HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-07 Draft Minutes
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY – APRIL 7, 2009
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Tanner called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
II. 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
Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner
Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairperson Tanner led in the pledge of allegiance.
IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION
Ms. Aylaian summarized pertinent February 26, March 12 and March 26,
2009 City Council actions.
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Request for consideration of the February 17, 2009 meeting minutes.
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Limont, seconded by Commissioner R.
Campbell, approving the February 17, 2009 meeting minutes. Motion
carried 5-0.
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Case No. PMW 09-03 – CAHUILLA FALLS, LLC and BIGHORN
GOLF CLUB, Applicants
Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a 1,626
square foot lot line adjustment for property known as 1017
Cahuilla Falls (APN 652-320-006).
B. Case No. PMW 09-34 – D.R. HORTON and PAULINE
THOMAS, Applicants
Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a lot
line adjustment for property located at 43-350 Tennessee
Avenue (APN 637-470-058).
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Limont, seconded by Commissioner S.
Campbell, 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 08-247 – VERIZON WIRELESS, Applicant
Request for 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 and generator room located
at the rear of the Desert Gateway Self Storage property at
73-750 Dinah Shore Drive.
2
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009
Mr. Kevin Swartz reviewed the staff report and recommended approval of
CUP 08-247, subject to the conditions.
Commissioner Limont acknowledged that there was a gap in coverage
and asked how far it was. She asked when driving down Monterey Avenue
if coverage was lost if someone took a right on Dinah Shore and down
Cook. Mr. Swartz deferred the question to the applicant.
There were no other questions for staff. Chairperson Tanner opened the
public hearing and invited the applicant to the podium.
MR. ROBERT McCORMICK, representing Verizon Wireless, 27 Via
Granada in Rolling Hills Estates, California, 90274, addressed the
Commission. Responding to the question regarding the hole in the
coverage, he said if they came down the main thoroughfare there
and turn west to Dinah Shore, their hole is the entire industrial park
and that portion of I-10. He thought it was about a quarter of a mile
in either direction.
Commissioner Limont asked if they were coming down Cook Street and
went west on Dinah Shore, upon going left, they would lose contact.
Mr. McCormick said maybe after an eighth of a mile the call would
be dropped, and they would probably have three-quarters of a mile
before it picked back up again.
Commissioner Limont said it would pick back up again at Monterey and
concluded it would be the same thing when darting along I-10.
Mr. McCormick concurred.
There were no other questions for the applicant. Chairperson Tanner
asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to the
proposed project. There was no one. Chairperson Tanner closed the
public hearing and asked for Commission comments.
Commissioner S. Campbell thought it was very pleasing to the eye and
was in an acceptable location. If they looked at the pictures without the
palm trees and then with it, it was very pleasing to the eyes. She moved
for approval.
Commissioner Limont stated that she drove down there today and could
see what Architectural Review Commission was suggesting, and she
appreciated their suggestion, but that area was so stark with regard to
3
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009
trees right now that this tower would stick up like the pine tree that has all
the different cells on it. She thought they had ignored north Palm Desert to
a certain extent as far as being conscientious of the aesthetic appeal out
there. She knew it was close to I-10, and was not negating the fact that
they do need cell coverage there, but for her she was just not willing to do
it at the expense of having this tower stick up in the middle of nowhere.
They could see it from I-10, from Dinah Shore Drive, and from Monterey
Avenue. For her, it was too big.
In that regard, Commissioner Schmidt said she was curious; when she
looked at it, it was obvious that it sticks up much higher than even the
tallest of surrounding trees that they were going to put there and in trying
to help shield it, they’ve actually called attention to it with the height of the
other trees. She was hoping that one or two of the other three large palm
trees would have staggered heights. She asked if that was possible. Mr.
Swartz noted that the picture showed them all at the same height, but
there was a condition that they had to vary in height from 35 feet to 45
feet. Commissioner Schmidt asked if 45 feet was the tallest. Mr. Swartz
said that was what was recommended by the Landscape Department.
Commissioner Schmidt stated that her observation was that the taller the
accompanying trees are, the more the height of that one would be
mitigated and kind of blend in. She said that Commissioner Limont’s
comment was well taken in that it sticks out there because there aren’t
huge palm trees in the area, so that would be her suggestion: taller trees,
staggered.
Commissioner Limont asked if staff knew if the palm trees around St.
Margaret’s were staggered, or if they pretty much were the same height.
Mr. Swartz replied that they’re pretty much the same height.
Commissioner Limont referred to the picture and said they could see
palm, cell palm, and palm. Mr. Swartz said that there was a condition by
the Architectural Commission requiring the applicant to place palm trees
throughout the site, as well. So then it wasn’t just a cluster of palm trees in
one area, there would be additional palm trees. Commissioner Limont
asked when the other palm trees would go in. Mr. Swartz confirmed that
they would go in at the same time.
Chairperson Tanner asked if that was a condition of the owner of the
property or a condition of Verizon. Was Verizon responsible to put in the
additional palm trees?
Mr. McCormick said it was three palms, and two more near the
entrance for a total of five live palms. He believed the heights for
4
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009
the three live palms around the pole were 50 feet, 40 feet and 35
feet, and that was because they had a microwave dish underneath
that was covered by hanging fronds. Also to address what was
mentioned about previous trees, he wasn’t sure when it was
installed, but in the last couple of years they’ve improved quite a bit.
The overall height of this pole is 65 feet, but that was to the top of
the fronds. The antennas were actually sitting around 57 feet.
Commissioner Limont pointed out that the structure was still 65 feet.
Mr. McCormick said they have one live tree at 50 feet and three
that were staggered. He believed the condition was for 40 feet.
Commissioner S. Campbell noted that Condition No. 7 added live trees
throughout the site, so there were going to be more trees besides those
three.
Mr. McCormick said there were two additional trees that they were
required to place at the entrance of the complex, and he believed
they were each 40 feet in height and would be live palms.
Commissioner Schmidt asked if the purpose of that was to help shield the
65-foot height.
Mr. McCormick concurred.
Commissioner Schmidt asked how far away those were from the cluster.
Mr. McCormick estimated approximately 200 feet to the west.
Mr. Swartz clarified that the condition says 35 to 45 feet, so if they wanted
taller palms, they just needed to specify the height. Commissioner
Schmidt said taller palms. Commissioner S. Campbell noted that Mr.
McCormick said one of the palms would be 50 feet high; 50 feet, 40 feet
and 35 feet in height.
Mr. McCormick concurred and said that the other two off of that
area would be 40 feet.
Commissioner R. Campbell asked if all of their towers were 65 feet, or if
that one was 65 feet because that was a lower area and they needed that
height for the coverage.
5
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009
Mr. McCormick said they were higher and were asked to come
down ten feet.
Commissioner Schmidt asked about the next increment lower.
Mr. McCormick explained that they would lose coverage if they
came down any further or moved in any other direction. They went
through it quite a bit with the Architectural Review Commission.
Commissioner S. Campbell noted that they had approved other cell towers
that were 75 feet in height.
Mr. McCormick said they were as low as they could go at this point.
There were no other questions. Chairperson Tanner noted that there was
a motion on the floor for approval. He asked for a second. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner R. Campbell.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner S. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
R. Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried
4-1 (Commissioner Limont voted no).
It was moved by Commissioner S. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
R. Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2497,
approving Case No. CUP 08-247, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-1
(Commissioner Limont voted no).
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
None.
X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES
A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
Commissioner S. Campbell reported that there was only one item
on the agenda, which was continued.
B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE
Commissioner Limont summarized the last meeting’s discussion
items.
6
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009
C. PARKS & RECREATION
Chairperson Tanner gave an update on their last meeting.
D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE
Commissioner R. Campbell reported on the various items that were
discussed.
XI. COMMENTS
Chairperson Tanner noted that Commissioner Limont brought up the issue
of going dark this summer. He indicated that it was difficult to do at this
point because we didn’t know yet when City Council might go dark. He
understood it was a whole lot cheaper to buy a plane ticket today than in
another month. He was just wondering if they could pinpoint the dark
weeks the Council was having this year. Ms. Aylaian explained that
historically they’ve taken off the second meeting in July and the first
meeting in August, and it’s been pretty predictable. Last year they did
alternating dates off. Her guess was that they would try to take the second
in July and the first in August. Staff just didn’t know at this time. For our
purposes, without knowing the Council’s plans, she would not plan to go
dark for more than one meeting in a row. It was far enough in advance
that as they work with applicants, if they knew there was one meeting or
another meeting they were going to go dark, they could steer people in
that direction. But to plan in advance two meetings being dark without
knowing the Council’s plan would be a disservice to applicants or people
trying to get their way through the system. She advised to either wait a
little bit or not to pick consecutive dates.
Commissioner S. Campbell pointed out that we’ve always been busy in
the summer time. They’ve always had things to do. As Ms. Aylaian said, it
wouldn’t be nice for applicants. Ms. Aylaian concurred that it could be a
hardship on an applicant. Right now they weren’t seeing any big cases
working their way through, but at the next meeting they would have two
CUPs, and the next meeting after that would be the Sign Ordinance
update and another CUP. They would probably be seeing CUPs trickle
through more than anything.
As long as they had a quorum, Chairperson Tanner suggested that
Commissioner Limont go ahead and make her travel arrangements and
hopefully they would have a quorum, and they could plan their schedules
around that. He said he would be here during the month of August, just
7
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009
not in the desert. He asked if that was good for everyone. Commissioner
S. Campbell said that was good for her.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Limont suggested that they adjourn the meeting in honor of
Paul Campbell. Commission concurred. It was moved by Commissioner
Limont, seconded by Chairperson Tanner, adjourning the meeting in
honor of Paul Campbell. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner S. Campbell
thanked them. The meeting was adjourned at 6:27 p.m.
__________________________
LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary
ATTEST:
_____________________________
VAN G. TANNER, Chairperson
Palm Desert Planning Commission
/tm
8