HomeMy WebLinkAbout0720 MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY - JULY 20, 1977
1 :00 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 Berkey at 1 :00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the
Palm Desert City Hall .
II. PLEDGE - Commissioner KELLY
III. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioner KELLY
Commissioner SNYDER
Commissioner READING
Chairman BERKEY
Absent: Commissioner KRYDER
Also
Present: Paul A. Williams - Director of Environmental Services
Hunter Cook - City Engineer
Ralph Cipriani - Associate Planner
Sam Freed - Assistant Planner
Kathy Shorey - Planning Secretary
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. MINUTES of the Planning Commission meeting of July 5, 1977
Commissioner Kelly requested that the following change be made:
err.+
Page 8, 8th paragraph from the bottom, second sentence, after project
add "and the Parkview Homes area".
A motion of Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Reading, to approve
the minutes of July 5, 1977, as amended, carried unanimously.
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A. Memorandum from the Design Review Board regarding signs on a specific
block located on Highway 111 .
Mr. Williams indicated that the signs should conform to the total concept
of the Sign Ordinance.
B. A letter from Commissioner Kryder notifying the Commission of his reason
for absence from this meeting, was read by Mr. Williams.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
VII. OLD BUSINESS
A. College of the Desert Site Specific Plan
Mr. Freed covered the circulation element of the plan noting that Palma
Village will be revised and that the City Engineer is concerned with the
traffic flow in the area. Also, right-of-way widths on streets will be
increased or revised with regard to usage. Further it was noted that the
City Engineer has suggested that the bikeways be deleted and be replaced
by the use of striping to indicate the path.
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
July 20, 1977 Page Two
VII. OLD BUSINESS (Continued)
A. College of the Desert Site Specific Plan (Continued)
Discussion by the Commission followed with the following points being
brought up: The boundary along the Las Palmas project, the location of
the proposed high school in regard to the northerly boundary, and the
storm drains.
taw Mr. Freed covered these topics and further stated that the Park and
Recreation Commission has seen all the information that has been printed.
He then noted that the Plan is not complete and some revisions will still
be made after the City Engineer has made further recommendations.
Mr. Williams indicated that the Commission would get more information on
the drainage plan at the next Study Session.
Mr. Freed pointed out that a second Redevelopment area will be created and
the over-all impact analyzed, with more information to be given to the
Commission as it is received and revised.
Commissioner Reading stated that he would prefer receiving all the com-
'Plete information at one time.
�� N} Williams noted that the Neighborhood meetings would be held in Septem-
r and that the first meeting on the College of the Desert Site Specific
lan would be held in October. He also indicated that the staff hoped to
have several individuals that have shown interest in the Plan, attending
the meetings.
Commissioner Kelly noted the importance of publicity on this Plan, hoping
for a big turn out by the citizens at the planned meetings.
VIII . NEW BUSINESS
A. Mr. Roger Harlow, a representative of the Desert Sands Unified School
District, spoke to the Commission regarding the present and future growth
of the population in the Coachella Valley and its effect on the schools.
Mr. Harlow handed out charts to the Commission indicating the growth
trend and enrollment projections for the school district (Exhibit A-E) .
The number of children per dwelling unit in the area was discussed and
a figure of .50 children per dwelling unit was noted as the average in
the Palm Desert area.
Mr. Harlow indicated that the problem facing the community for future
school buildings or improvements, is the passing of such bonds by the
community.
Commissioner Snyder questioned Mr. Harlow as to when the schools would
meet their peaks of enrollment.
Mr. Harlow replied noting that the grammar and middle schools would
probably meet their peak in another 3 or 4 years and the high school not
for another 7 or 8 years.
Discussion by the Commission followed regarding the need for a high school ,
ways of getting advance warning for the need of more school facilities
before it is too late, fear of double sessions, acquiring funds, and en-
rollment figures in schools being taken throughout the year.
The Commission thanked Mr. Harlow for a very fine presentation and their
appreciation for his speaking at this meeting.
B. C.V.C.W.D. Water Line Extension
Mr. Williams noted that the total proposed project area is in conformance
with the adopted Palm Desert General Plan.
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
July 20, ,1977 Page Three
VIII . NEW BUSINESS (Continued)
B. C.V.C.W.D. Water Line Extension (Continued)
Commissioner Snyder spoke about the terrible conditions of the streets
in the City after the water district has put in the sewers and that the
streets are not put back in their original condition once the work is
completed.
Mr. Cook spoke about the problem noting that he and Mr. Lowell Weeks of
the water district have had several conferences on the problem and that
he felt that the problem would soon be resolved.
Commissioner Kelly noted that the water district is responsible for the
streets and should have to redo them if not done right.
Mr. Cook indicated that the water district is responsible for leaving the
streets in the same condition as they found them and for there repair for
one year after the initial work. He also noted that the water district
could be taken to court if the problem was not solved. Mr. Cook offered
to take the Commissioners on a tour of the City to review the problem
areas.
Some discussion followed with regard to the difference between emergency
and routine repair of streets and how the water district determines such.
Chairman Berkey asked for a motion at this time. Commissioner Kelly moved
that the Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 263 finding that
the proposed project is in conformance with the adopted Palm Desert General Plan,
seconded by Commissioner Reading; carried unanimously (4-0) .
THERE WAS A BRIEF RECESS AT 2:05 P.M. THE MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 2:10 P.M.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS
A. Mr. Cipriani reviewed the cases for the Commission.
Case No. 75MF, Silver Spur Assoc. , request for approval of a preliminary
landscaping plan for a 217-unit condominium project to be located at
Ironwood Country Club.
Case No. 55C, Al Kuri , preliminary site, floor and elevation plans for
a commercial structure to be located on the north side of E1 Paseo, west
of Sage Lane. It was noted that the Design Review Board had requested
several modifications which the applicant had made and the Palm Desert
Property Owners Association had approved the project. In responce to
one of the Commissioners question regarding parking Mr. Cipriani indicated
that the plans showed more than the required amount of parking. Finally
the project has 13 standard conditions of approval .
Case No. 56C, Poul S. Moller, request for approval of preliminary site,
grading and landscaping for an open storage area to be located north of
44th Avenue and 250 feet west of Painter's Path. There was discussion
in regard to the drainage of water and the direction it would flow. The
City Engineer indicated it would flow east across adjoining property until
the property is more developed.
Case No. 79MF, Irwin Siegel , request for approval of final construction
drawings for a 180-unit condominium project to be located at Kings Point-
Shadow Mountain Drive. Mr. Cipriani indicated that the applicant had
failed to provide much of the required information, i .e. landscaping plan,
modified site plan, color samples, etc. Discussion on this case insued
in regard to the drainage problem with the project, long delay between
Phase l and 2 and why the Design Review Board process approved the project
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
July 20, 1977 Page Four
IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS (Continued)
A. Case No. 79MF (Continued)
when a complete set of plans had not been submitted. Mr. Cook noted that
he would receive in the next few days a report from consultants on the
needed drainage in the area and then he could review the plans and make
the final decisions.
..r MR. IRWIN SIEGEL, Builder, 17001 Ventura Blvd. , Ste. 200, Encino, Ca.
spoke to the Commission in favor of the project, noting that further
delay of the project would cause problems for the seller, the purchaser,
and the completion of the project. Mr. Siegel indicated that if the
180-units could not be approved the project would be stopped at this
point.
Chairman Berkey and Commissioner Snyder pointed out that there are no
dams for the water run-off in the area and that the City is presently in-
volved in a law suit with the City of Indian Wells over the same problem.
The Commission recommended that the Case be continued until the August 2nd
meeting and allow time for Mr. Cook to receive his report from the consultants and
make a decision on the flood control issue.
Case No. 82MF, Portola Village, request for approval of preliminary site,
floor and elevation plans for a 48 unit condominium project to be located
on the east side of Portola, south of Goleta. The need for larger turn-
around areas was noted, also the relocation of the swimming pool as re-
quested by the Design Review Board process.
MR. STEVE FLESHMAN, 74-133 El Paseo, Palm Desert, spoke to the Com-
mission in favor of the project noting that the streets are private
with upgraded elevations, with less traffic and no through traffic.
Commissioner Kelly noted the reasons for the relocation of the pool would
be due to the children in the area.
The Commission recommended that Condition No. 12 be deleted with regard to the
relocation of the swimming pool .
Case No. 51C, HMS Plaza West, request for approval of final construction
drawings for an office complex to be located on the southwest corner of
El Paseo and Lantana. Mr. Cipriani recommended that Condition No. 18 be
changed to read "A sidewalk six (6) feet in width in addition to a land-
scaped berm a minimum of 3 feet in height shall be installed along Larrea
Street. "
MR. STEVE FLESHMAN, 74-133 El Paseo, Palm Desert, was in agreement
with the conditions of approval .
Motion by Commissioner Reading, seconded by Commissioner Snyder to accept the
Design Review Board Cases by Planning Commission Resolution No. 264 with the follow-
ing changes to the Resolution: Case No. 79MF is continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of August 2, 1977, Condition No. 12 of Case No. 82MF is hereby deleted and
change Condition No. 18 of Case No. 51C to read as follows: A sidewalk six (6)
feet in width in addition to a landscaped berm a minimum of 3 feet in height shall be
installed along Larrea Street; carried unanimously (4-0).
X. DISCUSSION ITEMS
Discussion followed led by comments by Mr. Williams on the information provided
the Commission concerning the Draft Growth Impact and Evaluation Report by CVAG, the
letter from Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright regarding SB467, the Draft Blowsand Con-
trol and Protection Plan by CVAG, and How Will America Grow, the importance of each
and comments now and later would be appreciated. It was noted that the growth of the
valley will triple by 1980, population figures noted in the reports came from the
staff of the cities involved.
MINUTES AMENDEC,
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
July 20, 1977 Page Five
X. DISCUSSION ITEMS (Continued)
Chairman Berkey asked that the staff prepare a resolution covering all
the information and the Commission would study it at the next Study Session.
The Commission noted that all the information presented was important and
some of it exciting and they would appreciate information like this at any time
it is available.
XI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
<` RICHARD ARNOLD, 38551 Cactus Lane, Palm Desert spoke to the Commission
j,Y regarding Parcel A in the study zone.
�Y Chairman Berkey informed Mr. Arnold that the problem would have to be discussed
at the next Planning Commission meeting during the public hearings.
XII. COMMENTS
A. Staff - Mr. Williams noted that CVAG is forming committees and asked if
the Commission cared to attend any of the meetings or join any of the
committees, which were as follows: Environmental , Conservation, Housing
& Manpower Development, and Criminal Justice.
Commissioner Kelly noted her interest in attending the meetings on
Criminal Justice.
i
Mr. Williams also reviewed the last City Council meeting noting results
of various matters, noting that Councilwoman Newbrander asked for a mor-
atorium on building until water and resources are analyzed further.
B. City Attorney - Not present.
C. Planning Commission - Commissioner Reading read a letter addressed to the
Commission concerning the Commissions work since November 30, 1976 and
his opinion on same (Exhibit F) .
The Commission asked for a joint session to be planned with the City Council
in September.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Reading that the meeting
be adjourned at 4:10 p.m.
PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary
ATTEST:
GEORGE BERKEY, Chairman
/ks
EXHIBIT A
ti i � �� I�.a, `•'1�� o--C �
, o
KI III q O
o- m l a
�
1� �I N i � I �
° j 1I0 SIN M Q
�
L� ltl
TINor 1
41 S v
y • �� o o ,';; ~o i q vv O O O o O � o � 3 3 is .
E v o N MIS In �\s) rJ u N¢L I0,g�I `� �� 0. SIC a I a I I -n cc� tt� cn
fora. ------------ --
I �
C
0 1h n �O N 10 l0
-n n O n N 10 O+ 01 aD u'1
L N C.
.co M N d. m 01 10 10 N M L.
O N >a010
d '
q C
C ••'. l0 N- llY
v n In w tO v v 00 o v v CI n n <r w m �e o N
1 O rn•• Ol tO M N p R co N ^ ^ C Q m b �.1
N Q W In M Oi U 41 Y
O X
L
V) L 41
0 Kr V. Co CS 00 O -^ n N co ram-
J 1 t0 M et M N � � N O � Q N � V coO- •O O .
Ol III C'-
y ro O S
O
q ( iyr-
U
U N
L v
C7 co N
M 10 n Ip .
M l0 m In N M M M r- -0 r• N'O C
C L I^ a3 C IF•-0
a•.-a
.�. j >>4
1
O e _
N
V l0 N O In b r- N n N t0 co m c V C
N C 1 V N •cr I^ M M C
O 10�
u +ten qy �
N to
N co W n
C +
p W n N �O 47 co
^ C W N r.W.. n' V OJ M M ^ to N p >•.W d M 1 - lf) N 1!f M N M 0
q^� •O K < 0•N V
Im
0 N O
O
vt W q h l a.3 O O .-E-.
Y q Q q E
O •r N h .� _ ¢ J FI V d .1] N J E W i-1 C QI
yO.t O L O U C aa-• 01
¢! U ti-I O q O y3 nc+ � •r � h U p •r- p Q q 0
—
QI q LL U 1 1 C l>..� V U V•-�-• C
O O L S U W t t0J Y C 0
uC! A .�.• O 1 tOn �q O L .� L.l Z' Q
V 1 O 1 Ci, Y IL L t f'.l G Ql N 4J I Q V t7CZ
C N K ry�0i
- o v c •N i I E .-c T ` ` 1 .. W .- Ole
N j tll "O p C � 1 q 10 W i0+ N vi
a .-
a�l L
L.
4j: L ±. � r I� ± �. •� 3. � � `S p 'M1 � J J tl rn
U y u
„L. f- rt•l .0..- W d L. n} N
C. J
EXHIBIT B
t
it ii.m �-1 Jrl. � 'c .' r o4/ 11 t, 1 .I.•L ` �� ,. ..TLw].Ir. �
t Iti � Ili � $� •�• � � 1 I-.� J
^�'� I' t�_ ��fff / J� LNi,J µ I� �. I••S L� 1 � c .... , .� �•�
1,.'.ril •.::[ - t.taMYl?Ha}�I Nit. a...�,.'1Y 1•
W1
o`
�(1tV
lots
pp
%MAW
I
S �
� I 1
L S c �I�i Pn 100� � 0•. I � OI\I, K � �I `;`1
c
m I
• ai m n �� t�� M� � �f'1 i T M� `�•. �p �0 i 41�I h
y � W
I
� I' `6 `c� of
��,,,I� ;7�
� o a i '� � I I o , �I�I•�I � t�l I � I I ' I
All
v n I h 1, n
a,, 1� ! a I� f. 1-. t-,I, I I
EXHIBIT C
m
�� I � II ICI ► �
1 I
� � � i �� �I I I ► I, I
` I
I
z W V
I
oo �• U j cV I S M T I N � N ` M� d- Q i O
o K.► R; � IcYIri15r�. Icn� MI .p �IC�% ��J. I
zl,
K� S
d v zi-
v$j
-� T II I ► O I L T N C,- T I I ` 1 I `
I �n p
Q s �Ip �� ialo \o Mcd
o
I
• i
v = I I
J �
d
,I I
W t\► �I a, .6� ICI �I� � .
c
EXHIBIT D
,•� } C.6f YQ Pf ,'h�' !" V'�f^'r rC/ f?g rL'R ���f` /!,•%/j— /�',i/
..
i
176 -7f, 77- t^ ?n' c 7q---r-; '-O".'/' '")'� "� ^•9 !"< -R "6-071 {
f=
r �I r�� � r�J� } ar�o � j ► � � I I E
l �' )e Inc !G /6G� J s
3 1 ,
7 j .)c.!j I -177
/) I l7/
to 1 t7�'. i /tin I da. (,`.�' / c d ) w / c�✓ �[A � /�� 17r
-.
(�.. ) .,, r I t!� � J6.". I �:.'� � Js,.� �.J e, ' f^J•',� �.J.,+ �'�..'., �`... `�t J(•]� � ! .
�+ _ Y�l!':�),"••�ii�e.�ei � �U;'�;�:`�1.�`�'.` �,...,•.�.-Roc^1,r'�- �'r�; r'�'`v-' 6`?3,�-,�.�e^i.�, .
7:{7� i.i''":�7 � `�'J' e^.'.4.1�6 r. �.e�+n - '-... t•nt- n- •� .��t n 1 i
i e I
soo # ( ! II
i
coo
I
EXHIBIT E
F•C1Y�Q .r a '„ . s r
LC-i41°N
76-77I 77`7^1 7`-7- In-r n�`�i iGf�i'q nw� r. ten. .tee a �•. i n I? On' r
! ^ 700
✓C o
ell
j vr� ; d 6' Grf ;? '7 t}�. tf 7/-7 { '> -Cn 76� i
� /D ! 6G!" nit I 7 G+cq 7,36 ` 7q
-37 ! _
G2a
77, 77-,7in 7., t r i�r "_1 �... t ^ti _,- .: 7 f. :_ �_,• a �aT
2f0p
EXHIBIT F
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
I HAVE BEEN REFLECTING ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THIS BODY FOR THE
PAST EIGHT AND ONE HALF MONTHS, SINCE I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER AND
HAVE COME UP WITH THE FOLI:OWING THOUGHTS THAT HAVE RAISED QUESTIONS
IN MY MIND AND I HOPE WILL BE WORTHY OF YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SINCE 30NOVEMBER 1976 TO DATE, WE HAVE APPROVED 435 SINGLE FAMILY
OR CONDOMINIUM UNITS, 41 MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS, 12 COMMERCIAL UNITS
AND 37 MOBILE HOME UNITS. (THESE FIGURES ARE THROUGH ThE COURTESY OF
STAFF .AND DO NOT REFLECT ANY APPROVALS OR BUILDING PRIOR TO 11/30/76 )
IN APPROVING THE ABOVE, 'PIE HAVE REQUIRED THE BUILDER/DEVELOPER TO
INCLUDE SWIMMIN', POOLS,TENNIS COURTS,BIKE LANES, WALKING PATHS AND
MANY OTHER AMENITIES. ALL OF THESE EXTRAS ARE IN EFFECT POINTS OF
SALE FOR THE DEVELOPER AND RI,;HTFULLY SO. TE CE'RTAINLY 7!ANT OUR
CITIZENS TO HAVE ALL THE NICETIES AVAILABLE F'OR THEIR PRIIIIARY AND
SECONDARY HOLIES. BY REQUIRIN3 THESE COSMETIC AMENITIES, ARE WE
OVERLOOKING THE POSSIBILITIES OF A WATER SHORTAGE, ELECTRIC GAS
SHORTAGES OR FAILURES ADEQUATE POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION FOR THE
INCREASE IN POPULATION AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST PROPER EDUCATION
FACILI`I'IESFOR THE SCHOOL ACxE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY? IN NEWSPAPERS
AND MAGAZINES 77E READ THAT "lE COULD BE FACED WITH A WATER SHORTAGE
AND AS OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH, A SHORTAGE AT INCREASED RATES.
THERE IS AL60 TALK OF ENERGY SHORTAGES, CLASSROOM SHORTAGES, LACK OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT DUE TO PERSONEL SHORTAGES AND ON DOWN THE LINE. TO
BETTER EVALUATE OUR POSITION AS A CITY AND BE PREPARED FOR THESE
SITUATIONS IF THEY DO INDEED BECOME A REALITY, I SUGGEST THAT PITH
PERMISSION OF CITY COUNCIL OR BETTER YET, IN JOINT SESSION 'AITH CITY
COUNCIL, WE QUERY RESPONSIBLE PERSONS FROM THESE AGENCIES IN STUDY
SESSIONS AS TO THEIR IMMEDIATE AND LONG FLANGE PLANS TO FORM GUIDELINES
WE CAN LIVE WITH FOR FUTURE DECISIONS. I 'M SURE THAT ALL THE AGENCIES
WOULD BE EAGER TO COOPERATE FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY AND IN SOME
CASES FOR THE GOOD OF THEIR CUSTOMERS BUT IF NOT BY THE POWER OF
SUBPEONA DUCESTECUTA WHICH I WOULD ASSUME IS WITHIN ThE RI`tHTS OF COUNCIL
Ti-I'_:. PLANNING COMLiISION HAS BEEN ACCUSED IN THE PAST AND I AM SURE WILL
BE ACCUSED IN THE FUTURE OF RAMRODDIN4 PROJECTS THROUGH IN THE SUMMER
TIME WHEN A MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS ARE NOT HERE. WE ALL KNOW WE
'tdILL BE DAMNED IF WE DO AND DAMNED IF WE DON 'T BUT THIS COULD BE AN
OPPORTUNE TIME TO GET ANSWERS TO THESE UNKNOWNS. I THINK THAT THESE
QUESTIONS ARE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS TO THE COMMUNITY AND SHOULD BE
ADDRESSED ACCORDINGLY. AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, IT IS OUR FUNCTION
TO MAINTAIN FAIR AND ORDERLY GROWTH AND TITHCUT THE PROPER CONTROLS
AND GUIDELINES WHICH HAVE TO BE UPDATED CONSTANTLY TO REFLECT OUR
IVERCHANGINJI ECONOMY, WE CANNOT EFFECTIVELY AND PROPERLY FUNCTION.
IN THIS SO CALLED BUILDING BOOM, WHAT PROVISIONS OR CONTROLS HAVE
BEEN MADE TO PROTECT THE LEGITIMATE BUILDER FROM THE BOOTLEG OR
SATURDAY AND SUNDAY BUILDER? IS THERE ANY PROTECTION AGAINST THE
UNDERFINANCED BUILDER/DEVELOPER? ARE OR CAN COMPLETION BONDS OR
PERFORMANCE BONDS BE REQUIRED? IS OUR ON SITE BUILDING INSPECTION
ADEQUATE? DO WE HAVE ENOUGH INSPECTORS OR IS THE BUILDING GOING AT
SUCH A RATE THAT THEY CAN NOT MEET THE DEMANDS? RATHER THAN LET THIS
WHOLE ThING qET OUT OF HAND AND BACK US INTO A CORNER, SHOULDN 'T WE
BACK AWAY FROM THE FOREST SC THAT '+°u'E CAN SEE THE TREES BEFORE IT IS
TOO LATE? IT 'MOULD SEEM THAT STORM DRAINS AND SEWER SHOULD TAKE
PRIORITY OVER EVERYTHING ESPECIALLY SINCE THE EXPERIENCES OF LAST
SEPTEMBER. NOBODY IN THEIR RIGH`1' MIND WOULD WANT TO GO THROUGH THAT
�s �
AGAIN AND LE:A6T OF ALL SUBJECT .SOME INNOCENT NEWCOMER 1O THE DEVASTATION
AND COSTLY INCONVENIENCE THAT A LOT OF US HAVE BEEN THROUGH, ESPECIALLY
IF THERE IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO NOW. LET US GET OUR PRIORITIES IN
THE PROPER PROSPECTIVE AND NOT BE STAMPEDED INTO MAKING UN''IISE AND
POSSIBLY COSTLY DECISIONS.
SINCE I ',WROTE THESE THOUGHTS DOWN AS THEY HAVE COME TOME OVER THE
PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS I THOUGHT IT BEST TO CONSOLIDATE THEM INTO
LETTER FORM THAT 'WOULD BEST EXPRESS MY CONCERNS.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SINCERELY,
/X\
C