HomeMy WebLinkAbout1006 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 6, 1975
7 p.m. - Council Chambers
I . CALL TO ORDER
The adjourned meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission was called
to order by the Chairman at 7:05 p.m. on October 6, 1975 in the City Hall Council
Chambers.
II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners GEORGE BERKEY, ED MULLINS, WILLIAM SEIDLER,
MARY K. VAN DE MARK, S. ROY WILSON
Others
Present: Paul A. Williams - Director of Environmental Services
Steve Fleshman - Associate Planner
Sam Freed - Assistant Planner
IV. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
V. PUBLIC HEARING - Before outlining the public hearing procedures, Chair-
man Seidler noted that all items on the Agenda had been reviewed by the
Commission prior to the meeting during Study Session for informational
purposes only; and that no decisions were made on these items. He then
explained the hearing procedures and opened the hearing for the first
case.
A. Case No. CUP-07-75 CITINATIONAL BANK, Applicant: Request for a
parking lot on property in the R-3 district on the north side
of Larrea, between Portola and San Luis Rey.
Steve Fleshman presented the staff report which included a slide pre-
sentation relative to the location and relationship of the parking lot to ad-
jacent properties. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve this
request by Resolution No. 85, subject to the attached conditions.
Chairman Seidler asked for comments from the applicant or his repre-
sentative.
Representative of Citinational Bank, DEL DE REVERE, Irvine, California,
commented in favor of the project. He stated that as indicated in staff' s
report, Citinational Bank was requesting site plan approval for the use of an
R-3 zoned parcel for a parking lot; and explained that the building was exactly
the same as it was approved last year. His primary reason for being in atten-
dance was to answer questions which the Commission or members of the audience
might have.
WILLIS MILLER, owner of the property adjacent to the proposed parking
lot, spoke in favor of the project and recommended traffic circulation al-
ternatives for Larrea.
There being no further comments, Chairman Seidler closed the public
hearing.
Commissioner Berkey moved adoption of Planning Commission Resolution
ir,," No. 85, subject to the attached conditions. Commissioner Wilson seconded the
motion which carried unanimously.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- October 6, 1975
B. Case No. CUP-06-75 EUCLID-BALL, Applicant: Request for a home sales
office in a new residential subdivision on the south side of Haystack,
between Highway 74 and Portola.
Paul Williams presented the staff report. Euclid-Ball Company was re-
questing approval to operate a temporary new home sales office in conjunction
with 15 units under construction. Said office would be within the garage of one
of the units of the Portola Estates project on Haystack. Staff considered this
request appropriate and recommended approval by Planning Commission Resolution
No. 86, subject to the attached conditions.
The applicant was not present. There being no further comments, Chairman
Seidler closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Wilson moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion
to approve Resolution No. 86 with the attached conditions. Motion carried
unanimously.
C. Case C/Z-01-75 RMW OF THE DESERT, Applicant: Request for a change of
zone from R-3-7000 to R-3-3000 on a 100,000 square foot (2.28 ac. )
parcel on the south side of Parkview between the Palm Valley Channel
and Fairhaven Drive.
Steve Fleshman presented the staff report on this request in terms of
location, terrain and other related factors. After a slide presentation, Mr.
Fleshman advised that staff recommended approval of the request by Planning Com-
mission Resolution No. 87.
Commissioner Berkey commented that he felt the Planning Commission would
be setting a precedent by approving this change of zone, specifically because
there could be no assurances as to exactly how this land would be developed in
the future. After further discussion, Chairman Seidler asked for comments from
the applicant.
KARL MEISTERLIN, Cathedral City, owner and developer of the project, stated
that the City of Palm Desert presently had a problem in that little housing was
available in the community for college students. The designation of this property
would clear the way for the development of 32 single story, one bedroom student
type housing units, which he felt would greatly aid the housing shortage problems
for the students and the City.
Chairman Seidler commented that what was difficult was the fact that the
applicant had a very definite idea of how he wished to use the property if he
received approval for the change of zone. Commissioner Berkey commented that
Chairman Seidler's point was well taken, however, he was uncertain as to the
effect economic conditions might have on the project planned for the future. He
felt this case should be reviewed strictly as a zone change and how that zone
change could affect the surrounding areas.
Commissioner Mullins agreed with Commissioner Berkey and stated that when
the Planning Commission had previously studied this area, he thought it was the
general concensus that the most appropriate zoning for that area was R-3-7000.
Commissioner Van de Mark asked how many property owners were involved in
the subject area. Mr. Fleshman replied that a total of nine parcels was in-
volved. At this time he could not estimate how many individual owners were
involved.
Commissioner Wilson commented that he found it difficult to separate the
project from the zoning. He felt that the Planning Commission would be setting
a bad precedent if they were to start supporting an increase in density. He
then asked if there was some way the Commission could received more information and
have additional time to study this parcel in relationship to the surrounding areas.
He was reluctant at this time to start supporting the R-3-3000 zoning, however he
suggested that in the Commission's review of the Zoning Map, some kind of allowances
for this type of development should be considered.
Commissioner Berkey suggested a continuance of this case until after the
Commission had had a chance to have additional hearings on the general area.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- October 6, 1975
Paul Williams advised that if the Commission felt a continuance was in
order, the case should be continued to December 2, 1975.
Chairman Seidler asked for comments from the applicant.
KARL MEISTERLIN stated that he would be happy to accept a continuance
until December 2, 1975.
Commissioner Berkey moved that the matter be continued to December 2, 1975.
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Mullins and unanimously carried.
D. Case No. VARIANCE-07-75 RMW OF THE DESERT, Applicant: Request for a
variance to allow a parking ratio of 12 to 1 for a one bedroom
student apartment; and to reduce the minimum unit size to 600 square
feet of living area for a one bedroom student apartment on a 2.28
acre parcel on the south side of Parkview Drive between the Palm
Valley Channel and Fairhaven Drive.
Chairman Seidler advised that this case was in conjunction with the last
public hearing item and was a request for a variance on the parking. Mr. Williams
commented that based upon the circumstances of the continuance of the change of
zone case, staff recommended this variance also be continued until December 2, 1975.
Chairman Seidler asked if the applicant wished to address the Commission.
The applicant indicated he was in agreement with the continuance until
December 2, 1975.
Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Berkey seconded the motion to
continue this case until December 2, 1975. Motion carried unanimously.
VI . OLD BUSINESS
A. A discussion of Ordinance No. 81 modifying the procedures and
makeup of the Design Review Board.
Paul Williams advised that at the City Council meeting of September 25, 1975,
the Council acted on the changes to the Design Review Board and Process as dis-
cussed at the Joint Meeting of September 23. The first reading of the Ordinance
No. 81 was on September 25, 1975 and the second reading was scheduled for October 9.
Mr. Williams stated that if the Planning Commission approved Ordinance No. 81 as
presented, it would take effect November 8, 1975. The basic changes to the Or-
dinance were as follows:
1 . The Director of Environmental Services and the Building Official
are non-voting members unless they are needed to constitute a quorum.
2. Four (4) members will constitute a quorum.
3. Deletion of single family review from the Design Review Board.
4. Making the Design Review Board advisory to the Planning Commission.
In summary, Mr. Williams recommended that if the Planning Commission con-
curred with the proposed changes as outlined, the Commission should direct the
Secretary to inform the Council that the Planning Commission concurred with the
Ordinance as presented. It was the consensus of the Commission that the Ordinance
as presented was most appropriate.
On a motion made by Commissioner Mullins, seconded by Commissioner
Van de Mark and unanimously carried, the Secretary was directed to inform the
Council that the Planning Commission concurred with Ordinance No. 81 as presented.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- October 6, 1975
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Case No. County Conditional Use 1776-E, KADOW ENTERPRISES &
TED WEINER, Applicants: Case known as the Chapparal Golf and
Tennis Club is before the County Planning Commission on 138 acres,
north of the Whitewater Channel and west of Portola.
Steve Fleshman presented the staff report. In accordance with the
guidelines of the Joint City/County Cooperation Agreement, this case was forwarded
to the Palm Desert Planning Commission for review and comments. Mr. Fleshman
outlined staff's recommendations which were as follows:
Now 1 . That the proposed project was found to be in conformance to the
Palm Desert General Plan.
2. That the proposed development occur under the City's jurisdiction
by means of annexation to the City of Palm Desert.
3. That the conditions for the CUP require the applicant to obtain
full access on Portola.
4. Development of a recreational easement in the Whitewater Channel .
To ensure that the proposed development would occur in a manner that would
not be detrimental to Palm Desert, staff recommended that the project site be
annexed to the City. Because of the importance of Portola Avenue to this project
and the impact of the increased traffic on Portola, staff felt that careful
analysis of this project was mandatory.
After a lengthy discussion regarding annexation and the Portola Avenue
access, Chairman Seidler noted that from what was being presented and discussed,
he felt this was a very high quality type of development with its recreational
amenities. His concern was that the developer had not come to the City of
Palm Desert regarding access to the property. It was staff's recommendation that
Resolution No. 87 be approved determining the project to be in conformance with
the Palm Desert General Plan.
tow VAL LITCHFIELD of 43-155 Portola asked how many stories and/or height
was proposed for the condominium project.
Chairman Seidler replied that the Commission did not have this infor-
mation on the project, however, this was something that would have to be reviewed.
Ms. LITCHFIELD asked for clarification on the annexation procedures.
Chairman Seidler's reply was that Staff had mentioned earlier that the
City should pursue with the developer, the possibility of annexation to the City.
After a lengthy discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission that
Resolution No. 87 be revised to indicate that the project does conform to the
adopted General Plan. However, it was recommended that no action be taken by
the County on this project until a meeting was held between the applicants and
the city staff with regards to providing adequate access to the project. Chair-
man Seidler directed the Secretary to report back to the County, the Commission's
concerns.
Commissioner Wilson moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion
to approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 87 as amended to reflect the
Commission's concerns regarding access. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Request for a Change of the Meeting Night of the Planning
Now Commission of the City of Palm Desert.
Paul Williams advised that Planning Commissioners did not have sufficient
time between the receipt of their packets, which are delivered on Friday, and
the Monday meetings to review their material . Staff recommended that the meeting
night be changed to Tuesdays, which would allow adequate time for a more thorough
review of the cases to be heard.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- October 6, 1975
Staff recommended that the Commission approve Resolution No. 88, recom-
mending to the City Council , approval of a change of time for regular meetings
of the Planning Commission to Tuesday. The Design Review Board meetings would
be coordinated with the Planning Commission meetings so that they would be
on separate nights.
Commissioner Berkey moved, Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion to
approve Resolution No. 88. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Case No. T.T. 5075 M. B. JOHNSON, Applicant: Request for a 12-month
extension of a Tentative Map of 189 units on 42 acres at the
southeast corner of Deep Canyon and 44th Avenue.
Steve Fleshman presented the staff report including a slide presentation
of the proposed site. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission deny this
request by Resolution No. 89 for the following reasons:
1 . The project does not conform to the adopted Palm Desert General
Plan.
2. The project does not conform to the adopted or proposed Palm Desert
Zoning Ordinance.
3. The CUP will expire in January if construction has not begun.
4. Circumstances have changed since the project was originally
approved, and a more appropriate development plan was now in
order.
This project was originally approved by the County and has had several
reviews with the City. At present, the Zoning Ordinance would require 378
covered parking spaces, 145 open parking spaces, and 50% of the project in
useable open space. The current plan for this project did not meet
these requirements. Staff had serious reservations on the amount of useable
open space with the proposed plan. Further, the General Plan called for pre-
servation of the date palms in the area, and the plans presented to date did
too not reflect this.
Chairman Seidler asked for comments from the applicant.
MERVIN JOHNSON, 501 Golden Circle, Santa Ana, addressed the commission.
He briefly reviewed past approvals and substantial changes which had been made
to his plans. Staff' s comments regarding the useable open space were well re-
ceived. Mr. Johnson asked that the Commission consider the continuance of the
tentative map and allow it to expire with the CUP if that was possible. This
would allow him more time from a planning point of view to work out an improved
development plan.
Chairman Seidler advised that if the Commission were to accept Staff's
recommendations and deny the extension, they would not be saying that they
wished to discourage the applicant from proceeding with plans for development
of this property. If the Commission was to approve the 12-month extension, he
felt the approval would not mean a thing, due to the fact that there would be
some changes in the City's Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map which would not be
reflected in this plan.
Commissioner Van de Mark expressed her concern over the preservation of
as many date trees as possible in that area in order to preserve the character
of Palm Desert.
Commissioner Mullins moved that Resolution No. 89 be approved with the
deletion of finding #3, recommending denial to the City Council of this ex-
tension. Commissioner Berkey seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
D. Discussion of the Annual Report to the Council on Inter-
Governmental Relations on Planning Activities.
After a report by Mr. Williams outlining the City's Annual Report to
the Council on Inter-Governmental Relations on planning activities, the following
amendments were proposed by the Planning Commission:
. Planning Commission Minutes -6- October 6, 1975
Proposed Amendments:
Page 1 . Section A (4) - Delete Southern California Association of
Government and add same to Section A (3) .
Page 4. Section C (9)(i ) - Delete 'x'
Page 5. Section C (9)(j)(m)(n)(o) - Delete 'x'
Page 5. Section D (1 ) (b) - Add. . .Preservation of existing date
groves.
iffim Page 5. Section D (2)(b) - Add—Preservation of existing date
groves.
Page 5. Section D (2) (c) - Add. . .Living Desert Museum
Page 5 Section E(2) - Delete comma after cities and add the
word "in".
Staff recommended approval of the Annual Report as amended by Resolution
No. 90; and that Staff be authorized to forward said report to the State Office
of Planning and Research.
Commissioner Mullins moved approval of Resolution No. 90; recommending
approval of the document as amended to the City Council . Commissioner Wilson
seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
E. Case No. 19C CITINATIONAL BANCORPORATION, Applicant: Request for
approval of plot plans, architectural and other pertinent drawings
for a new bank at the southeast corner of San Luis Rey and El Paseo.
Steve Fleshman presented the staff report which was in conjunction with
case no. CUP-07-75. It was staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission
approve the plot plans, architectural and other pertinent drawings by Resolution
No. 91 subject to the attached conditions.
After a review of the conditions, discussion ensued regarding the sign
program. After careful consideration, Chairman Seidler moved that an additional
condition be added as proposed by Mr. Williams which would be worded as follows :
13. The sign colors as proposed were not approved. Two tones of brown
(dark brown and beige) are approved for sign colors, the combination
of which shall be approved by the Director of Environmental Services.
Commissioner Mullins seconded the motion which carried 4-1 with Commissioner
Wilson voting no.
Condition #11 was amended to read:
11 . Applicant shall agree in writing to all conditions contained herein
within 30 days of this action.
Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Berkey seconded the motion to
approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 91 with the attached thirteen con-
ditions as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
VIII . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
IX. COMMENTS
A. City Staff: Paul Williams asked for confirmation of those Planning
Commissioners who were planning to attend the League
of Cities Conference in San Francisco. It was deter-
mined that Commissioners Berkey, Mullins and Seidler
would be in attendance.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- October 6, 1975
IX. COMMENTS (continued) :
B. City Attorney - None
C. Planning Commissioners - None
X. ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by Commissioner Mullins, seconded by Commissioner Van de Mark,
the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
PAU A. WILLI MS,SECRETARY
ATTES
VMLM-R. SEIDLER AIRMAN