Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0701MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION XI. XII. B. C. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont reviewed the discussion items. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE ��: Commissioner Schmidt informed Commission that the next meeting would be at the end of the month. D. PARKS & RECREATION Chairperson Tanner stated that there were just brief updates at the last meeting. He also reported on the passing away of long-time Parks & Recreation Commissioner Dan Barnes last Friday. COMMENTS Ms. Aylaian informed Commission that the July 15, 2008 Planning Commission meeting would be canceled. The next meeting would be August 5. She also informed them that the City Council would be interviewing candidates for the vacant position on the Planning Commission next Friday, July 11. They were also scheduled for a regular meeting after that strictly for the purpose of identifying and appointing someone if they select them at the end of those interviews, in which case they would have one more commissioner available on August 5. Chairperson Tanner asked if there scheduled for the August 5 meeting at least three or four items. ADJOURNMENT was anything preliminarily available Mr. Bagato said they were planning It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:17 p.m. ATTEST:: ' � ! _ -----� � � S 7 /:2��--- VAN G �TANNER, Chair Palm Desert Planning Commission itm ./ - � G --�% � _-.' '-'� LAURI AYLAIAN, Secre�__ 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY – JULY 1, 2008 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tanner called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Members Present: Van Tanner, Chair Sonia Campbell, Vice Chair Connor Limont Mari Schmidt Members Absent: None Staff Present: Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Bob Hargreaves, Deputy City Attorney Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Renee Schrader, Associate Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Bo Chen, City Engineer Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Campbell led in the pledge of allegiance. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Request for consideration of the June 3, 2008 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Limont, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, approving the June 3, 2008 meeting minutes. Motion carried 4- 0. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Aylaian summarized pertinent June 12 and 26, 2008 City Council actions. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR None. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. CUP 08-228 – OMNIPOINT COMMUNICATIONS, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF T-MOBILE USA, INC., Applicant Request for approval to construct, operate and maintain a new T-Mobile wireless communications facility to be comprised of six panel antennas in three sectors on a 66’- 44” high mono-palm consisting of two GPS antennas, one emergency generator, one parabolic antenna, four BTS telecommunication equipment cabinets, coaxial cable running from the antennas to the BTS, power and Telco utility connection, to be installed inside Oasis Country Club at 42-300 Casbah Way, APN: 634-101-052. Mr. Swartz reviewed the staff report and recommended that Planning Commission adopt the findings and the draft resolution, subject to the conditions. Chairperson Tanner asked if the two mono-palms would be the same height. Mr. Swartz said yes and confirmed that they would be 66’44” to the top of the palm frond. Commissioner Schmidt asked if everything coming to and emanating from these two palms would be underground; there would be no above-ground wiring of any kind. Mr. Swartz said that was correct. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 Commissioner Limont asked how many palm-frond towers were in the city. Mr. Bagato guessed approximately 15. Commissioner Limont thought Palm Desert did a great job of hiding them, especially compared to those seen when traveling to Orange County or L.A., where there was some sort of a fir tree with spikes sticking out. She thought Palm Desert did a good job. Chairperson Tanner opened the public hearing and for anyone who wished to speak regarding this item to come forward. MR. PETE SHUBIN of Secoy Deployment Services, representing Omnipoint Communications, the applicant on the project, stated that they reviewed the draft conditions of approval and accepted them as presented. He was present to answer any additional questions. There were no questions for the applicant. Chairperson Tanner asked if anyone else wished to address the Commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2478, approving Case No. CUP 08-228, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. B. Case No. DA/PP/CUP 08-50 – BERNARD INVESTMENT GROUP / KEN BERNARD, Applicant Request for a recommendation to City Council for approval of a Precise Plan/Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement to construct a 20-unit senior citizen apartment project located at 73-582 Catalina Way. Mr. Swartz reviewed the staff report. He noted that the exit-only driveway was shown at 14 feet by the applicant, but the Department Public Works placed a condition on it to reduce it to 12 feet; the applicant was aware of that condition and concurred. Mr. Swartz informed Commission that the applicant conducted a meeting with the neighborhood. Mr. Swartz stated that the project would be compatible with the existing surrounding 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 neighborhood and all findings of approval could be made. It was a Class 32 Categorical Exemption for environmental purposes. He also stated that the project would conform to all zoning regulations, there was adequate parking provided, the design and layout would not interfere with the existing neighborhood, and the architecture would enhance the surrounding neighborhood. He recommended adoption of the findings and the draft resolution recommending to City Council approval, subject to the conditions. Commissioner Campbell asked if the project would be gated. Mr. Swartz said no. Commissioner Limont asked if this still had to go back to the Architectural Review Commission and the Landscape Committee. Mr. Swartz said yes and confirmed that they had preliminary approval. Chairperson Tanner asked when the applicant conducted conversations with the neighbors, if there were any complaints that were presented at that time. Mr. Swartz said no. There were no other questions. Chairperson Tanner opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the Commission. MR. KEN BERNARD, the applicant, stated that he read the conditions and was in agreement with them. He had also read the proposed development agreement and housing agreement and was in agreement with those as well, as tentatively done. Chairperson Tanner asked for any testimony in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. There was none and Chairperson Tanner closed the public hearing and asked for Commission comments. Commissioner Limont said she had one comment, and it went back to some things going on with Landscape Beautification, CVAG and other groups in the valley, and that is that water has become an incredibly important issue. She looked for guidance, but thought they needed to start looking to new developments and new projects with the thought of fountains not being the right way to go. They were looking at the issue of becoming a drought state and if that happened, it was better not to have to turn off the fountain. She also thought he had done a beautiful job, it was a tough lot, and it looked great, but encouraged him to do something other than the fountain if he could. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 Mr. Bernard stated that in speaking with the Department of Public Works, the proposal of grass and the fountain, and he was just finishing a similar project on Santa Rosa and that project, and because of the drought situation, they cut out all of the grass and the water feature on that project, and would probably do the same with this project, depending on Public Works’ input. Commissioner Limont appreciated it. Commissioner Campbell thought the project was very nicely done and had great architecture. She thought it would do well on that street. She remembered Mr. Bernard’s other work and was in favor of approval. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2479, recommending to City Council approval of Case No. DA/ PP/CUP 08-50, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. CASE NO. HPR/PP 08-259 – BRUCE KUYKENDALL, BARRACUDA, LLC, Applicant Request for approval of a preliminary building site for a five- acre parcel of land in the Hillside Planned Residential zone pursuant to the requirements of Section 25.15.130 (Optional Preliminary Approval) of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Said request does not qualify as a project under CEQA guidelines; no environmental studies shall be required at this time. Property is located west of the Palm Valley Storm Channel on Upper Way West, APN: 628-130-015). Ms. Schrader stated that approval of this request would recommend an appropriate building site for a single family residential home on a five-acre lot within the Hillside Planned Residential zone. As background, she said that currently the Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) zone code does not allow development on ridges. She provided a vicinity map to familiarize them with the site. She pointed out the project site, stating that the project site was west of Highway 74, to the west of the channel, and was accessed by an existing road, Upper Way West, for which there are 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 hillside homes higher up that travel on this road. The site itself encompassed both the ridge and a sort of downward slope looking down toward the Stone Eagle development on the side. Currently, Upper Way West traverses the actual property. There is an existing graded pad that was graded in the 1960’s prior to the applicant’s purchase of the property in 2003. Staff concluded that there were really only two viable options where the applicant could develop a hillside home. On the topographic map, there was a polygon labeled Pad 1, and a secondary one labeled Pad 2 substantially downhill by almost 50 feet in elevation. Basically, the analysis of both of these pads was based on two ideas: one was access and one was grading as far as the impact on the site. Access to Pad 1 could easily be made as a drive that would derive from Upper Way West and circled on a slow uphill toward the rear of the property, which is south facing. Pad 1 would probably incur very little, there is a contour it conforms to. Pad 2, however, in order to access that, would require an access through offsite, and contours would make it a little more of a lengthy impact. She showed a slide and explained that the images being provided were basically for discussion and were not design images or staff’s necessary recommendation for one or the other, but to illustrate the fact that this is the ridge that traverses the property. She also had the reference map of the ridges if they wanted to view it. Pad #1, as seen before, the idea behind it was that fill or a berm would be created along the ridge to renaturalize that ridge so that views toward the north of the city and the valley floor would be very much minimized. The idea would be to fill in the southern portion in order to make up for the berming. Pad #2 would require a great deal more cut and fill in order to make a sufficiently large enough pad to develop. Therefore, there would be cut on the side and identified the theoretical fill that would happen on either pad. Staff recommended that given the options and impact that would be created by either pad, Pad #1 was the lesser of the impacts and the applicant discussed with staff and brought images to discuss how that impact would be minimized through the renaturalization of the site and other options that were designated in the ordinance as ways to follow through and minimize any impact to the view. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 In conclusion, staff recommended that if Pad #1 was chosen, that it also be conditioned that the applicant return with a design for Planning Commission’s approval. Commissioner Limont asked if Pad #1 was on a ridgeline. Ms. Schrader concurred that Pad #1 is on a ridgeline and it was graded. Commissioner Limont noted that our new ordinance prohibits building on a ridgeline. Commissioner Schmidt noted that the elevation was 670 and asked if that was the flattened off area. Ms. Schrader concurred. Commissioner Schmidt asked for the elevation of the top of the ridgeline. Ms. Schrader said her answer would be conjecture; it would have to be interpolated and they hadn’t gone that far yet. Commissioner Schmidt noted that as Ms. Schrader indicated toward berming and almost rebuilding the ridgeline, from what she gathered Ms. Schrader was saying, her question was how many feet they were talking about: was it five feet, ten feet or 20 feet? Ms. Schrader deferred that question to the applicant, who would have a much better idea of what they were intending on that site. There were no other questions for staff. Chairperson Tanner invited the applicant to address the Commission. MR. BRUCE KUYKENDALL, a local grading contractor who has been in Palm Desert for 26 years, stated that he has specialized in hillside development with Bighorn Country Club on The Mountains side, not The Canyons side. However, he purchased this property back in 2003 with his partner, Dave Barren, and made his first submittal to Phil Drell back in February of 2004. The way the property lays right now, back in the 1960’s, someone went up the face of it and dozed off the top. What he proposed to do, like he was doing with all the other hillside lots in Palm Desert, was to leave the sides of the hill up, they were all natural right now up to that plateau, and then the plan he submitted back in 2003, which is that Pad 1 location and described exactly what staff recommended, was the most friendly pad site on that property that could go inside that cone and be somewhat like a volcano, so to speak, from the front three-quarter sides facing the city. He would leave that natural elevation up and then cut down inside roughly 20 feet off of that mountain edge; cut down roughly six to eight to ten feet and set the building back in such a way that the angle of the view of the roof would be barely visible. He worked with Phil Drell on five different revisions as the Hillside Ordinance developed. Mr. Kuykendall said he came in and he 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 spoke; he superimposed homes for the City Council and got a write up in the Desert Sun stating that he was given an exception at that time that it could be done. But as the process went on, he was asked to do five different renditions: one where he could only have 4,000 square feet to develop; the other one he brought in and received last year was his driveway approach to a cul-de-sac and that was entering from the rear of the property behind a knoll so it wasn’t visible to the city whatsoever. It approached the property from the back and had a cul-de-sac and received a 5-0 vote of approval at Planning Commission; however, as soon as he received that, he had a couple of City Council members who asked to meet with him on the property and that’s when he was told that he better withdraw his application because he did not have the support to proceed. He met with a couple of other City Council members and one said that he would never develop on this site, not on her watch. The other one said, “well, let’s buy ‘em out.” To shorten up a long story, he approached, at the recommendation of three City Council members, and met with Carlos Ortega, who said they had some interest and told him who to go to get an appraisal on the property. So he used that firm, paid for that appraisal, that appraisal came in. Three or four months went by and Mr. Kuykendall asked for a tolling agreement while the Hillside Ordinance was being approved and again, three months went by and they got their tolling agreement back unsigned and the City had no interest in purchasing it. So he’s back at their mercy again, coming back to the Planning Commission. He felt he had the right to develop a home site on that property. He invested in that property and it’s roughly worth ten times what he paid for it. But he would like to develop it or he’d like to be bought out. The approach they have and the plan he originally submitted back in 2003 would really put a nice home up there with earth tones, rock veneer, and non-reflective glass; all those ordinances he helped establish with the Planning Department 12 years ago when Bighorn was starting to develop their 12 estate lots. In fact, he built those lots. He has worked with the City, he was here in good faith and owns that property, and he either needed to be bought out or he asked the City to tell him where he can build. And the most logical spot, again, with Renee and Ryan and everybody’s help, was that original pad that was developed there. It’s a flat, dozed off pad; any disturbance that he does, he’s the best there is in the valley at re- 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 naturalization, hillside building and permeon and rock set. He knew he could develop a very, very nice pad with very limited impact, especially based on the conditions right next to him; within 125 feet is the Stone Eagle sales office and he has the maintenance facility he’s looking into, and the club house will be a higher elevation than he is and could be visible above and beyond him once he builds. He asked them to please, take a serious look at this and help them go forward on this project. He asked for questions. Commissioner Schmidt asked for confirmation that when Pad 1 was originally graded in the 60’s, that would put it in the County and not in the city at that time. Mr. Kuykendall didn’t believe it was in the city. Ms. Aylaian explained that the city wasn’t formed until after the 60’s. Commissioner Schmidt concurred and explained she wanted it on the record. She asked if Mr. Kuykendall knew what decade Pad 2 was graded. Mr. Kuykendall said no. Whoever graded the property went up the front of the property off of Beacon. Using the map on display, he showed where they came in off that road and went up and there’s a turn where he went up on top and dozed that off. That person also dozed off a Pad 2, and there was a little homestead shack there. It was dilapidated and unsightly, so Mr. Kuykendall took it down by hand and disposed of it. But they could see the road, and showed how the other owner went up on top and pushed all the material out and then turned around and went back down and off. But Mr. Kuykendall was familiar with this property because a friend of his, Terry Weiner, had it prior to him for roughly three years and he looked at it for him and was going to design him a house pad up there and then later he did buy him out and used the same concept and submitted it back in 2003. Commissioner Schmidt asked if Mr. Kuykendall had any idea what the original ridge line elevation would have been had it not been bulldozed off. Mr. Kuykendall guessed that it went up another four to six feet was all based on the way the hillside comes up and the width of it all. It could have peaked at roughly six to seven feet above that and it was roughly 150 feet long and 40 feet wide. If he left the outside edge up, he didn’t want the noise from Highway 74, so he was going to leave the front lip of it up, recess it about ten feet and then 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 put in a waterfall to the inside to disguise the noise of Highway 74. And then do the berming in such a way when they design the home out of the great room they could get a sliver view of the city lights. As stated, Commissioner Schmidt noted it said that the existing pad is approximately 18,000 square feet. Mr. Kuykendall said yes, what’s been disturbed. When he got through with resculpting it, Commissioner Schmidt asked what size of pad would be there and what size of home he was contemplating. To answer the question on the pad, he believed it would need a motor court up there and he would need to perc, so he would lose approximately 1,400 square feet to the perc situation and that’s why he came in to get the driveway approval prior to this, so he could perc in that area and make sure he could put it there before he designed a home. He would like to end up with roughly 16,000 square feet of pad, put in about a 4,000 square foot house and maybe a detached little casita or something, but set it back roughly on the pad where it says pad on the plan and have the front for a pool, waterfall, greenbelt area like an oasis, so to speak, and then have that sliver view down to the city. He planned to have one story; it is all bedrock up there, so he would not want to go with a two-story subterranean dropping a level. The way he engineered it, it crawls up in there, from the time he leaves the asphalt up to the pad, is about eight feet; he would leave six feet, plus he has a big knoll behind him that protects him from the Carver residence and they can’t see that location. It was the ideal situation for that property. Anywhere else he would be protruding out and creating a lot of slope. It wouldn’t be cost effective and would be very unsightly. Commissioner Limont asked if Mr. Kuykendall had been unable to build during the four-year period between 2003 and 2007 due to the City. Mr. Kuykendall said he wouldn’t say that. Commissioner Limont asked why he didn’t build prior. Mr. Kuykendall said he dabbled with it for about three years with five different submittals. As that period was going on, there were numerous hillside ordinances being passed and he was receiving 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 recommendations that Stone Eagle would take it and trade it for open space, there was another project that proposed that to him and it came through Planning and was talked about, so he kind of sat back. And he had just built a home further up in Cahuilla Hills, so he was just kind of sitting back and once he got involved again, it had been one dead end after another. Commissioner Limont said he did build a home during that time. Mr. Kuykendall said no, he had already built that home. From what she could see, Commissioner Campbell thought when he built the home, it would be very well camouflaged and it would blend into the hillside. It wasn’t Mr. Kuykendall’s fault that somebody graded the ridge, but he would build his home, camouflage it, and just bring everything back to its natural landscaping for that area. Mr. Kuykendall said exactly; the current home he did build up in Cahuilla Hills was at the very back of Cat Canyon and the mountains are his backyard, he used total earth tones, he had Buford Crites up there, who thought it was beautiful. It is an awesome home; it was done very well and fit into the hillside. He was all for that. He has one right above him that is pure white, two stories, so he was very conscious of the impact to the city, has been here 25 years, has been in business and watched the city grow, and was just part of it and happened to be in this predicament, but he’s the right guy for the job. Commissioner Campbell agreed that he wasn’t going to paint a house white up there, so as far as she was concerned, she would give her approval and recommend taking staff’s recommendation of Pad 1. Regarding the berming and the renaturalization of the slope itself, Chairperson Tanner asked how much berming and renaturalization he was talking about and how much work that would involve for Mr. Kuykendall. Mr. Kuykendall said it wouldn’t be a lot on the front edge out there because that would be the natural hillside coming up. Then what he would do is get on the inside of it, round it off, and roll it back down so what is there will be there. Off the front, he wouldn’t be trying to replicate any naturalization, he would leave all that up. Then there would be a fill area on the south side, a fill zone like all the estate pads in Bighorn. He would rock set that and permeon it just like he 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 did with the Carvers, a roughly 75-foot rock/slope half a million dollars worth of work to their residence to get theirs in. His would not even be half of that. Then again, he would make it big enough to roll it into a berm, use natural, indigenous vegetation, work it all in, permeon it, and blend it all in. Again, the roof colors would be earth colors and he would go through Architectural Review and he would put in a desert home there, a desert-friendly home. Even though this wasn’t a public hearing item, Ms. Aylaian suggested that the opportunity be offered to the public to give comments. Chairperson Tanner concurred and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. MS. JANICE WOODS stated that she was in the home probably most affected by Mr. Kuykendall’s proposed plan. She lives at 72375 Upper Way West. She heard Bruce mention the Carvers’ residence; she would be interested in knowing the exact impact it would have on her residence, although she certainly was not opposed to Bruce’s building. She felt this is the United States of America and people who own land should be able to build and she would never challenge the constitution of the United States of America. She thanked them. MR. JOHN MCCORMICK informed Commission that he owns a piece of property at the very top of the hill and he had always wanted to build his home on top of that and just never had the finances to put that together, but he planned some day to hopefully put that together. To see Bruce putting together what he’s got going to him all made sense. Him being in the business he’s been in and what he’s done, and he’s got a lot of things he’s done that is just right on track, so he was in favor of what Mr. Kuykendall had going. Mr. McCormick said his home address is 29220 Via Las Palmas in Thousand Palms, California, but he was in Palm Desert until about four years ago. He was totally in favor of the proposal and hoped to maybe someday come back because he was still here in Palm Desert and hasn’t left. He was totally behind what Mr. Kuykendall had going. He thanked them. MRS. ANTOINETTE CARVER, 72275 Upper Way West, said they spoke to this issue a number of months ago and while she and her husband believe that Mr. Kuykendall would build a beautiful home, they had no doubt about that, their only concern was that he was going to have to make some serious cuts on the side they look at 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 and Mr. Kuykendall wasn’t certain that the property would perc at that time. What they would hope is that if Mr. Kuykendall goes ahead and makes those cuts and it does not perc, that he would commit to renaturalizing (she didn’t like that work, but it seemed to be popular), renaturalizing those cuts so that the mountain would again look like it looks. That was all. She knew Mr. Kuykendall would build a beautiful home. She thanked them. MS. BARBARA STILES, 72895 Amber, asked about the destruction of the hillsides. Would it scar the hillside? She has lived there for 21 years and there are a few homes up there just east of the churches. She asked if it would be set below the churches where they couldn’t be seen so much. Chairperson Tanner asked the applicant to respond to Ms. Stiles’ question. Mr. Kuykendall pointed out the location on the displayed map in relation to the churches. He didn’t believe out of her backyard that she would be able to see the hill they were talking about, it was too low in elevation. He pointed out the CVWD pump station, the Stone Eagle entry and the churches. He didn’t believe that she could see it from her location. Ms. Stiles said she has been there 21 years and was worried about everyone else. They didn’t want to ruin Palm Desert because it is a fantastic community. Mr. Kuykendall agreed, wholeheartedly. He said it is a beautiful site and could be done in such a way that it would be hard to notice unless someone was really looking for it. He didn’t believe it could be viewed from her property. Someone going 55-60 mph up Highway 74 would get a quick look at it. Ms. Stiles thanked him. There were no other public comments. Action: Commissioner Campbell moved for approval. Commissioner Limont asked for discussion first. Chairperson Tanner agreed. Commissioner Limont noted that we have a hillside ordinance. She didn’t disagree with everything that folks were saying, and didn’t know Mr. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 Kuykendall’s work, but did know the Carvers work and Toni’s comment had merit with her. But she came back to this whole group who worked really hard for a Hillside Ordinance that specifically says no building on the ridgelines. As much as she could look at this and go, you know what? Look at the two pads, staff was right, this is the better way to go, obviously the neighbors feel he’ll be doing a great job, and they would be marching all over the ordinance. This was the second time in two meetings they had been asked to take an ordinance that hasn’t been in place seven months and just throw it by the wayside. She just had difficulty with that before they voted. Commissioner Schmidt acknowledged that this was tough. They knew when they proposed and passed the ordinance that they would be facing some of these issues. She was certain that Mr. Kuykendall would build a most wonderful house, but she could not, like Commissioner Limont, just fly in the face of an ordinance that so many people are depending on with exception after exception after exception. It was unfortunate that it was graded prior to even being in the city, and that did not constitute the grandfathering in her view. If anything, they should be looking at reconstructing the ridge without a home on it. So unless she saw something really concrete, a picture of what it would look like, she couldn’t encourage any further development on the site or encourage any more expense for him, and it would be expensive to make pretty pictures to show them a home in there. If he wanted to do that, she would encourage him to, but it would be a whole new reapplication. They worked hard at the behest of the people of the city to pass that ordinance and they had to enforce it. Chairperson Tanner asked staff about the construction below the ridgeline. The ridgeline itself, he understood it had been disturbed; the original ridgeline had been disturbed. His question was if this construction was on a ridgeline as they see it today; as it’s being proposed today, is it actually construction on the ridgeline. Ms. Aylaian explained that the Hillside Ordinance itself has a map appended to it that actually draws red lines on what was being identified as the ridges. That map shows that this is a ridgeline that runs through that property. So according to the Hillside Ordinance, this is considered a ridgeline despite the fact that work has been done there in the past. Chairperson Tanner asked if the ordinance itself gave any latitude as far as if the actual construction of the home itself was below the red ridgeline; was that correct if they were not interrupting or encroaching on the ridgeline in the construction of the home. Ms. Aylaian explained that the other provisions of the Hillside Ordinance would then take effect, but they were not prohibited from building on it if it was 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 not identified as being a ridge on the map that’s appended to the Hillside Ordinance. Chairperson Tanner reiterated that what she was saying was that this piece of property is in the effected ridgeline area. Ms. Aylaian said yes, it is. Chairperson Tanner said that applied even if it wasn’t building on top of the ridge, but below the ridge. Ms. Aylaian concurred. She added that this was only the second time that this portion of the ordinance has been implemented, and that’s for the Optional Preliminary Approval for the site and access location. When a site has been identified that does not approve the project, the project then goes back through Architectural Review for design analysis and would come back for consideration in the future. At that time the Planning Commission would have greater analysis, as well as exhibits that would demonstrate what the architecture would look like and the proposed mitigations as far as reshaping of the hillside or grading or rebuilding of the berm so that they would not be making a decision in a void. Chairperson Tanner noted that what staff was asking the Planning Commission to do today would be to recommend to staff and to the applicant to continue the process if they choose to and then bring it back to Commission after it’s been through the Architectural Committee. Ms. Aylaian said that was correct; the action today would identify a pad that would then go through the full process and go back for architecture, design, and the CEQA analysis to determine what kind of environmental impacts there would be. The project would then go through the formal approval process. Chairperson Tanner said or, if they could recommend that there be no more continuance of this effort on their part. Ms. Aylaian said staff was asking the Planning Commission to preliminarily identify a building pad and access to that pad. Chairperson Tanner clarified that that was all they were asking them to do is to identify that pad. Ms. Aylaian said that was correct. Chairperson Tanner said they were not being asked to say yes or no. Ms. Aylaian agreed that they were not approving a project. Chairperson Tanner asked if that was clear to everyone. Commission concurred. Chairperson Tanner noted that there was a motion on the floor. He asked for any further discussion on this issue. Commissioner Schmidt indicated that a second was needed for the motion. Chairperson Tanner seconded the motion (which was, by minute motion, to direct the applicant to proceed with Proposed Pad #1, including grading, berming, and renaturalization work necessary to obscure view of the homes and improvements from the valley floor, per the Hillside Planned Residential Zone Section 25.15.130 “Optional Preliminary Approval.”) 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 Chairperson Tanner asked if there was any other discussion. Commissioner Schmidt commented that if they look at it as a pile of dirt, the pad is a flattened pile of dirt which was the ridgeline and the dirt that was moved away from the ridgeline, if she was correct, now constituted the fill which allowed a large enough pad to build approximately 4,000 feet. So to berm it back up again, was really a major undertaking and he had to do the percs on it. She for one could not encourage more money into that project unless there was overwhelming support for him to do that; it’s expensive. Chairperson Tanner thought that should be left up to the applicant, but they were being asked to suggest a pad, either Pad #1 or Pad #2, for the applicant to continue the process. Mr. Kuykendall asked to make a comment on that. Chairperson Tanner invited Mr. Kuykendall to readdress the Commission. Mr. Kuykendall asked them to bear with him. He has been after this for five years. And politically he has been told again by two Council members no; he’s got opposition again here. All they were doing was putting a different dress on the same girl. He keeps spending money, he keeps going at this, he keeps talking to City Council members; the bottom line is there is stiff opposition to building on this property. They have Mr. Lennon who gave him a letter and said if he did build a house there, Mr. Lennon would give him golf cart access into the course. But at the same time, Mr. Kuykendall couldn’t help but feel that maybe he is in opposition to this too because it is in his view corridor from his clubhouse. He said he was really tired of playing the politics and he would just like to be either bought out for open space and treated fairly in lieu of…if he was going to go forward spending $80,000 like he quoted last time in a City Council meeting, he said it would cost him roughly $80,000 to really design something, not wasting his time; he wouldn’t throw $20,000 out and get a balloon case that can pop. It would cost him about $80,000 to do photo sims and design considerations. They could talk to any good architects here, and he knew them all and had worked with them all, and it cost $25,000 just for a retainer. So he didn’t feel like spending that money when he had all this opposition politically that’s out on the table. He said the City Attorney was aware of it and everyone here was aware of it. He would rather have an answer; if they didn’t want him to build there, then buy it, it’s for sale. He would trade it. He would 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 do something, but this sitting in limbo for five years and then where they were headed again right now was right back to where he was in 2003, right back to the same spot again. This just wasn’t right. To see Ted Lennon develop 60% of his property and Mr. Kuykendall’s property line was right there, that was not equal. It’s called a CEQA lawsuit. He was sorry for talking like that, but this was out of hand and was getting old. Commissioner Schmidt asked since 2003 when he purchased, or even before that, since he’s been aware of that property, she asked if he had ever been encouraged by anyone in this city to build on that site. Mr. Kuykendall said he never had opposition, real opposition that came forward until after he received Planning Commission approval last year with a 5-0 vote for a driveway to go in there and a cul-de- sac so he could perc test it to see if he wanted to go forward, and if not, he was going to renaturalize it, draw back out and know where he stood before he started spending the money. However, when he made those statements, Mr. Crites wrote a letter and sent him a copy of it where he said Mr. Kuykendall pretty well lied to the Council, which was totally untrue. That $80,000 in cost is real. He had to grade the road to get in there to perc it before his grading plan would even be accepted, so it was a catch 22 and that’s why with Phil Drell, bless his heart, for three and a half years, he was honest with Mr. Kuykendall and told him he was supposed to discourage him from going forward. They kept submitting and doing this and that, but he has had two City Council members and an ex-City Council member tell him he would never build there, so why should he go forward? Why don’t they get to the bottom of this? He was told to come and resubmit again. Well, he has and this time he would submit and go to the Council, and as far as his lawyer said, take that route and go from there. But that’s not what he’s about. He liked to know what he was doing. Commissioner Schmidt didn’t think it was in their purview to authorize the purchase of the ground. That’s certainly for Council to do, she assumed. Chairperson Tanner said they were there today to make a suggestion to Mr. Kuykendall on a pad site, and they had a lot of conversation about it. He asked one more time, to staff and to the City Attorney, what they were looking for the Planning Commission to do. If it wasn’t to approve Pad Lot 1 or Pad Lot 2, did they have any other choices on this miscellaneous item? Ms. Aylaian explained that the purpose of this item is that there was an application for the Optional Preliminary Approval to identify a site. If the 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 Commission were to look at both sites and feel neither were appropriate, but knew of a better one, they could certainly identify that one. Chairperson Tanner said they were asking staff to present to Commission those two sites or alternatives to those two sites. Ms. Aylaian said that staff has not be able to identify any alternatives to these two sites; staff believed these are the only two viable sites. Chairperson Tanner said it was presented to them as Pad 1 or Pad 2 to continue to pursue building on this lot. Mr. Kuykendall said that would maybe get him to City Council where at City Council he would guarantee that he would get shot down again. Commissioner Campbell said this was Planning Commission’s job and was all they could do. Mr. Kuykendall said he appreciated that. Chairperson Tanner said they again come back to a motion on the floor that they go with staff’s recommendation, Pad #1. There was a motion and a second. He called for the vote. The vote was 2-2 (Commissioners Limont and Schmidt voting no). Mr. Hargreaves explained that was a no action, basically, and subject to appeal to the City Council. He believed the applicant had 15 days. Chairperson Tanner thanked him. B. REQUEST FOR A FINDING OF GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FOR VACATING A PORTION OF GUADALUPE AVENUE. (Related to Case No. PP 07-07, the approved Delio office building at 44-450 Monterey Avenue.) Ms. Aylaian stated that the report was before them and if they had specific questions, City Engineer Bo Chen was available to answer them. There were no questions. Ms. Aylaian noted that this case was a follow up on a project the Planning Commission approved several months ago for a new office professional building fronting on Monterey. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, by minute motion, finding that the proposed street vacation of a 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 portion of Guadalupe Avenue to be consistent with the General Plan. Motion carried 4-0. C. Oral Report on Status of Residential Infill Projects. Ms. Aylaian explained that a year ago the Planning Commission asked staff to monitor at an administrative level what sort of projects were being approved over the counter or going to the Architectural Review Commission that would essentially create “McMansions”, a large amount of house on a small lot, especially in south Palm Desert where it could impact views. During the last six months, there had been no projects approved, and the closest they came was a project that increased the height of the structure in one small portion of the existing building that did not move any closer to any of the site boundaries, and did not significantly change the massing. So what she could report was the activity of the sort they were seeing several of years ago where the market conditions created a drive to overbuild on existing developed sites seems to have died and staff hasn’t seen a lot of interest in those types of projects at this point. Chairperson Tanner asked if staff was looking for any kind of Commission action. Ms. Aylaian replied no, this was purely informational. She suggested that since this did not seem to be an active area at this point, she would report back in another year to see if there was any need to monitor it more closely. Commissioner Schmidt asked if there was any way to determine the vacancies in the commercial corridor along El Paseo and Palms to Pines and that kind of sector. Ms. Aylaian explained that the City prepares and updates on a regular basis a commercial vacancy inventory and that project was headed up by the Economic Development Department and believed that report was done and available online. So they do regularly track what sort of commercial vacancies are out there. If she didn’t find it online, give staff a call or check with Ruth Ann Moore or Robin McCormick in Economic Development and they could help with that information. Action: None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell reported on the last meeting’s actions. 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2008 B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont reviewed the discussion items. C. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt informed Commission that the next meeting would be at the end of the month. D. PARKS & RECREATION Chairperson Tanner stated that there were just brief updates at the last meeting. He also reported on the passing away of long-time Parks & Recreation Commissioner Dan Barnes last Friday. XI. COMMENTS Ms. Aylaian informed Commission that the July 15, 2008 Planning Commission meeting would be canceled. The next meeting would be August 5. She also informed them that the City Council would be interviewing candidates for the vacant position on the Planning Commission next Friday, July 11. They were also scheduled for a regular meeting after that strictly for the purpose of identifying and appointing someone if they select them at the end of those interviews, in which case they would have one more commissioner available on August 5. Chairperson Tanner asked if there was anything preliminarily available scheduled for the August 5 meeting. Mr. Bagato said they were planning at least three or four items. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Limont, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:17 p.m. __________________________ LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary ATTEST: _____________________________ VAN G. TANNER, Chair Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm 20