Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2013-10-15 PC Regular Meeting Agenda Packet
CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA • TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2013 —6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Any person wishing to discuss any item not scheduled for public hearing may address the Planning Commission at this point by stepping to the lectern and giving his/her name and address for the record. Remarks shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes unless additional time is authorized by the Planning Commission. Because the Brown Act does not allow the Planning Commission to take action on items not on the Agenda, Commissioners will not enter into discussion with speakers but may briefly respond or instead refer the matter to staff for report and recommendation at a future Planning Commission meeting. Reports and documents relating to each of the following items listed on the agenda, including those received following posting/distribution, are on file in the Office of the Department of Community Development and are available for public inspection during normal business hours, Monday-Friday, 8.00 a.m.-5.00 p.m., 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260, telephone (760) 346-0611, Extension 484. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR ALL MATTERS LISTED ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE ROLL CALL VOTE. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR AUDIENCE REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND ACTION UNDER SECTION VII CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER OF THE AGENDA. AGENDA PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 A. MINUTES of the Planning Commission meeting of October 1, 2013. Rec: Approve as presented. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a two-year extension for Phase III of Precise Plan 03-19 located at 39-840 Portola Avenue. Case No. PP 03-19 (TDA Investment Group, 2025 Pioneer Court, San Mateo, CA 94403, Applicant) Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the extension (until January 3, 2016), Case No. PP 03-19. Action: VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER Vill. 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. Remarks shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes unless additional time is authorized by the Planning Commission. A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a fitness & gym facility within an existing office professional building located at 44-651 Village Court. Case No. CUP 12-385 (Five Star Fitness & Gym, LLC, 73-585 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 201, Palm Desert, CA 92260, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, continue Case No. CUP 12-385 to November 5, 2013, to allow staff additional time to address the applicant's modifications. Action: B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a new Development Plan creating uniform development standards for the Mountains at Bighorn in accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040. Case No. DP 13-316 (Bighorn Development, LLC, 255 Palowet Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2613, approving Development Plan 13-316, as proposed. Action: 2 GAPlanningWonica OReilly\Planning Commission\20MAgenda\10-15-13 agn.dou AGENDA PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 IX. MISCELLANEOUS None X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES B. PARKS & RECREATION XI. COMMENTS XII. ADJOURNMENT hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing agenda for the Planning Commission was posted on the City Hall bulletin board not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Dated this 10t" day of October, 2013. Monica O'Reilly, Reco g Secretary Please contact the Planning Department, 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260, (760) 346-0611, for assistance with access to any of the agenda, materials, or participation at the meeting. 3 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013Wgenda\10-15-13 agn.docx CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY MINUTES • TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2013 — 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 1. CALL TO ORDER x, r; Chair Nancy DeLuna called the meeting to ordgi'at 6:00 p m, II. ROLL CALL �u Present: r �.y Commissioner Ken Stendell , , Commissioner John Greenwb6d Commissioner Sonia CampbolkT Vice Chair Roger Dash k q k Chair Nancy DeL kk r Staff Present " Jill Tremblays 1i Attorn d Lauri Aylaian, to � ��kDevelopment Tore B.6gato, Pnnoi y Planner Er eja, Associate ner kevin Swartz,=Atanl nner nica O'Reilly, ni istra e Secretary III. PLE �E OF ALLEGIANCE Commk& er S160- Campbell led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMARY COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, reported that at the meeting of September 24, the City Council requested that the illuminated signage ordinance amendment go before the El Paseo Business Improvement District. The illuminated amendment was continued to the last City Council meeting of October. He stated that the City Council approved the ordinance amendment to allow A-frames and the amendment to reduce the parking requirements. PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 Chair DeLuna asked if a date was specified for the A-frame signs. Mr. Bagato stated that the A-frame signs will be allowed on El Paseo during the summer months. He noted that both A-frames and pedestal signs will be allowed on El Paseo. Chair DeLuna asked what the dates during the summer months are. Mr. Bagato replied that the summer months are June 1 through October 1. He said that the amendment will go to a second reading o�Qctober 10, and then it will take 30 days before it goes into effect (Novembe. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None € � w VI. CONSENT CALENDAR E� A. MINUTES of the Planning Commissi eeth t f September 17,2013. Rec: By Minute Motion, ap10"r ,e as prese", e; v Upon a motion by Commission Camp, l secok� Commissioner Stendell, and a 5-0 vote of the Planning Comml ion, th ent calendar was approved as presented. VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER tY " NoneN VIII PUsL� BEARINGS r , / . REQUEST EQ'R CONSIDERATION of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a private fitness studio with one-on-one personal training located at 74350 Alessandro DrivSuite A-2, in the R-3(4) zone (Residential Multiple Family). Case No. CUP,,1 -293 (Roger Paul Johnson, 73110 Santa Rosa Way, Palm De", CA 92266' Applicant). ... Mr. Kevin SWAM, Assistant Planner, reported that the property is located north of Alessandro Drive, west of Deep Canyon Road, and east of Portola Avenue. The site is currently zoned Multiple Family Residential. He said that to the north is Single Family Residential, to the south is General Commercial, and to the east and west is Multiple Family Residential. On January 11, 1990, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 89-12 for two single-story buildings for office professional use. He stated that the applicant has leased Suite A-2, which is 2,665 square feet. The training studio will have up to five full- time personal trainers who work by appointment only, and they will not have more than 10 people at one time (five trainers/five clients). The hours of 2 G:\Planning\Monica OReilly\Planning CommissionTOMMinutes\10.1-13 min.dou PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 operation are between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Sunday. Mr. Swartz presented a floor plan. He said the training studio will only utilize 10 parking spaces. Staff believes that parking is more than adequate, and there will still be parking spaces available for future office professional uses. He noted that personal one-on-one training is a low intensity use with no music, running, or outdoor training within the parking lot or the surrounding residential area. Mr. Swartz stated that staff recommends to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2612, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 13-293. He offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Ken Stendell asked what the parking�r�quirements are for suites B-1, B-2, and B-5. How will they impact the parkin if they were fully occupied? Mr. Swartz responded that parking for the., u i ing is four spaces per 1,000 square feet. The applicant at the time proyidd& 1 parking spaces. Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing o e `and asked for any publid,testimony IN FAVOR or OPPOSITION. MR. RON EPLING, 77880 Mountain View Akfi Desert, California, offered to answer any questions. Chair DeLuna asked the applicant if there. was anything that he would like to state about the busi ss. MR. EPLING st d than` y are notthe typical large box gym that would have a large memk `, "tiip. He r d than"i will not have memberships or group classes. H(P� noted th is clienteI are mostly mature. Q Chas DeLuna asks is by app went only. EPLING died y ` C missioner Csrpbell as d if they have a facility somewhere else. n, ` �'M MR apt ING responded that he currently works at World Gym located on Town Center ' AIN Commissioned Campbell asked if he will bring his clientele from World Gym to the private gym. MR. EPLING replied yes. Commissioner John Greenwood asked the applicant if he had any concerns with noise generated from the gym disturbing the adjacent office spaces. MR. EPLING responded that he does not have any concerns. He said that he does not foresee any noise emanating beyond their walls. He stated that they are 3 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-1-13 min.dou PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 breaking away from the big gyms, and that their clientele do not enjoy the loud noise. Vice Chair Roger Dash asked what is their source of clients. Is it through advertising? MR. EPLING said that their clients are from word of mouth. MR. ROGER JOHNSON, 73110 Santa Rosa Way, Palm Desert, California, stated that he is the other owner, and currently workt the World Gym. He mentioned that there will be another trainer starting Httb them, and they hope to hire one or two more trainers down the road. Commissioner Campbell asked if they are only"' to have two trainers when they open. MR. JOHNSON replied that they would have three with a fourth trainer starting in a a January. Commissioner Campbell asked if they are busy throughout the day. MR. JOHNSON responded thatrthey can be busy He said that during the winter they can train up to 10 peoot however they rd,611y do not want to do that anymore. He commented that during the un'Ter they train up to five people a day. Commission b J ampbell ired if troy train more than an hour per person."a — s M t Y MR JOHNS C� li fay I the train for one hour. Comr,issrone Ste' asked how many clients come in before 8:00 a.m. MR. JOHNSON respon 0 to 20 percent of the clients are before 8:00 a.m. Corn ssioner Stehi*ll asked if they are requesting to be open from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 P,�,.yseven days°a week. MR. that they will not be open from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on the weekends. TI1 will probably be open from 7:00 or 8:00 a.m. to noon or 4:00 p.m. He mentioned that they usually do not train on Sundays. Commissioner Stendell asked the applicant if they understand the complaint process. If there is a complaint, they may have to amend the hours of operation. MR. JOHNSON replied yes. Commissioner Stendell asked the applicant if they reviewed and understood the conditions set forth by the Department of Community Development. 4 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-1-13 min.dou PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 MR. JOHNSON replied yes. MS. ABBE FLEMMING, 44836 Santa Ynez Avenue, Palm Desert, California, stated that she has been living on Santa Ynez for 26 years. She voiced that the Venture Commerce Center has had nothing but problems. Ms. Flemming noted that the center only has 33 parking spaces, including handicap. She stated her concern is with not enough parking. If there is not enough parking, people start parking on Santa Ynez and in front of her driveway. She also stated that a right- hand turn is not allowed coming out of the center onto Santa Ynez; however, people still make the right turn down Santa Ynez. entioned that if the center gets full, the trainers only have eight parkin 3 es, and not enough for 10 people. Ms. Flemming noted that they also people from The Hood driving down her street. She feels that no one Lee the home owners and she feels frustrated. Chair DeLuna asked staff if there is res to Ms. Flemming ncern. Mr. Swartz explained that when hoeducte parking stu the study indicated there are enough parking spab Hey . ntioned that two businesses only work during the even in hours, and " business is a hair salon that is by appointment only. ' Chair DeLuna inquired what th Ian 1, re ar6 enough parking spaces in the future. Mr. Swartz responded th he ha er seen the parking lot full; however, he imagines that people willrk on the eet. He said there is parking available on -X Alessandro Dtive. He al�asaid there "no right turn" sign as you are coming out of the cent'ef-but ht rtofgre hove;` at could be regulated. d � . Ghat"E)'E.,�Luha asked Ms. Flemming if parking is worse on the weekend. S. FLEMMINC klf ponds there was a problem when the modeling business w ,yat the center ;She n6Q that people prefer to park on Santa Ynez Avenue because it is close She stated that the center is supposed to be an office buildlrt�gnd not a modeling school, a barber college, or real estate school. She V 11, said the``hours shoo _ be 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. or 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. ,d Chair DeLunHh nked Ms. Flemming for voicing her concerns. Chair DeLuna asked Mr. Swartz to discuss the number of parking spaces the applicant is allotted for the proposed use. Mr. Swartz responded that when the buildings were approved, there were 41 parking spaces with shared parking. Staff believes that there is adequate parking with the maximum of 10 people at one time for the proposed use. Chair DeLuna inquired about the eight parking spaces Ms. Flemming referred to. 5 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2011Minutes\10-1-13 min.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 Mr. Swartz replied that he is not sure which eight parking spaces Ms. Flemming is referring to. Chair DeLuna asked if there are 33 or 41 parking spaces. Mr. Swartz responded that he counted 41. Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development, stated that it is relevant to note that in the event this use does not go in, and an office use goes into that space, which is allowed by right without coming to tl 6r,JI lanning Commission, then that office space will be entitled to 10 parking spaces: Commissioner Campbell asked if they could hvhe ttaers' park on the street along Alessandro Drive. = � n> Mr. Swartz responded that could be part of the motion. ... Commissioner Campbell recommendsd dding to conditions of approval to i"tC have the trainers park on Alessandro De so„th"a are more spaces for their clients. Mr. Swartz stated that the 'art fees to the added condition. MS. FLEMMING stated that he er c f theapplicant decides to have spin or zumba classesi-_'and they ` t ave ogle attending classes. She voiced that she rrirants to make sure„ conditions are true and correct. Commissionkampbel . "Affirmed tf' s one of the conditions of approval. Mr.,Swartz stated t �onditiori NoTstates that the applicant could only have 777 & ,axirhum �,Q people. If the applicant is working outside of the conditions of approval, staf dould b6" it back to the Planning Commission to recommend revoking the Con �t�ona e Permit. �i M' 5 U R E S H SHAH 40530 Morningstar Road, Rancho Mirage, California, stated that he is nab Sure why the this case is before the Planning Commission. He saic�°f the a� ficant will have one-on-one personal training by appointment only. It is not a gV "' open to the public. He feels that the Conditional Use Permit should be ap OVed. With no further testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Campbell moved, by Minute Motion, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 13-293 to operate a private fitness studio with one-on-one training at 74350 Alessandro Drive, Suite A-2, and adding Condition No. 22 to the conditions to have the trainers park on Alessandro Drive and that their clients park accordingly. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Dash and carried by a 5-0 vote. 6 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-1-13 min.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 Commissioner Campbell moved, by Minute Motion, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2612. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Stendell and carried by a 5-0 vote. Chair DeLuna thanked the applicant for choosing to do business in Palm Desert, and wished the applicant the best of luck with their business. Mr. Bagato added that the previous Director of Planning was a little more liberal with the uses in this area. He stated that staff has informed Mr. Shah that the City will be following the office standards. He also stated thaf'staff has provided Mr. Shah with s copy of the conditions of approval. Commissioner Stendell mentioned that he drove::,I the`site, and noted that there is a sign that says "no left turn." He noted thaany car that is licensed in the State of California can drive on any road4 4'ny time, and arty place. He said to keep a car from turning right is difficult:' however, he understood that a car coming out of a commercial into a residential area is sometimes,:bI, lurdensome. Commissioner Stendell suggested addling "no parking signs" or are-there things that can be explored to help facilitate people from parking in front Ms. Flemming's home. Mr. Bagato responded that staff,will talk to they Department of Public Works to see what other options are available. Ms. Flemming mentioned that it [pt pq only people from the center they have issues with; they;a(so harre,people from The Hood parking in front of their home. She commented that one right someone from The Hood knocked their mail box down and drove away. IX. MISCEI-LANEOU lrte X. O�bMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. AR;AN PUBLIQ "LACES Commissioner t ell reported that the Art in Public Places Commission looked at proposals° he painting of traffic signal cabinets at three different locations. He mentioned that Ms. Deborah Schwartz, Management Analyst, is still looking for docents for the Public Art Docent Program. Chair DeLuna asked how does the city select which traffic signal cabinets get painted. Ms. Aylaian responded that staff works with the Department of Public Works to identify locations based upon proximity to other art pieces where there is visibility. 7 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-1-13 min.dou PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 B. PARKS & RECREATION Vice Chair Dash reported that the Park & Recreation Commission members were asked to contribute to the Palm Desert Strategic Plan. He noted that park and recreation programs will be affected by the loss of development funds. He said that there is a possibility of changing the thinking in parks and recreation in terms of having activities that bring in revenue, which has not been a focus of Palm Desert. He also reported that the development of a park near the 1-10 is planned to be a regional park. Vice Chair Dash asked Ms. Aylaian if she is familiar with the Strategic Plan. Ms. Aylaian replied yes. She said that there is committee for land use, housing, and open space. Chair DeLuna s .are members of that subcommittee. She commented that Mr4 ato i � the sustainability subcommittee. There are members oft �� ommunity rge also on the subcommittees. Vice Chair Dash commented that at"'th last PI g Comm issia Meeting he mentioned there was a parking issue a U sity Park dog park. He said that staff is looking at enlarging the do'` at Freedom Park, which is a regional park. He said that also lookrn' ' , building a temporary park near the I-10. :.. Chair DeLuna referred to the red al p? ice air Dash mentioned near the 1-10. She aske"ho decide ng fe a regional park. Is it the Planning Department, the City Co or someone from the outside? Ms. A laiar explained that a re iona ark is a ark that people would generally Y p g p p p 9 Y drive to and take adva # g ;ttte amet#ies. The city currently has two regional parks ,Qvic Center(Park and Freedom Park. A neighborhood park is a park that serves a W&borho6d and people are expected to walk or ride their bikes to it. said that a`.-eigh�rhood park does not have a lot of parking because you are not trying to draw outside traffic into a neighborhood. She stated that the city as land for a third `regionalrpark. It is anticipated that at build out that would be thorn total of alfgional parks in the city. Ms. Aylaian stated that the third regiona1°park will be located at the north end of Portola. It is 36 acres of which 10 acres have been,,idritified as for affordable housing use (26 acres for a regional park). Chair DeLuna asked what a bare bones park would cost. Ms. Aylaian responded that she does not have those figures. She noted Freedom Park cost approximately $7 million to develop. 8 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-1-13 min.doa PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2013 XI. COMMENTS Ms. Aylaian introduced Mr. Eric Ceja, the Planning Department's new Associate Planner. He is a valley native and had been a planner for seven years in the City of La Quinta. The Planning Commission welcomed Mr. Ceja, and said that they look forward to his first presentation. XII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Vice Chair Dash, second by Commissioner Greenwood, and a 5-0 vote of the Planning Commission, Chair DeLuna ad' "th6d,the meeting at 6:52 p.m.ORP NANCY,Q � UNA, CHAIR ATTEST: f y LAURI AYLAIAN, SECR A Y " PALM DESERT PLAN_ MISSIONA iaC �f �� v FOR vv v 9 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-1-13 mhdocx CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A TWO-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR PHASE III of PRECISE PLAN 03-19 (PP 03-19) LOCATED AT 39-800 PORTOLA AVENUE SUBMITTED BY: Tony Bagato Principal Planner APPLICANT: Paula Purcell TDA Investment Group, Inc. 2025 Pioneer Court San Mateo, CA 94403 CASE NO: PP 03-19 DATE: October 15, 2013 CONTENTS: Vicinity Map Approved Site Plan Recommendation That the Planning Commission grant a two-year extension for Phase III of Precise Plan 03-19. Background On May 27, 2004, the City Council approved Precise Plan 03-19 allowing the construction of a new office business park located at 39-800 Portola Avenue. Phases I and II are completed with only Phase III remaining. Phase III consists of a two-story 31,118 square-foot office building. The Certificate of Occupancy was issued for Buildings C and D on February 23, 2007. Due to economic reasons, Phase III of the project has not moved forward with construction. The applicant is requesting a two-year time extension for Phase III of the office business park. Submitted by: Department Head: Tony Bagato '.__ .,Lauri Aylaian Principal Planner Director of Community Development City of Palm Dam Community Development TDA SEP 27 2013 INVESTMENT GROUP Capital Management September 19, 2013 Mr. Tony Bagato City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578 Re: 39-840 Portola Avenue, Palm Desert APN 620-430-34 Tony, Thank you for the time you made for me, Mssrs. Vuksic and Prest last Friday. As I explained, TDA, as fiduciary investment manager for Construction Laborer's Pension Trust for Southern California(CLPT),has managed CLPT assets for over 20 years. CLPT recently purchased the Willow Vista office park on Portola Avenue. The property consists of four single- story office buildings, parking, including awnings for covered parking, and the subject parcel currently vacant, entitled for another property no larger than 31,118 square feet, 25' tall and currently zoned to accommodate a medical office building use. CLPT is a long-term holder of properties,takes great pride in the asset portfolio, maintaining them at the highest standard. We believe the Willow Vista property represents this level of ownership standard. The approval for the development of the last remaining vacant parcel is set to expire January 3, 2014. Given our recently assumed ownership, and the current market conditions that do not support such a development in the near term, we respectfully ask that the approval be extended two years, when such a development would likely be more economically feasible. Please present our request at the next Planning Commission Meeting. If you need anything additional from me, or if it would be helpful for someone from our office to attend in person, please do not hesitate to ask. Thank you again for your kind assistance. Sincerely, Paula Purcell TDA Investment Group Inc. 2025 Pioneer Court 650.343.6333 ph www.tdainc.com San Mateo, CA 650.343.0858 fax - 94403 USA k qj a 1`. 4 11411111 Row ' 4 A. �� s 4 �l yq '•'y t . j: _ .. r1 s; R „►a' 4' s y, R � jo x i � i 7,IV, ++ F Crfy a1,AaZm Awerl �dq TAW PLANNING COMMISSION VICINITY MAP PREST VUKSIC ARCHITECTS C O R I b R A I K G l 14-F W 6,52.21'N 01 c-00000 0 0 Cl L _j -------------- L 20- zMAed N 4 -7r -J 4— T PHASE I AND PHASE 11 ..... ------ A. r 520- BlIZOL, 14 --.'OLD�4, �4 �,Aqg VAT? 5 R 43 2' 0 -z 4- Lv- ctv LL N al'IR'l it F _j 7 4- lT COMMERCIAL PROJECT 1151116 11— All-VE LR Ztn&�As - -0-0 SCOTELLE DEVELOPMENT LLC. A '11" PORTOLA AVE PALM DESERT,CA 92260 SITE PLAN PHASE I & 11 TABULATIONS PHASE III TABULATIONS SCALE 1—20'4' TCT4L LAND 4GRE51 'OTAL�-11ND 2:9523&(2F'(594 ACRES) INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE 7C T 4 L 50'L:',Irl AREA 22544 50!:-' P-,RK;M3 REOU'IRED 93 CARS a 4,500-0 Cf:=ICE GR iRC2W GRS 6,'CC0'lE0;C4, T 1. - "Ec C-- �-RK:141,FRO/17ED E[; C-,R- DAVID G,PRIEST,AIA Cea90 --T LLLI �17'11�l �11 �11 4D:G4R 5-AGE5-IR0,111LED. SPLCE5 0-J.WKSIC,A IA C-IWJ0 CCC E C4Ls 0: 4�:--5 -aA 51� 0 00 .0 f-RF, SITE PLAN _REVtSIO-S- SCAL 20' AREA PERCENTAGES r 17 - W 4�323-�C.F- CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) TO OPERATE A FITNESS & GYM FACILITY WITHIN AN EXISTING OFFICE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 44-651 VILLAGE COURT SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner APPLICANT: Five Star Fitness &Gym, LLC Shah Family Trust 73-585 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 201 Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO: CUP 12-385 DATE: October 15, 2013 Recommendation By Minute Motion: Continue the discussion of operating a 22,617-square-foot fitness & gym facility within an existing 42,208-square-foot office professional building until the November 5, 2013, Planning Commission meeting allowing staff additional time to address the applicant's modifications. Background At the March 19, 2013, Planning Commission meeting, the applicant requested a continuance to the October 15, 2013, meeting to address the issues raised in the staff report dated February 19, 2013. On October 1, 2013, staff met with the applicant and new material was presented to staff, including a new statement of use. Additional time is needed by staff to review the new materials and to re-notice the public hearing to business owners who have been in opposition of the project request. Submitted d By Kevin Swartz, Assis ant Planner Depart Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT PLAN CREATING UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE MOUNTAINS AT BIGHORN IN ACCORDANCE WITH PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 25.28.060 AND 25.72.040 SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner APPLICANT: Bighorn Development, LLC 255 Palowet Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO: DP 13-316 DATE: October 15, 2013 CONTENTS: Resolution No. 2613 Notice of Exemption Forms"A"and "B" Legal Notice Exhibits "A"and "B" Viewing Lots Vicinity Map Recommendation Waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2613, approving Development Plan 13-316 as proposed. Executive Summary The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Plan to create uniform development standards within the Mountains at Bighorn for all residential lots. The Mountains began construction approximately 23 years ago. Over the years, 11 tentative tract maps have been approved, and many of the homes have been built with different development standards (setbacks and height). Also, changes have occurred during construction and parcel map waivers have been processed to move or merge property lines. These changes have resulted in many of the lots being irregularly shaped, located on sloping lots, abutting curved streets, or containing other limitations that make it difficult to apply the set of approved development standards identified on all tentative tract maps. Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 2 of 9 October 15, 2013 The Development Plan will provide clarity and uniform development standards that the applicant, developers, builders, and the City can follow for reviewing and approving new construction. The request will also apply retroactively to previous approvals due to variations in setback requirements throughout the 23 years of homes being constructed. The Development Plan will not modify the overall project in terms of the number of residential lots, grading area, or boundary limits. Background A. Property Description: The property known as the Mountains at Bighorn is located in south Palm Desert, on the west side of Highway 74. In the late 1980s, the site was known as "Bella Vista". The project proposed 1,066 units and a 325 room hotel and golf course. In 1990, Westinghouse Desert Communities purchased the property and renamed it "Bighorn Golf Club". Westinghouse was approved for approximately 450 units, 30 casita units, a 35,000-square-foot clubhouse, and an 18-hole golf course. Over the years, the City has approved 11 tentative tract maps and three parcel maps each consisting of different development standards. Below are four examples showing different development standards. TT 25161 allows the following development standards: • Front yards - 20 feet • Rear yards- 10 feet • Side yards - 8 feet • Height - 24 feet TT 27520 allows the following development standards: • Front yards - 20 feet • Rear yards - 10 feet • Side yards - 5 feet • Height - 20 feet TT 26068 allows the following development standards: • Front yards - 20 feet • Rear yards - 10 feet • Side yards - 8 feet • Height - 18 feet G:\Planning'Kevin Swartz\Word\Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Final PC SR_Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doc Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 3 of 9 October 15, 2013 TT 27709 allows the following development standards: • Front yards - 14 feet/20 feet • Rear yards - 10 feet • Side yards - 14 feet combined with no side less than 5 feet • Height - 18 feet In the past, City staff members have allowed homes to be constructed under different development standards if the Bighorn Architectural Review and Landscape Review Board approved them. City staff members also allowed Bighorn to make changes in the field for streets, pad elevations, grading and modifications from previous approvals. Furthermore, the original lot configurations were changed by different phases of the original tract maps, or by parcel map waivers that moved or combined property lines. The changes described above make it difficult for staff to determine what development standards should be applied to lots, when homes have been constructed under different development standards. B. Zoning and General Plan Designation: Zone: Planned Community Development (PCD) General Plan: Residential, Low Density (R-L), zero to four units per acre Project Description The applicant is requesting approval of a new Development Plan for the Mountains at Bighorn to create uniform development standards for all residential lots. As described above, many of the lots have been modified since the original tentative tract map approvals. Also, many of the existing homes have been constructed with different development standards since the Bighorn Architectural and Landscape Review Board has approved them. To address all the issues, the applicant is proposing a Development Plan to create a new set of development standards that will be the same for each lot. The Development Plan will be applied to the area identified in Exhibit A, identified below and in the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 2613. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Final PC SR_Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doc Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 4 of 9 October 15, 2013 TRACT 21620-2 (•I� 'I��ry�v4�w�aLd.�LY--_�-^ !�.� �� �rl � 111 TRgCt 2752V,3 �' ''EP ti i 7 , , TttA,c ( r fig! !"�'`"�.� r S / 1; It 1 1 1I( i f ....:�a.,,�.J .soar ':TRACT 26/61 BIGHORN T S HE MOUNTAIN ._ Ass sawn e 'Consultants Inc EXHIBIT"A. The proposed Development Plan is as follows: A. Plan Area The area subject to Development Plan (the "Plan Area") is depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated by reference. B. Incorporation of Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040 Except as otherwise modified by this Development Plan or a subsequent action of the City's Planning Director, as set forth below, the Development Standards set forth in Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040 of the City's Zoning Code shall be and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Development Plan. C. Minimum Yards The following minimum yard development standards shall apply to habitable structures (primary residence, including garage or guest residence) located within the Plan Area: G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\word\Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Final PC SR_Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doc Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 5 of 9 October 15, 2013 Minimum Front Yards— 14 Feet Minimum Rear Yards 10 Feet Minimum Side Yards— 5 Feet Non-habitable and other accessory structures, including without limitations, walls, decks, pools, spas, outdoor cooking areas, mechanical equipment, landscaping features, pergolas, and similar structures may be constructed within the minimum yards required under this Section. D. Minimum Separation Between Buildings The minimum separation between buildings, including two-story elements of single- family detached homes, shall be at least 10 feet. E. Maximum Building Heights The maximum building height shall be 20 feet. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of Section 25.40.040 shall apply to structures within the area of this Development Plan. F. Maximum Building Coverage The maximum building site coverage on any lot shall not exceed 60 percent of the total lot area. G. Modifications of Standards in Site Plan The Planning Director, or its designee, may, in conjunction with approval of a Site Plan for structures on an individual lot, modify the standards set forth in this Development Plan as an adjustment consistent with the standards set forth in Section 25.64.030 of the Municipal Code. Decisions of the Planning Director may be appealed to the Planning Commission in accordance with Chapter 25.60 of the Municipal Code. H. Effect of Development Plan In accordance with Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040 of the Municipal Code, the development standards contained in this Development Plan shall govern and control all development within the plan area. In the event that different or conflicting development standards are stated in any tentative or final subdivision map for the plan area or in any other provision of law, the provisions of this Development Plan shall supersede such standards and control. All development within the plan area shall comply with this Development Plan. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Planning Commission Staff Report_Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doc Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 6 of 9 October 15, 2013 I. Golf Club and Other Amenity Uses A number of lots have been developed previously with golf course facilities or other amenity uses, which are depicted on Exhibit B of the attached resolution. In addition, two currently undeveloped lots may be developed in the future with either residential or additional amenity uses, which such lots are depicted on Exhibit B as "Flex Lots." Any development on Flex Lots of either residential or amenity uses shall comply with the development standards of this Development Plan. II. Retroactive Application Any structure for which a grading or building permit has been issued within the area of this Development Plan prior to the effective date of the resolution approving this Development Plan shall be treated as though the resolution approving this Development Plan had been in effect prior to the issuance of such building or grading permit and shall be deemed to be consistent and in conformance with this Development Plan. Analysis The proposed Development Plan will provide uniform standards for all the lots within the Mountains at Bighorn. The new Development Plan will address several issues that staff and the applicant have recently encountered with permitting new construction. Given the fact that the original approved setbacks have not been applied per the approved resolutions, it has become difficult to determine which setbacks to use. Staff members in the past have approved different setbacks and heights since Bighorn's Architectural and Landscape Review Board has approved them. The development standards that are being proposed below in regards to setbacks are consistent with existing homes-within the Mountain at Bighorn. Staff believes that the proposed setbacks would not pose an issue for existing homes and future construction of homes. • Minimum Front Yards— 14 Feet • Minimum Rear Yards— 10 Feet • Minimum Side Yards — 5 Feet The applicant is proposing a maximum building height of 20 feet within the Development Plan. Many of the existing homes are built at 18 feet in height, with some homes having architectural projections around 20 feet in height. There are a small percentage of homes 20 to 24 feet in height, which have not been an issue for existing homeowners, and have not created negative public views along Highway 74. Initially, staff had concerns with the height request, and asked the applicant to construct story poles on some of the remaining 25 undeveloped lots. The applicant and staff agreed that the story poles should be applied to lots that could be visible from areas along Highway 74. The applicant identified the seven lots shown below. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Final PC SR_Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doc Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 7 of 9 October 15, 2013 ,aaw � w"a"•< ? aTaa .f t iatia � "a I hag, _ i b'f tw•� �'a°�� 49 ' : ,ylltew�rig Areas��- spy YArM 20'Story Pole Lots Date,: c ,4 'I0/2013 VM( Ni 9u MAP Staff viewed the lots from areas along Highway 74 (Santa Rosa & San Jacinto Mountains Visitor Center, Art Smith Trail Head, areas adjacent to the Canyons at Bighorn, Cahuilla Way, and several areas within Bighorn. After viewing the lots with story poles, staff believes the proposed building height of 20 feet would not pose a negative threat, or create line of sight concerns to homeowners within Bighorn and to public views along Highway 74. Also, Bighorn's Architectural and Landscape Review Board reviews and approves all new construction, and their process is more restrictive then the City's. Approval of the Development Plan will create uniform development standards for all residential lots that are straightforward for staff, the applicant, future builders, and home owners to follow and implement. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Final PC SR—Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doc Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 8 of 9 October 15, 2013 Findings Chapter 25.72 Decisions by the Planning Commission Section 25.72.040 Development Plan E. Procedure for development plan application, states the Planning Commission may approve a development plan if it finds the criteria set forth in this chapter has been satisfied to such conditions as it deems necessary. 1. The proposed Development Plan is in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance; Section 25.28.060 Planned Community Overlay District Purpose, states: "The Planned Community Overlay district allows for larger areas for coordinated land use, and master planning purposes that may include multiple properties. Approval of a Development Plan as outlined in Section 25.72.040 is required for approval of a development in the Planned Community Overlay district." Most of the lots within the Mountains at Bighorn have been constructed under different development standards since Bighorns Architectural Review Board approved them. Most of the lots are irregular in shape and size, which makes following the original tentative tract maps development standards which determines the setbacks hard to achieve. This has made it difficult to determine the standards to be used for new construction. The proposed Development Plan will create development standards that will provide the applicant and land developers assurance for all new construction and standardization of setbacks for new construction within the Mountains at Bighorn. In addition, the standards provide flexibility by allowing for modification of the plan to be approved by the Planning Director or his/her designee. 2. The proposed Development Plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; The proposed Development Plan will not result in any physical changes to the original approvals of the overall project in terms of the number of residential lots, grading, or any boundary limits that would create a potential impact to public health, safety or general welfare, or that will be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity of the Mountains at Bighorn. All development will continue to be required to meet the building code and other provisions of the municipal code, and to be constructed in compliance with OSHA regulations and other laws designed to protect the safety of the public. The Development Plan will establish new, uniform development standards for all new construction of single-family homes. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Final PC SR_Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doo Staff Report Case No. DP 13-316 Page 9 of 9 October 15, 2013 Environmental Review Approval of the Development Plan is considered a Class 5 Categorical Exemption (15305) for "minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20 percent, which do not result in any changes in land use or density." Since the project does not result in any changes in land use or density, no further review is necessary for CEQA. Submitted By: ^)�- JU�7 Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Department Head: Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Dev ent G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan\Final PC SR Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan.doc PLANNING RESOLUTION NO. 2613 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MOUNTAINS AT BIGHORN PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN THE P.C.D. PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE CASE NO. DP 13-316 WHEREAS, the Mountains at BIGHORN Project is located within the City's existing Planned Community Development Zone; and WHEREAS, the Mountains at BIGHORN Project has been developed over an approximately 23-year period as a planned master community comprised predominately of individually designed custom homes; and WHEREAS, many of the subdivided lots in the Mountains at BIGHORN Project are irregular in shape, are located on sloping lots, abut curving streets, or contain other limitations that make a literal application of rigid development standards impractical; and WHEREAS, the individual structures constructed at the Mountains at BIGHORN Project have been developed in an effort to achieve neighborhood harmony and consistency while preserving significant views and other community aesthetics; and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed and approved various site plans for the Mountains at BIGHORN Project pursuant to which individual structures have been constructed; and WHEREAS, Sections 25.28.060 of the City's Municipal Code authorizes the Planning Commission to approve a Development Plan for properties located within the City's P.C.D Planned Community Development Zone to establish standards for development within the area covered by such Development Plan; and WHEREAS, BIGHORN has requested that the City consider the adoption of a Development Plan for the Mountains at BIGHORN Project, and the City has determined that it is in the best interests of the City, as well as the residents of the BIGHORN Project for the City to adopt a Development Plan for the Mountains at BIGHORN Project in order to clarify and confirm the development standards for development within such area shall be governed by the Development Plan approved by the City; and WHEREAS, in order to avoid any potential confusion that may exist regarding approval of structures in the area subject to this Development Plan, the City desires to confirm that individual structures approved for development in the Mountains at BIGHORN Project pursuant to and in conformance with an approved site plan and a City-issued building permit are and have been consistent with the spirit and intent of the City's Municipal Code. PLANNING RESOLUTION NO. 2613 I. The proposed Development Plan is as follows: A. Plan Area The area subject to Development Plan (the "Plan Area") is depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated by reference. B. Incorporation of Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040 Except as otherwise modified by this Development Plan or a subsequent action of the City's Planning Director, as set forth below, the Development Standards set forth in Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040 of the City's Zoning Code shall be and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Development Plan. C. Minimum Yards The following minimum yard development standards shall apply to habitable structures (primary residence, including garage or guest residence) located within the Plan Area: Minimum Front Yards — 14 Feet Minimum Rear Yards — 10 Feet Minimum Side Yards — 5 Feet Non-habitable and other accessory structures, including without limitations, walls, decks, pools, spas, outdoor cooking areas, mechanical equipment, landscaping features, pergolas, and similar structures may be constructed within the minimum yards required under this Section. D. Minimum Separation Between Buildings The minimum separation between buildings, including two-story elements of single-family detached homes, shall be at least 10 feet. E. Maximum Building Heights The maximum building height shall be 20 feet. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of Section 25.40.040 shall apply to structures within the area of this Development Plan. F. Maximum Building Coverage The maximum building site coverage on any lot shall not exceed 60 percent of the total lot area. G1P1amwiQ\Kevin Swartz\WoedWmntalns at Biahom Development Plmi\PC Reso M—mans at Bi¢hom Development Plm.dwx PLANNING RESOLUTION NO. 2613 G. Modifications of Standards in Site Plan The Planning Director, or its designee, may, in conjunction with approval of a Site Plan for structures on an individual lot, modify the standards set forth in this Development Plan as an adjustment consistent with the standards set forth in Section 25.64.030 of the Municipal Code. Decisions of the Planning Director may be appealed to the Planning Commission in accordance with Chapter 25.60 of the Municipal Code. H. Effect of Development Plan In accordance with Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040 of the Municipal Code, the development standards contained in this Development Plan shall govern and control all development within the plan area. In the event that different or conflicting development standards are stated in any tentative or final subdivision map for the plan area or in any other provision of law, the provisions of this Development Plan shall supersede such standards and control. All development within the plan area shall comply with this Development Plan. I. Golf Club and Other Amenity Uses A number of lots have been developed previously with golf course facilities or other amenity uses, which are depicted on Exhibit B of the attached resolution. In addition, two currently undeveloped lots may be developed in the future with either residential or additional amenity uses, which such lots are depicted on Exhibit B as "Flex Lots." Any development on Flex Lots of either residential or amenity uses shall comply with the development standards of this Development Plan. II. Retroactive Application: Any structure for which a grading or building permit has been issued within the area of this Development Plan prior to the effective date of the resolution approving this Development Plan shall be treated as though the resolution approving this Development Plan had been in effect prior to the issuance of such building or grading permit and shall be deemed to be consistent and in conformance with this Development Plan. G:T1a,minx\Kevin Swartz\Word\Mountahts at Bigh—t Development Plan\PC Reso M—itauts at Bivhom Development Plm.dmx PLANNING RESOLUTION NO. 2613 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 Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of DP 13- 316, subject to conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Planning�Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, at its regular meeting held on the 15t day of October 2013, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: NANCY DE LUNA, CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: LAURI AYLAIAN, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION G:Thuming\Kevin Swartz.Mmd\Mountains at Biehom Development Plan\PC Rein Mountains at Biphm Development Plan.dmx bM stigi z suio uno a o 0 `\�3Sbd IJ b� fl Q �l by�y J/y 0 0 s Q is O U) z 0 0 Z < m o Z I- _ ::) m C7 0 _ mwLLI o = ® o 0 I o 0 0 u) O J Ulm LL O� Q cv >- z g r O z w Z g w Z O w o n w w a of a O o z w c w a /cr (9 ao z LL ..�tF V Y fo Z a < g nilm= a $� 6M sl i x suio uno a 0 0 3sbd 13 1 6� M ---- vQY?� p�3ip Nb Q V Ste_ � ON � I N N {V N N Q 4e 1 Z Q Q O � = 1jybi I IO i 1 I Z H 10 N W W 1 �N 1 1 ~ W N II 1 lb 9 � Y / � o h — J 41f O o U N ' ch cj 2�yzo a 0' M � z< co LL 9 (Ij i N. 8 Zaw Z J g O 49 Z) a- J O u w 0 cat Z_ Z V ` Z c J 0 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. Name or description of project: Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan 2. Project Location— The project site is located on the west side of Highway 74 at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. See attached map for location. 3. Entity or person undertaking A. Bighorn Development, LLC project: B. Other(Private) (1) Name (2) Address 255 Palowet Drive, Palm Desert CA, 92260 4. Staff Determination: The project will not result in any physical changes to the existing development. It will not change the land use, increase the density or change the environment. The project will modify the development standards for new construction on individual lots that have already been graded. All previous mitigation measures as a result of the original approval have been implemented for the existing condition that the project will not change. The Lead Agency's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the Lead Agency's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. ❑ The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. ❑ The project is a Ministerial Project. C. ❑ The project is an Emergency Project. d. ❑ The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. ® The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 15305-Class 5: Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations f. ❑ The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: g. ❑ The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: h. ❑ The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: October 15, 2013 Staff: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Preliminary Exemption Assessment FORM "A" NOTICE OF EXEMPTION Office of Planning and Research P. O. Box 3044, Room 212 Sacramento,CA 95812-3044 Kevin Swartz,City of Palm Desert TO: ❑ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors FROM: Community Development/Planning or 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 ® County Clerk County of: Riverside County 1. Project Title: DP 13-316 Mountains at Bighorn Development Plan 2. Project Location—Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site(preferably The project site is located on the west side of Highway 74 at the a USGS 15'or 7 1/2'topographical map identified by base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. See attached map for location quadrangle name): 3. (a) Project Location—City: City of Palm Desert (b) Project Location—County: Riverside County 4. Description of nature,purpose, and beneficiaries of Creating uniform development standards related to setbacks, Project: building setbacks, height, lot coverage,etc.for construction on individual lots. 5. Name of Public Agency approving project: City of Palm Desert 6. Name of Person or Agency undertaking the project, including any person undertaking an activity that receives financial assistance from the Public Agency Bighorn Development as part of the activity or the person receiving a lease, permit, license,certificate,or other entitlement of use from the Public Agency as part of the activity: 7. Exempt status: (check one) (a) ❑ Ministerial project. (b) ❑ Not a project. (c) ❑ Emergency Project. (d) ® Categorical Exemption. 15305-Class 5: Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations State type and class number: (e) ❑ Declared Emergency. M ❑ Statutory Exemption. State Code section number: (g) ❑ Other. Explanation: The Development Plan will not result in any land use changes, 8. Reason why project was exempt: density changes,or environmental changes to the existing community.The Plan only modifies development standards for existing residential lots. 9. Contact Person: Kevin Swartz,Assistant Planner Telephone: (760)346-0611 ext.485 10. Attach Preliminary Exemption Assessment(Form"A")before filing. Date Received for Filing: Signature(Lead Agency Representative) (Clerk Stamp Here) Assistant Planner Title Notice of Exemption FORM "B" � IIY CIF Ptlli U � Stf� I 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 9226o-2578 ' TEL:76o 346-0611 F.-,X:76o 341-7098 i n(uC palm-dcserl.org CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. DP 13-316 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT NEW DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE MOUNTAINS AT BIGHORN IN ACCORDANCE WITH PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 25-28.060 PLANNED COMMUNITY OVERLAY DISTRICT AND SECTION 25.72.040 DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTION: BIGHORN DEVELOPMENT LLC, has submitted a request for approval of a new Development Plan for the Mountains at Bighorn. Many of the subdivided lots in the Mountains at Bighorn development are irregular in shape, are located on sloping lots, abut curving streets, or contain other limitations that make it impractical to apply any set of rigid development standards. To address these issues, the applicant is proposing a Development Plan to create a new set of development standards that will be the same for each lot. The Exhibit below identifies the properties that the Development Plan will be applied to: ti IY© Trr-�I 7 1 r�� li��lTiy�r ``�\� �ram'�� ,✓'�"' �r�(�Ir �J if i �iF� �. a ) 1 Z..J BIGHORN _ -1- THE MOUNTAINS EXHIBIT"A" The proposed Development Plan is as follows: Incorporation of Section 25 28 060 Planned Community Overlay District Except as otherwise modified by this Development Plan or a subsequent action of the City's Planning Director, as set forth below, the Development Standards set forth in Section 25.28.060 and Section 25.72.040 of the City's Zoning Code shall be and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Development Plan. Minimum Yards The following minimum yard development standards shall apply to habitable structures (primary residence(including garage)or guest residence)located within the Plan Area: Minimum Front Yards—Fourteen Feet Minimum Rear Yards—Ten Feet Minimum Side Yards—Five Feet Non-habitable and other accessory structures, including without limitations, walls, decks, pools, spas, outdoor cooking areas, mechanical equipment, landscaping features, pergolas, and similar structures, may be constructed within the minimum yards required under this Section. Minimum Separation Between Buildings The minimum separation between buildings, including two-story elements of single family detached homes, shall be at least ten feet. Maximum Building Heights The maximum building height shall be twenty feet. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of Section 25.40.040 shall apply to structures within the area of this Development Plan. Maximum Building Coverage The maximum building site coverage on any lot shall not exceed sixty percent of the total lot area. Modifications of Standards in Site Plan The Planning Director, or its designee, may, in conjunction with approval of a Site Plan for structures on an individual lot, modify the standards set forth in this Development Plan as an adjustment consistent with the standards set forth in Section 25.64.030 of the Municipal Code. Decisions of the Planning Director may be appealed to the Planning Commission in accordance with Chapter 25.60 of the Municipal Code. Effect of Development Plan In accordance with Section 25.72.040 of the Municipal Code, the development standards contained in this Development Plan shall govern and control all development within the plan area. In the event that different or conflicting development standards are stated in any tentative or final subdivision map for the plan area or in any other provision of law, the provisions of this Development Plan shall supersede such standards and control. All development within the plan area shall comply with this Development Plan. Golf Club and Other Amenity Uses A number of lots have been developed previously with golf course facilities or other amenity uses, which are depicted on Exhibit B attached hereto. In addition, two currently undeveloped lots may be developed in the future with either residential or additional amenity uses, which such lots are depicted on Exhibit B as"Flex Lots." Any development on Flex Lots of either residential or amenity uses shall comply with the development standards of this Development Plan. Retroactive Application Any structure for which a grading or building permit has been issued within the area of this Development Plan prior to the effective date of the resolution approving this Development Plan shall be treated as though the resolution approving this Development Plan had been in effect prior to the issuance of such building or grading permit and shall be deemed to be consistent and in conformance with this Development Plan. PUBLIC HEARING: Said public hearing will be held before the City of Palm Desert Planning Commission on Tuesday, October 15, 2013, 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 request 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 at, or prior to,the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary October 4,2013 Palm Desert Planning Commission r r METATE'!�L METATE P AY.; r CAMYIL�LA WAY R •.� ��1 V�—to� � . 1 Y I '" 4 4�. IF � *... fM tZ } T M ;g e S p Y) r• Al KaNrsn vtr c g '�►� euYw4.LTw� �."- ii Ate. � � cq . '• 7r _ u � v d t "„+ 20' Story Pole Lots Date- 10/2013 VICINITY MAP