Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0217 � . _ MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANlVING COMMISSI0I�J C�IEETING FEBRUARY 17, 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 Chairman Seidler at 7 p.m. , February 17, 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 P+IARK. Absent: Commissioner S. ROY WILSON (Excused absence) Others Present: Paul A. Williams - Director of Environmental Services Steve Fleshman - Associate Planner Sam Freed - Assistant Planner Commissioner VAN DE P�IARK advised that she will be absent from the Planning Commission Meeting on March 3, 1976. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Van de Mark seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the February 3, 1976, meeting. P�otion carried unanimously. V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS � A. CONTINUED CASE - NEW SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE Consideration of a new Subdivision Ordinance for the City of Palm Desert. Mr. Williams explained that the new Subdivision Ordinance was brought about after many months of review by the staff, with assistance from the firm of Wilsey & Ham. He further stated that this document re- presents input from many diffenent agencies. He also felt that since this was such a lengthy document, the Commission should utilize to- night's meeting as a study session and continue the discussion to the March 3, 1976, meeting. At this time Chairman Seidler opened the discussion beginning with Article 26. 1 - General Provisions. Under Article 26.5 - Tentative Map, Commissioner Van de Mark questioned whether or not the City Council should be involved in the approval of tentative maps as this double review appeared to be a duplication of effort. Chairman Seidler felt that it is the responsibility of the City Council to make final approval . Chairman Seidler recommended that staff consider this entire section � again and revise it so that each one of the tentative maps should have a public hearing. -1- MIVUTES PLA�JNING COMMISSION MEETING -2- FEBRUARY 17, 1976 MARJORIE EGAN, 73-465 Grapevine, Palm Desert, California , sup- ported the concept of holding a public hearing for a tentative map since this would enable local residents to provide the maxi- mum amount of input to the Planning Commission and the City Council . Chairman Seidler felt that Section 26.6-3 - A�reement and Se- curity Instruments and Section 26.6-4 - Deeds and Easements � should be checked out and possibly be deleted as these sections seemed redundant. Chairman Seidler asked staff to check with the cities of Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage, and Indian Wells in reference to Sec- tion 26.9-12.01 - Progress Payments to ascertain if this par- ticular section is common practice. He asked that staff ad- vise of their findings at the next meeting of the Planning Commission on March 3, 1976. Chairman Seidler asked staff to research Section 26-10 - Parcel �1a� Procedure to see if it is required by the Map Act and advise the Commission of the findings at the meeting of March 3, 1976. After discussing Article 26.13 - Land Division Desi�n Standards, Chairman Seidler felt that it would be beneficial if staff were to obtain a relief map of the Palm Desert area so that developers could more easily visualize the topography problems of the hill- side areas. At this time, Commissioner Mullins moved, Commissioner Berkey seconded the motion to continue the discussion of the Subdivision Ordinance to the next Planning Commission study session prior to the March 3, 1976, meeting. Motion unanimously carried. � B. CONTINUED CASE - NEW GRADING ORDINANCE Consideration of a new Grading Ordinance for the City of Palm Desert. Commissioner Van de Mark made a motion to continue this discussion to the P9arch 3, 1976, meeting. There was no second to the motion. f•1r. LJilliams explained the basics of the new Grading Ordinance and stated that staff felt it was essential to review this type of or- dinance with the Planning Commission for their input even though it was a very technical document. Ne further stated that staff had reviewed and revised the proposed ordinance many times. A discussion between the commissioners and the staff ensued with reference to the various sections of the Gradin� Ordinance and whether grading permits should be required for minor grading pro- jects. Commissioner Berkey moved, Commissioner P1ullins seconded the motion to continue further discussion of the Grading Ordinance to the March 3, 1976, meeting. hlotion carried unanimously. ;�,,,� The Commission adjourned at 8:55 p.m. for a brief recess. VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Study session on the preliminary draft of the Sign Ordinance. Chairman Seidler began the discussion with Section 25.38-1 - Intent and Purpose. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING -3- FEBRUARY 17, 1976 �1r. '�illiams explained the major issues that were expressed in this document and pointed out the similarity to the City of Palm Springs' sign ordinance. According to Mr. Williams, one of the major issues expressed in this document is that signs should be directed towards the main street and not directed to- wards adjace�t properties. Another major issue of this ordi- nance is the distinction that signs in residential areas should be more restricted. � There was a lengthy discussion concerning the size of signs. Mr. Williams compared the difference between signs on Highway 111 with those on E1 Paseo. Several photos were shown to the Com- mission illustrating the visual effect of different sign size allocation formulae. Chairman Seidler suggested that the commissioners arrange for a special meeting in order to go out and view for themselves the different signs in the City. This special meeting should be prior to the approval of the sign ordinance. VIII . NEW BUSINESS - ��one IX. DESIG�J REVIEW BOARD ITE��IS A. Minutes of the February 10, 1976, Design Review Board meeting. The commission reviewed the minutes of the above meeting. X. ORAL COMMUNICATIOPJS - PJone XI. COMMENTS �`�` Chairman Seidler commented that the City was attempting to make the ordinances discussed at tonight's meeting very fair and easy to understand. XII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Van de Mark moved, Chairman Seidler seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. �_�____� �� �' .,� � , `� �_}�- _ ��.j' �\_�.�.;�.�- ..� UL A. WILLIA S, Secretary ATTEST: ' :� - <� WI IAM R. , ' an �