Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0501 NIIr1fJI'FS PALM DFSERT PLANNII� �[M�IISSI�I N�rIl� ZU�Y - [�►Y 1, 1990 7:00 P.M. - ('�1VIC CEI�fl�t Q7[]NC�L �IANBIIt ` 73-510 FRm f�1RII� DRIVE * �e �c �c * �c * * * * * * �c * * �t * * * * * * * * � * * I. C�Id, � ORDgt (�ia.irperc.�on Whitlock called the meeting to. order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLIDC� OF ALI�IAIVC.E Carmissiorier Dawr�s led in the pledge of allegiance. III. FiQLL CAI,L Members Present: Carol Whitlock, C�airperson Bob Dawns Rick Erv��od Sabby Jonathan Jim Richards Members Absent: None Staff Present: Ray Diaz Kandy Al1en ,i,� Dick Folkers Steve Smith Phil Drell Tonya Nbnroe IV. APPRU�TAL OF NIIIV�TI'FS: Consideration of the April 17, 1990 meeting minutes. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Catmissioner Er���od, approv.irig the minutes as submitted. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Dawns abstained). V. S�TR�RY OF �IL AGTI�I Mr. Diaz stunnarized pertinent April 26, 1990 city aouncil actions. VI. �1,SII�TP CAI�R None. �.r NII�AIPF� PAIM DFSE�T F'I�ArII�TII� �T�SSICH�i NF�Y l, 1990 � VII. PUBLIC HF�RIla;S A. Case Nos. PM 25900 and VAR 90-1 - PERRY ASH6Y, Applicant Request for approval of a varianc.e to the zoning ordinance to permit the creation of two (2) 13,068 square foot lots whereas the existing Rl, 14,000 zoning requires a minitman of 14,000 square feet per lot and appraval of a tentative parcel map for a lot split of an existiz�g 26,136 square foot lot into tw� (2) 13,068 square foot lots located at the southeast carner of San Pascual and De Anza. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report and recanme.nded approval. Carmissioner Jonathan asked for and received clarification as to previous lot splits granted by planning c�mission and the general size of the lots. Carmissioner Dawns cannented that there were not many small lots on that side of the city. C�airperson Whitlock opened the public testunony and asked if the applicant wished to address the cannission. � MR. PERRY ASHBY, applicant, stated that the lot split w�uld create a lot more commensurate with the area. He rx�ted that his engineer was also present to au�.swer arYy questions. C�airperson Whitlock asked if anyr�ne present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPP06ITI0[V to the proposal. Nfft. ERIC BALSER, 44-750 San Pascual, stated that he wished the whole piece of property could be built upon wittwut the lot being split. He indicated that his main concern was the devaluing of his property. He inforrr�d aannission that his hrn�e was 3,000 square feet. He r�ted that to the east was a smaller hane that had been vacant for a long time. He stated that once the good size lots were gone, they wr�uld be gone forever. He felt the size of the property should be preserved. MR. PERRY ASHBY stated that he builds quality hanes and people are happy with 1,600 square foot hanes on the lots he had previously built upon. He stated that the small lot wr�uld be 13,000 square feet and was riot considered a small lot. C7iairperson Whitlock closed the public testimorYy. 2 � NIINtIPFS PAllK DFSF�tT F'I�AN[1II� �T�IISSI(�I Ng1Y l, 1990 �.. Commission discussed adjacent lot sizes and determined that the findings for a variance could not be met and the proposal was incanpatible with adjacent properties. Action: Moved by Ccamissioner Jonath�n, seconded by CaYmissioner Richards, lY7-Gtructing staff to prepare a resolution of denial by minute motian. Carried 5-0. B. Case No. QJP 90-7 - PAI�i DESgtT PARTNE�tS, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit for a 31,000 square foot two story office c7omplex and certification of a negative declaratian of environmental impact on the R-3 zoned property at the northeast corner of Shadaw Nbuntain Drive and Larkspur Lane. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report. He r�oted that a letter frcm the Shadaw Cliff Haneawners Association had been received. Staff recannerlded appraval. �„ C�airperson Whitlock opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the cannission. MR. HOWARD LAPHAM, architect representing applicant, felt that the Shadaw Cliff HcmeaHmers Association had legitimate concerns. He felt that with the oleanders and landscapi.ng w�uld address the ooncerns. He described the potential use of the bu.ilding and felt the project would be cannatible with the area. Chairperson Whitlock asked if any�ne present wished to speak in FAVOR or �'P06ITICN to the proposal. There was no one and the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Jonathan noted that any development would be an improvernent to the area and felt this project we�uld be acceptable. - Carmissioner Richards stated that he had a minor concenz--that being a condition requiring the oleanders to r�nain forever. After further di.scussion ccninission instxucted staff to advise the architectural review carmission of their concerns regarding second story windaws facing east and that second raw landscaping materials sh�ould be installed on the west side of the wall. 3 � D�iIIV[TI�S PAr�i DESERT F'I,ANNII� �M��ffSSICN Ng1Y l, 1990 � Action: Moved by Commissioner ���od, seconded by Camiissioner Jonathari, appravirig the findings as presented by staff. Ca.rried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner ���od, seconded by Caimissioner Jonathan, adopting Planning Cannissian Resolutian No. 1436, approvirig CUP 90- 7, subject to conditions. C`,arried 5-0. c. case rro. a� 90-8 - ���/�an n�[pprgrrr, nvc., �ppiicant Request for appraval of a conditional use pern�it to add five units to the Aladdin L,ocige located in the R-3 zone on the south side of Shadaw Nbuntain Drive, 400 feet east of San Luis Rey Avenue. Mr. Smith outlined the salient points of the staff report and explained that a letter fr�an Mr. Lee Barxy had been received and felt his concerns had beP..xi addressed. Mr. Smith noted that ca�rnuLity develognent condition #6 should be amended to read an eight foot high wall, rx�t six feet, and add condition nos. 7 and 8 as submitted. Staff reacim�ended approval. Cnairperson Whitlock opened the public testi.mony and asked if the "'� applicant wished to address the camiission. MR. STAN KASSOVIC stated that all the conditions were acceptable. Cnairperson Whitlock asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPP06ITION to the proposal. MR. LEE BARRY stated that he found the added condition acceptable and stated that his neighbor, N�s. Jefferson, was also satisfied. (hairperson Whitlock closed the public testim�ny. C�airperson Whitlock stated that she had no problem with the project and Catmissioner Daums indicated that it would be a weloome addition to that vacant lot. Action: Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Cannissioner Richazds, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. 4 ,� NIIN[IPFS PAIM DESF.RT PLAI�INII� �M�SSICN NmY 1, 1990 � Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Canrussioner Richards, ac3r�pting Planru.ng Camtission Resolution No. 1437, appraving CUP 90- 8, subject to conditions as amended. Carried 5-0. D. C��se No. PP 90-6 - TMPF'RTAT. S�T N�TAL Q0., INC., Applicant Request for appmval of a negative declaration of environmental impact and precise plan for a 10,000 square foot industrial builduzg at 75-100 St. Criarles Place. Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report and reocnmended appraval. C�airperson Whitlock � the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the cannission. MR. ROBERT BUQQ,ES, architect for J.P. Construction, stated that he had no problem with the conditions and was present to answer any questions. C�zairperson Whitlock asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR � or �'P06ITIQ1 to the proposal. 'I'tiere was no one and the public testi.mony was closed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Camiissioner EYti,�od, appraving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Catmissioner F��n�od, adopting Planning Cannission Resolution No. 1438, appro�ving PP 90-6, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. E. Ca.se Nos. C/Z 90-2, PP/QJP 90-5 - FEGIOAE INC., Applicant Request for appraval of a negative declaration of . environmental impact, change of zone fran R-2 (single family residential) to C-1 (general commercial ), p�ecise plan and oonditional use permit for a 35,859 square foot commercial complex parking lot and greenbelt on 11 lots fronting on Monterey Avenue and San Antonio Circle. 5 ... NIIr1�JI�S P11I�I DESERT F'I,ArIIdII� Q�M`�IISSICN Ng1Y 1, 1990 � Mr, Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report and distributed a new plan and elevation, explaini� the changes that had been made. He noted that the new site plan addressed the ooncerns expressed by the architectural caRmission and felt the plan was consistent with the intent of the specific plan reoatmendations. Staff reoaYmended appraval, subject to the canditiorc�s. Camiissioner R.ichards did not feel it was ever the intent of the ca�tittee to have cannerc�.al an Monterey Avenue because of the traffic and potential negative impacts on the adjacent residential neighbort�ood. Conmissioner DawrLs concurred. Catmissioner Richards ;n�;cated that while he did not have a problem with the design of the building, he was opposed to the 30 foot height. He also felt that if the city were to oonsider using eminent danain, there had better be a strong reason to do that. He felt any develo�zt in that locatian shQuld r�t add to the traffic probl�n. Upon questioning by commission, Mr. Drell explained that the developer would be reimbursing the redevelognent agency for all costs of the acquisition. He indicated that the redevelopment agency would condenm the property and set the price based on appraised value. Cnairperson Whitlock opened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the ca�nu.ssion. �' NffZ. DIC�t OONIP'I'ON, representi.ng Mr. Lyons, informed ca�mission that he had addressed the comments of the architectural commission and was present to answer any questions. Upon questionirig, he explained that the cx�mer felt that retail would be a viable use on Nbnterey. Chaizperson Whitlock asked if anye�ne present wished to speak in FAVOR of the proposal. NII�. DUANE BAN�USH, property cx�mer to the east, felt that any develognent would be an imprav�nent to the area and �nfonned cannission that evezy m�rning there were haneless transients in the area, as well as unsightly upkeep of hccn�s on San Antonio - and he ends up picking up their trash frcm his yard. He indicated that his only concern was that the developer construct a six to eight foot high block wall between the parkirx� lot and his Ylane. � Co�missioner Richards suggested that Mr. Barnbush contact Frank Al1en in the code ca�liance departznerit and report the violations and if that didn't work, shaw up and talk to the city council. Catmissioner 6 � NIII�IITI'ES PAIM DFSF�T F'LArII17T� QM�IISSI�T � MAY 1, 1990 � Richards asked for Mr. Bambush's opinion of traffic. Mr. Bambush indicated his main aoncern was that people did not stop at the stop sign at San Gorgonio and San Pablo and he felt this str�uld be a four- way stop; he stated there was a problem with the view because it was r�ot a 90 degree angle. MR. DAVE TYMOFY infonned catmission that he was helping Dr. Lyons acquire scme of the property, even the last one. He ;�7i cated that he shared the concerns about the transients and they had boarded up the buildings and asked the city to help patrol them, as well as posted them, and called the sheriff's wYw told them to call when transients were there. He indicated that a watchman could rx�t be posted there all the time. He stated that regarding the acquisition of the last prY�perty, the property a�mer was offered a more than fair price and they were not tryirig to tht�aw anyone out. He indicated that if the city wanted retail or the corner f�ed up, the city wvuld have to participate, mainly because the last hanea�nzer wr�ul�'t. MS. TRACY YARDLY, 44-875 San Antonio Circle, informed cannission , that she had tried to contact her attorney, N�. Chandter Bx�awri, but he was unavailable. She also indicated that her acting agent, Ruth Giverson, had been ill for approximately three ,� months and was unable to attend the meetirig. She infonned carrnission that she awned a store which required her full-t�me service and was unaware of these proceedings until this afterrx�on. She requested a 90 day extension to allaw her time to confer with her agent and attorney. Ms. Yardly stated that she wanted to sell her property as cannercial property. Mr. Drell explained that rear properties were subject to the conditional use permit, which only permitted them to be used for parking. Mr. Diaz explained that the price of the property was not an issue for the planning commission to determine. Mr. Diaz indicated that Mr. Bzr�m was an expert in eminent danain type cases and a fair market value w�uld be decided, plus relocation benefits. He noted that Ms. Yardly did not appear to be opposed to the change of zone, but the price being offered for her property. Ms. Yardly concurred. He indicated that the decision of eminent dcxnain would be up to the redevelo�cnent agency. Ca�missioner Richards clarified for the record that this piece of property had to be acquired for the project to proc,eed. He felt that a piece of property should not be condemned at a parking lot rate another person on Nbnterey was receiving a cam�ercial rate and felt each parcel shouldn't be wr�rth any different, because if you can't 7 a.. r�IIPATI� PALM DF�IIZT P'I,ArII1Ii� Q['T�IISSI�I N�Y 1, 1990 � have one, you can't have any part. Mr. Diaz indicated that the property would be appraised at a fair market value at cannercial use. Mr. Drell rioted that the condenmation proceeding had mt started and as an example, on the last transaction, the houses in the area are worth appro�mately $70,000 to $80,000 and the values were according to appraisal for the intended use as specified by the Specific Plan. Mr. Drell indicated that the appro�ved use on that property was a parking lot, which could only exist if there was a commercial develognent on Nbnterey. Mr. Diaz indicated that in tenns of eminent c�anain, the twr� acres surr�ounding city hall were acquired by eminent c3ana.in. The property awner did not necessarily c�ane out "on the � short end of the stick". Calmissioner Richards disagreed abaut the value of the property being determined different frcm the parcels on Nbnterey. Mr. Drell indicated that the courts would make the ultimate determination on the value of the property. ' MS. TOBIE AOOSTA, property c7wner across frccn Mr. Bambush, stated that the applicant was goi.ng with the redevelognent agency to shield them against giving Ms. Yardly her fair value of what the property is zoned and if she is forced to sell and relocate elsewhere, the housing in Palm Desert is exper�sive and she w�uld r�t be able to find the same type of Yxx��e in quality she has there. All the cars and transients in the area that were ' discussed, those h�ies were being rented by [�. Lyons and they .rr were taking them for as much money as they can get out of them; all were full with sca�times 10 to 12 people, which was why there was congestion in the area. I�t. GARY LYONS, a�mer, explained that he had been a property awner in Palm Desert for approximately 15 years and began assc�nbling these property pieces 12 years ago. He indicated ttiat area was part of the Core Carmercial Area Plan and with regard to the last piece of property to acquire, it was appraised at its highest and best c;aYmercial use and offered prerni.wn on top of that; he felt he had been fair in terms of amQunt being offered. The purpose for presenting the projec� was that at the inception an analysis was dane for that use and at that time it was deternuned that it would be adaptable as a cormiercial/retail use. He stated that he wanted to car�ly with the nzles and regulations of the redevelopment agency. He indicated he had been involved aver the years in the buildirx� process and had a cooperative effort with Palm Desert City Council and planning staff and had tried to address the issues. He stated that he had been trying to acquire the praperties over the years at fair market value until this last one. 8 � NIIN[TI�S PAIM DF�E�T F7�I�IIVZI� QM�IISSI(�I N�Y 1, 1990 �"' Nh�. TYMOFY i.nfo� cannission that he had been a real estate broker and had dc�c�nentation on offers to the last property owner and a letter frcm the property owner's attorney frcm approximately two years ago and he indicated that he could produce that paper work if it would help carmission. He stated that they wanted aver twice the appraised camiercial value of the property, plus the building, plus the fences and out buildirx�, t� free. MS. AOOSTA felt that the reason they wanted everything almost given to them was because they got all the other properties cheap. She indicated that sane property awners only received $69,000-$70,000 and they told people that if they dich�'t sell, they w�uld have t� story buildings looking ckxan at them--they used that push technique and she hoped that N�s. Giverson got the price she wanted, because that would be the fair thing. Chairperson Whitlock closed the public testimony and asked for ocamission cam�ents. CamLissioner Jonathan felt the city did the right thing in the Palma Village Plan by envisioning a use other than residential use on Nbnterey. He indicated that this was an opportwzity for the city to � put on a better face. He felt there was one significant problem, that one property had yet to be acquired. He felt the proposed structure, setbacks and elevation were acceptable. He indicated that the acquisition of the property was a legal process issue involvirig �ninent danain which was a legal process and Catmission shQuld not get involved. He indicated that he had faith in the city and people involved in the process and ultimately the courts. He felt that acquisition of that piece of property sh�ould not stop the carmission fran going forward with their decision. Camtissioner En,x�od indicated that initially he had the same concerns as Commissioner Richards with allowing commercial next to residential, but noted that r�o one had caTrplained about the project and the only negative testimony was the price the last txxneawner wanted to get for her property. He agreed with N�. Drell and Mr. . Diaz about their recollection that the area be allowed for catmercial. He felt the design of the building was appropriate and was in favor of the project. Catmissioner Richards noted that he had been part of the caTmittee studying the use for the area and felt that office professional use was specifically called out for Nbnterey Avenue. He agreed with most of the project, but had a problem with retail use and the building 9 �r.. MIIVIJPFS PAIM DESIIZT F'I�ANNJI� aCNf�IISSI�I N�Y 1, 1990 .�r height. Mr. Drell indicated that the office professional zone had a m2xiirnun height of 25 feet. C�airperson Whitlock concurred with Carm.issioner Richard's carments and felt that office p�ofessional was m�re desirable on Nbnterey and wanted to see the height restxicted and a block wall along the parking lot to address Mr. Bambush's concern. Mr. Drell noted that the project had to have a block wall and was part of the conditions. Conmissioner 3onathan stated that he had been persuaded by Catmissioner Richards catments. Catmission maved to r��d appraval of the project as an office professional use, m�.urnun height of 25 feet, all sub�ect to the acquisition of the final parcel. Action: Nbved by Camtissioner Jonathan, seconded by Ca►missioner Richards, appraving the finduigs as presented by staff. Carxied 5-0. Nbved by Cannissioner Jonathan, seconded by Catm.issioner Richards, adopting Planning Camlission Resolution No. 1439, rec�mending to city council approval of PP/CUP 90-5, subject to conditions as am�nded. Carried 5-0. CI-IAIRPERSON WHITL�OCit CALLID A FIVE NiIN[PPE RECE5S AT 9:04 P.M. � F. Case No. CUP 90-9 - ItC�,LD G. NUILFS, Applicant Request for appraval of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant through use of 1200 square foot outck�or patio and 850 square feet of adjacent commercial space at 73-703 Highway 111. Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report and explained that plaruiing cannission retained the right to restrict the patio and/or expansion if at anytime it b�ies unacceptable. He rboted that the applicant w�uld also screen the roof equt��ent. Staff recarmended approval subject to the conditions. Chairperson Whitlock opened the public testimany and asked if the applicant wished to address the catmission. MR. RON NOILES stated that the e,xpansion would e.nhance the facility and thanked N�. Drell for walking them through the process. 10 � L NIIIV�TPFS PAIM DFSIIZT P'LArII1II� �M�IISSICI�1 Ng1Y 1, 1990 " CZ�airperson Whitlock asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITIo[�1 to the proposal. Nfft. JOE BRAt�IDT rx�ted that other business in the center (i.e. Danis�o's and Bigelaws) were delivery only businesses. He did rbt feel there would be any parking probl�n. Catmissioner powr�s indicated that those businesses each have several drivers that take up parking space. N�t. BRAM)T indicated that they w�uld oon�ly with the conditions as stated. CZ-�airperson Whitlock closed the public testimony. Action• Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner �ti�od, appraving the finclings as presented by staff. Ca.rried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner F�x�od, acbpting Plaruzing Carmission Resolution No. 1440, approving CUP 90- 9, subject to conditions. Carried 5-0. ... G. �rcial Develc�pment Low Ino�ie �nplvyee Housing Mitigation Fee - QTY OF PALM DESF�T, Applicant Request for plannirx� ca�mission recaYrnendation of appraval to city council the establish�ne,nt of a commercial development low income housing mitigation fee. Nfr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report. Catmission infornied staff that more t�me was needed to study the proposal and requested, if possible, that fees be studied in other areas (i.e. Phoenix Arizona, Austin Texas, or Ft. Lauderdale Florida). It was r�oted that there were fees for lizard,s, 'I'�J[�, scr�ool, art, drainage and signalization. Carmissioner Richards felt the city should keep in mind the total costs inwlved to insure a viable ecor�uc future for the city, noting the serious changes in California's econanic gr�rth in some areas. After further discussian Mr. Diaz indicated that he could get ca�ments from the economic development conntittee. Staff indicated that they w�uld tzy to obtain approximate figures that shaw the cost of building in Palm Desert with the fees that are presently levied. 11 ... NIIN[TPF� PAIM DFSII�T F'I,Hi�II�II� �T'iISSIQd I�1Y 1, 1990 .r/ (�airperson Whitlack opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPP06ITI�1. There was rb one. CaYrnission indicated that the item should be referred to the ec��ic developnent catmittee for review and continued to June 19, 1990. Action: Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by CcRmissioner Richards, c�ntinuing this matter to ,7une 19, 1990. Carried 5-0. VIII. NIISC�LI�IDOUS None. IX. ORAL Q'�T�i�TIG1TIC[d5 None. X. �T�lIS � Mr. Diaz noted that the next joint meeting of the planning cannission/city council/architectural review acmnission w�uld be on May 17, 1990 from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m, at a place to be determined. Camu.ssioner k���od inforn�ed Ntr. Diaz that he would rx�t be able to attend that day. XI. Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Carinissioner Richards, ad�ouYn.ing the meeting. Carried 5-0. The meeting adjournei 9:45 p.m. �M N A. DIAZ, S et A?'1'EST: � �� �'�-t,�-'� ��(,i.l�,�� C'AROL WHITLOC�C, Chairperson /� 12 �/