Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0618 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY - JUNE 18, 2002 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Finerty called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Tschopp led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Cindy Finerty, Chairperson Sonia Campbell, Vice Chairperson Jim Lopez Dave Tschopp low Members Absent: Sabby Jonathan Staff Present: Steve Smith, Planning Manager Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Tony Bagato, Planning Technician Jeff Winklepleck, Parks & Recreation Planning Manager Mark Diercks, Transportation Engineer Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the June 4, 2002 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the June 4, 2002 minutes as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Smith indicated that the only pertinent item to Planning Commission before City Council on June 13, 2002 was the adoption of the new CEQA guidelines. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR Mr. Smith informed commission that two requests for parcel map waivers had been received after the agenda had been prepared. He indicated that the commission could add these two requests with the unanimous consent of the commission. He stated that there was some urgency to the matter. Action: It was moved Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adding Parcel Map Waivers 02-01 and 02-04 to the agenda by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. A. Case Nos. PMW 02-01 and PMW 02-04 - DR. ROBERT McLACHLAN, Applicant Request for approval of two parcel map waivers to consolidate lots 1, 2, 13 & 14 and lots 4, 5, 10 and 11 to conform with an approved plan on property located between Cholla Drive and Park View Drive, APN 640-030-001 . Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. Vill. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. s 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 bow A. Case No. TPM 30624 - EDGEHILL ESTATES, LLC, Applicant Request for approval of a tentative parcel map to subdivide one .49-acre parcel into two single-family lots. Property is located on the west side of Edgehill Drive at the intersection of Hedgehog Street or 45-71 1 and 45-731 Edgehill Drive. Mr. Francisco Urbina addressed the commission. He informed the'commission that surrounding land uses included single family homes to the north, east and south, and to the west the storm channel and hilly open land. The proposal was for a two-lot parcel map on property zoned R-1 . Parcel one would have 10,004 square feet. Parcel two would have 11 ,221 square feet. He stated that the proposed parcel map was categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA per Section 15.315, Minor Land Divisions of CEQA Guidelines. Staff recommended approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 30624 subject to the findings and conditions in the draft Planning Commission resolution. Commissioner Tschopp noted that it appeared this map would bring the proposed lots into the same size or a similar size as adjoining lots. He asked if that was correct. Mr. Urbina confirmed that was correct. He indicated that most of the lots along the west side of Edgehill Drive were approximately 10,000 square feet in size. Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. ROBERT WILKENSON, 44-300 Camino Azul in La Quinta, stated that he was present to answer any questions. There were no questions. Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for commission comments. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2131, approving TPM 30624, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. %no 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 B. Case No. CUP 02-02 - VERIZON WIRELESS, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a 57-foot high wireless telecommunication tower on property located at 42-275 Washington Street. Mr. Tony Bagato explained that the subject property is located at 42-275 Washington Street within the Albertson's shopping center. He stated that the Jiffy Lube service station fronts on Washington Street and the proposed project tower and facility would be located behind Jiffy Lube. Mr. Bagato indicated that the applicant prepared some renderings which he distributed. He explained that they were photo images with some renderings showing perspective. He noted that the base of the pole would be 24-inches and round. The tower would be 50-feet high to the top of the antennae and 57-feet total to the top the palm fronds. There would be additional landscaping planted as well as five additional palm trees. Mr. Bagato showed the commission the elevations. He explained that the equipment shelter would be placed in the rear along with the tower. The shelter would match the existing shopping center's or Jiffy Lube's textures and colors. He passed around a color board with samples for the commission's review. Mr. Bagato stated that the project would be constructed over four existing parking spaces located to the rear of Jiffy Lube, so there would be a loss of four spaces. He said the shopping center currently has 728 parking spaces and based on the square footage of the existing center and the approved parcel precise plan located to the south, the requirement is for 670 spaces, so the loss of four spaces wouldn't be a problem since there would still be an overflow of 54 spaces. On May 14, 2002, the Architectural Review Commission looked at the project and it was approved 5-1 with Commissioner Hanson opposed and Commissioner Lingle absent. On May 24, 2002, Councilman Crites filed an appeal, so ultimately this case would be presented before the City Council. Mr. Bagato stated that the tower met all the zoning requirements for the tower. The artificial palm tree's design with the addition of the five palm trees and low shrub landscaping around the building should adequately camouflage the pole. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 Mr. Bagato indicated that under CEQA, this project was classified as a Class 3 Categorical Exemption and no further documentation was needed for CEQA purposes. Staff recommended that Planning Commission adopt the draft Planning Commission Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 02-02, subject to the conditions attached to the resolution. He asked for any questions. Commissioner Tschopp asked if staff had any idea how many phone companies are out there and how many might approach us in the future to have their own pole. Mr. Bagato said staff didn't know how many there could be and explained that staff receives requests on a case by case basis. There are several phone companies and staff didn't have any idea who might come in next. He stated that Mr. Drell mentioned at the Architectural Review Commission meeting the possibility that staff could contact some of these companies and ask for a master plan of the area to see where they could be placed and their need. Mr. Bagato also stated that currently staff has two other pending applications from AT&T, but they weren't near these locations. Commissioner Tschopp thought that a master plan would be an excellent idea. r` He didn't know how many phone companies were offering this, but there would be more in the future. Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Chairperson Finerty ,opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MS. MINAKSHI HEMLANI from 02 Wireless Solutions at 4300 Latham Street, Suite 103 in Riverside, stated that she was representing Verizon Wireless. Commissioner Tschopp noted that in the applicant's letter (see attached Exhibit A) she mentioned looking at a strip mall, but the lease negotiations were not favorable. He asked if that was a strip mall in this area. Ms. Hemlani said yes. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the property she looked at was in the back or in the front. r.. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18. 2002 e Ms. Hemlani said there were two malls in that area. Their general coverage area where they have a dead zone and need coverage is between 42nd Avenue and Washington. She believed that there were two malls across from the current proposed location. One of them where the lease negotiations fell through was at the side of the parcel, but only because they didn't have anything in the back or the front. Commissioner Lopez asked if Ms. Hemlani would be in a position to comment on the feasibility of doing a master plan for the Coachella Valley to say where they think they are going to need additional monopalms in the future. Ms. Hemlani said that the Verizon Wireless Performance/Radio Frequency Engineers were the ones who set up the program on how their program works together and they would be the ones to have something. Depending on how the system works as they go along, they change and taper it, but they had a general idea of where they need coverage. She didn't have that information with her. Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for commission comments. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff to approve the project. Chairperson Finerty asked for any discussion. Commissioner Tschopp stated that he didn't like this location, but he wasn't sure what the alternatives were or the legal steps they could take. He was concerned since the commission didn't know how many there could be and where they might end up. Chairperson Finerty stated that she was opposed to the project. She thought that Architectural Review Commissioners Hanson and O'Donnell had it correct about not placing these in high profile sites. When the City put the ordinance together, they were looking at putting them in the corner and in the dark. This request was front and center and Commissioner Hanson commented that it was in the face of everyone. Chairperson Finerty didn't believe that this was an appropriate location. She understood that alternate sites were considered, but that didn't mean because other sites were considered and they didn't work 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 out that it had to be on this site. She didn't believe it was in the best interest of the city. Having a tower 57 feet tall at Jiffy Lube would mean it would be 25 feet higher than most trees in the area and she thought it would stand out like a sore thumb. So she was opposed to the proposal. With the motion and the second on the floor, she called for the vote. The motion failed on a 2-2 vote with Chairperson Finerty and Commissioner Tschopp voting no. Chairperson Finerty asked if there was a resolution of denial. Mr. Hargreaves advised that the commission would need to vote as to whether or not the commission would want to do a resolution of denial. He would like to try to get the majority of the commission to agree on which way to act on this issue. Ultimately if two want to approve it and two want to deny it, what they might end up doing is continuing it until they got a fifth vote. Commissioner Campbell noted that Councilman Crites already filed an appeal taw and asked if it would automatically go to Council. Mr. Hargreaves said it would. Commissioner Campbell asked if the vote was 3-2 for approval or denial, it would still go to Council. Mr. Hargreaves explained that it is a CUP and the Planning Commission has the jurisdiction to make the original decision, so the Planning Commission needed to make a decision if it can make a decision. Whatever the decision the Planning Commission made*may or may not influence the City Council, but he would still like them to make one if possible. Commissioner Lopez suggested continuing with the denial with a recommendation to the applicant that they should take into consideration the alternative locations available to them that would not bring up the concern of it being in the front and center of everything. That might be the recommendation at this point. With that, Chairperson Finerty asked if Commissioner Lopez would be willing to go forward with a resolution of denial. Commissioner Lopez said yes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp to deny Case No. CUP 02-02. Chairperson Finerty asked for any discussion. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 There was none. Chairperson Finerty called for the vote. Motion carried 3-1 with Commissioner Campbell voting no. Chairperson Finerty asked if there was a resolution of denial. Mr. Smith said yes and distributed copies. Mr. Smith explained that the suggested findings for the denial were outlined in the middle of the resolution. They were: 1) The proposed location of the tower would be highly visible from a major street and a very busy shopping center; 2) The height of the structure in the proposed location is not compatible with the surrounding properties. He stated that staff was open to any other reasons if the commission wished to outline them. Chairperson Finerty asked if there were any other items that the commission wanted to add. Commissioner Tschopp stated that he wasn't sure it was appropriate in this case, but he would like to have additional information on the number of towers that we could end up with. Chairperson Finerty suggested after taking care of the resolution, directing staff to prepare a master plan and contacting all of the companies and putting the information together so that they could have some idea. Commissioner Tschopp agreed. Chairperson Finerty asked if there was a motion of denial. M Hargreaves p y a r. H gre s explained that the motion should be to adopt the findings as presented by staff. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-1 (Commissioner Campbell voted no). It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2132, denying CUP 02-02. Motion carried 3-1 (Commissioner Campbell voted no). Chairperson Finerty indicated that the City would appreciate it if the applicant would assist staff with the master plan to perhaps find an alternative location that would not be in such a high-profile location. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 tar C. Case No. CUP 02-03 - VERIZON WIRELESS, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a 59-foot high wireless communication tower on property located at 74-000 Country Club Drive. Mr. Smith explained that this site is the Cornerstone office complex at Portola and Country Club. The request was similar to the previous case in that they were looking at a 59-foot tall wireless communication tower camouflaged as an artificial date palm. The tower is proposed in the extreme northeast corner of the site in a landscaped area 29 feet by 27 feet. The monopalm would have three sectors of panel antennae. The height of the antennae would be at 52 feet. To the top of the palm fronds would be 59 feet. The base is round, 24- inches in diameter. Additional landscaping and eight live palm trees would be planted at the site to screen the facility. The site would include an 11 foot by 20 foot equipment shelter at a maximum height of eight feet. The freestanding building would be new construction at the northeast corner of the property. The architecture on the new structure would match the architecture on the existing Cornerstone buildings. In order to screen the building from the east, the applicant was proposing to increase the height of the wall in the area of the equipment structure to eight feet in height. This case was before Architectural Review on May 14 and received preliminary approval subject to the applicant recessing the shelter building and adding live palm trees to the Desert Willow golf course property which is adjacent to the northeast. As with the previous request, on May 24 there was an appeal to that Architectural Commission decision filed by Councilman Crites. Mr. Smith explained that once the Planning Commission has acted on this request, it would be referred to the City Council. Adding another twist, the applicant went back to ARC on May 28 and showed the commission revisions including the additional height to the perimeter wall. ARC at that point unanimously granted preliminary approval of the new elevation. The changes that had been provided were enough to turn around Commissioner Vuksic, who had voted against it the first time. At that point they also learned that Desert Willow was not interested in having additional palm trees planted on it. The action was approval without requiring the palm trees at that point in time. Also regarding additional palm trees, staff received a letter from the property owner to the east, the Stoltzmans, who at the end of their letter requested either 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 relocation of the tower and the generator to a different location on the rni property or mitigating funds placed in an escrow account to provide for screening. He said they were looking for palm trees to be put on the north end of their property. Mr. Smith indicated the applicant is proposing a 52-foot tower designed as an artificial date palm with additional live date palms around it. The new palm trees, the live ones, would range from 12 feet to 36 feet in height. The findings for approval were outlined on page four under Environmental Review. It was deemed a Class 3 Categorical Exemption for purposes of CEQA. Staff recommended approval of the request, subject to the conditions attached. Mr. Smith noted that the plans were on display and asked for any questions. Commissioner Tschopp asked the City Attorney for clarification on whether or not he would have a conflict of interest because he sits on the board of the Palm Desert Golf Corporation, the property owner to the north. He asked if he needed to abstain. He noted that he receives no compensation. Mr. +.ri Hargreaves asked if Commissioner Tschopp had any property interest. Commissioner Tschopp said no. Mr. Hargreaves asked if it was purely voluntary. Commissioner Tschopp concurred. Mr. Hargreaves asked Commissioner Tschopp if he felt it would bias his decision in any way. Commissioner Tschopp said no. Mr. Hargreaves stated that he didn't see any basis for a conflict. Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MS. MINAKSHI HEMLANI with 02 Wireless Solutions at 4300 Latham Street in Riverside, California, addressed the commission. Commissioner Lopez stated that one of the concerns outlined in the correspondence was possible noise that the generator might emanate. He asked if that was something they should be concerned about. Ms. Hemlani stated that this generator was only being installed for backup purposes. They would be running power to the site itself so it 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 was only in case of an emergency blackout. She believed that it would be run for about 15 minutes every month just to keep it working well. Otherwise, it wouldn't be on. Commissioner Lopez asked if it was a loud generator. Ms. Hemlani said she didn't think so. The type they put in is called Whisper Quiet. That didn't mean it was as quiet as a whisper, but it wasn't loud, and it was for backup purposes. Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the project. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for commission comments. Commissioner Campbell stated that this area was still quite barren. It was also in the vicinity of Desert Willow which was more of a flat land and didn't have as many trees like the other area. She felt that to put something here like that, even though they have a cluster of palms, it would be mostly in only one particular area, so she wouldn't be in favor of this proposal. tam Commissioner Tschopp stated that he had questions about the whole process; however, on this particular piece of property he still thought they have two property owners that have expressed concerns. The one to the east had concern about the landscaping and the screening that they don't have on their piece of property. The property owner to the north expressed concerns about its impacts and its views and the lack of screening, partly on its own cognizance because it was not allowing palm trees on its property, but nothing should require another property owner to have to put in things to screen something of this nature. So he wasn't convinced that this location or the applicant had done everything they could to mitigate problems that might arise to the other property owners. Commissioner Lopez said that the location wasn't where he envisioned these monopalms would be located, especially in this area when there wasn't other development out there. They were looking at an area that is relatively flat with nothing around. When there was such a blank slate, they could probably develop something for the future and incorporate it into this, but he thought that was the wrong way to look at it. They needed to look at what is out there right now and how it will impact the other areas, so he had a concern about this particular location. He said he rides his bike by there every day and 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 sees the area. He didn't think it fit well in this particular location. He knew the need was there for these structures for increased communications. He wondered how long that would last in the next evolution with communication and didn't know what would happen to these palm trees in the future. But in this case he didn't think it was the right location. He wished there was a way they could look at putting these particular structures in the middle of a property area away from the general view, but also incorporate itself better into the landscaping. He was opposed. Chairperson Finerty concurred. She also believed it was an inappropriate location. A palm cluster in this one area would really stand out. They have Desert Willow which is an outstanding golf course, Cornerstone is a beautiful office complex, and they have a hotel site. To put this tower in this location was inappropriate. It was 59 feet tall and it would be 23 feet higher than anything else in the area. She thought there was a better location for it. She asked for a motion of denial. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, denying Case No. CUP 02-03. Motion carried 4-0. Chairperson Finerty asked if staff had a resolution. Mr. Smith said yes. He explained that the draft resolution contained two findings for the denial. First, that the proposed location of the tower would be highly visible from a major street in a high profile golf course, Desert Willow. Second, that the height of the structure in the proposed location was not compatible with the surrounding properties. Mr. Smith stated that staff would be open to any changes or additions. Chairperson Finerty asked if there were any changes or additions. There were none. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting the findings as presented by staff and Planning Commission Resolution No. 2133, denying CUP 02-03. Motion carried 4-0. Chairperson Finerty asked if this would be the appropriate time to direct staff to prepare a master plan for service for wireless communication. Mr. Smith said yes. Chairperson Finerty asked if there was a motion. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 °r Commissioner Tschopp asked if that master plan would include the number of phone companies or communication companies that could approach the City to install towers as part of the plan. Mr. Smith concurred. He asked if there was anything else the commission wanted specifically included. Commissioner Lopez requested anticipated locations. Chairperson Finerty indicated that when they were talking about locations, low profile locations would work a lot better. Commissioner Tschopp suggested getting an idea of where they are going technologically because they kept hearing that the palms are getting smaller, that the stealth is getting better, and that they may some day be in bushes. He wondered how far that would be in the distant future. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, directing staff to prepare a telecommunications master plan. Motion carried 4-0. D. Case No. PP 02-09 - DERVIOUX INC., Applicant Request for approval of a precise plan to allow the development of a .38-acre site located at the southwest corner of Highway 111 and El Paseo to allow a 7,000 square foot Guistot Restaurant. Mr. Urbina explained that the project site is a .38-acre portion of a larger 12- acre piece owned by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palm Desert. The project site is relatively flat and surrounding land uses include commercial centers to the north and east, an older condominium complex to the south consisting of one-story buildings called Sandpiper residences, and to the west the Palm Desert Storm Channel and Desert Crossing shopping center. Mr. Urbina stated that in 1989 there was a master plan for a commercial development approved on the project site by Ahmanson Development. There was an Environmental Impact Report prepared which analyzed the environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA. The proposed project's environmental impacts were covered by that 1989 Environmental Impact Report. In September of 2001 , Planning Commission approved a precise plan of development for master planning most of the 12-acre redevelopment site. The 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 master plan approved was for a Palm Desert Visitor's Center with a new Chamber of Commerce and two restaurant pads. The five acres to the west would remain vacant and the Redevelopment Agency was contemplating trying to attract a hotel developer. The proposed Cuistot Restaurant would be located on one of the two restaurant pads previously approved in the master plan approved by the Planning Commission in September, 2001 . The entrance to the project site would be facing south toward Painters Path. To the north the restaurant would include a 2,000 square foot outdoor patio dining area with an outdoor fireplace. Immediately to the north of the outdoor dining area would be the proposed Eric Johnson Memorial Garden. The architectural style for the proposed restaurant would be French country. It would include tile roofs and the roof types would include gable and hip. The front entrance would include a covered porte cachere where patrons could be dropped off and picked up. Mr. Urbina showed the front elevation and explained that the exterior building materials would include stone and stucco. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve PP 02-09, subject to the findings and conditions contained in the draft resolution attached to the staff report. Since the patio would be facing the Eric Johnson Memorial Park, Commissioner Campbell asked if it would be open to the park, or enclosed, or if there would be a wall or fence on the patio besides the fireplace. Mr. Urbina indicated there would be a short wall. Regarding the ARC action, ARC stipulated that the plan be modified by adding a recessed shutter opening to enhance the appearance of the stucco wall on the east elevation. Commissioner Campbell asked Mr. Urbina to point out the location of that window on the drawings. Mr. Urbina did so. Chairperson Finerty asked how the ARC vote went. She was looking at the minutes from May 28 and couldn't see a vote. On page 19 it just stated that Commissioners Lingle and O'Donnell had concerns. She asked how they finally decided on the matter regarding the differing architectures. Mr. Urbina said they expressed the opinion that they were not objecting to the proposed French country architectural style because this is the westerly end of El Paseo and along the entire length of El Paseo there was a variety of architectural styles. The Visitor's Center was contemporary, however, they felt that given the type of restaurant use being proposed, French country style was 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 appropriate. Chairperson Finerty asked if Mr. Urbina recalled what the vote was on June 1 1 . Mr. Urbina said no. Referring to the May 28 meeting, Mr. Smith said his recollection was that there was not a vote and that they were being asked a different question and he wasn't at the June 11 meeting. Commissioner Tschopp asked if there were other developments in town that have been master planned with a lot of different architectural styles. Mr. Urbina said yes. There is a 270-acre development between the freeway and Gerald Ford Drive on the east and west sides of Cook Street. There is a Mobil Gas Station that is phase one that has been completed. That has a sort of contemporary flat roof modern style. Then there is a Hampton Inn under construction that has a flat roof, exterior stucco walls of contrasting colors, and most recently staff has received a precise plan for a 19,000 square foot multi-tenant office / light industrial building immediately to the north of the Hampton Inn that would include sloped the roofs. Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. BERNARD DERVIOUX, 73-505 Juniper Street, addressed the commission. He stated that he was planning to make a wonderful restaurant and to place Palm Desert on the culinary map of the world. It was his life dream and hoped the commission would approve it. Commissioner Tschopp asked if valet parking would be provided. Mr. Dervioux said yes. Commissioner Lopez asked if the restaurant would be open for lunch. Mr. Dervioux said yes. After no further questions, Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the project. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for commission comments. Commissioner Campbell stated that she was very much in favor of this restaurant. She indicated that there were many different styles of,architecture on El Paseo, but in this smaller acreage, to have something so unusual they 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 would not feel like they were in the desert, but in France and she was really looking forward for the restaurant being open all year around instead of closing for the summer time. She was in favor of the project. Commissioner Tschopp stated that it would be a very attractive building on a very prominent corner. He explained that his question to staff was to draw out that yes, we have a lot of different developments with different types of architecture. That seemed to work and he thought this would fit in very well. Commissioner Lopez concurred. He thought the architecture was great. And in that particular location he felt it would be an outstanding addition to the city. Chairperson Finerty concurred. She also felt it was a beautiful building and looked forward to it. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2134, approving PP 02-09, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. E. Case No. PP/CUP 02-05 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and a Precise Plan of Design/Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction and operation of a 12 (+/-)* acre elementary school and 22.8 (+/-) acre park with lighted baseball and soccer fields, a 13,000 (+/-) square foot recreation office/child care building, tennis courts, basketball courts, picnic pavilions, tot lot, restrooms, parking lot and other related facilities at 77-500 Country Club Drive. Mr. Jeff Winklepleck addressed the commission. He noted that the request was for approval of a 12-acre elementary school and 22.8-acre park. He explained that there would be some shared facilities. The school playground 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 area would be open to the park and for public use after school and on weekends similar to Washington Charter School. In addition to the school, primary park usage would include three lighted baseball fields, two lighted soccer fields, and a 13,000 square foot recreation office which would house the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District main office. It would be moving from Indio to this site. They would occupy the second floor. The first floor would be a child care facility. There would also be the standard park amenities including tennis courts, basketball courts, volleyball courts, picnic pavilions and tot lots. After meeting with the Whitehawk residents and Palm Desert Resort and Country Club, they requested inclusion of a community garden and a dog park. Staff looked at the plan, talked with the consultants and found a way to squeeze those two uses in. He agreed that they were needed in that area. To use the community garden, there were quite a few apartments near there and a dog park area was always good. Mr. Winklepleck indicated that this site was approved as a park/school site on `.. November 21 , 2000 as part of Tentative Tract 29468, the project by American Beauty Development and the City was still in negotiations with the property owner. The City was hoping to take possession of the land soon. Mr. Winklepleck stated that Desert Sands Unified School District authorized the City to act as lead agency on this project for them. The elementary school would consist of nine buildings. The tallest building would be a one-story multipurpose room with a maximum height of 35 feet. Many of the buildings would be about 19 feet tall to the tallest parapet. The School District would provide a separate teacher parking lot and bus turnaround area, which has been a problem in other locations. The bonus is that there is the park and approximately 194 parking spaces for school use during the day. This would hopefully be much easier ingress and egress for the folks going to school and the people driving by wouldn't be slowed down during the morning and afternoon school traffic. Baseball and soccer field lights would be similar. The same type of lighting used at the soccer field park and civic center ballfields would be used, the Musco type of lighting which was basically the best lighting in the industry for this type of facility to cut the light and keep it on the field and the glow out of the sky. In addition, a new control system would be installed, not only at %low 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 this new facility but at the existing facilities. Reservations would all be computer controlled. Right now if there is a problem, someone has to physically go out there and get into the time clocks to turn them off or on. Now if we have a call, they could be operated from a cell phone. They would have better control of the facilities. If there is a problem, they could get to it quickly. As with the City's other facilities, the lights would only be on when there is a scheduled practice or play and in no case would they be on after 10:00 P.M. In meetings with Palm Desert Resort and Country Club and Whitehawk, there was some concern expressed regarding the noise that the park and school would produce. Staff looked at existing facilities and at that specific area with regard to the existing ambient noise level from the freeway, from the railroad track and from Country Club traffic. With the separation between the park and the residences, in addition to added landscaping, the closest residence was 120 feet away from the closest recreation facility. Staff didn't foresee any noise issues. There would be additional noise from kids playing, but primarily it would be during the day and sometimes on the weekends. Most of the soccer played now concludes at 9:00 p.m. so staff felt that with the amenities and the additions this park would bring the neighborhood, the small amount of additional noise would no be an issue. In addition to the noise concerns, the residents of Whitehawk expressed concern with regard to the ingress and egress and the traffic. Their main ingress is at the existing light at Resorter Boulevard. They have a four-way light. There is also a secondary access which is basically just east of the school playground area. That would be a right-turn in and right-out only. Staff foresaw that as being a secondary access for parents to get in and out to help avoid any congestion at that light or minimize it. Their main concern was with parents traveling east on Country Club passing the light and going up to the next light where the industrial zone and Whitehawk's main entrance is and making a U-turn. They requested that a controlled left into that secondary access road be installed through the proposed median. After speaking to the City's Traffic Engineer, staff determined that it was not warranted. Since it is a controlled signal, it would not interfere with the Whitehawk residents' ingress and egress. Staff did not see a need for it now. If there was a need in the future, it was something that would be reviewed at that time. Regarding traffic load, Mr. Winklepleck said that the projected traffic load created by the projects would basically be about the same and actually a little 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 il` less than there would be if the property was developed with all single family residences. There would be a little more of a peak during the morning and afternoon with the school, but basically the projects as proposed would not affect the existing service level of "C." As far as facility rules and security, the same rules and security would be used which has been successful at the other parks. There is a perimeter sidewalk proposed around the entire facility so in case of an injury, access for a patrol car, paramedics, fire, etc., would be available to the whole park. Staff-was also working with the Fire Marshal to provide some additional access to the school. At the request of residents from Whitehawk and Palm Desert Resorter, they wanted to see a gate to control night time activities in the parking lot. Staff didn't have a problem with that and happily included that in the plan. Since the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District would be there, they would lock and unlock the gate. They already do that for all of our existing facilities so that would not be an issue at this site. `.. Environmentally, there were no historical or cultural resources or anything along those lines. The site is in the Fringe-Toed Lizard preserve area. As a public project, Mr. Winklepleck stated that the City was not subject to that fee, however, with the potential occurrence of milk vetch and some other similar species, the City and the School District would pay the $600 per acre fee to do our fair share and be a good neighbor. Staff recommended approval and Mr. Winklepleck asked for any questions. Commissioner Campbell asked Mr. Winklepleck to show on the map where the overflow parking would be made available. Mr. Winklepleck said that it could be used when there is back to schoo! night, baseball and soccer going on all at the same time. He pointed out the area that could be used. He said that they didn't anticipate needing it, but it was there just in case. He said they were looking at it because there was no place else to go. There was no parking allowed on Country Club. He said that the City would try to work with some of the industrial areas to see if they want some hand gates or pedestrian access, which might gain some parking in the evenings. Regarding the left turn on Park Center Drive that residents were concerned about, Commissioner Tschopp asked for confirmation that no left turns would r.. 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 be allowed. Mr. Winklepleck confirmed that it would be right-turn in and right- turn out only. Basically there would be a solid median there. Commissioner Tschopp asked how far the distance would be from there to the Resorter entrance. Mr. Winklepleck said it was a couple thousand feet. There was plenty of distance there. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the traffic engineers reviewing this had any problem with the outlets at this time and the amount of traffic that occurs at school at two peak periods of the day. Mr. Winklepleck explained that staff worked quite closely with the School District and this plan had evolved quite a bit. The original plan did not have a secondary access road and if it was just a park, the City wouldn't include that. But with our history and knowledge of what happens at schools, primarily experience with Palm Desert High School, trying to put that second road in now was deemed to be necessary and with the additional parking, the School District was very comfortable with it. Mr. Winklepleck thought it was the best we could do. Commissioner Tschopp asked how difficult in the future it would be to add a left-turn lane there if it was necessary. Mr. Winklepleck said that if it became necessary, basically it would require that they remove some landscaping. It wasn't too difficult. It wasn't warranted at this time, but if it did become warranted, staff would obviously look at doing it. Commissioner Lopez asked Mr. Winklepleck to describe what would be along Country Club Drive. He was concerned about the safety of the children, especially if a ball goes over the wall. Looking at the soccer fields, it appeared that the field was a distance from the goal areas and was probably far enough away that a ball probably wouldn't go over the wall. Mr. Winklepleck stated that staff has the same concerns. Primarily the one they were most concerned about was within the school area. One of the changes they were still contemplating was the easternmost soccer field. They were looking at moving it up and possibly putting the community garden fronting on Country Club which would give them a little more buffer. Basically what they would have along Country Club would be the standard desert landscaping of trees and rocks. They were still working on some of the grading issues, but the fields might be a little bit recessed with some berming which would help, but they would have at least a six-foot high wrought iron fence or combination short wall and wrought iron fencing along there. If necessary, they were also looking at some sort of netting system behind the goals to keep the balls from going out onto Country Club. Going back to the school issue, Commissioner Lopez noted that it looked like most people would enter and go into the circle area to either pick up or drop 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 off or could even go into the park area and it didn't look like there would be backup on that street. Mr. Winklepleck said that there would be signs that say teachers and buses only. The idea is to get parents past it and into their drop off area. He thought that once it was open there might be a little bit of an issue to begin with, but not for long. Commissioner Lopez asked about the proposed dog park area. Mr. Winklepleck pointed out the area. He pointed out an area that was basically a large concrete-covered area with a little gazebo. They could use it for anything from a temporary skateboard facility, to a barbecue, or to a dance. That would actually be shrunk down to about a 75 feet by 75 feet area. The basketball courts would then be moved up to provide an area in that location for a dog park. Commissioner Tschopp asked for confirmation that the circle area would not be used for parents to pick up their children. Mr. Winklepleck said it was for the bus drop off. Commissioner Tschopp said they would be going into the parking lot of the park essentially. Mr. Winklepleck concurred. He said the idea was for the parents to drop the kids off in that location or in the larger parking area. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the theory was that they would have to come back around out onto Resorter Boulevard. Mr. Winklepleck said that depended on which way they would be traveling on Country Club. If he was a parent, he would go out and make a right onto Country Club. But if he had to go east on Country Club, then he would go out to Resorter. Or there could be a right turn made onto Country Club and then a U-turn made at the light. There were different options. He said that one of the things they looked at closely because of the traffic patterns was where to locate the child care use since they have some of the same time frame issues with parents dropping off children in the mornings. So they tried to put that as far away from the school's main traffic area as possible. Commissioner Tschopp asked if there would be parking allowed on Resorter Drive. Mr. Winklepleck wasn't sure there was enough width there. Mr. Diercks said Public Works would not allow it. Mr. Winklepleck agreed that it probably wasn't a good idea with the bus traffic or general traffic. Commissioner Lopez asked if the soccer field next to the school would be lit. Mr. Winklepleck said yes. They anticipated that three poles would light both fields similar to field five at the soccer park which is more practice lighting, not a game type lighting. Commissioner Lopez pointed out that the access road would be used frequently and would be a major thoroughfare between two soccer fields. Mr. Winklepleck said that was correct. They would have fencing definitely on one side to keep kids from running across that road. %NW 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 Commissioner Tschopp asked about the processing for the school. He asked if the architectural plans, etc., would come before the City. Mr. Winklepleck said no. The School District said that they needed to go through the same CEQA process as the City for the park and if we acted as lead agency and got them through that at the same time, that way they wouldn't have to hold an additional hearing and go through the same process. He said he would be happy to bring back their plans for the commission's review. Once this request was approved by the City, they didn't have a whole lot of say. It then goes up to the State Architect. Mr. Winklepleck explained that the architecture is similar, at least the footprint would be similar, to the new school in La Quinta on Miles and Dune Palms. It would be a little more Spanish style. The one in La Quinta was a little modern. He said he has seen some conceptual renderings and didn't think they looked bad. He said he would be happy to bring them to the commission. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the School District was tied to the pads as delineated on the plans or if they could take it and do whatever they wanted. Mr. Winklepleck stated that the School District at this point was fairly tied to these pads because they are on a very tight schedule. They need to have their working drawings essentially completed by September and up to the State in order to open in fall of 2004. If they got delayed another month or two, they would be pushed out to 2005. They basically indicated that they would have this site in 2004. Commissioner Tschopp asked where the School District was going to put all the temporaries once the school was built. Mr. Winklepleck said that was considered. He stated that the School District originally showed five buildings with a little area for temporaries. The City said no, if we're selling you the land at least put all the buildings in because you know you're going to need them and put them in right up front. Commissioner Tschopp asked if there was any way the City could control that issue in the future. Mr. Hargreaves said probably not. Mr. Winklepleck said that the City would like to, but the School District acts separately from us. They try to cooperate where they can. Commissioner Tschopp again asked where any temporaries would go and if there was a way to shield them from the view from Country Club and from the park. Mr. Winklepleck guessed that temporaries would go in where the basketball courts are located now. A little bit west of the turf area. But the District told him there wouldn't be any temporaries. Mr. Winklepleck noted that no letters of opposition were received on this j project. 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 t.. Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the project. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Campbell stated that she was in favor of the project. She said that the community needed the park and the school and commended Mr. Winklepleck on a job well done. Commissioner Tschopp thought it was well thought out for the piece of land and that Mr. Winklepleck had done a good job in laying it out and it would meet some critical needs that the city has for recreational facilities and additional schools. He expressed a concern with the access. Based on the experience he has had at the different schools over the years, they could not have enough exits, ingress or egress, turn arounds and just where they least expect it, parents would find a way to park and somehow bottle it all up. He encouraged everyone to take a look at that and leave the option open for the future for the additional left-hand turn if necessary. Based on his experience, he requested that they really take a hard look at it and make sure it works now because it would be a challenge. Mr. Winklepleck informed the commission �r.. that they would be doing a Use and Construction Agreement with the District. He suggested adding a condition that they also look at doing a traffic management plan on circulation so they could start out right and see how it works. Commissioner Tschopp thought that was an excellent idea. Commissioner Lopez stated that he would concur with previous comments. He also thought it was a great use of the land and loved the idea of a park in this part of town. It has been needed for a long time. He congratulated Mr. Winklepleck on pulling it together. He said it looked wonderful. He also said he had a little different take on the left-hand turn at the access road. He was concerned about the parents. What he saw at Jimmy Carter School were parents using that left-hand turn for a U-turn. They would make the U-turn and go around there. He said when he's at Desert Springs Villas, he was constantly appalled at the parents that put their kids in harm's way when they make that U-turn. He couldn't tell them how many times there has almost been a serious accident at the location. And it was for no other reason then to make a U-turn. Sometimes they go into the resort and the entrance there and go out again, and that caused another problem because they have someone pulling out with the kids and the parent is in a hurry, and then there was someone else making a U-turn. He appreciated the concern about the left-hand turn, but he was concerned in the future about it being used for a U-turn and that would be very a... 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 dangerous on Country Club with the high traffic speeds, etc. Overall he thought this was a great use. He was always concerned about the safety of the children first and foremost, especially along busy arterials. But he congratulated Mr. Winklepleck and thought the project looked great. Chairperson Finerty agreed. She said she remembered when they first started talking about the park at the Project Area 4 Committee and that was many years ago and it has taken a long time to get it all put together, but it is a job well done. She asked for a motion of approval including the suggested condition. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2135, approving PP/CUP 02-05, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 4-0. Chairperson Finerty stated that she also liked the name Freedom Park and thought that was great. The commission concurred. Mr. Winklepleck noted that this was basically the master plan and he had given the commission conceptual drawings for the recreation building. He said they were still trying to come up with some good icons and freedom type icons. He explained they didn't want to go overboard, but would hopefully do it in a manner indicative of our other parks, classy, and staff would do their best. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Case No. PP/CUP 02-07 - PATHFINDER CHURCH OF THE RISEN CHRIST CHURCH, Applicant Per Planning Commission direction on June 4, 2002, presentation of a resolution denying a request by Pathfinder Community of the Risen Christ Church for a precise plan/conditional use permit and parking adjustment for a 2,000 square foot church facility at the northwest corner of Alessandro Drive and San Jacinto Avenue, 73-900 Alessandro. a Chairperson Finerty asked for a motion. 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 2002 taro Action: It was moved by Commissioner Tschopp, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. Move by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2136, denying PP/CUP 02-07. Motion carried 4-0. B. Request for consideration of initiation of an amendment to Chapter 25.21 of the Zoning Ordinance (Second Senior Units) to bring it into compliance with state law Mr. Smith indicated that the commission had a brief written report from Mr. Drell. Mr. Smith explained that basically the City has not updated its Second Unit Senior Ordinance provisions since 1983. In the interim the State has passed legislation on a fairly regular basis and we need to amend our code and at least bring it into minimum consistency with the State law in this area. Staff was requesting for Planning Commission to direct staff to initiate the ordinance amendment of Section 25.21 . Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, initiating a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to bring Section 25.21 into compliance with State law. Motion carried 4-0. 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 - (June 6, 2002) Chairperson Finerty noted that she wasn't at the meeting, but understood that land use was the topic as it would be again Thursday. There was also discussion about having Portola four lanes wide versus six. 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 18. 2002 E. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE - (No meeting) F. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE - (No meeting) G. PALM DESERT/RANCHO MIRAGE MONTEREY AVENUE CORRIDOR PLANNING WORK GROUP - (No meeting) H. ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) XI. COMMENTS 1 . Chairperson Finerty said she had been advised that there would be no meeting on July 2. Mr. Smith said that was correct. Chairperson Finerty noted that the next meeting would be July 16, 2002. 2. Mr. Diercks noted that Commissioner Campbell had asked about the height of vehicle headlights at the last meeting. He did a little research and the California Vehicle Code set the height at four and a half feet as the maximum to the center of the highest land, so they could go as high as four and a half feet and a four-foot wall didn't guarantee that all lights would get blocked, but the average car height was probably two to three feet. He did a quick walk around the parking lot this afternoon and didn't find one that was over four feet. Not even the trucks. Commissioner Campbell thanked Mr. Diercks for the information. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. S E SMITH, Acing Secretary ATTEST: CINDY FINE Y, Chairperson,/ Palm Desert Planning Commission ' /tm 26