Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-12-05 PC Regular Meeting Agenda Packet CITY OF PALM DESERT REGULAR MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2017 — 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 REGULAR MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 5, 2017 A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of November 7, 2017. Rec: Approved as presented. Action: VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER Vill. 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 of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow Palm Desert Auto to operate a car dealership and display up to 10 automobiles outdoors within its shared parking lot for sale purposes located at 41-700 Corporate Way, Suite A; and approval of a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Case No. CUP 17-022 (Palm Desert Auto, Palm Desert California, Applicant). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2713, approving Case No. CUP 17-022. Action: X. MISCELLANEOUS None XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES B. PARKS & RECREATION XII. COMMENTS XIII. ADJOURNMENT 2 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Agenda\12-5-17 agn.docx AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 5, 2017 1 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 30th day of November 2017. Monica O'Reilly, Recording Secretary Please contact the Planning Department, 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260, (760) 346-0611, for assistance with access to any of the agenda, materials, or participation at the meeting. 3 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Comm ission\2017\Agenda\12-5-17 agn.docx CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY MINUTES TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2017 — 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Nancy DeLuna called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Lindsay Holt Commissioner Ron Gregory Commissioner John Greenwood Vice Chair Joseph Pradetto Chair Nancy DeLuna Staff Present: Jill Tremblay, City Attorney Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development Ron Moreno, Senior Engineer/City Surveyor Eric Ceja, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner Monica O'Reilly, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Lindsay Holt led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Director of Community Development Ryan Stendell summarized pertinent October 26, 2017, City Council actions. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of October 17, 2017. Rec: Approved as presented. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to approve a Parcel Map Waiver application to acquire golf course property (APNs 771-220-016 & 771-220-017). Case No. PMW 17-160 (Par Development, Palm Desert, California, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve Case No. PMW 17-160. Upon a motion by Vice Chair Pradetto, second by Commissioner Gregory, and a 5-0 vote of the Planning Commission, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: None). VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VI11. NEW BUSINESS None IX. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of October 3, 2017. (Continued from the meeting of October 17, 2017). Rec: Approve as presented. Upon a motion by Commissioner Gregory, second by Commissioner Greenwood, and a 5-0 vote of the Planning Commission, the minutes were approved as presented (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: None). X. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to approve a precise plan of design and a tentative parcel map for condominium purposes for the construction of 49 garage/storage units within two buildings totaling 57,661 square feet; and approval of a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Case Nos. PP 17-129 and TPM 37349 (Spinelli Homes, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska, Applicant). 2 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 Associate Planner Kevin Swartz presented the staff report (staff report is available at www.cityofpalmdesert.org). He noted that the applicant and architect were available to answer questions. Mr. Swartz offered to answer any questions. Commissioner John Greenwood asked if the landscape on the north side of the property would be visible from Interstate 10 and only the interior of the project. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct and noted there would be an eight-foot wall. Commissioner Greenwood asked staff to elaborate on the use of the units. Are they strictly for automobile and RV storage? He also asked if there could be an industrial business since they are going to be condominiums. Mr. Swartz responded that there would not be any industrial businesses. The units would be used to store vehicles or goods such as a pool table or used as a man cave. Commissioner Greenwood inquired if staff does not foresee parking being an issue. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. Commissioner Greenwood referred to the zero lot line condition on the west property line and asked if the zero lot line is exposed. He believed Barkingham Palace is adjacent to the proposed project. Mr. Swartz responded that Barkingham Palace is approximately 10 feet from the property line. He mentioned Barkingham Palace was conditioned to build a wall. However, they are holding off on building the wall because the building for GarageTown will potentially be the wall. Commissioner Greenwood commented that he is surprised there is no articulation to the west wall. He said it appears the wall will be plain stucco and asked if that is correct. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. He said staff contacted the owners of Barkingham Palace. He stated there is not a concern with the wall because you would not be able to see it from Dinah Shore Drive. Commissioner Greenwood stated there is a 10-foot gap. He asked if the gap extends northerly and would not be seen from Interstate 10. Mr. Swartz remarked that a portion of the gap might be seen from Interstate 10. 3 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 Commissioner Greenwood commented that his experience on past projects in Palm Desert there is some articulation to the walls and all elevations stand on their own regardless if there is a zero property line. Chair DeLuna inquired if there is a secondary access for the Fire Department. Mr. Swartz responded there is not. He pointed to the site plan and access points, which were approved by the Fire Department. Chair DeLuna asked if individuals would be purchasing or renting the condominium units. Mr. Swartz replied that the units would be purchased. Chair DeLuna inquired if an individual would install an air conditioner unit on the roof if they chose to. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. Commissioner Holt asked if there is on-site security or an on-site office to assist unit owners. She said if there is an issue with a unit, is there a phone number available for the unit owner to call. Mr. Swartz deferred the question to the applicant. Commissioner Holt mentioned there seems to be some inconsistencies with the design of the retention basin. She also assumed the applicant forgot to add trash enclosures, which is not shown on the tentative parcel map. She asked if there is enough space for on-site stormwater. Mr. Swartz responded that the trash enclosure was an afterthought. At first, the owner did not want to add a trash enclosure. Commissioner Holt commented she was confused because there is an easement that runs along the east side of the property and listed as storm drains. She asked if there would be underground stormwater retention on the site or sheet flowed to the retention basin. She also asked if the interior retention basin would be asphalt or concrete. Senior Engineer/City Surveyor Ron Moreno responded that the interior is asphalt and sheet flowing to the basins, with positive drainage going to the concrete swells. He noted the reason the easements are shown on the map is that they are part of the mid-valley channel. He noted water would be directed to the rear basin on the north side of the property. 4 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Comm!ssion\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 Commissioner Holt inquired if there would be any stacking issues off of Dinah Shore Drive if there is more than one unit owner entering the property. Mr. Swartz responded that the Transportation Engineer reviewed and approved the plan. Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. MR. ROBERT PITCHFORD, the applicant, Bermuda Dunes, California, offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Greenwood asked the applicant how the roof is going to drain. MR. PITCHFORD responded that there would be roof drains at every other bay, and they would drain out towards the front of the building. Commissioner Greenwood asked if the drains would be draining to the east and west or to the north and south of the building. MR. PITCHFORD replied that Building One would drain to the east due to the property line. Building Two would drain to the east and west. He explained water would drain into the troughs to the drains. Commissioner Greenwood asked if there were any concerns with the aesthetic on the zero property line condition where there is visibility from Interstate 10 or Dinah Shore Drive. MR. PITCHFORD answered he does not have a concern since Barkingham Palace is right up against the 10-foot side setback. He said there is only 10 feet between the buildings so you will not see a long blank wall from Dinah Shore Drive; however, you may be able to see a little more from Interstate 10. Commissioner Greenwood asked how much would be seen from the freeway. MR. PITCHFORD replied about the length of four condo units. Commissioner Greenwood asked staff if the construction documents have to go back to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) for review. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. Commissioner Greenwood asked the applicant if he was open to meeting with City staff to enhance the northern corner of the property. MR. PITCHFORD replied that it is a possibility. 5 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 Commissioner Holt asked if there is going to be on-site security or someone manning the clubhouse. MR. PITCHFORD said there will not be someone there 24 hours. There will be a maintenance person present most days and owners will have access to the maintenance person. Commissioner Greenwood inquired if there will be a governing board of all the owners. The contractor replied no. Commissioner Holt asked if there has to be a governing board with a condominium map. MR. REX ABARRATE, the contractor, Thousand Palms, California, explained that there is a condominium map, which will legally setup contact information. Mr. Moreno interjected that as part of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) review; staff received the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) because they had to look at the trash enclosures. After the tentative map is approved, the engineer will move forward with the condominium map and plan along with the CC&Rs. Commissioner Greenwood asked who would administer the CC&Rs and would they be required to form a board. In this case, Mr. Moreno said he did not believe so. He noted that the City Attorney has not completed reviewing the documents. Commissioner Holt clarified that there will be a contact number available for owners to call for assistance. MR. PITCHFORD said yes. Commissioner Holt mentioned the site plan notes restricted access along Dinah Shore Drive and asked for clarification. Mr. Moreno replied that the restricted access is a condition placed by the Department of Public Works due to an elevation difference running from Dinah Shore Drive up to the pad to the two buildings and the clubhouse. He pointed out that the final construction documents will have an access ramp that will switch back from the clubhouse down to the public right-of-way. Due to the elevation difference, there was a need to make sure people are not stopping at Dinah Shore Drive to enter the actual property. In addition, he commented where the driveway exists, there is a reciprocal access agreement that has been recorded. 6 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 With no further testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Holt wished she would have thought of this project. She sees the value in the community and for the people that travel to have the option of air- conditioned garage/storage units available. Commissioner Greenwood agreed with Commissioner Holt. However, he asked that the architect and designer review the sensitive areas close to the north elevation, northwest and southwest corners to make sure there is a slight variation in color and texture plane. In addition, have the areas reviewed by the ARC during the final review of construction documents. Commissioner Gregory commented that it looks like a nice project and wished he would've thought of it too. He understood Commissioner Greenwood's point and it would be good for staff to take a look at it. Commissioner Greenwood asked staff if it is necessary to make his request a condition of approval. Mr. Swartz replied Commissioner Greenwood could make it a condition of approval; however, he felt his point is covered. Vice Chair Pradetto moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2710, approving Case Nos. PP 17-129 and TPM 37349, subject to conditions. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Greenwood and carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: None). Chair DeLuna thanked the applicant for doing business in Palm Desert. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a church within a 12,966-square-foot building within the University Village located at 36-927 Cook Street; and approval of a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Case No. CUP 17-148 (Church 212, Palm Desert, California, Applicant). Associate Planner Kevin Swartz outlined the salient points of the staff report (staff report is available at www.cityofpalmdesert.org). Staff recommended approval and offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Gregory commented parking seemed to be the major concern. He asked if there are other issues. Mr. Swartz replied parking is the only concern. Commissioner Gregory asked if there would be a concern with noise. 7 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 It is an isolated area, and staff did not feel noise would be a concern. Vice Chair Joseph Pradetto asked Mr. Swartz if he believed there is a parking problem or any specific concerns about parking for the proposed project. Mr. Swartz replied no. Vice Chair Pradetto asked him if he was sure. Mr. Swartz believed there is plenty of parking in the area. Chair DeLuna commented the church anticipates growing from 300 members to 450 within the next five years. She voiced her concern with parking if they expand, and asked if there are any contingency plans. She asked if the church would relocate, provide more parking, or provide valet service. Mr. Swartz pointed to Condition of Approval No. 9 which states if the church expands to 350 members under the Condition Use Permit (CUP), the church will need to amend the CUP or the church would need to come up with an alternative plan. Chair DeLuna asked if the issue with parking would be revisited from time to time. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. He noted an amendment to the CUP would require a new public hearing to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Greenwood asked if College Drive lends itself to any parking on the street or are there signs that parking is not allowed. Mr. Swartz replied he did not see parking on College Drive. Commissioner Gregory asked if a parking problem becomes apparent prior to the church having 350 members, would the City have to act based on the conditions. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. If there is an issue, the CUP provides staff the tools to revisit the case. Commissioner Gregory clarified that 350 members would trigger an official review of the CUP. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. Chair DeLuna inquired how the church membership will be monitored. 8 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 Mr. Swartz hoped that the church would notify the City, or adjacent businesses would gage and notify the City. Commissioner Greenwood asked if staff received any feedback from adjacent business owners. Mr. Swartz replied no. Commissioner Greenwood asked if a public hearing notice was sent to all of the businesses within the University Village. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. He said University Village is owned by one individual who had notified all of their tenants. Commissioner Greenwood asked if the peak times for the church when parking could be an issue are Saturday and Sunday evenings. Mr. Swartz responded peak times would be Wednesday and Sunday evenings. Commissioner Holt inquired if there are tenants in Building 6. Mr. Swartz replied no, but soon there will be. Commissioner Holt asked if the church included the parking spaces in the vicinity of Building 6 in their parking calculations. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. When there are tenants in Building 6, Commissioner Holt asked if the church is hoping the new tenants will operate at different hours. Mr. Swartz stated he was mistaken and noted there is a tenant (a medical group) in Building 6. He mentioned the medical group has regular business hours. Commissioner Holt inquired if more than 350 members fit in the sanctuary. Mr. Swartz responded that staff reviewed the occupancy. Staff calculated the sanctuary could hold approximately 300 members. He referred to the exhibit and pointed to other areas where people could watch or listen to the service. Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. MR. GABRIEL LUJAN, the architect, Palm Desert, California, commented that they performed a parking analysis and there are close to 300 parking spaces near the church. Therefore, they do not feel there would be a parking issue. In 9 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 addition, the medical group has regular business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). He said Building 5 and Building 6 would complement each other. During the day, the medical group would need the church's parking and in the evening the church would need the medical group's parking. He offered to answer any questions. Chair DeLuna asked what time members would start arriving for the Wednesday evening service. MR. LUJAN responded members would start to arrive around 6:00 to 6:15 p.m. for the 6:30 p.m. service. Commissioner Greenwood asked if the medical group occupies the entire Building 5. MR. LUJAN replied yes. Commissioner Holt commented that the only time there might be a parking issue is during a special event. She hoped the applicant would be kind enough to alert the adjacent businesses if a special event were to take place. MR. LUJAN responded that they would notify adjacent businesses. If they get to a point when parking may become an issue, they discussed having parking attendants to guide people so they do not have problems with other businesses. Church 212 plan is to have a five-year lease or maybe seven. He hoped that in seven years they would be blessed with a site to build their own church. With no further testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Gregory commented that it is an excellent use of complementary parking. It is a great example of reducing the square footage of parking. He noted that the church is on a growth cycle and if they grow to a point where parking could be an issue, at that time, the church would look into purchasing property. Vice Chair Pradetto remarked that the only thing better would be a drive-in church in a giant parking lot and people stay in their cars. Commissioner Greenwood moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission No. 2711, approving Case No. CUP 17-148, subject to conditions. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Gregory and carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: None). Chair DeLuna thanked the applicant for doing business in Palm Desert. 10 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 C. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to subdivide an 18-acre commercial parcel into 14 parcels for the Monterey Crossing Specific Plan located at the northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive. Case No. TPM 37157 Amendment No. 1 (Fountainhead Shrugged, LLC., Newport Beach, California, Applicant). Principal Planner Eric Ceja reviewed the staff report (staff report is available at www.cityof pal mdesert.org) and recommended approval. He said the Planning Commission received a memorandum prior to the meeting regarding a letter from a local utility. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution approving the amendment for Tentative Tract Map 37157 along with the following condition: "Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit for review and obtain approvals from the affected local utility owners, including the Coachella Valley Water District, Southern California Edison, and Southern California Gas Company."He offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Greenwood asked if property lines have an impact on the aesthetic or potential retail. For example, adjacency on a prominent corner of Dinah Shore Drive and close to a property line that may affect glazing, amount of glass used, etc. Mr. Ceja responded that there are several tenants identified for some of the parcels and some buildings have been approved. He said any new building that the Planning Commission or the ARC did not approve would have to go back through the process. He felt confident that with any building that comes forward requiring staff and ARC approval would get quality architecture for the building. Commissioner Greenwood asked what would be the side setback be on Parcel 8. Mr. Ceja believed there is a 20-foot setback off Dinah Shore Drive. He also believed Parcel 8 has been identified for a Les Schwab Tire Center, and the elevations have been shown to the Planning Commission and the ARC. Commissioner Greenwood clarified that the proposed tire center would stay and everything would be in line with the way the map is being parcelized. Mr. Ceja replied yes. He emphasized that staff has a materials board and architectural language of the Monterey Crossing Specific Plan. He expressed that there is flexibility in subdividing the map further; however, the architecture will remain consistent throughout the project. Chair DeLuna inquired if a second hotel is still part of the plan. Mr. Ceja replied that the flexibility for a second hotel is still in the plan. Commissioner Holt asked what the purpose of Parcel 14 is. 11 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\201TMinutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 Mr. Ceja responded that Parcel 14 is a remnant when the county abandoned the former alignment of the Monterey Avenue overpass. He said the parcel is tied into the CC&Rs on the Costco site so instead of cluttering the site with Parcel 14, the applicant is separating it. Vice Chair Pradetto declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. MS. VASANTHI OKUMA, the applicant, commented that Mr. Ceja did a good job presenting the revision to the parcel map. She offered to answer any questions. Chair DeLuna asked if there still is a possibility of a second hotel and where would it be located. MS. OKUMA responded that they are actively marketing with hotels; however, there has not been any interest. With no further testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed. Vice Chair Pradetto moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission No. 2712, approving Case No. TPM 37157 Amendment No. 1, subject to conditions and adding the following condition: "Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit for review and obtain approvals from the affected local utility owners, including the Coachella Valley Water District, Southern California Edison, and Southern California Gas Company." Motion was seconded by Commissioner Gregory and carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: None). Chair DeLuna thanked the applicant for continuing to work with the City. The City is looking forward to the project. XI. MISCELLANEOUS None XII. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES None B. PARKS & RECREATION None 12 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\201TMinutes\11-7-17.docx PRELININARY MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 7, 2017 XIII. COMMENTS None XIV. ADJOURNMENT With the Planning Commission concurrence, Chair DeLuna adjourned the meeting at 6:54 p.m. NANCY DE LUNA, CHAIR ATTEST: RYAN STENDELL, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MONICA O'REILLY, RECORDING SECRETARYO 13 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\11-7-17.docx PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: December 5, 2017 REQUEST: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow Palm Desert Auto to operate a car dealership and display up to 10 automobiles outdoors within its shared parking lot for sale purposes located at 41- 700 Corporate Way, Suite A; and approval of a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Recommendation Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2713, approving the applicants request to operate a car dealership and display up to 10 vehicles outdoors within a shared parking lot for sale purposes; and approve the Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Executive Summary Approval of staff's recommendation will allow the applicant to operate a car dealership and display up to 10 automobiles outdoors within a shared parking lot. The applicant would like the ability to display additional vehicles; however, staff has determined that only 10 parking spaces are appropriate due to the site layout and existing businesses. Background Analysis A. Property Description: The property is located on the northeast corner of Lennon Place and Corporate Way, south of Hovley Lane East. On March 4, 1986, the Planning Commission approved Precise Plan 86-6, which allowed two office/warehouse buildings totaling 20,000 square feet. The building facing Corporate Way (Building One) allowed for five tenants, while the other building (Building Two) allowed for two tenants. In the rear of the buildings are roll-up service doors for each tenant. The project was approved for 32 shared parking spaces; two parking spaces per tenant and the remainder for guest parking. The site has two access points, one off Corporate Way and the other off Lennon Place. The two buildings were constructed and completed in 1988. Currently, Building One has four tenants: Accounting Services, Door Pros, Smog Dog, the applicant's business, and one vacancy. Building Two has two tenants; Paint Company and Big Wheels Jeep Tours. December 5, 2017 — Planning Commission Staff Report Case No. CUP 17-022 — Palm Desert Auto Page 2 of 4 t n r~ (I C ' r Ar 6 B. Zoning and General Plan Designation: Zone: SI, Service Industrial General Plan: E, Employment C. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North: SI, Service Industrial/Warehouse and Office Uses South: SI, Service Industrial/Storage Yard East: SI, Service Industrial/Warehouse and Office Uses West: SI, Service Industrial/Industrial Businesses Project Description The business specializes in classic cars and currently sells automobiles via the internet and by appointment only. The applicant will use this location for displaying up to 10 classic cars outdoors within the shared parking lot. The business operates seven days a week by appointment only and there will be two employees working on-site. G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP's\CUP 17-22 Palm Desert Auto Corporate Way\PC Staff Report PD Auto.docx December 5, 2017— Planning Commission Staff Report Case No. CUP 17-022 — Palm Desert Auto Page 3 of 4 Analysis On January 28, 2016, the City Council approved Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) 15-350 allowing new and used outdoor automotive sales within the Service Industrial (SI) and Freeway Commercial Overlay Zoning Districts (FCOZ), subject to a CUP. Prior to the City Council approving ZOA 15-350, the City allowed indoor automotive sales, within the SI zone. Over the years, many of the businesses took advantage, especially within the Cook Street industrial area, and expanded outdoors occupying another business's parking spaces and public parking along the streets. In February 2017, the Code Compliance Division mailed letters to all car dealerships stating that they need to obtain a CUP for display and sales of vehicles outdoors; otherwise, they would be subject to fines. All CUPs are reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Planning Commission to ensure there is adequate parking and land use compatibility with surrounding properties. A. Land Use Compatibility: The surrounding uses consist of a smog station and industrial offices/warehouse businesses. The site will operate seven days a week by appointment only during regular working hours, which is consistent with other businesses in the area. The applicant would like to display up to 18 vehicles, but staff has determined that 10 vehicles are appropriate based on the existing tenants and site layout. Although the existing tenants do not generate a high volume of traffic (customers), staff does not want vehicles displayed in non-designated parking areas, which the applicant is currently doing. Currently, the applicant has not received complaints from the City or the adjacent business owners, and has demonstrated that the business is compatible with the surrounding uses. Furthermore, the CUP will allow the Planning Commission to establish conditions for how many vehicles will be allowed to be displayed on-site, specify no street parking, and compliance with advertising devices such as no balloons, roof-mounted adverting, flags, pennants, propellers, oscillating, and rotating devices. Staff is recommending up to 10 vehicles and that they must be parked in designated parking spaces. B. Parking: The property has a shared parking lot with 32 parking spaces. Each of the seven tenants is allocated two parking spaces totaling 14 spaces leaving 18 for guest parking. Staff is recommending allowing the applicant to display up to 10 vehicles, which would leave eight spaces for guest parking. The Big Wheels Jeep Tours business parks and stores all vehicles within their warehouse and rarely has customers. The other businesses (painting, investment, and alarm) also rarely have customers. The Smog Dog works on an appointment only schedule and may occupy up to three parking spaces during peak hours. Since the applicant's business operates by appointment only, and has two employees, staff believes that there is adequate parking available, and the use will not create a public nuisance in regards to parking. GAPlanning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUP's\CUP 17-22 Palm Desert Auto Corporate Way\PC Staff Report PD Auto.docx December 5, 2017— Planning Commission Staff Report Case No. CUP 17-022 — Palm Desert Auto Page 4 of 4 Environmental Review This project has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff has found this project to be categorically exempt, under Class 32: In-fill Development Projects, of the CEQA. Because of the categorical exemption, no further environmental review is necessary. 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. Prepared by: Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner LEGAL REVIEW DEPT. REVIEW FINANCIAL REVIEW CITY MANAGER WA N/A N/A Ryan Stendell Robert W. Hargreaves Director of Janet Moore Lauri Aylaian City Attorney Community Director of Finance City Manager Develo ment APPLICANT: Palm Desert Auto 41-700 Corporate Way, Suite A Palm Desert, CA 92211 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2713 2. Exhibit "A" Site Plan Showing Approved Parking Locations 2. Legal Notice 3. Notice of Exemption 4. Exhibits G:\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\CUFs\CUP 17-22 Palm Desert Auto Corporate Way\PC Staff Report PD Auto.docx PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2713 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, CONSIDERING ADOPTION OF A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; AND APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW PALM DESERT AUTO TO OPERATE A CAR DEALERSHIP AND DISPLAY UP TO 10 AUTOMOBILES OUTDOORS WITHIN ITS SHARED PARKING LOT FOR SALE PURPOSES LOCATED AT 41-700 CORPORATE WAY, SUITE A CASE NO: CUP 17-022 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 51h day of December 2017, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by Palm Desert Auto, for approval of the above-noted project request; and WHEREAS, said applications have complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act," Resolution No. 2015-75, the Director of Community Development has determined that the proposed project request is categorically exempt under Article 19 Class 32: In-fill Development Projects Categorical Exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further review is necessary; and WHEREAS, the parcel is located within the Service Industrial zoning district, which allows outdoor automotive sales, subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP); and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons, which are outlined in the staff report reasons to approve 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 (SI) zoning district. The purpose of the Sl zoning district allows for the manufacture, distribution, outdoor automobile sales, and service of products intended for use with the City and uses that are consistent with the residential, resort, and recreational character of the community. The existing buildings were approved and constructed for industrial type uses. The proposal to operate a car dealership and display up to 10 automobiles for outdoor sales within a shared parking lot requires a CUP for land use compatibility and parking demand. It can be determined that the approval of this CUP is consistent with the existing surrounding land uses and with the on-site parking demand. The building also conforms to all development standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed type of business conducted at this site will be compatible with the surrounding businesses. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2713 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. The proposed conditional use is adjacent to properties with similar land uses. The proposed project to operate a car dealership and display up to 10 automobiles outdoors within a shared parking lot for sale purposes complies with the zoning code, and all building, life safety and environmental standards. No new building and site improvements are necessary since the site complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).Therefore, the conditional use, will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare. 3. That the proposed conditional 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, and operational standards contained in the zoning code. Based on the parking study, staff believes that there is adequate parking available, and the use will not create a public nuisance. 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 "Employment District." The intent is to provide a wide variety of office-intensive activity that could include some manufacturing and light industrial businesses. The proposed business will be geared towards clientele in the area and outside of the Coachella Valley. A primary objective stated in the Land Use & Community Care of the General Plan under Industrial Goals is to provide for the development of business parks and non-polluting industrial uses, and which assures compatible integration with other, non-industrial land uses. The non- industrial use of outdoor automobile sales is a non-polluting use and offers the City to expand its business portfolio to residents and tourist. The proposed use will be using the same built improvements, rather than constructing new ones that would be used a small percentage of time. This project maintains a land use that is consistent with the General Plan. The project is consistent with the General Plan in respect to the appropriate use of the proposed location. The business is compatible with surrounding land uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby approve the project as proposed, subject to conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2713 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, at its regular meeting held on the 5`h day of December 2017, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: NANCY DELUNA, CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: RYAN STENDELL, SECRETARY N�i Ijll PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 'IiiI,i,,. I,I�N!llhllllilllllll��l�lL ,, ,�illl I� I II ICI � ��� � p�lUo,. ��,i,llll►►ill � I III,� I i li�j IIII , I I INIIINI)N�li��l��III I�� 'llll I II!I illll �,u�IIII,NNlpllu��,. "il i . IININ I;li��- f lingllglll�'�l IlllliV PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2713 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO: CUP 17-022 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, 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 the approved project and all Palm Desert Municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use or structure contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Building and Safety Department jll Public Works Department Fire Department �u�plll���llllll;; . 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. Any proposed change of this CUP will require an amendment, which will result in a new public hearing. uiiiliilliU 6. Improvements that are not on the approved site plan may be subject to additional requirements and plan submittals. 7. The business shall not display more than 10 automobiles outdoors for sale within the shared parking lot. 8. The automobiles for sale shall only be parked on-site within designated parking spaces within the parking lot and not within the public streets as identified in Exhibit "A", which is attached. 9. Each car shall be limited to one sale/price sign displayed inside the vehicle on the dashboard. 10. Advertising devices shall not be allowed such as balloons, roof-mounted adverting/devices, flags, pennants, propellers, oscillating, and rotating devices. eu i I 4' • .y 4$ r E %! J 14 rw. 4 i� fi d e+ x " �. ,p � ♦ • �U� cif. 10 Approved Parking Spaces TU f � EXHIBIT "A" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.2713 Date: 2017 cr,FO ,� VICINITY MAP CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. CUP 17-022 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PALM DESERT AUTO TO DISPLAY VEHICLES INDOORS AND OUTDOORS FOR SALE PURPOSES WITHIN A SHARED PARKING LOT LOCATED AT 41-700 CORPORATE WAY SUITE A. 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: 41-700 Corporate Way, Suite A 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 December 5, 2017, at 6:00 p.m. 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 November 24 to December 5, 2017. 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 November 24, 2017 Palm Desert Planning Commission NOTICE OF EXEMPTION TO: Office of Planning and Research FROM: City of Palm Desert P. O. Box 3044, Room 212 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 ❑ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors or ❑ County Clerk County of: 1. Project Title: CUP 17-022 2. Project Applicant: Palm Desert Auto 3. Project Location — Identify street address The property is located on the northeast corner and cross streets or attach a map of Lennon Place and Corporate Way, south of showing project site (preferably a USGS i Hovley Lane East. 15' or 7 112' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 4. (a) Project Location — City: 41-700 Corporate Way, Suite A (b) Project Location —County: Riverside County 5. Description of nature, purpose, and Approval of staff's recommendation will beneficiaries of Project: allow the applicant to operate a car dealership and display up to 10 automobiles outdoors within a shared parking lot. 6. Name of Public Agency approving City of Palm Desert project: 7. Name of Person or Agency undertaking City of Palm Desert the project, including any person undertaking an activity that receives financial assistance from the Public Agency as part of the activity or the person receiving a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement of use from the Public Agency as part of the I activity: 8. Exempt status: (check one) (a) ❑ Ministerial project. (Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(1); State CEQA Guidelines § 15268) (b) ❑ Not a project. (c) ❑ Emergency Project. (Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(4); State CEQA Guidelines § 15269(b),(c)) (d) ® Categorical Exemption. The City of Palm Desert (City), in its capacity as Notice of Exemption FORM `B" State type and class I the Lead Agency for this project under the number: CEQA, has determined that the proposed project request is categorically exempt under Class 32: In-fill Development Projects, of the CEQA. Because of the categorical exemption, no further environmental review is necessary. (c) ❑ Declared Emergency. (Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(3); State CEQA Guidelines § 15269(a)) (f) ❑ Statutory Exemption. State Code section number: (g) ❑ Other. Explanation: 9. Reason why project was exempt: The car dealership will operate within an existing building. 10. Lead Agency Contact Person: Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner Telephone: (760) 346-0611 > >. If filed by applicant: Attach Preliminary Exemption Assessment (Form "A") before filing. 12. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No 13. Was a public hearing held by the lead agency to consider the exemption? Yes No If yes, the date of the public hearing was: March 12, 2015 Signature: � r/ Date: Title: ce" Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant Date Received for Filing: (Clerk Stamp Here) Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21100, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code. Notice of Exemption FORM `B" Re: Statement of Use for Conditional Use Permit Application Address: 41 700 Corporate Way, Palm Desert CA 92260 This application is for a permit to display"for sale''vehicles in the parking structure of the address mentioned above. The business has been established in 2013 as a Used Car Dealer at this address and has been operating as such since. Per City of Palm Desert's request due to code/zoning change I am applying for this permit. The address has 5 tenants,each tenant has an attached garage in the back. Currently I am using the side parking(adjacent to Lemon Way)spaces to display vehicles for sale while the front parking (adjacent to Corporate Way), 12 spots, are used for customers of all tenants. We have been operating this way for over 3 years and never have an issue with any of the neighbors or other tenants in the building. The nature of this business is selling cars and therefore has to have the ability to display its inventory for consumers. We do not, have not, and will not use the property of the neighboring businesses and therefore do not i_nterf �v;+�+ rt2em in�y way. Since opening this business we never had any complaints or issues from any of our immediate or adjacent neighbors and would like to continue operating in harmony with the surrounding businesses. 07/14/2017 To The City of Palm Desert, Corporate Way m Palm Desert,do not have an issue with the city grantimtg Palm Desert Auto permission to display vehicles in the south sick of the building paking area,it does not i ntafere with my needs and Operation. C.3 cl r e� 14rccl f/ I 07/14/2017 To The City of Palm Desert, L S v'A ,tenant of 41700 Corporate Way in Palm Desert,do not have an issue with the city grwbnng Palm Desert Auto permission to display vehicles in the south side of the building paking area,it does not interfere with my needs and operation. c{r e_q L J Xr eci I en u� Gv� 07/14/2017 To The City of Palm Desert, t ,tee of 41700 Corporate Way in Palm Desert,do not have an issue with the city grantinng Pahn Desert Auto permission to display vehicles in the south side of the building paking area,it does not interfere with my needs and operation. w r IL) �a v P�I Cl r e_q PC, 07/14/2017 To The City of Palm Desert, I BUJ I/I S termant of 41700 Corporate Way in Palm Desert,do not have an issue with the city graromig Palen Desert Auto percussion to display vehicles in the south side of the building paking area,it does not intetcrffere with my needs and operation. � Qv►-CF ..,� cx r e� Pa c, :Arch 07/14/2017 To The City of Palm Desert, tennant of 41700 Corporate Way in Palm Desert,do not have an issue with the city grantiemg Palm Desert Auto permismn to display vehicles in the south side of the building paking area,it does not interfere with my needs and operation. ZI �x L� W pa r ..-,� Gl C.� PO f 4rc ( t t