Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-05-21 PC Regular Meeting Minutes CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • TUESDAY, MAY 21, 2019 — 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Ron Gregory called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Joseph Pradetto arrived at 6:04 Commissioner John Greenwood Commissioner Nancy DeLuna Vice-Chair Lindsay Holt Chair Ron Gregory Staff Present: Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development Eric Ceja, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner Monica O'Reilly, Management Specialist II III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Nancy DeLuna led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Director of Community Development Ryan Stendell summarized pertinent City Council actions. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 21, 2019 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of March 19, 2019. Rec: Approve as presented. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION approval of a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 36342 for the subdivision of 22+ acres into 196 units consisting of 84 cluster units, 64 attached units, 48 single-family homes, and a private recreation facility development located on the northwest corner of University Park Drive and College Drive. Case No. TTM 36342 (WSI Mojave Investments, LLC Irvine California Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve a one-year time extension for Case No. TTM 36342 until May 21, 2020. Item B was removed for separate consideration under Section VII — Consent Items Held Over — of the agenda. Please see that portion of the minutes for resulting discussion and action. Upon a motion by Commissioner DeLuna, second by Vice-Chair Holt, and a 3-0-1 vote of the Planning Commission (AYES: DeLuna, Gregory, and Holt; NOES: None; ABSENT: Pradetto; ABSTAINED: Greenwood), the balance of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented. VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION approval of a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 36342 for the subdivision of 22+ acres into 196 units consisting of 84 cluster units, 64 attached units, 48 single-family homes, and a private recreation facility development located on the northwest corner of University Park Drive and College Drive. Case No. TTM 36342 (WSI Mojave Investments, LLC Irvine California Applicant). MR. MIKE BYER, the representative for WSI Mojave Investments, LLC, Irvine, California, stated that they made changes to their project when the City updated the University Park Specific Plan. He communicated that the project has been on hold due to the market. However, majority of the infrastructure is constructed within the site. He noted that the entire infrastructure would need to be taken out of the ground if a new project were to be redone. He offered to answer any questions. Commissioner DeLuna commented that the City approved the project over eight years ago and there have been multiple time extensions. She also commented that she wants to make sure the project does not stall. She stated if the Planning Commission grants the time extension tonight, it would be the last. MR. BYER noted that they did not own the property for eight years. Commissioner DeLuna asked how long they have owned the property. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 21, 2019 MR. BYER replied that they owned the property since 2014. He commented that they are still waiting for the market to recover. He was hopeful they would see the project move forward very soon. Commissioner DeLuna asked if they anticipate this being their last time requesting a time extension. MR. BYER responded that he hoped so. Commissioner John Greenwood asked City staff if the project is consistent with the University Park Specific Plan. Mr. Stendell replied yes. He noted that the applicant made changes to the map to be consistent with the University Specific Plan. Vice-Chair Lindsay Holt asked if it is correct that the Subdivision Map Act only allows for so many time extensions. Principal Planner Eric Ceja replied that is correct. During the market downturn, the state granted a number of automatic extensions. Vice-Chair Holt understood the automatic extensions made by the state; however, the City cannot extend the map forever. Mr. Ceja said that staff could find out how many extensions are allowed in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and report back to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Greenwood commented that he is cognizant of being sensitive to how long the project could be extended. He said if the applicant comes back in a year for another time extension, the Commission would need to consider the request. However, he is not going to say he is not going to approve it if it came back again. Commissioner Greenwood move to, by Minute Motion, approve a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 36342 until May 21, 2020. Motion was seconded by Commissioner DeLuna and carried by a 5-0 vote. VIII. NEW BUSINESS None IX. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of March 5, 2019. Rec: Approve as presented. Upon a motion by Commissioner Greenwood, second by Commissioner DeLuna, and a 5-0 vote of the Planning Commission (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None), the minutes were approved as presented. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 2152019 X. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to approve a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate an indoor 4,800-square-foot kennel-free doggy daycare/overnight boarding and grooming facility within a portion of an existing industrial building located at 42- 620 Caroline Court, and adoption of a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Case No. CUP 19-0005 (The Village Pup La Quinta, California, Applicant). Associate Planner Kevin Swartz presented the staff report (staff report(s) are available at www.cityofpalmdesert.org). He noted that he received an email and two letters opposing the proposed project. He also noted that one of the letters mentioned the project is in a commercial area; however, the site is located in a Service Industrial zone. He mentioned that the applicant is proposing a sound wall abutting the church to mitigate noise. Mr. Swartz stated that he would have the applicant address how they currently handle pet waste since it was a concern in one of the letters. He referred to Condition of Approval No. 11 that states the applicant must submit a pet waste removal program to the Department of Community Development. Lastly, he displayed a photo of the La Quinta location and pointed out that the site is near a restaurant, a pottery store, and residential homes. The applicant has been in the La Quinta location for over six years, and they have not received any complaints from nearby businesses or residents. Staff recommended approval and offered to answer any questions. Commissioner DeLuna asked if the City received any correspondence from the church. Mr. Swartz replied no. Commissioner DeLuna referred to the floor plan and pointed to the area labeled as Boarding and Feeding. She asked is that the area where the dogs would go for the evening. Mr. Swartz deferred the question to the applicant. Commissioner Greenwood inquired if the sound wall is listed as a condition of approval. Mr. Swartz replied no. Commissioner Greenwood asked if the applicant is amenable to installing a sound wall. Mr. Swartz replied that is correct. Chair Gregory declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. MR. KHALED HABASH, La Quinta, California, stated that he has never received a noise complaint at his La Quinta location, and noted they share a common wall outside with a pottery business. He explained that they have a controlled environment for the dogs and highly trained staff to take care of the dogs. The problem with other facilities is they keep dogs caged up, or it is a free-for-all, which they do not allow at their facility. He mentioned he does not allow dogs that bark in his facility. As for pet waste removal, he explained they 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 21, 2019 use bags, rags, and clean on the spot. They place the waste in a poop bag designed to trap odors, then into a trash bag and into a covered waste bin. He asserted that the La Quinta facility has never had an outbreak of any sickness, which is almost unheard of in the industry. He stated that they have never had a complaint concerning odor. Mr. Habash said they would board the dogs indoors. Additionally, he spoke to the pastor of the church, and they have no concerns with the proposed facility. He mentioned that the sound barrier was his idea in case there is any noise, not necessarily from barking dogs. Commissioner DeLuna asked how often the trash bin in the parking lot is emptied. MR. HABASH responded that the trash is emptied once a week. He would not oppose having the trashed picked up twice a week if it made everyone happy. MR. ART MILLER, property owner and manager at 42-580 Caroline Court, Palm Desert, California, wrote a letter dated May 20 opposing this matter. He said many of his questions have been answered. However, he voiced his concern with the increased traffic in the business park. He pointed to the site of the business park to indicate how people are leaving The Village Pup would be driving in front of his building. He asked why the project is a non- kennel facility versus a kennel. He also asked if there are standards when a dog stays overnight. He expressed that he is opposing the project as presented, but would appreciate staff answering some of his questions. MR. MIKE ROVER, legal counsel for the Berger Foundation, Palm Desert, California, submitted a comprehensive letter opposing this matter. He commented that there would be outdoor dog activities, which would allow for additional noise outdoors. He noted that most of the properties in the area have a zero lot line. He appreciated the applicant addressing the removal of pet waste. However, the three buildings share a dumpster and recycle bin. He noted that the Berger Foundation owns several properties in the area. He also voiced his concern with an increase in traffic in the shared parking lot. He mentioned that the Berger Foundation owns and maintains the driveway that is u-shaped or c-shaped. Therefore, they are concerned with wear and tear of the driveway. He also mentioned that when families are attending morning or evening church services, there is a danger of vehicle and pedestrian/pet interaction in the parking lot. In conclusion, if the Planning Commission is inclined to grant the CUP, he believed the conditions of approval could be tightened up. MR. HABASH addressed the concern regarding increased traffic. He pointed out that for most businesses; traffic is a good thing because they get visibility. He stated their business is the best of the best and most of their clientele are from local country clubs. He explained that dropping off or picking up a dog is quick, and they do not require many parking spaces. He mentioned that people would use the path with less resistance. Therefore, he did not think his customers would drive all around the parking lot when there is an exit in front of their building. He cannot control which way people enter or exit the parking lot; however, he could make suggestions to his customers even though access is in front of their business. If sharing a trash bin is an issue, they do not have a problem ordering their own. He reiterated that the church was not opposed to their proposed business. Commissioner Greenwood asked the applicant if there is more traffic in the morning and afternoon, or consistent. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 21, 2019 MR. HABASH responded that there are a couple of cars arriving at the same time. He noted that most dogs are boarded for one, two, or three weeks and sometimes for a month at a time. He said it is never a constant amount of non-stop traffic. Chair Gregory commented that people would most likely exit the same way they enter the parking lot because it is quicker. Commissioner Greenwood asked if The Village Pup were to vacate the building, could another doggy business operate under the same CUP. Mr. Swartz responded that as long as the new applicant does not modify the CUP in any way, the applicant could operate under the same CUP. However, if the building were vacant for a year, the CUP would go dormant. Commissioner Pradetto asked what the investigation process is if more than, eight unrelated persons of normal sensitivity in the area report problems. Mr. Swartz replied that the Code Compliance Division would respond to a complaint. Mr. Stendell added that the investigation would begin with communication to see if staff could resolve a complaint(s). If not, the CUP would go back to the Planning Commission for review. Vice-Chair Holt stated that she has a concern in terms of language. She said the conditions were not for a commercial or industrial area. She asked if staff could reword "unrelated" and "residents." Mr. Swartz remarked that staff could change the wording. Chair Gregory asked why staff chose the number eight for unrelated persons. Mr. Stendell responded that staff used the number eight for other cases, and it was used uniquely for each scenario. Staff felt eight was a good number to use when considering the businesses in the vicinity. Chair Gregory clarified that the number is based on experience and prior applications. Mr. Stendell replied yes. With no further testimony offered, Chair Gregory declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Greenwood commented that this is the second application for The Village Pup. However, the first time around the applicant proposed to have the business in a residential area, which was not a good fit for the surrounding area. He felt the Service Industrial zone is a good fit for the business, and the conditions in place are adequate. He shared that he has had his own experience with The Village Pup in La Quinta. He has two dogs; one dog was allowed, and the other was not welcomed because she is a barker. The Village Pup is true to their word, have an incredible business, do an amazing job, and first class. He was in favor of the project. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 21, 2019 Vice-Chair Holt mentioned she visited The Village Pup in La Quinta for a second time and stayed for two hours. She did not experience any negative impacts, such as odors or barking. She also felt the business would work in the proposed location. Chair Gregory communicated that The Village Pup has a very controlled environment, it is a successful business being careful with the dogs, and the psychology works well. He asked the Commission for a motion unless there were other comments. Commissioner DeLuna moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2757, approving Case No. CUP 19-0005, subject to the conditions of approval. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Greenwood. Commissioner Joe Pradetto agreed that the site is a much better location and supported the motion. However, he would feel more comfortable supporting the motion with clarifications to Condition of Approval No. 8. He believed "eight unrelated persons" is too much for the location. He is more open to five, and three are too few. Additionally, change the word "residents" to something more reflective of the surrounding uses. He requested amending the motion with the changes mentioned above. Commissioner DeLuna asked Commissioner Pradetto if he wanted to change the number from eight unrelated persons to five. Commissioner Pradetto requested amending the motion to amend Condition of Approval No. 8, as follows: 1) change the word residents to occupants; 2) change eight unrelated persons to five unrelated persons; and 3) change within a year to a 12-month period. Commissioner DeLuna amended the motion to include Commissioner Pradetto's amendments stated above. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Greenwood and carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None). Commissioner Holt requested City staff circulate the conditions of approval to the business owners, so they know what the policy entails. Also, include a contact number for the Code Enforcement Division. Mr. Stendell said yes. XI. MISCELLANEOUS None XII. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Lindsay reported that GarageTown installed an art piece from the El Paseo Exhibition onto their site. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 21, 2019 B. PARKS & RECREATION None XIII. COMMENTS XIV. ADJOURNMENT With the Planning Commission concurrence, Chair Gregory adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m. R N GR G RY, CXqA ATTEST: RYAN STENDELL, SECRETARY MONICA O'REILLY, REC ING SECRETARY 8