The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0820 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - AUGUST 20, 1985 2:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE NO 5TUDY SESSION WA5 HELD PRIOR TO THE MEFTING. 1 . CALL TO ORDER Chairman Crites called thr meeting to order at 2:03 p.m. II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Erwood 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: Steve Smith �•• Dick Folkers Doug Phillips Phil Drell Tonya Monroe IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of the August 6, 1985 minutes. Commissioner Richards requested a word change on page 3 and a more detailed outline of romments made by Mr. Riccardi and Mr. I_Bung on page 4. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the August 6, I985 minutes as amended. Carried 5-0. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Smith reviewed the actions of the city council at its meeting of August 8, 1985. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 �i VI . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PM 15088 - PHIL HARRIS, Applicant Request for approval of a one year time extension for PM 15088, which created three lots from a 1 .8 acre parcel located at 49-400 JFK Trail . Action: Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to approve the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 5-0. V11 . PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case No. PP 85-20 - LEPAN-LEVY, Applicants Request for approval of a precise plan of design and negative declaration of environmental impact to allow 28 apartment units on an 87,2.50 square foot property in the R-3 18,000 (3) S.P. zone located north of Verba Santa between the Frontage Road and Ocotillo. Mr. Smith explained that the applicant had addressed the concerns raised at the August 6 meeting and recommended approval . Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. BRANKO LEPAN explained that the site plan had been revised to reflect the 25 foot width of driveway accesses as required by the fire marshal . Commissioner Erwood inquired if the amendments changed the 501. effected properties or number of driveways. Mr. Smith replied that the number of driveways would remain at eight and indicated that the director of public works could address the issue of percentages of affected property, but had not seen the revised plan. Commissioner Frwood asked if Mr. Folkers would like a few minutes to study this. Mr. Folkers concurred. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Wood, to continue this item and suspend the order of the agenda. Carried 5-0. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 8. Continued Case No. ZOA 85-5 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of a zoning ordinance amendment lowering height maximums in the R-? and R-3 pones. Mr. Drell indicated that the architectural commission had reviewed the amendment and determined there were no significant problems. The architectural commission stated that it preferred to have the option of building up to 30 feet with the provision of a complete line of sight analysis demonstrating no Sight problems. Commissioner Richards asked if the architectural commission had any major problems with the line of sight. Mr. Drell replied no and indicated that this amendment just gives a guideline on which to rely. Commissioner Erwood asked if this would motivate developers to ask for the 30 feet height maximum or dilute standards. Mr. Drell replied no and explained that the commission was compelled to approve up to 24 feet, but that any height more than that was discretionary and that the amendment placed the burden upon the applicant. Chairman Crites suggested the addition of either two story or 30 �... feet to explain the intent of the amendment. He reminded the commission that the city council was concerned about the clearness of intent. He suggested the insertion of, "Under no circumstances is this intended to allow three story development." Commissioner Richards felt that number of stories should be eliminated. 1f line of sight allowed for more than two story it should be allowed. He indicated that planning commission's duty was not to determine what was inside a building, but to make judgement on the exterior - height. Chairman Crites indicated that he would probably vote against the amendment without the addendum. Mr. Drell recalled a project that had come before the commission that met all the requirements except for the number of stories and was denied. He indicated that this amendment would allow flexibility in unusual circumstances. He noted that the intent of the ordinance was to protect the line of sight and privacy. 3 r.. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 Commissioner Erwood inquired as to if this would make every applicant ,r ask for the maximum 30 feet, subject to planning commission discretion. Mr. Drell replied no, on the basis that the amendment refers basically to R-2 and R-3 zones and that a line of sight would be difficult to achieve because of the size of the lots. Commissioner Richards explained that to achieve line of sight, 75-100 foot setbacks would be required, which would be difficult to achieve. Commissioner Richards felt that under some circumstances a larger project might warrant more than one or two stories ( i .e. projects on Cook and Fred Waring where there would be adequate setbacks for determining line of sight, especially where abutting a golf course) and the amendment would not prohibit a better use of land. Commissioner Wood spoke regarding Commissioner Erwood's concern about all applicants asking for maximum height. He noted that it would not be economically feasible for a builder to add the extra feet in height if it was not essential . He also spoke regarding Chairman Crites' concern regarding height. He explained that while most people were against three story, the height would not be higher than maximum 30 feet. Commissioner Wood also indicated that he had some concerns regarding the basis for determining height and requested clarification as to whether staff was talking about the basis of elevation at original grade, fill , slab, or flooring. Mr. Drell stated that it is measured from finished grade to highest point ri of building to any point on the roof and indicated that it was less severe. He stated that the ordinance prohibits more than three feet of fill located in the general plan provisions on height. Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed amendment. MR. SANDY BAUM, 45-800 Deep Canyon, asked for clarification regarding measuring from curb and being changed to finished grade by the Palma Village plan. Commissioner Downs replied that it has been that way since the flood control regulations. Mr. Baum expressed concern regarding wall height around developments ( i .e. Vintage at Portola) and stated that the six feet on top of the grade prohibits views from within. Commissioner Richards felt that Mr. Baum expressed good observations regarding Vintage. He thought that the original intent of the ordinance was to protect views and that in the case of the proposed amendment it would help eliminate grey areas for developers. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 `ur Mr. Baum asked what the height limit was in regard to S.P. ;,on(- and asked that One Quail Place be nsed as an example. Commi ,3 ione,r Wood noted that there was confusion about measuring height from the top of curbs and suggested getting a notice out on this. Mr. Drell indicated that height has always been measured from finished grade. Chairman Crites closed the public testimony and requested further comment or a motion. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissinner Erwood. approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1073, recommending approval of ZOA 85-5 to city council . Carried 5-0. CHAIRMAN CRITES REOPENED D15CUSSION RFGARDING ITEM #A AT THIS POINT. Mr. Folkers indicated that the changes to the street width kept the project within conformance with the conditions. low Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this project. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Wood. seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the finding, as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1074, approving PP 85-20, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. C. Case No. CUP 85-4 - EXTENDED LEARNING TECHNIQUES, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit and negative declaration of environmental impact to allow construction and operation of a private school (k through 12th grade, 528 students max. ) (preschool , 170 children max. ) in the PR-5 zone located on 4. 75 acres on the south side of �i +s MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 Hovley Lane, approximately 1600 feet west of Portola Avenue. Mr. Smith explained that the applicant had requested a two week continuance. Commission concurred with the request. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to continue this rase to the meeting of September 3, 1985. Carried 5-0. D. Case No. PM 20570 - RICHARD LEE, Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map to allow suhdivision of a 17,424 square foot lot in an R-2 zone into two parcels located at the southeast corner of Catalina Way and San Rafael Avenue. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the request and recommended approval of the parcel map. Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. VIC VILLENEUVE indicated that he was there to answer any questions. Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this request. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Wood, approving the findings as present by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Wood, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1075, approving PM 20570. Carried 5-0. E. Case No. VAR 85-2 - OTRA 1, Applicant Request for approval of a variance of the front and side yard setbacks to allow construction of garages and carports over existing parking spaces 6 r MiNUTFS PALM OF SEPT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 198S in titr• P-a (multiply-f;An,i Iv ra,.iripnti;il rii<.trirt) �r 7n1)n i nratnd nn land hnundpri by Prin0r;3ma (lr i vo, Sim%nt ! .trip. Ahrnni.-i lr,til , .-rrirl rl Mr . Srn i t h hilt i i npri rhp ,,I i i r•nt ,)n i nt,, of tho r.tiff rynnrt ami r F-rnmmpndorl anprnva I . (-ornmi i onpr R i rhard, i nqi i i rp(i .-innut p,irk i ng riff i r i pnr•y arrow!i ng to rurrpnt ,t.-tndard,. (:r)mm,. ,;,inner flown, rr;)i iPd nnne. Mr . timitn rat,I i rd that hon�it Ic.r, the hi i i I ri i no P;r i rtnri pr i nr rn r i tv i nrrarpor.-ti: i nn anti ,i,; tho anp 1 i rant w,i,; nni' ;inn I v i nn for an ride!i t i nn. nn prirk i nq dot- i r i on(,v is dpompri to px i,t. f.nmmi s-�i nnar Richard,. fn I t th,It if thr, grirano wa,) i n^ta i 1 on thorn wnu I rt not mi irh room and vt'ry i i tt I r• npnn ,r arp rind I,;kr,d tnt. l narking ,parrs prnviriod. Mr . Smith raniied that hp did not know the ona rind two hpdrnnm hroakriown. (.nmmi,-, inner Rirh<-ird, arkpri how many -,nacpc. wprp nrecprtt iv prnvidnd. Mr . Sm i rh rop I i nri 54 rinr•nvpri rl (,nmmi ,�Jnnpr Dr)wn- ;tarprl that it w,�, hiii It hefnrp trip ritv', i nrnrnorat i on -and, therptory.. tnPrp w:i, no cipf i r i onr:v .:Inn <;;3w nn ro i<;nn to d i c�cu ,s Ct irk i nn riof i r i pnry harausP trip pun 1 i rant wa-; nor t.:ik i nq nt tt or adding -invt h i nq, (rnnm i n,i oner Richard- pup l a i nnri that no wa- , ronrarnprl ;mnut 7.Ir:ign , rr�r taking nw.riv npan ,p:ir•p, Pvnn though it, wni t l d ho wo 1 romr- to thr, tenants. Hp folt that it writhe! m-3kr- the pro iprt rook ac. if btii idinq nrrtlpipd the tntai .-imnunt of -iv;ii I.-ihir sp;Iro. C.ha i rmon r r i tps was a l c;n rnnrernnd Shot it nppn ,naro and felt th•It aftor visiting the prn fort it, di ri nor mntrh the prn iort on thr, oppnsitp irip of the ^tram whirr, provide, a foot grpenheit batwppn the rt trh -)nri f i i -.t hi i i I rl i no. Ha fa I t than rho nro ject was wp l i kppt and the i nst,-I i i;it i on nf- h I ank w.-i 1 1 cinri garage doors ,-ind lark of sothark-. wou 1 n nor (,rev i do a nns i t i vp tipgrarip to thy, rommunity. Comm!5,i nner Wood :3 I,;n Pxnrp• ,pti rnnrorn .-ind i ndi rater! that hp was wa i t i nca to hoar to ;t i mnnv from ad iaront nrnnnrty i,twnar,. f:nrnrni„i nnpr P,i ch.ird-. ,tatorl thprp w,-ic; a I nt of nn-,tryat mirk i ng and that the ;trr<t i , rharrirtr�ri . Pri by two r•;Ir ppnple in the anari-mant,;. HF- fo 1 t thpro w,-i, a tpndnnr•y for parking nrrih I Pm, :ind th.it if t.hp ann I i cant was to rnr i n^P ter narking c'.parn it wnt(1 ri rrp.`itf, proh l pm,; for ttirni nrl. 1 410111, MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 t Chairman Crites stated that garages are occasionally used for other things than parking sufrh ns storage. which could also create a p,-irk i rig. Commissioner Richards asked what percentage of the project was for parking. Mr. Smith indicated in the 30-407, range and indicated that renditinnc, of approval #4 stated that structures on corners should he one garage and two carports and that condition #5 will provide for a three foot high block wall or shrubs adjarent to carports next to the street. Chairman C'T i tPs opened the plah 1 i r t PSt i mony and asked the applicant to addrp.s the commission. MR. RRAF) GATFS explained that the intent was to improve the property for the tenants and the city. He explained that the bu i 1 d i ng was 62000 square feet with a proposed 54 garage facility - four garages and two rarports in each parking area. He noted that the overhang extends into right of way but leaves an open space appearance. He stated that the garages would be used for rare; only and that all 36 units are 2 bedroom/2 bath. He said that considerable open spare was provided in the center of the prnjert as well as two swimming pools and 15 feet of grass area on both sides. He explained that there has been considerable thefts with cars and that garages would be a VAN benefit to tenant,. He stated that the project to the north on FI Camino was two story with garages underneath, fence is next to the sidewalk, providing literally nn open space and that the project to the west from rttrb to hlli lding corners are hetwePn 12-1 5 feet to re s i dent i a 1 wa 1 I . He indicated that his project was built li years ago and that the lots are irregular and that the irrPgul::jrity of the parking renter aisles of open space now is very tight (20 feet) . He stated that he moved it as far back as he could to provide proper turning as (,lose to presenr f-�tanriarri,. as he rot 1 ri get . Chairman Crites asked if anyone prf'sPnt wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one. the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Richards felt that the applicant alleviated his concerns satisfactorily. He stated that the nlanning commission should not stop someone from ltpgrading a facility based on current requirements. Action: R I MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 Mnvf�d by Gomm i i onpr Flown, , =,t�ronded by Comm i 5= i nnpr k i rhrir ci apprnv i ng the f i nrl i nq,, ,a, pre,Pntpd rry ;t<3fi (.3rr i prl Mnvr•ri by C:nmm i .ti i nnpr I)nwn prnndprt by ('nmrn i i onF�r R i r h,3n lc, adnpt i ng P I ann i nq (.c-rmmi ion Rp=.n I i it inn No. ](176, :anprnv i nra VAR .uhjPrt to (i)nditions. (::it -d F. Case No. ZOA 85-4 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Cnn".i derat i on of an amendment to the Palm Oe,cert 7on i ng (n-d i nonce sort- i nn regrirni nn traf f i r ,i ght nh,tr'i rct i nn=.. Mr . `.mith, F,xpl.ainpd that the zoning nrdin,ance amendment wniilri ornv i rip l p=.s re,tr i ct i on=. to trriff i r s i qhr nh�.trrlrt inns rind the :3mPndrnF nt would mPavjre f rnrn prnnerty line i ntpr.pct i nn to whpr e ct irh I i ne,; i nt.er,,Prt and then (.:-.nmP hark 4fl feet for thn tr ianq:e ^f vi,ihi l ity and indirated th.rt rp�identi,ai w.:i, Similar to rnrnmPrrirrl ( i .e. Harm riis,O . Mr . tim i th rF�rommenried approval . (:nmmi ��.ioner Wnnri ;a-kpCl if thi met with puhl it work-. C�tanr-arr Mr . Fr)1 kers rep I i Pd that F)pr i nd i r- cnmp I ri i nt,, had heen rPrp i vpri and rhi ampnrimrnt wo(ild hpin .al 1pvi,atP tha;P orohipm-,. rr.. Chairman (:rite". nppned the puh I i r test i many. MR. 1,ANny BAHM, AS-AOO UPPp Canyon, pxpi.ained that he had r'nmp hefnr(, the planning rommi,siren previnu,ly :ind was nrantpri varirince. He invited the planning r-nmmi,-.inn to enmr, ;.3nri innk at the wa 1 1 he i ne tfa l Ind hPforp a der i s i nn was made. He fp i t thai the proposed ampnrirnpnt �,eemeri mnre rP=.tr ict i vp. He .;a I fplt that rnmmprrinl and rr,idPnti.-il c,hotild he =.Ppar-atr. l.omrrli-1-.innpr Frwo nd felt 1-hat the °,;imp �t'andfard-, and r`7Ir1.1?,3t Inn' appl ird to hnth rommprri;al and rP: idpntiai arena . Mr . smith i nr'i rat pd the :ampndmpnt w,ns a! I r-,nrnmp,ass i nq l but 1 ps . r p,tr i rat i ve. with the same ingir applied, (=nmmis,sinner Wnnri a,ked for rl.-irifiration on th( .imilrrrity of re, iriential to rr3mmPrri;r1 hprau-;P rpsidenti:al arena; rinn't provide �tup -.innal , and that r,nmmerri.-3i hui !dint_; ,iriewalk, and ,(-'thark, differ in rp,identi;il and rnmmerri.al arP:3 y rr MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 Mr. Fniker Pxplained that thi aiso applied to edge of pavement and would do a better job and suggested that if problems orcur staff can come hark with changes. He felt that this would he a better way to go than property lines. Mr . Baum stated that he had never been aware of the seven foot- parkways . Diff PrenrP between residential and commercial was will taken. He felt that there should he separate regulations for residential .and rommerrial . Mnst areas have at least 10 or 12 foot parkways and suggested two separate regulations. Mr. Smith indicated that the example hefore rommi5sion regarding Deep Canyon used 18 feet of parkway and on Yricca Tree 32-16 feet of pavement ultimate. That was the example used is an improvement from the property owners point of view. Chairman Crites closed the puhlic testimony and asked staff about the seven foot parkway. Mr. Baum staters that staff would find that Deep Canyon has been down graded in the .area of Yurr.a Tree with a total 60 feet of right of way - Yurca Tree will he paved ahout �0 feet. Commissioner Wood rommentPd that while the amendment may not he perfert it was a move in the right dirertion. Action: Moved ny Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving thf, findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Cnmmissioner Wond, serondPd by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commissinn Resolution No. 1077, rerommendinq approval of 70A 85-4 to rity rnunril . Carried 5-0. Vill . MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS A. OUTSIDE ORGANIZATION RESPONSE OR COMMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION CRITERIA. Mr. Smith explained that Mr. Dial would hring this matter to rommis,,inn on SPptemher 17, 1985. Artinn: Moved by Comml �;sioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Frwood. to rontiniie this item to 5eptemher 17, 1985. Carried I(i MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 B. DISCUSSION OF DATE AND AGENDA FOR NEXT JOINT CiTY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Chairman (X i t r-, rp(,nrrimpnrinrt t hr f o l i nw i nra i f pm-,: Di ,i us .inn of ,idowalkc, throughout the city .7nri in thr inriri-.tt iai park. h. Potential u^r� fnr land nortr, of Country 1.l Ijh Dr .i yr . with ri i-suss i nn of r i t y Pnt ranri, hP.:aut i f i r.it i nn. r. Ilpciate on nt proviouc; agpnda itPmc;. d. Commis=.i onPr F rwond mngp�rpri d i Sri ic,s i nn on h i rv(-l r prit ti-,. Cnmm i s�i nner R i rhtarci,. rpquestpd the review of rernnt i y ripr)rovr-d aFrartm(-nt prn.iprt,, in the r i tv. It was ,uggp,t eri that �t.if f nreparr ra r(-port r:n how many ar,provp(l ;ipartment projects have hpen dove l oppri. t hr,i r nrriir)anr,v I Pvp I , dens i tv proh i Pms ( i f :my) , and polirr� and fire vr,,pnnse�, into there riewmpmrmts. Comm i s-- i onPr Wond r-pgw ,fprt d i'1rug5 1 on on rrzon i ng of unimproved pavre 1, and rrpdrit i ng them to t)p ron-,i,tpnt with the gpnr'r,,i I pl,in. �.+ C.nmmic,sion dic�ru��,pd a pntpnti,ri rlay for the meeting. Chairman Cr i t PS i nd i rated that hip wn I I d nrt i fv the rornm i,s i nn or, wh i rh day watt rhr,pn. IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr . '.;indy R aum. 45-Rfit) Dpr p Canyon Dr ,i vP oftFrPd ati a .ugga,�;t i nn for (Iisru-,-,ion at th? rity (rorrnri ! /planning cnmmiS inn mpfl ing city h(-aut 1 f i rat i on. He noted that with t hp rnn<,,t ri Irt inn .3nrl npen i ng of trap Marr intt the rity )hnalo Ifim, into imnrovinq .areas othpr than just the Highway J J J . F I PraF;pn rorrhlnrs. X. COMMENTS Comm i c;i nnpr- Wood nr)ter, that on WPdnpsriav, Aurna,,t 7 I , OnP Ou;i i 1 PlarP way having an nrn(,n hnu-,v ho,t(,d by the Chamnrr of (.nmmprrr�. Mir. Smith ,t;atpri that on SPptemhpr 3 the planning rnmm i r,r;i nn would he reviewing Some of the rPznning to impipment the P,almi V i 1 I--ige p 13n. it ai.. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1985 X1 . ADJOURNMENT rrl Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m. 0 , �'" (r=;:...�t/P'/ �✓ v. a „__ . -. RAMON A. DIAZ, Sec 4tayq ATTEST: RUFO TES, Chairman /tm a 12