Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-09-06 PC Regular Meeting Agenda Packet CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 — 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 SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of August 16, 2016. Rec: Approve as presented. Action: VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER Vlll. NEW BUSINESS None IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he or she 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 to approve a new 20,429-square-foot pet hotel building and a building pad to accommodate a future 2,200-square-foot veterinarian's office within the Service Industrial zone located at 73-650 Dinah Shore Drive. Case No. PP/CUP (Marlorand, LLC, Palm Desert, California, Applicant), Rec: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2677, approving Case No. PP/CUP 16-178. Action: X. MISCELLANEOUS None XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES B. PARKS & RECREATION C. GENERAL PLAN & SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE XII. COMMENTS 2 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Agenda\9-6-16 agn.docx AGENDA PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 XIII. ADJOURNMENT I 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 1 st day of September, 2016. Monica O'Reilly, Records Secretary Please contact the Planning Department, 73510 Fred Wa►ing Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260, (760) 346-0611, for assistance with access to any of the agenda, materials, or participation at the meeting. 3 GAPlanningWonica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Hgenda\96-16 agn.docx CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION PRELIMINRARY MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 2016 — 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM SERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair John Greenwood called the meeting ���der at 6:02 II. ROLL CALL Present: t: Commissioner Ron Gregory{° ice Chair Nancy Del-una Commissioner Kathleen Kell Commissioner Joseph Prade Chair John Greenwood Staff Present: Jill Trembl ity Attorn . ' Ryan Stend ,'recto unity elopment Eric C 'a, Prin r ' As a Planner ica O'� Ad trative Secretary III. DGE OF AL IAN Ch eenwood 1` the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMA F NCIL ACTION Mr. Ryan Ste dell, Director of Community Development, summarized pertinent City Council actions. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Planning Commission meeting of July 5, 2016. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve as presented. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to perform a lot line adjustment to adjust property lines between parcels at 45-400 Larkspur Lane (APNs 627-262-007, 627-262-008, and 627-262-011). Case No. PMW 16- •63 (West River, Inc., El Dorado Hills, California, Applicant). ` '° Rec: By Minute Motion, approve Parcel Map 16-163. Upon a motion by Commissioner Pradetto, o"d by Co sioner Kelly, and a 4-0-1 vote of the Planning Commission with Vi air DeLuna A T, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented ( Greenwood, Gr q Kelly, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: DeLuna) : � VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VIII. NEW BUSINESS None ' IX. PUBLIC H.- NGS A. REQUES a Conditional Use Permit to operate a tail bar wi ommercial zone located at 44-750 San o q ue, 1. Case No. CUP 16-157 (Mark Green, La Quinta, California; t licar�" ,' evin Swartz ;A socia Planner, presented the staff report (staff report is av a at w_ w yofpalmdesert.org). He noted that staff received one com in favor d one comment in opposition. Staff recommended that the PI nnin m n approve the Conditional Use Permit (CUP). He offered to answer an ns. Commissioner Joseph Pradetto referred to Condition No. 9 in regard to cleaning public areas after closing. He asked if the City has added that condition in the past or is it new. Mr. Swartz responded that it is new. He said there was a bar on El Paseo called Napas Tapas that had an issue with trash being left in the public areas so the City placed a condition on their permit. For this reason, staff placed the same condition for this proposed bar. 2 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 Commissioner Pradetto asked if the condition that was added to Napas Tapas permit help with the trash issue. Mr. Swartz replied that Napas Tapas did not comply with the conditions of approval. As a result, the City Council revoked the CUP and they are no longer in business. Commissioner Kathleen Kelly referred to Condition No. 13 pertaining to noise complaints. She asked how the number of 10 complaints as selected. Mr. Swartz explained that there was a noise (mu sue at the Palm Desert Country Club clubhouse. Initially, a condition noise complaints was added to their CUP; however, staff found th co nant had their whole household sign the complaint. Therefore, st f t that 1 plaints would be a sufficient amount. He said if the Planni mmission de `��' d to change the number of complaints from 10 to five, ommended only o mplaint could be received per residence or per bu . 1 Commissioner Kelly referred to a clause ity staff is authorized to look at modifying the hours of ration. She 1 if there is any reason not to phrase that more broadl " as "sta uId look at modifying these conditions." Mr. Swartz replied is no re n n th phrase, and it does make more appropria Commissi elly poin; to an o ead view of the site, and asked what the facility behi parki s. Mr elie as a me ility. mmissione " ly c d that there would not be normal activity during prime e for the app is b ss. Mr. rtz replied t most of the businesses in the area close at 5:00 p.m. Commi >er Gregory mentioned that the Tilted Kilt had some public reaction to . nd. He asked if staff had specifics such as how many people complained, what was the resolution to settle the issue. Mr. Swartz answered that it was actually South Beach; not Tilted Kilt. South Beach had outdoor music on their outdoor patio, and the Rancho Mirage residents complained about the noise. He stated he is not sure how many complaints were received; however, the resolution was that they had to move the music indoors. 3 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\6-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 Commissioner Gregory questioned if the proposed bar would only have indoor music. Would there be speakers outdoors? Mr. Swartz said music would only be indoors. He believed that the applicant may have karaoke a couple of nights. He noted that any entertainment at the proposed bar would need to go through the Entertainment Permit process. Chair Greenwood asked if it is correct that the proposed bar did not go before the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. He said the applic not making any exterior modifications. He mentioned that staff took the p bar before the ARC as a miscellaneous item, with no action. At that th licant was looking at painting a portion of the fagade; however, RC an felt there was no logical break in the building to paint a di color. They iscussed a new awning and signage. . Chair Greenwood asked if there was a` scuss' regard to the endow film. Mr. Swartz deferred the que n to the app Chair Greenwood asked whe h rty line -'des. Mr. Swartz replied t is to th ht a a. Chair Gree inqui- if sta s seen the proposed improvements for American Disabiliti ct (AD A mpliance. ,sx Mr. Swartz re d in Department staff has not reviewed the A yeme wever, th ing and Safety Department did review the e air Greenwo ske here was any concern with the diagonal parking ing direct cir tion a cent to the curb. Mr. replied t concern has not been brought up. Chair Gre inquired if staff is concerned with the rear patio of the bar. He is concerne re would be noise to the adjacent neighbors, it is a dark parking lot, and would prefer to see people in the front in terms of the General Plan. Mr. Swartz believed that the applicant wants to use the rear patio for people to smoke, and that the noise is a valid point since it faces the neighbors. Chair Greenwood declared the public hearing open and asked for any public testimony IN FAVOR or OPPOSITION. 4 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 MR. MARK GREEN, Desert Fox Bar, La Quinta, California, communicated that he originally wanted to open the bar at 2:00 p.m.; however, there was some opposition so he found it reasonable to open at 4:00 p.m. He felt there is ample parking in the area, and cited that most of the adjacent businesses close at 5:00 p.m. He also said the rear patio would be available to people that want to drink and smoke. He offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Kelly asked the applicant to share what happened to the Palm Springs location. MR. GREEN responded that he couldn't persuade roperty owner to extend his stay. He noted that there were hotel rooms d' bove his bar, and it was an unhappy marriage due to the noise coming f 11,111 he Commissioner Kelly commented that aw pictures ignage in Palm Springs, and she had the impressio s a pub style ba a asked the applicant what signage style he en s for the roposed ba `. San Pablo Avenue. MR. GREEN responded tha a style is an 4 ale neighborhood bar. He made clear they would not have to p and it is dance club. Mr. Swartz displayed pictures the ring tion and pointed out the hotel rooms direc ove the H e ictures of inside the bar, and said the ba blo Av uld to ilar. Commissi regory tioned t here is not a great view in the rear patio. He inquire ould to have ller wrought iron fence, with some type of material to i t ,5t id t e could consider a wall, if the Planning Commission felt it s necessa missioner Gr ry co ented that if he was inclined to use the rear patio, it wo of be beck g unless he really needed to smoke. MR. G a with Commissioner Gregory. He is only providing a rear patio for th that want to smoke. Mr. Stendell noted that Palm Desert has an ordinance, which does not allow smoking near the main entrance of a restaurant. Chair Greenwood asked what the existing lighting in the parking lot is. MR. GREEN replied that he does not think lighting exists in the parking lot at this time. He said he would have lighting in the rear patio. 5 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 Chair Greenwood asked the applicant what he is considering for the sign design. MR. GREEN responded that he would be removing the Pregnancy Crisis Center wording and adding Desert Fox using the existing awning. He would then add the Desert Fox as a cutout backlit on the upper part of the building. Chair Greenwood asked the applicant if he is leaving the window film on the windows. MR. GREEN answered that he was planning on leavin window film because the bar is west facing and there is a heat gain. Chair Greenwood commented that he likes th a o ing some life on San Pablo Avenue. He said with the reflective o film it Id be hard to see a lively bar. He voiced concern with safety back patio. MR. GREEN remarked that having r patio an more peop sent would increase the safety of people that are g an _ :. g from their c V., In closing, he said the bar is a walkable destinatio F that want to have a drink in the evening and thanked the nning Com n. The following individuals spot' = 'n SITIO e proposed cocktail lounge bar for the following reasons aclai of a ate parking, concern with safety due to the less peo it th homeless people, it is not good for adjace es, an MR. EAR LACE, a ent pro owner, Rancho Cucamonga, California. MR. MAX RY a n . Palm Springs, California. LA djacent property owner, Escondido, California. S. JENNIFER IAS, cent property owner, Palm Desert, California. M VID O'D ELL, property owner across the street, Palm Desert, Calif voiced concern with parking on San Pablo Avenue in general. He asked the plans to do in the long term regarding the parking issue. Last, he a sues with the homeless people around his business. MR. GREEN remarked that he also shares the concern with the homeless people. He stated that he would not let a homeless person into the bar since they could not afford to buy drinks. However, he does see a homeless person able to buy a beer across the street at Circle K for 99 cents. He communicated he has very high standards, and would not let intoxicated and unattractive people to loiter his bar. He addressed the music (noise) issue, and voiced that he has never had bands in his bar. In Palm Springs, he would have a duet come in one night a week. It is a small cocktail lounge dedicated to conversation; not a disco. 6 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 He noted that there are 18 parking spaces behind his building. He declared that he is a tenant, pays taxes, and why should he be restricted from running a business. Mr. Green expressed that they should all be able to share the street; it is a public resource. With no further testimony offered, Chair Greenwood declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Joseph Pradetto questioned if the parking spaces along San Pablo Avenue in front of the businesses are owned by th property owners or the City. Mr. Swartz replied that that it belongs to the City; ' blic street. Commissioner Pradetto pointed to the park' a s aces, a arified that they do not belong to the property owners. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. F Chair Greenwood asked staff to display the property or the site plan presented in the agenda pa ts. He refer the plan and noted that there is a discrepancy between the and the the site is actually laid out. He noted that the space on the e (44- an Pablo Avenue), seen on the site plan, would be on the hern spa here a trash enclosure is shown and not i center oe erned how the applicant currently has t articul explai hat the parking on the south side is back' p agar ADA p g egress and there is a trash enclosure that may n w=, ction well , MR. GREEN a d ented was inaccurate. is 1 ra believed that the Circle K attracts a great number of the meless in ea grees that it is a problem. He felt the homeless issue y be partiall ress - the condition to have a security guard at the bar. oes not thin e bar ould yield to more homeless and felt it is safe. In ter f parking, elieved the fight was over the public parking spaces and who to use a spaces. City staff and the applicant have worked well togethe a ompelling case in regard to most of the parking for the bar would occ parking spaces are not being used by the daytime businesses; therefore, he kay with parking as-is. Commissioner Kelly agreed with Commissioner Pradetto. She felt that the parking issue was addressed when the applicant agreed to open the bar at 4:00 p.m. instead of 2:00 p.m. She also agreed that there is a homeless problem in the area, but felt that the proposed use would not exacerbate the homeless issue. She recommended the following changes to Condition of Approval No. 13 to afford more flexibility to respond to any situations that may arise: 1) Change the 10 reasonable persons to five (5) unrelated persons; and 2) Change staff will 7 G:\Planning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16 docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 look at modifying the hours of operations to staff will look at modifying these conditions. She said it would allow for a quicker response if there are problems, and allows for a broader range of responses. Commissioner Pradetto asked Commissioner Kelly if she wanted to make a motion with those modifications. Commissioner Kelly moved for approval with the two changes stated above. Commissioner Gregory commented on the goal of ablo Avenue being a family-oriented area. He wondered if there could n open window where people could see inside and see people having ich would make the bar look less spooky. It would also attract the kind . op City is hoping would use San Pablo Avenue. He felt the film on endows cky for a place that could be a nice quality cocktail lounge t racts attracts ople. There are other options to mitigate the solar pro acing west. There ,,,'; he would like to add the removal of the window fil a motion. Chair Greenwood agreed with the P1 mmissioners comments. He stated he is sensitive to M , 'Donne[I's ents, in terms of decisions the Planning Commission mak impact businesses. However, in this case the proposed bar woul A a later f so it should not impact the 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. busin,, es. este'< at the applicant gets an accurate layout patio, r 1 in lot, and the patio is in compliance wit ireme nice concern with lighting, noise, and safety in ear p nd pa lot. He requested that staff work with the applicant . stablish accept lighting within the rear patio. Chair Greenwoo ed he Is like ave the window film removed. C er asked i r Greenwood is adding the condition to e ow ; air Greenwo plie ' He would like the condition added to remove the ow film to cre a cle r visual impact to the interior space. Com 'oner Ke terjected that she has made a motion so Chair Greenwood would n AN her motion, with the added condition. Ms. Jill Tre ay, City Attorney, interjected that since Commissioner Kelly proposed the motion, the motion belongs to her. Therefore, she is entitled to make the motion with the new changes. If there is not a second to the motion, the motion would fail and another Commissioner could propose a different motion. Ms. Tremblay suggested that Commissioner Kelly restate her motion for the record. Commissioner Kelly moved, By Minute Motion, to approve CUP 16-157, with the following changes: 1) Replace 10 reasonable persons with five unrelated 8 G1Planning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 persons 2) Replace the hours of operation with these conditions; and 3) Add a condition for the removal of the reflective coating on the windows. Motion was seconded by Chair Greenwood and carried by a 4-0-1 vote (AYES: Gregory, Greenwood, Kelly, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: DeLuna) Commissioner Pradetto thanked the applicant for doing business in Palm Desert. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to demolish an existing fuel station and construct a new 5,400-square-foot market and fu 'ng station canopy for Tower Market located at 73-801 Highway 111. No. PP/CUP 16-180 (Tower Energy, Torrance, California, Applicant). Mr. Eric Ceja, Principal Planner, outlined th en nts in the staff report (staff report is available at www.cityofp sert.or tall recommended approval and offered to answer any ques Commissioner Pradetto referred to tion of Ap oval No. 26. questioned if the developer would be required to s the i fees. If so, fi much are the fees. Mr. Ceja replied he does the exa ount. Typically, development impact fees are not calculate velope mits building plans. Commissioner Pr noted st t proposed use is a less intense than th e. Th ow d tall recommend an impact if the propose ect wo a ame ted? Mr. Ceja re ded it use th a is being updated, and there may not have been im fe a ted that this site was developed in the 19 may mend ch o the fee structure or the impact fees. mmissione de ed if there has been a collision history in the lot going t into San Lui y AV and the frontage road. Mr. 'a replied he not have statistics on the collision history. Commi er P tto stated that he drives in the area a lot, and there is a difference inconvenient and unsafe. If there is no collision history, he would charac ize the lot as inconvenient. Mr. Ceja said staff would have to contact the Police Department to get the collision history. He mentioned that the consolidation of the driveway allows the applicant to add more landscape and a screen wall around more of the property so the uses at the gas station are screened from Highway 111. Commissioner Gregory commented that the applicant agreed to reduce the planting area by 50 percent and pointed to the landscape drawings. He noted 9 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\5-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 that Washingtonia hybrid palms come in different thicknesses. He recommended an 18-inch base so the palms to get the quality indicated in the landscape drawings. He also recommended a minimum size of five-gallons of the plant material, which would give the plants a good head start. Lastly, he wondered if there should some architectural guidelines along the Highway 111 corridor. The applicant has made a good effort with the style of the proposed project, but wondered if there is a more coherent approach that the City may wish to take on this important corridor. Mr. Ceja responded that architectural guidelines are cellent suggestion as they continue with the General Plan Update. Staff king at a Highway 111 corridor plan, and may establish some architecturlines as well. Chair Greenwood referred to the General P a d aske` ere have been any discussions regarding the frontage road. .. `, ill it work wit new site? Mr. Ceja answered yes. They discus aking all a frontage,r X similar. He said the applicant was able to co "' ate t iveways an Yoved one driveway to the far west, which allows cr' a .' aza space the City envisions with the General Plan. . Commissioner Gregory aske MIours of tion are. Mr. Ceja deferred uestion t" e a " Chair Greenwood ed the x lic he open and asked for any public testimony IN FAVOR or OP TION. MR. MARK r Rancho Palo Verdes, California, co ed t own an gate 50 stores in northern California. They s a and building another store in Coachella. He offered to swer any q , ons. . missioner Gr ry as what the hours of operation are. MR. Y replie eT P00 a.m. to midnight. Commissi gory asked the applicant if they have any problem with his concerns he ressed in the plant materials. MR. TIM ROGERS, Tower Energy, La Quinta, California, responded that they do not have a problem addressing Commissioner Gregory's concerns. Chair Greenwood asked the applicant what kind of food service they would have in the market. 10 G:\Planning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 MR. VASEY said they would have basic groceries, fresh produce, frozen foods, and a hot case with chicken fingers, breakfast burritos, etc. Chair Greenwood asked if the preparation of hot food would require roof mounted equipment, other than the HVAC equipment. MR. VASEY replied no. The food equipment would be located in the storage room, such as a fryer and a hood. Chair Greenwood inquired if there is a grease exhaust e roof. MR. VASEY responded there is a hood that woul to the roof. Chair Greenwood asked if the hood had n taken i ccount on the roof plan. MR. VASEY deferred the question t rchitect. MR. NICK FULLERTON, architect, Bigfo a, explained that the roof has a bathtub top. All the equip is down so r e would be able to see it. r Chair Greenwood stated h a make .e everything is below the parapet. MR. FULLERT woul ai'. ure its der the parapet. Chair Gre od point o the n west corner of the proposed market in conjunction the a Japan restaurant. He voiced his concern with visibility and h e :y k, such as the stucco wrapping around th e p t ut that t of the restaurant is much lower. He asked y ar se rapping the stucco around the corner to create a weep er to whe u see the stucco wrapped to all points visible from the rthwest come M LLERTON lied that they would wrap the stucco. He said they are also goin 'll in the ` , solid, and have a gutter go across the top so the water would b tro rom both sides. He affirmed that anything exposed would be stuccoed ed. Chair Greenwood asked if the applicant is comfortable with everything the ARC recommended. MR. FULLERTON said they are comfortable with the changes made by the ARC, and they are in the process of making those changes. With no testimony offered, Chair Greenwood declared the public hearing closed. 11 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Comm ission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 Commissioner Pradetto commented on Condition No. 26, which a developer has to pay impact fees. However, the findings in the staff report expressed this would have less impact than exists now. He clarified that the argument is potentially the previous property owner did not pay the impact fees. Commissioner Kelly stated that the condition is phrased "increased presence of structures, traffic, and population,"and she understood the staff report to say that this is better than what is there now. The automotive repair station created something very unattractive. However, the new use wo d have certain impacts so she is not troubled by the condition. Commissioner Pradetto stated he is sensitive t siness coming to Palm Desert and having to pay fees for just the sakes ayi es. He explained that his bias is if they could avoid charging a fe e ouId I x,do it. However, the applicant may want to pay the fee to °ne with it. A time, he is not prepared to change the condition. Mr. Stendell interjected that staff con s to f he issues in r essing the fees as they relate to redeveloping pro the net impact of developer impact fees versus assess t of full fee if the property were vacant. He said staff would continue to operativel h the development community to this end. Chair Greenwood ed, by f: to o g Case No. PP/CUP 16- 180, with the addition ditions, alm shall have a minimum trunk size of 18 inches, a ants s e a mi, um of five gallons in size; and 2) All visible building exterior e11 be finis with p and/or stucco with no visible concrete masonry unit (CM the b Motion seconded by Commissioner Kelly and carried by a 4-0-1 vo Y r G ory, Kelly, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT- air Green tha and welcomed Tower Market to the City. X. AELLANEO None f xX XI. COMMIT TING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES None B. PARKS & RECREATION None 12 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\8-16-16.docx PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 16, 2016 C. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP Mr. Stendell reported that the Draft Environmental Impact Report would go live on Friday, August 19, 2016. Staff anticipates the General Plan Update public hearings with the Planning Commission will occur at the second meeting in October. He said staff would deliver the information to the Planning Commission in time for them to review. XII. COMMENTS Chair Greenwood commented that as they move f d with the General Plan and the City corridors, is there an overall theme evel of architecture and design is the City trying to achieve? He said th in eeting to discuss this topic with the ARC, Planning Commission City Co would be of great value. � � XIII. ADJOURNMENT With the Planning Commission concur it Greenwood adjourned the meeting at 7:37 p.m. RE OD, VICE CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: E RY NDELL, RE PA SERT PLA C ISSION MONICA O'REILRWRDING SECRETARY 13 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2016\Minutes\5-16-16.docx CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REQUEST: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A NEW 20,429-SQUARE-FOOT PET HOTEL BUILDING AND A BUILDING PAD TO ACCOMMODATE A FUTURE 2,200-SQUARE-FOOT VETERINARIAN'S OFFICE WITHIN THE SERVICE INDUSTRIAL ZONE LOCATED AT 73-650 DINAH SHORE DRIVE SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner APPLICANT: Marlorkand, LLC 72-960 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO: PP/CUP 16-178 DATE: September 6, 2016 CONTENTS: Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2677 Legal Notice Architectural Review Commission Minutes, dated July 26, 2016 Exhibits Recommendation Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No.2677, approving a notice of exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act, and approval of a new 20,429-square-foot pet hotel building and a vacant building pad for a future 2,200-square-foot veterinarian's office. Architectural Review Commission On June 26, 2016, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed and approved the project as proposed with a 7-0-1 vote,with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. The Commission supported the architectural and landscape design and the site location. The Commission stated that the design and materials of the facility make a very attractive building, with clean architectural lines and elements.The Commission also stated that the building has appropriate massing in the right locations. Staff Report PP/CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace Page 2 of 5 September 6, 2016 Executive Summary The applicant is currently operating Barkingham Palace undera Conditional Use Permit(CUP) within a leased building adjacent to the proposed site on Spyder Circle. The applicant has purchased the current site, and is requesting approval of a new 20,429-square-foot pet hotel and a vacant building pad for a future veterinarian's office. The pet hotel will have 71 suites to accommodate dogs and cats for overnight stays, an indoor play area, and an outdoor play area with a water feature. A new CUP is required since they run with the land and cannot be transferred to a new property, and the use of a boarding facility within the Service Industrial zone requires a CUP. Otherwise,the proposed project meets all other development standards within the zone. Background A. Property Description: The vacant 4.53-acre parcel is located in the northern portion of the city. On August 4, 2015,the Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map 36961,which subdivided the parcel into two parcels. The applicant purchased Parcel 2,which is 160 feet x 463 feet, totaling 1.74-acres. The property is located on the north side of Dinah Shore Drive, east of Monterey Avenue, west of Portola Avenue, and south of the Union Pacific Railroad and Interstate 10. The vacant parcel is rectangular in shape and flat. One access point will be located on the west side of the property off of Dinah Shore Drive once developed. B. Zoning and General Plan Designation: Zone: S.I. — Service Industrial General Plan: I-BP— Industrial Business Park C. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North: City Limits/ Interstate 1-10 South: S.I. / Industrial Buildings East: S.I. /Vacant Land West: S.I. / Industrial Buildings Project Description The Ritz at Barkingham Palace is an upscale boarding and grooming facility fordogs and cats. The project will have one access point off of Dinah Shore Drive that will lead into the parking area. The 20,429-square-foot pet hotel building will be situated in the middle of the property with the outdoor play area to the northeast. The building consists of 71 dog suites, (which vary in sizes), grooming and dog wash room, offices, therapy room, storage room, and an indoor GAPlanning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\Staff Report PP CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace.doc Staff Report PP/CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace Page 3 of 5 September 6, 2016 play area. The outdoor play area has four dog runs, a water feature, and a play area for the dogs to run. The business will be open seven days a week from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and employs four persons otherthan the owner. Owners of the animals will drop-off and pick-up by appointment only. In the future, the applicant would like to construct a 2,276-square-foot veterinarian's office facing Dinah Shore Drive. The architecture of the building will come back for ARC review and approval. A. Architecture: The main building's architecture maintains a contemporary theme with flat roof lines, architectural pop-outs, and thick architectural elements.The facility is single-storywith roof lines between 16, 18, and 20 feet, with an overall height of 22 feet. The design includes desert colors that are of smooth stucco finishes, stone veneer, and aluminum frame windows and doors. All roof top equipment will be concealed within the roof and screened from all public views. The applicant is also proposing a six-foot high block wall around the site. There will also be five (5) 15-foot x 15-foot shade structures, with a red fabric roof at 10 feet in height located in the outdoor play area. B. Landscaping: The landscape design consists of a desert theme with species requiring minimal water usage. The proposed landscaping along Dinah Shore Drive consists of Shoestring Acacia trees, a variety of shrubs and decomposed granite as ground cover. The parking area and the west perimeter property line consist of Tipuana Tipu trees and shrubs. The east property line is lined with Mexican fan palms and shrubs. The rear of the property consists of a water feature that is 35 inches deep; grass area for the dogs to run on, various trees (Southern Oaks, Shoestring Acacias, and Mexican fan palms). Overall, the landscape design is minimal, but provides for a good balance with the use of the outdoor play area and the building architecture,while maintaining lowwater usage.The applicant has provided a detailed landscape plan,which is attached to the staff report. Final landscape plans will be submitted to the City's Community Development Department and the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval. GAPlanning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\Staff Report PP CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace.doc Staff Report PP/CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace Page 4 of 5 September 6, 2016 Analysis The use of a pet hotel requires approval of a Precise Plan and CUP by the Planning Commission since it is located within the S.I. zone and is a new building. The project as designed complies with all development standards for the zone including setbacks, building height, parking, lot coverage, and land use compatibility. The use will not add additional traffic to the area since the facility operates with four staff members and pet owner's drop-off and pick-up their pets in a timely manner. Staff does not anticipate the traffic volume to increase once the future veterinarian office is operating since the business operates on an appointment only schedule. A. Parking: Chapter 25.46 Off-street Parking and Loading requires animal boarding facilities to provide one (1) parking space per five (5) animal runs/suites. At 71 animal runs/suites, the site would need 15 parking spaces. The future 2,276-square-foot veterinarian's office requires four(4) parking spaces per 1,000 square feet, which would total nine (9) parking spaces. The two uses generate 24 parking spaces and the site will have 35 parking spaces. Since animal owners' drop-off and pick-up by appointment only, staff does not anticipate any parking problems. The 35 parking spaces should provide sufficient parking for pet owners, staff, and the future veterinarian office. B. Land Use Compatibility: CUPs are discretionary and viewed on a case-by-case basis. In this case, the site is surrounded by existing industrial and office uses. The business operation of seven days a week between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. is compatible with the surrounding uses,which maintain similar hours. The use will not create negative impact, such as noise, to the adjacent businesses. The outdoor activity for the dogs will be used primarily in the morning and evening times. Staff is not concerned with the use posing a negative noise disturbance since the property backs up to the freeway and is surrounded by industrial type businesses. Furthermore, the applicant has been operating the same use within the area since 2008 and has not created any public complaints. The project does not physically divide an existing community, and does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation outlined in the General Plan. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\Staff Report PP CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace.doc Staff Report PP/CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace Page 5 of 5 September 6, 2016 C. Findings of Approval: Findings can be made in support of the project, and in accordance with the City's Municipal Code. Findings in support of this project are contained in the Planning Commission Resolution attached to this staff report. Environmental Review According to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff must determine whether a proposed activity is a project subject to CEQA. If the project is subject to CEQA, staff must conduct a preliminary assessment of the project to determine whether the project is exempt from CEQA review. If a project is not exempt, further environmental review is necessary. A review of a non-exempt project would result in a Negative Declaration, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Generally, an EIR must be prepared if a project may have a significant impact on the environment. In this case, the City of Palm Desert, in its capacity as the Lead Agency for this project under the CEQA, has determined that the proposed project is categorically exempt under Article 19 Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects (Class 32) of the CEQA; therefore, no further environmental review is necessary. Submitted By: & "L4"� Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner Department Head: iqL__ Ryan 9fendell, Director of Community Development G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\Staff Report PP CUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2677 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND APPROVING A NEW 20,429-SQUARE-FOOT PET HOTEL BUILDING AND A BUILDING PAD TO ACCOMMODATE A FUTURE 2,200- SQUARE-FOOT VETERINARIAN'S OFFICE WITHIN THE SERVICE INDUSTRIAL ZONE LOCATED AT 73-650 DINAH SHORE DRIVE CASE NO: PP/CUP 16-178 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 6th day of September, 2016, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by Marlorkand, LLC. for approval of the above noted; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 26th day of July, 2016, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by Marlorkand, LLC. for approval of the above noted; and WHEREAS, according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City must determine whether a proposed activity is a project subject to CEQA. If the project is subject to CEQA, staff must conduct preliminary assessment of the project to determine whether the project is exempt from CEQi review. If a project is not exempt, further environmental review is necessary. The apphcao �has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implemental to California Environmental Quality Act," Resolution No. 2015-75, in the Directs ,of Communi(r " elopment has determined that the proposed project is an Article 19 C7ass ''32: In-Fill Development Projects (15332) Categorical Exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further review is necessary; and WHEREAS, the proposed_ project conforms to the development standards and maximum building„heights listed in the City's Zoning Ordinance for the Service Industrial zoning district;grid WHEREAS, the parcel is located in the Service Industrial zoning district, which allows various types of uses and lists "boarding facilities" as conditionally permitted uses; and WHERt at sai&public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if and " "all Interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons, which are outlined in the staff report reasons to approve the said request: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accordance with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purpose of the district in which the site is located. The site is located within the Service Industrial (S.l.) zoning district. The purpose of the S.I. zoning district is to allow for the manufacture, distribution, and service of PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2677 products intended for use with the City and uses that are consistent with the residential, resort, and recreational character of the community. Over the years, staff has allowed non retail commercial uses within the S.I. zone as long as they are compatible and do not impact the adjacent businesses. The proposal for a pet hotel requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to ensure land use compatibility and establish parking requirements. It can be determined that the approval of this CUP subject to the attached conditions, is consistent with the existing surrounding land uses and with the on-site parking requirements. The type of activity conducted at the proposed site is a community resource to the public, but typically is not favored in residential, office professional, or existing planned commercial zones so it is appropriately located in a Service Industrial zone. The building when constructed will conform to all development standards contained in the zoning ordinance and the building code. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Specific conditions have been placed on; the pet hotel to meet all applicable requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. This project, as mitigated by the conditions of approval, will not be detrimental to general"public health, safety, and welfare or materially injurious to the properties in the vicinity. Water, sanitation, public utilities and services are already constructed and available throughout the surrounding area. The proposed new building will comply with all building, life safety and environmental standards during Construction and continued operations, including: storm water discharge, health licensing, and fire prevention strategies. All building and site improvements will comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Therefore, the conditional'use, will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare, and will enhance sugpunding properties rather than detract from them. 3. That the proposed 6060itional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this title, except for'-approved variances or adjustments. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards for building setbacks and height restrictions, all operational standards contained in the zoning code, and is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The organization operates a service based use that operates throughout the day during normal business hours and throughout the night when most adjacent businesses are closed. This use will provide a service to the community in a location that will not cause disturbances to its adjacent neighbors. The proposed use does not require approval of any variances or adjustment. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City's general plan. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is "Industrial-Business Park (I-B. P.)." The Business Park provides for a flexible mix of office, service commercial, light manufacturing uses ranging from professional and medical offices to limited retail GAPlanning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\PC Reso 2677.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2677 sales. A primary objective stated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan under Industrial Goals, Policies and Programs is Goal 1, which provides for the development of business parks and non-polluting industrial uses, and which assures compatible integration with other, non-industrial land uses. Policy 6B of the General Plan Land Use Element is to review all business park/industrial development proposals with a special regard for public health and safety issues to ensure that the type and intensity of the use is appropriate for the proposed location and comparative with surrounding land uses. The non-industrial use of a pet hotel is a non-polluting use and offers residents a needed business. This project maintains a land use that is consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the General Plan. The project is consistent' with the General Plan in respect to the appropriate use of a pet hotel facility at the,proposed location. The business is compatible with surrounding land uses, and is effectively located in a remote area and occupies a portion of a vacant parcel where it will not cause any disturbances to adjacent businesses. 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 for approval of the Planning Cetnmission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hey approve PP/CUP 16-178, subject to conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPT,ED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, at its regular meeting held on the 6t" day of September 2016, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES. ABSBT: ABSTAIN JOHN GREENWOOD, CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: RYAN STENDELL, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION GAPlanning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\PC Reso 2677.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2677 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO: PP/CUP 16-178 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development/Planning, as modified by the following conditions. 2. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein, which are in addition to at municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter rriy be in force. 3. 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: Building & Safety Department City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Coachella Valley Water District- Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the Department of Building & Safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 4. Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City against any third party legal challenge to these approvals, with ,counsel chosen by the City at applicant's expense. 5. The applicant shall submit a sign application to the City's Department of Community Development for any building mounted or monument signs associated with the project. 6. The„business shall operate seven (7) days a week, 24 hours a day. 7. The architecture for the future veterinarian's office facing Dinah Shore Drive must be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Commission. 8. Final landscape, plans shall be submitted to the City's Community Development Department an"`ihe`Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval. The landscape plan sh°all conform to the preliminary landscape plans prepared as part of this application, and shall include dense plantings of landscape material. All plants shall be a minimum of five-gallons in size, and palm trees shall be a minimum of 18 inches at the base. 9. Building mounted lighting fixtures shall conform to the City's Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. GAPlanning\Kemn Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\PC Reso 2677.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2677 10.All visible building exteriors shall be finished with paint and/or stucco. No visible building elevations, or precision block, shall be left unfinished. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: 11.The applicant shall submit a grading plan to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. Any changes to the approved civil or landscape plans must be reviewed for approval prior to work commencing. 12.The grading plan shall identify all proposed and existing utilities. 13.The applicant shall submit a PM10 application for approval. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 24.12 regarding Fugitive Dust Control. 14.The applicant shall abide by all provisions o City of Palm Desert Ordinance 843, Section 24.20 Stormwater Management and,,,J0 DJscharge Ordinance. 15.The applicant shall submit a final Water Quaff° anag0ent Plan (WQMP) for approval. The WQMP shall identify the Best Managemen >"Prao es (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The wash down and cleanup procedures for animal waste should be specifically addressed. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the Operation and Maintenance Section of the approved final WQMP shall be recorded with County's Recorder Office and a"conformed copy shall be provided to the Public Works Department,. 16.Animal waste shall kept out of the storm drainage system. 17. Provide the City Engineer with evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the State Water Resources cntrol Board. Such evidence shall consist of a copy of the NOI stamped by the State Water Resources Control Board or the Regional Water Quality Control Board, or a letter from either agency stating that the NOI has been filed. 18.The applicant shall pay the appropriate signalization fee in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 'arid 79-55 and drainage fee in accordance with Section 26.49 of Palm Desert Municipal Code and Palm Desert Ordinance Number 653. 19.The applicant shall enter into an agreement and post security, in a form and amount acceptable to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the construction of off-site improvements including but not limited to an eight-foot curb adjacent sidewalk. 20.The applicant shall submit a cash deposit for half the construction of a bus turnout on Dinah Shore Drive. GAPlanningXemn Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\PC Reso 2677.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2677 DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & SAFETY: 21.This project shall comply with the latest adopted edition of the following codes: A. 2013 California Building Code and its appendices and standards. B. 2013 California Plumbing Code and its appendices and standards. C. 2013 California Mechanical Code and its appendices and standards. D. 2013 California Electrical Code. E. 2013 California Energy Code. F. 2013 California Green Building Standards Code. G. Title 24, California Code of Regulations. H. 2013 California Fire Code and its appendices and standards. 22.An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed as required per the City of Palm Desert Code Adoption Ordinance 1265. 23.A disabled access overlay of the precise grading plan is required to be submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan review of the site accessibility quirements as per 2013 CBC Chapters 11 A & B (as applicable) and Chapter 10. 24.All exits must provide an accessible path of travel to the public way. (CBC 1027.5 & 11 B-206). 25.Detectable warnings shall be provided where required per CBC 11 B-705.1.2.5 and 11 B- 705.1.2.2. The designer is also required to meet att Americans with Disability Act (ADA) requirements. Where an ADA requirerent,'is more restrictive than the State of California, the ADA requirement shall supersede the state requirement. 26.Provide an accessible path of travel to the trash enclosure. The trash enclosure is required to be accessible. Please obtain a detail from the Department of Building and Safety. 27.All c&tractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business License prior to perniit issuance per Palm desert Municipal Code, Title 5. 28.All contractors and/or, owner-builders must submit a valid Certificate of Workers' Compensation Insurance coverage prior to the issuance of a building permit per California Labor Code, Section 3700. 29.Address numerals shall comply with Palm Desert Ordinance No. 1265 (Palm Desert Municipal Code 15.28. Compliance with Ordinance 1265 regarding street address location, dimension, stroke of line, distance from street, height from grade, height from street, etc. shall be shown on all architectural building elevations in detail. Any possible obstructions, shadows, lighting, landscaping, backgrounds or other reasons that may render the building address unreadable shall be addressed during the plan review process. You may request a copy of Ordinance 1265 or Municipal Code Section 15.28 from the Department of Building and Safety counter staff. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\PC Reso 2677.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2677 DEPARTMENT OF FIRE: 30. Fire Department Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 31.The project may have a cumulative adverse impact on the Fire Department's ability to provide an acceptable level of service. These impacts include an increased number of emergency and public service calls due to the increased pres�ce of structures, traffic, and population. The project proponents/developers will be expected to provide for a proportional mitigation to these impacts via capital improvetxtents and/or impact fees. 32. Fire Department emergency vehicle apparatus access`road locations and design shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code, City of Palm Desert Municipal Code, and Riverside County Fire Department Standards. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. 33. Fire Department water system(s) for fire protection shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code, City of Palm Desert Municipal Code, and Riverside County Fire Department Standards. Plans must-be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to building permit isiacer 34.Addressing. New and existing buildw s shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identifirtion laced in position that is lain) legible and pP 9 � placed P plainly 9� visible from the street or road fronting.the pfoperty. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Commercial,`multi-family`residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum of 12-inch numbers with suile numbers being a minimum of six inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six Sri'ch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four.-inch letters and/or numbers,as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC Chapter 5) GAPlanning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Precise Plans\PPCUP 16-178 Barkingham Palace\PC Reso 2677.doc CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. PP/CUP 16-178 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A NEW 20,429-SQUARE-FOOT PET HOTEL BUILDING AND A BUILDING PAD TO ACCOMMODATE A FUTURE 2,200-SQUARE-FOOT VETERINARIAN'S OFFICE WITHIN THE SERVICE INDUSTRIAL ZONE LOCATED AT 73-650 DINAH SHORE DRIVE The City of Palm Desert (City), in its capacity as the Lead Agency for this project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), completed an Initial Study to review the potential environmental impacts of the project and have determined that the proposed request will not have a negative impact on the environment. Project Location: 73-650 Dinah Shore Drive Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution supporting the project request. Public Hearing: The public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission on September 6, 2016 at 6:00 pm. Comment Period: Based on the time limits defined by CEQA, your response should be sent at the earliest possible date. The public comment period on this project is from August 26 to September 6, 2016. Public Review: The project plans are available for public review daily at City Hall. Please submit written comments to the Planning Department. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at, or prior to, the Planning Commission hearing. All comments and any questions should be directed to: Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760)346-0611 kswartz@cityofpalmdesert.org PUBLISH: DESERT SUN RYAN STENDELL, Secretary August 26, 2016 Palm Desert Planning Commission ARCHITECTURAL REV;r_W COMMISSION MINUTES July 26, 2016 Commissioner McAuliffe said the fire station the applicant built in Rancho Mirage is a very fine building and asked him if the level of design quality, given that's its two different projects with two different budgets... MR. RICCIARDI interrupted and said one project had a very low budget. Commissioner McAuliffe said that is when architects go to work. MR. RICCIARDI said some architects understand budgets, but very few do. Commissioner McAuliffe said he presumed that the applicant understands the budget which is the primary challenge. As an architect you have to ask yourself how you can make this work within the constraints you are given. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to deny the architectural design of a new 5,280 square foot warehouse building as presented. Commission provided architectural comments to the applicant, who was unreceptive. Motion was seconded by Commissioner McIntosh and carried by a 6-1-0-1 vote. A Roll Call vote was called: COMMISSIONERS AYES NOES ABSTAINED Clark X Colombini X Lambell X Levin X McAuliffe X McIntosh X Vuksic X Chair,Van Vliet X B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP/CUP 16-178 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: MARLORKAND LLC, 72960 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of preliminary approval of a 20,000 square foot building, site plan, and landscape plans; Barkingham Palace. LOCATION: 73650 Dinah Shore Drive ZONE: S.I. Commissioner Vuksic recused himself from this project and left the conference room. GAPlanningUanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2016\160726min.docx Page 6 of 11 ARCHITECTURAL RE€,-W COMMISSION MINUTES July 26, 2016 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner, presented plans for preliminary approval of a 20,000 square foot building for Barkingham Palace. They have been leasing their current location since about 2008 and have now purchased the vacant lot on the south side of Dinah Shore Drive. The applicant is proposing to build a 20,000 square foot pet hotel and a 2,200 square foot future veterinarian facility. Since this is zoned Commercial Industrial it does require a Conditional Use Permit and Precise Plan since it is a new building and will go before the Planning Commission. He described the plans and stated there are no architectural plans at this time for the future veterinarian facility, but the architectural plans will come back as part of the entitlements when they are ready to build. He described the plans and said the back of the building on the north side will be visible from the freeway and is 20' in total height. He passed around the materials board for the Commission's review. MR. ROB PRITCHFORD, Project Designer, went over the plans and described each elevation. MR. MIKE HOMME, Homme Construction Company, said this new building will be two times bigger than the current building with 30 more spaces than what they currently have now. The indoor play area is bigger by a third, and out back there will be a bigger and nicer area for the dogs. Commissioner McIntosh said this is a good example of design with masses that are not as articulated in some areas but articulated in smaller areas. Chair Van Vliet said there was a substantial setback on the north elevation and asked what the visibility was and Mr. Swartz said the railroad tracks were there as well as tamarisk trees, and the applicant will be adding other trees. Chair Van Vliet said this building has good architecture for this industrial area. The Commission discussed the A/C equipment that needs to be down below line of sight. Commissioner McAuliffe said given the size and proportion of the building the applicants have done a very nice job with composing a building of this scale. The north elevation is very well composed. GAPlanningWnineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2016\160726min.docx Page 7 of 11 ARCHITECTURAL REVIuvV COMMISSION MINUTES July 26, 2016 ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to preliminarily approve as submitted with the exclusion of the veterinarian facility. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, and Van Vliet voting YES and Vuksic abstaining. 2. CASE NO: MISC 16-203 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: LERAE BRITAIN MOELLER, P.O. Box 3775, Palm Desert, CA 92261 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of preliminary approval of residential paint color change from tan to light blue. LOCATION: 45653 Portola Avenue ZONE: R.2, S.P. Mr. Eric Ceja, Principal Planner, presented a paint color change from tan to light blue. He presented before and after photos of the house and said the property owner is trying to do some property maintenance that includes re-painting. After Code Compliance received a complaint from a neighbor regarding the new color, the applicant has now repainted the house a lighter hue of blue. The trim, posts, and the roof of the carport is white. He said staff went out to this property to confirm the new lighter color, as well as looking at other homes in the neighborhood that use colors that we traditionally don't see. Staff is recommending approval of this color. The Commission reviewed and discussed the new color. Chair Van Vliet said he drove by the home prior to the meeting and said the new color is very subtle but in the shade it is darker. MR. JOVANI BUSH, the applicant's son, said he didn't realize a permit was needed to paint the house. He explained where the light blue and white colors would be used and said this is a work in progress. Commissioner Vuksic said it is important to note that the style of this low slung home has a pretty strong horizontal line with a white eave and the beam details that are white and thinks the light blue works here. He doesn't think it would work on the home next to it G\PIanningWnineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2016\160726min.docx Page 8 of 11 } m W E9-Ob£ (09L1 :l £6B£-ObC t09L1 Vl NdOJI d_) Lb353a W-IV Z9 d - W O � I (n vlwaoa,rv� la3saaxV w-Iva 1J s�„w xoa 9ca-rL. 38OH5 HVNIQ OS9-FL ' 0 1M911HMtdW GliOdH011d 1tdamo d 37V-7Vd WVH9NIYIYVO ri w NV]d 111S W Ln 0 0 W N 00 �F N awn wore N91H.0-.9 a�soaoNd .00 091 n LL Q D Z N LL n Q of S J Q J W 'N Q 00 V M -ZCL� W Ln ,,0 •• X�� O W a r � O W M \� � � Z �UI � OX � Li —LLIn \C i ' Q W r W Z O z V W LL1 0 ... YLnOM W < M - Co H- 1-LnC� 'T 1 ff C�Go Ln Z :D V cr�M M � /v LL O L.n 2� .-, z •O 2 W 00 2: J I J o CD Q O o J o V m I QMa o z c� •a-0 oc O ra o f 2: CL I- W Wa- Jr- a 0L CLr Er\ \ m O _ ...1_ In Ul Ul In n \ o A = 1 , v Li- - < < < M �� � I, 1 ,' LLLL a �0- a- C -- v ww -------- - - - -' 0 LLL n Ln Ln Ln W �• -- � - � u)Ln 0 o o, Ln v In 0 W n n NM a o` cr o of v ui Ln Ln W W Q o CL > ol O O Ln A O O Nroo ow v 1 ' F �oM � NrM I Vln Ln ONN C) 'T W DLn W r N CU W Ul CC W I Q C7 I Lo r V W F- Q =J F- Lf) CC J 11J w 0 W J Q ail W > W W >W Z a > m F O Q J W C H O W O W O W n N Z =CC J V 06J m W Z' Z D Q z \ W J W D 0 0 0 S S W Q > Z C F- W Li.f- J Cr LL W F-- O Lli - W O Q O m C J m d F CL O a _ W , o ' � w Q Z --- o—--- o OQ a �� a - x I I I na 0 ' WLL 0 I I 1 N -- I — I 3AINN AVn]1 VJ 1 I 1 _ ■ � ¢ I II -' � 3fIN3AV A]ti31NON Ii Z I 1 _ II ¢ �a ' ------- I _ Y 0 1 1 „ I I _4 L r a - -_- _- t 1 s I m ¢W 1 0 o a 0 0 01 L 1 r' - —i 1 0 1 I � 1 1 1 I 1 w I 1 1 .9-.et Iry 1 Im • rvv'i 1 •n f soy owe > ; 'JNI15I%3__-__ _._-_.____—_—__.-._._-__------_--_—__.— - -- — - ---- — 3A[80 380HS HVNlO -- ___------- Nalvn�m>-,la] Nm T E@ W M Q C6 8 CO a E L4� 05 d 0 you c rwl r-." �.w •a.c¢..+�. m I r 1 Y t 01 pa0 i I ^g_ p V V O Ej 122 - a3 m a>> o a��y B W = - U 9 zzz A F m � ) e ,. 1 , x W FsE cc CD dpX000 os U4 Cy ti o S-ffi a z E LU� � �I uC'.c•" of7C T� tb)C"� � � V m�0g as a m m roarrppz_ OF o�OM C"ll JMcn C p p a 0 0 & NE�I�fWO V 0 a. vi o J m00 ^ w 'O LU w 3 N W N - w gwwww $ U)¢ a � zzzz �FO ^w o w Uww2 10 o a p LL p q��yatO�99r�099tCt��7w da0 $ ; M �.�X000 aomm a cf) G d L N pg o O F EMS, b ZZ _ 7 C5 u Q m ° - 1 ' 10 IT t\`A. •� ' s 1 9 1 l Q N 1 +� yr— —0 2 1 Ann 94Iwu------------- zscs-o>c \ovl' ad+ skier-oec :ovt, 'v lhbO it�V? '1N3530 W V6 Ih .> •Y m i vtrJaodt,.v� .a=�3�w�vdi�sri,v zo.�sca->: _ F. I 3N01-6 HVNTO US7-2 2- o I 17i11NatlV OtlOdHOlid S.tlffOtl. l)V lVd WWVH,)NINNYB rvtiId aooIJ V i� lmd!,=y Q O G r,r N ? I I Ul }'1 Ii I 11 UI I t L- 1 Lilj� J •- �i- F'� F rt .i --1 F'�- F I II l i � j- ' i , j Y W j 1; _1L — d¢3G J it I;g iI I - - it T , O I '= a N id II S j f I r1 i � � - ----°-- ------ I j z I I I -- s I _ I 1 5 I K o a _ I o —— 0:- 0r--1 nF7 i I I �� zsss-ooE oiti xvy E6FE�DAE ros41 7�PJNOji.lv'J 'r.N3530 WIVd vlr ao�t Zvi iaasau wive t,s-itH xeA s£e-s[. W)WI-MJIG OS9-£L i ■ oI I 1�i11M7tlY✓ �tl B�/N711d ltli■Otl ;48 XV140NI m8n �^I!cv ■ a PIC1J.tlA3l3 R I r � � I J Q i i a a I I I I II r III j I I I I I I I i i ICI f I _ w I � I -t I I I - 71 - i i I :t� I "_Ov£ (09L, xv, 269E-OoS: 091, VINNO-41-W-D '1,149,SAG W-7Vd V1 VINHOd17V:� 'Ld3Sall W­a -1-1 SlITH XOJ S"-kL 3L n"�,,HVNiG OS9-fZ z Low.11.11HOlhow LICA iLtammots 9Jv -4 KVR9NIYdV8 SNOM)�5 Ma ing r0ll V/ L LN N"I il i L_j b3 t1d9SK Wlvd , a O,e 0 4 Z o $N $ 33V]Vd VgVHJNI)Id`d9 ,�� ' `��do = s O U o m O '^ ¢2 F='Z^O C Y Q U Qd �s N`dld ONUN`dld JQIVNMMNd '` a w z u z J tiw� r ¢ Z � et N .- O o Z o z _W 3 H o < = o a w g 31111133HS a U a uVi s 10'9-1133HS H$ ffi Wn my a n� y 00'S-113 S 1 �. fi: [= a m� �3 0 � gg u�i ` i - L aFi fiv J Q � a^ i• r ai f.,� `^pray 't ,. a 4r. �� �or 3p�Eo Oi Ol LL W i.,SY+ Wn�y 45 e`�}• d �t f^L? 4. uj 51. �w ",5, ,y a• � Q � f tLL i r k§ C� �m �h+ M S� W �L sn kbxf ._ °���� µ� � x°•k. ,s rx r^�" ��"7t t '.I �� r .a4 W�L�r ¢ 4 M Y Z 0 ,Z— � J,� Zo`°cZ = i �U w h tee• o g# ,., �. V z l7> ` >O nZ > O2 Z w C` I q aO g tii w ID Z d p r2 Z O LL Q Oy2 _ a 4� I O m Z OL„' 1.t 4 W t W W m _ d. OC I-N � �3zF�0 t->O W zDZQ 5 - } v - - a �o¢z U o F h~ I - -- — 4 z z ,nj Um w.��. _ w w _ v� o NW 3Qw �V r y� S w L a 3 3.k QUO � zN �o Z< O oW rg t � 10 Z �54�A" ri rPM Yaf�`d ti'4�,�ett�'Xr�, ..° 't .4i tr i a1 4 ro Q W M1'�r� S"' ` 'a,i ''' 0 O z o -T' W K L <o `b Q v 0 e W 9AINCI 3dOHS H`dNICI Z< d3 "1d3S3a Wlbd o o Z o wQ DDblbd VWHJND1dVO Y z o a :103road < < W O U Q U O y O � Nbld ONI1Nbld ANbNlWll3dd z z u z W o Z zo w g = ¢ < w 5 31111133HS y O � U a O H �IT Q � rr rr IL Uy 0I a-�.��H U og§ o o z am��� a�u � 3 y a11111 11 10 4J o U e nU tt" J U o �� '� 3 � r 77 3, 1 aai " rx 0 r \ �w wo0D=Um z ;3wa '�+""e"t'`A �} �S'ti<, iy 4 .� r��.��F�"'��s6• � ��y �s .� £ �'P j,. t Y" 'k `t'x`' i#` €'� y. ,!s da � tts. o-*w"x•!9 ttat" s `{ er,k�'� c a �'' ` _ } i'" ^t 9^n s $ ' OX 'Y" x. 1 -4 � - Rs y�,. x 5 M#4$y�-i-�,� a § � 3' ,a.a� _>r �n �,.a},... r"`•"' ,r- r#y :. ry-1 + * Cam.C �y rw' tt'v r Y z non ar '� a a,7:i4 2. 0 �j s t c`9 4 iZ` . 't a "�`a fat . #Cy ., �y�^cxt-' x ru E °t P S iC'rK .,� LY 914a a r a 11 L 10'9 -1133HS 9 H 00'S -1 *Ommur- SlIM38 MVNIAFMd S N 0 1 S I h 3 a OL0£L 3d Sld'3d'NV03 131NVo NINyfN38 .7n Ho' i; mg/I£/S '3lva '-" � o 3tv0 0,ddd NoudlWS3a AB 3Lva �j11Y0 dpV! iLl1'LFS(09L) QNYI INVOYA a�� 51A10 �1P 09LL6 V3'I'M3O WIVd %+ S I'315'3(1N3Atl l.3U31N l ONIt HO 'lYI1ZdJON00 W09 IIAI9Ntl93 MMM E9914N4(N9l) W 0 0 L ON c 3ll'ONVV)tl0lVW ltlW - — aaas-a'raas n3 aINmN n'aaas z9e 9 d a o I969C dVW d0 Z BOW W O 9NIA3ANN$ONV 9NI833NI9N31IAI3•9NINNVId ONVI �� �3jNro a�o,+� YYZ7b Vo'jmum ymd _ s3aoti' audaflZ�OY HYAIIQOS9frL T� w INI •NV93 ONV Nd93 VROM 31VIs'30eW.-OA,A W'IMRM gNd:JD AM to _ __._-__� N as � - � _ - --- _ -- - - cs _ 2C3llJtl'd v'-ASK w - ! a b Li lf!f O I I r' eb v 1 I � � �� 1 s 1 t ��}� fy 4 V ♦ 17S ty�.1:.7f � �• �'�.. � t_..ty � o F y fit. �,1� • a � r,�;'i 1'� :_f 4 a�' �� �I � 1:1♦���xA. � �. I F Is �" s r ill- ♦ S f9L1 KTlOR%X W } [5 >k+4 ! 4 Zf 4 A x a + Z go d�NV-ld bj V 1 ;«1€ 3 3n5 r stz r Q Q � 1 v V �'j.� 1 Y G S 1 sk �', l �` •``f Q i �_jg F 'f jx M � rV fm��i 4tL as s EL Q a z O< 3 LNYld , ."$S`i`. A,f,F' 'r r ' u+^*, ,4.i'av_ijt 1 6 ^It 'o I`ir 11 rd Q � F IL � � "c� i ar"rl*,� n� � m I I' + �° 4.Ri c. t'A "'M ? fi'kY4MRfa,. ,u,'. I4rF'. ;y- ¢M CCU �d 10 o fi f`7 � t 1 «1�ytxw 1 N3JiJYld ,f .� t 4 y .- tl,Yi{i _ t.l J It,V b 1 IY61 ® Z ~' fn All, ,�. 51 e�: t �tAIt�T id F- ti a3LYk 9NI1SIK3 :]n I�]O JHOHS HVN I G i E i i ? t i ? f ` / ? f S A 1 W C_`? Q Z C� Ul i ! I Z 0 E j E F--- i i ? W = t o I UJ E Z I Z w J f a � i i I f Z i i i i I f i f ! i t t I i t t t i t t ! t t t 1 t t i t t ! Z t ( O / \ d � / o ! !a I = ao t t a Q Z in