Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0621 NIIN[TI'ES PALM DESERT PLANNING, Q2T4ISSION MEETIM TUESDAY, JUTE 21, 1988 7:00 P.M. AEMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE R=4 73-510 FRID WARING DRIVE NO STUDY SESSION WAS HELD. I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Erwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Downs led the Pledge of Allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Rick Enmood, Chairman Bob Downs Jim Richards Carol Whitlock Members Absent: Faith Ladlow Staff Present: Ray Diaz VM„ Kandy Allen Gregg Holtz Phil Joy Catherine Sass Ruthie Worthy Mr. Diaz introduced Ruthie L. Worthy, who will fill in for Tonya Monroe during her vacation. IV. APPRUVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the June 7, 1988 meeting minutes. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Catrnissioner Dawns, approving June 7, 1988 meeting minutes as submitted. V. SCE 4WV OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Diaz reported that the council did consider a zoning ordinance amendment relating to control of color in the hillside area and wishes to have the chairman present the coRmission's position on the proposed change. INV MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING C 44ISSICN JUTE 21, 1988 VI. CCNSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. VAR 87-1 RALPH SANIO PIEIRD, Applicant Request for approval of a one-year time extension for a previously approved request for a rear yard setback from 20 feet to 8 feet for the R-1 10,000 zoned property located at 47-817 San Corral. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, approving consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 4-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ccntin ued Case Nos. GPA 87-6, C/Z 87-13, and PP 87-37 - COOK H1VLEY STREET ASSOCIATES, Applicant Request for approval of a general plan amendment, change of zone, negative declaration of environmental impact, precise plan of design and development agreement to construct 612 apartments on the south side of Havley Lane, approximately 1,300 feet east of Portola Avenue. No Ms. Sass explained that this case was continued at the applicant's request. Staff informed the commission mission that the Palm Desert Parks and Recreation Commission would accept a compromise of reducing the adjacent open space to 20 acres and expanding the project by five acres if it would resolve the crowding concern raised by the commission. The applicant had redesigned plans to accommodate concerns expressed to date. Camussioner Downs asked how many units per acre would be built on the site. Ms. Sass calculated that there are 20 units per acre, 17 on the expanded site. Staff supports a recommendation for approval because it finds the project meets or exceeds code requirements. Mr. Diaz indicated that the issue of over-crowding should be considered because it was one of the concerns discussed at the Parks and Recreation Commission. The revised plan does not show the additional five acres donated to the apartment project. Commissioner Richards asked whether or not they could design a park on this site. Mr. Diaz clarified that the only issue brought to the Parks and Recreation Camtission was one of ultimate park size. Engineering information which should have been received is not yet 2 ..Mr NINLTIM PAIM DESERT PLAMIW. CO144ISSICN JUTE 21, 1988 ftow available. Information should be given to the council regarding development as a park site. In response to further questions, Mr. Diaz stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission reluctantly affirmed a 4-1 vote to a compromise reducing the park to 20 acres if it resolved the commission's concern over project crowding. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of the proposed. MR. JACK BUTLER, 2401 Colorado Drive, Santa Monica,spoke in favor of the project and explained that the current plan was arrived at from testimony received at the April 5 public hearing and meetings with adjacent ,property owners. The developer stated that it was planned to master grade the entire site and that the drainage concerns would be addressed. Commissioner Richards expressed concern that sufficient information on the park design was not available. MR. EDWARD DYER, Desert Youth Sports, spoke in favor of the project and stated that his group had commissioned a local architect to draw a plan. He felt the site could accommodate lighted fields and a snack bar. Commissioner Richards stated that perhaps the person who needs to address the commission is here. Mr. Butler believes we can design what is needed. Mr. Butler stated that a ball field can be lowered, if need be, so as to serve as a retention base. Commissioner Richards added that, until a basic grading plan is available, we cannot give a specific answer. Further discussion ensued regarding potential park facilities and drainage issues. Mr. Butler explained that a very nice project can be designed at the requested density. The project has a clubhouse and physical fitness center. The development provided 10%- of the units as affordable. All units have microwaves and fireplaces. They are managed very proficiently; there are security guards on duty, and the site manager is on the premises 24 hours a day. . In response to Commissioner Richards' question, Ms. Sass stated the drainage issue could be handled by retaining the water on site. The applicant wishes to drain into the existing retention base. Commissioner Richards said he would like to see the ball fields lowered. 3 law NIIPATPFS PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSICN JUKE 21, 1988 Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in OPPOSITION to the proposed. Speaking against the proposal was F.R. KI)ONALD of 1900 E. Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach: With the corruption going on in Washington, it is no surprise to see the same in this project. If I were to take this plan to kindergartners, I would have to tell them that you can't put a square peg in a round hole. I would tell the children when they try to put a 20-acre project across from a Marriott Hotel project, the latter wants to be sure no one else puts anything in that location. They acquired another 160 acres. We know we just don't want to put anything on this location. Conmissioner Richards clarified that 220 feet is sufficient between units. Mr. McDonald continued I can't believe we can take a piece of property we could not bring up to PR 5 and bring it up to PR 20. In the year 2000, I am going to cane onto this property, and there is nothing you can do about it. They are going to put it right next to my property, which is a PR 3-1/2, when they are looking up at a 2- story apartment building. MR. Dom. BARD, 41-613 Aventine Court, Palm Desert, and a member of the City's Parks and Recreation Cannission, addressing the hearing as an individual. He stated that the Parks and Recreation Ccnmission couldn't do anything until the project issues were resolved. Once the size and configuration of the park were determined, the park site could be designed. Commissioner Whitlock stated she was not satisfied with the density. Mr. Diaz clarified that the Marriott is opposed to the plan. Chairman Erwood added that developers generally reduce densities after initial hearings and evaluation. He further clarified that what needed to be decided was the appropriateness of the zoning at this location. He added we are talking about a change of zone, we are talking about going from 17 to 20 units per acre, we are being influenced by park land which was previously offered to the city. The commissioners are concerned about trying to right the wring previously done. You have to consider what the zoning is and what the concept is can the property. Commissioner Richards stated he felt that this was an appropriate location for that. He added that we have an absolute need for low- cost housing. Relating to the affordable housing issue, Commissioner Whitlock stated, "This is not low-cost housing; only 10% of these units are designated low-income housing." She added, that we must 4 NIN T ES PALM DESERT PI,AN DU COMMISSION JUNE 21, 1988 sometimes look at what actually develops. This appears to be representative of the type of housing needed by the community, but I don't think anybody here will live long enough to see it. Catmissioner Whitlock concluded that she supports the park concept but was concerned with project density. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, that this item be passed on to council without recommendations. The vote was two in favor, two against. Mr. Diaz stated that the commission should send the matter up to council with "No action" as opposed to "No recommendation" Outlining the concerns expressed by the ccmission. Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Cammissioner Whitlock. The vote remained two in favor, two against. Mr. Diaz indicated the staff will prepare a white paper and submit it to council. C n nissicner Richards suggested that the plans also be revised. B. Continued Case No. CUP 88-2 - SCMITZ ENTERPRISES, INC., ,` Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit and development agreement to construct a 17-unit senior citizens' apartment project in the R-2, S.O. zone on the south side of Santa Rosa Way near San Pascual Avenue. Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the staff report and pointed out that there was no objection to the architecture other than the windows. The rear yard setback requirement is 20 feet but was shown as only 10. The applicant advised staff that he prefers the plans submitted which avoids building on the back. Staff finds it could recommend approval if conditions cited in the staff report are met. Cammissioier Richards objected to the number of units in this zone, on this size lot. He advised staff to include lot size in future reports. Commissioner Downs pointed out that the applicant built two other senior citizens' projects in the city within the past two years. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. 5 qRW MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNIM COM IISSIM JUNE 21, 1988 �■ri MR. HARRY SCHMIITZ addressed the ocnmission. He stated that he was under the impression that the size of the building on the property was the responsibility of the planning cannission, and the architectural commission was to approve design. We have studied this plan for a long time. There are different ways to site buildings on this property. The primary objection we have to the current plan is the requirement to put the building to the back and the parking to the front. The tenants cannot watch their cars; older people feel more secure if they have sane control over their property. Commissioner Downs stated that the nature of the property itself created a security issue. As designed, a fire truck could not enter the rear of the property. I feel it is a nice looking building; this is the applicants third project. The applicant again stated he felt this was the best utilization of the site. The rear 10 feet is not as valuable and he prefers to keep the 30 feet setback in the front. Mr. Schmitz felt having more than a 17-foot driveway would necessitate removing two large palm trees; we were trying to preserve those. Ocmmissioner Richards stated he didn't like what was designed either "no -- the 30-foot setback or 17 units per acre. It must be 24 units to the acre. Ms. Sass clarified that the project lies in senior overlay. Commissioner Richards felt that the project looked like a nice little hotel that you would build in Inglewood. Commissioner Richards continued, "we could not do better with that site if we are going to go to 23 units per acre." If you want the density jump, I have some very valid concerns about police protection and the parking. Mr. Schmitz clarified the oannission has approved this type of project twice before. Commissioner Richards stated the difference lies between 6 units as opposed to 17 units. Commissioner Whitlock stated she does not have a problem with the project. Commissioner Richards suggested that the developer revise site plans to include 16 units because the current plan does not make maximum utilization of the site. It is too much on the low-budget side of the fence. Cannissioner Downs suggested that this item be continued to give staff time to talk it over. In response to the chairman's question as to what the applicant thought about continuing the item, Mr. Schmitz responded that he is trying to minimize cost. He added that any re-design would result in increased cost which must 6 �; NIQATI�S PALM DESERT PLANNIM 00M ISSIM JDNE 21, 1988 be passed on to tenants in the form of increased rental. Camtiissioner Richards said the staff never objected on the basis of architectural design. You are getting a good density bonus here. You have gone frcm 8 to 17 units. Commissioner Dawns asked that the topic be re-opened to public hearing. Staff does not have a problem with waiting until the end of August. Commissioner Richards said he believes the project could be dome better. Mr. Diaz suggested that the item be moved to continued until July 5. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of or OPPOSITION to the proposed. There was no one. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, continuing the case to July 5, 1988, to allow the applicant time to revise plans incorporating suggested changes. Carried 4-0. C. Case No. PM 23619 - TRIAD PACIFIC DEVEMPMENr CORP., Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map creating two parcels out of one at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Havley Lane. 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. Commissioner Richards clarified that one condition of the precise plan was that both projects be built simultaneously. It was this conuissioner's concern that the project would be split up. Mr. Diaz clarified that the development of both parcels must be at the same time. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There being no one, the public hearing was closed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1292, approving PM 23619, subject to conditions. Carried 4-0. 7 ,r. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNDU CIO MISSION JUNE 21, 1988 D. Case No. TT 23449 - PFDMESSIVE SAVD4 S & U)AN, Applicant Request for approval of an 11-lot tentative subdivision located within Winter Haven Ccndcminiums on the south side of Havley Lane, 300 feet west of Portola. Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended approval of this project. Chairman Erwood opened public testimony and asked the applicant to address the cccmaissicn. MR. QHARLEES HAVER spoke briefly in favor of the project.. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of or OPPOSITICN to the proposed. There was no one. Action: ; Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissicner Whitlock, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1293, approving TT 23449, subject to conditions. Carried 4-0. E. Case No. CUP 87-14, CZ 88-5 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of a master plan of development for the civic center site bordered by San Pablo Avenue and San Pascual Channel on the west and east; Magnesia Falls and Fred Waring Drive on the north and south. Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended approval. He also mentioned that we could do reduce noise levels and aid the drainage facility. This also involves the access way to College of the Desert. This enhances circulation in the area and slaws dawn traffic on San Pablo. We plan to build a ball field which could be lit in the future and use temporary lights in adjacent neighborhoods. We located this as far away from the residential as possible and 250 feet away from Magnesia Falls. Next to it would be a 6-foot fence, utilizing chain link or pyracantha, and a 20-acre park. We tried to keep circulation paths down to a minimum on the city hall side. I spoke to Bob Reardon who had some concerns about the ball park. Commissioner Richards pointed out that originally we hired a consultant, but none is here. Are we at a complete impasse with the college. Mr. Diaz stated that we are not at an impasse with the 8 air MaN[AES PALM DESERT PLANUING CXX44ISSION JUNE 21, 1988 college, but the issue of a library is a critical one. If the ultimate location can be determined, the plan can be modified. The city can proceed without the cooperation of the college; when the college is ready, we can revise the plan. C7cmaissioner Richards asked if its cooperation is not required for approximately 60 acres. Mr. Diaz stated that the space requirement needs analysis. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of the proposed. MR. DENNIS G{DECIE, member of the Board of the YMCA, spoke in favor of the project. At the request of the city, we developed a joint services agreement which was sent to City Manager Bruce Altman. The YMCA still awns 2 acres. We are currently working with Carlos Ortega but need to make sure this is taken care of. The actual space requirements of the YMCA and the Coachella Valley are being worked out. The Y would be responsible for the youth program; the Parks and Recreation Commission would have responsibility for the adult programs. MR. JERRY HUNDT, General Director - YMCA of the Desert, spoke in favor of the proposal. For there to be so many plans in existence, this one really functions well. With all of the ,.., parks in one area, it will be easier to control. Commissioner Richards pointed out that he got the 2 acres and acts as if he is going to drive a hard bargain on this. It will be used for day care and recreational facilities. He added that the more concrete the request, the better. The city has drawn the map, and the project is already funded. Commissioner Richards inquired whether Mr. Godecke's project is currently funded. They are going to build Phase I, about 3,000 feet,which will take the Y to approximately 30,000 square feet. MR. DANUM BARNES spoke in favor of the project, pointing out that the Parks and Recreation Commission has been stymied by this plan, which is a good substitute for the original plan. We have set up a committee of your people and those in the community, and we feel that we can move on this as it is right now. It will give the city an excellent recreation area. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak OPPOSITION to the proposed. DR. DAVID GEORGE, of College of the Desert, spoke in opposition to the proposal. He stated in part, "I have been there since 9 mow MIIA= PALM DESERT PLAMIW7 QNMISSION JUKE 21, 1988 January 1986; our trustees met with your council at that time. Both of us laid out plans. We have our issues on their way. There was a very full description of our position in the Haskins & Sells study of the library. Mr. Diaz added that his only concern here is that the college has not seen the latest plan but, on the basis of fair play, there are substantial differences on which the college should have been consulted. Cannissioner Richards further stated, we have tried to get you involved. We did get the involvement; now you say you don't have the opportunity, but you said a month ago trustees met with the council. Mr. Diaz indicated the location of the library and added, "if things are worked out between the three jurisdictions, the plan can be revised. " The study can be presented to mil in July; the location can be worked out with the college and Riverside County, and we can proceed. One of the key issues was re-location of the ball diamond. We tried to take everybody' s sensitivity into consideration. Phil Joy agreed to present the plan to the college. MR. VIC M VILLENEUVE spoke in opposition to the proposal: "My members and I have been concerned about the development here. r.�r "We were aware of the Johnson property. That proposal will go on to include one-story units which was one of the reasons they decided to purchase there. I think perhaps the inclusion of ball diamonds may not constitute the most efficient use of the site. I am not opposed to the new plan. In this area, you are going to be to increasing the flow of traffic on San Pascual. I think relocation of the entrance to the park would be a good idea. We should take a look at some type of traffic control. I think we do need the recreational facility, but the ability to enjoy the view is no less important than the recreational facility. I would also like to convent on what's going to go into the corporate yard, not have dumpsters located there. I don't know whether there is enough space to locate all those ball fields with the lighting facing west. Lighting and noise in the area are really incompatible. The lighting will also provide security for the canvercial area. You can provide drainage by dropping the fields down four feet or so. I don't know whether the timing is right -- this being June and half the people on any street are not in town. I hope this was not deliberate. The city needs the recreational facility but should be sensitive to the needs of the con unity. 10 .ram NIINUIES PALM DESERT PLANNING OC MISSICN XNE 21, 1988 Commissioner Richards stated, "Before lighting gets put there, there must be a change in City Council." As it gets installed, there will be a lot of opposition to it. We want to give them a couple million dollars worth of ball fields, but they are saying, "We don't want them." MR. SANDY BALM inquired as to what the space is just above the tennis courts and added there should be additional tennis courts. Staff clarified that one of the buildings relates to the YMCA and the other will be used by the Recreation and Park District. There should be more parking surrounding the community center. You will have a lot of people going into the com unity center, and I would like to see it more centrally located in relation to the parking. The idea of clustering use would cut dawn on the complaints. &pansion should be laid out so you can see where they are going. Mr. Diaz added, "Everybody wants a park but not in proximity to where he lives." Ideally, we ought to build a park where nobody lives. There should also be a provision wherein the park monitored for a period of six months. In no event should the athletic field be lit after 10:00 p.m. I can appreciate the experience he has had with the golf course lights. �... MR. WILLIAM HQMMEZDIlNGER spoke in opposition to the proposal and expressed concern about Commissioner Richards' comments that he did not want to be in on the planning stage. He added, "I don't like to see the plan moved aside while major ideas are being dumped between Dr. George and the city." Mr. Hemmerdinger added, "I object wholeheartedly to any kind of lighting in this facility because of the quality of life in the comunity." I would like to see some kind of height restriction with regard to architectural design of the library. Commissioner Richards pointed out that the only thing that has been built higher than 33 feet was the Marriott. Any construction has to be 1,000 feet frcm the nearest building. This is a $50,000,000 building going next to you. Mr. Hemmerdinger pointed out that we have an abundance of ball fields. Mr. Diaz added that the parents want their kids to play at night on lit fields. Commissioner Richards clarified that the community's major objection to the ball fields is that they do not belong to them; they will be the property of the school district. Mr. Neumeyer stated that, without lights, the facility is useless. We have four ball fields without lights, which are not used for that 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING CIIM ISSICN Jim 21, 1988 reason. Soccer cannot be played in the winter because it is dark at woo 4:30. If the fields cannot have lights in this facility, we don't need it. It's like building a library without books. Mr. Diaz advised staff to change its recommendation to include the condition that if the fields cannot be lit, they should not be constructed. When we start to develop the parks, the fields will not be built. Canaissioner Richards said, "We are looking at a group which keeps 1100 or 1200 kids off the street."We don't want to spend $50,000 a year to go out and buy another parcel. Mr. Diaz added that we now have the money and the land, so we want to see something very concrete. The nearest ball field should be from 250 to 300 feet from the nearest house. MS. GBORGIA PALIAGRAND spoke in opposition to the proposal: "We not only get the light from the golf course, but from the ball field." We also get the sand from the ball field When you cane around Rutledge, the light does create a safety problem. On the other side of the channel, there is the garbage and another chain link fence. Mr. Diaz clarified that a park will be placed on the city's side of the land. Mr. Duke Catilano added he realizes there have been some problems in discussions with the city about getting the money together.Chairman Erwood added that the swim people would certainly like the money moved to the program. If need be, we could have the lights. The next step in the process is the City Council. The public hearing was declared closed. Commnissioner Downs said he appreciates the tents of the public, and he is sorry Dr. George got upset. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution 1294, approving CUP 87-14 and CZ 88-5, subject to conditions. Carried 4-0. VIII. MISC LT ANBOUS ITEMS A. Case No. PP 88-3 - Phil Harris Fashion Promenade. Discussion of new building elevations. 12 NMgU ES PALM DESERT PLA 0MG COTaSSICN JUNE 21, 1988 Mr. Diaz advised that the architect went back and revised the elevations which were previously more of a modernistic approach. This is just an information item. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, continuing this case to July 5, 1988. Carried 4-0. B. Discussion of hillside home. An oral report will be given. Action: Mr. Diaz recannended that this case be continued until next month. IX. ORAL CCK41MICATICN MR. LARRY (FMUEM, representing the El Paseo Business Association stated that on April 19, he stopped in to give his support. The developer told you he had a problem with item B of Resolution 1285. Our association was asked to support the bill, which we did. We felt we would be sending a message to shoppers that this is the right place to be. The field review r.w was sent back for further review and study. It was later determined that it should be revised until it comes back in Spanish. There was nothing inherently wrong with it, but there was nothing inherently right with it either. It is my position and the position of the association at our board meeting that it does not conform to the strong Spanish architecture of the adjacent building. We have said before that architecture is important, but I am asking you tonight to share their reservation on why a Spanish building is being proposed. Commissioner Richards and Mr. Diaz pointed out that the other building is architecturally appealing and that the applicant has since withdrew his opposition. The problem we have is that everybody thinks the same thing. The merchants changed the first plan so much that it was rejected. We are left with little alternative but to go to the next suggestion. We were left on the side streets on projects in which we have an interest. Mr. Diaz clarified that there was an opening on the architectural commission. A letter is being prepared inviting the E1 Paseo merchants to provide applicants for that position to the City's Architectural Commission. That opening occurred two or three weeks ago. If the commission concurs, the design of the building must be approved by the architectural commission. The fact that you sit on the architectural commission does not necessarily mean that your position will be taken all of the time. The merchants' association cannot agree. It was clarified that the plans must be brought to the council for approval. 13 NII.NUIES PALM DESERT PLANNDG CCMMISSICN JUNE 21, 1988 X. CxMMENI'S None. XI. Moved by Chairman Erwood, Seconded by Cannissioner Dawns, adjourning the meeting. Carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secto ATTEST: j RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman /rlw 14