Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-03-20 PC Regular Meeting Minutes CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2018 — 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Joseph Pradetto called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Lindsay Holt arrived at 6:03 p.m. Commissioner John Greenwood Commissioner Nancy DeLuna Vice Chairman Ron Gregory Chairman Joseph Pradetto Staff Present: Robert Hargreaves, City Attorney Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development Eric Ceja, Principal Planner Ron Moreno, Senior Engineer/City Surveyor Monica O'Reilly, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Joseph Pradetto led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION None V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of February 20, 2018. Rec: Approved as presented. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to approve a Parcel Map Waiver application to merge two parcels at 48-322 Northridge Trail (APN Nos. 652-350-007 and 650- 350-028). Case No. PMW 18-0001 (The Paolella Trust Langley B.C. Canada Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve Case No. PMW 18-0001. Upon a motion by Commissioner Greenwood, second by Vice Chairman Gregory, and a 4-0-1 vote of the Planning Commission, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: Holt). VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VIII. NEW BUSINESS None IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a recommendation to the City Council for the construction of a 396-unit apartment project with a clubhouse, recreational amenities, and roadway improvements; and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for an undeveloped 18-acre parcel located on the south side of Hovley Lane East and east of Portola Avenue. Case No. PP/CUP/EA 16-394 (New Cities Investment Partners, LLC., Walnut Creek, California, Applicant). Principal Planner Eric Ceja reviewed the staff report with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation (staff report is available at www.cityofpalmdesert.org). He noted there were several comments regarding school safety due to the proposed project being close to James Carter Elementary School ("Carter"). Staff was consulting with public safety officials regarding safety concerns raised around the school. It was mentioned that the placement of tall buildings next to the school does not present any additional security or safety concerns. He acknowledged that tall buildings currently exist near schools in the Coachella Valley, the State of California, and the country. In regard to the density bonus and the need for affordable housing, he noted that the California Department of Housing and Community Development and 2 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\201B\Minutes\3-20-1B.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 the Southern California Association of Governments provide an allocation of total housing needs for each city. For the current Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) cycle, the City of Palm Desert is required to build 98 low-income units. The proposed project would help meet the affordable housing requirement. Lastly, he stated as intended for the past 30 years, the apartment site still makes sense from a land use and planning perspective because of the close proximity to schools, transportation, businesses, and public services. The site also promotes walkability. Staff supported and recommended approval to the City Council. He made clear there would be another public hearing at the Council meeting. At the completion of his report, he mentioned the City Attorney had additional comments regarding the density bonus. In regard to the legal environment in which the Planning Commission considers the proposed project and due to the significant amount of affordable housing, City Attorney Robert Hargreaves stated there are protections under Federal and State law. The law has come up with a number of standards that constrain the City's ability to deny a project, such as the proposed project. He said the proposed project does comply with the underlining zoning of the General Plan. Furthermore, the legislature has made it much more difficult for cities to deny projects as the one being proposed and increases the liability for the City if such project is denied. He explained that if the City were to deny a project as such, the City would have to make specific findings. The only relevant finding that could be considered is a specific adverse impact upon the public health and safety, which there is no feasible method to mitigate that impact. He defined a specific adverse impact as a significant, quantifiable direct and unavoidable impact based on the objective identifiable written public health and safety standards. He also noted under the law, the City is prohibited from discriminating against people with lower incomes which could become a basis for having a court overturn any decision made by the City. With that said, he advised that during the discussions, they could discuss specific impacts such as school safety or traffic. The one topic that cannot be discussed is any negative references to people of lower-income status. Mr. Hargreaves offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Nancy DeLuna asked if the project is denied, what is the developer's recourse and what is the usual outcome. Mr. Hargreaves responded that whatever happens during the meeting, it is only a recommendation to the City Council. Before the Council could deny the project, the City Council would have to make specific findings. The developer would then have the option of addressing the impact or the developer could sue the City, which could be costly to the City of Palm Desert. Commissioner Lindsay Holt referred to the MND and asked if there were any impacts that could not be mitigated. Mr. Ceja replied no. 3 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 For impacts that could be mitigated, Commissioner Holt asked if those items would be taken care of by the developer. Mr. Ceja replied that is correct. In regard to traffic impacts, Commissioner Holt inquired if the impacts have been outlined in the traffic study. Mr. Ceja replied that is correct. Commissioner Holt clarified that any improvements necessary to infrastructure to sustain a Level of Service (LOS) C for all of the intersections within the vicinity of the project would be taken care of by the developer. Mr. Ceja replied that is correct. Chairman Pradetto declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. MR. LEE NEWELL, New Cities Investment Partners, LLC., Walnut Creek, California, stated he would reserve his comments until the end of the meeting. Commissioner Holt asked Mr. Newell if he has worked out his issues with Canterra Apartments ("Canterra"). MR. NEWELL replied he hoped so. Commissioner Holt commented that she would like to hear from Mr. Moran with Canterra Apartments. MR. RICHARD MORAN, Canterra, Palm Springs, California, stated he and his partner own Canterra. He said they were concerned with the three-story buildings adjacent to their property line because the buildings would block the view of the mountains for many of their residents. He stated Mr. Newell agreed to lower four of the three-story buildings adjacent to Canterra. He said they also agreed to the garages along their property line. He mentioned that he talked to Mr. Ceja about Canterra also building garages to mitigate the impact along the property line, which staff did not oppose. He stated nothing is ever perfect, but they are happy with the agreement that was worked out with Mr. Newell. Prior to taking comments from the public, Chair Pradetto asked the Planning Commission for ex parte comments, which means any conversations they had outside the Commission meetings that were not in the staff report or in staff's presentation. 4 GAPlanning\Monica OFeilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 Commissioner DeLuna commented that she had a meeting with the owner of Canterra and his attorney to discuss his concerns with the proposed project. The meeting was held at the Palm Desert City Hall with staff present at the meeting. Commissioner John Greenwood said he had the same meeting as Commissioner DeLuna but at a different time. The meeting was also held at City Hall with staff present. Chair Pradetto called for public testimony at this time. The following individuals spoke in OPPOSTION to the proposed construction of a 396-unit apartment project for various reasons that included the height of three- story buildings, the three-story buildings adjacent to two single-story subdivisions, the project is not proper at the site location, reduction of parking space standards, zero-lot-line setbacks and not having a buffer, loss of mountain views, loss of privacy, decrease of property value, increased traffic in the area, impacts to the elementary school, school safety due to three-story buildings overlooking the schoolyard, fire safety, environmental impacts associated to dust and wildlife, noise pollution, automobile pollution, concern with damages to adjacent homes due to construction, concern with the sand dunes and sand due to construction, the need for a landscape buffer, concern with the beer garden, lack of proper hearing notification, and the wall between Portola Country Club (PCC) and the proposed project should be at least eight feet tall. MS. NANCY THORP, Angels Camp Road, Palm Desert MS. JUNE ENGBLOM, Angels Camp Road, Palm Desert MS. ANNE HOENE, Zircon Circle, Palm Desert MR. SID TOLCHINSKY, Granite Place, Palm Desert MS. PATTY MC NAMARA, Angels Camp Road, Palm Desert MR. OSCAR MARTINEZ, Via Venezia, Palm Desert MR. ED KNOPF, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MS. DIANE WOHL, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MS. DONNA KNOPF, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MR. ORRIN WEINSTEIN, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MR. DAVID NEWMAN, Via Venezia, Palm Desert MR. RICHARD WOHL, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MR. JOE MARTINEZ, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MR. LOREN CAMPBELL, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MR. JAMES GUGINO, Via Garibaldi, Palm Desert, voiced his concern with the items mentioned above. Additionally, he is concerned with the low-income units and people climbing over the wall to steal. He stated that Robin Hood stole from the rich and not from the poor. Chairman Pradetto called a recess at 7:03 p.m. and he reconvened the meeting at 7:10 p.m. 5 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 MR. PAUL BAMBAUER, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MS. CARRIE SMITH, Via Treviso, Palm Desert MR. JOHN MODER, Mirage Cove Drive, Rancho Mirage MR. STEVE ZOET, Via Treviso, Palm Desert MS. LAUREEN SAWYER, Zircon Circle East, Palm Desert MS. PAULA SCHOFIELD, Via Garibaldi, Palm Desert MR. STEVE MILLER, Via Vittorio, Palm Desert MS. CHARLENE PETERSON, Zircon Circle East, Palm Desert MR. ED ZAKANYCH, Angels Camp Road, Palm Desert MS. LUCILLE WILLIAMSON, Angels Camp Road, Palm Desert MR. LEE SOLIDER, Via Venezia, Palm Desert MS. DIANA ALTORFER, Via Pellestrina, Palm Desert MR. ROBERT AULT, Via Aregio, Palm Desert MS. GERALDINE DAVIS, Angels Camp Road, Palm Desert The following individual spoke IN FAVOR of the proposed construction of a 396- unit apartment project. MR. JIM SCHMID, Daylily Circle, Palm Desert, stated that his daughter attends Carter and a younger son who he hopes will also attend the school. He voiced his disappointment with the sensationalizing of shootings. He said kids are going home from school and mentioning someone at school went up to them and were asked what will you do if there is a shooting. He stated the reality is the odds of a shooting are infinitesimally small and his children should not be thinking of shootings. He believed there is no risk to his children or any of the other children attending Carter from two- or three-story buildings on an adjoining property. As a community member, the proposed project is important for housing. He communicated that eventually, the community will have to face the reality that single-family homes are not going to be enough and housing density will be needed. He felt the City should work with the developer and the community to resolve some of the outstanding issues. Chairman Pradetto called a recess at 7:44 p.m. and he reconvened the meeting at 7:47 p.m. Chairman Pradetto thanked everyone for their comments and being respectful of one another. He believed they covered a lot of ground and they will have a lot of good discussions. He invited the developer to the podium to address the Planning Commission. MR. NEWELL stated he is sorry to disappoint Mr. Steve Miller, but they will be eliminating the beer garden. He explained they really did not know it was there because of the tiny grove of trees. Additionally, they will eliminate the sand volleyball court. He said there would be a 27-foot buffer with two rows of trees to be planted for PCC. There will be 105 feet between the back of PCC homes and the first two-story buildings. For Venezia, they removed the garages and they will 6 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 add an eight-foot buffer by planting a large hedge. He noted the hedge can grow up to 10 to 15 feet or more. He mentioned the project would accommodate 700 to 800 people; not 1 ,200 like someone commented. He also mentioned that the elevation would be close to the adjoining parcels when grading is finished. He addressed the comment regarding the rental amounts for the low-income units and noted rent would be $500 to $700. He stated the proposed project is the subject of a 29-year-old development agreement (DA). The DA is a contract between the City and the property owner. The property owner for Canterra and the property owner for the proposed project deeded 20 acres to the City of Palm Desert for the soccer park. It was a joint donation, which was done 29 years ago. He noted that the laws of the State of California and the City of Palm Desert both required density bonuses be granted for projects with a 20 percent affordable housing component, which is all they are requesting. He also noted the City's General Plan mentions up to 40 units of density per acre and three-story buildings. He has been responsive to the Canterra and the adjoining single-family subdivisions by eliminating 40 percent of the three-story units. Mr. Newell referred to traffic and noted Portola Avenue is a LOS C, Hovley Lane East in the morning is a LOS B and in the evening is a LOS A. With the proposed traffic signal on Hovley Lane East, the LOS will be A on Hovley Lane East in both the morning and evening. He communicated the LOS traffic study was done independently for the City. Commissioner Greenwood asked Mr. Newell if he would consider changing Building No. 10 to a three-story building and Building No. 11 to a two-story building to create a greater buffer between the communities. MR. NEWELL responded that originally Building No. 10 was a three-story building and had the building changed to two stories. With all the changes, the project changed from 412 units to 396 units. Commissioner Greenwood said he appreciated the considerations made with Canterra. He asked if Building Nos. 10 and 11 are changed, would there be an adverse effect on the agreement made with Canterra. MR. NEWELL replied that he would not have an issue changing Building No. 10 to a two-story building and Building 11 to a three-story building. However, Mr. Moran may want to comment on the proposed change to the buildings. MR. MORAN stated he would be opposed to the changes proposed by Commissioner Greenwood. Commissioner Greenwood asked Mr. Newell to explain the requirements that are put in place for property management. MR. NEWELL responded that they would use Alliance Property Management ("Alliance"), which is the same property management company that Mr. Moran uses. He said Alliance is a large property management company and very familiar 7 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 with affordable housing increments.. Alliance would do background checks (criminal and civil) and verify income. He noted the affordable housing tenants are not exempted from the same process. He also noted that leases will state that garages cannot be used for storage and they have the right to inspect garages under the terms of the lease. Chairman Pradetto said Mr. Newell noted that he does 80 percent market rate and 20 percent low income. He asked what would be the market rate for the proposed development. MR. NEWELL replied that the market rates would be similar to Canterra. He said market rates would probably be in the $1,200 to $1 ,600-$1,700 range. Chairman Pradetto inquired if he would charge an additional amount for garage space. MR. NEWELL replied yes. Chairman Pradetto asked if covered parking would be on a first-come, first-served basis or will there be assigned parking. MR. NEWELL replied that covered parking would be assigned. Chairman Pradetto asked for the depth of the landscape buffers to surrounding communities. MR. NEWELL answered the buffer would be eight feet on the side of Venezia and 27 feet on the side of PCC. Chairman Pradetto asked what type of trees would be used as a shrub. MR. NEWELL replied a ficus tree. Chairman Pradetto asked how tall ficus trees grow. MR. NEWELL said he has some ficus trees in his backyard and they are approximately 12 feet. Chairman Pradetto commented that he looked at the grading plans and it appears the grade would be at the same level as the nearby residents. He inquired if the City inspectors and/or engineers inspect and verify the pad height. Mr. Ceja replied yes. He mentioned that the grading plans indicate buildings being within a foot of the Venezia and PCC communities to the southwest, as well as, 18 inches from the school. He noted the City Council approves a grading plan, and the final grading has to be within a tolerance of six inches (6") of what is approved 8 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 on the grading plan. Once the grading p.lan is approved and finalized, grading is inspected by City inspectors. In regard to the sand, Chairman Pradetto asked if the developer would have to comply with Air Quality Management District (AQMD) dust control standards. Mr. Ceja replied yes. Commissioner DeLuna commented that across the street from the proposed project are the Marriott's Desert Springs Villas ("Villas"). She asked how tall are the Villas buildings and how tall from street level along Hovley Lane East. Mr. Ceja responded that the Villas are two stories and sit approximately eight to nine feet above the street. The height is an excess of 34 feet. Commissioner DeLuna clarified that there would be trees planted between PCC and the proposed project. Mr. Ceja replied yes. He pointed out two Conditions of Approval relating to the landscape buffer. In addition, carport structures are not allowed along Venezia. Chairman Pradetto asked Mr. Ceja if he meant no carport structures along PCC because he sees carports along Venezia. Mr. Ceja responded that the applicant has indicated carports along Venezia. However, City staff has recommended no carports along Venezia. Commissioner Holt asked if staff considered an eight-foot-high masonry wall opposed to a six-foot-high masonry wall along Venezia. Mr. Ceja replied no due to an existing wall. He said the wall may have to be removed to build a higher wall, which could be cost prohibitive. He stated the City's code is strict on wall heights, with six-foot high wall heights being the maximum. Chairman Pradetto asked where in the staff report does it state that staff is recommending not having carports along Venezia. Mr. Ceja responded that the condition is in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2699. Mr. Stendell interjected that the condition is on page 10 of the resolution, Condition No. 11 . Commissioner Greenwood clarified that all proper notifications have been adhered to starting from ARC to the Planning Commission. 9 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 Mr. Ceja replied that is correct. Commissioner Greenwood commented that it was mentioned at the previous meeting that Desert Sands Unified School District was notified. He understood there was not an issue. Mr. Ceja replied that is correct. Commissioner Greenwood asked if the proposed project is consistent with State laws and AB 2222. Mr. Ceja replied that is correct. Commissioner DeLuna inquired if the proposed project is in compliance with the City's Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. Mr. Ceja replied that is correct, with the exception of the parking requirement. Chairman Pradetto stated a concern was mentioned relating to electricity and water. He asked staff to explain how water is provided for this type of project. Mr. Ceja responded that when the City receives a development proposal, the proposal is transmitted for review by the different utilities, the school district, and other service providers in the area. He noted the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Southern California Gas Company, and Southern California Edison (SCE) responded that there is electricity, gas, and water to supply the proposed project. Chairman Pradetto said if CVWD were to determine that they do not have the water supply to service the proposed project, he asked if it is their determination and they would not issue a letter suggesting they could not adequately service the project. Mr. Ceja stated that the City received a "Will Provide Service" letter from CVWD that commits the district to providing water and sewer to the project. Chairman Pradetto inquired if staff considered a traffic circle. Mr. Ceja replied yes. Staff discussed a traffic circle with the City's Transportation Engineer. However, with the existing geometry of the street, a traffic circle was deemed infeasible. Chairman Pradetto asked Mr. Newell if the project would be affected if Building No. 4 was reduced to two stories. Mr. Newell replied that it would be a reduction of 12 units. 10 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 In terms of economics, Chairman Pradetto asked if the reduction of 12 units would make or break the proposed project. Mr. Newell replied no. Vice Chairman Ron Gregory commented he was going to ask the same question. He appreciated Mr. Newell's candor. He mentioned his concern when someone is driving eastbound on Hovley Lane East, and the buildings will loom and impact on the neighborhood. He said the other three-story buildings are tucked within in a way that it tiers upward. Unfortunately, they have a collision of expectations on the part of the neighbors which he could sympathize with. Additionally, the City has the General Plan and there are changes that come about and are unfortunate for people that live in the area. If they could all mitigate and compromise to some degree to minimize the impact, it would be very helpful. With no further testimony offered, Chairman Pradetto declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner DeLuna commented that the proposed project is a complicated and complex issue, with many opposing points of view. She believed on behalf of the developer, the developer has compromised and he does seem to be vested in the community. The developer has responded to requests such as eliminating the beer garden, reducing three of the three-story buildings, compromised with the owner of Canterra, compromised in terms of removing garages, and agreed to landscape buffers. She understood how change could be difficult after seeing nothing but unobstructed sand dunes and mountain views. She noted the project has always been planned at that location and given the density bonus laws the City has to deal with; no one is ever going to be completely happy. However, she felt there were good compromises that were reached. She said the Commission could further discuss reducing Building No. 4 to two stories, but she felt the developer has done a good amicable job of being sensitive and giving back where he could to accommodate the neighborhood. Commissioner Holt believed that the project comes down to aesthetics. She said in reality, the traffic study shows that the project would improve the traffic conditions in the area. She mentioned planning studies that she has read recommend locating schools near high-density residential developments. She could not find any studies in regard to safety issues relevant to high-density residential developments next to schools. She said there would be short-term construction activities, which would all be mitigated. She mentioned she would rather live next to a site that is developed than a site that has sand blowing and pest issues that comes from vacant desert land. She appreciated the setbacks and landscape buffer, which is a lot more than she has seen some other developers give. She noted she missed the last meeting and does not know about items that were negotiated. At the end of the day, she believed the project comes down to building height, aesthetics, and obstruction of viewsheds. She said the one issue with the proposed project was Building No. 4. All the other three-story buildings 11 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 have been internalized on the site so she does not see how those buildings could be an issue. She would not want to take away amenities from the residents that would live in the proposed project. She felt residents should have access to amenities regardless of their income. She made clear that no one on the Planning Commission is on the take and they do not get paid. They all volunteer their time and care about the City and the residents. She said she looked at the grading plan, and she agreed that the pad elevations are going to be similar to the adjacent properties. She also said the City is honest about the grading plan that has been presented to the Commission. Therefore, she does not have an issue with the elevations at the site. She communicated that the United States is going to add 100 million people by 2050 and they need places for people to live. People are going to locate where there are jobs and that means there will be higher-density developments. She stated she does not see any way around that, and from a planning perspective, it makes a lot of sense. She noted that the Villas and the proposed project are going to be the same height with the proposed project being three stories. She also noted she is sensitive to the viewshed issue and three-story buildings are difficult to stomach. Vice Chairman Gregory noted there is the line of sight drawings in the agenda packet. He said it is a shame that they are having a collision between what was and what the City wants to do and work with the problems that they have, such as an increase in population and people having to drive in from out of town to work. He stated he has been in Palm Desert for over 40 years. He remembered when two-story buildings were being proposed in large quantities, there was a lot of concern and rage about the loss of viewsheds. He requested staff to display the line of sight drawings. For the people that do not understand the line of sight diagrams, Vice Chairman Gregory stated the diagrams could be confusing. He explained that when the taller element is pulled further away from the point that the view is taken from (the back of homes), the three-story building does not really loom over the homes as many residents fear that it would. He believed the removal of the carport structures on the Venezia property line will be helpful. The suggestion of Ficus benjamina, which would grow much taller than 12 feet if not controlled, there is a tradeoff because it is a very dense shrub or tree material planted along the property line. He stated the Planning Commission will be making a recommendation to the City Council, and he felt that the Council would be able to make changes with respect to addressing the General Plan. The Commission could only make a recommendation based on what the Commission is given. He said there could have been workshops with the adjacent communities so the project would not be so frightening; however, that did not happen. Commissioner DeLuna moved for approval and asked Mr. Stendell if the Commission needs to discuss reducing Building No. 4 to two stories or make the recommendation to the City Council. 12 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 Chairman Pradetto interjected that he would like the Planning Commission to move forward with the motion and if the Commission wants to recommend changing Building No. 4 to two stories, it should be included in the motion. Commissioner DeLuna moved for approval with Building No. 4 becoming a two- story building and asked if that is how the motion should be structured. Staff replied yes. Chairman Pradetto commented that in terms of notification, he asked staff to put together a memorandum on how the notification of the CEQA document was advertised. He stated it was not advertised on the website and he felt it was a cop- out. He expressed to staff that it is a good public service to have everything on the website as a default. He also felt the Planning Commission has come a long way, with the first meeting being disastrous and could understand why the meeting was disastrous. They have had a few meetings so he is less sympathetic to the notification because the Commission has post phoned the meeting a month from the previous meeting, and there has been a lot of good public input. Therefore, he felt comfortable voting on the project after having heard the residents' input and called for the vote. Commissioner DeLuna moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2699, recommending to the City Council approval of Case No. PP/CUP/EA 16-394, subject to conditions; and subject to Building No. 4 changing from a three-story building to a two-story building. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Gregory and carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: None). X. MISCELLANEOUS None XI. COMMISSION MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Mr. Stendell reported that the Art in Public Places Commission considered the update to the El Paseo art exhibition. B. PARKS & RECREATION None XII. COMMENTS Commissioner DeLuna requested for an update on the progress of the San Pablo Avenue corridor project. 13 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2018 Mr. Stendell responded that at the last City Council meeting, the Council awarded the contract for the final design. Mr. Ceja added that staff anticipates a six-month window to prepare the construction drawings. Construction would begin in the fall or winter of 2018. Commissioner Greenwood asked how far do the plans extend. Do the plans go past San Gorgonio Way? Mr. Ceja replied that the plans are from Highway 111 to the College of Desert north entrance. He noted staff is still coordinating with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments for the CV Link connection. Commissioner DeLuna thanked the two officers with the Sheriff's Department who helped keep the peace. She felt their presence was a very calming influence. Vice Chair Gregory thanked Chairman Pradetto for leading the Planning Commission effectively through the meeting. XIII. ADJOURNMENT With the Planning Commission concurrence, Chairman Pradetto adjourned the meeting at 8:27 p.m. J SE H PRAbETTO, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: Y STENDELL, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MONICA O'REILLY, RECORDING SECRETARY 14 GAPlanning\Monica OReilly\Planning Commission\2018\Minutes\3-20-18.docx