HomeMy WebLinkAbout0521 MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY - MAY 21, 1985
2:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
� � � � * � * � � � � � -� �- � � � �- � � � � � � � �- �- -� �- � -� � -�
NO STUDY SESSION WAS HELD PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
I. CALL TO ORDER
�. The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Richards lead in the pledge of allegiance.
III. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Buford Crites, Chairman
Bob Downs
Richard Erwood
Jim Richards
Ralph Wood
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Ray Diaz
Steve Smith
Phil Joy
Al Cablay
Tonya Monroe
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
�
Consideration of approval of the minutes from May 14, 1985. Chairman Crites
asked that on page 2 regarding ZOA 84-3, that after the motion and vote it be
noted that he was voting against the zoning ordinance amendment based solely on
opposition to additional signage, which he requested at that meeting.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Erwood, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to approve the
minutes of May 14, 1985, as corrected. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner powns
abstained.)
V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION
No summary due to lack of a council meeting.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Case Nos. CUP 04-81 and 150 C - ROMEO PULUQI,
Applicant
Request for approval of a one year time extension of a
conditional use permit and architectural commission
approval to allow the addition of 832 square feet of dining
area to an existing restaurant on .38 acres within the C-1,
S.P. (General Commercial, Scenic Preservation Overlay)
�"" zone, located at 73-340 Highway 111.
Commissioner Wood asked that Mr. Puluqi address the commission.
MR. ROMEO PULUQI explained that his business was for sale and that he
would not be making the modifications himself, but that the ability to
modify would help sell his property.
The commission indicated that their policy was to grant a maximum of two time
extensions.
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 21, 1985
Commissioner Richards felt that there were extenuating circumstances and that
with the Palma Village study exceptions should be made for everyone in the Fred
Waring, Monterey, and Deep Canyon affected areas.
Commissioner powns indicated that he was in favor of the time extension.
Chairman Crites indicated that time extensions had been turned down for exactly
the same reasons in the past and felt that a master plan change did not warrant
granting time extensions. ,�
Action:
Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to approve the
one year time extension by minute motion. Vote: 2-2-1 (Chairman Crites and
Commissioner Erwood voting no, Commissioner Richards abstaining.) After noting
that this was not a passing vote, Commissioner Richards changed his vote in favor.
Carried 3-2 (Chairman Crites and Commissioner Erwood voting against.)
B. Case No. TT 19074-1 - GFB ac ASSOCIATES, Applicant
Request for approval of a one year time extension of a
tentative tract on behalf of San Pablo Properties.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner wood, to approve the
one year time extension by minute motion. Carried 5-0.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Continued Case No. PP 85-6 - NICK JORGENSEN, Applicant
Request for approval of a precise plan of design to allow
construction of three residential apartment units on an ,�y
8925 square foot lot on the south side of Driftwood Street
340 feet west of Deep Canyon.
Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report and indicated that the
project was a class 3 exemption and that the findings could be met. He noted that
the plans would undergo considerable architectural review and recommended
approval.
Commission and staff discussed potential parking and traffic hazards as well as
clarification on the CEQA section of the staff report.
Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address
the commission.
MR. NICK JORGENSEN, applicant, indicated that he would do a good job
and that the project would be beneficial to the city and that he could see no
problems with parking and that no one would be sorry if the project was
approved.
Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of
OPPOSITION to the project. Hearing no one, the public testimony was closed.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner Wood, adopting the
findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. +�
Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner Wood, adopting
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1045, approving PP 85-6. Carried 5-0.
-2-
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 21, 1985
B. Case Nos. TT 20817 - ROBERTSON HOMES, Applicant
Request for approval of a tentative tract map to subdivide
a 42 acre parcel located at the northeast corner of Cook
Street and Fred Waring Drive in a PR 7 zone (per
development agreement) to allow construction of 220
apartment units on the north portion of the site.
�► Mr. Joy outlined the main facts of the staff report and explained that the main
concern of staff was the proposed phasing of the project.
Commissioner powns stated that when the project was originally before the
council, the project was only allowed as long as the single family was built at the
same time as the apartments, Mr. Joy concurred saying that the change of zone
was approved because of the single family concept. Mr. Joy noted that the
development agreement insures that the developer will at some time build the
single family units. Commissioner powns reiterated that the project was allowed
because of the single family units being constructed consecutively with the
apartment complex.
Commissioner Richards asked for and received clarification regarding location and
road access.
Chairman Crites felt that the only guarantee to have the single family built would
be to have the single family units built at the same time as the apartments.
Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address
the commission.
MR. HARDY STROZIER of Robertson Homes explained that they were in
total agreement with staff requirements and conditions. He indicated that
they did not want to develop single family residents at this time, but would
�' commit to submitting a tract map. He stated that this was under the
development agreement which allows them to enter into a private contract
with a local government agency and indicated that it did not restrict them
from phasing the projects. He noted that it was not their intent to shirk any
improvements, but that they would like to proceed with the apartment
program for occupancy of flpril or May of 1986.
The commission felt that the applicant should consider a continuance to discuss
with the applicant construction of the single family units at the same time as the
apartments. Commissioner Wood agreed that the single family units should be
developed in the near future and asked if the applicant developes the apartments,
processes and files the subdivision map and and got the land ready for development,
if this would be agreeable. Mr. Strozier replied that that was closer to something
his client could agree to and suggested that the com mission approve the proposed
request now, and that he would come back in 30 days to file a tract map.
Commissioner Richards expressed a wish to avoid potential problems if the project
were developed in phases.
Commissioner Wood surmised that the development of the single family units might
not be economically feasible for the applicant and noted that the applicant was
willing to file a subdivision map. Commissioner powns concurred.
Chairman Crites and Commissioner Erwood felt that the entire project should be
developed at the same time. Commissioner Richards also felt the entire project
� should be built at once and indicated that if it wasn't, he would vote against the
whole thing. Chairman Crites informed the applicant that it was his perogative to
ask commission for a continuance.
Mr. Strozier asked for the commission's opinion of the site plan. Commissioner
Downs indicated that the project looked good. Commissioner Wood noted that he
was satisfied with the project. Commissioner Richards discussed integration and
suggested that the applicant take another serious look at the project and come up
-3-
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 21, 1985
with another plan. Commissioner Erwood indicated that he had no problems with
the site plan. Chairman Crites spoke regarding access at Cook Street and visibility
problems, and asked the applicant if he was requesting a continuance.
Mr. Strozier clarified that the commission wanted to see an entire project
with a tentative map filed and asked if he could get back within two weeks.
Mr. Diaz replied that readvertisement would be necessary and that if the �
applicant submitted a map to staff within one week, he could come back in
30 days. ,,,,�
Commissioner powns noted that this would not need to go back to city council
unless it was called up and that Councilmember Wilson had the swing vote when
approving, which he did because of the mix. Commissioner powns indicated that
the was not what the city council approved.
Mr. Strozier requested that he be given four weeks to resubmit.
Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION to the project. No one came forward.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner powns, continuing
Case No. TT 20817 four weeks (June 18). Carried 5-0.
C. Case Nos. PP 85-10 and PP 85-11 - BERNIE SOLOMON, Applicant
Request for approval of a negative declaration of
environmental impact and a precise plan of design to allow
construction of two industrial buildings (total 24,815 square
feet) in the S.I., S.P., service industrial with a scenic
preservation overlay zone on 1.1 acres located on the west _
side of Corporate Way, 261 feet south of Hovley lane. �
Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended
approval.
Commission and staff discussed parking design and ingress and egress problems.
Commissioner Richards felt that the mutual access agreement did not need to be
required and that the project did not need to be tied together with driveways.
Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address
the commission.
MR. BERNIE SOLOMON, 73-185 Irontree Drive, stated that he would not
agree to any conditions with neighbors to the south. He indicated that the
project had a good, functional design and that he was not interested in
creating a frontage road.
Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION to the project. There being none, the public testimony was closed.
Chairman Crites indicated concern regarding the zero lot line next to open space,
as well as open space next to industrial.
Commissioner Richards indicated that public works condition no. 11 relating to
mutual access agreements should be deleted. �
�
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Wood, adopting the
findings as presented by staff. Carried 3-2 (Chairman Crites and Commissioner
Downs voting no.)
-4-
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 21, 1985
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Wood, adopting
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1046, approving PP 85-10 and PP 85-11,
subject to conditions, including deletion of public works condition no. 11. Carried
3-2 (Chairman Crites and Commissioner powns voting no.)
VIII. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
..�.. NONE.
IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. Mr. Bernie Solomon spoke as a resident regarding Deep Canyon Grove and
the action of the commission at that time. The commission was not
prepared to discuss the project at that time.
2. Mr. Sandy Baum, thanked the commission for the approval of his requested
variance at the last meeting in his absence.
3. Mr. Jim Swartz, explained that he was planning to reconstruct a car wash on
Highway 111 and San Marcus if the commission would permit the structure
to be rebuilt. The commission indicated that they would be in favor of
improvement at that site.
4. Ms. Pam Smallwood, indicated that she came to the meeting late and asked
what action was taken regarding agenda item B. Chairman Crites explained
that it was continued.
X. COMMENTS
Chairman Crites expressed displeasure on behalf of the commission at the lack of
legal counsel in attendance.
�.�.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, to adjourn the
meeting. Carried 5-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m. /''�
� 3�
�s�� � �
A � 15
jr �w �s�"+�'e/�'� ' � v �. �.�'�,
RAMON A. DIAZ, Secre
ATTEST:
�/'�—�� ��:..�—— ----.__
: ��-_.� —=�..._
UFO CRITES, Chairman
/
�
-5-