dust. Mr. Diercks said it was something he would have
to look into and get back to her on.
Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION. There being no one, Chairperson Campbell asked for a
motion of continuance.
4
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 18, 2003
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner
Tschopp, by minute motion continuing Case No. HPR 03-01 to April 1, 2003.
Motion carried 5-0.
B. Case No. CUP 03-01 - CARL VOCE, Applicant
(Continued from February 18 and March 4, 2003)
Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow a
9,500 square foot cancer/chemotherapy/internal medicine
medical office in the office complex located at 73-712 and 73-
726 Alessandro Drive.
Mr. Smith explained that this item was continued from March 4, 2003 to allow
the applicant to submit additional information and give staff an opportunity
to evaluate that new information. Staff met with the applicant on Monday,
March 10, and at that point they provided an original floor plan which was
included in the staff report. That plan showed the original proposal as a
9,500 foot medical office facility. The main difference was that plan did not
include the research facility that was shown on the plan which was on
display. That revised plan occupied 10,294 square feet in two buildings. A
doctor's office and two exam rooms had been removed from the main
building. That area was replaced with the research center. The doctor's
office and two exam rooms had been moved to Suite B-4 in the next building.
Staff reviewed the revised floor plan with a view to determining the maximum
number of employees that could be expected. The applicant has been saying
20 employees. Mr. Smith said he found space for at least 16 employees, plus
in the medical research area one additional investigator for a total of 17. A
copy of the letter from the oncologist who would be operating the research
center which explained the personnel was included.
Next they got into a fairly detailed discussion on the operation of the three
facilities at the proposed location. Starting with the infusion area, there would
be a maximum of six chairs in that area. The applicant was careful to note
that this would not be a daily checkup location. The operator, Desert Medical
Group, currently operates six other locations in the valley and they expect
those services to be provided in Bermuda Dunes and Palm Springs.
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2194
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPME
NT PLAN ALLOWING GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 12,819 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING
PAD, A 6,415 SQUARE FOOT ACCESS DRIVEWAY
THERETO ON A 5.12 ACRE LOT IN THE HILLSIDE
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL ZONE WEST OF THE STORM
CHANNEL, SOUTH OF SOUTHCLIFF ROAD, APN 628-120-
013
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did
on the 4th day of March, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing which was
continued to March 18 and April 1 , 2003, to consider the request of DORI CREE to
permit grading of a 12,819 square foot building pad and 6,415 square foot access
driveway on a 5.12 acre site within the Hillside Planned Residential zone generally
located west of the Palm Valley Storm Channel, south of Southcliff Road, more
particularly described as APN 628-1 20-013; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of
Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has
determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its actions, as
described below:
1 . The proposal as conditioned is consistent with the adopted Palm Desert
General Plan and West Hills Specific Plan as amended, Option 2 of
Municipal Code Chapter 25.15 Hillside Planned Residential District and
with the recommended Hillside Amendment Alternative A.
2. The proposed site grading, as conditioned, complies with the intent and
specific requirements of the Hillside Planned Residential District to blend
with the natural terrain to the greatest possible extent.
3. The proposal as conditioned will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2194
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings
of the Commission in this case.
2. That Planning Commission does hereby recommend to City Council
approval of HPR 03-01 , subject to the conditions attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of April, 2003, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: JONATHAN, LOPEZ, TSCHOPP, CAMPBELL
NOES: FINERTY
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE 2-7
SONIA CAMPBELL, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL, ecretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2194
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
Department of Community Development:
1 . The development of the property described herein shall conform to approved
exhibits on file in the Department of Community Development and shall be
subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition
to all the requirements, limitations and restrictions of all municipal ordinances
and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force.
2. That the applicant shall demolish the existing residence and totally renaturalize
this area prior to commencement of grading proposed under this approval.
3. That the applicant shall submit and receive approval by the Architectural Review
Commission of a plan to renaturalize the proposed driveway, cut slopes and fill
slopes.
4. That the total disturbed area on the 5.12 acre lot for the building pad and
driveway shall not exceed 19,727 square feet (i.e., 16,727 square feet plus
3,000 square feet allotted to driveway).
5. That future landscaping and dwelling plans shall be approved through the public
hearing process required in the code.
Department of Public Works:
1 . In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
2. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in
accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Site grading
design shall include consideration of existing topography.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2194
3. Any storm/detention area design and construction shall be contingent upon a
drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works.
4. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.15, all
manufactured slopes shall be planted or otherwise protected from the effects
of storm water runoff and erosion with thirty days of completion of grading.
6. Access drive grades shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal. Access
drive and pad/parking area shall be paved or sealed to conform to PM 10
regulations.
7. Prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project, applicant shall
provide evidence of legal access rights.
8. Further conditions may be applied when plans are submitted and reviewed for
a home on the site.
Riverside County Fire Department:
1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced
project, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC and CBC or
any recognized Fire Protection Standards:
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all buildings per UFC article 87.
2. A fire flow of 1 ,500 gpm for a one hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure
must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow
of 1 ,500 gpm for single family dwellings.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2194
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4"x
2%2 "x 2%2 ", located not less than 25 feet nor more than 200 feet from any
portion of a single family dwelling measured via vehicular travelway. (*See
comments under Other at the end)
5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that
the water system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings
with a 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 feet from the
building and within 50 feet of an approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two
family dwellings.
7. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within
150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall
not be less than 12 feet or unobstructed width and 13 feet 6 inches of vertical
clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street, the
roadway must be 36 feet wide and 32 feet wide with parking on one side.
Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45 foot
radius turn-around, 55 feet in industrial developments.
Turnout has been provided. No parking allowed.
8. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates,
barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key
over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width
shall be 16 inches with a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches.
9. A dead end single access over 500 feet will require a secondary access,
sprinklers or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no
circumstances shall a dead end over 3,000 feet be accepted. Provide turn
around incorporated with driveway.
10. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the City.
11 . Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws or
when building permits are not obtained within 12 months.
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2194
Other:
* Fire hydrant will be located prior to driveway.
* Should incorporate turn around within driveway. County Fire specs.
6
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: April 1 , 2003 continued from March 4 and March 18, 2003
CASE NO: HPR 03-01
REQUEST: Approval of construction of a driveway and 12,819 square foot building
pad on a 5.12 acre lot in the Hillside Planned Residential District west
of the storm channel, south of Southcliff Road, APN 628-120-013.
APPLICANT: Dori Cree
P.O. Box 25
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
BACKGROUND:
This matter was initially continued from March 4, 2003 to March 18, 2003 in order
to allow the applicant to stake the site to show pad elevations. Planning Commission
members were invited to visit the site to see the area first hand.
Staff visited the site on Tuesday morning March 11 , 2003. Seeing the extent of the
fill needed to accomplish the first pad as proposed by the applicant, staff concluded
that the pad height should be lower than the proposed 552 in that location.
While the surveyors staked that original proposed pad, the applicant had them also
stake a pad further to the west at 561 elevation.
Prior to the March 18, 2003 Planning Commission meeting the applicant submitted
a revised proposal showing the new pad and requesting a continuance until April 1 ,
2003.
The property has an existing single family dwelling located on a flat section of land
at the east end of the lot. The applicant indicated previously that she was prepared
to remove the existing residence and renaturalize that area in order to obtain this
approval.
The westerly portion of the lot encompasses steeper mountain slopes with elevations
ranging from 515 to 610. Toward the center of the lot a somewhat flatter plateau
area exists with elevations ranging from 538 to 562.
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
APRIL 1, 2003
The applicant proposes to grade part of this plateau area and create a 12,819 square
foot pad site at elevation 561 .
The second part of the request involves the creation of a 12-foot wide by 380-foot
long driveway extending from the east lot line (existing driveway) through steep slope
areas to the proposed pad.
The plan as submitted includes a driveway section with a 18% grade. The Fire
Department requires a pull-out half way up the driveway to allow two vehicles to
pass. This has been shown on the revised plan.
November 14, 2002 the City Council initiated an amendment to the Hillside Planned
Residential District (discussed previously). In that report staff presented two new
code alternatives. This project will be evaluated for conformance with both these
alternatives as well as the current Hillside Ordinance.
II. ANALYSIS:
The project at this time does not include home plans. The applicant advises that she
intends to implement this approval and sell the pad. The purchaser will then process
home plans through the complete public hearing process.
The new pad location is superior to the previous one. Even though the pad is
proposed nine feet above the previous one (561 vers 552) the pad is not set at the
edge of a ridge line which was the case in the first request and is setback further
from the view corridor on Highway 74. In this location the ridge line to the northeast
will serve to screen the future residence from view from below.
CURRENT STANDARDS:
The applicant has calculated the average slope on the lot at 34.0%. Under Option 1
of the current Hillside Ordinance, lots with between 31 % to 35% average slope are
entitled to a maximum of one unit for every 2.50 acres and building pad disturbance
cannot exceed 7.5% of the lot area. For a 5.12 acre lot, the current code would
permit 16,727 square feet of disturbed area for the two pads and a maximum of two
units. Fully renaturalized areas and roadways are excluded. Approximately 6,500
square feet of the existing residence area has not been renaturalized. This 6,500
square feet needs to be accounted for in total permitted pad grading on the property.
2
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
APRIL 1 , 2003
The proposed pad will need to be reduced in size so that the existing dwelling pad
plus the proposed do not exceed 16,727 square feet.
Staff calculated the existing disturbed pad area at 6,500 square feet. Therefore, the
proposed pad may not exceed 10,272 square feet (16,727 - 6,500 = 10,272).
The applicant has indicated that the proposed driveway will be surfaced with
decomposed granite to blend in with the surrounding terrain and the cut slope will be
renaturalized. As such its area would not be included in the "disturbed area" total.
If the existing home is demolished and the pad renaturalized, the pad as proposed
complies with the current ordinance.
ALTERNATIVE A:
This alternative limits areas with less than 10% slope to one lot per acre and areas
of great than 10% slope to one lot per five acres. Permitted grading is limited based
on average slope of the property plus 3,000 square feet for driveway access.
At 34% average slope the 5.12 acre site is limited to one dwelling unit so the
existing unit would need to be removed and renaturalized and the 5.12 acre
(223,027 square feet) site would be permitted 16,727 square feet of graded
disturbed pad area. This alternative requires the driveway to be located so as to blend
in to the greatest practical extent into the natural terrain. The location shown will
require considerable cut in the hillside and renaturalization of the cut slopes. A
preferable driveway location could be achieved with cooperation of the property
owner to the south. If the cooperation could be obtained, the driveway would be
located at the toe of slope on a diagonal across that lot removing the necessity for
much of the hillside disturbance.
The proposal will comply with this Alternative if the existing residence is removed
and that pad totally renaturalized.
ALTERNATIVE B:
This alternative requires a minimum of five acre lots and limits grading to 10,000
square feet for the pad and 3,000 square feet for the driveway. This plan proposes
a 12,819 square foot pad and 6,415 square foot driveway. In order to comply with
3
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
APRIL 1, 2003
this alternative, the existing residence would need to be removed and renaturalized,
and the total pad and driveway area reduced to 13,000 square feet.
COMPLIANCE MATRIX
Current
Project Ordinance Alt A Alt B
Permitted Number 2 2 1 1
of Lots
Permitted Grading:
Building Pad 12,819 sq.ft. 16,727 16,727 sq.ft. 10,000sq.ft.
Access Driveway 6,415 sq.ft. Not defined 3,000 sq.ft. 3,000 sq.ft.
Total 19,234 sq.ft. 19,727 sq.ft 13,000 sq.ft.
Existing Residence 6,500 sq.ft.
25,016 sq.ft.
III. CONCLUSION:
Our conditions of approval will be oriented to bring the project into compliance with
Alternative A. If the Planning Commission recommends a less or more restrictive
ordinance, the resolution and conditions will need to be amended accordingly.
The plan as presented will comply with the current ordinance if the proposed building
pad area is reduced to a maximum of 10,272 square feet or if the existing residence
is removed and that area renaturalized.
The plan as presented will be in compliance with Alternative A provided the lot has
a maximum of one unit and total disturbed area does not exceed 19,727 square feet
(pad plus driveway). This has been met (19,234) if the following actions are
undertaken:
1 . Remove existing residence and totally renaturalize this pad area.
2. Renaturalize driveway (decomposed granite proposed).
3. Renaturalize cut slopes on driveway.
4
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
APRIL 1, 2003
The plan as presented will comply with Alternative B if the existing residence is
removed, the existing pad is renaturalized, the proposed pad is reduced to a
maximum 6,585 square feet and the driveway does not exceed 6,415 square feet
(i.e., total 13,000 square feet).
IV. RECOMMENDATION:
That Case No. HPR 03-01 (Revised) be recommended to the City Council for
approval, subject to conditions consistent with Alternative A.
V. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Comments from city departments and other agencies
D. Plans and exhibits
Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by:
Steve Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
/tm
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOWING GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 12,819 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING
PAD, A 6,415 SQUARE FOOT ACCESS DRIVEWAY
THERETO ON A 5.12 ACRE LOT IN THE HILLSIDE
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL ZONE WEST OF THE STORM
CHANNEL, SOUTH OF SOUTHCLIFF ROAD, APN 628-120-
013
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did
on the 4th day of March, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing which was
continued to March 18 and April 1 , 2003, to consider the request of DORI CREE to
permit grading of a 12,819 square foot building pad and 6,415 square foot access
driveway on a 5.12 acre site within the Hillside Planned Residential zone generally
located west of the Palm Valley Storm Channel, south of Southcliff Road, more
particularly described as APN 628-1 20-013; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of
Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has
determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its actions, as
described below:
1 . The proposal as conditioned is consistent with the adopted Palm Desert
General Plan and West Hills Specific Plan as amended, Option 2 of
Municipal Code Chapter 25.15 Hillside Planned Residential District and
with the recommended Hillside Amendment Alternative A.
2. The proposed site grading, as conditioned, complies with the intent and
specific requirements of the Hillside Planned Residential District to blend
with the natural terrain to the greatest possible extent.
3. The proposal as conditioned will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings
of the Commission in this case.
2. That Planning Commission does hereby recommend to City Council
approval of HPR 03-01 , subject to the conditions attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of April, 2003, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SONIA CAMPBELL, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
Department of Community Development:
1 . The development of the property described herein shall conform to approved
exhibits on file in the Department of Community Development and shall be
subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition
to all the requirements, limitations and restrictions of all municipal ordinances
and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force.
2. That the applicant shall demolish the existing residence and totally renaturalize
this area prior to commencement of grading proposed under this approval.
3. That the applicant shall submit and receive approval by the Architectural Review
Commission of a plan to renaturalize the proposed driveway and cut slopes.
4. That the total disturbed area on the 5.12 acre lot for the building pad and
driveway shall not exceed 19,727 square feet (i.e., 16,727 square feet plus
3,000 square feet allotted to driveway).
5. That future landscaping and dwelling plans shall be approved through the public
hearing process required in the code.
Department of Public Works:
1 . In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
2. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in
accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Site grading
design shall include consideration of existing topography.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
3. Any storm/detention area design and construction shall be contingent upon a
drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works.
4. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.15, all
manufactured slopes shall be planted or otherwise protected from the effects
of storm water runoff and erosion with thirty days of completion of grading.
6. Access drive grades shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal. Access
drive and pad/parking area shall be paved or sealed to conform to PM 10
regulations.
7. Prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project, applicant shall
provide evidence of legal access rights.
8. Further conditions may be applied when plans are submitted and reviewed for
a home on the site.
Riverside County Fire Department:
1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced
project, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC and CBC or
any recognized Fire Protection Standards:
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all buildings per UFC article 87.
2. A fire flow of 1 ,500 gpm for a one hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure
must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow
of 1 ,500 gpm for single family dwellings.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4"x
2%2"x 2%2 ", located not less than 25 feet nor more than 200 feet from any
portion of a single family dwelling measured via vehicular travelway. (*See
comments under Other at the end)
5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that
the water system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings
with a 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 feet from the
building and within 50 feet of an approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two
family dwellings.
7. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within
150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall
not be less than 12 feet or unobstructed width and 13 feet 6 inches of vertical
clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street, the
roadway must be 36 feet wide and 32 feet wide with parking on one side.
Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45 foot
radius turn-around, 55 feet in industrial developments.
Turnout has been provided. No parking allowed.
8. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates,
barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key
over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width
shall be 16 inches with a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches.
9. A dead end single access over 500 feet will require a secondary access,
sprinklers or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no
circumstances shall a dead end over 3,000 feet be accepted. Provide turn
around incorporated with driveway.
10. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the City.
11 . Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws or
when building permits are not obtained within 12 months.
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
Other:
* Fire hydrant will be located prior to driveway.
* Should incorporate turn around within driveway. County Fire specs.
6
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Department of Community Development/Planning RECEIVED
Attention: Steve Smith
FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Public Works Director/City Engineer
kA?.t b 2003
SUBJECT: HDP 3-1, Cree Pad and Driveway (Revised) CDMMUNICITYOFTY LOPMDESERTENT ARTMENT
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DATE: March 20, 2003
The following shall be considered conditions of approval for the above-referenced project.
(1) In accordance with Palm desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans
and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking
and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project.
(2) Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in
accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Site grading
design shall include consideration of existing topography.
(3) Any storm/detention area design and construction shall be contingent upon a drainage
study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the
Department of Public works.
(4) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
(5) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section. 25.15, all manufactured
slopes shall be planted or otherwise protected from the effects of storm water runoff
and erosion with thirty days of completion of grading.
(6) Access drive grades shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal. Access drive
and pad/parking area shall be paved or sealed to conform to PM 10 regulations.
(7) Prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project, applicant shall
provide evidence of legal access rights.
(8) Applicant shall comply with provisions of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 24.12,
Fugitive Dust Control as well as Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and
i charge Con I.
6c1-
Joseph S. Gaugush, P.E.
UruRN1
A RIVERSIDE CvuNTY
(MENT„,,,,
'QET pIPF PROTECN�H/. FIRE DEPARTMENT
C F3RESTET
DF In cooperation with the
AFIRE Ess'" out.
.N.' m California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
mcarnam
210 West San Jacinto Avenue • Perris, California 92570 • (909) 940-6900 • FAX (909) 940-6910
^: ..rrfi1 D
DEPARTMENT
FIRE
t
Tom Tisdale
Fire Chief t t=,rr..R 1 9 2003
Cove Fire Marshal's Office
Proudly serving the 73710 Fred Waring Drive#222 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
unincorporated Palm Desert CA 92260 CITY OF PALM DESERT
areas of Riverside (760)346-1870
County and the
cities of: C
Banning TO: `,- J�iji DATE: 3/03
+ ../
Beaumont
Calimesa REF: /1-(. V 5 - v fti
Canyon Lake
If circled, conditions apply to project
Coachella
Desert Hot Springs With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above
. referenced project, the fire department recommends the following fire
Indian Wells protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal
Indio i Code, NFPA, CFC, and CBC or any recognized Fire Protection
Standards:
Lake Elsinore I The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the
La Quinta remodel or con truction of all buildin s er UFC article 87.
• 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual
Moreno Valley pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed
Palm Desert on the job site.
+ Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a
Perris gpm flow of:
Rancho Mirage C) 1500 gpm for single family dwellings
San Jacinto 4. 2500 gpm for multifamily dwellings
5 3000 gpm for commercial buildings
Temecula The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super
Hydrant (s) 4"x 2 1/2" x 2 1/2", located not less than 25' nor more than:
q� dop
200' from any portion of a single family dwelling measured via
Board of Superviso s 1 vehicular travelway
7. 165' from any portion of a multifamily dwelling measured via
Bob Buster ,
District 1 vehicular travelway
i t 8. 150' from any portion of a commercial building measured via
John Tavaglione
District 2 vehicular travelwav
Jim Venable 0 Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include
District 3 verification that the water system will produce the required fire flow.
Roy Wilson 10. Please be advised the proposed project may not be feasible since the
District 4 existing water mains will not meet the required fire flow.
Tom Mullen
District 5
0 Install
' 6"a coofvemrt
pleteical NFI'Aclearance 13.fiWre sphereriparallelnkler systepamrk. Tinghisis apreql►uhiersed to uanll
buildings sq
uare a 3000 s uare 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 lie
less than 25' from the building and within 50' of an appapprovedhydrant. 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.
13. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
14. Install portable fire extinguishers per NITA 10, but not less than one
2A10BC 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 Ilood/Duct automatic fire extinguishing system per NI TA 96
in all public and private cooking operations except single-family
residential usage.
16. Install a dust collecting system per UFC Chapter 76 if conducting an
operation that produces airborne particles.
11 All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway cktending
to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story.
The roadway shall not be less than /Z,of unobstructed width and
��
/0t
^ both sides of the street the roadway must he 36' wide and 32' wide
�, with parkingon one side. Dead-end roads in excess of ISO' shall he
'Y(1 .Y provided with a minimum
� 45' radius
turn-around 55' in industrial
( ‘i y) s,iy‘
developments.
use ►
goWhenever access into private property is controlled through r.
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 ‘'ert►c:rl
lti� clearance of 13'6".
" 1 ad end sin le access over 500' will require a secondary access,`Y l Acc g I;�r.�
J \V'
sprinklers or other mitigative measures approved by the
OP" V pMarshal. Under no circumstance shall a dead end over 1300' lie
%
()• �� accepted. __
`�lT
20. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main
access points from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an
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
0occupancy type.
2 .. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by
the city.
23. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm
plans must be submitted separately to the Fire Marshal for approval
olpprior to construction.
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 in Palm Desert.
Location: 73710 Fred Waring Drive #222, Palm Desert CA 92260
Other:
C (---12-'16c,
"4"/CO-A C o
5-hvv 14_ ivIcor6O vr► girouvj e....11GA,4,
Pf vct -cam Cn,_,,, I --* _ 5 .
Aeexe_ ,A ,/,5361 _
Sincerely,
David A. Avila
Fire Marshal
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: March18, 2003 continued from March 4, 2003
CA
SE NO: HPR 03-01
REQUEST: Approval of construction of a driveway and 1 5,043 square foot building
pad on a 5.12 acre lot in the Hillside Planned Residential District west
of the storm channel, south of Southcliff Road, APN 628-120-013.
APPLICANT: Dori Cree
P.O. Box 25
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
I. BACKGROUND:
This matter was continued from March 4, 2003 in order to allow the applicant to
stake the site to show elevations. Planning Commission members were invited to
visit the site to see the area first hand.
Staff visited the site on Tuesday morning. Seeing the extent of the fill needed to
accomplish the pad as proposed by the applicant, staff concludes that the pad height
should be set lower than the proposed 552. At 540, the peak of any roof will be
visible but only on a limited basis. Lowering the pad would also have the benefit of
reducing the amount of rise in driveway needed to reach the pad.
While staff was at the site, the applicant advised that she was considering moving
the pad further back on the site and setting it at an elevation of 560. When viewed
from Highway 74 a home in that location, while at a higher elevation, should be less
visible in that it will be screened by the ridge to the northeast.
The applicant has submitted a letter indicating that she is amending the request to
the west pad and has requested a continuance to April 1 , 2003 to prepare plans for
review.
II. RECOMMENDATION:
That the matter be continued to April 1 , 2003 to allow staff to review the request
(when plans are received) and prepare a resolution based on that request.
Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by:
______ __\_
Steve Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
MAR-1Z-2003 12 :45 PM HI RGOH A99OC . INC. 76E 33 5699 P. 02
. NAICivil Engineering 68-955 Adelina Road
Contract Administration Cathedral City.CA 92234
Camsaltiagg and Project Management [760] 323-5344•Fax[760] 323-5699
March 13, 2003
Attention: Steve Smith
City of Palm Desert
73.510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Subject: Dori Cree—Hillside Development Permit HPR 03-01
Dear Steve:
Please continue our Hillside Development Permit HPR 03-01 to the April 1, 2003 Planning Commission
Meeting. I will be submitting a revised preliminary grading plan for the Commission's review and
consideration early next week. Ms. Cree has requested that I move the pad ftuthor west to be less visible
from the adjacent property owners and from the valley floor. The new pad location will be tucked in
behind the crest of the ridge.
Thank you for your continued assistance.
Please call me if you have any questions regarding this request.
Sincerely,
/‘`,/144144
Kris Schulze, P.S.
Cc. Dori Cree
0:\PROJECTS12002-27 DORI CREE PROPERTY\Doc uments\Ietters\030313-planning commission continuance.doc
Received Mar-13-2003 12:43pm From-700 323 5099 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 002
CI
TY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: March 4, 2003
CASE NO: HPR 03-01
REQUEST: Approval of construction of a driveway and 15,043 square foot building
pad on a 5.12 acre lot in the Hillside Planned Residential District west
of the storm channel, south of Southcliff Road, APN 628-120-013.
APPLICANT: Dori Cree
P.O. Box 25
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
BACKGROUND/CURRENT PROPOSAL:
The property has an existing single family dwelling located on a flat section of land
at the east end of the lot. The applicant proposes to retain the existing residence and
create another building pad.
The westerly portion of the lot encompasses steeper mountain slopes with elevations
ranging from 515 to 610. Toward the center of the lot a somewhat flatter plateau
area exists with elevations ranging from 538 to 552.
The applicant proposes to grade this plateau area and create a 1 5,043 square foot
pad site at elevation 552.
The second part of the request involves the creation of a 12-foot wide by 289-foot
long driveway extending from the east lot line (existing driveway) through steep slope
areas to the proposed pad.
The plan as submitted includes a driveway section with a 20% grade. The Fire
Department comments require it to be modified to no more than 18%. Also, the Fire
Department requires a pull-out half way up the driveway to allow two vehicles to
pass. This slope change can be made without altering the driveway alignment and the
pull out can be provided in the fill area adjacent to the pad.
November 14, 2002 the City Council initiated an amendment to the Hillside Planned
Residential District (discussed previously on this agenda). In that report staff
presented two new code alternatives. This project will be evaluated for conformance
with both these alternatives as well as the current Hillside Ordinance.
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
MARCH 4, 2003
II. ANALYSIS:
The project at this time does not include home plans. The applicant advises that she
intends to implement this approval and sell the pad. The purchaser will then process
home plans through the complete public hearing process.
CURRENT STANDARDS:
The applicant has calculated the average slope on the lot at 34.0%. Under Option 1
of the current Hillside Ordinance, lots with between 31 % to 35% average slope are
every2.50 acres an
d buildingpad disturbance
entitled to a maximum of one unit for
cannot exceed 7.5% of the lot area. For a 5.12 acre lot, the current code would
permit 16,727 square feet of disturbed area for the two pads and a maximum of two
units. Fully renaturalized areas and roadways are excluded. Approximately 6,500
square feet of the existing residence area has not been renaturalized. This 6,500
square feet needs to be accounted for in total permitted pad grading on the property.
The proposed pad will need to be reduced in size so that the existing dwelling pad
plus the proposed do not exceed 1 6,727 square feet.
Staff calculated the existing disturbed pad area at 6,500 square feet. Therefore, the
proposed pad may not exceed 10,272 square feet (16,727 - 6,500 = 10,272).
The applicant has indicated that the proposed driveway will be surfaced with
decomposed granite to blend in with the surrounding terrain and the cut slope will be
renaturalized. As such its area would not be included in the "disturbed area" total.
ALTERNATIVE A:
This alternative limits areas with less than 10% slope to one lot per acre and areas
of great than 10% slope to one lot per five acres. Permitted grading is limited based
on average slope of the property plus 3,000 square feet for driveway access.
At 34% average slope the 5.12 acre site is limited to one dwelling unit so the
existing unit would need to be removed and renaturalized and the 5.12 acre
(223,027 square feet) site would be permitted 16,727 square feet of graded
disturbed pad area. This alternative requires the driveway to be located so as to blend
in to the greatest practical extent into the natural terrain. The location shown will
require considerable cut in the hillside and renaturalization of the cut slopes. A
preferable driveway location could be achieved with cooperation of the property
2
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
MARCH 4, 2003
owner to the south. If the cooperation could be obtained, the driveway would be
located at the toe of slope on a diagonal across that lot removing the necessity for
much of the hillside disturbance.
The proposal will comply with this Alternative if the existing residence is removed
and that pad totally renaturalized.
ALTERNATIVE B:
This alternative requires a minimum of five acre lots and limits grading to 10,000
square feet for the pad and 3,000 square feet for the driveway. This plan proposes
a 15,043 square foot pad and 3,473 square foot driveway (plus Fire Department pull-
out of approximately 250 square feet). In order to comply with this alternative, the
existing residence would need to be removed and renaturalized, and the total pad and
driveway area reduced to 13,000 square feet.
COMPLIANCE MATRIX
Current
Project Ordinance Alt A Alt B
Permitted Number 2 2 1 1
of Lots
Permitted Grading:
Building Pad 15,043 sq.ft. 16,727 16,727 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft.
Access Driveway 3,473 sq.ft. Not defined 3,000 sq.ft. 3,000 sq.ft.
Total 18,516 sq.ft. 19,727 sq.ft 13,000 sq.ft.
Existing Residence 6,500 sq.ft.
25,016 sq.ft.
III. CONCLUSION:
Our conditions of approval will be oriented to bring the project into compliance with
Alternative A. If the Planning Commission recommends a less or more restrictive
ordinance, the resolution and conditions will need to be amended accordingly.
The plan as presented will comply with the current ordinance if the proposed building
pad area is reduced to a maximum of 10,272 square feet.
3
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
MARCH 4, 2003
The plan as presented will be in complia
nce with Alternative A provided the lot has
a maximum of one unit and total disturbed area does not exceed 19,727 square feet
(pad plus driveway). This can be achieved if the following actions are undertaken:
1 . Remove existing residence and totally renaturalize this pad area.
2. Renaturalize driveway (decomposed granite proposed).
3. Renaturalize cut slopes on driveway.
The plan as presented will comply with Alternative B if the existing residence is
removed, the existing pad is renaturalized, the proposed pad is reduced to a
maximum 10,000 square feet and the driveway does not exceed 3,000 square feet.
IV. RECOMMENDATION:
That Case No. HPR 03-01 be recommended to the City Council for approval, subject
to conditions consistent with Alternative A.
V. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Comments from city departments and other agencies
D. Plans and exhibits
Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by:
Stev Smith Phil Drell
Planning Manager Director of Community Development
/t m
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOWING GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 15,043 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING
PAD, A 3,473 SQUARE FOOT ACCESS DRIVEWAY
THERETO ON A 5.12 ACRE LOT IN THE HILLSIDE
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL ZONE WEST OF THE STORM
CHANNEL, SOUTH OF SOUTHCLIFF ROAD, APN 628-120-
013
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did
on the 4th day of March, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
request of DORI CREE to permit grading of a 15,043 square foot building pad and
3,473 square foot access driveway on a 5.12 acre site within the Hillside Planned
Residential zone generally located west of the Palm Valley Storm Channel, south of
Southcliff Road, more particularly described as APN 628-120-01 3; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of
Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Resolution No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has
determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its actions, as
described below:
1 . The proposal as conditioned is consistent with the adopted Palm Desert
General Plan and West Hills Specific Plan, Option 2 of Municipal Code
Chapter 25.15 Hillside Planned Residential District and with the
recommended Hillside Amendment Alternative A.
2. The proposed site grading, as conditioned, complies with the intent and
specific requirements of the Hillside Planned Residential District to blend
with the natural terrain to the greatest possible extent.
3. The proposal as conditioned will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings
of the Commission in this case.
2. That Planning Commission does hereby recommend to City Council
approval of HPR 03-01 , subject to the conditions attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 4th day of March, 2003, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SONIA CAMPBELL, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOL
UTION NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. HPR 03-01
Department of Community Development:
1 . The development of the property described herein shall conform to approved
exhibits on file in the Department of Community Development and shall be
subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition
to all the requirements, limitations and restrictions of all municipal ordinances
and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force.
2. That the applicant shall demolish the existing residence and totally renaturalize
this area prior to commencement of grading proposed under this approval.
3. That the applicant shall submit and receive approval by the Architectural Review
Commission of a plan to renaturalize the proposed driveway and cut slopes.
4. That the total disturbed area on the 5.12 acre lot for the building pad shall not
exceed 16,727 square feet less 473 square feet equals 16,254 square feet
(where 473 square feet is the amount of driveway area in excess of 3,000
square feet).
5. That future landscaping and dwelling plans shall be approved through the public
hearing process required in the code.
Department of Public Works:
1 . In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
2. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in
accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Site grading
design shall include consideration of existing topography.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
3. Any storm/detention area design and construction shall be contingent upon a
registered civil engineer that is reviewed and
studyprepared bya 9
drainage p p 9
approved by the Department of Public Works.
4. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.15, all
manufactured slopes shall be planted or otherwise protected from the effects
of storm water runoff and erosion with thirty days of completion of grading.
6. Access drive grades shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal.
7. Prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project, applicant shall
provide evidence of legal access rights.
8. Further conditions may be applied when plans are submitted and reviewed for
a home on the site.
Riverside County Fire Department:
1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced
project, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC and CBC or
any recognized Fire Protection Standards:
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all buildings per UFC article 87.
hour duration at 20 ps
i residual pressure
for a one
fire flow o f 1 500 gpmP
2. A
must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow
of 1 ,500 gpm for single family dwellings.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4"x
21/2 "x 21/2 ", located not less than 25 feet nor more than 200 feet from any
portion of a single family dwelling measured via vehicular travelway.
5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that
the water system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Please be advised the proposed project may not be feasible since the existing
water mains will not meet the required fire flow.
7. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within
150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall
not be less than 24 feet or unobstructed width and 13 feet 6 inches of vertical
clearance. Where parallel parking is required on both sides of the street, the
roadway must be 36 feet wide and 32 feet wide with parking on one side.
Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with a minimum 45 foot
radius turn-around, 55 feet in industrial developments.
8. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates,
barriers or other means, provisions shall be made to install a "Knox Box" key
over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle access. Minimum gate width
shall be 16 inches with a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches.
9. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws or
when building permits are not obtained within 12 months.
Other:
1 . Driveway is at 20% grade, is too steep. We will accept 18%. Also provide turn
out per County specs half way up driveway. We will also require fire hydrant at
turn out location.
5
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Department of Community Development/Planning
Attention: Steve Smith
FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Director of Public Works /City Engineer
SUBJECT: HDP 3-1, Cree Pad and Driveway
DATE: January 24, 2003
The following shall be considered conditions of approval for the above-referenced project.
(1) In accordance with Palm desert Municipal Code Chapter 27,complete grading plans
and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking
and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project.
(2) Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in
accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Site grading
design shall include consideration of existing topography.
(3) Any storm/detention area design and construction shall be contingent upon a
drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public works.
(4) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading
plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for
checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this
project.
(5) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section. 25.15, all manufactured
slopes shall be planted or otherwise protected from the effects of storm water runoff
and erosion with thirty days of completion of grading.
(6) Access drive grades shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal.
(7) Prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project, applicant shall
provide evidence of legal access rights.
(8) Further conditions may be applied when plans are submitted and reviewed for a
o eon the sit%
LAO ,kiivill tfi r.��
Joseph S. Gaugush, P.E.
i.�� P s- ra
' -- �` vk
; 'o f .
' -" c is 4 e '
Y YyG
r c s^ S n , iy;� '. r++4,lx e:. t*›z '
A
C11Y Of PUL (D DESLI! T
•
•
f 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 260-2 5 78
1\ ,, TEL: 760 346-06t I
a?'_ :' FAX: 760 341-7098
i nfo@palm-desert.ors
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO.: HPR 03-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert
Planning Commission to consider a request by DORI CREE for approval of grading activity to
establish a driveway and 15,000 square foot building pad for a 5.12 acre lot in the Hillside Planned
Residential District west of the Palm Valley storm channel,south of Southcliff Road.
APN 628-120-013. yea T
.'
/P.
N. u ;j^vw
Subject RA in
Pro •
III
PO
HP.R,D L \ P ara,
till
-----\ Aoy.7-Acie '
AMIE
-� k�UI
5.' f ■1111■
R 1111111111111
SAID public hearing will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 4, 2003 in the Council
Chambers in the Palm Desert City Hall, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at
which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments
concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the
hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for
review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of
8:00 a.m.and 5:00 p.m.Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court,you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at,or
prior to,the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL,Secretary
February 22,2003 Palm Desert Planning Commission
*I AT E R ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY
kV/
/STR►C COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
POST OFFICE BOX 1058•COACHELLA,CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(760)398-2651 •FAX(760)398-3711
DIRECTORS: OFFICERS:
JOHN W.McFADDEN,PRESIDENT STEVEN B. ROBBINS, INTERIM
PETER NELSON,VICE PRESIDENT February 5 2003 GENERALMANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER
TELLIS CODEKAS ry , JULIA FERNANDEZ, SECRETARY
RUSSELL KITAHARA REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS
PATRICIA A. LARSON
File: 0163.1
R E E /'.?' .I.-
Department of Community Development
City of Palm Desert - 2003
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Viv�h'.'JNIcTYJ LEE'viq. :j?3i 1."J7'U PAKI BEN''.
Palm Desert, California 92260 +?T' nr PALM,; FxT
Gentlemen:
Subject: HPR 03-01
This area is designated Zone B on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at
this time by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
This area lies on the mountain slopes west of Highway 74 and is not subject to flooding from
stormwater flows except in rare instances. The runoff from the adjacent local drainage areas
can cause serious damage to improvements. The design of interior drainage works should
include provisions for solving this local drainage problem.
The District will furnish domestic water 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. The customer will
be required to sign a low water pressure acknowledgement.
The District will need additional facilities to provide for the orderly expansion of its
domestic water system. These facilities include a booster pumping station. The developer
will be required to provide land on which some of these facilities will be located. These sites
shall be shown on the tract map as lots to be deeded to the District for such purpose.
Additional domestic water pipelines will have to be installed by the subdivider in order for
the District to provide service to all parcels.
Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the District for
review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management.
TRUE CONSERVATION
USE WATER WISELY
Department of Community Development
City of Palm Desert -2- February 5, 2003
If you have any questions please call Dan Charlton, Stormwater Engineer, extension 2316.
Yours yery trul
G
A____„ 0
Steve Robbins
Interim 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:dd\eng\sw\feb\hpr03 01
050630-3
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
C0-0 ,:. COUNTY
atv, ,o, .,FS RIVERSIDE
oEp RorecT,°"` FIRE DEPARTMENT
r1RESTrT
+! aIn cooperation with the
i FIRE), SESS'" C./4,
mim ` California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
IM210 West San Jacinto Avenue • Perris, California 92570 • (909) 940-6900 • FAX (909) 940-6910
FIRE
DEPARTMENT RE( T ET
Tom Tisdale D
Fire Chief ,
Cove Fire Marshal's Office -' �i�
Proudly serving the 73710 Fred Waring Drive#222 T
p Palm Desert CA 92260 POMMuNrn'5_1 OF PALM NT EPARTMENTD�
unincor orated
areas of Riverside (760)346-1870
RT
County and the
cities of:
� 1 S1-E.`l
Banning TO: jrT��`� i-" DATE: �/ C'
67-3
4.
Beaumont /
Cal mesa REF: CO � 2 /z —7� (�
1 C ' /
Canyon Lake
• If circled, conditions apply to project
Coachella
s C) With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above
Desert Hot Springs
• referenced project, the fire department recommends the following fire
Indian Wells protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal
4.
Indio Code, NFPA, CFC, and CBC or any recognized Fire Protection
. Standards:
Lake Elsinore The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the
La•Quints remodel or construction of all buildings per UFC article 87.
• C.2? A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual
Moreno Valley pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed
4.
Palm Desert on the job site.
• Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a
Perris
4. gpm flow of:
Rancho Mirage Q 1500 gpm for single family dwellings
4.
San Jacinto 4. 2500 gpm for multifamily dwellings
+ 5 3000 gpm for commercial buildings
Temecula The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super
Hydrant (s) 4"x 2 'A" x 2 '/2", located not less than 25' nor more than:
® 200' from any portion of a single family dwelling measured via
Board of Supervisors vehicular travelway
7. 165' from any portion of a multifamily dwelling measured via
Bob Buster
District 1 vehicular travelway
8. 150' from any portion of a commercial building measured via
John Tavaglione
District 2 vehicular travelwa
Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include
Jim Venable
District 3 verification that the water s stem will roduce the re uired fire flow.
Roy Wilson . Please be advised the proposed project may not be feasible since the
District 4 existing water mains will not meet the required fire flow.
Tom Mullen
District 5
11. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all
buildings with a 3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The Fire
Marshal shall approved the locations of all post indicator valves and
fire department connections. All valves and connections shall not be
less than 25' from the building and within 50' of an approved
hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings.
12. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler
systems and Water-flow switches shall be monitored and alarmed per
CBC Chapter 9.
13. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
14. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one
2A10BC 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 NFPA 96
in all public and private cooking operations except single-family
residential usage.
16. Install a dust collecting system per CFC Chapter 76 if conducting an
operation that produces airborne particles.
0 All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending
to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story.
The roadway shall not be less than 24' of unobstructed width and
13' 6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required on
both sides of the street the roadway must be 36' wide and 32' wide
with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be
provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around 55' in industrial
developments.
18 Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of
gates, barriers or other means provisions shall be made to install a
"Knox Box" key over-ride system to allow for emergency vehicle
access. Minimum gate width shall be 16" with a minimum vertical
clearance of 13'6".
19. A dead end single access over 500' will require a secondary access,
sprinklers or other mitigative measures approved by the Fire
Marshal. Under no circumstance shall a dead end over 1300' be
accepted.
20. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main
access points from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an
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.
22. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by
the city.
23. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm
plans must be submitted separately to the Fire Marshal for approval
� prior to construction.
'(244. 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 in Palm Desert.
Location: 73710 Fred Waring Drive #222, Palm Desert CA 92260
Other:
..-41► 116. 4EL /"
„chi_
-
Z -
Sincerely,
David A. Avila
Fire Marshal
J &'/c'rv'Donald L. & Anne A. Bentley
1826 Roanoke Road
Claremont, CA 91711
(909)624-9195 RECEIVED
February 28,2003 FEB 2 8 2003
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Commission CITY OF PALM DESERT
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
Dear Commissioners:
The Bentley family has owned and enjoyed our property located as 47305
Highway 74, on the hillside off Southcliff Road, since circa 1958. Over this period we
have observed the development of the City of Palm Desert as the natural beauty of the
open desert land has been replaced with a high density of buildings and green growth.
We support the commission's desire to restrict grading of the hillside to prevent a
staircase effect, and to retain the natural vegetation. We further support limiting the
density of buildings to the west of the drainage ditch, one of the few natural desert areas
remaining on the flat within the city. For this reason, we support Alternative B for the
Hillside Planned Residential District Ordinance.
We feel any plan that makes use of the "Average Slope Formula" is inappropriate
in that it "averages" over a five-acre parcel. Concern should be the slope of the building
site, not the total parcel. A parcel with several steep canyons could have a large flat
area that would not require excavation, yet this parcel would have a high average slope.
Another parcel with a constant slope might require excavation for any building site, yet
the parcel might have a low average slope.
With respect to the two requests presented by Dori Cree, Case Numbers
TT31135 and HPR 03-01, we urge you to make your decision based upon the
ordinance that is to be set in place as a result of the current review of the Hillside
Planned Residential District Ordinance. Because further building at the base of the hill
will only further remove our view of the natural open space, we strongly urge you to
support the adoption of Alternative B for this ordinance.
Sincerely y rs,
Donald L. Bentley