Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0801 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COFf RSSION NEETII G TUESDAY - AUGUST 1, 1989 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER ODUNCIL CEAMBER 73-510 FRE D WARING DRIVE I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Erwood called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Erwood led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Rick Erwood, Chairman Sabby Jonathan Jim Richards Carol Whitlock Members Absent: Bob Downs Staff Present: Ray Diaz Slob Hargreaves Dick Folkers Phil Drell Steve Smith VAMP Phil Joy Catherine Sass Tonya Monroe IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: No minutes were submitted for approval. VI. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Diaz summarized pertinent July 20, 1989 city council action. VII. CONSENT SE NT CALENDAR A. Case No. PP 87-7 - LAUREL DEVEIAPME TP CCMPANY, Applicant Request for a one /year time extension for a 21,580 square foot commercial project on the south side of Highway 111 at the city's western boundary. NIINLYIES PALM DESERT PLANNING OC144 SSIC N AUGUST 1, 1989 �i Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Chairman Erwood, denying the one-year time extension for PP 87-7 by minute motion. Carried 4- 0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Cane No. ZOA 89-1 - CITY OF PA1M 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 was requested to allow the Chamber of Cnrierce and the committee to work out differences and to meet with staff. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to address this item. MR. DAN EHRLER, Chamber of Commerce, stated that while they were requesting a continuance, everything had been completed and they needed to get everyone together. .I Action: Moved by Cammissioner Jonathan, seconded by C.amUssioner Richards, continuing ZOA 89-1 to September 5, 1989. Carried 4-0. B. Continued Case No. PP 89-8 - MEKE 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 explained that this matter was continued from July 5 to address concerns. Staff surveyed residents living adjacent to recently built office buildings. Based on the staff report and conditions staff recommended approval. Cammissioner Richards felt that three responses was not enough of a response to justify proceeding with a major change in policy to construct two story office buildings next to one story residential hcmmmes. 2 ..r+ MIN(TI�S PAIN DESERT PLANNIM COMMISSION AUGUST 1, 1989 Mr. Diaz noted that the project before commission reflected the amendments that were brought about and code changes (i.e. Darr Eye Clinic and Holden & Johnson buildings on Monterey and the policy design was reflected in the Oliphant/Lizza building). He noted that while it is summer, a larger full-time residential population occupied this area. He stated that as part of the survey self- addressed stamped envelopes were distributed. Commissioner Richards stated that his opinion of office professional use for Monterey Avenue was quite different than that for Fred Waring Drive. He also indicated concern for starting a precedence of allowing two story office buildings on Fred Waring and possibly extending to Deep Canyon. Mr. Drell clarified that the office professional use was intended to only go as far as San Pablo. Comaissioner Richards felt that the residents adjacent to two story building would be losing privacy and that any kind of development of this type should not be done "piece meal" and suggested that staff should reopen the entire subject and consider all property. Commissioner Richards stated that he was opposed to two story use on this property. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the low applicant wished to address the commission. MR. MIKE FEDDERLY, 43-035 Tennessee in Palm Desert, stated that a lot of thought went into the proposed building and the 40 to 50 mph traffic speed on Fred Waring had to be considered. He did not feel residential development would be appropriate. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. MS. DYANA SWANSON, 73-080 Santa Rosa in Palm Desert, stated that they were promised things by the city which they have not seen. She was in favor of this building to prevent dust from four wheel drive vehicles, lights of traffic from the cultural center, and prevent Fred Waring traffic noise. MR. RICHARD FISCHER, architect for the project, informed co nnission that at the last meeting Mr. and Mrs. Cline were present in opposition to the project, but their concerns had been mitigated. He indicated they would be installing the wall first. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. 3 NIIIV[TI�S PALM DESERT PLAMMU CENMISSICN AUGUST 1, 1989 Commissioner Whitlock stated that she shared Commissioner Richards' concern over the two story, but with the opposition resolved she was more receptive to the revised plan. Cammissicner Jonathan concurred with Commissioner Whitlock and felt that the office space used by attorney and doctors would be appropriate. Camtissioner Jonathan asked if there would be an elevator. Mr. Fischer replied that it would depend on the occupants. It was noted that certain handicapped requirements would have to be met. Mr. Fedderly stated that he would be using part of the development for his business. Chairman Erwood agreed with Commissioner Richards background assessment of the area, but the fact that there was no longer any opposition to the plan made him feel that the impact on the surrounding property owners would not be significant and he would support the project. Action: Moved by Ccmmissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Richards voted no). Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1368, approving PP 89-8, contingent upon city council approval of C/Z 89-11. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Richards voted no). C. Case No. PP 89-17 - J.P. CONST UCPICN, Applicant Request for approval of a precise plan and negative declaration of environmental impact for construction of 31,008 square feet of industrial warehouse space at the northeast corner of State Street and Sego Lane. Ms. Sass outlined the salient points of the staff report. She noted that the project received preliminary approval by the architectural commission. Ms. Sass informed commission that condition no. 8 addressed landscaping and perimeter screening. Staff recommended approval. Commissioner Richards asked about industrial parking being required for office use and Ms. Sass stated that the project complied as an 4 urn NIINUIES PALM DESERT PLANNIM C1CM4ISSIC N t AUGUST 1, 1989 rr industrial use. Mr. Diaz informed commission that if a tenant did not comply with the zoning, they could be caught through the certificate of use/business license process. Commission and staff discussed the provisions for office versus industrial parking requirements. Commissioner Richards noted that on past projects staff encouraged applicants to provide more parking and felt that this applicant should provide more parking and the city be stricter as to types of businesses allowed in the service industrial zone. Commissioner Jonathan noted that this project met the code requirements. Commissioner Richards stated that the commission was not obligated to approve projects if the project was not appropriate. Mr. Drell indicated that if commission felt the 2/1000 requirement was inappropriate the code should be changed, but the change might be economically detrimental to the type of business the city would . prefer to see in the industrial park, rather than on Highway 111. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. LCXJ BISHOP stated that the concerns expressed were valid, but indicated that the west building would be one tenant and his 11' proposal called for 18-20% for office space; the east building would have two tenants, 10% office and remainder warehouse industrial uses. He stated that his project complies with the requirements and felt the project should be approved. Camnissioner Richards noted that problems exist when buildings and owners change. After further discussion Ccomm_issiener Richards asked Mr. Bishop if his client would agree to a deed restriction and Mr. Bishop indicated that he could not speak for the client, but he would recommend against it. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVM or OPPOSITIM to the proposal. There was no one and Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Commissioner Richards spoke in favor of a deed restriction being placed on the property and the city enforcing stricter measures for use in the industrial Area, or uses providing adequate parking. Chairman Erwood expressed concern with placing deed restrictions on property and problems the owner might have removing it later and penalizing this developer for something that might happen in the future. Commissioner Jonathan concurred with the chairman and felt 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLAN IM CUM-USSICN AUGUST 1, 1989 the answer for solving problems in that area should lie somewhere else. He suggested a survey be done once a year. Mr. Bishop indicated that the owner of this property owns ten buildings in that area and parking is more than adequate; the problem exists in other areas. Mr. Diaz suggested formation of a two-member comtittee and staff to go out during the business day and see where problems exist and determine potential solutions. Commissioner Jonathan suggested getting a list/percentage of businesses and offices, then possibly going out. Commissioner Richards noted that the worst areas were created before the city incorporated or have since annexed into the city and he felt business people were usually the last ones to complain about neighbors until it gets out of control. Commissioner Whitlock did not feel it would be appropriate to penalize this developer and was in favor of approving the project. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Ccmmissioner Jonathan, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Richards voted no). Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1369, approving PP 89- 17, subject to oond.itions. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Richards voted no). D. Case No. TT 24214 - PACIFIC THEATRES INC., Applicant Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and a 16 lot single family subdivision located on 4.58 acres within the PR-5 zone on the north side of Country Club Drive 700 feet east of Monterey. Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report. He noted that cc mTunity development condition no. 2 should read recordation of a final map should occur within 24 months from the date of approval unless an extension of ilme is granted; also no. 5 should read for two story construction there shall be a minimum ten foot side yards with a combined distance between buildings of 20 feet, including a 20 foot rear yard setback. He also recommended that since this lot was adjacent to a lot not owned by the applicant, the two story location 6 DU21WES PALM DESERT PLANNIM O(144 tSSICN AUCQ)ST 1, 1989 �•�► should be implemented as part of the overall plan of the tract with the cooperation of the adjacent property owner. He noted the property to the east and north would be heard at the next meeting. Canaissioner Richards felt that this applicant should have waited two weeks to allow the projects to be heard simultaneously. Mr. Drell stated that the applicant applied for this tract approximately six months ago and the city convinced him into waiting to proceed with our office complex. The other application had not been submitted at that time and was pushed up as far as it could be. Ccomissioner Richards noted that there was not even a set policy for setbacks and he was concerned with privacy. Chairman Erwood opened_ the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the camtission. MR. LARRY JOHNSON, Engineering Services, stated that the original plan called for straight streets that would be cul-de- sacced with 18 lots. The proposed project involves four separate owners who all want to hold onto their property. A master plan development was conceived and their property ended up with 16 lots. He felt there was a good system, but did not know for certain what kind of houses United Savings or Pacific Theatres would have, but they would be similar; he also did not know how many two story houses they would request. He felt that along Manor Care and back down the Stoltzman/Smallwood piece would be single story. He requested the flexibility inherent in the zone to allow for the two story. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVCR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Caimission Richards felt the hearing should be continued and felt that two weeks was not that much of a delay. He agreed that the city had put then off, but work in that area had been continuous. He wanted the developers addressing them and saying they have some type of agreement in principal and will canplete a neighborhood and call out which way the streets will go, location of two story units, etc. He felt there were too many unresolved issues. Cmrdssioner Jonathan conaUrred. Chairman Erwood reopened the public testimony to allow for a motion of continuance. 7 `rr MINWES PALM DESERT PLAPNIM QMKISSIC N AUGUST 1, 1989 Mr. Johnson stated that Mr. Earl Turner was present representing United Savings, he did not feel it was necessary to address the commission; Mr. Keiter was also present. Mr. Johnson stated that they were trying to provide a master plan format within which each developer could "do his own thing" on his awn property. They did not want to be together. Canmissicner Richards stated that he did not want to see any spot zoning and an agreement be reached. Mr. Diaz stated that he would prefer to have the map approved tonight, but if during the next two weeks if all parties have an agreement on two stories and location worked out that could be part of the package. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Connissioner Jonathan, continuing TT 24214 to August 15, 1989. Carried 4-0. E. Case No. CUP 83-20, Ammdment 2 - BB O'BRIENS, Applicant Request for approval of a 1,020 square foot expansion to an existing restaurant at 72-185 Painters path. Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the staff report and remanded approval. Commission discussed parking and clarified that most of the expansion would be in the kitchen area. Mr. Joy stated that condition no. 6 should be amended to read that a parking agreement with the adjacent property owner shall run with the land and a valet parking plan be approved by the technical traffic committee unless the requirement is waived by the property owner. Mr. Joy explained that the agreement at the parking lot should be for valet parking only. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. DAVE FOREMAN stated he was present for questions and concurred with the amended condition. Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVCR or OPPOSITICN to the proposal. 8 NII gUTES PALM DESERT PLANNIM CCMMISSIC N AUGUST 1, 1989 `•• Commissioner Whitlock felt that parking was not a problem and with the expansion being mostly to the kitchen, recommended approval. Commissioner Richards concurred. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Cammmissioner Richards, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0. Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1370, approving CUP 83- 20, Amendment 2 subject to conditions as amended. Carried 4-0. F. Case No. PP 89-5 - NMUMRA PATEL, Applicant Request for approval of a precise plan of design for a two story (23,235 square foot, 19,750 square foot net) office building and negative declaration of environmental impact as it pertains thereto on a 42,400 square foot site at the southwest corner of Highway 111 and Lupine Lane. Mr. Smith distributed plans and explained that since the staff report was written, three or four amendments to the plan had occurred. He reviewed easements, traffic circulation, and driveway access to the Project. Mr. Folkers stated that based on the most recent plan, it was public works' recommendation that a right-turn lane be required to allow additional parking and landscaping, but would like the developer to be responsible for paving the alley. He clarified that this would also allow alignment with the Super Block 3 project. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. NARE DRA PATEL stated that he had been working with the departments of planning and public works to address problems. He indicated that the Cafe de Mexico restaurant had expressed concerns with the parking. Mr. Patel felt that the most recent plan complied with all code, planning and public works requirements. Chairman E rwood asked if Mr. Patel had any problem with paving the alley. Mr. Patel replied no. 9 1r MIlVCTI'ES PALM DESERT PLANNUG COMMISSION AUGUST 1, 1989 Chairman Erwood asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. MR. JOHN CRISTE, 275 N. El Cielo in Palm Springs, stated that he was representing Scrney Everett and Sons of Cafe de Mexico. He noted that this property was highly visible and felt its development would be a plus to the Highway 111 frontage, as well as benefit from the deletion of the slip ramp and completion of the Super Block concept. He submitted a letter of support to staff. MR. SANDY BAUM, 45-800 Deep Canyon Road in Palm Desert, informed commission that the slip ramp was very dangerous and felt that ten feet of landscaping was not adequate. Mr. Folkers stated that the issue of slip ramps would have to be addressed because the city did not budget the money for the project. He indicated that with the right-turn requirement, this would allow more landscaping to be provided. Commissioner Richards felt that this was a high priority issue and should be so addressed in the next year's budget. He also felt that an opening at Sage was needed. Staff informed commission that they would pass the recommendation along to council for the budget. Staff and commission discussed the parking and staff recommended that a 17 space parking credit be allowed in exchange for the applicant granting to the city a driveway easement over a portion of his property to connect the west Frontage Road to Lupine Lane, a distance of 100 feet south of Highway 111, and for implementing the Super Block concept adjacent to the subject property (i.e. Highway 111 widening improvement, installation of landscaped stalls between Highway Ill curb and the parking area) as well as closure of the existing Frontage Road/Lupine Lane intersection. Commissioner Richards stated that he would like the credit to be part of the record for future reference. Chairman Erwood closed the public testimony. Mr. Folkers suggested that because of the closure of the ramp Cafe de Mexico be asked to help bear the cost. Someone from the audience spoke up and said they would have to get approval from the owner of Cafe de Mexico. Commissioner Richards requested that Mr. Folkers calculate a figure for the next meeting. 10 MMAY ES PAIM DESERT PLANNIM COMMISSION AUGUST 1, 1989 1r i Action: i Moved by Oomlmmissicner Richards, seconded by Co mmi ssicner Whitlock, i instructing staff to prepare a resolution of approval by minute motion. Carried 4-0. G. Case No. PP 89-20 - G & L E ERPRISES, Applicant Request for approval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and a precise plan of design to allow construction of a 10,745 square foot service industrial building on each of two adjacent lots on the north side of St. Charles Place. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report and indicated that some revision of the plan would be necessary to provide through traffic circulation on the site. While the applicant chose not to revise the plan, staff recommended approval subject to the conditions of approval. He stated that 245 square feet would be reduced on the building size even if the proposed plan was acceptable to provide adequate turn-around. Chairman Erwood opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. ROBERT RICCIARDI, 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane in Palm Desert, distributed pictures of other areas in Palm Desert where similar parking situations exist and felt that his request was not unique. The applicant and commission discussed parking and a tie-in reciprocal access agreement with the property owner to the east and working with Truly Nolen for access. Commission determined that the applicant should provide a minimum of 20 parking spaces and agree to participate in a reciprocal access agreement with the property owner to the east. Mr. Ricciardi stated that he was basically in agreement. Action: Moved by Camdssioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, 11 r.. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLAN COMMISSION AUGUST 1, 1989 adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1371, approving PP 89- 20, subject to conditions as amended. Carried 4-0. IX. MI A. Case Nos. GPA 89-4, C/Z 89-9, PP 89-9 - BERNAIRD DEBUZ E, Applicant Request for approval of a resolution, per ccnmissionIs direction, for denial of a general plan amendment from medium density residential to office professional, change of zone from PR-5 N S.P. to O.P. , and precise plan approval of a mixed use restaurant/office project for an 11.3 acre site on the north side of Highway 111 at the east city limit. Mr. Ricciardi addressed the commission and explained what measures he was taking to resolve drainage questions and access. He requested that the ccmission not make a decision, but table any action for 60 days. Mr. Diaz explained that at the last meeting commission instructed Ali staff to prepare a resolution of denial, and the city attorney advised that the application could be denied without prejudice, which would allow the applicant to reapply without waiting a year or appeal the decision to the city council within 15 days. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1372, denying GPA 89-4, C/Z 89-9, and PP 89-9. Carried 4-0. B. Case No. VAR 87-1 - RALPH SMMPIEM, Applicant Clarification for a one-year time extension granted by the pl&riing mission on July 5, 1989, 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. 12 r/ ND NUIES PAIM DESERT PLANNIM COTMIISSION AUGUST 1, 1989 Mr. Diaz explained that when the variance was approved in 1987, Mrs. Witmer expressed concern and as a result a condition was placed that Mrs. Witmer be consulted prior to construction within the eight feet of the property line. The applicant had sent certified letters to Mrs. Witmer asking that she contact the applicant or Mr. Smith, with no response. Mr. Diaz also explained that he had tried to call Mrs. Witmer, but received no answer. Mr. Diaz indicated that staff would be willing to send a certified letter frcin the city to try to get a response. He felt that if no response was given, the condition should be waived. Commissioner Richards felt that the wording should include that if Mrs. Witmer is not heard from within 30 days, the plan would be implemented. Commission and staff concurred. X. ORAL OCD14UVICATIC S None. XI. COMMENTS Commissioner Jonathan requested that staff conduct a survey of the Cook Street Industrial area to determine compliance with zoning uses and the effects on existing parking. Comissioner Richards asked staff to continue efforts to find out the opinion of residents living next to office professional zoned buildings. XII. ADJOURNMENr Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, adjourning the meeting. Carried 4-0. The meeting adjourned at 10:02 p.m. /ATTEST' RAMJN A. DIAZ, Secret - � RICHARD ERWOOD, Chairman /tm 13