The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZOA 85-4 SIGHT OBSTRUCTIONS 1985 MINUTES '! PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION • AUGUST 20, 1985 I Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1076, approving VAR 85-2, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. F. Case No F85:-)4 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Consideration of an amendment to the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance section 25. 56, 200 regarding traffic sight obstructions. Mr. Smith explained that the zoning ordinance amendment would provide less restrictions to traffic sight obstructions and the amendment would measure from property line intersection to where curb lines intersect and then come back 40 feet for the triangle of visibility and indicated that residential was similar to commercial ( i .e. Baum rase) . Mr. Smith recommended approval . Commissioner Wood asked if this met with public works standards. Mr. Folkers replied that periodic complaints had been received and this amendment would help alleviate those problems. Chairman Crites opened the public testimony. MR. SANDY BAUM, 45-800 Deep Canyon, explained that he had come before the planning commission previously and was granted a variance. He invited the planning commission to come and look at the wall he installed before a decision was made. He felt that the proposed amendment seemed more restrictive. He also felt that commercial and residential should be separate. Commissioner Erwood felt that the same standards and calculations applied to both commercial and residential areas. Mr. Smith indicated the amendment was all encompassing but less restrictive, with the same logic applied. Commissioner Wood asked for clarification on the similarity of residential to commercial because residential areas don't provide stop signals and that commercial building sidewalks and setbacks differ in residential and commercial areas. 9 MINUTES ` PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 c Mr. Folkers explained that this also applied to edge of pavement and i would do a better job and suggested that if problems occur staff can come back with changes. He felt that this would be a better way to go than property lines. Mr. Baum stated that he had never been aware of the seven foot parkways. Difference between residential and commercial was well taken. He felt that there should be separate regulations for residential and commercial . Most areas have at least 10 or 12 foot parkways and suggested two separate regulations. Mr. Smith indicated that the example before commission regarding Deep Canyon used 18 feet of parkway and on Yucca Tree 32-36 feet of pavement ultimate. That was the example used is an improvement from the property owners point of view. Chairman Crites closed the public testimony and asked staff about the seven foot parkway. Mr. Baum stated that staff would find that Deep Canyon has been down graded in the area of Yucca Tree with a total 60 feet of right of way - Yucca Tree will be paved about 30 feet. Commissioner Wood commented that while the amendment may not be perfect it was a move in the right direction. Action: Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1077, recommending approval of ZOA 85-4 to city council . Carried 5-0. VIII. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS A. OUTSIDE ORGANIZATION RESPONSE OR COMMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION CRITERIA. Mr. Smith explained that Mr. Diaz would bring this matter to commission on September 17, 1985. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, to continue this item to September 17, 1985. Carried 5-0. 10 PROOF OF PUF ' 'CATION This space Is for County Clerk's Filing Stamo (2015.5 C.C.. J Y STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECEIVED County of Riverside '85 AUG 15 PM 1 53 CITY OF PALM DESERT I am a citizen of the United States and a PR j9PPGi -- resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to Proof of Publication of or interested in the above-entitled matter. I - am the principal clerk of the printer of the CASE,NO;,, ZOA„85„-4........................... DESERT POST .................................................... .....................,.................................,.. -ne a newspaper of general circulation, printed c' P and published Bi-weekly 'ne n 59 in the City of ..P3.1!9..U.g:S P.?.G............. oP County of Riverside, and which news- Pe es paper has been adjudged a newspaper 9D, D of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, under the dateof.lA/.5.., 19 .64., Case Number .83658 ; that the not!ce, ......... of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published. in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: 8.9 ...................................... all in the year 19..8.5. I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. . Dated at.......Pnl.... tn .......De.se....r..t................ California, this. 9th dayofAug: „ 1985 /Signature Free coplat of lhls blank form may b4 secured from: CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPER SERVICE BUREAU, INC. Legal Advertising Clearing House 120 west Second St., Los Angeles, Calif. 90012 Telephone: (213) 625.2541 Plau#roauut GENERAL Proof of Publication whrn ororrina this form. i CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: AUGUST 20, 1985 CASE NO: ZOA 85-4 REQUEST: Consideration of an amendment to the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance section 25 . 56. 200 regarding traffic sight obstructions. APPLICANT: CITY OF PALM DESERT 1. BACKGROUND: A. GENERAL: As you may recall during the deliberations on VAR 85-1 , Sandy Baum, discussion arose regarding the current sight restrictions for corner lots. It was deemed desirable to consider amending the current requirements and, therefore, this item Is being presented to you. B. EXISTING REQUIREMENTS: The present code requirements is as follows: On a corner lot, no fence, wall , hedge, or other obstruction, except the natural grade of a site, within a triangular area formed by the street property lines and a line connecting points on the street property lines twenty-five feet from the intersection of the projection of the streets right-of-way, shall exceed a height of three feet above established grade at the edge of the street pavement on plans approved by the director of environmental services or the existing pavement or traveled way if plans have not been approved. C. PROPOSED REVISION: Staff proposes to revise the requirement so that the area of visibility is measured from existing or future curbline rather than property line. This would allow developers more flexibility while still meeting the intent of providing visibility at corners. The revision proposed by staff would be as follows: ` STAFF REPORT CONTINUED On a corner lot, no fence, wall , hedge, structure, or other obstruction, except the natural grade of a site, within a triangular area formed by the existing or future curblines and a line connecting points on the existing or future curblines a minimum of forty feet-from the intersection of the projection of the curblines, shall exceed a height of three feet above established grade at the edge of the street pavement or the existing pavement or traveled way. Staff feels this amendment would provide the visibility we need while providing additional flexibility for developers, homeowners, etc. 0. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The director of community development has determined that the request is a class 5 categorical exemption and no further review is deemed necessary. II . RECOMMENDATION: Staff feels the amendment would be acceptable and provide the city with the necessary visibility. Therefore, staff recommends: A. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. recommending approval of ZOA 85-4 to city council . III. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution. B. Legal notice. C. Exhibit showing change. Prepared by Reviewed and Approved by SBS/tm J i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RELATING TO TRAFFIC SIGHT OBSTRUCTIONS. CASE NO. ZOA 85-4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California did on the 20th day of August hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amendment to zoning ordinance section 25.56.200 relating to corner traffic sight obstructions. WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-8911, in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of a zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and protects the community health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the considerations of the commission In this case. 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of ZOA 85-4 as provided in the attached exhibits, labeled Exhibit"A". PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 1985 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BUFORD CRITES, Chairman ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary _ S Off Tl rrrn_ ®�OIP�o 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 CITY OF PALMDESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 85-4 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert ordinance section 25.56.200 regarding traffic sight obstructions. SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August 20, 1985 at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 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. 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 planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Palm Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ August 9, 1985 Secretary QICOPb59E�D AMCgUe OF O7Ulg1, t1.lR8l,.1►.1C �� PKop�iC.N Al G to TYPI cA L- aur �...orr�c� I yr R`�u 1 r�M;✓t�IT 'TS(P!G/4I- eoMMV4ZGIaL 51TUATION I Q,oPbSC-D AMCqu6 DP OSaSILATY �c11e8Lrl.J� .r 4121 PI¢oP��'tY NG Y1 TYPI CA l- i3ll I I-D I I•.1 C-9 1 T-(PIGa L 60MMW-rIAL SITUATION PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1077 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RELATING TO TRAFFIC SIGHT OBSTRUCTIONS- CASE MO�__ZOA 85-4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California did on the 20th day of August hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider amendment to zoning ordinance section 25.56.200 relating to corner traffic sight obstructions. WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89", in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of a zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and protects the community health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the considerations of the commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of ZOA 85-4 as provided in the attached exhibits, labeled Exhibit"A". PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 1985 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: DOWNS, ERWOOD, RICHARDS, WOOD S CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE BUFORD CRITES,* Chairman ATTEST• RAMON A. DIAZ, Secre 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1077 EXHIBIT "A" f ^ Section 25.56.200. On a corner lot, no fence, wall , hedge, or other obstruc- tion, except the natural grade of a site, within a triangular area formed by the street property }tees and a 44ne eenneettng points an the street property twenty f#ve feet from the tnterseetten of the preyeetton of the streets right-of-way, shall exceed a height of three feet above established grade at the edge of the street pavement on plans approved by the director of community development or the existing pavement or traveled way if plans have not been approved. Amend to: Section 25.56.200. On a corner lot, no fence, wall , hedge, structure, or other obstruction, except the nature grade of a site, within a triangular area formed by the existing or future curblines and a line connecting points on the existing or future curblines a minimum of forty feet from the intersection of the pro.iection of the curblines, shall exceed a height of three feet above established grade at the edge of the street pavement or the existing pavement or traveled way. i 1 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 85-4 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm ➢esert Planning Commission to consider an amendment to the Palm Desert ordinance section 25.56.200 regarding traffic sight obstructions. SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August 20, 1985 at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 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. 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 planning commission (or city council ) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Palm Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ August 9, 1985 Secretary �I