Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0915 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED HARING DRIVE too A TWO-HOUR STUDY SESSION WAS HELD PRIOR TO THE MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER CONFERENCE ROOM. I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Erwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Downs led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Rick Erwood, Chairman Bob Downs Faith Ladlow Jim Richards Carol Whitlock Members Absent: None 0w Staff Present: Ray Diaz Tim Connor Greg Holtz Catherine Sass Tonya Monroe IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the September I , 1987 meeting minutes. Action: Moved by Commissioner Ladlow, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, approving the minutes as submitted. Carried 5-0. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Diaz explained there were no matters directly impacting the planning commission. V1. CONSENT CALENDAR None. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 Mr. Diaz recommended taking Item Nos. E & F out of order. Upon discussion, commission indicated the item order should stand. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case No. CUP 87-10 - ARCO PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, Applicant Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and conditional use permit to allow construction of a gasoline station and mini-market at the northwest corner of Portola Avenue and Highway Ill . Mr. Diaz outlined the salient points of the staff report. Commissioner Richards noted that public works has a problem with entrances onto Portola. Mr. Holtz stated that this was correct and indicated that stacking of cars at that intersection was a problem. Commission further discussed ingress, egress and traffic. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. CRAIG YAMASAKI asked for and received further clarification of public works concerns. He felt their plan was viable and expressed a desire to make the project work from both points of view. He stated that they would remove the other station. Commissioner Ladlow asked for and received clarification regarding Highway Ill access and parking. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. MR. SANDY BAUM, 45-800 Deep Canyon Drive, Palm Desert, felt there were traffic problems at Portola and Goleta; he also felt that the Shell station corner was one of the busiest corners and did not seem to create a problem; he discussed curb cuts and access and felt that there were no problems today in going in or out at the existing site; he also indicated that staff was overacting and felt trying to put in a curb cut on Alessandro was not realistic. Mr. Diaz noted that one letter had been received in opposition. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 �..► MS. MARY BROOKS, 73-333 Country Club, representing Roy Barbetty and Ira Johnson, stated that they are strongly opposed to this use as one of the most highly visible corners in the city, other development would enhance the site, an office complex is being development for the north side and the complex would look into the rear of the gas station, and felt that if Arco was concerned about beautification, they would not have let the present site deteriorate, and that increased traffic on Portola and access from Highway III would create a serious traffic problem. She also indicated that she did not want to work across from a gas station and felt there were better uses for the site. MRS. MERTYL BRADDOCK, 73-005 Shadow Mountain, stated that she travels that road and felt that it would be dangerous to increase traffic there. Mr. Yamasaki addressed concerns brought up by the public testimony and Chairman Erwood then closed the public testimony. Commissioner Richards felt that this was a better site, noted that this was the fourth or fifth revision and that the facility will have restrooms and will be a spanish style design. He felt that it was time to move this project on its way. Commissioner Richards also indicated that he would like to see it come back with a curb cut on Portola. Commissioner Downs agreed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, finding the use acceptable and instructing staff to prepare a resolution of approval by minute motion. Carried 3-2 (Chairman Erwood and Commissioner Ladiow voted no. ) B. Continued Case Nos. GPA 87-3, C/Z 87-7, TT 22690, and PP 87-26 - TEMPLE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Applicant Request for approval of a general plan amendment, change of zone from PR-3 S.P. to PR-3.5 S.P. , a tentative tract, precise plan of design and negative declaration of environmental impact to construct 1234 condominium units and a golf clubhouse on 404 gross acres at the northeast corner of Country Club Drive and Cook Street. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended approval . Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. MARK TEMPLE, 1010 Andreas Palms, Palm Springs, reviewed the changes made to the previous plan. Chairman Erwood asked if Mr. Temple agreed with the conditions on page five. Mr. Temple replied yes. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of the project. MR. DAVID CHRISTIAN, architect, noted that the site plan and elevations had been redesigned and stated that they were pleased with the results. Commissioner Richards thanked the architect and developer and informed them that if they found the marketing of the phases not working correctly, that they have the opportunity to come back to planning commission for a review of their decision to eliminate the sixplexes. MR. MIKE SMITH, 73-080 El Paseo, stated that they have worked out the phasing of streets and property line wall , as well as discussed drainage and retention. He was present to answer any questions. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one, Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1251 , approving PP 87-26 and TT 22690, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1252, recommending approval of GPA 87-3 to city council . Carried 5-0. r 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1253, recommending approval of C/Z 87-7 to city council . Carried 5-0. C. Continued Case No. PM 22885 - KARL BURETZ, Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map that subdivides the parcel into two lots. Ms. Sass stated that the matter was continued from the last meeting to allow staff to add public works conditions. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. KARL BURETZ, 35815 Highway 74, Palm Desert, explained the request and asked for any questions. Chairman Erwood asked Mr. Buretz if he had reviewed the public works conditions. Mr. Buretz replied that there were no problems. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1254, approving PM 22885, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. D. Contirmied Case No. C/Z 87-10 CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and change of zone from Hillside Planned Residential (HPR) to General Commercial (C- 1 ) for the approximately 7000 square foot portion of APN 640-02-003 directly adjacent to the west side of Highway 111, east of the toe of slope and west of Parkview Drive/Highway 111 . 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 Mr. Diaz explained that the matter had been continued to allow commission to review information on litigation. Staff recommended approval . Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Richards stated that his questions had been answered and concurred with staff. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Ladlow, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Ladlow, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1255, recommending approval of C/Z 87-10 to city council . Carried 5-0. E. Case Nos. GPA 87-4, C/Z 87-6, PP 87-28 - DAVID AND MARY STOLTZMAN, Applicants Request for approval of a general plan amendment and change of zone from planned residential to office professional for construction of a 40,000 square foot single story medical office plaza at the northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Hovley Lane. Mr. Diaz outlined the salient points of the staff report, noting that the consultant was reluctant to add this type of change because of adjoining property owners. He indicated that letters had been received in opposition, as well as lists of Palm Desert residents in favor and against the project. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MRS. MARY STOLTZMAN, 74-055 Highway 111 Palm Desert, described the process of selecting the site and mitigation measures they were willing to provide. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. 6 No MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 Mr. Diaz explained that the matter had been continued to allow �rrii commission to review information on litigation. Staff recommended approval . Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Richards stated that his questions had been answered and concurred with staff. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Ladlow, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Ladlow, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1255, recommending approval of C/Z 87-10 to city council . Carried 5-0. E. `�� C/Z 87-6, PP 87-28 - DAVID AND MARY f a general plan amendment and change of asidential to office professional for 1,000 square foot single story medical northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Hovley Lane. Mr. Diaz outlined the salient points of the staff report, noting that the consultant was reluctant to add this type of change because of adjoining property owners. He indicated that letters had been received in opposition, as well as lists of Palm Desert residents in favor and against the project. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MRS. MARY STOLTZMAN, 74-055 Highway ill Palm Desert, described the process of selecting the site and mitigation measures they were willing to provide. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. 6 �i MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1967 MR. MIKE SMITH, 73-080 El Paseo, engineer for the project, stated that the site would be lowered as low as they could and still have proper drainage and described landscaping and medians to be provided. MR. BEN DOBBINS, 3880 Lemon Street in Riverside, stated that he was present to answer any questions regarding the traffic report. Commissioner Ladlow asked for and received clarification as to the traffic count increase. Chairman Erwood noted that this project would increase traffic four times higher than residential . Mr. Dobbins concurred. MR. BOB RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, architect, described the facility, the gates to be provided, employee parking, and the hours of operation. He stated that sometimes the planning commission has to make unpopular decisions for the benefit of the whole, but felt that the percent of homeowners were not overwhelmingly against the project. He asked that commission keep an open mind. MR. MARY MAGALOR, Chapparel , spoke in favor of the project stating that the building would enhance the neighborhood, people would not have to go to Eisenhower and try to park, and a traffic light could be installed to direct traffic. MR. JOE SWANK, 40-088 Siiktree in Sagewood, spoke in support of the project and felt it would enhance the community. MS. MOLLY SCHECTER, 40-127 Sagewood, stated that she had been a resident six and a half years. She felt that if the development were allowed to go in, there would be increased traffic during the busiest time of the day, with too many cars already on the road. She spoke against the location of employee cars and expressed a desire to keep this a safe environment. MR. CHARLIE SWEAT, 74-595 Peppergrass Lane, stated that it would be hard to development as residential economically, and would not work on a major arterial . He felt the proposed project was appropriate and asked for approval . MS. KATHY MOLLIVER, 40-128 Sagewood, stated that this is one of the only residential developments in the area and expressed concern regarding safety for neighborhood children and traffic and felt the neighborhood should be kept like it is. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 MAO MR. DENNIS JOHNSON, 40-471 Sagewood, Silktree Homeowners Association President, stated testimony had been given for and against the project and felt that the majority of the Sagewood residents were against the project. He noted several items brought up in the staff report and pointed out Rancho Mirage's letter also was in opposition. He objected that Dr. and Mrs. Stoltzman found it necessary for patients to sign the petition in favor. He indicated that it looked like a nice facility, but felt that this was the wrong location. He noted that the Stoltzmans were against a development in Indian Wells, but they want to build one here and indicated that their office is in Palm Desert and their home in Indian Wells. MR. DAVID MILLER, 40-056 Sagewood, speaking also for Grace Doden and Wanda Downs, spoke in favor of the project, stating that only good would come from this facility and it would enhance the area and property value. MRS. WENDY JONATHAN, directly behind the development, stated that with this development present house prices would go down and felt that it should not be in her backyard. She noted that a lot of people are patients and a lot are not young family people. She also expressed concern regarding traffic generated by the project. MS. DANA HOWARTH, 43-825 San Jacinto, stated that Palm Desert High School is in her backyard. She indicated that she was in favor of the project and does not like to drive to Eisenhower. MS. CAMILLE TODD, Grapevine, felt that this would be a good location for the project. MR. JOE WASHMAN, 43-096 Manzanita Drive, felt that this was a good location and that going to Eisenhower and looking for parking was ridiculous. MR. JOHN ROSS, Foundation of the Retarded Representative, stated that they support the project. MR. DON YOUNG, 44-309 Mill Court in Hidden Palms, spoke in favor of the project. He noted that he has 1 i ved here 12 years and wondered how traffic would be in another 12 years along Monterey, Portola and Cook. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 �r■. MR. AND MRS. PHILLIP RAFF, owners of property for the last 35 years, spoke in favor of the project and felt that it was a good facility for the community. MS. KATY PORKRIN, employee of Dr. Stoltzman and a Palm Desert resident, stated that the facility was needed and indicated that she would have liked to have this type of facility in her backyard. MS. ROSE STARK 40-453 Sugarbush Court, stated that she was a real estate appraiser and indicated that property values do go down. She indicated that the real issue here is if the project is suitable for this site. MS. JOANNE SHACKLEFORD stated that commission should keep in mind that it is a change of zone and indicated that she had envisioned the whole area as residential . She questioned where children would be able to ride their bikes with the increase in traffic from the project. MRS. JUDY YOUNG, 44-309 Mill Court in Hidden Palms, also spoke in favor of the project. MR. DAN JOHNSON, 40-488 Sagewood, spoke in opposition to the project due to increased noise and traffic and noted that he has two small children. MR. BILL REICHER, 40-201 Sagewood, opposed the project and felt it would be more appropriate somewhere else. MR. DAVE GERMAIN, developer of Monterey Meadows, stated that the property owners oppose this project 100%. He indicated that he had tried to buy the corner to build single family homes. He requested that commission not change the zone. MS. PAT THRIFFY, 43-450 Desert Springs Drive, stated that when she moved to Palm Desert there was nothing in sight and felt the desert has grown. She spoke in favor of the project and felt that it was in a good location. MR. DAVID STARK, Sagewood, spoke in opposition to the project and felt that the city should stick to the general plan and zoning. He stated that he was not opposed to the construction of the facility, only the location. 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 MR. AND MRS. PACK, 40-480 Sagewood, directly behind the project, spoke in opposition and felt that people would sign anything that would not affect them. They felt a complete environmental impact report should be done on the traffic, air pollution and noise pollution. MS. SARAH AUSTIN, 40-440 Perriwinkle Court, spoke in opposition to the project and felt the zoning should remain the same. She stated that just because there is such a traffic problem at Eisenhower, the project and traffic should not be given to their neighborhood, which mostly consists of young families. MS. BRIDGET JOHNSON, 40-471 Sagewood, stated that the issue is zoning. She indicated that the city had made a master plan as to zoning and felt that it should not be changed. Chairman Erwood asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. BOB RICCIARDI stated that the major issue against the project is the traffic. He noted that Monterey is now the major traffic street in Palm Desert for north sphere traffic and that traffic would increase regardless. He suggested if there was a problem with traffic diverting through Sagewood to avoid the light, Sagewood should add an entry gate. He stated that until the city puts Portola through to Interstate 10 traffic will increase. He also clarified that there would be no pharmacy as part of the facility. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Chairman Erwood indicated commission needed to decide if the project warranted a change of zone and general plan amendment and felt that the project was not compatible because it is totally surrounded by residential . Chairman Erwood felt that the project would help increase traffic. He also indicated that the city has adequate property available that would be suitable for development. Commissioner Richards complimented the applicant on the staff presentation and the mitigating measures they were willing to implement in the R-1 zone. He indicated that he had never seen this great a need for a medical center before and asked everyone to attend the meeting on September 22 for the public hearing on the north sphere area. He felt there could be property in that area that might be suitable for this type of development. Commissioners Ladlow and Whitlock both concurred with comments by Chairman Erwood and Commissioner Richards. 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, instructing staff to prepare a resolution of denial . Carried 5-0. A TEN MINUTE RECESS WAS CALLED AT THIS POINT. THE TIME WAS 9:55 P.M. F. Case Nos. CUP 87-11 AND TT 22794 - IRONWOOD ASSOCIATES, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit and tentative tract map to allow construction and operation of a family golf center on 25.86 acres in the open space zone on the south side of Hovley Lane, approximately 250 feet west of Corporate Way. Mr. Diaz explained that staff is requesting a continuance and noted that the parks and recreation commission wished to review the project, as well as noting that a general plan amendment application is being required as part of the application, which would require re-advertisement. He also stated that the applicant was requesting the continuance, also. Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the staff report and indicating a parking deficiency. She felt that basically the site was suitable and acceptable for this use and noted that the general Plan amendment would be necessary to change the open space designation for private recreational use. Staff recommended continuance to a date uncertain. Upon questioning from Commissioner Richards, Ms. Sass clarified that parcel no. 2 would be used as a golf center and the facility would provide for pitching practice, 60 tees, and a driving range, focusing on use by high school students. Ms. Sass also clarified for Commissioner Whitlock that staff was recommending a complete lighting study. Chairman Erwood o ened the public testimony. MR. ROGER LANGER, Portola Country Club, expressed concern regarding lights shining into his home, walls for protection against golf balls, and felt that the map should show exactly where the project comes up to their property line. 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 MR. WILLIAM KELLY, 74-676 Asurete, stated that he attended a meeting a week ago and plans were also discussed to take the property to the west and change the zone for residential . He felt the applicant was trying to get approval on this change of zone to facilitate a future change of zone. Mr. Kelly also objected to the lateness in hearing" this item when it was known that it would be continued. Commissioner Downs stated that it was discussed at the beginning of the meeting. Commissioner Richards also informed Mr. Kelly that since a public hearing was advertised, planning commission is obligated to take public testimony. Commissioner Richards also reviewed the history of the parcel . MR. RAY CULLIGAN, 42051 Sutters Mill Road, Portola Country Club, stated that the sore points of the area are the ATC's and dune buggies. He also expressed concern regarding the lights and suggested the project be turned 90 degrees to allow lights to face the commercial areas. MR. CHARLES PEISER, 74-570 Zircon Circle, stated that it was difficult to say if he was in favor or opposition and he wondered how it was before the commission with no environmental report. He also stated that the family golf center was going to be open until midnight and expressed concern regarding the lights and vandalism. He stated that they would like an environmental impact report done; they did not know what a family golf center was; and opposed them being open until 12:00 a.m. MR. JORDAN HUGHES, 74-377 Zircon Circle East, informed commission that in another area that allowed miniature golf, people were bussed in at night and they gambled on the games. MS. ROSE WACHTER, Zircon Circle West, stated that she works with young people and was opposed because this is a potential drug center and felt this should be rethought, or more information provided. MR. RICHARD DIRKMAN, 74-416 Zircon Circle, stated that there are no places in Palm Desert where the public can play golf unless they live in a private residence. He said the issues to be decided are if there is a need, and will it be an asset. He noted there were driving ranges at Suncrest and College of the Desert. He objected that they would have the lights from the College and this project coming from both directions. 12 Wiwi MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMKR 15, 1987 Chairman Erwood noted that more information will be available at a future public hearing and staff was recommending a continuance. He indicated that the applicant would be present at the future meeting. Mr. Diaz stated that he strongly recommends that the applicant meet with the Portola Country Club Homeowners Association to discuss concerns on a one-on-one basis. He did not feel staff members needed to attend. Commissioner Downs stated that it would be the first public hearing Item on the future agenda. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, continuing this item to a date uncertain. Carried 5-0. G. Case No. ZOA 87-3 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of an amendment to zoning ordinance chapter 25.58.070 A & 8 to allow special limitations in the residential zone. i00 Mr. Diaz explained that the report was initiated by Code Compliance and the gentleman was on vacation. He requested a continuance to October 6. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the matter. There was no one. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, continuing this matter to October 6, 1987. Carried 5-0. ViIl. MISCELLANEOUS None. IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 X. COMMENTS Mr, Connor suggested that commission direct the city attorney's off i ce to draft an amendment to the ordinance that i f a case has to be re-noticed, the applicant should be billed for the cost. Commission felt that it did not apply to this previous case and staff noted that in some cases if there is any question, it was better to re-notice. XI. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adjourning the meeting to September 22, 1987. Carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:48 p.m. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secret ATTEST: r, RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman /tm 14