HomeMy WebLinkAboutHillside Residential Zone 47075 Southcliff Rd APN 628-120-002 CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
II. REQUEST: Continued Council review of a Planning Commission and
Architectural Review Commission actions approving a hillside
development plan to allow grading of the site and construction of
a single family home on five acres within the Hillside Planned
Residential zone known as 47-075 Southcliff Road, APN 628-
120-002.
III. APPLICANT: Eddie Babai
45-640 Highway 74
Palm Desert, CA 92260
IV. CASE NO: HDP 98-2
V. DATE: May 27, 1 999 (continued from December 10, 1 998)
VI. CONTENTS:
A. Staff Recommendation
B. Background
C. Discussion
D. City Council Minutes and Staff Report of December 10, 1 998
E. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 20 and November 3, 1 998
F. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1902
G. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 20, 1998
H. Architectural Commission Minutes of September 22, 1998 and May 11 , 1999
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and
Architectural Commission and deny the application based on the finding that as
designed the building will not meet the goal of the Hillside Ordinance of blending
with the natural terrain "to the greatest practical extent."
B. BACKGROUND:
This case was reviewed by the Council on December 10, 1999 after receiving
approval from the Architectural Commission and Planning Commission. Based on the
staff recommendation, the City Council sent it back to the Architectural Commission
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
HDP 98-2
MAY 27, 1999
and directed the applicant to redesign the home, reducing its area to 3,000 square
feet and repositioning it on the pad allowing it to more effectively blend with the
natural terrain.
The applicant submitted revised plans which were reviewed by the Architectural
Commission on May 11 . The building was not reduced in size. The only
architectural redesign was the addition of a stone veneer on the east elevation. The
building was repositioned in relation to the edge of the slope from five feet to 30
feet. This was accomplished by pushing the pad toward the west and renaturalizing
the eastern edge. As part of this renaturalization, a four foot high stone berm would
be constructed at the slope edge to help obscure the view of the building. The
existing access road which crosses the entire parcel would be renaturalized along
with the existing house site and all previously graded cuts and fills outside the
defined 10,000 square foot pad. All non native vegetation will be removed. Any
required retaining walls would be faced with stone or otherwise designed to mimic
a natural feature.
The Architectural Commission felt that the revision helped to further mitigate the
visual impact of the home and granted preliminary approval subject to submission of
a revised landscape plan detailing the renaturalized design. They did not comment
on or endorse the applicant's refusal to reduce the house's size.
C. DISCUSSION:
The repositioning of the house away from the edge of the slope partially addresses
the visual impact of the project.
When staff originally recommended that the building be redesigned and reduced in
size, it was hoped that the revised plans would incorporate softer edges and more
natural forms which would inherently be less obtrusive. Simply adding the stone
veneer to the hard edged contemporary geometric forms do not go far enough toward
the objective of camouflaging a 5,600 square foot structure regardless of its other
aesthetic merits.
Staff is therefore recommending that the application be denied based on the finding
that the architectural design does not meet the goal of the Hillside Ordinance to blend
with the natural terrain to the greatest practical extent.
i" OUNCI CTION:
',,PPROVED DENIED.
''F WED OTHER
PHILIP DRELL, DIRECTOR ¢�SATE .��
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,, .,404 ��'�s �; 1'w►1.1�
/tm •
ABSENT
2
r hd 2. r '
IS\ p98 cc2) i, T �
�RIF�.ED 3Y:� . _
File with Cie, C rk's Offict
MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 10, 1998
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
D. CONSIDERATION OF A PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION APPROVING A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW GRADING OF THE SITE AND CONSTRUCTION
OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON FIVE ACRES WITHIN THE HILLSIDE PLANNED
RESIDENTIAL ZONE KNOWN AS 47-075 SOUTHCLIFF ROAD (APN NO. 628-120-002)
Case No. HDPP 98-2 (Eddie Babai, Applicant).
Mr. Steve Smith, Planning Manager, stated the property was at the west end of Southcliff Road,
high in the hills, and that both the Architectural Review Commission and the Planning
Commission had approved the plan. He said in both instances, staff argued for a smaller
structure located in a less prominent location. Following the Planning Commission action, he
said several Councilmembers approached him to request Council consideration, and staff
continued to recommend that the dwelling be smaller and less prominent. He reported that a
meeting with the Applicant's architect, Councilman Ferguson, and himself was conducted this
afternoon. He said they would be making their presentation, take any feedback, and look at
relocating the dwelling on the site.
Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited testimony in FAVOR of or OPPOSED
to the subject case.
MR. SEAN ABAII, Principal of Saba Architects, 4500 Campus, Suite 520, Newport
Beach, CA, stated they preferred not to have a continuance. He said their firm knew the site
was a critical location because of its hillside zoning; therefore, they did much research with
regard to hillside zoning and City of Palm Desert zoning overall. He felt they had met all'the
requirements_ However, he said because the most prominent position on the property is'the
peak, where the house would have the greatest view of the entire valley, he realized this-was
the concern of the Planning Department. He offered to answer any questions.
Upon question by Mayor Spiegel whether what he had been told, that part of the hillside had
already been graded and taken away for the project, was correct, Mr. Abaii responded that had
been done without his knowledge, and the owner had been "slapped on the hands" for going
ahead with this part of the project without involving the architecture firm or pulling the proper
permits. He said although this was done somewhat illegally, it had been rectified by making
the owner draw up proper plans and hire a California Registered Civil Engineer to design the
• pad according to City standards.
Councilman Ferguson stated he had made most of his comments to the Applicant during the
meeting earlier this afternoon. However, he said he wished to comment on the history of the
hillside ordinance and its purpose, as it seemed that the owner's purpose and the City's purpose
were at opposite ends. He felt that comments provided by those Councilmembers who
participated in the process and adoption of the ordinance could provide some guidance for' the
drawing of alternate plans that might be acceptable to the City.
34
MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 10, 1998
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Councilmember Benson commented that in adopting the ordinance, as she read it, the intent was
to make development as unobtrusive as possible from the valley floor. Therefore, she said if
the Applicant was willing to reduce the size of the structure and reposition it, she felt that was
the action to take. Councilman Kelly concurred and added that even the color scheme was to
be addressed with a treatment which blended into the hillside.
MR. ABAII responded that the hillside ordinance only limited the Applicant to the grading of
a 10,000 square foot pad. He noted that his client had a five acre lot, and once 10,000 square
feet was graded with a 5,600 square foot house and driveway situated thereon, there was no
room for anything else-- they were limited based on the standards as set forth by the hillside
ordinance.
Councilman Kelly responded that with regard to the hillside ordinance, it was designed so this
situation would not happen, and building lower would allow for an increased density. He
clarified by stating that whether five acres or not, the intent was to prevent cuts and to keep the
building space as small'as possible. Mayor Pro-Tempore Crites added that it was also the intent
to provide incentive to utilize existing flat areas, or existing pads, rather than to cut yet more
pads, noting that the 10,000 feet was a maximum amount as allowed by Council decision-- it
111 could be considerably smaller. Therefore, he said that the interpretation that 10,000 was
automatic was not necessarily correct.
Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing closed.
Mayor Pro-Tempore Crites noted that the staff report referred to an existing home, the Olinger
home, which Council later regretted approving when it saw the final exterior shade applied
thereto. He hoped staff would pay close attention to this type of situation in the future for
making structures ultimately compatible with the existing hillside.
Councilman Ferguson commented that the ordinance was written so that Council had flexibility
for the preservation of aesthetic views. He cautioned that while there were details of square
footage of lot/pad, etc. to be considered, the bottom line would be that if the project did'not
meet the aesthetic objectives, it would probably receive rather rough treatment. He said he told
the Applicant's attorney that it was the visual impact that the Council had concern about.
MR. ABAII said based upon Council's comments, he would request a continuance; however,
he re-emphasized that the project was in full compliance of 35% lot coverage, as set forth by
the City's standards. He added that the way the home was situated, only the round portion,
approximately 25-30% of the house was up front, and the remainder of the house was placed
in the back. He said they objected to reducing the size of the house, as it was his client's
longtime dream to build that size of home for himself, and they would need justification as to
why the Council would require him to build a 3,000 square foot home. He stated they did not
object to repositioning the house, moving it back and spending another $100,000 in re-grading
costs.
35
MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 10, 1998
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Councilman Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, refer Case No. HDPP 98-2 back to Architectural
Review Commission and direct the Applicant to revise the proposal to not to exceed 3,000 total square feet
and that the dwelling be repositioned on the pad to a less prominent location to make the project blend in
with the hillside. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote.
XVII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
With Council concurrence, Mayor Spiegel adjourned the meeting at 8:18 p.m.
. /
ROBERT A. SPIEG' , Y S R
ATTEST:
i
SHEILA LIGA ITY CLERK
CITY OF P LM D T, CALIFORNIA
I
' 36 )
CITY OF PAS M PEcFRT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
Mayor and City TO: Honorable Council
II. REQUEST: Council review of a Planning Commission action approving a
hillside development plan to allow grading of the site and
construction of a single family home on five acres within the
Hillside Planned Residential zone known as 47-075 Southcliff
Road, APN 628-120-002.
III. APPLICANT: Eddie Babai
45-640 Highway 74
Palm Desert, CA 92260
IV. CASE NO: HDPP 98-2
V. DATE: December 10, 1998
VI. CONTENTS:
A. Staff Recommendation
B. Background
C. Analysis
D. Conclusion
E. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 20 and November 3, 1 998
F. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1902
G. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 20, 1998
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council refer this case back to Architectural Review Commission and
direct the applicant to revise the proposal to not exceed 3,000 total square feet and
that the dwelling be repositioned on the pad to a less prominent location to make the
project blend in with the hillside.
B. BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this application October 20, 1998.
At that time staff recommended that the proposal be referred back to the applicant
for redesign (i.e., reduce size of the dwelling, change the color and make it less
prominent--see discussion below). Commission directed staff to prepare a resolution
of approval provided the applicant revised the colors to the satisfaction of staff.
Resolution No. 1902 approving the project was adopted by Planning Commission
November 3, 1998 on a 4-1 vote with Commissioner Finerty voting nay.
CITY STAFF c ! PCPT
HDPP 98-2
DECEMBER 10, 1998
Several members of Council contacted staff requesting that this application be
scheduled for full City Council review.
The property is a five-acre site at the westerly end of Southcliff Road which is a
narrow paved road which connects to the CVWD maintenance road on the west side
of the Palm Valley Channel. The property is presently occupied by a single family
dwelling.
A significant amount of grading activity has taken place in the area of the proposed
new home and a new driveway. This grading activity was performed without benefit
of permit or approval.
1 . ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:
North: HPRD/Vacant (exempt)
South: HPRD/Dwelling
East: HPRD/Vacant
West: HPRD/Vacant
2. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND SITE ZONING:
Hillside Planned Residential/HPRD
3. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The construction of a single family home is a Class 3 categorical exemption for
purposes of CEQA.
4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The request is to authorize the completion of the grading for the new dwelling
and its driveway and then construct a single family dwelling. The 5,600
square foot dwelling will be single story, 17 feet in height with a three-foot
circular projection. The dwelling colors now include lava rock gray and
weavers cloth beige. The dwelling architecture has received preliminary
Architectural 'review Commission approval. The proposal also includes
demolition of the existing dwelling and renaturalization of the driveway and
pad serving that unit.
2
T' rOLINCIL STAFF PEPOR I -
HDPP 98-2
DECEMBER 10, 1998
C. ANALYSIS:
The zoning ordinance for the hillside district encourages a minimum amount of
grading and requires retention of natural vegetation. The ordinance allows a 10,000
square foot building pad be created on a five-acre parcel.
As noted previously, the applicant proceeded with grading without a permit.
Notwithstanding, the new pad placement is the most logical location on the lot
because expansion of the existing pad would create a very significant slope visible
from the northeast and anywhere else on the property would require movement of
more material.
The applicant has chosen to maximize the pad size and place a 5,600 square foot
dwelling in the most prominent position on the new pad. The driveway, garage and
pool are located to the back side of the pad.
The Architectural Review Commission reviewed this project its September 22, 1998
meeting (minutes attached). At that time staff noted that the colors were too dark
and will not blend in with the hillside and minimize the visual impact of a prominent
architectural statement. ARC discussed the colors and the project in general and felt
that landscaping would help to soften the appearance. ARC granted preliminary
approval to the project as submitted. After the first Planning Commission hearing the
applicant changed the colors to the satisfaction of staff.
The goal of the ordinance is to blend new homes into the hillside. Staff disagrees
with the ARC and Planning Commission actions and feels that this project will not
blend into the hillside for the following reasons:
1 . A 5,600 square foot home is larger than was anticipated on a 10,000 square
foot pad.
Essentially, the dwelling is being placed on a 10,000 square foot lot. A typical
home on a 10,000 square foot lot in the flat land would be between 3,000
and 3,500 square feet including the garage.
The 5,600 square foot dwelling will exceed 50% coverage of the pad. The
Olinger residence which is quite prominent was constructed in 1 987 and it is
only 1 ,830 square feet plus a 528 square foot garage.
2. The original colors of the proposed structure did not in staff's opinion blend in
with the hillside. The applicant has revised the color scheme to a lava rock
3
CITY PCOU C!` CTA_=c PCDO91"
HDPP 98-2
DECEMBER 10, 1998
gray and weavers cloth beige which should better blend in with the hillside.
The extraordinary size of the dwelling and position near the front edge of the
lot will still make it quite prominent.
D. CONCLUSION:
Staff feels that the dwelling needs to be reduced in size and be repositioned on the
pad.
Given the architectural design which the applicant is pursuing, a setback from the
edge of the pad should be provided. This could be accomplished by relocating the
driveway to the east side of the pad and placing the dwelling further back on the pad.
Prepared by:
Steve Smith
Reviewed and Approved by: L1�
Philip Drell
/tm
4
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY CALIFORNIA
• .z Fad; DEPARTMENT �QP„-cu`NT o1`cR fsl
e.�.....
a�d0AE.PROTECriori-
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
�!' COUNTY ' CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
• or
AND FIRE PROTECTION C FIRESTr
RIVERSIDE NAY• " D
JAMES M. WRIGHT
Fle .-
FIRE CHIEF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE
COVE FIRE MARSHAL 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE
70-801 HWY 111 PERRIS,CALIFORNIA 92570
RANCHO MIRAGE,CA 92270 TELEPHONE: (909) 940-6900
TELEPHONE: (760) 346-1870
FAX: (760)328-1071
TO: Steve Smith 11-12-98
Planning Department
FROM: Mike Mc Connell
Fire Marshal
SUBJECT: PP 98-2
I reference to my letter dated 10-15-98 on fire department requirements, should the
council approve the project the fire department will amend the requirements. If any of the
four previous conditions can not be met a residential fire sprinkler system can be
installed as a mitigating factor.
Mike Mc Connell
Fire Marshal
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF PALM DESERT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Smith, Planning Manager
FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager
SUBJECT: HDPP 98-2; EDDIE AHMAD BABAI AMENDED CONDITION
DATE: November 25, 1998
Public Works Condition No. 5 for the above-noted project should be modified to
read as follows:
* Access drive grades shall be subject to the approval of the Fire
Marshall.
Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.40, as referenced in Condition No. 5, is
applicable to street design. The subject access drive does not function as a street
and, therefore, would not be subject to the limits specified in Section 26.40.
JOSEPH S. GAU , . . -
JSG/ms
�7
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
C. Case No. HDPP 98-2 - EDDIE BABAI, Applicant
Request for approval of a hillside development plan to allow
grading of the site and construction of a single family home on
five acres within the Hillside Planned Residential zone known as
47-075 Southcliff Road, APN 628-120-002.
Mr. Smith explained that the plans were on display and passed out
photographs. He visited the site one day last week and took some pictures
and thought they might be helpful. He said the request was to develop on an
existing five acre site a large single family home located at the westerly end
of Southcliff Road. Access to Southcliff was from the CVWD access road
south of Thrush. He indicated that the project description was twofold. One
was to allow the applicant to complete the grading activity which he had
begun and then to approve the 5,600 square foot single story dwelling unit on
this graded pad. He said that the existing five acre lot has another existing
graded pad with a dwelling located on it. That house with trees and
landscaping was located north of the proposed pad. As shown in the
photographs, there had been considerable grading activity there that was done
without permit or approval. The hillside ordinance allowed for a graded pad
of up to 10,000 square feet. If the application before the commission this
evening were successful, then the applicant would have to remove the existing
dwelling unit and re-naturalize the area, the driveway and pad areas so that
they are left with one home up there and one graded pad of 10,000 square
feet. He indicated that Architectural Review at its meeting of September 22,
1998, granted preliminary approval to the plans that were distributed to
Planning Commission. He passed out a copy of the color palette that was
shown to Architectural Review at that time. Mr. Smith said staff discussed
this matter at length with ARC in that they did not agree that the color scheme
would blend in with the hillside. Copies of the minutes were included in the
commission packets. He said the goal of the ordinance is to allow limited
development in the hillside. He noted that at one time there was a referendum
on hillside development as well as a variety of other issues in the hillside.
More recent hillside development included the Olinger residence located a
couple of hundred yards southerly of this property. That home showed up on
the hillside in a lighter tan color above the Community Church. That was done
in 1 987-88. It was a 1 ,830 square foot home plus a 520-530 square foot
garage on that pad. In this instance the Planning Commission was being
requested to approve a 5,600 square foot dwelling on a 10,000 square foot
17
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
pad. Staff did not believe it was the intent of the ordinance that they would
be building monuments on the hillside. If they were looking at a 10,000
square foot lot on the flat land, it would have a 30%-35% coverage limit, or
be 3,000 or 3,500 square feet. In this instance what they were looking at
was in excess of 50% coverage on the pad. Secondly, staff was concerned
that the color palette would not blend in with the hillside. In that area staff
disagreed with the action by the Architectural Review Commission. Staff felt
this dwelling needed to be reduced in size, have its color scheme revised to
better blend in with the hillside and reposition the smaller home further to the
south on the pad so that it would be less prominent. Staff's recommendation
was that Planning Commission take public testimony and continue this matter
to a date certain and direct the applicant to revise the proposal to not exceed
3,000 square feet and to revise the colors and the site plan to make the
project better blend in with the hillside. He asked for any questions.
Commissioner Finerty asked if the Olinger home Mr. Smith referred to was the
last home that was built on the hillside. Mr. Smith said yes, for this area of
the hillside. There have been others down in the area of the tennis courts
further to the north which while they were technically in the hillside, they were
not as high up in the hillside. Commissioner Finerty asked if this would be
comparable with where this home is proposed. Mr. Smith said yes, with the
Olinger residence. It was a couple of hundred yards to the south and if they
were standing at a point on Highway 74 they would be able to see both
residences.
Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to
address the commission.
MR. SEAN ABAII, the Principai of S.A.B.A. Architects, informed
commission that he was the architect for this project. He said that
before the Commission was a rendering that would show how the
house would look, which was also presented at the Architectural
Review Commission meeting. He said he reviewed the staff report and
wanted to go over some of the items that Mr. Smith mentioned to
perhaps shed more light on some of the issues. The staff report
indicated that the applicant chose to maximize the pad size and place
a 5,600 square foot house on that pad. They hired a civil engineer
before they started to do this project and the plans before Commission
indicated that the pad is actually 9,900 square feet, so it was below
18
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
10,000 square feet and they were not maximizing the pad. He showed
the rendering to Commission and explained that when they submitted
to the Architectural Review Board it took about five or ten minutes for
the Commission to review and look at the project. They all had high
praises about the project and most of them said that this is the type of
project they would like to see on the hillside and these were the colors
they would like to see on a hillside, rather than just a white or very light
colors. They all agreed that these colors, which are also earth tone
colors, do blend in with the mountain. He explained that they
conducted a lot of computer analyses and took samples of the granite
actually up there and did color matching to see what they could do to
make it blend even better. That was how they came up with the
proposed colors, but the colors were not important. He said they were
there to please the City, to make sure they have a project that would
blend in with the colors of the mountain. If the City has suggestions,
or if Mr. Smith has suggestions about changing the colors, they would
willingly listen. He had no problem with that. He pointed out a
statement that was a quotation from the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance,
which he thoroughly read and which was mentioned by Mr. Smith, that
said that a typical home on a 10,000 square foot lot, and the key word
was "lot" in the flat land would be between 3,000 to 3,500 square
feet, which was a 35% lot coverage. He agreed that was absolutely
correct, but asked the Commission to remember that his client has a
five-acre lot, not a 10,000 square foot lot. The pad they are proposing
on the five-acre lot is approximately 10,000 square feet. If they were
to use the zoning ordinance figure of 35% coverage, they would have
a house size of 1 .62 acres. They have a pad of 10,000 square feet on
a five-acre lot. He also mentioned that the Architectural Review
Commission was pleased and had high praises for the house. They said
this was the kind of home they would like to see up there on the
mountain and not something white, not something simple, and not
something that would not blend with anything.
Chairperson Campbell asked for clarification that Mr. Abaii wouldn't mind
changing the.color of the house.
Mr. Abaii said he wouldn't mind as long as the color wasn't white,
which wouldn't blend in. He said they took a piece of granite and
actually did the computer analysis to get the earth tone colors that
19
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
would blend in, but he had no problem with working with the City to
come up with a desirable color.
Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION to this project. There was none. Chairperson Campbell closed
the public hearing and asked for commission comments.
Commissioner Finerty noted that she was new to the Commission and this
was her first hillside development case so she diligently read through the
ordinance trying to find out how many square feet a home could be and found
that the ordinance was silent on the square footage, as well as the height of
the building. She was concerned about the reference to the Olinger home
being built 12 years ago and it was noted that although it is 1 ,830 square
feet, which is significantly smaller than the home before them tonight, that it
was quite prominent and this home was constructed 12 years ago. She was
also concerned that whatever they decided tonight would set a precedent and
wondered if it would be a good idea to go back and review our hillside
ordinance and find out what it is that they really want in the hills, what size
of homes (if any) and to fine tune the ordinance because it didn't tell her or
guide her as far as making a decision this evening. She would rather have a
home built by a plan on what they really want than accidentally because the
policy hadn't been properly set.
Commissioner Jonathan thought that revisiting the hillside ordinance was not
a bad idea but felt it would be inappropriate to postpone a decision regarding
this matter based on a review of the ordinance. Furthermore, if the ordinance
were to be reviewed and changed, it would be even more inappropriate to
apply new and changed standards to an application that is before them at this
time. His interpretation of the present ordinance is that the basic objective is
to be as least intrusive on the hillside, particularly as it is viewed below, as
possible. He believed that the size of the house had to be considered, not in
isolation, but in recognition that it is on a five-acre lot and not on a 10,000
square foot lot. He didn't have any kind of a problem with the size of the
home. They certainly had homes much larger throughout the desert, including
on five acre lots in Rancho Mirage. He didn't have a problem with that size of
a home on five acres. He loved the colors, but not for the hillside. He thought
that some kind of compromise was going to be necessary there and suggested
that if they moved forward with everything else that they allow the applicant
and staff to work out an acceptable color scheme and only in the event that
20
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
any disagreement couldn't be resolved between the applicant and staff
directly, that the matter come back to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Beaty said he was in favor of a continuance. There was a very
clear statement in the ordinance which states that architectural design and
materials to the greatest practical extent blend in with the natural terrain. He
didn't see either the architecture or the colors or materials blending here at all.
He was interpreting the project as an attempt to build a monument as Mr.
Smith referred to where they would have something that stands out and
everyone would say "wow, look at that". That clearly was not the intent of
the ordinance. He believed the intent was to give the individual an opportunity
to live on the hillside and enjoy the hillside and views, but not impose the view
of their location on those on the flat land.
Commissioner Fernandez concurred with Commissioner Jonathan and Dr.
Beaty regarding the colors. He felt this was a great project and that the house
was beautiful and would really look nice, but it was his opinion that the
applicant should get together with the City and work out the colors. He would
be in favor of the project and would like a continuance until both parties could
decide on the colors.
Chairperson Campbell stated that she was also glad that Mr. Abaii brought out
the fact that the definition was for 10,000 square foot lots in the flat land and
not five acres, which she wasn't aware of. This is a five-acre piece of
property and as far as the design of the home was concerned, she thought it
was very nice. Also, compared to some of the homes up there it was quite a
step up. She also looked at the property today and the height at that location
and as far as the landscaping was concerned that Architectural Review
brought up, it would be nicely landscaped and would camouflage a lot of
building. As far as the colors were concerned, there were a lot of shadows up
in the mountains with dark and light colors and they don't want a white or
beige home up there. She thought they could go ahead and work out
something as far as the colors were concerned. She asked for a motion.
Commissioner. Jonathan noted that it sounded like a few of the commissioners
wanted this to come back before them because there were enough changes
they were asking for that they want to see it before it's approved and he could
live with that. It also sounded like most of them didn't have an objection to
the size of the home or the basic architecture. The area of discussion for most
21
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
of them was really on the color palette so if the Commission was so inclined
he would be prepared to move for a continuance of the matter to a date
certain which they could address with the applicant, but limit the issue to the
color palette. He indicated if that was acceptable to the Commission perhaps
they could move in that direction. Chairperson Campbell agreed that the
discussion should be on the color palette. Mr. Smith stated that part of staff's
concern was with the location of the home on the pad. He asked if the
Commission wished staff to pursue that or if they accepted the driveway and
garage in its current location on the plot plan. Commissioner Jonathan stated
that he didn't have a problem with it. Commissioner Fernandez also said he
didn't have a problem with it. Commissioner Jonathan asked Mr. Abaii how
much time he would need in order to address the color palette with staff with
the hopeful objective of coming back to the Commission with something that
both staff and the applicant could agree on.
Mr. Abaii said he would leave that up to Mr. Smith. They were open
and would be available any time next week.
Mr. Smith noted that he would be on vacation next week and they would have
to work with Mr. Drell, but he felt it was something that could be handled in
one meeting and suggested a continuance to November 3, 1998.
Mr. Abaii stated that November 3 would be fine.
Commissioner Jonathan noted that they always had the ability of a further
continuance if for some reason it wasn't resolved. Commissioner Jonathan
stated that the motion was to continue the matter to November 3 with
discussion being limited to the color palette.
Commissioner Finerty said that she concurred with Commissioner Beaty with
regard to the potential monument and she would not want to limit the
discussion just to the colors. Commissioner Jonathan said the motion still
stood and wanted to see if there was any consensus.
Mr. Abaii said that if the Commission looked at the plan, they did a lot
of studies which were also reflected by site delineation or site drawing
which he believed was on the next page. They knew that they didn't
want to design a house that was a block that would be intrusive or
obtrusive that would look like a big mass. Their first attempt was flatly
22
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
refused by the Architectural Review Commission and he showed that
design to the Planning Commission. He noted that the original design
was for a two-story house and they took Architectural Review
Commission's notes and comments and went back to the computer and
came up with a house that was stealth in design which has a lot of
curves to it. He explained that curves don't hit you like a solid tall wall
of concrete or block. When designing a project, in order to soften a
project an architect uses a lot of curves and also by placing the house
on that location of the site was one of the key elements of making it
not to be so obtrusive or stick out too far. They took advantage of the
10,000 square foot limitation they had and put the house all the way
to the far back of it. If the city ordinance allowed them to go to a
20,000 square foot pad, they would be more than happy to push the
house even further back which would allow them to have more
landscaping development. They worked with the 10,000 square feet
allowed and designed a house that was curvilinear and stealthy.
Commissioner Beaty asked if the findings required demolition of the existing
structure and naturalization of the terrain. Mr. Smith noted that the
Commission didn't have a resolution of approval in the packet. When the
resolution came before them, staff would put in a condition requiring that.
Chairperson Campbell asked if the applicant would have a satellite dish at the
new home like at the existing home.
Mr. Babai indicated that it would be moved. Mr. Abaii said they could
replace it with a much smaller one.
Commissioner Beaty noted that they really make some small ones now.
Chairperson Campbell concurred.
Commissioner Finerty asked if staff, during the two-week continuance, could
do a survey of the other homes in the hills to determine the average and
largest square footage. Mr. Smith said he had a discussion last week with the
gentleman of the lot adjacent to the east, a Mr. Cree, and Mr. Smith had
expected him.:to be at this meeting. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Cree that question
and Mr. Cree said they were between 800 and 1 ,000 square feet.
Commissioner Beaty noted that those were the homestead shacks. Mr. Smith
indicated that they were the homestead dwellings and Commissioner Beaty felt
that some of them are shacks. Commissioner Jonathan felt it would be more
23
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 1998
telling, in response to Commissioner Finerty's comment, to look at the most
recent additions, particularly just north of Bighorn around Cougar Trail and that
area. Some of those homes are very large and very expensive. Mr. Smith said
that area was in the County. Commissioner Jonathan noted very few people
think of Cahuilla Hills as not being part of Palm Desert and that was something
that could be addressed if and when they looked at the hillside ordinance.
Commissioner Beaty said he would second the motion.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Beaty,
to continue HDPP 98-2 to November 3, 1998 directing staff to meet with the
applicant to resolve color palette concerns. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner
Finerty voted no).
Chairperson Campbell requested that staff also prepare a resolution of approval
for adoption at that meeting. Mr. Smith said it would be prepared consistent
with the Planning Commission's direction and they would attempt to clarify
the color issue. Chairperson Campbell clarified for the applicant that the only
unresolved issue that was being continued was the color palette.
D. Case No. CUP 91-8 Amendment - SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY
CHURCH, Applicant
Request for approval of a one-year time extension to a
conditional use permit to allow the temporary use of a five-acre
parcel west of the existing facility to locate a 6,400 square foot
classroom building and a 280-space parking lot at 73-251 Hovley
Lane West.
Mr. Smith explained that the request was for a one year time extension of the
temporary use permit at Southwest Community Church. As the staff report
indicated, the Commission approved the use of this five-acre parcel for a
parking lot and a 6,400 square foot temporary classroom in March of 1997.
The church had plans to move to a new facility and there was a condition
placed on that approval for the removal of the temporary classroom building
effective September 30. As well, the resolution established numerous
operational conditions to improve the compatibility of the facility with the
residential neighborhood to the west. Ground breaking for the new church did
24
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1902
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOWING GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,600 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING ON A FIVE ACRE SITE IN THE HILLSIDE PLANNED
RESIDENTIAL ZONE, 47-075 SOUTHCLIFF ROAD, APN 628-
120-002.
CASE NO. HDPP 98-2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 20th day of October, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request
of MR. EDDIE AHMAD BABAI for approval of a hillside development plan to allow
construction of a 5,600 square foot single family home on a five acre site within the Hillside
Planned Residential zone generally located west of the Palm Valley Storm Channel, more
particularly described as APN 628-120-002; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution
No. 97-18," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project
is a Class 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 is consistent with the adopted Palm Desert General Plan and
West Hills Specific Plan.
2. The proposal complies with the intent and specific requirements of the Hillside
Planned Residential District.
3. The proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general
welfare, or be materially injurious to properties for improvements in the
vicinity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby approve Hillside Development Plan
No. 98-2, subject to the conditions attached hereto.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1902
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 3rd day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BEATY, FERNANDEZ, JONATHAN, CAMPBELL
NOES: FINERTY
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
„
.22r\A—c—ek:
SONIA M. CA/M/PBELL, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Q2(9
PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1902
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. HDPP 98-2
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. Applicant shall receive approval from the Riverside County Health Department for an
on-site septic disposal system prior to issuance of building permits.
3. That all disturbed slope areas and the existing pad area and driveway be renaturalized
to blend in with the surrounding undisturbed slopes.
4. That the dwelling height and design be substantially consistent with that given
preliminary approval by the Architectural Review Commission at its September 22,
1998 meeting.
5. That the perimeter landscaping be designed to blend with the natural hillside. Plan
to be approved by Architectural Review Commission.
6. That the existing dwelling be removed from the site prior to issuance of any
occupancy permit for the new dwelling.
7. That the colors shall be as shown on the color sample board dated November 3,
1998.
8. In addition to all normal development fees, the applicant shall be subject to the
double permit fee provision of the grading ordinance as a result of past illegal grading
activity.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1902
Department of Public Works:
1 . Any storm drain/retention area construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study
prepared by the registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the
Department of Public Works.
2. 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.
3. Proposed 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.
4. 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 within thirty days after completion.
Riverside County Fire Department:
1 . Access will not have an up or down grade of more than 15%.
2. Access will not be less than 20 feet wide.
3. Access will be free of sharp confined turns, 45 feet outside radius.
4. An approved turnaround shall be provided at all building sites.
4
c; 1 T OF FAL vi DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: October 20, 1998
CASE NO: HDPP 98-2
REQUEST: Approval of a hillside development plan to allow grading of the site and
construction of a single family home on five acres within the Hillside
Planned Residential zone known as 47-075 Southcliff Road, APN 628-
120-002.
APPLICANT: Eddie Babai
45-640 Highway 74
Palm Desert, CA 92260
I. BACKGROUND:
The property is a five-acre site at the westerly end of Southcliff Road which is a
narrow paved road which connects to the CVWD maintenance road on the west side
of the Palm Valley Channel. The property is presently occupied by a single family
dwelling.
A significant amount of grading activity has taken place in the area of the proposed
new home and a new driveway. This grading activity was performed without benefit
of permit or approval.
A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:
North: HPRD/Vacant (exempt)
South: HPRD/Dwelling
East: HPRD/Vacant
West: HPRD/Vacant
B. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND SITE ZONING:
Hillside Planned Residential/HPRD
C. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The construction of a single family home is a Class 3 categorical exemption for
purposes of CEQA.
S T At'r f�Et'VYi I
HDPP 98-2
OCTOBER 20, 1998
D. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The request is to authorize the completion of the grading for the new dwelling
and its driveway and then construct a single family dwelling. The 5,600
square foot dwelling will be single story, 17 feet in height with a three-foot
circular projection. The dwelling colors/materials include indian red, dark gray
and glass block. The dwelling architecture has received preliminary
Architectural Review Commission approval. The proposal also includes
demolition of the existing dwelling and renaturalization of the driveway and
pad serving that unit.
II. ANALYSIS:
The zoning ordinance for the hillside district encourages a minimum amount of
grading and requires retention of natural vegetation. The ordinance does allow a
10,000 square foot building pad be created on a five-acre parcel.
As noted previously, the applicant proceeded with grading without a permit.
Notwithstanding, the new pad placement is the most logical location on the lot
because expansion of the existing pad would create a very significant slope visible
from the northeast and anywhere else on the property would require movement of
more material.
The applicant has chosen to maximize the pad size and place a 5,600 square foot
dwelling in the most prominent position on the new pad. The driveway, garage and
pool are located to the back side of the pad.
The Architectural Review Commission reviewed this project its September 22, 1 998
meeting (minutes attached). At that time staff noted that the colors were too dark
and will not blend in with the hillside and minimize the visual impact of a prominent
architectural statement. ARC discussed the colors and the project in general and felt
that landscaping will help to soften the appearance. ARC granted preliminary
approval to the project as submitted.
The goal of the ordinance is to blend new homes into the hillside. Staff disagrees
with the ARC action and does not feel that this project will accomplish that goal for
the following reasons:
2
1 Hrr nCr.n
HDPP 98-2
OCTOBER 20, 1998
A. A 5,600 square foot home is larger than was anticipated on a 10,000 square
foot pad.
Essentially, the dwelling is being placed on a 10,000 square foot lot. A typical
home on a 10,000 square foot lot in the flat land would be between 3,000
and 3,500 square feet including the garage.
The 5,600 square foot dwelling will exceed 50% coverage of the pad. The
Olinger residence which is quite prominent was constructed in 1987 and it is
only 1 ,830 square feet plus a 528 square foot garage.
B. The colors of the proposed structure will not blend in with the hillside. The
colors when combined with the extraordinary size of the dwelling and position
near the front edge of the lot will make it quite prominent.
III. CONCLUSION:
Staff feels that the dwelling needs to be reduced in size, have its color scheme
revised to better blend in with the hillside and reposition the dwelling on the pad.
Given the architectural design which the applicant is pursuing, a setback from the
edge of the pad should be provided. This could be accomplished by relocating the
driveway to the east side of the pad and placing the dwelling further back on the pad.
Alternatively, the applicant could revise the architecture and colors to allow better
visual integration with the hillside.
IV. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission continue the case to a date certain and direct the applicant to
revise the proposal to not exceed 3,000 total square feet, revise the colors and site
plan to make the project blend in with the hillside.
V. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Legal notice
3
I/;iF- FStt'uhi I
HDPP 98-2
OCTOBER 20, 1998
B. Comments from city departments and other agencies
C. Plans and exhibits
Prepared by , /�
Steve Smith
Reviewed and Approved by
hil Drell
/tm
4
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
CITY OF PALM DESERT
TO: Department of Community Development/Planning
Attention: Steve Smith
FROM: Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 98-02; EDDIE AHMAD BABAI
DATE: October 14,1998
The following should be considered conditions of approval for the above-
referenced project:
1 . Any storm drain/retention area construction shall be contingent upon a
drainage study prepared by the registered civil engineer that is reviewed
and approved by the Department of Public Works.
2. 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.
3. Proposed 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.
4. 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 within thirty days after completion
of grading.
PAGE 2
MEMO TO STEVE SMITH
HDP 98-02
CodeSection 4
5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Co 26. 0, the
maximum grade for a hillside road shall not exceed twenty percent unless
the Fire Marshall requires a flatter slope. Road grade segments in excess
of twelve percent may not exceed 300 feet in length and must be
constructed of Portland cement concrete.
RICHARD . FOLKERS, P.E.
RJF:PG/rh
,7
RIVERSIDE COUNTY CALIFORNIA
e.w.... 1 FIRE DEPARTMENT a�PF at PROTECTENT or �N9y
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
COUNTY ''• CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY `�•`'�
or
AND FIRE PROTECTION <.,.A_ C F:IRESTr
RIVERS►DE r.ir.,:., •LAMES M.WRIGHT �CF
FIRE CHIEF (FIRE ti ,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE a
COVE FIRE MARSHAL
10-801 HWY ill 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE
PERRIS,CALIFORNIA 92570
RANCHO MIRAGE,CA 92270 TELEPHONE: (909)940-6900
TELEPHONE: (760)346-1870
FAX: (760) 328-1071
TO: Steve Smith 10-15-98 F"1ECEWED
Planning Department
OCT 15 1998
FROM: Mike Mc Connell
Fire Marshal C :MUNITY CEUELOPUNT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF PALM DESERT
SUBJECT: PP 98-2
The following requirements apply to this project.
1. Access will not have an up or down grade of more than 15%.
2. Access will not be less than 20' wide.
3. Access will be free of sharp confined turns, 45' outside radius.
4. An approved turnaround shall be provided at all building sites.
Mj'^ ke c��C^^o��nnell wtiil
IU r Y 4_
Fire Marshal
printed on recycled paper
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 22, 1998
MINUTES
Commissioner Urrutia suggested that a planter could also be installed at the
southwest corner of the building.
Commissioner Urrutia commented favorably on how the architect added
articulation to the structure, and Commissioner Holden indicated that he also
did a good job in reducing the massive appearance of the structure.
Commissioner O'Donnell expressed support for the improvements to the
design.
Action:
Commissioner Holden moved, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to
grant preliminary approval of the revised plans with the following conditions:
1) that the landscaping be upgraded to improve screening from the adjacent
residential areas; 2) that the drive-through element be reduced to a single
lane; 3) that the drive-through structure be lengthened, with plantin'd added
on the north side of the drive-through to soften the appearance. The motion
carried 5-0.
2. CASE NO.: HD PP 98-2
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EDDIE AHMAD BABAI, 45-640 Highway
74, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised
drawings for hillside development of single-family residence
LOCATION: 47-075 Southcliff Road
ZONE: HPRD
Mr. Drell presented the plans and materials sample, and opined that the "
colors are too dark and will not blend into the hillside. Mr. Drell indicated that
he believes the line of sight drawing is inaccurate.
Commissioner O'Donnell commented favorably on the proposed colors,while
Commissioner Van Vliet felt that the colors should be more consistent with
the color of the hillside.
10
DRAFT® SUBJECT TO
REYIZIQ
filr __
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 22, 1998
MINUTES
Commissioner Urrutia felt that landscaping will help to soften the
appearance, and the applicant indicated that a landscaping plan is
forthcoming.
Action:
Commissioner Urrutia moved, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to grant
preliminary approval. The motion carried 5-0.
3. APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RICHARD PRICE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
for AVONDALE GOLF CLUB VILLAS, 27127 Calle Arroyo, Suite 1905, San
Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval
landscape plan
LOCATION: Avondale Country Club
ZONE: PR-3
Michael Bunganich, the landscape architect for the project, reported that the
City's landscape consultant, Eric Johnson, indicated to the project developer
that the plan contains too many trees.
Chairman Gregory noted that the trees are shown at 25 feet apart, which
should be sufficient to allow growth.
Mr. Smith noted that the street improvement plans have not yet been
submitted, and there is a concern that the area may not be as large as once
thought; so the Commission may approve the proposal, and if changes are
necessitated by the street improvements, it will be brought back to the
Commission.
•
Mr. Bunganich stated that he has reviewed the street improvement plan
which includes a 19-inch median with two-inch stamped concrete on either
side; so there is sufficient room.
Action:
Commissioner Connor moved, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to
grant preliminary approval. The motion carried 5-0.
11
D tA FT on SUBJECTT TO
REVISION
25.15.010
Chapter 25.15 planned residential district and do not require pre-approval
pursuant to a development plan:
HILLSIDE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT A Small family day care homes. (Ord.742§ 5, 1994) _
Sections: 25.15.025 Large family day care homes.
5.15.010 Purpose. Large family day care homes are permitted subject to
25.15.020 Permitted uses_ a use permit pursuant to Chapter 25.72A of this code.(Ord_
25.15.023 Principal uses and structures 742 § 6, 1994)
permitted.
5.15.025 Large family day care homes. 25.15.030 Development standards.
25.15.030 Development standards. Development standards shall be as approved by the plan-
25.15.040 Abandoned uses. ring commission in a public hearing and shall be based
25.15.050 Circulation. upon the following development options. The minimum
25 15 060 Structural design. density obtainable shall be one dwelling unit per five acres.
25.15.070 Fire protection_ It will be the responsibility of the applicant to provide suffi-
2.5.15.080 Erosion controL cient data supporting the applicability of any option.The
25.15.090 Preservation of open space. planning commission shall make a final determination
Z5.1.5.100 Submittal requirements for concerning which option or combination of options is
development plan. appropriate. Farms submitting topographic clam must be
25.15.110 Environmental assessment. registered civil engineers.
•
25.15.120 Required information.
25.15.130 Optional preliminary approval OPTION NO. 1 — PARCEL AVERAGE
procedure_ SLOPE METHOD
25.15.010 Purpose. This option requires a topographic map of the entire
The ptrpose and intent of the hillside planned residential parcel with maximum five foot contour intervals. Using
district is: the following formula and tables the average slope for the
A. To encourage only minimal grading in hillside areas entire parcel is determined leading to density designations
that relates to the natural contours of the land and will not and grading limitations:
result in extensive cut and fill slopes that result in a pang
or staircase effect within the development; A. Average Slope Formula.
B. To retain nasal vegetation which stabilizes slopes
and where necessary to require additional Iandscaping to s = .002291E Where: S = Average percent slope
stabilize slopes and maintain the necessary cuts and fills A
in hillside areas: I = Contour interval,in feet
C. Require the retention of natural landmarks and L = Summation of the con-
features including vistas and the natural skyline as integral tour length, in feet
elements in development propocals in hillside areas.(Ord. A = Area of the parcel in
322 (part), 1983) acres, of ownership
being considered.
25.15.020 Permitted uses.
Uses and activities permitted by approved development B. Density.Density within the district shall be based
plan shall be as follows: on the following scale:
A. Grading;
B. Single-family attached or detached dwellings; Minimum Acreage Per
C. Land subdivisions; Percent Slope Dwelling Unit
D. Remodels and additions only require department 1. 10— 15 0.66 acres;
of environmental services approval_(Ord.322(part), 1983) 2. 16 —20 1.00 acres;
3. 21 —25 1.2.5 acres;
25.15.023 Principal uses and structures 4. 26 — 30 1.66 acres;
permitted. 5. 31 — 35 2.50 acres:
The following are permitted uses within any hillside 6. :6 or over 5.00 acres.
363 (Palm Desert 7-95)
25.15.030
C. Grading. The minimum of percentage of a lot to 3. Maximum of overall density of one dwcIIing unit
remain in a natural state without cut or fill shall be de- per acre.
termined on the basis of the average slope of the natural The city may require any measure it feels nee-scary
terrain of the lot Such determination shall be made on to mitigate adverse environmental or aesthetic impacts of
the basis of the natural stare as being defined as the condi- grading or construction_Location and gades of arrecs roads
Lion of the lot prior to any new development The following shall be as approved by the fire marshal and planning
table indicates the minimum percentage of a lot to remain commission.If adverse aesthetic and environmental impacts
in a natural state: of site and access gading cannot be adequately mitigart-1i
then the designated location shall not qualify as a building
Percent of the Lot to site under this option.
Remain in the Natural Density for the area remaining after the application of
Percent Slope State Option No.3,shall be determined via Option No.1 or Nu.
1. 10 — 15 325 2.
2. 16 —20 47.5 Architectural design and materials shall to the greatest
3. 21 —25 625 practical extent blend with the natural terrain_
4. 26 — 30 77.5
5. 31 —35 925 GRADING RESTRICTION FOR PROPERTIES
6. 36 or over 95.0 OVER TEN PERCENT SLOPE DEVELOPED
UNDER OPTION NO. 2 AND OPTION NO. 3
D. Density transfer. The planning commission may
require a transfer of density from one portion of a parcel Grading on the site shall be limited to•the minimum
to another,to mitigate adverse environmental or aesthetic required for safe access and the structural requirements
impacts. of the dwelling unit Grading for the building pad shall
not involve an area greater than ten thousand square feet.
OPTION NO. 2—TOE OF SLOPE That area disturbed by grading other than that required
for art-r-ss or building foundation,including all visible cats
Owners of parcels located at the toe of the slope may or fills,must be contoured and landscaped to blend with
delinea areas adjacent to the valley floor(minimum area the surrounding natural terrain prior to final inspection or
one-third acre, minimum dimension one hundred feet), within one year following completion of grading if construc-
which after application of the slope formula described in Lion has not commenced.
Option No. 1 arc shown to have an average slope of less
than ten percent.These areas will no longer be subject to OPTION NO.4—PREFERRED
the restrictions contained in this title, will be assigned a DEVELOPMENT AREA
density of three dwelling units per acre and shall be devel-
oped according to procedures set out in Chapter 2524. The ability of the city's architectural review commission
If the remaining area exceeds four acres,an additional process to insure proper siting of units within the hillside
unit may be developed in the hillside.If the remainder is is directly proportional to the size of the parcel. Certain
less than four aces,the hillside must remain undeveloped. lots may not contain any acceptable sites while others may
For aremainder larger than five aa= density will be deter- contain several. The larger the parcel, the greater the
mined through Option No. 1 or No. 3. likelihood that suitable locations can be found_It is theeefere
advantageous to encourage the consolidation of smaller
OPTION NO. 3 —DWELLING UNIT parcels so that sites can be developed wording to aesthetic
BUILDING Si 1 h and environmental criteria instead of arbitrary existing
property lines. It is
Instead of determining density by the average slope of
the entire parcel as in Option No. 1, the applicant may
delineate specific dwelling unit building sites whose slopes
arc twenty percent or less and are not adjacent to the valley
floor, if the following criteria is met
1. Minimum area of one-half acre;
2. Minimum dimension of one hundred feet;
(Palm txscrt 7-95) 3 64
25.15.030
also the city's desire to concentrate development on the structures and roadways shall be in accordance with the
less visible lower slopes uniform fire code and approved by the fire agency.
The following option offers increased density for B. Roof shall be of incombustible material ap- -
larger parcels or combination of parcels submitted proved by the fire agency.
under one development plan if at least ten acres arc C. All easements for fire breaks shall be dedicated
located in the preferred development area as shown on to this purpose through recordation.
the zoning map. D. All buildings shall be equipped with fire suppres-
Density shall be based upon the following table: sion automatic sprinkler systems approved by the fire
marshaL(Ord.322(part), 1983)
AREA DENSITY
10-19 acres 2 d.uJ5 acres 25.15.080 Erosion controL -
20 acres 3 d uJ5 acres All manufactured slopes shall be planted or other-
wise protected from the effects of storm runoff and
erosion within thirty days after completion of grading.
Site location, grading, roads and architectural de- Planting shall be designed to blend with the surround-
sign shall be as approved by the planning c°rnmission ing terrain and the character of development.(Ord..322
and architectural commission and shall minimize ad- (p ),1983)
verse aesthetic and environmental impacts and shall
maximize the preservation of the natural character of 25.15.090 Preservation of open space
the hillside. In order to insure
This option cannot be applied in conjunction with permanent retention of the natu-
ral terrain as required in Section 25.15.040,a covenant
any other options.(Ord.322(part),1983) approved by the city attorney shall be recorded dedi-
cating all building rights to the city and insuring that
25.15.040 Abandoned uses. the natural areas shall remain as shown on plans ap-
If, pursuant to this chapter, an ezisting building proved by the city.(Ord.322(part),1983)
and/or building site is to be abandoned,the abandoned
-building shall be removed from the site and properly 25.15.100 Submittal requirements for
disposed of and the site regraded and landscaped to development plan.
blend with the to-rain prior to any other building per- Prior to the issuance of any building or grading
wits being issue for the property. (Ord. 322 (part), permit (unless otherwise provided), or land subdivi-
1983) sion, a development plan shall be approved by the
planning commission.This may include,as determined
25.15.050 Ca-^Elation. by the director of environmental services,the following
information as set out in Sections 25.15.110 through
A: Street alignments where possible shall parallel
contours of the natural terrain and be located in valleys 25.15.130.(Ord.322(part), 1983)
or on ridges so as not to be visible from the valley floor.
B. Street lighting, when required, shall be of low 25.15.110 Environmental assessment
profile design and unobtrusive.(Ord.322(part),1983) All applications shall comply with the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act. (Ord_ 322
25.15.060 Structural design..
(part),1983)
Site plan review in accord with Chapter 25.70 is 25.15.120 Required information.
required for all development.
Structure height and setbacks shall be flexible in The director of environmental services and/or plan-
order to achieve the purposes of this section-(Ord_3"'? ning commission may require any of the following in-
(part),1983) formation:
A Accurate topographic maps indicating the fol-
lowing:
25.15.070 Fire protection_ 1. Natural topographic features with an overlay of
In areas where there will be a fire h'a7ard, in the the proposed contours of the land after completion of
opinion of the fire agency,the following shall apply: the proposed grading,
A. Clearance of brush or vegetative growth from ? Slope analysis with at least five-foot contour in-
365
25.15.120
tervals and a slope analysis showing the following slope screens,enclosures and structures,including drainage
categories: facilities,
6. Any other information required by the planning
10%—15% 26%—30% commission;
16%—20% 31%—35% C. Reports and surveys with recommendations
21%—25% 36%and over, from foundation engineers or geologists based upon
surface and subsurface exploration stating land caps_
3. Elevations of existing topographic features and bilities, including soil types, soil opening, hydrologic
the elevations of any proposed building pads, street groups,slopes, runoff potential,percolation data, soil
centerlines and property corners, depth,erosion potential and natural drainage patterns;
4. Locations and dimensions of all proposed cut D. Archeological studies in areas where existing
and fill operations, evidence seems to indicate that significant artifacts of
5. Locations and details of existing and proposed historic sites are likely to be encountered in order to
drainage patterns,structures and retaining walls, insure that these artifacts and/or sites are not inadver-
6. Locations of disposal sites for excess or excavated tently destroyed;
material, E Additional information to include:
7. Locations of existing trees,other significant veg- L Average natural slope of the land,
etation and biological features, 2 Acreage and square footage calculations,
8. Locations of all significant geological features, 1 Area of impermeable surfaces,
including bluffs, ridgelines, cliffs, canyons, rock 4. Ratio of parking area to total land area,
outcroppings,fault lines and waterfalls, 5. Ratio of open space to total land area,
9. Locations and sizes of proposed building areas 6. Description of maintenance program for pro-
and lot patterns, posed developments involving joint or common owner-
10. Any other information required by the planning gip.
commission; 7. Any other specific information determined to be
B. Site plans and architec*ural drawings illust-arng of special interest relevant to the applicant's proposal
the following: (Ord_322(part),1983)
L Architectural characteristics of proposed build-
ings, 25.15130 Optional preliminary approval
2. Y..faiv il7 an-4, r`4:re tzir _i c...tul c-, pate-. , _ ....
including street-widths and grades and other easements The applicant may choose to submit information
of public rights-of-way, and request a prelirninaty approval from the planning
3. Utility lines and other service facilities,including cornrnis ion which will assign the appropriate develop-
water,gas,electricity and sewage lines, meat standard option, determine density, identify
4. Landscaping, irrigation and exterior lighting building sites, access roads and locations.No permits
Plans, shall be issued until final approval is obtained. (Ord.
5. Locations and design of proposed fences, 322(Part),19M) -
366
-;iiii: - IV uU Pala] D .--se t
N�„_ Q. 73.510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE(619)346-0611
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. HD PP 98-2
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert
Planning Commission to consider- a request by EDDIE AHMAD BABAI for approval of a
single-family, hillside residence, located at 47-075 Southcliff Road. Property is also
particularly described as A.P.N. 628-120-002
p,3-. `t ' P \ ��' r�aR 'V* • " = • �/t i I —'R 3 .
Imo. / d'
- Frti.-T• --, _ g
! \VO‘-c-'1 .002-4; %.,jEr• ' , ce-, ‘
,-- _ [
- - ----_,__________ \..--.) s-''''• --\. ''''';' 3,4.14:11'- i8-11',,;V."... '. -• '",•-i• [
---- - r+ 1. } R. s,moo
H.P'p ! ��� 1�!�i( _ ' 1 'R.II 12;0100 1 11 1 1 1 1 V '�I la
_ 11I _� / J : rMt
3r1 ....7:r J 4
9.1 1.
y/4.,••0,. 7 7 P.RrT Ss: %.03 s ; ; ;Y H p-t►ly
- ', p-4�EPj CAt$YON I I At ,-,{f,'t✓'_. ` ,
~1 R'1 I
- - ; Subject Property �_.� _s�.,;lE �i�x__.:'s=': ...'`.J..,�
I= O.S. --- - P E • 1:: .}.:.:.fr- - it ^' 'I
;I' -T-T I F�` ' ''r'rr- ; . '•0-4'.F2,i
MATSTACR ROAD
oRI — — i ,. _.- -1=IN ',t'---{?•1 IO.Aoe ? •-1 to 00o
--- ------ -- g• p - . . ." C"ri • - -- • " a
- 1-- i FT'I 'A .. ... a s,---PI iiiim
I — — e ,.i zf 1. -R-1 10,000_-
) .'- ----f� :'D , t�a•nna I r '.t.., 1 -
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 20, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be
heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall
I 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
throuoh Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council)
at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
. October 9, 1998 Palm Desert Planning Commission
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
MAY 11, 1999
MINUTES
Commissioner Connor noted that the Parkinsonians should be replaced with
Cercidium Desert Museum, and added that he would like to see top dressing
of decomposed granite along the street frontage. Also, the plans should call
out the sizes of all the palm trees.
Chairman Gregory pointed out that the shrubs indicated for the north side of
the building won't perform in that exposure, and suggested plants more
appropriate for a northern exposure.
Action:
Commissioner Holden moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to
grant preliminary approval with the condition that the proposed six-foot wall
element on the south property line be removed. The motion carried 5-0.
6. CASE NO.: HD PP 98-2
APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): EDDIE AHMAD BABAI, 45-640 Highway
74, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised
drawings for hillside development of single-family residence
LOCATION: 47-075 Southcliff Road
ZONE: HPRD
Mr. Drell reported that there are no changes proposed for the house except
for the stone veneer; however, renaturalization is very important in this
project, and the pad will be cut further back into the hill in order to move the
house back from the edge of the pad. The landscaping plan still shows turf
and non-native plantings, and the pad still scales out at more than 10,000;
so some changes need to be made.
Chairman Gregory commented that the plans should show with what the
slope is being renaturalized.
Action:
Commissioner Holden moved, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to grant
approval subject to submittal of a landscape plan indicating revegetation.
7
DRAFT® SUBJECT TO
REVISION
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
MAY 11, 1999
MINUTES
The motion carried 5-0.
7. CASE NO.: CUP 99-4NAR 99-1
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GLORY TO GOD MINISTRIES, P.O. Box
467, Palm Springs, CA 92663
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of a
15,620 sq. ft. single-story worship center with 708 seats and a 17,679 sq. ft.
gymnasium with on-site parking for 291 cars
LOCATION: West side of Portola, 600 feet north of Frank Sinatra
ZONE: PR-5
Mr. Alvarez reported that the property consists of 4.62 acres located on the
west side of Portola Avenue 600 feet north of Frank Sinatra. The property
is surrounded by vacant property zoned PR-5. The proposed church facility
consists of three separate structures, several outdoor recreational facilities
and parking. The site's sole access if from Portola Avenue.
The worship building will consist of 15,620 square feet and is designed to
seat 708 people. The building is set back 74 feet from the south property
line, 115 feet from the north property line and 70 feet from the west property
line. The worship building's main architectural feature will be the dome-
shaped roof made of a finished aluminum with a maximum height of 24 feet.
The remainder of the structure will consist of a stucco exterior with split face
Nock columns and a standing seam metal roof.
The family center building will consist of 17,679 square feet and will be used
for a variety of purposes, including a gymnasium, classrooms, offices,
restrooms and a kitchen. The building will have exterior materials similar to
the worship building, including a standing seam roof, split face columns and
a stucco finish. The building height is proposed at 33 feet, and as such, will
require a variance from the maximum allowed 24-foot height in the PR zone.
The building will be set back 80 feet from the north and south property lines
and 97 feet from the front property line. On the east facing elevation, the
portion of the building which extends above the 24-foot height maximum is
set back 136 feet from the property line. Similarly, the portion extending
8 DRAFT
SUBJECT TO
REVISION
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 22, 1998
MINUTES
Commissioner Urrutia suggested that a planter could also be installed at the
southwest corner of the building.
Commissioner Urrutia commented favorably on how the architect added
articulation to the structure, and Commissioner Holden indicated that he also
did a good job in reducing the massive appearance of the structure.
Commissioner O'Donnell expressed support for the improvements to the
design.
Action:
Commissioner Holden moved, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to
grant preliminary approval of the revised plans with the following conditions:
1)that the landscaping be upgraded to improve screening from the adjacent
residential areas; 2) that the drive-through element be reduced to a single
lane; 3) that the drive-through structure be lengthened, with planting added
on the north side of the drive-through to soften the appearance. The motion
carried 5-0.
2. CASE NO.: HD PP 98-2
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EDDIE AHMAD BABAI, 45-640 Highway
74, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised
drawings for hillside development of single-family residence
LOCATION: 47-075 Southcliff Road
ZONE: HPRD
Mr. Drell presented the plans and materials sample, and opined that the
colors are too dark and will not blend into the hillside. Mr. Drell indicated that
he believes the line of sight drawing is inaccurate.
Commissioner O'Donnell commented favorably on the proposed colors,while
Commissioner Van Vliet felt that the colors should be more consistent with
the color of the hillside.
10
DRAFT_ SUBJECT TO
REVISION
r
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 22, 1998
MINUTES
Commissioner Urrutia felt that landscaping will help to soften the
appearance, and the applicant indicated that a landscaping plan is
forthcoming.
Action:
Commissioner Urrutia moved, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to grant
preliminary approval. The motion carried 5-0.
3. APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RICHARD PRICE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
for AVONDALE GOLF CLUB VILLAS, 27127 Calle Arroyo, Suite 1905, San
Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval
landscape plan
LOCATION: Avondale Country Club
ZONE: PR-3
architect for the project, reported that the
Michael Bunganich, the landscape a c o p
City's landscape consultant, Eric Johnson, indicated to the project developer
that the plan contains too many trees.
Chairman Gregory noted that the trees are shown at 25 feet apart, which
should be sufficient to allow growth.
Mr. Smith noted that the street improvement plans have not yet been
submitted, and there is a concern that the area may not be as large as once
thought; so the Commission may approve the proposal, and if changes are
necessitated by the street improvements, it will be brought back to the
Commission.
Mr. Bunganich stated that he has reviewed the street improvement plan
which includes a 19-inch median with two-inch stamped concrete on either
side; so there is sufficient room.
Action:
Commissioner Connor moved, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to
grant preliminary approval. The motion carried 5-0.
11
DRAFT.. SUBJECT TO
REVISION