Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0204 ��'�� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - FEBRUARY 4, 2003 � ` �� 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE .� * � � �. � � � � * * � * � .� * � �. � * � .� �. .� .� .� � �- -� � .� � � � �. � �. � � * �. I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Finerty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Lopez led in the pledge of allegiance. 111. ROLL CALL Members Present: Cindy Finerty, Chairperson Sonia Campbell, Vice Chairperson Sabby Jonathan Jim Lopez r,,., Dave Tschopp Members Absent: None Staff Present: Steve Smith, Planning Manager Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Mark Diercks, Transportation Engineer Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Smith summarized pertinent January 23, 2003 City Council actions. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. �.. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 i ; z V!!. CONSENT CALENDAR J None. VIII. PUBLIC HEAR(NGS 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. CUP 02-36 - WHITNEY J.S. COFFER AND GINA L. ELLIS, Applicants Request for approval of a conditional use permit to operate a three room massage establishment within a proposed 1 ,575 square foot health facility at 74-333 Highway 111 , Units 106 and 107. Chairperson Finerty noted that the recommended action was to continue ' ..� this item and asked if there was any staff report. Mr. Smith indicated that there were problems with the mailed notices on this case so they were obligated to move it on to the meeting on the 18th. Chairperson Finerty asked if the public hearing should be opened. Mr. Smith said yes. Chairperson Finerty o ened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the project. There was no one. The public hearing was left open. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, by minute motion continuing Case No. CUP 02-36 to February 18, 2003. Motion carried 5-0/ B. Case No. CUP 85-2 Amendment #2 - THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN BERNARDINO, Applicant Request for approval of an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow construction of an 8,489 square foot i 2 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 � addition to the Sacred Heart Elementary School located at 43-775 Deep Canyon Road. Mr. Smith noted that the commission received a letter from Jackie German of 43-800 Florine Avenue and copies had been distributed to them. Mr. Urbina addressed the commission. He showed the commission the project site plan and explained the proposal involved construction of two new buildings. The closest building to Florine Avenue would have a setback of 30 feet and there was also a proposed expansion of an existing building to allow for more offices. There were two new classrooms proposed in the two new buildings. Each classroom would have a maximum of 35 students for first grade and second grade. According to the applicant, there was a high demand for enrolling children in the school and there was not enough capacity to meet that demand. The buildings would also house a new computer lab. Approximately two months ago construction of a new six-foot high �+ wrought iron fence was completed along the westerly boundary of the project site along the east side of Florine Avenue to prevent and discourage people from parking on Florine Avenue and then walking across the parking lot, either to the school or to the church. The existing parking lot at the site has 534 parking spaces. The highest day of use for all the parking spaces is on Sundays when the school would not be in operation. There was also a preschool located at the southerly end of the site on Fred Waring Drive. The time of day when the elementary school, preschool and worship services occurred Monday through Fridays from approximately 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. There was an overlap in time that those three buildings were in use. Staff visited the project site during two mornings at approximately 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. There was an abundance of parking spaces available and over half the parking lot was available. The parents who drop off and pick up the school children access the site either through Fred Waring Drive or three entrances off of Deep Canyon Drive. They form a loop system and drop off the children near the front entrance to the school. frr 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 ; � � .� Mr. Urbina showed a colored perspective elevation showing the new addition. The building would be a flat-roofed building with materials which would include colored concrete, block and stucco that would match the contemporary style architecture of the existing building. As mentioned by Mr. Smith, Mr. Urbina noted that staff received a letter this evening in opposition from the property owner of an existing home that is surrounded on three sides by the existing church parking lot. When staff visited the site during the weekday mornings, they did not observe any people parking on Florine Avenue using the church or the school, although the applicant stated in a letter that he has observed people utilizing the church facilities parking on Florine Avenue. Mr. Urbina said that might continue to occur regardless of whether the school expansion was approved or not. The applicant had stated that the access gate in the wrought iron fence closest to the proposed expansion would remain locked. The purpose of that gate was to allow pedestrian access to a member of the church who lives in an existing single family residence immediately to the north of the proposed expansion. ; ; Staff was recommending that the Planning Commission approve � Amendment #2 to CUP 85-02 based on the findings and conditions of approval in the draft resolution. Commissioner Jonathan indicated that in the staff report it was noted that the parking lot has 56 new spaces, bringing the total to 440 spaces. But the columnar illustration indicates that the total number of spaces is 534. He asked for clarification. Mr. Urbina explained that the addition occurred with a prior amendment to the application. Commissioner Jonathan asked if there were in fact 534 spaces or 440. Mr. Urbina said the figure of 534 was taken from the previous amendment that expanded the parking lot. He thought the applicant could address that point. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the total expansion they were looking at is about 8,500 square feet. The staff report indicates that the student capacity would increase by a potential of 186 new students. Mr. Urbina said that was based on the off-street parking formula in the Zoning Ordinance. However, the applicant stated that the school administration wouid not allow more than 70 new students to be located in the , proposed new buildings. So the 186 students mentioned in that table � i 4 i"'� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 � was misleading. It was just based on the formula in the off-street section of the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Jonathan said that was related to parking and pointed out that obviously there was no way two new classrooms were going to house 186 new students. Mr. Urbina said that was correct. He also confirmed that they were looking at 70 new students, not 186. Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. TIM HOLT of Holt Architects in Palm Desert stated that he was representing the Diocese. His address was 41-555 Cook Street in Palm Desert. Mr. Holt stated that Mr. Urbina addressed the scope of the project adequately. He was prepared to respond to any questions. He said there had been a slight adjustment in the program at Sacred Heart School that would make a slight adjustment to what was described earlier. The four classroom addition that is proposed would now �""' essentially accommodate 7th and 8th graders and the third and fourth new classrooms were for the purpose of an expanded science lab. There wasn't one at the school right now. And a new computer lab which would essentially serve to accessorize the existing curriculum. Mr. Holt stated that the building was positioned in such a way to relate to the existing school. There was a covered walkway which would tie the pedestrian circulation back into the existing facility. The primary student circulation would take place in that area. The new parking lot that exists today just immediate(y south of the proposed addition was an additional parking area that was constructed in the last five or six months. He believed that might contribute a little bit to the discrepancy that commission noted a few minutes ago. The 534 figure was the correct overall figure for the site. He asked for any questions. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the number of parking spaces required was 225 and provided was 534. He asked if the requirement of ` 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 � � 225 was not just for the school but also the sanctuary. He asked if 225 was for the entire facility. Mr. Urbina indicated that the 225 spaces reflected the number of required spaces only for the school including the expansion. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the 534 was what was available not just for the school, but the entire facility. Mr. Urbina said that was correct. The 225 in reality might be an unrealistic number as far as the school actually needing 225 spaces, It most likely by itself would never need 225 spaces, but that was the number arrived at based on using the formula in the existing off-street parking section of the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Urbina knew what the total parking requirement was for the entire facility including the sanctuary, the offices, and classroom, etc. Mr. Urbina said he didn't have that figure. Mr. Holt said ihat this was the first time in their experience, either in public or private school construction in planning, that they had a parking requirement for an elementary-middle school in this � proportion. Obviously these students don't drive and they were � providing by ordinance requirement a vehicie space for every three students and they could see where that disproportion appeared to be just an obvious thing and yet it was the calcu(ated number that is derived from the requirement. He said that was a little unusual. Commissioner Tschopp indicated that in the staff report it was noted that in 1985 the church was expanded and asked if Mr. Holt knew how long the church had been there. Mr. Holt said he wasn't sure. Mr. Urbina thought phase one of the church was there at least in the early 1960's, perhaps the late 1950's. Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR of the project. There was no one. Chairperson Finerty asked for OPPOSITION to the project and asked if Mrs. German wished to address the commission. She noted that all of the commissioners had read her letter. � � 6 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 � MRS. JACKIE GERMAN, 43-800 Florine Avenue in Palm Desert, addressed the commission. She said she wanted to comment on Mr. Urbina's statement that he visited the neighborhood at 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. She wanted to invite him to come between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. when people are dropping off their school kids and also when they have special events happening at the school and at the church. Because they have a meeting almost every night. Then she wanted them to come on Saturday evening right before the Saturday evening service and observe the people parking in front of her house and on the sidewalk and up and down Florine. Then she would like him to come on Sunday morning and observe. She has people on one side of her house and it was just a wooden fence. They park right next to her fence, right next to her backyard, right next to her bedroom patio. With what they had done so far to her house like she said in her letter, it was amazing it was still standing. It was very frustrating because they have done so much building and tearing down and rebuilding and there was so much traffic with all of this going on. Even though the new addition would face their property, it still impacted her residential '�""' neighborhood. She said the commission was welcome to come and observe what it was like to live right there. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mrs. German had spoken to the people from the church about these problems with people parking in front of her home. Mrs. German stated that she understood that they weren't supposed to have access once they built the fence to the parking lot. But now they had a wide open space at the other end near the nuns' home. They have a six-foot high fence. Now they were going to leave the gate. She understood the church owns all the homes on the other side of the street and they have access � through their backyard so she didn't understand why they needed a fence there if not to accommodate the people who were using her street to access the facility. Commissioner Jonathan stated that what he was getting at was in terms of specific problems that she has experienced, he asked if she had addressed those kinds of incidents specifically with the church. i�.r 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 � Mrs. German said she didn't even know who to talk to and she � had some real estate people call her and some people who attend the church call her and asked her why she hadn't moved. But no one had actually contacted her. She had a neighbor across the street who told her it was for the cF�urch and she had to accept that. She said she had a couple of people from the Boa�d tell her that if she didn't move, that they were going to tear down all the houses and she would lose the value of her property. All she asked them to do was provide her a comparable house in the same neighborhood and they could have her house, but they didn't want to do that. She felt like she was being harassed. Someone called her that had a buyer. The church offered 51 13,000. She asked where she was going to live in Palm Desert for that amount. Commissioner Jonathan thought it sounded like she hadn't had direct conversations with church people about specific problems she had experienced. Mrs. German said one gentleman said he was a member of the Board and represented the church. � Commissioner Campbell asked where the wooden fence was located that Mrs. German mentioned. If it was north, south or east. Mrs. German said it was east on her property. Commissioner Campbell asked if she had quite a few people parking right next to her fence. Mrs. German said she had them parking on all sides, but this one particularly was a problem. On the other side was her driveway, but on that side was her bedroom, patio and her backyard where the dogs were. Commissioner Campbell asked if that was right next to the new parking lot they just built. Mrs. German said yes. ; � i 8 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 r�.. Chairperson Finerty asked if anyone else wished to speak in OPPOSITION. MR. EDWARD PEREZ, 43-760 Buena Circle, in Palm Desert, stated that he was part owner of the home on Florine. One thing that was kind of misleading was the fence. The fence goes so many feet and it ends. It was not blocking anything. That was why people had access on Sunday morning to park on Florine and walk into it. His understanding was that the fence was supposed to block those people from going in there. He didn't know if it was going to be completed. They hadn't done anything in approximately six to eight weeks. That fence just stands there. He asked if there was someone he could ask about the fence. He also said the Planning Commission was being misled. They thought there was a fence blocking the people from going in there. There wasn't. There was an opening where they left a lot open. Probably where they were going to build the student buildings. That had been ieft open where people track across the fence. As '�"'' far as he was concerned it was a liability to the church themselves with people walking in the loose gravel. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Perez was speaking of the fence along Florine. Mr. Perez said yes and pointed out the location on the map. Commissioner Jonathan asked if it would become a non issue when the structures were built. Mr. Perez said not really because they were going to put a gate there. He didn't know why the nuns needed a gate because their fence was adjacent to the church buildings and they could put a gate there. That would keep it completely blocked. Because someone would forget to lock that gate and who would be responsible for keeping it locked? He had no objection if they put in a fence without a gate there. �.. 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 � � � � �i Chairperson Finerty closed the public hearing and asked the commission for comments. Commissioner Jonathan said he had a question for the applicant. The gate that Mr. Perez just spoke of, he asked if that type of gate could be placed between the two structures rather than on Florine. Mr. Holt said there was a lockable gate proposed between the buildings at Florine. The adjacent residence to the north was owned by the church and occupied by the nuns that teach at the school. The purpose of the gate was exclusively for their use. It would be locked and they would be the only ones with a key and authorized to access that point. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the gate would be on Florine. Mr. Holt confirmed that the gate would face Florine. Commissioner Jonathan asked if it was possible to place the gate so that it wasn't on Florine, but instead went directly from the residence to the � rest of the church facility. Mr. Holt said it would be possible to do that. It would require an opening in the existing masonry wall. The assumption that was made regarding the new wrought iron fence that would occur, it tied directly into the southwest corner of the proposed new building. So there would be no possible vehicular or pedestrian access through this side yard area to Florine in the future. Commissioner Lopez asked where the wrought iron fence would end. Mr. Holt said it would terminate down at the wall that would be the northern boundary of her property. Chairperson Finerty asked for commission comments. Commissioner Campbell stated that she takes her parents to church there on Sundays and they went to church at 9:30 a.m. and she picked them up at 10:30 a.m. They changed and then went to church at 1 1 :00 and � 10 � MlNUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 `. she picked them up at 12:00. She stated that it is a busy church and the parking lot is busy. But the new addition to the parking lot to the north of Ms. German and to the south of Ms. German, there was hardly anyone there. And just on the east of her fence was just a driveway and when she picked up her parents from church in the morning, she goes in on Deep Canyon in front of the church and just went behind Ms. German's home, exited on Fred Waring and looking down Florine, she didn't see anyone there. So she didn't think that even on Sunday when it would be the busiest time for the church goers, she didn't see a problem for the new addition where the parking lot was made or on Florine. For the other services they have in the mornings between 7:30 and 8:00 a.m., she didn't think all of the parking (ot would be filled up during those hours. As Mr. Holt pointed out, there is adequate parking and these children don't drive. So she didn't think they would have any problems as far as a lot of traffic was concerned in that parking lot. So she was in favor of the addition. Commissioner Jonathan also thought that the basic use of the church was appropriate for that area. He knew there had been some issues �""" between that use and the surrounding residential properties. But by and large he thought they had been resolved. The conditional use permit before the commission which was to expand the existing use, not to change it, by adding some educational facilities, a computer lab and a little bit of office space he didn't think was a significant departure from the existing use nor did the addition of the number of students and up to four new faculty employees and five new administrative employees in his opinion that did not significantly impact the use or the parking demand. He thought the design was attractive and appropriate. More importantly, Architectural Review Commission thought so as well. Circulation had been vastly improved with what had been done. So i�gress, egress, and circulation was effective. Based on his experience and on the staff report, he thought the parking was adequate. He asked staff in the future to be a little bit more careful with the charts. When they look at what is provided versus what is required, he wanted to be make sure they were talking apples to apples. Regardless of that, he thought that parking overatl was adequate. He stated that he would like to see that gate off the street and put between the structure and the rest of the church. That seemed to him to be the logical enhancement. With that he would support the application. � 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 Commissioner Lopez concurred. Originally when they were Iooking at the expansion of this facility they placed a condition that access off Florine would be relocated to Deep Canyon and Fred Waring. That took care of a iot of problems they were having regarding traffic going through that residential area which was a concern. His understanding was that when the wrought iron fence is complete and the buildings are completed that this will continue to help, as well as the expansion of Fred Waring. The access was even better, He thought the design was excellent. The parking was also adequate and he concurred with Mr. Holt that these students wouldn't drive. For the most part they would be dropped off. He thought it was a good use of the land and facilities for the further education of the students. So he concurred. Commissioner Tschopp agreed. He thought it was well designed and would fit into the Sacred Heart project very well. He concurred that they needed to ask the applicant, even with the plans in place to put up the wrought iron fence, to take additional measures that parents and parishioners attending the church and school recognize that there is a residential neighborhood right next door. So he would like to see the ga#e moved and since it was just a limited access for staff living in the house, � it could actually be locked and used only for staff. Then he would also like the applicant to agree to in the future work with the neighborhood should there be additional problems with parents dropping off their kids, traffic and parking on the surrounding neighborhood streets. If the applicant agreed to do that and with the help of Code Enforcement and perhaps the Police Department, that would help to keep the tenor of the neighborhood intact. Chairperson Finerty asked if there was a motion. Commissioner Campbell stated that she would move for approval with the addition of condition number eight replacing the gate for the sisters to move from their backyard into the new building area instead of going from Florine Avenue. Commissioner Lopez seconded the motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. , 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 i.. It was moved by Commissioner Campbeli, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2183, CUP 85-2 Amendment #2, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 5-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Request for clarification of condition of approval for Case Nos. PP 02-20 and DA 97-2 AMENDMENT 1 - PREST / VUKSIC ARCHITECTS Request for clarification of a condition of approval relative to installation of a two-foot high block wall, Planning Commission Resolution No. 2181 , Condition No. 13. Mr. Smith explained that at the last meeting the commission considered this project on Technology Drive. Staff circulated a copy of Resolution No. 2181 to them with Condition No. 13. Since the meeting they learned a little bit more and one of the items was that the wall in question would �""' need to be placed in the Caltrans right-of-way. This whole matter would be going before Council on the 13th of February. Considering that it was in the Caltrans right-of-way and the fact that that elevation of the building and the landscaping would probably solve the concern they had, staff was strongly considering recommending to the Council that they remove that condition. So basically they were asking the commission before the matter gets to the Council, if they had known that the wall was going to be in the Caltrans right-of-way, if they would still have imposed the condition. They weren't asking the commission to waive the condition. They weren't in a position to do that at this point, but they wanted to get some preliminary comment from them so that they could advise the Council on it. Commissioner Lopez noted that he would have to abstain. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he was one of the individuals that advocated the wall, but at that time, more important in his mind was the landscaping on the hill which he thought was a more effective means of ameliorating the view from the offramp from that section of the road. The view looking down into the roof equipment and into the rear of the i�.. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 # � i � property where the rear of the doors and commercial activity would take place. He said he discussed the matter with staff and he was persuaded that the landscaping had been modified so that it would be effective in achieving that goal. Therefore, a two-foot wall became superfluous and in his mind it wasn't a necessity at this point. Commissioner Tschopp said that if the removal of the two-foot wall didn't impact anything else, including the landscaping or the view, then he had no problem with eliminating that condition. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Chairperson Finerty also concurred. She asked if they needed a minute motion. Mr. Smith said no. Staff would just indicate what the comments of the commission were. Action: None. � t XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES � A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES - (January 22, 2003) Commissioner Campbell stated that it was informational. B. CIVIC CENTER STEERING COMMITTEE - (No meeting) C. DESERT WILLOW COMMITTEE - �No meeting) D. GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE - (January 30, 2003) Chairperson Finerty noted that the committee discussed circulation and whether or not they would like to have traffic Level of Service C or D and they were waiting for the traffic models to come back. E. LANDSCAPE COMMlTTEE - (No meeting) F. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE - (No meeting) , � 14 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 r.. G. PALM DESERT/RANCHO MIRAGE MONTEREY AVENUE CORRIDOR PLANNING WORK GROUP - (No meeting) H. ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) XII. COMMENTS Commissioner Jonathan informed the commission that there was a meeting of the second unit ordinance subcommittee scheduled on February 6 at 9:00 a.m. Mr. Smith noted that the Housing Authority tour was on Tuesday, February 1 1 at 9:00 a.m. Commissioner Campbell indicated that she had already rsvp'd. XIII. ADJOURNMENT �"' It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. The motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.m. ��-��-� i � . PHILIP DRELL, ecretary ATTEST: . � ��- �.(r '� /��' l' CINDY FINE TY, Chairper o Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm � 15