Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0705 ADDENDUM Due to the number of corrections to the Minutes of the Palm Desert Planning Commission Meeting of Wednesday, July 5, 1978, they were rewritten and are attached hereto . By the action of the Planning Commission on the Minutes of July 19, 1978, they do also approve the revised Minutes of the July 5, 1978, meeting. low MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY - JULY 5 , 1978 7 :00 PM - CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS I . CALL TO ORDER The special meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Berkey at 7 :00 p .m. in the Council Chambers in the Palm Desert City Hall . II . PLEDGE - Commissioner Kryder III . ROLL CALL Present : Commissioner FLESHMAN Commissioner KELLY Commissioner KRYDER Commissioner SNYDER Chairman BERKEY Others Present : Paul A. Williams - Director of Environmental Services Ralph Cipriani - Associate Planner Dave Erwin - City Attorney Dave Ortegel - City Fire Marshal Kathy SHorey - Planning Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of regular meeting of June 14, 1978. Mr. Williams noted the following corrections to the minutes. lst page, under Election of Vice Chairman, vote should be 4-0 not 4-1 . Page seven , last paragraph , vote should be 4-0 not 4-1 . On a motion by Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the minutes were approved as corrected; carried unanimously (5-0) . V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Berkey announced that prior to this meeting, the Commission had met in a Study Session for the purpose of clarifying the Staff recommendations. No decisions were reached. Chairman Berkey then explained the Public Hearing procedures to those present . A. Continued Case Nos. DP 05-78 and 117MF, TERRA INDUSTRIES , Applicant Request for approval of a Revised Development Plan and Preliminary Design Review for a 198-unit condo- minium project to be located on approximately 33 acres at the northwest corner of Fairhaven Drive and 44th Avenue . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Two VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) A. Case Nos. DP 05-78 and 117MF (Cont . ) Chairman Berkey noted that he and Commissioner Fleshman were not present at the meeting of May 30 , 1978, but that they had listened to the tape of the meeting concerning this case and that they were both familiar with the cases . Mr. Williams reviewed the cases and noted that the applicant had submitted revised drawings changing the foot print pattern of the units and the number of parking spaces. He noted the concerns of the Design Review Board and stated that the Staff recommended denial of the Development Plan and rejection of Case No . 117MF. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. ROBERT KRIESE , President of Terra Industries , addressed the concerns as mentioned by Mr. Williams. He indicated that there was 51% open space and that the area adjacent to the project near the flood channel could be used for additional open space. Mr. Kriese then presented a revised cluster plan which would make the garages more accessible and circula- tion easier . He then noted that this project is proposed as a way of trying to reach an affordable housing range . Further, he noted agreement with the suggested pool size and the 20 ft . setback for the units could be met . DANIEL SALERNO, Architect for the project , gave a slide presentation showing the circulation con- cept , patio concept , garage access concept , and pictures of a project in Laguna Hills. He also presented samples of the materials and colors to be used. Commissioner Kryder asked about the distance between the garages , noting that the plan is deceiving. Mr. Salerno indicated that it would be 20 ft . between them all . Commissioner Kryder asked about the guest parking and if there was guest parking for all the units. Mr . Salerno stated that there was not guest parking at every cluster. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed project . Being none he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission, noting that the Staff and the Design Review Board had recommended denial . Commissioner Kelly indicated that she felt that the amenities were not adequate, open space was inadequate, and the parking is in- adequate, noting that parking is hard to enforce and people will park wherever they want . Chairman Berkey asked to have the two-story issue clarified , asking Mr. Williams to note where the two-story units would be located. Mr. Williams noted the various two-story units on the outside . Mr. Kriese stated that the J and F plans are the same plan , but the J plans are two story, so wherever there is a J it will become an F. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Three VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) A. Case Nos . DP 05-78 and 117MF (Cont . ) Commissioner Fleshman stated that the amenities were inadequate; the realtionship of the pools to the units is poor; parking on one side of the street is bad; and the applicant has appeared to do the minimum, as required in the Zoning Ordinance , on everything . 'ow Chairman Berkey noted his concern with the lack of guest parking in the project . Commissioner Kelly stated that the concerns voiced at the May 30, 1978, meeting were still apparent . Commissioner Snyder stated that he thought the applicant would have worked out his problems with the Design Review Board, but this hasn ' t happened. Chairman Berkey asked if there was a time limit on this project and if perhaps the applicant would like a continuance . Mr . Williams stated that there is no time limit on the Development Plan but that there is on the Design Review Board case. Mr. Kriese stated that there were two new con- cerns brought out at this meeting that had not been mentioned previously. He stated that the parking as proposed is the best they can do and that they have tried to comply with the Design Review Board' s wishes. He indicated that they would gain nothing by going back to the Design Review Board. On a motion by Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the Commission denied the Development Plan and rejected the Preliminary Design Review by Planning Commission Resolution No. 373; carried unanimously (5-0) . B. Continued Case Nos. C/Z 02-78 and Related Draft EIR, CHACAHUALA, LTD. , Applicant Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 20, 000 to PR-4 on a 37. 8 acre parcel located south of Little Bend and north of Mesa View ex- tended between Alamo and Arrow Trail and the re- lated Draft EIR. Mr . Williams reviewed the case and noted the previous report and the revised Staff Report . He then reviewed the drainage concerns and indicated that the applicant proposes an open channel through the project . He then noted the correspondence received stating concerns with drainage adjacent to the project . Mr. Williams then reviewed the Draft EIR noting that it is very complete and the Staff is recom- mending that the EIR be certified as complete , despite the Commission ' s action on the Change of Zone. Further, he noted that the PR zone best mitigates the problems of this parcel . .r Chairman Berkey asked the City Attorney, Dave Erwin, about the liability that the City could possibly face in the event of another flood. Mr. Erwin stated that all the City can do it to make sure that the City has sufficient flood control and that steps are taken to pro- tect the adjacent property. Chairman Berkey also noted that he and Commissioner Fleshman had listened to the tape from the meeting of May 30, 1978, regarding this case as they had both been absent . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Four VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) B. Case Nos . C/Z 02-78 and Related Draft EIR (Cont . ) Commissioner Fleshman asked when the channel on Haystack was due to be completed. Mr. Williams noted that it is planned for this fiscal year. Commissioner Fleshman then asked about the one along Ironwood. Mr. Williams stated that it was planned for the next fiscal year. Commissioner Snyder asked if there were catch basins on Haystack. Mr. Williams stated that they were in the budget . Commissioner Fleshman referred to page 4 of the EIR with regard to "Noise" . He stated that noise is a long term impact and should be treated as an accumulative impact . He also asked to know the cubic feet per second that the channel will carry . Commissioner Kryder noted his concern for the water entering and leaving the project and what the effect would be if water path above the project shifts . Mr. Williams stated that the intent of the Master Drainage Plan is to carry the water down to Haystack, and the Indian Hills Villas south carried to the east . Commissioner Kryder noted his concern for the project being started prior to the flood control be completed so that proper drainage is provided. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time . HAROLD HOUSLEY, Project Engineer, 73-893 Highway 111 , addressed the concerns of the Commission regarding drainage and traffic . He noted the revised plot plan and the changes that had been made . He stated that during a normal rainfall , the water will be handled by the water going underground to the channel along Haystack or Portola to the Deep Canyon Channel . He stated that although there is a wall around the pro- ject, there will be openings in the wall for the water to run through. Further, he noted that a re- tention basin could be constructed on the City park site. Also , he stated that the proposed drainage within the project would better protect the Silver Spur Association area. GENE SCOTHORN, Wilda & Assoc. , referred to Commis- sioner Fleshman question , stating that the channel could carry 3600 cubic feet per second and this is a high figure. Also he stated that the local drain- age problems of the proposed project have been met , outside the project area is a regional problem. Commissioner Fleshman asked what size of an open channel would be necessary to carry the amount of water that will be generated in this area? He also stated that he was concerned with downstream area. Mr . Scothorn stated that the channel is not designed to protect against catastrophic floods, that is some- thing that should be dealt with at a regional level . He noted that their main concern was with how the swale would handle the water going toward Haystack. Chairman Berkey stated that the project will generate $57, 000 towards the drainage fund. There was some discussion about the cost of the City proposed project at Haystack. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the project . Being none, he asked if anyone wished to speak in OPPOSITION. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Five VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) B. Case Nos. C/Z 02-78 and Related Draft EIR (Cont . ) TOM O' SULLIVAN, Homestead and Alamo, noted his concern for the traffic, and asked that the entrance on Alamo be closed. JANE WOOLLEY, 73-010 Somera, noted here con- NNW cern with the traffic and asked why Chia can ' t be opened to take flow off Alamo. HAROLD BIRD, Sun Corral Trail , asked about the elevation of the east boundary on Arrow Trail ; whether the houses on Arrow Trail are above street ; do they have driveways onto Arrow Trail ; and will the water be diverted by the wall . Mr. Williams noted that there would be a wall on the backside of the units on Arrow Trail . EARL MCCANN, Riata Trail , noted his concern with the density and the potential loss in value of adjacent homes. He stated his objection to condo- miniums . JIM HALL, Skyward & Alamo, noted concern with traffic and there are already too many condos, wants single-family. FRED GRIGGS , President Silver Spur Ranchers Assoc . , stated that the project is presented well , but wants w large homes not condos. He also noted his concern for the completion of the fire station and flood control . These two concerns should be dealt with and completed prior to the project . DON BOLAS , 73-182 Skyward, noted that there is no need for the increase in density, this type of development is not needed in this area. He also noted his concern with noise and pollution. ELIZABETH CHARLIBLOCK, 73-234 Skyward, corner of Chia, stated that she agreed with Mr. Bolas and the other speakers. She asked about the drainage on Chia and on Haystack next to Marrekesh. Against project of this type in this area. SILVA WINTER, Somera, object to condos, should be single family homes, also objected to increase in density. Chairman Berkey asked if the applicant wished to make a RE- BUTTAL at this time. A. T . WILKES , Architect for the project , addressed himself to the various questions brought up . He stated that the major entrance will be on Mesa View, with a secondary on Alamo. He also noted that the swale could be deepened and raise the pads on the east ; the lots will be 10-12, 000 sq. ft . ; the area is better off with this project than without , with regard to flood control ; and, he stated that there would be less traffic with this type of project than with single-family homes. HAROLD HOUSLEY, noted that the Planned Unit Development gives a variety of opportunities to follow, allows more open space. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Six VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont. ) B. Case Nos. C/Z 02-78 and related Draft EIR (Cont . ) TOM O' SULLIVAN, stated that he opposed the project due to the traffic problems and the access to the property. Chairman Berkey stated that the present R-1 would create more access to Alamo and that this proposal allows for control . At this time Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . Commissioner Fleshman stated that the easiest access for most of the residents of the project would be to use the Alamo entrance/exit ; PR is preferred to R-1 ; all questions and concerns noted at this hearing should be better clarified; and, no more than 20% of the traffic should be directed to Alamo. Commissioner Flesh- man proposed a PR-3 zone. Commissioner Kelly stated that she like Commissioner Flesh- man's proposal; against the higher density; planned residential is only workable zoning for the parcle. Commissioner Snyder noted that the presentation and the EIR were both very complete but he is concerned with the flood control and the obligation of the City. The work that needs to be done in the City is beyond the scope of the applicant . Planned residential is good for the area. Commissioner Kryder stated that he concurred with Commissioner Snyder and that the EIR is so complete that it defeats itself in a sense. He noted his continued concern for projects being approved prior to the completion of flood control in the City. Chairman Berkey stated that he liked Commissioner Fleshman ' s approach and that he was concerned with the zone change and the in- crease in density. The PR-3 is a good solution . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman to recommend to the City Council a Change of Zone of PR-3 and to certify the EIR as complete by Planning Commission Resolution No. 374, seconded by Commissioner Kelly; carried (4-1) (AYES : Berkey, Fleshman , Kelly, Kryder; NOES : Snyder) . THERE WAS A BRIEF RECESS AT 9:40 P.M. THE MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 9:50 P.M. C. Continued Case Nos. DP' 09-78 and 126MF - CHACAHUALA LTD. , Applicant Request for approval of a revised Development Plan and Preliminary Design Review for a 131-unit condo- minium project on approximately 38 acres located rt south of Little Bend Trail and north of Mesa View extended between Alamo and Arrow Trail . Chairman Berkey asked the applicant if they would like to continue this case due to the action on the Change of Zone. Mr. Williams noted that to consider the project is meaningless as it does not form to the approved zoning. He also noted that the issue of the Development Plan goes into limbo until the zoning is acted on by the City Council on July 27, 1978. Mr . Williams recommended that the Cases be continued to the August 1 , 1978 , meeting. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Seven VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) C. Case Nos. DP 09-78 and 126MF (Cont . ) Commissioner Fleshman noted the following items that would be needed prior to the cases being discussed or acted on : Detail of road crossing the channel ; detail of all exterior walls and how they relate to adjacent property; specifics on channel and how it too will carry the water; the units on Arrow Trail are not appropriate ; need 40 ft . setbacks along Silver Spur area; no more than 2 units joined together; minimum 1 ,600 to 2, 100 sq. ft . units are appropriate as proposed; and, circulation, no more than 20% of the units should exit on Alamo . On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman , the cases were continued to the meeting of August 1 , 1978 ; carried unanimously (5-0) . D. Case Nos. C/Z 05-78, C/Z 05-78(EIR) , DP 10-78, and 133MF, BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES, Applicant . Mr. Williams noted that a written request for a continuance had been received and Staff recommended that the cases be continued to the August 1st meeting. On a motion by Commissioner Snyder , seconded by Commissioner Fleshman, the cases were continued to August 1 , 1978; carried unani- mously (5-0) . Commissioner Fleshman left the room due to a conflict of interest . E. Case No . TT 12784, SILVER SPUR ASSOCIATES , Applicant Request for approval of a Tentative Map which would create a 2-lot subdivision to provide for 100 air- space condominiums and recreational amenities on approximately 10 acres within the PR-7 zone located north of Irontree Drive, west of Mariposa Drive and south of Foxtail Lane. Mr . Williams reviewed the case and noted points of the proposed Development Plan. He pointed out the memorandum received from the Fire Marshal and letters (received regarding concerns with the density and traffic. Mr . Williams noted Staff ' s recommendation of approval and reviewed the various conditions of approval. Chairman Berkey asked if density was part of the approval sought . Mr. Williams noted that it was . Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. LARRY SPICER, representing Ironwood Country Club, stated that this project was not proposed as a downgrade to the present area. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak n,W in FAVOR of the proposal. Being none, he asked if anyone wished to speak in OPPOSITION to the project . MIKE BAGNAL, President of Homeowners Association #2, stated that he was concerned with the parking on Foxtail , as it is already a problem; the density would be 307o than the present zoning; would like more open space and amenities; and, the number of tennis courts would not be sufficient for the number of total units. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5 , 1978 Page Eight VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) E. Case No. TT 12784 (Cont . ) FRED SMUCK, 73-536 Dalia Lane , stated that the proposal should be like the rest of the development as proposed originally. MR. BUCKWALD, 48911 Flox, stated that he agreed with the others and that this is a law step backward, will add to the already exist- ing rentals , and there are too few pools. Chairman Berkey asked if the applicant would like to give a REBUTTAL at this time . Mr. Spider stated that each of the units would have an individual therapy pool, so there would not be a need for more pools. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission. Commissioner Snyder stated that the problem is one of density . Density is creating most of the problems in the area which are traffic and parking. Chairman Berkey agreed that traffic and congestion would be increased and this is already a problem. Commissioner Kelly noted her agreement and stated that ' the traffic, density and inadequate amenities were her concerns. She referred to the correspondence received stating that people are out of town this time and year and cannot appear to comment on the request . Commissioner Kryder noted his agreement and stated that per- haps Ironwood should take a look at the density in the area for over- all goals in the future . Chairman Berkey asked if the Commission should deny or if the applicant would like to revise his proposal . Mr. Spicer noted that if the tennis courts were deleted, the density would be 6 adjacent to 7. The Commission agreed that the parking, lack of amenities , and the density were the main concerns. Mr. Spicer stated that he would not like a con- tinuance, would rather have a denial that he could appeal to the City Council . Commissioner Kelly asked that the concerns of the Commission be emphasized to the City Council . On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the Commission denied the request due to the high density and the traffic by Planning Commission Resolution No. 375 ; carried (4-0) (AYES : Berkey, Kelly, Kryder, Snyder; ABSTAIN : Fleshman) . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Nine VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) F. Case Nos . CUP 06-78 and 132MF, CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF THE LATTER DAY SAINTS, Applicant Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit and a Preliminary Design Review to allow a 26 ,000 sq. ft . 26 . 75 high church building with a 77 ' spire and related Sunday School classrooms on a 3.66 acre 40W parcel located at the northwest corner of Park View Drive and Monterey Avenue within the PR-7, S .P . zone and approval of a Variance to permit a 77 foot tall spire where 55 feet is the maximum height permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Williams reviewed the cases and noted the concerns of the Design Review Board with regard to spire and the continuation of the meandering bike path. Chairman Berkey asked if Standard Condition No . 1 should state that the case will go back before the Design Review Board. Mr . Cipriani noted that the case was continued by the Design Review Board so they will be reviewing it again. Commissioner Kelly suggested that Special Condition No. 10 be combined with Special Condition No. 6. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. OTTO KORVER, 1110 S . Robertson, Los Angeles , stated that the main part of the tower was 59 feet high, which could be cut to 55 feet , .+ the tower is tapered up till the last two feet which is a lightning rod. Commissioner Snyder noted that he believed that the highest point in the City had to have a red light on top of it . Mr. Korver had no objection to this. He then asked about the right-of-way as stated in Special Condition No. 4 and the mounding as noted in Special Condition No. 10 . Mr. Williams noted that the figure in Special Condition No. 4 should be 110 feet not 126, and with regard to the mounding, 3 feet would be sufficient . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the project . PAUL PAYNE, 208 Michelle, Palm Springs, stated that if the tower is lowered it would be out of proportion with the building and it would be better to delete it if the maximum is 55 ' . He asked to have the traffic safety lighting explained. Mr . Williams stated that the Director of Public Works intent is that the intersection and the driveways be lite . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in OPPOSITION of the project . Being none, he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Ten VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) F. Case Nos. CUP 06-78 and 132MF (Cont . ) Chairman Berkey noted that since the Design Review Board had continued the case, the Commission should not be considering it and Special Condition No. 8 should be deleted and left up to the Design Review Board. Commissioner Fleshman noted that the spire should be left as proposed or not at all, the building will speak for itself. Commissioner Kryder stated that the 77 ft . spire is necessary for the architecture of the building and to eliminate it the building might loose impact , and noted his approval of the Variance request . Commissioner Snyder stated that he agreed that the spire was an important part of the church but that we do have an ordinance and a Design Review Board, so let the architect work it out with them. Commissioner Kelly suggested that just the CUP be approved and eliminate the Variance. Commissioner Snyder stated that the Variance should be denied and adopt the Resolution as written but leave the spire up to the Design Review Board. Mr . Williams advised the applicant that the next Design Review Board meeting was July 11, 1978, at 5 : 30 p .m. and that they would need a sample material board. On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman , the Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit with the noted changes to the Conditions of Approval and denied the re- quest for a Variance by Planning Commission Resolution No. 376 ; carried (4-1) (AYES : Berkey, Fleshman , Kelly, Snyder; NOES : Kryder) . G. Case No. VAR 04-78, CLIFFORD W. HENDERSON, Applicant Chairman Berkey noted that the applicant had request that the case be continued due to the lateness of the evening. On a motion by Commissioner Kelly , seconded by Commissioner Snyder , the Commission continued the case to the meeting of July 19, 1978; carried (4-1) (AYES : Berkey, Kelly, Kryder, Snyder ; NOES : Fleshman) . H. Case No. C/Z 04-78, COVE CONSTRUCTION, Applicant Request for a Change of Zone from PR-5, S .P . and PR-5 to R-1 12, 000 on a parcel approximately 75 acres in size generally located east of Highway 74, between Homestead Road and Portola Avenue. Mr. Williams reviewed the case and noted that the Staff re- commended approval of the Change of Zone but that S .P. should be added to the R-1 12, 000 designation on the map and on the resolution. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. ED WRIGHT, President of Cove Construction , noted his agreement with the Staff Report . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Change of Zone . Being none , he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . On a motion by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Kelly, the Commission approve the Change of Zone by Planning Commission Resolution No. 377; carried unanimously (5-0) . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Eleven VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) I . Case No. C/Z 03-78, CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN DIEGO, Applicant Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 9, 000 (Single-family residential , minimum 9, 000 sq. ft . lots) to R-2 (Single-family residential , minimum 4, 000 sq. ft . lot area/du) on approximately tow 7. 9 acres located west of Deep Canyon Avenue, north of 44th Avenue. Mr . Williams reviewed the case and noted that Staff recommended approval of the Change of Zone. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. The applicant was not present . Chairman Berkey asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Change of Zone. Being none , he de- clared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . Commissioner Fleshman noted that the R-2 zone was not appro- priate and that a PR-4 to PR-5 range would be better, also he would like to see the Development Plan . Commissioner Kelly stated that the applicant should be sent the reasons for this case being denied as the zoning is not appropriate . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman, seconded by Commissioner Snyder , the Commission denied the Change of Zone request by Planning Commission Resolution No. 378; carried unanimously (5-0) . %00 J. Case No. CUP 10-77(Amend) and 131MF - PALM DESERT 210 Ltd. , Applicant Request for approval of an Amendment to an approved Conditional Use Permit to provide for an additional 11 lots within an existing mobilehome subdivision within the R-M zone. Mr. Williams reviewed the case and noted the concerns of the Design Review Board. There was some discussion about the size of the fairways and the relationships to the greens and tees . Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. The applicant was not present . Chairman Berkey then asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed cases . Being none, he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission. On a motion by Commissioner Kryder , seconded by Commissioner Kelly, the Commission approved the cases by Planning Commission Resolu- tion No. 379 ; carried (3-2) (AYES : Berkey, Kelly, Kryder ; NOES : Snyder, Fleshman) . K. Case Nos. C/Z 06-78, CUP 07-78 and 83C - HAROLD KAPP, Applicant Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 and R-3(4) to R-3 (.9) on approximately . 24 acres on the east side of Portola, between San Marino Circle and Alessandro Street and approval of a related Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Design Review to allow the construction of a park- ing lot on said site. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Twelve VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) K. Case Nos. C/Z 06-78, CUP 07-78 and 83C (Cont . ) Mr. Williams reviewed the case and the conditions of the CUP and Design Review Case . He also noted that on the change of zone, the zone should be R-3(9) not R-3 9, 000. Commissioner Snyder asked how realistic the right-of-way requirement on Portola was . Mr . Williams stated that the City is commented to widening the road. Chairman Berkey stated that the precedent should be set now. Chairman Berkey then declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. HAROLD KAPP, 46-050 Amir, noted his agreement the the Staff ' s recommendations , but asked about Special Condition No. 6. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the project . JOHN OUTCAULT, Architect for the project , noted that the parcel involved was not suitable for a building. He asked about the walls being re- quired and noted that they would obsure the line of sight at that intersection . He also objected to the undergrounding and noted that it was unreasonable . It should be undergrounded to the pole until the rest of the block under- grounds. He also noted his objection to the wall as required in Special Condition No. 8. Commissioner Snyder stated that the undergrounding issue was unreasonable . Chairman Berkey asked if the City Council would handle this . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in OPPOSITION to the proposal . Being none he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . Commissioner Fleshman noted his objection to the wall and stated that 3 feet of mounding landscaped would be more appropriate . Chairman Berkey noted that landscaping at the corner would be more appropriate. Mr. Williams stated that the landscaping would have to be done carefully. There was some discussion about the adjacent lot being a parking lot under the Redevelopment Plan and whether the existing buildings should be offered for dedication. Commissioner Fleshman stated that there should be a good landscaping screen from the R-1 adjacent zoning. He also suggested that a Special Condition No. 10 be added stating that a portion of the existing building in the right-of-way shall be under unrevocable offer to the City. Commissioner Kryder and Commissioner Snyder objected to Com- missioner Fleshman proposed Condition stating that it would not be fair to the applicant . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman , seconded by Commissioner Kelly, the Commission approved the requested Change of Zone, by Plan- ning Commission Resolution No. 380 ; carried unanimously (5-0) . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman to approve the CUP and the Preliminary Design Review with the noted corrections and the addition of Condition No. 10 failed due to lack of a second, then the motion was made again without the addition of Condition No. 10, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, by Planning Commission Resolution No. 381 ; carried unanimously (5-0) . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Thirteen VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) L. Case No. DP 07-78 and 123MF - DEEP CANYON TENNIS CLUB HOMEOWNERS ' ASSOCIATION, Applicant Request for approval of an Amendment to the approved Development Plan for the Deep Canyon Tennis Club and preliminary Design Review to provide for the addition of two tennis courts at the Deep Canyon Tennis Club. .. Mr. Williams reviewed the cases and noted the concerns of the Design Review Board and noted that the Design Review Board had requested that the courts be recessed 4 feet . Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. ROBERT BARNES, President of Deep Canyon Tennis Club Homeowners ' Association, noted his disagreement with recessing the courts 4 feet . GREG ERICKSON, Vice President of J. M. Peters, Architect for the project , stated that he had not been notified of the Design Review Board meeting. He noted that the additional cost to recess the tennis courts would be about $10, 000. Would like to be able to go back to the Design Review Board if the problem cannot be solved at this meeting. Commissioner Kryder stated that if it is costly then the Design Review Board should reconsider. Commissioner Fleshman asked the applicant if he could compromise .• and lower the courts 2 feet . Mr. Erickson stated that the retaining wall would also be very costly if this approach was used. Mr. Cipriani noted that the applicant had first submitted this case several months ago and due to the complete plans not being sub- mitted it had been delayed. It is the applicant ' s responsibility to check on the Design Review Board meeting date under these circumstances. There was some discussion as to the height of the fence and the material to be used. Also there was some concerned mentioned for the scenic highway view along Highway 74. An addition to Special Condition No. 2 was suggested to read as follows : as not to be visible from Highway 74 frontage . Commissioner Fleshman asked if there would be more landscaping than there is at present . Mr . Erickson stated that there would be. On a motion by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman, the cases were approved with the addition to Special Condi- tion No. 2 by Planning Commission Resolution No. 382 ; carried unani- mously (5-0) . VIII . OLD BUSINESS - None Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Fourteen IX. NEW BUSINESS A. County Referral Case No. TT 12721 , PALM DESERT GREENS, Applicant Request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map to create 41 mobile home lots and 2 lots for recreation purposes on approximately 10. 14 acres within the R-T zone at Palm Desert Greens Country Club. On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman seconded by Commissioner Snyder , the Commission directed the Secretary to forward their comments, which were : lack of amenities and if approved the lots should be de- eper; carried unanimously (5-0) . X. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS A. Review of Cases acted on by the Design Review Board at their meeting of June 20, 1978 . Mr. Cipriani reviewed the cases and noted that Case No. 134MF should be rejected due to the action on the related Tract 12784. Case No. 84C there was some discussion as to the type of material allowed as a canopy over the gas pumps and to the location of the signs. Case No . 116MF - Add Condition No. 6 requiring carport standard storage. Case No. 72C - Mr . Cipriani noted that the Design Review Board had a 3-2 vote and the objection was that the site plan could be better. The applicant , Mr. Ricciardi noted that this was a good plan. On a motion by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Snyder, the Commission approved the actions of the Design Review Board except Case No. 134 was rejected and the addition of Condition No. 6 on Case No. 116MF, by Planning Commission Resolution No . 383 ; carried ( 3-2) (AYES: Berkey, Kryder , Snyder; NOES : Kelly, Flesh- man) . XI . DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Economic Practices Manual from Office of Planning & Research. This item was continued due to the lateness of the hour. XII . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None XIII . COMMENTS A. City Staff Mr. Williams remined the Commission of the proposed schedule for the next three months. He also noted the letter received from Roger Harlow of the Desert Sands Unified School District . Commissioner Kelly stated that this was a childish and uninformative letter. B. City Attorney - Not present Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Fifteen XIII . COMMENTS (Cont . ) C. Planning Commissioners Commissioner Kelly stated that this agenda was too long and that this should never happen again. Mr. Williams stated that from now on the agendas would be limited to five (5) Public Hearings. XIX. ADJOURNMENT On a motion by Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the meeting was adjourned at 1 :05 a.m. ; carried unanimously (5-0) . "AWILLIAMS , Secretary ATTEST: GEORGE B Y, Chairman /ks MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COS ISSIOI T =TI dG WEDNESDAY - JULY 5 . 1978 7 : 00 PM - CITY HALL CO C 1 L CHAMBERS I . CALL TO ORDER The special meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Berkey at 7 :00 p .m. in the Council Chambers in the Palm Desert City Hall . II . PLEDGE - Commissioner Kryder III . ROLL CALL Present : Commissioner FLESHMAN Commissioner KELLY Commissioner KRYDER Commissioner SNYDER Chairman BERKEY Others Present : Paul A. Williams - Director of Environmental Services Ralph Cipriani - Associate Planner Dave Erwin - City Attorney Dave Ortegel - City Fire Marshal Kathy Shorey - Planning Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of regular meeting of June 14 , 1978. Mr. Williams noted the following corrections to the minutes . lst page , under Election of Vice Chairman , vote should be 4-0 not 4-1 . Page seven , last paragraph , vote should be 4-0 not 4-1 . On a motion by Commissioner Kelly , seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the minutes were approved as corrected ; carried unanimously (5-0) . V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Berkey announced that prior to this meeting, the Commission had met in a Study Session for the purpose of clarifying the Staff recommendations . No decisions were reached. Chairman Berkey then explained the Public Hearing procedures to those present . .. A. Continued Case Nos . DP 05-78 and 117MF , TERRA INDUSTRIES , Applicant Request for approval of a Revised Development Plan and Preliminary Design Review for a 198-unit condo- minium project to be located on approximately 33 acres at the northwest corner of Fairhaven Drive and 44th Avenue . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5 , 1978 Page Two V1 . Pr BLIC IiEARI ,'GS ( Cont . ) A. Case Nos. pn 05 -78 and 1_ 11.TF (Cont . ) Chairman Berkey noted that lie and Commissioner Fleshman were not present at the meeting of May S0 , 1975 , but that the had listened to the tape of the meeting concerning this c,ase and that they were both familiar with the cases . Mr . Williams reviewed the cases and noted that the applicant had submitted revised drawings changing the foot print pattern of the units and the number of parking spaces . He i,oLed the c:onc(- rns of the Design Review Board and stated that the Staff recommended denial of the Development Plan and rejection of Case No . 1171'VIIF . Chairman. Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. ROBERT KRIESE , President of Terra Industries , addressed the concerns as mentioned by Mr . Williams. He indicated that there was 510 open space and that the area adjacent to the project near the flood channel could be used for additional open space. Mr . Kriese then presented a revised cluster plan which would make the garages more accessible and circula- tion easier. He then noted that this project is proposed as. a way of trying to reach an affordable housing range . Further , he noted agreement with the suggested pool size and the 20 ft . setback for the units could be met . DANIEL SALERNO, Architect for the project , gave a slide presentation showing the circulation con- cept , patio concept , garage access concept , and pictures of a project in Laguna Hills. He also presented samples of the materials and colors to be used. Commissioner Kryder asked about the distance between the garages, noting that the plan is deceiving. Mr. Salerno indicated that it would be 20 ft . between them all . Commissioner Kryder asked about the guest parking and if there was guest parking for all the units. Mr . Salerno stated that there was not guest parking at every cluster . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed project . Being none he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission , noting that the Staff and the Design Review Board had recommended denial . Commissioner Kelly indicated that she felt that the amenities were not adequate , open space was inadequate , and the parking is in- adequate , noting that parking is hard to enforce and people will park wherever they want . Chairman Berkey asked to have the two-story issue clarified , asking Mr. Williams to note where the two-story units would be located. Mr. Williams noted the various two-story units on the outside . Mr. Kriese stated that the J and F plans are the same plan , but the J plans are two story , so wherever there is a J it will become an F . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 19718 Pale Thr-e VI . PliBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) X . Case Nos . DP 05-78 and 117MF ( Cont . Commissioner Fleshman stated that the amenities were inadc,ryuate ; the relat-tonship of the pools to the units is poor ; parl>ing on rune side of the street is bad; and the applicant has appeared to do the mninimum, as required in the Zoning Ordinance , on everything . Chairman Berkey noted his concern with the lack of guest parking in the project . Commissioner Kelly stated that the concerns voiced at the May 30, 1978 , meeting were still apparent . Commissioner Snyder stated that he thought the applicant would have worked out his problems with the Design Review Board , but this hasn ' t happened. Chairman Berkey asked if there was a time limit on this project and if perhaps the applicant would like a continuance . Mr . Williams stated that there is no time limit on the Development Plan but that there is on the Design Review Board case. Mr. Kriese stated that there were two new con- cerns brought out at this meeting that had not been mentioned previously. He stated that the parking as proposed is the best they can do and that they have tried to comply with the Design Review Board ' s wishes. He indicated that they would gain nothing by going back to the Design Review Board. wow On a motion by Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the Commission denied the Development Plan and rejected the Preliminary Design Review by Planning Commission Resolution No . 373 ; carried unanimously ( 5-0) . B. Continued Case Nos. C/Z 02-78 and Related Draft EIR , CHACAHUALA, LTD. , Applicant Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 20 , 000 to PR-4 on a 37. 8 acre parcel located south of Little Bend and north of Mesa View ex- tended between Alamo and Arrow Trail and the re- lated Draft EIR. Mr . Williams reviewed the case and noted the previous report and the revised Staff Report . He then reviewed the drainage concerns and indicated that the applicant proposes an open channel through the project . He then noted the correspondence received stating concerns with drainage adjacent to the project . Mr . Williams then reviewed the Draft EIR noting that it is very complete and the Staff is recom- mending that the EIR be certified as complete , despite the Commission ' s action on the Change of Zone . Further, he noted that the PR zone best mitigates the problems of this parcel . Chairman Berkey asked the City Attorney , Dave Erwin, about the liability that the City could possibly face in the event of another flood. Mr . Erwin stated that all the City can do is to make sure that the City has sufficient flood control and that steps are taken to pro- tect the adjacent property. Chairman Berkey also noted that he and Commissioner Fleshman had listened to the tape from the meeting of May 30 , 1978 , regarding this case as they had both been absent . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Four VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) B. Case Nos . C/Z 02-78 and Related Draft EIR (Cont . ) Commissioner Fleshman asked when the channel on Haystack was due to be completed. Mr . Williams noted that it is planned for this fiscal year . Commissioner Fleshman then asked about the channel improvement through the 15 acre park donated by Ironwood. Mr . Williams stated that it was planned for the next fiscal year. Commissioner Synder asked if there were catch basins on Haystack. Mr. Williams stated that they were in the budget . Commissioner Fleshman referred to page 4 of the EIR with regard to "Noise" . He stated that noise is a long term impact and should be treated as a cumulative impact . He also asked to know the cubic feet per second that the channel will carry. Commissioner Kryder noted his concern for the water entering and leaving the project and what the effect would be if water path above the project shifts. Mr. Williams stated that the intent of the Master Drainage Plan is to carry water north and east of Indian Hills Villas down to Haystack. Commissioner Kryder noted his concern for the project being started prior to the flood control being completed so that proper drainage is provided. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. HAROLD HOUSLEY, Project Engineer, 73-893 Highway 111, addressed the concerns of the Commission regarding drainage and traffic. He noted the revised plot plan and the changes that had been made . He stated that during a normal rainfall , the water will be handled by the water going underground to the channel along Haystack or Portola to the Deep Canyon Channel . He stated that although there is a wall around the project there will be openings in the wall for the water to run through . Further , he noted that a retention basin could be constructed on the City park site . Also, he stated that the proposed drainage within the project would better protect the Silver Spur Association area. GENE SCOTHORN, Wildan & Assoc. , referred to Commissioner Fleshman ' s question , stating that the channel could carry 3600 cubic feet per second and this is a high figure . Also, he stated that the local drainage prob- lems of the proposed project have been met, outside the project area is a regional problem. Commissioner Fleshman asked what size of an open channel would be necessary to carry the amount of water that will be generated in this area? He also stated that he was concerned with downstream area. Mr. Scothorn stated that the channel is not designed to protect against catastrophic floods, that is some- thing that should be dealt with at a regional level . He noted that their main concern was with how the swale would handle the water going toward Haystack. Chairman Berkey stated that the project will generate $57, 000 towards the drainage fund.. There was some discussion about the cost of the City proposed project at Haystack. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the project . Being none , he asked if anyone wished to speak in OPPOSITION. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978. P ` e F v e VI . PUBLIC HEARING: (Cont . ) B . Case tyros . C;Z 02-78 and Related Draft EIR (Cont . TOM O' SULLIVAN , Homestead and Alamo , noted his concern for the traffic , and asked 'chat `-he entrance on _Alamo be closed. JANE WOOLLEY, 73-010 Somera, noted her con- cern with the traffic and asked why Chia can ' t 5,e opened to take ',low off Alamo . HAROLD BIRD, Sun Corral Trail , asked about the elevation of the east boundary on Arrow Trail ; whether the houses on Arrow Trail are above street ; do they have driveways onto Arrow Trail ; and will the water be diverted by the wall . Mr. Williams noted that there would be a wall on the backside of the units on Arrow Trail . EARL MCCANN, Riata Trail , noted his concern with the density and the potential loss in value of adjacent homes . He stated his objection to condo- miniums . JIM HALL, Skyward & Alamo, noted concern with traffic and there are already too many condos , wants single-family . _ FRED GRIGGS , President Silver Spur Ranchers Assoc . , stated that the project is presented well , but wants large homes not condos. He also noted his concern for the completion of the fire station and flood control . These two concerns should be dealt with and completed prior to the project . DON BOLAS , 73-182 Skyward, noted that there is no need for the increase in density , this type of development is not needed in this area. He also noted his concern with noise and pollution . ELIZABETH CHARLIBLOCK, 73-234 Skyward, corner of Chia, stated that she agreed with Mr. Bolas and the other speakers. She asked about the drainage on Chia and on Haystack next to Marrekesh . Against project of this type in this area. SILVA WINTER, Somera , object to condos , should be single family homes , also objected to increase in density. Chairman Berkey asked if the applicant wished to make a RE- BUTTAL at this time . A. T . WILKES , Architect for the project , addressed himself to the various questions brought up . He .. stated that the major entrance will be on Mesa View, with a secondary on Alamo. He also noted that the swale could be deepened and the pads raised on the east . The area is better off with this project than without , with regard to flood control ; and, he stated that there would be less traffic with this type of project than with single-family homes. HAROLD HOUSLEY, noted that the Planned Unit Development gives a variety of opportunities to follow, allows more open space . Minutes Palm Desert Planninc Commission July 5 . 1978 Pa ;e `iti VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) B. Case Nos . C/Z 02-78 and related Draft EIR (Cont . ) TOM O' SULLIVAN, stated that he opposed the project due re the t r if fie I;roblems -and the access to the property. Chairman Berkey stated that the present R-1 zone would create more access to Alamo and that this proposal allows for control . At this time Chairman Berkey declared I-lie Pub7_ic Hearinr; closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . Commissioner Fleshman stated that the easiest access for most of the residents of the project would be to use the Alamo entrance/exit ; PR is preferred to R-1 ; all questions and concerns noted at this hearing should be better clarified; and, no more than 200 of the traffic should be directed to Alamo . Commissioner Flesh- man proposed a PR-3 zone. Commissioner Kelly stated that she like Commissioner Flesh- man's proposal ; against the higher density ; planned residential is only workable zoning for the parcel . Commissioner Snyder noted that the presentation and the EIR were both very complete but he is concerned with the flood control and the obligation of the City . The work that needs to be done in the City is beyond the scope of the applicant . Planned residential is good for the area. Commissioner Kryder stated that he concurred with Commissioner Snyder and that the EIR is so complete that it defeats itself in a sense . He noted his continued concern for projects being approved prior to the completion of flood control in the City. Chairman Berkey stated that he liked Commissioner Fleshman ' s approach and that he was concerned with the zone change and the in- crease in density. The PR-3 is a good solution . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman to recommend to the City Council a Change of Zone of PR-3 and to certify the EIR as complete by Planning Commission Resolution No. 374 , seconded by Commissioner Kelly; carried (4-1 ) (AYES : Berkey, Fleshman , Kelly , Kryder; NOES : Snyder) . THERE WAS A BRIEF RECESS AT 9:40 P.14. THE MEETING WAS RECONVERTED AT 9:50 P.M. C. Continued Case Nos . DP 09-78 and 126MF - CHACAHUALA LTD. , Applicant Request for approval of a revised Development Plan and Preliminary Design Review for a 131-unit condo- minium project on approximately 38 acres located south of Little Bend Trail and north of Mesa View extended between Alamo and Arrow Trail . Chairman Berkey asked the applicant if they would like to continue this case due to the action on the Change of Zone . Mr. Williams noted that to consider the project is meaningless as it does not conform tothe approved zoning. He also noted that the issue of the Development Plan goes into limbo until the zoning is acted on by the City Council on July 27 , 1978. Mr . Williams recommended that the Cases be continued to the August 1 , 1978, meeting. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission Jule 5. 1978 VI . PUBLIC 11EARINGS (Cont . ) C. Case Nos. DP 09-78 and 126'1117 ( Cont . ) Commissioner Fleshman noted the following items that would be needed prior to the cases 1)ein discussed or .ctLd )n : detail of road crossing the channel ; detail of all exterior wails and how they relate to adjacent property; specifics on channel and how it will carry the water ; the units on Arrow Trail are not appropriate : need 40 ft . setbacks along Silver Spur area; no more than 2 units joined together ; minimum 1 , 600 to 2 , 100 sd. F L . units are as proposed: and, circulation , no more than of the i.ir_its shr)1cl exit on Alamo . On a motion by Commissioner Snyder , seconded by Commissioner Fleshman , the cases were continued to the meeting of August 1 , 1978 : carried unanimously ( 5-0) . D. Case Nos. C/Z 05-78 , C/Z 05-78(EIR) , DP 10-78 , and 133MF, BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES , Applicant . Mr. Williams noted that a written request for a continuance had been received and Staff recommended that the cases be continued to the August lst meeting. On a motion by Commissioner Snyder , seconded by Commissioner Fleshman , the cases were continued to August 1 , 1978; carried unani- mously (5-0) . Commissioner Fleshman left the room due to a conflict of interest . E. Case No. TT 12784, SILVER SPUR ASSOCIATES , Applicant Request for approval of a Tentative Map which would create a 2-lot subdivision to provide for 100 air- space condominiums and recreational amenities on approximately 10 acres within the PR-7 zone located north of Irontree Drive, west of Mariposa Drive and south of Foxtail Lane. Mr . Williams reviewed the case and noted points of the proposed Development Plan . He pointed out the memorandum received from the Fire Marshal and letters received regarding concerns with the density and traffic. Mr . Williams noted Staff ' s recommendation of approval and reviewed the various conditions of approval . Chairman Berkey asked if density was part of the approval sought . Mr . Williams noted that it was . Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time . LARRY SPICER, representing Ironwood Country Club , stated that this project was not proposed as a downgrade to the present area. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the proposal . Being none , he asked if anyone wished to speak in OPPOSITION to the project . MIKE BAGNAL, President of Homeowners Association #2, stated that he was concerned with the parking on Foxtail , as it is already a problem; the density would be 30`oniore than the presen[tzoning ; would like more open space and amenities ; and, the number of tennis courts would not be sufficient for the number of total units. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5 , 1978 Da-e Fi;,t,T- VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) E . Case No. TT 12784 (Cont . FRED SMUCK, 73-536 Dalia Lane , stated that the proposal should be li'H� e the rest ,;t the development as proposed originally . MR. BUCKWALD , 48911 Phlox, stated that he .r1 agreed with the others and that this is a step backward, will add to the %Ireadv r Tcist - ing rentals , and ther^ are ~oo few pools . Chairman Berkey asked if the applicant would like to give a REBUTTAL at this time . Mr. Spicer stated that each of the units would have an individual therapy pool , so there would not be a need for more pools . Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . Commissioner Snyder stated that the problem is one of density . Density is creating most of the problems in the area which are traffic and parking. Chairman Berkey agreed that traffic and congestion would be increased and this is already a problem. Commissioner Kelly noted her agreement and stated that the traffic , density and inadequate amenities were her concerns . She referred to the correspondence received stating g that people are out of town this time of year and cannot appear to comment on the request . Commissioner Kryder noted his agreement and stated that per- haps Ironwood should take a look at the density in the area for over- all goals in the future. Chairman Berkey asked if the Commission should deny or if the applicant would like to revise his proposal . Mr. Spicer noted that if the tennis court complex were included in the density calculation for this portion of the project it would be 6 dwelling units per acre which would be adjacent to an area with a density of 7 dwelling units per acre . The Commission agreed that the parking, lack of amenities, and the density were the main concerns. Mr. Spicer stated that he would not like a con- tinuance, would rather have a denial that he could appeal to the City Council . Commissioner Kelly asked that the concerns of the Commission be emphasized to the City Council . On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the Commission denied the request due to the high density and the 'traffic by Planning Commission Resolution No. 375; carried (4-0) (AYES : Berkey, Kelly, Kryder, Snyder; ABSTAIN : Fleshman) . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5 , 1978 Pare ":i ne VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) F. Case Nos . CUP 06-7S and 132MF , CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF THE LATTER DAY SAINTS , Applicant Request for approval of a Conditional Use permit and a Preliminary Design Review to _allow 26 , 000 sq. ft . 26 . 751high church building with a 77 ' spire and related Sunday School classrooms on a 3 . 66 acre *NW parcel located at the northwest corner of Park View Drive and Montorey Avenue within the PR- e , S . P . zone :.nd approval of a Variance to permit a '77 Loot I;all spire where 55 feet is the maximum height permitted by the Zoning Ordinance . Mr. Williams reviewed the cases and noted the concerns of the Design Review Board with regard to spire and the continuation of the meandering bike path . Chairman Berkey asked if Standard Condition No . 1 should state that the case will go back before the Design Review Board. Mr . Cipriani noted that the case was continued by the Design Review Board so they will be reviewing it again . Commissioner Kelly suggested that Special Condition No . 10 be combined with Special Condition No. 6. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time . OTTO KORVER, 1110 S . Robertson , Los Angeles , stated that the main part of the tower was 59 feet high , which could be cut to 55 feet , the tower is tapered up till the last two feet which is a lightning rod. Commissioner Snyder noted that he believed that the highest point in the City had to have a red light on top of it . Mr. Korver had no objection to this. He then asked about the right-of-way as stated in Special Condition No . 4 and the mounding as noted in Special Condition No. 10 . Mr. Williams noted that the figure in Special Condition No . 4 should be 110 feet not 126 , and with regard to the mounding , 3 feet would be sufficient . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the project . PAUL PAYNE , 208 Michelle , Palm Springs, stated that if the tower is lowered it would be out of proportion with the building and it would be better to delete it if the maximum is 55 ' . He asked to have the traffic safety lighting explained. Mr . Williams stated that the Director of Public Works intent is that the intersection and the driveways be lit. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in OPPOSITION of the project . Being none , he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5 , 1978 Pale Ten VI . PUBI IC r?� RI:rGS ( Cont . ) F. Case Nos . CUP 06-78 and (Cont . ) Chairman Berkey noted that since the Design Review Board had cone inu+_ d the case , the r_nmmi_ss ion -hoitld not b, cnns .der' r; it and Speciai Condition o. 8 should be deieted and left up to^ the Design Review Board. Commissioner Fleshman noted that the spire should be left as proposed or not at all , the bu i l d i n�r will sl1)eak f o y � t r Commissioner Kryder stated that the 77 ft . spire is necessary for the architecture of the building :nnd if eliminated the building might lose impact , and noted his approval of the Variance request , Commissioner Snyder stated that he agreed that the spire was an important part of the church but that we do have an ordinance and a Design Review Board, so let the architect work it out with them. Commissioner Kelly suggested that just the CUP be approved and eliminate the Variance. Commissioner Snyder stated that the Variance should be denied and adopt the Resolution as written but leave the spire up to the Design Review Board. Mr . Williams advised the applicant that the next Design Review Board meeting was July 11 , 1978, at 5 : 30 p .m. and that they would need a sample material board. On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman , the Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit with the noted changes to the Conditions of Approval and denied the re- quest for a Variance by Planning Commission Resolution No. 376 ; carried (4-1) (AYES : Berkey , Fleshman , Kelly, Snyder; NOES : Kryder) . G. Case No. VAR 04-78, CLIFFORD W. HENDERSON, Applicant Chairman Berkey noted that the applicant had requested that the case be continued due to the lateness of the evening. On a motion by Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Snyder , the Commission continued the case to the meeting of July 19 , 1978; carried (4-1 ) (AYES : Berkey, Kelly, Kryder, Snyder ; NOES : Fleshman ) . H. Case No. C/Z 04-78, COVE CONSTRUCTION , Applicant Request for a Change of Zone from PR-5 , S. P . and PR-5 to R-1 12 , 000 on a parcel approximately 75 acres in size generally located east of Highway 74, between Homestead Road and Portola Avenue. Mr . Williams reviewed the case and noted that the Staff re- commended approval of the Change of Zone but that S .P . should be added to the R-1 12 , 000 designation on the map and on the resolution. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. ED WRIGHT, President of Cove Construction , noted his agreement with the Staff Report . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Change of Zone . Being none , he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . On a motion by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Kelly, the Commission approved the Change of Zone by Planning Commission Resolution No. 377; carried unanimously ( 5-0) . Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Eleven VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) I . Case No . C/Z 03-78, CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN DIEGO. Applicant Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R- 1 9 , 000 ( Single- ainily residential , mini_inum 0 , 000 sq. ft . lots) to R-2 (Single-family residential , minimum 4 , 000 sq. ft . lot area/du) on approximately WNW 7. 9 acres located west of Deep Canyon Avenue , north of 44th Avenue. Mr . S,'illiams reviewed the case and noted that Stalf recorlimended approval of the Change of Zone. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time. The applicant was not present . Chairman Berkey asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Change of Zone. Being none , he de- clared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . Commissioner Fleshman noted that the R-2 zone was not appro- priate and that a PR-4 or PR-5 _ zone would be better , also he would like to see the Development Plan . Commissioner Kelly suggested that the applicant be informed of the reasons for denial of the case since the zoning is not appro- priate and that the recommended zoning alternatives be forwarded for consideration by the applicant . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman , seconded by Commissioner ,. Snyder , the Commission denied the Change of Zone request by Planning Commission Resolution No . 378 ; carried unanimously ( 5-0) . J. Case No. CUP 10-77(Amend) and 131AIF - PALM DESERT 210 Ltd. , Applicant Request for approval of an Amendment to an approved Conditional Use Permit to provide for an additional 11 lots within an existing mobile, home subdivision within the R-M zone . Mr. Williams reviewed the case and noted the concerns of the Design Review Board. There was some discussion about the size of the fairways and the relationships to the greens and tees . Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time . The applicant was not present . Chairman Berkev then asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed cases . Being none , he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . On a motion by Commissioner Kryder , seconded by Commissioner Kelly , the Commission approved the cases by Planning Commission Resolu- tion No . 379 ; carried ( 3-2) (AYES : Berkey , Kelly , Kryder ; NOES : Snyder , Fleshman) . K. Case Nos . C/Z 06-78, CUP 07-78 and 83C - HAROLD KAPP , Applicant Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 and R-3(4) to R-3 (9) on approximately . 24 acres on the east side of Portola , between San Marino Circle and Alessandro Street and approval of a related Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Design Review to allow the construction of a park- ing lot on said site. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978e1 f VT . PUBLIC fiEARZJGS ( Cont . ) K. Case Nos . C/Z 06- 18 . CUP 07-78 and 83C ( Conti . ) Mr. Williams reviewed the case and the conditions of the CUP and Design rev, ie, Case. I iC0 !'UtC "3 that )il Ltr 1`tiil^C zone , the zone should be R-3(9) not R-3 9, 000. Commissioner Snyder asked how realistic the right-of-way requirement on Portola was . Mr . Williams stated that the City is committed to widening the road. Chairman Berkey stated that the precedent should be set now. Chairman Berkey then declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time . HAROLD KAPP, 46-050 Amir, noted his agreement with the Staff ' s recommendations , but asked about Special Condition No. 6 . Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the project . JOHN OUTCAULT, Architect for the project , noted that the parcel involved was not suitable for a building. He asked about the walls being re- quired and noted that they would obsure the line of sight...at that intersection . He also objected to the undergrounding and noted that it was unreasonable . Undergrounding should be limited to service lines . He a.. d noted his objection to the wall as required in Special Condition No . 8. Commissioner Snyder stated that the undergrounding issue was unreasonable . Chairman Berkey asked if the City Council would handle this. Chairman Berkey asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in OPPOSITION to the proposal . Being none he declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission . Commissioner Fleshman noted his objection to the wall and stated that 3 feet of mounding landscaped would be more appropriate . Chairman Berkey noted that landscaping at the corner would be more appropriate. Mr . Williams stated that the landscaping would have to be done carefully. There was some discussion about the adjacent lot being a parking lot under the Redevelopment Plan and whether the existing buildings should be offered for dedication . Commissioner Fleshman stated that there should be a good landscaping screen from the R-1 adjacent zoning. He also suggested that a Special Condition No. 10 be added stating that a portion of the existing building in the right-of-way shall be under unrevocable offer to the City. Commissioner Kryder and Commissioner Snyder objected to Com- missioner Fleshman proposed Condition stating that it would not be fair to the applicant . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman , seconded by Commissioner Kelly, the Commission approved the requested Change of Zone , by Plan- ning Commission Resolution No . 380 ; carried unanimously ( 5-0) . On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman to approve the CUP and the Preliminary Design Review with the noted corrections and the addition of Condition No. 10 failed due to lack of a second, then the motion was made again without the addition of Condition No. 10 , seconded by Commissioner Kryder , by Planning Commission Resolution No. 381 ; carried unanimously ( 5-0) . Minutes Palm Desert Planning ,Commission July 5 , 1978 Page Thirteen VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . ) L. Case o . DP '.) ( - r S ,.nd 1-22'',1 - DEEP C 1.. .'O`: 13 HOMEOWNERS ' ASSOCIATION , Applicant Request for approvai of an Amendment to the approved Development Plan for the Deep Canyon Tennis C1�1,b and preliminary Design Review to provide for the additi'-n of two tennis courts at the Deep Canyon Tennis Club . Mr. Williams reviewed the cases and noted the concerns of the Design Review Board and noted that the nesi-,n Bna,rd ':,. d requested that the courts be recessed 4 feet . Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant would like to speak at this time . ROBERT BARNES, President of Deep Canyon Tennis Club Homeowners ' Association , noted his disagreement with recessing the courts 4 additional feet . GREG ERICKSON , Vice President of J . M. Peters , Architect for the project , stated that he had not been notified of the Design Review Board meeting. He noted that the additional cost to recess the tennis courts would be about $10, 000. would like to be able to go back to the Design Review Board if the problem cannot be solved at this meeting. Commissioner Kryder stated that if it is costly then the Design Review Board should reconsider . Commissioner Fleshman asked the applicant if he could compromise and lower the courts 2 feet . Mr. Erickson stated that the retaining wall would also be very costly if this approach was used. Mr . Cipriani noted that the applicant had first submitted this case several months ago and due to the complete plans not being sub- mitted it had been delayed . It is the applicant ' s responsibility to check on the Design Review Board meeting date under these circumstances . There was some discussion as to the height of the fence and the material to be used. Also there was some concerned mentioned for the scenic highway view along Highway 74. An addition to Special Condition No. 2 was suggested to read as follows : as not to be visible from Highway 74 frontage . Commissioner Fleshman asked if there would be more landscaping than there is at present . Mr . Erickson stated that there would be. On a motion by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman . the cases were approved with the addition to Special Condi- tion No . 2 by Planning Commission Resolution No . 382 ; carried unani- mously ( 5-0) . VIII . OLD BUSINESS - None err Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Fourteen IX. NEW BUSINESS A . County Referral Case No . TT 12721, PALM DESERT GREENS , Applicant Request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map to create 41 mobile home lots and 2 lots for recreation purposes; on approximately 10. 14 acres within the R-T zone at Palm Desert Greens Country Club. On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman seconded by Commissioner Snyder, the Commission directed the Secretary to forward their comments, which were : lack of amenities and if approved the lots should be deep- er on Country Club Drive ; carried unanimously (5-0) . X. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS A. Review of Cases acted on by the Design Review Board at their meeting of June 20, 1978. Mr. Cipriani reviewed the cases and noted that Case No . 134MF should be rejected due to the action on the related Tract 12784. Case No . 84C there was some discussion as to the type of material allowed as a canopy over the gas pumps and to the location of the signs. Case No . 116MF - Add Condition No. 6 requiring carport standard storage. Case No. 72C - Mr. Cipriani noted that the Design Review Board had a 3-2 vote and that the issue resulting in the split vote dealt with the differing architecture among the 5 buildings. The discussion which ensued included a presentation by the applicant ' s architect , Mr. Bob Ricciardi in which he defended the fact that 4 of the buildings were similar architecture to other existing buildings in the community. The basis of his defense was the fact that this was his style and with each new project he did make refinements. Associate Planner Cipriani pointed out the side issue of two different architectural styles within one project . Mr. Ricciardi responded that building placement was such that when the project was built it would appear to be integrated, and compatible because of landscaping and improvements . Mr . Cipriani pointed out the apparent conflict of repeating architectural themes of existing buildings with the apparent desire of the City Council , Planning Commission and Design Review Board to get diverse styles as expressed in a joint study session at Rancho Las Palmas last year. On a motion by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Snyder, the Commission approved the actions of the Design Review Board, except Case No . 134MF was rejected and the addition of Conditions to 2 cases, by Planning Commission Resolution No . 383 . Said motion was carried 3-2 with the following votes : AYES : Berkey, Kryder , Snyder ; NOES : Kelly, Fleshman . XI . DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Economic Practices Manual from Office of Planning & Research. Following discussion of this item the Commission directed the Staff to prepare any comments they may have and forward them to OPR. XII . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None XIII . COMMENTS A. City Staff Mr . Williams reminded the Commission of the proposed schedule for the next three months . He also noted the letter received from Roger Harlow of the Desert Sands Unified School District Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5 , 1978 Page Fifteen XIII . COMMENTS (Cont. ) A. City Staff (Cont . ) Commissioner Kelly stated that the letter did not address the issues. i... B. City Attorney - Not present C. Planning Commissioners Commissioner Kelly stated that in fairness to the appli- cant , staff and commission, agendas should be limited in the future . Mr. Williams stated that from now on the agendas would be limited to five (5) Public Hearings . The Commission agreed to this policy. XIX. ADJOURNMENT On a motion by Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the meeting was adjourned at 1 :05 a.m. ; carried unanimously (5-0) . IPAIUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary ATTEST: 1 GEOR , CHAIRMA /tb