Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PP 86-26 COMMERCIAL BUILDING/HIGHWAY 111 1986
PRECISE PLAN rT 2C TENTATIVE TRACT - ZONE CHANGE PARCEL MAP VARIANCE C.U.P. REFER TO: APPLICANT: V VMV-n Wayv. >U l LOCATION: 11' REQUEST ES EXISTING ZONE: PREPARATION PROGRESS _ DATE` BY COMMENTS APPLICATION RECEIVED LEGAL PUBLICATION SENT NOTICES SENT FIELD INVESTIGATION DEPTS. NOTIFIED BUILDING ENGINEERING FIRE POLICE RECREATION & PARKS SCHOOL DISTRICT DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS FLOOD CONTROL PRELIMINARY MEETING STAFF REPORT aL Ell FINAL PLAN APPROVAL PRECISE PLAN (6) LANDSCAPING PLAN (5) t L i J PLAN. DIRECTOR MOD. (6) HEARINGS & ACTIONS DATE ACTION VOTE REVIEW BOARD HEARING P.C. HEARING PUBLISHED P.C. PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT NOTIFIED C.C. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE NO. RESOLUTION NO. EFFECTIVE DATE RECORDED FOR DATA- BANK ZONING MAP CORRECTED REGULAR PALM DESERT CjXY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 12, 1995 Mayor Crites suggested that the request be referred to the Charitable Contributions Committee for consideration. Counciimember Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, refer this matter to the Charitable Contributions Committee for consideration. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING SIGN PROGRAM (LETTER TYPE, HEIGHT ON WALL, AND NUMBER OF APPROVED COLORS) AND APPROVAL OF ARCffiTECTURAL TOWER FEATURES HEIGHT LIMIT TO FACILITATE TBE REMODEL AND ON AT THE FORT ELEVEN TOWN CENTER ON THE WEST SIDE TOWN CENTER WAY B HIGHWAY 111 AND FRED WARING DRIVE, Case No PP 86-28 Amendment #1 (Festival Management Corporation, Applicant). Associate Planner Steve Smith reviewed the staff report, n s project was located on the west side of Town Center Way between Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive. He said the request was for an additional 6,263 square feet of area including demolition of the former Crown Books and the adjacent pet store, shifting of the parking lot, moving of the driveways, etc. He said the changes were being proposed in order to attract new tenants to the center. He noted that specific City Council action was required on the following: 1) app oval of architectural elevations which provide tower ele: Zhts to a maximum height of 42 feet 6 inches which exceeds the height limit for the zone; 2) amendment to the sign program which as originally approved by the City Council; 3) approval of wall signs mounted higher than 20 feet; 4) approval of two additional colors above the limit of three provided for in the ordinance; 5) individual shop signs are proposed on the parapet wall above the shed roof which makes these signs "roof" signs pursuant to the ordinance, which are prohibited; 6) request to allow reverse channel letter signs facing Fred Waring Drive. Mr. Smith reviewed each of the above requests in detail as outlined in the staff report dated October 12, 1995. He said the applicant was also seeking approval to place on the north side of Pad 9 reverse channel illuminated letters; he noted these types of signs facing Fred Waring Drive had been allowed for Mrs. Bone's and for Pier 1 Imports. With regard to the adjustment to the parking, he said several of the remaining tenants in the center had appeared before the Planning Commission and expressed support for the proposal. Councilmember Benson stated that she did not feel something should be put in for this center that would diminish what was done at the Mervyn's center. She said this project sits right on the Highway,and having a dome would not bring in the business and looked terrible. Mayor Crites said he felt all of the Councilmembers would vote to make sure we get this center rehabilitated. Some of the things seemed reasonable such as turning the buildings 5 ivmvti'rES REGULAR PALM DESERT Crt'Y COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 12, 1995 x x s s x s s s s s s s x s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s around. He said this center did not go bad because of signage. The Trader Joe's center has a similar situation on Fred Waring Drive without being on Highway 111 and is very successful. He said signage on the parapets was something the Council had consistently not allowed in the City of Palm Desert. There were a lot of things that could be done to help this center, but not all of the things that staff has brought are things that should be allowed. He added that the Council has never granted five colors. Mr. Smith stated that the Architectural Review Commission had not taken a position about the colors and that staff was not recommending approval of five colors. This was a request of the applicant. Councilman Kelly stated that he liked special towers and domes and felt they broke up the line of so many buildings and added to the aesthetics. He said he did not think the towers should be looked at as part of the building height and added that he had no problem with the height of the towers at all. With regard to signage, he said he would lean toward giving businesses enough signage so they can attract business. He said he would look toward some type of compromise on the signs - perhaps a little less gaudy color and giving them some neon but making sure it is lower. Councilman Spiegel stated this center had not been 80% occupied since the beginning, and he felt this was because of the lack of local management and.the fact that it is the dullest center he had ever seen. He said the towers did not bother hitii and added excitement to what exists now. He felt getting rid of the Crown Books and Petco stores was a smart move because it puts a major tenant in the center, and having another major on Highway 111 would attract others. He agreed the signage should be revisited. He suggested that the Council vote on the architecture tonight, since the remodel would take the longest, and revisit the signs at the next Council meeting. Councilman Snyder said he felt it was important to keep businesses and help those that are having problems. He said he did not have a problem with the remodeling and felt something should be done to make that area more visible and get the spaces rented. He agreed the sign program should be revisited and said he could not visualize signs on the roofs. MR. JOHN MANAVIAN, Vice President of Festival Management, stated he had been involved with this project for almost a year. He said they realized there were serious problems, with Marshall's and other tenants leaving the center. He said they were actively looking for other tenants to replace those that have left and had found two new national tenants. He said signage was critical to the final lease negotiations. He noted they were prepared to leave the parapet walls as they are. He said they were trying to get away from the internally illuminated signage, and what they were requesting would give the lighting a softer look. With regard to the five colors, he said they could live with four if five was not an appropriate number. With regard to the towers, he said they were trying to create architectural interest in the project and were trying to get away from the monotony that is there now. 6 lvmvtiTEs REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 12, 1995 Mayor Crites stated that the Council would need to look a little more at that component of the signage. He said there was neon signage in the City, but there is not a major shopping center that uses that as a consistent thing. He said at this point it looked like there was agreement on allowing a different type of signage on Fred Waring, allowing a four-color palette, no parapet signage, and towers with some height. He said the colors would be red, white, blue, and one other color, and he asked if the applicant would come back at the next meeting with what he wished to have as the fourth color. Council and the applicant. concurred. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve as presented by staff the parking modifications, building setbacks, building combinations, tower elements, a waiver to permit one additional color above the limit of three colors, and to bring the signage facing Fred Waring Drive into conformity with the rest of the center's signage. Motion was seconded by Kelly. Councilmember Benson expressed concern with the tower elements and said she did not see any reason to have a higher tower than the Palm Desert Town Center. Councilman Spiegel amended his motion to exclude the tower elements so they could be considered separately. Councilman Kelly agreed to amend his second. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Councilmember Benson said she could see having some height on the buildings but could not see any reason to have the towers go up to 42 feet 6 incbLls. She said she felt this was just disgraceful. Councilman Kelly said his idea of the towers had nothing to do with bringing in business but would make Highway 111 look better. He said that in his judgment putting towers in this center and breaking up the monotony of the stores adds to the look of Highway 111. Mayor Crites said he felt architectural features were needed to break up the monotony; however, he said he was,not sure they need to be 42 feet 6 inches on Highway 111. Councilman Spiegel said he felt the center needed the towers because it is a dull center now. Mr. Smith stated for clarification that the tower elements over the entry is 42 feet 6 inches, while over Major #2 on the parking lot side it is at 40 feet. He said there was also the one at Pad #9 which was at 39 feet. He noted that the grade difference between Highway 111 and the entrance to the Marshall's store is four to five feet depressed; therefore, the tall tower viewed from Highway 11l would be seen as less than 42 feet. Mayor Crites stated that there were others at Desert Crossing that were 40 feet high and were a block away from Highway 111, not on the pavement. He said he agreed they were necessary, but these are extreme. 7 ARNUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 129 1995 Councilman Kelly moved to approve the tower elements as presented by staff. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers Benson and Crites voting NO. Mayor Crites noted that the issue of the fourth color would be on the City Council Agenda for October 26, 1995. E. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF COACHELLA VALLEY .ASSOCIATION OF. GOVERNMENTS MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY/TRANSFER STATION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (Contract No. C10570). Environmental Conservation Manager Lisa Constande reviewed the staff report, noting that this would not commit the City to any financial or flow control obligation. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel, she responded that three out of the nine Valley cities had approved the Memorandum of Understanding; the cities of Palm Springs, Indio, and Coachella had all tabled the matter. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the Memorandum of Understanding and authorize the Mayor to execute the same on behalf of the City of Palm Desert. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vole. F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES APPLICATION PARTICIPATION. Mr. Folkers noted the report in the.packets and offered to answer any questions. Councilman Kelly expressed concern with the landscaping out at Interstate 10. He said he had recently visited Phoenix and felt the landscaped areas on its freeways looked super. He said approval of this request was an opportunity for the City to extend its landscaping program and do something good as far as enhancing the three I-10 interchanges. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Support the Transportation Enhancement Activities Application by Riverside County Transportation Department for the enhanced landscape of the Monterey Avenue, Cook Street, and Washington Street interchanges with a 11.5 percent cost match and four-year maintenance commitment; 2) authorize the appropriation of$126,000.00 from the Year 2000 fund reserve. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. G. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGY LICENSING. Economic Development Manager Paul Shillcock reviewed the staff report and offered to answer any questions. Councilmember Benson questioned the 3-1-1 vote of the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) to approve this and asked why this matter was before the Committee 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT LAi'Y COUNCIL MEETING QCTOBER16;1995 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s X. OLD BUSINESS A. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION RELATIVE TO FOURTH SIGN COLOR FOR REMODEL AND ADDITION AT THE FORMER ONE ELEVEN TOWN CENTER ON THE WEST SIDE OF TOWN CENTER WAY BETWEEN HIGHWAY 111 AND FRED WARING DRIVE, Case No PP 86-28 Amendment #1 (Festival Management Corporation, Applicant). Mayor Crites noted a request from the applicant for continuance of this matter. Councilman Spiegel moved to continue this matter to the meeting of November 9, 1995. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. XL REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER 1. Constitution Revision Commission's Summary of Preliminary Recommendations. Mr. Diaz noted the memorandum in the packets. He asked that Council let staff know if are any issues that Council wishes staff to look into at this point or in the near future. He also noted the suggestion in the last paragraph of the letter relative to the possibility of looking at the "general law" versus "charter city" issue at a later date. Counciimember Benson stated that she had asked several months ago for staff to look into the pros and cons of this and had never heard anything else. Mr. Diaz responded that staff would prepare a report for the next meeting. Mayor Crites asked that staff also provide a progress report at the next meeting relative to the school district boundary change. No Council action taken on this item. 10 AENUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT .rY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 9; 1995 s s s s s s s s one of the major property owners in the area north of Frank Sinatra, and she indicated she would be willing to file and support that. He said staff intended to conduct a get- together and have a meeting with Dolores Ballesteros of the Desert Sands Unified School District, members of her staff, members of Palm Desert City staff, himself, and some others and advise her exactly what we are looking at doing. He said he would like to have Council appoint two members to serve on this committee so we can then sit down with two members of the School Board and move forward. He said it was his intention if practical to have the two Councilmembers appointed this evening meet with the School Board members prior to the December 14th meeting so on the 14th we can come back with a schedule on exactly what needs to be done. With Council concurrence, Councilmembers Spiegel and Crites were appointed, with Councilman Snyder appointed as an alternate. %I. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Final Tract Map 27770-1 (Whitehawk), Sheffield Homes, Applicant (Continued from the Meeting of October 26, 1995). Mayor Crites noted the report in the packets. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 95-97 approving, Tract Map 27770-1. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. B. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION RELATIVE TO FOURTH SIGN COLOR FOR REMODEL AND ADDTITON AT THE FORMER ONE ELEVEN TOWN CENTER ON THE WEST SIDE OF TOWN CENTER WAY BETWEEN HIGHWAY 111 AND FRED WARING DRIVE, Case No. PP W28 Amendment #1, Festival Management Corporation, Applicant (Continued from the Meeting of October 26, 1995). Mr. Drell noted that the applicant was available to make a presentation to the Council. MR. ROSS ANDREWS, Festival Management, stated that at the last meeting three colors were agreed upon, with the fourth to be selected at a later date. He said they were asking for a change to the approved sign program to allow for the face of the letters to be transparent, that the light source be exposed,. and that the letters be held off the surface of the wall and be back lit. With regard to the colors, he said red, white, and blue had been approved at the last meeting and that they were requesting the fourth color be yellow. Councilman Snyder moved to, by Minute Motion, approve yellow as the fourth color for this center. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 4-1 vote, with Mayor Crites voting NO. Mr. Drell asked whether Council would deal with the issue of the signage as requested by Mr. Andrews. Mayor Crites responded that this issue was not on the Agenda and that he 14 REGULAR PALM DESERT tii'Y COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 99 1995 s s s s s s e s s s s s s s s s s .s s s s s s s s t s s s s s t s t s t s t would like to have the original report before him with the choices the Council had at that time. Councilmember Benson stated she felt more clarification was needed on the type of sign, and she said the lighting around it was not discussed before. Mr. Drell stated that the approved program was for smaller, simple letters with exposed neon back lighting. He said the only Council action at this time would be design direction that the Council would be willing to look at it. Councilman Spiegel stated that the Council could approve the block letters with back lighting; however, anything beyond that would have to go to the Architectural Review Commission to review on a case by case basis. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, accept the block letters for the majors, and anything beyond that would have to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. Motion was seconded by Snyder. Upon question by Councilmember Benson, Mr. Drell responded that the letters would not be block letters lilac Mervyn's—they would be exposed single letters like the "E" on the samples shown by the applicant. Mayor Crites stated that what he had not seen was a slide of the existing sign at night so that he could make a comparison. Mr. Andrews responded that he did not have a slide of the existing sign at night. Upon question by Councilmember Benson relative to the signs for the majors, Mr. Andrews responded that they would be one-color signs for each tenant from the approved palette. Mayor Crites called for the vote. Motion carried by unanimous vote. XIL OLD BUSINESS A. R—EQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRA T FOR TBE WASTE NGTON STREET WIDENING PROJECT (Contract No. C10560, Project No. 669/95). Mr. Diaz noted the report in the packets. Councilmember Benson suggested that in the future the staff reports indicate where the contractors are located. Mr. Folkers responded that this particular contractor, Cooley Construction, was located in Victorville. Councilman Snyder asked whether this project would be completed before Christmas, and Mr. Folkers responded that staff would try to do so. 15 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF ACTION Date: July 17, 1986 MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH 74-660 Anoyo Drive Indian Wells, CA 92210 Re: PP 86-26 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of July 15, 1986. APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1164. CARRIED 3-0. Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen ( 15) days of the date of the decision. RAMON A. , SEC6TA PALM DESERT PLANNIISSION RAD/tm PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1164 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PAL-M DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND A PRECISE PLAN: OF DESIGN TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 7900 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED ON THE NORTH HIGHWAY III FRONTAGE ROAD BETWEEN CABRILLO AND SANTA MARGARITA AVENUE. CASE NO: PP 86-26 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 15th day of July, 1986 hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request by MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan of design to allow construction of a 7900 (gross) , 6715 square foot (net) commercial building within the general commercial zone located on the north Highway 111 Frontage Road between Cabrillo Avenue and Santa Margarita Avenue. WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-8911, in that the director of community development has determined that the project will have a significant impact on the environment and a negative declaration has been prepared. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts to exist to justify their actions: 1. The precise plan is consistent with the intent and purpose of the general commercial zoned and the Palm Desert General Plan. 2. The project's design will not depreciate or unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity. 3. The project will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. A negative declaration of environmental impact is hereby approved. 3. Precise Plan 86-26 on file in the department of community development is hereby approved subject to the attached conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1164 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a—regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 15th day of July, 1986 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: DOWNS, WOOD, AND CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: ERWOOD AND RICHARDS ABSTAIN: NONE -�' B,F CRITES, Chairman ATTEST,.., �I RAMON A. DIAZ, Secret ur /dlg 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1164 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. PP 86-26 Department of Community Development: I . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of community development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 3. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless a time extension is granted, other- wise said approval shall become null , void and of no effect whatsoever. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contem- plated by this approval , the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Riverside County Department of Health Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Water and Services District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from all sides with materials similar to building walls. 6. Trash provisions shall be approved by applicable trash company and city prior to issuance of building permit. Department of Public Works: 1 . Drainage and signalization fund fees, as required by city ordinance, shall be paid prior to grading permit issuance. 2. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the department of public works. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1164 3. Full public improvements, including traffic safety lighting, as required by ordinance and the director of public works, shall be installed in accordance with city standards. 4. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the department of public works prior to the project final . 5. Complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the city engineer for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the city. 6. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to grading permit issuance. 7. Landscaping maintenance on Alessandro Drive shall be provided by the property owner. 8. Existing utilities on Alessandro Drive shall be undergrounded per each respective utility district's recommendation. If determined to be unfeasible applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. 9. Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the city engineer for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. 10. Installation of sidewalk on Alessandro Drive and Palm Desert Drive North. 11 . - Offsite improvement plans to be approved by public works department and a surety posted to guarantee the required offsite improvements prior to grading permit issuance. 12. Installation of sewers to serve this project. 13. Size, number and location of driveways to public works specifications with only one driveway approach to be allowed to serve this property. 14. Any permit issuance shall be subject to the waiver of parcel map first being approved and recorded. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1164 City Fire Marshal : 1 . Install a water system capable of delivering 3000 GPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a 3 hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation shall be based upon a m i n i mum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 200 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways. a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. C. hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the fire marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the building department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in PP 86-26 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the fire marshal". 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . T. All buildings over 5,000 square feet require an approved fire sprinkler system. /dlg 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: July 15, 1986 CASE NO: PP 86-26 REQUEST: Approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan for a 7900 square foot gross, 6715 square foot net, commercial building located on the north side of Highway III east of Cabrillo Avenue. APPLICANT: MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH 74-660 Anoyo Drive Indian Wells, CA 92210 I. BACKGROUND: A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: R-3 (4)/multi family South: C-1 S.P./commercial East: C-1 S.P./commercial West: C-1 S.P./vacant B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project is a one story commercial building fronting on Highway III with parking to the rear. The parking lot will have two driveways with access to Alessandro Drive. Architecture will be contemporary (flat roof, glass and stucco) . The architectural commission has granted preliminary approval . PROJECT DATA: Project Ordinance Requirement Site Area 20,647 sq. ft. Building Area (Gross) 7,900 sq. ft. (Net) 6,715 sq. ft. Building Height 14 ft. 30 ft. maximum Front Setback 8 ft. 5 ft. minimum Parking (1/250 sq.ft.) 27 27 i L PP 86-26 II. ANALYSIS: Project meets all applicable zoning standards. The following precise plan findings can be made. 1 . The precise plan is consistent with the intent and purpose of the general commercial zone and the Palm Desert General Plan. 2. The project's design will not depreciate or unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity. 3. The project will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. III. RECOMMENDATION: Approve findings and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. _ approving PP 86-26 subject to conditions. IV. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Legal Notice Prepared by Reviewed and Approved by /dlg 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 7900 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED ON THE NORTH HIGHWAY III FRONTAGE ROAD BETWEEN CABRILLO AND SANTA MARGARITA AVENUE. CASE NO: PP 86-26 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 15th day of July, 1986 hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request by MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan of design to allow construction of a 7900 (gross), 6715 square foot (net) commercial building within the general commercial zone located on the north Highway III Frontage Road between Cabrillo Avenue and Santa Margarita Avenue. WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89", in that the director of community development has determined that the project will have a significant impact on the environment and a negative declaration has been prepared. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts to exist to justify their actions: 1. The precise plan is consistent with the intent and purpose of the general commercial zoned and the Palm Desert General Plan. 2. The project's design will not depreciate or unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity. 3. The project will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. A negative declaration of environmental impact is hereby approved. 3. Precise Plan 86-26 on file in the department of community development is hereby approved subject to the attached conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this I5th day of July, 1986 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BUFORD CRITES, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /dig 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. PP 86-26 Department of Community Development: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of community development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 3. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless a time extension Is granted, other- wise said approval shall become null , void and of no effect whatsoever. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contem- plated by this approval , the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Riverside County Department of Health Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Water and Services District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from all sides with materials similar to building walls. 6. Trash provisions shall be approved by applicable trash company and city prior to issuance of building permit. Department of Public Works: 1. Drainage and signalization fund fees, as required by city ordinance, shall be paid prior to grading permit issuance. 2. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the department of public works. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ 3. Full public improvements, including traffic safety lighting, as required by ordinance and the director of public works, shall be installed in accordance with city standards. 4. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the department of public works prior to the project final . 5. Complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the city engineer for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the city. 6. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard Inspection fee shall be paid prior to grading permit issuance. 7. Landscaping maintenance on Alessandro Drive shall be provided by the property owner. B. Existing utilities on Alessandro Drive shall be undergrounded per each respective utility district's recommendation. If determined to be unfeasible applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. 9. Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the city engineer for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. 10. Installation of sidewalk on Alessandro Drive and Palm Desert Drive North. 11 . Offsite improvement plans to be approved by public works department and a surety posted to guarantee the required offsite improvements prior to grading permit issuance. 12. Installation of sewers to serve this project. 13. Size, number and location of driveways to public works specifications with only one driveway approach to be allowed to serve this property. 14. Any permit issuance shall be subject to the waiver of parcel map first being approved and recorded. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. City Fire Marshal : 1. Install a water system capable of delivering 3000 GPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a 3 hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation shall be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 200 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways. a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. C. hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the fire marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the building department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in PP 86-26 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the fire marshal". 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . 7. All buildings over 5,000 square feet require an approved fire sprinkler system. /dig 5 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 July 1, 1986 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. PP 86-26 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and a precise plan for a 7,900 square foot commercial building located on the north side of j Highway III east of Cabrillo Avenue, more particularly described as: '. Lot 6 B west 112 of Lot 7 Block G Palma Village Unit No. 6 R- .; WAY I /� 61 WAY V d f ^ Z R i w ' - tin a 10 WAY Q '. �0 to I- 13 �OQ CL f4� R-3 (4) ` R,3 �4) .N R-3 (4)1 U - A F SSA N f,R0 LC ! i IS.k' M H. IGH4AY Ili E7 ' I R13 :i S. El.L�`.,- GAMING SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 15, 1986 at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 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. If you challenge the proposed actions In court, you may be limited to raising only those Issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described In this notice, or In written correspondence delivered to the city council (or planning commission) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary July 4, 1986 Palm Desert Planning Commission 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083 of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO: PP 86-26 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: MR. & MRS. J. WAMBAUGH 74-660 Anoyo Drive Indian Wells, CA 92210 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: A 7900 square foot commerc i a l building located on the north side of H i ghway III east of Cabrillo Avenue. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the initial study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. RAMON A. DIAZ, DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /dig '\. CASE F+YDIROI�*?ITTAI SERVICES DEFT. IYITIAL STUDY EWIAO IEIYTAL EVALUATI011 CHECKLIST NOTE: The availability of data necessary to address the topics listed below shall form the .basis of a decision as to whether the application is considered complete for purposes of environmental assessment. ENVIROr1MENTAL IMPACT$ (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers, possible mitigation measures and comments are provided on attached sheets) . Yes Maybe No I . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions , displacements , compaction, or a� overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction; covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off the site? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? 1/ c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Zr 3. No Water. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe a... Changes . in Currents , 'or the course or 1 direction of water movements? -' b. Changes in-absor tPnn r`at� v p s, drainage Patterns, or the rate and-amo6nt of surface water runoff? C. Alterations to the flood waters? course or flaw of f d. Alteration Of-the direction or rate of f flow of ground waters? e- Change in the quantity of ground waters, f either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? f. Reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? _ 4• Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of plants (in cluding trees , shrubs , grass , and crops )? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants. , C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area , or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 5. Anirra��• Will the Proposal result in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or - - numbers of any. species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles , or Insects)? b: Reduction of the numbers of any unique, ei rare, or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existin g wildlife habitat . %_ 3. Yes 6. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: M�be No a• Increase in :.the rate of use of any natural resources? b. 0epletion of any non-renewable natural resource? 7. Enemy. Will the proposal result in: a. use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or re- energy?quire the.dezelopment of new sources of 8. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a v risk o�Qlosion or the r , hazardous substances in release of to, a eluding, but not limited pesticide's,' imi cid to es, oil d -chemicals , the event of an accident oraupsetrconditions? in g. E�onom_ i_�S Will the Proposal result in: �^ a. A change in 'the value of property and improvements endangered by flooding? b• A change in the value of property and improvements exposed to geologic hazards beyond accepted cc=unity risk standards? 1 0. Noise. -- � Will the Proposal increase existing noise levels to the point at which accepted co munity noise and vibration levels are 11. Land 'use. present Wi l l .the ro a tteraL-on of the p developed or result in the Planned land use of an area? 12. Open — ace. Will the proposal lead to a decrease in the -amount of designated open space? 13. ou_Po lemon Will the proposal result in: a. Alteraticn or the location, distr ' • den ibnti sit or an, Y, growth rite f Population of the Citv? o the human b. Change in the population distribution by age, income, religion, racial , or ethnic group, occupational class , household t • YPe• ,/ 4. Yes Maybe No 14. Emolovment. Will the proposal result in additions new long-term jobs provided, or a change in the number and per cant employed , unemployed, and underemployed? 15. Housing. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in number and per cant of housing units by type (price or rent range, zoning category, owner-occupied and rental , etc. ) relative to demand or to number of families in various income classes in the City? _ b. Impacts on existing demand for additiona housing or creation of a l housing? 16. Transoortation/Circulation resut . Will the proposal tn: a: Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for 'new parking?C. Impact upon existing transportation systems? _ d. Alterations to present patterns Of or movement of peopleand/or goods' e. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists , or pedestrians? _ f 17 . Public Services . Will the proposal have an effect upon , or resu t in a need for, new or altered governmental services in any of the following areAs: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? C. Schools ? —• d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? f. Other governmental services? v S 18. Public Fiscal Balance. Will the Yes Maybe No p result in a net change in government fiscal flow (revenues less operating expenditures and annualized capital expenditures)? 19. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems , or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications system? C. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? . f. Solid waste and disposal? —� 20. Human n Huh Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or Potential health hazard? b. A change in the level of community health care provided? 21 . Social Ser"ices. Will social services? the proposal result in an increased demand for provision of general _ _ _ v 22. Aest_ h cs Will the proposal result in: a a. Obstruction of any scenic vista, or view open to the public? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? c. Lessening of the overall neighborhood (or area) attractiveness, pleasantness, and uniqueness? 22. Licht and Glare. Will the proposal produce new fight or T1t' re? 24. Archeolocical/Historical . Will the proposal resu t in an a teration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, Object, or building? i 6. Yes Maybe No 25. Mandatory Findings of Significance: a. Oces the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment or to curtail the diversity in the environment? b. Ooes the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) ✓ c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small , but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) d. Ooes the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings , either directly or indirectly? Initial Study Prepared By: � nl OO 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083 of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO: PP 86-26 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: MR. & MRS. J. WAMBAUGH 74-660 Anoyo Drive Indian Wells, CA 92210 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: A 7900 square foot commercial building located on the north side of Highway III east of Cabrillo Avenue. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the initial study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, Included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. RAMON A. DIAZ, DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /dlg g pPS6-a6 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 July 1 , 1986 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MR. & MRS. J. WAMBAUGH, 74-660 Anojo Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210; ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. MATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval for 7900 square foot commercial building. LOCATION: North side of Highway 1I1 east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission asked the applicant to resubmit showing architectural detail as expained at meeting. Date of Action: June 24, 1986 Vote: Carried 4-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen ( 15) days of the date of the decision. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JUNE 24, 1986 landscaping should be further studied. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Cook abstaining) . 4. CASE NO: 308 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PACIFIC EQUIPMENT, 6171 Wimbledon Drive, Riverside, CA 92506; HOLDEN & JOHNSON, 73-330 E1 Paseo B, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of a 8500 square foot landscape equipment warehouse/showroom. LOCATION: Northeast corner of 42nd Avenue and Corporate Way. ZONE• S. I . Mr. Joy gave an outline of the proposed project and indicated that he was requesting additional landscaping. Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Martin to grant preliminary approval subject to the usual preliminary conditions, landscaping conditions set by staff and adequate screening of roof mounted equipment. Carried 5-0 5. CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH, 74-660 Anojo Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210; ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval for 7900 square foot commercial building. LOCATION: North side of Highway Ill east of Cabrillo. ZONE• C-1 Mr. Drell indicated that the proposed building was compatible and similar to adjacent buildings. Commissioner Martin felt that the Highway Ill elevation should be restudied. 8 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JUNE 24, 1986 It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commission Martin to return to the applicant for restudy. Carried 5-0 6. CASE NO: 302 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, c/o FRANK WELLS, 4337 Fairlawn Drive, La Canada, 91011 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of gas station and convenience store plans. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Portola and Highway 111 . ZONE: C-1 Mr. Drell outlined the project indicating that staff was concerned with the size of the lot being too small to accommodate the proposed buildings and to provide adequate stacking for cars. Commissioner Drury felt there would be circulation problems that would be more complicated than the existing problem at the station. Commissioner Cook questioned if President's Plaza could be used as an access point for the site. Mr. Drell indicated that it was possible to utilize President's Plaza for access. Commissioner McCrea stated that the building appeared as a corporate structure which he was against. He felt the colors were too bright and should be more subdued. Mr. Dallas Holmes, attorney, explained that Arco was upgrading the station and wished to add a convenience store. Mr. Frank Wells indicated that Arco was willing to invest $400,000 to improve the facility and that the size of the convenience store could be reduced if necessary. He stated that he was unaware that President's Plaza was available for their use. Commissioner Drury noted that the proposed layout would not be adequate to handle the season traffic and that this could be a major problem at Portola. She recommended the applicant make use of the President's Plaza access. Mr. Diaz had concern with a convenience store being located on this site. He indicated that a CUP is required for the gas station and 9 AGENDA ITEM NO: III-B-16 DATE: JUNE 24, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MR. & MRS. J. WAMBAUGH, 74-660 Anojo Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210; ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Ln, Palm Desert, 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval for 7900 square foot commercial building. LOCATION: North side Highway Ill east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-1 DISCUSSION: Proposal is for a one story contemporary stucco commercial building. Architec- ture is rather undistinguished, the project meets code requirement with the exception of the parking lot entrance which must be increased to 24 feet in width. The landscape plan does not contain sufficient detail for review. RECOMMENDATION: Grant preliminary approval and direct applicant to prepare detailed landscape plan. PD/dlg 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 October 1 , 1986 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MR. & MRS. WAMBAUGH c/o ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of working drawings and landscaping. LOCATION: North side of Highway III east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-I Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission approved this case by minute motion subject to conditions. Date of Action: September 23, 1986 Vote: Carried 5-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen ( 15) days of the date of the decision. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached. minutes. MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION TUESDAY - SEPTEMBER 23. 1986 1:00 P.M. COMMUNITY SERVICES CONFERENCE ROOM 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE I . The meeting was called to order. at 1 :00 pm after. a one hour study session. Commission Members . Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent. Ron Gregory, Chairman X 18 0 Al Cook X 14 4 Mary Drury. X 12 6 Charlie Martin X 17 1 Russell McCrea X 14 4 Rick Holden, Alternate X 14 4 Staff Present: Steve Smith Phil Drell. Catherine Sass Ken Weller, Donna Gomez It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the minutes of September 9, 1986 as written. Carried 4-0-I (Commissioner Drury abstaining) .. II. Moved by Commissioner Cook; seconded by Commissioner Drury to approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 5-0 1 . CASE NO: 254 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : IMPERIAL BANK, Mountain View Falls, P.O. Box 92991 , Los Angeles, CA 900D9. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of .revised landscape plan. LOCATION: Mountain View Falls 2. CASE NO• 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MR. & MRS. WAMBAUGH c/o ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of working drawings and landscaping. LOCATION: North side of Highway III east of Cabrillo. ZONE• C-1 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 23, 1986 Approval subject to the following condition: 1 . Addition of planter at east front of bui-lding and street trees. III . CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1 . CASE NO: 1133 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : ROBERGE JEWELRY, 73-520 El Paseo, Palm Desert, CA . 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with signage. LOCATION: Northeast corner San Pablo and El Paseo. ZONE: C-1 S.P. Mr. Smith explained that the proposed awning had received conceptual . approval with the colors and signage to be reviewed. Commission, at study -session, discussed whether the awning should be one continuous awning or broken into sections. Consensus was to have one continuous awning. Mr. Larry Grobeck, applicant, explained that the awning would be black with white lettering and would be 90 feet of actual awning. He noted that one of the "Roberge" names was deleted from the original awning proposal . Commissioner Holden was concerned with how the ends of the awning would look and how the awning would relate to the wood beams. He requested a drawing showing what happens at the ends of. the awning. The applicant indicated that some beams would be cut and removed to provide space for the awning to hang properly. Commissioner Cook thought that the awning could not be installed as indicated by the applicant. He questioned if the owner of the building concurred with the alternations. The applicant indicated that the owner was in favor of all changes being made. Commissioner Martin felt that the awning would provide solar protection and thought it was nice and clean. He suggested a scale drawing be provided. 2 AGENDA ITEM NO: III-A-3 DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MR. & MRS. WAMBAUGH, c/o ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of working drawings and landscaping. LOCATION: North side Highway III east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-1 DISCUSSION• At preliminary review applicant was required to relocated mechanical equipment to the roof, providing adequate parapet, add landscaping at east front and provide 42" rear parking screen wall . Mechanical equipment has been relocated and screened, but other two conditions have not been addressed. Applicant is showing dwarf oleander in place of parking screen wall . There is still an absence of front landscaping on the east side. PD/dig s i r 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 July 28, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MR. & MRS. J. WAMBAUGH, 74-660 Anojo Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210; ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of 7900 square foot commercial building. LOCATION: North side of Highway III east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission granted preliminary approval subject to conditions. Date of Action: July 22, 1986 Vote: Carried 5-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen ( 15) days of the date of the decision. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22. 1986 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Sign and wall mural approval . LOCATION: 74-140 E1 Paseo ZONE; C-1 Applicant submitted revised plan showing changes that commission had recommended. It was moved by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the sign as submitted. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Cook opposed) . B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MR. ✓I MRS. J. WAMBAUGH, 74-660 Anojo Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210; ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of 7900 square foot commercial building. LOCATION: North side of Highway III east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-1 Mr. Drell indicated that a more detailed plan had been submitted showing the items questioned at previous submittal . Commissioner Martin stated that he would rather see the compressors placed on the roof and landscaping around the columns. He noted that there must be a 42" wall or hedge at the rear parking lot. Commissioner Cook recommended that some screens be placed around roof mounted equipment. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant preliminary approval subject to the following conditions. 1 . Final landscape plan to be reviewed;north elevation landscaping should remain as proposed and front east end of building to have additional planting. 5 i MINUTES i ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1986 2. A 42" wall to be provided around north parking lot to provide screening. 3. Mechanical equipment to be relocated. Carried 5-0 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. CASE NO: 307 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALM DESERT VILLAS INC. , P.O. Box 1942, Palm Desert, CA 92261 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT• Preliminary approval for a 113 unit senior housing apartment project. LOCATION: South side of Country Club 1600 feet east of Monterey. ZONE: Propose PR-5 Senior Housing Overlay Applicant submitted revised plans and indicated that changes had been made to the site plan showing shading and solar protection. Commission was concerned that there were too many cross streets and suggested that the street be jogged and the one cross street be deleted. Commissioner Martin stated that he liked the idea of an institution at the front of the lot. Mr. Drell indicated that planning commission was requiring an active recreation area. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Drury to grant conceptual approval . Carried 5-0 2. CASE NO: 309 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MANOR CARE, 1940 Old Tustin Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92701 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT• Final approval of senior complex. 6 AGENDA ITEM NO. III-B-3 DATE: JULY 22, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MR. & MRS. J. WAMBAUGH, 74-660 Anojo Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210; ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of 7900 square foot commercial building. LOCATION: North side of Highway III east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-1 DISCUSSION: The commission had requested the applicant to resubmit plans showing more detail . Additional fascia detail has been provided. PD/dlg CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: July 15, 1986 CASE NO: PP 86-26 REQUEST: Approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan for a 7900 square foot gross, 6715 square foot net, commerc i a l building located on the north side of H i ghway Ill east of Cabrillo Avenue. APPLICANT: MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH 74-660 Anoyo Drive Indian Wells, CA 92210 I. BACKGROUND: A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: R-3 (4)/multi family South: C-1 S.P./commercial East: C-1 S.P./commercial West: C-1 S.P./vacant B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project is a one story commercial building fronting on Highway Ill with parking to the rear. The parking lot will have two driveways with access to Alessandro Drive. Architecture will be contemporary (flat roof, glass and stucco) . The architectural commission has granted preliminary approval . PROJECT DATA: Project Ordinance Requirement Site Area 20,647 sq. ft. Building Area (Gross) 7,900 sq. ft. (Net) 6,715 sq. ft. Building Height 14 ft. 30 ft. maximum Front Setback 8 ft. 5 ft. minimum Parking ( 1/250 sq.ft. ) 27 27 PP 86-26 11. ANALYSIS: Project meets all applicable zoning standards. The following precise plan findings can be made. 1 . The precise plan is consistent with the intent and purpose of the general commercial zone and the Palm Desert General Plan. 2. The project's design will not depreciate or unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity. 3. The project will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. 111 . REODMMENDATION: Approve findings and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. _ approving PP 86-26 subject to conditions. IV. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Legal Notice Prepared by Reviewed and Approved by /dig 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 7900 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED ON THE NORTH HIGHWAY III FRONTAGE ROAD BETWEEN CABRILLO AND SANTA MARGARITA AVENUE. CASE NO: PP 66-26 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 15th day of July, 1986 hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request by MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan of design to allow construction of a 7900 (gross) , 6715 square foot (net) commercial building within the general commercial zone located on the north Highway III Frontage Road between Cabrillo Avenue and Santa Margarita Avenue. WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89", in that the director of community development has determined that the project will have a significant impact on the environment and a negative declaration has been prepared. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts to exist to justify their actions: 1 . The precise plan is consistent with the intent and purpose of the general commercial zoned and the Palm Desert General Plan. 2. The project's design will not depreciate or unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity. 3. The project will not endanger the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. A negative declaration of environmental impact is hereby approved. 3. Precise Plan 86-26 on file in the department of community development is hereby approved subject to the attached conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 15th day of July, 1986 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BUFORD CRITES, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /dig 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. PP 86-26 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of community development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 3. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless a time extension is granted, other- wise said approval shall become null , void and of no effect whatsoever. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contem- plated by this approval , the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Riverside County Department of Health Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Water and Services District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from all sides with materials similar to building walls. 6. Trash provisions shall be approved by applicable trash company and city prior to issuance of building permit. Department of Public Works: I . Drainage and signalization fund fees, as required by city ordinance, shall be paid prior to grading permit issuance. 2. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the department of public works. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ 3. full public improvements, including traffic safety lighting, as required by ordinance and the director of public works, shall be installed in accordance with city standards. 4. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the department of public works prior to the project final . 5. Complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the city engineer for checking and approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the city. 6. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to grading permit issuance. 7. Landscaping maintenance on Alessandro Drive shall be provided by the property owner. 8. Existing utilities on Alessandro Drive shall be undergrounded per each respective utility district's recommendation. If determined to be unfeasible applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. 9. Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted, as required by ordinance, to the city engineer for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. 10. Installation of sidewalk on Alessandro Drive and Palm Desert Drive North. 11 . Offsite improvement plans to be approved by public works department and a surety posted to guarantee the required offsite improvements prior to grading permit issuance. 12. Installation of sewers to serve this project. 13. Size, number and location of driveways to public works specifications with only one driveway approach to be allowed to serve this property. 14. Any permit issuance shall be subject to the waiver of parcel map first being approved and recorded. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ City Fire Marshal : 1 . Install a water system capable of delivering 3000 GPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a 3 hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation sha 1 1 be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 200 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways. a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. C. hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the fire marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the building department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in PP 86-26 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the fire marshal". 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . 7. All buildings over 5,000 square feet require an approved fire sprinkler system. /dlg 5 • 1�- ^ C�$f�� o� `i-�t71 Wren ���p�o4. 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 July 1, 1986 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. PP 86-26 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Oesert Planning Commission to consider a request by MR. B MRS. J. WAMBAUGH for approval of a negative declaration of environmental Impact and a precise plan for a 7,900 square foot commercial building located on the north side of Highway III east of Cabrillo Avenue, more particularly described as: Lot 6 a west 112 of Lot 7 Block G Palma Village Unit No. 6 R I .. . WAY -R- d WAY ", d up i , z J � 0 W I _. U) . 7 R.1 > . > r z -, 13�CQ0 13�Q JO WAY u1 O Rrt l A. J J r -C W r4r— R-3 (4) ` R,3 f4� N R-3 (4)[ R-3 (41 U A 6 E SSA N 0 R 0 k N HIGHWAY 111: - C ::C E.I , . S. P. r C ' R + 3 (4) >_� S. a' EL CAMIN0 "' SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 15. 1986 at 2:00 p.m. In the Council Chamber at 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. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those Issues you or someone else raised at th0publlc hearing described in this notice, or In written correspondence delivered to the city council (or planning commission) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary July 4, 1986 Palm Desert Planning Commission ODI 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083 of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO: PP 86-26 APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: MR. 8 MRS. J. WAMBAUGH 74-660 Anoyo Drive Indian Wells, CA 92210 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: A 7900 square foot commercial building located on the north side of Highway III east of Cabrillo Avenue. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the initial study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. RAMON A. DIAZ, DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /dig CASE JC. �6 ti- cYGIRONL!*CYTAL SERVICES DEPT. IY UD ITIAL STY EYVIRO`15fEYTAL SVALUATI021 CEZCXLIST NOTE: The availability of data necessary to address the topics listed below shall form the basis of a decision as to whether the application is considered complete for purposes of environmental assessment. ENVIRONME`1TAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers, passible mitigation measures and comments are provided on attached sheets) . . Yes Maybe No I . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in jy geologic substructures? b. Oisruptions, displacements , compaction, or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature , or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? ✓i Z, 3• Water, Will the Les Maybe No proposal result in: a- Changes . in currents , 'or the course or 1 direction of water' movements? Ilk b. Changes in-absorption rates , drainage Patterns , or the rate and- amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Alteration Of-the direction or rate of ✓flow of ground waters? e. Change in the � —'— ✓ either through gdirectyadditionsdorawith- drawalaquifes, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? f. Reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? _ 4• plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of plants (includding trees , shrubs , grass , and P ) . b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? , c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area , or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 5. Animal. Will the proposal result in• a. Changes in the diversity of species, or - - numbers of any- species of animals (birds , land animals insects)? including reptiles , or b, Reduction of the numbers of any unique, v rare, or endangered species of animals? C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration existing Wildlife habita+? 3. 6. Natural Resources , Yes M�be No • Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in .the rate of use Of resources? any natural b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? ?• Enerov, Will the proposal result "-� a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Demand upon existing sources of ent of new so ene quire the.deselop m rgy, or re- energy? urces of 8. Risk of Upset Does v osal i risk o�an oretheoreteasenoflve a hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, pesticides , ail , chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident ar upset conditions? 9, Economic Loss Will the �---' Proposal result _in: a. A change in •the value of property and improvements endangered by flooding? b, A change in the value of property and impro-,emen ;s exposed to geologic hazards beyond accepted community risk standards? 10. Noise. Will t. — -- � rease existing noise levels Loath Proposal atcwhich accepted community noise and vibration levels are exceeded? 1i. Land 'use. Will the proposal result in the a a erati on of the present developed or. Planned land use of an area? 12. Ooe. -tee_• Will the proposal lead to a decrease in the -amount of designated open space? 13. Poou=o� Will the proposal result in: a. Alteraticn or the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human Population of the Citv? b. Change in the population distribution by aye, income, religion, racial , or ethnic group, occupa nal class , household type? 4 Yes Maybe No 14. E:n_ ems. Will the proposal result in adaitionai new long-te:m jobs provided, or a change in the number and per cent employed, unemployed, and underemployed? 15. Housing. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in number and per cent of housing units by type (price or rent range, zoning category, owner-occupied And rental , etc. ) relative to demand or to number of families in various income classes in the City? _ b. Impacts on existing housing or creation of a demand for additional housing? 16. TransOOrtation/Circulation. Will the proposal resu t in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing transportation Systems? _ d. Alterations to present Patterns of or movement of people ?and/or goods.) e. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists , or pedestrians? 17. Public Services . Will the proposal have an effect upon , or resu t in a need for, new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? _v b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? f. Other governmental services? v c 18. Public Fiscal Balance. osal Yes Maybe No result in a net change in�government propfiscal flow (revenues less operating expenditures and annualized capital expenditures)? 19. Utiliti . Will the proposal result in a ✓ need —for--new systems , or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? ~ b, Communications system? — ✓ C. Water? d, Sewer or septic tanks? / e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 20. Human Health Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or Potential health hazard? b. A change in the level of community health ✓ care provided? 21 . Social Se r/ices. Will the proposal result in an increased denand for provision of general social services? 22. AesL_ h_e Will the proposal result in: — v a. Obstruction of any scenic vista, or view open to the public? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive r site open to public view? c. Lessening of .the overall neighborhood (or area ) attractiveness, pleasantness, and uniqueness? _ v 23. Licht and Glara. Will the proposal produce new fight or g are? 24. ArcheoTocical/Historical , Will the proposal resu t in an a terac�on of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object, or building? / i J RIVERSIDE-COUNTY of Cktr09y FIREDEPARTMENT - - I,�,j, IN COOPERATION WITH THE ill ;,'a`','.y-_ CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY o RAY HEBRARD 9'�FNr 6f f°per -- FIRE CHIEF 210 W EST SAN JACINTO AVENUE ULAU p 9(9 ��l a I Imo, PERRIS,CALIFORNIA 92370 Raymon Diaz TELEPHONE:(714)657.3183 Planning and Community JU N 2 4 1986 Development Director 73510 Fred Waring COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 CITY OF PALM DESERT Reference: PP Sb_26 Applicant: S. wAM6a49h Dear Mr. Ramon Diaz The following fire protection requirements are in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code and Life Safety Code standards. 1 . Install a water system capable of delivering 3000GPM fire flow from any fire hydrant for a 3 hour duration in addition to domestic supply. The computation shall be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. P4p@ f4aw r@quipe- MOR46 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 200 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways . a. exterior surface of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow, and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. b. curbs shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. c. hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three copies of the water system plan to the Fire Marshal for review. Upon approval , one copy will be sent to the Building Department and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in PP 86-2 6 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Fire Marshal ." 5. Prior to delivery of combustible materials to the building site, the required water system shall be installed, operating and delivering the required flow. 6. Additional fire protection requirements may be necessary when the applicant submits specific plans for consideration and approval . 7. All buildings over 5000 square feet require an approved fire sprinkler system. Very truly yours, RAY HEBRARD Fire Chief By,, tq-W.'r MIKE MCCONNELL Fire Marshal ¥ 2 ! % o Cf . 200 2§ 3J \\ \ § $* * . 44 e , e %4m , yt % ] 4A ® 2 » eC) \° %/ Q !) , ; K Ra ,l w a , t \ In, } Co C)J J \RJ /J { \ Cl * � \ \ \\ 7\7 \$ x \go ew : 3- A! �§ % 6 S\ \ \ \~ \ $ Ia;a 9 > < \ \ , \ & %f rt, ;i§® mow is /§w rl cl ƒm ,!® @ zt j{� )\\ \k� a~ R \ \ km&� GN §\� m M y#& \ m q §) ƒ � g %Re zr- G� ua eq 7V h k 2� 2? 4 k - 4'i k n Rm [ ) gym% * & 0k \� 2m%%q & �� %nk2 q G , ! /ui , i. OO 0 Tsz Tl Trrry� 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO(S): pp $ 6-fir PROJECT: C®vrwtrct"Q I�c i��1"�` APPLICANT: M` - + MYS Z 1/V &.6 au5(,% -7q -66o A-no p _r-. Enclosed please find materials `describing a project for which the following is being requested: .nostaC a, /J s} �- -- Sa., t,v� �e7 ihvc. alma. V%1145d Uv,;i- Pro 6 L off- _ 6n �1 w�i yz YYB (.2-0 33 The attached data was prepared by the applicant and is being forwarded to you for comments and recommended conditions of approval. The city is interested in the probable impacts on the environment (including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, noise objects of historical or aesthetic significance)-and recommended conditions of approval based on your expertise and area of concern. Your comments and re ommended conditions of approval must be received by this office prior to 4:30 p.m. 1 ,�}� J5A , in order to be discussed by the land division committee. The land division committee (comprised of director of environmental services, city building official, city engineer, fire marshal and a representative of CVWD) will discuss the comments and recommended conditions of approval and will forward them to the planning commission through the staff report. Any information received by this office after the receipt deadline will not be discussed by the land division committee. Sincerely, RAMON A. DIAZ DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES RD/Ir Attachments - PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVisCrE a(�yG y ; FROM : DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS JUN 13 1986 SUBJECT: r i-,`BAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT DATE : JL1Nc- 1211�1 The following should be considered conditions of approval : © Drainage and signalization •fund fees , as required by City ordinance , shall be paid prior to +r�op of—the—f-inaI mepd—fr �permit Issuance) . 2 ) Drainage fact r( ties shall be provided, per Ordinance No. 218 and the Master Drainage Plan, to the specifications of the Director of Public Works . Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study by the private engineer that is approved by the , Department of Public Works . �4 Full public improvements , Including traffic safety lighting, as required by ordinance and the Director of Public Works , shall be installed In accordance with City standards. SO Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to the protect final . © Complete Improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted , as required by ordinance , to the City Engineer for checking and approval before construction of any Improvements is commenced. The engineer shall submit "as-built" plans prior to the acceptance of the Improvements by the City. 1 cl rlvPNvc S and 2T-k-Inc (�r�$ O7 All privatehsl shall be inspec4d by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to ( reeordat (en—ef—the—€4-naa—maps—(-any^permit Is- suance) . �11�4� p21M QLandscaping maintenance on A kM br sFia11 be provided by the Ehemee a -Assoc-la't-i-on3 (property owner ). Existing utilities on Alma«,-{,.r-,•, QC_, sha l l be underground- 09 ed eac . respective utility district a a . 10) Traffic safety striping on shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works . A traffic control plan must be submitted to and approved by the Director of Public Works before placing pavement markings . II Complete grading plans and specifications shall be submit ted , as required by ordinance , to the City Engineer for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits . 12 ) Dedication of feet of right-of-way on shall be done prior to issuance of any permits and approval of plans . I3 Installation of sd-Fb—end— utterr—masping—paving—arm s I dewa I k on n I r av Fa�n� pQso�rt Dr-, _• 14 ) Waiver of access to except at approved locations shall be granted on the final map. ,I 1 I1 I 15 ) Close unused driveway with full heighth curb and gutter .' : 16 Offsfte improvement, plans to be approved by Public Works . . :I • Department and a surety posted to guarantee the required ; offslte improvements prior to 4-F-eeerda44-erg—e-f—the—f-I-na-1 '! : Tai -A(permit issuance) . 17 ) FUII improvement of interior streets based on ( 60 ' residen- tial ) (private ) ( industrial ) street standards as established in accordance with Chapter 26 , Section 26 . 40 . 040 , C. P.D . Code . 16) Installation of one-half landscaped median in or cash payment for one-half the cost of landscaped median , at the option of the Director of Public Works . I1 19) Traffic analysis to be prepared for the project to address the specific Impacts on existing networks ( street and Intersections ) and the proposed mitigation measures recom- mended for approval by the City. , . II I 20 Installation of sewers to serve this project. 21 Size , number and location of driveways to Public Works specifications with only Gina , driveway approachHi-&4 to be allowed to serve this property. 22 ) No (new) requirements . (Original conditions apply) 23 Any permit Issuance shall be subject to the waiver of parcel map first being approved and recorded. 24) Complete (parcel ) (tract) map( s ) shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the City Engineer for checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of certificate of occupancy by the Building Department . i r, o_ doe Richard J . Folkers , P.E . RA/RJF i r ' i I 1 i it I, „1 73-510 Fred Waring Dr., Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 1POPLOCAMON F'ORWC: Dept.of Planning and Community Development w 6wt • J. ftm4i O 2N& $ Applicant ( lease print) i4- 4016maoing Address AN Oy D fl*.l�E TeleDn o ne cl — 1 State Z'Co aa — REQUEST! (Describe specific nature of approval requested I. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1h110a v1n.54, U14 weem . suark. cl3 &orb le? 1 . rillaA S l +ksw 33 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. c EXISTING ZONING • Coal �/ Property Owner Authorization The rsi to states t they are the o er Is) of the property described herein and hereby give autnor- i I for th iling o i pplicayon. 5 422. nature Oate Agreement absolving the City of Palm le all iabiliries relative to any deed restrictions. 1 DO 8Y MY SIGNATURE ON ISor A RE ENT, A Ive the City of Palm Desert of all liabilities regarding any deed restrictions mV b,applic le to the property described herein. � 12 G igna ure Date Applicant's Signature � • / ��/ �- Siq ure / Data (FOR STAFF USE ONLY) Environmental Status Accepted by: ❑ Ministerial Act E.A. No. - ❑ Categorical Declaration CASE MO ❑ Negative Declaration CASE IlV a ❑ Other Reference Case No. EMVIeaMMEWiZ SEMIC6/.Ta 9-11-e2 11 *STEWARZ TITLE COMPANY OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY 74-075 EL PASEO,SUITE A-2A • P. 0. BOX 1801 • PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92261 TELEPHONE: (619) 568.1874 Sanctity of Contract JUNE 16 , 1986 To Whom It May Concern , We certify that the attached property owner ' s lists are true and complete as provided by the 85/86 tax assessment rolls on the subject property , and the listing of property owners within 300 feet of the property involved is true and correct to the best of our knowledge . Sincerely , Anita Anita Molina Customer Service Rep. Leonard & Margaret Henderson Kenneth Romage Barbara & Floyd Vail P. 0. Box 504 Edward Lovett 72-284 Pitahaya Palm Desert, CA 92260 74-218 Alessandro Dr. Palm Desert, CA 92260 625-083-006 Palm Desert, CA 92260 625-083-008 625-083-007 C ynthia Lynn Osborne Joe Cabanyog Frank R. Goodman & Assoc. 44-835 Santa Anita Ave. 77-900 Avenue of the States 77-900 Avenue of the States Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 625-083-009 625-085-003 625-085-004 Gary W. Lyons Ernest & Hilda De Marbiex Ramon & Guadalupe Arce 4151 State St. P. 0. Box 125 P. 0. Box 442 Erie, PA 16508 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 625-085-005, 006 625-091-002 625-091-003 Ervis B. Dayton Robert & Linda Nutting Allen & Joyce Steele 74-280 Alessandro Dr. P. 0. Box 54541 P. 0. Box 2193 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Los Angeles, CA 90099 Palm desert, CA 92261 625-091-004, 005, 006 625-091-007 625-091-008 Michael & Polina Coltum James & Ruby Klepper Donovan Taylor 655 N. Hayworth Ave Apt. 206 12922 Ranchwood Rd. 44-836 Santa Ynez Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90048 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Palm Desert, CA 92260 625-091-009 625-091-010 625-092-002 Joan & Albert Glowicki John V. Trefts Joseph & Dee Wambaugh 74-935 Highway 111 124 Washington St. 74-660 Arroyo Dr. Indian Wells, CA 92210 Marina Del Rey, CA 90291 Indian Wells, CA 92260 625-092-003, 004 625-094-015 625-094-020 Desert Plaza Kenneth B. Jacques Enterprises LML Dev. Corp of Calif. c/o Sam Russel 7080 Hollywood Blvd. P. 0. Box 1000 P. 0. Box 2056 Los Angeles, CA 90028 La Quinta, CA 92253 Palm Desert, CA9 92261 625-121-001 625-121-002 625-112-007 Frank & Eileen Occhipinti Woods Electricon Corp. 906 Madonna Way 74-271 Highway 111 Los Altos, CA 94022 Palm Desert, CA 92260 625-122-002 625-122-003 J i m e O ti � ( a i 89. N "♦ g O h o r,c¢. nl �L9 9) Ql O � O O v h A YNEZ � iv 14 O r_ Br zs, a Q3 �b osQS „/ O Q MO ^ P o£ =F ------------ O 90 E 6¢ u c► s P $ CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMO TO: Phill Drell FROM: Brent Conley RE: PP86-26 DATE: June 9, 1986 The plan as proposed has to address a number of suggestions. The addressing of the businesses must be consistant with existing businesses on Hwy 111 . This addressing must be at least 6" in height on contrasting background on both back and front of building. The plan does not address possible roof access or roof height. This is important that any possible roof access be properly secured to avoid rooftop entry. Consideration should also be made that access to each building can be made undetected by moving through adjacent lavatory rooms . This entrance is unlikely, but should be addressed because of similar past problems. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to contact me at ext. 303. Brent Conley Crime Prevention BC/rrt JUN 1 81986 Southern California Edison. Company COMMONClIIV DEVELOPMENT OEPARIry 1 36-100 CATHEDRAL CANYON DRIVE OF PALM D£SEBIME CATHEDRAL CITY, CALIFORNIA 92234 RECEJvED AN 16 1986 ENGINEERING DEPAR7'MENT To: City of Palm Desert CITY OF PALM DESERT; Subject: Palma Village, Unit N6 Environmental Impact Report Gentlemen: This is to advise that the subject property is located within the service territory of the Southern California Edison Company and that the electric loads of the project are within parameters of projected load growth which Edison is planning to meet in this area. Unless the demand for electrical generating capacity exceeds our estimates, and provided that there are no unexpected outages to major sources of electrical supply, we expect to meet our electri- cal requirements for the next several years. Our total system demand is expected to continue to increase annually; however, excluding any unforeseen problems, our plans for new generation resources indicate that our ability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods will be adequate during the decade of the 80's. Current conservation efforts on the part of Edison's customers has resulted in energy savings. Optimization of conservation measures in this project will contribute to the overall energy savings goal. Very ttruu,ly yours, Glenn Buchanan Customer Service Planner r C� �aPalmaUeeert Water & Serviced 2ii3t rict 44.500 PORTOLA AVC �/yG BOX 161 PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92MN 2 4 1986 BOARD OF DIRECTORS: phone:(619)346-6338 ROBERT C. H. LAWMAN, President COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPART61ENT R. CLAIR McDONOUGH CITY OF PALM DESERT SHARON K. EPPS PHYLLIS GRIGGS, District Secretary June 18-, 1986 Mr. Ramon Diaz Director of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Re: Case No. PP 86-26 Mr. & Mrs. J. Wambaugh, Commercial Building Lot, 6 & West � of Lot 7 Block G, Palma Village Unit No. 6 Alessandro Drive Dear Mr. Diaz : In response to your letter regarding the above referenced project, we would like to make the following comments : 1 . A frontage fee of $15. 00 will be imposed along Alessandro Drive. 2 . The District will install a 2-inch water meter and service at a cost of $3000 each. 3 . As an alternate to Item No. 2 , the District could provide individual meters for each unit. 4 . All meter installation charges and frontage fees must be paid before installation work will begin. 5. If a single 2-inch meter is used an approved 2-inch backflow prevention device must be installed as part of the plumbing. 6 . At least one week advance notice should be given prior to service installation. 7. The addition of any new fire hydrants or the relocation of any existing, if required by the City Fire Marshall, would be completed at an additional cost to be determined upon request. All costs would be paid for by the developer. Mr. Ramon Diaz June 18 , 1986 Page Two 8 . A fire sprinkler service connection is to be completed at the expense of the developer according to the District' s standard, a copy of which is attached. We request that a copy of the conditions be sent to us. If you have any questions in regard to the above, please contact us. Very truly yours, Palm Desert Water & Services District cc: Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc. „, , i _1_ • l }I Af 16 A* ASSOIrIATES E L I, iVEITH - - A RCI ITECT ASSOCIATE a _ ;t a ! - -__ _ �- __ .,• t a Y PEAF� LANE �. _. � PALM DESERT y : A1...1FQ r 11� 9 2 6[� : TELE� � r'3t°;S 6 '1 9 3 4 6 2 2 2 3 w I h` b -SOUTH — I _ - I�Q ' i• f t r � XSw y i ! w xni k hT� v }.� ._ .: , � � ^"s�g`•��.-• 'y'�°-'' ,p� fit"'_ � ,r'.� ,`` tt Rt.+ • I • t+n L4 i ,4ii'."r:Wr x,• rx,r e: , .e:.. .,,,.a,.:..: :. ..,. _-_.... ...,.... .. ,�,.....,_,,,. _.-.---____._ ---_ ._...._ .- ~_+...,., .. Yn.—. ,.,• ,may - V' _ -.. ^-__- __ m'+r.-.-....�•".,: __..-- T, PLkST �,tt C , � we 2 CERa - _ . , ,1 Imo, + t. 3. FIXED ZZ µ ` 4. STOREFF J 7 DOOR 5. CMCRETE BLOCK EAST 5. PLANER FASCIA WEST O. H. S 1 M. � 7. PLASTER WAi.LS x �” • v , x , t l;v ���.I�i 101l� PAxI w.,>•`ka,Z k'�.:.:9,�`7"... 4 -NORTH x bk�. 1 +T J 2 Cv NO. DATE REVISIONS _ M Co _ I m - PROJECT a -- A CC�MN-AiEE�C1 �. .E� �► w , , m a, .a. f. , „ a , 3 , ern' +maar` Sea J. ' "'AMEAUGH, 74 — O A O `O 13P VE -- � ECTION 1[ DIA WELLS , CA1,_ 1E s I I . :_ •_. .r. ... t TITLE P � I EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS DATE SHEET NO. DRN. BY SCALE APPROVED OF: : r , ' .,;: �, 'af„xr":m.a+tYF9.4•7w,a Y,p/; ,.,. ' _.__._.__ ,._, , -,..�,......;...,.., ..-....«�..r.�a+n.a+,.a-.arowe�n•J,.W*..G+Yaae,'�naafi_. _{ i r I A I , A , WENDELL Rs ILICCIARTir, j , , ._ 777 „4 a ARCHITECT _ ` E , ,. •:.roc s r - 1 vow , 1 t, r? I 'a s, I i r i 45 275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE' L PA M DESERT , r CAL1FrC' it�. 92260 TELEPD '1 9 — 3 4 6 — 2 2 T r ., ' ",S`s�➢zte"+we r.E w.x.i"'.+e .,d• *�.: �.d12i G'v„gyp _.,..y. ur,,,'4•:ans.aeu¢ R ' SOUTH 1 j 1 ��� ' � .rk_.y. '�"r'„�12 '��.Ye'."„'..-. off",:- � .�w..��. -w'•t«.r.o. �.-- _�*rw:' s c- M LEGEND FY1 PLASTERs 1 " 2. CERAt'?I C TILE _ 3. . �r ,. ._rt .. -,.,., ., . , .._�. _.,,,,r_.m.�,,o�,�:,�- a �-r-.��;.�w. ,.�;;,�� .,_�._,m,.�,,;,,,.• ,.�.��,_ FIX ED D GLASS tr 4. STOREFRONT DOOR ' 5. CONCRETE BLOCK EAST 6• PLASTER FASCIA 7• PLASTER WALLS WEST O. H. SIM. a,. r f y1 Tr z '�, .w d'Y,, II , Ir � ;yll!.. •t • ,. i' , ;I i • �.i g `+ if i ,- ,�;,,„�.•.;, ,: - �� ''I i ti ! �i „„, �, # r' 'i I _ _ '�` •w+.�_..-..^:!y --:'mw¢ai.:iA' ::: 1C;��C�-�� �:ya. i� r� 1�Y. f...�rr'+'�...w�.:n:.. .'___ i � �� .��� ti1►i'.tlr,'" "-:.d1�:':�r„ b� yam„ FL__._... ..lt I�__ I I P;�' 'i�}`, j� am,. t-.., �qr P.rn< s. F,�.�`-r.,- , .€+,,�•,� .., , .., � �,...: ....,__ ,�$.�., - .Ye�.� te.wm.a ..t_-�s�.i._. _ .,.ah•t-: RY s ,A". "2" mn eF` v....�a ..,,... �n :,':o. ,S:Yc. W. ., ,,,...� ,.,.,r a,.,.. .,.,.,:......... .. >.-,.;....- �r r'::4 Te 3•,s Y:G.&:.:,: __NORTH M ry �-- NO. DATE REVISIONS I PROJ E CT — . 1 a COMMERCIAL a. s _:: _ __. ___ - —�,.--�.-- � --•�— .FS✓4GL'5g+2,2wReS "",''C>y ....ynl7i2x .^e^:..,,�-a�, .. .., ,. ,.. :, MPvo MRS* 74 66 �ANOYO DRIVE .SECTION `" INDIAN WELLS , CALIFORNIA a, TIT E , ,w EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1 3 1 D AT E SHEET NO. b ; pwr2 DRN. BY SCALE I APPROVED 0F: