Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0805 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - AUGUST 5. 1986 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED HARING DRIVE A TWO HOUR STUDY SESSION WAS HELD PRIOR TO THE MEETING. BEGINNING AT 5:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Crites called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. after a two hour study session. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Erwood led in the pledge of allegiance. Ill . ROLL CALL Members Present: Buford Crites. Chairman Richard Erwood Robert Downs Jim Richards (arrived after council summarv) %or Ralph Wood Staff Present: Ramon Diaz Phil Jov Catherine Sass Dave Erwin Richard Folkers Donna Gomez IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 15, 1986 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Wood to approve the minutes as submitted. Carried 3-0-1 (Commissioner Erwood abstaining) . V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Diaz explained that city council held a special meeting to award the contract for the high school access road to Massey Sand and Rock. Construction of which is to commence within the next ten days. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 86-8 - L b T DEVELOPMENT, Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map waiver consolidating three lots into one for development of a senior apartment project. B. Case No. PMW 86-18 - DICK GLOVER, Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to consolidate two lots into one. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs. seconded by Commissioner Wood, approving the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 5-0 VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case No. CUP 86-3 - LIVING DESERT RESERVE, Applicant Request for approval of a 6500 sq . ft. . educational building within a public institution moo zone on the east side of Portola south of Haystack. Mr . Joy indicated that the architectural commission had granted preliminary approval of the plans and that staff was recommending approval of the conditional use permit. Chairman Crites opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. JOHN OUTCAULT, architect. 74-133 El Paseo, explained that he had reviewed the staff report and had no objection to the conditions of approval . He indicated that the building would be an addition to the existing buildings and that it would enhance to appearance of the site. Chairman Crites asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. Hearing no one the public hearing was closed. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 Action: Moved by Commissioner Wood. seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0 Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1168, approving CUP 86-3, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0 B. Case Nos. C/Z 86-4 and PP 86-31 - JOHN TURNER, Applicant Request for approval of a zone change from planned residential five dwelling units per acre to affordable high density planned residential 10 dwelling units per acre to allow construction of a 60 unit apartment project located on the north side of Magnesia Falls Drive at Rutled4e. Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the project and indicated that there had been some design changes since the last submittal . He explained the background of the site and the previously proposed Projects for the site. He indicated that preliminary approval was granted by the architectural commission and that staff was recommending denial of the project. Commissioner Richards felt that the price ranges for existing apartments in Palm Desert were high and that the city has put most of the apartments in the hands of one developer. Commissioner Wood questioned the amount of low cost housing that would be provided in this project and if the reason for staff recommending denial was based on the housing element goals. Mr. Diaz indicated that he had received a letter from Earlene Schudge of Portola Country Club stating that she was opposed to the Project in that the density was too high, additional noise and aesthetics. She felt that apartments should be built away from established residential areas. Chairman Crites opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. SANDY BAUM, project coordinator , 45-800 Deep Canyon, indicated that he had walked the neighborhood showing plans and discussing the project with surrounding residents. He stated 3 %No MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 that out of 37 people he spoke with only four were in opposition. Most people were in favor or had no objection to the project. He noted that he did not concur with the staff report and felt that this project should not be based on the assumption that San Tropez and One Quail Place fall into the affordable housing range. He indicated that the city was only at 20% of their goal for affordable housing. He noted that the denial was based on the timing of the housing element and not on the project itself. Mr. Baum felt that the city had an obligation to provide for apartments on this site because of past actions. Chairman Crites was concerned that the city was not meeting the quota of affordable housing units that the housing element states. Chairman Crites indicated that 44 low and moderate units was desig- nated in the housing element as the number of affordable units that should be approved each year. Mr. Diaz noted that the figures quoted by Mr. Baum were correct in that the city is deficient in the number of affordable housing and senior housing units. Commissioner Richards explained that he was involved in the housing element plan discussions and indicated that the intent at that time was to provide apartments in the city, which a certain percentage would be for lower income rates. These apartments would provide housing for the working people entering the job market in Palm Desert. Chairman Crites asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. MR. ED MELANEY, Wedgewood Glen, indicated that the last proposal was denied and a condition was applied that stated a new proposal could not be reheard for one year unless a substantial change was made to the plans. He noted that he was still opposed to the project and felt the commission should deny the project without further comment. He stated that no more than 48 units should be provided on this site and that the rental apartments in the city now are not full as yet. Commissioner felt that the deletion of 20 units was a substantial change for this project. Commissioner Richards questioned Mr. Melaney on his background with this type of project and how he came up with the 48 units. 4 r MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5. 1986 MR. MELANEY indicated that he was a licensed real estate broker and he felt that 8 units per acre was adequate for this site. MR. DON YOUNG, Wedgewood, was concerned with the two story impact and the change in aesthetics on the surrounding neighbors. MS. VIRGINIA MCWILLIAMS, was concerned with the ingress and egress areas and the traffic impacts on existing residences. Mr. Folkers responded that the city has a contract with a consultant to design a traffic signal and are working with the mobile home park on the west to provide for additional safety measures. He stated that there has been traffic surveys that have determined no existing problem in this area. Mr. Joy indicated that the developer could be required to provide street improvements from Deep Canyon. Chairman Crites questioned when the signal would be installed at Magnesia Falls. Mr. Folkers replied that within three months a contract should be awarded to install a signal at Magnesia Falls and Portola. MR. DON YOUNG indicated that as a property owner he was not �... aware of the discussed site zoning for apartments. He felt that this type of information should be available to prospective buyers of property. Commissioner Richards explained that they looked at this site very hard and determined that it should be apartments because of the location of the park, schools and the wash. MRS. KOSSOV felt the density would bring a lot of traffic and objected to the large density in the middle of all the existing residents. MR. SANDY BAUM felt that the project provided for adequate landscaping and walls and was located close to the wash and 124 feet from the nearest resident. He indicated that the project would be very attractive for surrounding residents. Chairman Crites asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project, hearing no one he closed the public hearing. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 Commissioner Wood sympathized with the home owners but felt that if ri the project developer was within their rights they can be approved. He stated that the area would be improved with this project and felt that 10 units per acre was not an excessive density. He advised that denial should not be based on the housing element quota and that the city needed this type of development therefore, he would support this development. Commissioner Erwood was in disagreement with the statement that the 20 unit deletion was a substantial change in the nature of this project. He felt that the case should not be before the commission at this time. Commissioner Richards stated that this site was ideal for apartments and that no one can determine exactly what the density should be on a site. He felt that other projects have received 15 or 20 units per acre and thought this was an acceptable request. He felt that the reduction from the original request of 127 units down to 60 units was a substantial change. He pointed out that only one side of the project would be exposed to residents which is to have a 124 foot setback. Commissioner Richards felt that the architect for this project was very talented and that the plans indicated that the building would be very attractive. Chairman Crites questioned if the letter from Dr. Conlon regarding the proposed site being able to support the weight of the project had been addressed. Mr. Folkers indicated that the situation had been reviewed and no problems were found. He noted that he would check into it further. Mr. Diaz stated that the grading ordinance would require soiling testing. Chairman Crites noted that the change of zone would not allow any further height than what is allowed under the current zoning. The applicant is requesting a 22 foot high building and the current zoning allows 30 feet. Commissioner Richards indicated that the zoning ordinance requires two parking spaces per unit, a certain amount of open space and landscaping and amenities that would make the project attractive and keep it similar to the Wedgewood project. Commissioner Wood asked for a vote and indicated that the action should include findings to mitigate the traffic concerns. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 r.. Mr. Diaz indicated that there would be a public hearing before the city council to approve a development agreement which will be noticed to surrounding residents. Action: Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Downs, to direct staff to prepare the appropriate findings for a resolution of approval . Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Erwood was in opposition) . A FIVE MINUTE RECESS WAS CALLED AT 8:35 P.M. C. Case No. PP 86-35 - FRANZ TIRRE, Applicant Request for approval of a 12,600 sq. ft. office warehouse building on the north side of Lennon Place, 330 feet west of Eclectic. Mr. Joy explained that this project and the adjacent project to the west are providing a joint access to allow adequate circulation. He indicated that the project meets all code requirements and has received preliminary approval from the architectural commission. Staff recommended approval . Chairman Crites opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. FRANZ_ TIRRE, 46-333 Burroweed, noted that the owner of the property was concerned with the condition requiring a reasonable assessment for Cook Street improvements including bridges at Interstate 10 and the Whitewater Channel . He questioned what the owner could expect as a "reasonable assessment" for these improvements. Mr. Diaz explained that there is a study in the process currently, but that at this time the city has no information as to the cost of the improvements. Commissioner Richards indicated that the owners being assessed will be the most served by the improvements. He noted that they attempt to involve the largest group of people affected to participate in the assessment . This includes the major entries and the beneficiaries thereof. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 a Chairman Crites asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. Hearing no one the public hearing was closed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0 Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1169, approving PP 86-35, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0 It was moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Downs to suspend the agenda and hear Item E before Item D. Carried 5-0 E. Case Nos. CUP 86-5 and VAR 86-4 - RICHARD b MAY LEE, Applicants Request for approval of a conditional use permit and variance to allow the conversion of four existing standard rental units to eight senior citizen rental units under provisions of the Senior Housing Overlay Ordinance. ] Mr. Diaz gave the background on this case and recommended denial of the proposed conditional use permit and variance. Chairman Crites opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MRS. MAY LEE. Pacific Palisades, explained that she had just received the staff recommendation therefore she requested a continuance to review staffs concerns. Commissioner Wood asked if there were any legal problems with continuing this case. Mr. Erwin replied that the commission should ask if anyone wished to speak in regards to the project before continuing the case. Chairman Crites explained that they could continue it or discuss it at this time. MRS. LEE decided to discuss it at this meeting. She explained that the project conforms to the senior overlay code which would allow 12 units and they have only eight. They are 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1966 renting all units except two to seniors. She felt that the city's goal should be to have additional senior housing and not to concentrate on unit size. She thought that the change to R-3 zoning meant she could have additional units. She noted that the contractor advised her that it was all legal . MS. RENEE BENNETT, resident of smaller unit, indicated that she was very comfortable in her unit and felt that it provided adequate living space at a good rate. She noted that the unit was very clean and she has her own garage. She was very pleased with the apartment. MR. RICHARD LEE, Pacific Palisades, indicated that they now know that what they did was wrong. He felt that the units were good senior apartments at a reasonable price and should remain as they are. He noted that the apartments were located across the street from the senior center which was a good location for senior apartments. Commissioner Wood questioned the type of nuisance this project will cause. Mr. Diaz explained that they did these changes without a building permit which is not allowed in the city. He noted that staff seldom recommends denial but they felt in this case since this was done illegally and the smaller units are not allowed by code it should be denied. Commissioner Richards explained that there was a lot of time put into the study of the minimum size of rental units. He indicated that they looked at several different size units and determined that the size provided in the discussed project was too small to accomm- odate a full time resident. Chairman Crites asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. Hearing no one the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Downs stated that he has been a contractor for along time and that he could not vote for the proposed variance. He noted that if they could do this why couldn't he and anyone else. Commissioner Erwood felt that this would encourage violation of the zoning ordinance and indicated that he would vote against a variance. Commissioner Richards felt that the commission should uphold the law of the city and back staff in recommending denial of the proposed variance. 9 %NW MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 Chairman Crites indicated that he was very unhappy to have to deny the requested variance because he felt that the applicants did not do this intentionally. He noted that he would have to vote to deny the requested variance. Mr. Diaz pointed out that this decision could be appealed to the city council within 15 days of this meeting. Action: ~Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0- 1 (Commissioner Wood abstaining) . Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1170, denying CUP 86-5 and VAR 86-4. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Wood abstaining) . D. Case No. HDP 86-2 and PM 21655 - Mc Millian, Applicant Request for approval of a hillside development implementing conditions of PM 21655 for subdivision of a 13 acre lot into two residential parcels. ari Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the case and indicated that the project meets the intent of the HPR District and staff recommended approval subject to conditions. Commissioner Wood questioned if counsel had reviewed this for any type of conflict with the city ordinance and zoning laws. Mr. Erwin indicated that lie did not forsee any conflicts. Commissioner Downs felt that this site was limited to pads of 5,000 square feet at a previous meeting. Ms. Sass indicated that the building area could be up to 5% of the total acreage. Chairman Crites felt that it should be required that the homes and pads follow the contour of the land. Commissioner Wood questioned what the commission was to look at and review for approval . Mr. Erwin indicated that there were two items; the division of the lots and the hillside development plan. 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1966 Chairman Crites opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. RICHARD ROMER, attorney, 73-941 Highway 111 , indicated that his clients intention was not to build two houses on these lots. His intention is to have approval of two lots. He stated that they want to grade the lots and provide the largest pads possible. Mr. Diaz indicated that the maximum building pad size is not called out by the ordinance. He noted that Charles Martin of the architectural commission required that the pads conform with the hillside. Chairman Crites expressed concern over the grading and pads being installed before the selling of the lots. He indicated that at the proposal for a restaurant on this site it was discussed that a black top road would not be allowed. Mr. Diaz explained that the pads could not be graded without having something approved for the lot. He noted that the architectural commission was requiring a native color asphalt to be used for the road and/or driveway. Commissioner Richards pointed out that a standard needed to be established regarding roads in hillside areas. This item has not been discussed and the commission needs to be consistent in this area. MR. ROMER questioned if the native color asphalt was required by law. Mr. Folkers indicated that he could substantiate this as being necessary but it is not an ordinance requirement. It would be a public works department requirement. Mr. Diaz informed that this condition was agreed to by the representative at the architectural commission meeting. Commissioner Erwood questioned if a gate would be provided for the driveway. MR. ROMER indicated that they would provide a gate prior to the construction of the lots. Chairman Crites asked about the placement of utilities. Mr. Diaz explained that under the present code the utilities are required to be undergrounded unless proven unreasonable. He noted that power poles would be above ground. 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1986 MR. DAVE WAGNER requested that condition number 14 under public works which requires a complete parcel map prior to issuance of any permits be changed to prior to issuance of building permit. Mr. Erwin suggested that himself, Mr. Folkers and Mr. Wagner meet to discuss this condition for resolution. Mr. Wagner concurred. MR. SANDY BAUM, 45-800 Deep Canyon, expressed opposition to the proposed project in that he would rather see the originally proposed restaurant on the site. Chairman Crites asked if anyone else wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. Hearing no one the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Richards was concerned with the future of other hillside developments and the requirements for the type of roads that may be utilized. He requested that staff develop a plan of attack to address this concern that would be advantageous for both the city and the developer. Chairman Crites was satisfied that the conditions and statements made by staff were adequate in addressing the necessary steps to protect the environment and assuring the design of the road will be aesthetically correct. He questioned if the commissions concerns WAO would be reviewed by the architectural commission. Mr. Diaz indicated that they would. Amended conditions to include public works number 14 which is to be reviewed and discussed between Mr. Erwin, Mr. Folkers and Mr. Wagner for resolution. Condition number 19 to be added to public works requiring a securable gate be provided at the row line to prevent unauthorized entry. Condition number 15 to change the words "ordinance" to "drainage" and "run off". Action: Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0 Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1171 , approving PM 21655 subject to conditions as amended. Carried 5-0 Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1172, approving C/Z 86-4, subject to conditions as amended. Carried 5-0 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1966 VIII. MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Diaz clarified the fact that the Ahmanson project condition was to provide for the commencement of the major building construction Prior to the issuance of building permits for smaller pads rather than the completion of the major building. Commission concurred that it should be commencement of construction of the major building. Mr. Diaz questioned the commission on the possibility of changing the planning commission meeting time for the day meeting to a night meeting. This would provide for two night meetings rather than one day and one night meeting. Commission agreed that this would be preferable. IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NONE X. COMMENTS NONE XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ] RAMON A. DIAZ, SecHetar�— ATTEST: JIM HAR S, Acting Chairman /d g 13