HomeMy WebLinkAbout0304 MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY - MARCH 4, 1997
7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
i...
�. * � � * * * * * * * * * * * � � � ,� * * * � * * * � * � � * � *
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Ferguson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Beaty led in the pledge of allegiance.
: III. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jim Ferguson, Chairperson
Paul Beaty
Sonia Campbell
George Fernandez
Sabby Jonathan
Members Absent: None
� Staff Present: Phil Drell Mark Greenwood
Sandy Jacobson Tonya Monroe
Steve Smith
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Consideration of the February 18, 1997 meeting minutes.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell,
approving the February 18, 1997 minutes. Carried 5-0.
V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION:
Mr. Drell summarized pertinent February 27, 1997 council actions.
VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
v..
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Case No. PMW 96-43 - TERRA NOVA CONSTRUCTION, Applicant
Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to adjust existing golf
course boundaries to convey portions of residential lots to golf course
within Marrakesh Country Club.
B. Case No. PMW 97-2 - TERRA NOVA CONSTRUCTION, Applicant
, Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to adjust existing golf
course boundaries to accommodate proposed residential units within
Marrakesh Country Club.
C. Case No. PMW 97-5 - ELIZABETH STEWART AND ROBERT DAU, Applicants
Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to allow a lot line
adjustment for Lot 32 Tract 4274 within Marrakesh Country Club.
D. Case Nos. TT 26562 and PP/CUP 90-27 - SUN CORPORATION OF
AMERICA, Applicant �
�
Request for approval of a third (and last allowable) time extension for
a 687 unit residential development, 18 hole golf course and 225 suite
hotel on 420 acres located east of Portola Avenue north of Frank
Sinatra Drive.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell,
approving the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 5-0.
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Continued Case Nos. C/2 96-6, PP 96-10, TPM 28448 and DA 97-2 -
MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, Applicant
Request for approval of a Change of Zone to PCD (Planned
Community Development), precise plan of design, Master Plan of
Development, Tentative Parcel Map and Development Agreement for
270 +/- acres generally located south of Interstate 10, east and
west of Cook Street.
�
2
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
Mr. Smith stated that this proposal was back and was now in a form so that they
could proceed. He noted that the case was most recently noticed for the Planning
Commission meeting of February 18 and it was continued to this evening. He
indicated that the applicant is the owner of 270 +/- acres of property located east
and west of Cook Street south of Interstate 10. He noted that colored site plans
of the development plan were on display. He indicated that a blueprint copy of the
same plan was included in the commission's agenda packet. He stated that the
development plan provided for the long-term development of the 270 acre area
through designating eight planning areas (PAs 1-8). For the most part they were
looking at proposals for commercial centers on the various planning areas, although
. PA8 was designated for a possible future residential development. That one site
would be on the south side of Gerald Ford Drive just east of Portola. He showed
on the map display the location of the freeway to the north, Cook at I-10, PA1
which would be discussed later for a precise plan review, PA2 which was 50 +/-
acres to the west of Cook Street north of Gerald Ford, and PA3 which would be
another commercial parcel. He said that PA4 adjacent to the railroad was a future
industrial area and PA5 which would be a mixed use area for industrial, commercial,
and residential uses. PA6 would be industrial use along the railroad east of Portola
as far as PA2. There was an office business park shown on the north side of
Gerald Ford as PA7 and PA8, which was a linear strip of residential use on the
south side of Gerald Ford. He noted that in the packet the commission received a
�" copy of the draft development agreement with the terms and conditions under
which the properties would be developed within this PCD zone (Planned Community
Development) category. If the commission accepted the development plan, then
the commission would recommend approval to the council the change of zone to
PCD. The next step in the approval process for property within the area would be
that they would file the precise plan of design and it would need to be consistent
with the terms and conditions specified in the development plan. In the
development plan there were two tables (figures 2 and 3) which showed likely
development scenarios, intensity of use, number of units, and amount of square
footage of commercial and/or industrial use that they could expect. The latter they
described as a trend alternate; if the trend alternate was followed, as indicated in
the traffic study, there would actually be a reduction in the intensity of
development in the area and a consequent reduction in the traffic in the area
relative to what the current General Plan would permit at its maximum. Mr. Smith
said that the applicant advised him last week that the uses they are pursuing at this
point were less than the trend alternative would have projected. Whether that
would hold for the long term was not known, but there would be an actual
reduction as it would apply on PA1 which comes under the precise plan review.
Mr. Smith noted that on page 8 of the staff report it stated that the master plan of
development was basically acceptable with the exception of a few changes that the
city would like made if commission were to recommend approval of the PCD
zoning. Staff would ask that the applicant make these changes to the development
�"" plan prior to it going to City Council for hearing. Those ten items were fairly minor;
3
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
i
�
�
staff would like those changes made before the case goes to council. Staff's
recommendation for approval on the development plan and the recommendation
was that commission recommend to council adoption of the PCD zoning contingent
upon the changes being made to the development plan. As mentioned previously,
part ot the development plan process would require precise plan review on the
various planning areas or portions of the planning areas. At this time staff has
received a precise plan request as it applies to the entirety of PA1 , the commercial
area east of Cook Street north of Gerald Ford Drive. The plans for it were also on
display. He demonstrated on the map the location of the 21 acres in the precise
plan and showed the landscape plan. He said that the precise plan proposes a
. service station, convenience store and car wash at the corner with one access point
from Cook Street. He said a new street was proposed to serve the industrial area
to the east as well as providing access into the remainder of the area. The food
park with six restaurants showed two restaurants fronting onto Gerald Ford, three
on the ring road fronting onto a fairly large food park area, and one restaurant on
the corner of the two new streets. As well, the applicant was providing an
oversize vehicle parking lot for R.V.s and big rig trucks. The Freeway Commercial
Overlay Zone which the commission recommended approval to council two weeks
ago provided, in addition to the drive-through restaurants, for RV storage which
would typically be permitted in the base zoning of PC-2. He said that mini-self �
storage and a retail center were also proposed. He showed on the map how the �
access was provided to the food park. He said that a requirement of the Freeway
Commercial Overlay Zone was a provision of at least 30% of the area to be
landscaped. In the southerly portion of the proposal, the food park and service
station area, was around 48%, and an overall 35.6%. Mr. Smith indicated that
parking for the entire area was adequate and staff put in a condition of approval
that since this would be developing over phases, if the city finds that parking is not
adequate, they would require more on the later users that come through. He said
that the reverse could also be true. If there is excess parking, they might want
more landscaping and less asphalt. Mr. Smith stated that the architecture for the
service station, car wash and convenience store was shown on the map.
Landscaping adjacent to the car wash which would be right on the corner would
have a very deep landscape buffer going to an eight foot wall, so they would berm
up to an eight foot wall that would effectively screen off half of the building in that
the building height would be 16 feet. They wouldn't be able to see the cars going
through the driveway. He said there would be a triple-lane dry off area for the car
wash vehicles. He also indicated that the convenience store would also serve as
the point to pay for the car wash. He said that the service station, convenience
store and car wash concept was shown to the Architectural Review Commission
last Tuesday. While it was not on their agenda and they couldn't take action, they
did review it and their comments were contained in the staff report on page 10 and
he described the comments as being more than generally positive. "It's nice �
because you can't even tell it's even a gas station" and "It is the look we were �
looking for". Mr. Smith noted that they had seen the proposal on this corner some �
4
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
+o..
time ago and it was not acceptable and was rejected. These were very positive
comments and it would be on the next ARC agenda on March 1 1 . Staff anticipated
that the applicant would receive the typical preliminary approval at that time. Mr.
Smith stated that staff was recommending that Planning Commission recommend
approva! to the city council of ihe PCD zone change and approval of the precise
plan of design for planning area #1 subject to the conditions contained therein. On
the development agreement, staff was recommending that it be continued to March
18, the next meeting. For the tentative parcel map, the applicant originally
requested a 60-day continuance; in talking with him earlier this evening he
suggested 30 days. Staff did not have a problem with that, it was a matter that
when the new precise plan came in on PA1 they would need to alter some of the
proposed lot lines and whatever time frame it took them was fine with staff.
Commissioner Campbell asked where the entrance to the gas station would be
located. Mr. Smith replied that one access point was from Cook Street and a
second access was a driveway that goes to the restaurant park, and a third access
was the ring road that goes around the food/restaurant park and goes back to the
service station. Commissioner Campbell said that when cars exit the car wash to
the drying area, she asked which entrance the cars would use for the gas station
pumps and if it would be the same driveway. Mr. Smith showed the circulation
� pattern on the map. He indicated that the landscaping extended up to provide the
staging area for the dry off area and demonstrated how the cars would exit the
restaurant park to north bound Cook and Gerald Ford. Commissioner Campbell
asked if there would be any congestion caused by the cars in the dry off area and
cars leaving or entering the area or people using the gas pumps. Mr. Smith noted
that they provided a triple staging area capable of handling 16 cars. If they only
had one employee drying cars, things could back up, but staff didn't anticipate a
traffic problem unless it became the most successful convenience store, service
station and car wash all combined into one. He indicated that the access has been
looked at by the engineering staff and he felt with the layout they gave the city
that they could be reasonably confident that it would provide adequate service.
Commissioner Campbell asked if the hours of operation for the convenience store
and gas station pumps were 24 hours. Mr. Smith said that was correct.
Commissioner Campbell asked if there would be a gas station attendant available
24 hours and if there would be adequate surveillance. Mr. Smith said that the
facility would be staffed 24 hours, but it was probably only inside the convenience
store and the applicant could address that more specifically. It was his
understanding that a person would have to go inside to pay for gas, whether it was
12:00 noon or 12:00 midnight. Commissioner Campbell noted that the issue was
raised for the gas station on Deep Canyon Road and the city only allowed the
facility to be open until midnight or 2:00 a.m. because there wouldn't be anyone
watching the pumps in the early hours of the morning. Mr. Smith clarified that
when staff recommended the hour limitation for Cam's Corner, it was because they
� didn't want business activity in the residential neighborhood beyond those hours
5
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
�
�i
and that was consistent with what they did with the Lucky's Center to the east.
In this location there was no residential development around it and it is in the
Freeway Commercial Overlay �one where they are creating freeway visible signage
and they were trying to attract people here who are using the freeway, so he felt
it would be consistent to allow them to be open 24 hours. Commissioner Campbell
wanted it to be a safe area for people to use the facility.
Mr. Drell said that he would like to alter the recommendation slightly relative to the
precise plan. In that the precise plan would ultimately be contingent upon City
Council approval of the development plan and the freeway commercial zoning and
. since this would be the very first project of the development plan and the freeway
commercial zoning to be approved, he believed the recommendation should be a
recommendation to council. In any case, it wouldn't be effective until those plans
were approved anyway and sometimes council wanted to see more than half a
proposal. They typically liked to see ordinance amendments, zone changes and
associated development proposals at the same time.
Chairperson Ferguson asked if that was discussed with the applicant. Mr. Drell said
that it was. He stated that theoretically in the conditions of approval he believed
it should say that this approval is subject to approval of the PCD zoning, the
development plan and the freeway commercial change of zone, because if those �
didn't get approval, this could be contrary to the zoning.
Commissioner Jonathan asked if the prior proposal that went to ARC for the gas
station was submitted by the same applicant. Mr. Smith replied no and indicated
that it was submitted by a proposed future developer of the service station, car
wash and convenience store.
Chairperson Ferguson indicated the public hearing was open and reminded anyone
speaking in favor or opposition to please state clearly their name and address for
the record so that it could be properly reflected in the minutes. Chairperson
Ferguson asked the applicant to address the commission.
MR. MARVIN ROOS, Director of Planning Services for Mainiero, Smith &
Associates, 777 E. Tahquitz Canyon in Palm Springs, stated that they are
the project planners and engineers for the case and they were also working
with Frank Urrutia Architects on the gas station design and overall
architectural concepts, they were working with Ron Gregory Associates on
the landscaping, and they submitted a full traffic study by Endo Engineering
for the entire 270 acres. Hydrology and biology studies were also
completed so that they could talk about the significant issues with this land. ;
He said that he appreciated the effort on the part of staff, commission and
ARC for this project. He said they what they were trying to do was a little
unique in terms of the kinds of pre-planning under the circumstances since
6
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�..
they didn't have a lot specific development proposals for the 270 acres of
commercial, industrial, etc., although they believed the project is consistent
with the goals and objectives of the Palm Desert General Plan. He said they
were trying to forge a new concept for this area with the kind of land uses
that they are familiar with. He indicated that they started this process
before ZORC became "a household name" and with the idea that with a new
offramp they had a major responsibility to the city to come up with
something that was unique, special and a gateway project. With fast food
restaurants and gas stations, that was not necessarily something they would
typically put into a gateway statement, however, he thought they had
_ created that with the help of ZORC. Their long term objective is to convince
fast food people that this would be a really good item for them financially
with the extra maintenance costs for the landscaping and park and those
kinds of things. He said they were not used to that, they were used to five
feet of landscaping and they would have to be shown a really nice picture
and they were in the process of trying to put something together. Since
they pre-saged ZORC they had a slightly different configuration of these
uses in mind than the one that ultimately came out of ZORC. He said they
might wish to seek a little bit of an alteration to the concept of their
development plan versus what ZORC came up with in as much as the
� limitation of the Freeway Overlay Zone was strictly on the old commercial,
which was 80 acres and part of which was on the campus site. They have
9750 feet of frontage on the freeway and to limit that just to one area might
not be in the best interest of the project overall. Their development plan
that was not mentioned as a change did say that they would have drive-
throughs north of Gerald Ford and specifically they listed PA4 which they
were showing as an industrial concept to the east. Staff indicated that they
would be flexible in the long run and wouldn't prove difficult if they came
in with a good idea. As an example, freeway oriented commercial for the
Freeway Overlay Zone allows some additional signage for freeway oriented
businesses. They might come into PA7, which was the hillside area
overlooking the whole area, with a freeway oriented hotel that in all other
ways matched up with the intent of the Freeway Overlay Zone to allow
some additional signage for people to say there is a nice Hyatt Hotel for
freeway travelers and they need to know about it. They needed to have
some assurance that if they come in with that they might be able to present
plans that would do that. In light of the recommendations, they had only a
couple of areas they wanted to see specific changes to, keeping an open
mind the issue of the freeway oriented businesses. One of the areas was
a technical area and they have already talked with the Public Works
Department. One of their development agreement areas and one of their
development plan areas was that they would gain credit for the value of the
land that they would be dedicating to the mid-valley channel. That was a
�" master planned regional facility that ultimately provided them with no benefit
7
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
because they couldn't discharge any water into it and they would have to
maintain all of their water onsite. They were not only dedicating over 1 1
acres for the mid-valley channel, they were also being deprived of the use
of their 30 foot utility easement, which they normally could use for parking
or something like that. The total was over 17 acres of land. He wasn't sure
what the ultimate value of the land would be, but in addition to having to
dedicate 18 acres of land, they were also being asked to pay 51,000 an
acre for drainage fees. Across the street if they had 270 acres, they would
have a S270,000 liability. They have not only the $270,000 liability, but 18
acres of land. They would be dealing with that in the development
. agreement which would be coming back to the commission and they would
like to wrestle that issue out. As one of the wording changes, No. 9 on
staff report page 8, recommending replacing "shall" with "may". That still
allowed it to happen. They were just trying to point out the issue of equity
so that they could be able to come back and plead that case. At this time
they didn't want to delete reference to permitted drive-through restaurants
in Planning Area 4, primarily because they haven't seen the development
proposal yet and they feel the intent of this has always been to adjust as
necessary the zoning ordinance as it applies to this property based on the
fact that they were coming in with an overall master plan. They have asked
for other things that don't comply specifically with the zoning ordinance '
here and there and they felt that in good planning they didn't want to ""�
preclude some of these things and could come back with a plan that
Planning Commission would have total discretionary approval of if it didn't
make sense. He thought it probably wouldn't be drive-through restaurants,
but some other type of use that was a freeway oriented use that might take
the need for additional signage. Most of the other changes that were on
page 8 were okay with them. Again, there was the grading and drainage
and the one issue of the drive-throughs. The matter of the development
agreement would be coming back to the commission with what he felt was
a very exciting long-range art in public places proposal. They have had
meetings with John Nagus and met with him again today. They were on the
agenda for the Art in Public Places Committee for March 19 and they were
seeking a subcommittee to come up with some extraordinary concepts for
art for people coming into the city on Cook Street. They would know there
was a very unique geographical concept as people come down the freeway
and head back up Cook Street. It was kind of a bowl shape but they
thought as people come down that perhaps a very commanding art in public
places installation, whether it was a ground form or a major water feature
or something else, would create the major aspect of the gateway. The
development agreement would attempt to put together a large master plan
for this area and might even include the campus site and maybe even the
residential site as they go through that with Art in Public Places to find out
what could really happen as an exciting concept here. He said they were �.�i
8
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
i...
seeking a continuance of the map so that they could match up with the
changes that have happened since they submitted their application in
October and that they would be back right after the development
agreement. They didn't have any problem with the City Council looking at
this and thought it was something they wanted to see and felt it was
important for them to see. He didn't anticipate any particular problem with
it. Regarding the questions that came up regarding the gas station, he said
that they moved ahead with the design of this gas station because they
were concerned that the look should be appropriate. The folks they were
working with did some reasonable gas stations, but the first drawings they
. saw were nice, but not up to the quality they were looking for. That was
why they moved ahead with the design as they have and this would set the
standard for Planning Area 1 . Relative to the operational characteristics,
they would anticipate a fairly typical 24 hour freeway orientation. He said
there was generally people onsite that are not "locked up in a box", but at
this point he couldn't guarantee that there couldn't in fact be a security area
that the clerks could stay in and deal out of that area. He indicated that the
design of this was oriented to be a walk-in store. It was not the typical
small little cubicle. He anticipated that the people would be accessible and
could monitor the whole facility. The car wash would only be open during
� typical 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. business hours. He felt there was plenty of
storage and said they tried to integrate the design. Everyone comes into a
common space and could then go to a gas station and didn't have to go
back into the street to go to any of the other facilities. They felt the
circulation worked quite well to get people in and out including people with
trailers and large vehicles. He thought that besides the couple of concerns
that they have, that they were in accordance with the staff
recommendation. He said they would like to get the feeling from
commission that if they came back with the right freeway oriented use in
some areas other than the existing 88 acres of PC-2 zoning already out there
that somewhere outside of that area may still be appropriate for freeway
uses wherein particularly the signage might make some sense if they came
back and still met the same criteria for the freeway overlay zone. He noted
that Frank Urrutia and Bob Mainiero were also present to answer any
questions.
Chairperson Ferguson asked if anyone else wished to speak in FAVOR of the
application. He asked if anyone who wished to speak in OPPOSITION. There was
no one and he closed the public hearing opened up the discussion for the
commission. He reminded the commission that he previously recused himself from
this matter and would not be participating in this discussion as he has a client who
is in discussion with the applicant and might have an interest one way or another
in how this gets resolved.
�.r
9
MiNUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
,
�
�
Commissioner Jonathan felt that they would really be talking about two parts--one
was the change of zone and the other was the precise plan. His perception was
that the change of zone was completely appropriate and in the direction their prior
discussions have taken and consistent with what was happening in the area. The
precise plan he also felt was consistent with that direction and he applauded the
applicant for recognizing the responsibility to the city. He viewed this area with
great interest because he thought the quality of the community was often judged
by the appearance of its least desirable uses. When putting in drive-through
restaurants, gas stations, etc., next to a freeway, it has the potential for either
being a very destructive impact on a city's appearance or it really augmented its
_ stature. He felt this project did the latter. They were creating something that for
people coming into the city, hopefully their subconscious reaction would be that if
this part of the city that has the potential to be the worst part looks this good, then
they were in for something good. That was appropriate and necessary for this area
and he appreciated that they approached the development with that kind of
sensitivity. He was in favor.
Commissioner Campbell concurred with Commissioner Jonathan and was in favor
of the project. She felt it was very well done. She thought the food park with the
garden would be a very attractive entrance to the city. ;
,
�
Commissioner Fernandez stated that the applicant had done a great job and he was �
in favor of the project.
Commissioner Beaty said that it was now obvious why there were all the
continuances, because the applicants had done their homework and he was very
impressed with the proposal and was in favor.
Chairperson Ferguson noted that there were several different motions being
requested, the change of zone, master plan and two continued items. Mr. Drell
noted that the commission also had to address the staff recommended
modifications and the applicant's response to those recommendations. They
involved two items--one being the extension of the Freeway Commercial Overlay
Zone to the PA6 and PA4 areas, which was in essence all along the freeway
frontage. All he could say was that they just went through an exercise of
establishing where that zone should go for better or worse and he thought there
was a specific intent to at least at this time limit those to areas directly associated
with the interchanges. ZORC made that decision and they could have
recommended that they put the zone all along the freeway, but didn't. The
applicant always has an ability to ask for the overlay in the future, and typically
when they show us a wonderful development, that was when they could be
granted that extension. He felt it was premature given the recommendation at the �
last meeting and the item going to council at its next meeting. If they did this, �
whoever owns the property from Portola to Monterey should have the expectation
10
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
ir..
that he will get it as well in that there is really nothing unique about this proposal.
They haven't shown any detailed development which would justify it. That was
staff's position. Regarding the grading issue, there was a representative from the
Public Works Department to comment on whether or not the project warrants a
credit for dedication of drainage right-of-way. Mr. Greenwood stated that the Public
Works Department was recommending that the language be changed to the word
"may" rather than "shall". This allowed them to continue negotiations on the issue
while taking into account the interests of all, whereas if they allowed the word
"shall" to be included at this point, the city's interests may not be protected.
Chairperson Ferguson said that he assumed the commission heard the applicant's
concerns and noted them. He said there were essentially three motions
recommended to the commission by staff and they were open for alterations if
commission chose to. He asked if anyone had a motion that was other than that
which was recommended by staff. Commissioner Jonathan said that he would
make a motion for approval as amended by staff because he concurred with the
rationale that was presented. He would want the items to be amended as
indicated. Chairperson Ferguson asked if he was talking about Mr. Drell's
amendment that all of this be conditioned on final council approval. Commissioner
Jonathan agreed and indicated that the freeway commercial overlay zone should
�, not be expanded.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting
the findings as presented and amended by staff. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairperson
Ferguson abstained).
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1787, recommending to City Council approval
of C/Z 96-6 and the Master Plan of Development for Wonder Palms Commercial
Center. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairperson Ferguson abstained).
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting
the findings as presented and amended by staff. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairperson
Ferguson abstained).
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1788, recommending to city council approval
of PP/CUP 96-10, a precise plan of design for development on Planning Area #1 of
the Master Plan of Development for Wonder Palms Commercial Center, subject to
conditions as amended. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairperson Ferguson abstained).
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, by
�'�' minute motion continuing DA 97-2 to March 18, 1997 and continuing TPM 28448
11
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
i
�
to April 1 , 1997 to permit the applicant to adjust the parcel lines consistent with
the approved precise plan and development plan. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairperson �
Ferguson abstained).
B. Case No. CUP 97-3 - JOHN AND GARY CRAIG, Applicant
Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the
operation of an outdoor seasonal fresh strawberry stand at 42-575
Washington Street. The proposed mobile stand will provide retail
sales and will be operated during day light hours only. The stand will
occupy a 10 foot by 20 foot lawn area in front of the Kerrigan
Medical Building.
Mr. Smith indicated that this is the first request other than the Street Fair at the
College of the Desert to take advantage of the code provision allowing outdoor
sales. The applicant wished to place a mobile strawberry stand on the lawn area
in front of the Kerrigan medical office building on the west side of Washington
Street at Dudley Avenue, which is south of Avenue of the States. He said that
adjacent uses to the north was Don 0's Restaurant, to the south apartments, to the ;
east across Washington Street were apartments and a single family dwelling, and '
to the west there was the aforementioned medical office building. He noted '""�
commission had a proposed layout included with the staff report, as well as a
sketch of the stand itself. The applicant wished to operate during daylight hours
throughout March, April and May from the lawn area. The location shown on the
sketch showed the unit to be seven feet back from the sidewalk on Washington
Street. He said staff has a concern with that location in that Washington Street
has heavy traffic. Dudley Road was a minor street that accesses to Washington
Street and it was not signalized. Were there to be parking on the west side of
Washington Street in this area, there was a potential for traffic conflicts in that
area. Hence, staff was refuctant to approve the use in that location. He noted that
commission received a letter from Mr. Gilmore expressing a similar concern with the
traffic conflicts for people exiting onto Washington Street at Dudley. Staff
recommended in favor of the application, but staff was requiring as one of the
conditions of approval that the building be located a minimum of 40 feet back from
Washington Street and that it be oriented towards the parking lot. In visiting the
site on a few occasions, the easterly most row of parking in the medical office
building parking lot (7 or 8 spaces) was always empty. If they could get the people
who would be frequenting the strawberry stand to pull off of Washington Street
and pull into the office building parking, then he didn't think there would be a
conflict. Since the grass area in front of the building was 50 feet deep, hopefully
by moving the structure back 40 feet would be enough of a deterrent to keep �
someone from running across to grab a box of strawberries. He said staff was also ;
suggesting that the approval be valid for one year only and that the commission �
12
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�r..
could grant an extension toward the end of the one year period and that would give
staff an opportunity to review the operation and get a better feel for its impacts.
Staff recommended approval for a one year period and noted that Mr. Drell spoke
to a representative of the Project Area 4 Committee that has been working on the
secondary plan for that area and she indicated she didn't have any concern with the
use and looked forward to buying one of the early available boxes of strawberries.
Commissioner Campbell asked if the strawberry building would face the parking lot.
Mr. Smith agreed that the opening would face the parking lot and noted that the
applicant asked him if they could design it to open both ways and staff didn't have
. a problem with that because the distance would be enough of a deterrent to offset
the concern staff has relative to parking on Washington Street. Commissioner
Campbell asked if there was a no parking sign on Washington Street in that area.
Mr. Smith replied no. Mr. Drell indicated that they would also encourage the
applicant to have a small directional sign pointing the way to the parking lot to get
to the strawberries. He said they would probably want some kind of a small sign
on the street anyway. He indicated that they could also red stripe the curb on
Washington Street if it was necessary.
Chairperson Ferguson said that Mr. Drell addressed one of his questions that dealt
� with whether or not a temporary monument sign would be aflowed. Second(y, the
issue raised by Mr. Gilmore in his letter he believed concerned egress onto
Washington Street and basically because of the high volume of traffic and lack of
a signal, the residents had to wait some measure of time to get out onto
Washington Street. He asked how, if at all, moving the strawberry stand back 40
feet addressed Mr. Gilmore's concerns. Mr. Smith said that the concern staff had
was that the curb lane in front of the medical office, while it is not painted red at
the current time, no one parks there. If they put vehicles there, even if they were
only stopped for three minutes to run and pick up some strawberries, it created the
situation where the people coming out of Dudley would have to inch out that extra
width of one car or RV or whatever was parked there that was not being parked
there now. Even if it was painted red, some people that were only planning to stop
for two minutes might still park there. It would offer the opportunity of impacting
on their ability to exit from Dudley onto Washington Street. Chairperson Ferguson
said that was what he was concerned about--getting onto Washington Street,
particularly for people were turning left, that created a back log at that intersection
and people being creatures of habit, if they could park, even if they had to walk 40
feet, it was less time then they would spend waiting in line to get back onto
Washington. He felt they might just park there anyway. He asked if the applicant
has had previous experience running this kind of strawberry stand and what volume
of business could be expected in terms of number of cars per hour. Mr. Smith said
that the applicant has experience and he was here and could perhaps answer those
questions.
w..
13
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
�
�
�
Chairperson Ferguson o�ened the public hearing and asked for all those in favor of
the application to speak first, then those opposed to speak next, and then rebuttal
comments from the applicant after that. He asked the applicant to address the
commission.
MR. JOHN CRAIG, 29-706 Avenida Del Real in Sun City, stated that he had
an idea that might address both the problems the city has with curb parking
and the problems he has with exposure. Being a new business that far
away from the curb and street, they were planning on a lot more exposure
than that would avail them. He said there were two monument signs there
. in the front of the grassy area and he wanted to put a three foot high by six
foot wide sign between the two monument signs, which would block the
path of anyone coming from the curb to the stand. They would have to go
around it and it would discourage that kind of parking along the curb and the
foot traffic going back and forth. Also, he wanted to have the stand open
to both sides because even if he was selling only to the parking lot he
wanted the exposure to the street so that people could see what they were
doing. He said that on the side facing the street, he could also put out a
display of his berries, but wanted to have shuttered windows behind that so
that side of the stand was closed to the street so people wouldn't be able ;
to buy berries from that side of the stand, yet he could still have access to ;
rotating the berries because they had to be moved about every half hour if r"�
they had that kind of exposure to the sun. Between those two things he felt
that curb parking could be eliminated and the problems of people wanting
to park there would be gone. He said that he just became aware of those
concerns yesterday. As far as traffic per hour, normally they had 10-15
cars per hour. He didn't think they would have that now with them being
located that far away from Washington Street. He felt it would now be
about 6-8 cars. He didn't think it would be a very lucrative venture this
year, but he.wanted to get established out here. They have been running
strawberry stands on the other side of the county for the last six years and
they have proved to be very popular and he felt that out here because it is
so far from strawberry growing regions that this would be popular. He
wanted to make this a model stand this year to prove themselves. The one
year permit was no problem with him because he was confident that they
could prove themselves. He said that business was sometimes heavier on
the weekends, but then the office building would be closed and it would be
easier for people using the intersection.
Commissioner Campbell asked why he wanted to locate the stand in that particular
area. She asked if it would be easier for him to deal with the Lucky's shopping
center. ;
�
�
�
14
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
e..
Mr. Craig stated that Lucky's owns that Lucky's shopping center and they
have never had any luck selling strawberries from a supermarket parking lot
because they didn't want the competition.
Commissioner Campbell asked if he had approval from the owners of the medical
office building.
Mr. Craig replied yes.
Commissioner Campbell asked if he had received any comments from the owners
of Don O's Restaurant.
Mr. Craig said that he hasn't talked with the owner of Don O's, but he was
hoping to work out a situation with him where he could supply the
restaurant with some berries.
Commissioner Campbell asked what size of monument sign he was considering.
Mr. Craig said that he was hoping that he could have a sign that would be
angled in the middle so that it angles back almost like an arrowhead. It
` would probably be three to four feet on each side. He said it would be three
or four feet high. It would be low enough to not make it a traffic hazard,
but high enough so that people could still see the stand.
Commissioner Campbell asked if he thought people would jump over the sign.
Mr. Craig said he didn't think so, but if someone was going to park in the
red zone at the curb, jump over the sign, and then go to a window that is
closed to get strawberries, there was not much more he could do. He
thought the sign itself would be a deterrent and it would also address some
of his concerns about exposure. The sign would be located in the place
where he originally intended the stand to be. That way people could see it
from the street. As far back as they are, the angle from the two sides of
the building, people would not be able to see the stand until they were
almost parallel to it. Without some kind of signage there it would be
difficult, although he would do it anyway he had to to get it started.
Commissioner Campbell said that when she drove by the area, she drove by Don
O's and all of a sudden she was at Dudley and hadn't even seen the grassy area,
although she did stop to look at it.
Mr. Craig said that the stand itself was described as nine feet wide, but he
wanted to extend that to 12 feet if that was possible. Originally the spot
�"'` where it was supposed to be was uphill so the awning at six feet from the
15
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
i
�
bottom of the stand would have been about 6'6" as people walked up to the
stand. He wanted to raise it to 6'6" for the height of the awning off of the
ground since they were now on a flat area and he didn't want people to
bump their heads on it.
Commissioner Jonathan asked Mr. Craig where the strawberries were frorri.
Mr. Craig replied Ontario and Chino. He said that they buy from seven
different fields--there were two in Chino and five in Ontario.
, Commissioner Campbell asked why Mr. Craig felt this was the best location on
Washington Street rather than locating in another area and not having to go
through the conditional use permit process since the property on the east side of
Washington Street was County land.
Mr. Craig felt that the County land was harder to get a permit for. He had
been trying for two years to get a permit and was running into a !ot of
difficulty. Although it might not seem like it, this was kind of a new
concept. He thought the commission was probably familiar with farmer
stands, but to sell remote produce away from the field and one item only ;
was difficult because there was only one thing to pull with and not a lot of �
varieties of items. Plus it was only seasonal so they were only here �
temporarily. He said it was usuafly too long for a temporary use permit for
most cities, but was too short to grant a conditional use permit on. There
were a number of problems involved. Also, he had to find a landlord that
was willing to rent for only three months a year. The Lucky's shopping
center was out because Lucky's owns the center and ihey wouldn't want
the competition, so he didn't even ask them. They tried at a Lucky's center
in Temecula and there was no way they would agree. He said there weren't
that many other areas to consider; there was a new development at the
corner of 42nd and Washington Street on the County side that he was
working with and they were supposed to start construction, so this year he
went there first thing and they haven't started any construction yet. The
rest of the street was not zoned for it and they have conflicting conditions
and it depends on who you talk to at the County as to what has to be done.
He was waiting until there was a development over there so that he could
locate on a developed piece of property, kind of like this one.
Commissioner Campbell asked if the building would be dismantled after three
months.
Mr. Craig said that it was a portable structure on wheel, but the wheels
were on the corners and the interior was open and was on ground. It �
wasn't like a trailer that was up two feet. The actual structure raises and �
16
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
lowers on the frame so that it can be moved. It would be stored the rest of
the year, but hopefully it would look like it was a permanent structure. He
didn't want a temporary looking stand. He wanted a very nice permanent
looking stand which would be classy so that they could move in and out of
developed areas. He said that most of the other stands are on unimproved
land. Out here, most of the land was improved or desert and there wasn't
any access to it and there were very few vacant lots here, so they would
need to have their stands in developed areas. No one would want a
produce-looking stand in their nice shopping center.
Chairperson Ferguson asked if anyone wished to speak in OPPOSITION to the
proposal.
MR. JIM JONES, 1315 Manzanita Avenue in Palm Springs, said that he
came here to speak in opposition, but after listening to staff he didn't feel
he was in opposition any more. He was Mr. Gilmore's partner, the person
who sent the letter. The residents who live in the apartments were the ones
concerned about the project since they are the ones who have to daily go
in and out of the property. He said there were 35 signatures on a petition
given to him, but their main concern was that cars would be parked on
;� Washington Street and when they looked left toward the signal they
wouldn't be able to see it. He felt that staff seemed to have addressed that
problem, so he didn't feel like they were in opposition. He said that it
bothered him too. He stated that he felt Mr. Craig should be given an
opportunity to operate his business and it was only for a three-month period
and then they could see what actually occurs.
Chairperson Ferguson asked Mr. Jones if he was reasonably comfortable that the
35 people who signed that petition, given what he had heard tonight, would
withdraw their signatures.
Mr. Jones said that he hadn't discussed it with them since he just picked it
up on the way to the meeting, but his understanding was that their concern
was as stated earlier. He said that when he visited the property a person
could wait a while to get out because it is a busy street. Many times what
he would do was make a right turn and go down a ways and then turn
around. He said that sometimes it was faster to do that, but he didn't visit
there that often, maybe only once a week, so it wasn't a big issue with him.
He didn't think it would add that much more traffic than Dr. Kerrigan's office
anyway, who was a very good neighbor and they were very happy when he
put his office there.
MS. MARILYN HAMLET, 42-600 lowa Street in Palm Desert, stated that she
�" was the President of the Palm Desert Country Club Association. She said
17
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
i
�
�
that they had their Board of Directors meeting and discussed this and the
Board didn't want this use. She said that she was fairly new to the
community since she has only lived here four years. She said that they
were very happy when Lucky's went in and when the Kerrigan's built their
nice building and felt that to put a stand in there would be reverting to what
was there before. She felt they would be going backwards. Across the
street on the County side they were now selling Ray Ban sunglasses on the
corner and to her a strawberry stand in that area she just didn't like at all.
She said that when she goes to Dr. Kerrigan, she has problems and didn't
go there during the busy times of day and it was a problem getting out onto
_ Washington Street. She said you could turn to the right, but even with the
number of cars the stand would have, this was not a reasonable location for
a strawberry stand.
Mr. Craig readdressed the commission and stated that he thought she was
concerned about the type of thing that he was here today not to be, which
was not to be squatters on the corner and the type of people that set up a
card table and sell different items illegally without licenses. The whale
purpose of going through this process and getting a license and coming
before the commission was so that they could do it in a legal fashion and �
with the approval of the Planning Commission, they would have the building '
look really nice and he thought their comparison to what was there before "'�
and the Ray Ban sunglass sales is different. He didn't think anyone would
be in opposition if they could see the difference between this operation and
what Ms. Hamlet was concerned with. He hoped that they would be
allowed to open this year to prove to anyone that has concerns that this is
not that type of situation. It is the kind of thing they run up against all the
time because people have bad connotations about this type of thing and
produce stands in general. He said that because produce stands rotate their
items and have a lot of different varieties, they have a lot of organic trash
bui(dup and that causes a lot of probfems. He said they didn't have any
trash at all. They take their small amount of trash and take it with them
every night and the stands are left clean and empty all the time. There was
no problem with that. Basically, he didn't think this was what Ms. Hamlet
was talking about or that she was familiar with and that the other citizens
were concerned with, but he would just like to be given a chance to prove
that.
Chairperson Ferguson closed the public hearing and asked for commission
comments.
Commissioner Campbell stated that she would move approval on a temporary basis �
for one year on the condition that the curb is painted red and no parking was ;
allowed on Washington Street. She would also like it under surveillance to make �
18
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
i.�►
sure that people do not park there and if in the future it was needed, install no
parking signs. She wanted to make sure that customers parked in the parking lot
to buy their strawberries.
Commissioner Jonathan stated that he would be voting in opposition to this project,
not because he was opposed to outdoor fruit stands but because he was persuaded
by Ms. Hamlet's testimony as President of the Palm Desert Country Club
Association. He felt this was an inappropriate location for this particular use.
Commissioner Beaty ag�eed with Commissioner Campbell and felt that the applicant
, was sincere in attempting to make this an attractive display and he encouraged Ms.
Hamlet to scrutinize it carefully if it is approved and to come back to the Planning
Department if there were problems with it and revisit it next year.
Commissioner Fernandez stated that he was also in favor of the project. He felt
that a three month operation and a one-year approval should be given a try.
Chairperson Ferguson said that he wasn't "wild" about this project--not because
he didn't think the applicant had a wonderful looking stand because he does, not
because he didn't like strawberries because he does, and not even because he felt
the location was inappropriate because he felt that the ordinance invited open air
�"" vendors subject to a conditional use permit, but he had strong concerns about the
traffic situation. His practice historically has been to take a look and see if it is the
problem everyone thinks it is and approve it subject to conditions that would allow
them to go back and remediate those problems if they manifest themselves. Based
on that philosophy he was in favor of granting the applicant what in effect would
be a two and a half month temporary use permit, even though it was a conditional
use permit because as he understood it, the applicant didn't operate after May and
by the time he had to come back to the Planning Commission, he would only be
four or five days into his next selling season. He was not in favor of having the
booth open to both sides. He felt that the applicant's concern was getting
customers to his site and he was not sure that having open windows even with
shudders was the way to do that. It could create the very problems that everyone
was discussing trying to alleviate. He was also in favor of Commissioner
Campbell's suggestion that the curb be painted red, but he would rather condition
approval of this application on close monitoring and if parking became a problem,
then it should be painted red. If it wasn't a problem, it might go away. He wanted
the Palm Desert Country Club Association to monitor it, as well as the residents of
the apartment complex, and he felt that this was a quality looking stand. He drove
through the state of Washington last September and saw a number of these
upscale faci{ities along the road selling apples and other wares that were indigenous
to Washington and he didn't see why this couldn't be in the same vein. He wanted
the applicant to have an opportunity to establish himself and it would be in effect
"` for two and a half months and if problems do occur, he wanted to see it
19
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
�
�
conditioned on staff being able to remediate those problems and the commission
would look at it again this time next year.
Commissioner Beaty concurred with Chairperson Ferguson, but he thought that the
applicant would have glass windows on the street side and asked if that was
correct. Mr. Craig said he would like wooden louvered shutters so that it looked
closed. He asked if he couldn't have that window with the shutters, if he could
have a shelf for displaying strawberries. He felt that strawberries sold themselves.
Chairperson Ferguson asked if this was a stand that Mr. Craig used elsewhere. Mr.
Craig stated that the stand he proposed for this site was not like the one the
, commission now had a picture of; it would be much more upscale that it. He said
that it would have stucco on the outside and should look like it was built there and
would be on the ground. Chairperson Ferguson asked why he needed shutters if
they were going to be kept closed. Mr. Craig explained that strawberries needed
to be rotated, but if the shutters were not acceptable, he would like a shelf and
could walk around the outside to move them. Commissioner Beaty said that
someone could steal them if he didn't have a window and that might give an
obvious feeling that strawberries couldn't be purchased from that side, but it might
be of use. Chairperson Ferguson suggested letting Mr. Craig proceed as suggested
and if parking becomes a problem one of the options commission could look at was �
having him close that side of the stand. He didn't want to solve problems that �
didn't exist, but he wanted to leave the commission the flexibility to address them
if they manifested themselves. Mr. Craig said that was fine with him and any
conditions they placed if a problem arose later on or if it became too much of a
problem and they wanted to pull the use that was fine with him too. He just
wanted to be given the opportunity to try.
Chairperson Ferguson asked staff if there were enough contingencies in the existing
resolution that would allow staff to do what has been discussed without amending
it. Mr. Drell said that they could add some. He said the commission could also say
the permit was good for oniy three months instead of a year. Chairperson Ferguson
said that if there was a parking problem reported to them and chronicled, he would
like staff to be able to go out and do something about it without having to come
back to commission first. Mr. Drell said that a condition could be added relative to
either parking or traffic congestion and the applicant just volunteered that if they
make a finding that his operation is contrary generaNy to the intent of the approval
or zoning ordinance, he has agreed to a termination. First is the decision on
whether or not to red curb Washington Street. The first condition would be that
if as a result of staff monitoring that parking on Washington Street is a problem,
no parking shall be designated on the curb. The second condition would be that
if any unforeseen problems associated with the use becomes apparent, then staff
would have to come back to the commission to revoke the permit. Unforeseen �
problems may result in revocation of the permit prior to the one year period. ;
Chairperson Ferguson clarified that the finding should be able to be made by staff. �
20
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
ar.
Chairperson Ferguson asked if those two conditions were acceptable to Mr. Craig.
Mr. Craig concurred and asked about the sign request. Chairperson Ferguson
clarified that the city has a sign ordinance. Mr. Drell said that there was a sign
ordinance and an architectural review process which is a condition. Chairperson
Ferguson asked if they would look at the stand as well. Mr. Drell said yes, the
stand was a prominent visual feature just like landscaping, walls and monument
signs. That would determine if these things were successful and part of the test
was if something like this could be made to appear to be in compliance with city
standards. In terms of the signage, typically the city would only permit a
directional sign if it was necessary. The applicant was not necessarily entitled to
. anything else and Mr. Craig was talking about something rather substantial at 20-
30 square feet in size. He said that Planning Commission could make a
determination at this time as to how large a sign they were willing to give him.
Technically Mr. Craig was asking for an exception to the sign ordinance which he
is entitled to do before he actually applies for the sign, but given the timing and
how long it would take to go back and forth, commission might want to consider
what type of signage they would be willing to approve. Ultimately the design
would be based on the architectural commission's decision.
Chairperson Ferguson stated that he personally did not want to approve a sign he
V has never seen and he was uncomfortable since he hadn't seen the building and
they were charting into unknown territory to give the applicant a chance to
establish himself, so he personally would just allow him to work with the existing
ordinance and if there was a problem he could come back. He felt that when
people saw the word "strawberries" people would go straight to where ever he was
located.
Mr. Craig said one reason he came up with the monument sign was because
the commission was concerned about people coming up across the back.
Chairperson Ferguson said that he was talking about 105 feet of perimeter cut off
by a corner monument face, or 75 feet. There was no way they would grant a 75
foot monument sign.
Mr. Craig said that there was actually one on each side of the proposed
sign. Placing it in the middle would completely cut off access through there
and people would have to walk around. Normally if you had a pathway to
a house, you wouldn't put something blocking the way to it.
Chairperson Ferguson indicated that at this point he would be comfortable letting
Mr. Craig work with the existing sign ordinance and if there wasn't a problem, then
there wasn't a need for signs placed in that particular manner and staff could work
it out. Mr. Drell noted that there were other ways to obstruct pedestrian flows
""' than with signs. Chairperson Ferguson asked Ms. Hamlet to monitor this since it
21
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
�
�
was temporary and was for about two and a half months and he would be the first
one out there to see if it melds with the existing community. If it doesn't, he would
"lead the parade" to modify it so that it did. He was not unmindful of their
concerns.
Commissioner Campbell reiterated that there was a motion with the condition that
the curb be painted red and that it would be monitored and included Mr. Drelf's
conditions. Mr. Drell indicated the conditions would be that as part of monitoring
if it becomes a problem the curb would be painted red, and that if other unforeseen
problems occur, they might result in the revocation of the permit prior to the one
. year term. Commissioner Campbell concurred.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting
the findings as presented and modified by staff. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner
Jonathan voted no).
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1789, approving CUP 97-3, subject to
conditions as amended. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Jonathan voted no). �
r.ri
C. Case No. CUP 90-6 Amendment - SIMONDS ENTERPRISES FOR THE GOLF
CLUB AT PALM DESERT, App(icant
Request for approval of an amendment to a conditional use permit to
allow night lighting of an existing golf driving range located at 74-
945 Sheryl Avenue.
Mr. Drell explained that this was an existing driving range currently unlighted.
There was now a recently adopted lighting ordinance that specifically has
provisions for the lighting of driving ranges. There was a lighting plan in the
commission packet and this proposal conforms with requirements of the lighting
ordinance for driving ranges. Even though the ordinance doesn't require that this
be a conditional use permit, because of the adjacent residential area, staff felt the
neighborhood should be notified and notified all those around the golf course and
driving range. He felt this particular design was acceptable and recommended
approval with one additional condition. Previously the applicant came to the
Architectural Commission for approval of some screening on the channel side of the
range to keep golf balls from going into the channel and it was approved by the
Architectural Commission with the requirement that some bunches of palm trees
be planted adjacent on the outside of the screening to divert the eye from the �
appearance of the screen and those palm trees had yet to be installed. Therefore, ?
rr1�
22
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
a�.►
the condition on this would be that they couldn't pull any permits or initiate this
lighting until those palm trees were installed.
Commissioner Jonathan noted that paragraph two of the analysis indicated that the
lights at the tee boxes faced east and asked if that should be west. Mr. Drell said
no, the tee boxes were not next to the street, but were on the far west side of the
driving range. Commissioner Jonathan asked about the tee boxes on the east side
of the driving range and Mr. Drell clarified that those wouldn't have any lighting.
He explained that the light level at those tee boxes would be one tenth of a foot
candle, which was slightly more than a full moon so the only lit portion would be
. the west side of the driving range.
Commissioner Campbell asked how many palm trees the applicant was supposed
to plant there. Mr. Drell said that he believed it was to be three or four bunches.
They were supposed to come back and show the city what they were going to do--
it was a generalized direction. Commissioner Campbell asked if they were to face
the channel. Mr. Drell said that they were on the channel side of the screen.
Commissioner Campbell clarified that the channel faced Palm Desert High School.
Mr. Drell concurred and said that when driving down Cook Street and when looking
up there would be some visual distraction from the palm trees. ARC wanted
� something a little more decorative than a 30-40 foot high driving range screen in
that location.
Chairperson Ferguson indicated that the palm trees were to mitigate the screen
which was already installed, but the palm trees never got installed. Mr. Drell
concurred. He said his understanding was that they were in the process of doing
that so they didn't have a problem. They apparently had some change over in their
grounds crew people and it "fell between the cracks". He said this was just a
reminder.
Commissioner 8eaty commented on the condition of the existing trees. He said
that some of them were in a pretty sad condition and there were some trees laying
down in the wash. He didn't know where those came from but they needed to be
removed.
Chairperson Ferguson opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to
address the commission.
MR. WILLIAM BLUE, 73-429 Fox Tail in Palm Desert, stated that he was the
Chief Financial Officer for Simonds Enterprises and an officer of the
corporation. He said that they agreed with Mr. Drell's observation initially
concerning the fencing, but wanted to make a couple of corrections. They
are on Sheryl Avenue or thought they were for the last year and a half, and
�"" if it was Sheryl Drive, they were in the wrong place.
23
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�
�
Mr. Drell indicated that it was Sheryl Avenue.
Mr. Blue said that they were then in the same place. Secondly, their fence
that was approved, and he appreciated the approval, but it begins 200 feet
from Cook Street and they are in the process of acquiring bids both for the
architectural layout and acquisition of the Mexican fan palms. The
management changed, which would have no effect on their moving forward
on this and they would have it completed in a short time. He believed that
they would continue to be in compliance of all of the aspects that they have
provided in terms of signage and beautification of the property. He said
. they were very interested in having this go forward and in their strategic
plan they have continued to survey those who participate at their practice
center and they have indicated a desire to have some changes made. The
first change was to install shaded areas with misted tees so that during the
summertime senior residents of Palm Desert could practice during the
daytime. They did so and noted an increase in business. They further asked
them to strongly consider the addition of the regulation lighting so that they
could have an opportunity as both working people and during the
summertime to make use of the facility after the sunlight gets lower. He
believed that they have provided the specifications the City desires, they ;
would continue with their beautification and he added that the Golf Center ;
and Simonds Enterprises were an integral part of the planning group that is "'�
hoping to put together a Cook Street business organization that has as part
of its proposed charter, if in fact it is approved by the majority of businesses
required, to beautify Cook Street in an extension of what they heard about
here and also through the business area to make certain that the additional
traffic coming off the interchange recognizes and acknowledges the breadth
and diversity of business available on Cook Street, including the Golf Center.
Commissioner Campbell asked if the applicant would mind if a condition was added
that the palms trees would go up simultaneously with the lighting.
Mr. Blue said that he wouldn't accept simultaneously--he would accept that
the palm trees would be in place before the lights.
Chairperson Ferguson asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION
to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. He asked
for commission comments.
Commissioner Jonathan asked about the hours of operation and if having the lights
off at 10:00 p.m. was inconsistent with the other lighted operations like the COD
driving range which is off at 9:00 p.m. Mr. Drell said he wasn't aware of what �
time they turn off. Commissioner Jonathan said that was his recollection. He �
remembered the residents coming in and complaining that the lights were on until �
24
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�r..
9:30 p.m. and sometimes as late as 10:00 p.m., but maybe that had changed. Mr.
Drell said that part of the problem with the Cook Street field lights was that they
do not meet our lighting ordinance in other respects. Commissioner Jonathan said
that there was the recent approval of the soccer complex with lights off at 9:00
p.m. Mr. Drell thought those lights were off at 10:00 p.m. Commissioner
Jonathan disagreed. He said that the lights were to be off at 9:00 p.m. and the
facility vacated by 9:30 p.m. Mr. Drell said that he thought it was 10:00 p.m. and
10:30 p.m. Commissioner Jonathan said that he was very familiar with the
restrictions. Mr. Drell said that for this case the time was consistent with the
ordinance adopted by council. He felt that if they did do close the soccer complex
. earlier, it was because of the noise generated from the soccer games.
Commissioner Jonathan asked if to the 10:00 p.m. time was consistent, in his
knowledge, with other lighted facilities in the city. Mr. Drell said that they have
never had an ordinance before that specifically identified hours of operation for lit
golf driving ranges and it was set at 10:00 p.m.
Commissioner Beaty asked if there was a restriction for the Cook Street baseball
field lights because those were the offensive lights. He didn't think these lights
would be a problem. Mr. Drell said that those football lights were unrestricted by
the city. Commissioner Beaty said that the football lights weren't on that often,
,�, the problem was the baseball field lights. Mr. Drell thought that when that was
adopted, there weren't any restrictions placed on them other than as a matter of
policy for the operators of the facility. Again, he felt that the design of the
proposed lights were such that the perimeters would be virtually dark.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0.
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1790, approving CUP 90-6 Amendment,
subject to conditions as amended. Carried 5-0.
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
A. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION THAT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATIONS
FOR McMILLON DRIVE AND PALM DESERT DRIVE NORTH AT DEEP
CANYON ROAD ARE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
Mr. Greenwood said that the first one was a one foot wide strip on the former
McMillon Drive that involved a previous vacation by the county so they were left
with this one foot strip that is of no use to them. The second was at the
� northwest corner at Deep Canyon and Highway 1 1 1 . The city's street widening
25
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
�.f
project on Highway 111 and Deep Canyon required modification of the frontage
road so that there wouldn't be access on the frontage road to Deep Canyon and
that involved a street vacation also.
Chairperson Ferguson asked if that on at Deep Canyon and Highway 1 1 1 was in
connection with the Cam's Corner project. Mr. Greenwood concurred.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Campbell,
determining by minute motion ihat the subject right-of-way vacations are in
. conformity with the Palm Desert General Plan. Carried 5-0.
X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES
A. CIVIC CENTER STEERING COMMITTEE - (No meeting)
B. DESERT WILLOW COMMITTEE - (No meeting)
C. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE - February 20, 1997
�
�
Commissioner Jonathan indicated that the committee met and it was mostly �
a brainstorming session and there was nothing substantive to report.
D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE - (No meeting)
E. PALM DESERT/RANCHO MIRAGE MONTEREY AVENUE CORRIDOR
PLANNING WORK GROUP - (No meeting)
F. ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE - February 19, 1997
,
Chairperson Ferguson indicated that the Zoning Ordinance Review
Committee continued their work on the maximum lot coverage limitations
or improvements in residential zones and they looked at a number of
different options to try and prevent repetitive housing types from an
architectural aspect and he wasn't sure that they reached any finality on
that issue. All of that would be coming to the commission soon.
Commissione� Jonathan asked who the liaison was to the Palm Desert/Rancho
Mirage Avenue Corridor Work Group. Chairperson Ferguson said it was
Commissioner Campbell. Commissioner Jonathan said that he would also like to
participate on that committee and perhaps trade for the other committee he was .�
responsible for. Commissioner Jonathan said that he was happy to continue on �
EDAC but he thought he was also on Project Area 4. Commissioner Campbell �
noted that Commissioner Fernandez was supposed to be the primary representative
26
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 4, 1997
iwr.
for Project Area 4 and Commissioner Jonathan the alternate, but she could be the
alternate as long as she wasn't the primary representative attending the meetings.
She said that Commissioner Jonathan could then be the primary representative for
the Palm Desert/Rancho Committee. Mr. Drell noted that they probably wouldn't
have to meet very many times. On a staff level they have probably gotten three
quarters of the way through resolving the issues on Monterey so it would just take
a few meetings of the policy makers to resolve whatever was left. Commissioner
Campbell asked if Commissioner Jonathan would still remain as the EDAC
representative. Commissioner Jonathan concurred.
XI. COMMENTS ''
Chairperson Ferguson said he had one comment. Upon reading the minutes last
week he could see Commissioner Jonathan's point and wanted to reiterate that
there wasn't any criticism of the commission implied other than simply giving notice
that meetings would start at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Drell said that the clock had been
checked and it was now accurate.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner Campbell, se n by omm ssioner Fernandez,
�"" adjourning the meeting by minute motion Ca e 5- . �'he m ting was adjourned
at 8:52 p.m. /
,
PHILIP D EL , Secret ry
;
i
ATTEST:
JAMES CATO FERGUSON, Chairperson
Palm Desert Planning Commission
/tm
i..
27