Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0831 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 7 PM - CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS I . CALL TO ORDER The regularly scheduled meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Wilson at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers of the Palm Desert City Hall . maw II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Kelly III. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioner GEORGE BERKEY Commissioner GLORIA KELLY Commissioner NELSON MILLS Commissioner MARY K. VAN DE MARK Chairman S. ROY WILSON Also Present: Paul A. Williams - Director of Environmental Services Steve Fleshman - Associate Planner IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of the August 17, 1976 meeting. A motion of Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Van de Mark, to approve the above minutes as written was unanimously carried. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Wilson explained that the Planning Commission had met in a Study Session prior to the meeting for the purpose of becoming more familiar with agenda items. He stated that no decisions had been made at the Study Ses- sion. Chairman Wilson then explained the Public Hearing procedures to the audience. A. CASE NO. VARIANCE 03-76 - F. S. & L. INDUSTRIES Consideration of a request for a Variance from Section 25.31-4 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code to permit two 2-story residential structures in the R-3, S.P. Zone, on property located at the southwest corner of Portola Avenue and Flagstone Lane. Chairman Wilson asked that it be noted for the record that Commissioner Berkey would be abstaining from the discussion on the request due to a possible con- flict of interest. Commissioner Berkey left the Chambers during the discussion. Mr. Williams explained the request for the Variance, showed the location on the map, and also showed slides of the proposed lots. He further stated that the original project of eight two-story fourplexes was approved by the Palm Desert Planning Commission on December 10, 1973. Six of the buildings had been subsequently constructed. However, no building permits were issued for the final Lots 16 and 17; therefore, any new construction would be subject to present zoning standards as opposed to the County standards under which the original construction took place. Mr. Williams then stated that staff was recommending that the Planning Commission grant the Variance by Planning Com- mission Resolution No. 170. Mr. Williams also mentioned that letters had been received both in favor of and opposed to the project. Chairman Wilson asked if the applicant was present. -1- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 AL KURI , 79-080 Montego Bay Drive, Bermuda Dunes, CA. , President of F. S. & L. Industries (developer of the project) spoke to the Commission on the background of his project. He explained to the Commission that the parking design had been improved to allow an open view area to the golf course site. Mr. Kuri further stated that he objected to Condition No. 12, which required the installation of a six foot sidewalk along the full frontage of the pro- perty. He stated that he felt this requirement was not feasible or practical at this time for several reasons. One of the reasons given was that there ... were no existing sidewalks in the area. Another reason was that Edison Com- pany had two underground vaults and that the sidewalks would be in the way of said vaults. Chairman Wilson asked if anyone was present who wished to speak to the Com- mission in favor of the project. Being no one, Chairman Wilson then asked for testimony in opposition to the project. BEN BARNUM, 74-105 Setting Sun Trail , spoke to the Commission and stated that "the project as it sits is in violation of all the codes". Mr. Barnum was also concerned about the parking situation and presented a photograph depicting the existing parking situation. Chairman Wilson asked Mr. Williams for a brief background of the project. Mr. Williams explained that when the first six buildings were constructed, the City was operating under County Codes. Mr. Kuri stated that his buildings were not in violation of City Codes at that time. Mr. Kuri also stated that the parking problem had been corrected by doubling the parking space for the new buildings and that with the installation of curbs and gutters, as one of the conditions, the parking situation as it now existed would be alleviated. Chairman Wilson closed the Public Hearing and opened the matter for discussion among the members of the Commission. Chairman Wilson stated that two major items should be discussed. The first item was whether or not the Commission should grant the Variance and the second item was the sidewalk issue. Commissioner Van de Mark felt that unless the sidewalk extended all the way to Grapevine, it would not be necessary. She further stated she did not approve granting the Variance as she felt the Scenic Preservation Zoning should be en- forced. Commissioner Mills had no comments and Commissioner Kelly stated that this was an extremely difficult situation because of the zoning problem. She further stated that there seemed to be more letters received in favor of the project than against it. Chairman Wilson agreed with Commissioner Van de Mark with reference to not approving the granting of the Variance. There was a short discussion regarding the sidewalk issue. Commissioner Van de Mark made a motion to deny the Variance by Planning Com- mission Resolution No. 170 which was seconded by Chairman Wilson. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: KELLY, VAN DE MARK, WILSON NOES: MILLS ABSTAIN: BERKEY At this time, Chairman Wilson advised the applicant of the appeal process. Commissioner Berkey returned to his seat on the Commission. -2- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 B. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TRACT 8237 - U. S. LIFE SAVINGS Consideration of a final Environmental Impact Report for a 185-unit residential subdivision on 54.5 acres of land located east of Portola Avenue, south of the Whitewater River Storm Channel , and west of Deep Canyon Road. Mr. Williams reviewed the staff report with the Commission. The staff report .. included comments from the various agencies and organizations that received copies of the EIR. Mr. Williams also presented a late response which was received from the Southern California Air Pollution Control District regarding auto emission calculations. In summary, Mr. Williams stated that staff felt that the information provided in the EIR was complete and recommended that the Planning Commission recommend the EIR to the City Council for approval and certification. Chairman Wilson asked if the applicant was present. FRANK GOODMAN, 73-655 Shadow Mountain Drive, spoke to the Commission and stated that he believed the report stood as recommended by the Planning staff. Chairman Wilson asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak in favor of the completeness of the EIR. Being no one, he then asked if there was any- one who wished to speak against the certification of the EIR. RICHARD KITE, 48-643 Stoney Creek, had a question regarding the number of children that had been projected in the report as being of school age. Mr. Williams clarified the report for Mr. Kite and stated that 111 school age children were projected for the area; but that the total number of children, under the age of 18, would be 218. .. Being no other comments, Chairman Wilson closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Berkey moved and Commissioner Mills seconded the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 171, as corrected, recommending certifica- tion of the EIR to the City Council . Motion unanimously carried. C. CASE NO. TRACT 8237 - U. S. LIFE SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION Consideration of a Tentative Map for a 185-unit residential subdivision on 54.5 acres of land located east of Portola Avenue, south of the White- water River Storm Channel , and west of Deep Canyon Road (R-1-9,000) . Mr. Williams presented the staff report to the Commission. Said report in- cluded a background of the project and numerous discussion issues as follows: Neighborhood and Community Park Facilities Street Width and Improvement Designs Proposed Types of Improvements Required on the Streets Bonding for the Improvement of Magnesia Falls and Deep Canyon Modification of Florine Avenue Limiting Connections to Deep Canyon Drainage Street Lights r.. Undergrounding Mr. Williams stated that a great deal of discussion had gone into the design of the tract. He further stated that the issues under discussion were in some part caused by a transition that was occurring among the staff in terms of con- verting from utilization of the engineering services of the County to the recom- mendations of the City Engineer, who recently had been appointed to the City staff. -3- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 The three main issues according to staff are road design, undergrounding, and drainage. Mr. Williams recommended that the drainage issue be reviewed by the City Engineer before the Tentative Map goes to the City Council . Mr. Williams further stated that staff felt the sidewalks were essential throughout the sub- division. Chairman Wilson asked if the applicant was present. FRANK GOODMAN, 73-655 Shadow Mountain Drive, spoke to the Commission and pre- sented MR. DON SHAYLER, Engineer for the project, who would be available to answer any technical questions that the Commission might have. Mr. Goodman stated that the primary problem was the drainage problem and that the prime consideration of the entire tract relative to the street layout was to move the water to the Channel . Mr. Goodman stated the first issue he would like to discuss with the Commission was the issue of sidewalks. He presented a map showing the proposed locations for sidewalks within the subdivision. He stated that the developer only wanted to install the necessary sidewalks in order to get the people across the subdivision. He commented on the new im- provement of Alessandro Street and that the City had not installed sidewalks as a part of that improvement. Mr. Goodman stated that he objected to item "f" under Condition No. 2, pertaining to a 20 foot minimum width connection between the subdivision and the existing paved section of Deep Canyon. He felt that item "f" was "redundant" . Mr. Goodman's next objection was to Conditions No. 4 and 5, regarding dedication of Lots 177 through 185. He suggested to the Planning Commission that the City accept the in lieu fee instead of the land dedication requirement. There was some disucssion regarding Dr. Rigby's property as a possible alter- native dedication. Mr. Goodman also objected to Condition No. 7, pertaining to the C. C. & R's undergrounding requirement. DON SHAYLER, 73-893 Highway 111, spoke to the Commission regarding the shape and existing slope of the land. Mr. Shayler showed the water drainage routes on the map and stated that the street pattern was designed to accommodate drain- age. Mr. Shayler presented a list of proposed alternative conditions to the Commission. Said list included the deletion of item "f" under the existing Condition No. 2, the modification of item "i" , and the addition of items "j" and "k" to read as follows: i . The extensions of Primrose Drive and Erin Street shall be improved on the basis of thirty-two foot (32' ) of improvements on a fifty feet (50' ) of right-of-way. Type C curbs are approved on Erin Street. j. Street trees shall be installed as part of the building construction on each lot, and shall be subject to the approval of the Design Re- view Board. k. 5 foot wide sidewalks shall be constructed along the street frontages of Lots 177 through 185, 24-25 ( 'A' Street only) and 134-144 ( 'A' Street only) . Mr. Goodman then stated that he had already met with a representative of the school district and that the district had agreed to provide curb and gutter and sidewalks along Rutledge Way up to the new subdivision. Chairman Wilson asked if anyone was present who wished to speak to the Com- mission in favor of the project. Being no one, he asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak against the project. -4- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 VICTOR CLARK, 74-280 Erin Street, spoke to the Commission as a representative of several citizens who lived in the area of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Clark presented a letter to the Commission, signed by 48 residents of the area, stating that they were not against the development of the vacant 54-acre site; however, they would like to propose consideration of a plan to cul-de-sac the majority of the streets that are now dead-ended. Mr. Clark further stated that they were asking that Magnesia Falls and Deep Canyon be the only streets that should be extended through. RICHARD KITE, 48-643 Stoney Creek, spoke to the Commission and was concerned with the recreation aspects of the project. Chairman Wilson asked Mr. Goodman if he wished to make a rebuttal . Mr. Goodman stated that they had attempted to achieve what Mr. Clark had re- quested, but that the drainage problem was a prime consideration due to the land being so flat. RONDI SALTER, 74-120 Desert Star Boulevard, spoke to the Commission voicing her concern about the preservation of the existing character of the neighborhood. ART BENDER, 74-020 Desert Star Boulevard, spoke to the Commission regarding his concerns on the extension of Desert Star Boulevard. He stated that Desert Star was the only boulevard in Palm Desert and that it had become a "raceway" and he was concerned due to the number of children who lived in the area. Chairman Wilson closed the Public Hearing and opened the matter for discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner Berkey was concerned with access problems regarding Deep Canyon. Commissioner Kelly felt that there were too many problems at this time regarding the impact on the area pertaining to schools, families, park facilities, traffic, etc. She felt that the project should be continued until such time as the City Engineer could review it more thoroughly. Mr. Williams advised the Commission that if they decided to continue the hearing to the next Planning Commission meeting, the applicant would have to agree to the continuance or the project would automatically go to the City Council . Commissioner Van de Mark was concerned about the sidewalk issue and the width of the streets and felt that the City Engineer should be present in order to answer the technical questions pertaining to these issues as the Commission did not have the expertise to make a decision. Commissioner Mills agreed with the suggestion for a continuance. Commissioner Berkey felt that there were a lot of unsolved problems regarding this project and that it needed more study. Chairman Wilson concurred with the idea of a continuance and felt that the pro- ject had been prematurely presented to the Planning Commission. Chairman Wilson further stated that legally the Commission must get the applicant's approval for a continuance and if the applicant so agreed, he should work with staff to resolve all the problems that had been discussed. Chairman Wilson then reopened the Pub- lic Hearing to discuss the possible continuance. `" Mr. Goodman stated that he was disappointed as he had spent at least 22 months in discussing the subdivision with staff and they were in agreement with most of the Conditions of Approval . Mr. Goodman stated that he not been able to spend enough time with the City Engineer as the City Engineer had gone on vaca- tion just prior to this hearing. Mr. Goodman stated that time was of great im- portance and if he agreed to a continuance, he was requesting a definite date be set for the next hearing. -5- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 A short discussion ensued between the Commission and Staff. A date for the next hearing was set for September 14, 1976. Chairman Wilson asked Mr. Goodman if he agreed to a continuance to September 14, 1976. Mr. Goodman replied that he agreed. Mr. Victor Clark agreed to the continuance. Mr. Art Bender was in favor of the continuance. Commissioner Kelly moved and Commissioner Van de Mark seconded to continue Tract 8237 to the Planning Commission meeting of September 14, 1976. Motion unanimously carried. Chairman Wilson called a brief recess at 8:55 pm and the meeting was reconvened at 9:07 pm. D. CASE NO. CUP 08-76 - DESERT EMPIRE TELEVISION CORPORATION Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the con- struction of a television studio and office facilities on a 3-acre site, located on the north side of Park View Drive, west of Monterey Avenue (PR-7, S.P. ). Chairman Wilson asked Vice-Chaiman Berkey to preside over the discussion on this case and left the Chambers due to a possible conflict of interest. Mr. Williams showed slides of the location and explained the request for a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Williams further explained that the City Zoning �Ww Ordinance permits community facilities in the PR Zone by Conditional Use Per- mit and the Planning Commission must determine that by definition the proposed television broadcasting studio and office facilities are allowable in the Planned Residential Zone District. Mr. Williams stated that staff felt that the use was appropriate for the area and zone for which it was proposed and that the project would be an asset to the community. Mr. Williams ended his presentation with a staff recommendation that the Planning Commission find such a use is within the intent and purpose of the Planned Residential Zone District and approve the Con- ditional Use Permit request, subject to compliance with conditions. Vice-Chairman Berkey asked if the applicant was present. JOHN CONTE, 75-600 Burro Lane, In..dian Wells, (President of Desert Empire Tele- vision Corporation-Owner and Operator of KMIR-TV) spoke to the Commission re- garding his reasons for wanting to move his facilities from Palm Springs to Palm Desert. Mr. Conte stated that he had operated his studios under a Con- ditional Use Permit from the City of Palm Springs for the past eight years and that he had never had any complaints relative to the operation. Mr. Conte further stated that they were in agreement with practically all of the Conditions of Approval and he would like to have Mr. Ricciardi discuss the conditions with the Commission. ROBERT RICCIARDI , 73-700 Highway 111, stated that he was questioning the wording of Conditions No. 14 and 15. He stated these conditions were unnecessary under .r the Uniform Building Code and he therefore was requesting their deletion. The conditions is question read as follows: 14. The building must be fully protected by a completely automatic sprinkler system in accordance with National Fire Protection Association Standard No. 13. -6- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 15. Building must meet all requirements of Title 19 of the California Administrative Code. Mr. Ricciardi further questioned Condition No. 19 which reads as follows: 19. Water system must be installed before delivery of any combustible materials to the job site. Mr. Ricciardi asked that Condition No. 19 be deleted. Mr. Ricciardi also stated that he was confused as to the wording of Condition No. 20 which reads as follows: 20. The applicant shall install an 8 foot concrete bikeway/pedestrianway 4 feet north of the curb line along the full frontage of the pro- perty on Park View Drive to standards as specified by the City En- gineer. Mr. Williams explained that the condition should be reworded and suggested the following rewording (which is a combination of Conditions No. 20 and No. 21) : 20. The applicant shall provide a future agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, for the installation of an 8 foot wide concrete bikeway/pedestrianway, 4 feet north of the curb line along the full frontage of the property on Park View Drive including a handicapped curb ramp at the intersection of the right-of-way with the west pro- perty line at a time as determined by the City. Mr. Ricciardi also requested the deletion of Condition No. 13, due to the fact it was meaningless. Condition No. 13 reads as follows : 13. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the water company, with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in C.U.P. No. 08-76 is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Department of Fire Protection". Vice-Chairman Berkey asked if anyone was present who wished to speak to the Com- mission in favor of the project. DICK KITE, 73-757 Highway 111, spoke to the Commission as a representative of the property owner across the street from the proposed facilities. Mr. Kite stated the property owner was requesting future consideration for a change of zone from R-1 to R-2. Mr. Kite also stated the proposed facilities would be a great asset to the community. JOHN W. LURING, Executive Director of Friends of the Cultural Center, presented a letter to the Commission from Dr. Stout, President of the College of the Desert. Said letter endorsed the proposed project. Vice-Chairman Berkey asked if anyone was present who wished to speak in opposi- tion to the project. Being no one, Vice-Chairman Berkey closed the Public Hearing and opened the matter for discussion among staff and the Commission. Mr. Williams stated that staff would agree to the deletion of Conditions No. 13 and No. 19. He further recommended that Condition No. 14 be rewritten to require that the building plans be reviewed by the City Fire Marshall and suggested the following rewording: *`" 14. The building plans shall be reviewed by the City Fire Marshall to determine whether it should be protected by a completely automatic sprinkler system in accordance with National Fire Protection Association Standard No. 13. -7- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 Mr. Williams also suggested the following rewording for Condition No. 15: 15. The building plans shall be reviewed by the City Fire Marshall to determine whether the requirements of Title 19 of the California Administrative Code apply to the project. Mr. Ricciardi and Mr. Conte stated that they agreed to the rewording as pro- posed by Mr. Williams. tow Commissioner Van de Mark moved to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 172, with the noted corrections to the Conditions of Approval as recommended by staff. Commissioner Kelly seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried. E. CASE NO. CHANGE OF ZONE 02-76 - CITY OF PALM DESERT Consideration of a proposal to re-zone a 2.5 acre parcel from PR-1, D, S.P. , O.S. and S to R-3-43,560 (9) S.P. and R-3-43,560 (9) D, S.P. , located on the east side of Highway 74 adjacent to the Indian Springs Mobilehome Park. Mr. Williams presented the staff report to the Commission which explained the request. Mr. Williams also pointed out the location on the map and showed slides of the area. His presentation ended with a staff recommendation for the Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Change of Zone to the City Council and gave the following justifications: 1. The proposed change of zone is in conformance with the adopted Palm Desert General Plan. 2. The proposed change of zone would not be detrimental to surrounding properties. 3. The use of the overlay zone districts will allow the City to adequately review any development that may occur on this property. Mr. Williams also presented a letter from Mr. R. L. Spicer, President of the Ironwood Country Club. The letter expressed some general concerns regarding the eventual land use for the subject site. Chairman Wilson asked if anyone was present who wished to speak to the Commission regarding the project. BILL HOBBS, Secretary of the Palm Desert Masonic Temple, spoke to the Commission and expressed their desire to build a Masonic Lodge on the proposed site. There being no further comments either in favor of or opposed to the project, Chairman Wilson closed the Public Hearing. There was a short discussion regarding the total acreage of the property and how much of the property was located in the Wash area. Commissioner Berkey moved to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 173, recommending approval of the Change of Zone to the City Council . Commissioner Mills seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried. VI. OLD BUSINESS None -8- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 VII. NEW BUSINESS A. CASE NO. 43MF - DESTINATION RESORT CORPORATION Consideration of a request for Design Review Board Process approval of final construction plans for a 28-unit condominium residential project in the Shadow Mountain Resort and Racquet Club project. tow Mr. Williams stated that as a part of the review of the Deisgn Review Board items from their last meeting, the staff had put two cases that were of par- ticular concern on this agenda as separate items. Mr. Williams explained that the Conditional Use Permit for Case No. 43MF was amended in June of 1976. The amendment allows the developer to cluster dwelling units in 2- story buildings around the swimming pool in the center of the project. The amendment of the Conditional Use Permit provided for a number of capital im- provements and changes to existing facilities. The issue before the Commission was when these improvements should occur. DOUG HINCHLIFFE, 131 Yacht Harbor Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes, spoke to the Commission as a representative of Destination Resort Corporation. Mr. Hinch- liffe objected to several of the recommended revisions to the plans for this project. His main objection was to the requirement for undergrounding the utility lines as a part of this phase of construction. Chairman Wilson stated that it was the custom of the Commission to take any public input that may be available. ELLEN HUNTINGTON, 72-820 Shadow Lake Drive, spoke to the Commission and voiced her objection to the fact that 2-story buildings would be allowed and also objected to the roof top air conditioning equipment. Mr. Hinchliffe stated that the air conditioning units on the roof would be tow architecturally integrated and would not be visible from ground level . Mr. Williams suggested revising item "2)" on the second page of Resolution No. 174, and also revising item "6)" on the same page. The suggested revisions are as follows: 2) That it does hereby approve Plot Plan No. 43MF, subject to the completion of conditions 1-4, 6, 9-12, and 17 of CUP 03-73, Planning Commission Reso- lution No. 151. 6) That the driveway entrance at Juniper as shown on Exhibits U, V, and W, shall be installed as a part of this phase of the construction subject to any revisions required by the City Engineer. There was a short discussion regarding the deletion of the requirements for the installation of curbs and gutter and also the installation of undergrounding. The general consensus of the Commission seemed to be that the provisions for the installation of curb and gutter could be delayed at this time but that the requirement for the installation of undergrounding should be taken care of now. Commissioner Berkey moved to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 174, with the change of waiving the requirements for curb and gutter for this phase of the construction but maintain the requirement for the installation of under- grounding. Commissioner Kelly seconded the motion. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BERKEY, KELLY, MILLS, WILSON NOES: VAN DE MARK -9- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 B. CASE NO. 44MF - DESERT EMPIRE TELEVISION CORPORATION Consideration of preliminary site plans, floor plans, and elevations for a proposed television studio and office facilities for KMIR-TV, located on a 3-acre site on the north side of Park View Drive, westerly of Monterey Avenue (PR-7). Mr. Williams presented the staff report on this second item from the Design Review Board meeting of August 24, 1976. Chairman Wilson was excused from the discussion due to a possible conflict of interest and left the room. Vice-Chairman Berkey took the chair. Robert Ricciardi spoke to the Commission and explained that the time element was of great importance. He stated that they would have to have the construc- tion completed by the 15th of December. He distributed pictures of the pro- posed facilities to the Commission. He further stated that the facilities would be of metal construction due to the time element involved. There was a short discussion between Mr. Ricciardi , the Commission and staff regarding the treatment of the metal . Vice-Chairman Berkey asked Mr. Ricciardi if the applicant was in agreement with all the conditions of approval . Mr. Ricciardi replied yes. Commissioner Kelly moved to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 175. Commission Mills seconded the motion; motion unanimously carried. C. REQUEST FROM CVCWD TO FIND PROPOSED PROJECT IN CONFORMANCE TO THE ADOPTED PALM DESERT GENERAL PLAN. Mr. Williams explained the request that the Planning Commission find that the use of the Whitewater River Storm Channel by the Desert Sands Unified School District for recreational purposes would be in conformance to the adopted Palm Desert General Plan. He then stated that staff's recommenda- tion was that the Planning Commission approve the request. Commissioner Berkey moved to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 176, approving the request. Commissioner Kelly seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. VIII . DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS A. Review of cases heard by the Design Review Board at their meeting of August 24, 1976. Mr. Fleshman explained to the Commission that there had been 5 items on the Design Review Board agenda and that 4 of the cases had been approved and one of the cases was deferred. A representative of the applicant was present re- garding the one case that had been deferred. Mr. Ricciardi spoke to the Commission and stated that he was representing Mr. Harold McCormick. Mr. Ricciardi apparently misunderstood the decision of the Design Review Board. He thought that the case had been rejected where as it had only been deferred so that the case could be restudied by the Design Re- view Board. Mr. Bill Hobbs, Vice-Chairman of the Design Review Board, was also present and explained the above deferrment to Mr. Ricciardi . -10 V MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 31, 1976 Commissioner Mills moved to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 177, approving the Design Review Board actions of August 24, 1976. Commissioner Kelly seconded the motion; motion unanimously carried. IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS BEN BARNUM, 74-105 Setting Sun Trail , addressed the Commission as a represen- tative of Dr. Eldon Prock, Veterinarian, who was issued a Conditional Use Per- mit one year ago. Mr. Barnum stated that the applicant was requesting that the Planning Commission approve a time extension. Mr. Williams explained that the Conditional Use Permit which had been issued would become null and void unless it was used within one year from date of issuance. The Commission concurred with staff on the legalities of the situation. X. COMMENTS A. City Staff None B. City Attorney None C. Planning Commissioners Chairman Wilson commented that he thought it was a great idea for the Design Review Board to have one of their members attend the Planning Commission meetings. Chairman Wilson further asked staff if any arrangements had been made since the last Planning Commission meeting regarding a joint City Council/ Planning Commission study session. Mr. Williams explained that the study session had not been arranged yet. Chairman Wilson requested that the session be scheduled as soon as possible as the members of the Planning Commission looked to the City Council for guidance on several matters. Chairman Wilson also asked if there was any update on the Sign Ordinance. Mr. Williams explained that the City Council had been extremely busy working on the budget but that the Sign Ordinance was scheduled for the first City Council meeting in October. XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Van de Mark moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Kelly seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 11:03 p.m. PAUL A. WILLIAMS, SECRETARY ATTEST: A V/11y' WILS , CHAIRMAN -11-