HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd 1069 Res 04-44 Holt Architects - DA 97-2 Addendum 2, TPM 31563, & PP 04-05REQUEST:
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
Request for approval of Addendum #2 to the Wonder Palms Master
Plan to expand permitted uses in Planning Area 1 to include Planned
Industrial uses, a master plan for Planning Area 1, a tentative parcel
map fora 21.86 acre commercial/office/industrial project, a precise plan
for five (5) two story buildings totaling 166,000 square feet on 10.59
acres of the site and a height exception for mechanical equipment
screening purposes. The site master plan includes 236,450 square feet
of commercial/office/industrial, 14,750 square feet of restaurants
(including two drive-thrus), and a three story hotel with up to 104 rooms.
This project has been previously assessed for purposes of CEQA. The
project is generally at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Gerald
Ford Drive, more particularly described as APN 653-410-023 through
025, 653-690-015 through 019.
SUBMITTED BY: Jeff Winklepleck, Parks and Recreation Planning Manager
APPLICANT: Holt Architects
41-555 Cook Street Ste. 1-100
Palm Desert, CA 92211
CASE NOS: DA 97-2 addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
DATE: May 13, 2004
CONTENTS:
Recommendation
Discussion
Draft Ordinance No. 1069 and Draft Resolution No.04-44
Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 20, 2004
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2263 recommending approval
Planning Commission Minutes of April 20, 2004
Related Exhibits
Staff Report
Case Nos. DA 97-2 addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
Page 2
May 13, 2004
Recommendation:
That the City Council pass Ordinance No
to DA 97-2 Addendum #2
That the City Council adopt Resolution No
PP 04-05, subject to conditions.
Executive Summary:
. 1069 to second reading relating
04-44 approving TPM 31563 and
The applicant is proposing a master plan and a tentative parcel map for the 21.86
acre site located at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive
wrapping around the existing gas station. The master plan will include 236,450 square
feet of office/industrial, 14,750 square feet of restaurant (including two drive-thrus) and
a three story hotel with up to 104 rooms. The proposed precise plan is for five (5) two-
story buildings totaling 166,000 square feet on 10.59 acres of the site and a height
exception for mechanical screening purposes.
The site is identified as Planning Area #1 within the Wonder Palms Master Plan
(WPMP). To facilitate the project, the applicant seeks an amendment to the W PMP to
expand the permitted uses to include Planned Industrial uses. This will conform with the
Industrial/Business Park designation as identified in the City's updated general plan.
The Planning Commission considered this request attheir public hearing held on April
20, 2004 and recommended approval 3-0 with Commissioners Campbell and
Tschopp absent.
Discussion:
I. BACKGROUND:
A.
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Southern Pacific Railroad, Interstate 10
PR-5/vacant (Cal State campus)
PCD/vacant
PCD/ Arco and Hampton Inn
Staff Report
Case Nos. DA 97-2 addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
Page 3
May 13, 2004
B. General Plan Designation:
Industrial - Business park
C. Site Description:
The 21.86 acre site is generally located at the northeast corner of Cook Street
and Gerald Ford Drive. The project site wraps around the existing gas station
and has frontage on both streets, however the Cook Street overpass occupies
the majority of the Cook Street frontage. The site is vacant with minimal
vegetation and slopes from south to north.
D. Site history:
The subject property has had two precise plan approvals in the past. The most
recent proposal, which was approved by the Planning Commission in 2000,
included a sports complex with a hotel pad, two fast food pads and two office
pads for a total of 318,202 square feet. In 1996, the Planning Commission
approved a precise plan for a service station with convenience store and car
wash, a food court (six restaurants including drive-thru fast food), a vehicle
parking lot, RV storage, self storage facility and retail shops.
II. PROJECT:
A. Master Plan of Development and Precise Plan
The applicant has provided a proposed master plan for the 21.86 acre site
which includes 14,750 square feet of restaurant, a three-story hotel up to 104
rooms, and 236,450 square feet of industrial/business park uses: The
proposed uses require that the Wonder Palms Master Plan Planning Area 1 be
amended to include industrial uses as part of allowable uses. However, to help
ensure that the types of industrial uses that occupy the site are compatible with
the office uses and the overall image of the center, the applicant is proposing
to prohibit the following uses: mortuaries, preparation of foodstuffs (bottling,
baking, etc.), vehicle service and storage facilities and adult entertainment
establishments. The current underlying zone is PC-2 (district commercial) which
Staff Report
Case Nos. DA 97-2 addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
Page 4
May 13, 2004
permits offices and commercial uses. The proposed uses conform with the
Industrial/Business Park designation as identified in the City's updated general
plan.
The precise plan includes five(5) two story buildings totaling 166,000 square
feet on 10.59 acres located at the northwest portion of the property adjacent to
the freeway overpass and the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks.
The remaining industrial/business park, hotel and restaurant pads will be
processed by separate precise plans which will be reviewed by the
Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission.
B. Access and Circulation
There is one ingress/egress point off Cook Street which is will be shared with
the gas station. Three ingress/egress points are located along Gerald Ford
Drive which are located at the eastern limit, center and western limit of the
property. The eastern and western access are limited to right turn
ingress/egress only and the main central access is full ingress/egress.
A traffic study was previously completed for the 270 acre Wonder Palms
Master Plan which includes the subject property. Staff reviewed the previously
approved projects and the related traffic impact study completed by Endo
Engineering and determined that the proposed project's impact is less than
previously approved. Therefore, additional study is not required.
C. Architecture and Landscaping
The five buildings are designed in a contemporary style which utilizes standing
seam metal roofs, colored precast concrete and cantilevered metal shade
structures. Building colors are in the warm range and include tan, terra cotta and
brown with patina green and evergreen being used for the roof colors.
The subject site sits adjacent to the Cook Street overpass which, at its peak,
is approximately 35 feet above the proposed building pads. In addition, the
elevation of the site is substantially lower compared to properties to the south
on Cook Street. This created a challenge for the architect to adequately screen
Staff Report
Case Nos. DA 97-2 addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
Page 5
May 13, 2004
rooftop equipment. The proposed standing seam metal roof and louver system
will screen the equipment.
The maximum building heightforthis project is 39'-8"from finished grade (39'-
2" from finished floor) which exceeds the 30 foot maximum allowed for the zone.
In comparison, the previously approved sport complex project had a roof height
of 46 feet. Based on the extenuating circumstances including site elevation and
exposure from the adjacent freeway overpass, the request for the additional 9'-
8" in building height'to accommodate the roof and louvers to screen the
equipment is warranted. In fact, if the proposed buildings did not have the
unusual rooftop exposure, the project would meet the 30' height requirement.
The Architectural Review Commission granted the project preliminary
architectural approval on March 9, 2004. The commission was impressed with
how the architect addressed the screening issue and very impressed with the
project and the architecture. Ray Lopez and Associates submitted conceptual
landscape plans and is developing more detailed preliminary plans which will
then be submitted for approval by staff, the Landscape Review Committee and
the Architectural Review Commission.
D. Code Requirements in Chart Form
Project Required
Site size 10.59acres* 100 acres
Building area 166,000 s.f.
Building Height 39'-8" 30 feet
Building Coverage 19% 50%
Building setback from arterial 100'+ 32'
Off Street Parking 670 664
* Project is portion of 270 acre Wonder Palms Master Plan
III. ANALYSIS:
The project is identified as Planning Area 1 in the Wonder Palms Master Plan. The
proposed addendum will add industrial uses and conform with the recently approved
Industrial/Business Park general plan designation for the site.
Staff Report
Case Nos. DA 97-2 addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
Page 6
May 13, 2004
The project is parked at the general office/retail standard of 4 spaces/1000 square feet
of gross floor area which will allow full occupancy by general office uses. In addition,
by parking the site at this standard, it gives the developer the flexibility to include
medical offices equal in square footage to industrial uses as the net parking
requirement is met. For example, a 1000 square foot industrial use requires 2 parking
spaces while a 1000 square foot medical office use requires 6 spaces which results
in a net requirement of 4 spaces/1000 square feet of floor area.
The project requires approval of a 9'-8" height exception to allow the increase from the
30' permitted height to the proposed 39'-8" height. The extenuating circumstances
including site elevation and exposure from the adjacent freeway overpass, the request
for the additional 9'-8" in building height to accommodate the roof and louvers to
screen the equipment is warranted.
IV. CEQA REVIEW:
The Director of Community Development has determined that the proposed project
has been previously assessed for purposes of CEQA and no further study is
necessary.
The project is within the fee area established by the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed
Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan. It is also in the historical habitat of a number of other
plant and animal species being considered for listing as threatened or endangered.
To avoid their future listing, a Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) is
being prepared through CVAG which will provide long-term protection through the
creation of preserves.
A $600/acre fee will be imposed to mitigate the loss of Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat.
The project will also be subject to any additional mitigation requirements of the
MSHCP which may be in effect at the time of development.
V. Conclusion:
The project before City Council will create an architecturally attractive major entry
statement for persons entering the city via Cook Street. The master plan provides for
restaurant uses which will work well with the Cal State campus and adjacent freeway
access.
Staff Report
Case Nos. DA 97-2 addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
Page 7
May 13, 2004
The proposed land uses with the amendment to the development agreement are
compatible with the Industrial/Business Park designation as identified in the City's
updated General Plan.
Submitted by:
Jeff in epck
Parks and Recreation Planning Manager
Approval:
Ho er Croy
ACM for Dev
ent Services
Department Head:
Director of Community Development
Approval:
Carlos L. 0
City Manag 'r
(W pdocs\tm\sr\PP03-11.cc)
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-2 EXPANDING PERMITTED
USES TO INCLUDE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL USES IN PLANNING
AREA #1 OF THE WONDER PALMS MASTER PLAN
CASE NO. DA 97-2 ADDENDUM #2
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 13th day
of May, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by HOLT
ARCHITECTS for approval of the above described project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 2263 has recommended
approval of said development agreement; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution
No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project
has been previously assessed, no further review will be necessary; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the
following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of said request:
1. With the Amendment to . the Development Agreement, the proposed
industrial/business park uses are in accord with the objectives of the zoning
ordinance and the purpose of the district in which the site is located.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
City Council in this case.
2. That DA 97-2 Amendment #2, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is hereby
approved.
3. The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to
publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation,
ORDINANCE NO.
published and circulated in the city of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in
full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City
Council, held on this day of , 2004, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
Robert A. Spiegel , Mayor
ORDINANCE NO.
EXHIBIT "A"
3
ADDENDUM TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DA-97-2
(WONDER PALMS)
This Addendum ("Addendum") to Development Agreement DA-97-2 ("Development
Agreement") is made and entered into this day of , 2004, by and
between the City of Palm Desert, California, a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of California (the "City"), and
, ("Developer"), with reference to the following facts,
understandings and intentions of the parties:
RECITALS
A. On April 24, 1997, the City adopted Ordinance 838 approving Development
Agreement DA-97-2 (the "Development Agreement"), attached hereto as Exhibit "A", for a
development commonly known as "Wonder Palms". The Development Agreement was
recorded in the records of Riverside County, California, as instrument No. 179687 on May 22,
1997 and remains in full force and effect.
B. The Development Agreement provides certain assurances that the property
("Property") subject to the Development Agreement as described in Exhibit "B" of the
Development Agreement will be permitted to develop according to the Development Plan and
Existing Land Use Ordinances, as defined by the Development Agreement, for the term of that
Agreement.
C. The Development Plan provides for six enumerated Planning Areas and specific
development parameters for each Planning Area.
D. On day of , 2004, the City approved the Master
Plan for Planning Area 1 attached hereto as Exhibit "C" which provides for an
industrial/business park development which lies within Planning Area 1 of the Development
Plan.
E. Developer(s) owns all the property subject to the Master Plan, as more particularly
described in Exhibit `B" hereto ("Master Plan Property").
F. City and Developer desire to supercede the Development Agreement to expand
allowable uses in Planning Area 1 to include industrial uses with the following
exceptions:
1. Mortuaries
2. Automotive storage and repair
RMPUB\RWH\225373
1
3. Preparation of foodstuffs (bottling, baking, etc.)
4. Adult entertainment uses
and to continue in effect the assurances that Planning Area 1 will be permitted to develop
according to the Existing Land Use Ordinances pursuant to the terms of the Development
Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement
legislation, as defined in the Development Agreement, and in consideration of the mutual
covenants and promises of the parties therein contained, the parties agree that Development
Agreement DA-97-02 is hereby superceded, with respect to Planning Area 1 only, as follows:
SECTION 1. The property subject to this Addendum shall be Planning Area 1 only.
SECTION 2. The Master Plan shall be the "Development Plan", as defined and described in the
Development Agreement, for the Precise Plan Property. Development within the
Master Plan Property shall be in accordance with the Master Plan and, except as
otherwise provided in the Precise Plan, in accordance with Existing Land Use
Ordinances of the City as defined in the Development Agreement.
SECTION 5. Transfers and Assignments., Effect of Agreement on Title.
5.1 Rights and Interests Appurtenant . The rights and interests conveyed as
provided herein to Developer benefit and are appurtenant to the Property. Developer has the
right to sell, assign and transfer any and all of its rights and interests hereunder and to delegate
and assign any and all of its duties and obligations hereunder. Such rights and interests
hereunder may not be sold, transferred or assigned and such duties and obligations may not be
delegated or assigned except in compliance with the following conditions:
(i) Said rights and interests may be sold, transferred or assigned only
together with and as an incident of the sale, lease, transfer or assignment of the portions of the
Property to which they relate, including any transfer or assignment pursuant to any foreclosure of
a Mortgage or a deed in lieu of such foreclosure. Following any such sale, transfer or
assignment of any of the rights and interests of Developer under this Agreement, the exercise,
RMPUB\RWH\225373
2
use and enjoyment thereof shall continue to be subject to the terms of this Agreement to the same
extent as if the purchaser, transferee or assignee were Developer hereunder.
5.2 Covenants Run with Land .
(i) All of the provisions, agreements, rights, powers, standards, terms,
covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their
respective heirs, successors (by merger, consolidation, or otherwise) and assigns, devisees,
lessees, and all other persons acquiring any rights or interests in the Property, or any portion
thereof, whether by operation of laws or in any manner whatsoever, and shall inure to the benefit
of the parties and their respective heirs, successors (by merger, consolidation or otherwise) and
assigns;
(ii) All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as
equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable law;
(iii) Each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act on the Property
hereunder (A) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property, (B) runs
with such lands, and (C) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its
ownership of the Property or any portions thereof, and shall benefit each party and its lands
hereunder, and each such other person or entity succeeding to an interest in such lands.
SECTION 6. Notices. Any notice to either party shall be in writing and given by delivering the
same to such party in person or by sending the same by registered or certified
mail, return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, to the following addresses:
RMPUB\RWH\225373
If to City:
City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, California 92260
3
If to Developer:
1. Valley Center Development, LLC,
A Limited Liability Corporation
P.O. Box 1154
San Luis Obispo, CA. 93406,
City of Palm Desert, California, a
Municipal Corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the
State of California
2. Timothy DiTomaso and Deborah DiTomaso,
Trustees of the DiTomaso Living Trust
P.O. Box 27247
Anaheim, CA 92809
3. Desert Sports Group, LLC,
A Limited Liability Corporation
4730 S.W. Macadam Avenue, Ste 101
Portland, OR 97239
4. David Turner and Paula Turner
77-899 Wolf Road, Suite 102
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Either party may change its mailing address at any time by giving written notice of such change
to the other party in the manner provided herein. All notices under this Agreement shall be
deemed given, received, made or communicated on the date personal delivery is effected or, if
mailed, on the delivery date or attempted delivery date shown on the return receipt.
SECTION 7. Except to the extent of any inconsistency with this Addendum, all provisions of
the Development Agreement are incorporated herein by this reference and shall
remain in full force and effect.
RMPUB\RWH\225373
[SIGNATURES APPEAR ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Addendum as of the date and year
first -above written.
"DEVELOPERS": "CITY'
1. Valley Center Development, LLC,
A Limited Liability Corporation
P.O. Box 1154
San Luis Obispo, CA. 93406
Parcel 1, PMW 00-15,
Document #2000-475387, pp 1-25
City of Palm Desert, California, a Municipal
Corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the State of California
By By
Prinicipal Robert A. Spiegel, Mayor
2. Timothy DiTomaso and Deborah DiTomaso,
Trustees of the DiTomaso Living Trust
P.O. Box 27247
Anaheim, CA 92809
Parcels 2&3, PMW 00-15
By
Timothy DiTomaso
By
Deborah DiTomaso
3. Desert Sports Group, LLC,
A Limited Liability Corporation
4730 S.W. Macadam Avenue, Ste 101
Portland, OR 97239
Parcels 4,5,6 & 7, PMW 00-15
By
Principal
RMPUB\RWH\225373
5
4. David Turner and Paula Turner
77-899 Wolf Road, Suite 102
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Parcel 8, PMW 00-15
By
David Turner
By
Paula Turner
ATTEST:
Rachelle Klassen, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert
RMPUB\RWH\225373
l.A1.4111 V KAV lA ALL-Y U KYV NE Al-111N V W L t LbrIV1Lt 1V 1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
On before me,
personally appeared
❑ personally known to me - OR o proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person
whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized
capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or
the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the
instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature of Notary
My commission expires:
OPTIONAL
Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document:
Document Date:
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name:
Number of Pages:
❑ Individual
❑ Corporate Officer
Title(s):
o Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General
Top of thumb here
❑ Trustee
RMPUBIRWH1225373
Signer's Name:
❑ Individual
❑ Corporate Officer
Title(s):
❑ Partner— 0 Limited ❑ General
❑ Attorney -in -Fact
0
Top of thumb here
7
Guardian or Conservator
Other:
Signer is Representing:
RMPUB\RWH1225373
❑ Guardian or Conservator
❑ Other:
Signer is Representing:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MASTER PLAN
FOR PLANNING AREA 1, ATENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR
A 21.86 ACRE COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL
PROJECT, A PRECISE PLAN FOR FIVE (5) TWO STORY
BUILDINGS TOTALING 166,000 SQUARE FEET ON 10.59
ACRES OF THE SITE AND A HEIGHT EXCEPTION FOR
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING PURPOSES. THE
SITE MASTER PLAN INCLUDES 236,450 SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL USES, 14,750 SQUARE
FEET OF RESTAURANTS (INCLUDING 2 DRIVE-THRUS)AND
A THREE STORY HOTEL WITH UP TO 104 ROOMS. THE
PROJECT IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF COOK STREET AND GERALD FORD DRIVE,
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS APN 653-410-023
THROUGH 025, 653-690-015 THROUGH 019.
CASE NO. PP 04-05
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 13th day
of May, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by HOLT
ARCHITECTS for approval of the above described project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 2263 has recommended
approval of said precise plan; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution
No. 02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project
the project has been previously assessed and no further study is necessary; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the
following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of said request:
1. The proposed precise plan will comply with each of the applicable provisions
of this title, except for approved exceptions permitted through the development
agreement process.
2. The proposed location of the industrial/ office / restaurant / hotel uses and the
conditions underwhich it will be operated and maintained will not be detrimental
to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity.
RESOLUTION NO.
3. The proposed precise plan complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of
the City's General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
City Council in this case.
2. That the City Council does hereby approve Case No. PP 04-05, subject to the
attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City
Council, held on this day of , , by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
Robert A. Spiegel, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. PP 05-05
Department of Community Development:
1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the
department of community development/planning, as modified by the following
conditions:
2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one yearfrom the date
of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise, said approval shall
become null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions
and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and
state and federal statues now in force, or which hereafter may be in force.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this
approval, the applicant shall first obtain permit and/or clearance from the following
agencies:
Coachella Valley Water District
City Fire Marshal
Public Works Department
Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to
the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for
the use contemplated herewith.
5. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas.
Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and department of
community development and shall include provisions for recycling.
6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in section
25.58 of the zoning ordinance.
3
RESOLUTION NO.
7. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these
conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping forthe
life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be
recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run
with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include
a Tong -term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate
watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific
materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be
consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the
approved landscape plan.
8. The eastern slope of the Cook Street overpass adjacent to the site shall be considered
a street frontage and landscaping shall be required and installed as part of this project.
9. A detailed parking lot and field lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval,
subject to applicable lighting standards. Plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting
engineer.
10. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works
prior to architectural review commission submittal.
11. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building
permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringed -Toed Lizard, TUMF,
School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees.
12. That the approval of PP 04-05 and TPM 31563 shall not be effective until the related
Development Agreement (DA 97-2 addendum #2) is approved by the City Council.
Department of Public Works
1. The project shall be designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase in
developed vs. undeveloped condition for a 100 year storm. Any drainage facility
construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study
prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the
Department of Public Works prior to start of construction. Retention area shall be
accommodated by widening the mid -valley channel in accordance with the drainage
study for this project. Widened area of the channel shall be to the southwest and
offered for dedication to the City.
4
RESOLUTION NO.
2. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and
79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of any permits associated with this project.
3. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF).
Payment of said fees shall be at the time of building permit issuance.
4. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer,
shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public Works prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.
5. All public and private improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public
Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading
permits.
6. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the
issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works.
7. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance
with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall
be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval before
construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans are to
be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the
installation of required offsite improvements prior to permit issuance.
8. Landscape installation on the property frontages as well as on -site shall be drought
tolerant in nature and maintenance shall be performed by the propertyowner(s). This
shall include the slope of the Cook Street overpass.
9. Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 24.12, Fugitive
Dust Control and Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control.
Developer shall contact the Riverside County Flood Control District for informational
materials.
10. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading
plans/site improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of
Public Works for checking and approval priorto issuance of any permits. Preliminary
landscape plans shall be submitted concurrently with grading plans.
5
RESOLUTION NO.
11. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in
accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
12. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert
Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards and
the city's Circulation Network. Those improvements shall include, but not be limited to
the following:
► Installation of an 8' wide concrete sidewalk on Gerald Ford Drive.
► Installation of one-half width of a raised median island along the project
frontage. The project may provide a cash payment in -lieu of construction for
the required median island.
Rights -of -way and/or easements necessary for the installation of the above referenced
improvements shall be conveyed to the city prior to the issuance of any permits
associated with this project.
13. The project driveway located at the east property line shall be limited to right turn
ingress and egress only and shall be limited to a maximum of 40' in width or as
determined by the City Engineer. A reciprocal access agreement shall be executed
with property located to the east (and the Mobil Station), providing access to the traffic
signal approved with PP/CUP 01-21. Said agreement shall include provisions for
payment of a proportionate share of maintenance costs on the approved access route.
14. Traffic safety striping on Gerald Ford Drive shall be provided to the specifications of
the Director of Public Works. A traffic control plan must be submitted to, and approved
by, the Director of Public Works prior to the placement of any pavement markings.
15. Complete parcel map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of
Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits.
16. Existing catch basin on Gerald Ford Drive at the easterly property line shall be
relocated westerly to accommodate the proposed driveway and a drainage pipe shall
be installed to convey this waterto the Mid -Valley Storm Channel. City shall reimburse
developer for costs associated with the installation of the drainage pipe only.
6
RESOLUTION NO.
17. A 20' minimum drainage easement, or less as approved by the City Engineer, is
required along or near the east property line to accommodate drainage facility
described above. No walls or structures, including trash enclosures, shall be
constructed within this easement.
18. Developer shall provide a level, minimum 8' wide easement adjacent to the Cook
Street Overpass, or as approved by the City Engineer, to provide a future connection
to a bikepath along the Mid -Valley Storm Channel.
19. In accordance with City Council Resolution No. 01-5, dead-end parking aisles shall be
eliminated.
20. There shall be recorded on the map a reciprocal easement for; parking and access,
drainage, and use of trash enclosures.
Fire Department Conditions
1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced project, the
fire department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in
accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC and CBC or any recognized Fire
Protection Standards:
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all buildings per UFC article 87.
2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure must be
available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow of 3000
gpm for commercial buildings.
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4" x 21/2"
x 2 %" located not less than 25' nor more than 150' from any portion of a commercial
building measured via vehicular travelway.
5. Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the
water system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Install and complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with
a 3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The fire Marshal shall approve the
7
RESOLUTION NO.
locations of all post indicator valves and fire department connections. All valves and
connections shall not be less than 25' from the building within 50' of an approved
hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings.
7. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and Water -flow
switches shall be monitored and alarmed per UBC chapter 9.
8. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
9. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one 2A10BC_
extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75' from walking distance. A `1,<' type
fire extinguisher is required in all commercial kitchens.
10. Install a Hood/Duct automatic fire extinguisher system per NFPA 96 in all public and
private cooking operations except single-family residential usage.
11. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of
all portions of the exteriorwalls of the first story. The roadway shall not be less than 24'
of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is
required on both sides of the street the roadway must be 36' wide and 32' wide with
parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a
minimum 45' radius turn -around 55' in industrial developments.
12. A dead end singe access over 500' will require a secondary access, sprinklers or
other mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no circumstances
shall a dead end over 1300' be accepted.
13. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points
from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an adjoining development.
14. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city.
15. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be
submitted separately tot he Fire Marshal for approval prior to construction.
16. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, orwhen
building permits are not obtained within twelve months.
RESOLUTION NO.
9
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: April 20, 2004
CASE NO: DA 97-2 addendum #3, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
REQUEST: Approval of an addendum to the Wonder Palms Master Plan to expand
permitted uses in Planning Area 1 to include Planned Industrial uses, a
master plan for Planning Area 1, a tentative parcel map for a 21.86 acre
commercial/office/industrial project, a precise plan for five (5) two story
buildings totaling 166,000 square feet on 10.59 acres of the site and a
height exception for mechanical equipment screening purposes. The
site master plan includes 236,450 square feet of
commercial/office/industrial,14,750 square feet of restaurants (including
two drive-thrus), and a three story hotel with up to 104 rooms. This
project has been previously assessed for purposes of CEQA. The
project is generally at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Gerald
Ford Drive, more particularly described as APN 653-410-023 through
025, 653-690-015 through 019.
APPLICANT: Holt Architects
41-555 Cook Street Ste. 1-100
Palm Desert, CA 92211
I. BACKGROUND:
A. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North: Southern Pacific Railroad, Interstate 10
South: PR-5/vacant (Cal State campus)
East: PCD/vacant
West: PCD/ Arco and Hampton Inn
B. General Plan Designation:
Industrial - Business park
C. Site Description: —
The 21.86 acre site is generally located at the northeast corner of Cook Street
and Gerald Ford Drive. The project site wraps around the existing gas station
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. PP04-05, TPM 31563 and DA 97-2 addendum #3
APRIL 20, 2004
and has frontage on both streets, however the Cook Street overpass occupies
the majority of the Cook Street frontage. The site is vacant with minimal
vegetation and slopes from south to north.
D. Site history:
The subject property has had two precise plan approvals in the past. The most
recent proposal, which was approved by the Planning Commission in 2000,
included a sports complex with a hotel pad, two fast food pads and two office
pads for a total of 318,202 square feet. In 1996, the Planning Commission
approved a precise plan for a service station with convenience store and car
wash, a food court (six restaurants including drive-thru fast food), a vehicle
parking lot, RV storage, self storage facility and retail shops.
II. DISCUSSION:
A. Master Plan of Development and Precise Plan
The applicant has provided a proposed master plan for the 21.86 acre site
which includes 14,750 square feet of restaurant, a three-story hotel up to 104
rooms, and 236,450 square feet of industrial/business park uses. The
proposed uses require that the Wonder Palms Master Plan Planning Area 1 be
amended to include industrial uses as part of allowable uses. However, to help
ensure that the types of industrial uses that occupy the site are compatible with
the office uses and the overall image of the center, the applicant is proposing
to prohibit the following uses: mortuaries, preparation of foodstuffs (bottling,
baking, etc.), vehicle service and storage facilities and adult entertainment
establishments. The current underlying zone is PC-2 (district commercial) which
permits offices and commercial uses. The proposed uses conform with the
Industrial/Business Park designation as identified in the City's updated general
plan.
The precise plan includes five(5) two story buildings totaling 166,000 square
feet on 10.59 acres located at the northwest portion of the property adjacent to
the freeway overpass and the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks.
The remaining industrial/business park, hotel and restaurant pads will be
processed by separate precise plans which will be reviewed by the
Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission.
2
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. PP04-05, TPM 31563 and DA 97-2 addendum #3
APRIL 20, 2004
B. Access and Circulation
There is one ingress/egress point off Cook Street which is will be shared with
the gas station. Three ingress/egress points are located along Gerald Ford
Drive which are located at the eastern limit, center and western limit of the
property. The eastern and western access are limited to right turn
ingress/egress only and the main central access is full ingress/egress.
A traffic study was previously completed for the 270 acre Wonder Palms
Master Plan which includes the subject property. Staff reviewed the previously
approved projects and the related traffic impact study completed by Endo
Engineering and determined that the proposed project's impact is less than
previously approved. Therefore, additional study is not required.
C. Architecture and Landscaping
The five buildings are designed in a contemporary style which utilizes standing
seam metal roofs, colored precast concrete and cantilevered metal shade
structures. Building colors are in the warm range and include tan, terra cotta and
brown with patina green and evergreen being used for the roof colors.
The subject site sits adjacent to the Cook Street overpass which, at its peak,
is approximately 35 feet above the proposed building pads. In addition, the
elevation of the site is substantially lower compared to properties to the south
on Cook Street. This created a challenge for the architect to adequately screen
rooftop equipment. The proposed standing seam metal roof and louver system
will screen the equipment.
The maximum building heightforthis project is 39'-8" from finished grade (39'-
2" from finished floor) which exceeds the 30 foot maximum allowed for the zone.
In comparison, the previously approved sport complex project had a roof height
of 46 feet. Based on the extenuating circumstances including site elevation and
exposure from the adjacent freeway overpass, the request for the additional 9'-
8" in building height to accommodate the roof and louvers to screen the
equipment is warranted. In fact, if the proposed buildings did not have the
unusual rooftop exposure, the project would meet the 30' height requirement.
The Architectural Review Commission granted the project preliminary
architectural approval on March 9, 2004. The commission was impressed with
3
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. PP04-05, TPM 31563 and DA 97-2 addendum #3
APRIL 20, 2004
how the architect addressed the screening issue and very impressed with the
project and the architecture. Ray Lopez and Associates submitted conceptual
landscape plans and is working with staff on developing more detailed
preliminary plans which will then be submitted for approval.
D. Code Requirements in Chart Form
Project Required
•
Site size 10.59acres* 100 acres
Building area 166,000 s.f.
Building Height 39'-8" 30 feet
Building Coverage 19% 50%
Building setback from arterial 100'+ 32'
Off Street Parking 664 670
* Project is portion of 270 acre Wonder Palms Master Plan
III. ANALYSIS:
The project is identified as Planning Area 1 in the Wonder Palms Master Plan. The
proposed addendum will add industrial uses and conform with the recently approved
Industrial/Business Park general plan designation for the site.
The project is parked at the general office/retail standard of 4 spaces/1000 square feet
of gross floor area which will allow full occupancy by general office uses. In addition,
by parking the site at this standard, it gives the developer the flexibility to include
medical offices equal in square footage to industrial uses as the net parking
requirement is met. For example, a 1000 square foot industrial use requires 2 parking
spaces while a 1000 square foot medical office use requires 6 spaces which results
in a net requirement of 4 spaces/1000 square feet of floor area.
The project requires approval of a 9'-8" height exception to allow the increase from the
30' permitted height to the proposed 39'-8" height. The extenuating circumstances
including site elevation and exposure from the adjacent freeway overpass, the request
for the additional 9'-8" in building height to accommodate the roof and louvers to
screen the equipment is warranted.
4
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. PP04-05, TPM 31563 and DA 97-2 addendum #3
APRIL 20, 2004
IV. CEQA REVIEW:
The Director of Community Development has determined that the proposed project
has been previously assessed for purposes of CEQA and no further study is
necessary.
The project is within the fee area established by the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed
Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan. It is also in the historical habitat of a number of other
plant and animal species being considered for listing as threatened or endangered.
To avoid their future listing, a Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) is
being prepared through CVAG which will provide long-term protection through the
creation of preserves.
A $600/acre fee will be imposed to mitigate the loss of Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat.
The project will also be subject to any additional mitigation requirements of the
MSHCP which may be in effect at the time of development.
V. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommend approval of PP04-05, TPM 31563 and DA
97-2 addendum #3 to the City Council, subject to conditions.
VI. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Comments from city departments and other agencies
D. Plans and exhibits
Prepare • by. Reviewed,nd Approved by:
Jeff pleck -P--I✓lil Drell
Parks and ecreation Planning Manager Director of Community Development
5
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. PP04-05, TPM 31563 and DA 97-2 addendum #3
APRIL 20, 2004
Review and ' oncur:
Homer Croy
ACM for Develop► - ► Services
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.2263_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT 97-2 TO EXPAND PERMITTED USES IN PLANNING
AREA ONE TO INCLUDE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL USES, A
MASTER PLAN FOR PLANNING AREA 1, ATENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP FOR A 21.86 ACRE COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL
PROJECT, A PRECISE PLAN FOR FIVE (5) TWO STORY
BUILDINGS TOTALING 166,000 SQUARE FEET ON 10.59 ACRES
OF THE SITE AND A HEIGHT EXCEPTION FOR MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT SCREENING PURPOSES. THE SITE MASTER PLAN
INCLUDES 236,450 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/
OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL USES, 14,750 SQUARE FEET OF
RESTAURANTS (INCLUDING 2 DRIVE-THRUS) AND A THREE
STORY HOTEL WITH UP TO 104 ROOMS. THE PROJECT IS
GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
COOK STREET AND GERALD FORD DRIVE, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS APN 653-410-023 THROUGH
025, 653-690-015 THROUGH 019.
CASE NOS. DA 97-2 Addendum #2, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, Califomia, did on the
20th day of April, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by MOLT
ARCHITECTS, for approval of the above described project; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm
Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No.
02-60," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project was
previously assessed no further review will be necessary; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify recommending to City Council approval of
said request:
1. With the Addendum to the Development Agreement, the proposed addition of
industrial uses to Planning Area 1 are in accord with the objectives of the zoning
ordinance and the purpose of the district in which the site is located.
2. The proposed precise plan will comply with each of the applicable provisions of
this title, except for approved variance or adjustments; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2263
The proposed the project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
4. The proposed precise plan complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the
City's general plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That approval of Tentative Parcel Map 31563 and Precise Plan 04-05 is hereby
recommended to the City Council; subject to conditions attached.
3. That the approval of Addendum #2 of Development Agreement 97-2, attached
hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby recommended for approval to the City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 20th day of April, 2004, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: FINERTY, LOPEZ, JONATHAN
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: CAMPBELL, TSCHOPP
ABSTAIN: NONE
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL,Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2263
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NOS. PP 04-05 AND TPM 31563
Department of Community Development:
1 The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the
department of community development/planning, as modified by the following conditions:
2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date
of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise, said approval shall
become null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and
limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and
federal statues now in force, or which hereafter may be in force.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this
approval, the applicant shall first obtain permit and/or clearance from the following
agencies:
Coachella Valley Water District
City Fire Marshal
Public Works Department
Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the
department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use
contemplated herewith.
5. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas.
Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and department of
community development and shall include provisions for recycling.
6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in section
25.58 of the zoning ordinance.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2263
7. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these
conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the
life of the project, which agreement shall be .notarized and which agreement shall be
recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with
the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-
term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times,
fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be
planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the
Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape plan.
8. The eastern slope of the Cook Street overpass adjacent to the site shall be considered
a street frontage and landscaping shall be required and installed as part of this project.
9. A detailed parking lot and field lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval,
subject to applicable lighting standards. Plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting
engineer.
10. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works
prior to architectural review commission submittal.
11. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits
including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringed -Toed Lizard, TUMF, School
Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees.
12. That the approval of PP 04-05 and TPM 31563 shall not be effective until the related
Development Agreement (DA 97-2 addendum #3) is approved by the City Council.
Department of Public Works
1. The project shall be designed to retain storm waters associated with the increase in
developed vs. undeveloped condition for a 100 year storm. Any drainage facility
construction required for this project shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared
by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public
Works prior to start of construction. Retention area shall be accommodated by widening
the mid -valley channel in accordance with the drainage study for this project. Widened
area of the channel shall be to the southwest and offered for dedication to the City.
Signalrza ' cewith-CityofiPafrrrDesert-ResolutiorrNo 79-fi7 arrcf79-
55, shall be paid prior to issuance of any permits associated with this project.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2263
3. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF).
Payment of said fees shall be at the time of building permit issuance.
4. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall
be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance
of a grading permit.
5. All public and private improvements shall be inspected by the Department of Public
Works and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits.
6. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the
issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works.
7. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with
Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall be
submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval before construction
of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans are to be approved by
the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required
offsite improvements prior to permit issuance.
8. Landscape installation on the property frontages as well as on -site shall be drought
tolerant in nature and maintenance shall be performed by the property owner(s). This
shall include the slope of the Cook Street overpass.
9. Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 24.12, Fugitive Dust
Control and Section 24.20, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. Developer
shall contact the Riverside County Flood Control District for informational materials.
10. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading
plans/site improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of
Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. Preliminary
landscape plans shall be submitted concurrently with grading plans.
11. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in accordance
with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
12. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert
It n cipat ode, shall be -installed inaccordance with appiica
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2263
city's Circulation Network. Those improvements shall include, but not be limited to the
following:
► Installation of an 8' wide concrete sidewalk on Gerald Ford Drive.
► Installation of one-half width of a raised median island along the project frontage.
The project may provide a cash payment in -lieu of construction for the required
median island.
Rights -of -way and/or easements necessary for the installation of the above referenced
improvements shall be conveyed to the city prior to the issuance of any permits
associated with this project.
13. The project driveway located at the east property line shall be limited to right turn ingress
and egress only and shall be limited to a maximum of 40' in width or as determined by the
City Engineer. A reciprocal access agreement shall be executed with property located
to the east (and the Mobil Station), providing access to the traffic signal approved with
PP/CUP 01-21. Said agreement shall include provisions for payment of a proportionate
share of maintenance costs on the approved access route.
14. Traffic safety striping on Gerald Ford Drive shall be provided to the specifications of the
Director of Public Works. A traffic control plan must be submitted to, and approved by,
the Director of Public Works prior to the placement of any pavement markings.
15. Complete parcel map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of
Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits.
16. Existing catch basin on Gerald Ford Drive at the easterly property line shall be relocated
westerly to accommodate the proposed driveway and a drainage pipe shall be installed
to convey this water to the Mid -Valley Storm Channel. City shall reimburse developer for
costs associated with the installation of the drainage pipe only.
17. A 20' minimum drainage easement, or less as approved by the City Engineer, is required
along or near the east property line to accommodate drainage facility described above.
No walls or structures, including trash enclosures, shall be constructed within this
easement.
6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2263
18. Developer shall provide a level, minimum 8' wide easement adjacent to the Cook Street
Overpass, or as approved by the City Engineer, to provide a future connection to a
bikepath along the Mid -Valley Storm Channel.
19. In accordance with City Council Resolution No. 01-5, dead-end parking aisles shall be
eliminated.
20. There shall be recorded on the map a reciprocal easement for; parking and access,
drainage, and use of trash enclosures.
Fire Department Conditions
1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced project, the fire
department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in
accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, CFC and CBC or any recognized Fire
Protection Standards:
The Fire Department is required to seta minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction
of all buildings per UFC article 87.
2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure must be available
before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm flow of 3000
gpm for commercial buildings.
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4" x 2'/2" x
2 1/2" located not Tess than 25' nor more than 150' from any portion of a commercial
building measured via vehicular travelway.
5. Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that the water
system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Install and complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with a
3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The fire Marshal shall approve the locations
of all post indicator valves and fire department connections. All valves and connections
shall not be Tess than 25' from the building within 50' of an approved hydrant. Exempted
are one and two family dwellings.
7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.2263
7. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and Water -flow
switches shall be monitored and alarmed per UBC chapter 9.
8. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
9. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one 2A10BC
extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75' from walking distance. A 'K' type fire
extinguisher is required in all commercial kitchens.
10. Install a Hood/Duct automatic fire extinguisher system per NFPA 96 in all public and
private cooking operations except single-family residential usage.
11. All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150'of all
portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall not be less than 24' of
unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is required on
both sides of the street the roadway must be 36' wide and 32' wide with parking on one
side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be providedwith a minimum 45' radius turn-
around 55' in industrial developments.
12. A dead end singe access over 500' will require a secondary access, sprinklers or other
mitigative measures approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no circumstances shall a dead
end over 1300' be accepted.
13. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points from
a main roadway or an emergency gate from an adjoining development.
14. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city.
15. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be
submitted separately tot he Fire Marshal for approval prior to construction.
16. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when
building permits are not obtained within twelve months.
8
D. Case Nos. DA 97-2Addendurn #3, TPM 31563 and PP 04-05 - HOLT
ARCHITECTS, Applicant
Request for approval of an addendum to the
Wonder Palms Master Plan to expand permitted
uses in Planning Area 1 to include planned
industrial uses, a master plan for Planning Area
1, a tentative parcel map for a 21.86-acre
commercial/ office/industrial project, a precise
plan for five (5) two-story buildings totaling
166,000 square feet on 10.59 acres of the site
and a height exception for mechanical
equipment screening purposes. The site master
plan includes 236,450 square feet of
commercial/office/ industrial, 14,750 square feet
of restaurants (including two drive-thrus), and a
three story hotel with up to 104 rooms. This
project has been previously assessed for
purposes of CEQA. The project is generally at
the northeast corner of Cook Street and Gerald
Ford Drive, more particularly described as APN
653-410-023 through 025, 653-690-015 through
019.
Mr. Winklepleck began by describing the change of zone request.
Commissioner Finerty said that they read all the uses that would not be
allowed under the industrial use and asked for clarification on what would be
allowed. Mr. Winklepleck said he would let the applicant describe it in more
detail, but typically they were looking at clean industrial uses including tile
sales, cabinet sales, and things like that, but no automotive repair, no
bakeries or other cooking uses. The addendum to the development
agreement would include the industrial uses and he would allow the applicant
to describe those in more detail.
Mr. Winklepleck continued describing the project.
Chairperson Jonathan noted that Mr. Holt put up the rendering and he asked
if that was the only precise plan before the commission. Mr. Winklepleck
said that was correct. Chairperson Jonathan asked for clarification that it
corresponded with Parcels 1-6. Mr. Winklepleck concurred.
Regarding the history of the site, Mr. Winklepleck indicated that the site has
seen a couple of different approvals. The most recent was the sports
complex in 2000 which included a sports complex approximately 200,000
square feet and that included ancillary uses, as well as a hotel, some fast
food and office pads for a total of 318,202 square feet. In 1996 a plan was
approved for a service station (which was subsequently built and the
remainder was not), a food court, vehicle parking lot/RV storage, self
storage and some retail shops. So there has been quite a bit of activity on
this particular site.
As far as access and circulation, he said there is one ingress/egress point
off Cook Street which is shared with the gas station. There are three
ingress/egress points off of Gerald Ford. The western most and eastern
most will be right -turn in and right -turn out. The main central access will be full
access for ingress and egress. He said there was a traffic study done with
the Wonder Palms Master Plan and staff reviewed the previously approved
projects and the related project impacts this project would create and
determined that the previous study done by Endo Engineering was sufficient
which dealt with the sports arena. Staff determined that the impact of this
project was less, therefore, additional studies would not be required. He also
described the architecture and colors in detail and had a material sample
board on display.
He thought an interesting challenge for this site was the location as it sits
adjacent to the Cook Street overpass, approximately 32 to 35 feet above the
pad level of the proposed buildings. In addition, when traveling north on
Cook Street, there was a potential for someone to see quite a bit of the roof
top equipment similar to the University buildings. The challenge for the
architect was to come up with architecture that fit the site and hid the
equipment. He said the proposed maximum building height is 39.8 feet from
finished grade. This exceeded the 30-foot maximum allowed for the zone.
For comparison purposes, he stated that the previously approved sports
complex had a roof height of 46 feet, so they have granted exceptions in the
past because of the location and uses. The additional height was to
accommodate the louvers in the roof to screen the equipment. If this building
was located in another location that didn't have the potential to have all of its
rooftop equipment seen, it would actually meet the height requirement. So
the additional nine feet was only to screen the rooftop equipment.
The project was before ARC on March 9 and they were impressed with the
architect's approach to the screening of the rooftop equipment and were
also impressed with the architecture of the building. They granted preliminary
approval to the project. The landscaping was being developed and would be
submitted for approval at a future date. There were some conceptual plans
that were submitted, but they are working with city staff to better define the
plant materials.
Regarding code requirements, Section D, the applicant pointed out to him
that under Offstreet Parking those numbers should be reversed. There are
actually 670 spaces provided by the project and 664 are required by the
project. The project is identified as Plan Area 1 in the Wonder Palms Master
Plan. The proposed addendum would add industrial uses which will
essentially conform to the approved business park general plan designation
for the site. The project is parked at the general office/retail standard of four
spaces/1,000 square feet of gross floor area and will allow, if they need to,
full occupancy by offices. In addition, this allows the developer flexibility to
mix and match with the industrial uses. For example, if they were to provide
1,000 feet of industrial with a standard of 2/1,000 and then come in with
1,000 square feet of medical which is parked at 6/1,000, the essential net
would still be 4/1,000. So it did allow them some flexibility.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if the trade off would be for the entire 22-acre
site or if they were just talking about these five. Mr. Winklepleck said in this
case they were only talking about this precise plan. Chairperson Jonathan
said it looked like the design is exclusively suited for office. He didn't really
see roll up doors or storage yards in the design before them. He wasn't
seeing industrial use here. Mr. Winklepleck said that would be best
answered by the applicant. He thought the height exception allowing the
additional nine feet eight inches was warranted because of the extenuating
circumstances. He noted that the project was deemed previously assessed
for CEQA purposes and recommended approval.
Mr. Drell added that the reason why it was previously assessed is that the
previous project which approved the ice rink was a far more intensive project
than this one, therefore, the analysis which was appropriate for that one also
applied to this one.
Chairperson Jonathan opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to
address the commission.
MR. TIM HOLT, a Principal of Holt Architects, stated that they are the
applicant for their client, Jerry Williams of JW Design and
Construction out of San Luis Obispo. He stated that it has been their
objective to create a project here that is not only an appropriate
complement to the future of the educational complex which will
comprise the Cal State Campus, but to also create a project that will
represent the city well at the main entry point into the city from
Interstate 10. The perspective that is available to view this project is
rather extraordinary, particularly from the north at the interstate point,
the access points, the east bound entry drive east to the interstate
gives an excellent perspective to the north side of this project. He
said the elevations they had studied suggested that the vantage point
of the vehicle at the top of the overpass is approximately 34 or 35 feet
above these pad elevations which he thought drives the point that he
thought Jeff had done an admirable job of explaining the challenge
architecturally. He said they do have some unfortunate examples
about 500-600 feet up the hill to the campus site where there is a lot
of exposed mechanical equipment. This architectural solution was
intended to conceal through an architectural treatment the rooftop
mechanical equipment which are inherent to a project of this kind.
Being a multi -tenant type of facility, there is a need for a series of
mechanical units on top of the roof because they needed to zone this
building at both levels for any number of sized potential inhabitants or
tenants. So those units would be conventionally spread on the roof.
Without this element they are talking about, there will be a direct
visual access from the top of the bridge for any vehicle that is
approaching southbound to look right down onto the roof and thereby
view the mechanical equipment. So a screen device was necessary
to conceal view of the undesirable rooftop equipment.
He said they worked closely with the civil engineer to place the pad
elevations of these five structures at variable points. It is not a dead
level type of site, but there is some variations to pad elevations and
that would lend to some architectural variety as well with regard to
roof heights and be particularly apparent at the ground level. In
addition to that, each of the five buildings complement the others.
They hoped they are a good complement to the campus in the future,
but the colors are meant to vary.
Two of the roof shapes vary to some degree in color and in profile in
terms of the green complementary colors. The other earthtones also
varied around the building so there weren't two exactly the same, but
were meant to complement. He hoped they did that well.
Regarding uses and permissible uses, their intent and desire is to
have as many professional office users as they can, but the reality
might suggest that some research and development type firms might
be highly interested in a location like this adjacent to the interstate.
From that standpoint they have allowed in the design the
implementation of roll up doors on the north side elevations of
Buildings 2 and 3. Those would be the ones that face the railroad
tracks directly to the north and users that might be large area users
that might have need for two-story space and perhaps loading and
unloading capabilities would be able to do that as an alternative use.
He believed the market place would be the prime determinate in how
much of that is necessary; however, they have not requested it to face
either Cook Street or Gerald Ford. All of that would be the
conventional office type building design they were looking at. He
thought there was an observation earlier about large open areas for
trucks or service vehicles. He said they purposely did not include that
function here. They intent for R&D and clean industrial which would
not require exterior service or yard areas to accommodate outside
storage, servicing of any types of vehicles or particularly large truck
movement. Even though the site is not restrictive in its circulation
pattern, they do not see undesirable or unsightly storage as being
appropriate to that area.
If they had their choice and if folks respond to this location like they
expect, they are hoping it will end up with the majority being
professional offices and general offices. He asked for any questions.
Commissioner Finerty asked if he knew what type of fast food restaurant
would be proposed.
Mr. Holt said this particular site in the precise plan they were looking
at right now did not include that portion of the site where the fast foods
are.
Mr. Winklepleck noted that at the first Planning Commission meeting in May
staff would be coming back with a food court and approval for the drive-thru
so there might be additional information then.
Mr. Holt indicated it is part of a separate submittal.
Commissioner Lopez applauded Mr. Holt on the way the rooftop equipment
was hidden. Regarding the materials, he said they look very nice because
the colors are sharp, but when going over the overpass looking down on it he
wondered over time how the materials would last with the look of them and
the fading with the heat. He asked for additional information on that.
Mr. Holt stated that the specified material on the roof areas is a
standing seam metal with a 20-year warranted finish, which is about
the best they can specify in today's world. He said they have had
these roofs on various buildings throughout the desert. He hasn't seen
any fading really evident during the first ten years of life. It seemed to
occur somewhere after the 11th or 12th and it was very very gradual.
He didn't know what they could do to guarantee this won't occur 20
years down the road because to some extent it will.
Commissioner Finerty asked if perhaps the lighter green rooftops would be
less likely to fade then the brighter evergreen.
Mr. Holt said the same warrantee and data is inherent to both of these
colors. It's possible and probably from the practical standpoint, and
only time would tell, which one of them would tend to be sun effective.
Commissioner Finerty asked if Mr. Holt had the evergreen on roofs and
buildings in the desert.
Mr. Holt said no.
Commissioner Finerty said that would be her only concern on that one
having a tendency to fade.
Mr. Holt said he understood.
Chairperson Jonathan stated that there is a pretty good amount of frontage
on Cook Street between Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. He wasn't sure how many
feet that translated into, but that was a pretty long distance and it appeared
from the rendering, and he had to compliment him on the architecture, he
adored it and thought it was wonderful. It is very interesting and refreshing
and he liked it very much. His question was along Cook Street from the
aerial type of rendering it appeared, perhaps because the landscaping was
not there, as if sitting at the top of the intersection looking towards the
mountains about to drive down Cook Street, it looked like there is covered
parking all along Cook Street. They didn't have the landscaping there and
that is the entrance to the city and what people will be looking at on a first
blush coming off the freeway heading down Cook Street south looking to
their left, they are potentially looking at very little landscaping and just a
bunch of structures very close to the street and curb. He asked if he was
reading that right or if there was more setback. He said there is a landscape
plan, but it still looked very thin.
Mr. Holt stated that he was entirely correct in the way it appeared on
the rendering. One of the conditions of approval required that the east
facing slope be landscaped with this project, so their landscape
architect was working with staff on that solution, much the same as the
west facing side of Cook Street on the other side was conditioned to
be landscaped. Their landscape plan would also include some
additional planting along that property line area to help to conceal that
area. He believed on the other hand that they would look pretty much
over the top of about 85% of these covered parking areas.
Mr. Drell concurred. He said they would have to be right up at the edge
staring down a slope to see those. Hopefully auto drivers will be looking
straight ahead and not staring down a slope.
Chairperson Jonathan clarified that he was talking about when someone
was coming off the freeway heading down Cook Street, for all the frontage
along Cook Street he only saw a very thin area for landscaping. Mr. Drell
clarified that it was a huge area. All that area is a slope and it would be
landscaped. The off ramp is at the top of the slope, 50 or 100 feet away.
Chairperson Jonathan explained that it was the slope from the height of the
interchange coming down, so it sloped toward the east. Mr. Drell said it was
steep; probably a 3 to 1 slope. Mr. Winklepleck informed commission that
the minimum would be about 65 feet at the south end and then it almost
doubled. Mr. Drell concurred that it was over 100 feet corning off the off
ramp.
On an application that the commission approved on the other side of Cook
Street, Chairperson Jonathan noted that their conclusion was to create some
trees in that down slope to soften and mitigate the view. Trees that would
grow up pretty tall so that it was more like a green park -like area between
the road and the financial buildings. He asked if that was part of where the
landscaping design was heading. Mr. Drell said it wouldn't be a hedge, it
would be desert style landscaping with the trees and distances normally
seen, but the trees in that area were probably still 20 or 30 feet apart. Our
goal isn't to create a forest there, but typical desert. He said desert
landscaping tended to be on the sparse side, but it would be landscaped.
Chairperson Jonathan said if it was desert landscaping and sparse, then
they wouldn't have a softening of the view. They would be up pretty high
looking down into this project, so on the other side the commission's
conclusion was to soften that view by creating some trees that would
eventually be pretty tall with leaves so that there is some softening of the
direct view into the project. Mr. Drell said there would be in this project. It
wouldn't be solid. They didn't plant trees to create a solid barrier.
Chairperson Jonathan said it didn't have to be solid and that wasn't what he
was saying. Mr. Drell said yes, it would be similar to what they see in
perimeters at Desert Willow and other places. The Desert Willow standard is
the one staff usually refers to as the density of planting that they expect. So
there are clusters of two or three trees together, then some space. Mr.
Winklepleck explained the intent of staff's condition was to emulate the
previous condition off of Technology Drive on the other side. Chairperson
Jonathan concurred. Mr. Winklepleck said that would be the direction and
they would be using that as an example. Chairperson Jonathan confirmed
there was the same problem on the off ramp as it heads down. Mr.
Winklepleck concurred.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION of the project.
MR. DAVE TURNER with Coachella Valley Engineers, 77-899 Wolf
Road Suite 102 in Palm Desert, addressed the commission. He
confirmed he was with the applicant. He explained that along with the
landscaping, there is a little room along the edge of the roadway, but
the landscape architect was working on that and it does drop off
about 35 feet and they would work with the City in trying to get it
landscaped and take care of the concerns.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if he understood that the thought was to, if a
driver is looking straight down on the project it is kind of hard, so they should
break that up with a little bit of landscaping. It didn't have to be a solid wall of
green, but it should be in his opinion something other than just the flat typical
desert sparse landscaping. So something needed to be vertical to soften the
view coming down off the interstate.
Mr. Turner concurred. He indicated there was a question/concern on
two of the conditions. Under Public Works Condition No. 17, he
believed that condition where it said the drainage easement along the
west was actually talking about the east property line where they are
relocating a catch basin and putting in a new storm drain. In those
negotiations, it was originally going to be on the lot line between their
project and the project to the east. In the negotiations to get that
worked out and relocated, they were going to put that in a 10-foot
easement. So they just wanted to see if they could get that easement
down from 20 feet to 10 so they can keep their trash enclosure they
have proposed there.
Mr. Joy agreed that it should say east property line, not west. Going over this
project with the City Engineer, he specified a 20-foot drainage easement as
the requirement. Chairperson Jonathan said he was hearing there would be
stuff on there and it would be more palatable to the applicant to have ten feet.
Mr. Turner concurred. He said the pipe wasn't going to be very deep.
He thought they would have enough room and if there is a problem, if
it needs to be maintained, it would have reciprocal access right down
the drive that he thought would work with any maintenance on it.
Chairperson Jonathan asked Mr. Joy if he knew of any reason it had to be
20 feet given that a pipe is not going to be that big and that it would
presumably be adjacent to the property line. Mr. Joy said it was his
understanding that 20 feet would be required for the pipe and any kind of
repairs that might need to be done so it wasn't substandard and for the pipe
to fit inside. He said a 20-foot minimum is what the City requires of any kind
of drainage easement and 10 feet would be substandard. He said where
they wanted the drainage easement there were trash enclosures and those
kinds of things on top of it and they did not want the trash enclosures on top
of the drainage easement. Chairperson Jonathan asked the applicant if they
wanted to go up to 10 feet.
Mr. Turner concurred.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if there was a 20-foot setback there anyway.
Mr. Turner said they actually took the storm drain that was proposed
on the property line and took it all onto their property. It is going down
the drive aisle. In their negotiations, this goes back nine months ago
or so, but they agreed to put in a 10-foot easement so they would like
to stay with a 10-foot easement.
Chairperson Jonathan pointed out that staff seemed to be unyielding on that
issue. Mr. Joy said they went over this item in great deal and Mark
Greenwood specified that is what he wanted. Chairperson Jonathan asked
for confirmation that the figure wasn't arbitrary, it is what staff needs. Mr. Joy
concurred. Mr. Drell said that they could add the language "or as determined
by the City Engineer."
Mr. Turner said they could work with Mark on that issue and that would
satisfy them if they said "20 feet, or as approved by the City
Engineer." That would be fine.
Mr. Winklepleck said that since the project is going to City Council, they will
have time to get work on it.
Chairperson Jonathan recommended "20 feet or less as determined by the
City Engineer." Everyone agreed.
Mr. Turner said that on Public Works Department Condition No. 18,
this came up where they were wanting an eight -foot easement
adjacent to the Cook Street overpass for a future connection for the
bike path for the mid valley storm channel. He said they weren't
opposed to that condition and thought it would be a very good idea
for the future. He said they don't have eight feet along the westerly
side. They were going to be regrading that slope for landscaping and
also for catching the drainage that would come off the overpass onto
the site and they could very easily leave an eight -foot path along the
actual right-of-way right up along the easterly edge east of the existing
storm drain there and accommodate a future bike path there. They
could accommodate it, but rather than an easement on their property,
they would like to accommodate it within the right-of-way.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if he was talking about along Cook Street.
Mr. Turner said yes.
Mr. Drell asked if the bike path was identified along the north side of the
property.
Mr. Turner said they didn't and there was nothing in the conditions on
it.
Mr. Drell said there needed to be.
Mr. Turner said that the 28-acre project to the east that got approved
about a year ago, the bike path was going to be within the Mid Valley
Storm Channel right-of-way on that project. So when it didn't show up
as a condition on the north, he was under the assumption it would
continue in the same manner as that project.
Mr. Drell asked Mr. Joy if that worked. Mr. Joy explained that the bike path
would be on the north side of the channel. In discussions he had concerning
whether or not they should require this developer to actually install a bike
path or have it installed at a future date relates to the condition to provide the
connection also. But there had been a number of developments along the
Mid Valley Channel that have not installed a bike path, so they felt it wasn't
fair to make this developer do it. Mr. Drell asked if they were confident
CVWD had no problem with having the bike path within their right-of-way. Mr.
Joy said they have 20 feet of right-of-way on the other side of the channel.
Mr. Drell asked for confirmation that they didn't have a problem with it. Mr.
Joy concurred. With regards to the bike path location, it was similar to the
drainage easement. Public Works prepared this memo a couple of months
ago and he felt uncomfortable discussing these matters at the Planning
Commission meeting without the City Engineer. They had two months to
discuss this and this is the first time it has come to his attention that the
developer had any problem with this requirement. The reason why they didn't
want the bike paths along the eastern part of the project where the applicant
is requesting it to be located is because it is a considerable distance from
Cook Street itself. They want the connection to be at Cook Street.
Mr. Turner clarified that they were actually proposing that it stay at
Cook Street. All they were trying to do is take it off their property and
put it within the Cook Street right-of-way.
Mr. Drell asked who controlled that right-of-way.
Mr. Turner said it was right-of-way that the city controls.
Mr. Drell questioned if it was CalTrans.
Mr. Turner said it went back about a year ago, but in their discussions
the city controls the right-of-way up to that point and then over the
Interstate is CalTrans.
Mr. Drell asked if there was room to create a bike path there without creating
retaining walls.
Mr. Turner said yes, because they were going to be doing some
regrading in there because of the slope and the drainage. He said
they could put the bike path in there while they were grading. He
thought their closest point of slope is about 40 feet and it goes to
about 120 feet, so they had plenty of room to fit a future bike path. So
they agreed it should stay there, they were just requesting it to stay
within the Cook Street right-of-way.
Mr. Joy apologized, he thought they wanted to move it to the east.
Mr. Turner said no, to the easterly side of the Cook Street right-of-
way.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if they could simply amend that condition to say
that it will be on the Cook Street overpass if feasible? Mr. Drell said it could
say "as determined by the City Engineer." Chairperson Jonathan agreed.
They wanted to make sure there wasn't a design problem and to confirm
who owns it. Mr. Joy didn't think it mattered whose right-of-way it was on as
long as it is installed.
Chairperson Jonathan asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION on this matter. There was no one and the public hearing was
closed. Chairperson Jonathan asked for commission comments.
Commissioner Finerty said she liked the architecture and would move for
approval with the amendments to Public Works Condition Nos. 17 and 18.
Commissioner Lopez concurred. He thought it was a great looking project
and one they would all be very proud of. He seconded the motion.
Chairperson Jonathan also concurred. He reiterated his interest in the
landscaping all around. This is a focal point in terms of an entry to the city
and he had confidence that ultimately the landscaping will compliment the
beautiful and interesting architectural design that has already been made
part of this project. He was in agreement and called for the vote.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2263, recommending to City
Council approval of DA 97-2 Addendum #2 (previously identified as #3),
TPM 31563 and PP 04-05, subject to conditions as amended. Motion
carried 3-0.
CITY Of PfllAl OEERi
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346-061 I
FAX: 76o 341-7098
info@palm-desert.org
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NOS. PP 04-05, TPM 31563 AND
DA97-2 ADDENDUM #2
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Deserft City Council
to consider a request by Holt Architects for approval of an addendum to the Wonder Palms Master
Plan to expand permitted uses in Planning Area 1 to include Planned Industrial uses, a master plan
for Planning Area 1, a tentative parcel map for a 21.86 acre commercial/office/industrial project, a
precise plan for five (5) two story buildings totaling 166,000 square feet on 10.59 acres of the site
and a height exception for mechanical equipment screening purposes. The site master plan
includes 236,450 square feet of commercial/office/industrial, 14,750 square feet of restaurants
(including two drive-thrus), and a three story hotel with up to 104 rooms. This project has been
previously assessed for purposes of CEQA. The project is generally at the northeast comer of Cook
Street and Gerald Ford Drive, more particularly described as APN 653-410-023 through 025, 653-
690-015 through 019.
SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, May 13, 2004, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber
at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time
and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning
all iterns covered by_this public hearing_notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing.
Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is availabjle for review in
the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. Mondaythrough Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in
this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public
hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun RACHELLE KLASSEN City Clerk
May 3, 2004 City of Palm Desert, California