HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-06-20 PC Regular Meeting Minutes CITY OF PALM DESERT
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
r MINUTES
- TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2017 — 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 6:12 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present: Absent:
Commissioner John Greenwood Commissioner Ron Gregory
Commissioner Lindsay Holt
Vice Chair Joseph Pradetto
Chair Nancy DeLuna
Staff Present:
Jill Tremblay, City Attorney
Eric Ceja, Principal Planner
Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner
Monica O'Reilly, Administrative Secretary
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair DeLuna led the Pledge of Allegiance.
IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION
Mr. Eric Ceja, Principal Planner, summarized pertinent June 8, 2017, City
Council actions.
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. MINUTES of the Planning Commission meeting of June 6, 2017. r.r
Rec: Approve as presented.
Upon a motion by Commissioner Greenwood, second by Commissioner Holt,
and a 4-0-1 vote of the Planning Commission, the Consent Calendar was approved as
corrected (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT:
Gregory).
VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER
None
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
None
IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to approve a Conditional Use Permit to
operate a kennel-free doggy daycare/overnight boarding and grooming facility
within an existing 2,769-square-foot office building located at 74-330 Now
Alessandro Drive. Case No. CUP 17-089 (The Village Pup, LLC, La Quinta,
California, Applicant).
Mr. Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner, recommended that this item be continued
to the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting of July 18. The reason for
the continuance is due to an error in the legal notice that was mailed out. Staff
proposed that the Chair open the public hearing in case there is someone in
attendance who would like to speak on this item, and cannot attend the meeting
of July 18.
Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony
FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter.
MR. ORRIN WEINSTEIN, Palm Desert, California, stated that he met a
gentleman outside in the parking lot that drove here from Los Angeles. He was
told that there was no public hearing so the gentleman left.
Chair DeLuna asked Mr. Weinstein if the gentleman was attending the meeting
for the item pertaining to the doggy daycare.
MR. WEINSTEIN replied that is correct.
err
2
GAPlanningWonica OReillyTIanning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
Chair DeLuna remarked that if the subject matter is continued, there will be a
public hearing on July 18.
WM
MR. WEINSTEIN clarified that the gentleman not being present tonight will not
eliminate him from speaking at the July 18 meeting.
Chair DeLuna replied that is correct.
With no further testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed.
Vice Chair Pradetto moved to, By Minute Motion, continue Case No. CUP 17-089
to July 18. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Greenwood and carried by a 4-0-1
vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT:
Gregory).
B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a recommendation to the City Council
for the construction of a 412-unit apartment project with a clubhouse,
recreational amenities, and roadway improvements; and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act for an
undeveloped 18-acre parcel located on the south side of Hovley Lane East,
east of Portola Avenue. Case No. DA/PP/EA 16-394 (Lee Newell, Walnut
Creek, California, Applicant).
Mr. Ceja recommended that the Planning Commission continue this item to a
low date uncertain. He said the Commission received many letters from surrounding
developments that are opposed to the proposed project. In addition, staff asked
that the applicant update their Mitigated Negative Declaration to reference the
adopted General Plan. The continuance of this item would allow the appropriate
amount of time for the applicant to update the documents. It would also allow
time for staff to review the environmental documents and send out a new notice
for the next public hearing.
Chair DeLuna understood that she could open the public hearing for public
comments. However, the Planning Commission will not discuss or respond to
any comments. She asked if that is correct.
Mr. Ceja replied that is correct. He noted that not only is the public able to
comment tonight, the public will have an opportunity to comment at the next
public hearing.
Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony
FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter.
MR. RICK MORAN, Canterra Apartments, Palm Springs, California, stated that
Canterra Apartments (Canterra) would be negatively impacted by the proposed
�... 412-unit apartment project. He said the project is over scale, overly dense, and
3
GAPIanning\Monica OReiIMPIanning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
overly tall. The project would take away the mountain views from most of their
tenants that are adjacent to the project. He said that the height of Canterra is 24
feet. He noted that the two-story units for this project have elements that go up to
34 feet and the three-story units go up to 39 feet. Mr. Moran stated that five of
the eight three-story units are along Canterra's property line, which would cut out
the mountain views. He expressed that people will lose their views and privacy;
the project will impact traffic and overcrowd the nearby elementary school.
MR. STEVEN SMITH, Palm Desert, California, stated that he is opposed to the
scale and size of the proposed project. He said that he had no idea this meeting
was taking place tonight until he found out through a neighbor. He also said
many property owners in Venezia are part-time residents and others are on
vacation. They did not know about this meeting. He suggested that this item be
delayed so other property owners have an opportunity to express their concerns.
MR. TRAVIS VAN LIGHTEN, Rutan & Tucker, LLP, on behalf of Canterra,
thanked the Planning Commission and staff for the consideration to continue the
proposed project and the content of a letter their office sent to the City of Palm
Desert. He looked forward to reviewing the revisions and the proposals from the
applicant. Mr. Van Lighten requested that they are given enough time to
adequately review any of the additional documents that might come forward. For
a project of this magnitude and with so many residents in an uproar, it deserves a
thorough vetting and review from both the Planning Commission and staff.
MS. PATTI MC NANCE, Palm Desert, California, communicated that she ` w
purchased her home in Venezia about five years ago with the intent of retiring in
Palm Desert. They have a beautiful view from the back of their property, which is
right against the proposed project. She voiced her concern that there is a zero
setback, and as a result, she would see a garage in her backyard. Additionally,
there is a huge pile of sand that would need to be moved. The dust will create
environmental issues, which would affect all of the residents in Venezia. She
knows there are mitigations in place, but they need to go above and beyond the
mitigations. Secondly, the density is an issue and she hoped that scaling the
project back is considered. She noted that there are three concessions; however,
she does see a concession for the zero lot line. It is a fourth concession, which
she does not see in the staff report.
MS. DIANE WOHL, Palm Desert, California, said that she would piggyback on
what others have said. She voiced that she and her neighbors are very upset in
which the proposed project has been handled and not communicated to the
residents. She felt that their trust for the city and the people that represent them
has not been honored. Increasing the density of the development would create
significant traffic problems and would adversely affect their health due to the
school traffic that is backed up twice a day. In addition, three-story buildings in a
residential area are not appropriate. She noted that there are no residential
communities in Palm Desert that have three-story buildings and they do not want
4
GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
to be the first community. It is not fair and residents in the area felt that they have
not been taken into consideration. Ms. Wohl commented that they moved into
�,. Venezia as retirees because of the peace, the quiet, the lack of traffic, and for
health reasons. They also object to the setback and parking variances being
proposed, which they did not know about until a few days before the meeting.
Last she quoted the words from the Code Compliance website page, ". .
ensures that all of the City's neighborhoods are consistent with community
standards. . . Recognizing the importance of protecting Palm Desert's wonderful
quality of life." She stated that she would like the city to do just that.
MR DAVID VIDULICH, Palm Desert, California, stated that the proposed project
was originally approved for 308 units, which that alone is a high-density project
that would create more traffic. He voiced that the applicant is changing the
project to three-story buildings and 412 units. He asked if there is an
Environmental Impact Report on the project.
Chair DeLuna responded that the Planning Commission is not responding to
questions, they are only receiving comments this evening.
MR. VIDULICH remarked that environmental studies should be looked into
because the project is too big for the parcel and for the people that live in the
area. He stated he was not notified of the public hearing. He found out about the
meeting through one of his neighbors and felt that was not right. He commented
that he is not worried so much with the view. He believed that when you
tow purchase a lot, you do not buy it as a view lot. Mr. Vidulich said fire codes could
possibly not be met with so much density and no setbacks. He stated there
should be more environmental studies done and residents need to be notified of
the public hearings.
MR. ORRIN WEINSTEIN, Palm Desert, California, stated that he is the vice
president for the Venezia homeowners' association (HOA). He had the
opportunity to meet the representative for the proposed project. During the
presentation to the HOA, he believed that some of the items the representative
discussed were glossed over, which are now being brought to light. He noted that
he and his wife drove in from Scottsdale, Arizona, to attend this meeting. He is
concerned that the project would hurt the value of his property. He has been
living in Venezia for 14 years, and his expectation for his property is that the
value increases. They will no longer have a quiet neighborhood and there will be
dust. He stated that the city is not going to pay a cleaning crew to clean each one
of their homes. He voiced that he wants the Planning Commission to think about
that since he has been paying taxes in Palm Desert for 14 years. All the
residents in their community pay taxes and they all should be heard. He hoped
they all come to an amicable decision on moving forward and thanked the
Planning Commission for their time.
5
GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
MS. DIANA ALTORFER, Palm Desert, California, stated that she is married to
the Venezia HOA chairman. Her husband was told earlier in the day that the
meeting was cancelled. She said she was on the phone for 30 minutes to let ..
people know the meeting was cancelled and the proposed project was off the
table. However, they found out that the project is not off the table. She expressed
that there were people prepared to talk, who may not be available for the next
meeting, are not present tonight to comment. She voiced that the communication
for this project has been bad. Residents in the area did not know of the increased
density and that it would allow variables. She said they moved to Palm Desert 14
years ago from Connecticut. They bought the house when there were no model
homes and bought the home with trust in the community. Ms. Altorfer mentioned
that her husband had seen the presentation, and he was planning to give the
presentation to the community. It had been a month since the chairman received
the presentation. They did not have time to introduce the project to the
community because they had a board meeting scheduled for June 21. She said
she blasted a newsletter to the community with the little information she had, and
thanked her friends at Canterra who were able to supply her with pictures and
information. She stated that Ms. McNance currently has a view of the mountains;
however, she will have a view of a 13-foot wall if the project is approved. Ms.
Altorfer voiced that these are the things that people need to know about. She
was very disappointed on how the process works in Palm Desert.
MS. TAMMY VILLARINNO, Corona Del Mar, California, communicated that she
manages Canterra. She stated that the proposed project will have a negative
impact on their residents. She assumed that the additional units (306 units to 412 ..ri
units) are because the applicant may have agreed to additional affordable
housing, which gives them a density bonus. She noted that Canterra has
moderate housing that will expire in 2019. She stated that the three-story
buildings will impact the views of Canterra residents on the west side. She said
they apply view premiums on units with those views and that those will be
eliminated by the project. She also said there will be dust and noise for the
residents during construction of the project.
With no further testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed.
Vice Chair Pradetto asked staff how the residents would be notified and
incorporated into the discussions.
Mr. Ceja explained that staff notified property owners who were within 300 feet of
the project. He stated that some owners were not notified because they were not
within the 300 feet of the project. He noted that he received a lot of emails from
property owners. As long as he has email addresses, he would be able to notify
residents of the next public hearing.
Vice Chair Pradetto addressed the audience and asked them to share the
information with their neighbors. WW
6
GAPlanningWonica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
Commissioner Greenwood moved to, By Minute Motion, continue Case No.
DA/PP/EA 16-394 to a date uncertain. Motion was seconded by Vice Chair Pradetto
and carried by a 4-0-1 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES:
None; ABSENT: Gregory).
Chair DeLuna thanked everyone in the audience for attending the meeting.
C. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a recommendation to the City Council
for approval of a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Chapters
25.02, 25.04, 25.10, 25.16, 25.22, and 25.28 of the City's Zoning Map for
consistency with the adopted General Plan. Case No. ZOA/CZ 17-105 (City of
Palm Desert, California, Applicant).
Mr. Ceja outlined the salient points in the staff report (staff report is available at
www.cityofpa l and ese rt.o rg).
Commissioner Greenwood interjected and asked what the density ratio for PR-22
is.
Mr. Ceja replied PR-22 is Planned Residential (PR), 22 dwelling units per acre.
Commissioner Greenwood inquired if the zone would always be followed by the
ratio throughout all the maps.
Mr. Ceja responded that there is some flexibility in the PR zones. Staff identified
the max densities for PR zones on the map. He continued with his presentation,
and noted that staff only updated six zoning sections. He stated that staff will
come back to the Planning Commission for other sections that need to be
updated. Staff felt that the six sections being considered are the most impacted
by the General Plan and recommends the Planning Commission recommend
approval to the City Council. He offered to answer any questions.
Vice Chair Pradetto mentioned that on page 04-3, Table 25.04-1: Zoning Districts
under Overlay Districts, still lists Mixed-Use Overlay and asked if it should be
removed.
Mr. Ceja replied that Mixed-Use Overly should be removed.
Commissioner Lindsay Holt understood that they would go through this process
again with additional chapters. For future chapter amendments, she asked if they
could receive a redline version of the text changes.
Mr. Ceja replied absolutely.
7
GAPlanningWonica OReill&lanning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
Commissioner Holt asked if an additional review of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) is not needed since staff is bringing the Zoning Ordinance
into compliance with the General Plan. ..I
Mr. Ceja responded that is correct. It was determined that changes to the Zoning
Ordinance and Zoning Map were made to be consistent with the General Plan.
The Environmental Impact Report was sufficiently reviewed as part of the
General Plan Update.
Vice Chair Pradetto referred to page 10-12, Item No. 13. He asked if the General
Plan has engineering requirements for private road construction, or is it
specifically outlined in the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Ceja responded that it is specifically outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. He
noted that it is an existing section of the Zoning Ordinance that was not changed.
Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony
FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter.
With no testimony offered, Chair DeLuna declared the public hearing closed.
Vice Chair Pradetto moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2700, recommending to the City Council approval for Case
No. ZOA/CZ 17-105. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Greenwood and carried
by a 4-0-1 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None;
ABSENT: Gregory).
X. MISCELLANEOUS
None
XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES
A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
Commissioner Holt reported that the Art in Public Places Commission (AIPP)
discussed the maintenance contract for the City's 60 plus pieces of art. It was
mentioned that the City Council approved to return the art fees to Venus de Fido
for the art piece they installed at their site. The AIPP added an artist to the City's
registry, and approved to accept proposals for the painting of two traffic boxes.
B. PARKS & RECREATION
None
ew
8
GAPlanningWonica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2017
XII. COMMENTS
Chair DeLuna thanked the Sheriff's Department for being responsive.
For the forthcoming 412-unit apartment project, Commissioner Greenwood asked
if they could get the agenda packet or the CEQA document earlier so the
Commission has time to review the documents and be prepared for the next
meeting.
Mr. Ceja replied yes.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
With the Planning Commission concurrence, Chair DeLuna adjourned the
meeting at 7:05 p.m.
NANCY DOWLUNA, CHAIR
ATTEST:
RYAN STENDELL, SECRETARY
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MONICA O'REILLY, RECO ING SECRETARY
9
G1PlanningWonica OReilly\Planning Commission\2017\Minutes\6-20-17.docx