Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0315 �—�--� MINUTES � PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION . TUESDAY - MARCH 15, 2005 � � * � * � � * � * * �. * � .� � * * � * � � �. * -� * � * � � � * * � * * * � .� * * I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tschopp called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Finerty led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Dave Tschopp, Chairperson Jim Lopez, Vice Chairperson Sonia Campbell �"�"" Cindy Finerty Sabby Jonathan Members Absent: None 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 February 15 and March 1 , 2005 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, approving the February 15 and March 1 , 2005 meeting minutes. Motion carried 5-0. � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 � ;� � .� � V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Drell and Mr. Smith summarized pertinent March 10, 2005 City Council actions. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 03-17 - MICHAEL FEDDERLY, FEDDERLY & ASSOCIATES, Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to merge Lots 13 and 14 of Tract 25296-5 within Bighorn. � � Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. 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 No. TT 30438 Amendment No. 2 - DESTINATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Applicant Request for approval of Amendment No. 2 to the approved tentative map to adjust the approved pad elevations in the area � 2 `� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � west of the storm channel opposite the Somerset community. APN's 652-020-001 & 002, 652-070-002 thru 010. Commissioner Jonathan advised the Commission that he would be abstaining from discussion and voting on this matter and left the room. Mr. Smith indicated that in October of 2002 City Council approved The Crest project, which is now known as Stone Eagle. That included a tentative tract map for 44 single family lots amongst other items, including the golf course and clubhouse, etc. That approved map had certain pad elevations shown on it. August 17, 2004 the Planning Commission approved Amendment No. 1 to the tentative map which adjusted several lot lines while retaining the total lot count at 44 lots/units and adjusted the approved pad elevations. Generally, the lots at the northwest corner of the map were lowered by up to 15 feet, while the lots in the southeast area were raised three to five feet. The six lots at the south end were lowered one to two feet at that time. The Planning Commission was now being requested to once again alter the �,,, pad elevations. They were not being requested to add or delete lots, they were being asked to approve new pad elevations. In the northerly area, Lots 1 through 10, this area originally had four lots which were set above natural grade. In the August 2004 action, they lowered the area two to 15 feet. That put all ten lots below natural grade in that area. At this point they were requesting to raise these lots two to three and half feet. All these lots would continue to be at or below natural grade. Lots 11 to 20 to the south side of the proposed lake, in the August 2004 action Planning Commission raised these pads to the point where eight lots would be above natural grade. All of these lots would now be above natural grade. The reason for increasing the grade in that area was due to the height of the lake. They had a section on the lake which confirmed the necessity of raising these lots in that the lake would drain through a spillway under the road and then eventually make its way into the channel. So that became the basic height necessary in that area. '�"` 3 MINUTES :� PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 Lots 21 through 27 were also being raised an additional one and a half to two feet. This was necessary to make these lots consistent with the previous northerly lots where they back onto them. Lots 28, 29 and 30, these three were originally below natural grade. Then they were lowered another three to four feet. Now they were requesting to raise them three feet. So they were basically back to where they began with those three. Lots 31 through 34, they've always been above natural grade and they would remain so on the new map. Lots 35 through 37 were raised in the August 2004 amendment. And they were proposed to be raised again, but they would still remain at or below natural grade. Lots 38 through 44 at the southerly end of the project were lowered on the August 2004 map and they remain unchanged at this point. In the area of the maintenance building that was originally shown at 629 in the August 2004 action, the applicant was requesting to raise that area two feet to 631. At the same point, they were looking at reducing the height of the southeast corner of that area to 621. Natural grade in this area ranged from 635 at the west end to 610 at the east end. Mr. Smith said staff had contact from two property owners. Janice Wood to the north of the maintenance facility, and the Carvers located to the northwest of the maintenance facility. They expressed concern with the visual impacts. The Commission received letters which were passed out today from both parties. The clubhouse pad remained unchanged, and it was unchanged with the August action. The applicant provided staff with a detailed analysis and letter supporting the requested changes. Basically, it stemmed from their further defining the lake construction and its ultimate level. Then proceeding from there and finding that they were getting less shrinkage or more shrinkage in certain areas and in order to balance the site they need to make the adjustments they were requesting this evening. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � In the area of the maintenance facility, he said the applicant advised that the increase was necessary to provide adequate flood protection in this area. When the matter of the maintenance facility went through Architectural Review Commission back in December, that commission had significant concerns relative to the visual impact there and the applicant committed to ARC that they would significantly screen it. As of today, staff received a photo "sim" of a photo taken from the Carver property to the northwest looking southeast toward the area of the maintenance facility and basically showing that it could be accomplished. What he meant by "can," through a system of berms, landscaping and appropriate design they could make the maintenance facility all but disappear. And now it was a matter of them coming up with a plan to implement this photo sim. Staff recommended that Planning Commission approve the request, subject to all the conditions that were imposed previously, plus, that once the matter has been recommended for approval by ARC, that they return with the matter here so the Planning Commission could also have the opportunity to see the design solution that implements this level of screening. He asked for �,,; any questions. Commissioner Lopez asked for staff to point out the location of the clubhouse on the map. Mr. Smith did so. Mr. Drell explained that in essence they would be using the back end of the buildings to screen the yard. They would have to make the back end of the building more like a decorative wall and then landscape it and berm it. They hadn't really seen how exactly in detail this would work. This was going to be one of those situations where ultimately they wouldn't be done until staff says they're done. It would be in the execution, so the basic standard of the review is this maintenance yard would have to meet the same sort of standard as if it was a house and they knew the sort of scrutiny houses in the hillside were given. Referring to the photograph, Commissioner Lopez asked what was in front of it. Mr. Drell said it was a cut. That cut is going down into the creek and it would have to be renaturalized with rock and plant material. In the letter, the property owner on the other side of the bank was requesting that her side get the same level of treatment in case there is a flood that her side is just as protected as the applicant's side. Throughout the whole project, every cut �"` 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 that looks like that had to be restored to a natural appearance with rock and landscaping. Chairperson Tschopp noted that staff provided a Table A, and if he was reading it right, the far right-hand column was basically from the natural grade and what they were looking at tonight was the difference that would entail from the August 2004 subtotal, so in actuality some of them were showing an 11-foot increase and tonight they were actually discussing a two- foot increase from the already previously approved grade. Mr. Smith said that was correct. They would have to do the math for the one column where they would compare the August with the January. There were no other questions. Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the Commission. MR. BILL MUNSON, 5 Como Circle in Palm Desert, addressed the Commission. He stated that Mr. Smith did an excellent job of explaining. He thought the table told the story. There were a lot of � numbers and it took some time to study it, but basically what they � were requesting with this revision was a very minor change from what was previously approved. Again, the controlling factor on these lot raises stemmed from a flood control issue. He pointed out Bruce Creek going through the project and said the water level from a major event or design event dictates the elevation of these lots along the channel. Once those lot grades were established to be protected from flood control, the next issue was the relationship between these lots and the next lots going up the hill. After that, again, the lots on the crest of the hill. So it was kind of a step by step process to establish grades. The highest lots on the project in all cases involved considerable cut from where they are naturally. They weren't raising any lots. The raised lots were dictated by the flood control and he pointed out the area. Also, another point that was made was the balancing of the site not to import or export any dirt and try and make the site work within itself. Where all the cut makes the fill and all the fill comes from the cut. So there was no dirt moved through the city other than within the � limits of the site. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 �.. He said Mr. Smith also addressed the maintenance building. What they had done to mitigate some of the issues here was they increased the setback from their property line an additional 25 feet. That allowed them to build some berms. He pointed out the location. The berm at one end was 645. Where the highest point of the building is 647.6; they were two and a half feet above the berm on this corner. He pointed out the location of the Carver residence looking down. They moved the building over, took the material bins and relocated them to a lower grade ten feet below, down at 621 versus 631. That allowed them to provide more of a screen. In another area they established a berm to screen the neighbor in that region, again, planting trees on top of the berm, so anyone looking down from that area would see, filtered through trees and shrubs, an outline of the building possibly. But they wouldn't see the yard in front. The material yard is lowered. They felt they would not be able to see it in any way, shape or form down there. �,,; They dealt with these issues and tried to mitigate them. They had other projects in the city with similar issues and when all was said and done, the residents were happy and the people were happy. So they don't ignore them, they try to deal with them and take care of any issues. He said they have a project that is built into the hills and it is a different animal. They've learned a lot. It has been very difficult and they weren't dealing with two dimensions, they were dealing with three dimensions. It was a tremendous issue to try and resolve all of this. They've been through numerous grading plans trying to get the site to be balanced so they weren't bringing dirt in or out and were dealing just within the site. They finally arrived at something. In their submittal of August 2004 they were very close, but because of flood control, they had to revise it in small quantity. Basically, if they took an average of the changes, it was about a foot and a half per lot for the entire site, or 18 inches that they were requesting so they are balanced. They thought their architecture from the day they approached the city blends into the hillside. They made efforts to make that happen. They felt it was very good looking and would be � � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 a beautiful project and everyone around it would be happy because what they see would be very pleasant. Chairperson Tschopp asked if he had looked at the conditions and agreed with staff's conditions. Mr. Munson said yes. They knew what they were showing the Commission tonight was a representation. They had to deal with Mr. Drell and the City and make everyone happy when all was said and done and that was their intent. They would do that. Chairperson Tschopp asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. He noted that he had one Request to Speak Card from Mr. LaTourette and invited him to address the Commission. MR. PETER LA TOURETTE, 72-445 Desert Flower Drive, which he said was in Somerset, the adjacent property. He said they mainly just �$ had some clarification and comments more than anything else. Originally when they were with Mr. Lennon and his people, they stood on one of their balconies across from where the houses were going and they told them at that time it was going to look like Sardinia or Tuscany and everything would be in the natural terrain and they wouldn't see it. That wasn't going to happen, but they didn't have a big problem with that. But what they were concerned with now, since they were going to see all these houses front and back in some cases, that there is sufficient amount of landscaping to hide and cover that because he said he would do that if they had visual sight of the houses themselves. And the other thing they were concerned about is they still plan on the parking lot like they have in The Reserve to use a low level bollard type lighting and also heavily landscaped there again so they don't see massive asphalt in the parking lot. So those were their basic concerns. These were things they discussed with Mr. Lennon before. The lots changed somewhat and they understood the reasons for that, but they also wanted to make sure these other things were followed through on. He didn't think the maintenance building affected , them, it was on the other side of the hill. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � Mr. Smith said that was right. MRS. ANTOINETTE CARVER, 72-955 Deergrass Drive, informed Commission that her properties were at 72-275 and 72-240 Upper Way West. She had major concerns because the proposed maintenance yard sits in her front yard. The photograph that was put up on the screen was not the view they see from their home, it was the view they see from a portion of their driveway and it was far more disturbing if they were to look at it from their two properties, from right up in the compound of the property. She didn't know exactly what the solution was to this, but she cringed to think they might elevate the pads even higher. She did like what they had done with moving the bins because they thought those were going to be at the back of the property and felt that was positive, but they decimated Ramon Creek. It was truly a heart break. She was so disturbed over this. They worked so hard to comply with all of the requirements from the Department of Fish and Game where they �,,,,,; didn't harm in any way a blue line creek. They spent considerable amount of time and money and care in developing their property so that it was aesthetically pleasing to everyone that looked at it and would only serve to enhance the property values of the people around them. She knew in many respects that the Stone Eagle development would be an enhancement, but she had difficulty with the fact that the maintenance yard was placed in their view shed rather than over with the people in Stone Eagle where she thought it should be appropriately placed. Mr. Lennon told them that he was going to have an aerial shot done of the project and that he would superimpose drawings of the buildings on it for their perusal and they had not seen that. But she just wanted to let Commission know that they have very strong feelings of opposition toward this and any help they could have to make this less disruptive as possible would be deeply appreciated. Mrs. Carver said the number of casitas seemed to have increased since they were first told about the project and they were wondering how many casitas would actually be requested by the time the project � 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 .� £ ;� � was completed or perhaps they might come back and submit again to add even more to try and support the course. That's a concern to them. The other thing they were concerned about is there seems to be a very steep grade leading up to the property. That being the case, she was wondering if when they have full loads of material, if these golf carts that were supposed to be used since no vehicles were allowed on the property, if these golf carts were used, if they would have to be the noisier, gas powered variety or if they would all be electric carts. She said that summed up her comments. Chairperson Tschopp asked if the applicant wished to readdress the Commission. Mr. Munson came forward. To address Mr. LaTourette's comments, he would address the parking lot and the low level lighting. He pointed out the parking lot and said they intend to build a combination of berms, landscape screen walls, and fences the length of the ;3 project. They could see the berming in the area where they have � room to do it. In the areas where they didn't have as much room they � used walls, trees, screened fences, etc. This parking was considerably lower than the clubhouse site. The nearby grade was 650 and the parking lot stepped down. He showed where the grade was 612 and said it was 37.5 feet lower than the pad of the clubhouse itself, so the lot does step down and they felt it would be well hidden. As far as lighting in that area, they probably wouldn't use any high lights or standard lights, but something more like landscaping lighting. They don't expect a lot of night activity, but they would need enough light for safety, but it wouldn't be a brightly lit parking lot. Mr. Drell asked if they would be using concrete pavers like the Bighorn parking lot. Mr. Munson said that hadn't been determined, but they intend to use pavers of that sort in certain areas of the project. He didn't know if it would be in the parking lot necessarily, but again, he didn't think the parking lot would be seen from Somerset mainly because of the .� � � 10 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � screen, number one. And also the fact that the grades were considerably lower. He noted that Mr. LaTourette also mentioned hiding the homes. The grades were shown for the home sites and he thought their homes were beautiful and their theme was the Sardinia Esmeralda Coast. He had some architecture if they wanted to see the homes and had elevations and colors that they viewed. He said that the colors would blend into the hillsides, noting that there were numerous browns out there. They could see the multicolored roof tile, again blending into the hillside. The eaves, he said it was difficult to see, but they were curved and a different style of architecture. Basically, there were no flat roofs, they pop up and down blending into the hillside. He showed the product for the north ridge, the highest up on the hill which would be most seen. Then he showed the product for the lots along the perimeter of the lake. There were screens over the windows, little trellises. All of that was tailored from the architecture on the Esmeralda Coast in Sardinia. He believed that addressed Mr. � LaTourette's concerns. (Mr. LaTourette spoke from the audience and said he had no problem with that.) Regarding the number of casitas, they were still at 44 lots and they had been at that number since he could remember. The steep grade going up to the golf course, yes, there was a steep grade but the cart path that goes up was down rather low. He showed the path that led up to the golf course. From their clubhouse to the top was about 3,000 feet, so it was better than a half a mile. Going up the cart path, it was down in a very low area. There was a ridge befinreen it and Mrs. Carver and he doubted they would see anyone there. As far as the maintenance vehicles that would go up the cart path, gas carts are noisier than electric, there was no question about it. But with modern technology, the gas carts don't make much noise and were not anything like they used to be. There would be a combination of vehicles used, some gas, some electrical which was typical for maintenance of any golf course. He didn't think it would be an issue where they would be super noisy. Mr. Drell asked what the golfers would be using. � 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 Mr. Munson said the golfers would be using electric carts and they won't make any noise at all. And they would be the majority of the traffic. The maintenance workers would go up and down in a day's time. They also have some bunkers on top to house some of the golf course equipment so it doesn't come up and down, but stays on the course. The equipment that can stay up there will, and the equipment that needs maintenance comes down. He said they were trying to address the issues and knew Mrs. Carver had some concerns and he thought they would address them and make those concerns go away when it was all said and done. Mr. Drell said it was his understanding that they would be restoring the creek to a natural appearance. Mr. Munson said yes, they worked with Fish and Game, Fish and Wildlife and the Army Corps. of Engineers and got all of their appropriate permits and showed them where they were going to do : impacts and mitigated those impacts. They have rules and regulations � to follow to put them back and they weren't finished yet, they were in progress. Chairperson Tschopp closed the public hearing and asked for Commission comments. Action: Commissioner Finerty said it appeared that the applicant had worked very hard to mitigate all of the concerns, and from previous experience with the applicant, they've never had any problem and they have been more than willing and they've been good on their word to address any issues that come up. She moved for approval. Commissioner Lopez concurred. He also believed that this is a project still in the works with a long way to go on it and there were a lot of opportunities to review and inspect the area as it pertains to the maintenance shack and all of the berming and landscaping that would occur all around this particular location. It is still a work in progress. The elevation changes average between 12 and 18 inches or two feet wasn't 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH__15, 2005 irr unusual in this kind of situation, so he concurred and seconded the motion. Commissioner Campbell said the problem here is the maintenance building which hasn't been approved by ARC and it would also come back to Planning Commission for review and comment. It seemed like everything else going on in the project is done very diligently and they have never had any problem with Mr. Lennon before. Since the problem was the maintenance building, which would be coming back to them, she was in favor of this approval. Chairperson Tschopp concurred. He thought the applicant was working diligently with the neighbors and the City trying to minimize the impact it would have on the area. He thought they would end up with a very beautiful golf course development. He noted there was a motion and second on the table and asked for any other discussion or comments, then called for the vote. Motion carried 4-0. �,,,.,, It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2327, approving TT 30438 Amendment No. 2, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. COMMISSIONER JONATHAN REJOINED THE MEETING AT THIS POINT (6:40 p.m.). IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Status Report and Discussion of Condition Compliance for Case No. CUP 03-17 Commissioner Finerty said Mr. Bagato gave her the minutes which she needed to review. She would be calling him back. Mr. Drell said the applicant was agreeing to add more landscaping and agreed he was deficient. So it was in progress and he agreed to mitigate the problem and staff was monitoring it. Action: None. �""" 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 `� B. Update and Discussion of Valet Parking Permit for Augusta Restaurant Mr. Drell noted that staff handed out a memo from Code Enforcement that described their observations relative to both what was going on with the valet parking, which was a permit issued by the Public Works Department, and they've also received complaints on the volume of music coming from the outdoor music venue. He said they should also have a copy of a letter from the applicant addressing her concerns with the current conditions. The report from Code identified that the sound levels from the outdoor music exceeded the 55 db after 10:00 p.m. Prior to this monitoring he met with the applicant and expressed the nature of the City's concerns. In the discussion relative to the valet parking permit, it was the observation of the Code Department that the lot is now open to self parkers. They can't enter on Larrea, but they can enter from the front or from Portola. He identified 13 cars in the lot that were self parkers. The applicant in her letter described some kind of operational traffic concerns by valet parkers that resulted from multi-use. The other issue is they have some problem with valet where if sufficient numbers of people don't want to valet park, it results in the valet lot being half empty and everyone being out in the street. That wasn't really the case at Augusta. The valet lot is full so the degree of overflow would be the same as seen from the memo. They were actually using the post office lot at night and if the post office doesn't mind, staff didn't have a problem. In this case the management of the valet did not seem to have an impact on the street since the valet lot is full. He informed the applicant that if she has concerns over conditions, we have a process where she can come back and he thought that was what her letter requested, to have those conditions modified and get back on the right track. 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 +�. The issue with the noise levels, that was a little bit cut and dried. They have pretty specific standards and 55 decibels is the commercial standard, which is what they applied at the boundary. So it wasn't the residential standard, it was the commercial standard, and right now the level is exceeding the commercial standard. It was partly a result of the architecture of the building which actually serves as an amphitheater and then projects the sound out into the residential area. The only remedy for that is after 10:00 p.m. to turn down the volume. But again, there was a process if she wanted to go back through the CUP process. In this case the requirement of the CUP was to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. To change that would mean amendment to our noise ordinance. Again, turning down the volume was, unfortunately, really the only remedy for that. That was the status and the applicant was present if the Commission had any questions. w�, When Mr. Drell talked about the 55 decibel level that applies to the commercial standard, Commissioner Finerty noted the complaints were coming from residents. Mr. Drell explained that our ordinance specifies that at the boundary of commercial and residential use, the commercial standard is what applies. The theory being that when you live downtown, you are accepting a different noise environment. But it still drops down considerably after 10:00 p.m., even in the commercial zone. What the survey indicated is that approaching midnight, this particular night the band was getting louder, not softer. He believed the Planning Commission put severe limitations on the outdoor music, it got appealed to Council and the Council was far more lenient, but didn't say they approve it until midnight, which was kind of unprecedented, but they must comply with the City Noise Ordinance. He noted that the big spike after 10:55 p.m. was a diesel truck going by, but 62 was still significantly above. Basically the human ear can really perceive a two-decibel change, so 62 at seven decibels above the standard is a very noticeable increase in volume. � 15 MINUTES � PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 Commissioner Finerty asked if at 10:10 p.m. the high there was 68.5? Mr. Drell said he directed Code to note if the source came from anything other than the music, he was supposed to take note of it. Commissioner Finerty concluded that the 68.5 at 10:10 p.m. was then the result of the music, but the 74.8 at 10:55 was a result of a diesel truck. Mr. Drell said that was correct. Commissioner Campbell said the average was 57.83. Mr. Drell said that was correct. Those were the averages over a 15 minute period and basically he noted that the 47 is really the ambient, the general level of noise when the band stopped. The general traffic background noise of EI Paseo, Highway 111 and Portola. Commissioner Campbell noted that on Larrea there is only one apartment building that's residential. Everything else was more commercial right there. Mr. Drell said that was correct. That was another reason they use the commercial standard. Commissioner Lopez asked what staff was suggesting. Mr. Drell said there were two issues. On the valet permit, the starting point was in the Public Works Department. They issued it and it was his understanding that they would hopefully be, based on the letter submitted by the applicant, giving her an opportunity to revise the conditions on the permit if they feel it is necessary. Regarding the noise issue, as much as he loves music, our ordinance and the condition was quite explicit and the suggestion was that the next time, and the Code person tried to do it, was basically work with the applicant with the meter to see what it takes in adjusting the volume to get them into compliance. He was willing to do that. If they turned it down from 8 to 7, what did that do for the readings and demonstrate what it takes to get to compliance. In the absence of that sort of cooperation, it would be to initiate a hearing to in essence revoke that condition which allows outdoor music. Commissioner Lopez asked if there were any other restaurants along that area they have received complaints about. Mr. Drell said <� all the other ones are either indoors or the patios are in front. This 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � is the only one we have where the patio is in back. He recalled the discussion involving the business that preceded Roc's. There was an issue with outdoor music and it was in the front. One complaint was another business in the center. But that was the big difference. Buildings are great sound buffers and that's what we usually have. Here the building was acting in the opposite capacity as an amplifier. That's the fundamental problem. Chairperson Tschopp said if he understood it right, the noise issue was not something within the perusal of this Commission and staff suggested that the valet parking be taken through the normal process, which would be to meet with Public Works and discuss it there. Mr. Drell said yes, they have the ability to revoke that permit on their own. The applicant has the ability to request modification of the permit. The noise issue is within the Planning Commission's purview because the authority or ability to have the outdoor music until midnight is a condition of the CUP. Therefore, based on this evidence, there are grounds to reopen the public � hearing on the CUP and consider either revocation or modification, not of the CUP, but of that particular condition dealing with outdoor music and the hours which now allow it until 1 1 :30 p.m. Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Chairperson Tschopp asked if it was his recommendation at this point to take it through the normal process. Mr. Drell said in the absence of a commitment by the applicant to work with Code Enforcement to come up with, either through some noise mitigation in the area of the patio that somehow mitigates that noise bouncing off the building, or at least experimenting with him out there with the noise measure to see what it takes to get the musicians down to 55 decibels. He noted the applicant was present and she could answer those questions. Regarding the parking issue, Commissioner Jonathan recalled that the applicant was required to create a parking lot south of the project on Portola. Mr. Drell said that was correct. Commissioner Jonathan asked if that lot would be available for the valet parking. Mr. Drell was sure it was. It was his understanding that valet �` 17 MINUTES � PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 parkers already use the post office lot, so they were aiready taking cars offsite already. Commissioner Jonathan pointed out they weren't using that southerly lot. Mr. Drell didn't know why they weren't using that one or why they felt the post office lot was more convenient than the lot. Maybe they could drive straight across. That was a question for the applicant. Commissioner Jonathan just wanted to make sure his memory was correct that that south parking lot is part of this project. Mr. Drell concurred. Chairperson Tschopp invited the applicant to address the Commission, requesting that she state her name and address for the record. MS. DENISE ROBERGE addressed the Commission and asked if he wanted her home address or business. Chairperson Tschopp said either would be fine. � Ms. Rober e said oka EI Paseo and Portola. First of all w�� 9 Y, , she wanted to talk about the music. They tried the music at 55 and if they had to stick with that there was no point in having the band because they couldn't hear it. The ambience level is 47 and she did work with the officer that was sent on Saturday and he went back and checked it and came back to talk to her. They brought the band to a level where it's worth having a band and that was like 63. Besides that, there was basically one lady that is complaining and that's been basically the same person complaining all along. If they go inside the restaurant, they can't hear the band because the doors are closed. When she mentioned that to Mr. Drell that they can't hear the band and have to have piped music in the restaurant, she didn't see how this lady could hear the music in her house. He replied that maybe she wanted to sit on her patio. Then she suggested to him to invite City Hall's Council, Planning Commission and � everyone to come down and experience the restaurant on 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � a Saturday night to see just what is happening there. It's one of the few places in town where everyone can go and dance, have a great time, there weren't any drunks, no fighting, there's good food and the age group is from 25 to 80. The city does need a place to go where people can go and dance. And they come from out of California and appreciated being able to sit outside in the evening and that's one of the reasons they come there. It would be a great loss to this city if they closed down the music at Augusta. In fact, they would hear some repercussions from the people who live here because they love it. They even had to start having a cover charge because there were too many people coming. And the parking situation, which she described to them as best as she could, one of the reasons why the other lot was not always used is because if they go back there in the evening, and she has allowed the city to use that lot for five � or six years, they cleaned that lot, they've had citations because the construction workers use that lot, the schools use that lot, the churches use that lot, and she didn't mind, but she didn't like the letters she gets from the City which are very threatening. And it wasn't them that are messing that lot. She really didn't like it when they told her they were going to close the restaurant down. That's all she had to say. Commissioner Lopez said he has been to the restaurant on a Saturday night during prime season several times and the music is wonderful and you often forget where you are because the place is really hopping. And she was right, it's an excellent restaurant and he knew it was used a lot by groups and conventions that want to come into town and utilize the entire facility. But what they were looking at here was a situation where the music at times, and he has been there, it is quite loud and unfortunately it bounces off that building and goes up into the community. �""'` 19 MINUTES 3 PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 :� � Ms. Roberge said they have brought it down quite a bit in the last three weeks and there are times when it does, because she can't control the band all the time. When she hears it, she can go back and say they need to turn it down, but they're a band. She does the best she can there. Commissioner Lopez said he could appreciate her situation, but unfortunately, as they look at what they were looking at tonight; he didn't remember there being a live band that was microphoned and amplified there the entire time. He thought that was something that had evolved over the last couple of years. Ms. Roberge said that was right. Commissioner Lopez said that previous to that, there were no complaints. Ms. Roberge said they always had complaints from the house directly behind them, no matter what they did. Mr. Drell remembered there being complaints about two or three years ago and they did a noise monitoring then and it was below 55. As a result, the complainant was informed that it was in compliance and it went away for a while. Commissioner Lopez thought it needed to be brought back into compliance. Ms. Roberge said then they would have to kill the band. Commissioner Lopez said or control the band. Ms. Roberge said she had the band brought down to 55 when the compliance officer was there and they couldn't hear it over the 47 ambience level. If you can't hear it, there's no point in having the band. 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � Commissioner Jonathan asked Ms. Roberge if anyone has told her to shut down the restaurant. Ms. Roberge said that they just said in two letters she got that either they are going to revoke her permit or solve the valet parking lot, the permit to run the restaurant. That basically says they are going to close it down if she doesn't solve the valet parking. Commissioner Jonathan asked if anyone told her to shut down her restaurant. Ms. Roberge said in a letter it said if she didn't comply with the valet parking, they would shut the restaurant down. Commissioner Jonathan asked if she would answer with a yes or no and asked if anyone has told her to shut down her restaurant. �.,., Ms. Roberge said no. Commissioner Jonathan thanked her. He asked if anyone told her to get rid of the band. Ms. Roberge said no. Commissioner Jonathan asked her to do him a favor, and if she was going to play victim tonight, that's okay. Ms. Roberge interrupted and said she wasn't here to play victim because if she couldn't have the band. Commissioner Jonathan said he listened to her and he just wanted to make a comment. Ms. Roberge said she wasn't here to be his victim or play victim because she doesn't play victim for anybody. �""` 21 MINUTES � PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 Commissioner Jonathan said he appreciated that and that meant they could work together constructively to solve the problems that have existed on her property for a long time. He read her letter and the second paragraph said, "We ran August Restaurant with valet service for five years unaware that we were violating any valet parking conditions." Ms. Roberge said right. Commissioner Jonathan said he has in his file a number of letters that were sent to her over the years advising her of this problem. Ms. Roberge said to show them to her because she's been getting them in the last two to three years and she didn't get any before. Period. Commissioner Jonathan said in the past she has responded to the :� same violations they were seeing this year. She previously put cones on both of those driveways, she put cars in both of those driveways, she had been told to cease doing that, to stop doing that, and she did. Ms. Roberge said they did stop. He wasn't correct there, they did stop, and they had three accidents. Commissioner Jonathan asked when they stopped doing it why they stopped doing it. Ms. Roberge said because she got a letter. Commissioner Jonathan asked if that was last year or the last couple of years. Ms. Roberge said she has actually had two letters from them. Commissioner Jonathan asked if that was in the last couple of years. 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � Ms. Roberge said yes. Commissioner Jonathan said he didn't understand her comment in the March 15, 2005 letter where she said she was unaware of this problem. Ms. Roberge said she didn't say she was unaware of it, she said in the first five years they didn't have a parking problem, because they didn't have much of a business and there was no valet parking problem. Commissioner Jonathan said okay. The bottom line is there are a couple of problems with the property. Ms. Roberge said that he has had problems with her property from day one. Commissioner Jonathan said she has had problems with her �„f, property. That's the issue here. They were trying to work with her to solve those problems, but it takes some... Ms. Roberge said that he has fought her on this property from the day she built it. Commissioner Jonathan said he was having a great level of difficulty in just trying to complete a sentence. Ms. Roberge said not when he called her a victim. She didn't go for that. Commissioner Jonathan said okay, if she wasn't a victim, that gave them the opportunity to work together to solve the problems, but it would take some level of accountability from her end to say, "Okay, I see there is a noise problem, I see there is a violation of my valet parking permit, now let's work together to find a way to resolve those two problems in a way that meets my needs to operate a restaurant profitably and successfully and at the same �` 2 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 time meets the neighborhood's needs and the city's needs." He said there is common ground if she would open her mind to that. Ms. Roberge said she has a very open mind, suggest some common ground instead of sending her notes that they'll shut the restaurant down. Give her some common ground, ; right now. Commissioner Jonathan said he would go through that right now. Number one, with regard to the noise problem, he thought she could put in some effective noise barriers. Ms. Roberge said she has had an engineer out to look at that. Commissioner Jonathan thought she could lower the decibels, maybe not down to 55, but down to an acceptable level. He thought they could, for example, say well, instead off 55 maybe they allow 62, but only up until 10:00 p.m. There's room for compromise, there's room for resolution. With regard to the parking, he was sorry, but she has an empty parking lot south of her and those valet people could run those cars up and use that parking lot, leaving a portion of her lot available for those who choose to self park. He wasn't there to resolve her problems, but as an amateur off the top of his head, he could think of numerous possibilities and if those possibilities were exhausted, he personally would be much more amenable to saying they've exhausted the possibilities and maybe they just need to live with this. He wasn't opposed to that, but he'd like to explore possibilities for resolving these two problems. He thought it took a certain amount of openness from her, with all due respect, to at least be open to those possibilities and work with staff to determine whether in fact there is common ground and solutions or not. 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � Ms. Roberge stated that when she goes to work with Mr. Drell, he tells her the code is the code and that's it. There's no working with Phil. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he didn't want to go there, because he was going to have to tell her he disagreed. Ms. Roberge said he wanted her to work with them, and when she tries to... Commissioner Jonathan said she was getting into personalities... Ms. Roberge said she wasn't. Sorry, she wasn't. Commissioner Jonathan said she was going down the wrong path, because if they were going to go down that path, he had to tell her that he has the utmost respect for Mr. Drell and his entire staff. So what he would say is to encourage her to work with staff � because if she didn't, she was leaving them with very very few alternatives. Ms. Roberge said okay, how does she work with a man who says the code is the code; conform to it or go to City Council. That didn't leave her any grounds to work or anywhere to go. Chairperson Tschopp thought it did. He thought that was her recourse as a citizen and business person in this community is, she's stated what her thoughts are on the valet parking and she obviously got some on the noise ordinance and if Mr. Drell is limited by what the code and the ordinances are, and he and his staff are limited in what they can do, then she probably needed to have those letters and her argument forwarded to the City Council to have them look at it. Then they would be venue who would be able to change, modify or hopefully come to some type of agreement on those two issues regarding her restaurant. So he thought that was her venue, her avenue. Sometimes they are all limited by the rules. If they were limited by the rules and they �"`' 2 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 don't work for her, then she should go to the people who make the rules. He thought that was where she needed to go. Ms. Roberge said okay. Commissioner Finerty added that she went for a 50th birthday party at Augusta restaurant and there were two cars that wanted to self park in her lot and they were told no. And that was two different cars on the same evening. That it was strictly for valet and they couldn't get into the lot anywhere because it was coned off and there was an older car back on Larrea. They were told no, park on the street. Ms. Roberge responded that like she said, they need all that parking for valet because 95% of their customers or more expect valet. Commissioner Finerty said that per the City ordinance, she needed to provide parking in her lot for people that don't want valet and that's the big issue here with complying with the valet. By coning off her lots, she precluded anyone from self parking. Ms. Roberge explained that the reason they cone off the lot is not to preclude someone from self parking, it was like she stated in her letter. They can't have traffic coming in from all angles and trying to drive between the two buildings and that's what they do. She was agreeing with her. Commissioner Finerty said the valet ordinance does state that there has to be some self parking, 50% is what the ordinance says. They were two cars and it was very frustrating to have that occur because her husband and her son are very picky about their : cars and that's why they don't like valet. They also don't like parking on the street because things can happen and they feel ; better parking in a lot. So they were denied that and she knew full well at that time what our code said and she didn't make an issue of it. But she did think that the valet portion of the 50% needed to be followed and if someone does go to her restaurant and 26 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � requests to self park, she thought they needed to be allowed to and not told no, there is none. Ms. Roberge asked if they had a good time. Commissioner Finerty said she had a wonderful time and had wonderful food. The dessert was great and that's why they chose the restaurant in the first place to celebrate the 50th birthday party because she has been there for lunch out on the patio and as Ms. Roberge noted in her letter, it is a special venue. She wholeheartedly agreed. That's why she has been there a lot of times and takes guests there frequently. She just would like the opportunity to be able to self park and not be denied that when she knows the City's ordinance. Chairperson Tschopp said he was also not a fan of valet parking and parks his own car. He hadn't had a problem with Ms. Roberge's establishment, but they have a code and she thought it � was there for a reason and thought it worked. What he was hearing her say is that perhaps it doesn't work on her property because of circulation issues, the entrances and so forth. So he would encourage her to work with Public Works, sit down with them, go through her letter and the code and look at what perhaps with the help of the Public Works engineers to see what she could do to perhaps make it work. As Commissioner Jonathan said, hopefully they could come to some agreement that works. Commissioner Campbell said there's a parking ordinance and knew that some of the Commissioners didn't like to valet park, but her husband was different. If there's a parking area on the street, he still wants to have valet parking because these are kids that do need the money and everyone has to work. She's been there on Saturday nights and Denise was right, there are people there of all ages having a good time. And while they are there, they don't think of the noise level. Sometimes you have the music which maybe has to play louder because there's so much good times and people talking and otherwise they wouldn't be able to listen to the music. They've had this complaint from the tenant on Larrea for �"` 27 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 many many years and she knew who her daughter is and her daughter has moved away. She was wondering if she had also moved with the daughter, but unfortunately she's still there. Ms. Roberge said the other issue that hasn't been brought up is there is a sign that points right into her parking lot that says free parking. And there is another issue with the post office during the day now that they're discussing parking. Their boxes face her parking lot and if they go out there at 10:30 or 1 1 :00 a.m., they have to put notices on at least 15 cars that this is private parking. And a lot of other people drop their cars off in their parking lot, do the street and come back. That's an issue that the City should be looking at, too. With regard to the sign that says free parking, Commissioner Finerty asked whose sign that belonged to. � Ms. Roberge said it's the City's. Commissioner Finerty asked whose property it was on. Ms. Roberge said it's on the palm tree right outside her building. Commissioner Finerty asked if it was possible to remove it. Mr. Drell said there's an implication that when a sign says free parking it means free public parking. Commissioner Finerty asked if the inference of the free parking sign was to the lot behind the gallery. Mr. Drell said yes, there's really no free public parking on the south side of the street technically anywhere. All the public parking is Presidents Plaza on the north side of the street. The Gardens is public parking. Commissioner Finerty asked if they could remove the free parking sign. Mr. Drell said yes. Commissioner Finerty asked if they could see if that gives Ms. Roberge some relief so that her lot could be open to those who wish to self park. 28 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � Ms. Roberge said she didn't mind the self parking, she didn't like the customers who park there who aren't spending their money at her establishment. Commissioner Finerty said she totally understood. Ms. Roberge said that was a serious problem for them day and night. Commissioner Finerty indicated that if the free parking sign was what she believed to be part of the cause of that, and that sign was removed, she asked if they could remove that as a starting point along with instructing her valet personnel that there has to be a percentage set aside for self parking. And if that means they have to use the lot by the post office, they'll have to do that so there is some self parking. She asked if that was agreeable for the parking issue. � Ms. Roberge said yes, if they could put the cones up on the entrance way from Portola and Larrea because it creates absolute havoc. They have traffic coming in off of Portola and traffic coming in on Larrea and they are all trying to drive between the buildings. Commissioner Finerty said she wanted to clarify that she understood. If the patron were to enter off of EI Paseo, the valet would say sure, you can self park and go into the lot and then when the patron was done, they could exit out the same way they came in to avoid any problems. She said she would be comfortable with that. Commissioner Jonathan thought there were a number of problems with that, including fire issues which was addressed in the memo they received. He didn't think they necessarily needed to resolve this problem here tonight. He thought they needed to give the applicant an opportunity to work with staff to come up with a comprehensive resolution which might include what she suggested, or they might say no, the Fire Department needs the �""" 2 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 driveway open, so there might be another solution. He didn't know. He didn't think that was their job tonight. Their job was to facilitate an opportunity for staff and the property owner to work together. He also told Ms. Roberge that she has a wonderful restaurant, if he didn't make that clear, he should have. She has a wonderful restaurant that offers many unique opportunities for good food, entertainment and the music was very nice, and so forth. So that's certainly not what this is about. They would all like to see her business survive and prosper. Having said that, there are a couple of problems and those problems need to be faced square and resolved. He thought that could be done. Just sitting there tonight they've brain stormed some potential solutions. He knew there were more and he had confidence in the City's professional staff and their ability to resolve problems like this. Commissioner Jonathan suggested that they give staff and the property owner an opportunity and maybe in a month hear back about what the proposed solutions are. Regarding Commissioner Jonathan's reference to the memo for Condition 10 with the Fire Department, Commissioner Finerty noted that Ms. Roberge's letter indicated that the cones are 18- inch collapsible rubber that can be driven over by any emergency vehicle that requires access. She asked Mr. Drell if he knew if the Fire Chief agreed with that. Mr. Drell didn't know. He presumed these were rubber cones that could be quickly moved out of the way. The problem was when they were parking cars in front of them which could not easily be moved out of the way. But they would consult with the Fire Marshal as part of any proposed solution. Expanding more on Commissioner Finerty's comment as far as self parking, she was talking about going into the back parking lot to park, but thought that would really be, as they enter the entrance to the restaurant the valet takes it in the back. Then there's parking on the right-hand side. That would be more of the logical place to have self park because they could exit on Prickly Pear. 30 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2005 � Chairperson Tschopp thought this was an issue that could be dealt with through the staff and he encouraged Ms. Roberge to meet with Phil and staff here as soon as possible to go over some of these issues. They talked about the circulation and perhaps signs in the lots, taking down a sign, maybe putting an arrow that says public parking is up the street. He thought there were some things that could possibly be done here and encouraged her to work with staff. When it comes to the noise ordinance, it wasn't the perusal of this Commission; he himself was in favor of EI Paseo, if it could be done, having a little louder noise there. They need some nightlife there. That was his personal opinion, so he asked her to work with staff and perhaps depending on what she believed was proper, to take that further. They could maybe move this forward with that direction and ask that a report come back in a month or so. Commission agreed with it coming back in a month. Chairperson Tschopp thanked the applicant. Action: ;�, None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell reported that they would have a meeting on March 16, 2005. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Finerty informed Commission that they discussed at length the landscape at Wal-Mart to help break up all of the asphalt in the parking lot and they are still at the drawing board. Mr. Drell said they came to Architectural Commission and they are working on adding more relatively large, especially the Sam's lot, parking islands with more vertical elements and large shrubs to accomplish that goal. Mr. Drell said they should be breaking ground this week or next week. `� 31 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15 2005 � C. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Finerty reported that the meeting was canceled. XI. COMMENTS Commission briefly discussed the circulation, valet parking and noise levels at Augusta Restaurant. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. �� ,/� " STEPHEN R. SMITH, Acting Secretary ATTEST: _._ �.__. _ _ � - � 5 DAVID TSCHOPP, Chairpers Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm ,,,{ 32