HomeMy WebLinkAbout0818 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
August 18, 1975
City Hall Council Chambers
I . CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission
was called to order by the Chairman at 7: 02 p.m. on August 18 , 1975
in the City Hall Council Chambers .
II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III . ROLL CALL
Present : Commissioners GEORGE BERKEY, ED MULLINS AND
WILLIAM SEIDLER
Absent : Commissioners MARY VAN DE MARK AND S . ROY WILSON
(Excused Absences)
Others
Present : Paul Williams - Dir . of Environmental Services
Sam Freed - Assistant Planner
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Berkey seconded
the motion to approve the minutes of August 4, 1975 , as submitted.
Motion carried unanimously.
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
VI . PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Seidler explained the public hearing procedure
r�.. and opened the hearing for staff' s first report .
A. Case No. CUP-04-75 PROCK : Consideration of a con-
ditional use permit to allow a small animal hospital
to be constructed on the north side of Highway 111 ,
between Monterey Avenue and San Marcos .
Paul Williams presented the Staff Report and advised that this
case was continued from the August 4 , 1975 Planning Commission meeting.
The specific reason for continuance was at the directive of the
Commission to allow statements that would guarantee adequate mitiga-
tion of potential noise and odor problems that could result from
the construction of the proposed small animal hospital to be added to
the final conditions of approval . Since the last hearing, staff
after consulting with the City Attorney, modified the conditions with
the addition of conditions 23, 24 , and 25 ; and the condition of
undergrounding, as stipulated under the conditional use permit
was deleted and subsequently placed under the conditions of the
parcel map for this project .
After explaining the ramifications of the additional con-
ditions and the deletion of the undergrounding condition under the
conditional use permit , he advised that staff ' s recommendation was
to approve the conditional use permit by Planning Commission Reso-
lution No. 71 , subject to the attached 25 conditions .
Chairman Seidler remarked that since he was not in attendance
at the last meeting he would abstain from any comments regarding
this issue, but he would continue to conduct the public hearing.
After a brief discussion , Chairman Seidler asked if the
applicant had reviewed all 25 conditions . The applicant replied yes .
MINUTES -2- August 18, 1975
ELDON FROCK, 1850 N. Main Street , Salinas California - Mr.
Prock expressed his appreciation for staff ' s work done on his behalf.
He was also in full agreement with staff ' s proposal and the 25 con-
ditions of approval .
There being no further comments, Chairman Seidler closed the
public hearing.
Commissioner Mullins commented that he felt the applicant was
willing to comply with all of the conditions; and the addition of
conditions 23, 24 and 25 should give the Commission the assurance
they were seeking with regards to the control of noise and odor
nuisances which could occur.
Commissioner Berkey agreed with Commissioner Mullins ' comments
and therefore moved for approval of Planning Commission Resolution
No. 71 with the attached 25 conditions. Commissioner Mullins seconded
the motion . Motion carried 2-0 with Chairman Seidler abstaining.
Paul Williams advised that under the Planning Commission by-laws ,
the matter carried. -
B. Case No. CUP-05-75 FEATURE 'TOMES : Consideration of a
conditional use permit to operate a temporary subdivision
sales office for the Moroccan Palm tract in an existing
garage at the northeast corner of Somera and Alamo.
Paul Williams presented the staff report and recommended
approval of the conditional use permit by Planning Commission
Resolution No. 72 subject to six conditions , one of which limited
the use to a maximum of two years or until all homes had been sold,
whichever occurred first . The most important condition was number
four which specified that no sign or advertising of any type whatso-
ever could be erected or installed until plans had been approved by
tow the City of Palm Desert .
In summary, he recommended that the Commission consider the
addition of a seventh condition to be worded as follows :
7. Upon closing of the sales office , the sales
office shall be converted back to a garage.
C. L. BARTON, Construction Superintendent for the project ,
73-012 Skyward Way, Palm Desert spoke in favor of the two year
approval for the sales office.
Chairman Seidler closed the public hearing.
After a review of the conditions , Chairman Seidler suggested
that the Planning Commission review such approvals for temporary
sales offices around a one year period. This would not mean the
Commission would discontinue approval , but would be a yearly review
to verify that all conditions as originally established were
currently being met .
Commissioner Berkey commented that he felt the sales office
should be reviewed after one year, but should remain in effect
until the last unit was sold.
Paul Williams stated that the present Zoning Ordinance
specifically specified a maximum of two years. After that period
of time they would have to apply for a variance for an extended
length of time.
After a lengthy discussion between the Commissioners and
staff regarding a one year period versus a two year period of
expiration , Commissioner Mullins moved for approval of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 72 subject to the attached six conditions
with the addition of condition seven as worded by Paul Williams ;
and leaving the expiration at two years as written . Commissioner
Berkey seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
MINUTES -3- August 18, 1975
C. Case No. CUP-1357 ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT CO. :
Request for a 12 month extension on the conditional
use permit covering the final 209 units for the
Mountainback project on the west side of Highway 74 ,
between Homestead and Portola (Carriage Trail) .
Due to a conflict in schedule , the applicant requested
that this case be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of
September 2 to be considered along with the Tract Case No . 4442
which was also on this meeting ' s Agenda listed under New Business.
Because this public hearing was noticed, Chairman Seidler
opened the hearing for persons to speak in favor or against this
case. There being no comments, Commissioner Mullins moved, Com-
missioner Berkey seconded the motion to continue this public hearing
until September 2 . Motion carried unanimously.
VII . OLD BUSINESS
A. Case No. PM 6912 ELDON PROCh: Consideration of a
parcel map to convert three 60 foot wide lots into
two 90 foot lots on the north side of Highway 111 ,
between Monterey and San Marcos. This case was
continued from August 4 , 1975.
Paul Williams presented the staff report . This case was
continued in conjunction with the conditional use permit on the
small animal hospital . He then proceeded to outline the two most
major concerns expressed at the last Planning Commission meeting
which dealt with the undergrounding of utilities and the require-
ment of the installation of a full-width paved alley along the
entire rear property line of parcels 1 and 2.
Staff recommended that the condition regarding undergrounding
hold as previously specified. Condition 7,"'3 should remain unchanged.
Regarding condition #4, the Commission may wish to review this
and require some modification to this condition to which the applicant
was in objection to. Staff ' s recommended modification to be con-
sidered by the Commission was as follows :
That an additional alternative be added to
the condition stating that the applicant may
submit a cash bond for the value of the proposed
construction where immediate installation was
infeasible .
Chairman Seidler stated that this was not a public hearing,
but the Commission welcomed any comments from the applicant or
his representatives at this time.
JACK GHORMLEY, project engineer , 82640 Highway 111 , Indio ,
spoke on behalf of the project . He advised that it was his under-
standing that the Commission really was without authority to modify
condition #3 beyond what had already been recommended by Staff. He
wanted to convince the Commission that there were extenuating; cir-
cumstances in this case; and requested that the Commission more
strongly ask the City Council to give Dr. Prock special consideration.
From a practical standpoint , he felt it wasn ' t feasible to
tow From
at the present time. Dr . Prock would have to underground
in front of his and other property as well because of the location
of the existing power poles. Because of the size of the project and
the facility, perhaps Ordinance #38 did not apply in application to
this particular project .
MINUTES -4- August 18, 1975
Regarding condition #4 , Mr. Ghormley asked for relief or
modification for Dr. Prock to pave only the maximum of 1/2 the
alley, which would be the entire rear property line of parcel #1 .
Commissioner Berkey asked for clarification of City Council
policy regarding a bond in lieu of paving.
Discussion then ensued between staff and the Commissioners
regarding the alternative of paving 1/2 the alley and how the
remainder of the alley would be paved in the future .
LLOYD MOUNT, Walker & Lee, Palm Desert , spoke in favor of
Now the project . He advised that the applicant ' s request for paving 1/2
of the alley specifically referred to 1/2 long,not wide. Mr .
Mount ' s primary concern was that if the applicant was required to
pave the full 180 ' he would be financially penalized due to the fact
that he only owned 90' of the two parcels . Therefore, he requested
relief for the applicant to only pay for improvements on his frontage.
He felt it was preferable for a bond to be posted and to install the
improvements at the same time when the rest of the street was done
since this was mostly undeveloped property along Palm Desert Drive .
After a lengthy discussion, Commissioner Mullins moved that
Planning Commission Resolution No. 73 be approved with the 10 con-
ditions as written. Commissioner Berkey seconded the motion which
carried unanimously. Chairman Seidler abstained from voting.
Commissioner Berkey commented that his vote was on the basis
that this was a policy matter and that the final decision of changes
to the conditions should be made by the City Council .
Commissioner Berkey stressed the fact that he felt Dr. Prock
should only improve the alley for the full length of his parcel which
was 90 ' ; or have the option of posting a cash bond for the value of
the proposed construction where immediate installation was infeasible.
Commissioner Mullins agreed with Commissioner Berkey and
recommended by minute motion that the Planning Commission recommend
to the City Council, that condition #4 be modified to require paving
for 1/2 of the alley (90 ' ) ; and that the applicant be permitted the
option of posting a cash bond in lieu of paving. Commissioner
Berkey seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Chairman
Seidler abstained from the vote.
VIII . NEW BUSINESS
A. Case No. Tract 4442 ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT CO. :
Request for a 12 month extension in which to file a
final map for the final phase of 209 units of the
Mountainback project , on the west side of Highway 74
between Homestead and Portola (Carriage Trail) .
This case was continued to the September 2 , 1975 Planning
Commission meeting at the request of the applicant .
B. Case No. Tract 5277 DESTINATION RESORT CORP. : Request
for a 12 month extension in which to record a final
map for the Palm Desert Racquet and Resort Club project ,
east of San Luis Rey and south of Shadow Lake Drive .
Paul Williams presented the staff report . It was staff ' s
recommendation that the 12 month extension be granted by Planning
Commission Resolution No. 74 ; and that such a recommendation be made
to the City Council by said resolution with the additional condition
stipulated in the resolution that requires Design Review Board
process prior to any construction and that that process include
landscaping , irrigation , and lighting plans as a part of the approval .
The original conditions would remain unchanged.
a
MINUTES -5- August 18 , 1975
Commissioner Berkey moved for approval of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 74 . Commissioner Mullins seconded
the motion which carried unanimously.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS
The Commission reviewed the three cases discussed at the
Design Review Board meeting of August 5 and expressed an interest
in Case No. 14C, the sign plans for the Toni O'Malley project .
This case would be brought up for review by the Planning Commission
after plans have been approved by the Design Review Board.
Staff advised that the City Council , at their last meeting,
reviewed the recommendations proposed by the Planning Commission
regarding changes to the present Design Review Board process .
The City Council will schedule a joint meeting with the Planning
Commission and the Design Review Board to air the whole matter.
X. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
X I . COMMENTS
A. City Staff
Paul Williams referred to the letter prepared by himself and
passed out to the Planning Commission for review during study
session. Staff recommended by minute motion that the Planning
Commission request that the City Attorney provide them with a legal
opinion with regards to the City' s position relative to deed
restrictions that affect the development of property within the
City of Palm Desert .
After review of Mr . Williams ' letter , by minute motion
Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Berkey seconded the motion
that this request be forwarded to the City Attorney request that he
research and document a legal opinion on deed restrictions within
the City of Palm Desert . Motion carried unanimously.
B. City Attorney - None
C. Planning Commissioners
The Planning Commissioners discussed a change in the meeting
schedule of the Planning Commission to be implemented in the near
future. It was the concensus of the Commissioners that the first
meeting of every month be held to specifically review conditional
use permits, tentative maps, and various other applications submitted
by individuals. The second meeting of the month would be reserved
for discussion of ordinances, specific plans , and other long range
planning activities. Therefore, applicants would not have to sit
through lengthy discussions on ordinances which were not pertinent
to their case , but they could attend the second meeting of the month
if they were interested in hearing and giving their input to various
planning issues.
Chairman Seidler then directed Paul Williams to set the
future schedule of meetings accordingly.
XII . ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Berkey moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded
the motion to adjourn the meeting at 8 : 20 p.m. 11otion carried
unanimously.
AT T PAUL A. WILLIAMS , SECRETARY
W LAM S IDLER HAIRMAN