Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01-18 PC Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY — JANUARY 18, 2011 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Limont called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Members Present: Connor Limont, Chair Mari Schmidt, Vice Chair Sonia Campbell Nancy De Luna Van Tanner tow Members Absent: None Staff Present: Jill Tremblay, Assistant City Attorney Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Tony Becker, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Tanner led the pledge of allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Aylaian reported that the City Council had three meetings since the Planning Commission last met. At the first meeting, the City Council approved the Parcel Map Waiver for the addition and construction of fifteen homes to be built by Ponderosa Homes. Another meeting was a special meeting held Monday, January 17, 2011, regarding the governor's proposed state-wide budget cuts to Redevelopment Agencies in California. The final meeting was a two-day retreat attended by Council members, staff and interested citizens. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18 2011 The topics discussed included Capital Improvement Projects that have been planned, the "Hiring Freeze," condition of city parks and marketing efforts to .. name a few. No decisions or votes were made or taken, this was just an informative session for new council members to become acquainted with other council members and establish priorities for the New Year. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NONE VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Request for approval of the January 4, 2011 meeting minutes. Action: Commissioner De Luna moved and Commissioner Schmidt seconded the approval of the January 4, 2011 meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR NONE Vill. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Limont stated that 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. Case No. TPM 36338 / HTE 10-388 Avondale Country Club, Applicant Approval for a tentative parcel map to create three new residential lots for Avondale Golf Club, located within Avondale Country Club on the northwest corner of Country Club Drive and Eldorado Drive. Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz orally presented his staff report and PowerPoint presentation to the Planning Commission. He described the three properties that the country club wished to develop or sell for development. The request conforms to the zoning ordinance and staff recommends approval. Mr. Swartz entertained commissioner questions. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18 2011 Commissioner De Luna asked Mr. Swartz about the current neighbors to these parcels and how/if they would be affected by the development of these parcels. Mr. Swartz stated that staff • advertised to all area people owning property within 300' of the parcels in question, and received no feedback regarding any of the parcels. Commissioner Tanner asked if these parcels were already zoned and 'tracted' in this parcel map or a brand new project. Mr. Swartz stated that it was brand new, but that the zoning is consistent with the area and would not change. Chair Limont clarified that these parcels still match with the original development standards. Mr. Swartz stated that the development standards wouldn't change, even by adding these homes, which would bring the total up to 304 homes which is under the 307 originally planned. Commissioner Campbell pointed out that there were already driveways built on a couple of the parcels in anticipation of this endeavor. Hearing no other questions, Chair Limont declared the public hearing open. Warren Carey, 75779 Heritage West, Palm Desert, is on the Board of Directors of Avondale and spoke about the project. He stated that this project has been underway for some time. The board asked the members for their approval [by majority] and received their approval to design and build on the lots. He assured the Planning Commission that none of these lots would deter from any view or access to the golf course. Mr. Carey stated that the Board received no objections to this project. Commissioner Tanner asked Mr. Carey if he (Avondale) would be developing these lots and/or selling them. Mr. Carey stated that yes; the process would be that they would first offer them up for purchase and development to any of the membership. If they wanted to build a house, they would have a 30 day window to begin that process. If no members wanted to purchase/develop the lots, then Avondale would put the lots on the open market for sale. Commissioner Schmidt asked if there were any other vacant properties in Avondale. Mr. Carey stated that there were a total of five lots (including these three), but that these other two lots aren't strategically placed and would have issues with errant golf balls or blocked views. Consequently, the Board decided not to pursue 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING OMMISSION JANUARY 1$ 201 anything with these two lots. Theoretically however, they could be developed at a future date. Commissioner De Luna queried about Parcels #1 and #2 and noticed that their lot-lines extended farther out than their neighbors' and asked if this would block their neighbors' views. Mr. Carey stated that the CC&R's allow a lot-line fence up to 32" in height, so as to protect the view of the lot holder and the neighbor(s). He didn't anticipate that this would be an issue when the lots were developed. Mr. Carey stated that both houses are 'end' houses and have privacy walls that were allowed to be built just short of the property line. Parcels #1 and #2 would not be impacted by these fences because their location allows their view to be straight on facing the fairway. Commissioner De Luna followed up by asking about the size of the houses that would be built. Mr. Carey stated that the houses would range from 2,400 to 3,800 square feet. Commissioner Campbell asked if there were any two-story houses in Avondale. Mr. Carey stated that there were none but that some houses have decorative cupolas on their roofs. Chair Limont heard no other questions presented and declared the public hearing closed. Action: Commissioner De Luna moved and Commissioner Campbell seconded the motion to approve case TPM 36338 / HTE 10-388 with conditions. The motion carried for approval 5-0. Commissioner De Luna moved and Commissioner Campbell seconded adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2541, recommending approval of TPM 36338 / HTE 10-388 with conditions. Motion carried 5-0. B. Case No. PP 10-302, The Magnon Companies, (DMV) Applicant Approval of a precise plan of design for a new Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) facility, located at 36-400 Technology Drive, north of Gerald Ford Drive. The proposed building totals 11,280 square feet on a vacant 2.22 acre site. Principal Planner Tony Bagato verbally presented his staff report and PowerPoint presentation. The site is in the north sphere of the city off of Technology Drive, north of Gerald Ford Drive. The 4 rrrli �.. w �r MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18 2011 building would be over 11,000 square feet and would have two drives to accommodate both ingress and egress. There would also be a motorcycle testing area, porte-a-cochere and other amenities to the facility. The architecture and colors are described as "desert contemporary". The Architectural Review Committee endorsed the project as proposed with no changes and with that, staff recommends approval of the project. Mr. Bagato entertained questions. Commission De Luna began by asking about the interior design: there were circles showing on the design and she wanted to know what they were. Mr. Bagato said that they represented people standing in line. She then asked about emergency egress in case of fire and were there enough exits and any issues. Mr. Bagato stated that the Fire Marshall looks at safety requirements and had no issues. Commissioner De Luna continued by asking about the seating. She noted that the building occupancy limits was nearly 300 people, but there was only seating for 50. She suggested that some of the empty space in the southeast corner of the building and even outside could use more chairs or benches to accommodate more people and prevent them from having to stand or congregate in groups. Mr. Bagato said he would let the designer speak to this. Her final question for staff was about the look of the entrance and could it have more stone around it, making it look more important. Mr. Bagato stated that he would let the architect speak to that, but it was his (Mr. Bagato's) opinion that this particular design wouldn't support stone with the rest of the building. Chair Limont asked about covered parking. Mr. Bagato stated that there was one tree per three spaces per city ordinance and this met that requirement. Chair Limont stated that she would like to see more shade in some form for people waiting in the heat. She also asked if this building had solar panels. Mr. Bagato stated that presently no solar would be built on it, but it is a LEED-Silver certified building and that met and exceeded 'green' requirements. Hearing no other questions, Chair Limont declared the public hearing open. Carter Reddish of Carter Group Architects, 1810 S. El Camino Real, San Clemente, CA approached the podium and answered Commissioner questions. Doug Magnon of Doug Magnon OW 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18. 2011 Companies, 4284 Arcada, Palm Springs, CA also was present to answer questions. Commissioner De Luna began by thanking the gentlemen for their dynamic designs, but wanted clarification on the colors. Mr. Reddish presented the Commissioners with new renderings of the colors to show them more accurately. Commissioner De Luna, in the mean time wanted to return to the seating issue. Mr. Reddish stated that the State regulates state buildings and the DMV has a fixed program and `formula' for the specifications of the building, number of seats, placement of windows, etc. He stated that until the DMV changes their `formula', the items are subject to these regulations and that is what is drawn. Commissioner De Luna understood and asked if her request for more stone around the entry fell under that dictation. Mr. Reddish said no, that they could look at that. They were very pleased to be able to use color out here. Commissioner De Luna mentioned that color fades fast here and would that be kept up? Mr. Reddish said that the State would be responsible for upkeep of the building and making sure everything was maintained over time. Commissioner De Luna wanted to clarify elevation and directions. She mentioned that on an earlier rendering, the elevation said south, but was told that it was actually east. Mr. Reddish stated that there was a discrepancy from the very first rendering, which had the wrong label listed, to the one they are looking at now and that this one was correct. Commissioner De Luna asked about screening of the windows and could they be set back farther than they are now. Mr. Reddish reconfirmed that, again, that was up to the DMV specifications, but that all windows have awnings over them for shade. Mr. Reddish wanted to inform the Planning Commission that the State asked that a misting system be installed outside for the people waiting in the heat. Commissioner Schmidt asked about the drainage channel behind the building. Mr. Reddish and Mr. Magnon stated that it was part of the drainage of the area. Mr. Bagato informed the Commissioners that this was a CVWD drainage channel that flows throughout the north part of the valley. Each abutting developed business would be responsible for developing their portion of the channel. The 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18, 2011 developers of the DMV would be developing their portion of the channel as required. Chair Limont wanted to ask about installing solar panels. Mr. Magnon stated that the building is LEED-Silver certified. The State will have the option to install solar panels, but that they would determine at a future date if it were economically feasible depending on their electric bills. Chair Limont stated that she wasn't looking at this from a cost standpoint, but more from the standpoint that this is `Palm Desert-a leader in energy' and she felt that the State, of all entities, should be leading the way on saving energy. Mr. Magnon stated that the building is designed to accommodate solar panels if the DMV later chooses to install them. Commissioner Schmidt asked one final question of staff if the Commission had any authority to require solar on this project. Mr. Bagato stated that the Commission could make it a condition of approval, but if that became a condition that the Developer/State could not or would not implement, then that could possibly halt or 'kill' the project. The City Attorney, Jill Tremblay, confirmed that fact. Action: .rr Commissioner De Luna moved and Commissioner Tanner seconded the motion to approve case PP 10-302 with conditions. The motion carried for approval 4-1 (Commissioner Limont voting NO). Commissioner De Luna moved and Commissioner Tanner seconded adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2542, recommending approval of PP 10-302 with conditions. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Limont voting NO). C. Case No. CUP 10-413, West Coast Barber College, Applicant Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the use of a Barber College at 74-350 Alessandro Drive, Suite A-1, located in the R-3 (4) Zone, (Residential Multi-Family). Mr. Swartz approached the podium to present his staff report and oral presentation. He began by alerting the Commissioners that a letter was presented to staff just before the meeting tonight and asked that the Commissioners take a moment to review it. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18 Commissioner De Luna wanted to verify the amount of parking stated Now in the letter just presented. The letter states that there are 32 parking stalls, when, in fact there are 33. Mr. Swartz presented the case: The property is located on Alessandro Alley, just north of Highway 111. In January of 1990, the Planning Commission approved a CUP 89-12 for two single-story buildings totaling over 11,000 square feet. Building A is 5,365 square feet divided into two suites. Building A Suite A-1 would be West Coast Barber College. Suite A-2 isn't occupied. Building B is entirely empty at this time. The Barber College would have three instructors, one office manager and one receptionist. Currently there are 25 students enrolled. The business only allows 4-5 students at any one time for approximately 4- 5 hours. The hours of operation are 9 a.m. -- 6 p.m. Monday through Wednesday and 9 a.m. — 8 p.m. Friday and Saturday. The R-3 (4) Zone does allow for a mix of offices, schools and colleges subject to Conditional Use Permits and adequate parking. There are eight spaces directly in front of the Barber College. A parking study showed that there are 26 parking stalls available at most times of the day for this use. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Swartz offered to answer questions. Commissioner De Luna began by asking about the parking. She clarified by stating that the Barber College has eight stalls to utilize. Mr. Swartz said that was correct. She stated that there are nine businesses there. Mr. Swartz said that there are nine suites there, but they are currently vacant, save one. Commissioner De Luna posited that should those businesses be filled, they would have at least 2-3 employees each and in that case, how do these eight parking spaces fit into that plan? Mr. Swartz stated that when there was a dance studio next door, the parking spaces were utilized, but not all students (neither the dance studio nor the college) used all of the spaces at once due to staggered hours. Commissioners Tanner and Schmidt stated that they would direct their questions to the Applicant. Commissioner Campbell stated that when area businesses close for the day, presumably around 5 p.m., then that means more parking spaces would probably open up since the Barber College had evening classes. m 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18. 2011 Chair Limont needed to clarify about the training stations. She asked why there were 34 stations when only 4-5 students would be there at a time. She doesn't want to allow 34 when there aren't that many there " at this time and get into a situation where over-expansion of the student population causes parking issues down the road. She also noticed that the applicant is just now asking for a CUP and did this mean he was operating a Barber College without authorization up to this point? Mr. Swartz stated that the applicant applied for a business license as a barber shop, but Code Enforcement found out that they were operating as a college and cited them. Commissioner Schmidt asked staff about the employee:student parking ratio. She stated that there were five employees/instructors each with cars. That already takes five of the eight spaces listed. With this approval, they could operate as a barber shop as well and that would mean walk-ins would also need parking. Commission De Luna mentioned that right now, the eight stalls are already `spoken for' but one day, when other businesses open, they too will need parking minus the eight stalls. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the operation as a barber shop AND a barber college simultaneously was allowed under the city municipal code and that the shop wouldn't need a separate business license for it. Mr. Swartz stated that was correct. Chair Limont asked who is responsible for the students; does the State r. regulate the safety and the licensing? Ms. Aylaian stated that the State is responsible for the licensure and oversight of any barber college and the instructors and students. Chair Limont declared the public hearing open and asked the applicant to come forward. Jesus (Jessie) Escamilla, 74157 Portola Pointe Ln., Palm Desert, CA answered any questions that the Commissioners posed. Commissioner Schmidt asked about the parking situation and if he believed that he had adequate parking. Mr. Escamilla stated that at no time would there be 34 students at once. He assigns each student a time to come in so that their lessons and times are staggered. He also mentioned that he assigns each student their own station (one of the 34) to use for classes. He stated that no student would be there for eight hours. She asked if he schedules about 4-5 students at a time for no more than 4-5 hours. He stated that was correct. She asked if he was aware that street parking is not only limited but somewhat dangerous at this location. .r 9 MINUTES PALM EGSEQT a� oNN�NO COMMISSION JANUARY 18, 2M Mr. Escamilla wasn't aware of that fact and mentioned that he talked with the landlord about the building and when he heard that there was a computer school/college there before, he assumed that it would be the perfect transition for his college to locate there. Commissioner Tanner asked about hair styling and barbering itself, and realized that the State is regulating this, but what about the walk- ins, are they are large part of your revenues, or a smaller part? Mr. Escamilla stated that walk-ins make up the majority of his revenues at this time. Commissioner Tanner mentioned that the college is charging for 1,500 clock-hours of training for a certificate. Commissioner Tanner wanted to know if most of the students are part-time, since they probably have other jobs during the day. Mr. Escamilla stated that was the case. If a walk-in customer walks in while instruction is going on, would the instructor stop what they were doing and go cut that customer's hair? Mr. Escamilla said that there would always be an instructor overseeing what the students were doing and that one of the other barbers or instructors would go assist the customer. Commissioner De Luna still needed clarification on the parking. She wanted to know if the college would ever grow beyond the 34 students. Mr. Escamilla wasn't sure about that at this time. So many students rely on financial aid and at this time that is limited. In better times, it might be a possibility, but right now, he didn't foresee that happening in the immediate future. Commissioner De Luna and other Commissioners counted at least nine or ten parking spaces that would be taken when one counts the office staff and students. And that number 'over parks' the facility when considering that walk-ins haven't been counted. Mr. Escamilla stated that not all of the students would drive. Some would walk or take the bus. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the 34 stations that are shown on the first drawing were in use right now. Mr. Escamilla stated that they are. She followed up by asking how many people frequent the building during open hours. Mr. Escamilla stated that earlier in the week and earlier in the day the top number is around nine. Later in the week after hours, the number rises to about fifteen. Commissioner Campbell asked who the students practice on. Mr. Escamilla stated that they practice on each other, volunteers and even doll heads. 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18, 2011 Mr. Robert Darmody and Ms. Bernadette Gonzales of 32-200 Cathedral Canyon Dr, Cathedral City, CA both approached the podium to oppose this permit. Mr. Darmody began by stating that Mr. Escamilla has been operating his barber college in various places in Palm Desert (Westfield Mall for example) and operates as a barber college that accepts tuition in exchange for teaching a trade. He stated that he has documentation that the college is in name only. Ms. Gonzales stated that she researched the licensure that one would receive from this college and none of the credits or hours will transfer anywhere. She stated that if the Planning Commission wished, she could provide them with documentation from the State Board regarding this issue. She stated that she felt that the City and Code Enforcement should be handling this issue. Ms. Abbe Flemming of 44836 Santa Ynez, Palm Desert came forward to speak in opposition to this permit. She said her property is directly to the north of the building in question and that she was the one who delivered the letter to staff just prior to the meeting tonight. She wanted to explain that when the dance studio was there, there were many students that parked in front of their house and other nearby houses. When students from the previous college were there, they also would park and stay late. She can hear people in the parking lots blaring their car stereos at all hours of the night. She even walked out to request that the students turn down their radios. She wanted to reaffirm that there is just not enough parking for this or future businesses because all parking is scarce along Alessandro Alley. Ms. Flemming also stated that she was a manicurist for ten years and she had to have her own license, in order to answer a question one of the Commissioners had about licensure. Chair Limont, hearing no other testimony, declared the public hearing closed. Chair Limont asked for Commission comments and questions. Commissioner De Luna asked the City Attorney, Jill Tremblay if the City is liable or responsible for verifying that applicants have valid business licenses or credentials. Ms. Tremblay stated that at this time, this vote is just a recommendation for the approval or denial of the permit. ..r 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18. 2011 Commissioner Tanner stated that this is just a commission that recommends. He feels that until Mr. Escamilla can offer some proof or two documentation necessary stating that he is a bona-fide college, that Commissioner Tanner's recommendation would be to deny the motion of approval and not send that to the City Council. Commissioner Schmidt asked staff about their findings about credentials and if staff takes the time verify credentials. Mr. Bagato spoke about this and reminded the Planning Commission that their denial would be based on lack of parking spaces, not credentials, since the Planning Commission is tasked with vetting land-use issues. If the Commission desired to deny this application, they should deny based on parking (or lack thereof) or land-use. Ms. Aylaian wanted to address the issue of staff verifying credentials of applicants. She likened the situation to the Federal, State and Local governments not overlapping services. There are state entities that are responsible for credentialing for certain services, and City staff entrusts that responsibility to the other appropriate agencies. The tax payers should expect that the appropriate agency fulfills its own responsibility, and does so correctly. Otherwise there would be overlap and added expense for doubling, or tripling-up of various verification services if one governmental agency is obliged to perform the same verifications as others. The Planning Department and staff are tasked with verifying land uses and compatibility and not with credentials or license verification; those tasks are held by other entities. Recommended Action: Commissioner Tanner moved and Commissioner De Luna seconded denying the findings and recommendation as presented by staff, and direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial based upon the lack of adequate parking at the site. Motion to deny carried 5-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Case No. CUP 10-106 Cornerstone Church, Applicant Informational report to the Planning Commission regarding CUP 10-106, Cornerstone Covenant Church located at 73-605 Dinah Shore Drive. Mr. Kevin Swartz informed the Planning Commission that the Cornerstone Church requested a change to their maximum occupancy rate to be 232 people. Their original application was for fixed-seating; 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18, 2011 however, they recently submitted a requested that included non-fixed seating. Staff believes that this change is compatible and placed the condition of approval on the CUP that the maximum number in attendance in the Sanctuary be no more than 232 people. There were no questions of staff at this time. Chair Limont stated that she was disappointed with the situation and strongly suggests that the code is enforced on this matter. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell stated that there is no meeting until tomorrow and that will be an art walk,along El Paseo. B. LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTtE Commissioner Limont stated that there was no meeting. C. PARKS & RECREATION Commissioner Tanner commented that they will introduce the original draft suggestions with the "Y" running the pool facility. He stated that there would also be discussions with Ryan Stendell about overrunning costs. The City Council has approved a study to be done on a skate park for potential expansion since it is already ..r over-used, even after-hours. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt stated that there would have been a meeting yesterday, but due to Martin Luther King Holiday, it will meet January 20, 2011 (this Thursday). XI. COMMENTS Ms. Aylaian wanted to impress upon the Commissioners that the City of Palm Desert has an excellent art program and the trained volunteer docents are always available and willing to take any interested parties on a FREE tour of our extensive and renowned art exhibits. ..r 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 18. 2011 XII. ADJOURNMENT vow Commissioner Schmidt moved and Commissioner Campbell seconded the adjournment of the meeting by minute motion. The motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. LAURI AYL , Secretary TTEST: M. CONNOR LIMONT, Chair Palm Desert Planning Commission /tb 14