Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0407 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY – APRIL 7, 2009 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tanner called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Members Present: Van Tanner, Chair Sonia Campbell, Vice Chair Russ Campbell Connor Limont Mari Schmidt Members Absent: None Staff Present: Lauri Aylaian, Director, Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Planner Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairperson Tanner led in the pledge of allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Aylaian summarized pertinent February 26, March 12 and March 26, 2009 City Council actions. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Request for consideration of the February 17, 2009 meeting minutes. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009 2 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Limont, seconded by Commissioner R. Campbell, approving the February 17, 2009 meeting minutes. Motion carried 5-0. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 09-03 – CAHUILLA FALLS, LLC and BIGHORN GOLF CLUB, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a 1,626 square foot lot line adjustment for property known as 1017 Cahuilla Falls (APN 652-320-006). B. Case No. PMW 09-34 – D.R. HORTON and PAULINE THOMAS, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a lot line adjustment for property located at 43-350 Tennessee Avenue (APN 637-470-058). Action: It was moved by Commissioner Limont, seconded by Commissioner S. Campbell, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. CUP 08-247 – VERIZON WIRELESS, Applicant Request for approval to construct, operate and maintain a new 65-foot high mono-palm wireless telecommunications tower for Verizon Wireless, and to convert an existing storage room into an equipment and generator room located at the rear of the Desert Gateway Self Storage property at 73-750 Dinah Shore Drive. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009 3 Mr. Kevin Swartz reviewed the staff report and recommended approval of CUP 08-247, subject to the conditions. Commissioner Limont acknowledged that there was a gap in coverage and asked how far it was. She asked when driving down Monterey Avenue if coverage was lost if someone took a right on Dinah Shore and down Cook. Mr. Swartz deferred the question to the applicant. There were no other questions for staff. Chairperson Tanner opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. MR. ROBERT McCORMICK, representing Verizon Wireless, 27 Via Granada in Rolling Hills Estates, California, 90274, addressed the Commission. Responding to the question regarding the hole in the coverage, he said if they came down the main thoroughfare there and turn west to Dinah Shore, their hole is the entire industrial park and that portion of I-10. He thought it was about a quarter of a mile in either direction. Commissioner Limont asked if they were coming down Cook Street and went west on Dinah Shore, upon going left, they would lose contact. Mr. McCormick said maybe after an eighth of a mile the call would be dropped, and they would probably have three-quarters of a mile before it picked back up again. Commissioner Limont said it would pick back up again at Monterey and concluded it would be the same thing when darting along I-10. Mr. McCormick concurred. There were no other questions for the applicant. Chairperson Tanner asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to the proposed project. There was no one. Chairperson Tanner closed the public hearing and asked for Commission comments. Commissioner S. Campbell thought it was very pleasing to the eye and was in an acceptable location. If they looked at the pictures without the palm trees and then with it, it was very pleasing to the eyes. She moved for approval. Commissioner Limont stated that she drove down there today and could see what Architectural Review Commission was suggesting, and she appreciated their suggestion, but that area was so stark with regard to MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009 4 trees right now that this tower would stick up like the pine tree that has all the different cells on it. She thought they had ignored north Palm Desert to a certain extent as far as being conscientious of the aesthetic appeal out there. She knew it was close to I-10, and was not negating the fact that they do need cell coverage there, but for her she was just not willing to do it at the expense of having this tower stick up in the middle of nowhere. They could see it from I-10, from Dinah Shore Drive, and from Monterey Avenue. For her, it was too big. In that regard, Commissioner Schmidt said she was curious; when she looked at it, it was obvious that it sticks up much higher than even the tallest of surrounding trees that they were going to put there and in trying to help shield it, they’ve actually called attention to it with the height of the other trees. She was hoping that one or two of the other three large palm trees would have staggered heights. She asked if that was possible. Mr. Swartz noted that the picture showed them all at the same height, but there was a condition that they had to vary in height from 35 feet to 45 feet. Commissioner Schmidt asked if 45 feet was the tallest. Mr. Swartz said that was what was recommended by the Landscape Department. Commissioner Schmidt stated that her observation was that the taller the accompanying trees are, the more the height of that one would be mitigated and kind of blend in. She said that Commissioner Limont’s comment was well taken in that it sticks out there because there aren’t huge palm trees in the area, so that would be her suggestion: taller trees , staggered. Commissioner Limont asked if staff knew if the palm trees around St. Margaret’s were staggered, or if they pretty much were the same height. Mr. Swartz replied that they’re pretty much the same height. Commissioner Limont referred to the picture and said they could see palm, cell palm, and palm. Mr. Swartz said that there was a condition by the Architectural Commission requiring the applicant to place palm trees throughout the site, as well. So then it wasn’t just a cluster of palm trees in one area, there would be additional palm trees. Commissioner Limont asked when the other palm trees would go in. Mr. Swartz confirmed that they would go in at the same time. Chairperson Tanner asked if that was a condition of the owner of the property or a condition of Verizon. Was Verizon responsible to put in the additional palm trees? Mr. McCormick said it was three palms, and two more near the entrance for a total of five live palms. He believed the heights for MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009 5 the three live palms around the pole were 50 feet, 40 feet and 35 feet, and that was because they had a microwave dish underneath that was covered by hanging fronds. Also to address what was mentioned about previous trees, he wasn’t sure when it was installed, but in the last couple of years they’ve improved quite a bit. The overall height of this pole is 6 5 feet, but that was to the top of the fronds. The antennas were actually sitting around 57 feet. Commissioner Limont pointed out that the structure was still 65 feet. Mr. McCormick said they have one live tree at 50 feet and three that were staggered. He believed the condition was for 40 feet. Commissioner S. Campbell noted that Condition No. 7 added live trees throughout the site, so there were going to be more trees besides those three. Mr. McCormick said there were two additional trees that they were required to place at the entrance of the complex, and he believed they were each 40 feet in height and would be live palms. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the purpose of that was to help shield the 65-foot height. Mr. McCormick concurred. Commissioner Schmidt asked how far away those were from the cluster. Mr. McCormick estimated approximately 200 feet to the west. Mr. Swartz clarified that the condition says 35 to 45 feet, so if they wanted taller palms, they just needed to specify the height. Commissioner Schmidt said taller palms. Commissioner S. Campbell noted that Mr. McCormick said one of the palms would be 50 feet high; 50 feet, 40 feet and 35 feet in height. Mr. McCormick concurred and said that the other two off of that area would be 40 feet. Commissioner R. Campbell asked if all of their towers were 65 feet, or if that one was 65 feet because that was a lower area and they needed that height for the coverage. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009 6 Mr. McCormick said they were higher and were asked to come down ten feet. Commissioner Schmidt asked about the next increment lower. Mr. McCormick explained that they would lose coverage if they came down any further or moved in any other direction. They went through it quite a bit with the Architectural Review Commission. Commissioner S. Campbell noted that they had approved other cell towers that were 75 feet in height. Mr. McCormick said they were as low as they could go at this point. There were no other questions. Chairperson Tanner noted that there was a motion on the floor for approval. He asked for a second. The motion was seconded by Commissioner R. Campbell. Action: It was moved by Commissioner S. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner R. Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Limont voted no). It was moved by Commissioner S. Campbell, seconded by Commissioner R. Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2497, approving Case No. CUP 08-247, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Limont voted no). IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner S. Campbell reported that there was only one item on the agenda, which was continued. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont summarized the last meeting’s discussion items. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009 7 C. PARKS & RECREATION Chairperson Tanner gave an update on their last meeting. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner R. Campbell reported on the various items that were discussed. XI. COMMENTS Chairperson Tanner noted that Commissioner Limont brought up the issue of going dark this summer. He indicated that it was difficult to do at this point because we didn’t know yet when City Council might go dark. He understood it was a whole lot cheaper to buy a plane ticket today than in another month. He was just wondering if they could pinpoint the dark weeks the Council was having this year. Ms. Aylaian explained that historically they’ve taken off the second meeting in July and the first meeting in August, and it’s been pretty predictable. Last year they did alternating dates off. Her guess was that they would try to take the second in July and the first in August. Staff just didn’t know at this time. For our purposes, without knowing the Council’s plans, she would not plan to go dark for more than one meeting in a row. It was far enough in advance that as they work with applicants, if they knew there was one meeting or another meeting they were going to go dark, they could steer people in that direction. But to plan in advance two meetings being dark without knowing the Council’s plan would be a disservice to applicants or people trying to get their way through the system. She advised to either wait a little bit or not to pick consecutive dates. Commissioner S. Campbell pointed out that we’ve always been busy in the summer time. They’ve always had things to do. As Ms. Aylaian said, it wouldn’t be nice for applicants. Ms. Aylaian concurred that it could be a hardship on an applicant. Right now they weren’t seeing any big cases working their way through, but at the next meeting they would have two CUPs, and the next meeting after that would be the Sign Ordinance update and another CUP. They would probably be seeing CUPs trickle through more than anything. As long as they had a quorum, Chairperson Tanner suggested that Commissioner Limont go ahead and make her travel arrangements and hopefully they would have a quorum, and they could plan their schedules around that. He said he would be here during the month of August, just MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2009 8 not in the desert. He asked if that was good fo r everyone. Commissioner S. Campbell said that was good for her. XII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Limont suggested that they adjourn the meeting in honor of Paul Campbell. Commission concurred. It was moved by Commissioner Limont, seconded by Chairperson Tanner, adjourning the meeting in honor of Paul Campbell. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner S. Campbell thanked them. The meeting was adjourned at 6:27 p.m. __________________________ LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary ATTEST: _____________________________ VAN G. TANNER, Chairperson Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm