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