Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1117 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - NOVEMBER 17, 1992 7 :00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE vow * * * * * * * * * * * * * I . CALL TO ORDER Chairman Spiegel called the meeting to order at 7 : 00 p.m. II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner White led in the pledge of allegiance. III . ROLL CALL Members Present: Bob Spiegel, Chairman Diane Cox Sabby Jonathan Randy White Carol Whitlock Members Absent: None Staff Present: Steve Smith Doug Phillips Gregg Holtz Tonya Monroe IV. PRESENTATION TO JIM RICHARDS AND BOB DOWNS FOR SERVICE ON THE ... PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Jonathan, Commissioner Whitlock and Chairman Spiegel commended both Bob Downs and Jim Richards for their contribution to the commission. Chairman Spiegel presented them with a commemorative picture drawn by the city' s graphic artist, Naning San Pedro. Mr. Downs thanked commission. Mr. Richards stated that it had been an honor and privilege to be on the commission. He said the city had grown a lot and had done many things . He felt the role of the planning commission remained the same and was a balance between three distinct entities : the developer, the public, and staff . He said it was a challenge and was a role he enjoyed tremendously and would miss it, but it was time to move on. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the October 20, 1992 meeting minutes . Action: Moved by Commissioner White, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, approving the November 17 , 1992 meeting minutes as submitted. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Cox abstained) . MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1992 VI . SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Smith summarized pertinent November 12 city council actions . VII . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PP 90-12 - WILLIAM WILSON, Applicant Request for approval of second one year time extension for an 8, 619 square foot industrial/showroom building at the northeast corner of Boardwalk and Mediterranean. Action• Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, approving the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 5-0 . VIII . PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case No. CUP 92-11 - MR. SEAN SONTAG, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to expand the existing Louise ' s Pantry restaurant by 600 square feet (enclose the existing east patio area) located in the 111 Town Center at Highway 111 and Town Center Way. Mr. Smith noted this item had been continued from October 6 and 20 . On October 27 the applicant received approval from the architectural review commission for the architecture on the proposed addition. The applicant followed their direction and altered the shape of the structure and added the hip roof element as shown the plans that were distributed in commission packets . Mr. Smith felt the decision before the commission was whether or not the city wanted to see an addition this close to the street. Staff recommended approval of the addition, subject to the conditions in the resolution. Commissioner White asked if this proposed addition was larger than the one presented at the last meeting; Mr. Smith said that the drawings might reflect a slight addition, but the conditions of approval restricted the enclosure to 600 square feet of interior space, which was the initial request. woo 2 I MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1992 *0W Chairman Spiegel opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. SEAN SONTAG, representing Louise' s Pantry, informed commission that they complied with architectural commission' s request and had provided extensive landscaping around the structure to blend in with the building. He felt that Ron Gregory had done a nice job on the landscaping. He requested approval . Chairman Spiegel asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . There was no one and Chairman Spiegel closed the public testimony and asked for comments by the commission. Commissioner White stated that he still had concerns about the view from the driveway onto Town Center Way and how this could create a traffic hazard. He said it was difficult now to see around that corner when coming through the driveway onto Town Center Way. Building a larger building without a view directly through the building he felt might exacerbate the problem. Commissioner Jonathan complimented the applicant on the vow addition, but going from a required setback of 25 feet, which was currently there, down to an exception of six feet was excessive. He felt the existing setback was justified and to i make an exception would be unjustified. Commissioner Whitlock concurred; she felt it was unfortunate that Mr. Sontag had gone through so many revisions with the architectural commission. She was disappointed that the commission was not able to increase the setback more than the six feet. Mr. Smith clarified that the setback would be six feet from the property line; the actual distance from the curb would be 16 ' 6" . Chairman Spiegel noted that right now there was outdoor dining at Louise' s Pantry and he was under the impression that the project was merely a matter of them enclosing the outdoor dining. Mr. Smith said that was the initial request, but when the applicant started revising the plan in accord with the architectural commission, the front wall of the patio dining area was moved out four feet closer to the street, but also pushed back further to the south away from the corner. He demonstrated the locations on the map. Chairman Spiegel asked ... if a variance was needed when the patio was initially built. 3 I MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1992 Mr. Smith replied no, that a variance was not needed because the walls were 42" high. After further discussion about the actual setback distance, Commissioner Jonathan explained that he did not feel the attributes had been discussed at the last meeting because architectural commission had not granted approval . He said that he was sensitive to any excess process that an applicant had to go through. He indicated that he had to review the merits of granting the setback. Commissioner Cox asked where a car would stop if a person was in a car going through the intersection to make a right-hand turn going toward Highway 111. She noted she was trying to understand the issue of line of sight and any hazard. Commissioner White demonstrated on the map his concerns with the landscaping and the possible hinderance to the line of sight. He said that he liked what the applicant had done with the architecture and it appeared very appealing, but he still had safety concerns . Chairman Spiegel reopened the public testimony to allow Mr. Sontag to address the commission. Mr. Sontag pointed out that based on the drawing that the line of sight was not an issue. He said that when standing at street level, the patio and the building itself was already elevated two and a half to three feet. His patio currently runs off the corner of the building and his walls were 48" and scalloped. They would be eliminating the walls and bringing the patio 12 feet in, so they were increasing the line of site. He said the engineering department came to him a couple of weeks ago and said they were considering installing a bus stop right on that corner; he and Mr. Folkers walked the corner and there was no room for it. He felt the line of sight had been improved. Mr. Sontag said that the reason for enclosing the patio was for the comfort of the clientele. He felt they had lost quite a bit of square footage, though architectural commission allowed them to go out four feet from the existing wall which would give them over 12 feet of landscaped area in the front. He thought that at the last meeting there was a positive feeling about the enclosure by the planning commission. Commissioner Jonathan said that he was not opposed to Louise ' s Pantry. His problem wasn't so much the line of sight as it was the general concept that once a project was completed, setbacks had been negotiated, as well as landscaping. Once the city had landscaping and nice things to look at, it was 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1992 very difficult for him to trespass on that because he felt the city was losing aesthetic value. He noted that in cities that have deteriorated one thing that came to mind was that they were all cement and he cited Los Angeles as an example, where it was hard to find a tree anywhere, much less a greenbelt with meandering sidewalks . That was his problem. Mr. Sontag said that he understood that, but noted that there were delivery doors and solid concrete existing in this area. He said they were planning to attract the eye more to the corner and the look of the building would be improved with the enclosure. He felt with the increased landscaping with the look of the patio and glass would be an improvement to the entire site. Commissioner Jonathan said that he could see his point and asked about the section on the left. Mr. Sontag said there was an additional four feet to what was currently existing and it lined up with the existing columns of the building. He felt that was more in tune with exactly what was built. He explained that they added about four feet onto that and the added landscaping would wrap all the way around. Commissioner Jonathan indicated that he was beginning to be persuaded. Mr. Smith clarified that there was a daylight triangle at the intersection in that the city had a standard for the free flow of traffic to keep walls and landscaping out of the area. He showed on the map how it related to the proposal . He also distributed a picture to the commission of the existing landscaping and indicated that there was a problem now, but the landscaping would be improved when the enclosure was completed. He said that the addition of palms would not be a sight problem. Commissioner Cox asked if the walls facing Town Center Way would be glass . Mr. Sontag said there would be a wall 32" high; the existing was about 48" high with scallops between the columns and they would run their glass from 42" up to about eight feet. He stated they wanted to keep the patio feeling, but also wanted to have a controlled climate for the customers . Chairman Spiegel closed the public testimony and asked for additional comments from the commission. Mr. Smith noted that Commissioner White said that if he had a perspective on the corner showing the building and the landscaping out to the street, he would be better able to make 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17 , 1992 a decision. Commissioner White indicated that it would make " it easier to see precisely what was being proposed and suggested a continuance. Chairman Spiegel recommended that commission meet at the site. Mr. Smith indicated that the site could be staked and marked. Chairman Spiegel reopened the public testimony and asked for a motion of continuance. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, continuing CUP 92-11 to December 1, 1992 by minute motion. Carried 5-0 . B. Case No. ADJ 92-7 - ZACHARY L. HENSLEY, Applicant Request for an appeal of a denial by the Palm Desert Zoning Administrator of rear yard setback adjustment from 20 feet to 16 feet for a room addition at 74-370 Covered Wagon Trail . Mr. Smith explained that the applicant was seeking a reduction in his required rear yard setback from 20 feet to 16 feet to allow a room addition. Per the normal procedure for the department, an adjustment request was circulated--if any opposition was received, then the request was denied and the applicant had the ability to appeal the decision to commission, which was what happened. He noted there was a letter from Mr. Mark Ryan, a resident on Old Prospector, who wrote opposing the addition. The zoning administrator concurred with Mr. Ryan and denied the request. The applicant appealed his decision, hence the item was before commission. Commissioner Whitlock asked if Mr. Ryan was the only neighbor opposed to the request; someone from the audience said no. Chairman Spiegel opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. There was no response. Someone from the audience said that Mr. Hensley left the building. Chairman Spiegel asked if anyone wished to address the commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . MR. JOHN ZIMMER, 74-373 Old Prospector, said he lived directly behind Mr. Hensley' s house. He said that he attended the meeting with Mr. Diaz and he brought pictures and voiced his concerns at that time and the request was denied. He felt that Mr. Hensley left 6 i I i MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1992 i because he heard Commissioner Jonathan talking about setbacks on the previous case. MR. JACK HENNESEY, 74-399 Old Prospector, stated that the man in back of him on Covered Wagon let his oleanders grow too high and now he wasn't able to see the mountains . He felt if the variance was allowed he would be looking right into this man' s property. He indicated it would be too close. Chairman Spiegel closed the public testimony and asked for comments from the commission. Commissioner Whitlock concurred with the zoning administrator i and moved for denial . Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner White, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0 . Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner White, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1593, denying ADJ 92-7 . Carried 5-0 . IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Request for a Zoning Ordinance Amendment - LARRY E. DODD, Applicant Mr. Smith explained that the director was seeking direction from the commission as to whether staff should proceed with certain amendments to the zoning ordinance as it related to commercial zones, particularly the PC-2 and PC-3 zones . He noted that on the Carver development there was a situation where one zone permitted supermarkets and the other zone didn' t. One zone had a maximum size limit and minimum size limit for the properties and maximum building sizes . Mr. Dodd had a proposal that was neither one. He indicated that it was a matter of whether or not staff should proceed with an amendment for public hearing. Commissioner Jonathan clarified that PC-3 wouldn't let in supermarkets and PC-2 limited the size of buildings, so a large supermarket wouldn't be allowed. Mr. Smith concurred and indicated that this would be an opportunity to clear up the conflictingstandards . Mr. Smith explained that staff P +r.r 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1992 could not initiate changes to the zoning ordinance, it could only be done with the direction from the planning commission. Action: Commission directed staff to proceed with the amendment. X. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. XI . COMMENTS Chairman Spiegel stated that in the future projects should not be brought to the planning commission until it had received architectural commission approval, citing Mr. Sontag' s item as an example. Mr. Smith said that he would pass that message on to the rest of the staff. XII . ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner White, adjourning the meeting. Carried 5-0 . The meeting was adjourned at 7 : 48 p.m. RAMON A. DIAZ , StacrdYary ATTEST: R BE T A. SPIEGE , C r Palm Desert Planning ommission /tm 440