Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0921 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY - SEPTEMBER 21 , 2004 6:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Jonathan called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Lopez led in the pledge of allegiance. Ill. ROLL CALL Members Present: Sabby Jonathan, Chairperson Dave Tschopp, Vice Chairperson Sonia Campbell Cindy Finerty % o Jim Lopez Members Absent: None Staff Present: Steve Smith, Planning Manager Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Tony Bagato, Assistant Planner Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Engineer Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the September 7, 2004 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the September 7, 2004 minutes as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. hr MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Smith summarized pertinent September 9, 2004 City Council actions. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 04-18 - BERDAN HOLDINGS, LLC, AND MONTEREY 170, LLC, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to adjust four parcels to conform to recent general plan update and to facilitate future development of parcels located on the north side of Dinah Shore Drive 1 ,487 feet west of Portola Avenue. B. Case No. PMW 04-12 - DESERT WELLS 237, LLC, Applicant •i Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to merge Parcels 1 , 2, 3 and 5 of PMW 99-1 1 to accommodate development on property south of Gerald Ford and west of Cook Street, more particularly described as APN 653-390- 053, 055, 082 and 087. C. Case No. PMW 04-13 - DESERT WELLS 237, LLC, AND ART PALM, LLC, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to merge Parcel 2 of PMW 04-12 and Parcel 6 of PMW 99-1 1 and Parcel A of PMW 98-17 for property south of Gerald Ford and west of Cook Street, more particularly described as APN 653- 390-062, 064. ..i 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 D. Case Nos. PM 30314 and PP/CUP 01-21 - SWAJIAN & SWAJIAN, Applicants Request for approval of a second one-year time extension for a five building industrial/office complex (73,928 square feet of total building area) and a five lot tentative tract map for a 6.10 acre site located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive approximately 1 ,100 feet east of Cook Street, 75-300 Gerald Ford Drive. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0-0-1 (Chairperson Jonathan abstained). 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 Nos. GPA 04-02, C/Z 04-04 and HDP/PP 04-21- HAGADONE FAMILY TRUST, Applicant (Continued from September 7, 2004) Request for recommendation to City Council approval of a general plan amendment from open space public reserve to hillside reserve (one dwelling unit per five acres), a change of zone to prezone the northeast corner of Section 5 T5S R6E from Riverside County's N-A (Natural Assets, one dwelling unit per 20 acres) to HPR, D (Hillside Planned Residential, one dwelling unit per acre with a drainage, flood plains and watercourse overlay zone) to facilitate annexation to the city, and a hillside development plan/precise plan to allow the construction of a 32,016 square foot single-family home, and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration as it relates to the project thereto. ti 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 Mr. Bagato outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended approval. Chairperson Jonathan opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. JOHN BARLOW, 3403 Fernan Hill Road, Coeur D'Alene, Idaho, addressed the commission. He informed commission that he was representing the owners, Duane and Lola Hagadone. He is a co-trustee of the Hagadone Family Trust and for the last 25 years he has had the pleasure of doing all of the development work for their company for Mr. Hagadone and has had the experiences to tell them tonight a little bit about the concept and where they were coming from and why they are here. He said Mr. Hagadone is a great dreamer. Anyone who knew about their background, they have property in Coeur D'Alene known as the Coeur D'Alene Resort which is a wonderful property on the lake. And the lake is part of his vision as well because he loves water. As they could see in the project, water is an integral part of the design and he enjoyed that very much. But as a dreamer and a person who enjoys taking a piece of property and making the most of it, Mr. Barlow could tell them as an example that 13 years ago they developed a golf course and had a piece of property a little shy of the needed acreage and the next they knew they had a floating golf green and today it is a world famous floating golf green on the Coeur D'Alene Resort. It kind of exemplified the way they do things--with a lot of vision, a lot of preplanning and they have fun. In the ultimate, Mr. Hagadone is a person who likes to be very proud of what he does. And they don't sell what they build, it is always kept within the estate and they maintain it well. So this was actually the pinnacle of Duane and Lola's planning for the latter part of their lives. They have lived in the valley every winter since the 1960's and have been at various clubs, presently at the Vintage Club. When this piece of property became available that had a little larger space and great views, it gave them an opportunity to do some planning for something they really wanted 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 r.. to bring in the outdoors, bring in the water, yet have the privacy of the location. In so doing, it was in his planning and thinking that they have a location that is very private, not just to them, but they didn't want a pinnacle that was seen from all angles. It is designed very specifically to be a residence that blends into the mountain, that is very subtle. They became acquainted with architect Guy Dreier, a very talented guy, and certainly with what he was asked to do and what he delivered as a design, they couldn't be more excited. The property gives them what they are looking for and a wonderful place to live in a great setting, yet it fits perfectly into the mountainside and is in harmony with everything that is there naturally. And that was very important to them. He believed the staff report adequately displayed the intent. If the Planning Commission was interested, he would have Mr. Dreier give an explanation of his design, but that basically gave them a background for why they were there tonight. Realizing that they needed the Planning Commission's approval to proceed, he said r.. they would appreciate the Commission's consideration of their request. He asked for any questions. On the copper roofs, the titanium facets and the bronze glazing windows, Commissioner Tschopp asked how much reflection they would give off when the sun is going down. He asked if people would be able to see them from the valley or from a distance, the reflection off of those windows and fascias. Mr. Barlow referred the question to Mr. Dreier. MR. GUY DREIER, 74-105 Mockingbird Trail in Indian Wells, addressed the commission. Commissioner Tschopp asked about the reflection off the glass and the sun hitting the roof and fascias and asked if there would be much reflection. Mr. Dreier said if they were looking at most of the overhang, what they had done was really pick the angle of the sun up to the west any time it would come straight in and they really had the Ir..r 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 overhangs there. There was no way the sun would hit most of the glass. They are 15 to 20 feet under overhangs on that side recessed back in and then they had the rock outcroppings. He said they identified outcroppings on the site that exist and they took them all the way up to actually hold up the roofs visually. The ones they could see were continuing from the mountainside, then the faceted roofs that overhang the glass. The glass was recessed way back in and the majority of that would be copper with just a small 12-15 inches of titanium along the edge. Commissioner Tschopp asked if for confirmation that the reflection would be minimal, if any. Mr. Dreier said yes, he didn't think the sun would get to the glass until it got very low. Commissioner Lopez stated that he was awed by the design and thought they did an incredible job with it. It truly was magnificent. Mr. Dreier said he had the opportunity to work with Mr. and Mrs. pp Y Hagadone. Commissioner Lopez asked if Mr. Hagadone gave him the ideas or if it was Mr. Dreier. Like Mr. Barlow, Mr. Dreier said that initially they sat down with Mr. Hagadone on the golf course and he said that when he was golfing with his friends he did not want to have to have them tell him about the house, he wanted to have to show them where the house was. He wanted it to blend into the mountain and he wanted it to be a surprise to people that it is actually on the mountain. At that point they looked at the facets in the mountains, the rocks and all the things that make up the house. They were actually going to take molds on existing rocks and continuing right up into the house, so they would follow it all the way through as far as the detailing. But it was a combination of all of their ideas and he executed them. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 Chairperson Jonathan asked if anyone else wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION regarding this matter. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Jonathan asked for commission comments. Commissioner Campbell stated that she had never seen anything so outstanding and felt that it blended in with the natural terrain and ridge line. She also thought it was very well camouflaged. She noted that Commissioner Tschopp asked about the windows, but looking at the view, she didn't think there would be any glare. She said they did an outstanding job and the project had her vote. Commissioner Finerty concurred and added that she was delighted to have Parcel No. 2 annexed into Palm Desert. Commissioner Lopez also concurred. He believed that although the project is far beyond the Hillside Ordinance standards, the purpose was there and that was important; the purpose in being able to develop this piece of property and build it into the mountainside. It was a wonderful accomplishment and he commended them. He said he would move for approval. Commissioner Tschopp said when they make exceptions to a code and something like this comes up, they knew why exceptions to the code were made available. Something like this met all the requirements for granting an exception. It exceeded the 4,000 square foot building size, but the way it is designed and how it fits into the site, the architecture, materials, the colors and so forth spoke very highly of the architect and met all the requirements for granting an exception. He was also in favor. Chairperson Jonathan asked if there was a second to Commissioner Lopez's motion. Commissioner Tschopp seconded the motion. Chairperson Jonathan added his concurrence and compliments to the architect and the applicant for accomplishing something with such great sensitivity. It seemed easy to get approval of the Planning Commission at this moment, but it didn't always come easy and when they look at granting an exception, typically for a norm of 4,000 square feet to go to 32,000 there has been great work that has already been done to make it seem easy. The blending of the structure with the hillside, and he was r.. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 fortunate to be able to walk the property and witness that first hand, the design that is in such harmony with the environment was truly to be commended. He thought that they set the standard. Not that every exception needed to be 32,000 square feet, but certainly in the manner in which they approached the critical issues of not disturbing the environment while accomplishing the owners' objectives was quite admirable. He added his concurrence and asked for the vote. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5- 0. Move by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2293, recommending to City Council approval of Case Nos. GPA 04-02, C/Z 04-04 and HDP/PP 04-21 , subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. B. Case No. TT 31490 - PONDEROSA HOMES II, INC.,INCApplicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, a tentative tract map to subdivide 84.32 +/- acres into 241 single-family lots and modified setbacks for dwellings on the 241 lots. Property is located at the northwest corner of Portola Avenue and Gerald Ford Drive, 74-000 Gerald Ford Drive. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report. He noted that staff distributed a memo that was received relative to a bus stop. It requested a bus stop on westbound Gerald Ford on the north side west of Portola. Staff passed out an additional Community Development Department Condition No. 11, "That the applicant shall provide a bus pullout and pad for a future shelter on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive, west of Portola Avenue, in a location acceptable to the Director of Public Works and Sunline Transit. If bus service on Gerald Ford Drive exists at or prior to permit issuance for the last phase of development, then developer shall be required to construct a bus shelter with 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 tow architecture acceptable to the Director of Community Development and Sunline Transit." Staff recommended approval with that addition. Commissioner Lopez asked if all the gates were unmanned, key-pad type gates versus guard gated. Mr. Smith said that was his understanding, but the applicant could address that issue. Commissioner Lopez asked for and received clarification relative to the project's proximity to Shadow Ridge and the project's entrance on Gerald Ford. Commissioner Campbell indicated that Public Works was requiring in a condition for the opening on the median to be moved. Mr. Smith confirmed that it would shift slightly. Chairperson Jonathan asked if for the less than 10,000 square foot lots the only exception being requested was a reduction of front yard setbacks to 15 feet for dwelling only, not garage. Mr. Smith said or side in garage, yes. Chairperson Jonathan noted that for 10,000 square feet and over, the same exception, plus the reduction in side yard to six �.. feet/16 combined. Mr. Smith said that was correct. Chairperson Jonathan asked how many lots were in each of those categories. He noted that he would ask the applicant. He asked if staff happened to know the average lot size. Mr. Smith said 11 ,408. They calculated that on the matrix. Commissioner Lopez asked about the ingress and egress for the gates at Gerald Ford and Dinah Shore for cars. With 241 lots, there could be a significant number of people trying to get into the gate at any one time. He asked if that was taken into the consideration. Gerald Ford would be a busy road. Mr. Smith stated that it was taken into consideration and there would be adequate stacking. Chairperson Jonathan opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MS. PAMELA HARDY with Ponderosa Homes at 6671 Owens in Pleasanton, California, addressed the commission. She said she was happy to be at the meeting. Ponderosa Homes is a Northern California home builder. While they have other projects in the desert community, this is their first project in Palm Desert and they 1.W 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 were excited to be part of this community. She said they have been working closely with staff for some time now during the General Plan update process, as well as during the acquisition of the SCE site which was incorporated into their project. Regarding the breakdown of lot sizes, they have 107 10,000 square foot lots and 134 8,000 square foot minimums. Those were for purposes of establishing their development standards. Their smallest lot she believed was closer to 8,800 square feet with the average being 11 ,000. Their biggest lots were just under a half acre. Their team of consultants was present and would be happy to provide any additional information or answer questions. Present was Joe LaScala from Sommers and Murphy, their landscape architect; Mike Pimrose from JBC Architects; and Mary Roos from Mainiero Smith, their civil engineer. She asked for any questions. Commissioner Campbell asked for the sales price range. Ms. Hardy explained that they were in the process of developing the product type for their smaller 8,000 square foot minimum. They expect to break ground sometime in Spring or Summer with construction for their first phase sometime during the summer. They had to evaluate the market at that point in time, but guessed it would be in the $400,000 to $500,000 range. That depended upon the market at that time. Commissioner Tschopp noted that the architectural plans that were included with their packets showed three different styles and asked if three was the minimum or if there were other variations on those models that would be done. Ms. Hardy said they have three facades. They felt the facades in and of themselves had a lot of variation and detail that would make each one of the homes look and feel very different from each other as they provide that additional mix through the project site. i 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 MR. MIKE PIMROSE, 3937 Hackett in Long Beach, California, addressed the commission. He stated that he designed only a portion of the homes for the lots, for the larger ones. There would be another set of plans that would be designed for the smaller lots, so the elevations would be quite different. Normally they would do three styles for a tract depending on the size of the tract and how many homes. Also depending on how many lots, they could go to four plans. In this case there were three plans with three elevations each and that seemed adequate enough. Chairperson Jonathan said that if he understood it right, there are three primary styles: Spanish, Prairie and Desert Ranch. But then for each of those styles there are three variations. They have different elevations. Mr. Pimrose confirmed that there were three different facades for each plan and there were three different plans. Chairperson Jonathan noted they were looking at nine different models. L► Mr. Pimrose concurred. Chairperson Jonathan asked for and received confirmation that these were only for the larger 10,000 square foot lots. So there would be nine variations for 107 homes and they might expect even additional styles for the other 134 homes. Mr. Pimrose wasn't sure. He hadn't been retained to do that architecture so he couldn't answer that, but they would certainly be different from his design. The other thing to take into account were the different color schemes which would also add variation to the street scene. MR. MARVIN ROOS, MSA Consulting in Rancho Mirage, addressed the commission. He said they were happy to finally be before the commission. They waded through the General Plan discussion, the Edison stuff and actually owners of the whole half of this section were working together on an assessment district including Sares Regis, Lowes, Tom Noble, Ponderosa, Rilington, the School District and Myron McLeod. They were all pulling it 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 together to do an infrastructure master plan so that everything goes in at once and everything is coordinated, adding to the major offsite retention basin that Tom Noble had already started to develop along the freeway, so there wouldn't be the individual basins. It would all be a master planned community. He noted that it was a challenging site. There was an 85-foot drop and they tried to follow the topo and drop it down. They were happy with the design and were getting into final design soon. Of all the conditions, they only had one that was a minor question and that was the requirement under the Department of Public Works Condition No. 4, the first dot. He said he spoke with Mr. Greenwood. It said this was calling for a 75-foot total half-street right-of-way and what they did was because they have a 50-foot Edison easement on Portola and a 30-foot easement on Gerald Ford, his understanding was that they would be able to put part of that extra parkway in that so it wasn't an actual full one. Mr. Greenwood said he would talk to Mr. Joy about that. Mr. Roos said there was plenty of room to do a bus turnout. Chairperson Jonathan thought they should resolve these issues one by one. Mr. Roos said there was only one. They were okay with the bus shelter. Mr. Joy said that was their intention. They were only going to have 12- feet of excess right-of-way on Portola Avenue for public right-of-way and then the rest could be made up in the easement. Mr. Roos asked for any questions. Chairperson Jonathan asked about the sloping. It was 85 feet from the southwest to the northeast. Mr. Roos said that was correct. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 Chairperson Jonathan asked if that would end up being gradual or if one part would be more extreme and then a flat area. Was the whole thing kind of a hillside type of development? Mr. Roos said the idea was to have a series of breaks in there. Basically the backyards would be a slope with probably a small retaining wall at the base. So that would be taken up gradually as the site comes down. They shouldn't actually see any retaining walls from offsite because they were doing it in small increments. Driving south up Portola, assuming there is an interchange there someday, Chairperson Jonathan asked if people would be looking at a sloping, kind of community type area. Mr. Roos said yes. Chairperson Jonathan noted that wind is always a factor in the north area and asked if the slope was facing the wind and if that was an issue. �.. Mr. Roos said the slope is parallel to the wind. The slope is parallel to the freeway, so it would basically be coming across that. The yards front and back were directed to the northeast for the most part. Their lots were slightly lower along Gerald Ford so they wouldn't have to import dirt. Going down Gerald Ford, they would basically see roofs along those 25 or 30 homes because it would all be dropping down away from it. Chairperson Jonathan asked if Mr. Roos envisioned individual swimming pools for the most part for these priced homes on these sizes of lots. Mr. Roos said large lots, yes. Everyone would have their own options for their own swimming pools. Chairperson Jonathan asked for confirmation that it was one reason for not creating a central type recreation facility. Mr. Roos concurred. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 f Commissioner Lopez noted that they addressed the front yard setback request. He asked about the side yard setback and asked if that was due to the slope. Mr. Roos said where they are coming down the hill on the side yard they made them a little wider at that point. So there would be some slope and some small retaining. Part of that would assist that in the request for the reduced setbacks. They are having to take up some of that extra slope. On occasion, for the most part they had it in the rear, but they would have a little on the side also. Chairperson Jonathan asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this matter. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. He asked for commission comments. Commissioner Tschopp noted that the elevations in the packets were for the 107 homes at 10,000 square feet. He asked staff if the elevations for the 134 homes of 8,000 square foot lots would go to ARC for approval. Mr. Smith said yes. Commissioner Campbell moved for approval. Commissioner Finerty seconded the motion. Chairperson Jonathan assumed that was as presented, but with the addition of Condition No. 11 . Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2294, approving Case No. 31490, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Chairperson Jonathan stated that because he has an ownership interest in property across the street from the next public hearing item, he would be abstaining from the matter, he asked Vice Chairperson Tschopp to handle the proceedings and exited the room. 14 J MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 C. Case Nos. GPA 04-01, C/Z 04-03 and PP 04-22 - WILLIAM J. WORZACK, Applicant Request for approval of a general plan amendment and change of zone from low density residential (R-1 , zero to four dwelling units per acre) to office professional (O.P.) and a precise plan of design for two one-story office professional office buildings with a combined floor area of 6,500 square feet on a .9-acre site located at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. Mr. Urbina outlined the salient points of the staff report, noting that there was an amended page 3 for the Planning Commission resolution and recommended approval of the project. On page 4 of the staff report under project parking, Commissioner Finerty noted that it said that the total parking places said 27 and on page five it talked about 25 spaces for Building 1 and Building 2 requiring 12 spaces, which would be a total of 37. Mr. Urbina agreed that wasn't correct and indicated that Building 1 would have 15 parking spaces and Building 2 would have 12 parking spaces, which was a total of 27. Commissioner Finerty asked if on page 5 where it said the parking lot for Building 1 provides 25 spaces, that should read 15 spaces and that Building 1 requires 14 rather than 24. Mr. Urbina said that was correct. Referring to the colored rendering that was distributed to the commission, Commissioner Finerty asked if it would be as white as it was showing in the print out or if it was another color. Mr. Urbina thought the rendering turned out lighter than the true colors proposed. He circulated the material sample board to the commission. He stated that the material board more truly reflected the true proposed colors of the exterior of the buildings. Commissioner Lopez asked if it was truly going to be a white building and then off colors on the various walls. Mr. Urbina said the exteriors were supposed to be more of a light beige and dark beige, like the materials board. 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 Commissioner Campbell noted that Building No. 1 was the largest building with quite a few offices and more square footage then Building No. 2, yet Building No. 1 only had one restroom and Building No. 2, the smaller building, had two. Mr. Urbina said she was correct in that Building No. 1 showed only one restroom and Building No. 2 showed two. He suggested that the project architect could explain the reason. On the home to the west of the driveway, Commissioner Campbell asked if it was a new home or if it was just having a new facade put on. She asked if those were all new homes on that side of the street, because they looked gorgeous. Mr. Urbina confirmed that some of the homes were constructed within the last two years. Commissioner Campbell thought they were impressive and that this building would blend right in with the homes. Mr. Urbina indicated that staff thought that would be the case. There were no further questions of staff and Vice Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. WILLIAM WORZACK, 46-520 Arapaho Terrace in Indian Wells, addressed the commission. He thanked the commission for hearing them tonight. He noted that Mr. Guy Dreier was the applicant and one of the investors in the project. He said they weren't speculative real estate ventures, this would be the home of their corporate headquarters. Building No. 1 , Industrial West, their firm, has been in business in the city of Palm Desert for 26 years. Mr. Dreier has also been in business in Palm Desert for quite a long time. At this time they desire to have a single-tenant corporate identity like that. He apologized for the pictures that showed the stark white color. He thought that Mr. Dreier wanted to address that. MR. GUY DREIER, 74-105 Mockingbird Trail in Indian Wells, addressed the commission and also apologized. He said he didn't like to do computer renderings, he preferred doing models like with the previous case. He said the building would be all taupe with slate columns and a real champagne-colored roof. He said the material board is what they would have. He said it was an acid 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 tow wash stucco that has a really nice, leathery warm color to it. That is the majority of the building. Then the columns holding up the entry structure would be slate. Then the bottom side of that would be the stained taupe wood. So it would be tone on tone and really warm. Regarding the bathrooms, he pointed out the area that was supposed to be a bathroom, it just wasn't shown. Commissioner Campbell noted that they would have a long line otherwise with all those offices. There were no further questions for the applicant. Vice Chairperson Tschopp asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this matter. MR. BRETT PICANO, 74-857 Sheryl Avenue, addressed the commission. As Commissioner Campbell alluded to, he said there are five brand new or year old homes along Sheryl Avenue. The one just to the west of the project is an existing home just having the facade and a lot of work redone. He said his home was actually in the middle of the brand new five custom homes, so he was just about four homes down from this. His opposition to this is that it would create extra traffic in the area with there already being an inordinate amount of traffic because almost everything that comes off the back streets behind Sheryl came down from Sheryl. Down and around through Sheryl. The extra pollution it would create in the area, and the loitering around office buildings was something they shouldn't have around the residential community. With the high density across the street, he didn't know if they were condos or apartments, but they seemed to have a lot of traffic coming in and out of there. With this building and with the building across the way, he thought it would be an inordinate amount of traffic coming down Sheryl Avenue. That was his main opposition. Vice Chairperson Tschopp asked if the applicant wanted to make any rebuttal comments. %W 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 To address Mr. Picano's concerns, Mr. Worzack said that their firm probably sees three people a day and Mr. Dreier sees none. That's why he said these weren't speculative. This wouldn't be lease for income, these would be their corporate homes. It was Mr. Dreier's corporate address, too. They virtually generate no traffic whatever being a commercial real estate firm. They see four cars a day, maybe. He didn't think Mr. Dreier saw any. They wouldn't be generating traffic and that's why Mr. Dreier was with them. They wanted a project that looked like a single family residence, rather than a commercial building. Mr. Dreier said they could see the house he did on the previous case and they do three or four of them a year, so his clients were mostly gone and they have very little traffic. Commissioner Campbell asked if their hours of operation would be 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. five days a week. Mr. Worzack said yes. They are an administrative office and they don't see people there. The people they do see are on the project sites. Commissioner Campbell asked if they had employees, a secretary. Mr. Worzack said yes, they do. Mr. Dreier said he has three employees. And they might see his car working on a Sunday afternoon. He would be the only one there on the weekends. Vice Chairperson Tschopp closed the public hearing and asked the commission for comments. Commissioner Lopez thought it would be an improvement to the area. He was concerned about some of the office buildings across the street, but other than that, he thought it was a great looking project. He wasn't aware that it was going to be their offices and thought that was wonderful. He moved for approval. Commissioner Finerty concurred. She noted that it was a tough area to find something that would fit and with this building just being a little over 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 16 feet, it would fit in nicely. She also liked the colors that were chosen and the materials used. She thought there wouldn't be that much traffic compared to what it could be with a typical office dwelling, so it seemed to be the perfect fit. Commissioner Campbell concurred. She thought it was a great place to have it and didn't think it would have as much traffic as regular homes would. She was also very impressed with the architecture. She liked the roof line and hoped they would see it more often. Vice Chairperson Tschopp also concurred. He said it would be a nice buffer from the residential. He didn't think it would increase traffic that much and might actually channel some down the other lane. Regarding the comment on loitering, he thought that the applicant would be as happy as the homeowner if they called the police department when there are problems. He thought it would be a good project. He asked for a second to Commissioner Lopez's motion. Action: tow It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0- 0-1 (Chairperson Jonathan abstained). It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2295 as amended, recommending to City Council approval of Case Nos. GPA 04-01 , C/Z 04-03 and PP 04-22, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0-0-1 (Chairperson Jonathan abstained). Chairperson Jonathan rejoined the meeting. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell said they looked at a couple of renderings for murals for the community room for the library. They had to choose number one and number two to recommend to Council for their approval. Everything else was informational. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Finerty said the meeting was informational. C. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Finerty said this meeting was informational. XI. COMMENTS Chairperson Jonathan reminded staff that they were still waiting for the parking standard clarification to the S.I. standards relative to 20%, less or more, of office. Mr. Smith said they might see it October 5. He had intended to have it the 19th of October, but he might have the ability to get it to them earlier. But definitely sometime in October. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Chairperson Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:13 p.m. STEPHEN R. SMITH, Acting Secretary ATTEST. SABBY JO THAN, Chairperson Palm Desert tanning Commission hm 20