Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1206 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION �.. TUESDAY - DECEMBER 6, 2005 6:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tschopp called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Lopez led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Dave Tschopp, Chairperson Jim Lopez, Vice Chairperson Sonia Campbell (arrived at 6:03) Cindy Finerty r.. 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 November 1, 2005 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the November 1, 2005 meeting minutes. Motion carried 4-0 (Commissioner Campbell was absent). V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Drell summarized pertinent November 10, 2005 City Council actions. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 r.r (Commissioner Campbell arrived at this time.) Vl. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 05-07 - BIGHORN DEVELOPMENT, LLC Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to adjust lot lines between Lot 12 of Tract 25296-5, Parcel 1 of PMW 03-17, and Parcel 3 of PMW 01-15 on Lantana View within Canyons at Bighorn. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, by minute motion approving Case No. PMW 05-07. Motion carried 5-0. B. Case Nos. PP/CUP 03-16 and VAR 03-03 -JAMES McINTOSH and ROD MURPHY, Applicant Request for approval of a second one-year time extension to allow a 6,192 square foot two-story office building and a variance reducing the minimum side yard setback from five feet to zero at 44-650 Monterey Avenue. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, by minute motion approving a second one-year time extension for Case Nos. PP/CUP 03-16 and VAR 03-03. Motion carried 5-0. Vlll. 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. 2 '�' MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 raw A. Case No. PP/HPD 05-27 - KRISTI HANSON, Applicant Request for approval of a recommendation to City Council to approve a precise plan of design to allow a 10,856 square foot single family home within the Hillside Planned Residential zone at 630 Pinnacle Crest within the Canyons at Bighorn. Mr. Drell explained that the applicant requested a continuance. A few issues had arisen that the applicant wanted to resolve. A continuance was recommended to the December 20, 2005 meeting. Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant wanted to make any comments. (She didn't.) Chairperson Tschopp asked if anyone present wanted to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the project. There was no one. Chairperson Tschopp left the public hearing open and asked for a motion. Commissioner Jonathan asked the applicant if the continuance to December 20 `... was acceptable. Ms. Hanson concurred. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, by minute motion continuing Case No. PP/HPD 05-27 to December 20, 2005. Motion carried 5-0. B. Case No. PP/CUP 05-23 - BOURESTON DEVELOPMENT, Applicant Request for approval of a precise plan/conditional use permit to allow the construction of a single-story 36,175 square foot office building, including up to 9,044 square feet of medical office space, located at 44-651 Village Court. Mr. Smith reviewed the staff report, noting that the map that was included in the Commission packets showed the property somewhat larger than it was in actuality. There was a 100-foot buffer on the west side between this site and the residents at Hidden Palms. He explained that was part of the north end of Embassy Suites. %1W 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 VMS He indicated that the findings could be met, it was a Class 32 Categorical Exemption for CEQA purposes and recommended approval, subject to conditions. Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the Commission. MR. RON SAKAHARA, Lee & Sakahara Architects, informed Commission that he was the architect for the project representing the applicant, who had been called out of town at the last moment. He thanked the staff. He said he worked diligently with staff over the past few months, especially Steve Smith who had been very helpful in processing this entitlement project. He said they read all of the conditions in the staff report and made no exceptions to any of the comments. He was present to answer any questions. The Commission had no questions for the applicant. Chairperson Tschopp asked for testimony in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. There was none and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Tschopp asked for Commission r, comments. Commissioner Finerty stated that she was very impressed. The architecture was nice and she also liked the fact that they have an extra 15 parking spaces and the landscaping coverage was at 29% when it only needed to be 15%. She thought that was a real plus. She appreciated that and moved for approval of the project. Commissioner Campbell was also in favor of the project and seconded the motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2365, approving Case No. PP/CUP 05-23, subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. 4 �' MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 %NW C. Case Nos. C/Z 05-03, PP/CUP 05-22 and TT 34179 - SUMMIT PROPERTIES, Applicant Request for a recommendation to City Council of approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, a change of zone from S.I. (Service Industrial)to PR-13 (Planned Residential, 13 units per acre), a precise plan/conditional use permit and tentative tract map for condominium purposes to construct 247 residential condominium units on a 20-acre site at the northeast corner of Gateway Drive and 35th Avenue, 73-600 35th Avenue. Project includes a height exception for roof elements to a maximum of 34 feet 6 inches. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he had an ownership interest in property in the area and that he would be abstaining from discussion and voting on this matter. He left the room. Mr. Drell informed Commission that the zoning on this property since its r.. annexation to the City has been designated for industrial business park. As well, Planning Commission recommended in the updated general plan that it be industrial business park. When it went to City Council, during shuffling around and changing densities of residential properties, they found a need to create some newly designated residential acreage and at the time, over the protests of the then property owner, redesignated this property in the general plan to residential. It put it in a rather unique situation in terms of its location. Unique in terms of how they usually locate residential property. It is surrounded on the north and the east by developing industrial park development. On the west it is bordered by the back end of the big boxes at the south end of the Wal-Mart center. The residential to the south pad height would probably be 12 to 15 feet below by virtue of the fact that the residential on the north and south of 35th Avenue would be significantly higher than 35th and they were significantly lower than 35th. In terms of designing the site for residential design, they hadn't confronted the unique conditions confronted by this property for a residential project in terms of its extreme urban nature based on the surrounding properties. In reviewing it and recommending the design, they took those unique conditions into account in that it is in essence within a commercial / industrial environment, not a residential one essentially. So they had to create their own residential quality consistent with what's around them to a r•• 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 .r certain degree. Therefore, their change of zone was in response to the Council's action to redesignate them from industrial to residential. Mr. Smith reviewed the staff report in depth and recommended that the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council approval of the project, subject to conditions. Commissioner Finerty asked if this project went to the Landscape Committee. Mr. Drell said no, typically on projects that are still speculative in terms of their land use, until they know the project is approved, they wait on the details on the perimeter landscaping. It also involved a good deal of street frontage and would go eventually. Commissioner Finerty noted that they had an example of a landscaped lane and it was totally different from the usual type of landscaping. Mr. Drell said he regretted that picture was in there. If they looked at the landscape plan, they worked at length with the applicant to create opportunities for trees. They insisted that the lanes include sufficient trees so they weren't stark alleys. H assumed they had an exhibit of the landscape plan. Commissioner Finerty noted that some of the trees shown in the picture, if it was accurate, looked like there a. was hardly any room and that they would grow right into the building. Mr. Drell agreed. He said they had details and the applicant had been working intensely with Spencer Knight and Diane Hollinger to come up with a design to allow sufficient planter area for the trees and actually modified the elevations eliminating overhangs where the trees would be, pulling them out from the buildings to create adequate space for the trees to grow. Commissioner Finerty asked if they were proposing to use desert scape. Mr. Drell concurred. In the lane situations, they were limited to trees that grow vertically and they would be trees that survive and are compatible with the space. The landscape architect provided a few alternatives. Adequately landscaping those lanes was a high priority for the landscape department. He said it would be going to a landscape committee meeting. Once they know there is a project, the final details of the landscaping would be reviewed by everyone that needed to see it. Commissioner Finerty asked Mr. Smith if there had been any discussion about putting in another pool. She noticed that there was one pool for 247 units. For example,where she lives they have exactly 247 units and they have five pools. Mr. Smith said this was a large pool. Commissioner Finerty pointed out that there 6 �.ri MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 could be a variety of people who live there and it seemed that the kids would congregate to the large pool and she wondered if one pool was adequate for a pool of this size and the diverse people who could be living there with the variety of units offered from one bedroom units to two bedrooms with a loft. Mr. Drell thought that was a good question for the applicant. Regarding the current Gateway Drive and future road development, Commissioner Lopez asked for clarification on the location in terms of Gateway Drive, the existing construction trailer and where it turns left to go to 35th. Mr. Drell thought it was about half way. Basically it took them to the end of the first phase of the Wal-Mart project. Commissioner Lopez indicated that Mr. Drell was saying it was quite a bit farther up in terms of the existing hill. Mr. Drell said that right. Mr. Smith clarified that if they went in on Spyder Circle, those lots along the south side of Spyder back onto the future 35th Avenue. Mr. Drell noted that to the north are two large industrial business park complexes. The bigger concern was the view of these residential units looking over at the industrial units. What was happening on the north side of this project, there was an agreement between this property owner and the property owner of the industrial park that they will contribute landscaping .� to be planted at the edge of this project which would more effectively screen the industrial buildings to the north. He said they were looking at a similar solution on the east side. Chairperson Tschopp asked if this applicant was notified or if staff was recommending that this applicant be part of the City's new energy policy program. Mr. Smith thought staff had that conversation with them. They were given a copy of Mr. Conlon's memo that was also included in the packet for the Taylor Woodrow project at Council scheduled Thursday. It would need to meet those same criteria. Mr. Drell indicated that Mr. Conlon was working as part of the program to hopefully provide carrots to justify the economic viability of going beyond those standards, so if they wanted to get into photovoltaics or whatever he was trying to put together for funding programs with Edison, Southern California Gas, and the PUC consortium being put together to help fund enhancements beyond that list. Mr. Drell noted that Architectural Commissioner Kristi Hanson was present. If the Planning Commission wanted to hear it, she could discuss the Architectural Commission's specific reasons for justifying the height exception. Commissioner f•• 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 Campbell stated that she agreed with their statement regarding it and if Ms. Hanson had anything more to add, would be happy to hear about it. MS. KRISTI HANSON addressed the Commission. She said that like Mr. Smith mentioned in the staff report, they really felt that with the style of architecture, even though it was sort of a low prairie, low hung style, it would come off very simple and boring if they did not add those extra elements. She in particular was much more of a pro "let's do better architecture" and give a little bit on height limits because they were sort of arbitrary anyway. She thought they were moving into a different sort of element when they started doing this many units grouped together which was unusual for the desert, but she thought it was a trend they were going toward and they would have to allow a little bit more height exceptions in order to make interesting architecture. She thought the rest of the Architectural Review Commissioners felt the same. Mr. Drell pointed out that this was also one of those situations where no one's views were being blocked because of its proximity. There were no other questions and Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the Commission. MR. STEVE LEVINSON addressed the Commission and said he was representing the applicants, Summit Properties, and had a couple of comments he wanted to speak to. First, he wanted to address some of the Commission questions. With regard to comments and questions by Commissioner Finerty, he said that regarding the photo in the packets, he too regretted that it was included. Mr. Drell had asked him to provide a photo of sample projects that have trees in their alleys. The majority of the development world do not put large trees in their alleys primarily because there are garage ways and cars were going through. He had a difficult time finding such a project and that picture was of a single-family detached project in Newport Beach and were homes selling in the $2 million range. It was specifically because Mr. Drell asked for the picture and he, too, commented in a meeting that it was nothing like they were doing here. His reply to Mr. Drell was he knew that, but he asked for the picture. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 As Mr. Drell mentioned, they spent hours on the issue with these garage lanes with Diane and Spencer from Public Works Landscaping, as well as Ron Gregory of RGA, their landscape architect. They discussed tree species, how big and how tall, how they would grow, if they had room to grow and room to live and they believed they came up with solutions that Diane, Spencer and Phil were appreciative of. What they did was widen the lanes to provide for adequate landscape planting islands in between these garages where a canopy tree could be planted far enough from the building where they can grow up and grow high and thrive and fill out the way they believed everyone expected them to look. They created a lot of space to the detriment of the landscaped paseo to make these look like pedestrian friendly lanes and with staffs help and prodding, got a very amicable and good solution. They also pulled the eaves back on those garage locations to provide the tree with the amount of room it needs to grow, to thrive with the amount of open ground area that it needs to thrive and not be a tree that looks good the day it's planted and dead a year later. That wasn't the intent. So a lot of work and study was done. Regarding the swimming pool, as Mr. Smith mentioned, they had a considerable time dealing with the topography of this site between the 50- foot drop in one direction and the 30-foot drop in the other direction and trying to have flat areas to drive into garages and access units with. So they were using the topography and stepping down by tiering and dropping down the site in both directions. As Mr. Smith also mentioned, the clubhouse pool area took on a considerable drop in terrain. With the clubhouse level at the top, with the terrace level dropping to a mid terrace level, dropping to a third level where the pool would be, about a 10-11 foot difference between the top and down below. So it took a lot of topography which they thought was a positive view from the top looking out and the views from the pool area looking up over these terraces. They felt it would be quite dramatic. He said the pool would be 4,300 square feet in size. A typical pool seen in most places were maybe 850 to 1,000 square feet, so it is a large pool. It's a huge pool. They also had a cold pool and a warm pool. But with the topography, what they found was that sometimes second pools or third pools look like second pools or third pools. They look like they were stuck %um 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 somewhere and didn't have a lot of true ambience. They felt they created a lot of feeling here and certainly had a pool of a size well in excess of many products of this nature. The slope was one condition, but really the ambience of what they wanted to create mandated them to put in one spa and the pool was quite large. The third item with regard to landscape beautification committee, they were actually on the agenda for December 7, so it was going to be discussed then. But he wanted to stress that Public Works has been involved and Diane and Spencer had been in numerous meetings with Mr. Drell and Mr. Smith and others. They have been with this project for five or six months. They've gone through four or five site plans and had a lot of great work and help from the staff to get to this point. So there had been a tremendous amount of work in getting to where they were. He hoped he addressed those three comments. Commissioner Finerty noted that they were going to have one bedrooms, which might be for single people or couples or elderly and they might want to enjoy the pool or perhaps the spa. The only option was going to be to go to this one area where there would be kids and noise. She was thinking that since he addressed the size of the pool, and she agreed that it is huge, but she wondered if there was any consideration to putting a few spas throughout the complex because there were so many people in the desert with arthritis and she knew in her association it was really a plus to have a few where they can have peace and quiet and get away from the kids. Mr. Levinson said his engineer and architect were in the audience and they probably needed to ask them the question and the reason why is really more the physical nature of the topography they were dealing with, but he understood her point. His only other comment was going to be that the clubhouse pool complex would be almost two acres is size. He didn't disagree with her comments by any means, but there really was a difference between one side and another. It was a long way from one side to the other and he felt there would be people scattered. With that in mind, he has children and understood what she was saying, and they from a marketing standpoint thought about it and felt comfortable with the resort feel they thought they had provided. They thought it would be a place 10 r' MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 people would really want to be. They could see what they could squeeze in. Commissioner Finerty asked what they would have inside the clubhouse. Mr. Levinson said that the clubhouse was approximately 6,800 square feet. He apologized that their floor plan had not been included in the Commission packets, but he would try to help them visualize it. They would walk into an entry foyer. There would be a series of different lounge type rooms. A tv room, for example, where there would be comfy couches and a big screen tv in one area. They had another area that would be a lounge type and have a bar counter with refrigeration, an area that could be used for functions and a raised area with potentially a grand piano. Again, a separate lounge area as opposed to the tv room. Another room would basically be an indoor/outdoor room that could open up that was more of a recreational room with billiard tables and other recreational facilities for the residents. The building would also have a couple of multi-purpose rooms for arts and crafts or other uses, as well as a fitness center with full `r bathroom, showers and lockers. Commissioner Finerty asked what kind of fitness center would be provided. Mr. Levinson wasn't sure of the square footage of the fitness center, but it was a sizeable area. It wasn't a closet with a universal gym. It was a large room that would have room for aerobics, yoga, etc., along with a combination of cardiovascular and weight equipment. Multi stations. In their projects they didn't believe in sticking one station in and calling it a workout facility. It is a facility they could quit their gym membership for. That was his opinion right now. Commissioner Finerty asked if he knew what kind of equipment. Mr. Levinson said he has used muscle dynamics and other types of equipment in other projects and didn't know why they would change now because it works. It is a room he would like to be impressive and the room is impressive when filled with exercise equipment. When they walk in and see lots of stuff and see four or five different cardiovascular, elliptical, stair %NW 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 goo master or a treadmill. It is the same with the weight equipment. It just looks impressive with all the pieces of equipment even if the average person only uses three of the pieces. But that is their aim and what they would do. He anticipated a room half filled with equipment and the other space being left for physical activities such as yoga, aerobics, mirrors, ballet bars and that type of thing. Regarding energy efficiency, Mr. Levinson noted that the energy program was mentioned. He received information from Mr. Smith that talked about energy efficiency with regard to architectural efficiencies and appliances. They didn't have any issues or problems with the information provided to them. He said by design their project actually was energy efficient with its prairie style look with the lower style roof lines, the larger overhang over the glazing and that is actually one of the reasons they designed that long before they thought about complying with the energy codes. So yes, they've seen what has been provided to date and didn't have any issues. With regard to the building elevations themselves, Mr. Levinson said he wanted to reiterate their position. When they looked at the design of this property, being a property that does stare on one side at the back of a Wal- Mart, a high wall sitting many feet above them, being where they are sifting over an industrial park on two sides and try to create something where people would want to come and live in that environment. So they had to create something that was special as far as they were concerned, something that was unique and nice and something construction-wise that is quite expensive. But they did it because they thought they needed to be different. They did not build the standard tuscan Mediterranean everyone wants to do. They came up with a completely different look. A look they are very excited about. They had to create this reason to be there and a reason they could be seen there because of the position of their site below street grade, 8-12 feet in some locations. Those loft elements occur on two or three occasions per building. Lofts typically were on the back side of the buildings, not on the street. Even within the project they typically face the interior paseos and not the internal drives. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 A lot of thought was given to the location. They felt this was good for the project even though they knew it was something that would be questioned. They felt strongly enough and hoped the Commission would see the situation they were dealing with on the site and would understand why they needed to make sure they weren't forgotten in this location. Mr. Levinson said they reviewed the conditions and the only question he had for the record was Public Works Condition No. 14 where Public Works asked that all the entry gates for the project be set back 100 feet from the curbline of the adjacent street. He said that was the case on their main entry. It was not the case on their secondary entries that are resident-only gates. They did not anticipate stacking issues at these resident gates because they are strictly for residents. They wanted the opportunity to continue to address this issue with staff and Public Works as they move forward with the project. Otherwise, the conditions were fine. He asked for any questions. He noted that his architect and engineer were also present to answer questions. Commissioner Finerty asked if this would have a homeowners association. Mr. Levinson said yes. Commissioner Finerty asked if there would be CC&R's. Mr. Levinson said yes. Chairperson Tschopp asked what he anticipated the homeowners association dues to be. Mr. Levinson said they had not prepared the DRE budgets yet. It was their intent, just as it was their intent to price these at a price level that if they look at what the competition is doing lower, it is their intent to make this a marketable project with price and they hoped to keep the association dues within a very reasonable range, but he couldn't answer the question yet. Commissioner Campbell asked if on the resident-only gates it allowed only one car. �•• 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 Mr. Levinson said the gates are 60-70 feet away and could stack three or four cars. They were almost at 100 feet with the other gates, but not quite. He attempted to address that with Mr. Greenwood, but they weren't done talking. Mr. Drell said the unfortunate alternative would be to convert them to exit only, which would concentrate more traffic entering at the main gate which increases the potential for a stacking problem at the main gate. He thought an alternative would be to make it subject to experience with a condition that if it creates a stacking problem, they could make it exit only or come up with another solution. At this point in time changing the location of the gate started completely redesigning the project. Commissioner Campbell thought it was acceptable and asked why they would want all the traffic for the complex going through the main gate. Mr. Drell thought two were right-in and right-out only. Mr. Levinson believed the one on 35th had a condition for right-in and right- out. Chairperson Tschopp asked if the plan allowed for parking for gardeners and service personnel. Mr. Levinson said they were over parked per code. They have two car garages for each unit and the roadways were lined with parallel parked cars sitting in landscaped islands. Instead of having head in parking and rows of back ends of cars, they put cars parallel to the street and actually brought the landscaping out into the street. So they have a considerable amount of excess landscaping that could be used for service people as well as guests. Commissioner Finerty noted that she read that the streets would be 24-feet wide. Mr. Drell explained that was exclusive of the parking areas. The travel lanes are 24-feet. It was similar to Hovley Gardens, but better landscaped. They would have the two-way aisle and then parking pockets that are beyond the aisle. The street width including the parking spaces were probably 40 feet. So they were well out 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 of the travel lane, but the good thing is the street trees are at the 24-feet so they get the shaded travelway in addition to parking spaces. Commissioner Lopez noted that the staff report indicated a request for waiver of the housing agreement and asked if Mr. Levinson wanted to address that issue. Mr. Levinson said that was kind of a blunt way to say it, but the idea and the reason they had no problem addressing and bringing forth the proformas and comparable analysis showing what everyone else in the valley was charging is that their sales prices were already lower than what everyone else was charging. So in order to come back and make it even lower and put that restriction upon them literally would make it where they couldn't afford to do the project. They were agreeing to the 20% as addressed and reviewed by staff, which was still well lower than market. Their idea was that their entire project is basically lower than market. If they looked at a price value graph provided .., to Mr. Drell, it had the sales prices on one side and square footages on another and they could compare unit by unit, floor plan by floor plan the projects out there of this similar density and they draw a line connecting them and their project was the lowest on the chart. Everyone else was charging more and in most cases well more. Only one project in the summary lower than them was the conversion of Palm Lake Villas, which wasn't quite what was being built here. Commissioner Lopez asked for confirmation that Mr. Levinson was comfortable with Community Development Condition No. 9. Mr. Drell said there is no specific requirement for a housing agreement. What there was in the general plan is a required criteria for high density projects to address affordable housing issues. What they tried to do was ask what the project is capable of achieving based on real costs of land, construction and normal risks and rewards for developers. What they hoped to do is at the time all those costs are known is say here are some units they know the cost of and make those available to the Housing Authority and tell them what the cost was to build them and the only way to get them lower is through assistance and that's what the Housing Authority's job is. So it would then be up to the Housing Authority to decide if they want to use this project to achieve ..W 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 ..r some of their goals by putting some of the money they get from their 20% set aside so they could be lowered further. Commissioner Lopez asked if the Housing Authority continued through the resale process and future resales. Mr. Drell said that was the other issue that really required someone like the Housing Authority to be involved. Once the developer sells the unit, he's gone. So in terms of controlling affordability of ownership product, they need some governmental agency to participate. For the units to count as part of the city's affordable housing supply, ownership housing has to be kept affordable for around 45 years. The justification for that is whoever buys them is going to have their mortgage payments significantly reduced. So basically there would be a silent second which in essence becomes due and payable if it's not occupied by a qualified resident. Mr. Levinson said to answer Commissioner Lopez's questions, yes. There were no other questions for the applicant and Chairperson Tschopp asked for any testimony in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the application. There was none and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Tschopp asked for Commission comments. Commissioner Lopez stated that overall the project was very interesting. He wasn't too concerned about the height exception and could live with that because of the extreme graphical fluxuations. Also, because it would be located in an area he didn't think would have a tremendous impact. Architecturally, he thought it was very handsome and he liked the style. It was very different from other parts of the community and he liked it. The pedestrian walkways were a plus and added to a community and residential feeling. He always enjoyed that portion of it. The pool area was a little bit of a concern. It is large. Capacity would probably be stretched to the maximum during the summer months, so for 90 days it might be a little bit crazy, but for the rest of the time it would probably be just fine. The clubhouse and clubhouse elevations were very handsome, so overall he thought the project looked good. And they were okay with all the conditions of approval. He noted it was a little bit against their nature to have as much put into one area because they like to see open space, desert and the views, but this seemed to fit in this particular location. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 low Commissioner Campbell concurred. She indicated it was a great location to have this type of development. Even though there were quite a few units, she was sure there would be a variety of age groups in there. As far as the pool was concerned, elderly people would probably not go to the pool anyway and would rather stay inside where it's cool instead of going out to the pool. She didn't really see that as a problem. There would also be areas for volleyball court, basketball court, tot lots dispersed throughout this community. As far as the landscaping was concerned, from the design and the way it was stated with regard to the street and the parking, there would be quite a few trees and she was sure they wouldn't have to worry about the landscaping with Spencer and Diane being on the job because they would make sure everything's adequate. They wouldn't be blocking views with the lofts or two-stories, there wasn't a problem with the height exception and she was also in favor of the project. Commissioner Finerty said she had some concerns. Overall she liked the architecture. It didn't give her a real desert feel, but everything in the desert didn't have to look like it belongs in the desert. It is attractive. She was concerned about r.. the one pool. She lives in a homeowners association with 247 units and spas are a big deal. She would like to see more spas throughout the complex. She thought it would be really enjoyable for the older people with arthritis. That seemed to be the big use where she lives. The project reminded her of where she used to live in Orange County in Cypress. It was the same kind of design and almost the same style with the alleys. She could see a definite need for that here. She wasn't thrilled with the ten-foot height exception, but she supposed if they were ever going to have a height exception, being buried between Wal-Mart, Interstate 10 and the service industrial would be the perfect place for it as long as the homeowners were content living in a service industrial area. She was also worried that it was too congested of an area. Her concern was that with the traffic from the Wal-Mart going in, Sam's Club, and with the existing Costco. That intersection is already extremely busy. She voted against the Wal- Mart project largely because of the traffic that is already there. That is a real concern and they would be adding another 247 with such a high density of 13 units per acre. She also wanted to see the energy program that the Taylor Woodrow project was looking at adhered to. She was really on the fence on which way to go and was glad it was going to the City Council because she hoped they would take her comments to heart. But she knew she needed to make a decision r..► 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 wrr and would vote in favor of the project, but with serious reservations as discussed. She looked forward to the Landscape Committee meeting to see what they came up with because that was also a concern. Chairperson Tschopp thought it was a good project for a difficult location with three sides being industrial and commercial, the shape of the property as far as the height of the land, and the grade. He thought the developer did a good job given those limitations and changing this from service industrial to a housing development. At 13 units per acres, it was at the midpoint of the high density type zoning and fit here fairly well given the location and future schools that would be built in the area. He didn't have a problem with the height exception. If they were going to do it anywhere, like Commissioner Finerty said, this would be the place to do it given the topography and the commercial property surrounding it and 35th Street and how it would back up to it. It wouldn't impact anyone elses view. He liked the architecture. He thought it was good and looked very appealing. He didn't have the concern with the swimming pool that the other Commissioners did. He thought ar► pools were over rated in country clubs and under used quite a bit. This central type pool would be easier to maintain and much more efficient in the long run than a lot of small pools that don't get used. All in all he was in favor of the project. It is a higher density, but that's what they wanted to create in the general plan and they also wanted to create affordable housing and the prices the developer is anticipating at this time to offer them at is probably as affordable as they could get in that area. He was in favor of the project. Commissioner Lopez said he would move for approval. Mr. Drell asked if, in terms of a motion, they wanted to deal with the stacking issue raised by the applicant relative to that condition. Chairperson Tschopp said the motion should incorporate Condition No. 14 to allow Public Works to work with the applicant. Mr. Drell concurred. 18 °"'� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 Mr. Smith also suggested Condition No. 10 relative to the energy program, that the project shall be reviewed for consistency with the energy criteria contained in the memo from the Office of Energy Management dated 11-28-05. Mr. Joy indicated that Public Works Condition No. 16 might also need some work. He suggested adding the same language that was added to Condition No. 14 because there might be a community facilities district being formed that could affect some of the requirements. Mr. Drell said they say these improvements are their responsibility unless they are taken on by a future community facilities district. Mr. Joy referred to the requirement for the signalized intersection. That would probably be part of the facilities assessment district, so it wouldn't be the responsibility of the developer himself. The same language in Condition No. 14 regarding working with Public Works staff should be incorporated into Condition No. 16. Commissioner Lopez said he would incorporate all of that into his motion for approval. Commissioner Campbell concurred and seconded the motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Jonathan abstained). It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2366, recommending to City Council approval of Case Nos. C/Z 05-03, PP/CUP 05-22 and TT 34179, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Jonathan abstained). (Commissioner Jonathan rejoined the meeting.) D. Case No. ZOA 05-04 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for consideration of an amendment to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 25.30 to allow "supermarkets" not exceeding 50,000 gross square feet as conditional uses in the Regional Commercial PC(3) zone. w 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 Mr. Drell reviewed the staff report and recommended that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of Case No. ZOA 05-04. Chairperson Tschopp asked if someone applying under this would still come to the Planning Commission. Mr. Drell said yes, it would be a conditional use permit. For example, if Mervyn's or Ross went out of business, in terms of dealing with the unique rear loading of a market they would want to make sure that the site was appropriate or that the project got modified appropriately so that it would be consistent. One of the sites being looked at didn't have that conflict at all. It backed onto another commercial center. He confirmed that it would come back to the Planning Commission. He said that supermarkets were like restaurants in many ways and there are certain situations that with design they would want to accommodate the loading requirements because they were different then a department store. Chairperson Tschopp opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2367, recommending to City Council approval of Case No. ZOA 05-04. Motion carried 5-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell updated the Commission on the last Art in Public Places meeting actions. 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Finerty reported that the meeting would be December 7. C. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Finerty noted that the meeting would be later in the month. XI. COMMENTS Mr. Hargreaves introduced Carlos Campos, an attorney with their office in their public law department. He said Mr. Campos might come to Planning Commission meetings from time to time. Commission welcomed him. Mr. Drell updated the Commission on the status of Palm Desert Country Club. With all the development they were seeing east of Monterey, Commissioner �.. Jonathan asked what the status was of the Dinah Shore extension to Portola. Mr. Drell indicated that the Portola interchange was on the Council agenda, but thought they were requiring the right-of-way and there were negotiations, but wasn't sure where it was in the Public Works process. Mr. Joy thought it was a stand alone project. He would investigate and report back. Commissioner Jonathan thought there was a condition of approval on the Wal-Mark project that the extension of Dinah Shore had to be completed by the completion of the Wal- Mart project. He remembered they were concerned with the traffic situation and it looked like Wal-Mart was moving quickly along. Mr. Drell said they were supposed to be open in January or February. Commissioner Lopez asked about the agenda for the December 20 meeting. Mr. Smith indicated there were several items. Commissioner Campbell said she would be absent. Everyone else indicated they would be present. Commissioner Lopez asked about the January 3 meeting. Mr. Smith said it was open. Mr. Drell said there weren't any items scheduled yet and if they wanted to, they could direct staff to keep it free. Commission concurred. 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2005 XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:24 p.m. nn �1� 6l PHILIP DRELL Secretary ;ATTEST: DAVID E. TSCHOPP, Chairperson Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm VW 22 '�