The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDP 05-78 - 200 UNIT CONDOS FILE 1 1978 MR, FRED McKEE . Ironwood resident , addressed Council stating that the proposed development, would be more like a tenement than a condominium project inasmuch as it would appeal more to renters than to permanent homeowners . MS . -1 RAGE , 73-302 Highway 111 , Palm Desert , expressed con- cern over media reports she had heard relative to sewage = seepage into the Valley water., She asked if this project . approval would contribute to that problem. Mr . Bouman . advised that Ironwood Country Club was on the sewer system. MR. ANTHONY LODICO, 73-610 Boxthorn ; Palm Desert , expressed concern over the traffic volume which is already too great and stated that he would like` to see half the requested density approved. He also expressed his disappointment at the rapid rate of growth of the entire city . MR . ALEY CAMPBELL, 73-416 Dalea Lane , Palm Desert , stated that this project should not be approved in mid July because of the fact that so many homeowners are not in town . He also opposed the density. MR. LARRY SPICER offered rebuttal to many of the points raised. He stated that even though the August 1st meeting had not required legal notification , he had personally noti- fied the property owners in Ironwood of the hearing. He pointed out that even though the major issue was density , he did not think the residents understood that although Ironwood was allowed 7 units to the acre overall, the average_ density in either proposed or already developed areas of the project was 2 . 8 units to the acre . Councilman Brush asked Mr . Williams why residents were not noti- fied of the August 1st meeting. Mr . Williams responded that under the City ' s ordinance , it was not a requirement to notice Design Review Board cases , which the revised development plan was . Mayor Pro-Tem McPherson asked if there was any further input and with none offered, he declared the Public Hearing closed , and asked Council for their pleasure. Councilman Brush stated that based on what the Council had heard relative to the net density at Ironwood, he felt Council had no choice but to approve the Tentative Tract flap . He so moved. Mayor Pro-Tem McPherson seconded the motion . Motion carried on the following vote : AYES : Brush & McPherson NOES : Newbrander ABSENT: Wilson & Mullins ABSTAIN: None B. APPEAL OF CASE IJ10S . DP 05-78 AND 117114F , TERRA INDUSTRIES , Applicant : Cons ' an on of an Appeal of Planning Commission No. 373 Which Rejected a Development Plan and Preliminary Design Review for a 200-Unit Condominium Pxoject Which Was To Be Located on Approximately 33 Acres at the Northwest Corner of Fairhaven Drive and Avenue 44 . Mayor Pro-Tem McPherson declared the Public Hearing open and asked for the Staff report . Mr . Williams reviewed the Staff Report pointing out that ( the Planning Commission had denied the Development Plan L and Preliminary Design Review for several reasons : The design of the proposed development was not felt to be in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and would be detrimental to the harmonious , orderly and attractive development contemplated by the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan ; the overall site plan is poor ; the design would not provide a desirable environment for occupants ; the site plan would not function well for either residents or guests of the project ; and the requirement of a 20 foot setback could not be met . Mr . Williams stated that Staff concurred with the findings of the Planning Commission and recommended denial of the appeal . August 10 , 1978 Page 4 AIr . William& reviewed the correspondence received relative to the project including a letter in favor of the project from `,Ir . Donald L. Balch, 73-431 Pinyon Street , Palm Desert . and a letter from the Planning Commission of the Cite _-)f Rancho Mirage recommending approval . Mavor Pro-Tem McPherson asked for input in FAVOR of the appeal . AIR . JACK BENNETT addressed Council as a representative for Terra Industries . He stated that their objective in developing this project was to meet a need in the community for smaller and less costly housing. He pointed out that his firm had developed a similar project in Orange County which had been very successful and well accepted. He noted the many changes that had been made since their initial submission of the project to the City, and stated that they were willing to make further changes to make the project not only compatible but desirable for the City of Palm Desert . He asked that if Council denied the appeal that they do so without prejudice so that they could come back and work on the project . flavor Pro-Tem McPherson asked for input in OPPOSITION to the appeal and none was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed. Councilman Brush moved to uphold the findings of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal without prejudice by Resolution No . 78-103 . Councilman Newbrander seconded the motion ; carried unanimously with the members present . VIII . RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 78-104 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH ITS FINDINGS AND AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF FILES FROM THE 3 DEPARTiMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES THAT HAVE BEEN MICRO- i F I LIIED.. 7 Mr. Bouman stated that this was merely a housekeeping matter in that the subject records had been kept the legal length of time, had been microfilmed , and by authorization of this resolution , could be destroyed. Councilman Newbrander moved and Councilman Brush seconded to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No . 78-104 . Motion carried unanimously with the members present . MAYOR PRO-TEM AlcPHERSON DECLARED A 15 MINUTE RECESS AT 9 : 10 P .M . AND RECONVENED THE MEETING AT 9 : 25 P. M . IX. ORDINANCES For Introduction : A. ORDINANCE NO. 191 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING, REPEALING AND ADDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF TITLE 5 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNI- CIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES . f Mr . Bouman advised that this ordinance would bring our Citv Code into conformance with State law by making the distinction between a contractor and an owner builder . Councilman Brush moved and Councilman Newbrander seconded to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 191 to second reading. Motion carried unanimously with the members present . August 10, 1978 Page 5 Y 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 RECE , JUL 281978 ENVIRONMENTqL SERVICES July 24, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF PALM DESERT APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 373 WHICH REJECTED A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW FOR A 200-UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT WHICH WAS TO BE LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 33 ACRES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FAIRHAVEN DRIVE AND 44TH AVENUE. CASE NO. DP 05-78 and 117 MF 1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider an appeal by Terra Industries of Planning Commission Resolution No. 373 whichrejected a Development Plan and Prelim- inary Design Review for a 200-unit single-family, semi-detached condominium project which was to be located on approximately 33 acres within the PR-7, S.P. (Planned-:residential , maximum 7 d.u./acre, scenic preservation overlay) zone at the northwest corner of Fairhaven Drive and 44th Avenue, more parti- cularly described as: APN 621-320-001 APN 621-320-002 APN 621-320-;003' APN 621-320-004 APN 621-320-.005 APN 621-320-009 APN 621-.320410 V> w W a > PARK a . VIEW DRIVE I 7 < YID a l p - `✓ y I I I I i 44TH AVENUE I _ tp LL � I I c { i I SAID Public Hearing will be held on Thursday, August loth, 1978, at 7 :00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the Palm Desert City Hall , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California , at which time and place all interested persons , are invited to attend and be heard. Sheila R. Gilligan , City Clerk City of Palm Desert Publish -, Palm Desert Post July 27th, 1978 a C. c ( JULUIE y 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE,PALM DESERT,rAUFORNIA 82280 l a to, r•�� TELEPHONE(714) 346-0611 3'°a�`.....4 C/tfCkF N° Wii a a°Qq` Rpt� O Steven & Sharon Brown 36770 Palmdale Rd. Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 _s �R U.POSTdGEIZ- a 41.24.7e � pp=��'°' is 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE,PALM DESERT,CAUFORNIA92260 ^'4 Q C�5 I r I TELEPHONE(714) 346-0611 ,r E7LR^•� Q to > i, Gladys Ma tson z ; gDpRgS 43-720 Ho hua Rd. 4LC alm Deser CA 92260 > : 'Al (D$44w, ®Q' nDalnrnm =3=mnra p� JUL24 e _� . 48.275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE,PALM DESERT,CAUFORNIA 62280 � �•, . ,_ �'q L(F TELEPHONE(T14) 346-0611 h tooT .;. AS ADDRESSED 3CS 7O Ffi'?WAP.D Rod Dean % Ac6 Approved Appliance & Maintenance JUL 281978 � 14446 Hamlin St. __Van_Nuvs._CA 91401 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • t _. 1 a, CITY OF PALM DESERT P.O. BOX 1648 PALM DESERT, CA. 92260 APPLICATION TO APPEAL DECISION OF TIIE /-GAiYiY/k/6 670/w/ /SS/O/f/ TO THE 017-Y Coa1t1r?6_ ON CASE NO. 0/'o e-r- 2P Name of Appellant po. '8ex ,/=60 (o/¢ • 9z/ 3 � 7/y Address Phone Appealing decision of (date of meeting) jvU -Y 19 regarding application of ( if same as Appellant , write Sane) $A/H for (descri.ption of .application) _ Reasons for. Appeal : AreLjC1tnl i does Nc)7 /j6Rr-c g.),7H decis '�;o or- y�L�l an�iJ(r CoM ASS oa &N+� Doe N�7 rt-6L THE CoM/s Srs°"Trul17 (alu r-iCsroob Pfo.eo i AN-b h4g;Ad h)e 017N/ 0004AJQ' L, -- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date appeal filed and Fes -eceived: \7VoY /9 19 �uS��i � / /VC, Public hearing set- for tic //� /////� HU6 /o 19 7S . SlgSia� App ll.ant Date Director of Environmental. Services cc: Appellant Planning File (Complete and distri.buts after public hearing) COUNCIL ACTION cc: Appellant Planning Director of Date Eiivironm2ntal Services P. C. approved on OA INDUSTRIES, INC. P.O. BOX 82417, SAN DIEGO, CA 92138 (714) 283-7141 July 13, 1978 City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane f Palm Desert, CA 92260 i ATTN; City Clerk Dear Sir: We would like to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission in Case #117MF to the City Council for a decision on the proposed development of 198 single family, semi detached condominium units at the northwest corner of Fairhaven and 44th Avenue. Please schedule this appeal at your earliest opportunity and advise us if any additional information or exhibits are required of us other than those already submitted to the Planning Commission members. Sincerely, TERRA INDUSTRIES, INC. ROBERT E. KREI President REK:lgm cc: Jack, Bennett