Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0414 PLANNING COMMISSIOr1 MEETING P�IINUTES April 14, 1975 Middle School - 7 : 00 p .m. I . CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planninv Commission was called to order by the Chairman at 7 : 00 p .m. on April 14, 1975 at the Palm Desert P�iddle School . � II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III . ROLL CALL Present : Commissioners GEORGE BERKEY, ED MULLINS , WILLIAM SEIDLER, r2ARY K. VAN DE MARK, S . ROY LJILSON Others Present : Paul Williams - Dir. of Environmental Services Freeman Rader - Associate Planner Sam Freed - Assistant Planner Bill Garrett - Wilsey & Ham Consultant IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Berkey moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion to approve the March 17 , 1975 minutes as submitted. The motion carried unanimously. V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None VI . PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Seidler explained the public hearing procedure. �r. A. Case No. PUP-Ol-74 THETA LOGAN : Consideration of a request to exten t e approva of the public use permit previously ;ranted by the Commission to enable the applicant to operate a preschool center in a residential district. (R-2) Freeman Rader presented the Staff Report requesting the ex- tension of approval of a public use permit previously g�anted by the Commission to enable the applicant to operate a preschool in a residential area; and also increase the number of children permitted to attend to not more than 15 . Paul Williams then indicated that the public use permit would expire on April 14, 1980. After reviewing the report in detail, Mr. Rader recommended that it be moved by Resolution No . 43 that the Planning Commission approve the request for extension of the public use permit, subject to the conditions of approval, extending the use until April 14, 1980 . Chairman Seidler then opened the public hearing. First to address the Planning Commission was : �,,,, THETA LOGAN 74-081 Guadalupe Avenue Palm Desert , California Theta Logan expressed her appreciation with regards to this approval and felt it was most appropriate to continue this preschool, as it was a needed and worth- while type of facility for the city of Palm Desert . 2. Commissioner Van de Mark moved, Commissioner Wilson seconded the motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 43 with all the conditions as stated. Motion carried unanimously. VII . OLD BUSINESS - None VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. Adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. 1 , setting forth the basic powers and planning guidelines pertaining to the Redevelopment Project. �..� Paul Williams presented the Staff Report regarding the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. 1, and briefly discussed the basic elements . He brought to the attention of the Commission, some minor wording changes the staff felt were appropriate . After these changes were discussed in detail, Bill Garrett, Wilsey & Ham Consultant , was asked to speak on behalf of the Plan. Bill Garrett then addressed the Commission. 'rie felt that the Plan had been explained in great detail at previous Planning Commission meetings , and therefore, had only a few comments to make . First, he stated that the word "adoption" had been used during the meeting. He emphasized that the Planning Commisssion was not being asked to adopt this Plan, but approve and refer it to the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council for finalizing. With regards to changes recommended by the staff, Mr. Garrett said that Wilsey & Ham could see no problems with the recommended changes . Paul Williams then suggested revised wording for Resolution No. 43, deleting the word "adoption" and amending it to read "approval of the Redevelopment Plan. " `""""" Commissioner Berkey moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution No . 43 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. At this point in the meeting, Freeman Rader requested that Case No . Tract 6602-CHESTER ANDERSON be reviewed at a later time durin� the meeting, due to the fact that certain citizens , who had expressed concerns regarding this project and wanted to address the Commission, were not yet in attendance. There being no conflicts with this request, the Commission then began review of the next item on the agenda. B. Case No. lOC - ROY CARVER: Consideration of a request or plot plan approval for Phase III of the Palms to Pines Shopping Center, located west of Plaza Way, between State Highway 111 and El Paseo. (CPS) Freeman Rader presented the Staff Report . He stated that the applicant is proposing to develop a nortion of what will eventually be a large expanded community shopping center. The portion proposed for development at this time is a com- bination shopping, eating, and entertainment facility. ;,,,,�, He explained that the proposed project appears to be the type which is most suited to the approved and projected use for the area. Since this project would be a part of a much larger project when the area is fully developed, Mr . Rader explained that it is essential that proper provisions for handling circulation be incorporated at this time. He stated the staff had pre- pared an overall circulation plan for this area to accommo- date projected auto and pedestrian traffic. Both the County and the State had reviewed the master circulation plan and found it effective in dealing with current and future traffic requirements . 3 . The applicant had adapted his plans to conform with the master circulation plan. Mr . Rader stated that since this project is but one part of a larger development, it is likewise necessary that it effectively integrate with existing and future development. This project conforms with this requirement , both in archi- tectural design and in flexibility to connect with future development via plaza expansion, pathway extension and structural extension. The adjacent property owner (thru �., authorized representatives) had reviewed this proposed project and had indicated that every effort would be made to integrate future development in with it. The adjacent property owner (who owns the remaining land scheduled for planned mini-regional development) had also reviewed the master circulation plan and indicated willingness to conform to it. Mr . Rader indicated the overall architectural quality of the proposed center was quite hibh and provides a high standard upon which future development within the vicinity should be based. Adequate parking would be provided by means of on-site parking and adjacent parking from other areas . Provisions were being made to provide for any overflow parking which might occur until the remainder of the center is completed. In summary, Mr. Rader stated that the proposed project met with all ordinances and General Plan provisions . It conformed to the overall circulation plan for the area and provided for attractive ways of integrating in with future development . The quality was of a desirable calibre. Therefore, he felt it appropriate to approve the plot plan and architectural �... concept of this proposed project. He indicated further in- depth reviews of this project would continue as plans are finalized and the Design Review Board would be able to closely monitor every aspect of the project as it undergoes completion. Mr. Rader concluded his report by recommending that the Commission concur with the staff' s recommendation and approve the project by Resolution No. 45 , subject to some 38 conditions . The members of the Planning Commission sought clarifications from Mr . Rader on several items and then the Chairman asked for comments from interested parties . The first person to address the Commission was : ROY WILLIAM CARVER P.O. Box 408 El Monte, California Mr. Carver indicated he had read the conditions under which the staff and the Architectural Review Board had recommended approval; and took exception to a couple of the conditions . Condition ��25 bothered him with regard to the marquee for "' the theater . He then went into an explanation of several modifications they had to make in their plans to merely locate the theater in an appropriate section of the center , and now were concerned with the proper signage and exposure . 4. Another exception was with Condition ��36 . He didn' t want everything in the shopping center to look the same . He felt that the Spanish theme and design carried through- out the center was harmonious with the rest of the community. He did agree with the reduction of the height of specifically the Carrows Restaurant . However, he didn' t want all the buildings to become bland and monotonous . He summarized by stating that he felt it was not staff' s '""" perogative to make recommendations regarding archi- tectural plans . He then wanted to speak about another matter. He stated that for several months he had come before the staff to develop this proposed plan; and elevations had been changed a dozen times in order to come in with what he felt the staff was going to recommend to the ARB. He said he was disappointed and surprised that they had 38 conditions of approval for their plans . He stated he hadn' t just thrown the plans on their desk and asked them to approve them. He expressed his con- cern that during that time, some of the final conditions hadn' t been mentioned. Chairman Seidler then made comments based upon the remarks made to the Commission. He said it was not staff ' s intent nor did he believe it would be the Commission' s intent to disapprove any marquee, and that all signage including the marquee would be worked out at one time so that there would be an integrated theme of all signage. After considerable discussion, Freeman Rader wished to state that the conditions as submitted were restatements of the facts which were discussed previously with the applicant. He stated the staff had not waited until the last moment to �'"' make these changes or conditions of approval. ROBERT STEIN 8383 Wilshire Boulevard Beverly Hills , California Mr. Stein was a representative of the proposed theater for this shopping complex. He gave a brief background regarding the theater construction, the types of movies to be shown, and specific reasons for approval of a marquee and the proper signage for his business . GREG JORGE 10960 Wilshire Boulevard Westwood, California Mr. Jorge spoke on behalf of the McDonalds facility proposed for the new shopping complex. He explained McDonalds ' concern with the appearance of the building and how the McDonalds could be an attractive facility and would contribute to the city. MR. MOORHEAD San Pasqual �,,, Palm Desert , California Mr. Moorhead asked how many parking spaces were going to be provided for a McDonalds . Mr . Jorge informed the Commission & Mr . Moorhead that a total of 60 spaces would be provided. The Commission then reviewed the parking situation as it related to specific uses during various times of the day. 5 . Chairman Seidler said it should be noted that when you take the buildings individually, with regards to parking spaces , it could make a big difference. The theater is located on a separate parcel and during 5 days of the week, those parking lots don' t have too many cars parked in them them during the day time . Fven if you took them individually, those spaces would not be needed from 9-5 . At ni�ht is when the theater, with its large seating capacity, would be utilizing the spaces . When analyzino the parking needs , consideration must be given to the time that these spaces would be used. �..�. A lengthy discussion then ensued with re;ards to regulations , ordinances , and other parking space considerations . BERNIE LEUNG 73-690 El Paseo , Suite ;�4 Palm Desert , California Bernie Leung outlined the parking requirements at Safeway as approved under the County' s jurisdiction, in comparison to the proposed shoppin� center parking, stating that the new requirements were even more stringent than previous requirements . DENNIS GOODMAN Construction Supervisor , McDonalds 10960 Wilshire Boulevard tiJestwood, California In response to comments on the roof design of McDonalds , Mr . Goodman stated that the height of the roo_f was required due to the amount of airconditioning equipment housed on the roof in order to adequately operate their specific type of operation. There had been a question �"" raised with regards to the beams on the structure. Mr. �oodman said McDonalds could see no problem with deletin� the beams , however, they must have adequate space to house their airconditionin; equipment . Commissioner Berkey moved that condition �k36 be modified to read: (36) Roof lines on structures C,D, and E shall be be as shown on the ori�inal plans ; and the roof lines on buildin�s F and G shall be as shown on the applicant ' s revised plans with the exception of the beams on buildin; F; and that all materials on the roof and sides shall be similar . Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion. Motion was unanimous- ly carried. Chairman Seidler moved that condition y�35 be modified to read as follows : (35) An additional row of parking spaces shall be provided along the west side of the project to provide for additional parking. Sixty (60) of �,,,,, these spaces shall be permanently retained in order to meet current ordinance requirements . Landscaping on the west side shall be provided as approved by the Director of Environmental Services . Commissioner Wilson seconded the motion. Motion was unanimously carried. 6. After further discussion regardin� the landscapinj described in condition ��35 , it was agreed by the Commission to amend their motion to chan�e the sixty (60) parking spaces to fifty-five (55) as the first motion did not take into consideration, the landscaping space requirements of the parking spaces . Commissioner Wilson seconded the amended motion made by Chairman Seidler. The motion, as amended, was unanimously carried. Discussion then ensued with regards to condition ;�11 , si¢nage approval. Commissioner Van de Mark moved that all si�nage """' plans be brou�ht back to the Planning Commission for final approval . Commissioner tJilson seconded the motion. Approval of this motion was 4-l. Commissioner Wilson moved that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 45 , subject to the attached conditions as amended. Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion. Motion was unanimously carried. C. Case No. Tract 6602 CHESTER ANDERSON: Consideration of a request or an approva o a Parcel Map to change the side lot between two (2) existin� parcels . (R-2-8000) Freeman Rader presented the Staff Report . He stated that the applicant was proposing to resubdivide an existing area of land into two (2) separate parcels . The existing area of land was currently divided into two (2) parcels (as was shown on P�ap ��l) . However , the applicant wished to chan�e the size and shape of those parcels in order that the land could be suitable for development into two separate lots and dwellings . He also stated that the proposed parcelization (as was shown on P�ap �k2) conformed with the required lot sizes ; and development if properly planned could be carried � out effectively. In summary, Mr . Rader stated that since the property in question was landlocked away from any public ri�ht-of-ways , special approval must be acquired in order to obtain access from the privately owned road which abuts the property to the south. If this provision and other conditions were met , the proposed parcelization would be compatible with the existing development in the area, and was there.fore, appro- priate. Any further attention which must be accorded to the development of this property could be handled throuah the Architectural keview Process . Mr . Rader concluded his report by recommendin; that the Commission concur with staff' s recommendation and approve the project by Resolution No . 46 , subject to the conditions of approval . ENOS REID 3800 Oranje Street Riverside, California Mr. Reid, representative for Silver Spur Associates , wanted to bring to the Commission' s attention, a legal problem that existed with the proposed lot split . He � stated that there was no recorded legal access to any public street or highway concerning this property; and since there was no such access , he felt it was mandatory that the �ommission see that a public access is pro- vided before the division can be approved. He explained the legal ramifications of County Ordinance 460 , Section 3 . 2� with regards to requirements pertinent to this case. He also stated that Silver Spur Trail had been offered as a legal right-of-way, but it was never accepted by the County. 7 . ED PECK 73-610 Buckboard Trail Palm Desert, California Mr. Peck explained problems which had occurred over the past three years in trying to straighten out the matter of a private road versus a public accessway. In summary, Mr. Peck recommended that the Commission take no action on the lot split since there anparently was a question of legality involved which had not be resolved in the past. H felt that perhaps the process "�"' before the Commission may be a vehicle for solving the problem. Chairman Seidler suggested that since there was a question of le�ality involved, the Commission should turn the matter over to the City Attorney for review and opinion. Then, if the staff feels that it is legally proper , the matter will be taken up by the Planning Commission at that time . Commissioner Wilson moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion that the Commission disapprove Planning Commission Resolution No. 46 . Approval of the motion was 4 in f avor with Commissioner Berkey abstaining . D. Discussion of recor�nended chan es to the Palm Desert General Plan as pro�osed by the Re erendum Committee . Paul Williams presented the Staff Report. He stated that by Planning Commission Resolution No. 47 , it was recommended that the Planning Commission report back to the City Council , that the submitted document would be utilized by the Commission as a part of the Study Sessions on the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map . He also stated that the document would be con- � sidered as a part of the amendment of the General Plan which may be necessary as a result of the development of the imple- mentation tools to the General Plan, particularly the Zonina Ordinance and Zoning Map . The Commission felt that the document submitted by the Referen- dum Committee expressed concerns other than just with the General Plan, and therefore, the City could consider it only as additional citizen input. Chairman Seidler stated that it should be noted that the Commission did not have before them an amendment to the General Plan and would not be making revisions to the General Plan without following proper procedures . Commissioner Wilson commented that as he read through the Committee' s report, he consistently found it addressing the Zoning Ordinance, which the Commission had worked on for many hours . He was very disappointed that members of the Ref_eren- dum Committee had not shown up to give the Commission their input in person. He suggested that more citizen input be given in the future. Commissioner Berkey moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution No . 47 . ,�,� Motion was unanimously carried. 8 . E. Case No. Tract 6229 MARR.AKESH: Consideration of a request to revise a previously approved tentative map for the final portion of the Marrakesh project. (R-1-10, 000) Freeman Rader presented the Staff Report. He recommended that the Planning Commission approve a revision to the previously approved tentative map for the final portion of the Marrakesh planned residential development, subject to conditions of approval. The only effective change that would occur from the approval of the revised map would �ue ttie change in the � number of phases in which the project would be completed. Commissioner Berkey moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution No . 48 subject to conditions of approval . Motion was unanimously carried . F. Polic Statement on Whitewater Channel: Request by the Coac e a Va ey Association o Governments (CVAG) for City Policy Statement on the use of the Whitewater Channel as a public pathway and recreation reserve. Paul Williams presented the Staff Report. The staff requested that the Planning Commission endorse a Policy Statement by the city to outline its policy regarding the development of the Whitewater Channel as a possible "regional public reserve. " He concluded by stating that staff recommended it be moved by Resolution �o. 49 that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council , approval of this Policy Statement . Chairman Seidler recommended that Exhibit A, ��9 be modified to read as follows : 9 . Future housing or commercial developments located on the Whitewater River are to provide rights-of- ir way for the trail system. Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Wilson seconded the motion to approve P anning Commission Resolution No. 49 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. IX. OP�AL COMMUNICATIONS - None X. COMMENTS A. City Staff : Paul Williams informed the Planning Commission that his office would soon be sending out the particulars for a seminar to be held in Coronado, June 30th and July lst , which he would like the Planninb Commission to attend. B. City Attorney - None C. Planning Commissioners - None XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10 : 20 p .m. �____ ■.r � � ,. ` �\ �_� ��'`-.� � �!�....�"t.. ��� ��.'J t.�,,V't s<'`�;\ _ ,3 � PAUL A. WILLIANIS , SECRETARY ATT� T• �'` I AM SE , CHAI