Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-17 Draft Minutes MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY – FEBRUARY 17, 2009 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tanner called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Schmidt led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Van Tanner, Chair Sonia Campbell, Vice Chair Russ Campbell Connor Limont Mari Schmidt Members Absent: None Staff Present: Lauri Aylaian, Director, Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Renee Schrader, Associate Planner Melissa Grisa, Assistant Planner Phil Joy, Transportation Planner Janine Judy, Sr. Office Assistant IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Request for consideration of the December 16, 2008 and January 6, 2009 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Limont, seconded by Commissioner R. Campbell, approving the December 16, 2008 meeting minutes. Motion carried 5-0. Action: MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 It was moved by Commissioner R. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, approving the January 6, 2009. Motion carried 4-0, Commission Limont abstaining. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Aylaian summarized pertinent February 12, 2009 meeting minutes. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PP 03-19 – SCOTELLE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Applicant Request for approval of a second, one-year time extension for Phase III (one remaining building) of Case No. PP 03-19 (which allowed the construction of five office buildings totaling 53,662 gross square feet) on property located at 39-800 Portola. Action: It was moved by Commissioner R. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. CUP/PP 08-263 – THE LIVING DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of a request by The Living Desert, located at 47900 Portola Avenue, for a Conditional Use Permit, a Precise Plan Amendment, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration as it relates thereto. The request would revise the original Living Desert plan to construct, in four phases, new zoological exhibits and a new entry 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 complex as follows: Phase 1: African lion, meerkat, rock hyrax enclosures, Phase 2: crocodile, tortoise, lovebird, serval enclosures, Phase 3: future entry complex/events building, Phase 4: future hyena and rhinoceros enclosures. Ms. Renee Schrader reviewed the staff report and stated that due to the concerns expressed at the December 2, 2008 meeting this action was continued to the next meeting on January 6, 2008. However, the applicant was unable to attend and the issue was postponed to the next available meeting, which is tonight’s hearing. The concerns voiced at the December 2, 2008 meeting were general: traffic considerations; appearance of the perimeter chain-link fence; and three noise considerations, of which one was regarding special events, one regards tour/school buses, and one regards leaf blowers. She stated that, in response, staff conditioned that there be a stop sign at the exit, but subsequently found that there is one there. According to the Public Works Department it is the best possible and only mitigation for the reported concern. It is as close as it can be to the curb and is visible from a distance. Included in the Commission packets were written correspondences received February 11, 2009 in favor of the project, presenting the Commission with signatures from 33 residents who expressed their support of the project, and a copy of a written statement submitted by Mr. Patrick Bedrosian in opposition to the expansion. Ms. Schrader stated that the findings for a Conditional Use Permit and a Precise Plan had been met. Staff believes that they have addressed the Commission’s concerns and the attached conditions should adequately meet those concerns. Staff recommends approval of CUP/PP 08-263 by adoption of the findings and the draft resolution, subject to the conditions. Chairperson Tanner asked for any questions of staff. Commissioner Limont was concerned with the buses running in the parking lot and asked who has jurisdiction over private property and if staff checked into that because there have been some new ordinances with regards to greenhouse gases. Ms. Schrader stated that if the Planning Commission wanted to additionally condition the project, additional research could be performed. Commissioner Limont stated she just wanted to make sure this was addressed. Mr. Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney stated that he didn’t 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 know but that he would look into the issue and get back to the Commission. He stated that part of the condition is that the applicant must comply with whatever air quality requirements are in effect. Commissioner R. Campbell said that the staff report indicated fourteen buses visited the site, but upon review of the log provided, the most they had on one day was five, except for eleven one day in May. He asked if this count was correct because it was showing very few buses. Ms. Schrader stated that to the best of her knowledge the information was correct, and was compiled by the applicant based on their records. Commissioner S. Campbell asked what type of landscaping they would have along the chain link fence. Ms. Schrader stated that the main theme of that right of way landscape is a naturalized landscape with local materials. Staff is very concerned that the chain link fence itself be screened from view and staff will work with the applicant to make sure that the plan is adequate and is checked on in phases. Seasonal inspections would be performed to make sure that the landscaping is maintained and that the chain link is not visible. Commissioner R. Campbell stated that it was mentioned to the Commission that the leaf blowers were being used at six in the morning and asked if this was correct and if it was discussed with The Living Desert. Ms. Schrader stated that the applicant would comply with the Municipal Code regarding leaf blowers. Commissioner S. Campbell asked if that would be the same requirement for the outdoor entertainment. Ms. Schrader stated that staff was imposing an additional restriction out of sensitivity to the fact that The Living Desert is adjacent to a residential neighborhood. Sunday night any outdoor music or noise would end at 9:00 p.m., and Friday and Saturday night it would end at 10:00 p.m. The Living Desert provided a list of events held and there aren’t many in the evening. They are willing to comply with the curfew imposed in the conditions. There were no other questions for staff. Chairperson Tanner opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the Commission. MS. TERRE CORRELL, applicant, 47900 Portola Avenue, Palm Desert, California, 92260. She thanked the Commission and read a statement regarding the conditions for the approval of Lion Ridge. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 The statement reported that since 1970 The Living Desert has been preserving, conserving and interpreting the desert and its animal and plant life. The master plan has been to interpret the world’s desert ecosystems, including both animal and plant exhibits, from North America, Africa and Australia. The mission of The Living Desert is “Desert Conservation through preservation, education and appreciation.” The objectives of The Living Desert are: 1) preservation of the Colorado Desert in its natural state; 2) fostering an awareness of, and appreciation for, the variety of plants and animals in worldwide desert ecosystems; 3) building populations of various species of desert animals and plants threatened with extinction and; 4) fostering biological studies contributing to the protection of desert species in the wild state. The first North American animal exhibit for Kit Fox was built in 1972 and the first African exhibit was constructed for slender-horned gazelle in 1981. The proposed exhibit “Lion Ridge” is part of the master plan approved by the Board of Trustees. Lion Ridge’s main inhabitants are African lions. Now large predators such as these are ultimately forced into smaller parcels of habitats and face extinction throughout much of their range. The Living Desert is working to establish conservation populations of lions, along with many other species. Lion Ridge will also be home to servals, African tortoises, rock hyrax, crested porcupines, meerkats and lovebirds. The educational programs of The Living Desert give access to desert ecology, plants and animals to enrich the understanding of their interdependence and conservation. Last year over 30,000 school children visited The Living Desert from both inside and outside the valley, participating in programs designed to help meet the California teaching standard for science. Ms. Correll reported that The Living Desert has reviewed and agrees to the Special Conditions of Approval in IV, Analysis, with the following comments: 1. The Living Desert has a stop sign posted at the exit gate. 2. The correct name for the building Phase 3 is the Special 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 Events Building, not Conference Center. The primary purpose of this building is to house temporary exhibits and its secondary purpose is to be used for private functions. Prior to submitting for Phase 3, they will prepare a traffic study for approval. 3. The Living Desert will install new plant material and maintain the landscape to shield the fence from view of the Portola Avenue right of way. The USDA requires a perimeter fence. The Living Desert has chosen to use chain link barb wire at the top. This is a common fence type used in the zoo industry for animal containment, as well as for security. The USDA exhibitor’s license was granted in 1978, and a chain link fence was installed along Portola in 1970. A chain link fence is also installed on Portola at Ironwood County Club. 4. The Living Desert will work with the City to establish seasonal landscape inspections of the Portola fence. 5. The Living Desert will restrict outdoor entertainment to Sunday through Thursday to end at 9:00 p.m. and Friday and Saturday, to end at 10:00 p.m. They will write these restrictions into rental contracts. 6. The Living Desert will post signage regarding the idling of buses for more than fifteen minutes. They will also send out notices and post on their website the notice that “the environment and energy are valued resources. The idling of any bus longer than fifteen minutes is discouraged”. The Living Desert will also inform tour operators of the City ordinance regarding the idling of buses. Ms. Correll reported that she recently took the opportunity to ask bus drivers to leave their engines running, while she and another staff member went across the street to listen. They could not hear the three group tour buses on December 31, 2008 or the five school buses (three gasoline and two diesel) on January 15, 2009. Only when the bus was in The Living Desert Drive at the stop sign to turn on to Portola could they hear the bus. The group tour bus drivers said they would not hear their engines as they were equipped with “whisper” engines. Regarding the school buses, they do turn off their buses when on site. A variety of vehicle traffic on Portola from cars to work trucks (some with diesel engines) to semi-tractor trailers can be heard. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 7. The Living Desert will adhere to the City ordinance for use of leaf blowers and landscape maintenance equipment. Ms. Correll summarized that The Living Desert has been committed for 40 years to bring to people, through gardens and animal displays, the ability to experience firsthand the worlds’ deserts, animals and plants and their ecosystems. They also preserve the desert and its inhabitants for the sake of future generations by expanding educational programs and exhibits, increasing conservation activities and continuing to develop educational and conservation programs and a recreational asset to the City of Palm Desert and the Coachella Valley. Chairperson Tanner asked Ms. Correll if they will continue this phase work even under the conditions of the economy today. Ms. Correll stated that they are planning to fundraise for their exhibits and said that if they are unable to raise the money they will not be able to build their exhibits, but they want to continue moving forward with their master plan as the economy allows. There were no other questions. Chairperson Tanner asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION of the proposed project. MS. VIRGINIA YEAGER, 73700 Roadrunner Court, Palm Desert, California, 92260. She stated that she has been a resident of Corsican Villas for over 37 years and The Living Desert is a very caring and co-operative neighbor and the more they do the better it is for Palm Desert economically and educationally. MR. THOMAS TEFFT, 47719 Date Palm Court, Palm Desert, California, 92260. He stated that he is a resident of Corsican Villas and The Living Desert is a world class zoo and botanical gardens with missions that emphasize conversation, education and preservation of wildlife and natural resources. In order to carry out these missions, The Living Desert must be open to public access, which involves buses as well as private vehicles. The proposed construction project would enhance the missions and allow The Living Desert to do a better job of educating the public. Because it is a non-profit organization, The Living Desert must host various fundraising events and must be held in the evening when The Living Desert is closed. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 As a docent at The Living Desert he has never received complaints of the bus noise or fumes and occasionally hears music from the events at his home, but it is never really loud and it is turned off at 9:00 p.m. MR. SCOTT RAMSER, 105 N. Washington, Wichita, Kansas. He introduced himself as the architect for The Living Desert and was available to answer any questions the Commission may have. MS. KAREN CASIER, 73175 Deer Grass Drive, Palm Desert, California, 92260. She stated that she is a resident of Palm Desert and has been visiting The Living Desert for over 20 years, recently as a life member. She trusts the staff’s vision for the welfare and growth of the park and their participation in the species survival plan has resulted in numerous successes and reflects the high caliber of the organization and its staff. She indicated that she supports the Lion Ridge project because in order to keep visitors returning to both the city and The Living Desert, it is important to have something new for them to see. Lion Ridge would accomplish this and bring tourism dollars to both the zoo and local businesses. The Living Desert provides education to the public including many area school children and Lion Ridge would enhance education for all visitors. A new special events building would be a welcome addition because special events and parties are a large source of operating income. MR. STEVE FUCHS, 73720 Shadow Mountain Drive #9, Palm Desert, California, 92260. He stated that he is a docent in the education department for The Living Desert and has been doing youth tours for two years. The education mission is to fulfill some of the California teaching standards requirements with regard to native people and life sciences. The Living Desert is a center of learning and provides continuing education for adults and outreach programs to bring nature into the classrooms. It is truly a private institution in the public’s interest. MS. KAREN SAUSMAN, 47900 Portola, Palm Desert, California, 92260. Ms. Sausman stated that, as founding Director of The Living Desert, she was in attendance to thank the City Council and the Planning Commission for their efforts in reviewing their project and expressed her appreciation to the City for the many years of support that they have given The Living Desert. She also assured the City that if they continue support, she and her staff will continue to work 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 hard to make the Planning Commission, the City Council and the City proud of having The Living Desert within its boundaries. 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 MR. WILLIAM BLUE, 73640 Irontree Drive, Palm Desert, California, 92260. He stated that he has been a resident since 1983 and a member of The Living Desert since 1984. He considers it to be one of the main attractions of the community and supports the continuing expansion of exhibits and education. He stated that the facility is highly respected and visitors and residents have increased their visits each year. Concurrently as president of the board of Animals Samaritans, he is very proud of the humane education program which incorporates the wonderful assets of The Living Desert in creative and beneficial “critter camp” programs for elementary age students. For those living in close proximity to The Living Desert, selection of home sites initially took into consideration The Living Desert, its physical appearance from the street, traffic on Portola and surrounding gated communities. The Living Desert’s growth and the potential benefit to the City and the Valley are a plus. All limited access communities and The Living Desert have fencing appropriately decorated with local vegetation that reduces the exposure of the fencing or walls. The increase traffic on Portola is being properly planned by the City with increased lanes and access and the number of commercial transport vehicles, but through State- mandated vehicle requirements they have incorporated noise abatement mufflers and fume dispersal equipment. As the city continues to expand and garner additional residential interest, The Living Desert represents everything positive and synergistic as a good neighbor in local environment. As a resident on Portola and as a frequent visitor to The Living Desert, and also as a docent, he is unaware of any major distractions in terms of audible or site issues day or night. MR. MAX MILLER, 47748 Mirage Court, Palm Desert, California, 92260. He stated that he and his family have been residents in Corsican Villas for more than ten years and members of The Living Desert for approximately the same amount time. They enjoy it very much and visit frequently. He and his visiting friends enjoy it and urged the Commission to approve the project. MS. BARBARA SPENCER, 73290 Riata Trail, Palm Desert, California, 92260. She stated that she and her husband have been residents of Palm Desert for over 20 years and eight years on Riata Trail and both are excited about the exhibit being planned. It is a reminder of their tour of Cougar Park in South Africa. What they see 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 at The Living Desert is opportunity for the community and the Coachella Valley and for all the children to see and learn about Africa. What a great gift The Living Desert gives to a community by teaching these students about their own fragile desert environment. Their conservation programs for endangered species will hopefully ensure the long term survival of these species in the wild. The Living Desert is an institution that not only gives locally, but globally. MR. GREG SCRIMMONS 73200 Grapevine, Palm Desert, California, 92260. He stated that he has been a resident of the desert all of his life and said the whole façade of The Living Desert is great with the way all the buildings are back from the street. With all their projects they have taken the time to diminish the view on the site whether through landscaping, color or roof line. Chairperson Tanner asked if anyone else wished to speak in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION of the proposed project. MR. PATRICK G. BEDROSIAN, owner of property in Corsican Villas, Palm Desert, CA 92260. He first addressed a comment made regarding the control of buses or noise on private property. At Albertson’s the City says when the trucks can make deliveries and when they have to leave. So for trucks and bus noise and traffic, that is why there is a Conditional Use Permit. One of the comments made was that the music could be heard from area homes, and that is a violation of the city ordinance. Noise should not be heard; blowing of horns, loud speaker conversation, or music on other properties. It’s all about being a good neighbor. He stated that people are saying there are no complaints, and that is not true. He questions why the applicant would walk across the street to listen to the buses, talk to the bus driver or talk to the people across the street if there weren’t a problem. There is a problem when you hear things in your home and your roof vibrates. He stated that according to The Living Desert website, people can have their parties until midnight. He understands that they are talking about making changes, but they weren’t concerned until they wanted something. He is not opposed to The Living Desert; he’s been there and loves the desert. What he is opposed to is their statement on their website, “why do animal and plants become endangered”? By introducing non-native species. This information is in their website, and they want to introduce non- 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 native species. He stated there was a fence there, but that it was replaced. When the new fence went in it should have been up for approval. As far as the requirements of zoos go, he drove into their property and there is a secondary fence in the parking lot. Looking at the outside fence, there are places that he could get through. They are saying that they have to have these things because of the rules of the zoo, but any type of business put in this city is subject to regulation and those regulations are to protect the neighborhood, where you can hear a pin drop and all noise levels are based on ambient noise levels. How about late at night when he wants to listen to what he wants to or open up his slider? He requested that the Commissioners look at what he presented to the Commission. Chairperson Tanner asked the applicant is she had a rebuttal. MS. CORRELL stated that The Living Desert wants to be a good neighbor to the residents that surround them and, as previously stated, they are happy and willing to meet the conditions as outlined in the application for the project to go forward. She asked if the Commission had any questions. Commissioner R. Campbell asked if there is a problem introducing animals to an area they are not accustomed to as mentioned on the website. He asked if that means introducing them to the wild or to a controlled area. Ms. Correll stated that what that refers to is the introduction of non-native species into wild habitat. For instance, the common house sparrow is what is considered an injurious species that was introduced in the 1800s and spread across North America. Prior to that time it was not found in North America, and introducing non-native species into the wild state often times can became a problem. At The Living Desert the animals are contained in their animal exhibits. Chairperson Tanner asked if anyone else wished to speak in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION of the proposed project. There was no response and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Tanner asked for Commission comments. Commissioner Limont stated that she thought that The Living Desert has always done a good job, and agreed with the comments made in favor of the project; it is a wonderful and enjoyable institution. Her interpretation was 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 simply that the Commission had issues with regard to the neighborhood; it seemed at the time the city was not aware of them, so before going forward she wanted to make sure that there was agreement. Her major comment was that regardless of the ordinance with regards to AQMD, The Living Desert is in a city that is promoting conservation and energy efficiency and air quality issues. She hoped that The Living Desert would “walk the walk” and tell the buses that they, in accordance with AQMD which prohibits commercial vehicles from running more than fifteen minutes, must follow that rule. As long as The Living Desert meets everything that has been asked for, she stated that it was a good project. Commissioner R. Campbell stated that he could not add to the eloquence of what Commissioner Conner said because he agreed with her in total. Commissioner S. Campbell thanked the staff for the very good job providing the Commission with solutions to all of the comments they had at the last meeting. She stated that The Living Desert is willing to go along with all the conditions that were imposed upon them, and expressed that this is a good project and she had no problem with approving it. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the Special Events building would come before the Commission for approval when it becomes a reality. Ms. Schrader answered that the Commission would be approving the whole plan for that. It is conditioned so that, when the time comes to pull building permits, they provide the Public Works Department with a separate parking and traffic study so that the city can make sure that, compared to the volumes that are already visiting the park for the lions, there will be adequate capacity and no impacts. If the Public Works staff believes that there is an impact that can’t be mitigated without a hearing, it would be returned to the Commission. Right now, approval is for the whole master plan, including the footprint of the Special Events building. Commissioner Schmidt asked if they were approving the structure and what it looks like. Ms. Schrader stated that the Architecture Review Commission (ARC) has approved the structure and the materials, and the final review will pass through the ARC for approval, but a condition could be added to require that it be presented to the Planning Commission before it receives building permits. Commissioner Schmidt felt that it would be prudent for the Commission to review whatever structure goes up in the future and she would like that to be added, if possible. Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development, stated that typically the Planning Commission would not re-look at those issues, provided that what is submitted in a year 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 or two, when they are ready to move ahead, does not deviate from what was approved now. It would go to the ARC again because they look to make sure that what they are pulling permits on does not deviate from what was approved. If there were something substantively different from the approval in the Conditional Use Permit, it would come back to the Commission. She asked Commissioner Schmidt if she was suggesting that it should come back even if the design does not change. Commissioner Schmidt answered that she would like to see it again. She thought it would be prudent and stated that it was certainly up to the Commission to make that determination and she would appreciate seeing it before it becomes a reality. Chairperson Tanner stated that he would like to see a posting of the ordinance that prohibits the running of the buses for fifteen minutes as opposed to a verbal discouragement. Conditions were met that the Commission addressed earlier on and he trusts the ARC to do a proper job with the Special Events building. He asked if this Commission would introduce both items or if they vote on just one. Ms. Aylaian stated that a Commissioner could move the staff recommendation with a caveat that the Special Events building come back to the Planning Commission for review of the architecture, or that they just move the staff recommendation. The former would involve the Commission in issues other than land use. There was no further discussion. Chairperson Tanner called for the vote. Action: It was moved by Commissioner R. Campbell to approve the findings as presented by staff. Commissioner S. Campbell asked if that would include the review of the Special Events building after ARC. Commissioner R. Campbell felt that the ARC would not do anything that the Planning Commission would need to change. Motion seconded by S. Campbell without the Special Events building coming back through the Planning Commission. Commissioner Limont agreed that the building should be reviewed by the Planning Commission, but didn’t want to hold up the project and suggested a study session or an invitation to attend the ARC meeting when it reviewed the building. Chairperson Tanner noted that there was a motion and a second. 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 There was no further discussion; Chairperson Tanner called for the vote. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner R. Campbell moved and, Commissioner S. Campbell seconded, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2496 approving Case CUP/PP 08-263. Motion carried 5-0. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Oral presentation by the Architectural Review Commission on use of building height in architectural design. Ms. Aylaian introduced the Architectural Review Commission’s (ARC) presentation before the Commission by reporting that building height has long proven to be controversial in Palm Desert. Projects that involve building height are typically reviewed by three different bodies, including the ARC, Planning Commission and the City Council. Each of the different groups represents a different perspective. Because of some questions asked by Planning Commission members about specific projects that deal with height, Ms. Aylaian stated that she believed that it would be helpful to have the ARC explain their perspective firsthand. One question in particular was on the Urban Crossings affordable housing project, where the project was originally submitted at one height, but the ARC requested changes that increased the height of some elements. A Planning Commission member questioned ‘why anybody would ever recommend that a building go higher’. She reported that another question regularly posed is why, if there needs to be variation in building height, that variation not be achieved by going lower rather than by going higher. The third concern she hears from time to time deals with tower elements; there seems to be a reluctance to approve a project with a tower element because there is a belief that the approval is a variance or would somehow set a precedent. Ms. Aylaian reported that four members of the Architecture Review Commission would present their perspective on how they look at a project height, both from the perspective of internal building workings and constraints, and from the exterior architecture and context. At the end of the presentation they would like to open up a conversation to make sure that each body understands the perspective of the other, and why they do at times have varying interests. MR. JOHN VUKSIC, Architect, Prest-Vuksic Architects. Mr. Vuksic stated that he would show a PowerPoint presentation using photos and exhibits to illustrate four building types: office buildings, two-story retail, office industrial projects, and then some large retail projects. Mr. Vuksic began by showing photographs of a series of two-story 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 Palm Desert office buildings right at the height limit. He pointed out in the photos how the packaged rooftop mechanical systems can be seen from ground level, explaining that this is because of limited structure space, caused when the height limit does not allow adequate space for ceiling height, ducting, and mechanical units all within a two-story building. One way to solve this problem is to install “split” systems, similar to the kind found in residential homes. However, these systems are much less efficient because ducts must remain small and have more bends in the small truss space available between the first and second floor of a building. Larger HVAC units and ducting are not possible with the height limitations in the office professional zone. Mr. Vuksic showed four building sections that illustrate the typical trusses, ducts, and rooftop mechanical equipment of an office building. Each section gained a few feet in height, showing how the duct size could be improved to become more efficient, the ceiling height could increase to meet standards for Class A office space, and that a mechanical enclosure could fully enclose rooftop equipment. He demonstrated that today's demands for Class A office space and energy and cost efficiency cannot be met within the current height restrictions. Mr. Vuksic next addressed two-story retail and retail/office projects, highlighting some attractive buildings around the Coachella Valley with good composition of forms and broken up roof lines. Several of the examples from neighboring cities illustrated two-story village-like architecture which still preserved mountain vistas. He then specifically highlighted several new buildings on El Paseo, including the Ralph Lauren building, which is made to look like a two story building, but is actually one story with a high interior space. The other noted building was the Daily Grill, which houses low-ceilinged offices on the second floor, and has fairly low ceiling heights in the restaurant as well. This block on El Paseo is reflective of new market demands, as the developer recently demolished the center of the block, which was of fairly recent construction, in order to construct Class A Retail Space, for Class A tenants, such as Gucci, Bottega Veneta, and Burberry. These stores have fourteen to sixteen foot ceiling heights, which does not accommodate buildable, leasable second story space while still remaining within the height limit. Mr. Vuksic showed a building section with fourteen foot interior ceiling heights on the first floor and offices above with ten foot interior ceilings heights, which used good structure, efficient duct space, and 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 properly screened mechanical equipment on the roof, but the building height approached 40 feet to achieve this Class A Retail space. Mr. Vuksic next presented industrial office buildings, displaying pictures of some of the new service industrial buildings located off of Dinah Shore. He highlighted how tower elements, no matter how minimal, can break up the boxy look of a building. The main comparison was between Bedrosian Tile, with the majority of the building 30 feet tall and either side rising up to 36 feet, and the Venture Commerce Center. This building used color to change up the long façade, but has no movement of elements or variety in the simple, block-like form of the building. Mr. Vuksic explained how tower elements can enhance building architecture, yet can sometimes become awkward if they are out of proportion with the rest of the building as well. He suggested that there has to be a balance between creating enough interest and not creating any at all. He showed a slide which began with a basic square building at the height limit, which could be approved per City code. The roof line was all at one level with no interest or variation in the architecture. Then he added layers to the image, with details below the height limit. Tower elements were then brought forth illustrating how the building could be enhanced beyond what was seen in original image with the typical flat roof line at the height limit. The last image illustrated addition of a tower element to the same building, where the tower was too tall and was out of proportion with the rest of the building. He indicated that the ARC would not approve such a tower element, since it was out-of- scale for the building. Next, Mr. Vuksic brought forth photos of the Westfield mall, and of Rancho Mirage’s comparable retail center, The River. The photos generally illustrated how Westfield is largely dull looking and not very visible from Highway 111, and how The River is 100% visible from Highway 111, bustling with activity. He indicated that the city needs to look at adjacent neighbors to make sure that Palm Desert remains competitive in order for developers to want to build here. Lastly, Mr. Vuksic displayed photos of buildings in Rancho Mirage along Highway 111 that were constructed on grades that are well below street level. These illustrated that the building isn't seen; only roofing and building signage are visible. This situation may comply with height restrictions, but does nothing for the tenant or the 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 architecture. The height limit is measured from where the building is situated, and does not take into account its context, surroundings, or 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 grade changes. He stated that these buildings may have been better presented without a blanket height for their zone, and instead taking a closer look at the individual site. Mr. Vuksic concluded his presentation with two comparison photos, one of the Bedrosian Tile building, displaying architectural interest with tower elements above the height limit, and the Venture Commerce Building, displaying a color-blocked, singular, one-height form. Although the buildings are similar in type and function, the former displayed far greater visual interest and superior aesthetics. Ms. Aylaian acknowledged the time that was put into this by the ARC Commissioners; they worked collaboratively. She clarified the misconception that tower elements that Mr. Vuksic described require approval by the ARC, the Planning Commission and/or the City Council. This is not true. The zoning ordinance allows tower elements by right, as long as they comprise no more than ten percent of the building area and are not more than 25 feet above the rest of the building. What the ARC is looking for is judicious use of these elements to enhance architecture on a project specific basis. She asked the Planning Commission to share their comments and questions. Commissioner R. Campbell referred to the comment made regarding being in competition with The River, and asked about Rancho Mirage’s height limit. Ms. Melissa Grisa, Assistant Planner, stated that she researched the height limits of neighboring cities. Some were comparable and some a little higher. But with every city there is the ability to take each project to their City Council and ask for extra height. For example, the City of Palm Springs recently approved the Hard Rock Hotel at 120 feet and the City of Indio has a project going up that is above their height limit. She found the City of La Quinta to be the highest limit with 50 feet along their core of Highway 111. She indicated that she researched building heights from Palm Springs to Indio along Highway 111. Mr. Vuksic stated that the point of the photos was to show that The River was more visually prominent from Highway 111 than the Westfield Mall is. The buildings are a lot closer to Highway 111 at The River, but they are not particularly obtrusive. Ms. Aylaian pointed out that when we talk about being “in competition” with Rancho Mirage or other cities, it is the sales tax revenue generated that goes into the General Fund. So the competition is not just a beauty contest, but a need in a very real sense to be attractive to both national and local retailers. She reported that the City needs Class A retail space and Class A office space. By code, the 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 ARC is charged with recognizing “the interdependence of land value and aesthetics and provide\[ing\] a method by which the city may implement this interdependence to its benefit”. So there are factors in land values and in development that drive ARC concerns and drive the aesthetics of a project when an important regional center like Westfield is considered. There are reasons for making it prominent, like The River, rather than trying to make it blend in with landscape as is done with other types of developments. MS. PAM TOUCSCHNER, Architect, WWCOT Architects. Out of this presentation she would like the Commission to walk away with the understanding of the difference between a parapet height and an enclosure that screens the HVAC. There is a parapet that comes up and defines the edge of the building, but screening that sets back from the parapet may then enclose the HVAC. In many of the buildings shown in the presentation, the HVAC units set back from the edge are still visible. If the height limit would have allowed for those to be screened, it would have helped the buildings look “stronger” and would screen the units. One of the reasons why units go up on a roof and not at grade level is the efficiency of the units. On grade, they also take up space, interfering with building entrances and parking. She believes that this is where the codes should provide flexibility. Several cities have a parapet limit and a separate set of criteria for equipment enclosures. MR. CHRIS VAN VLIET, Contractor, CL Van Vliet and Company, said that the units that go on the roof are fairly substantial; anywhere from 42 to 60 inches in height and are large package units. They have to be placed in certain portions of the building to be efficient and would have to be screened. Tower elements obviously allow that to happen in a certain amount of locations. The other option that is sometimes done on buildings is to put a “well” in the building someplace and depress the units, but this results in a waterproofing nightmare. It is very difficult to do, very expensive and takes up interior space of the building, which is one of the main reasons the ARC considers tower elements. They enhance the architecture of the building and the mechanical functioning as well. MS. KAREL LAMBELL, 48999 Barberry Lane, Palm Desert, California said that each of the Commissioners takes into account the specific site where the building will be placed. The building should make a statement in its context. Sometimes the ARC sees buildings that are 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 very flat, without articulation, and that is a red flag. The ARC wants something that has some personality. It is important to have some substance, rather than having a flat, commercial, boring look. The ARC has achieved that in many ways and will continue considering height to make sure that that happens. That is why each project is looked at specifically – to make that building look the way it should look for the City of Palm Desert. Mr. Hargreaves asked the Commissioners if the current ordinance provided them with sufficient flexibility to maximize the architecture, or if they would like to see a different ordinance. Mr. Vuksic responded that the Commission didn’t want to make any recommendations. They wanted to show the Planning Commission some of the things that they are up against when they are looking at the buildings, judging the aesthetics, and looking at how the building could be better. He said that Ms. Touschner’s remark about the mechanical equipment enclosures is definitely something to consider. Commissioner Schmidt said that Mr. Hargreave’s comment is not that far afield. She could only speak for herself and said that having grown up in design and architecture, she looks at buildings much the way the ARC does, but what she sees that is withering away in the city is the original concept of being open and set back. The difference between The River and Westfield is a front loaded parking lot, and if you look at the new designs that came through a month or so ago she was excited because it is back loaded. Nordstrom doesn’t even want to be on the street; they want to be back off the street. What disturbs her and what she sees happening again and again is that the city is getting very mid-century looking. More and more is being introduced into the community because it is the fad right now and she finds that a shame. She acknowledged Mr. Vuksic’s remarks about being competitive with other cities and said that existing ordinances that allow for two story development have to give the ability to build Class A two story space, which is causing the struggle now. Commissioner Schmidt stated that the city is on the brink and that she does not like a tower element that impacts mountain views or crowds the street, particularly El Paseo. She reported that she doesn’t care as much about development closer to Interstate-10; it’s Spartan at the moment. If Jiffy Lube develops there and needs a tower element, she is more apt to let it go by her than when it is in the heart of the city. It really disturbs her to obliterate the mountains in order to house an air conditioning unit because it’s more efficient to build that way or to give higher ceilings. She expressed that what was presented was very helpful and that she didn’t mean to criticize it all, but she wanted to give her 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 personal view. She is worried about over building, and understands the problems of competition. 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 Mr. Vuksic agreed with her but indicated that in the future it will be difficult to attract higher end tenants. Ms. Touschner responded that Commissioner Schmidt was essentially talking about view corridors, and she felt that it is an important discussion in terms of which are the ones to preserve. To say that they should blanket the whole city and apply to every single area may actually be limiting in terms of growth. At some level growth is important and desirable. She stated that recently her firm decided to build their own building, and it is amazing to be in that position. The owner looks at every screw and every two by four and what the cost is, and then has to justify it to a bank just to get a loan. That is where a delicate balance is coming from. Good architecture can cost one hundred dollars or one hundred thousand dollars, but the economics need to make sense. To build a building that looks like a two story building, but isn’t really, is very difficult to explain to anyone for financing. If Disneyland wants a certain image, yes. But as a building to build and then sell a service or product out of, it’s got to make sense to the bottom line. It’s part of finding that balance between view corridors and heights and the things that are important to this city, then infusing them over the whole city. It is not one or the other; you can have all by finding the right balance. She also stated that height restrictions should be relaxed to make sure that the city has the right individuals coming here and wanting to build. If given the tools to build something that financially makes sense and has good architecture, then they will come and they will build it. But without those tools, the city is going to struggle in terms of who will come here and what they will build. Commissioner R. Campbell asked staff if the Commission has the right to ask the City Council to revise the code. Ms. Aylaian stated that such requests need to come from either the Planning Commission or, more especially, from the City Council. Staff does not generate code changes because they represent changes in policy. If they chose to, the Planning Commission could pass a request for code revisions on to the City Council and request their direction. Commissioner Limont stated that she did not move to Palm Desert for the buildings. She thinks there is a price to pay to live in Palm Desert and thinks that the fact that we have been such a good city with our demands on what we allow and don’t allow, and that understated elegance goes a lot further. She doesn’t want to be The River, she doesn’t want to be Palm Springs and she doesn’t want to be Indio. She likes Palm Desert and knows that we have 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 to adjust with the times and knows that we are up against tough economic times. She has enough of a feeling for what the city has to produce to keep running, but she didn't think that the city should lower its standards or let everyone build. She stated that driving out to Interstate-10 is a heartbreak. There are wonderful towns in California that have stuck to their guns and have not torn down their buildings or extended their height within reason. She stated that builders will not give up immediately; they will just have to keep going back to their engineering department until they do it. She understands that rooftop air conditioners are important from an energy efficiency standpoint, but instead of increasing height as the answer, we need to give a little more elsewhere. She doesn’t want to lose Palm Desert any more than has already been done. Mr. Vuksic stated that one of the reasons he likes the wall sections presented is that the measurements are unbiased. They represent actual conditions. He thinks that there is a better chance of achieving understated elegance if there is flexibility to attract more sophisticated designers and more sophisticated tenants. As an architect, the real struggle working on the ARC is with less sophisticated designers who don't "get it” and must come back three, four, or five times because they are unable to design in such tight restrictions. The final project is approvable, but nobody is excited about it and it's not very good. That situation will continue, but it would help to have the space and ability to actually create more interesting design with more sophisticated applicants. Commissioner S. Campbell asked Mr. Vuksic if the architects would rather go ahead and have the ordinance changed to allow greater height so that applicants didn't have to continually come to the Planning Commission where some support greater height and some do not. Mr. Vuksic stated as before that the ARC didn’t come to the Planning Commission to make any recommendations, but did say that the current code is a deterrent because designers don't want to go through the whole entitlement process when they can just do something really uninspired and be approved without going beyond the ARC. The current regulations serve as a bit of a deterrent for stronger architecture statements. He thought it would be beneficial to consider raising the building heights, particularly to allow for concealing equipment enclosures on the roof. Chairperson Tanner said that there has to be a gentle balance between issues presented. He agreed that height restrictions in the zoning ordinance 26 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 are there for a reason and he agreed with what two of the Commissioners said, but yet he noticed that there has to be change in order to keep up with the changing times. He acknowledged that the Commission has not agreed on some projects and advocated a gentle balance and a coordinated effort to attract architects and designers having a little bit different view of the boxes in the north side of town, where he has not been a fan of development near Interstate-10. Some developers really tried, but other builders just put up a box. If a study session is needed to talk about heights and potential code changes, then he suggests doing it sensibly and maintaining dialogue in both directions. He indicated that the Planning Commission wants to see the city grow as the ARC does, but that Planning Commissioners each have different ideas about it. Commissioner Schmidt said that projects requesting exceptions come to the Commission, she looks very carefully at the location and how it melds with that which is planned or has been done for that particular area. She believes that probably the ordinances are fine as long as all parties understand that there need to be exceptions, because she has lived long enough to know that if the building heights were changed to 35 or 40 feet, the city would have Palm Springs and Mr. Wessman type projects where the height is 90, 75 or 60 feet, and she doesn't think that is what Palm Desert is all about. She thinks it is a low key, low rise community and if there are exceptions that help enhance a building, she is all for it. She cited the Jensen's renovation with a number of tower elements as being appropriate because it dealt with two streets, Highway 111 and El Paseo, with back loaded parking to El Paseo. It had a pretty good street scene improvement to Highway 111, and she wasn’t going to object to the tower units, even though they were exceptions. She is not sure revising the current ordinance about height is necessary if everyone is on the same page with it. She has chosen to look at each project individually as it relates to the city. Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner stated that many of the zones in the zoning code do provide for either height exceptions -- as in a Planned Residential zone or a Commercial zone -- or allow tower elements that staff brings forth as a courtesy. With Development Agreements, greater height can be approved as is recommended for Westfield. Staff scrutinizes the applicants on a case-by-case basis. For example, the Larkspur Hotel developer wanted three stories on the residential side of the project, but staff advised him that it didn’t make sense to do three stories up against Shadow Mountain Drive and that staff would not support it, but that there was an eleven foot grade drop across the site that would make three stories for the 27 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 hotel portion of the project because it worked visually with the line of sight and the slope drop. That gave three stories in the front commercial side and two stories on Shadow Mountain Drive where there are residences. In that case staff advised the developer that they would not support the three stories on Shadow Mountain Drive. As another example, Mr. Bagato cited the Holiday Inn on Cook Street. The original design had three stories next to the bridge, so the view from the street would be looking at the top of the roof. This is in a zone where anything above two stories requires a height exception, and hotels are no longer viable on two story levels. Since for three or four stories an exception would be needed for height, staff recommended that the developer submit four stories to see more of the building architecture from the street. From this standpoint, staff is really specific. Mr. Bagato added that one of the reasons that Palm Desert has been so successful is that it has been forward thinking regarding planning. When Palm Springs didn’t want the mall, Palm Desert was able to see the benefits and bring it to the city. When the Marriott Hotel was proposed, it was 77 feet tall and just 1,200 feet from the street. Starwood came in recommending four stories and the City Council approved it; now it can't be seen from surrounding streets except Portola, and even there only a small portion of it can be seen. When staff recommends height in these cases, it is a case-by- case basis and with good architecture it works. Part of the problem is that when an applicant wants to propose a building that requires a height exception and is informed that the proposal will require Planning Commission and City Council approval, and that the process will be controversial, they come back and propose something like a box because they want what is the easiest to approve in order to get going. Mr. Bagato stated that the Fred Waring Drive area is also difficult because the parcels are meant to have boutique buildings, but some people have bought four or five lots and made one large building, which makes it difficult to achieve a large two-story building on Fred Waring. He suggested that on Fred Waring parapet heights should be considered rather than equipment screen heights. But areas next to the freeway can likely accommodate greater height as long as the building is not too close to the street and has good architecture. He summarized by saying that staff is sensitive to height and is something that is reviewed on a case by case basis. 28 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Chairperson S. Campbell reported that they discussed the names of titles for the student essay contest and chose artists for the city’s registry. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont reported that they were looking at re-routing the entrance into the club house at Desert Willow and sprucing up the temporary parking lot on the east side. There is a $600,000 grant for the Monterey median project, but they have to spend $600,000 so staff is in negotiations and will bring that back. April is Arbor Month with something planned for every weekend and the green spray dye is going well on foreclosed homes. C. PARKS & RECREATION Chairperson Tanner reported that they have gone to one meeting a month. There are some issues with proposed sight areas and the last time they met it didn’t come up in discussion. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner R. Campbell reported that the January meeting was changed and he wasn’t able to attend and the February meeting was cancelled. XI. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON A. Election of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson Action: Move by Commissioner Limont second by R. Campbell, electing Chairperson Tanner as Chairperson by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. 29 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 Action: Move by Commission R. Campbell second by S. Campbell, electing Commissioner Limont as Vice Chairperson by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. B. Appointment of an Art in Public Places Representative, Appointment of a Landscape Committee Representative, Appointment of a Parks & Recreation Commission Representative, and Appointment of a Project Area 4 Committee Representative. Action: Move by Commissioner Limont, second by Commissioner Schmidt, by minute motion, appointing S. Campbell as the Art in Public Places representative. Motion carried 5-0. Action: Move by Chairperson Tanner, second by Commissioner Schmidt, by minute motion, appointing Commissioner Limont as the Landscape Committee representative. Motion carried 5-0. Action: Move by Commissioner Limont, second by Commissioner S. Campbell, by minute motion, appointing Chairperson Tanner as the Parks and Recreation Commission representative. Motion carried 5-0. Action: Move by Commissioner Limont, second by Commissioner S. Campbell, by minute motion, appointing Commissioner R. Campbell the Project Area 4 Committee representative. Motion carried 5-0. XII. COMMENTS Commissioner Schmidt said that there was an ugly mess of exposed mechanical equipment located at the Wachovia building on the corner of Highway 111 and Highway 74 that she did not remember approving. She stated that she distinctly remembered that they were to be screened with landscaping and asked what could be done. Mr. Bagato stated that was due to construction plans that were changed. He has been working with the developer and approved a screened wall in front of the big metal cabinet and 30 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 is working on landscaping in front of the A/C condensing units. The actual parapet height is only six inches so the entire HVAC system is down below with screening planned there as well. In the initial drawings there was a solid element, but due to changes during construction the developer made an opening that they put the cabinet in. Commissioner Schmidt asked if they were working on it. Mr. Bagato replied that they still have a temporary Certificate of Occupancy and the final has not been issued because of this issue. Commissioner Schmidt asked if a monopalm was approved at the Holiday Inn east of the new Long’s Drugs and said that it lacks screening. Mr. Bagato stated that this is currently a headless palm tree, and that staff is looking into the issue. Commissioner Schmidt commended staff for removing the atrocious façade that was put up during construction of The Gardens project; she stated that it now looks attractive. She asked if that was going to remain that way. Ms. Aylaian stated The Gardens, Phase II project is being pushed back and is now scheduled to begin construction the first of August. That being said, she would not be surprised if they ask for a little bit more time if the market doesn’t change by August. The screening that is there now is temporary and will remain until the time when construction starts. At that point, they will need to relocate the screening to be able to do the work along El Paseo and will erect a different screen. Commissioner Schmidt stated that it looks infinitely better now than it did before. She asked if that would be going back up again. Ms. Aylaian stated that it wouldn’t be going back up and that the maximum height allowed by staff is twelve feet. Mr. Bagato stated that they spoke with the developers and they are aware of the twelve foot maximum. Commissioner Schmidt suggested that it be painted a desert color and Mr. Bagato said that they have discussed painting it more of a tan/beige color. Chairperson Tanner asked if there was anything that they could do as a City to change the color of the Del Rio’s Restaurant that has now gone out of business. He thought there was something that we could do to force them to paint that building because it is an awful eyesore. Ms. Aylaian stated that she would have the Code Compliance Department take a look at it. Generally once a color is approved, the city cannot force them to change the color, but if it is a property maintenance issue they do need to maintain the building. Chairperson Tanner asked who approved those colors. Mr. Bagato stated that they were never officially approved and said that it went through the process and was denied. He said that if they were out of 31 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2009 compliance in any part of the code staff could revoke their Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Unfortunately, the restaurant went out of business before staff could take action. Technically the property hasn’t been operating as a restaurant for more than a year and the CUP is now expired so the city could require that the future tenant repaint the building. Ms. Aylaian stated that at this point there are no Public Hearing items scheduled for the first meeting in March, so the Commission should anticipate that that meeting will be cancelled. The League of California th Cities is having their annual Planning Institute in Anaheim from March 25 to th. 27 She stated that going through the budget cuts with Council last week she returned the budget that would have been available for staff training and conferences, but she did ask and they did agree to leave funding for up to two Planning Commission members to attend. She felt that this would be beneficial especially for Commissioners who are relatively new to the Commission. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner R. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm. LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary ATTEST: VAN TANNER, Chairperson Palm Desert Planning Commission /jj 32