HomeMy WebLinkAbout0418 _.
A'IIN[TPFS
PAIM DFSF�2T P'LAI�II�TIlJG �T�IISSI�I N�PIl�
, ZUFSi]AY - APRIL 18, 1989
7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CII�I'F�t Q7ClNC1L C�IANBF�t
73-510 FRID WARII� DRIVE
�.►
* �t � * * * * * * * * � * * * * * * * * * �t * * * * *
I. C,�1LL � ORDER
C�airman EYti�od called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PI.IDG� OF ALL�IAIVCE
Carmissioner Whitlock led in the pledge of allegiance.
III. RC7LL CALL
Members Present: Rick Ezr�od, C�airman
Bob Daar�,s (arxived during crnu7cil s�mary)
Jim Richards
Carol Whitlock
M�ribers Absent: None
Staff Present: Ray Diaz Phil Jay
Steve Smith Kandy Allen
Catherine Sass 'Poriya Monr�oe
Gregg Holtz
�rr
IV. �RDS 11I�ID PRESLM'ATI�15
C�airman Er�x�od presented a plaruzing canrLission resolution to Faith
Ladlaw in recogrLition of her service on the carmission.
V. APPROVAL OF MLN[TI'FS:
Consideration for approval the April 4, 1989 meeting minutes.
Action•
Nbved by Corrmissioner WtLitlock, seconded by Cannissioner Richards,
appraving the April 4, 1989 meeting minutes as sul.�nitted. C'.arried 3-
0.
VI. S;[�T�IZY OF Qx]NCIL ACTI�1
Mr. Diaz si.urmarized iterns pertinent to the cc�cnu.ssion fmn the city
council meeting of April 13, 1989.
�rr.
NLIIV[TI�S
P11LM DLSII�P PLIINNII� �T�SISSI�I
11PRIL 18, 1989 •
ur/
VII. Q7IVSFNP Cl1LII�l1R
A. Case No. f�W 89-3 - � COLItIRK, Applicant
Request for appraval of a parcel map waiver to
canbii�e t�•ro lots on the north side of El Paseo,
west of Portola and east of Prickly Pear.
B. Ca.se No. PNb�I 89-5 - OLIP'fIANr, LIZZA & ASSOCIA'PFS, Applicant
Request for appraval of a parcel map waiver to
consolidate four parcels into two located on the
norttiwest corner of Nbnterey Avenue and Arboleda
Avenue.
C. Ca��-�e No. I'Nb�l 89-6 - TiiE VILLAS AT DESERT FALLS, Applicant
Request for appraval of a parcel map waiver to
relocate exi.stir�g property lines to fit e�sting
walls located ttiat the Villas at Desert Falls.
Action:
N9oved by Coi�u�iissioner powns, seconded by CaTmissioner Richards, �
approving ttie cor�,sent calendar by minute motion. Carried 4-0.
VIII. PUBLIC fIFl1RII�
Mr. Diaz infozmed conunission that the applicant for Item C was
requesting a coritinuance to May 2, 1989 and asked if ccrmlission would
consider that item first for people in the audience. Catmission
concurred.
C. Case Nos. C/Z 89-4 and CUP 89-2 - HOPE LUTHERAN (�IIJftCH,
11���lic:anL
Request for approval of a change of zone fran R-1
( resideritial single family ) to P
(ptabl ic/i.c�.stitution) zone and a conditional use
peniLit to allaa the expansion of the present
ctiurch facilities located at the r�rthwest corner
of Portola 1lvenue and Fairway Drive.
Chairmari Er�-�ood op�xied the public testimony and asked if anyone
present wished to speak regarding ttLis case. There was no one.
2 v�
MLNtIPFS
PAIM DESIIZT F`I.ArII1II� ��SSI�1
APRIL 18, 1989 ,
'�' Action•
Moved by Commissioner powns, seoonded by Catmissianer Whitlock,
continuing C/Z 89-4 and CUP 89-2 to May 2, 1989. C��rried 4-0.
A. Ckllt.11ri2� Ca9@ TI05. CjZ $H-g Si](3 PP HH-ZO - Mi12AT.F'_STE INVF:S�I'
Q�., Applicant
Request for approval of a change of zone from R-3
(4) multi-farnily (one unit per 4000 square feet)
to R-3 (one unit per 2500 square feet) for the •
rx�rth side of Alessandro betweexi Deep Canyon Road
and Cabrillo Avenue and a negative declaratio�
and precise plan for a 13 unit one-story
apartment project at the northeast corner of
Alessandro Drive and Santa Ynez Avenue.
Ntr�. Diaz stated that if it was camtission's feeling that the plan
and zoning were rr�t appropriate, staff sh�ould be directed to prepare
a resolution of denial with specific findings for adoption at the
next meeti.ng, to be acccn�anied by a repart to amend the Palma
Village Specific Plan.
Chainnan Erwood o�ened the public testimony and asked if the
`"""' applicant wi5hed to address the carini.ssion. No one came forth.
C�ainnan E.r��od asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVI'�t or
OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public
testimony was closed.
Catmissioner Richards felt the findings to apprave a change of zone
had nQt been satisfied and recarmended denial based an the firu3irx�s
that the single family, one story units were nr�t cat�atible next to
high density units; all parking is in one specific place and would
nQt upgrade the area; and the appearance that the building is too
much and too big a building for this lot.
Action:
Moved by Corrunissioner Richards, seconded by Ccxrmissioner Dawns,
instructing staff to prepare a resolution of deni.al to be adopted at
the May 2, 1989 meeting. Carried 4-0.
B. Case No. ZOA 89-1 - CITY OF Pl�IM DF�IItT, Applicant
Request for appraval of amendments to the sign
3
�
MIIVUI'FS
P11LM Di��r PLl1Y�II�III� �IISSI(�I
JIPRIL 18, 1989 •
�
ordinance, Section 68, as it applies to signs and
awrzings.
Mr. Smith outlined the sal.ient points of the staff report,
delineating the proposed changes to �he sign ordinance. He indicated
that the city council appointed a caTmittee to review the issue of
rieon in great detail--t.Yiey felt that neon was inappropriate on
freestanding signs, but felt it could be done in a reasonably
integrated, arct�itecturally acceptable fashion in either wall signs
and/or in ttie arctiitecture of a building. He stated that there was
also sane discussion whether neon should be allawed at all. Ntr�.
Smith stated ttiat some direction frcm the planni.ng aa�iission was
needed regardicig r�eon signage. fie noted that written responses had
been received regarding the interim awning from the Charnber of
Ca�merce and El Paseo Business Association. N�. Smith stated that
enough iriput on awnirigs had been received and caTmission could refer
the awcling portion to the city council and further the process of
awiiings. Staff r.ecommended a continuance for signs to allow
irit:ereslc��3 groui�s furttler review.
Catinissioner Da•ms r�quested clarification on the letter from Valley
Pltunbing. Mr. Snuth stated that their input had been accepted and ,
section 570 on page 5 had been amended to increase the size frccn 3 �
square feet up to 15 square feet. �
CcRanissioner Richards requested and received exa�mples of signs that
were reviecaed by the cannittee and in the staff report discussion
regarding parapet signs. CaTmissioner Richards stated that he was
irivr�lved i.n writi.Tx� the first sign ordinance. He indicated his
coilceni about tlie colors, noting the change in colors retail is naw
usir�g arid ttieir need to be different and m�re exciting. CamLissioner
Rictiards stated ttiat one of the first probl�ns they originally ran
into was three colors. He wr�ndered if the ca►mi.ssion would be doing
sanethi.ng right in limiting sane of these things. Staff felt that
Canrtis�ioner. Ricl�ards was corzect in the assumption that retail
seemed to w�1t louder aiid brighter signs, b�t it was the feelir�g of
ttie subcaia�uttee ttiat the city had been going to far in acquiescing
to ttiese typi.c�l.ly large, brigtit signs; they wanted to restrain that
by excludi.ix� excessive contrasting cc�lors and setting a limit of
three color types. Mr. Diaz stated that it was the archi�ects
ttien��elves wt�o wailted the three-color limitation and were the ones
who wanted it eliminated in 1982. He felt the wr�rds should be added,
"three colors or stiades of color".
Chairman Eri��oc�d operled the public testimony and asked if anyone
present wisYied to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITIC�I.
4 ,n,/
NIIIV[TI'FS
PAI1�I DESFIZT PI�l1I�II� QM�IISSICN
APRIL 18, 1989 ,
�l�wr
MR. DAN EHRLER, executive vice president of the chamber of
oannerce, felt that it was very inq�ortant for the conmission to �
receive input that the chamber received frcm the board of
direc�ors and two of their ccamittees. He indicated that two
other cam�ents received included, 1) "I perceive this policy to
be reasonably suitable for producing the desired result t.hough
the terms used suggest a highly sub�ective process for
approval"; and 2) "Have no problem with the abave (regardirx� the
interim policy for awr�ngs); would like to see the continued use
of awni_ngs as a theme on E1 Paseo as it cbes give the entire
area a distinctive quality." He stated that the board of
directors was being asked for a position of statement regarding
the interim policy at their full board meeting next Tuesday and
liaison CouncilR�ernber Buford CYites wr�uld be present to provide
interaction. The board had just received the additional sign
revisions and Mr. Ehrler was proposing that a task force be
formed consisting of interested board members, the
business/ecorx�uc carrr�ittee and civic affairs carmittee and the
E1 Paseo Business Association and Tawn Center w�uld be requested
to participate in going through the proposed changes section by
section to allaw for carments and/or revision an each section
and take it to an additional study session with planning
carmission and/or council to have a proc,ess of discussion. He
'�"" stated that he was concerned with the
process that would be used
to allaw interaction and wanted to txy to set up a mechanism to
directly caimunicate concerns and resolve sane differences in
that format prior to city council action. Mr. Ehrler felt the
result would benefit the whQle camnuiity.
Carm.issioner Richards asked about t,��e time frame Mr. Ehrler felt the
creation of this working committee and for completion of
recarmendations. Mr. Ehrler stated that he sent his recam�endations
to the board arid they would be considered next 'I�esday, and if the
board concurred, it would set up a meeting the follawing week to
begin the process; he felt it would take a month. Carmissioner
Richards felt that this could becane an issue of great excitement and
emotion and wanted to see the business catmunity oane back with a
unified stand on all issues that affect them. Carmissioner Richards
stated that he would also like a good job done by both the chamber
and E1 Paseo Business Association.
Corrunissioner Rictiards mentioned ttie issue of the street ntm�ber,
r�ting ttiat several years ago it was suggested that E1 Paseo and
Highway 111 (having a poor way of identifying street rn.mibers) put
scme sort of a sign in the median that on one side said it was the
5
�.
MLMIPES
P71IM DI�E�'P PL,�1N�Tit� (XX`T9ISSI�i
�1F�RIL 18, 1989 ,
r
s
�
�
w/
72-400 block aiid on the opposite side w�uld say it was the 72-300
block to allaw better visibility for the more elderly residents; he
requested that the chamber and El Paseo Business Association consider
that option.
Mr. Ehrler stated that with the process he proposed, m�re of the
excited manents that could occur would be avr�ided.
Nk2. MIKE STANLEY, Imperial Sign Cccnpany, stated that his concern
was not necessarily the restrictions, but enforcement of the
existing code as it stands. He did not feel it was enforced
enough. �ie stated that cutting ckxan the height of a ten foot
sign to six feet for the 40$ reduction, with the height
calculated fran ground level and grade drops c�awn two-three
feet, wr�uld result in a sign three feet high fr�an road grade--he
was askit�g that a sign be reviewed each time before
arctiitectural review or city council. On the issue of three
colors, he stated that one calor was the background aolor and
rx�nnally i.v�ry, and that wr�uld leave only twr� other colors--he .
felt tt�at colors were nonnally restricted by staff or ca�mtssion
and did nat see the need to limit the rn.unber of aolors. He
stated t,Y�at he wr�uld like the opportunity to take this issue to �
the business community and get comments. He agreed that �
restrictions sYiould be placed on the sign j.ndustry, but one that
could be lived with and if �he sign blended too well, no one
would see it.
MR. LARRY GRO'PBECK, El Paseo Business Association Chairman,
stated tllat he just received a copy of the staff report on the
sign ordirlance changes and felt he would have substantial
caianents on ttiose changes. He stated that in regard to the
acanings, he was assuming tYlat the logos would continue to be
unrestricted in size and dimension--he did not see it addressed
in the staff report and if there were restrictions on the size,
placemei�t and color, it w�uld be scmethirxJ else he would like to
review.
N�. Diaz inforn��d him ttiat if i� is not specifically permitted in the
ordinance, it would not be allawed--the only signage allowed on the
awnirlg it�cluding ttie logo would be a m�irrn.un height of eight inches
or one-ttiird the height of the awning.
Mr. Grotbeck stated that they w�uld find that vezy restrictive
a��d burder�rai�e. He stated that he also had a problem with the
�•rordirig "bl.e�id", stating that they were starting to pick up the
color of E1 Paseo and felt that this limitation would be working #
;
6 �
NIIIVUI'F'S
PAIM DFSEE2T PI,ANiJ.LI� �fT'QSSI�1
APRIL 18, 1989 ,
�+ in direct opposition. He stated that they were not bothered
with signs or awnings "shauting and screaming" at them and were
believers in color. He indicated that color regulation was
under the architectural ocmnission purview and they needed the
necessary skills to select fran among colors that may not ble,nd,
that amtrast, but still could be tastefully used with the
architecture and color. He felt that the sign color selection
should be on an individual basis and the end result wr�uld be
better. He also felt that the eight-inch letter size was too
restrictive and stated that some customers are elderly and have
problgn.s seeirig; he encouraged a larger letter size and felt 12
inches w�uld be a compromise. He also indicated that straight-
drop awnings should not be ruled out, but each awning be
considered individually.
Commissianer Richards asked if N�. Grotbec,k wauld have a problem
w�rking in aon�unction with the chamber. N�. Grotbeck stated that he
weuld not have a problem working with the chamber.
Action•
Cannissioner Richards maved for a continuance for two m�nths, to June
20.
Mr. Diaz recarniended the continuance to June 20, but requested that
�""' the interim policy be recarmended for council authorization.
Chairman Er�x�od asked if the city was already pexmitting awni.ngs
without these particular guidelines. Mr. Diaz stated that an interim
policy on awnirigs was being used, but r�t an interim policy for signs
and the use of the inter�n policy would elimisiate any additional nan-
conforming signs.
Cannissior�er Richards did ryot feel that a two-m�nth continuance on
signs was unreasonable--he stated that he would like to see a freeze
, on any new avmings or signs for the ne�t two months. Camtissioner
Richards stated that he would amerid his motion to include a freeze on
approval of any signs or awni.rx�s. He also stated that he wr�uld be
available to the chamber and E1 Paseo Business Association to
participate in their meetings. Ccamissioner Dawns seconded the
rrbtion.
Ms. Allen stated that the council would be the proper body to
authorize a freeze.
Cannissioner Richards stated that he would an�end his motion.
7
�.n
rti r�n�rs
rnrrl �csc�rr rr�ruv�c�c aor�r�l.ssia�rrr
11I'RIL 18, 19£39 ,
�
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Catmissioner DawrLs,
continuing ZOA 89-1 to June 20, 1989. Carried 4-0.
Moved by Conunissioner Richards, seconded by Camussioner poHms,
recannendiiig to city council a twr� mQnth moratorium on signs and
awnings. Carried 3-1 (Carmissioner Whitlock vr�ted r�o).
D. Case Nos. PP 87-2U llmenc�nent and TT 24539 - TRIAD PACIFIC
DEU�APNffI1r Q7RP., Applicant
Request for approval of an amenc�nent from 224
apartri�nts to subdivision into 90 single family
hane lots.
Ms. Sass outliried the salient points of the staff report and
er.pressed concer.n for the norttiern most office par}ting area because
of the invnkx�r of r��titive vetlicular trips throughaut the rest of
tYie par}ciiig lot ai�d determined that the impact on this street of
openir�g up anottier access point w�uld be mQre severe than having the
circulation pattern as it exists on the plan. The applicant had
suggested ttiat the majority of that lot would be assigned employee il
parking and that ox�uld re�rx7ve some of the concern there. She also �
noted changes in caiimuzity developnent condition #25 affecting bike
path placeitient--it w�uld be on Havley Lane and Cook Street only; #27
established the single family lot setback; and added #30 that the
applicant sY�all riot object to a city initiated change of zone to R-1
8,(� ai�d tt�at or�ly one single fa�nily tial�e be built on each lot as a
subdivision. Staff recunnended apprr�val of the project.
Camussioner po�nLs asked on condition #14 if it could be enforced
ttlat only 1974 or later diesel trucks be used for delivery. Chairman
Erwaod noted that the same condi�tion was used on the project at �the
conier of h'btit:erey a��d couc�try c1.ub. Mr. Diaz stated that in that
conditiori it could be added that the a�mer or his successors if found
in violatiori of ttLis condition, shall pay a $200 fine per i.ncident.
Ca��nissioiler WlLitlock asked if the maving of the parking entrance on
Coolc would coincide with the potential Marriott timeshare across the
street. P�is. Sass stated ttiere would be r� median break and access
would be right turn in and right turn out.
Ccalnussioner Richards asked what the approximate density usage on
bott� �BTCE'15 to tt�e east and north were; Ms. Sass replied PR-5 with
buildirig ot�t at five units per acre. Mr. Diaz felt that the Lakes i
8 �
N1IN[TTF�
PAIM DFSIIZT F'L�ArII�1ii� QM�IISSIC�i
APRIL 18, 1989 ,
"" might be 4-5 units. Ms. Sass noted �that this proposal called for 3.6
units per acre. Camiissioner Richards asked what was proposed for
the flood retention basin and Ms. Sass indicated the area wr�uld be
landscaped with grass and trees, but the actual plan had not yet been
sutxnitted. Cannissioner Richards felt that this would be the time to
put some aesthetic considerations on this developer; he felt
sunethirx� nice stx�uld be put in the flood retentian basin alang the
lines of a mini-park. He also stated that an architectural ameizity
should be added to the entrance way, if possible. Cannissioner
Richards asked if there were any restrictions or conditions to make
this a walled carrrnuLity; Ms. Sass stated there was no conditions as
such. Camtissioner Richards asked that staff c�onsider both issues.
He felt some restrictions/amenities should be added to insure
canpatibility with adjacent properties. N�. Diaz stated that public
streets could not be gated or have limited access; Catmissioner
Richards pointed out that they did not have to be public streets.
N�. Diaz stated there would be not problem adding a condition that
the landscape plans for the retention basin be reviewed and appraved
by the planrLing coamission. Catmissioner Richards felt that a gated
crnmunity would benefit eveYyone and enhance the property values and
aid in security. Mr. Diaz stated that it wr�uld be secure frrr�n the
office use by the fencing on the yards and gating on the streets
wr�uld have to be redesigned on Cook to allow for a stackiix� area; he
also suggested a neighborr�ood watch program for sec.-urity purposes.
�.. '
Chairman Erwood �ened the public testimony and asked if the
applicant wished to address the camiission.
NIl�. BILL TAYLOR, Triad representative, distributed phQtographs
to acc�ipany his aam�ents and stated that Ntr�. Diaz received a
letter fran the Lakes Har�eaariers Association (Nh�. Diaz rx�ted
that he had bee.n absent frcm the office twc� days and had not
seen it; Cannissioner Richards stated that half the ccmnission
had not received the letter, noting that he had received a copy
at his house). Cannission requested that Mr. Taylor read the
letter before beginning his carments; he did so. He r�oted that
the concer7�s expressed related to protection of views, privacy,
security and peace and quiet. Mr. Taylor stated that when the
master plan was developed for the Lakes, the zon.ing an this
parcel was PR-9 and that architect established a roadway and �
landscape buffer that resulted in a setback averaging 60 feet
fran the six foot p�ivacy wall to their property line to ensure
an optimum of privacy. He indicated that with the fence,
laridscaping buffer, arid tkie roadway it was felt to be more than
adequate by their design professionals. He felt that an
additional buffer was not required because one already existed.
9
�,.►
MIMlI'F�
PALM DFSL'E2T PI,�1rII1iI� QT'MLSSION
APRIL 18, 1989 ,
�
Referrir�g to photos one and two, he felt the request for
pyracarittia was inappropriate since pyracantha had not been
planted along the carrron wall adjoining Vista del Nbntana and
ttie Carlotta cariplex; he also stated there were m depressions
alor�g their property line, but a planned and deliberate mounding
occurs ttiat restricts their neighbors views. He also stated
tt�at extren�e care was taken to ensure that the earth balances
arid that no costly off-hauling activities by large trucks w�uld
occur to attribute to the vehicular traffic oongestion. He
stated that in ptioto three with the Lakes addition of the golf
course resulted in maunding with a total lack of privacy to the
occupants of lots 18, 19, 20 and 21 of this development. Mr.
Taylor i�ted ttiat #3 of ttleir letter requested that only single
story dwellirigs be allawed within 435 feet of the northern
border of ttie proposed develop�nt; thi.s 435 foot restrictian
for. t�x� st:or.y Yuuxiies when acici��c] to �ie 60 feet frccn the Lakes
l�anes to ttieir fence on the sout�iern border w�uld create a total
distarice of 495 feet. He felt this request was unreasonable,
rx�t.irx3 t}�at code requires 120 feet between a two story hane and
a si.c�gle story resident where R-2 zoning occurs. No two story •
dwellirlg w�uld be constructed within 250 feet of a Lakes hcnie,
in excess of twice the require.rr�nt for R-2 zonirx�. With respect
to the air conditioning camients of item 4 of their letter, he
indicated ttiat their initial row of apartrnents had a total of 36 �
air conditioning systems in close proximity to the Lakes
CCilillUIl1�; however, only 18 hcmes would be within the same
linear distance in 1,462 feet and by c�rparison in that same
parallelir�g distance only 20 yards frc�n the project's property
line, tt�e La}ces collectively shares the noise of 30 units of
ttleir neighbors. Their c�m density resulted in 30 Y�ouses the
same lerigth of road frontage which the pro�ect proposes to
construct 18 homes. He objected to the inference that the
residerrts of the p�posed developnent would be scme type of
second c1�ss citizen; the value of the Yxxnes wc�uld range fran
$17U,U(� to $?_(10,(X)0 each, and the marketi.ng analysis i,ndicates
full-tune residents. He e�nptiasized Triad's carmit.�nent tc7ward a
quality and well-planned developnent.
Cannissioner Richards alluded to his earlier comments regarding
gating to provide a private ca�arnuzi.ty (he noted that the Sage�,n�od
deve].opnecrt ��rould naw like to be gated, but was not possible). He
indicated ttiat gated canrnuzities appear to do better in the marketing
process.
Mr. Taylor stated tt�at the stackir�g distance of cars adding up had to
be addressed; t�e inciicated that 100 foot stacking lane was designed
10 �
NIIN[TI�'S
PAI1�I DFS�T PLAI�II�IIl� QPT�IISSICN
APRIL 18, 1989 .
'""' south of Irontree daHm Cook, plus an additional 50 foot tu�nirx3 lane;
he stated that the loss they would anticipate wauld be a mininn�m of
four lots on the west entzy to the oatq�lex ($250,000). Mr. Taylor
also iru3.icated that sane pum,�zasers view haneawners fees as a blank
check because fees can be raised and his intent was to keep the
ha�aaners costs minunal.
Commissioner Richards sta�ed that because residential would be
allawed next to office professional, he was requesting that the •
applicant reserve four spaces (lots 86-90) to be the last four spaces
sold. He felt that option of gating shr�uld remain open. N�. Taylor
stated that he would present that to their manage.�nent, but could see
no problem. CaTnussioner Richards felt that sanething extra might be
needed to encourage potential buyers to pay $170,000-5200,000 hanes
next to an office professional area. N�. Taylor stated that he would
also look at the east entry frpn Via Cinta to see if reserving lots
would be prudent. Mr. Diaz stated that the only reasai the stacking
distance wc�uld be needed is for people to turn around and would rx�t
be needed at Via Cinta. Mr. Taylor also stated that they planned to
construct a masonry wall arourid the perimeter.
Carm.issioner Richards asked Ntr. Taylor if he had any problem with the
flood retention basin being more in the fonn of a mini-park. N�.
Taylor explained that their landscape concept for the total oomplex
`r`r on the ccnmercial would cost approxi.mately $250,000; he stated they
would be going with the drought-type planting, but to retain water
frcm drainuig into the streets a considerable depression would be
necessary and a mini-park develognent could present some serious
maintenance problems. Mr. Taylor stated that the buffer behind the
residences, in an effort to relieve ha�eowners of making a monthly
association payment, w�uld be asking staff and carmission to allaw
them to coIivey ttlose retention sites and buffer areas into the
commercial tract so that the landscapers for the commercial
develognent would maintain them. Ca�missioner Richard_s urged N�.
Taylor to allaw for the possibility that when the tx��e sites were
sold out, the applicant have a flexi.ble design so that hr.x�ieawners
would have the opportunity to turn that flood retention into a mini
park and potential hanec�mers should be infornied of that possibility
when they purchase.
Ccmnissioner Richards stated tliat he would like to see an alternative
plan for gating drawn up and an alternative plan for the entrance to
be a Ru ni-park, whether it be a gate in the wall or sanething else as
an option for tiai►eaUmers. Ntr. Taylor stated that the carments were
well taken and stated tt�at he felt they wr�uld probably be acted upon
by their cairpany. Mr. Taylor stated that in regard to the R-1 zonirx�
11
�..
MIN[TI'E�
PI1LM DL•�SE�2T PL�11I�1N.LNG �ISSION
11PRIL 18, 1989 ,
�
recanmended by staff, only eight to ten Yx�mes would be twr� story (10$
to 15°s maximi,un). Ms. Sass explained that the purpose of changing the
zone to R-1 was ru�t to limit the number of two story units, but to
resolve potential problems subdivision wr�uld create at a PR-9 zoning
and limiting one hcme per acre. Mr. Taylor stated that they would
have no proble�n with staff placirig any special rAr�d.itions an this
particular request for amenc�nent.
Mr. Diaz stated that it was the city's intention that whichever goes
first, t.��e office or ttie single family, that all the improvements on
Cook Street and Hovley Lane be installed. N�. Taylor agreed. Ms.
Sass stated ttiat the setback for an 8,000 square foot lot wr�uld be a
15 foot rear yard, 20 foot front yard, and a ocn�bined 14 feet on the
sides, miriilmam 5 per aode. Mr. Taylor agreed.
Ct�airmar� Er�rood as)ced if anlrone present wished to speak in FAVC�t or
OPI�ITi(�1 to tt�e project.
t�IIt. MIC7t11�I, S'I'OCK��URST, 316 Ruruzing Springs and president of the
Lakes Couirt;ry Club Association, stated that his main concern was
security, noting that he had been burglarized twice. He stated
that gatirig was discussed with Mr. Taylor, who told th�n it
would take twr� lots to accanplish this, but he felt they were
the npst uc�desirable lots. He s�ated that they were askiuzg for .�1►
conditioi�s that w�uld ensure security.
I�t. ID E`I'��EL, a director at the Lakes, reminded cannission that
in tt�e past the applicant's primary goal was for office
professi.�tial zoning and a proper buffer between that and
existir�g developiierits ori ttie north acid east was a 100 foot
landscaped buffer area previously appraved and the nearest twr�
story builcling was to be 435 feet north; height for single story
was 15 feet and 25 feet for two story, wall height to be raised
tcaa feet �u�d a depressed zone in the buffer area so the actual
height fran t�tie Triad side would be ten feet. He felt that this
st�ould izot be igiiored. He also felt that if a small landscaped
azea arzd a roadway, plus the 20 foot setback to the front of
tlouses o,rould accanplish a security area, planting area, renrve
ttie noise of patio parties fram the inmediate wall and retain
tlie vie��as. He also requested view corridors by placing
restriction of two story buildings within a reasonable distance
depending on the architecture. He stated that they would prefer
a gated camnuiity and w�uld be willing to wr�rk with Triad.
MS. KI`ITY r1cC�0Y WINESTEIN, Rw�ning Springs Drive, stated that
st�e was in favor of the 100 foot buffer zone and felt that they
12
�
NiIIV�JPFS
PAIM DESERT F'LArIIVII� Q�MISSIQ�1
�.u. 18, 1989 ,
'� wc�uldn't have the same peace and quiet as before. She felt the
proposal was not acceptable, especially developea right against
the wall. She also stated that she wr�uld like a landscaped area
along the wall to help preserve the noise level to which they
have ber�ie accustaned.
C�airn�ri E.Yti�od closed the public testimony.
CcRmissioner Richards noted that at previous meetings the sheriff's
departmeazt indicated that the best means of security were neighbors.
He said his concerns were for possible gatirig and a mini-park should
be added as a condition.
Chairman �Y��od disagreed with gating the ccRmunity and did not see a
need for more gated canrn�nities. He felt nice rxm-gated catmunities
should be available. The buffer area next to the wall he perceived
as being more of a security risk than having a house there; saneone's
private yard would have to be gone through then aver the wall to get
into the Lakes Country Club and with a buffer zane no one w�uld be
watching. He r�oted that there was a condition relating to security
alarnis. Ms. Sass stated that condition had slipned through frcm the
previous proposal when it was apartrnents. Mr. Taylor rr�ted that the
hanes w�uld be wired for alaxms, but it wr�uld be optional. C�airn�ari
�ti�od r�oted that #26 wr�uld be deleted.
irr.
Cannissioner Dawns felt cond.ition #29 should be amP.nded to read that
a tw�-story mix of rx�t m�re than 15 percent and at least 435 feet
away fran tY�e Lakes be required, which w�uld allaw for a line of
sight. Mr. Taylor stated that a minim�un of 200 feet, which would
mean 250 feet frcm the nearest Lakes hr.xne was what they had planned.
Cannissioner Daans stated that all da�ni the center could allaw for
that amenc�nent; a double line at the top with the rest at 300 feet
with t.�ie lots 100 feet to 128 feet deep, plus at Caok Street it would
be at least 300 feet away; putting all the twr� story da�nz behind the
industrial. Cannissioner R.ichards stated that the applicant would
not agree to 400 feet; Caimissioner DaNm stated that he wr�ulchi't
stick to 400 but stated that there shouldn't by any two story
development witt�i.n the double raw. Ms. Sass stated that tY�se lots
along the Lakes were lots 1-20, 30-38, and 86-90 and would be
conditioned as one story. Carmissioner R.ichar�d.s clarified that there '
would be one story buildings, a street, and another one story
building between the proposal and the adjacent property c�mers of the
Lakes. Mr. Taylor concurred with that.
Carmissioner Richards stated that his interest in a gated carrrn�nity
steinned f�xn t�is concern for the safety of the children in the area,
13
�
MIIV[lI'FS
P11LM DLSF�T PL�NI�TTII� QNMLSSION
APRIL 18, 1989 .
�
<
�
�
noting tYie amount and speed of traffic. He requested conditions for
an alternate plan be designed into the current engineering to allaw
for gating, and taking the flood retention basin and m�kjrx3 it
accessible to ttie txxneawners if they wish to make it into a mini.-park
that tZiey vrould maintain. Cannissioner Richards stated that with
those conditions, he would mave for approval.
Mr. Diaz felt tt�at a tw�-week continuance would be in order to allaw
for staff to ari�end the resolution to write the exact wardirig of the
conditions and allaw the Lakes residents to review the ordinance.
CamLission concurred and C�airman EYti�od opened the public hearing
and asked for a motion.
Action:
Moved by Cottunissioner Richards, secanded by Cannissioner Dawns,
continuing PP 87-20 Amenchnent and TT 24539 to May 2, 1989. Carried
4-0.
E. C���e No. PP 89-4 - O�PIi11 III, LTD., l�pplicant �
Request for approval of a precise plan of design
to develop an 11 unit aparbrient pro�ect on a '�
parcel boLu�ded by El Camino, Sunset lane and
Abronia Trail.
Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the staff report and
recaimended approval.
CamLissioner Wh.itlock requested a reason for the use of flat roofs.
Ms. Sass deferred the answer to the project architect.
C�airn�3n Er_woa� opened the public testimony and asked the applicant
t:o ac3dre�s tiie caimissiori.
MR. STEVE SULLIVAN, architect, informed caimission that the
changes made to ttie pxnj ect were because of ecor�xnics.
Camussioner WiLitlock asked Mr. Sullivan about the use of flat roofs
aver a long-rarige period and the maintenance required for upkeep.
Mr. Sullivan stated that the water wr�uld be distributed through roof
drains and did not see a potential problem except for regular
maintenance. Camu.ssioner Whitlock also asked about tile roofs. N�.
Sullivan stated tx�at it would be ecoriaiu.cally impossible for the
applicarit to use tile.
i
14 �j
NIIIV[JI�S
PALM DFSIIZT F'L�ArII�TII� CSNMISSIQ�i
APRIL 18, 1989 .
`.r
Commissioner Richards felt that the previausly appraved 17 units
wr�uld not have been appropriate and compl�melzted the architect on the
appearance of his plans and felt with the open space it w�uld be a
nice looking builduzg.
Chairman Ertin�od rx�ted that the buildisig caverage was only 25.8$.
Chairman Ez�n�od asked if any�ne present wished to speak in FAVOIt or
OPP06ITION to the proposal. There being no ane, the public testimony ,
was closed.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by CaRmissioner Richards,
adoptjng the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0.
Moved by Coirunissioner powns, seconded by Cannissioner Richards,
adopting Plaruzing Camussion Resolution No. 1347, appraving PP 89-4,
subject to conditions. Carried 4-0.
F. Ca�e Nos. PP 89-6 and CjZ 89-6 - UAVE N�,NOOE�AN, Applicant
Request for appraval of a zone change frcm R-3
and R-2 to 0.P. , a 43,000 square foot, twr�-story
r office building and negative declaration of
environmental impact, north of Alessandro between
San Pascual and San Juan.
(�airman Ez��od called for a five minute recess at this point to allaw for
drawings to be displayed. The time was 9:38 p.m. C�iairmari ��x�od called the
meeting to order at 9:43 p.m.
Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the staff report. Staff
recannerided approval of the proj ect.
Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the
applicant wished to address the carmission.
Nff2. BERN�tD LEUNG, architect, stated that their intent was to
create a residen.tial type of architectural gramnar and described
haw the design w�uld achieve that effect. N�. Leung stated that
the architectural ccRmission felt that the building was too
mor�otonous arid wanted the building pulled back and forth. He
explained ttie architectural detail sr�awn on the displayed plan
that would alleviate that concern. He also rx�ted that the
15
i.r.
MINl1I'FS
I'11I.M ULSI3rP I'Ld1MVII� C��NLLSSiCJN
1\PRIL 18, 1989 ,
S
�
�
m�iirnun amount of landscaping to the R-1 was given, with sane
areas 30 feet deep on the R-1 side.
C�iairman Ertiaood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAWEt or
OPPOSITI(Rd to the project. There being no one, the public testimony
was closed.
Commissioner WYiitlock felt the appearance from Alessandro was
pleasant and liked the architectural style, but expressed
disappointrnent that no residents behind the proposed parking were in
atteridance to speak.
MR. DAVE M11�KIAN, awner of tiie property, stated that he passed
out letters to the ad�acent property c�mers to al law them ta
cane into their office and look at the plans; only one gentl�nan
did so.
MFt. LE[ING stated that the gentlernan came into the office and
la�l{ed at the drawiiigs and elevations and liked them.
Ccnmissioner Richards stated that he did rx�t envision any�ne taking
five lots and CC[11YJ1L]lIK� them. He did not see this in the office
professional ar�d felt it was too big and too imposing on Alessandro.
Fie said the problem was r�ot thi.s pax-ticular building, but a building i■ri
that big and lo��g was r�t appropriate. He did not feel this was the
right kind of buffer the office professional use was intended to be.
Mr. Joy sta�ed tllat one point brought out at the architectural
CCtTiillSSlOi1 il1C,'E3tlIlC� was that the front elevation wr�uld not actually be
seezi fran �iy point because Alessandro was such a narrrxa street and
it wc�uld not be seen from Highway 111 because of blockage by
buildicigs.
C�airman En•,ro�d agreed with Camtissioner Richards and felt that the
narra,�iess of ttie street would magnify the largeness of the building,
creating a tw�nel effect.
Mr. Jay clarified for carmission tt�at Alessandro was 40 feet and the
specific plan proposal was to narrr�w the road. He stated that this
project was not proposing any narrawing of the street.
C�airmail Erc',�ood stated that during recent discussions of the office
professional zone, commission discussed not allowing lot
corLsolidations k�ecause large buildings violated the intent of the
use.
i
�
16 �
NiINtTPFS
PAI1�i DFS�2T F'I,�1I�II�II� Q1`T'iISSI�1
11PRIL 18, 1989 ,
w► Camussioner Richards did rwt feel this project met the intent of the
office professional zoning. He indicated that the 2.2 acres with
43,000 square feet of office space on a 30 foot wide str�eet was too
much. He noted that it was a pravisian of the zane that aarmission
could approved it, but felt this project was too much an Alessar�dro.
N�. Diaz reminded carmission of the extensive hearings on the Palma
Village plan that had taken place and wi�th the redevelopnent agency
to i�rove these type of areas through con._�olidation of lots. Mr.
Diaz stated that if large office buildirx�s were not wanted, but
possibly 5,000 square foot single stozy office bui.ldirxJs, then scme
re-evaluation of that Palma Village plan shauld be oon.sidered; he
felt this ty�e of office building and upgrade was what was needed for
this area. Canaussioner Richard.s felt that applied to Nbnterey and
FYed Waring, but not Alessandro because this would be a major
imposition and Alessandro w�uld rx�� be able to handle the additional
traffic.
Cannissioner Dawrls stated that traffic would be directed c7a�m San
Pascual and San Juan frcm their driveway and would encroach further
into the residential area. Mr. Diaz stated that people w�uld cane
out to Alessandro because they wr�uld r�t have any reason to go
thr�ough the residential area. Cannissioner poFnLs stated that if the
parking lot entrance were on thase two streets, they would be caning
fr�cm Fred Waring and going ck7wn those streets to park; he felt too
""' much traffic wr�uld be directed da�m those residential streets.
MR. LEUNG informed the commission that he served on the
architectural review ca�Lission for ten years and has been
practicing architecture here for 18 years and understood haw the
city grew and the thinking inwlved and indicated that he was
rx�t a navice. He felt that the nature of the area needed to be
understood and haw ttx�se pieces of property became that way and
carmission should asked themselves why these five parcels stood
the last 30 years un.sold and undeveloped. He stated that the
cam�ercial area on the south side of Alessandro started to cane
into the residential area and their backs face Alessandro, so
Alessandro had to wait almost 25 years before something
happened. Ttie five lots there w�uld never beoane R-1 and it
would be very difficult to build an R-1 on that third lot dawn.
Every piece of property had its awn uniqueness that had to be
considered. If the project gets revised/cut ckx�m, he wr�ndered �
what would be done with the fifth lot if camtission determines
that only four lots could be combined. He fel� their project
created sanething realistic and was well landscaped. He felt
this was probably the only way to create the needed buffer. He
stated tt�a� Alessandro was a short street that d�urtps traffic off
17
rr.
MIN[TI'L•S
�'ACM DFSEE�P PIJII�INII� QI�T'iISSION
11PItIL 18, 1989 ,
�
San Pablo and Deep Canyon, so it was nr�t heavily trafficked.
The only traffic going there would be to service the proposed
building.
Cc�nmissioner Ric2�zrds stated that everything N�. Leurig said was true
and if the project were one story he w�uld be in fawr, but 43,Q00
square feet on tw� acres of land on a 30 foot proposed road was too
rrtuch ar�d that was the basis of his recortmendation that a resolution
of denial be prepared. He felt the project as proposed w�uld have a
detrimental effect on the neighbortyood.
Action:
Moved by Co��unissioner Richards, seconded by Ccamissioner DawiLs,
instructing s�aff to prepare a resolution of deni.al. Carried 4-0.
G. Case Nos. PP 89-7 aryd ADJ 89-2 - J�S L1�I�IDQ1, Applicant
Request for approval of a four unit, sjngle story
residential ca�lex located on the south side of
Shadow Nbuntain Drive, 400 feet west of Portola.
Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the staff report and
recum�ended approval. �
Cannissioner Richards asked for and received clarification on the
design of the garages.
C7zairnlan Erwood o ep i ed the public testimony and asked the applicant
to address ttie oatinission.
MR. C�iARLES MARTIN, 40-840 Thunderbird Road in Rancho Mirage,
described the project and the architectural style.
C7iainnaii Ervxxxi �sked if ariyone present wished to speak in F1�W12 or
OPI'CJ6ITi�1 to the proposed. Ttiere being no one, the public testim�ny
was closed.
Actiori:
Moved by Con�n�issioner Whitloc}c, seconded by Catmissioner Dc�nLs,
adopting ttle findings as presented by staff. Cazried 4-0.
Moved by Conunissioner powns, seconded by Calmi.ssioner Whitlock,
adoptir�g Planni.ng Camu.ssion Resolution No. 1348, approving PP 89-?
and �1DJ 89-2, subject to conditions. Carried 4-Q.
18 �
NIIIV[TI'FS
P11IM DFSF�T PLANNII� QM��IISSI�I
APRIL 18, 1989 .
�
H. Ca_9e No. TT 24486 - KFN-M�R II�PIItPRISFS, Applicant
Request for approval of an eight lot single
family subdivision located r�orth of FYed Waring
Drive, 350 feet east of Phyllis Jack.son Lane.
Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the staff report and .
re�ded appraval.
Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the
applicant wished to address the camLission.
NIEt. F�I STII�IDELL, representirig F�1-Nf�R, felt this was a good
pr�ject and asked for any questions.
C�ainnan Erwaod asked if anyune present wished to speak in FAV�t or
OPP06ITI�1 to the proposed. There being r� ane, the public testimr�Yy
was closed.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Ca►inissioner powns,
acbpting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0.
�"'� Moved by Commissioner Richards, seaonded by Cannissioner powns,
adopting Plaruzing G.x�mission Resolution No. 1349, approving TT 24486,
subject to conditions. Carried 4-0.
7X. NII
A. Ca_9e No. CUP 89-4 - FRm FF�tN, Applicant
Request for conditions of appro�val clarificati�.
N�. Diaz noted the changes that had bee,n made to the plan and that
with the parking provided ar�d reduction of the buildux� in the rear,
it met what he felt was the cannissian's intent for the p%ject to
oanply with c.ode require�nents. CamLission concurred.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Richards, secorided by Ccx�missioner DaFms,
appraving by minute �tion the developr�nt's changes and clarifying
that their intent was for the building to comply with code
requiremerlts.
19
w
MIN[TI'ES
P11LI�1 DP�EErP PLd1NNI.I� �NMISSI�I
11PRIL 1$, 1989 ,
�
X. ORl1L �Jr]ICIITIONS
l�ne.
XI. QTT9II11'S
A. Carmissioner Richards requested the status of the aerial ph�oto
study relative to grading and infill on the High�way 74jMesa View
development. Mr. Holtz indicated. that the study was in pror,ess
with no time certain for canpletion. Corrmissioner Richards
instn.icted staff that he wr�uld like the jnformation at the next
meeting; he also noted that dirt was being piled on a lot 15' to
20' high, where the church was going in at the old canrnuiity
ceiiter s.i te. Fle questioned the legality of that being dr�ne.
B. Mr. Diaz noted saneone was requesting tennis court lighting on
Mesa View and noted the conditions staff was proposing.
Catmission ciirected staff to bring this proposal before them
because of the sensitivity to lighting in that area.
xiz. � r .r
Moved by Conunissioner Richards, seconded by Ca��issioner Dawns,
adjourning the meeting to May 2, 1989. Carried 4-0. The eting was
adjourned at 10:33 p.m.
,✓ .
�
RAMON A. DIAZ, Secret
A'IT'.
�..-��� .
RI ERWaOD, C7iairman
/�
r
20 �