Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0705 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNIM OCt44ISSION MEETING WMNESDAY - JULY 5, 1989 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CErIITH. ODUNC IL CHANGER 73-510 F M) WARLUG DRIVE I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Erwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Cbnudssioner Dawns led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL hers Present: Rick Erwood, Chairman Bob Downs Sabby Jonathan Jim Richards Carol Whitlock Members Absent: None Staff Present: Ray Diaz Kandy Allen Joe Gaugush ftm Phil Drell Steve Smith Catherine Sass Tonya Monroe IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the minutes for the meeting of June 6 and 20, 1989. Action: Moved by Ocnudssioner Whitlock, seconded by Camnissioner Richards, approving the June 6, 1989 meeting minutes as submitted. Carried 5- 0. Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Ccnrnissioner Dawns, approving the June 20, 1989 meeting minutes as submitted. Carried 4- 0-1 (Chairman Erwood abstained). V. SUt44%RY OF ODUNCIL ACTION Mr. Diaz informed ccnnission no council meeting had taken place since the last planning commission meeting. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING, CCW[SSICN JULY 5, 1989 VI. OCIVSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. VAR 87-1 - RALPH SAMOPIEM, Applicant Request for a time extension of one year 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 Downs, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, approving the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 5-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARINIM A. Cbntimied Case No. ZOA 89-1 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of amendments to the sign ordinance, Section 68, as it applies to signs and awnings. Mr. Diaz explained that a continuance to August 1 was being requested to allow the city attorney and chamber to review the final reports. ri Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak regarding ZOA 89-1. There was no one. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Cnudssioner Dowels, continuing ZOA 89-1 to August 1, 1989. Carried 5-0. B. Oontirxied Case No. CUP 89-3 - CABLE & RYLEE, Applicant Request for approval to construct a 13 unit senior apartment project and on the southeast corner of Catalina Way and San Carlos. Ms. Sass explained that staff was recommending that the building be relocated and moved forward six feet. She noted that the building would be only one story structures and recommended approval. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the connission. 2 NIINLYIES PALM DESERT PLAMII, OOKUSSICN JULY 5, 1989 r.+ MR. WENDELL RYLEE concurred with the staff report and was present to answer any questions. Chairman Fxwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed project. MS. MAGGIE LEON, Director of the Joslyn Cove Senior Center, informed ocmmission that there was a need for senior housing and was in favor of this project. Chairman Ezwood closed the public testimony and asked for ccmrents by the ccnmission. Commission voiced approval of the project, including the buildings being moved forward six feet. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Downs, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1361, recommending approval of CUP 89-3 and the development agreement to city council. Carried 5-0. C. Continued Case No. TT 24632 - LUNDIN DEVELOPMENP CO., Applicant Request for approval of a tentative tract map subdividing 77.8 gross acres into 169 single family lots and 2 additional lots set aside for 220 future apartment units at the southwest corner of Portola Avenue and Country Club Drive. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report and informed ccnvdssion that a letter had been received from the Silver Sands Hcneowners Association Board of Directors delineating a list of conditions. Staff recannended approval of the project as revised, subject to the added conditions from the July 5 meeting and conditions 1, 2 and 4 of the Silver Sands letter dated June 27. Mr. Gaugush addressed odidition 3 and indicated that the director of public works' opinion was that construction of a median island in Portola was not a necessary improvement to this development, but understood the homeowners association's concerns for Portola traffic safety but the median was not the answer. The northern most entry 3 I�LIIV[TI� PALM DESERT PLANNDIG 00MUSSIQN JULY 5, 1989 point closest to Country Club Drive probably provided the most conflict and controlled access would be implemented there; Mr. Gaugush also indicated that the southerly entry point could be left as full access. Commissioner Richards asked if the apartments were located on Country Club as originally proposed. Staff replied yes, and indicated that under the current PR-5 zone two story single family hones could be permitted. Mr. Diaz indicated that if the applicant wishes two stony units and they were not identified at this time, they would have to cane back for approval. He felt the applicant might wish two story development next to San Tropez. Commissioner Richards expressed concern that apartments should be next to other apartments to allow high density next to high density. he was also concerned that the east side of San Tropez where the cars and parking lot would be would have insufficient setbacks and too much noise to be adjacent to single family hones. Chairman Erwood owned the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the comu.ssion. MR. HURB LUNDIN, applicant, stated they had met with representatives from the projects located across the street, including Silver Sands at the study session. In addition, Mr. Gleason and the applicant had filed an agreement that reflected their concerns. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of the proposed development. MR. GLEASON, Silver Sands Hccmeowners Association, thanked the camussion for the workshop to allow resolution of concerns. He distributed a handout to modify the conditions of their earlier letter that 1) As part of the development's first phase the streetscape work plan along Portola, including the wall, landscaping and sidewalk except undergrounding of overhead power lines, will be completed. Developer agrees to join an assessment district, aid in financing future undergrounding of power lines at Portola and phase 6 entrance will be walled off until phase 6 is developed; 2) The wall design will be similar in height and appearance as design illustrated on elevations dated June 20 and attached hereto; 3) Turning movements from the two Portola entrances will be unrestricted except for egress 4 MI21JTES PAIM DESERT PI AMDG CICNMISSICN JULY 5, 1989 ... from the phase 6 entrance to be evaluated based on results of a traffic study to be completed and approved by the city before construction of phase 6. Developer will provide a raised median strip on Portola frontage to reduce conflict with turning movements and through traffic in keeping with city standards and criteria; 4) Excluding covered parking structures, there will be no phase 6 one story buildings within 128' and no two story buildings within 300' of the west Portola curb; 5) All developments within phase 6 will conform to Portola sight lines, exhibit attached hereto and distributed on June 20. Upon questioning by commission, Mr. Smith stated that he had not seen these new conditions. Commissioner Richards noted that the document between the developer and the homeowners association would have no effect on the decision of the planning commission. Chairman Erwood concurred and stated that the city could not be bound by the agreement between the developer and homeowners. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVM or OPPQSITICN to the proposal. There was no one and Chairman Erwood. r..r Commissioner Whitlock requested information from Mr. Lundin on the two story issue. Mr. Lundin indicated that he had not designated if there would be two story and where that would be located. He felt that if two story was developed in the single family development, it would be in the interior and no more than 20-30% of the project. Commission and staff discussed use and location of possibly two story units, access, setbacks, sidewalk widths and bike lanes. Cbmimission clarified that public works condition no. 6 should have specific language stating exactly what was being required. Commissioner Richards felt that doubling the amount of sidewalk from a requirement of six feet to 12 feet should be discussed and if it was determined to be a good idea, it should be done everywhere, not just with this specific project. Mr. Diaz stated that Mr. Lundin could appeal or litigate the condition if he was opposed. Mr. Lundin addressed the commission on the two story and said he was willing as a condition of approval to limit two story components to 20% and the limit of 300' separation from the southerly boundary (Casablanca). Commissioner Richards stated that he did not like the location of the apartment and made a motion to eliminate two story use in the single 5 MINUTES PRIM DESERT PLANNDU CXXIT4ISSICN JMY 5, 1989 family development and he made a motion to dilute the 12' meandering sidewalk/bikepath as a mandatory condition. He stated that if staff could not cane up with specific language at the meeting, the sidewalk condition should be specified as eight feet. He felt that if staff was going to request sidewalk widths of 12 feet, it should be so adopted by planning commission and council. He asked the applicant if cannission and council were require 12 feet within a year, if he would agree to that. Mr. Lundin replied yes. Comtissioner Richards stated that he felt two story single story development was not appropriate because of insufficient buffer of a 19 unit density next to five. Both motions died for lack of a second. Commissioner Jonathan stated that Commissioner Richard's points regarding the two story units were well taken, but felt there was a demand for two story single family developments. He moved to make a substitute motion with the 300' setback from Casablanca and limitation of 20% two story and clarified that standard setbacks within the interior would apply. Commissioner Richards asked what two story standard setbacks were and Mr. Smith stated that setbacks for 20g two story units would congregate on the west end of the property, and staff suggested addition of condition no. 10 that setbacks on two story units be front yard 20 feet, rear yard 20 feet, side yards a total of 20 feet and minim ml of 8 feet, which would allow 16 feet between structures and in most cases 20 feet between buildings. Commissioner Jonathan amended his motion to include the 300 feet between Casablanca, 20%- maximum and a minim= of 10 feet between structure and front and rear as indicated by staff. Commissioner Richards noted that the city did not have a setback policy for two story residential units. He felt the setbacks should not be made on the spur of the moment. Mr. Diaz suggested a postponement on the two story units and when applicant decided if he would develop them, he could cane back and staff would have a list of single story developments that have been allowed two story units. Commissioner Jonathan amended his motion to delete the two story single family residences. Mr. Smith reoaimended that condition no. 10 be added that no two story development be allowed without prior approval by the planning camdssion. It was moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to approve the findings as determined. Notion carried 5-0. 6 .nrl M324 TICS PALM DESERT P.LANNDU COMMISSION JULY 5, 1989 It was moved by Camtissioner Downs, seconded by Ccamissic er Richards to adopt Planning Ccnmission Resolution No. 1362. Before the vote was taken Mr. Diaz asked the resolution was to include the conditions requested by the hotxxxnZers association. Mr. Smith stated that he had no problems with them, but would like the wording "phase 6" to be changed to "lot 7" to avoid future confusion if the phasing were to change. i Commissioner Richards stated that they would have to be incorporated as a condition that says developer agrees to the condition on the document that is signed and added to the conditions. Chairman Erwood stated that each item deemed to be appropriate could be incorporated by reference. Camtissioner Richards noted that it would be binding to the city on anything referring to public works. He felt the city attorney should review it. Mr. Diaz suggested that the matter be continued to later in the meeting to allow staff to ward conditions so they could be added to the resolution. Ccmmission concurred. D. Gbntimied Case Nos. PP 89-13 and VAR 89-2 - O. MICHAEL La44E, Applicant ,r Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact, a precise plan and setback variance for a 2650 square foot single story office building on a 7280 square foot lot on the east side of Monterey Avenue, 400 feet south of Fred Waring Drive. Mr. Smith 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 oommission. MR. MICHAEL HCMME, 277 Santa Barbara Circle, stated that he was present to answer any questions. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITICN to the proposal. There was no one and Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Commissioner Richards asked staff to review the office professional standards and setbacks for this project; Mr. Smith did so. 7 M]a TPES PALM DESERT PLANNIM CXr44ISSION JULY 5, 1989 Commissioner Richards asked about the height of the proposed building; Mr. Smith replied 14 feet. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Jonathan abstained). Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning CcRmission Resolution No. 1363, approving PP 89- 13, VAR 89-2 and associated street vacation, subject to conditions. Carried 4-0-1 (Comu ssioner Jonathan abstained). E. Case No. TT 24530 - BARON'S FIlW4CIAL, GROUP, Applicant Request for approval of a tentative tract map subdividing 90 acres of PR-5 zoned land located south and west of Frank Sinatra and Cook Streets into 277 single family lots having minimum lot sizes of 10,000 square feet and minimum widths of 80 feet. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report. He stated the applicant was requesting 30% two story development and the conditions would reflect that and delineate specific lots. He indicated that condition no. 5 should be deleted and replaced with wording that minimum setbacks for lots with single story dwellings be front yard 20 feet, rear 20 feet, and sides totally 15 feet, minimum 7 feet. He added condition no. 9 that minimum. setbacks for two story development be front 20 feet, rear 20 feet, and sides 20 feet total, minimum 8 feet and condition no. 10 that maximum coverage limit shall be 30% of lot area except for lots having lot area of 10,200 square feet or less which shall have maximum coverage limit of 35%. With those changes staff recommended approval. Commissioner Richards made note of the fact that the density would be ` 3.07, the road narrows from widths of 50-60' to 30' , would eliminate sidewalks, adds two stories, provides no parks and no obvious amenities. He indicated is objection with two story development had to do with single family development being more appealing aesthetically. % Commissioner Jonathan shared most of Commissioner Richards concerns but felt two story should be allowed with detrimental aspects mitigated. He expressed concern regarding the sameness of all the MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNIM COMISSIM JMY 5, 1989 `' units, the side setbacks, and streets should be wider with sidewalks. He felt greenbelts or scenic parks would be attractive. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the ccmnission. MR. TCM LAGIER, office manager for Charles Haver and Associates, pointed out that the streets were a minimum of 36 feet and the main street through the project would be 42 feet. The retention area in the center of the project would be improved as a green area for baseball, etc., but not accepted as a park but as usable space. He indicated 10,000 square feet would be the minism lot size and the large lots were designed to have their own swimming pools. He stated that the two story hones would be a minimum of 200 feet from the property boundary. Mr. Lagier informed commission that Richard Krotz was the owner and he was present to answer any questions. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR of the project. MR. RICHARD KRCYrZ emphasized that they were building to the market and there was a high demand for two story units. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in OPPOSITION to the proposal. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Richards stated that he was opposed to two stories. Chairman Erwood agreed with Comnissioner Jonathan that there might be a market and if kept within the interior of the development and did not impact property outside this development, his concern was lessened. Ccn nissioner Richards indicated that he did not want to set a precedent. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he would like to find a way to satisfy his concerns with a uniform ruling on two story setbacks or by this action, set a precedent for future development. He felt the project perimeter setback minimum should be considered, a set maxinnun of percentage and appropriate setback from other properties should be determined. He felt that 20 feet was not much between two story structures and expressed 6oncern regarding privacy. Commissioner Richards indicated that this was a political issue that and council should give some direction. He stated that this development would provide single family development which the 9 it M NLTfES PALM DESERT PLANNIM OC[41ISSICN JULY 5, 1989 ccnvun.ity wants, and he would go along with the plot map as it was providing staff work out details of what would be done with the retention/parkway area. Camussicner Whitlock also noted that this development was within the north sphere and would like some direction from council on two story development. Chairman Erwood noted there was the option of deleting the condition permitting two story development and if the developer wanted to appeal, it would go to council. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he was opposed unless his other concerns were addressed and felt the project was too congested, more green areas were needed, and more of a break up in the row of houses should be incorporated into the design. Mr. Krotz stated that time was of the essence, understood the two story housing concerns, the talk about sidewalks and design was disturbing because he had done three major redesigns already; he suggested no sidewalks or possibly having a sidewalk on one side. Mr. Diaz noted that private streets in the past did not sidewalks. Mr. Gaugush clarified that there were no standards for private street development, but that public sidewalks were six feet. Commissioner Jonathan that for him to approve the development he would like sidewalks on both sides of the street, wider streets, and greenbelts. Mr. Diaz informed camtission that greenbelts in private developments did not fall under the landscaping and lighting district act, but was strictly homeowners association and it would place additional expenses on the bcmeowners. C niuission discussed deletion of condition nos. 7 and 8, and amending no. 5. Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Camu.ssioner Whitlock, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Jonathan voted no). Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1364, approving TT 24530, 10 MITUrES PALM DESERT PLANNIM OCNMISSION JULY 5, 1989 ~ subject to conditions as amended. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Jonathan voted no). F. Case Na. PP 89-8 - M1KE FEDDERLY, Applicant Request for approval of a precise plan of design for construction of a 10,500 square foot office building on the south side of Fred Waring Drive, 560 feet east of Monterey. Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the staff report. Staff clarified that there would be ten covered parking spaces and sidewalks would be consistent with sidewalks along Fred Waring. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the ocamission. MR. RICHARD FISCHER, architect, stated he was present to answer any questions. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITICN to the proposal. �.. MR. HURB KLINE, owner of the house behind the parking lot, spoke against traffic because of only one access. Commissioner Richards reviewed the implementation of the Palma Village plan and the hearings that had taken place. Upon request, staff clarified that setbacks between the building and property line would be 51 feet. Commissioner Whitlock asked if it would be possible to move the building forward to give more rear yard setback. Mr. Drell provided clarification regarding a sight study versus height that done. CcnuLissioner Jonathan asked Mr. Kline if he would be in agreement if the building was shifted west and the parking lot were moved to the east. Mr. Kline replied yes, but he would prefer one story. MRS. BETTY KLINE addressed the cc nnission and stated that she would prefer residential development and felt there would be a problem with privacy. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. 11 rrr M]3Af ES PAIM DESERT PLAMDU CCMMIISSION JULY 5, 1989 Commissioners Whitlock and Downs concurred with the concerns expressed. Commission discussed moving the building, relocating the access, requiring one story, and building a wall to prevent creating a burden on the residents. Ctnvassioner Richards suggested a continuance to allow the developer to work with the effected residents. Mr. Drell noted that the Ray-Al building was similar and that staff could interview the residents behind that building. He felt that the development had decreased noise from Fred Waring and created a better atmosphere. He indicated a requirement that no two story windows be allowed to look down into one story development could be added. Commissioner Downs stated that covering the whole rear parking would also alleviate some noise. Mr. Drell stated that a traffic study could be clone to determine the number of cars and trips per day. Mr. Diaz suggested a continuance to allow the developer and residents to work together and staff would interview residents behind similar projects. Mr. Diaz indicated that he had spoken to Mr. Nettley and his concerns with visibility at the Darr Eye Clinic buildings was worked out and he approved of the reduced traffic noise. Chairman Erwood reopened the public testimony and asked for a motion. .rl Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Canafssioner Richards, continuing PP 89-8 to August 1, 1989. Carried 5-0. G. Case No. PP 89-16 - KAM CIONS M=ICN OD., Applicant Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan for an 8,513 square foot industrial building at the southeast corner of Melanie Place and Merle Drive. Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended approval. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. JAMES FEPRIDGE, architect representing Cary Meyers, stated that he was present io answer any questions. 12 NIIN[JIES PALM DESERT PLAMVIM CU44 SSIC N JURY 5, 1989 Commissioner Jonathan asked for and received clarification on the grading of the loading dock. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVM or OPP0SITIC N to the proposal. MR. RICHARD MILLER, representing Senecer Development, expressed concern with the aesthetics and landscaping. Mr. Miller stated that he would prefer landscaping being provided rather than sidewalk. He felt the Design Center set a standard for development in that area and was concerned about screening and parking. Mr. Drell suggested that Mr. Miller attend the architectural commission meeting and express his views there. MR. DUKE BAKER, 73-435 Agave Lane, owner of property in Cook Square, shared concerns with Mr. Miller. He felt the loading dock would be better facing the side and not the street and had parking concerns. He also expressed concern that building could be turned into offices in the future. Chairman Erwood stated that the applicant would have to cane up with parking if they changed to offices and if there are violations that people know about they should be reported. Mr. Fetridge felt that the building would be attractive and the loading ramp was in the front because of the lot configuration. He indicated that the storage area would be kept concealed by a wall and there would be loading dock doors that would be closed off at night. He informed commission this would be a quality building. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the ramp was visible from the front of the building. Mr. Fetridge stated that it was level at the curb/property line; he indicated that heavy landscaping would be planted and that the loading dock would keep vehicles off the street. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony and asked for a motion. Action: Moved by Commissioner Rfchards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Dawns abstained). 13 r.. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLAMING QIMTISSICN JULY 5, 1989 Moved by Camtissionerr Richards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adopting Planning Ccamission Resolution No. 1365, approving PP 89- 16, subject to conditions. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Downs abstained). ' C. ConU need Case No. TT 24632 - UNDIN DE VU"M Wr OD., Applicant Mr. Diaz stated that the conditions of approval would be as follows: 10. As part of the development of phase 1 the streetscape along Portola Avenue, including the masonry wall, landscaping and sidewalk will be completed. 11. The entrances to Lot 170 will be walled off until development of Lot 170 is commenced. 12. The design of the wall including height, minimum six feet and maximum eight feet and appearance shall be similar to the wall design and elevation dated June 20, 1989 and on file in the department of ccmm uty development and a reduction attached hereto as Exhibit A. 13. Turning movements from the two Portola entrances shall be unrestricted except for egress from Lot 170 which shall be evaluated based on the results of the traffic study set forth in public works department condition no. 21, to be completed and approved by the city prior to construction of Lot 170. 14. Developer shall construct a raised median and landscaping on Portola in keeping with city standards and will agree to join an assessment district formed under the 1972 Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Act as amended. 15. Development of Lot 170 shall be shown on the site plans and elevations dated June 20, 1989 and on file with the department of community development, a reduction of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 16. All development on Lot 170 shall conform to the Portola sight line, exhibit on file in the department of community development, a reduction of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Catmission concurred with the conditions as amended. 14 coo NII qurES PAIN DESERT PLANNITG C 0MMIISSION JULY 5, 1989 i Action: Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning C nTnission Resolution No. 1362, approving TT 24632, subject to conditions as amended. Carried 5-0. H. Case No. PP/CUP 89-18 - CABLE AND RYIEE, INC., Applicants Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan/conditional use permit for a 60 unit low income senior apartment project on 2.7 acres on the north side of Catalina Way, west of the Joslyn Cove Senior Center. Mr. Drell 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. r� MR. WENDELL RYLEE concurred with the staff report. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. MR. FRANZ TIERRE, 46-333 Buurroweed, asked if rents would change with construction costs. Mr. Drell informed him that if construction costs increase, the city would audit the information for verification and rents could be increased per median income numbers. Commissioner Richards stated that he was not aware of figures dealing with construction costs effecting rents. Mr. Drell stated that this was a specific agreement drawn up by Best, Best & Krieger's real estate attorney because of the city's involvement. Action: Moved by Commissioner% Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. 15 •.r NIIIV�7PFS ' PALM DESERT PLC CU44ISSICN JULY 5, 1989 r% Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Caimissiener Downs, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1366, approving PP/CUP 89-18, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. r I. Case No. PP 89-15 - HWJEY MILLER, Applicant Request for approval of a car wash, lube center and detailing area with covered parking southeast of Cook Street and Sheryl Avenue. Mr. Diaz outlined the salient points of the staff report and recommended approval subject to conditions. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the connission. MR. HARVEY MILLER, 380 Red River in Palm Desert, stated he was present to answer questions. Cormmissioner Whitlock asked if pick up and delivery would be part of the new development's service. Mr. Miller replied yes and described the services and the operation of the project. coo Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITICN to the proposal. There being no one, the public testimony was closed. Action: Mowed by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Cannissioner Jonathan, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1367, approving PP 89- 15, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. VIII. MISCELI.ANBOUS None. IX. ORAL QTT'INICATIC NS None. 16 DUNLUES PALM DESERT PLADIIIDU CCNMISSICN JULY 5, 1989 X. OCNMENfPS Camu.ssioner Downs requested a new planning commission packet book and staff indicated he would receive one. XI. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adjourning the meeting. Carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:07 P.M. RAM014 A. DIAZ, Sec t *i RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman /t `r 17 rr