Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0203 ��'—� MINUTES � PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY - FEBRUARY 3, 2004 6:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER ' � 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE � * * � � * � * � � � � � � � � � � � �- � � � � �« * � * � � * � � � � � � * � * � I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Campbell called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Jonathan led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Sonia Campbell, Chairperson Sabby Jonathan, Vice Chairperson Cindy Finerty � Dave Tschopp Members Absent: Jim Lopez Staff Present: Phil Drell, Director of Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Steve Smith, Planning Manager Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Planner Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Request for consideration of the November 18, 2003 8:30 a.m. meeting and December 16, 2003 8:30 a.m. meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Chairperson Campbell, approving the 8:30 a.m. meeting minutes of November 18 and December 16, 2003. Motion carried 4-0. � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 ; , � .r�� V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Drell said there were no items on the 22nd and summarized pertinent January 29, 2004 City Council actions. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR None. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. ; � A. Case Nos. TT 31969 and PP 03-24 - SOUTHERN SUN CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Applicant Request for consideration of a recommendation to the City Council of an approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, a precise plan of design, a tentative tract map to subdivide 9.75 acres into 64 single-family lots, modified setbacks for dwellings on the 64 lots, and termination of the existing development agreement (DA 99-3, Ordinance No. 932). Property is located on the south side of Park View Drive between One Quail Place apartments and Fairhaven Drive, more particularly known as 72- 755 Park View Drive and APN's 640-040-001 , 01 1 , 012, 013, 014 and 015. Mr. Smith reviewed the history of the previous project approval on the property. He explained that it was determined by the applicant to be infeasible to construct; therefore, the applicant wished to terminate those approvals and obtain approval of a 64-lot single family tentative tract map as outlined in the staff report. Mr. Smith described the landscaping `. ; and architecture, and distributed material samples. Regarding setbacks '�_ � 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � on the two-story units, the staff report indicated there would be five feet on each side with a minimum of 12 feet of separation. The applicant since advised that there would be ten feet of separation between units. Mr. Smith noted that would also have to be corrected on Exhibit C to the draft resolution. Relative to the two-story, he pointed out the list of modifications the commission would be approving should they approve this project. Mr. Smith explained that the action tonight would be a recommendation to the City Council in that Council would need to formally terminate the development agreement in order to approve this, so the whole package would be given to them. While the lot size would be smaller than the lots to the north and to the east, staff felt the project at six and a half units per acre represented a logical transition between the One Quail Place density of 22 units and the single family areas to the north and east which were in the range of three units per acre. He said the two story 24-foot units comply with the code limit, the architect is attractive and well designed and was given preliminary approval by ARC. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was included. Mr. Smith recommended approval of the proposed �""�" tentative tract map and precise plan with the ten feet of separation. He asked for any questions. Mr. Drell explained that a 36-foot wide street allowed for parking on both sides. That is the standard residential street width and allowed double parking. He also commented that what the commission was seeing before them was the evolution of what they assumed would be condominiums 20 years ago. The marketplace's demand for single family detached housing and the legal problems associated with the product liability lawsuits with condominiums combined to encourage detaching what used to be townhouses and to create side yards. The feeling is that if this zone allowed four of these units to be attached together, which is what typically happened in a condo project, then surely they could be detached. In many respects it is a positive solution to the problems that have been experienced in the past with condominiums. Chairperson Campbell asked if there were any questions of staff. On the site summary, the third page of the packet the commission received, Commissioner Finerty noted that it talked about how many �, acres and dwelling units per acre and there was a section called 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 .� � � greenbelt. She asked if there was a number that belonged there. Mr. Smith was advised the number should be .7 and it should read "Recreation Area/Greenbelt .70". Commissioner Finerty noted that was less than an acre. She asked if these units had front yards. Mr. Smith said yes. On the single story, 15 feet and 20 feet to the garage door. It was the same for the two-story. Commissioner Finerty asked about the back yards. Mr. Smith reported there would be a minimum of 15 feet in each instance and if they looked at the site plan, there would be more provided, but the prescribed minimum is 15. Commissioner Finerty asked if there would be a homeowner's association. Mr. Smith said yes. Commissioner Finerty asked if there would be any pools. Mr. Smith said there were none shown on the plan. Commissioner Finerty asked if the back yards were large enough for a pool. Mr. Smith said there are pools in 20-foot rear yards. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the interior streets allowed for sidswalks. Mr. Smith said they haven't shown them on the map, but they have an eight-foot easement behind the curb. Commissioner Jonathan said that in terms of sidewalks and room to ride bikes, push strollers and � that kind of thing, it wasn't shown at this point. Mr. Smith said that was � correct. He didn't think there was a private community in the city that has sidewalks. He confirmed that they have 36-foot wide streets with parking on both sides. Mr. Smith said that was typical in all the gated communities. Mr. Drell also said in gated communities it is the standard local street section. Commissioner Jonathan said it appeared to him that many of these lot sizes that average a little over 4,000 square feet with homes that average around 2,000 square feet would not in fact support a swimming pool in the rear yard because there are certain setback requirements between a pool and the property line and so forth. He assumed the applicant had not provided an analysis of how many of these lots would accommodate pools. Mr. Smith said no, they hadn't. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the one page Commissioner Finerty referred to earlier had in the upper right-hand section Plan 1, Plan 2, Plan 3 and Plan 4. He asked if that was a realistic layout of how the homes would sit on a lot and the distance between them or if they had something more accurate. Mr. Smith indicated that they were shown on ;:� the tentative map. There were typical lot setbacks shown there and other � � 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3. 2004 � than the change from 12 to ten, the rest was accurate. Commissioner Jonathan said the commission didn't get that map. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the map showed homes on the individual lots. Mr. Smith said it shows three lots and the typical lot se#backs would be 15 in the front, 16 to the house, 24 to the garage on one, and 15 in the rear. Commissioner Jonathan suggested that the map be circulated. Staff did so. Commissioner Jonathan noted that Mr. Smith recommended at the bottom of page five of the staff report that a modification of the standards is needed for these types of smaller lot developments. He asked if staff had studied the issue and had a specific recommendation right now to deal with smaller lot sizes and a standard that would be applied in terms of setbacks, lot coverage, separation on the sides, and so forth. Mr. Drell said yes, kind of what the commission was seeing was staff's recommendation. Commissioner Jonathan asked if they developed standards by application process. Mr. Drell said yes, that was the best time to do it. It was best to look at a real world project as opposed to a hypothetical one and decide whether it works or not. Commissioner Tschopp pointed out that in the staff report it states that ''�"` there are two emergency access points onto Fairhaven and he could only find one on the map. He asked for clarification on the location. Mr. Smith said that if the commission didn't receive the tentative map, he apologized. There is a second driveway north of the one shown on the conceptual site plan. He said it is a fire access only and the end of the street will be a sidewalk area. Commissioner Tschopp asked if there was any plan to signalize the access point for the 64 lots at Park View Drive at this time or if there were any concerns from the Traffic Engineer about the amount of traffic using that street. Mr. Smith noted that there was previously a 250-unit approved project there with considerable staffing, so they were reducing the traffic. He said no, the Traffic Engineer did not express concern or indicate if or when a signal would be warranted. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the previously approved project was a retirement project. Mr. Smith said it was a retirement/continuing care project. Commissioner Tschopp said that it would have been nice to have a comparison of the traffic count between the projects. He asked if there was a breakdown on the number of lots at the smaller size, the 3677 ones. Mr. Smith said there was one at that size. Commissioner Tschopp asked what the average lot size would be. Mr. Smith stated that most of the small lots would be at the 4,232, the 46 by 92 size, and there were � a few lots larger; not many. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 ;h� :� � Commissioner Tschopp asked how many two-story units there would be. Mr. Smith reported there would be 60 two-story units and four one-story units. Mr. Drell stated that the four one-story units were on Fairhaven across the street from the other one-story units. Regarding traffic, One Quail Place has one driveway on Park View. If they assumed that half the units use Park View and half the units use Fred Waring, that's approximately 190 units that are using Park View from One Quail Place and it has never created a problem. Sixty-four units was a relatively small subdivision. Access would be a little better if it would be allowed onto Fairhaven, but due to the desire to isolate the project from the existing neighborhood, their access is all on Park View, a relatively large street that generally didn't carry a lot of traffic except during some periods when the college could have some traffic. With regard to the lot sizes, Chairperson Campbell noted that the staff report indicated 3,677 to 7,294. She asked if there was a lot that was 7,294 square feet. Mr. Smith replied yes, there is one. And there is one at 3,677 square feet. Chairperson Campbell pointed out there were also some dead end streets and she noticed that in a letter from a Rancho � ,:� Mirage planner and he asked how come we didn't have cul-de-sacs at � those dead ends so that there would be room for a fire truck to turn around. She asked if it would be possible to have cul-de-sacs instead of dead end streets. Mr. Smith said yes, with smaller lots. Mr. Drell reported that the Fire Department has the ability to exit onto Fairhaven so they didn't need to turn around, they could continue right onto Fairhaven. He said there were fire gates there. Chairperson Campbell asked if they were at all the dead end streets. Mr. Drell said yes, there are two on Fairhaven. He said they are relatively short, but those two allowed the Fire Department to exit onto Fairhaven. There was one very short one that dead ends into One Quail Place. Chairperson Campbell noted that there were two that ended at One Quail Place. Mr. Drell indicated they are short enough that the Fire Department doesn't have a problem with them, as long as they can turn around in essence in the driveways. Chairperson Campbell asked if this complex was going to be a gated community. Mr. Smith said yes. Chairperson Campbell asked if the entrance would be parallel to the entrance across the street from Park View. Mr. Smith reported that it was directly opposite. Commissioner Jonathan pointed out that the letter from Rancho Mirage �� raised concerns about pad heights and that some of the pads are being 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � artificially elevated. Mr. Smith asked if Commissioner Jonathan was referring to the letter included in the packets or the one received yesterday which was circulated to the commission today. He also noted that a copy of a petition was received today in support and was circulated today. In paragraph four the letter said that at least two of their previous comments had been addressed. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the pad heights had not changed. Mr. Smith said they had. The earlier map showed a difference in elevation between One Quail Place and this one which resulted in a significant wall along the west side. That had been reduced to the point where the retaining now ranged from one to three instead of three to five. Commissioner Jonathan asked if other applications or projects had been processed under the PR-7 zone. Mr. Drell answered yes, Desert Rose is seven units per acre. Commissioner Finerty asked for clarification that those were all single story. Mr. Drell said it is single story attached. He said it is an affordable housing project and they are 1 ,100 and 1 ,200 square foot units. Commissioner Jonathan asked if they had similar exceptions to coverage, setbacks and so forth. Mr. Drell said yes. "'�""'' Commissioner Jonathan asked if there were other projects processed under the PR-7 zone that are apartments or condominiums. Mr. Drell said there is a project on San Luis Rey that is two-story condominiums, south of EI Paseo. He said we don't have much PR-7 property and those are the two that came to mind. There were no further questions and Chairperson Campbell o�ened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. DAVID MOREHEAD informed the commission that he was representing the applicant and Southern Sun Construction. With him was Joe Degrato of Danielian and Associates, the architects that designed the homes, as well as Mike Peroni of the Keith Companies, the civil engineering firm that worked with the site plan and layout. What they were seeing tonight was the result of numerous meetings with the City and Phil Drell making changes. Their objective with Paseo Village was to develop first class homes priced in the 5350,000 range. Their marketing study suggests that this target niche is not being filled adequately and it provides the city with a step up single family home for some of the people who wr 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � :� � can't afford the 5450,000 to 5500,000 and up homes that are currently on the market. Mr. Morehead stated that these would be premium homes in a gated community with first class architecture and an infill location. The size of the lots and number of homes were somewhat dictated to them by the economics of the land cost and buying out the senior development. They believed it would be a nice transition from the two-story One Quail Place apartment project to the single family homes currently on Fairhaven. He said they talked to the significant rnajority of the residents of the Fairhaven neighborhood, showed them the site plan and elevations, and found tremendous support for the homes. Some evidence of these conversations was submitted to the commission and some of the residents were present to give their support of the project. He said he and the architect and engineer were all present to answer any questions. Commissioner Jonathan asked if there would be sidewalks on the easement. ,� ;� � Mr. Morehead stated that it was his understanding that there would be sidewalks. Regarding the back yards, they tried to make most of the backyards 20 feet in depth. They looked at some of the recent homes in the marketplace and even much more expensive homes and 20 feet is a back yard that is somewhat acceptable and did allow for a small pool. Commissioner Jonathan noted that a standard pool is 15 x 30. Mr. Morehead said it wasn't a standard pool. Commissioner Jonathan said he needed some clarification. Mr. Drell indicated that the issue with setbacks to the rear wall was really generated from a building code and they have approved three feet to a back wall. They just had to build the wall of the pool stronger because of the cone of compression created by the rear wall, so typically they could have a pool within five feet of a building and three feet of a back wall which would allow for a 12-foot pool. He commented that he grew up with a 12 x 40 pool with three lanes of lap swimming. � �� � 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 �r Mr. Morehead said the project currently on Portola and Hovley (Venetia), those backyards are roughly 20-22 feet and they have pools in the models and they look quite nice. Those homes were going for 5640,000 today and most have been sold out. Mr. Drell clarified that it was located near Carter School. Commissioner Jonathan asked if it was Mr. Morehead's sense that most lots would accommodate pools. Mr. Morehead said yes. Commissioner Finerty said they talked about a recreation area with a tot lot and barbeque area. She asked if there was anything else. Mr. Morehead said no, that was pretty mu�h it due to the size of the project being just 64 units. They didn't think it was demanding of such a facility. �'` Commissioner Finerty asked if he had given any thought to putting in a community pool. Mr. Morehead said they had originally, but they did the numbers on it and their numbers broke even somewhere around 80 to 85 units to make the pool and community center and they didn't think it would be the quality they wanted to represent with this project. Since they didn't have the room for that many homes, they backed off of that. Commissioner Finerty clarified that she was only talking about a pool, not a community center. Mr. Morehead said they hadn't thought about just a pool. Commissioner Finerty asked if he would be amenable to looking at that. Mr. Morehead said they could look at it, but he didn't think there was room on the project for that unless it went into one of the greenbelt areas. � 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � � � Commissioner Finerty noted there would be room if they removed one lot. Mr. Morehead said quite possibly. He asked if she felt that a single pool would benefit the project. Commissioner Finerty said absolutely. The primary reason was there are a number of bedrooms, most likely there would be kids, they are always hearing that kids don't have anything to do and we have long hot summers and pools offer a great recreation for the kids. Most kids don't want to swim alone in their 12 x 15 pool in their backyard. They enjoy swimming with other kids and a lot of HOA's in the valley offer community pools and she thought it was a big success and she wanted to see that offered, perhaps in exchange for the small lot they talked about. Mr. Morehead said he would like to look at that. Obviously, they wanted the project to be as appealing to as large a number of people as possible. That helped them as well as the community :� itself. He didn't think the cost of a pool impacts the project �.rri significantly, so it wouldn't be a factor of that. It would be the potential size of the pool itself. He wasn't sure if one lot would be adequate for a pool. He asked if he could show the commission where, or perhaps demonstrate this evening that 75% to 80% or more of the homes are of adequate size and backyard to accommodate a pool. He asked if that would alleviate some concerns. Commissioner Finerty said no for the reason that they already talked about not a normal sized pool that the yard could accommodate. It would be a very small pool and because of that she didn't think that was acceptable or in the best interest of this project. Commissioner Jonathan said he would agree, but wouldn't mind giving Mr. Morehead the opportunity to present that option. Pools were in some ways a luxury item, but out here in the desert they edged closer to a necessity. Sagewood was a good example of a planned unit development of 100 homes that has a central community pool without a clubhouse. � They have a barbeque area, bathroom, a pool and two tennis courts. For � � 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3. 2004 �r example, if Mr. Morehead was to combine the recreation areas on the plan with the adjacent lot, that would probably give him more than enough room to do something along those lines. He commented that he isn't an architect or an engineer and wasn't going to tell him how to design the project, but he was giving that as an example of utilizing the space they've already got devoted to recreation in combination with maybe one more lot to accommodate that. But if that wasn't feasible and Mr. Morehead wanted to persuade the commission that another option is doable, then he would be open to that. Mr. Drell added that Driftwood Apartments, which are actually four plexes on Driftwood, there we persuaded the developer to take one of the lots and put in a pool after a great deal of scepticism. After the project was done we were thanked because it was a significant marketing tool. The guy said he couldn't have sold the houses nearly as easily without the pool. Having the pool was some trouble and was another obligation of the association to maintain, but was for all the people who don't want to maintain their own pool and it provided a more inviting community gathering area to create a little more sense of � neighborhood area for all the people who don't want to maintain their own pool. And it provided a more inviting community gathering area to create a little more sense of neighborhood. Commissioner Finerty concurred. Residents could have pool parties and barbeques. Mr. Morehead stated that if it was a strong opinion of the Planning Commission that they need a pool for the project, they would put a pool in and would do so happily. Commissioner Jonathan concurred with what Mr. Drell said. He lived in Sagewood for about 10 years ten years ago and it was utilized and it was a selling point. It was used for birthday parties, other types of gatherings and on weekends families would go there, even some families that had their own pool just because other people and friends and neighbors were gathered there. So if they are looking at a 5350,000 price range, and he wasn't a real estate agent and wasn't going to do his marketing, but speaking as an individual if he was looking at a home, especially if it was an entry home or step up, it would attract him to know that he didn't have to spend additional money to build a pool, at least initially. From a planning standpoint, they are always looking at the � impact, particularly ones high density developments have on the city 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � ,� wr� resources and public pools are extremely limited in the desert at this time. One on-site would be of benefit in his mind. Mr. Morehead asked if he had heard of any problems with any of the homeowner's associations having liability problems. Commissioner Finerty informed him that she is president of her homeowner's association. They have six pools on-site. They are a gated community as well. The HOA would still have to maintain liability insurance. It isn't prohibitive just because there is a pool. He might find that kids on skate boards or kids falling out of a tree might cause much more grief than a pool. Commissioner Tschopp noted that there were quite a few two-story units facing the apartment complex to the east/west. He asked if there were any concerns there and if any plans had been made to landscape those backyards to shield his residents or the residents of the apartment complex from the activities in the backyards. Mr. Drell clarified that they side onto One Quail Place and back onto the apartments on the east. He � indicated that the apartments have a line of carports that back onto that � property. Commissioner Tschopp concurred, but pointed out that they were multi-story and was wondering if the backyards wouldn't be landscaped and it would be up to the residents. Mr. Morehead said the backyards would not be landscaped by the developer, but would be by the individuals. Also, the parking area along One Quail Place has quite a few trees quite tall now that run the entire area, so the landscaping would have to be tailored to fit in with each individual's needs and desires. Commissioner Tschopp said he was curious about the petition signed by numerous individuals in the neighborhood. The petition stated that the 64 homes' average sale price would be approximately 5350,000 and he was curious what he anticipated the low and high to be. Mr. Morehead said that the study they had performed by an outside consultant about nine months ago came in with a price of around 5340,000. Since then the market has moved up quite a bit and they feel that 5350,000 was a low ball number. Of course, ` everything depended on the interest rates and the market. It � � 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2004 � certainly wasn't guaranteed, but they kept a lot of "feelers" out with the consultants finding out the degree of demand and it overwhelmed them at how much demand there is for homes in the area. This particular step up size home is not being offered in this area at all. Commissioner Tschopp asked if there was a low and a high if the average is $350,000. He clarified he wasn't trying to pin him down, he was just interested. Mr. Morehead said it would be based on the square footage and he thought it would be around S 187 a square foot. A little less than $200 a square foot. They were hoping for over 5200 a square foot, but they were trying to be conservative when putting together the plans so they weren't surprised. Commissioner Finerty asked if there were standards in the CC&R's that would dictate how long homeowners would have to install the landscaping. � Mr. Morehead said the landscaping in front of the home would be provided as part of the home cost. If she was talking about the back yards, they could address that. He thought it was a good idea to make sure. He personally hadn't thought of it, but he was sure the attorneys had put it together and it was a very good point. Commissioner Finerty said that now days people get around three months and some associations even dictate a palette of acceptable plant material. She asked if the front yards would be maintained and if there were common areas being maintained by the HOA. Mr. Morehead said they would be individually maintained. They are relatively small front yards and their experience in the past, he envisioned people in this neighborhood taking some pride and making the front yards their own and spending some time there. There was a little bit of a social thing that goes along with that where they meet people in the front yard. � 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � � � ..r�� For the front yards that the developer would provide, Commissioner Finerty asked if there would be grass or some sort of desert scape. Mr. Morehead was pretty sure it would be a desert scape and combination. It was beyond his expertise, but he understood there is a limit to what kind of plants can be planted. Mr. Drell explained that our water conservation standards limit in terms of area to no more than 30% turf. He wasn't sure if Mr. Morehead's project had any turf in the front yard, but they do have an approved landscape plan and staff had a copy of it. Mr. Morehead said they were pretty much told their hands were tied in that area as far as flexibility and he personally liked grass, but apparently that didn't work so well with water conservation. Commissioner Finerty noted that sometimes when they depend on individual homeowners to maintain their lawns, especially out here because of the over seeding, sometimes that didn't always happen and if you have a neighbor next door that doesn't bother to overseed, it tends ,;,� to detract from the neighborhood. Mr. Morehead said that could always be the case and they have found that people that are buying a step up situation, generally the more they pay for a home the more likely they are to keep it up. And with the front yards as small as they are, he didn't anticipate a problem. It would certainly be an agenda item of the homeowner's association, he just didn't know the marketability of it and was a little afraid to dictate that. Chairperson Campbell noted there were some homes on the north side of Frank Sinatra by Portola and they offer a spa and a swimming pool with their home. She asked if he thought about doing that. Mr. Morehead indicated it would be an upgrade option as far as the spa. He would anticipate that most of the homes would take that up and that's what the market study seems to indicate, that there will be quite a bit of upgrade. � `� � wi� 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � Chairperson Campbell thought with two-story homes there would be a lot of children. There were no other questions and Chairperson Campbell asked for any questions in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. Referring to the blue Request to Speak cards submitted, Chairperson Campbell asked Judie Rogers to address the commission. MRS. JUDIE ROGERS, 43-840 Fairhaven Drive in Palm Desert, addressed the commission. She stated that this project would definitely impact her home and she believed in a positive way. She thanked the commission for bringing up the pool area and making it so that there are things that people moving in this neighborhood can enjoy. They have a wonderful neighborhood where they are and have benefited for the last five years or so with Fairhaven Drive being closed off to the public. Prior to that there were quite a few people who used their streets as through ways to get away from the Fred Waring/Monterey traffic. To this day they still have snow birds that come down Arboleda and figure out they can't get �"" out and have to go back down because they think they can cut off some traffic there. The streets are much safer and things don't happen like they used to. There is no late night drinking or people coming there parking. She stated that they are in favor of the project because that is what they wanted all along. A nice community across from them with families, not necessarily a 24/7 facility with traffic, staff, ambulances, fire personnel, etc., crashing through their gates, etc. The main concern they have is for Fairhaven to remain closed. To open it up to allow access into a community like this would 12- fold the traffic, especially because of the density. Naturally they would love to see three houses per acre and somewhat similar to what they have in their neighborhood. They have several people who have changed their homes and added on and they are now third-acre homes and some of them have 3,000 and 4,000 square feet and want to see a nicer element always around them. Being in the real estate field, she said she knows there are no areas left in Palm Desert where they can see any kind of a new � home situation in the southern sphere. The northern sphere is 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � � � basically untapped, but then they get into the areas of wind and a little less desirable areas for houses. She was appreciative that the houses that will line Fairhaven will be single story. She knew some of that was mandatory because of code. She was appreciating that, too. She wouldn't like a two- story home looking into her home and wanted to offer Fairhaven Drive for the community pool area because then they wouldn't be able to vacate and they wouldn't have to worry about it. She wanted to comment on their thankfulness for this project rather than a senior center. They would greatly appreciate going for it again with a big red mark about not opening up Fairhaven Drive. MR. JOHN MARTINEZ, 72-777 Fleetwood in Palm Desert, addressed the commission. He said he owns the property, the apartments, just to the east of this project. He liked the project but had two concerns/questions. He asked about a wall along Park � View facing the street with a setback of how many feet. ,,,,� Mr. Smith stated it would be 20 feet from the curb. Mr. Martinez asked if it would be compatible with the rest or if it would be a different stone. Mr. Smith said it would be a block wall and suggested that the applicant could respond specifically as to the material. Mr. Drell said it had to be either decorative material or stuccoed block. Mr. Martinez said that in other words it would be compatible with the rest of it. Mr. Drell concurred. Mr. Martinez asked if there were going to be fences between the units and if so, what kind of fences for the backyards. Mr. Drell said those fences could be wood. a� t� ,; � 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2004 � Mr. Martinez said that when he talked to staff last week, the lot on Park View at the northeast corner was going to be a holding for all the water from the streets. He asked if that was correct. Chairperson Campbell said it was a retention center, yes. Mr. Martinez said that since his buildings are right next to that, he was concerned about additional water being there and what effect it would have on his buildings. Mr. Drell informed him that the retention area would be below grade and really what it was doing was stopping the water from flowing onto his property. Mr. Martinez said he understood what it was doing, but it was going to be right there. He asked how much effect that would have in undermining his building or not. Mr. Drell said it would have none. It was water soaking into the ground � and was probably a Public Works questions. Commissioner Finerty thought it would be no more effect than if it was next to the units. Mr. Drell concurred. He said it isn't a river, it might pond once every four or five years. Probably the biggest problem is maintenance of it. Sometimes they become wetlands from nuisance water, so there needs to be a provision in the association. Typically those things get dedicated to the City or there was some City control over the retention areas usually. Mr. Morehead thought it might serve to know that the wall will not be on the street side of that retention basin. They decided to bring it around so that it will be a green area landscaped and will look pretty from the street. On the other side of that wall the garages will be out there and he didn't think they would be impacted whatsoever from the water. Mr. Martinez said that was his concern. He has seen projects that he was involved in where sprinkler lines or lines broke and the water was continually running 24 hours and fill up those basins, which end up against a structure which could undermine the foundation. That was his concern. vr.► 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � � � � Mr. Drell stated that we haven't had that problem with any retention basin in the city as long as he's been here. Part of the reason is they hardly ever have any significant water in them at all. They are typically designed, and he thought the overflow was designed, to go into the street before it will go into his property. Mr. Martinez said he likes the project. He was agreeable when they had the assisted care living one and he thought the council should okay it. MR. JOE SCARNA, 72-840 San Juan Drive, stated that he is on the Fairhaven side of the neighborhood. He wanted to echo what Mrs. Rogers said. Seeing these homes come in was a welcome relief based on what the other project was slated for. His one concern would be that Fairhaven, and he was originally opposed to it being closed, but he is glad he was out voted. It turned out to be a great thing for his neighborhood. He said he built a new home on his property. He has almost a 4,000 square foot home on San Juan Drive that he built. Out of ,� the 60 homes there, he thought in his neighborhood about 12 or 14 have been rebuilt, so his neighborhood has been making a change over the years. He thought the Fairhaven Street needs to be kept closed off from everyday traffic. That would be his one concern. He would like to see larger lots, but the adjustments the council made would make it work. He thought it would be a great project for Palm Desert. Traffic on Park View would probably be increased, not decreased, because obviously children grow up and have cars so most of those homes would end up being two or three car homes. With the assisted senior citizens project, none of them drive. The vehicles that would have been on that property would mostly be people who work there and that would have been it. He thought Dave was correct in assuming there will be additional traffic and he would like to see some traffic studies done because they are getting increased traffic to the college. They have Rancho Mirage on the other side. That didn't disappear and those homes are still there and traffic going on on that side, plus their neighborhood ;� uses it as well to Park View. So they are adding 64 more homes � � 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2004 �irr times how many cars? He thought a better traffic study needed to be done and maybe a traffic light needed to be put there and speed limits revisited on that particular street. Other than that he found the project a positive project for their area. MR. JERRY ROGERS, 43-840 Fairhaven, said there are four houses on the east side of this project that are probably most impacted and one is the house where he lives. He said he would be the first one to tell the commission that he was probably the most vehemently opposed individual to the senior project. He is probably the most 100% in approval for this project. But he also wanted to be here for one other thing. He wouldn't reiterate what everyone else has said exclusive of the Fairhaven closure, he thought was very critical. There have been a number of very close accidents even with the streets closed in their area. If those streets open back up those cars are going down those streets at 40-50 mph. But he also wanted to thank the commission. This is : an evolution. It's a process. The City Council, the Planning Commission, it's a process and everybody has their input and they �^ are very grateful that they were allowed to get up and speak their minds and their piece as far as their property value and their livelihoods and their community and the way they live. This is an excellent cornpromise to what was originally proposed and they support it 100% with the Fairhaven closu�e. Mr. Drell said that right now the openings of the streets onto Fairhaven look like street openings. He thought they should be modified to basically meet the bare fire lane requirement which he believed was only 20 feet so they wouldn't be developed in any way to resemble a street nor be convertible to a street. They should just be a fire lane access driveway and not built to street standards. MRS. JOY RICHARDSON, 72-790 Arboleda Drive, stated that her lot is two lots east of Fairhaven. She bought her property in 1976. She and her husband are in the process of planning on doing quite a major remodel over a period of the next couple of years and they plan to stay there through their retirement. So her biggest concern is the impact on Fairhaven as everyone had been mentioning. Other than that, she thought the project was going to be very � favorable for them and would be a great improvement for all of 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 .� � � � their neighborhood. They had a big concern about Fairhaven staying closed and no access from Arboleda which would be straight into the project as it is. MR. ROD MURPHY, 72-764 Arboleda, located on the corner of Arboleda and Fairhaven. He, too, agreed with all his neighbors and was in agreement with what was happening there with certain exceptions. He thought Fairhaven should remain closed and that as Mr. Drell indicated a moment ago, those two crash gate areas be narrowed down to 20 feet. What was going to happen to them along Fairhaven with the two-story homes, even though they are being given a 100-foot setback per code or a variance on that, they are losing some view and they have a nice view. It's much better than what would have been there. He said that over at One Quail apartments there are some eucalyptus trees. With the impact on the view that they are going to have from the two-story homes, these trees at One Quail Place apartments are in excess of 100 feet tall. He said it would be nice to see the City cut them down. Trim them down. But bottom line is he is all for the project as long ' as they don't get hurt on Fairhaven. ,� Mr. Drell said he would forward that comment onto the Housing Authority. Chairperson Campbell asked if there were any rebuttal comments by the applicant. He said no. Chairperson Campbell closed the public hearing and asked for commission comments. Commissioner Finerty said that like Mr. Rogers, she was adamantly opposed to the previous project and voted against it. She was absolutely delighted that they have another option that is much more suitable to the community. She, too, would prefer larger lots and three and a half units per acre, but sometimes they don't get everything they want and this is a marked improvement over the previous project. Therefore, she would move for approval of the project based on the nice landscaping, it is single family, it is in a gated community with an HOA and a pool and with the narrowing of the emergency access to 20 feet. Mr. Drell asked if that included the reduction of one unit. He assumed the applicant ;; wasn't going to be able to produce a pool without eliminating one unit. � ,� � � 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2004 i.., Commissioner Finerty said she would like to see the revised plan back as a miscellaneous item just to see where the pool would be. Commissioner Jonathan concurred. One of the things that sold him on the project was the architecture. He thought it was very very attractive. The density was a huge concern, particularly the exceptions to coverage and side yard setbacks, front and back, the size of the backyards, all of them were concerns. But he thought there was a need for this type of housing. There is a demand for it and very little supply. The key is to design it appropriately, which the applicant had done, and to locate it appropriately, which he had also done. This kind of project couldn't be thrown into a traditional neighborhood nor put 4,000 square foot lots with homes of a higher density. They couldn't be plopped into a traditional neighborhood, but this particular location was really conducive to this type of project. He thought they had the necessary combination, the appropriate architecture, the appropriate location, the design, circulation, and so forth the applicant had taken care of so he was in concurrence. He did suggest that when they approve this as a condition for the swimming pool that his expectation is that they would end up � with 63 units because he thought in addition to the existing recreation area the applicant would need another lot. He would suggest in the approval that it be made a condition and if for any reason the applicant finds that they can create a pool of sufficient size to not lose the lot, he would rather see them come back and prove that to them. Commissioner Jonathan was also concerned about the sidewalks. If they are in the plan, they didn't need that as a condition. Mr. Drell asked if it was in the Public Works conditions. Mr. Smith said no, sidewalks were not shown on the tract map, but were shown on the conceptual site plan that the applicant provided later in the process. Commissioner Jonathan suggested a condition that said that sidewalks be installed pursuant to the conceptual site plan. Mr. Drell asked if it was a four foot o� five foot sidewalk. He thought four was adequate as far as he is concerned. Mr. Smith said it was shown as four. Commissioner Jonathan said he was okay with four, it would give them more landscaping. The idea is that kids can ride their little bikes without being in the street. Mr. Drell also noted cars are parked occasionally. He thought it was part of the hard scape of the front landscaping. Commissioner Jonathan said he would second the motion as proposed to be amended. Commissioner Finerty � concurred. 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � .rri� Commissioner Tschopp said he was still not real happy about the density and still not real happy about the setbacks. He thought the houses were way too close and was still skeptical about the prices being charged given the distance between the houses and with the small lot size, but the applicant has numerous consultants and has done the research, so that was his risk. He thought the architecture was very well done and would be a very nice looking neighborhood. He said that this was another case that when the citizens of a neighborhood step up and state what they really think, it made a big difference. Given their input, he would support the project. Chairperson Campbell also concurred. At the beginning when she read the staff report she wasn't too keen on the smaller lots. With the one story houses placed in the right location and with the two-story homes, everyone would look into each other's yards, so it wasn't that they have a one story near a two-story. Everyone would be compatible. She thought it was a great location. To have so much density there with children, it was nice area to live in, it is very close to Westfield Shopping , Center, Trader Joe's and people can just walk across the street. There :� would also be a dental office near there. They can go to C.O.D. and the ,,,� swap meet. Everything was there. She was in favor of the project. Chairperson Campbell noted there was a motion and a second and called for the vote. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the motion included the termination of the development agreement. Mr. Drell concurred. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4- 0. It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2249, recommending to City Council approval of TT 31969 and PP 03-24, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 4-0. � 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2004 � IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Case Nos. GPA 03-02, C/Z 03-01 and PP 03-05 (Revision #1) - JAMES AND LUCILLE FEIRO, ET.AL., Applicants Per Planning Commission direction on January 20, 2004, presentation of 1) a resolution denying a request for a general plan amendment and change of zone from medium density residential (R-1 13,000) to office professional, a precise plan, and Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for two (2) lots on the west side of Deep Canyon Road, north of Ramona located at 44-575 and 44-605 Deep Canyon Road; and 2) a resolution recommending to City Council approval of a general plan amendment and change of zone from medium density residential (R-1 13,000) to office professional, and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for two (2) lots on the west side of Deep Canyon Road south of Ramona, 44-655 and 44-675 Deep Canyon Road. It was noted that the applicant submitted a letter withdrawing their '�""' application and no further action was necessary. Action: None. Mr. Drell indicated that he also forwarded that discussion on to the City Council at the General Plan meeting, so they were actually anticipating an appeal. He would inform them that they could just pull back the General Plan designation as recommended by the Planning Commission. Any change of zone would have to occur by initiation by those property owners. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A, ART IN PUBLIC PLACES None. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE ��, None. 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3 2004 � � � .� C. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE None. XI. COMMENTS Commissioner Tschopp noted that tonight they were looking at Fairhaven Drive and there are other areas in the city where they have had to close off roads because people are using them as a short cut. He asked if the neighborhood was in agreement, if the city would consider making almost a limited gate there where the homeowners would have a transponder or something to allow access. Mr. Drell said no, they couldn't selectively limit access to a public street. He said this was an experiment. If the experiment was over, he thought what they needed to do was finish it off as a cul-de-sac so they didn't forever have a wooden barricade. He thought this might be a good time to bring it back to the Council. The consensus of the neighborhood is that this has been a success and now 3 is the time to take away the temporary nature of the closure and make � it permanent with a physical road improvement. Commissioner Tschopp � agreed. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Commissioner Tschopp wanted to make that a minute motion recommendation to the City Council. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Tschopp, seconded by Chairperson Campbell, recommending to City Council that the temporary closure of Fairhaven Drive be made permanent with physical road improvements. Motion carried 4-0. Chairperson Campbell indicated that she read in the newspaper that Commissioner Jonathan would be running for City Council and offered her congratulations. � � � � 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2004 � XII. ADJOURNMENT it was moved by Chairperson Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:23 p.m. r--- ...--- PHILIP DREL , Secretary ATTEST: � , `` � _y.,_- -� i c SABBY JONA HAN, Chairperson Palm Desert PI ning Commission /tm � � 25