Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0127 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 27, 1976 7 p.m. - 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 p.m. , January 27, 1976, � 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 Williams - Director of Environmental Services Steve Fleshman - Associate Planner Sam Freed - Assistant Planner IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. The minutes of the January 13, 1976, meeting were to be presented for approval at the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of February 3, 1976. Chairman Seidler commented that tonight's meeting would also be for the purpose of a study session, due to the heavy work- � load of the Commission. � Secretary Paul Williams introduced the new Planning Division secretary, Marcie Johnson. V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS - P�one VII . OLD BUSINESS A. A discussion reference the under�rounding of utility lines for City National Bank. Paul Williams explained the existing facilities. Staff discussed the possibility that the undergrounding be on the basis of a cash bond, but recommended that the original conditions be upheld re- quiring undergrounding as a part o� construction. The Commission felt it had no alternative but to uphold the requirement of under- grounding per Ordinance No. 38. Paul Williams recommended the Commission hold to the �equYP�ments of P�anning �ommission Resolu- tion No. 91 mandating undergrounding as a part of construction. Steve Fleshman gave a detailed account of the problems which were caused by the existence of two separate service levels for the motel property. The cost to convert the motel to an underground service would amount to approximately $5,500, and that this was � what the bank was objecting to. At this time, Mr. ROBERT STRANGE, Attorney for Citinational Ban- corporation, requested a waiver of the undergrounding requirement, stating the bank was on a three-phase electrical distribution sys- tem and the motel was not. Conversion of the motel service would amount to considerable extra expense for the bank, which they felt was unwarranted. -1- PALNNING COMMISSION MEETING -2- JANUARY 27, 1976 In this respect, Mr. STRANGE requested the Planning Commission to grant a change in the Conditions of Approval for Case No. CUP-07-75, specifically Item No. 5. Chairman Seidler then stated that the Planning Commission did not have the authority to waive the undergrounding requirement without City Council approval . Chairman Seidler asked what the total cost of the project was. Mr. STRANGE replied that approximately $250,000 would be spent for the building. Chairman Seidler stated to Mr. STRANGE that regardless of tonight's action, the applicant would have """` the right of appeal . On a motion made by Commissioner Berkey, seconded by Commissioner Wilson and unanimously carried, the Commission upheld the findings of Planning Commission Resolution No. 91 with reference to Item No.S under Conditions of Approval . B. CASE N0. 24C - ROBERT DRIVER FOR GERONIMO'S RESTAURANT Paul Williams reviewed the above case with reference to the approval of a monument sign. Commissioner Van De Mark moved and Commissioner Wilson seconded a motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 119 with the correction of the spelling of Chairman Seidler' s name. Motion was carried unanimously. C. HILLSIDE DEVELOPP�IENT GUIDLEINES Staff reviewed the report on �Hillside Development Standards and a lengthy discussion ensued. After discussing the specific provisions, the Commission recommended numerous changes to be made as follows: �, 1) Access and Circulation Policies Commissioner Berkey felt that Item No. 1 should be deleted. 2) Architectural Design Policies The commissioners agreed that Items No. 2 through 6 should should be deleted as they tend to duplicate many of the City's basic ordinances. Items No. 1 and 7 are to remain as is. 3) Density Policies Item No. 3 under this heading is to be deleted as it is not a practical requirement according to Commissioner Berkey. 4) Drainage Policies The word "more" under Item No. 2 should be changed to read "move". 5) Excavation and Grading Policies Chairman Seidler felt that the words "desert varnish" should ,,,,,,,, be deleted as they were impractical . Also, under Item No. 2, the last word in the first sentence should be changed from "basis" to read "basin". The third sentence, under Item No. 2, beginning with "Excess" and ending with "location" should be deleted. 6) Lightin Pg olicies The commissioners agreed that Items No. l, 2, and 4 should be deleted as they were a duplication of City ordinances. -2- . PLANNING COMMISSIOfJ MEETING -3- JANUARY 27, 1976 7) Landscaping Policies According to Chairman Seidler, the bond for landscaping maintenance is not required elsewhere and should not be required for hillside areas; therefore, Items No. 2, 3, and 4 are to be deleted. 8) Open Space and Recreation Policies Item No. 1 should be deleted as it is already in the �"`� General plan. Chairman Seidler felt that Item No. 2 should be rewritten and that the last sentence should be deleted as no permits should be issued in hazardous areas. Item No. 3 should be deleted as it sounds like enforced dedication per Chairman Seidler and Commissioner Berkey. 9) Public Facili� Policies Items No. 2, 4, and 5 are to be deleted as they are already covered by other City ordinances. 10) Safet,� Pol icies Chairman Seidler felt Items No. 3 and 5 should be deleted as they are general comments that are not needed. 11) Vehicle and Pedestrian Facility polici.�s Chairman Seidler stated that Item No. 5 should be deleted as it was a general item. �" Chairman Seidler suggested that the Commission advise the staff to accept the above changes and revise the resolution accordingly. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. SIGN ORDINANCE Since this was the first time the Commission had seen the pro- posed Sign Ordinance, it was agreed that the discussion should be in the nature of a study session that would last for several meetings. Chairman Seidler suggested that the Planning Commission hold a joint study session with the Chamber of Commerce Sign Committee to review the ordinance and obtain their recommendations. The Commission started its review on Page No. 14. Suggestions were made by all of the commissioners as to changes and additions as follows: 25.38-16.01 Change the word "submit" in the first sentence to "submitted". 25.38-16.02 �,,,, Change the word "submit" in the second sentence to "sub- mitted". 25.38-16.11 Change "allowed" to "needed" and "advertise" to "identify". 25.38-18.03 This subsection is to be deleted. -3- ' , . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING -4- JANUARY 27, 1976 25.38-18.07 Chairman Seidler felt that Item (b) under Membership should not be limited to the four professions listed. Under No. 6, Actions of the Amortization Board, the last sentence should be changed to read as follows: "However, no extended amortization period shall exceed more than one (1) year or double the allotted time, � whichever is greater." Under Item No. 7, change fifteen (15) days to read thirty (30) days. 25.38-22 This section to be deleted as is is already in the Zoning Ordinance. Because of the length of the remaining agenda items, it was decided to wait for the next study session to review the re- maining sections of the Sign Ordinance. B. New Application Forms for the Plannin� Division Projects Paul Williams reviewed the new forms and explained this was the first draft for the Commission' s input. Chairman Seidler felt that since the Planning Division worked with these forms every day, they should know what was needed and therefore recommended finalizing the forms. The discussion was continued to the next study session. � C. Neighborhood 6, Density Sam Freed gave an explanation to the Commission on the poten- tial density permitted by the Zoning Ordinance for Neighborhood 6. The report indicated that there are 1,027 dwelling units currently existing in the area. The overall density for the area would be 5.25 dwelling units per acre at maximum development. Based on the new Zoning Ordinance, approximately 694 dwelling units could be added to the neighborhood. The R-1 area will average 3.39 units per acre. The Planning Commission felt Mr. Freed's explanation of the re- port was sufficient and satisfactory and no further action was ta ken. D. Case No. 30MF - Living Desert Reserve Paul Williams reviewed the request for the approval of a 1,200 square foot building addition and stated the Design Review Board thought the addition would be appropriate. Commissioner Wilson moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded a motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 120. Motion was carried unanimously. �...� IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS The staff made available the files of cases heard by the Design Review Board at its meeting of January 20, 1976. The Planning Commission did not request to review any of these items. X. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None XI. COMMENTS Staff distributed a preliminary report to the Planning Commission relative to Code Enforcernent activities of the Planning Division. -4- " , s PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING -5- JANUARY 27, 1976 XII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Van de Mark moved, Commissioner Berkey seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. �: k. r�..�. A A. WILLIAMS, Secretary ATTEST: � . , L M R. EIDLE , airman � � -5-