Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0619 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY - J U N E 19, 2007 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Campbell called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. il. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairperson Campbell led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Sonia Campbell, Chair Dave Tschopp, Vice Chair Connor Limont Mari Schmidt Van Tanner Members Absent: None Staff Present: Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Ryan Stendell, Associate Planner Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Request for consideration of the May 15, 2007 meeting minutes. Commissioner Limont noted a correction on page 10, paragraph 3, changing the word "dropped" to "increased". Action: It was moved by Commissioner Tschopp, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, approving the May 15, 2007 minutes as amended. Motion carried 5- 0. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Aylaian reviewed pertinent May 24 and June 14, 2007 City Council actions. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 06-26 - LOST HORSE MOUNTAIN, LLC, AND LA QUINTA VILLAGE BUSINESS CENTER, LLC, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a lot line adjustment to accommodate site development for property located at 74-836 Technology Drive. B. Case No. PMW 07-05 - HOWARD AND KATHLEEN GILLMAN AND ALLEN DESERT PROPERTIES, LLC, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a lot line adjustment to transfer a portion of Lot 1 of Tract 27520 to Parcel 1 of PMW 97-28 for property located at 136 Tekis. C. Case No. PMW 07-14 - CALI HOLDINGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND BIGHORN DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a lot line adjustment for property located at 125 Tamit Place. D. Case No. TT 31490 - MARVIN ROOS/MSA CONSULTING, INC., Applicant Request for approval of a second one-year time extension for tentative tract map to allow construction of future phases within Ponderosa Homes for property located at 74-000 Gerald Ford Drive. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Tschopp, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. Vill. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case Nos. TT 35271 and TT 35272 - PALM DESERT GREENS ASSOCIATION, Applicant (Continued from March 6, March 20, April 7 and May 15, 2007) Request for approval of two tentative tract maps to subdivide 7.58-acres into 331 lots for property at 73-750 Country Club Drive, also more particularly described as APN's 620-272-014, 620-261-050, 620-251-039, 620-241-027, 620-094-026, 620- 082-035, 620-131-031, 620-141-001 and 620-151-034. Ms. Aylaian explained that the applicant was once again requesting a continuance. She said they indicated they have had some difficulty scheduling meetings with their neighbors, but they were optimistic they would be able to meet and resolve issues and come back at the July 3, 2007 meeting. Staff recognized this has been continued a number of times and in the event that they are still not able to work something out by the next meeting, staff would proceed with the original recommendation to act upon this item. Chairperson Campbell noted that the public hearing was open and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. MS. MARIE BEFELD of Suncrest Country Club stated that she was in favor of the extension. Basically, they have not had any communication because they(the applicants) haven't called them. But they were working on it. Some other information came up that they want to go over with them. It wasn't like they were ignoring them, which is what it sounded like, but they never did get a copy of the letter. But she was in favor of a continuance. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Commissioner Tschopp asked Ms. Befeld if July 3 was a realistic date or if a later meeting in July or August would facilitate it better. Chairperson Campbell noted that it was their last date. Ms. Befeld said the applicants had to deal with their association and she didn't. Commissioner Schmidt noted that it wasn't Ms. Befeld's application. Chairperson Campbell indicated that the next meeting after July 3 was July 17 and the first Tuesday in August was August 7. Ms. Aylaian recommended that staff be allowed to consult with the applicant. Commissioner Schmidt asked if they were aware it was the last continuance. Mr. Stendell said that technically they weren't at a last continuance. Staff discussed this issue with the City Attorney and were comfortable saying they will either have an agreement or a staff recommendation. The applicant was aware that July 3 was the date to have some kind of a proposal for an agreement or staff would possibly be pushing forward with a recommendation at that point. The applicants were comfortable with that. Commissioner Tanner asked if the issue was that they couldn't meet with the rest of the homeowners, or the contingent part, or if there was a lack of interest. Mr. Stendell didn't think it was a lack of interest and said he couldn't speak as to what has been going on between the two neighbors, but he knew there were some initial meetings. A letter was received which was distributed to Commission in their packets. Ms. Aylaian thought both parties indicated they had been having difficulty meeting with each other and since staff isn't directly involved in the negotiations, staff couldn't speak to it. Ms. Befeld said all they had to do was call them and set up a meeting. Chairperson Campbell suggested a continuance of two months and coming back in September. Ms. Aylaian thought they needed to discuss this with the applicant. Mr. Stendell concurred, indicating that the applicant was not present and had requested in writing a continuance to July 3. Chairperson Campbell agreed they could continue it to July 3 and if they weren't present, they could take the staff recommendation. There were no other comments and the public hearing was left open. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Tanner, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, continuing Case Nos. TT 35271 and TT 35272 to July 3, 2007. Motion carried 5-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Presentation of landscaping concerns relative to small lot residential development. Ms. Aylaian introduced Mr. Spencer Knight, the City's Landscape Manager. Mr. Knight thanked the Planning Commission for allowing him to make a presentation to them. He explained that approximately three years ago Palm Desert probably started in earnest approving development in the north end of the city and some projects were high density projects. The landscape staff launched out with great enthusiasm and approved landscape plans. As development occurred and landscaping was installed, they began to notice some issues. They presented their concerns to the Landscape Beautification Committee. The Landscape Beautification Committee requested that staffs concerns be taken to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC)and Planning Commission as a matter of information. Mr. Knight said he already visited ARC and now he was completing the last of his assignment, which was to share with Planning Commission what they've found as a point of reference. He asked as they continue to work through the development in the north end that they keep these things in mind. He said it might lead them to other decisions, he didn't know, but this is what they had seen as a result of what had been developed so far. He stated that smaller, high density lots resulted in the landscape being impacted by the lack of planting area. They found they have a lack of space in three areas in a development. At the ground level, they have space issues between hardscape and structures. The other issue that surfaced is that utilities create problems on the ground surface. The next area where they are running out of space is below ground in the root zone. He showed an exhibit which depicted a sidewalk, asphalt to the street, a foundation and the floor of a structure which impacted the ability of roots to expand. He said they see roots that will expand underneath concrete and asphalt so far and then eventually won't expand any farther. It wasn't because of a lack of water, but a lack of oxygen. The potential result is a dwarf root system and trees that can fall over when there is wind. r MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 The other area having a space limitation is above the horizontal plane vertically. They find that for trees, and sometimes even for shrubs, they don't have space for the foliage to grow. What they see or what they potentially think will happen will be the trees and shrubs will be topped and mispruned. The agents that restrict the above ground portion of growth for the plant are structures and utilities again. He said they really have some space restrictions. The head of the tree was imposing on the building or the building imposing on the tree. Typically what they've seen in the past when maintenance occurs is when a tree matures, they literally flat side the tree right adjacent to the building and lose half the canopy. When staff went out to Desert Rose to take a look at that project there were wonderful trees, but the heads were kind of small. Everything was well shaped and most everyone thought it looked good, but he realized that most of the trees should have 40-foot canopies, and the canopy should be fully extended by this time, but were only 15-feet wide. That meant that people had consistently topped those trees and were holding them in place. In a developer relationship type dynamic, if the developer has to do something, they will subjugate the landscape to the building because the building is what sells, not the landscape. He said the landscape will never increase the price, but it certainly makes it sell better. What they see are developers compromising the landscape design; they'll either do it during the design process and want a lesser landscape design approved, or compromise it during construction and change it without notifying the landscape staff. Their inspectors show up and say they can't do something and then they get into a process of having to change the approved plans, which could be very tedious. He noted that it has been extensive in some cases. Eventually what happens is the developer develops a resistance to the city requirements and it gets to be problematic. The developer typically ends up with some level of dissatisfaction with City staff and City processes and then it goes through a complaint process. What happens from the City side is the City ends up with lesser quality landscaping, the aesthetics are less, and we lose urban forestry canopy and the associated benefits like the energy conservation characteristics from trees, the co2 tie-up which helps with the greenhouse effect, and those kinds of things. A situation like this is typically mitigated with smaller trees, but the smaller the tree, the less of a benefit they get from the tree. As a solution, Mr. Knight indicated that staff has is now asking that both a wet and dry utilities plan be given much earlier in the review process. It is 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 inconvenient for the builder, but at least it's inconvenient at the front end and not the back end when he's done with his project and trying to finish. That helps them a little bit in being able to adjust where the utilities go. Mr. Knight showed a series of pictures where landscaping was supposed to go, but were replaced by cable and electrical boxes, water service and back flow devices. What they were originally told by the engineers is that CVWD requires that they all be lined up. He called CVWD and asked and was told they like it that way, because it was easier to install, but they would install according to how they were shown on the plan. So they can require the engineer to adjust those and give them space in between those elements to at least get a shrub in there. One picture showed a Southern California Edison vault which was an eyesore and decreased from the aesthetics. One picture showed a 4 x 8 utility box that replaced a nice palo verde. He said he would like to see smaller buildings and more landscape, but that created an economic issue for the developer. He said staff would do their best to rearrange utility placement. Another issue in terms of hardscape that has been an impact since the first of the year were ADA requirements. Slopes and developments are now required to have longer walkways and that impacts more of the landscape area to get the right angle. That added to an already encumbered situation. It wasn't that they couldn't not have the ADA or utilities, but it did require some looking into. He talked to Planning about it and was discussing with staff potential ways to address it. It's a problem that exists and they would continue to work on it and do what they can to resolve it. He asked for any questions. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the utilities had to be in dedicated easements. Mr. Knight indicated that most utilities require or prefer to set their utilities right at edge of curb or end of sidewalk. His suspicion was that was the way it was going to be. They had been asked to move them in further, but they wouldn't do it. He didn't know what legal grounds they had for it. Commissioner Schmidt noted that they were basically locked into have a trail of utilities that usually abut the roadway. Mr. Knight said yes, but staff was asking them to space them apart. One bank of water meters that was shown was for a large industrial area containing multiple units, so every unit has water service to it. They haven't got into a situation where they have run out of frontage space where they couldn't space them, so they would address that when it occurs and he wasn't sure what would happen with that. His approach would be to stagger them to accommodate some landscape. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Commissioner Schmidt asked if typically at this point there was no requirement for the layout of these utilities. They just sort of happen after the building has been approved. Mr. Knight said the plan that creates this mess is called a utility plan, a wet and a dry utility plan. Staff was now requiring developers to turn those plans in with their landscape plan and with their precise grading plan. That was way ahead of when they are used to doing that. When he gets it, he compares it either as a separate plan or it has been superimposed over the landscape planting plan. They take a look at that and if they see conflicts like this, they go back to the civil engineer and have them at least space them out if they can or relocate them. A lot of times like in the example of the large green power pedestal, that might have been able to be relocated across that parking lot area on a side area that would have been less intrusive on the building. That wall on that building was designed for a nice tree to go there and if they had caught that, they would have had them move it to another place. So they try to get them to redesign, but staff is limited in what they can do. They can require them to be moved, but they have limitations to what they can do. Commissioner Schmidt asked if this was for both commercial and residential development. Mr. Knight concurred. Chairperson Campbell asked if sometimes it was the fault of desert landscaping. If they had some grass and painted green all the cement utilities to blend in with the grass as well as some green bushes, that would camouflage them very well instead of having the cement and the dried, dead flowers and sand. Mr. Knight said he would then have to talk to the Planning Commission about nuisance water running down the gutter from the turf in the parkway. Commissioner Schmidt noted that grass also required maintenance. Mr. Knight said his contention is if they had spaced the boxes out, they could have plant material that will fit between them and camouflage them. Chairperson Campbell thought different planting that grows very well in the desert which requires minimal water would be better instead of something dry. Mr. Knight agreed they would have required a different plant material that spreads more and would have covered it. On one project when the landscape plan was approved, they did not know those water meters were going there. Had they known, they would have changed the plant material requirements. Chairperson Campbell indicated that with any applications from now on, they would have to really look at them very closely. Mr. Knight agreed and said 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 that was why they were now requiring a wet and dry utilities plan with the landscape plan. Chairperson Campbell noted that developers did the minimum they could to not spend the money. Mr. Knight said that on one particular project, Southern California Edison required eight-feet of clear space for access. By the time the project met everyone's requirements, there was room for only one daisy in the corner. Commissioner Tschopp said it sounded like staff was headed in the right direction to get the plans and make adjustments. Some of the water meters he couldn't believe couldn't be placed closer to the building or even the electrical utilities and suggested staff meet with Edison and work out something better. These were terrible. It defeated the whole purpose of having a landscape plan. He was sure the architects didn't like it and thought the probably builders didn't like it either. Mr. Knight said they might end up in discussions with both the Water District and Southern California Edison to see what they could do to mitigate this if they can't gain a solution without that. He wasn't sure staff was looking forward to taking on either one of those organizations. Commissioner Schmidt asked what the Planning Commission could do to help him. Mr. Knight said it was just informative. He wasn't sure what could be done through the Planning Commission's function unless Ms. Aylaian had some suggestions. Ms. Aylaian said they could generally look for the Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission to look over staff's shoulder to make sure the landscaping has been addressed and designed prior to approval. One of the continuing issues they have are developers who try to force their projects through before their landscape design is complete because they see it more as an after thought and staff is under continuous pressure from the developer to get it to the Planning Commission and Architectural Review before they've completed their design. But anything the Planning Commission could do to verify that the landscaping plan has been complete, if it has been approved by Public Works, and heightening awareness on behalf of the developer as to the importance of landscaping to the City. Chairperson Campbell said when they are approving a building, they should also be approving the landscaping in a way. Ms. Aylaian said they were not wanting to entirely entitle projects until they are at least through the conceptual design of landscape. They don't issue the building permit until the landscape design is completely detailed out. The developer generally will not have their utility plans complete by the time they reach the Planning Commission. But it doesn't hurt to double check to see if their conceptual 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 landscape design has been submitted and approved and been through Architectural Review. Commissioner Schmidt asked why it would come to Planning Commission before it was finished. Landscaping is a major component. Ms. Aylaian explained that a developer proposing a project is going to spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars developing their design to the point where it can be built, depending on the project. Getting that kind of investment of monies before knowing if the project will even be approved by the Planning Commission is a heavy burden. So generally they work through so their architecture has had preliminary/conceptual approval and their landscaping has had conceptual approval. By coming to the Planning Commission and getting approval for the concept, they know what they are going to be able to build and they know the general parameters before going ahead and investing the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars actually developing the working drawings to the point where building permits can be issued. It's kind of an industry standard. Generally a project gets Planning Commission approval so they know they have a buildable, viable project. It's probably about 75% of the architecture and engineering that is done after Planning Commission and/or City Council approval Chairperson Campbell asked if after a building has been approved, if they could demand that Mr. Knight look at the landscape and everything else before the approval becomes final. Ms. Aylaian believed that the conditions of approval actually do require approval of the landscape plan before building permits are issued. As much as anything, their awareness and questions if the conceptual landscape design has been reviewed and approved gives reinforcement to developers that landscaping is important in this city. Mr. Bagato noted that staff is trying to do more progressive steps in the development side and staff is conducting pre-application meetings with developers before applications are submitted with no fee. An applicant will meet with one person from every department or even two people and a representative of the Fire Marshal. They will then know what staff is anticipating will required up front. Because of landscaping and ADA requirements, they are being told right up front before application submittal that staff wants to see the utilities with the landscaping. Planning Commission approves a general site plan with a percentage of landscaping and trees and from that end staff would expect Planning Commission to still monitor those. But staff will be asking for utility and ADA plans up front now so they know pretty much what is being approved through Planning Commission and City Council is what will pretty much be built. 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Mr. Bagato said they see preliminary architecture, but they don't require full construction structural plans at that point. It was the same with the landscaping. They are trying to address this and work interdepartmentally and having more meetings to take a progressive approach. He didn't know what additionally Planning Commission would need to see, it was just that there would be a better planning process and once a project gets approved, staff would be making sure everything needed is done before building permits are issued. The tendency is for a builder wanting to start construction when his landscaping plan hasn't received final approval and in the past staff has let them proceed up to a certain point. The plan then comes in as an after thought once utilities are in. So they were now looking at making sure conditions of approval have been met before anyone gets a building permit and conditions of approval include landscaping approval and easements filed. They used to let some of those go to be more developer friendly and get them going. Staff has a lot of pressure put on them from developers because of money. Now they are firmer up front and they know it from the beginning and there should be less resistance at the end. So they are taking active steps to change the process on how planning and development gets done. Using Wachovia as an example, Commissioner Schmidt recalled that the Planning Commission approval of that project was based heavily on the required landscaping because they all sort of thought it was an unattractive building and some substantial, mature landscaping would help. Her approval was based on that and if they were now telling her that because one of these utility boxes has to be where one of the huge palm trees was required, then they shouldn't be approving something that critical at a major corner in the city such as at Highway 111 and Highway 74/Monterey. She was perplexed by that and she would really look at the landscaping coming before them. Mr. Knight mentioning the shearing off of one side of the tree, this whole city is predicated on some shade, desertscaping and so forth, and if plants are being exchanged for utility boxes, they have to find a way to mitigate that Mr. Knight appreciated that perspective. He thanked the Commission for their support for what he and his staff do in the city. Mr. Knight thought that was the best thing from his perspective and from his staff's and their review process. If a developer has been given a clear message at the Planning Commission level that the landscaping has value, and in the case of the example Commissioner Schmidt brought up that the project was approved based on maintaining the integrity of the landscape, when he is down in the trenches with the developer negotiating what is happening, if he has this in 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 their minutes, then he can take this to the developer and say they can't down grade their landscape because their approval was based on maintaining the integrity of the landscape. The other thing would be as the Planning Commission reviews a project, they can look at that open space. How much is dedicated to landscape? When the Vineyards project started the process, they had some site plans that didn't have the best use of their open space and staff worked with them a couple of times until they got the best use of their open space. If they have a good site plan going into the process, they have a better chance of maintaining some kind of higher level of integrity in the landscape when they get the finished product, in spite of the utilities. Part of that site planning and how staff will approach it is to minimize the impact of the utilities, because they can design them with a minimal impact as opposed to spreading them out all over. But if Planning Commission looks at the site plan for them and makes sure the integrity of the landscape remains in place and as much open space as they can, that would be very helpful. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the Landscape Committee looks at the relationship between the utilities and landscaping. Mr. Knight said they typically don't match the plans. They will get a presentation, and frequently it was similar to what the Planning Commission sees. Either Planning Commission sees it first or vice versa. So it was a general overview of the site and they look at the site plan and the plant material. It depended on the individual interest of the member, and staff would bring up their particular areas of interest and discuss them. The actual matching of the utility plan, the grading plan and the landscape is done at a staff level for the most part, and on occasion it gets called up. Commissioner Tanner asked if staff puts the landscape plan down on top of the overall plan itself, if the utility company (CVW D or Edison) can come in at the last minute and change where they are going to put the equipment. When Mr. Knight was talking about one particular picture, he said they had to exchange a tree with a 4 x 8 box. The landscape plan showed a tree there and the utility company came in and said no, they were going to put in a box. He asked if there was a way to countermand that. Mr. Knight said they are supposed to install per the utility plan. There could be site conditions that would change that utility plan for some reason. It wouldn't happen frequently, so if they land on the job and the utility plan shows that the box should have gone in one place but was installed in another, then staff would take issue with it and they would have to come up with some kind of reasoning that would make it okay to change their approved utility plan. If they didn't have 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 a good reason and didn't respond to staff's request to move it, then they would have to see where they would have to go from there. They haven't had that situation yet, but he would certainly make an issue of it, unless his higher ups called him off, because it was an approved plan. Ms. Aylaian added that from experience on some of the projects they've done for the City, the utility company can and will and does come in on an approved set of plans and change the location of the equipment, regardless of the concerns of the developer. Commissioner Tanner said regardless of the concerns of the City's. Ms. Aylaian concurred. Commissioner Tanner said they were kind of in a catch 22; they can look at and approve plans, but if all of a sudden it doesn't suit CVW D or the fire department, then they will make changes in it that can dramatically affect our parkways. Mr. Knight said he has not gone into discussion with the Water District, Southern California Edison or the Cable Company regarding misplacement of utilities. It does occur, but they were under the impression it was sacred and he was coming to learn that it isn't sacred and there is room for adjustment. How much they can get to happen where plans have been changed without discretion, they just did it, he didn't know what they could do. He has had success in working with developers to make sure their underground contractor keeps all his lines close to the curb. He has had contractors that haven't cooperated, so he has that leeway in terms of working with the developer and their builder. But they haven't challenged the utilities yet, but the way things are going, he was sure they would. Commissioner Limont asked if there was any recourse if someone decides to change it and asked if we have inspectors. Ms. Aylaian said that inspectors do go out. They've also found that even the inspectors for the utility companies will come out and override their engineer's design in the field as to where equipment should be located. She thought their best bet was to continue to maintain and push for as much open space as possible and space dedicated for landscaping; that way if they change the location, then theoretically they are freeing up another location in which they can have landscaping to help compensate for the fact that a box is now not ideally situated for where they would like it. Chairperson Campbell indicated with all the information they received this evening, they would look at each project in a different way after tonight. Commissioner Tschopp thought by the time a project got to Planning Commission it was too late. If it gets to them and the landscaping isn't properly fitting the building, then staff hasn't done their job. It's in the building 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 code what the percentage of landscape should be to the building and most developers would push that to the maximum to get the most economic value they can from the building, so the Planning Commission is looking to staff to make sure when it comes to the Planning Commission the landscaping fits the building, and to the very best of their abilities the utilities are hidden from view. He wished them good luck dealing with the utility companies, but he thought that was the next step and looked to staff to do that. Mr. Knight said the biggest things were the site plan issues. Once he gets the plans, for the most part the site plans have been developed. Whoever sees that first, they should keep an eye out for the open space and that would be the valuable thing. Ms. Aylaian said that Commissioner Tschopp had a very astute observation. Fundamentally there are going to be tradeoffs and at an early point it is determined what the lot coverage is going to be; the developer looks at how much building is needed to get on this lot to be able to sell it, and the remainder can be used for incidentals. If some of the underlying ordinances allow greater lot coverage than is appropriate for these new, smaller lots they are seeing, given that any residential lot will need the same amount of land devoted to utility boxes, when they get a smaller overall lot, it could be they are allowing too much building to go on that and the developer's options are twofold: build a smaller home or structure, which they generally don't like to do, or go up vertically to a second story, which the City generally doesn't like to see. But going forward that is something staff will be looking at, as well as better enforcement and coordination of the regulations that are in place. If that doesn't get the end results that we need, staff might need to go back and look at some of the fundamentals, such as the Zoning Ordinance, to see if it allows too much building coverage to be able to accommodate the needs for the utilities, landscaping and ADA accessible components. Commissioner Schmidt said she was talking about density. Ms. Aylaian concurred. Commissioner Schmidt indicated that something else that comes to mind that might help all of them is that everyone of these pictures that were shown in her view created an attractive nuisance. If someone is hurt stumbling or falling, this could be a considerable liability to the City and she thought this was a much more serious thing then perhaps they might know. She noted that her background is design and commercial buildings and this was just a problem to her. There are other areas that don't allow this and simply won't allow it. They either work with the utilities to come to some kind of understanding, but if she was an architect and had a 4 by 8 box in front of a gorgeous building, she would have a seizure. Mr. Knight didn't think the 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 architect was too happy about it. Commissioner Schmidt said the architect's hands were probably tied, and they have to get it occupied and have to move it on. She didn't know how the Commission could help Mr. Knight, but she thought it was a very serious issue. It was unattractive and was a necessity. She did not like open pits near a curb on the street. One day someone could fall in one and break their hip. There were some other issues besides just being ugly and trying to mitigate landscaping. She didn't think they should be on the street, but tucked behind in parking lots and other places. Mr. Knight said he wouldn't argue with that. Chairperson Campbell thanked Mr. Knight for the pictures and presentation and said they would do all they could to help. Action: None. Pictures received and filed. B. Discussion of additions to, and renovations of, single family homes in established neighborhoods. Ms. Aylaian stated that at one of our recent meetings one of the Planning Commission members requested that staff look further into renovations and additions to existing homes in established neighborhoods to see what they could do to prevent or combat the "McMansion" effect being seen in some of our existing neighborhoods. Staff took a look at a couple of different approaches. She noted that this is an issue she has dealt with in her own neighborhood; however, she didn't want to initiate any kind of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance that strike at a policy level solely based on the request of a single Commission member, so she wanted to bring it up with the entire Commission to see if the concern is one that is universally shared, and if the Commission would like to guide staff if this is something they should be doing. Secondly, staff has talked interdepartmentally about the whole concept of what to do in some of our older, established, often charming, neighborhoods, particularly in south Palm Desert, when the property values become such that someone can come in and buy an older home and take it down to the studs and significantly rework the entire structure, making it much larger, so that it is now bigger, brighter, shinier, newer, prettier and more valuable than the predecessor, but maybe is not in keeping with the neighborhood. In particular, there are pros and cons associated with revising the zoning ordinance to limit what a property owner can do with their residential 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 property. Some of the pros are that the new development that the rehabilitated homes might be better in keeping with the long-standing character of the neighborhood. It also leaves intact some of the things we love so much about south Palm Desert in particular. Some of the cons were financial. Prohibiting someone from adding onto or upgrading their existing home and doing that globally by changing the Zoning Ordinance could actually stifle investment in the community and where the prices are such that someone is spending $500,000 to buy a 1,300 square foot 12-foot high home in south Palm Desert, they are going to want to do what they want to do to upgrade it. They might want to add onto it and significantly rework it because some of the older construction may not be the best quality. If they are being, prohibited from upgrading, that could stifle investment and rehabilitation in some of the older neighborhoods so that they become stagnant and eventually blighted. So they potentially don't want to completely prohibit opportunities for upgrades. South Palm Desert, and the Palma Village area, is one of the few areas in the city where owners can express their own creativity and vision. There are a large number of gated communities in the city with homeowner's associations that tightly control through CC&R's exactly what the architecture can look like and what can be done. So when they have some of these areas they are talking about where an individual can come in and build their dream home, this is one of the few places in the city where they can do it. There are pluses and minuses to try and control what somebody can do in the existing neighborhoods, and she was asking for discussion and feedback from the Commission on what they would like to see and if they think what is being done now, which kind of gives a free hand to developers and property owners, is that working, or do they see that they are losing character they want to maintain and is something to more tightly govern in the future. Commissioner Tschopp asked if there have been a lot of complaints from neighbors, have there been problems in neighborhoods, and if there has been a significant amount of contact from citizens. Ms. Aylaian said she has not, but her tenure in the department was relatively short and deferred the question to Mr. Bagato. Mr. Bagato indicated there have been a few cases over the years where they have neighbors complain. A lot of times it was associated with not knowing what was going on and right now when a home gets approved, a 15-foot height can be approved over the counter and anything up to 18 feet can be approved by the Architectural Review Commission. The general staff practice is to look at the neighbors. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Mr. Bagato thought one problem is that no one is notified and that was something staff contemplated adding, to notify adjacent neighbors. Sometimes the majority of the complaint is just that they didn't know or didn't know they could do so much. Owners are allowed to build to their setbacks, height requirements and building coverage. Other instances when there have been complaints were when vacant lots get developed. Many times the grade is below the curb. Because of drainage issues, what currently happens on vacant lots is a requirement to raise the grade. Ms. Aylaian clarified that it was raised 12 inches above the curb. Mr. Bagato said sometimes when grades are raised above street level and there are older homes built below street level, there is a grade issue that causes some issues. South Palm Desert naturally has a slope and there are grade issues in general. Some properties are five feet higher than others and in those cases that was probably when the most complaints are received. He said there was not much they could do unless they restrict height requirements at certain setback levels. He said he could think of maybe five to ten complains during the six years he has been here. But more often than not, the complaints were because no notification was received. Commissioner Tschopp said it wasn't a significant problem right now. Mr. Bagato concurred, he wouldn't say that it is significant. When someone comes to the City and wants to raise a piece of property and start from the ground floor up or if they want to dramatically change the exterior of the home, Commissioner Tanner asked if they come before the Planning Commission. Mr. Bagato said no, not unless a variance is being requested. Commissioner Tanner asked if an applicant was in compliance with the building codes and they present them to staff, there is no reason to bring them to Planning Commission. But if they were asking for a setback variance or a height variance, they would. But the 12 inches above the curb was not a variance, it was a code requirement. Mr. Bagato said that was correct, and that only applied to vacant lots. The building code says one stud can be left and still be considered a remodel, but if they only have one stud up, that's pretty much a brand new home. Engineering indicated that typically in those cases, they still need to keep the foundation in order to avoid certain building requirements, so a lot of people don't raise the grade for a remodel. The only time the grade generally gets raised is on a brand new vacant lot. Mr. Bagato indicated that right now staff measures the height of homes and fences from the Public Work's approved grade level. One thing they discussed was to start measuring from the curb height so when grades 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 change, the height can be restricted in relationship to the height of the curb and everyone is on an equal playing field from a curb standpoint and the grade raises. That didn't happen very often. Most of these homes have probably been remodeled to larger scale rather than torn down and a brand new one built. Chairperson Campbell asked if most of the remodels blend in with the neighborhood or with the previous home, making them larger but keeping them the same. Mr. Bagato said the grade remains the same. With the price people are paying for land right now, houses are significantly bigger. Someone paying $500,000 for a home is going to want to build a home at least two times the value of the land. So there are some pretty significant homes replacing small 12-foot high roof homes with 15-to 18-foot roof peaks and maximizing their setbacks. Commissioner Tanner noted that does have an encroachment effect, especially in an area with a grade difference going from the top of Highway 74 down. Mr. Bagato agreed. Someone could have a 10-foot high home with an eight-foot setback and a low window and someone could remodel up to 15-feet high and have a window higher at the same setback and the grade difference. The extreme differences were the ones that usually have the most problems. Ms. Aylaian added that during in-house discussions, some things have been identified that could be done administratively to make sure that these types of houses do blend in better with the neighborhood because there were obviously some significant departures in architectural style and some of the heights. She thought staff could do some policy tweaking without rewriting the ordinance that would allow a little more blending and get the homes to fit in a little bit better. They could do a better job there. But generally she wanted to address the Commission to see if this is a problem, to see if they hear from their constituents complaints about what is happening, and if they have concerns on their own or if it was something they want staff to undertake. Commissioner Limont said if we have ordinances and we stick with them, we are ahead of the game. On a personal level, and Mr. Stendell was aware of this because he came out to her neighborhood, but they've literally had people move, she now has no privacy in her backyard, and her neighbors did nothing but stick within the ordinances, but they went up and nobody took into account the grade. So now they can look completely into her back yard. Then they start playing the game of McMansions. Could she also play that 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 game? Sure. She could go in and rip down her house, build higher and then all of a sudden they would have this development going on. Again, it is a sweet neighborhood. Old south Palm Desert. She indicated there are some really beautiful neighborhoods not unlike where Mr. Stendell lives. They were built in the 1970's or earlier and a lot of people move there because that's where they would like to be and didn't want a big house that was tall or be next to a house equally as tall. Commissioner Limont thought they needed to start taking into consideration grade with height. She said that Steve Smith also went out and looked at it. His first inkling was that no one measured to make sure this was only 18 feet and he thought they also had to go up on the pad and that wasn't taken into consideration. So if they take a four-foot elevation drop and go up 18 feet, now they are at 22 feet. Now it is starting to get significant and with an eight- foot setback. There are these changes going on. The point being that her concern is twofold. One, if someone buys a piece of property, absolutely it is their right to build a home. In the same vein, if someone spent a ton of money to buy their dream house in a neighborhood they want to live in, she thought it was their right to be able to have a neighborhood they can raise their kids in, grow old in without worry about two huge houses on either side. It was tough one. She thought south Palm Desert was an extremely unique area and would like to see it maintained as opposed to having it look like Orange County in 20 years. Chairperson Campbell asked if Commissioner Limont was the only one who had this problem. Commissioner Limont didn't think her area was the only one. Two blocks away in the Monticello neighborhood there is a mini Hagadone house there. She thought it was amazing that it got approved. Chairperson Campbell commented that anything coming before them would be looked at closely without changing any ordinances. Commissioner Schmidt felt that as much a right as someone has to come and build a mini Hagadone house, the people who exist there have equal rights to maintain the integrity of their existing community. There was also the fact that no neighbors are contacted or sign off on a proposal. If she wanted to buy a lot and stayed within the setbacks and the height limitations, she could do whatever she wanted there. That wasn't right either; it wasn't fair to the existing community. She knew in some other communities that there are established neighborhoods and there are absolutely maximum square footage additions. In other words, for a house at 2,200 square feet, if someone wanted to go up or out on that house, they had to stay within the setbacks and could only add 800 square to the existing footprint. 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Commissioner Tanner asked if that would mean adopting new ordinances. Ms. Aylaian said it would be a revision to the existing ordinance. Commissioner Tanner said this was an established area, not a new area. Commissioner Schmidt concurred. The example used was a requirement for an established area built in the 1960's in another community. She said it is a beautiful neighborhood. That city said they wanted to maintain the integrity of that neighborhood and if someone wanted to add square footage, they were allowed up to 800 feet maximum. If there was some mitigating reason they needed 1,000 feet, a variance could be requested, but one in ten would be granted. She didn't know if that would help. She thought it could become a big problem. Chairperson Campbell thought it should be left up to staff to take care of administratively and not change any ordinances. Commissioner Schmidt suggested looking at a maximum footage addition and also contacting the existing neighborhood. That seemed fair. Commissioner Limont thought neighbors should be contacted because even Bob and Sharon Spiegel had folks looking into their home and no one even contacted them. Ms. Aylaian said she was a little hesitant on the noticing requirement and would defer to the City Attorney. Noticing for a public hearing was a big deal, so if they take something that is an over-the-counter approval right now, which would be for a remodel or renovation of a single-family home, and everything is in compliance, it didn't even need to go to the Architectural Review Commission. The Architectural Review Commission doesn't have public hearings and suddenly if the applicant needs to notify all property owners within a certain radius or distance, they now need to have a venue for public hearings to be held to allow them to make their comments. She wanted to think about that some more and talk with staff and the City Attorney. Commissioner Schmidt clarified that she was talking about notifying the adjacent neighbors and neighbors across the street. Ms. Aylaian had a suggestion that was administrative and might go a ways to helping with the issue. Right now the Architectural Review Commission is charged with assuring that homes blend in with existing neighborhoods. Actually, on ones that can be approved over the counter, she is charged with making sure it blends in with the neighborhood. Typically what has happened historically is the applicant is not required to submit their home drawn in context so they 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 don't see adjacent properties. What they have is someone coming before Architectural Review Commission if it is between 15 and 18 feet in height showing their new home. If it looks great, they have no reason to not approve it. What they had discussed is requiring instead that they not only bring in the drawings of what they want to propose, but photographs of the properties on each side of it and perhaps even elevations showing them the grade difference between them so that they can actually look at it. Whether or not it is done over the counter, if they aren't asking for increased height, or if it goes to Architectural Review Commission, they are then presented with the home in context and can make a more informed decision as to whether it blends in with the neighborhood. Commissioner Limont thought that was definitely a step in the right direction. Monticello does not blend in that neighborhood. Ms. Aylaian felt that as a stand alone, it is a beautiful home. Commissioner Limont agreed that if it was put on two acres it would be gorgeous. But it should not be smushed on that teeny lot in that cute little neighborhood. Commissioner Schmidt asked what happens when someone buys two lots and does a tear down and puts one house, if they would have to come in. Ms. Aylaian explained that they would have to do a lot line adjustment to combine two lots into one. Lot line adjustments are typically consent calendar items. Commissioner Tschopp thought the big problem would be a new code being applied to an old neighborhood. They get problems that occur with pad height, view lines and so forth. It has happened in other communities and wouldn't have to be them reinventing the wheel because other communities have had to deal with this; he cited costal communities as an example. To notify neighbors wouldn't be any good unless there was a code with some teeth in it to stop it. It appears right now we don't have a code that could stop it. He truly didn't know if we wanted to stop it because if they do, it could have an economic impact on some old neighborhoods and truly some of the houses needed to be cleaned up now. He said it is a fine line they were going to walk and in his opinion he didn't know if they were ready to change the code, but he thought it was something they needed to be very aware of and make sure when individual homes come to the Planning Department that they are looked at very scrupulously and he liked her idea of going to Architectural Review, but it might be something to keep in the backs of their minds for the future so that they can maintain some integrity in the neighborhoods better. He could definitely see problems developing and getting worse. 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Ms. Aylaian said Commissioner Tschopp was absolutely right that we aren't the first community to experience this. In talking with people from costal communities, this is a big deal. We think we own our views of mountains, but people in coastal communities own their views of the ocean and you don't mess with that. And they have a lot of California bungalows built in the 1950's that are small and people want to come in and spend $1 million for an ocean view and build Monticello times two. So they are taking a look at what other communities have done to see if there is a great solution that addresses all concerns. There was no perfect solution, but staff was open to suggestions. Commissioner Schmidt asked for clarification that typically in older neighborhoods if the tear down takes all but one thing, the grade doesn't change. Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Even if they took down all of the walls, people generally leave in the foundation because that is a great deal more expensive added to just building a house. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the height would be from that existing foundation. Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Commission Schmidt asked if it is a total tear down, where the 18 feet would be measured. Approximately a foot and a half? Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt said that if she has a house next door to someone like that and the pad was raised a foot and half, she could tell them right now if there was a 15-foot setback, they've created a water drainage problem for her as the neighbor next door and she would want to know about that before the house next door was built. Not all foundations stay in place. Mr. Bagato indicated that as part of the grading plan, Public Works would look at the engineering plans to insure it doesn't drain onto the neighbor. Most of the time people are going to have block walls that aren't going to drain through. They are raising it to drain the property to the street because in some older neighborhoods houses are below the street; if they aren't designed right there are a lot of flooding problems. That is why they require new lots to be above streets so they can drain through to the street and not onto other properties. Commissioner Schmidt thought this was potentially a bear cat and they should try to figure out a way to work with it. Mr. Bagato explained that any change in the Zoning Ordinance would require an initiation by the Planning Commission and that was why staff brought the discussion to them. If there is a significant problem that the group feels needs to be addressed, Planning Commission would initiate the amendment and staff would review it and come up with an ordinance with possible changes. Right now they could just 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 watch it for now. Commissioner Schmidt noted the ordinance wouldn't kick in for a while. Ms. Aylaian said it would have to go through the public hearing process before the Planning Commission and City Council. Commissioner Limont thought it was a good time to be working on it because housing is a little bit slower than it has been in the past couple of years. So this might be a really good time to have these discussions and start looking at this because it would be just awful to lose these neighborhoods and then look back in regret. Once it's done, it's done. The house next to her is built, the people behind it have moved because they were flooded twice because they did raise the pad. She thought this was a very good time for them to start taking this up, have a full discussion, and to make a good strong decision whether to change the ordinance or change the way we do business or not. That way they will have addressed it and looked at everything. Chairperson Campbell noted that staff had their comments. Ms. Aylaian said staff would continue to tweak the administrative procedures to better protect the areas and the character of the neighborhoods until or unless the Commission directs staff to prepare an ordinance or to implement a policy change. Chairperson Campbell didn't think right now was the time to do that until the matter was looked into a lot more closely. Commissioner Schmidt asked where she would get information on the average size of homes in a neighborhood. Ms. Aylaian explained that through the Building Department they can tell them the size of any given home, or if they have a finite number of ones they would like reviewed, they could get that information. But in a zone like this, each home is different. Commissioner Schmidt said the other city she mentioned has established districts that neighborhoods fell into and certain criteria applied to each different district. When someone went to buy, they knew what they would be allowed and that didn't seem to hurt anyone. Chairperson Campbell indicated that when there is a vacant lot, someone can build a home on it and you never know what's going to go in there. Commissioner Schmidt thought it was an existing community that should have some consideration. Commissioner Limont concurred. A number of her neighbors are in their 70's and 80's and she would like to see them live out their lives without having mini mansions next to them. 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 Commissioner Tschopp thought it was too complicated an issue for them to touch on everything tonight. There are all kinds of angles to look at. What Ms. Aylaian was saying was that perhaps under the existing ordinance staff can take a harder look, as well as Architectural Review, and that might work. If it wasn't too much to ask, he suggested a six-month report with thoughts from her and staff's direction as to how things are happening and give the Planning Commission some direction as to the magnitude of the problem or what staff sees happening down the road. Ms. Aylaian suggested reporting back at six months and at a year because typically it takes a while to see the homes constructed. Staff could report on what they are seeing coming through the approval process and then at a year maybe have a better idea of what it actually looks like. Commissioner Tschopp said perhaps staff could even offer some suggestions on ways to maybe tighten up the process or to balance all the different aspects that will be part of this problem. Ms. Aylaian concurred. Commissioner Limont said that at this point Planning Department was really looking at height and we were sticking with our ordinance as far our inspectors go. Ms. Aylaian said yes; they have had some discussions with the Building & Safety folks as to how they should verify that the height being constructed is in accordance with what they are permitted. They were then going back to the homeowner and requiring that they certify the actual height as constructed from their general contractor. Mr. Bagato said everyone agreed that would be the best solution, but they were still meeting on it. It had to be ultimately decided if staff would be the ones out there measuring. It wasn't just homes, but also commercial buildings. Developers receive pad certification for grading and other things have to be certified that they meet the plans, so he thought the easiest solution from a staff perspective is to make a height certification that the property owner is responsible to verify showing that the height of the building is the height approved. Commissioner Schmidt asked if that was a staff function. Mr. Bagato concurred. Chairperson Campbell thanked Ms. Aylaian. C. Discussion of summer meeting schedule. Ms. Aylaian explained that the Commission had additional information showing upcoming public hearing items and the anticipated public hearing 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 dates. By comparing that information with the canceled Council meetings, realistically there was only one meeting that could be cancelled because nothing has been scheduled. That would be the August 7 meeting. But she would recommend they tentatively plan to cancel that meeting unless some public hearing item arises that is important enough that they need to move it forward. Chairperson Campbell asked for confirmation that there would be meetings on July 3 and July 17. Ms. Aylaian said yes. Chairperson Campbell said that August 7 would be cancelled and then there would be a meeting on August 21. Ms. Aylaian indicated that staff would also be trying to keep the calendar clear for the October 2 meeting because there is a Cal APA meeting/annual conference in San Jose and some staff and Planning Commissioners have expressed interest in attending. Commissioner Tschopp asked when the soonest Council would be meeting after the August 21 meeting. Ms. Aylaian said September 13. The question was if anything Commission dealt with on September 4 would make it to the Council on the 13th. Ms. Aylaian said no, it would go the Council meeting after that. Potentially September 4 could be cancelled. Chairperson Campbell noted that September 3 was a holiday. Chairperson Campbell asked for confirmation that everyone was available on July 3, July 17 and August 21. Commissioner Limont said she was not going to be present on August 21. Commissioner Tanner said he would also be gone. If there was only one item scheduled for August 21, Commissioner Tschopp thought that would be an ideal one to delay because it could still make it to a September Council meeting if necessary. Commissioner Tanner agreed that it could be a good one to move. Chairperson Campbell asked if everyone was available on September 4. Everyone but Commissioner Tschopp could confirm their attendance. He said he wasn't sure, but would make every attempt to be available. Chairperson Campbell asked if the item to be scheduled August 21 could be moved to September 4 and then the Commission wouldn't meet at all in August. Ms. Aylaian was reluctant to positively cancel all meetings in August in the event something comes up. She would hate to miss two meetings in a row, but they could tentatively plan for that. She asked Mr. Bagato if the Sipovac application could be ready on August 7. Mr. Bagato said potentially he could be ready, but Mr. Bagato wasn't going to be at that meeting, but he could potentially have a staff report ready. They were also taking the project to the Landscape Beautification meeting. He didn't want to delay him any 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19 2007 longer than August because the applicant's been trying to do a project for a while now. Ms. Aylaian suggested if Commission members were available to attend on August 7, they could backfill for Mr. Bagato and present it at that time if Commission preferred. Chairperson Campbell asked if everyone would be here on the 7th. Commissioner Schmidt said they could always cancel it if there were no public hearing items. Ms. Aylaian said there was a chance that the Sipovac project could be changed substantively. Chairperson Campbell pointed out that even if two members were absent on August 21, there was still a quorum with three commissioners being available. Mr. Bagato said that if it wasn't ready by the 7th, it probably wouldn't be ready until September because he wouldn't have time to do the report until after vacation. It would either be the 7th or the end of September. Chairperson Campbell said they would keep it tentatively scheduled for the 21 st and they would cancel August 7. Ms. Aylaian concurred. Action: The August 7, 2007 Planning Commission meeting was cancelled. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Chairperson Campbell reported on the actions of the committee at their last meeting. B. LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont reviewed the Committee's discussion items and noted the appointment of Spencer Knight as the Chair and Lauri Aylaian as the Vice Chair. C. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont relayed information on the discussion items from their June 18 meeting. 26 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 19. 200T D. PARKS & RECREATION Commissioner Tanner informed the about the actions and discussion items from the last Park & Recreation Commission meeting and showed the Planning Commission a very nice dog park brochure that had been prepared by the Development Services Intern. XI. COMMENTS None. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Tanner, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. The motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary ATTEST: SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chair Palm Desert Planning Commission Am 27