Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0718 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLAMII'U OM-IISSICN MEETINGY TUESDAY - JULY 18, 1989 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC (ENTER COUNCIL CHANGER 73-510 FRFD WARIM DRIVE I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Erwood called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. II. PIS OF ALLEGIANCE Cccmtissioner Whitlock led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Richard Erwood, Chairman Bob Downs Sabby Jonathan Jim Richards Carol Whitlock Members Absent: None Staff Present: Ray Diaz Kandy Allen Gregg Holtz Steve Smith Tonya Monroe IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: No minutes were submitted for approval. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION ME:'. Diaz explained that no city council meeting had taken place since the last planning commission meeting. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR None. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case Nos: GPA 89-4, C/Z 89-9, PP 89-9 - BERNAM DEBONNE, Applicant Request for approval of a general plan amendment, change of zone, precise plan of design and negative declaration of envirommnental impact for a mixed use office/restaurant project consisting MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING CCMKISSICN JULY 18, 1989 of 114,800 square feet of offices and an 11,000 square foot restaurant on an 11.3 acre site located on the north side of Highway 111 at the east city limit. Mr. Smith explained that this item was continued to allow the applicant to meet with the Hidden Palms Homeowners Association. He stated that the plans were revised with the northern most building 'H' pushed back to a point 15 feet north of the property line, which would reduce noise and relocate traffic. Staff added condition #27 to public works to require construction of a storm drain system capable of transporting stormwaters from the project boundary northerly to Fred Waring Drive and a community development condition requiring identification and provision of an area for the city entry sign in front of the project; in return staff would be recommending to the Civic Arts Committee that the Art in Public Places fee be waived. Mr. Smith indicated that staff had not heard from the homeowners association. Staff recc mnended approval based on the changes. Ccmmmissioner Whitlock requested staff to identify the Highway 111 entry and the location of the Embassy Suites stoplight. Mr. Smith explained that the properties were 350 feet in width with the entry of the proposed project at the east side of that property and the traffic signal in the middle of the Embassy Suites property, 150 feet west of the property line and the plan showed a proposed secondary driveway connection through to the parking lot at Embassy Suites, as well as a connection at the northwest. Mr. Holtz explained that Caltrans requirements were for right-turn in and right-turn out only at the main entrance on the easterly property line. Comissioner Whitlock asked if the secondary access from Embassy Suites problems had been resolved. Mr. Diaz informed commission that a reciprocal access agreement was not required of Embassy Suites when it was developed. Commissioner Richards reviewed the background of when Embassy Suites was built, which had been part of a larder complex (i.e. Albertson's Market) and indicated council denied that part of the project, and numerous lawsuits with adjacent property owners were filed. Commissioner Jonathan asked for and received clarification that the only access point being required was the secondary access point off the west end of the flab portion of the property. Staff explained that the Embassy Suites access could be added as a requirement, but Mr. Diaz stated that if the applicant could not receive the access, the project would be difficult to access because the only way to get 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING CX[M MICN JULY 18, 1989 i.. there for traffic caning from the west would be a u-turn at Cook Street. CInairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. ROBERT RICCIARDI, 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, stated that he met with the homeowners association and tried to do everything they asked; moved one building next to the property line 20 feet from them, revised the west end parking to 19 feet from the property line, and the hcmeawners association would be consulted when the landscape plan was submitted. He stated that access was a problem, but felt that when the property to the east developed there would be a reciprocal agreement provided in addition to the project's right-turn in/right-turn out entry; he felt a median strip would prevent left-turn movement. Mr. Ricciardi informed commission that he was working with the eastern property owner to obtain access to tie-in lights between Embassy Suites and the property to the east, and also discussing drainage issues. Commissioner Whitlock asked Mr. Ricciardi if he had a restaurant operator. Mr. Ricciardi replied not yet, but felt that getting a good restauranteur would not be a problem. ir.. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVot or OFPOSITICN to the proposal. MR. HAROLD HOUSLEY, 45-175 Panorama, Suite F in Palm Desert, spoke in favor of the project and asked about the extent of the storm drain. Mr. Holtz explained that the storm drain would have to accept the discharge from the culvert going under Highway 111 and deliver the gpm to Fred Waring through a designed storm drain system. He indicated that Mr. Gaugush or Mr. Folkers had spoken to someone regarding the alignment and funding of the city's participation in the funding of some portion of the storm drain system. MR. PHIL BOSTLEY, Hidden Palms Board President, stated that he was not in favor or against the project at this time. He stated that Mr. Ricciardi assured them that the utilities and trash that make noise would be placed on the side away from their building, and felt stipulations should be made that no air conditioners, transformers or any kind of noise makers would be placed on the Hidden Palms side. He also questioned where the drainage would be placed; he informed commission that their 3 MINUIES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSIM JULY 18, 1989 eastern boundary was Indian Wells' western boundary and any drainage in Palm Desert would go through their property--scmeone had informed him there was an easement on their property. Mr. Holtz stated that was correct--a 15 foot wide drainage easement along the entire east side of Hidden Palms exists, and it was suggested by the director of public works that additional easement be obtained from Indian Wells; if that could be worked out then the existing drainage easement recorded may have to be incorporated in this drainage system. Mr. Bostley informed commission that would be 15 feet of about 30 date palms, the garages and refuse area would have to be torn up to install the drainage; he indicated their hones were approximately 20 feet from that wall and that his concern was the installation of the drainage system and the tearing out of the vegetation. He asked who was responsible for replacing the wall and landscaping. Mr. Diaz inforned commission that different easements stipulate different things and no one is supposed to build on drainage easements or on top of storm drains and it is the responsibility of the individual who did the constriction on the easement or the owner of the construction on the easement to restore--he did not know the stipulations of this particular easement. Mr. Diaz stated that it could be researched. Mr. Holtz stated that the easement was large enough to accommodate the storm drain system; it would be during the construction phases the problems would be encountered because the dirt from the trench would have to be placed somewhere temporarily until it was put back after installation of the pipes. Co udssioner Richards stated that he was a commission member when Hidden Palms was constructed, but did not remember any drainage through the property or any discussions regarding any development that was required to install a drainage system for scmeone else's vacant property. In this case with a south/north drain because of the elevation of Palm Desert, he did not feel Hidden Palms would have been required to think what could happen when the property to the south was developed. Mr. Diaz stated that the original drainage plan had drains going through there, which is why the easement was required. Mr. Diaz suggested a condition of the project that should the drainage be developed through Hidden Palms, the matter will be brought back to commission for discussion and resolution. Commissioner Richards r0called that one problem with that area was the drainage issue was not resolved until very late and the subject of that property drainage was not completed when Hidden Palms was constructed; he felt there was indecision as to whether the drainage water would go down Deep Canyon or through properties. He felt it 4 MIN[AIS PALM DESERT PLAMUM COTZISSIM JULY 18, 1989 would be difficult to claim an easement that would disrupt the lifestyles of the property owners and if it was researched, it might prove that the city was not in a position to make the determination of where the water would go. Commissioner Downs recalled that during discussions with Albertson's the drainage issue was discussed lightly and they had discussed setbacks for street widening for signals and the Deep Canyon storm drain to go down Deep Canyon, and only the property involved--not the ones farther east; nothing going south to north through Hidden Palms. Commissioner Jonathan agreed with the suggestion made earlier that if drainage becomes an issue, it return back to the planning commission. MR. BOSTLEY indicated there were more concerns; drainage facilities on Deep Canyon on the west side and most of the water from Deep Canyon ended up on the east side and in front of their entrance--he stated there were no drainage facilities on the east side and felt there should have been a tie-in across the street. He indicated that water was added to the water draining from their property and informed commission that several visits had been paid to them by Mr. Bob Smith from Code Compliance, criticizing Hidden Palms for dumping the overage from spraying into the street because of the problem at Cook and Fred Waring; he felt this project should not be added to the problem. Further discussion ensued on the location of present storm drain facilities and possible alternatives of drainage for the subject site. MR. BOSTLEY expressed concern regarding the access through Embassy Suites through the rear flag area; he pointed out that access through the rear would place the traffic right behind their back gate and 250 feet in front of the flag is vacant desert, so that would have to be paved. He did not have any concern for access through Embassy Suites in the front to access the traffic signal. Another concern was the preservation of the palm trees; he noted that a condition of approval for the project at Cook and Deep Canyon was required to preserve two rows of palm trees, but no one had watered the palm trees in the last two years. He requested that if palm trees are to be preserved, scmecane 'should water them. Mr. Diaz informed Mr. Bostley that a condition of approval is only implemented if a project proceeds. He indicated that the project in question seemed to be gone and a new landscape plan would be 5 Ow M314f'FS PRIM DESERT PLANN12 G CJCM4ISSICN JULY 18, 1989 submitted with a new project with the date palm trees being replaced with some type of tree. Mr. Bostley requested that a condition be added that the trees be maintained during this period so that they would be alive when the project is built. Mr. Diaz stated that it could be conditioned, but the city mil not require people to water the date trees. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVCR or OPPOSITIM to the proposal. There was no one and Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Cannissioner Richards felt the proposal was a bad idea because of the problems with access and unresolved drainage and easement problems. CamLissioner Jonathan stated that he liked the project but felt this location was inappropriate because of the limited access. Commissioner Downs concurred. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Ccwmmissicner Whitlock, approving the findings. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, instructing staff to prepare a resolution of denial for adoption at the August 1 meeting. Carried 5-0. VIII. NISCELLANBOUS A. North Sphere Discussion. Mr. Diaz explained that the North Sphere Plan was ready to send to council and asked commission if they wished to have another public hearing, or send the plan to council. He gave a brief outline of the plan and indicated that the plan incorporated the issues that had been recc nnended by commission from previous hearings. Commission determined that an additional public hearing before the comission was not necessary and referred the plan to council for approval. Action: % Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Cannissioner Richards, referring the North Sphere Specific Plan to the city council with a recommendation of approval. Carried 5-0. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 18, 1989 Now IX. ORAL C MK]NIICATICNS None. X. COMMENTS None. XI. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, adjourning the meeting. Carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:24 p.m. RAMON A. DIAZ, Seci ATUF. T RICIIPARD ERWOOD, Chairmarr- /tâ–º 7