Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1209 SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 9, 1974 MIDDLE SCHOOL - 7 : 00 P .M. I. CALL TO ORDER The Special meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission was called to order by the Vice Chairman in the absence of the Chairman, at 7 : 05 P .M. on December 9 , 1974, at the Palm Desert Middle School . �+ II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III . ROLL CALL Present : Commissioners : ED MULLINS , WILLIAM SEIDLER, MARY K. VAN DE MARK, S . ROY WILSON Absent : Chairman: C . ROBERT HUBBARD Others Present : Director of Environmental Services - Paul A. Williams City Attorney - Dave Erwin Associate Planner - Freeman Rader Assistant Planner - Sam Freed Wilsey & Ham Consultant - Larry Morrison IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of Novem- ber 18, 1974 and the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 2, 1974, were approved as submitted. tow V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Williams stated the only written communications were those that related to the items on the agenda and would be discussed at that time. A. Case GENERAL PLAN EIR - Consideration of the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the Palm Desert General Plan, December, 1974. Vice Chairman Seidler stated that State Law mandates that the City' s EIR report and proposed General Plan be dis- cussed in the order presented. He indicated that the evaluation that the Planning Commission must make with re- gards to the EIR was to determine whether the environmental impacts of the report were adequately expressed within the report. He stated that the Commission would recommend to the Council either certification of the report as sub- mitted, as modified as a result of the hearing tonight , or defer action until the revisions are made. He stated that the firm of Wilsey & Ham, Inc . had prepared the Draft EIR and the General Plan. He then introduced Mr . Larry Morri- son of the firm of Wilsey & Ham and stated he would be available for questions on the EIR. He then explained the low public hearing procedure and declared the public hearing open. He then asked the Staff for the report on the EIR. Mr. Williams presented the report on the EIR which in- cluded the agencies receiving the report, some 33 in num- ber, and included the staff responses to the comments made by some 9 of the agencies receiving the report . Mr. Williams went into detail as to the content of the EIR Special Planning Commission Meeting -2- December 9 , 1974 and summarized the major points of the EIR. On comple- tion of the Staff Report, he inquired as to any questions of the Commission. Being no questions , the Vice Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to be heard regarding the EIR. Mr. Lloyd Wiggins , 72-919 Bursera Way, Director of the Palm Desert Property Owners Association stated that the Palm .. Desert Property Owners Association does not feel that the document is adequate, and that the citizens were asked for input before the document was prepared and the input is opposed to the output . He stated that Palm Desert would not want to become the shopping center for the Coachella Valley or to have Palm Desert become the convention cen- ter as indicated in the report . They do not want high density and that the Association represents a considerable portion of the population of Palm Desert. He explained the present density is 3 units per acre in the Property Owners Association area, and that we are not asking for (in 2 cases) 18 per acre. He explained they would like to keep the present appearance of Palm Desert as a desert village. He then read a letter, dated December 5 , 1974, from the Palm Desert Property Owners Association and stated that the letter was the feeling of the property owners (copy attached. ) Mr. Charles Root , 45-860 Ocotillo Drive, stated that he and the home owners all want low density and therefore, he supported the comments made by the Property Owners Association. Mr. John Scurry, Sands and Shadows Apartments , Highway 74, stated he also was in favor of low density and less smog, and said he backs the Property Owners Association and in- troduced a letter to the secretary which more fully stated his position on the EIR (copy attached) . Mr. Lyman Martin, 73-218 Fiddleneck, stated in looking over the EIR, he had questions to ask of the secretary. What was the decision on the date palm groves , are they to remain as groves? [That about the increase in traffic and humidity? He suggested that we not grow so fast , slow down, and gather more citizen input , and to hold off on this certification. Mr. Martin asked the Commission to review page 14E with regards to the adverse impacts of the General Plan and inquired whether the Planning Commission wanted these changes made to Palm Desert . The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the EIR. Mr . Dave Bond, 44-532 San Pasqual , stated he was in com- plete approval with the speakers before him and added the majority of people do not want what is offered to them in the EIR. He requested that since the Chairman has retired, that he have no vote on what is before the Commission to- night. The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak on the EIR. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. He then asked if the Commission had any questions to ask of the Staff on the issue. Commissioner Wilson stated he read the EIR several times and could find no reference to Palm Desert becoming the shopping center or hotel convention center for the entire valley. He asked Larry Morrison, of Wilsey & Ham if this was spelled out in the report , to which Mr . Morrison re- Special Planning Commission Meeting -3- December 9 , 1974 plied there was no such indication in the report . Commissioner Mullins stated that the EIR was a document which was not supposed to be beautiful but to bring to our attention that there will be some adverse impacts and that the document is well done, and its contents are what we can expect to see happen as a result of growth and development . Commissioner Van de Mark stated that while population can create part of the environmental problems , all the things that brought everyone here will still remain the same if we can minimize the adverse impacts . The Vice Chairman then entertained a motion to certify or not to certify the EIR as complete. Commissioner Mullins made the motion, Commissioner Wil- son seconded to certify the EIR as complete and send 'it to the City Council including the statements made in the Staff Report and at the public hearing tonight . The mo- tion was unanimously carried. Vice Chairman Seidler recessed the meeting at 8 : 00 P .M. for 10 minutes . The meeting opened again at 8 : 10 P .M. B. Case PALM DESERT GENERAL PLAN, DECEMBER, 1974 - PLAN- NING COMMISSION INITIATIVE - Consideration of the first General Plan prepared for Palm Desert covering a planning area of approximately 82 square miles and extending from approximately Interstate 10 on the north to the San Bernardino National Forest on the south and Bob Hope Drive on the west to Washington Street on the east . too Vice Chairman Seidler made the statement of what the item was regarding the General Plan. He gave an in- depth introduction to the General Plan with regards to what had occurred previously as to previous public meet- ings , CAC input and City Staff input . Finally, he in- dicated that the Commission could either approve the General Plan as submitted, approve it as amended, or de- fer the matter to provide for additional input . Vice Chairman Seidler asked the Staff for the report on the General Plan. Mr. Williams indicated that Larry Morrison, of the firm of Wilsey & Ham would present the introductory remarks which would put the General Plan into perspective. Following those remarks , the Commission should consider the General Plan on an element by element basis . The Commission concurred with this approach. Larry Morrison then spoke and indicated that he was pleased to be presenting the summary of the Plan which was a culmination of 9 months effort , aided by inputs from the Citizens Advisory Committee, sub committees , Planning Commission, City Council, City Manager , the Staff, College of the Desert and other consultants . He stated the docu- ment is not a static document but a plan that reflects a series of cycles , and looks 30-50 years into the fu- omm ture. He then proceeded to show slides of the Plan and explain its development . Upon completion of the introductory remarks , Mr. Williams then read a letter from George Berkey, Chairman of the Citizens Advisory Committee, which recommended approval of the General Plan subject to some 6 changes . Mr . Wil- liams stated that the recommended changes of the CAC would be discussed where they would be applicable in dis- cussions of the specific elements . Special Planning Commission Meeting -4- December 9 , 1974 On the Land Use Element Mr . Williams proceeded to sum- marize comments from several letters received on the General Plan. The letters received were from the fol- lowing: Joseph E . Young, Mayor of the City of Indian Wells ; D. H. Mitchell, Mitchell Management Service; Cartwright Hunter, Sr. Warden, St . Margaret ' s Episco- pal Church; M. D. Jayred, Vice President Environment Development Co . ; Larry Morrison, Wilsey & Ham, Inc . regarding the Charles D. Taylor property; D. H. Shayler, Pacific Rim; Barbara Reynolds , Secretary of the Palm r.. Desert Property Owners Association; William E. and Dorothy L. Beck; Bradley A. Walker; a resolution, from the Concerned Citizens of Palm Desert; George Schulte- jann, Department of Fire Protection, California Division of Forestry; Jim Chapman, Bekins Management Company. Mr. Williams stated that the recommendation by the CAC to change the land use designation of the Point Happy area to low density was not supported in that the Staff and Wilsey & Ham felt the need for specialty commercial in that area. Mr. Williams pointed out on the land use map the changes that were requested by these letters and indicated those that Staff would recommend and those that Staff would not recommend. Vice Chairman Seidler stated that he had a question with regards to the proposed densities on the land use map and how they related to existing development in the City. He then asked Mr. Williams to point out some of the existing development in the community and their ap- proximate densities which Mr. Williams proceeded to do so . Mr . Williams then went to the aerial photo to point out the areas of low density and very low density stating that Sandpiper has 3 units to the acre , Fiddleneck and south of Shadow Mountain has 2-3 units per acre, east of the school along Peppergrass is 52 units per acre. Within the Property Owners Association area, some areas are as low as 3 and as high as 62 and that the highest density in the city is around the Deep Canyon area. Being no questions of Staff from the Commission, Vice Chairman Seidler asked if anyone from the audience would like to speak. Mr. John Scurry, Sand and Shadows expressed his feelings about the density and height stating that the beauty of the area would be lost with high rises , or buildings over 2 stories , and stated we should not make an L.A. out of Palm Desert . Mr. John MacDonald, 2215 West Broadway, Anaheim, Real Estate Investor, spoke regarding the road system stating we have a cobweb of roads . He indicated that the roads seemed not to go in the direction where the traffic would want to go. He was particularly concerned with the fact that 42nd Avenue was no longer shown as a through street . He stated that he owned a 40-acre parcel at the southeast corner of the intersection of Portola Avenue and 42nd Avenue . He stated that after a thorough analy- sis of the area he had acquired this property as a long- term investment . He stated an additional objection re- garding the present designation of this present 40 acres as a Sand Dune Park . Mr . Ron Gorman, Verba Santa Drive, stated he was sur- prised at the low number of persons attending the meet- ing and he thought the hearing should be postponed until Special Planning Commission Meeting -5- December 9 , 1974 the meeting received more publicity. Since the resigna- tion of the Chairman, he thought it would be better to have input from the new Commissioner as well. He in- quired as to the proposal by St. Mary' s Church. After an explanation by the secretary, he stated he was not in favor of the proposal on the basis of the increased traffic of the project. He went on to indicate that he fully supported the resolutions of the Palm Desert Prop- erty Owners Association and he requested that greater consideration be made of these statements than given by Staff. " Mr. Enos Reid, Attorney, 3800 Orange Street, Riverside, spoke regarding Ironwood Country Club and indicated that since the country club has an approved Conditional Use Permit he would request that the property be given a designation of medium density residential . He went on to indicate some recommended wording to be added to the text of the Land Use Element which spoke to the situa- tion where development has approved Conditional Use Permits . Mr. Scott Biddle, 1970 Placentia Avenue , Costa Mesa, developer of Mountainback, stated that since Mountain- back has an approved permit regarding the medium density, he asked that it be continued on that basis and not re- verted to low density. He recommended that the Commis- sion follow the Staff recommendation and indicate the Mountainback property as medium density residential. Mr. Lyman Martin, 73-218 Fiddleneck, once again asked how much of the date palm areas would remain as a pro- tected area and urged complete preservation. Mr . Larry Morrison indicated on the aerial photo the existing date groves and pointed out the date grove to be preserved. Mr . Martin stated that developers come in and cut down everything and these date palm areas are precious and should be left alone to die a natural death. Mr. Robert Chaplicki, Thunderbird Country Club , Rancho Mirage, stated he wished to see the home for the aged go into the 5-acre parcel between St . Margaret ' s Church and Palm Desert Community Church. He requested that the St. Margaret ' s Church property be designated as high den- sity residential to allow for this development. He stated that the architect was in the audience who could better describe the proposed project . Mr. Robert Ricciardi , 73-700 Highway 111, stated the home for the aged would be financed by HUD, built by 100% fed- eral monies , and that the idea is to provide minimal hous- ing at low cost . The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the Land Use Element , there being none, the next element discussed was the Urban Design Element . Mr. Williams stated the CAC recommended some changes and that Staff concurs with those changes . The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the Urban Design Element , there being none, the next element discussed was the Population/Economic Ele- ment. Mr. Williams recommended adoption of the Population/ Economic Element as written with no changes . Special Planning Commission Meeting -6- December 9, 1974 The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the Population/Economic Element, there being none the next element discussed was the Housing Element . Mr. Williams listed the changes in the Housing Element, recommending adoption of the Housing Element with those changes . The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the Housing Element, there being none, the next too element discussed was the Circulation Element . Mr. Williams listed the changes in the Circulation Element , recommending adoption of the Circulation Element with those changes . The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the Circulation Element , there being none the next element discussed was the Environmental Element . Mr . Williams read the changes to the Environmental Element , recommending that the comments be located in the Public Facilities Element and the Sheriff' s comments in his let- ter of November 27 , be combined and relocated to the Pub- lic Facilities Element. He recommended adoption of the Environmental Element with those changes . The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the Environmental Element, there being none, the next element discussed was the Public Facilities Element . Mr. Williams read the changes as spelled out in the pro- posed resolution and recommended adoption of the Public Facilities Element with those changes . �.r The Vice Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak regard- ing the Public Facilities Element to which Mr. Enos Reid asked that some changes be made in language on 7 .P . 1 , 7 .P . 2 , and 7 .P . 3 stating that the words , "the City shall" is in front of these paragraphs . He suggested that Staff be given a little more time to work this out in some way so that mandatory provisions can be treated with more flexibility, stating that Ironwood facilities do not fit in the framework of the text . He said he would like to work with Staff regarding the language. Mr . Williams thought that on page 7 .P . 2 line 27 , the fol- lowing changes should be made: Delete the word "above" add the word "herein" after the word standard; and on line 29, after the word"acreage" add "and design" , and change "village" to "neighborhood" . In addition, on page 7 .P . 3 , line 22 , the word "shall" be changed to "should" . The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the Public Facilities Element , there being none, the next element discussed was the Implementation Element . Mr. Williams recommended adoption of the Implementation Element as submitted. The Vice Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak on the Implementation Element. Mr . Dave Bond, San Pasqual Avenue, asked that we defer any action on this since there seems to be quite a few con- troversial items and that in the interest of the City we should not implement this plan at this time. The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak re- garding the General Plan. There being none, the public Special Planning Commission Meeting -7- December 9 , 1974 hearing on the General Plan was closed. He suggested that since there were several changes to be made , that when reviewing the General Plan and the proposed reso- lution, that the Commission review those with the addi- tions made by the Staff and those made tonight, and ad- dress ourselves to the Plan as revised. He then asked if any of the Commissioners wished to make any comments . Commissioner Mullins suggested taking the Elements one at a time from the back forward since the heaviest Ele- ment was the Land Use Map, which was at the front. This being done, the Elements were reviewed one at a time by the Commissioners who made changes which will be reflected in the revised resolution. Except for the Land Use Ele- ment, it seemed to be the concensus of the Commission that no additional changes other than those recommended by Staff should be made. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the staff-recommended changes for the Land Use Element . With regards to the re- quest of Ironwood to designate all the area south of Hay- stack as medium density residential , it was determined, after opening the hearing again to allow Mr. Reid to an- swer some questions regarding their request and closing the hearing again, that an additional change should be added to the Land Use Element to replace the changes #3 and #4 recommended by Staff to indicate that the property south of Mesa View Drive extended from Portola to High- way 74 and to the southerly city limits be designated as medium density residential . Commissioner Wilson brought up a proposal to change the Land Use designation of all property shown as medium den- sity south of the Wash, west of Cook Street , north of Highway 111 to low density residential. After a lengthy discussion and analysis of alternatives , it was determined that the medium density designation of this area should remain and that in the development of neighborhood plans , this alternative should be carefully analyzed. In addition, the proposal by Staff to change the Land Use designation of the property between Haystack and Shadow Mountain Drive extended where it parallels El Paseo and Portola and Highway 74 be changed from medium density residential to low density was reviewed, and the concensus of the Commission seemed to be that it was appropriate . Vice Chairman Seidler asked if there were any other com- ments by the Commissioners regarding the General Plan. Commissioner Mullins indicated that this General Plan had been developed over 9 months with sufficient amount of public input and he was of the opinion there was no need to continue the matter. Commissioner Wilson, in response to the statements made by the Palm Desert Property Owners Association with re- gards to the General Plan stating that Palm Desert was to be the shopping center of the valley and have a large convention center, did not seem to be true. Neither Staff nor any of the Commissioners could find those statements within the General Plan. Commissioner Van de Mark stated that there had been in- numerable public meetings on the General Plan and that Special Planning Commission Meeting -8- December 9 , 1974 she could see no virtue in extending its consideration any longer. There being no other remarks , Commissioner Mullins moved and Commissioner Van de Mark seconded a motion to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 23 as amended. The motion was adopted by the following vote : AYES : MULLINS , SEIDLER, VAN DE MARK, WILSON NOES : NONE ABSENT : HUBBARD ABSTAIN: NONE VII . OLD BUSINESS - None VIII . NEW BUSINESS - None IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None X. COMMENTS A. City Staff - None B. City Attorney - None C . Planning Commissioners - None XI . ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the meeting be adjourned. The motion was un- low animously carried. The meeting was adjourned at 12 : 00 P.M. PAUL A. WILLIAMS , Secretary ATTEST: ILLIAM R. SEIDL Chairman