Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0205 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COI�iISSION MEETING TUESDAY - FEBRUARY 5, 1991 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMHER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ..r I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Whitlock called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairperson Whitlock led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Carol Whitlock, Chairperson Bob Downs Rick Erwood Sabby Jonathan Jim Richards Members Absent: None Staff Present: Ray Diaz Kandy Allen Jeff Winklepleck Phil Drell Dick Folkers „�, Tonya Monroe IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: No minutes were submitted for approval. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Diaz indicated there were no pertinent council actions resulting from the January 24, 1991 council meeting. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR None. VII. PUBLIC IiEARINGS A. Continued Case No. CUP 90-22 - CLAUDIA HAMBURGER, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow an outdoor magazine and ..�. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 newsstand located at the northwest corner of San Pablo and Highway 111jPalm Desert '� Drive or at 73-111 E1 Paseo in the breezeway between the Galleria and Elegante. Mr. Diaz noted this case was continued because there were other sites being considered. No other location was deemed possible and the applicant was requesting approval of the San Pablo site. Staff recommended approval. Mr. Drell also noted that the E1 Paseo Merchants Association had concerns with the E1 Paseo location. He stated that no conditions regarding the traffic solution had been included in the conditions. He felt that the city created the situation and the applicant should not bear the burden of correcting the problem. Chairperson Whitlock o ened the public testimony and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. There was no response. Chairperson Whitlock asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. MR. MARTIN KAUFMAN, 73-690 E1 Paseo, board member of the E1 Paseo Business Association, informed commission that they had concerns about outdoor uses on E1 Paseo and �' - requested a continuance of this matter to a date after their February 21 meeting. Chairperson Whitlock closed the public testimony and asked for commission comments. Commission concurred that the applicant should not bear the burden of changing the median strip and two-way frontage road conversion. Commission discussed the appearance of the newsstand and after discussion determined that the architectural commission should review the specific site design. Action: Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Chairperson Whitlock, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Chairperson Whitlock, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1492, approving CUP 90-22. Carried 5-0. 2 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 B. Case No. PP 90-29, VAR 90-8 - TRIAD PACIFiC DEVELOPMENT y• CORPORATION, Applicant Request is for a precise plan of design and variance to allow construction of 136, 944 square foot office/commercial pro�ect on an 8.92 acre site at the northeast corner of Hovley Lane and Cook Street in the O.P. zone. Mr. Winklepleck informed commission that there was a previously approved pro�ect on this site. He described that plan and the new proposal. He indicated that plans for buildings A and B were continued at architectural commission for color and overhang revisions. He stated that the applicant was seeking approval for the pad locations for four satellite buildings. He outlined the salient points from the staff report and recommended approval, sub�ect to conditions with the deletion of community development condition nos. 25 and 27. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the option of not having a Cook Street access had been explored to not add to the heavy traffic on Cook. He also asked if the proposal had received architectural commission approval. Mr. Winklepleck reiterated ... that the applicant was seeking pad location approval and would need an architectural commission approved landscape plan before permits could be issued. Commissioner Jonathan asked if pad approval were given, would the pro�ect return to the commission. Mr. Winklepleck replied that it normally would not. Commissioner Jonathan asked what the maximum building area was that would be allowed. Mr. Winklepleck indicated that the original approval was for 139,000 square feet; the new proposal was 60�, or 136, 944 square feet. Commissioner Jonathan indicated that he would be in favor of changing the design circulation to avoid a Cook Street access to help remove traffic from Cook Street. Mr. Folkers informed commission that the public works department was in favor of an access on Cook Street; he also indicated that there would be a median there. Mr. Drell noted that the worst movement would be a left turn out and a median would prohibit that; there would only be right turn in, right turn out access. 3 ... MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 Commissioner Jonathan asked why the project was being changed. Mr. Winklepleck deferred the question to the applicant. r+ Chairperson Whitlock o ened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. ROBERT RICCIARDI, 75-090 St. Charles Place, informed commission that he was the architect for the project. He stated that the new proposal was a better design and would put the two story building in the center of the pro�ect, instead of on Cook Street, which would preserve the open space. He felt this would be more compatible. He indicated that he basically agreed with staff and was not opposed to the conditions of approval. He stated that the architectural commission granted conditional approval with the addition of a three foot overhang and setbacks, as well as some new window treatments. He informed commission that it would be a wafflecrete building, but he did not have a sample yet, and indicated it would resemble split face concrete block. He felt that by having a three foot overhang and four foot setback on the lower level, more undulation would be provided to prevent a straight looking building. Chairperson Whitlock asked about the additional five feet in height. Mr. Ricciardi replied that the additional height was � to hide air conditioning equipment. He stated that it could be 25 feet with "houses" to hide the air conditioning equipment, but he would prefer the extra five feet to provide a better system. He indicated that there would also be an elevator and possibly a tower. Commissioner Richards felt it was a much better design, but had concerns with the extra five feet. He suggested having an equipment room or wells instead of roof equipment. Mr. Ricciardi described several different cooling types of systems and indicated that the system they would use would be a good system as well as being economical. He noted that a problem with wells was flooding created by clogging and high maintenance. Commissioner Richards noted that this was office professional zoning and he would not be as concerned if it were commercial like the use across the street. He felt the building should be brought down and built without the extra five feet. Mr. Ricciardi stated that he could work with staff to possibly lower the grade. Commissioner Richards noted that the city has codes that allow a specific number of feet that 4 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COI�lISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 a grade can be lowered or raised. Mr. Folkers noted that the .�.� building might be able to be dropped in relation to the storm drain access, but would have to be studied by an engineer. Mr. Diaz noted that the buildings could have eight foot high ceiling heights instead of ten feet. Commissioner Erwood indicated that they had approved the previous pro�ect at 30 feet and had deemed it appropriate. Mr. Drell noted that the building height had not been an issue when the other pro�ect was approved. Commissioner Richards noted that the pro�ect was approved as a mixed use, and there was a spirit of compromise. Mr. Ricciardi indicated that he would settle for 28 feet and if the pad could be lowered, 30 feet. Commissioner Richards found this acceptable. Chairperson Whitlock asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he had two concerns: 1 ) the new plan looked like a warehouse with glass, whereas the other plan looked better and provided more landscaping and a water feature; and 2) the pro,j ect being proposed was piece meal with no architectural commission approval and no landscape plan. ... He indicated that he would have a problem approving a building of this size based on what had been provided. Commissioner Richards asked the amount that would be contributed to the art in public places program and Mr. Drell replied approximately $50,000. He also felt that Commissioner Jonathan raised a good point in terms of what was being provided in terms of landscaping. Mr. Ricciardi stated that they could put in a fountain and work with public works to get entrances acceptable to the city. He noted that the pad buildings would have to come back. He indicated that his building ytould look similar to the Frank Urrutia building. He felt that some of the difference in landscaping was from shadowing and planter setbacks shown on the old plan. Mr. Diaz noted that the old plan had a model and hadn' t been just a rendering. Mr. Ricciardi reiterated that the building proposed would be a fine looking building and better than the original plan. Commissioner Richards felt that it would be appropriate for a more detailed plan to come back to the planning commission 5 r... MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 after architectural commission approval. He contemplated that issue of whether the new proposal would lessen the quality or .,.r only be a change. He was in favor of having the two story away from Cook Street and felt the commission would like to see more "gingerbread" than that being shown. He indicated that he was not requesting the applicant to spend a lot of money, but provide more and work with public works. Chairperson Whitlock requested a continuance to see the additional decorative enhancement prior to granting approval . She was also concerned about the height and wanted to see the building lowered in addition to the pad lowered. She stated that she wanted the project brought back. Commissioner Jonathan concurred. Mr. Ricciardi informed commission that he did not know what businesses would be on the individual pads, but would create a building that would look good on the outside. Mr. Diaz noted that the architect could come back with a specific material and architectural theme. Mr. Ricciardi noted that an architectural palette had been done in a similar manner for the Chazan pro�ect and when a specific building came in, they would know there was a basic architectural concept. Mr. Drell felt that the commission wanted something more interesting than the building mentioned on Cook, and to see the architectural style defined and more visual �.r excitement. Mr. Ricciardi concurred with the continuance and suggested that he receive approval for the pad locations and ingress. Chairperson Whitlock stated she would like to see the total concept with the treatment on Cook. Commissioner Richards indicated that they would like to see something more definite; treatment of other pads as to materials and general description, height, etc. Mr. Ricciardi felt a continuance of two weeks would be adequate time. Commissioner powns asked what height the commission wanted to see in twa weeks. Commissioner Richards felt that 28 feet and a drop in pad elevation would help. Chairperson Whitlock stated that she was in favor of 25 feet. Chairperson Whitlock reopened the public testimony and asked for a motion of continuance. Action• Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Downs, continuing PP 90-29, VAR 90-8 to February 19, 1991 . Carried 5-0. 6 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COA'IIriISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 C. Case No. DA 86-1 - THE VILLAS AT PALM DESERT, Applicant ..�. Request is for an amendment to a senior housing development agreement relating to affordable housing requirements. Mr. Drell reviewed the background of the pro�ect and indicated that the senior overlay required 20$ of the senior pro�ect to be reserved for low and moderate income households. An agreement was approved allowing the applicant the option of constructing 20 affordable conventional senior apartments offsite that had to be available by March, 1991, which was 24 months from the completion date of the original pro�ect. In the event that the offsite units were unavailable, 15 units were to be provided onsite. He noted that the applicant was having trouble with financing, similar to the Hacienda de Monterey project. Hacienda de Monterey addressed the problem by giving the city 5469, 000 to allow the city to purchase property for senior housing, which was before the Housing Authority now. The proposal before commission was that the Villas at Palm Desert would pay to the city $10,000 per unit, totaling $100,000 and provide five units onsite. He reviewed who would be eligible and described what services would be provided, as well as how much rent would be discounted. He recommended approval. �..► Commissioner Richards expressed opposition to the fact that an agreement was reached, then three years later the applicant wished to change it. He felt that there were too many uncertain factors involved. Mr. Drell noted that this was similar to the One Quail Place project, except it would be for senior citizens. He noted that the city had already purchased some land for senior housing. After further discussion, Chairperson Whitlock opened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . MR. STEVE BRADFORD, 14629 Breezeway Place, the applicant, stated that they were not trying to avoid or get out of anything. He wanted to participate in the city' s program and tried to reach an agreement where they could provide some units. Upon questioning, he described amenities that would be provided and the approxima�e amount of rent and the amount they would charge. 7 .... MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COA4IISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 Chairperson Whitlock closed the public testimony. �nr Commissioner Richards informed commission that he would be abstaining. Action• Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Richards abstained) . Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1493, recommending approval of DA 86-1 Amendment to city council. Carried 4-0- 1 (Commissioner Richards abstained) . D. � IRONWOOD PARK PLAN - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and the Ironwood Park Plan to allow development of a 14.83 acre passive neighborhood park on the south side of Haystack Road east of Chia Drive. Mr. Diaz informed commission that the proposed park plan was the culmination of several neighborhood meetings and reviewed his experience in park planning. He noted that two letters � had been received requesting an environmental impact report. He did not feel that was appropriate because the park would not create a significant impact on the environment. He noted that the park would be passive; organized sports would not be allowed and the park would be self-policing. He informed commission that the nearest home on Buckboard was 150 feet away. He indicated that the park would eliminate the cars jumping the curb at Chia and vehicular traffic would not go into the Silver Spur area. He indicated there would be picnic areas and a �ogging/biking trail, with the turfed area approximately two and a half to three acres. Staff felt that a restroom facility was needed for a park. In terms of parking, Mr. Diaz explained that there was an area for 36 cars. Ten to 15 would initially be built, with room for expansion at a later date if it were needed. He also noted that there would not be lights, but staff suggested that conduit along walk ways be included for a possible future need. He noted that Mr. Eric Johnson did most of the planning and a large section of the area would remain in a natural desert landscaping. 8 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COI�IISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 r�... Chairperson Whitlock asked who would maintain the park and Mr. Diaz replied that the city would maintain it, and stated that he hoped people in the area would call if there is any problem. He reviewed the history of the city' s acquisition of the park and reiterated that Mr. Johnson is a premier landscape designer in the desert. Commissioner powns stated that he hoped any resident of Palm Desert would be welcome in that park. Commissioner Jonathan asked why no lights would be provided since there are many nice evenings here. Mr. Diaz replied that there were concerns from the residents about encouraging usage of the park late in the evening. Chairperson Whitlock opened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. � MS. BETTY NEWMAN, a resident on Buckboard, stated that she was never given a petition, and would prefer that it be at the northern end instead of the southern end and felt that one reason Chia did not go through was to keep traffic out. She was told that the land was dedicated desert and they like to look at the roadrunners and quail. Mr. Diaz stated that while Chia is not going through, it was w.. because the Silver Spur residents at the time of Chazan' s development did not want the street to go through and the plan was amended. He also indicated that one reason that the plan couldr. ;o further north was because of the natural drainage area a:. ::he well site. He felt that the 150 foot buffer from the Buckboard area plus the type of activities being provided would assure there would not be a great deal of noise. Commissioner Richards noted that it would be a desert condition except for the grass area. Mr. Diaz also noted that the area would be cleaned up. MS. KATE OTTSTEADER informed commission that �he has owned a lot on Haystack for ten years and was confused by the map. She asked about a lot that backs onto Haystack, nine lots up from Moon Lane, that in 1981 was green and was being maintained by the city. She had approached city hall at that time because the brick wall on the property was only 18 inches in some areas and her lot was four feet deeper. She stated that a lot of children played had football on that lot and more than once they would bump their legs on that wall and start 9 ... MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 to come onto her property. She was afraid a child would in�ure themselves and so she contacted city hall to "� purchase that property or heighten the wall . She was told that the property was not saleable because it was a natural wash. She came here one winter and it was a mess and had returned to raw desert. She was informed a couple years ago that the property was for sale. Mr. Diaz replied that the R-1 43650 lot was privately owned property and indicated that they would not receive access through the park; if as part of the original subdivision there were access easements to the property via Sun Lane, he did not know, but the city was not required to nor would recommend access to Ironwood Park. Regarding the lot on Haystack he did not know if it was for sale. Mr. Folkers stated that as far as he knew, it was never owned by the city, but there was a right for water to flow across it because it was a natural drainage course, which is still the case. If someone developed that property, the city would insure there would be water going above ground or underground on that lot. Mrs. Ottsteader asked if the property could be fenced if it was purchased. Mr. Folkers concurred. MRS. HARRY NUDD, 73-409 Little Bend Trail, stated that her neighbor was also present. She suggested a cul-de- sac for Little Bend Trail and was afraid people would use �' her driveway as a turn-around. Mr. Diaz stated that at this time the city would not cul-de- sac that street. He felt that only people who might do that would be people from Silver Spur Ranch because other people wouldn't know how to get there. He suggested the use of no parking signs, but that would prevent her guests from parking in front of her house. She replied that her driveway was big enough to accommodate her guests. Commissioner Richards stated that it could be conditioned for no parking. Mrs. Nudd informed commission that when the area was provided curbs and gutters, they were cheated out of the gutters, and when the street sweeper cleans, he leaves the dirt on her side of the road because of inadequate turn-around area. Mr. Folkers informed her that he would look into the matter, and requested her phone number. Mrs. Nudd also hoped that room would be left for the native animals. MR. ROGER HORSWILL, 73-610 Buckboard, President of the Silver Spur Ranchers Association, and property owner of 10 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COI�►iISSION FEHRUARY 5, 1991 a lot on Little Bend Trail expressed concern about ..► traffic turning around in driveways. After further discussion, Mr. Diaz indicated that a "not a through street" sign could be installed, then if it was necessary, cul-de-saccing could be studied. Mr. Horswill indicated that he was not included on the list and stated that there were other residents that should have been notified. He expressed concern about the number of parking spaces being limited and the amount of green area, noting a need for water conservation and economic considerations. He stated that he appreciated the city' s median enhancement. He indicated that he would prefer that the area be left as natural as possible. Commissioner Richards noted that less than ten percent would be turf. After further discussion, Mr. Diaz noted that for any future changes in the park, a public hearing would take place and indicated that the over 200 people on the petition, as well as everyone within the 300 foot radius received notice of this hearing. Mr. Diaz stated that if Mr. Horswill provided him with a list of his members, he would mail them a notice also. MS. JUDY WISE, 73-228 Mirasall Court, stated that she lives in Monterra, and expressed concern regarding the ..� location of the parking area and restroom facility, as well as noise. Mr. Diaz noted that there was a distance of 200 feet from the first park bench to the Monterra pro�ect. Ms. Wise asked how the park was being funded and Mr. Diaz replied that it was from general funds and development fees. Commissioner Jonathan noted that this would be a public park and anyone had a right to use it and it would be preferable that they use the parking lot, rather than parking in front of the homes of local residents. He felt the minimum parking spaces necessary should be included. Commissioner Richards stated that the 62 acres around the civic center would be a large park. MR. NEAL NEWMAN, 73-280 Buckboard, expressed concern regarding trash dumping and problems with the Edison Substation and well. He also stated that there was debris left from the developer to the left. He said 11 +�... MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 there was a pipe left there that they tried to move, but couldn't. � Mr. Diaz felt this would be resolved after the park is developed, and if the city determines that the contractor was responsible, then he will be held responsible. Mr. Newman also stated that if the city would notify them, they could come up with more creative ideas for the park. MR. RANDALL WHITE, resident on Somera Road, noted that there was a pathway set in the plan and suggested that a material be used similar to Panorama Park that could be used by everyone. He thought that it was some type of rubber composition. Mr. Diaz indicated that the city was looking at two different types of surface. The part for the �oggers and one for the bikes and stated that they were not just looking at grey concrete. Mr. Folkers was not aware of the resilient material mentioned, but they had discussed using decomposed granite. He stated that he would look into the material used in Panorama Park. Mr. Diaz noted that if commission recommended approval of the plan to the city council, within the next month it would be at council for hearing, and if they approve it staff would be '� directed to prepare the working drawings, then go to bid with construction starting before the end of the year. Mr. White stated that the reason he was asking about the paths was because he recently visited the city of Monterey and they have a 12 to 14 foot wide pathway used for �ogging, cyclists, and all kinds of people. He felt that with that type of pathway with the different composition of materials being incorporated within a city-wide cycle path would be nice. Mr. Diaz indicated that they had been looking at ten feet wide paths, but 12 feet might be possible. Mr. White commended staff and the commission on their efforts on behalf of the park. Chairperson Whitlack closed the public testimony. Commissioner Jonathan felt a lot of good effort had been put into the plan to meet the concerns and moved for approval . 12 ..r MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 Action• ,r., Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Downs, recommending by minute motion recommending approval of the Ironwood Park Plan and certification of the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact to the city council. Carried 5-0. VIII. MISCELLANEOUS A. DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Review of alternate site location for prcoposed Palm Desert Elementary School on a 40-acre parcel on the southeast corner of Portola Avenue and Hovley Lane East. Mr. Diaz noted that the school district was reviewing the southeast corner of Portola Avenue and Hovley Lane East as a potential school site. Staff felt the site was appropriate. Chairperson Whitlock asked if anyone present wished to speak regarding this matter. There was no one. After discussion, commission determined that this location was r.► acceptable for the proposed elementary school. Action: Moved by Commissioner powns, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the Palm Desert Elementary School site by minute motion. Carried 5-0. IX. ORAL COP4IUNICATIONS Mr. Stefan Szabo addressed the commission and stated that he lives on San Jac�nto and was concerned about the amount and speed of traffic on their residential street. He felt that it was a dangerous situation. After discussion, it was determined that the matter would be referred to the technical traffic committee for review and study. X. COI�4iENTS None. 13 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 1991 XI. ADJOURNMENT � Moved by Commissioner Erwood, seconded by Commissioner powns, ad�ourning the meeting. Carried 5-0. The meetin adjourned at 9:44 p.m. RAM N A. DIAZ, ec ary ATTEST: C�� CAROL WHITLOCK, Chairperson /tm �.�r 14 .�r