Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1221 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY - DECEMBER 21 , 1999 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE I. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairperson Beaty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Finerty led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Paul Beaty, Vice Chairperson Sonia Campbell Cindy Finerty Jim Lopez Members Absent: Sabby Jonathan, Chairperson Staff Present: Philip Drell, Director of Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Steve Smith, Planning Manager Martin Alvarez, Associate Planner Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the December 7, 1999 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the December 7, 1999 minutes as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Drell summarized pertinent December 9, 1999 city council actions. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 i VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. CUP 98-17 - BARTLETT COMMERCIAL, Applicant Request for approval of a one-year time extension of a conditional use permit to allow the operation of a 2,275 square foot restaurant with a maximum of 50 seats located at 73-495 Highway 111 . B. Case No. PMW 99-11 - AMERICAN REALTY TRUST, INC., Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to reconfigure the golf course lots at Desert Wells (Rancho Portola) located on the north side of Frank Sinatra between Portola and Cook. C. Case No. PMW 99-16 - BIGHORN DEVELOPMENT, LP, Applicant Request for approval of a lot line adjustment of Lots 17, 18 and "L" of Tract No. 25296-2 within Bighorn. D. Case No. PMW 98-32 - BIGHORN DEVELOPMENT, LP, Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to merge parcels 34 and 35 of Tract 26068 within Bighorn. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. Vill. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he/she or someone else raised at the public hearing described r a 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 r.. herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. TT 29579 - FORD-PLUMLEY GROUP, LLC, Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map to subdivide 4.75 acres into 16 single-family lots, located on the south side of Hovley Lane West, 1 ,500 feet west of Portola Avenue. Mr. Alvarez noted that this property was located on Hovley Lane West, 1 ,500 feet west of Portola. The project consisted of a 4.75 acre property zoned Planned Residential, five units per acre. He explained that it was similar in design to the adjacent property's single cul-de-sac 16 lots with a one-lot retention basin at the end of the cul-de-sac. He said this property is owned by the same developer who owns the property to the east, Sandpiper Court. The developer would mirror the development in design and the homes. He said he wanted to make one correction to the pad height average on the staff report. The average is six inches below the adjacent subdivision to the east and between six inches and one foot six inches below the adjacent pad heights to the west. He felt they were compatible and the homes would be similar to those currently being built to the east. Although similar, they had to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. Setbacks and development standards were outlined in the staff report on page two. He stated that the tract map was consistent with the General Plan for the Planned Residential zone. Lot size minimum would be 10,000 square feet and the average was 10,400. For purposes of CEQA, staff was recommending adoption of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and recommended approval of the tract. Commissioner Campbell asked if the perimeter landscaping plan had been reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. Mr. Alvarez said no, it would be reviewed at their next meeting. Vice Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. MARIO GONZALES, one of the project developers, stated that he was present to answer any questions. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 .■i Vice Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1963, approving TT 29579, - subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. B. Case No. TT 29585 - KRISCO, INC., Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map to subdivide 3.73 acres into 16 single-family lots located at the southeast corner of Hovley Lane West and Monterey Avenue. Mr. Alvarez indicated that tract map was located at the southeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Hovley Lane West. In Spring of 1999 the commission heard a proposal for a 60-bed senior assisted living complex which was denied by commission and denied by the City Council on an appeal. The property totals 3.73 acres, is zoned Planned Residential five units per acre, will have 16 single family lots and average lots size is 8,300 and the minimum is 8,000 as required by the ordinance. Pad heights in this tract, with the exception of Lot 7 at the south end of the cul-de-sac, were lower than the adjacent subdivision to the east. Lot 7 was four inches above the adjacent subdivision's finished floor heights. The Engineering Department reviewed this and found this preliminarily acceptable. He stated that there had been some confusion with some of the residents as to the actual footprints of the homes on these lots. He indicated that the commission would hear from the applicant that these were conceptual and not actual ones which would be reviewed by staff and the Architectural Review Board. The homes would be limited to 18 feet high so minimize impacts to the adjacent neighbors. The landscaping plan would be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission at a later date and was consistent with the PR zone. Staff recommended adoption of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and recommended approval, subject to conditions. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 Vice Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. WILLIAM POPE stated that he was present to answer any questions. Vice Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. MR. WHIT MARKOWITZ, 40-885 Avenida Calafia, stated that he was happy to report that he wasn't present opposing the project like the last time. He actually thought it was quite compatible with the area. He just wanted to address a couple of concerns which he hoped the developer would take into account. He thought most of them were addressed in the staff report. Most of his concerns, since his property abuts the development, were primarily with privacy, views, and shadowing. He knew they didn't all have rights to beautiful views of the mountains which they have now, but it wasn't clear as the staff �••• report pointed out what the current configuration of the lots were since they were off center compared to their lots. He would have two houses in back of him as opposed to two lined up with his lot, which staff felt would give a greater view; however his lot was number 7 and he seemed to be adversely impacted by the Alzheimer's facility that was planned in that the building was the closest to his lot at 15 feet. He too because of the way the cul-de-sac is structured looked like those houses would be pushed back as far as they could be into the rear setback, so he would just ask for consideration in terms of lot positioning, setbacks and maybe the design of the roof lines that would maximize views for all of them back there. Especially the setbacks which could be maximized as much as possible around some of those lots because it looked like where his lot is there would be very little view corridor compared to some of his neighbors, so he just wanted that taken into account. Commissioner Campbell asked if Mr. Markowitz realized that when he purchased his home next to an empty lot, something would be built there eventually. Mr. Markowitz acknowledged that. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 Vice Chairperson Beaty asked if the developer had any rebuttal comments. Mr. Pope just wanted to reiterate that these footprints, as discussed by Mr. Alvarez, were conceptual and they have architects lined up who have a couple of layouts they were starting to design. They would those comments in mind and they didn't want to obstruct anyone's views. He was glad that was brought up. Mr. Alvarez stated that he would notify the neighbors on that back side when the matter was scheduled before the Architectural Review Commission. Vice Chairperson Beaty advised Mr. Markowitz that he was welcome to attend that meeting. He closed the public hearing and asked for comments. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1964, approving TT 29585, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. C. Case No. TT 29444 - THE ULTIMATE RETURN, INC., Applicant Request for approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map to subdivide 9.74 acres into 32 single family (8,000 square foot minimum) lots located on the west side of Portola Avenue, 600 feet north of Frank Sinatra Drive. Mr. Smith noted that plans were on display and indicated that a copy of the tract map was included in the commission packets. The request was to subdivide two of the existing five-acre parcels into 32 single family lots. Average lot size would be just over 10,000 square feet with a minimum at 9,558. He stated that this property was the third tier of lots north of Frank Sinatra. They would take access from the new north-south street which would be created between the two parcels. There was condition in the draft resolution which would require that they obtain the right to cross that property between them and Tract 29469, which was the Baxley tract commission 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 v reviewed three or four meetings ago. Pad heights at the westerly end where this tract is adjacent to K & B homes showed the pads between one and three feet above the K & B site. Public Works felt it could be reduced down to maintain a maximum of one foot of difference between the two. He indicated they would be public streets. Findings for approval of the tract map were in the staff report on pages 4 and 5 and there was a Negative Declaration prepared for purposes of CEQA. Staff recommended approval. Vice Chairperson Beaty noted that the description of the project mentioned 8,000 square foot minimum lot sizes. Mr. Smith said that the PR zone allowed for a minimum of 8,000 and this map happened to come out at around 9,500 minimum. Vice Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. DAVID HACKER, Hacker Engineering, the engineers representing The Ultimate Return, addressed the commission and said they were in agreement with the conditions, but asked that two things be added to the conditions. Some type of reimbursement agreement added to the conditions for the proposed improvements from Frank Sinatra because if their tract goes in first, they would be putting in all of those improvements in the north-south direction. Vice Chairperson Beaty asked if there was a standard procedure for that. Mr. Smith deferred to the City Attorney. Mr. Hargreaves said it was a matter of policy. It was a Public Works issue. Mr. Hargreaves asked if the applicant had spoken with Public Works. Mr. Hacker said no. Mr. Drell said that it has been done, not so much with roadway extensions, but in the case of the median in front of the Marriott Hotel where typically they would be responsible for half the median but because they wanted the median to go in they put in the whole median and waited about ten years before development occurred on the other side of the street to get reimbursed, when there was precedence for it. He didn't think this was a decision for the Planning Commission to make. That was a decision that the City Council would probably have to make. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 Mr. Hacker said he would be happy to discuss that with the City Council and he would also talk with Public Works. He said the other item was the secondary access. On their tentative map they showed the secondary access at the east end of the cul-de-sac onto Portola Avenue and with the language of the conditions, they weren't sure that was approved or not, but they wanted to ask that that be the location of the secondary access with an emergency gate. Mr. Smith clarified that it was an emergency access only. They weren't referring to it as secondary because it would only be opened for fire trucks. Mr. Hacker said that they were in complete agreement with the conditions and thanked the commission. Vice Chairperson Beaty asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Campbell asked for clarification on included any language as to the reimbursement. Mr. Drell said it wasn't a planning issue, so the applicant would have to take it up with council/public works, perhaps as part of the final map. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1965, approving TT 29444, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. D. Case No. CUP 99-15 - COLUMBIA PAR CAR CORP., Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow an outdoor golf cart display located at 73-168 Highway 1 1 1 . Mr. Smith indicated that the project was located on the north side of Highway 111 across from Carl's Jr. He distributed some colored photos of the building and explained that the property in question has an 18 foot deep front yard 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 ` w situation currently finished in tan concrete and had a raised planter in the center. He noted a previous request to display golf carts and there just wasn't enough room. In this instance there was ample room to do it. Staff just didn't feel they should be doing it on concrete and that the location or situation in which they would display the carts should relate to the product that they were displaying. He talked with Mr. Coombs today and he expressed his regrets that he couldn't be at the meeting tonight. When staff told him about staff's idea, he indicated that was what he had in mind. He wanted to try and create a fairway and greens situation with a flag stick and a bench. He would also like to finish it in astroturf. Staff wasn't sure that was the direction staff was thinking at the time, but the applicant was amenable to a continuance until January 18 and staff would process his plans accordingly, but staff should hear from commission what type of a situation they would want, if in fact they wanted to go along with this request. Mr. Drell added that in looking at the pictures, in addition to landscaping the city might want to see general facade improvement to the building. He wasn't sure if just landscaping would be enough. One of the good things with owners asking for some of these things was the opportunity to get some overall enhancement to the property beyond f•.. just landscaping. Commissioner Campbell asked if the applicant would be removing the fence and gate. Mr. Smith said the fence would lend itself to security for the applicant. Mr. Drell said if something was approved, the city was looking at developing a facade improvement grant program. He thought this was one of the older buildings on the north side which would probably be eligible for such a program. Commissioner Campbell asked if they were planning to put a golf cart on the planter. Mr. Smith said there was one in it recently. Mr. Drell clarified that it wouldn't be on it, but in front of it. Commissioner Campbell concurred that the building could use some improvement. Mr. Smith indicated that they had recently painted, cleaned it up and had some holiday decorations on the windows. Vice Chairperson Beaty opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one. He asked for commission comments. Commissioner Finerty stated that she didn't want to mislead the applicant. She felt the building was an eyesore and she didn't want to continue it because this wasn't any different than previous requests for a clothes rack by City Lites, or the Rvs by Costco. The commission didn't allow a previous golf store to put a cart out and she felt that once this sort of thing was allowed, 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 .r they were setting a terrible precedent and the city would look cluttered rather than a resort community. She was opposed and didn't think they should waste the applicant's time. Commissioner Campbell stated that she felt differently. The other requests that were turned down were on the sidewalk. This would be on private property behind a gate or fence. She would take staff's recommendation to spruce it up and make it look green and do something with the building. To her it wasn't the same as putting in something on the sidewalk. She did say that the applicant would really have to go to Architectural Review Commission with his landscaping and refurbish the building. Commissioner Lopez said that he agreed with both commissioners. He thought the building was an eyesore, even it was perhaps a historical landmark. He indicated that he happened to occupy an office that was across the street from this building for several years when it was Second Hand Rose. There was an area out front that was off the street that perhaps could be an opportunity for a cart of two to be out there and not on the sidewalk itself, but he still felt the building was an eyesore and didn't think he could approve this J based on the overall look of the whole building. He asked if this was a new company coming into town. Mr. Smith said yes. Vice Chairperson Beaty asked for clarification that they were already in operation. Mr. Smith said that was correct. Commissioner Lopez said he would have a difficult time approving it and wouldn't want to waste the applicant's time. Vice Chairperson Beaty said he was in agreement with Commissioner Campbell. He thought the building was going to go ahead and operate whether this requested was approved or not and he liked Mr. Drell's idea of perhaps seeing if the building could be improved which in the long run would result in an enhancement to Highway 1 1 1 . He felt there was no question that it was setback and it wasn't the same condition where they wanted to place golf carts or clothing racks in the public right-of-way. He thought that if it could be done in an appropriate way, there was an opportunity to fix up that lot and he would be in favor of a continuance to see what the staff and applicant could work out. Mr. Drell said that the commission could act on the continuance. 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 Commissioner Campbell said she would move to continue because she felt the applicant, after Mr. Smith spoke with him, was in favor of doing some renovations and so forth. Mr. Smith clarified that he was willing to do 4 "some." Mr. Drell said that the message from commission would be that it would have to be something that was substantial, not purely surface cosmetics, but a substantial improvement to the overall property. Mr. Smith suggested that if the commission was going to continue the matter, that it be continued to February 1 , 2000 to allow the applicant two opportunities before the Architectural Review Commission before coming back to Planning Commission. Commissioner Campbell said her motion would be to continue this to February 1 . Vice Chairperson Lopez stated that in fairness to this company, he would second the continuance. Vice Chairperson Beaty stated that he strongly agreed with the continuance to give them an opportunity to improve the site. Commissioner Finerty was concerned about the number of carts on display. Mr. Drell indicated that if the applicant's goal was to simply convey that this is a golf cart store, then he didn't necessarily need four or five. After the landscaping was properly designed, there might only be room for one or two. Whatever it was, in essence the applicant would have the minutes to understand what he was up against and it would be his choice as to how much resources he wanted to devote to it. Commissioner Campbell felt he should have the opportunity to do that. Commissioner Finerty asked for clarification of Commissioner Campbell's motion and if she would be more specific as to what she wanted the applicant to do. Commissioner Campbell said it was per staff's recommendation and to also do something with the building besides just paint. Vice Chairperson Beaty asked if that was appropriate to have in the motion, since it would already be in the minutes. Commissioner Finerty said if they were going to be fair and give the applicant a chance, and she would go along with the chance, but she didn't feel they had given the applicant clear-cut direction as to what the commission was looking for. She was under the impression that Commissioner Campbell's motion was simply to have him add some astroturf or whatever type of landscaping to make the golf carts fit in nicer. Commissioner Campbell clarified that she would like a new facade on the building. Commission noted that the building had already been painted and needed a new face/face lift. Vice Chairperson Beaty clarified that it was Mr. Smith that mentioned astroturf and Mr. Drell that mentioned a possible grant in the future to help with a new facade. He asked if that was correct. Mr. Drell concurred and said that depending upon how ambitious the applicant was, and this would be a good candidate for such a program, the program was in the formative stages but in 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 j any case this was an opportunity. Commissioner Campbell indicated that if whatever the applicant submitted wasn't acceptable, then it wouldn't be approved. Commissioner Finerty asked for and received clarification on her vote since she was opposed to the display of golf carts, but was in favor of improving the building. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, continuing CUP 99-15 to February 1 , 2000 to allow the applicant time to prepare and process landscape improvement plans for the display area. Motion carried 3-1 (Commissioner Finerty voted no). IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION - PALM DESERT DRIVE SOUTH WESTERLY OF PORTOLA AVENUE Mr. Drell indicated that this was the vacation of a portion of the frontage road in front of the property at the southwest corner which was associated with a previously approved precise plan by which the frontage road would be rerouted along the west side of this new project into the Presidents' Plaza and then closed off in front of the building. He said this area would in part be widened and part would be landscaping. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, determining by minute motion that the subject abandonment is in conformity with the city's General Plan. Motion carried 4-0. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell said that there was a meeting on December 15. There was a presentation by Mr. Will Nettleship for a proposed median sculpture at Monterey Avenue and 1-10. This would be a joint project between AIPP and Public Works. The median would be 700 feet long and 700 feet wide. It would have interlocking curved walls made of concrete block with multiple colors and textures and would have glass block to accent the points 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 21, 1999 too of light. There would be three heights ranging from eight feet, five feet, four feet and then grade. It would create a nice streetscape to the entrance of Palm Desert at Monterey. She indicated there would also be palm trees on either side of it and would be very nice. It was noted that the cost would be approximately $330,000. B. CIVIC CENTER STEERING COMMITTEE - (No meeting) C. DESERT WILLOW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) 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 - (No meeting) XI. COMMENTS None. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. r PH IP DRELL ecretary ATTEST: PAUL R. BEATY, Vice Chairperson Palm Desert Planning Commission % /tm Mv 13