Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0507 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY - MAY 7, 1996 7 :00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * � I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Beaty called the meeting to order at 7 :01 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Jonathan led in the pledge of allegiance. III . ROLL CALL Members Present: Paul Beaty, Chairperson Sonia Campbell George Fernandez Sabby Jonathan Members Absent: Jim Ferguson Staff Members : Phil Drell Joe Gauqush Marshall Rudolph Tonya Monroe Steve Smith IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: �""' Consideration of the April 16, 1996 meeting minutes . Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, approving the April 16, 1996 meeting minutes . Carried 4-0 . V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION: Mr. Smith summarized pertinent April 25, 1996 council actions . VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PM 27419 - EDC CONSULTANTS, Applicant Request for approval of a first one-year time extension for a tentative parcel map subdividing 17 acres into 19 industrial lots . Project site is � located approximately one half mile easterly of Monterey Avenue, northerly of the future extension of Dinah Shore MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 Drive, and southerly of the Southern Pacific Railroad and Interstate 10 . r„� B. Case No. PMW 96-14 - SUNRISE DESERT PARTNERS, Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to adjust lot lines of condominium lots and golf course lots 8, 10 and 11 of Tract 26123-3 to accommodate common area Homeowners Association swimming pool plotting within Indian Ridge Country Club. Action: Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, approving the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 4-0. VIII . PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case No. CUP 96-12 - MS. MARIE ELAINE MALONEY for MONTESSORI SCHOOL OF THE VALLEY, Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and � conditional use permit to allow a 3535 square foot building expansion and to increase the permitted number of students from 60 to 120 children to amend the maximum age served from five years to 12 years and to reduce the required parking lot from 40 spaces to 15 spaces for the existing Montessori School at 43-250 Warner Trail . Mr. Smith noted that this matter was continued from the April 16, 1996 meeting. The applicant was requested to appear before the Project Area 4 Committee which Mr. Brashear and Ms . Maioney did. The committee heard that the site on Mountain View and Warner Trail was presently used by 40 students between the ages of two and a half years and five years and that the Palm Desert Country Club recreation building located at Avenue of the States houses another 40 students six years and above. The school presently provides through fifth grade. The present goal is to consolidate the school under one roof to increase the maximum number of students to 120 and provide for a sixth grade. In order to accomplish this the applicant needs the amendment to the county approved permit ( i .e. increasing the number permitted from 60 to 120, changing the age served from five years to a � 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 maximum of 12 years) . While the applicant is seeking �. approval for 120 students, Ms . Maloney indicated that a more realistic number would be 100, but they need the additional flexibility. They were talking about 100 to 120 students . The committee noted that they would be looking at potentially two and a half to three times more noise impacts from the playground. Mr. Brashear indicated that he was prepared to create a fence that would run in an east-west direction 70 feet north of the existing south property line. Staff previously suggested a ten foot buffer planted with citrus trees (condition no. 13) . Mr. Brashear suggested that the wall be moved north 70 feet to create a 70 foot buffer that at some point in the future they might process a parcel map on to create another single family lot fronting onto Warner Trail . It would be a good size residential lot fitting in with the existing lots on Warner Trail . The committee considered that and suggested that basically if the commission goes along with the expansion of the school, that they should also limit the maximum number of children on the playground at any one time to 20 . They concurred that the fence should be moved 70 feet north of the south property line. The committee also took the position that being a Montessori educational school was important in that they felt it was a mitigating factor in that its impacts on the community could be less than other educational uses, hence `•+ they suggested a condition that any expansion and the additional children served would only apply as long as the facility was used specifically as a Montessori School . The bottom of page 2 of the staff report noted that staff hoped to see a revised landscape plan and new wall plan and gating system which Mr. Brashear did discuss . Mr. Smith had not yet seen it. Staff continued to recommend approval with condition #13 being replaced to read, "Six foot high fence/wall be constructed to run east-west 70 feet north of the south property line and that the play area be located north of the new fence wall . The 70 foot wide area south of the new fence would act as a buffer. " Staff also suggested the additions of conditions 14 and 15 : The maximum number of children permitted on the playground at any one time shall be 20 children; and, that this approval applies only to the use of the property as a Montessori School . Any other school or use of the property must be approved through Planning Commission. Mr. Smith noted that he had a phone call from Jane Peters who told him she lived across Warner Trail . She was concerned that the buffer area could become a dumping ground if it wasn' t fenced off down to the existing property line fence. He suggested that the fence go down and tie in so they wouldn't have access from Warner Trail to that area. Staff inet with Mr. Brashear and Ms . Maloney before the Project Area 4 Committee meeting and Mr. Brashear did a memo � outlining the items they discussed and that memo/letter was 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 : presented to the Pro�ect Area 4 Committee. He asked for any � questions . � Chairperson Beaty stated that the public hearing was still open from the last meeting. He requested that comments that were expressed at the last meeting not be repeated. He asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. GARY BRASHEAR, representing Ms . Maloney, stated that Mr. Smith pretty much said it all . He wanted to add three things that they just met on with the area residents : 1) he would suggest the continuity of the wall and fence along the 70 foot lot space, it would add continuity and landscaping and he agreed with that; 2 ) Coleen Richey Delong along Mountain View wanted a gate and wall fronting her home so she wouldn't see the unsightly parking lot and cars coming and going and he would agree to gate it and wall it; he felt it was about 50 to 70 feet there. He noted that it was suggested to wall in the east boundary or fence it in with chain link fence to possibly cut down on crime and Ms . Delong requested that they wrap it in vines so that it would be better looking and he had no problem with that. 3) the time of the school would be extended and provide after � school programs . Instead of stopping at 2 : 30 p.m. or � 3 : 00 p.m. , he wanted to keep it open until 6 : 00 p.m. for � the after school programs . Those were the three items they discussed. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Brashear met with a cross representation of the surrounding residents . Mr. Brashear stated that they met with four or five just now. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Brashear had space limitations regarding parking that should become an issue. Mr. Brashear replied no. Commissioner Jonathan asked if they could provide more spaces than the 15 spaces being discussed. Mr. Brashear noted that there were 22 being required now. Staff concurred that the number was 22 . Mr. Brashear said that if they were required to go beyond the 22 spaces, there was room for them. Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . MRS. OLIVEIRA, 43-590 Warner Trail, said that they have a school on Warner Trail and Fred Waring. Those children were there every day, but there was vandalism. The traffic was "out of this world" and the street was used for speeding. This use would add more children and � more cars and more speeding. The speeding included the � buses . They asked for a four-way stop sign at the 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 corner and that was refused. Now they want more '� congestion, more noise and more children. She felt this would be unfair to the residents . MS. JOYCE FRISCOE, a resident of Robin Road and a member of the Project Area 4 Committee, said they received a notice last night in their mail boxes that a meeting would be today at 5 : 00 p.m. and basically they resolved a lot of the concerns presented. One thing that came up was the extended hours, which she had been unaware of . There might be less than 120 children until 6 : 00 p.m. , but that needed to be addressed. If the hours were extended to 6 : 00 p.m. to allow after school programs, then perhaps the number of children could be restricted. Her understanding was that the extended hours were for the after school programs . She showed the commission a copy of a drawing and asked if there would be another one that would reflect the changes or conditions . Mr. Smith stated that condition no. 7 in the resolution required that the wall across the Warner Trail frantage with design and location had to be approved by architectural review commission. That would take into account that, as well as the landscape plan that Mr. Brashear related to. The plan Ms . Friscoe had was not acceptable to staff . r.. Ms . Friscoe asked about the church use and how that would be clarified. If it would still be available because the church currently rents the space on Sunday mornings for services . The way it is now, she asked if the facility would be used for a church for 156 people on Sundays, as well as the 120 children during the week. She didn't feel the church membership was currently 156 people, but asked if that had been taken into consideration. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the applicant appeared before the Project Area 4 Committee. Ms . Friscoe concurred. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he apparently didn' t communicate his desires clearly enough, but he was a little disappointed at what didn't happen. He personally hoped and requested at the last meeting that Project Area 4 facilitate a meeting of all the concerned parties to see if something could be resolved and the needs of the applicant met while the concerns of the residents were addressed at the same time. He wasn't looking for another quasi-Planning Commission that could entertain the applicant and put on restrictions. Ms. Friscoe said that there was quite a bit of confusion in the parking lot after the meeting as to who � actually would put on the neighborhood meeting. She understood that it was going before the Project Area 4 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 Committee, but that if there was going to be a neighborhood � meeting, the meeting would be put on by Mr. Brashear and he ,�,� expressed that desire in the parking lot that night and that he would take responsibility for the neighborhood meeting. She left it up to the planning department. Mr. Brashear called her the Friday after the meeting, they were to meet on the first, and asked if there would be a separate meeting and there was some confusion. She felt that Tuesday was late notice and it was her understanding that there might be one on Friday after the Project Area 4 meeting and before this Planning Commission meeting. He might have felt it wasn't necessary because they mitigated a lot of the concerns, but then they did get a notice last night from the applicant for a meeting today. His understanding was that only people within the 300 foot range needed to be notified. Ms . Friscoe disagreed with that saying that it was the neighborhood streets that would be impacted by the school itself. Commissioner Jonathan felt that was something that could be explored in the future because he saw a very constructive and useful role for the Project Area 4 Committee to play in these types of situations and they have the resources of the city where she has the ability to make a formal notice or just have someone going up and down the street stuffing mail boxes . That might be something that could be refined in the ? future. Ms . Friscoe concurred. � MS. COLEEN RICHEY DELONG stated that she wanted to � verify what Mrs . Friscoe said. She indicated that she was a resident at 77-550 Mountain View across the street from Montessori School . After she left the last Planning Commission meeting she was under the impression that Mr. Brashear would get a hold of the neighborhood people and they would get together in a timely time. There was confusion and she was thinking like Mrs . Friscoe that after the Project Area 4 meeting they would get together with the neighbors . She said she attended the meeting with Mr. Brashear at 5 : 00 p.m. at the Montessori School and her concern was that basically, while she was not against the school going in and believed in Montessori, she looked straight across at the parking lot. That was the view from her living room, dining room and kitchen. When she bought her property this was just a sleepy little church and they met every Sunday and then when the school came in it was a limited amount of people, but now they were talking about more than doubling the size. She didn' t want to look out at a bunch of cars going by, traffic, and there was a lot of dust because it was a dirt road. There was `� a lot of crime that went on there and security was a problem. Every Friday night there were teenagers out � there partying and drinking beer. She suggested that 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 they put two security gates in the front on Mountain �.. View and a cyclone fence to go all the way down enclosing the parking lot and then put up a snail vine that would grow rapidly and cover the fence. That was something that would beautify the neighborhood. If they were allowed to have the children until 6 : 00 p.m. instead of 2 : 30 p.m. , she felt there should be a limit to the number of children allowed. If they were allowed to keep this as a church and 15 or 22 parking spaces was an issue, that was not many spaces for church members and they would have to park out on the street. That needed to be clarified. Also, there was talk about the 70 foot lot on Warner Trail to be an R-1 property and right now this was just one great big R-1 lot even though it was close to two acres . The map that she was given yesterday showed that there are two lots which would be a little over an acre that would become a flag lot from the parking lot of the church that qoes backwards . They would almost have to have an easement into their parking lot to sell it as an R-1 use. This was R-1 property but it was 40, 000 square feet per unit on Mountain View, Robin and Delaware. She asked that in the future that this stay R-1 40,000 and they shouldn' t be breaking up these acre parcels . They should enclose that parking lot for security reasons, to make it +r aesthetic with a fence and install security gates in front like Learning Tree, Tot Stop, and others that are enclosed. She felt that would provide some improvement. MR. WESLEY OLIPHANT, 77-900 Avenue of the States, informed commission that he was the parent of an eight year old daughter that goes to the Montessori School . Both he and his wife support Ms . Maloney in her venture and her teaching technique has reflected on his daughter immensely. He was happy to think that his daughter could attend this school for another year and gave Ms . Maloney his support 100$ . He felt it was important that it wasn't just from a developer' s point of view, but also from a parent' s . MS. KAREN TELLIER stated that she has a five year old son in the Montessori School and when she first came to Ms . Maloney she was overwhelmed with some of the techniques and achievements that the children have shown. In the four months her child has been attending there he has accomplished reading skills, which he did not have, spelling and arithmetic at the age of five. It was overwhelming for her because she went through many schools, including St. Margaret' s . She searched ,� for three years and was thrilled with the expansion so that her child could continue his education under the 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 � � Montessori School teaching. The children that go to � this school are beyond disciplined, they are respectful and with today' s society it was important for the children to be taught these skills and techniques and to go into the world and become better adults . If there were more schools like this, she felt there would be more children and parents that all work together. She said that she has three friends that live on this street and she spends a lot of her afternoons at their homes entertaining their other children and she also has a 22 month old son. As far as the traffic, it wasn' � from the parents so much. They take their children to school in the morning and car pool many times, especially with gas prices . They have several parents that pick up three or four students and take them and bring them home. They trade off. Some parents have to work until 5 : 00 or 6 : 00 p.m. The traffic she has seen was mostly people in a hurry to get to work. This was a good short cut. They were the ones speeding. Regarding the after hours, they have dance classes and ballet, as well as karate and things that children can be a part of, rather than going home and then being sent to another school or location for ballet or karate. She stated that when she picks up her child there generally is only two cars parked there. She didn' t feel there was a need for a ; lot of parking stalls . „� MRS. MONAGHAN, a resident at 43-170 Warner Trail, across the street from Montessori School . She agreed with Ms . Tellier and had never seen a dozen cars in that parking lot at the same time. She felt that allowing 30 children out at the same time was more reasonable then 20 . She noted that they have been taking the children out at lunch and they weren't at all noisy. She stated that the children down the street made more noise. She indicated that she would like to see a stop sign at Warner Trail . With the opening of Gerald Ford School they now have 150-200 cars speeding down Warner Trail to drop their children off in the morning and they come roaring back in the afternoon. Her daughter has children there and they do car pool . This has become a major street so there would be cars, but she wanted to see a stop sign to cut down on the speeding on that street. She also asked that the block wall be made smaller because the more wall area there was, the more graffiti would be out there until the landscaping could protect it. Otherwise, she was in favor of the school and wanted to see that corner cleaned up. Once the property was gated, there wouldn't be all of the kids a there, the drug deals in the lot or kids climbing the � roofs and smoking and trying to set fire to the building. � 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 MS. KATHY MAGID stated that she also has a home on � Warner Trail and her children attend school there and she wanted to re-emphasize that the children were getting a great education up to sixth grade. They were learning about politics, the world and she would match her child against any child in the valley academically and she felt the school was that important. They agreed with the four-way stop and Ms . Maloney would do anything she could to make sure the neighbors were happy and that the school went in according to schedule. She stated that now that they knew what the complaints were, they were easy to resolve. She hoped this proposal would be approved. Mr. Brashear stated that he and his wife were also fortunate to have a child in this school . He felt it was phenomenal what the school does . He was a developer, but he was doing this on a gratis basis, as well as many of the contractors, landscaping, etc . Most people were donating their time because they believe so much in this school . As far as the noticing, they didn't know about the Project Area 4 Committee until a month ago and they have done everything they could. There might have been some misunderstandings, but he felt that was solved. He requested that Ms . Maloney �rr address the commission on the after school programs and what she wants to accomplish. She owns the school and she deserves all the accolades . MS. ELAINE MALONEY stated that she was the owner and director of the Montessori School of the Valley. Their academic day was from 8 : 30 a.m. to 2 : 30 p.m. Monday through Friday. They offer an after school program from 2 : 30 p.m. to 5 : 30 p.m. currently. There were enrichment classes in ballet, theater, Tae Kwon-Do and tutoring. The numbers of children involved in these classes were around 10-15 daily. The children were enrolled in the school so they remained in the school . There was no traffic delivering these children and the children were promptly picked up at 5 : 30 p.m. She hoped to extend this year until 6 : 00 p.m. Commissioner Campbell asked if there were would be more than 20 children after school, and if they would be inside and not on the playground. Ms . Maloney concurred, and indicated that if they did go outdoors for refreshments or for art work there wouldn't be any more than eight to ten at a time. Chairperson Beaty closed the public hearing and asked for �.. commission comments . 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 Commissioner Jonathan stated that he was satisfied that the applicant did an effective job in mitigating the concerns of � the residents . He was a little disappointed in the process and lack of communication, but we would learn and we go along. He felt that because of the possibility of special events, more than 22 spaces were needed, especially if the school grows . He wanted to see 30 spaces and he understood that this would not be a problem because the spaces were there. He has had children in school for many years and there always seemed to be special events and assemblies or award ceremonies or Christmas programs or athletic competitions and in those instances he didn't want to see car parking spilling over into the streets and surrounding neighborhoods . He suggested 30 parking spaces . Regarding hours of operation, he felt going to 6 : 00 p.m. made sense on weekdays and had no problem with expanding those hours . Condition 15 limiting this to a Montessori School he felt was inappropriate. If it was going to have a permitted school use, it should just be a permitted school use . It was operating under a conditional use permit so if another school should take over the site, there would be a vehicle for complaints . Mr. Drell said that if there were complaints the commission could review it, but the condition provided for an automatic review if they change tenants . Commission would have the opportunity to review immediately any change in tenant. Commissioner Jonathan understood staff ' s � recommendation but he felt that condition was unwarranted because the use was under a conditional use permit and if there was another operator of the educational facility and that operator was not as neighborly as the existing operator, because there was a conditional use permit there was a built- in mechanism for complaints to be heard and for effective action to be taken. He was also concerned about the limit of 20 children if they ran into a situation where future success necessitated 22 or 23 children, so he would like to see that condition raised to 30 children. With those suggestions, he felt the applicant had done a good, effective job listening to and hearing the concerns of the residents . It was clearly an educational program that was beneficial to the community of Palm Desert and the Coachella Valley and commended all those involved. He was prepared to move for approval as amended. Commissioner Campbell concurred and was in favor of the 30 spaces . Also, the fenced wall in a form that is most appropriate with the security gates . She had no problem with the extended hours to 6 : 00 p.m. as far as there being no more than eight to ten children outside during those after school hours . Her son went to a private school up to the ninth grade and she felt it was the best education children could ' have. As to the traffic, she did live in Desert Breezes and � 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 she went back and forth on Fred Waring and didn't see a �'" problem with a stop sign at Fred Waring and Mountain View. She didn't feel it was the parents creating the traffic probZem on Fred Waring, but the other speeders going from Fred Waring to Country Club. She was in favor of the project. Commissioner Fernandez stated that he was also in favor of the project and he agreed with Commissioners Jonathan and Campbell as far as the extended hours and 30 children outside. He felt they were doing a great job that was good for the community and he supported the project. Chairperson Beaty concurred. He didn't feel that the number of cars that the school would generate would be a significant contributor to the traffic problem. He noted that this street was being looked at by the traf f ic engineer and it has been targeted by the police department and they were trying to get some additional enforcement and hoped that situation wouZd improve in the future. Mr. Drell noted that the applicant mentioned the construction of a wall for the adjacent property owner across the parking lot. Mr. Brashear felt that Ms . Delong wanted gates, ingress/egress and a wall in front of her house on Mountain ` View. Mr. Drell noted that would be an additional condition. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he would make a formal motion including amending condition 8 to provide for 30 spaces, condition 6 to provide for hours of operation from 8: 00 a.m. to 6 :00 p.m. on weekdays and removing condition 15 regarding the limitation to Montessori School and amending condition 14 to allow up to 30 children on the playground and adding a condition regarding the gates and wall on Mountain View. Chairperson Beaty asked if the commission would have a problem with leaving condition 15 in the conditions . Commissioner Jonathan stated that he would suggest removing that limitation of a Montessori School only because he felt it was overly restrictive because there was a conditional use permit that allows them to review it if there is a problem. He felt the commission needed to look at the use, not the user. Mr. Brashear asked if the commission was going to add a condition regarding the stop sign. Chairperson Beaty said it would not be a condition, it would be studied by the city to see if it was warranted. Mr. Gaugush said that was correct. The city has looked at other locations on Warner Trail with respect to the multi-way stops . They didn' t meet the � necessary warrants and staff would eontinue to study and observe Warner Trail. In the event that a need developed, 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 the city would proceed at that time. Chairperson Beaty again � noted that the city has targeted Warner Trail as a speeding � area and have asked for increased surveillance. Mr. Smith noted that in condition 7 after the word "design" in the second line needed the additional words "slump stone wall interspersed with open wrought iron sections" . Commission concurred and the motion was amended. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0 . Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1739, approving CUP 96-12, subject to conditions as amended. Carried 4-0 . B. Case No. CUP 96-16 - MONTEREY PARTNERS, LTD. , Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the operation of a 1575 square foot Togo' s sandwiches/ salads restaurant with sale of beer and t wine in an existing building in the � Plaza de Monterey center at the southeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Country Club Drive. Mr. Smith said that the request was to locate a new Togo' s Restaurant in the octagonal-shaped building located midway in the center. He noted that Wendy' s in January 1995 was reviewed by the commission for that location. At that time the commission heard various concerns from the area residents . They were enumerated in the staff report. Staff felt those matters had been addressed and commission concurred with staf f and commission approved Wendy' s for this location subject to conditions . The commission' s action was appealed to the city council. The appeal was upheld, meaning that Wendy' s was not approved for that location. Four concerns enumerated by the city council were that there was an odor problem in the neighborhood that could be exacerbated by the new Wendy' s; there was a parking problem that could be exacerbated; there was an existing trash problem which could be exacerbated; and that the existing center was congested, which could be further exacerbated. The applicant which is the center operator wishes approval for Togo' s at 1,575 x square feet. This compares to the 2, 100 square foot proposal by Wendy' s . The floor plan was on display. The request would include the sale of beer and wine. Total seating would 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 be 40 persons . Hours af operation would be from 10 : 30 a.m. � until 8 : 00 p.m. weekdays, 10 : 30 a.m. until 9 : 00 p.m. on weekends. There would be no cooking. The bread was baked elsewhere and delivered to this site. It was a sandwich and salad shop so there was no grease trap/interceptor, no ventilation hood, no gas service. They would have a commercial microwave oven. Essentially, staff felt that the reasons given for the denial of Wendy' s have been addressed with this new proposal . Regarding the odor, they would not be addinq to it because there was no cooking. Staff did a parking survey beginning April 8 . There were a total of 61 available parking spaces . Staff found that between 11 : 30 a.m. and 1: 15 p.m. weekdays there was an average of 28 vacant spaces in that area. When staff looked at it in December of 1994 for the Wendy' s proposal, there was about 35 vacant spaces but they expanded the area they were looking at to also include the spaces to the east of the driveway. At that time they were looking at a possible 103 spaces . If anything, the percentage of vacant parking has increased. Vacant spaces ranged from 23 to 37 out of the total 61 . For a restaurant of this size, if it was a stand alone staff would be looking for 16 parking spaces, 1 per 100 . The area staff looked at was reasonable in that it was approximately within 120 feet of the restaurant itself . With respect to the trash problem, after council rejected the Wendy' s � proposal, staff inet with the center representative, Mr. Spinello, who would address the commission and he did look into the trash problem at that point. Essentially what they were able to do was go in and without changing the trash container unit (the containers were in-ground) they were able to increase the size of the dumpsters because the holes were deeper than the containers they were using at that point. They achieved additional capacity, and where necessary ( i .e. the Kenny Roger' s area) they increased the pickup frequency as well . Code Enforcement advises that the complaints about the trash there have decreased. Mr. Smith viewed the parking lot for four Mondays and the trash bin in front of this location was full every Monday at noon. In talking with Code Compliance they felt it was weekenders from the community stopping by to drop off their trash as they left town. As a condition, staff was requiring that they increase the capacity of that location. He felt that with a use there until 9 :00 p.m. on Sunday nights that problem might be avoided. He noted with the addition of Togo' s there would only be a restaurant mix of less than 14� in the center. Typically the city allowed up to 20$ restaurant use in the overall mix. The city needed to be especially careful because the restaurants that were there were very successful . Basically staff did not feel this use would add to the odor, � congestion, parking and trash problem with this use. Staff 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 recommended approval subject to the conditions in the draft � resolution. � Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. SAM SPINELLO, 74-947 Highway 111 in Indian Wells, stated that he was the applicant. He noted that their goal was to tenant the building in a way that would not infringe upon the neighboring community or the existing tenants, while putting in another tenant to generate income for the owner. The first issue at hand was to look a� the industries already represented in their shopping center and not infringe upon their livelihood. It was difficult with a center like this with as many shops as this one represents . First they were charged with finding a use that would not infringe on those existing tenants . They have done that in that this one didn't directly effect any other tenant from their core business standpoint. Looking at the other issues brought up from Wendy' s like congestion, smell, trash and parking, they have attempted to mitigate that. He said they filtered through many uses before coming back with Togo' s . This was a neighborhood shopping center and primarily serviced this immediate area and they � didn' t want to infringe upon their comforts of living. � He felt they have picked a use that would be compatible. Chairperson Beaty indicated that he was not familiar with Togo 's and asked if it compared to a Subway Sandwich Shop. Mr. Spinello said it was very comparable. There currently weren't any Togo' s in the desert, although there would be one to follow in Palm Springs . He had gone out of the area to bring one here. It was similar to a Subway but with a little more pizazz/ambience. Commissioner Campbell asked if there would be any complaints from Lucky' s since they also serve sandwiches and salads . Mr. Spinello replied that typically there weren' t problems with larger stores because this was such a small portion of their sales . If they were to infringe upon a key tenant, they would be in for a real fight and they would have stopped immediately. Commissioner Campbell asked if the restaurant would only involve those locals that were there or if customers would be coming from other professional offices to buy sandwiches and salads . That would add to the traffic there. Mr. Spinello felt they could expect a fair amount of people from outside the immediate community to come to this � location. ; � � 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to address the rr.. commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . MR. BOB SCHREIBER, a resident of 40-027 Sagewood, which sits behind the Plaza de Monterey shopping center. He said that he was here to give the commission a slice of the nightmare that it was like living with this shopping center and Monterey Partners as their neighbor. They were awakened this morning at 6 :45 a.m. when the street sweeper came through f or the f ourth or f i f th time in s ix days . It was not only a street sweeper trying to keep up with the trash and garbage, but it was an air blower. They play a game with them because they knew that before 7 : 00 or 8 :00 a.m. the code enforcement officers weren' t out and they knew that the response time from the Sheriff ' s Department was at least 15-30 minutes if they were lucky, especially with this type of priority. They decided to sneak in 15 to 20 minutes early before the street sweepers were allowed. The homes along this wall rumble and shake several times a week. Kenny Roger' s Roasters who supposedly mitigated what they were supposed to be doing had delivery on Tuesday nights and Friday nights . They were very nice and decided to change their delivery schedule from 2 : 00 a.m. or 3 : 00 a.m. where a Mack truck was parked 25 feet from his �r.. bedroom window with a refrigerator on, shaking. They have decided they would be magnanimous and go within the 10 : 00 limit and they would park there about 9 : 45 and sometimes carry through until 10 : 30 or 11 : 00 . Again knowing that by the time the deputy sheriff got there that it would be too late. He has only managed to take three or four hours off work one day to actually camp out and wait for a sheriff ' s deputy to come and site a noise violator for the sweeping. They managed to get on ticket last month. They call whenever they can. They were not flatly ignored, they were apologized to, but it was never ending. Whoever came up with the idea of circling a few parking spaces on a map and saying that was some sort of scientific study had to be out of their mind. It was absolutely not a scientific study to circle an arbitrary 61 parking spaces and say they looked at the area from 10:00 a.m. to 1 : 00 p.m. , which was the absolute quietest time of the day in that shopping center. He stated that he would love for the commission to go to this center right now and see if they could even move without getting hit by a car while walking to try and find a space or to try and go to any of the restaurants there. He knew that they tried to be good neighbors by cleaning up, which is why they have the sweepers there four times a week instead of the once °ir or twice a week, but it was almost a comic response when 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 they try and voice their concerns to the Sheriff ' s � Department or to Code Enforcement. They have been � handled politely, but it was a nightmare. Their home absolutely vibrated, shakes, shudders and thunders four- six times a week, usually at 6 : 30 a.m. to 7 : 00 a.m. and 10 : 00 p.m. to 12 : 00 a.m. The employees from Papa Dan' s and Kenny Roger's restaurants have boom boxes in their cars and they fire them up every night. He gets ready at 10 : 00 p.m. because the employees were firing up their boom boxes and it was a nightmare living there. The response they have gotten was hands up in the air. Kenny Roger' s is a successful restaurant with a nice clientele of people and they go there themselves . The trash problem has not been taken care of . Cockroaches and vermin come right over the wall into the Sagewood development. Papa Dan's actually take their mats out back from the restaurant kitchen and hose them down. The employees camp out in the back smoking, throwing trash every single day and night. It is never ending. He felt he was the only person in Sagewood that received a notice since he asked several neighbors and no one else even knew about this meeting. He happened to get one in his mail box three or four weeks ago. He didn't know why no one else was notified. He felt they were � under siege to have to respond to this and give up a night with his children at the ballfield to address � something that was supposedly taken care of . They were happy when the council addressed this and he said that the council was horrified to hear that trucks actually parked to make deliveries in the evening hours. They actually came to a compromise not to do it at 2 : 00-3 : 00 a.m. but at 9 :00 p.m. or 10 :00 p.m. They thought it was taken care when Wendy's was denied. He felt that 2, 100 square feet was not substantially larger than 1,575 square feet. Just because someone wouldn't be preparing their food there today didn't mean they wouldn' t be preparing it there tomorrow. They felt insulted that they had to come to the planning commission to keep defending their diminishing property rights . Commissioner Campbell asked if Mr. 5chreiber moved into his home prior to the Lucky' s center being built. Mr. Schreiber replied no, but they moved in prior to Kenny Roger' s Roasters moving in. There was a little office section there and no restaurants there. It was perfectly quiet. He said it wouldn't surprise him to find out that the people who sold him the home knew about Kenny Roger's, but they decided to live with it and haven't taken legal action against anyone. ; They tried to address the concerns as neighbors . The management at Kenny Roger's Roasters were absolutely hostile and laugh in their faces if they call and complain about the 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 music being played in the employees ' cars . They were aware �+ the center was there when they moved in and they checked it out. It only had office uses and that didn' t pose any problems . Kenny Roger's was a nice operation with a nice clientele and nice food, but it has lots of problems . The odor from Kenny Roger' s in combination wi�h Papa Dan' s and several other restaurants was something they lived with also. The noise of the delivery trucks and street sweepers was unbearable and devastated the property. He wished the commission could visit on the nights they make deliveries and see where they park the Mack trucks . When they asked if the trucks could park on Country Club they were told it wouldn't happen. The delivery trucks only opened in such a way so that they have to pull in on that side of the restaurant and he was being unreasonable to suggest that they pull up on Country Club Drive. This is the way it has been. At 6 : 30 a.m. there was air blower not more than 20-30 feet from his bedroom window four time a week. That was probably in violation of the noise ordinance, but they say it 's part of the sweeping operation. It has been terrorizing to their home. He didn't know what to do about it and was shocked that within one year they already have to come back and defend it again. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Schreiber was a member of � the Sagewood Board. Mr. Schreiber replied no. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Schreiber knew if the board was apprised of this and if they have addressed the issue. Mr. Schreiber did not. He hadn't talked to anyone on the board, but would be happy to try and get a hold of them. MRS. LISA SCHREIBER stated that everything her husband said was true and they were worried that this was going to be another restaurant. The manager of the shopping center tries to be supportive and says that restaurants were much harder because they were more dirty since they were dealing with food, insects, trash and smell problems . It wasn't like an office that was open from 9 : 00 a.m. to 5 : 00 p.m. There were deliveries coming in at all hours and it was difficult because they thought it had been worked out. The parking was so full that she didn't know where people were expected to park. Mr. Spinello readdressed the commission and said that regarding the issues brought up here like the air blower, truck refrigerator, those were issues that might exist but he couldn't really comment further on them. Regarding this possibly turning into a cooking restaurant, he felt that would require further review of � the conditional use permit. 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 f Mr. Smith concurred and noted that condition 6 of the � resolution stated that Togo' s restaurant shall conduct no � cooking on this site. The facility shall have no grease interceptor and/or ventilation hoods . Mr. Spinello said they wouldn' t be able to change into a business that would become offensive in that fashion. They would have to come back before the commission again for review. He said he was well aware of the truck refrigeration units, noise and air blower. He was notified that morning because the property manager has tried very hard and has done a very effective job of maintaining the problems and issues here in the center and a couple of days ago they had a contract drawn for a new company to do the maintenance of the blowing and sweeping and apparently over the last couple of weeks they have been doing it at improper times and they were reprimanded more than once. He felt they had a problem there and the new company needed to know how important it was to follow certain guidelines . He was notified that that had occurred a couple of times and they were working on making sure they follow the guidelines given to them. He said this was a neighborhood shopping center close to homes and keeping it operating as a neighborhood shopping center next to a residential � community was a difficult issue. He said the proposed � use was away from the residential area and next to the street. It didn't limit what they should do as far as their efforts in mitigating the problems that have been voiced tonight, but most of the problems came from the ones that were the closest to the wall . He acknowledged that those problems do exist, as they did within every neighborhood shopping center that has certain uses, and trucks and services that needed to be provided there to service those businesses . The people that work in those businesses and peopie that come to buy things from the businesses created problems and as managers they had to work as best they could to keep things to a minimum. Their property manager has tried very hard in this case to bring things under control . Commissioner Campbell asked if he was going to try a little harder as far as the delivery trucks and sweeping was concerned. Mr. Spinello said that certainly the sweeping should be solved very quickly. The property manager has jumped right on that one and it has actually occurred twice. He thought his property manager was a strong manager and could stop that one. He did not know if the delivery issue : could be altered. Commissioner Campbell asked about the boom � boxes and talking to the manager of Kenny Roger' s . Mr. � Spinello said that the property manager could put that on her 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 list to work on as well . That was the first time he has '� heard that problem, although he could see instances where that would occur when the employees get off work and want to unwind and they did it in the parking lot. He said that she has been very effective; she just doesn't talk but they do get action and they try their best to stop those problems . Chairperson Beaty noted that the comment was made that no one else was noticed and asked staff to describe the noticing procedure. Mr. Smith stated that the legal notice was mailed to property owners within 300 feet--they went to Mr. Wong, Mr. Cassak, Mr. Packard, Mr. Dorfner, Mr. Hill, Mr. Yeager, Mr. Tanner, Mr. Schreiber, Mr. or Mrs . Kuda and the Silktree Homeowners Association, plus companies that own property in the area. Chairperson Beaty asked if these people had similar complaints . He didn't think the Togo' s proposal was creating the problem that the Schreibers were experiencing and he was very concerned about the problems created by Kenny Roger's and asked if the city had some recourse. Mr. Drell stated that there were delivery restrictions on that center. Chairperson Beaty asked what would happen if they were violated. Mr. Drell said that technically they could call up the entire precise plan for the whole center and find a way. He was a little disturbed with the applicant saying that he didn't know how to enforce those conditions . Those were �► conditions that have been on the center since the beginning and the original concern was deliveries to Lucky' s . They would apply to any tenant and it was the job of the property owners to make sure they are enforced. If not, the city could and would pursue action against them. There were complaints before about noise emanating from Papa Dan' s and Papa Dan' s was also there on a conditional use permit. Any of those specific restaurants that weren' t controlling their employees and were creating a nuisance to those adjacent property owners were a problem and it would behoove the property owner to make sure his tenants comply with requirements of the center or else there would be a problem for those tenants . Chairperson Beaty suggested that the Schreibers talk to their Board of Directors and start noting violations and keep a record of it and if action is not taken he wauld encourage them to contact city staff and pursue what Mr. Drell just outlined. Mr. Schreiber stated that they have contacted staff for close to three years on this issue and he could say that Papa Dan' s was equally responsible for the lack of control over their employees as was Kenny Roger' s . He � noted that Mr. Drell said there was a delivery schedule set up for the center. The last time they tried to talk 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 � about that no one could seem to come up with an actual � answer to that issue. That surprised him at the time ,r,� and he was glad to hear that there were actual rules and restrictions . It wouldn't surprise him if a 9 :00 p.m. , 10 : 00 p.m. or 11 : 00 p.m. delivery was absolutely prohibited. He was actually told that this applied to Lucky' s but not to any of the other tenants and that didn' t seem reasonable to them. They want to be good neighbors . The people that were mailed the notices, probably three of them were tenant occupied. There were a 100 homes in Sagewood, so if six, eight, ten or twelve homeowners got notices, that was a small percentage of the 100. They did not receive a notice from their homeowners association about this hearing. They wanted to be good neighbors, loved the neighborhood and would be happy to work with someone that actually has an ear and power. Mr. Drell suggested that if the neighbors were willing to put in the time, that a meeting be put together between the management of the center, management from Kenny Roger' s, management from Papa Dan's, and Mr. Spinello to try to get together and figure out how he can comply with the conditions of his project. Mr. Schreiber stated that he would also like = : to see someone do a more scientific approach to the parking � situation. Mr. Drell stated that for this sandwich place, the primary peak usage was lunch, therefore staff looked at the parking situation at lunch. This permit only applies to Togo's which is a lunch place, therefore they looked at their availability at lunch time. Chairperson Beaty closed the public hearing and asked for comments from the commission. Commissioner Campbell said that after reviewing the menu/ brochure and the location of the Togo's Restaurant she didn 't feel that it would influence Mr. Schreiber' s home. Also, there wouldn't be any cooking facilities in the restaurant. She noted that the busiest time was during lunch and she has been in that center at other times during the afternoon and hadn't seen a parking problem. She was in favor of the project. Commissioner Fernandez stated that he was also in favor of the project. He has visited the center in the evenings and at Kenny Roger' s it was difficult to find any parking. That was a real concern. He hoped that Mr. Schreiber would get together with the management of the center and discuss some of the concerns and if those concerns were brought to the city, they would focus on that and take care of it. He was in favor of the Togo' s Restaurant. 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 Commissioner Jonathan noted that Sagewood was built in the � early 1980 's and most of the homes were completed between 1980-82 and it preceded the Lucky's shopping center. The Lucky's center since its inception has had a terrible history of problems and they have only gotten worse with time and with the increase in tenants . The landscaping never looked like it did on the drawings and it got worse from day one. There is inadequate parking for existing uses, much less when the place gets filled up. Traffic circulation was abominable. Cars backed out of spaces in front of Lucky's, there were always cars stopped in the fire lanes and it was a poor layout and anything that happens in that center just makes it worse. He noted that until a year ago he was a resident of Sagewood for 11 years and he was very familiar with the problems of living there. He was one of the residents far away, so he wasn't directly effected, but he knew from his neighbors what terrible problems they experienced. He noted a saying that says that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and they always heard that the management would try to fix this and try to fix that but they never did. He didn't have a problem with this application, but it was the straw that would break the camel ' s back and he felt the city council was right when they said no way to Wendy' s . If this application goes through tonight, he hoped the city council would do the same thing. � He personally would be in favor of the applicant requesting an extension to see if they can come up with a comprehensive plan to satisfy the needs of the Sagewood residents once and for all and take care of it. It could be done. If they manage other properties they knew it could be done and it should be done in order to be a good neighbor and to simply do the right thing. He encouraged the applicant to request an extension to meet with the homeowners association board of directors to resolve the problems once and for all . Short of that, he could not approve this application for the reasons cited. Chairperson Beaty stated that he was in agreement with Commissioner Jonathan. He was not sure it was fair to hold up the Togo's application, but there was a history of problems that haven't been addressed and should be addressed. He was in concurrence that the applicant come up with a plan to assure the commission that the center would not continue to be a problem. Mr. Spinello said that last time when they came before with the city with Wendy' s they heard all of these problems and they did attempt and were successful in fixing these matters . Some still do exist, but there � was only one group that showed up at the meeting tonight whereas before the place was packed with many more 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 : people. They didn't put up much of a fight then and ,� clearly saw they had a problem and had been beaten, so � they went back and started working on those problems . The property manager has been given specific instructions and made a specific effort to fix the problems that were detailed here. They had been successful which is why there weren't many people here tonight. Those efforts have been made and they were successful . Commissioner Jonathan noted if that was the case, then Mr. Spinello' s task should be simple and it would be a slam dunk. He noted that the applicant could either request an extension or the commission would take a vote. Mr. Drell clarified that what the commission was suggesting was that before they make a decision on this application, that they work out some of these problems . Mr. Spinello asked if the specific direction was to go get the approval of the Sagewood Board. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he also needed to work out the problems with his neighbors . Chairperson Beaty also suggested that he bring the commission some assurance from some of the other people who were noticed that the problems are under control . He would like to hear from some of the other neighbors that things were better. Mr. Spinello replied that even though they weren't here tonight, he still ; had to come back with positive proof that they have solved � the problems which he said they have. Chairperson Beaty replied yes, that was what he and Commissioner Jonathan were asking for. He was not at all comforted with the attitude or the comments that he was hearing from the applicant that there was no problem, since the commission was hearing that there were problems from a resident. Chairperson Beaty asked if he would like a continuation. Mr. Spinello requested a continuation to June 4, 1996 . Chairperson Beaty reopened the public hearing and asked for a motion of continuance. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, continuing CUP 96-16 to June 4 , 1996 by minute motion. Carried 4-0 . C. Case No. PP 96-4 - OLIPHANT/MATZNER, Applicants Request for approval of a precise plan to allow the conversion and remodel of an existing 2032 square foot duplex to > an office and a 775 square foot addition : �■�M 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 at 44-311 Monterey Avenue in the O.P. '� zone. Mr. Drell noted that this was a remodel and addition of an old building in a professional office zone. It was in conjunction with a building the commission approved at the last meeting. It met all the goals of development for Monterey. It was consistent with the rear parking area, the architecture was compatible, and staff recommended approval . Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. WESLEY OLIPHANT, 77-900 Avenue of the States, stated that it was nice to have a project where there was agreement with the neighbors and everyone was happy to see an improvement. He agreed with all of the conditzons and he was present to answer any questions . Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to addressed the commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . There was no one and the public testimony was closed. Chairperson Beaty asked for commission comments or a motion. Action: �""' Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-0 . Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1740, approving PP 96-4, subject to conditions . Carried 4-0. D. Case Nos . C/Z 96-2 and Addendum to PP 95-8 and PMW 95-23 - DR. SURESH SHAH/NARENDRA PATEL, Applicants Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Enviranmental Impact, change of zone from R-3 (multifamily residential) to O.P. (office professional) , revised precise plan of design for a 31, 180 square foot two story office building and parcel map waiver to consolidate five (5) lots on the south side of Fred Waring Drive, west of San Pascual Avenue. Mr. Smith noted that the plans were on display and indicated that in November the commission looked at a proposal from Dr. Shah that encompassed the three interior lots . At that point they were loaking at a 16,700 square foot two story building. ,� The matter went to council in December where it was approved. In March of this year the city received a request to expand 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 on that approval, so the commission was now reviewing a zone j change on two more lots and a revision to the building plan � that was approved in November. Essentially the architecture was similar to the earlier proposal . The building was stretched. Formerly both accesses were on Fred Waring Drive. The proposal now was to have one access from Fred Waring with a two-way driveway through to San Pascual Avenue. There was a short dead-end parking situation serving 17 parking spaces at the east end of the site. When the matter was before Architectural Review, the site plan did not look like this . It had pushed the building back and brought in a row of parking across the front. The architectural commission was not prepared to go anywhere with a site plan in that situation. The app].icant submitted the revised plan. The revised plans have not been before architectural review, but staff was reasonably comfortable that this was the direction they wanted the applicant to proceed in. The developments to the west of this new five lot configuration are the apartment units across there. This took in that whole section of land and afforded the opportunity of removing the apartment units on the lot at the corner at San Pascual . They were accomplishing several goals from the Palma Village Plan. The site plan provided for 114 parking spaces and the ordinance requires 114 . Assuming a gross building area of 26 ,503 � square feet in that there was considerable non-leasable area, � the ordinance permitted them to delete from the total so they were looking at general office use limited to 18,500 square feet, which was calculated at four spaces per 1,000, and medical offices to a total of 8,003 square feet which brought the total requirement to 114 parking spaces. The zone change is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation for the area. Staff felt the architecture was of a high quality and would compliment the Civic Center area. The applicant has filed a parcel map to consolidate the lots which would be necessary to achieve this goal . Condition 5 of the draft resolution limited medical offices to a maximum of 8,003 square feet. Staff recommended approval of the zone change for the additional two lots and the addendum to the precise plan for the expanded plan. Commissioner Jonathan asked for clarification as to allowing a certain amount of parking in one application to be designated for office use at a rate of 4/1,000 for one portion and another portion as medical at 5/1, 000 . Mr. Smith explained that there was a requirement for medical offices in excess of 2,200 square feet to be parked at the rate of 5/1,000 . It wouldn't apply to the whole building in that there were blends of uses everywhere. Where it was � reasonable to distinguish between the two, staff did ( i .e. a � furniture store and a restaurant) . If there was a myriad of uses, it became more difficult to administer and staff looked � 24 Mirrv�rEs PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 at a broader category. Nothing in the ordinance precludes � staff from doing this . Commissioner Jonathan asked how staff could monitor compliance. Mr. Smith replied through business licenses . A tenant has to bring a Certificate of Conformance to staff when completing a business license. On it they were required to indicate the area they were leasing and the number of employees they were anticipating, as well as the type of use. Commissioner Campbell asked if there would be a change to the intersection at Fred Waring and San Pascual after this building would be built. Mr. Gaugush stated that they didn ' t anticipate any changes. Commissioner Campbell asked if a customer leaving the project wanted to go west, if they would still have to go down to Portola and make a U-turn. Mr. Gaugush stated that was correct. He said that there could also be an additional movement by exiting onto Fred Waring and making a U-turn at San Pascual . Mr. Smith noted that it was a permitted movement at this time. Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. NARENDRA PATEL, the architect for the project, stated that this would be a substantial improvement to '� the vacant property and he took into consideration the General Plan, the general use, and the architecture for the Civic Center and designed this building to be complimentary and consistent with the building across from them. At the same time it would improve the surrounding property and the existing vacant area in addition to removing the deteriorating building that exists now at the corner of 5an Pascual and Fred Waring Drive. Combining all five lots together and making this one project would be a great improvement to the city. He asked for any questions . Commissioner Jonathan asked for confirmation that Mr. Patel understood that by providing 114 parking spaces, he would be limited to medical use to 8,003 square feet. Mr. Patel stated that he understood that it would be approved on a case by case basis . Every time there was a tenant that moved in they would come in for approval . Mr. Drell clarified that the limit was up to 8,003 square feet. If he wanted more than 8,003 square feet he would have to come back to Planning Commission to get the condition changed. Mr. Patel stated that he understood. Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to address the � commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 MR. CRAIG YOUNT, a resident at 43-885 Carmel Circle, � stated that he lived in the corner house pointing � directly at the project. He felt that this project would take his view of �he mountains away and he was concerned about not reconstructing Fred Waring at San Pablo. He felt it was a dangerous intersection already. There have been many accidents, people turn when they are not supposed to turn and the speed on Fred Waring was a problem. He was at that intersection three and four times a day. He personally had not seen the Palm Desert plan, but wanted to know if this area was going to be the downtown area soon. He felt the city was encroaching into his residential area with this downtown area. He was sure his property value would be going down. He felt the Civic Center park, City Hall and Sheriff 's building was really nice, soft on the eyes and designed very well . He stated that he was a plastering contractor for Plaster Direct Centers so he was all for new construction, but he worried about his city and spends his money in this city and he was concerned about the area. If the city was changing this zone to office spaces, he worried about what would happen right behind him, across the street from him, and on down. That was the future and he was concerned about that. He was trying to get a look at the building to see if it was � soft enough. He said he looks at plans every day and he estimated three great big projects like this in the last month in the Coachella Valley, so there must be a need for them. He was concerned about the need for a stop sign or some kind of thing there. He didn't feel it was looked into deep enough and suggested that staff go to the police station to find out how many accidents were happened there. He asked if this had to go to two stories and asked them to cut it down to one. He liked to sit on his back porch, he smoked his pipe and looked at the mountains and he felt this project would take that away from him. DR. SURESH SHAH, the developer of the project, stated that he heard the concerns expressed but wanted to bring it to the commission' s attention that this property was already an R-3 designated area, so it was already approved for two story use. There were apartments west of this project that were two story. Also, there were apartments at the corner in a very run down condition and the city planning department encouraged him to acquire that area and demolish it to improve the site because the apartments were about 30 years old and they � needed improvements or change, but nothing was done. He � bought it at a very high price just to clean it up and � to make the project bigger and make it a clean, nice � 26 Mzrrtr�rEs PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 199b looking building for the whole area. He felt the r"" concern about the two story should not be a major issue. They put the building in such a way that it was a very long, narrow building so that it didn't go in the back towards the residents on the Santa Rosa side. It was far away from the Santa Rosa people and it wouldn't be an invasion of their privacy. The architecture was very nicely done and he felt the city would be proud of this building which would improve this site. Chairperson Beaty closed the public testimony and asked for commission comments or action. Commissioner Campbell stated that she was glad to see that Dr. Shah bought the apartments on the corner plus the other run-down home. The way the building would be constructed, he would not invade the privacy of the homeowners on Santa Rosa. Commissioner Jonathan said that in response to Mr. Yount 's comments, Mr. Yount was in part of the Palma Village area and part of the Palm Village Specific Plan was to create a buffer zone as they go from major street ta commercial to residential . There was a tremendous amount ot sensitivity to the two story feature and one of those mitigating requirements was that there be no windows looking directly °�' down from the second story to single family residences . Mr. Drell clarified that this project looked down at some apartments . The zoning behind it was for apartments and staff anticipated that they would be two story apartments . Commissioner Jonathan noted that the sensitivity there was to insure that privacy was maintained in homes such as Mr. Yount' s. Mr. Drell noted that Mr. Yount' s property was a block away on the north side of Fred Waring. Mr. Smith indicated that there was a single family home on the northeast corner lot at Fred Waring and San Pascual . He also pointed out that having the R-1 area, which Carmel Circle was, would limit development on the north side oF Fred Waring to single story, and 18 feet maximum height. Assuming they get something in that range, with the distance another 150 feet to this building, it won' t be seen from the gentleman' s backyard. Commissioner Jonathan clarified that this was not developing into a downtown area. It was certainly an office professional corridor and it was intended to be that way because they didn't want to put more single family homes on a street like Fred Waring, so there was some good forethought. He encouraged Mr. Yount to continue attending the meetings to let the commission know how he feels, but in this case he should not run into a problem. � Commissioner Fernandez stated that he was in favor of the project and felt it would enhance Fred Waring. 27 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 � Action: Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, approving the findings as presented by staff . Carried 4-0 . Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1741, recommending to city council approval of C/Z 96-2 and addendum to PP 95-8 and PMW 95-23, subject to conditions . Carried 4-0 . E. Case No. C/Z 96-3 - SANTA ROSA COUNTRY CLUB, INC. , Applicant Request for approval of the prezoning of part of Section 5, T5S R6E to city zoning Open Space (O.S. ) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it pertains thereto for an 81+/- acre site located on the south side of Frank Sinatra Drive and west of Portola Avenue (Santa Rosa Country Club) . Purpose of said prezoning is to facilitate annexation of site to the city. � Mr. Smith explained that staff inet with representatives of Santa Rosa Country Club and Mr. Johnson, et. al . , were present. They were very interested in annexing their country club into the city to remain as a golf course, hence they requested open space zoning. They could have had planned residential which would be consistent with the General Plan. They wanted to see their site remain a golf course so they were asking for open space. The matter will go through the city council . It has already been through the annexation committee and they directed staff to proceed. Following the council confirming the zoning it would then go to LAFCO and then come back to the city. He felt that maybe around Christmas time they would be able to say that Santa Rosa Country Club is in the city. Mr. Smith stated that the findings could be met and they were outlined in the staff report. Staff recommended approval . Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked if the applicants wished to address the commission. They declined. Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Beaty asked for commission comments or action. � � � 28 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 Mr. Smith noted he had received several calls from residents � of Palm Desert Greens and wanted to state for the record that this didn't effect Palm Desert Greens. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff . Carried 4-0 . Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1742, recommending to city council approval of C/Z 96-3 . Carried 4-0 . IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Case No. CUP 96-4/PP 96-2 - MICHAEL FEDDERLY, Applicant Request for a determination that an amendment to condition #8 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 1725 is a director' s modification pursuant to Code Section 25. 72 . 120. Mr. Smith noted that at the time the city reviewed the 'r conditional use permit for Mr. Fedderly the applicant felt that providing a ten year lease for the parking was achievable. The bank was only prepared to grant them a three year lease, which the commission had a copy of. The condition was fairly significant, except there was another condition requiring that the whole matter be reviewed again in three years . Staff felt that mitigated some of the concerns for the reduced term of the lease. If commission had no problem with a director' s modification, which the ordinance permitted, then staff would just go ahead with it. If that was not the case and the commission felt this was not something they wanted staff to do under a director' s modification, then staff would set the matter for hearing and bring it back in about four weeks, which would be after the neighborhood was noticed. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the commission requested 12 or 14 parking spaces . Mr. Smith clarified that it was 12 as outlined in condition 8 . Mr. Rudolph stated that the director' s modification was supposed to apply to minor revisions so what the commission was being asked to determine was that this was a minor revision. Chairperson Beaty asked if Mr. Rudolph had an interpretation for the commission. He replied no. Chairperson Beaty stated that he didn't have a � problem with the request since it was returning in three years . Mr. Drell said that if they couldn' t secure those 29 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MRY 7, 1996 parking spaces, then they were in violation of the conditional use permit and their leasable area would have to � be cut back to comply with their onsite parking spaces . Mr. Dick Baxley stated that he represented Mike Fedderly, the applicant, and was present to answer any questions . There were no questions and Chairperson Beaty asked for a motion. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, determining by minute motion that the requested amendment to condition #8 of Planning Commission Resolution 1725 to be a minor revision and within the purview of the director' s modification pursuant to Code Section 25 . 72 . 120 . Carried 4-0 . B. Case Nos . C/Z 95-6, TT 28295, and PP 95-10 - FOXX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Applicant This matter was before Planning Commission December 15, 1995 and February 20, 1996 at which time the case was continued to a date uncertain. The applicant has now � filed a written withdrawal of the proposal . Action: No further action is necessary. C. List of Discussion Items for the Joint City Council/ Planning Commission/Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Scheduled for May 16 , 1996 at 4 :00 p.m. in the Administrative Conference Room. Chairperson Beaty noted that staff provided commission with a draft agenda and now was the time to add any items to the agenda. Mr. Drell indicated that commission could add them now or before Thursday. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the summary of project areas and activities included a general update on approved projects that were under construction, like the interchanges, the golf course, and those kinds of issues . Mr. Drell concurred that it would include all of the city and RDA initiatives in terms of construction. Mr. Drell noted that Redevelopment 101 would explain how the redevelopment agency works, how it gets its money, and what it can and can' t do. Commissioner Jonathan requested that undergrounding of utilities within the city limits be included on the agenda. Mr. Drell indicated that a possible ai 30 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 freeway commercial zone has come up. The Steinbergs were in r... the process of planning their whole frontage of property they own along the freeway and there have been a lot of inquiries now that the interchanges were being constructed. He noted that there was some rather restrictive commercial zoning that tends to limit the types of uses usually found at offramps and they might want to look at that. Things like fast food restaurants and gas stations . He felt it might be a good idea to talk about this since they would be coming to the city with some proposals that would be at variance with the city's current general commercial zoning requirements . Chairperson Beaty asked if they would get an update on the school boundary issue. Mr. Drell said he could answer that right now and stated that staff had anticipated a negative response from Palm Springs, but got a rather conciliatory response. P.S.U.S.D. hired an economic consultant and Palm Desert did a projection of what they thought the ultimate buildout would be relative to how much revenue producing commercial there would be, how much country club residential that wouldn't produce children would be, how many children were estimated for the area, and Palm 5prings was reviewing it. Basically it was a matter of money. They needed a deal that would give Desert Sands enough money to serve the educational needs and Palm Springs enough money to meet their `•. financial projection. Relative to the joint meeting, Mr. Drell felt staff would be getting out copies of the Core Commercial Plan and Palma Village Plan before the meeting for commission to review. Action: None. X. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE UPDATE None. XI . COMMENTS None. �... 31 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1996 XII . ADJOURNMENT � Moved by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adjourning the meeting to May 21, 1996 by minute motion. Carried 4-0. The m��,eting w�s adj�urned at 9 : 13 p.m. --, , \ n t '-...E , fi .. " 't �--�i✓�' `- ........��_.._\! ti/'�-'�1--"� t \ PHILIP DRE L, Secretary ` ATTEST: ��.�-� � _ � PAUL R. BEATY, Chair erson Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm .� � 32