Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1202 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 2 , 1974 MIDDLE SCHOOL - 7 : 00 P .M. I . CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission was called to order by the Vice Chairman in the absence of the Chairman, at 7 : 07 P.M. on December 2 , 1974, at the Palm Desert Middle School . II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III . ROLL CALL Present : Commissioners : ED MULLINS , WILLIAM SEIDLER, S . ROY WILSON, MARY K. VAN DE MARK Absent : Chairman: C . ROBERT HUBBARD Others Present : Director of Environmental Services - Paul A. Williams Acting City Attorney - Jeffery Patterson Associate Planner - Freeman Rader Assistant Planner - Sam Freed IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Mr. Williams recommended that the minutes be carried over to public meeting proposed for December 9 for corrections and additions . `,, V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS A. Mr . Williams stated there was a letter received from the University of California at Riverside requesting the attendance of the Commissioners at a tour of the Philip L. Boyd Research Center on January 11 . Each of the Commissioners present indicated they would at- tend. B. Mr. Williams stated that other correspondence dealt with items on the agenda and would be discussed at that time . VI . PUBLIC HEARING The Vice Chairman explained the public hearing procedure . He then declared the public hearing open. A. Continued Case No . ICAP AMENDMENT - 04-74 - C . E . MILLER - Consideration of a request to amend the Palm Desert In- terim Core Area Plan by deleting the proposed realign- ment of the north frontage through Lots 149 , 150 and 151 , located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Monterey Avenue and State Highway 111 (C-P-S) (Con- tinued from November 18) m Mr . Williams read the Staff Report and recommended that the matter be continued for two weeks and requested continuance be considered at this time . Vice Chairman Seidler asked the applicant if he would con- sider a continuance for two weeks . Mr . C. E . Miller, 73- 512 Little Bend Trail said he would be glad to work with the Staff. Planning Commission Meeting -2- December 2 , 1974 Vice Chairman Seidler asked if anyone else wished to speak regarding this continuance, there being none, he then asked if there were any comments from the Commission. Commissioner Mullins asked if the two weeks would give Staff adequate time for this to which Mr. Williams replied that they would attempt to give this as thorough an analysis as possible in the next two weeks . Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the continuance of this matter for two weeks . The motion was unanimously carried. B. Case No. ICAP AMENDMENT - 05-74 - B. GIOGA - Considera- tion of a request to amend the Palm Desert Interim Core Area Plan by deleting the proposed 34-car parking lot recommended for the vacant parcel (Lot 18 , Palma Village Unit No. 11) located at the northeast corner of the in- tersection of De Anza Way and State Highway 111 - C-P-S . Mr. Williams pointed at the location of the area and dis- cussed the Staff Report. He requested denial by Resolution No. 20 stating that in reviewing the Core Area Plan, there were some things that were changeable and some not change- able . For example , what happens on Mr. Miller ' s property will determine circulation at that intersection and there- fore there are few alternatives to consider. However , the Core Area Plan is not "set in concrete" in terms of the park- ing lot locations . He recommended the matter be denied for reasons outlined in the Staff Report . He also suggested the Resolution be revised to include the fact that there is no need for this amendment at this time. He stated the appli- cant could apply to either build on this lot or sell the lot , the City could buy it and the Core Area Plan has no specific effect on this property other than to establish direction and specific intent . Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any questions from the Commission. There being none , he asked if the applicant was present. Mr. Bob Gioga, 74-467 Chicory, Palm Desert , the applicant , asked if by deleting the parking lot designation from the Core Area Plan he could go ahead and sell the property? Vice Chairman Seidler stated that Staff recommends denial based on the fact that a request is not needed at this time to change the Interim Core Area Plan. He informed the ap- plicant the recommendation for denial does not deny him the right to request another use of that land other than a park- ing lot . Mr. Gioga then stated he was confused and asked if it was necessary for the City to make a parking lot out of this property? He stated that if a parking lot were made of this property, he could not sell it since several persons interested in the parcel found out it was zoned as a park- ing lot and refused to discuss the sale with him. OWN Vice Chairman Seidler asked Mr . Williams to explain the zoning to Mr . Gioga to which Mr . Williams answered that the property is presently zoned C-P-S and has a wide range of uses . The Core Area Plan, when presented and adopted, designated certain lots for parking, and some items to preserve the character of the Core Area Plan, would have to be developed as outlined in the Plan. He stated Mr . Planning Commission Meeting -3- December 2 , 1974 Gioga' s property is not necessarily one of those areas and may not be limited to a parking lot . In other words , the ICAP was flexible when it discussed the precise loca- tion of parking lots . Mr. Gioga read a letter he wrote to City Council stating it was imperative that he sell the property, and that if the City would not purchase the property, he requested it be turned back to the original zoning. He then submitted the letter to the Secretary. Vice Chairman Seidler then asked if anyone was opposed to this matter, there being no opposition, he closed the pub- lic hearing. He then asked if the Commissioners had any questions . Commissioner Wilson asked if he could hear the amendment to the resolution once again. Mr. Williams suggested the addition of Item No . 3 to the resolution findings for the denial of the amendment to read as follows: The proposed amendment is not needed since the proposed parking lot could be located on the sub- ject lot or an adjacent lot and meet the concepts of the Core Area Plan. Therefore, the subject lot could be de- veloped commercially. Commissioner Wilson moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion to adopt Resolution No. 20 as amended. The motion was unanimously carried. Vice Chairman Seidler asked if Mr . Gioga understood the motion and action of the Commission from the standpoint that a denial did not prevent the use of his property. Mr. Gioga replied that he did. C. Case No. ICAP AMENDMENT - 06-74 - PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION - Consideration of a request to amend the Palm Desert Interim Core Area Plan by changing the land-use designation from Service Commercial to Restau- rant/Theatre/Hotel/Motel/Convenience Commercial on a site located east of State Highway 111 , north of Avenue 44, and south of Park View Drive - R-2 , R-3-4000 and C-P-S . Mr . Williams described the location of the parcel and briefly went over the Staff Report , recommending that the change of designation be affected. Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any persons in attendance owning property within the area affected. Mr. Frank Purcell, 389 Crestview Drive, Palm Springs , stated he owns a piece of property north of Avenue 44, west of Joshua Tree , south of Monterey. He then read a letter he previously sent to the City Council . He stated it was his intention to develop the property as it was originally pro- posed and that C-P-S is the proper zoning for that location, and any change in zoning would mean a dollar loss to him. Vice Chairman Seidler asked if anyone else in the audience wished to speak for or against this issue. There being none, the hearing was closed. He then asked Mr. Williams if there were any alternatives open to Mr . Purcell . Mr. Williams stated that Mr . Purcell technically has a C-P-S zoning. Mr. Williams indicated that the options for Planning Commission Meeting -4- December 2 , 1974 Mr. Purcell included the development of the property for a use specified in this amendment if approved; he could sell the property, or he could ask for a specific amend- ment to allow the home improvement use as he proposed, and Staff would look at alternatives . Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners or Staff. Commissioner Van de Mark stated she didn' t understand mom how one could reach the property from Avenue 44. Mr. Purcell stated the map attached to the Staff Report was incorrect and proceeded to show more precisely where the property was located and what access was provided. Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any other ques- tions . He stated there was a bit of confusion in the minds of the Commissioners and it would require more analysis and review. Commissioner Wilson suggested a continuance to clarify precisely the affect of Mr. Purcell' s property on the rest of the area being reviewed. Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Wilson seconded the motion to continue to next December 16 meeting. The motion was unanimously carried. D. Case No. Conditional Use Permit - 15-74 - T. O'MALLEY - Consideration of a request for a conditional use per- mit to allow a 27-space parking lot to be built on a portion of Lot 40, Palm Village Plaza Tract , located on the east side of Las Palmas Avenue, approximately 150 tow feet north of State Highway 111 - R-3 . Mr . Williams stated that this request was in the process of being reviewed, and that parts of the request do not conform to the parking ordinance. He suggested continu- ance to the December 16 meeting to allow revisions to be made. Vice Chairman Seidler asked if the applicant was in the audience. Mr. Wendell Veith, 477 Eagle Way, Palm Springs , speaking for the applicant stated the continuance to December 16 was acceptable. Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any comments from the Commissioners . There being none, Commissioner Van de Mark moved, Commissioner Wilson seconded the con- tinuance to the December 16 meeting. The motion was unan- imously carried. VII . OLD BUSINESS - None VIII . NEW BUSINESS A. Planning Commission study session on the public hear- ing draft of the Palm Desert General Plan and final Environmental Impact Report . Mr. Williams suggested that this item be carried over to the last part of the agenda so that concentration can be given to that item. The Planning Commission agreed to this request . Planning Commission Meeting -5- December 2 , 1974 B. Planning Commission approval of standard conditions used in the Architectural Review Board process . Mr . Williams asked that this matter be deleted from the agenda since the Architectural Review Board has not com- pleted its review. Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion that this matter be deleted from the r... agenda. C . Discussion of change to State Department of Trans- portation 20-Year Work Program. Mr . Williams stated the Staff recommends that the Commis- sion direct the Secretary to forward a statement to the City Council that the City is unaffected by this program. The only possible item affecting the City would be the widening of State Highway 74. He recommended no action be taken. Vice Chairman Seidler directed the Secret ary to forward the Planning Commission' s recommendation to the Council indicating the City is unaffected by the plan as proposed. Minute motion made by Vice Chairman Seidler , seconded by Commissioner Van de Mark. The motion was unanimously carried. D. Review of Proposed Coachella Valley County Water Dis- trict Sewer Projects for Conformance with General Plan. Mr. Williams suggested the Commission recommend to Coun- cil by Resolution No . 21 that the projects are in conform- ance with the General Plan and to notify the Water District of their conformance in order that the District may proceed with installation. Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any comments from the Commissioners . There being none , Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded that Resolution No . 21 be approved. The motion was unanimously carried. E. Case No . 3C - JOE CABANYOG - Consideration of a re- quest for approval of plot and construction plans to allow a small outdoor garden shop to be built at 74-200 Palm Desert Drive (north frontage road) . Mr . Williams went to the wall drawing to show applicant ' s request , he then read the conditions of approval . He stated that a condition should be added requiring that no materials be stored higher than the fence , and that this condition be numbered 6 . He recommended approval of this project by Planning Commission Resolution No . 22 to in- clude Condition No . 6 . Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any questions . Commissioner Wilson asked what is the access to parking in the rear, to which Mr. Williams replied that access would be directly off Alessandro . Vice Chairman Seidler asked if the applicant was present and if he understood he was to complete all items depicted on the approved plans including landscaping. Mr. Joe Cabanyog, P . 0. Box 434, La Quinta, stated he would include all improvements that were shown. Planning Commission Meeting -6- December 2, 1974 A brief discussion ensued regarding the billboard, land- scaping and sidewalk. It was recommended that Condition No. 4 be enlarged to include; "the proposed sidewalk along the north frontage road and any necessary curb and gutter and tie-in paving shall be installed to County standards . " Also it was recommended that Condition No . 6 be included in the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Wilson seconded approval of Resolution No. 22 including the addition of Condition No. 6 and the modification of Condition No . 4. The motion was unanimously carried. Vice Chairman Seidler recessed the meeting at 8 : 20 P .M. The meeting opened again at 8 : 30 P .M. The general dis- cussion of the General Plan then ensued with discussion of the following elements : 1) Environmental Impact Report 2) Implementation 3) Public Facility 4) Environmental Elements Mr. Williams explained the pertinent features of each element. After his presentation, a question and answer period followed. IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None X. COMMENTS A. City Staff - None B. City Attorney - None C. Planning Commissioners - None XI . ADJOURNMENT Vice Chairman Seidler adjourned this meeting to a Plan- ning Commission meeting on December 9 , 1974, at 7 : 00 P .M. at the Palm Desert Middle School. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned .at 10 : 00 P .M. P A. WILLIAMS , Secretary ATTEST: 'Y MONO //IlLy- I AM R. S ice Chairman