HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 08-247 Staff Report CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: Approval to construct, operate and maintain a new 65-foot high
mono-palm wireless telecommunications tower for Verizon
Wireless, and to convert an existing storage room into an
equipment room and generator room located at the rear of the
property of Desert Gateway Self Storage at 73-750 Dinah Shore
Drive.
SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz
Assistant Planner
APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless
15505 Sand Canyon Ave, Bldg D
Irvine, CA 92618
CASE NO.: CUP 08-247
DATE: April 7, 2009
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit would allow the installation and
operation of a 65-foot tall mono-palm. The proposal will require the Planning
Commission to approve the mono-palm per Chapter 25.104 of the Palm Desert
Municipal Code. The facility has been approved for its aesthetic and landscape
impacts by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) at its March 10, 2009
meeting.
II. BACKGROUND:
A. Property Description:
The project site is located in the rear parking lot of the Desert Gateway Self
Storage building east of Monterey Ave, south of Interstate 10. The site is
currently landscaped with shrubs and smaller tress. The site and
surrounding area do not have any live palm trees to blend in with the
proposed mono-palm, but a condition of approval has been placed upon the
project requiring that the applicant must provide three live palm trees that
vary in height from 35 to 45 feet, and add live palm trees throughout the
site.
Staff Report
Case No. CUP 08-247
April 7, 2009
Page 2 of 6
There is an existing catch basin that will not be affected during installation
of the proposed mono-palm, and the installation will not disrupt the drainage
flow. Southern California Edison currently has existing utility lines located
on the property that the applicant is leasing which will require the applicant
to obtain a written letter of authorization.
B. Zoning and General Plan Designation:
Zoning: Service Industrial (SI)
General Plan: Industrial / Business Park (I-BP)
C. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North: Interstate 10
South: Service Industrial
East: Service Industrial
West: Service Industrial
D. Ordinance Requirements (Sec. 25.104):
Zoning Ordinance development and performance standards include the
following:
1. Height: Maximum height of the tower shall not exceed 75 feet to the
top of the artificial vegetation, 65 feet to the top of the antennae.
2. Fencing: Any fencing and or wall shall be installed to screen the
equipment shelter.
3. Landscaping: Minimum perimeter landscaping screening to minimize
visual impacts to nearby viewers to the satisfaction of the
Architectural Review Commission.
E. Architectural Review Commission:
At its meeting of March 10, 2009 the ARC reviewed the proposed project
and had some discussion about the location of the proposed live palm
trees, since there are no live palm trees in the vicinity. The ARC wanted the
palm trees to vary in height and wanted the applicant to place palm trees
throughout the site. ARC granted approval, subject to adding live palm
tress that vary in height, adding additional palm tress throughout the
project site in order for the mono-palm to blend in, and shifting the mono-
palm south to avoid crowding. The motion carried 5-0-0-2, with
Commissioners Levin and Vuksic abstaining.
G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP 08-247 Verizon Mono-palm\Verizon PC Staff Report.doc
Staff Report
Case No. CUP 08-247
April 7, 2009
Page 3 of 6
F. Telecommunications Act:
The Telecommunications Act requires that local governments approve
wireless facilities where significant gaps in coverage prevent adequate
service. Cities are not obligated to provide parallel coverage for every
wireless provider. When a significant gap in coverage exists, wireless
providers must use the least intrusive means to provide the service.
Adequate service is a function of two factors:
1. Signal coverage for a particular location; and
2. Capacity of the antennae to handle the volume of calls.
Signal Coverage: Antennae must be disbursed throughout an area so that
there are no gaps or dead spots in coverage.
Capacity: A single antenna can handle a fixed number of simultaneous
calls. When that number is exceeded there is a busy signal or calls are
dropped. The total number of antennae for a particular area must therefore
be matched to the call demand.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Verizon Wireless is requesting approval to construct a 65-foot high wireless cell
tower disguised as an artificial palm tree with 12 panel antennas screened by palm
fronds and the addition of a four foot microwave dish. The applicant is leasing a
574 square foot area, including an existing storage room, for the proposed mono-
palm. The equipment shelter will be inside an existing storage room, and an eight
foot wrought iron fence will enclose the project site. No utility apparatus will be
located above ground. All utilities for the project will be routed underground. The
applicant proposes to camouflage the mono-palm by planting three live palms (that
must vary in height), and must add palm trees throughout the existing site to blend
in.
With regard to landscape requirements, a condition of approval has been placed
upon the project that the landscape plans must be approved by the City's
Landscape Specialist and must meet all planting and irrigation design
requirements prior to obtaining construction permits.
G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP 08-247 Verizon Mono-palm\Verizon PC Staff Report.doc
Staff Report
Case No. CUP 08-247
April 7, 2009
Page 4 of 6
IV. ANALYSIS:
This project will require the Planning Commission to approve a Conditional Use
Permit. The following findings responding to the Telecommunications Act and
the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.104 Commercial Communication
Tower Regulations explain the rationale for granting approval:
A. Findings for Approval:
Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act, wireless facility applications are
evaluated based on two fundamental questions.
1. Is there a significant gap in coverage?
2. Is the proposed location and design the least intrusive available
solution?
Is there a Significant Gap in Coverage?
There are no towers for Verizon Wireless or any other carrier located on
the north end of Palm Desert (see coverage map). The coverage map
illustrates that there is a significant gap in coverage in north Palm Desert.
Is this Design and Location the Least Intrusive Available Solution?
North Palm Desert does not posses the type of landscaping as other areas
of the city where approved mono-palms are located. Other areas in Palm
Desert are landscaped with palm trees, larger trees, bushes, and
ground cover. North Palm Desert is designed with a desert landscape
design. Although the site does not have any palm tress, this location is the
least intrusive in the surrounding area, since the mono-palm will be
surrounded by 30 foot high buildings. The proposed mono-palm at 65 feet
in height is smaller than existing mono-palms throughout the city. The
project will also be conditioned to add palm trees around and throughout
the project site.
Additional findings for the approval of commercial communication towers
are stated in Municipal Code Section "25.104.030 Permitted Commercial
Communication Towers and Commercial Communication Antennas in
Zoning Districts of City." As such, new freestanding commercial
communication towers/commercial communication antennas shall not be
allowed unless the applicant substantiates to the satisfaction of the
Planning Commission:
G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP 08-247 Verizon Mono-palm\Verizon PC Staff Report.doc
Staff Report
Case No. CUP 08-247
April 7, 2009
Page 5 of 6
A. That existing towers and buildings do not technologically afford the
applicant the ability to provide service to the service area of the
applicant or service provider.
A Project Description Letter has been submitted by the applicant
and attached to the Staff Report to provide documentation as to the
service need in the proposed service area. A propagation study
was undertaken to analyze the optimum placement for the cellular
panels. The report concluded that there were no other cell towers
in the vicinity.
B. That the geographical boundaries of the proposed service area
cannot technologically be bifurcated to avoid the necessity for a
freestanding tower/antenna at the height proposed.
Site selection and antenna height are the result of a computer
analysis of service coverage requirements for Southern California
and the United States. Topography (both natural and man made)
and vegetation characteristics of the valley make it difficult to cover,
even with multiple sites.
C. That the applicant shows compelling technological or economic
reason(s) for requiring a new freestanding facility.
The economic reasons are stated in the project description letter
submitted for the Commission's review and attached to the record.
Existing coverage in the area is inadequate for existing customers.
The proposed communication tower will allow for better service and
create a larger network leading to increased capacity. The
applicant has enclosed a copy of their existing coverage map and a
new coverage map based on the new wireless site, along with a
letter of site justification.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The project is a Class 3, Categorical Exemption for the purposes of CEQA and
no further review is necessary.
VI. CONCLUSION:
Staff has determined that the proposed mono-palm would be compatible with
adjacent properties, and meets all development standards in Municipal Code
Chapter 25.104 Commercial Communication Tower and Commercial Antenna
Regulations. The ARC has approved this request, based on the surrounding
G\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP 08-247 Verizon Mono-palm\Verizon PC Staff Report.doc
Staff Report
Case No. CUP 08-247
April 7, 2009
Page 6 of 6
terrain and the additional live palm trees around and throughout the site, and the
fact that the proposed equipment has been designed to be located within an
existing storage room and will not interfere with circulation or visual continuity of
the grounds.
The approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation of a 65-foot
high mono-palm and a 574 square foot leasing attendant equipment area, will
allow Verizon Wireless to expand its network of telecommunications facilities in a
manner consistent with current market demand.
VII. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the findings and adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. , approving CUP 08-247 subject to conditions
attached.
VIII. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution
B. Legal Notice
C. Architectural Review Commission Notice of Action and Minutes
D. Exhibits: Aerial vicinity maps, Plans and Photo-simulations
Submitted by: Department Head:
)0- 4
Kevin Swartz Lauri Aylaian
Assistant Planner Director of Community Development
Approval:
Homer Croy
U ACM for Development Services
G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP 08-247 Verizon Mono-palm\Verizon PC Staff Report.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A NEW 65-FOOT
HIGH MONO-PALM WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER FOR
VERIZON WIRELESS, AND TO CONVERT AN EXISTING STORAGE
ROOM INTO AN EQUIPMENT ROOM AND GENERATOR ROOM
LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY OF DESERT GATEWAY
SELF STORAGE AT 73-750 DINAH SHORE DRIVE.
CASE NO. CUP 08-247
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the
7th day of April, 2009, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by Verizon
Wireless, for the above noted Conditional Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution
No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is a
Class 3 Categorical Exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is
necessary; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission
did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of said request:
Findings for Approval:
Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act, wireless facility applications are evaluated
based on two fundamental questions.
1. Is there a significant gap in coverage?
2. Is the proposed location and design the least intrusive available solution?
Is there a Significant Gap in Coverage?
There are no towers for Verizon Wireless or any other carrier located on the north end of
Palm Desert (see coverage map). The coverage map illustrates there is a significant
gap in coverage in north Palm Desert.
Is this Design and Location the Least Intrusive Available Solution?
North Palm Desert does not posses the type of landscaping as other areas of the city
where approved mono-palms are located. Other areas in Palm Desert are landscaped
with palm trees, larger trees, bushes, and ground cover. North Palm Desert is designed
with a desert landscape design. Although the site does not have any palm tress, this
location is the least intrusive in the surrounding area, since the mono-palm will be
surrounded by 30 foot high buildings. The proposed mono-palm at 65 feet in height is
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
smaller than existing mono-palms throughout the city. The project will also be
conditioned to add palm trees around and throughout the project site.
Additional findings for the approval of commercial communication towers are stated in
Municipal Code Section "25.104.030 Permitted Commercial Communication Towers
and Commercial Communication Antennas in Zoning Districts of City." As such, new
freestanding commercial communication towers/commercial communication antennas
shall not be allowed unless the applicant substantiates to the satisfaction of the
Planning Commission:
A. That existing towers and buildings do not technologically afford the
applicant the ability to provide service to the service area of the applicant
or service provider.
A Project Description Letter has been submitted by the applicant and
attached to the Staff Report to provide documentation as to the service
need in the proposed service area. A propagation study was undertaken
to analyze the optimum placement for the cellular panels. The report
concluded that there were no other cell towers in the vicinity.
B. That the geographical boundaries of the proposed service area cannot
technologically be bifurcated to avoid the necessity for a freestanding
tower/antenna at the height proposed.
Site selection and antenna height are the result of a computer analysis
of service coverage requirements for Southern California and the United
States. Topography (both natural and man made) and vegetation
characteristics of the valley make it difficult to cover, even with multiple
sites.
C. That the applicant shows compelling technological or economic
reason(s) for requiring a new freestanding facility.
The economic reasons are stated in the project description letter
submitted for the Commission's review and attached to the record.
Existing coverage in the area is inadequate for existing customers. The
proposed communication tower will allow for better service and create a
larger network leading to increased capacity. The applicant has enclosed
a copy of their existing coverage map and a new coverage map based
on the new wireless site, along with a letter of site justification.
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 08-247 is hereby granted, subject to the
attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on the 7th day of April, 2009, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
VAN G. TANNER, Chairperson
ATTEST:
LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. CUP 08-247
Department of Community Development:
1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file to the
department of community development/planning, as modified by the following
conditions.
2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date
of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall
become null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions
and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and
state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this
approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following
agencies:
Planning Department
Fire Department
Public Works Department
Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to
the Department of Building and Safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for
the use contemplated herewith.
5. That where co-location may effectively be accomplished without violation of the
provisions of proposed Municipal Code Chapter 25.104 and without reasonable
interference with applicant's existing use, applicant shall allow third party co-location
onto the tower erected under this permit.
6. Landscape plans must be approved by the City's Landscape Specialist and must meet
all planting and irrigation design requirements prior to obtaining construction permits.
7. The applicant must provide three live palm trees that vary in height from 35 to 45 feet,
and add live palm trees throughout the site.
8. Applicant must submit a letter of authorization from Southern California Edison in
reference to utility lines.
Department of Public Works:
1. Building pad elevations for the proposed development are subject to review and
approval in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
2. Any landscape plans shall be reviewed and approved concurrently with construction
plans ad no permits shall be issued prior to Landscape plan approval.
Department of Building and Safety:
1. Project must conform to the current State of California Codes adopted at the time of
plan check submittal. The following are the codes enforced at this time:
2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (Based on 2006 UBC)
2007 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (Based on 2006 UMC)
2007 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (Based on 2006 UPC)
2007 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (Based on 2005 NEC)
2007 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE
2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
2. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business
License prior to permit issuance per Palm Desert Municipal Code, Title 5.
3. All contractors and/or owner-builders must submit' a valid Certificate of Worker's
Compensation Insurance coverage prior to the issuance of a building permit per
California Labor Code, Section 3700.
4. Structural plans and calculations will be required for the mono-palm structure. Design
parameters are currently 85 mph wind speed; exposure C (due to height) and seismic
design category as determined by CBC Chapter 16 Requirements.
5
CITY Of HUM DESERT
• p".� 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT,CALIEORNIA g226o-2576
` TEL:760 346-0611
�,� ►; FAX:760 341-7098
c,,:•. ,
� �.>?• info@palm-dcsetuorg
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO.CUP 08-247
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert
Planning Commission to consider a request by Verizon for approval of a conditional use
permit to construct, operate and maintain a new 65-foot high mono-palm wireless
telecommunications tower for Verizon Wireless, and converting an existing storage
room into an equipment room and generator room located at the rear of the property of
Desert Gateway Self Storage at 73-750 Dinah Shore Drive.
Ci of Palm Desert Map
N *,'44 N:4.
MF
_ )F
i 41044 1K,
SPYDER CYtO=
—_7�'. \1)X�--�
----•m A`E"` 4.
35TH AVE-35TH AVE
T
O
A
® \
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 7, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert,
California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be
heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall
be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project
and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community
Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning
Commission (or city council)at, or prior to,the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun Lauri Aylaian, Secretary
March 27, 2009 Palm Desert Planning Commission
•
CITY OF PERM DESERT
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
' TEL: 760 346-0611
FAX: 760 340-0574
info@palm-desert.org
March 10, 2009
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION
CASE NO: CUP 08-247
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): VERIZON WIRELESS, 15505 Sand Canyon
Avenue, Bldg Dist Floor, Irvine, CA 92618
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of an installation of a
70-foot monopalm telecommunicating facility.
LOCATION: 73-750 Dinah Shore Drive
ZONE: S.I.
Upon reviewing the plans and presentations submitted by staff and by the
applicant, the Architectural Review Commission granted approval subject to: 1)
fluctuation in the tree heights; 2) additional cluster of palm trees throughout the
project; and 3) shifting the mono-palm south to avoid crowding.
Date of Action: March 10, 2009
Vote: Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Levin and
Vuksic abstaining
(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. Any
amendments to this approved plan would need to be re-submitted to Commission
for approval.)
STAFF COMMENTS: It is your responsibility to submit the plans approved
by the Architectural Review Commission to the Department of Building
and Safety.
?N1W ON IMO MITI
ARCHITECTURAL R 'r W COMMISSION
MINUTES March 10, 2009
A. Final Drawings:
1. CASE NO: SA 09-079
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LUIS MARISCAL, 20117 Romar
Street, Chatsworth, CA 91311
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of
wall signage: First California Bank (withdrew)
LOCATION: 78000 Fred Waring Drive Suite 100
ZONE: C-1
ACTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner
Lambell to approve the withdrawal of Case SA 09-079. Motion carried 6-0-
0-1, with Commissioner Levin abstaining.
2. CASE NO: CUP 08-247
APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): VERIZON WIRELESS, 15505
Sand Canyon Avenue, Bldg D 1st Floor, Irvine, CA 92618
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of an
installation of a 70-foot monopalm telecommunicating facility.
LOCATION: 73-750 Dinah Shore Drive
ZONE: S.I.
Mr. Bagato stated that this was continued from a previous meeting
to allow the applicant to research other possible sites for the
monopalm. Unfortunately, there wasn't a suitable location because
there weren't a lot of palm trees on other sites. Staff has been
working with Public Works and there were no drainage concerns,
but from the development side they would request an easement
from Edison. They are required to have new A/C units because
they are moving the equipment inside one of the storage facilities.
However, one of the issues with that is that they will have to
relocate an existing wall to put in the A/C units which will remove
some existing landscape in the front. When staff approved the self-
storage facility, this whole project was conditioned because of a five
foot setback with a blank wall and the condition required that they
G:PlannirVarune JudyWord Files'A Mint tes1200TAR090310min.dod Page 2 of 15
(
(.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
MINUTES March 10, 2009
put in landscaping to help buffer the wall. With this proposal there
were concerns with the loss of landscaping. The applicant
proposed putting vines on the wall but the Landscape Specialist
had some concerns with the amount of room. Staffs overall
concern was that this location is very tight. The plans are showing
three trees and staff usually likes to see three or four. Staff is
recommending denial of the proposed location and encourages
them to find another location to mitigate the landscaping concerns
and get a few more trees in there.
Commissioner Gregory stated that he didn't find this to be that
offensive. In the photo Sims the three live palms appear to be the
same height as each other and if they were differing heights you
would have more mass at different elevations and be more realistic.
Mr. Robert McCormick, Verizon representative stated that they
have considered raising two of the palms; one to 50 feet and one to
40 feet. He indicated that the young tree currently there will be
relocated and said that they will be putting vines along the wrought
iron that is there. Commissioner DeLuna said that it appeared that
the applicant has done a lot of investigation of other sites and came
back to this one and agreed with Commissioner Gregory with
varying the heights of the live trees.
The Commission discussed other areas on that lot where this could
be located. Mr. McCormick explained that the monopalm would be
much more visible from the freeway if located in other areas and
stated that the building would screen this area and the elevation
drops down. Commissioner Lambell felt that it was too crammed
in.
Ms. Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist asked how large the
foundation was where this pole will be sitting. Mr. McCormick
replied that it was five foot nine inches. Ms. Hollinger stated that
the minimum planter size for a tree is 48 square feet and staff will
accept five by five. She pointed out that the applicant does not
have that kind of space especially if they were asking for additional
palm trees. She said that any plant will be struggling to survive in
the wall where they want to put the condensers. In reference to
moving the new tree, she requested that they not relocate it. From
a landscape prospective she indicated that the plants will be
struggling in that area.
G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2009'AR090310min.doc Page 3 of 15
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
MINUTES March 10, 2009
The Commission was concerned that there was not enough room
for the live trees. Mr. Bagato stated that the Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) will be approved for three trees and if it turns out that they
can't do three then staff will have to look at amending it or
redesigning it. Commissioner DeLuna stated that they have spent
an inordinate amount of time searching for other site locations and
stated that at some point usefulness rather than beauty is the
lesser of two evils. Mr. Bagato stated that staff has spent time with
the applicant out in this area and there is nowhere else that would
provide adequate screening.
Commissioner Touschner said that the trees could be massaged
and not be so close to the pole, with varying heights, as well as
being a little more random. Commissioner Gregory asked if there
was a general rule requiring three live palms. Mr. Bagato replied
that it is the direction of the Planning Commission to have four or
five live palm trees. He stated that even if they picked another site
none of these developments have a lot of palm trees and even if
they cluster four or five they are still going to stand out. He asked
the Commission if it would help by applying two or three more live
palms on the self-storage property to get more trees throughout the
project instead of just in one area. The Commission and the
applicant agreed.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked if they could shift the monopalm
south a bit to get more room on the upper one. Mr. McCormick
replied that they could. The Commission and the applicant
discussed the areas where additional palm trees could be located.
ACTION:
It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna and seconded by Commissioner
Lambell to grant approval subject to: 1) fluctuation in the tree heights; 2)
additional cluster of palm trees throughout the project; and 3) shifting the
mono-palm south to avoid crowding. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with
Commissioners Vuksic and Levin abstaining.
G:\PlanningUanine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2009\AR090310min.doc Page 4 of 15
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Department of Community Development/Planning
Attention: Kevin Swartz
FROM: Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Planner
SUBJECT: CUP 8-247 Verizon Wireless
DATE: June 26, 2008
The following shall be considered as conditions of approval for the above-referenced
project.
1. Grading plans for the proposed development are subject to review and approval in
accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
2. Any landscape plans shall be reviewed and approved concurrently with
construction plans and no permits shall be issued prior to landscape plan approval.
Phil Joy
CITY OF PALM DESERT
� rl4; BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT
••,°�, D y " INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner
From: Sam Szymanski, Plan Check Manager
Date: July 16th, 2008
Subject: CUP 08-266
I have reviewed the information provided and have the following comments:
1. Project must conform to the current State of California Codes adopted at the time
of plan check submittal. The following are the codes enforced at this time:
2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (Based on 2006 IBC)
2007 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (Based on 2006 UMC)
2007 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (Based on 2006 UPC)
2007 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (Based on 2005 NEC)
2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
2. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert
Business License prior to permit issuance per Palm desert Municipal Code, Title
5.
3. All contractors and/or owner-builders must submit a valid Certificate of Worker's
Compensation Insurance coverage prior to the issuance of a building permit per
California Labor Code, Section 3700.
4. Structural plans and calculations will be required for the mono-palm structure.
Design parameters are currently 85 mph wind speed; exposure C (due to height)
and seismic design category as determined by CBC Chapter 16 Requirements.
G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP 08-247 Verizon Mono-palm\Building Conditions.doc