Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0107 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY - JANUARY 7, 1997 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE r.. � * * � � * � � � * * � * � * � � � * * � * � � � � � �- * * � * � I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ferguson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Jonathan led in the pfedge of allegiance. Iil. ROLL CALL Members Present: Jim Ferguson, Chairperson Paul Beaty Sonia Campbell George Fernandez Sabby Jonathan Members Absent: None .� Staff Present: Phil Drell Helene Dreyer Tonya Monroe IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the December 17, 1996 meeting minutes. Action: Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Beaty, approving the December 17, 1996 minutes by minute motion. Carried 5-0. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION: None. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. •.. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 1997 r.rr VII. CONSENT CALENDAR None. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case No. PP 96-11 - GARY COVEL, GENERAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, Applicant Request for approval of a p�ecise plan and Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for a one story 20 unit senior assisted living complex on property located in the R-2 Senior Overlay zone at the southeast corner of San Carlos Avenue and Catalina Way. Mr. Drell noted that at the last meeting there were a few issues left unresolved that had to do with the site planning and neighborhood concerns. His understanding was that those property owners on the east side had concern over the location of the parking lot. They thought that maybe the building should be there and the parking lot moved. Since one of their issues was obstruction of view, they realized that � having a 12 or 13-foot high structure near their property would create a greater impediment to their view than a parking lot. In terms of traffic, there was a memo from the Traffic Engineer that the project would generate fewer trips than the permitted single family density of six units, so they would have less traffic than single family houses. Over time these projects would develop fewer and fewer trips as the residents age. The other issue had to do with the development agreement. There was a revised development agreement before commission. It had been revised more in form than substance. Under the Senior Housing Overlay, this project is required to provide four units within the project at affordable rents. They have dealt with these projects before and it was difficult to determine an affordable rent for an assisted living unit in that rent was only a small portion of the cost of these facilities. In the past they had come up with two alternatives. One which they did at the Villas at Palm Desert around the corner from this project. They had a 15 unit requirement and they agreed to pay off at a rate of 510,000 a unit to go into the City's affordable housing fund for ten units and then they agreed to allow the occupancy of five units. Supplemental Security Income has a program by which their recipients would occupy one of these units and the owner accepts the SSI payment minus $50.00. In that these would be for very, very low income SSI recipients, the City would cut the requirement in half to two. The development agreement provided the applicant a choice of either providing two SSI units at the described rate, or to pay the City �ni 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 1997 � 510,000, which was approximately 25% of the cost of building an apartment which the City would then use to subsidize four units and the applicant would pay a total of 540,000. Mr. Drell indicated that the applicant intends to pay the $40,000, but the agreement allowed the applicant to advise the City in writing before construction on which option he would prefer. Mr. Drell stated that the applicant could address the commission to describe his efforts to satisfy the concerns of the neighbors. Chairperson Ferguson opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. GARY COVEL, General Construction Management, stated that at the last meeting there were some issues that were not resolved. He said that Mr. Poe's concern was that there would be a fence on the south side of the property line and the drawing included a six-foot masonry fence. At the conclusion of the last meeting he felt that Mr. Poe's concern was resolved. He also spoke Mrs. Southerland a couple of weeks ago and her primary concern was the view. He explained that if they moved that parking lot to a different location, they would have to put a building where the parking lot was which would be more obstructive to her view. Things would only get more '�"' cluttered instead of less. She consented that they should leave it like it is. He stated that he called the Hightowers on a couple of occasions and spoke with Mrs. Hightower, although this was his first occasion to see both of them since the last meeting. He asked if the commission had any questions. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the applicant intends to build the minimum required parking spaces and there was insurance in the form of a bond that should additional parking spaces be required, they would be built. Mr. Covel replied that was correct. Commissioner Jonathan asked how that part of the parking lot would be used while it was not being used as parking spaces. Mr. Covel indicated that it would be landscaping. Commissioner Jonathan asked if it would be a significant problem to build out the additional four or five parking spaces. Mr. Covel stated that it shouldn't be a problem at all in the event that they are ever needed. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he has some concerns that he would bring up under discussion. He asked if in the event that the commission should feel it was appropriate to build out the whole lot from the very start, if it would cause any kind of a structural or configuration problem for the applicant. Mr. Covel replied no, none whatsoever.. Mr. Covel said that there was one other issue that the adjacent property owners raised at the last meeting that had to do with trash disposal and what .� 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 1997 ..rr times the trucks might come and go. He contacted Desert Disposal and they said it would be between 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Chairperson Ferguson asked if anyone wished to address the commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Ferguson asked for commission comments or action. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he was surprised and pleased to see that although there we�e residents present, the objections had been resolved, which was the purpose in continuing the matter. He felt it was gratifying to see that the process worked. He said that he had no problem with the application. He felt it was a good project although he had a concern with the parking adequacy. The reason was because they were talking about building out 15 parking spaces initially, but there were 20 units and some of the residents might not drive, but some of them might have two cars. With 20 units built out with only 15 parking spaces, which didn't account for the staff which was indicated to be three to service the dining room and administrative office, he felt the number might exceed three and that didn't address visitor parking. He felt that 15 parking spaces was inadequate and since it would be easy to go ahead and put in the additional four of five spaces, he would not have a ? problem approving this project, but subject to the complete build out of the whole .r1 parking lot of 20 spaces. Commissioner Beaty asked how the 15 parking spaces were arrived at; Mr. Drell stated that the ordinance gave the applicant the ability to ask for that reduction. He noted that the staff recommendation supporting the reduction was from staff observation at two other similar projects in the city. Those they did build out at one space per unit were typically less than half full. Whether there was a more efficient ratio of employees to residents in a larger project, he wasn't sure. Over time there was no question that there would be fewer and fewer needed. Commissioner Jonathan said that if it was a major construction impediment he might reconsider, but since it was just grass in that corner of the parking lot, he felt it would be easy and cost would be immaterial to just extend out the pavement and stripe it. He felt it would be far thinking and wouldn't hurt the applicant. Commissioner Beaty noted that he lives across the street from The Carlotta and there was a large parking lot there and he would prefer to see grass. He would rather go with the application as recommended since the applicant could add the parking later if it was needed. Commissioner Campbell stated that she was also in favor of the project and she concurred with Commissioner Beaty. She would rather see grass and if there were visitors, there was ample parking along the street. Mr. Drell noted that since they ' .�I 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 1997 +�. would be on the corner they would have a lot of street frontage. He thought that the neighbors would probably prefer them to park on the street. A resident spoke up from the audience and stated that she would prefer to see visitors parking in the lot because of the number of cars going to the Senior Center that used the street. Commissioner Fernandez stated that he was in favor of the project and agreed with Commissioners Campbell and Beaty as far as seeing more landscaping. He also lived across from The Carlotta and saw a lot of empty parking spaces and the additional landscaping would enhance the neighborhood. He was in favor of the project and more greenery. Chairperson Ferguson added that the majority of the time he agreed with Commissioner Jonathan on parking situations, but he would defer to staff's actual observations of the two other senior uses rather than on speculation and stated that if a private business needed more parking to make its business profitable, they would put in more parking. He would rather look at grass until asphalt was necessary. He commended the applicant for meeting with the neighbors and trying to accommodate their concerns. He understood that they looked at a number of configurations and what they have here was the best that could be done. The applicant's effectiveness '""' was demonstrated by the lack of opposing testimony. He asked for a motion. Mr. Drell asked if commission wanted to add a restriction on the trash pickup time to the conditions of approval. Commission didn't feel compelled to add it as a condition, noting that the City has a franchise agreement with the disposal company. Action: Moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Jonathan voted no). Moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1778, approving PP 96-11 . Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Jonathan voted no). Moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1779, recommending approval of DA 97-1 to City Council. Carried 5-0. ... 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 1997 � , ..� IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE UPDATE None. XI. COMMENTS � 1 . Chairperson Ferguson asked members of the commission if there was interest in attending the Planning Commissioner's Conference in Riverside. Commissioner Campbell stated that she would be interested in attending. Commissioner Beaty asked Mr. Drell for his opinion of this conference. Commissioner Jonathan asked when the annual Planning Commissioners Conference was scheduled for this year and where. Chairperson Ferguson stated that it was from March 12-14 in Monterey. Commissioner Jonathan i a stated that he did attend one year and for those commissioners that haven't ,,,� been at any conference, it was wonderful. It was very educational, addressed how to be more effective, described their role, and addressed how to understand plans. Commissioner Beaty noted that he also attended one year when it was in San Diego. Mr. Drell stated that the agenda for the conference in Riverside looked interesting, although sometimes it depended on who the speakers were. Chairperson Ferguson noted that he was a speaker at an APA conference that was in Palm Springs at the Wyndham Hotel and he agreed that if there is a good topic and a good panel it can be very helpful. Mr. Drell stated that if they at least got one good thing out a conference, it was worth attending. Chairperson Ferguson stated that he would also like to attend the meeting in Riverside. He was also interested in the Planners Institute in Monterey. Commissioner Campbell concurred. 2. Chairperson Ferguson noted that at the last meeting Commissioners Beaty and Campbell were appointed to the Desert Willow Committee. After speaking with Commissioners Beaty and Campbell after the last meeting, they agreed that two planning commissioners wou�d attend, but they would rotate among the three of them, much the way the City Council does. � 7 i � 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 1997 � 3. Mr. Drell noted that there was a tenant for the Ben Franklin store. It would be a large liquor outlet. Staff also had an inquiry about a live theater group trying to take over the old First Interstate Bank building. He also indicated that they were close to getting a tenant for the old Lucky's building. It would either be a single tenant or they would create a central-covered arcade, breaking it up into small spaces for specialty shops. Staff was directing them to go with a large tenant. Commissioner Beaty asked if there were specific conditions on the type of tenant that could occupy the old Lucky's building. Mr. Drell replied yes and explained that there was a 5250,000 letter of credit. If they go dark • for more than six months without finding an acceptable tenant, and it had to be an EI Paseo compatible user, then the City would take the 5250,000 and use it to find a tenant. Chairperson Ferguson asked if there was any update on tenants for Saks Fifth Avenue. Mr. Drell stated that there were several tenants that were signed up. XII. ADJOURNMENT � Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, by minute motion adjourned the meeting to January 21 , 1997. Carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:27 p.m. •---_.--��_� _r-'�"'� , l�t��-� � PHILIP DRELL, ecretary TES : / �. � AMES FER SON, Chairperson alm Des t Planni g Commission /t � 7