Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-15 PC Regular Meeting Minutes CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2013 — 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Nancy DeLuna called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Ken Stendell Commissioner John Greenwood Commissioner Sonia Campbell Vice Chair Roger Dash Chair Nancy DeLuna iWo Staff Present: Jill Tremblay, City Attorney Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Monica O'Reilly, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair DeLuna led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development, reported that at the meeting of October 10, the City Council had the second reading and passage of the pedestrian signage ordinance amendment, and the ordinance amendment to reduce the parking ratio requirements. Chair DeLuna asked if the pedestrian signage is only for the summer months. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 Ms. Aylaian responded that on El Paseo, pedestrian signage is only for the summer months and for single occupants of multi-occupant buildings. In addition, a business is allowed to put a sign out if they are open before 10:00 a.m. MW Chair DeLuna asked what the dates during the summer months are. Ms. Aylaian replied that the summer months are June 1 through October 1. Chair DeLuna inquired if it is currently being enforced. Ms. Aylaian said that the second reading is followed by a 30-day period before the ordinance takes effect. She said that staff is in the process of notifying the businesses of the ordinance change, and then the City will give them a 90-day period before enforcement begins. Vice Chair Roger Dash commented that there are times when construction work obscures a business. He asked if signage is permissible. Ms. Aylaian replied that if the fagade is under construction, the business is allowed to have an open sign. Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, stated that there was a request that came in after the agenda was formalized and needed to be acted upon before the next regular meeting. The request is for a time extension for a hotel (Candlewood Suites) that was approved on Gerald Ford Drive in 2006. He said that the „r deadline for the entitlements expires on October 18, 2013, and the applicant is not ready to pull construction drawings. Mr. Bagato stated that staff is requesting that the Planning Commission, by minute motion, add this item to the Consent Calendar (Item C). Chair DeLuna asked if there is a question about the item, do they need to pull it out of the Consent Calendar. Mr. Bagato replied yes. Ms. Jill Tremblay, City Attorney, briefly informed the Commission of the Brown Act pertaining to the agenda, posting, discussion, and other matters. Commissioner Campbell moved, by Minute Motion, to add Item C to the Consent Calendar for Case No. PP 06-18 / CUP 06-15. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Stendell and carried by a 5-0 vote (see Item C of the Consent Calendar). V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None ..rr 2 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.dou MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Planning Commission meeting of October 1, 2013. taw Rec: By Minute Motion, approve as presented. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a two-year extension for Phase III of Precise Plan 03-19 located at 39-840 Portola Avenue. Case No. PP 03-19 (TDA Investment Group, 2025 Pioneer Court, San Mateo, California 94403) Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the extension (until January 3, 2016), Case No. PP 03-19. C. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a two-year extension for a Precise Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a hotel site located at 74-144 Gerald Ford Drive. Case No. PP 06-18 / CUP 06-15 (May Garden & Associates/John Wang, 21250 Yorba Linda Boulevard, Suite G-338, Yorba Linda, California 92887) Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the extension (until October 18, 2015), Case No. PP 06-18 / CUP 06-15. Upon a motion by Commissioner Campbell, second by Chair DeLuna, and a 4-0- 1 vote of the Planning Commission, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented with Commissioner Greenwood ABSTAINING. VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a fitness & gym facility within an existing office professional building located at 44-651 Village Court. Case No. CUP 12-385 (Five Star Fitness & Gym, LLC, 73-585 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 201, Palm Desert, CA 92260, Applicant). Mr. Bagato reported that the applicant has redesigned the project. Staff is requesting to continue this item to the November 5 meeting to allow time for staff to review the project. Commissioner Greenwood moved, by Minute Motion, to continue Case No. CUP 12-385 to November 5, 2013, to allow staff additional time to address the applicant's modifications. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Stendell and carried by a 5-0 vote. also 3 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a new Development Plan creating uniform development standards for the Mountains at Bighorn in accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Sections 25.28.060 and 25.72.040. Case No. DP 13-316 (Bighorn Development, LLC, 255 Palowet, Palm Desert, CA 92260, Applicant). Mr. Bagato reported that the property is known as Mountains at Bighorn located on the west side of Highway 74. He displayed a photo of the site. He said that the property is zoned Planned Community Development, which requires a Development Plan. Mr. Bagato stated that the request is to amend the Development Plan due to issues with the current standards such as irregular lots, curved streets, and changed lot numbers and sizes. He said that staff is requesting a uniform Development Plan that will apply to the Mountains at Bighorn. He listed the following standards: setbacks are 15 feet in the front, 10 feet in the rear, five feet on the sides, separation between buildings are 10 feet, height maximum is 20 feet, and lot coverage is 60 percent. Mr. Bagato stated that the Director of Community Development can give approval for modifications. He mentioned that Bighorn does a good review of the homes, and staff has been comfortable with their review process for many years. He said that staff recommends approval, and he offered to answer any questions. Chair DeLuna asked what the height requirement is in the City of Palm Desert outside of Bighorn. Mr. Bagato replied that it varies. In an R-1 zone, staff and the Architectural Review Commission can approve up to 18 feet, in R-2 up to 24 feet, and in a Planned Residential zone from 18 to 24 feet. Chair DeLuna inquired if any of the homes at the Mountains at Bighorn could be seen from Highway 74. Mr. Bagato responded that some of the lots that have been developed could be seen from Highway 74. He mentioned that staff is working with Bighorn on assessing the pad heights along with line of sight studies. Commissioner Greenwood asked if the height requirement is from finished floor or from grade. Mr. Bagato replied that it is from grade to the top of the roof. He noted that there are provisions for chimneys. Chair DeLuna inquired if it is possible to have a roof line at 20 feet, and a chimney at an additional three to four feet. Mr. Bagato replied that is correct. Chair DeLuna asked if the lots currently being considered with 24-foot chimneys are going to be visible or near a ridge line. 4 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 Mr. Bagato responded that they will not be on a ridge line. He said that they are pre-graded lots; however, he cannot say if they will be visible or not. He noted that staff will be looking at the pad height adjustments. ow Commissioner Stendell referred to the tract map, and asked if the map represents the development on the west side of Highway 74, which is called the Mountains. Mr. Bagato replied that is correct. He noted that the dashes on the map represent 11 different tract maps. Commissioner Stendell asked how many homes have been built and completed on the lots. Mr. Bagato responded that the shaded lots on the map are vacant. MR. ANDREW FOGG, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP, 2049 Century Park East 28th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90067, stated that the shaded lots on the map are vacant and yet to be developed. He said that he believes there are 25 lots that remain undeveloped. Chair DeLuna asked Mr. Fogg if he knew how many lots are on a hillside or on a mountain where they could potentially have view issue. MR. FOGG responded that he does not think any of the lots would present an issue. He said that from Highway 74 you might see the top of a ridge. There is berming and landscaping along Highway 74 that protects the view. He said that he does not think there is anything that would protrude into the sky or affect the ridgeline. He also said that there would be no glare impacts due to Bighorn's lighting standards. Chair DeLuna asked if there are any outcroppings that would be affected by the heights. MR. FOGG replied not that he is aware of. Mr. Bagato commented that everything has been pre-graded, and homes at the highest point are buried far into the hillside away from Highway 74. Chair DeLuna asked if story poles were put up. Mr. Bagato replied yes. He said they were putting up poles a few weeks ago because there will potentially be requests to modify the pad heights. He noted that some of the pads heights have changed. Chair DeLuna asked if the pads changed to lower or higher heights. Mr. Bagato responded that some pads are higher and some are lower. 5 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 Chair DeLuna asked how much higher the pads are. Mr. Bagato replied that he believes one pad was five feet, which was the highest. Chair DeLuna commented that she has to rely on staff's opinion that story poles were put up and there is nothing obscured, such as a ridge line or rock outcropping. She asked if that is correct. Mr. Bagato responded that Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, has been working on the visual study. Mr. Bagato stated that he did not see the visual study. He said per Mr. Swartz did not say anything was significant. He stated that is one reason why they want to bring back pad heights to a future Planning Commission meeting. Chair DeLuna asked if each pad will come back to the Planning Commission on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Bagato replied that all pad heights will be brought back to the Planning Commission to be addressed at one meeting. Chair DeLuna asked if staff is requesting approval for a uniform standard of 20 feet tonight, then coming back at a later date. Mr. Bagato said that for the Development Plan, staff is requesting 20 feet as the development standard. When staff comes back with the pad height adjustments, .. staff will identify specific lots that may be a concern, and then discuss them with the applicant. MR. FOGG commented that the understanding is the 20-foot height will be established, then they will come back to the Planning Commission. He said that Bighorn had every vacant lot at the Mountains at Bighorn surveyed for its existing typographical height pad elevation, which they submitted to the City. Mr. Fogg stated that City staff noted that there were some deviations from the original tract maps that were approved 20 years ago. He explained that rather than putting in the pad elevations in today as part of the Development Plan, the City will first examine and confirm that there are no height impacts, then submit the pad elevations to the Planning Commission for approval. Chair DeLuna commented that if they approve the uniformity of the height, and someone buys one of the lots that has been raised five feet and it happens to be one of the lots in the back, and they bring forward a 20-foot house with a 4-foot chimney; does the Planning Commission have the ability to revisit that individual lot. .r 6 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 Mr. Bagato replied that the Planning Commission will have the ability to revisit because the City would not allow them to move forward with construction drawings until the increased pad height has been approved by the Planning Commission. MR. FOGG added that the standards that would apply are those on the existing tract maps. He stated that the Planning Commission would have to use the historic pad elevations until the Commission acts on whatever the new standards are. He said that the idea is to clean everything up and clarify the standards so that there are no impacts. Mr. Fogg stated that once the City has taken a look at it, then the field surveyors will do the story poles on the appropriate lots that need to be considered, and then the Planning Commission will approve the new pad elevation, which will be the new established pad height for those lots. He stated that they will do all of their due diligence so that there are no impacts. Vice Chair Roger Dash commented that they have been focusing on the elevations. He inquired about the other aspects of the development of the property. Will the Planning Commission review the development? Mr. Bagato said that Bighorn has an architecture and landscape committee that does a more detailed review of the house itself; however, they still need to meet the City's standards. He noted that the pad heights vary from what they originally were. Staff will bring the heights back at a separate meeting to see how they would impact the views. He said that technically, if someone came in and met the Development Plan standards and the grade matches the original tract map approved 15 years ago, they can build based on this plan because the pad has not been changed. However, if there is a pad that is higher, they cannot start construction until the Planning Commission approves the pad height. Commissioner Stendell commented that what they are approving tonight are the architectural standards of height and setbacks. He asked if the Planning Commission is going to see on a case-by-case basis a request for pad height amendments based on anything that is greater than six inches from the original plan. Mr. Bagato responded that they are hoping to come back with a set of pad elevations. He said that staff does not necessarily want to bring back every house at separate meetings. Staff wants to address all the pad heights at one meeting. Commissioner Stendell asked if the new setbacks and new height limitations are going to be greater than or less restrictive than the original development plan was allowed to proceed with. Mr. Bagato replied that in the past the Planning Department used to allow the homeowners' association (HOA) approval letter to be sufficient. As an example, W.. homes that were supposed to be 18 feet tall were approved at 22 feet or homes that were supposed to have a 20-foot setback was approved with 15-foot 7 G:\Planning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.dom MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 setback. He said that the standard practice in the past was for the City to allow what the HOA approved. He said that has changed, and the City is trying to bring as many homes as possible into compliance. NNW Commissioner Stendell clarified that the applicant will be returning with a complete study and would develop new pad height limits for each of the vacant lots. Mr. Bagato replied that is correct. Commissioner Stendell asked if the applicant will attempt to mitigate any concern of a neighbor next door. Will a notice be sent out to alert the adjacent neighbors? Mr. Bagato responded that the City notifies the adjacent property owners. He said that staff will be bringing the pad heights back to the Planning Commission all at one time, and staff will work with the applicant on notifying the owners of those homes that will be impacted. Chair DeLuna commented that she is seeking to avoid the situation they once had with the two homeowners suing each other and dragging the City of Palm Desert into the lawsuit, which involved litigation and took staff time. She said that she is a little concerned that they are not seeing the typography; however, she was supportive as long as staff could assure her that they will review each of the remaining lots at a different meeting. ■r Mr. Bagato responded that the concern is understandable, and that staff will be looking at the higher pads. Commissioner Greenwood mentioned that he is familiar with Bighorn's architectural guidelines, and he feels that Bighorn does a very good job with their review in terms of what they allow within the development. He said his concern is the impact of an adjacent neighbor, and he hopes that the HOA will take any impact into consideration when reviewing a project. Mr. Bagato commented that the Development Plan will give Bighorn and City staff clear guidelines to follow now and in the future. Ms. Aylaian noted that a notice for the Development Plan public hearing tonight was distributed, published, and legally noticed to all the homeowners. She stated that staff did not receive any calls, complaints, questions, or support and/or opposition to the plan. Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing open and asked for any public testimony IN FAVOR or OPPOSITION. MR. FOGG thanked City staff, and said that it has been a pleasure working with staff. He commented that they extensively discussed the pad heights. He stated No that he wants to make sure the Planning Commission feels comfortable, and that 8 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 they will come back with all the pad heights in a group. He noted that a notice will also be sent out to notify owners of homes within 300 feet. Mr. Fogg also noted that there is no building by right within Bighorn. A person would need to go to through Bighorn's architectural review committee. He said that the idea is to preserve views within the community. He stated that the Development Plan will add clarity, create a process, and reduce chances of another lawsuit. He offered to answer any questions. With no testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Stendell commended Bighorn for having one of the best design review boards in the valley for a pristine piece of property. He believes that the applicant's intent is to alleviate any potential problems in the future, and commended the applicant for that, and added that he looks forward to what is presented in the future. Commissioner Stendell moved, by Minute Motion, to approve a new Development Plan creating uniform development standards for the Mountains at Bighorn. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Campbell and carried by a 5-0 vote. Commissioner Stendell moved, by Minute Motion, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2613. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Campbell and carried by a 5-0 vote. .. Chair DeLuna commended staff and the applicant for a pristine process that is clear and understandable and that works to a common goal of promoting uniformities so as to avoid any potential differences that might occur. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES None B. PARKS & RECREATION None XI. COMMENTS None 9 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15-13 min.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2013 XII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Greenwood, second by Commissioner Stendell, and a 5-0 vote of the Planning Commission, Chair DeLuna adjourned the meeting at 6:52 p.m. NANCY DE LUNA, CHAIR ATTEST: LAURI AYLAIAN, SECRtIABY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION err 10 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2013\Minutes\10-15.13 min.docx