Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0417 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING ; TUESDAY - APRIL 17, 2001 � 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER � 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE � .� � � �. � .� � * .� � * �. � � � �. * .� � � �. � * * � .� � � � �. * � .� � * �. * �- � � �. .� �. I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Lopez called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. I1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Finerty led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Jim Lopez, Chairperson Cindy Finerty, Vice Chairperson Sonia Campbell Sabby Jonathan Dave Tschopp i t � Members Absent: None Staff Present: Phil Drell, Director of Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Steve Smith, Planning Manager Martin Alvarez, Associate �Planner Jeff Winklepleck, Parks and Recreation Planning Manager Mark Greenwood, Engineering Manager Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Request for consideration of the April 3, 2001 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Chairperson Lopez, approving the April 3, 2001 minutes as submitted. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Finerty abstained►. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION i � Mr. Drell summarized pertinent April 12, 2001 City Council actions. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS "�""� None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 01-13 - WORLD DEVELOPMENT, Applicant RecKaest for approval of a parcel map waiver to merge Lots 9 and 10 at 45-71 1 and 45-731 Edgehill Drive. Action: - It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning '""'� Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. PP 01-04 - GLS/GABRIEL LUJAN for WORLD DEVELOPMENT, Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and a precise plan to construct a 6,481 square foot professional office building located at 44-600 Village Court. Mr. Alvarez explained that the applicant was requesting approval of a 6,400 square foot office professional building located on Village Court at the eastern end of the city's boundary next to Indian Wells. He said this site is 18,263 square feet and is located toward the interior of Village Court, 1 ,000 feet to the north of Highway 11 1 . He described adjacent uses, that the project would consist of a two-story 6,481 square foot office building, and a maximum height of 25 feet from the finished pad as specified in the conditions of approval and as drawn on the plans, the building would be lowered six inches to comply with the City's maximum height for this district. In terms of access, 2 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � there will be two access points from Village Court. One would be a mutual access between the proposed site and the existing professional office building. The second is at the north end of the project, currently designed as a 19'5" two-way drive. Eventually once the property to the north developed it would be a mutual access for both properties. The building would have 5,509 square feet of usable space which requires 22 parking spaces. The site provides 23 with a row of covered parking spaces. On March 13, 2001 , Architectural Review Commission granted preliminary approval of the plans subject to some minor modifications that were described in the staff report on page three. The modifications were made conditions of approval. The project would be consistent with the development standards of the zone including height, parking, and setbacks. For purposes of CEQA the project would not have a negative impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was prepared. Staff recommended approval subject to the conditions. Chairperson Lopez opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. GABRIEL LUJAN, 74-854 Velie Way in Palrn Desert with GLS � Group on behalf of World Development, addressed the commission. He stated that he was present to answer any questions. There were no questions. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Jonathan said he thought that ARC did a very good job of going through the project and making the changes and improvements that would have been of concern to him. He indicated that the applicant worked effectively with ARC to accomplish that and that this project was exactly what that site called for. He moved for approval. Commissioner Campbell cnncurred. She said that when looking at the existing buildings this would fit in;- 'i�t met the requirements and she seconded the motion. �' 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting Planning Commi ssion Resolution No. 2060, approving PP 01-04, subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. B. Case No. CUP 01-06 - THE OASIS CHURCH, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow expansion of a church facility located at 74-842 Velie Way, Suite 4. Mr. Smith explained that the property is in the industrial park on Velie Way west of Cook Street. Oasis Church has operated in the current location since 1997. It began initially as a small counseling service and through time evolved e into a 3,000 square foot church without ever gaining a conditional use permit. Now they were seeking a 1 ,500 square foot addition. The property is zoned Service Industrial. There are other churches operating in other portions of the service industrial district. They wanted to add space number one for a 390 square foot youth area and space nu mber two for a 1 ,100 square foot addition for a children's area, office and restroom. The church operates services at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sundays, and Wednesday evenings at 7:00 p.m. Part of the request is to add Monday and Tuesday evenings around 7:00 p.m. and possibly Thursday and Friday evenings at 7:00 p.m. in the future. Mr. Smith noted that this is a through lot. It extends from Velie through to the north to 42nd Avenue but there was no physical way to pass from one side of the site to another so the portion that fronts onto Velie Way could only take parking from the Velie Way side. There were ten parking spaces there. The typical method of calculating parking for a church was to look at the sanctuary. He noted that the sanctuary would have 78 seats, which would create a need for 26 parking spaces. Onsite they have ten spaces. He noted that there were hundreds of diagonal parking spaces on each side of the street and Sunday morning it wasn't a very active place so there were lots of spaces available. Notwithstanding the lack of parking, staff did not foresee a problem with the use provided it stayed with its Sunday use and after 7:00 p.m. use � 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 `.► during the week. Staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the conditions contained in the draft resolution. Commissioner Jonathan said he understood Mr. Smith's explanation and rationale regarding the adequacy of parking for the evening and weekend use. He asked if staff had looked at the weekday daytime use of the facility in terms of the other uses being proposed for the office use, children's care area, and nursery to see if ten spaces out of 26 required would be adequate. Mr. Smith said he looked at it that morning and there were four spaces occupied at around 10:15-10:30 a.m. He had no trouble parking on the street either and didn't foresee a parking issue. Mr. Smith said that staff included a condition prohibiting any day care activity and that type of thing because that could create a problem. Commissioner Jonathan understood that it was a one time observance showing adequate parking, but he recalled being on Velie and every space was taken, plus 18 wheelers parked along those spaces. It could be a crazy area. His question was if the 1 0 offsite spaces would adequately meet the weekday use of the church facility as a whole. Mr. Smith said he discussed that with the applicant and the pastor would be there and possibly a couple of church secretaries. He felt that should be more than adequate. � Commissioner Campbell noted that Mr. Srnith said the church would operate after 7:00 p.m. and asked if that was when the youth and nursery areas would be used, not during the day. Mr. Smith said that was correct and didn't believe there would be a parking problem. Chairperson Lopez o�ened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. REV. SAM COBB, 44-650 North Holland Drive in La Quinta, stated that he was a member of the Oasis Church in Palm Desert. He said he and another member were present to stand in support and was present on behalf of their pastor, Pastor Stuart Roberts. He felt the staff report was very accurate and they didn't foresee any problems. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Campbell said she visited the area, even on weekdays during business hours, and it was very busy during the day, but with the hours of "'�' 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 operation of the church use she didn't believe there would be a problem with the parking. She moved for approval. Commissioner Finerty seconded the motion. She felt the conditions of approval addressed any potential problems. Commissioner Tschopp felt the use was compatible with the neighborhood and that the parking should be adequate. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbefl, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2061 , approving CUP 01-06, subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. C. Case No. PP 01-06 - FEDDERLY & ASSOCIATES, Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental � Impact and a precise plan to construct 12 apartment units on two parcels located on the north side of Larrea Street between San Luis Rey Avenue and Portola Avenue, 73-825 Larrea Street. Mr. Alvarez said that the request was for 12 apartment units on two Larrea Street lots located between Portola and San Luis Rey Avenues. On the eastern parcel was a vacant hotel. He noted that there were multifamily residential projects to the south, west and north and a vacant lot to the east. The project was a multifamily residential project. The lots are zoned R-3 which would allow a maximum of 13.5 units. The project will consist of two buildings containing six units each. The complex would have a swimming pool on the southeast corner of the property and would have three access points which would lead to parking. The westernmost access would be a circular drive leading to parking along the west property line and garage units along building number two's west elevation. The second and third access points would lead to garage units. The project would require 24 offstreet parking spaces. The site provided 24 and as required 12 would be within garage structures. In terms of setbacks the project complies with all the standards � � 6 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 +r..► of the R-3 district including front, rear, interior setbacks, coverage, common useable space, parking and building height which had been conditioned to be lowered a few inches to cornply with the 24-foot two-story maximum. Mr. Alvarez noted that commission received copies of the elevations which showed a modern Spanish architecture. ARC granted preliminary approval on March 13, 2001 , subject to three conditions. He noted that ARC was impressed with the design of the units. In terms of the development standards, the project was consistent with the R-3 district, a general plan multifamily ione. He noted that there was a letter from the Casa Larrea Resort which addressed some issues that might not be applicable to this specific project. Staff was recommending approval. For CEQA pu rposes the project called for a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. Commissioner Tschopp informed the commission that he would be abstaining. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he was concerned about the comments made in the Casa Larrea letter. He was more concerned about the comments that related to the other project. He asked if staff had researched the issues. Mr. Alvarez said no. Mr. Drell indicated that the matter would be referred to � the Code Enforcement Department. Commissioner Jonathan asked for staff to report back at the next meeting. Chairperson Lopez opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. LANCE FEDDERLY, 45-350 San Luis Rey, said that he was present representing the project and asked for any questions. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. MR. LAWRENCE CHANDLER, the owner of the Casa Larrea Resort, addressed the commission. After rereading his letter, he wanted to make sure they understood that it wasn't personal. They weren't totally opposed to the project. They didn't want their business destroyed again. With rising electric costs, gas costs and other things going on in the state of California, the last thing he needed was to go through another building project. He said he stated things in his letter which the commission might find minor, but when he saw clients not �.. � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 taking rooms because of the noise and being woke up, it became a � problem for him. He thought the project looked beautiful, the people building it did beautiful work, again, he didn't have a problem with it and hadn't seen the plans up to now. Some of the things he asked them to look at included two story height, which had already been addressed, and if he understood it correctly they had been asked to reduce the size. The landscaping had been addressed. He stated that they were a very old hotel that was built in 1959. They've owned it for seven years. They built a business there out of a building that was ready to close. Fedderly's bought the one across the corner and they had done a beautiful job. It enhanced the neighborhood trernendously, but as stated, they don't live in the neighborhood. They were the only permanent residents now left from San Luis Rey to Portola. They have good relationships with Union Bank and they couldn't ask for a better commercial partner in the neighborhood. The project beside them had a good onsite manager. The owner across the street, Susan, was very much in favor of this project, the caprice eight unit project. He agreed with her. But she too had concerns about parking. They had very little parking. He said he stood before the commission in favor of the project that they built on the corner of San Luis Rey and asked that it be � approved. One commissioner pointed out at that time that they were granting an exception of 10 or 12 parking spaces for the square footage. It was granted and he was relieved at that time. He now understood that concern. They have very limited onsite parking. Hopefully even with all the garages they were building with the new project they wouldn't suffer any more. Even in their situation, they have one space per unit, and if they had a resident at their hotel for a couple of days and a friend comes to visit, they had to find them parking on the street. This would eliminate quite a bit of that. Progress was progress. He asked thern to read the letter. He wasn't opposing the proposal. He said he knew there were laws regarding hours. He was asking that this commission give them some protection for things that were going on at 5:00 a.m. and continuing to 8:00 on Saturdays and Sundays, and a project that went on for two years that should take six months. This was what they were faced with last time. He thought it was a beautiful project that would enhance the neighborhood. He thanked the commission. P 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � Chairperson Lopez closed the public hearing and asked for commission comments or action. Commissioner Campbell noted that the project met all the requirements and would be consistent with other two-story multifamily residences on Larrea and Palm Desert has regulations when building could begin in the morning. Starting at 4:45 a.m. was bad. Mr. Drell thought the time was 7:00 a.m. when construction could begin. He also thought that the items identified in the letter could be corrected and he was sure Mr. Fedderly would cooperate. Commissioner Campbell said that the project would meet all parking requirements also. If people had visitors, they would have to park on the street. She felt this would be a wonderful projeci and good for the area. She was in favor. She also agreed that they would have to look into the issues brought up in the letter. Commissioner Finerty concurred with Commissioner Campbell that it would enhance the neighborhood. She agreed that the project should be completed in a timely fashion so as not to disrupt the neighbors. She also agreed with Commissioner Jonathan's request to have it go to Code Enforcement and � report back to Planning Commission at the next meeting. Commissioner Jonathan said that he concurred. The project stands on its own merits and would be appropriate for the location and would be a welcome addition to the neighborhood if done properly. He was very sensitive to Mr. Chandler's concerns. He said he did take exception to one paragraph on page three of the letter where he indicates that he knew he didn't have the money, friends in the city, or influence that this firm has and Commissioner Jonathan stated that he has been in the city for 22 years and he didn't think they had the kind of community that catered to influence. He thought it was a wonderful place where everyone had an opportunity to be heard and that was what the public hearing process was all about. He hoped Mr. Chandler heard that they were very concerned about his comments and were requesting staff to follow up. He encouraged Mr. Chandler to stay constructively involved in the process to insure that the follow up was to his satisfaction, particularly if the project is approved, and Mr. Chandler should know that they were here every first and third Tuesday and if he didn't have satisfaction with Code Enforcement or staff, he would welcome hearing from him. But back to the project itself, it stood on its own merits an d he was in full support. �. g MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 Chairperson Lopez also concurred. He thought the project stood on its own merits, was well thought out, was a good use of the property, and would fit in well with the surrounding area. The letter was also very concerning. He said he didn't get a chance to really review it carefully but they would follow up on it and it would be back at the next meeting if Mr. Chandler wished to hear the responses. He called for a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Tschopp abstainedl. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2062, approving PP 01-06, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Tschopp abstained). D. Case No. PP/CUP 00-27 - LAMB ARCHITECTS, Applicant � Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental � Impact, Master Plan of Development, and Precise Plan/Conditional Use Permit for a three-story, 88-room Hampton Inn hotel to be constructed on 2.4 acres on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive approximately 200 feet west of Cook Street, 74-900 Gerald Ford Drive. Mr. Smith noted that the property is located at the northwest corner of Cook and Gerald Ford. He said the request was two fold in nature. The first part was a request for approval of a master plan of development for the 5.4 acres on the corner which extended from Cook Street westerly approximately 800 feet to the proposed new street. He indicated that at a previous meeting the commission approved a parcel map for this property on the northwest corner and there would be a new street created. There was an access from Cook Street, a main access from Gerald Ford, two access points off of the new street and connections through to property to the north. At some point in the past year or so they approved two office buildings on the property immediately to the north. At this point the plan called for a service station, c-store concept on the corner, a restaurant on the west corner and then the matter of the ¢ � � 10 ,� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 r.. precise plan being the three story 88-room Hampton Inn. Mr. Smith showed the elevations. He indicated that the service station and restaurant would come in under a separate precise plan review some time in the future. He said the master plan met the criteria for the zoning district relative to landscaping, setbacks, building heights, and parking. The Hampton Inn proposa! would have 88 rooms, be three stories, 34 feet high. The height li mit in the zone is 35 feet. The project had a couple of tower elements at 38 and 42 feet which would need City Council concurrence which was provided for in the zone. The architecture was contemporary with a stucco finish. The landscaping would be "Desert Willow" style. February 27, 2001, Architectural Review granted preliminary approval to the architecture and landscaping. The uses that had been proposed, the service station, hotel and restaurant, were uses that were anticipated in the overall development plan adopted by the Council in April of 1997. Room sizes comply with ordinance provisions. The ordinance also had a requirement for a three-meal restaurant on the site or adjacent. The proposed restaurant would be in the Coco's vein and it was three meals per day. Mr. Smith indicated that in the past the City has approved hotels with restaurants to follow. The design of the elevation with the architectural treatment over the air-conditioning units had been reviewed by ARC and it was � contained as part of its approval. The development plan approved in 1997 was approved pursuant to a Negative Declaration. At that time it was based upon initial studies that included traffic and hydrology studies and a biological assessment. The master plan and the hotel precise plan were consistent with that plan. The project would be assessed a $600 per acre mitigation fee required in the Fringe-Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan and might be subject to additional mitigations depending upon when they take building permits for the multi species habitat plan. Staff was recommending that commission grant the recommendation of approval and certification of the Negative Declaration of Environmentai Impact. Commissioner Campbell asked if there was a time frame for the restaurant after the hotel has been approved. Mr. Smith said it would be as soon as possible. Staff noted that they were still waiting for Applebee's. Commissioner Campbell asked if there was anything in writing that specifically required the restaurant to be built within a specific time. Mr. Smith said he didn't know how they would guarantee that it would happen in a timely fashion. Mr. Drell said that with the restaurant express service they could get room service for every hotel from nearly every restaurant in the city, so it wasn't as much of a concern. �"" 1 1 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 Commissioner Jonathan asked if there was a detail on the exterior air- "'� conditioning units. Mr. Smith said yes. He explained that it was a system of louvers that blended in with the wall. He confirmed that the windows were recessed back in six inches from the face of the wall. Commissioner Jonathan pointed out that the louvers did not extend outside the wall and were contained within the setback. He asked if the air-conditioning units would not protrude beyond the wall. Mr. Smith said that was correct. They were almost flush with the windows. Commissioner Jonathan said that he would like some reassurance that staff felt comfortable that the access point was not to close to the Cook Street Interchange. He thought that was the first access point going south from the I-10 Freeway. Mr. Greenwood said they were not concerned about the access from Cook Street. It was right-in and right-out only. They were pretty confident it would be okay. Commissioner Jonathan asked for Mr. Greenwood's take on the distance between that access point and the offramp. Mr. Greenwood thought it was nearly a quarter mile. Chairperson Lopez asked if there was a deceleration lane before the right turn or if they came right off Cook. Mr. Greenwood thought there was a right-turn lane on Cook for Gerald Ford that this driveway would be part of. Upon questioning by Commissioner Campbell, Mr. Greenwood stated that there was a Public Works condition requiring a 100-foot right-turn pocket with a 90-foot "'� reverse curve for a deceleration lane on Gerald Ford. He said that fo r Cook the right-turn pocket on Cook would be for Gerald Ford. He thought that should address the Sheriff's concern. Chairperson Lopez said he takes that route quite often and he was concerned about the safety of that area as it continues to develop. That road was well-traveled right now. As they continue to develop hotels, restaurants, and gas stations, he was a little concerned about the access coming down the Cook Street ramp. People get up to a good speed and when they see a green light they are moving pretty quickly. He wanted to make sure the ingress and egress of that right-hand turn was out of harm's way from traffic coming down that hill. Mr. Greenwood said that they could look at it again to see if it is part of a right-turn pocket that is already there. He thought that should be adequate. If it wasn't part of the right-turn fane already on Cook at Gerald Ford, they could extend what was planned there to include this driveway and that turn pocket. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the new unnamed street that goes to the rear would connect to Cook Street. Mr. Smith said it would swing northeast and turns northwest and comes back to Gerald Ford 2,000-2,500 feet to the west. 12 „� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � Commissioner Tschopp asked if there were any alternatives that might be available as opposed to having people exit and having to do a "U" turn on the Gerald Ford/Portola new street and if there was any other viable way of doing that without a "U" turn. Mr. Smith said there would be signs directing traffic to the access road to the northwest for a left onto the new access road. There would be a stop sign and eventually a signal. He noted that this was only a secondary street and that people frorn Residence Inn and the Courtyard probably made "U" turns but they probably wouldn't do it again after the first time. Chairperson Lopez o�ened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. MARK BARBOUR with Lamb Architects, 426 North 44th Street in Phoenix, stated that he was present to answer any questions. Commissioner Finerty asked for the time frame for the restaurant. Mr. Barbour said he wasn't involved in that portion, but what he understood was that there are interested parties awaiting the outcome � of the hotel before they moved forward with any plans for the restaurant. That was only what he had heard but he didn't know exactly. Commissioner Finerty asked who was responsible for that. Mr. Barbour said he believed the property owner was present and he might be able to answer that in more detail. Mr. Drell commented that the master plan was predicated on that site being a restaurant pad. They would not be able to use that pad for anything other than a restaurant without finding another restaurant, so that site was pretty much tied up and reserved for a restaurant. He thought they would try as hard as they could to get a tenant. Commissioner Campbell asked about room rates. � 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 # � Mr. Barbour said that the owner wasn't present; otherwise he would "� have him step up and answer that question. He did confirm that they would be in the range of Residence Inn. Chairperson Lopez asked if Mr. Barbour was comfortable with the conditions of approval. Mr. Barbour said yes. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Jonathan said he had some concerns about the project, two stories was his preference, but given that the height of the project didn't exceed the zoning at 34 feet and the tower elements weren't excessive and the fact that this is near the freeway and would be near the campus and the architecture was creative, he was okay with the height and the three-story element. He felt they had to be careful with the intensity of use in this area. If they started adding up a successful hotel, successful restaurant, successful gas station, and a successful University of California campus and everything ' else that would be going in around there, they had the potential for a traffic '� nightmare beyond the traffic nightmares they were already enduring. They had to be very careful with that. For the right turn off of Cook he would like to see a condition that insures that there is either a deceleration lane or that the access point was part of the right lane for Gerald Ford. He agreed with Chairperson Lopez that without that they were inviting trouble on Cook Street. He again found himself complimenting ARC. The kinds of problems he would have had with the original submittal were ones they expressed their concerns with and the applicant made those changes in terms of visual interest, variety, ins and outs, and so forth, changing the contou r of the pool, and the landscaping, so he thought they have a more interesting product and one that met the requirements for that particular location. He was in favor of the application as conditioned. Commissioner Finerty said that she also shared the same concerns as Commissioner Jonathan, but she felt they had been resolved. She liked the architecture, the 34-foot height was within the code I imits, and she would like to see the restaurant get there sooner rather than later. She pointed out that 3 � a 14 ,�,� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � it is part of the ordinance that it is required. She felt the project would enhance the area and was in favor. Commissioner Campbell concurred with the other commissioners. She felt it was a wonderful project in a great location. She was pro business, so the more people they get, the better it is when they are here all year round. That was what she wanted, not just a six months out of the year community, but a full year community. She was in favor of the project. Commissioner Tschopp concurred with his other commissioners. Chairperson Lopez concurred and reemphasized that they needed to look at traffic flow down Cook Street. He would also concur about the growth of that area. They had done a great job right now in the north sphere and he wanted to see that continue with careful growth of that area and traffic flow, especially with the college campus and more and more students. He was in favor of the project and asked for a motion. Action: r.. It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2063, recommending approval of PP/CUP 00-27, a master plan of development for 5.4 acres on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive and a precise plan for an 88-room Hampton Inn to the City Council, subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. E. Case Nos. GPA 01-01, C/Z 01-01, PP 01-01 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant (Continued from March 20, 2001) Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; a General Plan Amendment from Hillside Planned � Residential to Park; a Change of Zone from Hillside Planned Residential, Drainage (HPR, D) to Open Space, Drainage (OS, D); and a Precise Plan of Design to allow the construction of a 27- acre park with a parking lot, restroom, picnic area and multi-use � - 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 ; � � trails at 72-500 Thrush Road, APNs 628-050-002, 628-050- � 018, 628-150-001 , 628-260-058. Mr. Winklepleck noted that at the last meeting this item was continued to look at revising the plan and eliminating the active facilities and to look at the issue of ihe Thrush Road Bridge relative to pedestrian and vehicular access. Those things had been done. The Thrush Road Bridge, as noted in the report, the vehicular access lane was two-way 24 feet. There was a four-foot sidewalk along the south side of the bridge. He spoke to Mr. Greenwood who indicated that was sufficient for both vehicular and pedestrian access for this facility. There was also a question about some of the projected numbers of vehicles to the site. Mr. Greenwood reiterated that there would be approximately a maximum of 100 trips per day with the majority on the weekend mornings. Also in the report he addressed the previous letters as well as some letters that came in since the last meeting. There was also one additional letter received from Guralnick & Gilliland who represent the Vista Paseo homeowners. One issue raised was lack of notice. Mr. Winklepleck said that property owners were noticed, but the association was not noticed. The state requirements were met. The association would be noticed of consequent meetings. He noted that the current plan removed all the active areas. They � shifted the parking lot to the north closer to the trail head. This would be a "� wide-open piece of land with a small parking area, some onsite trails, a restroom and a picnic area. The picnic area was originally shown as a picnic pavilion. After further study of the site where the trail head would be, there were a couple of nice Palo Verde trees that would be nice with just some tables under them. Mr. Drell said that for graphic purposes they were showing the parking as a significant feature on the north side. He said that the CVWD right-of-way extends 20 feet beyond the existing service road. What they were proposing to do was get an encroachment permit from CVWD to widen that road 20 feet and so there would be a road wide enough for head in parking. It wouldn't look like a parking lot as such, it would be a widened area in the road that would accommodate parking and wouldn't be a separate facility distinct from the service road. Mr. Winklepleck said that they contacted CVWD but haven't received an official response yet. Commissioner Tschopp asked if staff had any input on CVWD's plans when they plan on building these large wells. Mr. Drell asked if he meant the pump stations. Commissioner Tschopp said yes. Mr. Drell said that the three pump stations that were now in various stages of construction dated back to the ti � 16 u,n� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 `` settlement agreement of the lawsuit that occurred when Bighorn (then Rancho Bella Vista) was fi�st approved back in 1984. Litigation occurred for four or five years and there was a settlement in 1988 or 1989 which ultimately paved the way for Westinghouse to proceed with the project. Those three pump stations were part of that settlement. The City reviews them for aesthetic consideration and the one that was going in at Cahuilla Park they studied extensively trying to find alternative sites. They hired an engineer and looked at four or five alternative sites. Under the agreernent it basically said that they ask and we provide. They agreed to put it somewhere else if the City paid for the additional cost. After looking at all the other alternatives, they got them to move it to another location in the park, but they basically had design input about how the walls would look and how landscaping would be, but they were pretty much stuck with the general locations relative to the engineering and requirements that they not only provide pressure up the hill toward Bighorn, but apply pressure to specific zones to the east in terms of the neighborhoods of the city. So there were hydraulic requirements that set where they go. But they had aesthetic review. ' Commissioner Tschopp asked if this plan were approved, what the procedure would be in the future if the City expanded the park or other facilities in the � park. Mr. Winklepleck said that anything that came in beyond this, say in ten years from now and the �esidents want something, it would then go back through the public hearing process like this one, so it would go through Planning Commission and City Council. Chairperson Lopez noted that there were two gates, one at the bottom of the hill and one at the top, and he asked who had access and opened and closed those gates. Mr. Winklepleck said that CVWD owns 55 feet west of the Palm Valley Storm Channel that they essentially have all control on. Any access across there was with their permission. They have control and are responsible for it. Mr. Drell said that historically they didn't have a problem with other people using it as long as their access to it is not impaired. Chairperson Lopez said that if they go across Thrush Street Bridge, take a right-hand turn there is a gate right there. He asked who has the ability to open and close that gate. Mr. Drell said right now it was unlocked, but technicatly it was CVWD's gate. When the channel was built they basically agreed that all the existing parcels could use their access road as they had histo�ically to get to their property. Since that portion of the road between that gate and those homes that were near the park and church, there was no property that needed access now. � 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 There was a gate at the bottom near their water tank so for whatever reason ""� they had gated off this section since there was no public need at this time to use it. Chairperson Lopez said that if this park was approved and they cross Thrush Street Bridge there and take a right-hand turn, th at gate would always be open, but it would be closed in the evening. Mr. Winklepleck said that was what they were looking for. If they didn't give their approval, they would then have to construct the access road to the parking area co mpletely on the city's site, which would be approximately 30 feet into the natural area. Staff thought they would give their approval. In the past in other locations they had been willing to turn over maintenance of certain items i n return for access. Commissioner Campbell asked for clarification that Mr. Winklepleck said that CVWD would agree to widen the road 20 feet. Mr. Win klepleck clarified that the road was currently between 20 and 24 feet wide, 24 in average. The full right-of-way was 55 feet. What they would be looking for was approval to go in and construct the small parking lot on their property. In that one general location the City would be widening it and matching it up with the natural area as much as possible, approximately 20 feet. Commiss ioner Campbell asked if that would eliminate the need to outline the parking lot with the palm logs. Mr. Winklepleck said that the reason for the palm logs was two fold. One to � define the parking area so that people weren't just parking wherever they wanted and, two, to hopefully keep some vehicles off the park site. Commissioner Campbell noted that the palm logs deteriorate very badly. Mr. Winklepleck didn't agree and indicated that the palm logs at the Living Desert had been there quite a while. Commissioner Campbell agreed that they have been there quite a while and they were deteriorating. That was unsightly and so were the new ones. Mr. Winklepleck said that staff was trying to find something natural or some non fence type item and non concrete curb. Something along those lines that would fit in more naturally. Commissioner Campbell noted that there were large boulders out there right now and suggested outlining the parking lot with boulders instead of using the palm logs. Mr. Winklepleck agreed that they could look at using boulders to outline the parking lot, but the problem was with the remainder of the park site. They were talking about almost two linear miles and the cost of boulders to outline the park would be extreme. Commissioner Campbell said she wasn't talking about outlining the park and that it could be left just as it is, open space, and just put the boulders around the parking lot. Mr. Winklepleck thought the problem with that was if they left it open with no sort of barrier there would be quite a few off road vehicles and there was already an issue with that. � � 18 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2007 ��.. They were looking at some sort of compromise to keep it natural as well as provide a barrier to limit the majority of those off road vehicles. Commissioner Jonathan noted that there was a separately delineated parking lot. He said it looked like it would be possible to have three or four car parking areas every 100 yards or 50 yards just off the road like some state parks and asked if staff had looked at that option as opposed to creating a full parking lot. He noted that there was quite a length of straight road, so on the west side it would be possible to do some rectangular cutouts with logs or boulders for three or four cars at a time for 90 degree parking to be spread out. Mr. Winklepleck said that was something staff could definitely look at. Commissioner Jonathan thought that would be less intrusive. He said it was a long distance from the parking (ot to the edge of the park and if it was done along the road, it spread people out and would create a less intensive use and would be more practical. Mr. Winklepleck said that design wise that wouldn't be a problem. They had plenty of room to work with there and were willing to look at alternatives and that made sense. Mr. Drell said they could move that section. They already concluded that initially they probably don't need 36 spaces, but maybe half that amount. Spaces could be added later if ` necessary. Commissioner Jonathan indicated that staff was talking about improving and expanding the road, he requested clarification that staff wasn't talking about paving it. Mr. Winklepleck said they were talking about not making it stand out from the natural area. For access to the parking lot they were looking at a couple of things. One was paving with chip seal similar to the BLM Visitor Center where it was a more natural color or taking the existing natural dirt/gravel and combining it with some sort of binder and eliminating or minimizing the dust. Definitely not black top. Commissioner Jonathan indicated it would have more of a state park feel as opposed to a civic center park. Mr. Winklepleck agreed. He noted that this was the entrance to the Santa Rosa National Monument. Commissioner Jonatha n asked for confirmation that the rest of the park other than what had been delineated for restroom and picnic areas wou�d be left in a naturally maintained state similar to the Ironwood Park section that was natural desert. Mr. Winklepleck said that was correct. They were looking at cleaning up certain locations and possibly adding some Palo Verdes or mesquite trees similar to Ironwood Park. Commissioner Campbell asked what the plans were for providing more parking at Cahuilla Park. Mr. Drell said they would probably be adding eight or nine spaces with the construction of the pumping station which was being pushed � 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � as close to that road as ossible. There still remained about 25 feet between � P the road and the wall of the pumping station that they would grade, so the existing four spaces would extend down the road and there would be eight or nine more spaces. Commissioner Campbell asked if there were any plans for a new restroom there at all. Mr. Winklepleck said that at this time, no. There were a couple of things that the Parks and Recreation Commission were looking at at their next meeting. There was some concern about the picnic area, the trash can and the condition of the picnic table. They were looking at defining it a little more and maybe putting in a picnic pavilion and a real trash can. The bathroom issue hadn't really come up until this point. Typically they would respond to requests on existing parks. If they were to put this park in now, they would most likely add a restroom to it because it was an active site with the tennis courts. Commissioner Campbell indicated they had these tennis courts and picnic areas and there were no adequate restrooms for people picnicking or playing tennis. Mr. Winklepleck said he didn't disagree and noted that this park has been there since probably city incorporation. But it was being looked at. Commissioner Finerty asked if he was also looking at a new water founta in with a cooler. Mr. Winklepleck concurred. Commissioner Tschopp asked for clarification that what the Planning �i Commission was being asked to approve didn't include specific plantings or where the parking lot would go. Mr. Winklepleck said that the commission would be approving the location of the parking lot. The landscaping could be brought back but it would be in conju nction with the City's Landscape Manager. The idea was not to over plant or under plant. They didn't want a forest out there but in key areas they wanted to upgrade. Commissioner Tschopp said that considering some of the commission comments including the palm logs and perhaps breaking up the parking lot, he wondered if it necessitates it coming back or what the exact procedure would be. Mr. Drell said that the commission would be making a recommendation to the City Council. If the recommendation was to not have palm logs or if the parking was to be broken up, that would be the recommendation. Mr. Winklepleck said that he would be willing to bring back as an informational item whatever comes out of this. Commissioner Campbell asked for clarification on what would be included in the picnic area, how many tables, barbecues like for the 4th of July. Mr. Winklepleck said that they were looking at two or three picnic tables, a couple 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � of trash cans under existing trees and maybe sorne additional trees, but no barbecues. It was basically a trail head and that was what they wanted it used as. Chairperson Lopez indicated that the public heari ng was still open. He had several request to speak cards and asked Mr. Leonard Stuessel to address the commission. MR. LEONARD STUESSEL addressed the commission. He said he represented ihe Vista Paseo Homeowners Association as their President. He reiterated fihat he was not notified. His address is 134 Vista Royal in Palm Desert. When they looked at this park, it looked okay to a degree. But the problem they have is that there are only a few people in this hill area and as he understood it they were the ones that asked that the parking be moved further north. He said there was a parking spot called temporary parking at the Thrush Street Bridge. They were suggesting that it stay there and make that the permanent parking lot. Because there were a lot of houses as well as all of Vista Paseo, 87 homes in the area. They had two major concerns if they were put into just two categories. They have an environmental issue � which incorporated a lot of things including dust, trash, and noise. The second issue is security. He said that there is an opening that he stepped off on Sunday after church and it is 72 feet wide and there were some rocks put in but they were so small that regular people could move them. There was a gate that wouldn't stop anything. On the other side is the main mouth opening for a road that goes all the way up and into the new park. There were vehicles already going up and down there because there were no gates to stop them. One of the problems they have are four-wheeled vehicles traveling this road at high speeds, motorcycles and so forth and the police department who had been called several times said it wasn't on their priority list. He wasn't complaining about it he was just stating facts. On the other side of the wash was a trail for people to walk. He pointed out the location of the Vista Paseo wall and there were 18 homes there. That constituted a new security area problem because they already had people jumping over the wall and thefts in that area. They were afraid that more traffic on either side of this would cause more security issues than they already have. He noted that coming off that mountain were some strong winds and any dust created by either loosening up the area or �.► 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � vehicles running up and down the road would all come to those area � homes. They wanted the commission to consider not having the road open for vehicles to move around. He said that they have sent a letter to the Coachella Valley Water District already and they would like to have this shut off because when people park and go through these trails, they would send someone down to pick up the cars and would move back to pick up the passengers. The gate that was talked about earlier at the Thrush Bridge was not only open, it was broken open. There was another gate that was open all the time. There were some problems with both environmental issues, dust, trash and so forth, as well as security. They were asking for the commission's consideration to think this over again. They weren't against the park. Their purpose was to try and control the security, dust and debris that could be created. If the parking lot was moved up further, it would also cut down on some of the dust and noise for the other community. He said he didn't think anyone from that project was present, but they had a lot of people present from the Vista Paseo Homeowners Association that were really interested. MS. DORI CREE, 47-205 South Cliff Road in Palm Desert, � complimented the Planning Department and Mr. Winklepleck on the new site plan for the park. She thought the parking lot near the trail head was more logical. The gentleman who just spoke had concerns because they have homes at the north end. She said she owns 20 acres adjoining the park so she was of course very interested in seeing what happened at the southerly end of ihe park, which was in direct opposition to the gentleman who just spoke. I n her letter to the Planning Commission, she suggested that perhaps they could look at the two parks as one and just have one parking lot down at the Cahuilla Hills Park and eliminate the traffic along the channel and make the whole channel area the last gentleman referred to as a jogging, bicycling trail and have all of the cars park at the Cahuilla Hills Park. If that wasn't possible, she liked the location and size of the new parking lot. The other thing she was opposed to was that there was now a multi use trail around the entire park and she was hoping that could be eliminated because it goes right in front of her property and she already has one home there at 47-400 South Cliff Road. She lives there so she � sees what happens. Most of the people jog along the channel and don't go into the interior for their daily exercise. When the hikers come they � � 2 2 ,� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 �` would use the trails down at the south end of the park. Therefore she would recommend that the multi use trail be eliminated. She didn't feel it was needed given the fact that they have the entire channel to jog and bicycle along. She observed the temporary parking lot on Easter Sunday because a lot of people thought that the church would be using it and there wasn't one car in the parking lot on Easter Sunday. She also commented on the palm logs. Easter morning she went on a hike. She belongs to the Coachella Valley Hiking Club and they started out at the Living Desert and she really got to see what the palm logs look like after they have deteriorated. She said she had photographs and they were very unsightly. They looked awful after a few years. She agreed with Commissioner Campbell who suggested using boulders. She didn't think they would have to buy them or import them. That area was full of rocks and boulders and she felt it would be easy. Mr. Drell said that if perhaps they removed every single boulder on the property and made it smooth like a golf course there might be enough, but she would be surprised at what little distance boulders went when laying them end to end. `� Ms. Cree said that the palm logs definitely did not keep the off road vehicles from using that area. They pull right up against them and lower their loading ramps and wheel off their three-wheelers right over the palm logs. It didn't act as a deterrent. In summary, she said that if they had to have two parki ng lots, she thought the size and location of the new one was better, but would prefer one bigger parking lot at the Cahuilla Hills site. They could still access the trails and would still be able to get rid of the vehicular traffic along the channel. She wanted to see the multi use trail in the interior eliminated and keep the joggers and bicyclers going along the channel. Another planning commissioner had said that they were surprised that they didn't hear from more of the property owners up above, but she didn't think they weren't really impacted by this like she is because her property is right up against the ' park. The other people were high and above the park, so they weren't really impacted as much as she was. MR. CALVIN CREE, 47-400 South Cliff Road, pointed out the location of his house. He also noted the location of three properties owned by his mother, Dori, and he owns the five-acre parcel identified as �-•► 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 temporary parking, and his mother owned two other properties there as "'� well. He was particularly concerned about safety in this area. When the Homme family owned the property, they had it posted with no trespassing signs. It was understood by the public that it was an open space desert but was someone's property. Now just over the past month he has noticed a significant increase in people using and loitering in this area after dusk. From a security standpoint he was very concerned. He noted that in today's Desert Sun, Mayor Ferguson as one of his primary objectives for the city of Palm Desert was to continue acquiring land west of Highway 74. This area was obviously within his scope of acquisition. He also pointed out that the City's primary objective was to acquire property in this area so that it would not be developed. Now they are pursuing a concept of developing a park, which he considered a contradiction. He also pointed out that the map was a little misleading. There was a little hillside/protrusion in the middle of the lower flat desert area. It was shown as stopping at the property line. He said it actually continued into his family's property. The future access road or multi use trail was jogged out and he thought that was some creative surveying or engineering. He realized that these were federal land grants initially and that there were prescriptive easements along the five-acre boundary borders, but when this property � became incorporated into the city of Palm Desert, the easements along the borders of these five-acre federal land grants were no Ionger applicable and he wanted the City to reconsider the location of the future access road and the multi use trail. He said he liked the new location for the parking lot. He wanted to see as much of this 27-acre area remaining open space instead of being developed into a park as possible. At the very least the properties to the south of the Thrush Street Bridge remain unimproved and eliminate the multi use trail and keep it pristine open space desert to serve as a buffer area between the public area at the north where the trail head and parking lot was located and the properties that were south of there including the residence he currently occupied. He was all for the plan, he liked the new location of the parking lot, he would like to see the south half of this area remain open space and undeveloped with the elimination of the multi use trail and he would like the reconsideration of the design and engineering of the future access road as it pertains to encroaching onto the two five- acre parcels. 24 r„� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 �" MR. WARREN SLAUGHTER addressed the commission. He said that he and his wife own nine acres across the wash and it was an extension of the Thrush Avenue Bridge. He said they were delighted about the possibility of having a dedicated road there_ He said that they have owned their property for many years and it was very difficult to get financing on a residence when they didn't have a right-of-way over to another right-of-way. He added that he did have a key to the lock which he has had for several years. He said that he didn't violate the trust that was placed in him and he has never gone through that gate where he didn't get out and close the lock, no matter which way he was going. They did that because that was how they got over to their property. He was also glad that there were comments about these vehicles and motorcycles. It seemed like there were more around and he knew that putting up signs didn't do any good, but he was wondering if everyone affected would say that they have never and would never g ive those drivers permission to drive on their property if the police department might feel that trespassings were in fact taking place. He thought the people taking Thrush Road along to the right, there were sorne pretty good building sites there and he was sure that they too would be delighted with the possibi lity of a dedicated road in � front of them. He said they were remiss in n ot telling them about two moves that they made. They didn't have his address and he didn't learn about any of this until they arrived today, but that had been rectified and the City now had his correct address. H e said his current address is 21 Rue Cannes in Newport. MR. BILL GRIFFIN, 161 Vista Paseo, said that he home was in the center. None of his property adjoined the canal. He wanted the commission to know that they have called the police department many times at 11 :00 p.m. because of the motorcycles going up and over those hills at night. By the time the police get there the motorcycles are already gone. But they have been there two years and they have had at least 15 incidents at night with these motorcycles He thought they must be coming across the access above. He said that dust was a problem. The wind came from San Diego and right up over Bighorn and down. Any movement of that dirt created more dust. He didn't care what anyone else said, he thought the parking lot should be paved and the driveway should be paved. There was no way they could stop dust and if they were going to have 25 or 30 cars a day both in and out that � 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � i was going to create a lot of dust. All of those people in those "'� apartment buildings were affected by the dust and for people that moved here for health reasons dust was a big probtem. It was bad enough when they had wind storms, so he did think that the idea of breaking up the parking lot into smaller parcels was good and he also thought they need to have a chain link fenced gate and a gate that could be locked at night. There was a lot of activity up there. Drugs, kids up there at night, a couple of times there were bon fires up there at night, so they really needed to look at that problem. Every time they have had a problem, and one time there was a major problem with a big fire and by the time the police came and got up there they were gone. They definitely needed a locked gate for safety. He said that everyone that has been along the Vista Paseo wall has had intrusions into their property. He didn't thin k there was one homeowner in Vista Paseo that hasn't had people come over the wall or had things removed. He knew that people all behind hirn have had patio furniture and things taken over that wall. He thought it was a problem that needed to be addressed and they didn't need more problems. He was in the center, but he knew that the owners along the wall have had real problems so he fihought they needed some kind of security system at night. � � MR. RODNEY JOHNSON, 150 Vista Paseo, said he was a member of the homeowners association. He said that his property is directly on the channel side. It was true what Mr. Griffin just said that kids jump over the fence occasionally. Most of them have had to raise the wall just to keep the eye level out because the typical wall level isn't adequate to keep people from looking in or crawling in because of the wash area which was a trail area and continuation of Edgehill on the south side near the Baptist Church where Edgehill goes over and it was raised up higher than the property line so they had a good view into the lots. They could come over the wall quite easily and frequently did. They have also had rocks thrown into their pool. Their neighbors left out a box of chocolates for their pool man because he comes very early in the morning and it was not there come morning. He feared having the park, although it looked like a nice idea and sounded like a good idea, and thought it could cause a lot of problems. Already it was a teenage hangout. Kids have beer parties. Those of them that walk in the area notice that there are beer bottles, some bro ken, often times thrown into the channel where they break. As freq uently as it was � � 26 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 ``� cleaned up it became rather di rty and messy quite rapidly. He was afraid the park would encourage more usage by the kids who could do a lot of damage, especially if it wasn't locked up at night. That was the primary thing. If it went through, he felt it was essential that it be locked. Presently the bridge or gate by Thrush and the gate by Edgehill that goes over by the Baptist church were not locked. They could just lift it up and move it over. Once in a while it was locked, but frequently it wasn't. The one by Thrush was never locked. Often times it was open and laying on the ground. He used to live in Los Angeles in the Mulholland corridor between Laurel and Cold Water Canyons. They had a big problem when the Santa Monica Mountains National Conservancy put in a number of view points and cars would pull in and look at the wonderful scenery over Fryman Canyon and a number of others. Eventually the park service had to install gates that they would lock at night and open in the morning. There were a lot of beer and pot parties especially on weekend nights. It became a major problem. Lots of broken bottles and trash and things of that nature. He was concerned about the motorcycle noise. The motorcycles and atv's and suv's go through there on the west side of the channel right now. They create a lot of dust and pollution. Sometimes noise late a night. He said there � was apparently a former home site that burned down a number of years ago and there was a lone palm tree that people liked to hike to. He said it was a wonderful hike. The only problem was that suv's go up there and motorcycles. They have seen the lights from motorcycles at night. It created a bit of a problem for people who wished to go to bed early or those who didn't wish to see dust and pollution or hear the noise. He said he was a little concerned about the restroom situation as well. He wasn't sure how many of them were aware that there are some homeless people who live in the foothills next to the wash. They frequently walk the area and go down to Target to use the restroom. If a restroom was located in the park, it could become a very convenient bathroom and a little scary to any family that may wish to use it. Some of these people are mentally disturbed, not just homeless. Homeless in some sense in that some didn't wish to go to a shelter, but wanted to be on the streets on their own and created an element that was a little dangerous. He thanked the commission for their time and hoped they would consider some of the issues brought up. � 27 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 ,� � MS. MARIE BOCHNEWICH, an attorney with the firm of Guralnick & '�'� Guilliland. She said that the commission had their letter. Their address is 74-399 Highway 1 1 1 , Suite M in Palm Desert. She said she wouldn't reiterate the contents of the letter or the excellent comments that they had heard from the residents of Vista Paseo. She thought they had probably gathered that this area has a little bit of a free-for-all element in that it was open planned, uncontrolled, the gates there didn't seem to have any system for keeping the wash channel area secure. They had concerns about increased pedestrian traffic and off road vehicle traffic as this park is improved. Not that they were opposed to the park. The Association encouraged converting this from residential use which it was currently zoned for to open space/park. It was just a matter of fine tuning it so that they think through how they could channel use of this park in such a way that it wouldn't create additional negative noise and dust impacts, attract criminal vagrant type elements. She said she didn't want to over emphasize that but their residents' concerns and experiences of crime in this area were genuine, both from calling about noise nuisances from atv's and motorcycle vehicles to actual break-ins, burglaries and robberies. She said she had a couple of ; , concerns. Some of the homeowners mentioned that they do want the � parking lot to be locked and secured. She thought there was a system in place where someone from the Parks and Recreation facility could come in during the morning and lock it at night. Dawn to dusk. If they separated the parking into a broken up three spaces every couple of yards scenario as discussed earlier, she didn't think they would have the ability to control parking or the opening and closing of the park. She would oppose that. As mentioned in her letter, the Association was against moving the parking lot closer to V ista Paseo. That would create all the noise and rumpus from people coming and going throughout the day closer to the high density residential area of Vista Paseo and the neighboring community. They would m uch prefer to see the parking area stay where it is and hope that well marked trails leading people to the trail head would get pedestrians out of their cars and going in the right direction. They also had a concern, and she wasn't sure and would like to talk more with staff about this, but they were concerned about pedestrians taking a short cut by trying to get to the trail head once this was more formalized by cutting through the wash either to be picked up at the end of a hike or just to sneak up to the furthermost trail. They wanted to decrease pedestrian traffic along the wash and :� 2 8 ,� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 �.. channel, not encourage more of it. To that end they would seek the City's assistance in encouraging CVWD to do whatever it takes to get the gates beefed up. They probably needed a lot stronger gates. Even if they are locked, ihese gates weren't a serious barrier to people that wanted to get up there and motor around day and night. She was sure CVWD would be open to some gentle encouragement from the City to beef that up, to lock it and make it accessible only to emergency vehicles and actual CVWD utility use. That was what it was for. That was really all it should be used for. She hoped the City could help them with that. They had addressed that separately but hadn't heard back from CVWD. With regard to the restroom, she understood that it wasn't planned to be built immediately, but to the extent that there would be one, they would prefer that it be in another location in the park and not so close to their residents so that if it attracted teenagers at night or what other people might be hanging around, they would rather have that noise in a further part of the park. They would certainly expect that it would be locked at night and opened in the morning and that the park be patrolled and specifically that the bathroom be patrolled by police or some kind of Parks and Recreation `, personnel to make sure it isn't being used for drug use, teenagers drinking, vagrants camping out in the bathroom, etc. Those were their thoughts. They do support the park. It is a great thing for the city to be able to add this for the citizens of Palm Desert, but they would like it fine tuned from a security standpoint. Mr. Drell said that in response to Mr. Cree, the easements that he spoke of are federal patents that were inherent and recorded on each of those parcels. The federal government created those and they still exist and they are public easements for public purposes. When the city incorporated they did not eliminate those easements. That was why they were showing that future access road. He said they didn't propose to build that access road, but they were just showing that the development of the park did not preclude those easements. As far as the city was concerned, the ability to build that road exists but the city wasn't going to build it. That would be up to the owners of those properties if and when they wanted to gain access and build their properties. Relative to the multi use trail, when there was a public site like this, unless they built a trail they would end up with trails all over the place. Building the trail and making it a very obvious path of least resistance preserved the open space, otherwise people would create the trails if it wasn't `"' 2 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � built. Peopie would tend to stay out of the undisturbed areas if the trail was � clearly marked. In terms of why they changed the location of the parking lot, it wasn't merely to address the concerns of the property owners on the south side. After they went and looked and saw the existing temporary parking lot sitting right in the center of that property, it was a very prominent developed feature. That degraded the natural nature of the park. The City's goal was to provide parking but make it as least obtrusive and as least intrusive into the natural area of the park as possible. Relative to the picnic area, people would choose to congregate where it is most comfortable. Where it was most comfortable in this area was where they have always congregated - in that area against the hill where the trees are. The location of the parking lot, which could be moved any where along that road, but he agreed that any place it went they should make it a dust free surface. Any place they invite people to drive on that road should be a dust free surface. Again, it could be moved any where on that place it was just a matter of how far people would have to walk to get where they want to go, which was the picnic area where the trees are. That motivated this new design as well as addressing the specific concerns. They tried to come up with a location that made the most sense for the site. , 8 Mr. Winklepleck said he had no doubt that there was a dust issue and that the � majority of it was caused by the road. There might be some dust because of the vacant properties, but the primary reason for this park was to remain open space. They planned to disturb as little of the property as possible. Where it had been disturbed, they wanted to revegetate it and renaturalize it. Staff believed that would limit the amount of dust from this property. If in the future dust was still an issue from this property, they could look at mitigating it with some sort of soil cement or something that would harden or bind the top surface, the lighter particulate matter to keep it from getting up into the air. As far as vehicular access along CVWD's road as well as the restroom, it was their intention and could be a condition, and it was standard at all of the parks, that the restrooms are locked when the park closes and in this case the park closes at dusk. There were people on City staff that opened the facilities in the morning and Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District locked them. As far as the gate access, they could work with CVWD to beef u p the gate to make sure that they have access to it and that we could lock it. They wanted it open for hikers and people don't hike at night. As far as the park, development of a park versus open space, the majority of the site would remain open space. Park might not be the right word. It was more of a trail head. They didn't anticipate a great deal of activity on this particular site, so � � � 30 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 �` essentially what they saw was what they were going to get. Open space. He thought the noise issues were primarily with vehicles including motorcycles, atv's and such running up and down the CVWD road and the trail that would lead out of this particular facility. When they got to the trail project, one of the things they should look at was re-engineering or revising the trail to limit access to atv's and there were ways to do that. He said there would most likely be an increase in noise on the site. When they brought in additional people, there would noise. Staff didn't anticipate that the noise of the people using the facility would be increased above the standard ambient noise level. If there was noise after dark, as an official park site one of the directions to the Sheriff's Department would be for them to go out and patrol the site and respond to calls. They didn't want issues at this site any more than the residents around it. They wanted this site to be one the city could be proud of. He felt they have been successful with other parks in the city. The one thing about bringing in additional people to the site was that bringing in additional people wasn't necessarily a bad thing. Where they have certain unsavory characters using the park, when people come in who want to use the park, those unsavory ones usually go elsewhere. That's what happened at Palm Desert Country Club Park. The City has had very good experience with � that. They were willing to look at mitigation measures with the gates and working with CVWD to minimize the dust and any impacts on adjacent property owners. Commissioner Finerty said she understood Mr. Winklepleck's reference to Palm Desert Country Club Park, but there really weren't going to be any amenities or active things to do at this park, so she didn't think there was going to be a great deal of usage by the residents in the area to drive the other people away. After listening to the property owners and the homeowners association, she wasn't hearing that people want the park. Mr. Winklepleck said the park wasn't just for the people in that area. This might be one of our only trails open to the general public from January through June, which was lambing season. All of the other trails which were now under voluntary closure might not be under voluntary closure much longer. They might be under permanent closure during those times. Short of developing an official facility where people can hike out of and controlling it, people would continue hiking in areas where they aren't supposed to be hiking. So staff was working closely with BLM, Fish and Game, and Fish and Wildlife to try and develop this site and these trails to accommodate people in this area as well as the general public. He agreed that Palm Desert Country Club and this facility were two � 31 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � different uses. The main difference was that there would be more people at "'� Palm Desert Country Club because it is an active facility. But there was also night use of that facility. Staff felt that the additional day use at this location as an official park, the Sheriff would be directed to go to this facility and they would respond. Commissioner Finerty said she knew the Sheriff was directed to go, but the reality was that when the Sheriff was called they more than likely would have more important things to do and by the time they actually show up, usually the intruders are gone. Mr. Drell said that when they opened Ironwood Park, before they got Ironwood Park on the Sheriff's patrol, they had a problem at Ironwood Park with kids hanging out there late at night. They got complaints from the neighborhood. They instructed the Sheriff not just to go up there responding to calls, but to show up there periodically as part of their patrol. Once they started doing that the problem disappeared. He said that this is a regional facility. Just like the Civic Center Park. If they had asked the residents of Monterey Country Club, they were not in favor of those ballfields. They didn't ask for them and they felt they were intrusive upon their peace and quiet. But it is a regional facility that serves a regional, although relatively low level, desire for hiking trails in the hillside. Whenever they do a regional facility, to the greatest extent possible they try to mitigate � the impact of that facility on the adjacent neighborhood. The purpose of that : was not to serve that neighborhood's need essentially. They initially asked if "'r they wanted anything and they said no. The existence of the park wasn't to serve this neighborhood, but to service a regional need. Chairperson Lopez noted that the soccer park was a relatively new area with restrooms and picnic areas and gates that open and close. He asked about those gates. Mr. Winklepleck said that the only time the soccer park gates were closed was if they had some major field renovations. They were roll across gates and he thought they had only closed th em four or five times since the facility opened. Chairperson Lopez asked if there had been any problems in that park. Mr. Winklepleck said there had been some minor vandalism to some of the existing equipment, but considering the number of people that go there, the amount of occurrences have been minor. He couldn't think of anything major. There had been some graffiti and one of the large concrete balls being hit and rolling down into the field. Mr. Drell said that the issue of security was one where the folks that were intending to engage in criminal or undesirable activity wouldn't be dissuaded by whether it was public or private property. Those were the people who use it now_ All of those things exist now and those folks have never respected that the property was privately 3 2 ..r� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 `.. owned by the Hommes. The difference now was that the City owned it and when the City invests in it as a city facility, then the obligation became the City's to make sure it is safe and reflects the level of quality and security that the other facilities reflect. The fact that it was now pu blic, there was a greater chance that all of those problems that had been id entified would be addressed because it is now ours. Chairperson Lopez closed the public hearing and asked for commission comments or action. Commissioner Finerty said that there were a number of issues including dust, palm logs, the parking lot location, the number of spaces, if the trail should be along the channel or property lines, the restrooms, the gates need to be beefed up and locked, there was an issue with noise, and the only thing she could support tonight was the change of zone to open space rather than a park. Mr. Winklepleck explained that the open space zoning designation allowed for parks as permitted uses. The soccer park was zoned open space. Commissioner Finerty said that they were being asked to approve a change of zone from hillside planned residential to park. Mr. Winklepleck said that was � the general plan designation. Commissioner Finerty said she was suggesting that they just make it open space with no park. She didn't see a great need for a park. All she was hearing was that there are a group of hikers that apparently need a trail. Otherwise, they would make their own trail. That was the only real need that exists out there along with a few places for them to park. Commissioner Jonathan said he heard the testimony a little differently. He heard just about everyone say that they were in favor of the park, but they had certain concerns. He also respected staff's comments that this would be a regional facility. Of course the greatest response would be from the ones affected, which was as it should be. He was glad that they were here. They weren't going to hear from people living across Fred Waring. He saw this as a tremendous and wonderful opportunity to create and preserve open space within the city's borders. The real issue was how to design it in a way to create the least impact to surrounding residents. This kind of use was preferable to a multi residential development, which it was currently zoned for. Some of what they heard, not unexpectedly, was that the property owners on the south want the parking lot on the north; the property owners on the north want the parking lot on the south. His solution was to split the difference and "' 33 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � � create the parking lot along the perirneter road. He thought that was the "� perfect solution. If they ended up with four parking space lots along the CVWD road as miniature cutouts, he thought that was a more practical plan and a better place to put cars because that was a very long park. If they put the parking lot at one end or the other that seemed impractical. That was number one in terms of the design. Number two was the multi use trail. He thought it made sense. When people see a trail, they intrinsically get the message to walk along the trail and not off of it. Listening to the comments though, he thought the trail could be moved from the exterior maybe not entirely to the interior, but making more use of that interior area because with the trail just on the outside there was a great temptation to ignore the trail and walk across the park. He thought they could bring it inside and possibly remove some of the more intense use such as people walking and talking further away from residences. As issue number three, Commissioner Jonathan said that he didn't have a problem with picnic area per se, but he liked the Ironwood Park concept where there were some scattered tables along the trail. He wouldn't even call them picnic areas. It seemed if they spread out the use instead of putting everyone in one corner that they were making better use of that open space. He was talking about four or five tables scattered within the park itself. In summary, he saw this as an opportunity to create and preserve � open space. He would like the design elements to address the issues of the residenrts which he thought were understandable and valid and he thought there was a way to accomplish that. Commissioner Campbell said that what she would like to see done was to first take care of Cahuilla Hills Park. If they were going to have 12 or 13 parking spaces there and new picnic tables and restrooms, there was no need to have a parking lot or restrooms in this area. She would like to see it as is, open space without anything on it. If for any reason they needed to have a multi use trail, if people wanted to hike they could walk from Cahuilla Hills Park and go up the trail. She would be in favor of sprucing up the park and having the 12 or 13 parking spaces there and leaving this area open space as is without anything on it. She also thought that they should take care of the CVWD gates though and the locks. Commissioner Tschopp thought that this was a lot of land not to have any parking. He liked Commissioner Jonathan's suggestion of trying to spread some parking out similar to what they do at national parks at trail heads. The problems that exist right now were absent the park. He thought they would � '3 { 34 �„� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � continue as long as there is land there and since there was going to be land there whether it was developed or not, they needed to address the problems. The alternatives included a housing development which he didn't think was too exciting and keeping it completely open with no use to the public, which he didn't think would be acceptable to other residents of Palm Desert. He felt they owed it to the taxpayers to give them some type of access. He heard that people weren't opposed to the park and he was glad to hear that because when visiting the great cities of the world, a lot of them were defined by their parks. He was glad to see the City taking a proactive approach at trying to put more parks in. He did want to see the City make a real commitment to the safety, the noise and so forth generated by the people who would use the park. They weren't talking about the ones using the park legally, but the ones that were breaking the law today. They needed to put up barriers to keep the atv's, the suv's, and motorcycles out of there. Having some experience with Ironwood Park, it was exactly as Mr. Drell said. Initially there were some problems with Ironwood Park. The teenagers found out there was a park there. Within a couple of months of calling the police and getting the City's commitment, the problem went away completely and they actually have a better area now than before when it was vacant. So he did believe that the � City would address the safety concerns and that the police would make a commitment to do that. Regarding dust and no ise, the City needed to address that with some type of product on the road to keep the dust down and they were talking pedestrians walking th�ough the park, not vehicles, so he felt that if done properly, the trails would not increase the dust and perhaps might even mitigate some of it that exists right now. He would like to see the City take a different look at the palm logs. He didn't think they were exciting and weren't back to nature. He thought it might be a case where they City could incorporate some of the citizens' concerns into a committee, an oversight group of individuals, that as the park was developed those people could meet periodically and respond to the City with their concerns and things they see going on. But he believed with the City's commitment, we could see a very good park there. Chairperson Lopez also concurred with Comrnissioner Jonathan in that they have a great opportunity to develop something that they could all be proud of. But it needed to be developed very carefully. He was very concerned about the accessibility of the homes along the wash to crime. He said that was of great concern whether there was a park or not and needed to be tooked at sometime in the future. On that note, the access to this area with the gates, � 35 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 . access to the road, dust mitigation on that road and getting down to the parking area, he liked Commissioner Jonathan's idea of spreading that parking out a little bit and doing away with a formal parking Iot_ The parking lot there now was really an eyesore. He thought it would be nice to put it back to its natural state. Regarding the multi use trail, he agreed that a meandering trail through the middle would be good. Also to the south if the trail could end at the hill there, it would give a bit of a buffer to the residents in that area or at least access to that road. They could still keep it open space, but he wasn't sure how they would treat that or access to that area. It was very concerning to hear the comments regarding the use of this area by motorcycles at night. He hoped that as they proceed down the road on creating what would be a great opportunity, hopefully this would be discouraged. He had seen it happen at Ironwood Park and he lived in that area for a while. He was around the soccer park a lot in the early hours and didn't think there was a problem there. As they develop this area, he was hoping that a lot of these problems would decrease. He wasn't sure about the crime in the area and felt they needed to take a look at that since it was a whole other issue. It was very concerning in that area. He felt they should look at the proposed park as a trail head park. 4 It is used for people who like to go hiking. He thought that was how it would remain. There would still be joggers, walkers and people going down the � pathways north and south along the wash, but it would open up an opportunity for people to access the trail head and the trails up into the hills. The alternative was a residential area and that wasn't an exciting prospect. He felt the plan needed to be fine tuned a little bit and he wanted some direction from the commission. Commissioner Finerty said that if they all felt there were existing issues that needed to be resolved and Commissioner Jonathan thought about spreading out the parking lot, they talked about the multi use trail moving to a different site, getting more security on the gates. She thought they were all in agreement with open space. She didn't know if anyone was in favor of the palm logs. They need some type of barriers against the atv's, suv's and motorcycles. She was wondering if a continuance would be appropriate to try and work out as Commissioner Jonathan indicated the design issue until they have more of a level of comfort that the concerns that were expressed were addressed. Commissioner Jonathan thought the issues had been summarized very wel{ and that they needed to be addressed. If staff was also in concurrence, he felt � � � 36 ri MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 �r. a continuance would be appropriate. In the long run he hoped they would have happy neighbors and a better product. Commissioner Campbell said she would also like staff to bring back the plans for the other park so they don't duplicate what should be in one park. Commissioner Jonathan thought that was reasonable, but in driving and walking the area, he didn't see the two parks as being directly related because there was a great distance between the two. For example, he would be concerned if there was a restroom at Cahuilla Park that was supposed to be usable by someone that would be picnicking at the south end of this park. That had to be over a 30 minute walk. He didn't disagree that there should be a restroom for the tennis facilities, he was just saying that they were two separate parks and he wasn't sure they wanted to link them in terms of limiting for example one restroom facility for the two parks. Mr. Drell said that suggestion would be one to be made to the Parks and Recreation Commission. He agreed that was a separate site and was not before the comrnission at this time. If the Planning Commission wanted to make that suggestion that they look at improving that park, it would go to that commission and staff would report back. � Commissioner Finerty noted that Mr. Winklepleck said that at the next Parks and Recreation Commission meeting some of these suggestions for Cahuilla Park were going to be discussed. She asked if staff could make this an informational item at the next meeting. Mr. Winklepleck agreed and said he would update the Planning Commission at the next meeting. He said they were just going to look at conceptual ideas as to what is needed up there. They knew some specifics like the drinking fountain with cold water and a few other items. He would be glad to bring that back as an information item. Commissioner Tschopp noted that some people mentioned the problem with crime. Having been on the Public Safety Commission, he encouraged the residents to show up to a Public Safety meeting. They typically have two council members sitting on it, Councilman Dick Kelly and the Mayor. He felt that the residents should bring up these issues because they didn't have a park up there yet and there were no facilities up there, but they had problems. He thought those types of issues could be addressed no matter w hat happened on this piece of property. He believed that the City would take their comments and concerns seriously and look at alternatives. �"' 3 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 Chairperson Lopez agreed. He thought they were getting very close and he felt much more comfortable with the concept and asked for a motion of continuance for one month. Chairperson Lopez stated that the public hearing would remain open. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Chairperson Lopez, continuing this matter to May 15, 2001 by minute motion. Motion carried 5- 0. F. Case Nos. PP 01-03 and DA 01-01 - COOK STREET ASSOCIATES, ILC, Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and a precise plan of design for a 16,000 square foot showroom/warehouse building with ancillary office space at the northwest corner of Sheryl Avenue and Cook Street, 42-595 Cook Street. Request also includes approval of a development agreement which will limit uses in the project to those with a parking requirernent of two spaces per 1 ,000 square feet of floor area orless. Mr. Smith noted that commission received a copy of the full set of plans in their packets. The property is 45,700 square feet, vacant and located at the northwest corner of Sheryl Avenue and Cook Street. The property sloped north to south and was currently zoned Office Professional. To the north were two-story apartment buildings and to the west were three single family dwellings that front on the street to the west. To the south is vacant property. To the east across the street is vacant property. The request is for a 16,000 square foot showroom/warehouse building with some ancillary office space. The project would have access frorn two driveways on Sheryl Avenue. The easterly driveway would go into 16 parking spaces and one turn around parking space. The front of the building would be located on the east side facing Cook Street. There would be a second driveway access further west on Sheryl leading to 16 more parking spaces, the trash area at the north end and then five overhead doors where some loading and off loading of vehicles would occur. At the west edge of the property is an existing 20-foot alley that runs between Sheryl and Merle to the north and then three single family ' 38 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 200� �r.. residences. The southerly corner residential unit had its garage on the east corner. The building elevations were as shown. The most prominent feature was a 30-foot high tower element in the center of the Cook Street frontage. There would be a green metal seamed roof feature over the perimeters of the buildings, at least over the east and south perimeters. He indicated that the building elevations and architecture were given preliminary approval by ARC at its March 13 meeting. He stated that while the parking doesn't comply with a typical office standard of four spaces per 1 ,000 square feet, it did comply with the showroom provisions which were two spaces per 1 ,000 square feet. That was the use for which the applicant was applying. The setbacks, particularly from the north and west, were dictated by the zones. To the north would be a 10-foot side yard which was consistent with the apartment site. To the west the OP zone dictated 46 feet, which the project met. The OP zone allows for a wide range of uses, so if they were going to use the uses at the lower end of the parking standard, staff was looking for some long term assurance that the use of the building would stay within the uses at that parking level. Staff felt that showroom usage, art galleries and furniture stores were appropriate parked at two spaces per 1 ,000. He said that they were showrooms generally oriented toward interior design functions. � They took a look of various means of assuring that the long term use would stay within that parking. They looked at rezoning but staff didn't think that was appropriate. Staff came up with the applicant entering into a development agreement with the City that would be recorded against the property so that upon sale it would be there for whoever was purchasing the property to see that they couldn't put in a general office use even though the zoning was office professional. The project as conditioned with its limited uses as outlined on page four of the development agreement would limit uses to art galleries, interior design showrooms, audio visual showrooms, plumbing showrooms, electrical and lighting showrooms, furniture showrooms, ffoor covering showrooms, window treatment showroorns, and other similar uses as determined by Planning Commission to be no more objectionable than those delineated above. If they came up with some use that fit that 9th criteria, then it was possible they might be back here seeking approval of additional use(s). As conditioned, the project would have less traffic than a general office use at around 1 �,500 square feet. They estimated about 96 vehicle trips per day for this facility. General office at about 1 1 ,500 could expect approximately 127 trips. Staff was recommending approval of the application, but it was subject to and only if the development ag reement is adopted so that they have long term assurance that the property would only function pursuant �"� 39 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 to those permitted uses specified. For purposes of CEQA, staff was recommending certification of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. Commissioner Campbell asked if the developer was in favor of signing the development agreement. Mr. Smith said they had numerous conversations and he was aware of staff's concerns and he could address that question. Commissioner Finerty asked to see the rendering with the colors. Commissioner Campbell asked if it was a copper roof. Mr. Smith said it was a green metal roof. Chairperson Lopez asked if the City has entered into a development agreement at any other time as it pertains to a situation similar to this. Mr. Smith said the City has entered into development agreements, but not for a situation like this that he could recall. The more recent ones related to assisted living facilities and affordable units. Chairperson Lopez asked whose responsibility it was to monitor this ten years from now. Mr. Smith said ultimately it was the City's. Ten or 15 years down the line if someone issued a business license for an office use in that location and parking became a problem and the neighborhood started complaining about it, then someone would dig up the file and see that there was mistake made. Mr. Drell said that � with the new computer system and notations on the map, they would try to � have as many fail safe mechanisms to alert any future Certificate of Use that would trigger this. Obviously it was a complication in terms of the enforcement process. Mr. Smith said that on page four he would like to make some modifications to the conditions. Under number eight, the second line would "limit" uses, not "identify" them. Number ten would be replaced with a condition that reads, "That business hours shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 10:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. The City hereby reserves the right to further limit business hours on Saturdays and Sundays should it be demonstrated that the project is creating unexpected noise or other impacts on surrounding residential uses." Chairperson Lopez asked if loading and unloading would be confined to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Mr. Smith said that was correct. Commissioner Finerty asked if there were any other sites within the Office Professional zone that were similar to this where there were roll up doors at 14 feet and more of a warehouse atmosphere. Mr. Smith said the Office Professional he could relate to was located on Monterey and Fred Waring, so � � 40 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 �.. the answer was no. He couldn't think of another area. Commissioner Finerty asked if it would be fair to say that something like this would generally go into the city's Service Industrial zoning. Mr. Smith said there certainly were showroom facilities of this type in the industrial area. He was trying to think if there were any showrooms or art galleries in the OP district. He wasn't aware of any with the overhead doors. Commission Campbell said that on Corporate Way there was an art place with roll up doors. Mr. Smith said that was in the Service Industrial zone. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the property to the south was zoned OP. Mr. Smith said it was zoned single family residential. Mr. Drell indicated that in the past a bowling alley application had been considered for that location. Mr. Greenwood said he would like to amend a Public Works condition on page six, number 15. He wanted to add at the end, "should said district be formed." Mr. Drell said that the justification for the recommendation was that the applicant was proposing a use that was less intensive than what would be permitted under the OP zone, but not explicitly permitted by the OP zone. � They didn't want to change the zone to SI which would allow a bunch of other uses which staff didn't want at this s ite. The C-1 zone would allow a much more intense retail use, so of those three zones as a base zone, OP was the least intensive. That was why they chose to keep it OP. With these restrictions, although allowing some uses that were not explicitly allowed in the OP, the ones that they were allowing were less intensive than those permitted in the OP. That was the line of thought they came up with to arrive at this solution. Chairperson Lopez oaened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. SABBY JONATHAN, 42-620 Caroline Court, Suite 102 in Palm Desert, thanked staff. Being on the other end of the process, he said he had a new found appreciation for their professionalism and he has heard from clients all along how nice the City of Palm Desert is to work in as a developer and he was experiencing it first hand. They are truly helpful, concerned and profess ional and knew what they were doing. So it was a pleasure to work w ith them. To refresh the comrnission's memory, he explained that one and a half to two years ago the prior �"" 41 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � owner came to the City and asked how the commission wouid feel about a retail showroom type of use and got a unanimous reply that it sounded good and it could be appropriate. He said that at that time he had no idea that he would be interested in this property, but upon the subsequent purchase, they decided they wanted to do a retail showroom type of use. They looked at other uses including offices, medical, and they have had numerous offers from gas station operators. But in talking to the neighbors and analyzing the situation they felt that the retail showroom was least intensive and the most appropriate for this corner. There was nothing other than service industrial type uses facing on the Cook Street frontage between Hovley and Fred Waring. That was all there was, so this was cons istent with that. He said they thought they would be coming in with a change of zone request. But the City expressed concern about the type of open-ended use under Service Industrial. They could end up with more intensive, more noisy type uses. They didn't have a problem with the request but wanted to limit the use to certain types of activities that would be a quiet use. He said that was fine. As the applicant, he was letting the commission know that he was open to any way they wanted to do it. They could do it either as a change of zone, a condition of approval, or as a development agreement. He was okay with any and all of the above. Basically they wanted to develop what they were seeing. It was kind of a high scale interior design, maybe like Bath Kitchen Elegance, high end appliances or window coverings. Those types of tenants mostly having to do with interior design and pro bably catering to the high end market. Maybe to the designer trade and to the retail trade. If there was a furniture place, the doors in the back were primarily for loading and unloading furniture. It wasn't an industrial type use door, just access to ihe open storage area. He said they were open to any way the commission wanted to make that happen. He noted that they talked to the surrounding neighbors and had unanimous support. He had letters from all the surrounding neigh bors with the exception of Mr. Simons, who was present. He didn't think he had any opposition. The residential owners signed letters of support. He hoped they did their homework and seemed to have neighborhood support. His architect, Mr. Alan Sanborn, was present and he would go over a couple of technical matters. 42 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � MR. ALAN SANBORN, 1227 South Gene Autry Trail in Palm Springs, said he had a couple of items that needed clarification. Public Works condition number five said that they needed to widen the Cook Street frontage to 43 feet half width to coincide with the existing frontage up and down the �est of Cook Street. Then they had a condition about the overhead utility lines. If they widened the street, the existing utility pole ended up in the middle of the street. There was a concern with timing on those two things happening, the undergrounding and the widening of the street. One possibility was to bond for future street improvements at which time when poles go down, they would widen the street. Or they could come up with some other solutions. It was a concern that those two didn't seem to coexist at the same time. Regarding the 22-foot half street on Sheryl, there was already a 30-foot right-of-way dedication that exists. He believed the existing half-street is 18 feet. Whether the 22 feet was a plan to extend further west to the residential area or if it was some future widening of the street, he suggested that they could participate when the w hole street gets done versus putting in 22 feet now and have it jog back 18 feet at the alley. So he was also concerned about the timing of that issue. Everything ,� else seemed straightforward. Mr. Greenwood said that with regard to the widening on Cook Street it was widening that needed to happen, sooner rather than later, but they have some latitude and would work with the developer. In all likelihood they would need the widening before the undergrounding was ready to happen and in that case they would rather go ahead with the widening now and whatever happened with the utility lines happened. On the Sheryl widening, with the previous proposed commercial project across the street on Sheryl they had required a similar widening to accornmodate the additional traffic that would happen in that area and the additional turning movements. It wasn't planned to go further west into the neighborhood, just in the commercial area. In both cases he felt they needed to stick with building the improvements now. Mr. Drell asked if they would just move the poles over. Mr. Greenwood said that they could move it a number of feet without rewiring the poles, but that was limited to four or five feet. In all likelihood they would install new poles and rewire them. At some later date they would underground thern. They wouldn't be sitting in the middle of the road. `"" 43 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 Commissioner Campbell asked if there was going to be a wall on Cook Street of if there would be landscaping on Cook and then the parking area. Mr. Jonathan said they would shield the parking lot frorn view with a six-foot wall in the center location and there would be landscaping inside and outside the wall as well as against the building. Commissioner Campbell asked about the egress from the parking areas and if they would be able to make left turns on Sheryl from both points. Mr. Greenwood said yes. Commissioner Campbell noted that there was a problem with the other project and they weren't allowed to make a right turn but had to go all the way around. Mr. Greenwood said they wouldn't want to do anything that would cause commercial traffic to be forced into the residential neighborhood. The alternative was to allow left turns there. The traffic on Sheryl was pretty low, so the left turns could be accommodated pretty easily. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Campbell stated that she would recommend app roval as long as the developer signed the development agreement and hoped no slip ups occurred in the future. Commissioner Finerty said this was tough because for the past two and a half years she has listened to Mr. Jonathan and had learned a tremendous amount. One of the things that really resonated with her was that they shouldn't compromise the type of buildings they have, even in service industrial. They want the service industrial buildings to look really nice. Her concern was this type of a building, which reminded her of a post office, she didn't believe fit into office professional. She had never seen a project in OP that looked like this. The other concern was that this was on a major arterial. She knew they were sensitive about the buildings on the main arterials such as Cook. They wanted a nice entrance into the city and Mr. Jonathan had taught her to pay attention to that as well. She didn't believe that this was a project that belongs in OP. It would be a great project in service industrial. She appreciated the use as far as wanting to cater to the high end market and going with the less intensive use. What went with this type of use were unfortunately the loading docks and the 14-foot roll up doors which were inconsistent with office professional and more associated with service � 44 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 � industrial. There was a complication with the parking limiting it to 32 spaces and they had to be concerned with the uses in the DDA. That was another concern that perhaps staff could look out for but it left room for another error. She would be reluctant to vote for this project in an office professional zone. She didn't believe that the grey precision block fit in the OP zone, nor did she believe it was the desired architecture for Cook Street. Commissioner Tschopp said he didn't have a concern with the architecture. He thought it was bold and different, but that it fit in with some of the other things going on there, so he didn't have a real probiem with that. He thought that staff had addressed the concerns and issues he had. His only question was if the developer really wanted to sign this type of development agreement. Times change and things change and the real concern was down the road and if he really wanted that type of development agreement sitting on it. Other than that, the truck access needed to be limited beyond Sheryl past Clifford. He was surprised that some of the neighbors didn't have concerns with the doors but it seemed to work in the neighborhood and he didn't have a problem with it as proposed with the development agreement. � Chairperson Lopez thought the concept was very interesting and that the architecture lent itself to the area and would add to the area. The development agreement would address his concern as to what would happen with this project down the road in keeping the parking issue at hand and the use in this particular area. He was a littl e concerned about the operation of the facilities on Satu�day and Sunday. In the original condition it was open on Saturday and closed on Sunday. He was going to suggest that they also close on Saturday. If there was any opposition at all in the correspondence, it had to do with the use of this area on the weekends for the residents in the area. He was a iittle concerned about that. Otherwise, the rest of the project was fine. By opening for business on Saturday and Sunday, they left the door open for people to make deliveries on Saturday and Sunday and he thought it was inherent when doing business. If someone got behind on deliveries, they would make deliveries on Sundays and he thought it could create problems for the residents. He was concerned about the ability on Sunday. He could live with it on Saturday. He asked if there was a direction they could go. Mr. Drell explained that there were religious groups whose Sabbath was Friday or Saturday, so he didn't think it was appropriate to differentiate Saturday or Sunday. He agreed that if they would prohibit it, it would be on both Saturday and Sunday. That was consistent with the fact that offices were '� 45 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 typically closed on Saturday and Sunday. On the other hand, they have reserved the right in the agreement to close thern on Saturday and Sunday. He wasn't sure what sort of noise would be generated, but he was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and if there was a problem, they would address it. He would agree that if they were going to close it, it should be on both Saturday and Sunday. Chairperson Lopez said he wasn't opposed to giving them this opportunity and the benefit of the doubt. He would rely on the residents because he was concerned and knew that when he worked Monday through Friday and sometimes on Saturday, he was looking forward to a quiet day in his backyard or in his residence on Sunday and if there was business going on over there that was obtrusive in the way of noise, that would be a concern to him if he was a resident. He noted that there were a couple of yards there and everyone supported it, but he was concerned that they supported the closure on Sunday and wasn't sure what had been presented to them. Commissioner Campbell noted that one letter requested no late night hours after dark, no early hours Saturday or Sunday. It didn't request eliminating Saturday or Sunday, just no early hours. She noted that she works six days a week and looks forward to going somewhere on Sundays. Chairperson Lopez asked for a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-1-1 (Commissioner Finerty voted no, Commissioner Jonathan abstained). It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2064 and 2065, recommending approval of PP 01-03 and DA 01 -01 to City Council, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 3-1-1 (Commissioner Finerty voted no, Commissioner Jonathan abstainedl. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Case Nos. C/Z 00-02 and PP 01-02 - ROB ERT ORR, Applicant Per Planning Commission direction on April 3, 2001, presentation of a resolution denying a request for ap proval of a Negative 46 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 +r.. Declaration of Environmental Impact, a change of zone from PR-5 to O.P., and a precise plan for three buildings on a 2.33 acre site located at 74-150 Country Club Drive. Proposed zone change also includes the 2.33 acre lot immediately to the west. Mr. Drell noted that the applicant filed a letter withdrawing the current project. He would be submitting a revised application that would be going back before the Architectural Commission before coming back. He recommended that the commission accept the applicant's withdrawal. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, to receive and file the letter of withdrawal by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Finerty abstained). X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES - (No meeting) � B. CIVIC CENTER STEERING COMMITTEE - (No meeting) C. DESERT WILLOW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) D. GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE - (April 5, 2001 ) Commissioner Campbell indicated that they took a bus ride and then the next day discussed the air quality element, water resources and mineral resources. She noted that Chairperson Benson requested that everyone read their material before coming to the meetings so that they would have more time for discussion. E. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE - (No meeting) F. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE - (April 16, 2001 ) Commissioner Finerty indicated that they discussed the regional park site. � 47 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 17, 2001 G. PALM DESERT/RANCHO MIRAGE MONTEREY AVENUE CORRIDOR PLANNING WORK GROUP - (No meeting) H. ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) XI. COMMENTS None. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m. PHILIP DRELL Secretary ATTEST: � JIM LOP , Chairp s Palm s rt Planning o ission /tm 48