HomeMy WebLinkAbout1005 MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY - OCTOBER 5, 1982
7:00 P.M. - CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chairman Richards called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Wood
III. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Commissioner Crites
Commissioner Downs
Commissioner Wood
Vice Chairman Richards
Excused Absent: Chairman Kryder
Staff Present: Ramon Diaz
Stan Sawa
Phil Drell
Phill Joy
Linda Russell
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 21,1982
Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Crites, to approve the
minutes as submitted. Carried unanimously 4-0.
AT THIS TIME THE COMMISSION PLACED ITEM V (ELECTION OF OFFICERS) AT THE
END OF THE AGENDA AND BROUGHT UP MISCELLANEOUS ITEM NO. X.
X. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
Resolution of Commendation for Charles E. Miller
Vice Chairman Richards presented Mr. Miller with a Resolution of Commendation
and expressed the commission's gratitude.
VI. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION - NONE
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CASE NO. CUP 14-78 (Amendment) - THE LEARNING TREE CENTER,
Applicants
Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact and an amendment to a conditional
use permit to allow expansion of a preschool in the R-3 (9)
and R-1 (multiple family residential, one d.u./9000 sq.ft. of
land area and single family residential) zone located at the
northwest corner of Alessandro Drive and Cabrillo Avenue.
Now Mr. Sawa presented the staff report indicating that this matter was being reheard
because of the previous incomplete submission by the applicant of names of property
owners within 300' of the project. He briefly reviewed the site plan and major concerns.
He noted that in addition to the letters attached to the staff report in opposition or in
favor, more had been received. Petitions in favor and opposition were also received.
Staff recommended approval.
Commissioner Wood asked staff if the petitions were valid. Mr. Sawa replied they
-1-
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 5, 1982
were.
Mr. Sawa noted that an appeal filed by Mrs. Kopp on the first public hearing
decision, was not sent to council because of the hearing's invalidity.
Commissioner Crites asked staff, if after hearing the opposition's concerns did it
wish to modify its recommendation. Mr. Sawa replied that staff's two concerns would be
mitigated through the conditions imposed. Commissioner Crites asked if staff had
investigated citizens' concerns. Mr. Sawa stated he had and found that the use would be
compatible to the neighborhood.
Vice Chairman Richards asked if the applicant wished to make a presentation.
MR. AND MRS. ROBERT CRAVEN, operators of the preschool, stressed the need
for this type of school, and stated that they walked the neighborhood asking for opinions
and/or objections. In answering previous objections, Mr. Craven stated that property
value increases when located near a school; that no complaints relating to noise had been
received. Mrs. Craven noted that when they canvassed the neighborhood most people
were not at home or had no objections. She concluded that part of the expanded area is in
the R-3 zone.
Mr. Craven stated that, Mrs. Cook's, the neighbor immediately north of their
facility, principal objection had been the proposed block wall adjacent to her bedroom
window, blocking ventilation. Mr. Craven suggested that the block wall be 4 ft. in height
extending past her window, then be built up to 6 ft. beyond that point.
Commissioner Crites noted that Mrs. Lillian Vaughn sent a letter of opposition, but
also was listed in the petition in favor.
Vice Chairman Richards opened the public hearing and asked for testimony in
FAVOR:
urrr
PHIL REED, 44-850 San Antonio Circle, Palm Desert
MIKE LEITMAN, PhD, 73-960 El Paseo, Palm Desert
STEPHEN CHAMBERS, Palm Springs
JOHN VON, 54-865 Avenida Alvarado, La Quinta
ISABEL PAULS, 2800 Golf Club Drive, Palm Springs
GARY LOHMAN, 71-888 Vista, Rancho Mirage
DANIEL LEVINOFF, 52-240 Avenida Mendoza, La Quinta
JAMES CRAIG, 73-275 Santa Rosa, Palm Desert
Their comments can be summarized as follows:
No noise impact existing; high quality school; family oriented school; noise impacts
are from other commercial uses; reliable school; facility is very much needed in
community; school provides for nondenomination education and fulfills a philosophical
need; children are well supervised; operators are willing to cooperate with neighbors.
Vice Chairman Richards asked for testimony in OPPOSITION:
KATHLEEN KOPP, 44-870 Cabrillo, Palm Desert
DARREL WARD, 44-836 Cabrillo, Palm Desert
DOUG KOPP, 44-870 Cabrillo, Palm Desert
JACKLYN COOK, 44-805 Cabrillo, Palm Desert (Note: Mrs. Cook stated she had a
conversation with Mr. Craven but did not indicate she would be in favor of the expansion.
She felt the parking lot next to her home would create traffic and noise impacts).
Their comments can be summarized as follows:
The expansion was not for pre-schoolers but older children; facility is unattractive;
people in favor are out-of-towners or not neighbors of facility; too many children;
encroachment to R-1 zone; other areas for this type of facility are available; traffic
impacts; not compatible with neighborhood; too big; noise impact is unacceptable; and,
further encroachment into the single family residential area was unwarranted.
-2-
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 5, 1982
APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL:
Mr. Craven explained that they will not have the maximum number of pupils at all
times; he explained that the reason they would like to expand up to grade 3 is because a
child can stay at one school for up to six years; there will be no traffic impacts on
Cabrillo; and, they will continue to regulate the noise generated. Mrs. Craven stated
there is no problem with traffic congestion from the school; most people in the
neighborhood work during the day and school hours are from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Vice Chairman Richards closed the public hearing and asked for commissioners'
comments.
Commissioner Wood felt there seemed to be conflicting testimony; but also felt
that the location was zoned for this facility.
Commissioner Crites felt there was a wide variety of objections but was not sure
that all the issues were attributed to the school. Commissioner Crites felt that the issue
comes down to whether or not the commission is willing to approve something that is of
community value and opposed by the immediate neighborhood.
Commissioner Downs felt the expansion should not be in an R-1 zone.
Commissioner Wood felt the objections should be clarified by staff and the matter
should be continued.
Vice Chairman Richards voiced opposition based on Mrs. Cook's objections and the
testimony received from the immediate neighborhood.
Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Vice Chairman Richards, to reject
findings as recommended by staff. Carried 3-0-1 (Commisioner Wood abstained).
Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Crites, to instruct staff
to prepare a resolution denying CUP 14-78, with commission's findings. Carried 3-0-1
(Commissioner Wood abstained).
A TEN MINUTE RECESS WAS CALLED - THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:50 P.M.
B. CASE NOS. GPA 03-82, C/Z 08-82, and ZOA 11-82 - CITY OF PALM
DESERT, Applicant
Consideration of a general plan amendment, change of
zone, zoning ordinance amendment, and Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact, involving hillside
development standards for property generally located
between the Palm Valley Storm Channel and western city
limits.
Mr. Drell gave the staff report outlining the factors which had generated the
proposed revisions to present plans and ordinances. The goal of this amendment would be
to preserve the natural character of the hillside, while providing property owners with a
reasonable use of their land. Base density would be set at 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres.
Through development options, a density of up to 3 dwelling units per acre could be
approved for those areas at the base of the mountains having less than 10 percent slope.
Vice Chairman Richards opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to
speak in FAVOR. There being none, he asked if anyone wished to speak in OPPOSITION:
LEROY KIRKPATRICK, 33-801 Dana Point, objected to proposals which might
result in limiting development on his 3.5 acres to one unit. He asserted that he had been
assured that 2 or 3 units could be built on his land.
DORI CREE, explained that the zoning recommended in the Palm Valley Area
Specific Plan was based upon many considerations including the visibility of the slopes,
and the eventual developments occurring on them, from different parts of the city. She
-3-
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 5, 1982
further stated that she acquired four, five acre parcels along the bottom of the slopes
based upon the recommendation in the old plan of a one dwelling unit per acre density.
She objected to the new proposals since they might limit her to 4 to 8 units. She
requested that higher density be allowed on her property and along the base of the
mountains.
ALAN PERRIER, 3001 Tahquitz-McCallum, Palm Springs, explained that he ;k
represented Mr. Fox, owner of 97 acres in the study area. He felt that the proposals
were not adequately understood and severely limited his client's property. A great deal of
time and effort went into the Palm Valley Specific Plan and implementation of its
recommendation could result in high quality attractive development. He also objected to
the prohibition of hotel development in the new plan's zone. He requested that the
commission study the issues more thoroughly before making a decision.
ROBERT RICCIARDI, 42-600 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, stated that he
represented owners of 50 acres in the study area and argued that the slope formula and
the development options were too rigid. He favored proposals which would give the
commission greater flexibility in determining density and grading. He also requested a
continuance so that alternative proposals could be developed.
Vice Chairman Richards felt that the plan was not clear to the property owners in
informing them of the number of dwelling units they could develop; more precise
information as to permitted land uses should be provided. He concluded that this matter
should be continued until then.
Moved by Commissioner Crites, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to continue the
public hearing to a special meeting on November 8, 1982, at 7:00 p.m. for further study.
C. CASE NO. PP 01-82 - J.P. CONSTRUCTION, INC., Applicants
Request for approval of a precise plan to allow
construction of three industrial buildings on a 101,045 '
sq.ft. parcel in the S.I. zone on the north side of Mayfair
Drive, east of Green Way.
Mr. Sawa reviewed the staff report and recommended approval.
Vice Chairman Richards opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant
wished to make a presentation.
MR. SVEND PEULIKCE, 74-831 Velie Way, stated he had not reviewed the
conditions of approval and was not sure he concurred with them.
Commission asked the applicant if he wished to continue this case to the next
meeting. Mr. Peulikce agreed.
Moved by Commissioner Crites, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to continue this
matter to the meeting of October 19, 1982, to allow the applicant further review of
conditions of approval.
V. ANNUAL ELECTION OF OFFICERS - 1982/83
A. Nomination for Chairman
Motion was made by Commissioner Crites, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to
nominate Commissioner Wood for Chairman for the year 1982/83. Carried unanimously.
B. Nomination for Vice Chairman
Motion was made by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Crites, to
nominate Commissioner Richards for Vice Chairman for the year 1982/83. Carried
unanimously.
-4-
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 5, 1982
IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS - NONE
XI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE
XII. COMMENTS - NONE
vow
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner Crites, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to adjourn the
meeting at 10:22 p.m.
RAMON A. DIAZ
ATTEST:
RALPH WOOD, Chairman
Ar
-5-