Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0617 go-7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION r.r - TUESDAY - JUNE 17, 2003 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Campbell called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Finerty led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Sonia Campbell, Chairperson Cindy Finerty Jim Lopez Dave Tschopp Members Absent: Sabby Jonathan Staff Present: Steve Smith, Planning Manager Dave Erwin, City Attorney Tony Bagato, Planning Tech. Mark Diercks, Transportation Engineer Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Smith indicated there were no pertinent June 12, 2003 City Council actions. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ,,., None. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 i VII. CONSENT CALENDAR None. 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. A. Case No. CUP 09-83 Amendment#1 -JOSLYN SENIOR CENTER OF THE COVE COMMUNITIES, Applicant Request for approval of an amendment to the existing conditional use permit to allow a 25-space parking lot expansion on vacant land west of the existing parking lot adjacent to Catalina Way at the Joslyn Cove Senior Center at 73-750 Catalina Way. Mr. Smith explained that the Senior Center wished to expand their parking lot. They acquired the property to the west which would connect directly to the existing parking lot. There would be no new access from Catalina. He showed a drawing of the layout of the proposed expansion. He stated that staff was suggesting some modifications to the existing layout. The changes would not impact the number of spaces created. That would remain at 25. Staff wanted to create a planter along the west side adjacent to the existing block wall to create a buffer zone so that people weren't driving into that wall. The dimension on the property was 92 feet, so in order to maintain the ten spaces across on the top and bottom, they could only create a two-foot buffer. With those modifications as described in the staff report which would be implemented into the grading plan, staff was recommending approval, subject to conditions which would implement the changes. Mr. Smith noted that for purposes of CEQA this was a Class 32 categorical exemption. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17 2003 Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. MICHAEL BERNARD, the Executive Director of the Joslyn Senior Center, 73-750 Catalina Way in Palm Desert, addressed the commission. He thought the staff report summed up their request. They needed extra parking. They currently had 105 spaces and with the amount of activities they had going on year around which caused people to park on the surface streets on both sides in the neighborhood, adding these additional 25 spaces would make it a lot safer and easier access for the seniors and other visitors to the center. He said they would be following the same landscaping plan. He said the Phase 1 part of the plan was done last year. That was when they added landscaping and carports to the existing lot. They would duplicate the same landscape plan with the same type of trees and bushes to maintain a consistent look. Commissioner Lopez asked if Mr. Bernard was comfortable with the tAw suggestions of staff regarding parking flow. Mr. Bernard said yes. Commissioner Finerty asked if any of the parking would be covered. Mr. Bernard said no, not at this time. He said in the future if they received funding to do that they would consider it. Chairperson Campbell asked if Mr. Bernard thought the new parking area would be full year round. Mr. Bernard said it would be mostly in season, but even during the summer they had some special events that could draw 150 people or more to the center in addition to some of the regular activities. They had days this week when the parking lot was full and people were parking on the street. It was something they would probably need on a year round basis soon. %1W 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 3 Chairperson Campbell asked for clarification that it wasn't for prolonged periods of time during the day, like five, six or seven hours. Mr. Bernard concurred that they didn't have people come that would spend the whole day. They would come for morning activities and they also had afternoon activities, so there was a lot of turnover in the parking lot. Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There being none, the public hearing was closed and Chairperson Campbell asked for commission comments. Commissioner Finerty said she was glad to see someone coming forward to actually add parking. She moved for approval. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2206, approving CUP 09-83 Amendment#1, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. B. Case No. TT 30706 - PORTOLA POINTE, LLC, Applicant Request for approval of a tentative tract map to subdivide 5.05 acres into 16 single-family lots located on the west side of Shepherd Lane, 2600 feet south of Gerald Ford. Mr. Bagato noted that this was another vacant 5.05-acre lot roughly 2,600 feet south of Gerald Ford and 660 feet west of Portola. The property was zoned Planned Residential, five units per acre. The proposed tentative tract map would subdivide the five-acre parcel into 16 single-family lots. The subdivision would create a cul-de-sac street extending west from Shepherd Lane and ending right before the City-owned property. The individual lots would range from roughly 9,000 square feet to 13,000. Access to the street would be via Shepherd Lane. The single family homes had not gone to { 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 Architectural Review. They would be custom homes and they would comply with the standards of the R-1 8,000 zone. Those standards were included in the staff report. The tract map met all the Planned Residential requirements, all the physical improvements for the Palm Desert Subdivision Ordinance and California State Map Act and the proposed density was 3.1 units per acre, which was below the allowed maximum of five units per acre. The findings necessary for approval were in the staff report. Due to the number of projects already approved in the area, staff considered this an infill development for CEQA purposes and recommended approval of the findings and the resolution. Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. DAVID HACKER, 68-487 Highway 111 in Cathedral City, addressed the commission. He stated that he was the engineer for the developer. They concurred with the staff recommendation, had no additional comments, and requested approval. Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to address the commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There being none, the public hearing was closed and Chairperson Campbell asked for commission comments. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2207, approving TT 30706, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. C. Case No. CUP 03-09 - JIFFY LUBE / COACHELLA PETROLEUM, INC., Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to construct and operate an 1,811 square foot oil change facility on an r`" 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 existing pad in the Toys R Us center at 72-499 Fred Waring Drive. Mr. Smith explained that the property in question was a vacant pad some 3,640 square feet which was created as part of the original parcel mapping on the Toys R Us site in 1989. The applicant proposed to construct a single- story 1,811 square foot oil change facility on the pad. The facility would have two service bays, a restroom area, and a waiting room. The project also included a full basement that would be used for storage purposes. Mr. Smith indicated that this would be a single-story building with a maximum height of 19 feet with a tower element at 25'9". The Architectural Commission granted preliminary approval. He indicated that when it first went through ARC they were looking at a two-story building 36 or 37 feet in height. So they had seen considerable change and improvement through that process. By way of background, Mr. Smith explained that in September of 1991 the Planning Commission approved a request for a similar use on this property. The decision was called up for Council review. There were public hearings held in November and December of 1991. At that time council members expressed concern with visibility of the service bays from Fred Waring, the reduced setback compared to Toys R Us, and the poor location for this type of use. At that point in time there was also considerable concern expressed by the property owner to the north, who at that time was DSL. Eventually that applicant withdrew the request. Staff felt that this applicant had addressed to a great degree the concerns which had been brought forward in 1991. The views into the service bay would be screened with an eight to 12-foot high wall along the north side of the property. The wall would be stuccoed to match the building. It had the arches to match the rest of the architecture. This wall would prevent views into the service bays. The existing 20-foot deep landscape strip adjacent to Fred Waring would remain and would be enhanced. This building was smaller, it had a 36-foot setback from the pad limit and was 56 feet from Fred Waring. It was further back than the Toys R Us building. He said this was the same location and the same use, so the concern relative to the use of this property remained. Staff saw it being different at 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 this point in that they have a smaller project with better mitigation and they had seen the pad sit there vacant for 12 years leaving the loading dock area and the storage bins associated with Toys R Us exposed to view. In conclusion Mr. Smith felt the project had addressed the design concerns that were noted previously. There were very few alternative uses which could make use of a pad 3,600 square feet. Staff felt the construction of this facility would cut off the view of the Toys R Us loading dock, generally enhancing the overall appearance. Staff was recommending approval, subject to the conditions contained in the resolution. He also noted that yesterday staff was contacted by a representative for Toys R Us advising that there were CC&R's in effect on the property which might or might not limit the use on the pad. The City Attorney had an opportunity to review that if the commission needed direction. Mr. Smith stated that those comments did not change the staff recommendation and continued to recommend approval. �., Chairperson Campbell asked for comments by the City Attorney. Mr. Erwin stated that basically the position of the City has been and still was that we do not enforce CC&R's. They were private contractual rights between the parties. The City basically dealt with its zoning ordinance. To the extent that there might be disagreements with regard to CC&R's, that was left to the private parties to resolve. Commissioner Lopez asked if this project went through the approval process and continued, if that would be an item that would be brought forth to City Council. Mr. Erwin stated that was the same position of the City Council. The City does not enforce CC&R's. We don't interpret them or enforce them. The City made decisions based on its ordinances, regulations and conditions. Chairperson Campbell indicated that the commission could approve it and then the association could turn it down. Mr. Erwin said that was a possibility. Commissioner Tschopp asked if Toys R Us provided written clarification as to their objection, if it was the oil and lube use, the size of the building, or the parking impact. Mr. Erwin said their objection, as stated, was that they MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 believe this to be a prohibited use under their CC&R's and they equated this to an auto body shop. Chairperson Campbell asked if Toys R Us had a suggestion of what might be built in this location. Mr. Erwin didn't believe that Toys R Us controlled the property. They were one of the individuals who potentially had the ability to enforce some of the CC&R's, but they didn't control this property. He thought that anyone who controlled this property had consented to this application or it wouldn't be before them. Commissioner Tschopp asked for clarification about the height. Mr. Smith explained that it was 19 feet. On the west side of the building, the side fronting the maintenance road/Palm Valley Channel, Commissioner Tschopp asked if the landscaping back there would include a lot of trees or if it would be bermed to screen the back side. Mr. Smith said no. The building was actually right on that property line. There was no room for it. Chairperson Campbell asked if the bays on the Washington Street Jiffy Lube faced Washington Street. Mr. Smith said yes. Chairperson Campbell indicated that she never noticed them. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the parking was part of an overall agreement and if there was adequate parking onsite for this use. Mr. Smith said yes, especially if they were to remove the storage bins that are sitting there taking up parking. Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. ERNEST RAMIREZ, 12188 Central Avenue in Chino, California, stated that they proposed the project and went through several generations of the building. Initially they asked for a two-story building larger than this one, then came back and settled on a much smaller building that they felt would fit on the site. They were in concurrence with the conditions as set forth as part of the approval process and accepted those conditions. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 it Commissioner Lopez asked for clarification for the record as to the daily activities of a Jiffy Lube. Mr. Ramirez said that the servicing of the vehicles was basically lubrication only. He noted that there was mention of an objection to the use of that, but they were quoting a section of the 1989 CC&R's on page six that specified the uses not allowed, and it specifically stated auto body shop. This was a lubrication facility, ten minutes in and out. He said they didn't expect much more than that. Service would be inside the bays. They included a facade in the front because the bays were facing the street. He didn't think most people noticed them even if they did face the street because there was such a short period of time that they see it. In this case with the wall, he thought it gave them a better look. As far as service, the facility was strictly lubrication. Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this application. 6W MR. ANTHONY GINESSE, the Store Director of Toys R Us, 72-314 Highway 111, addressed the commission. He stated that they were strongly opposed to this use. Citing the CC&R's that were amended in 1989, it was a prohibited use. They were citing the auto body use. The other factor was that in the back parking lot, they have a trash container/dumpster and when it was unloaded, they needed that space, those parking spaces directly in front of the proposed site, to back in to pull out the trash container to empty it. With parking and other cars there, they would be unable to access the trash container. It would also make for a difficult entry when they bring their trailers into the back parking lot. They actually had to go through the parking lot, pull all the way far to the right, then back into their loading bay. If those parking spaces were continually full, that would create a problem for them. Chairperson Campbell noted that the pad had been there for many years, so someone must have known that something would be built there. They shouldn't have put those trash bins there and they might have to be moved. %W 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 i E s Mr. Ginesse said it was actually attached to the building. It couldn't be relocated. They would have to have some other kind of access. He said it was a very small pad and had been used for storage over the last couple of years during construction. It backed directly up to the wash. That area was a problem area as far as a security standpoint. They find the homeless there, shopping carts and trash and it was a problem for them. Chairperson Campbell suggested that if something was built there, they wouldn't have the homeless or trash there. Mr. Ginesse said that he was just voicing their concern that they were strongly opposed to the proposed use. Commissioner Tschopp asked if it was Mr. Ginesse's contention that nothing would fit on this irregular, small lot next to Toys R Us. Mr. Ginesse didn't think that was the case. With the amount of flow and traffic going through there and parking spaces, there were very few parking spaces available. It was mentioned that they had some storage containers there. Those had been approved by their association and were part of their normal containers as they go through various seasons of the year and they actually held product for the store. That was their secondary concern as well. Parking became an issue during their season. MR. GREG PETTIS, Community Affairs Director for Coachella Petroleum at 68-279 East Palm Canyon Drive in Cathedral City, addressed the commission. Referring to the site plan, he thought the commission could see the traffic pattern and on the left hand side where the traffic would go in and out the traffic toward the other additional parking spaces were not effected. From their count they had more spaces than what was required of the use. As mentioned, this had been an unused lot for over a decade. It was one of the few remaining spots in a retail area of Palm Desert that could be a blighted area. They believed their building would substantially improve the value of that neighborhood. It would take a 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 tow away the negative sight of the wash there, as well as provide the additional lighting and security at night that should help alleviate some of the other problems. He said they would be more than happy to work with Waste Management should there be a problem with access to the trash dumpster. They believed there was more than sufficient space to get into their building, but they would be more than happy to work with them to assist their neighbor. Chairperson Campbell closed the public hearing and asked for commission comments. Commissioner Lopez stated that in reviewing the site and the application, the only concerns he had were the previous concerns expressed by the City Council with regard to the poor location for this type of use. However, the property had been vacant for 12 years and the area back there was a bit of an eyesore. Looking from Fred Waring Drive and seeing several storage bins and Waste Management bins back there and then envisioning what would be there, he thought it would be a good fit for this particular pad and would improve the area. He didn't know of another use for the area back there. Reviewing the options, he thought this might be a perfect match. Parking wouldn't be an issue. It looked like they had an abundance of parking and might be able to work out an agreement with Toys R Us for a storage bin back there that would be hidden from plain sight because of the building. He agreed that back area was a natural attraction for the homeless or kids to party back there, but with a facility back there and appropriate security, he thought that might all go away. He saw the proposal as an improvement to that particular area and was in favor. Commissioner Tschopp felt this was a difficult case. Looking at the concerns of the past, one being that this was a poor location for this type of use, he didn't perceive this as being any worse than car washes or gas stations that were sporadic throughout the city that were well maintained kept to high standards. So he didn't see that as being a problem. He hoped that the landscaping on Fred Waring was adequate to shield it and improve the use of the building. It was a difficult location because it wasn't a destination type of business location. It was another poorly designed shopping center where there was always one lot kind of hanging out there and this was one of them. *MW 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 It was difficult, but he didn't have a problem with the proposed use and he thought the parking and access was adequate and he was in favor. Commissioner Finerty appreciated the applicant trying to alleviate concerns, but thought it was poor location for this type of use. That area was very congested and she didn't think they would have adequate landscaping in the back. It seemed they were just trying to squeeze something in there. She didn't know what the proper business should be there and regretted that the pad had been vacant for 12 years, but she thought putting in this type of use would compound the problem. Chairperson Campbell thought this building with the landscaping with 20-feet adjacent to Fred Waring would enhance that corner. It would be a right-turn in and a right-turn out so there shouldn't be traffic congestion. Having this building would alleviate the homeless and other problems. She felt it would enhance the back of the Toys R Us building. Toys R Us were probably busiest during Christmas and most of the parking was probably in the front, not the back, so she thought this was a good location for that type of business. She was in favor. v.rl Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-1 (Commissioner Finerty voted no.) It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2208 approving CUP 03-09, subject to conditions. Motion carried 3-1 (Commissioner Finerty voted no). D. Case No. TPM 31460 - PACIFIC ENGINEERING & ASSOCIATES, Applicant Request for approval of a tentative parcel map to subdivide a 1.584-acre parcel containing two office buildings and a parking lot into two parcels located at 73-712 and 73-726 Alessandro Drive. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 Mr. Bagato said that this Office Professional zoned property was located between San Pascual and San Juan on the north side of Alessandro. On July 17, 2001, the Planning Commission approved Precise Plan 01-13 allowing the construction of three office building on a 96,000 square foot lot. As part of that project there was a parcel map waiver filed that consolidated five existing lots into two parcels. Those were Parcels A and B. The current proposal was to split Parcel B into two lots. The proposed tentative parcel map would subdivide Parcel B, a 1.5-acre parcel into 28,896 square foot parcels containing a single story 10,168 square foot office building and the second parcel would be a 40,245 square foot pad containing a two-story, 18,016 square foot office building. A mutual access and parking agreement was conditioned on the project to insure that all of the parking requirements would be met for each individual parcel. The findings for approval were listed in the staff report. For CEQA purposes, the project was a Class 15 categorical exemption and staff recommended approval. Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. CARL VOCE, 545 Via Media in Palos Verdes Estates, addressed the commission. He thought the request was self-explanatory. He was trying to divide the two office buildings to have separate parcels. They originally had five lots. It was split into two. Now he was trying to split the two buildings. Chairperson Campbell asked for testimony in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There being none, Chairperson Campbell closed the public hearing and asked for commission comments. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2209 approving TPM 31460, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. �"' 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE CHANGE TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TIME AND PRESENTATION OF A DRAFT RESOLUTION. Commission continued their discussion of changing the meeting time to earlier in the evening. The general consensus was that they wanted to have meetings end earlier in the evening for the public, the commission and staff. The commission also directed staff to limit the number of items on the agenda when staff knew there was controversial items. The commission felt that ending at 9:00 p.m. or 10:00 p.m. would be better than 10:00 p.m. or 11:00 p.m. The final determination was to start the meetings a little earlier at 6:00 p.m. beginning on the first meeting in August. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings and adopting Resolution No. 2210 changing the meeting time to 6:00 p.m. beginning at the first meeting in August. Motion carried 4-0. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES - (No meeting) B. CIVIC CENTER STEERING COMMITTEE - (No meeting) C. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE - (No meeting) D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE - (No meeting) E. ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) XI. COMMENTS 1. Mr. Smith informed commission that the meeting of July 1 was canceled. 2. Commissioner Lopez stated that he would be on vacation the last two weeks in August. 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 17, 2003 XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Chairperson Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m. ...�--` A O—C PHILIP DRELL Secretary ATTEST: SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chairperson Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm 1r %'" 15