Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0916 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 16, 1974 MIDDLE SCHOOL - 7 : 00 P .M. I . CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Com- mission was called to order by the Chairman at 7: 00 P.M. on September 16, 1974, at the Palm Desert Middle School. II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III . ROLL CALL Present : Commissioners : ED MULLINS, WILLIAM SEIDLER, MARK K. VAN DE MARK, S. ROY WILSON, C. ROBERT HUBBARD Absent : Commissioners : NONE Others Present : Director of Environmental Services - Paul A. Williams City Attorney - Dave Erwin Assistant Planner - Sam Freed IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 3 , 1974, were approved as submitted. V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Hubbard explained the public hearing procedure . A. Continued Case No. Change of Zone - 01-73-PD - GERALD MOSS PROPERTIES - Consideration of final Environmental Impact Report for a proposed project located west of Painters Path and south of the westerly extension of Avenue 44, W-2 and R-2-5000. (Continued from Planning Commission meeting of July 29. ) Chairman Hubbard declared the public hearing open Mr. Paul Williams summarized the EIR report prepared for Webb Engineering by Harry H. Schmitz. Staff did address various comments received. Mr. Williams re- ferred to map on wall described as subject property. Mr. Williams read comments received from various agen- cies. He indicated that the EIR does cover the EIR concerns of the project. Mr. John Sanborn, 600 E. Tahquitz-McCallum Way, Palm wow Springs, representing Gerald Moss Properties, stated that the applicant concurs with what is in the report and will go along with Staff ' s recommendations. Chairman Hubbard asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor or against this project . There being no further input , Chairman Hubbard declared the public hearing closed. Planning Commission Meeting -2- September 16, 1974 Commissioner Seidler moved by Resolution No. 4 and Commissioner Wilson seconded that the report as filed is complete and recommended that report be sent to City Council for certification. The motion was un- animously carried. B. Continued Case No. Change of Zone - 01-73-PD - GERALD MOSS PROPERTIES - Consideration of a re- tow quest for a change of zone on property located west of Painters Path and south of the westerly extension of Avenue 44 from W-2 (Controlled De- velopment) and R-2-5000 (Multiple Family Dwell- ings) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) , R-3 (Residential) , and N-A (Natural Assets) . Con- tinued from Planning Commission meeting of July 29. ) - W-2 and R-2-5000. Mr. Williams indicated that the applicant requested the matter be continued to October 14 since Staff found project is not in compliance with City' s Gen- eral Plan and that a General Plan amendment would have to be processed before this rezoning. The applicant was notified of this and requested a con- tinuance. It was stated that County had a file on a request for General Plan amendment , and was filed in January, 1974. Staff feels continuance should be denied and request for rezoning is not considered for a number of reasons. Mr. Williams read the Staff Report spelling out the five concerns. He requested the rezoning be denied at this time. Chairman Hubbard stated that the Planning Commission tow did not intend to pass judgment , just that we' re caught with a situation where a new General Plan is being formulated. He stated he would prefer setting the hearing to a later date so that the whole picture could be looked at . Mr . John Sanford, representing the applicant , stated he appreciated the concern. He suggested that a re- quest be made to continue this application until such time as a General Plan for this area has been adopted or amended. Chairman Hubbard declared that the item be continued in January, 1975. Mr . Williams asked if January 13 was satisfactory. Mr. Sanborn replied, yes. Chairman Hubbard asked if anyone else wished to speak for or against this project . There being none, the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Wilson moved and Commissioner Van de Mark seconded that the matter be continued to January 13 , 1975 meeting. The motion was unanimously carried. C. Case No. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - 01-74 - Con- sideration of Zone Code Amendment to revise the parking standards - Section 1-. 12. Chairman Hubbard opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Meeting -3- September 16, 1974 Mr. Williams stated that Wilsey & Ham had provided the City with the proposed Parking Standards. Wil- sey & Ham did a good job in creating these standards , but failed to modify them in some areas Staff felt were of importance. Mr. Williams then described the modified sections of the Ordinance. Staff added Section 2 A (page 2) re- garding tandem parking spaces. It was suggested r.r that an addition for mobile homes be added to it . Section 3 speaks of various development standards of parking areas. The main area changed in this section deals with the Architectural Review Board. Section 4 deals with Standards of Development with regard to residential uses. Section 5 - Parking Design Stand- ards - added is one area Reserved for Parking Layout Drawings. Drawings would be included in the ordin- ance at a future date. Section 5 (7) , Mr. Williams read the five Special Parking Design Standards (a through e) . Section 6 speaks to Residential off- street parking. It was recommended that Section 6 (1) should read, "Single Family Parking Requirements (conventional detached, or mobile homes) . " Staff has prepared a resolution embodying recommen- dations of the City for Parking Standards and it was recommended that the Commission recommend the stand- ards to the City Council for adoption. Mr. Robert Ricciardi , 73-700 Highway 111, stated that on page 3, Section 3 (1) it should be noted that 10 feet width is excessive for off-street parking stalls. He stated that 9 feet is most widely used. He felt we were upgrading standards throughout most of this ordinance, even more than Palm Springs standards. He stated he would like to see 9 feet by 20 feet space. Regarding Section 3 (6) parking of compact cars , he stated that the 72 foot x 15 foot space is not going to work. It has been tried by developers before, and most people with compact cars prefer not to park in these spaces because they are not in convenient areas of the parking lot , and they park in spaces designated for larger vehicles. Doing this, the person driving a larger car is penalized because he can't park in a compact car space. He stat ed that Bob Gragg would speak regarding survey made of compact car spaces in parking lots . Chairman Hubbard disagreed with Mr. Ricciardi' s com- ments about the compact car spaces in parking lots. He stated that he read an article in Business Services, and according to that article, it is very successful. It reduces the amount of asphalt by 30%, and is some- thing to consider. Mr . Ricciardi stated he would like to see the Citizens Advisory Committee have a chance to talk on this. Chairman Hubbard asked if there was anyone else wish- ing to discuss this. Robert W. Gragg, 1840 West Imperial Highway, Los An- geles, stated that there are some centers trying this compact car space system and according to studies, it is working in some centers, and in some it is not working. It depends upon the cooperation of the in- dividuals using the parking lot . There is no real way to force people to use these spaces , people can' t be cited, but they can be asked to leave these spaces by Planning Commission Meeting -4- September 16, 1974 a guard and, of course, they resent it . This is strictly experimental, and if it works, it ' s good, so far it has not worked. He also confirmed that his company is installing some in their shopping centers. In that no other persons wished to be heard, Chair- man Hubbard declared the public hearing closed. Chairman Hubbard asked if any commissioners wished to speak regarding this matter. Chairman Hubbard stated that Mr. Ricciardi had a good point on the 9 feet . There are more 9 foot stalls across the country than 10 feet . It would be nice to have 10 feet . Commissioner Seidler stated that he would like to ask Staff what the rationale is, given by consultants regarding 10 feet versus 9 feet . Mr. Williams stated that the consultant felt there are many large cars around Palm Desert and the addi- tional 6 inches on each side of the car does allow for large doors opening. The 9 foot x 20 foot does cause problems for large cars. On that basis, the 10 foot x 20 foot was recommended. Chairman Hubbard called for a motion. Commissioner Wilson moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion that by Planning Commission Resolution No. 5, as amended, the Commission recom- mended adoption to the City Council. The motion was unanimously carried. it D. Case No. Conditional Use Permit No. 1357 - ENVIRON- MENTAL DEVELOPMENT CORP, for MOUNTAINBACK - Con- sideration of an amendment of CUP No. 1357 to per- mit a re-design of the site plan for the third and final phase of the project encompassing 33 . 6 acres located west of State Highway 74 and south of the westerly extension of Homestead. (Continued from Planning Commission meeting of July 1 , 1974. ) - R-2-7000. Chairman Hubbard opened the public hearing. Mr. Williams gave the Staff Report which recommended approval subject to conditions . Chairman Hubbard asked the commissioners if they had any questions of Staff. Commissioner Wilson suggested that in the conditions of approval , under (c) , Coachella Valley Flood Con- trol should be listed as an agency. Mr. Williams stated that Condition (b) should be changed since it is Council policy that models may be r.. built only after a final subdivision map has been re- corded. The Commission agreed with this change. Mr. Scott Biddle, Biddle Development Co. , 1970 Placen- tia Avenue, Costa Mesa, stated there were some condi- tions he would like to review. Item (f) , he requested management company be restated to read "Home Owners Association" . Item (g) , the wall. He showed slides of the existing development to show what had been done with palm trees to screen the development from High- way 74. He stated a wall tends to close in a project . Regarding Item (j ) , the requirement of two covered parking spaces per dwelling unit was discussed. Item Planning Commission Meeting -5- September 16, 1974 (n) , he stated they will reduce the light standards on the tennis court to cut glare. Chairman Hubbard asked the Staff that in Item (g) if it would be acceptable to delete the sentence about the block wall and leaving it to read, "land- scaping of front" . I too Mr. Williams stated that "landscaping and mounding" would be acceptable. Commissioner Wilson made the minute motion that Item (j ) be amended to read, "the project is to include at least one covered parking space per dwelling unit . Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion. Motion was carried by the following vote : AYES : WILSON, HUBBARD, VAN DE MARK NOES : MULLINS SEIDLER Justification for not requiring two covered spaces was the fact that the existing units did not have two covered spaces. Commissioner Mullins made the motion and Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion that by Planning Com- mission Resolution No. 6, the amended C.U.P. be ap- proved with Conditions f, g. j and n as amended. The motion was unanimously carried. VII . OLD BUSINESS A. Continued Case No. P.P. 1C - R. RICCIARDI for '� •+► MARKET BASKET - Consideration of Plot Plan for remodeling for project for Market Basket and ad- jacent store . (Continued from Planning Commis- sion meeting of September 3, 1974. ) - C-P-S. Staff stated the applicant recently submitted revi- sions of the front of the Market Basket store . He described the revisions. He stated that the major bone of contention was the underground utilities. Staff re-evaluated that portion of the conditions and recommended that a cash bond could be required. Other than that , the conditions remain the same. Noel Burks, 1053 Visalia, Costa Mesa, stated that Market Basekt has been in Palm Desert for 11 years and would like to continue. He stated Market Bas- ket is not opposed to undergrounding, but he feels it should not be required at this time. He stated that Market Basket would put up a cash bond or pro- vide a legal instrument for undergrounding. After some discussion as to the term "cash bond" and "surety bond" Commissioner Mullins moved and Com- missioner Wilson seconded that Resolution No. 7 be approved as written and that cash bond be changed to read "surety bond" . Motion was unanimously carried. B. Continued Case No. P.P. 30SF - CAROLE BROWNLEE - Consideration of Plot Plan for a single-family dwelling unit to be located on the north side of Alessandro, just west of San Pascual. (Continued from Planning Commission meeting of September 3, 1974. ) - R-3 . Planning Commission Meeting -6- September 16, 1974 Staff presented the recommendations for denial unless the dwelling were enlarged to 11 square feet . Chairman Hubbard asked if the applicant was present . Mr. Monte Thornberg, 82-232 Tahquitz Street , Indio , representing persons who will be doing the building, stated that the applicant is just interested in put- ting up a building on the existing slab and meeting the parking requirements. Commissioner Wilson moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion to approve Resolution No. 8 sub- ject to Staff conditions with the dwelling required to be enlarged to 940 square feet . The motion was unanimously carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M. for a 10 minute recess. The meeting opened again at 9 : 50 P.M. VIII . NEW BUSINESS A. Case No. P.P. 13MF - SAFREN DEVELOPMENT CO. - Consideration of Plot Plan for 68-unit condo- minium project located on 21. 5 acres which are situated west of Cook Street and southerly from Highway 111 - R-1-10, 000. Mr. Williams recommended, per the applicant ' s request , due to a religious holiday, that this matter be con- tinued to the September 30 Planning Commission meet- ing. Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Seidler seconded the motion to continue the case to September 30 Planning Commission meeting. The motion was un- animously carried. B. Case No. Tract 4442 - ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT CORP. - for MOUNTAINBACK - Consideration of a revised tentative map for Tract 4442 for the third and final phase of the Mountainback de- velopment , with 209 condominium units on 33. 6 acres located west of State Highway 74 and south of the westerly extension of Homestead. (Con- tinued from Planning Commission meeting of July 1 , 1974. ) - R-2-7000. Mr. Williams showed the tract representing the re- vised map . He recommended that Item 8 show Home Owners Association in lieu of Management Company. Chairman Hubbard asked if the commissioners had any questions. There being none , he asked if the appli- cant cared to add anything to what was said. +r.r Mr. Biddle stated that they were prepared, willing and anxious to accept all conditions. Commissioner Mullins moved and Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion to approve Resolution No. 9 as amended to change the words Management Company to Home Owners Association. The motion was unanimously carried. Planning Commission Meeting -7- September 16, 1974 C. Requesting the Determination for Proposed Pub- lic Works Projects in the City of Palm Desert . Mr. Williams read the Coachella Valley County Water District public works list . Since the project was in conformance with the City ' s General Plan, Staff recommended that the Planning Commission make such a finding. Mr. Williams recommended adoption of fir.. Resolution No. 10. Commissioner Seidler moved and Commissioner Wilson seconded the Resolution be approved and adopted. The motion was unanimously carried. IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None X. COMMENTS A. City Staff Mr. Williams stated there were informational items in the packets, the most important of which was the report presented to the City Council on the Core Area Plan and information that deals with projects that go beyond the Core Area Plan. He stated the Council had established two committees ; a Finance Committee and a Traffic Committee in the Core Area. Council would make the announcement of the names on September 26 of the Committee. Chairman Hubbard asked if the Commission wished to select the Planning Commissioner member of the Traf- fic Committee. Commissioner Wilson suggested Bill Seidler was on the Citizens Advisory Committee Traffic Committee and with that important background he might be good to represent us on this. Chairman Hubbard asked Commissioner Seidler if he would act . Commissioner Seidler stated he would be pleased to. Commissioner Seidler than asked a question about the proposed schedule for planning activities relative to the General Plan. He wanted to know what is going on during the period from November 7 to December 3 concerning the General Plan. Mr. Williams stated that the main thing going on is the EIR was circulated and comments would be coming back from the agencies. The other item is the Citi- zens Advisory Committee would meet and evaluate the General Plan elements to finalize their recommendations . Chairman Hubbard asked if it would be possible for the commissioners to sit in on the meetings of the Citi- zens Advisory Committee regarding the General Plan. He stated the commission needed some background be- fore December 7. Mr. Williams indicated that the Citizens Advisory Committee would welcome the attend- ance of the Planning Commission at their meetings. Mr. Williams stated that if there were any questions about this schedule, to please call him. B. City Attorney - None Planning Commission Meeting -8- September 16, 1974 C. Planning Commissioners - None XI . ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Seidler moved and Commissioner Wilson seconded the meeting be adjourned. The motion was unanimously carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10: 15 P.M. VOW PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary ATTEST: ERT HUBBARD, Chairman �Y.r