Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977/10/12 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall October 12, 1977 1 :30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to Date Vyola Ortner, Chairman 27 5 Carrie Allan x 17 2 Steven Chase x 25 6 Sig Ehrens x 28 3 Michael Harris x 16 2 Larry Lapham x 31 0 Staff Present John Mangione, Planning Director Marvin D. Roos, Senior Planner Ken Feenstra, Redevelopment Director Mary Isenberg, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee — October 10, 1977 John Miller, Chairman Richard Harrison Hugh Kaptur Earl J. Neel Sig Ehrens Lazlo Sandor Acting Chairman called the meeting to order at 1 :30 p.m. Approval of Minutes: The Planning Commission minutes of September 28, 1977, draft distributed, were approved unanimously. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0023-CUP - Application by MURRAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a 40-unit single story condominium use on property situated on the southwest corner of Camino Parocela and Cerritos Drive, R-G-A (8) & R-1-C Zones, Section 24. Action was taken on Negative Declaration September 24, 1977. Planning Director stated that this item had been continued from the previous meeting so that revised plans could be submitted by the applicant, however it had been noticed as a public hearing and interested parties could speak at this time. There was no response from the audience. Since no revised plans had been submitted, this item was continued to the November 23, 1977, Planning Commission meeting. CASE 5.0025-CUP - Application by the PALM SPRINGS YOUTH CENTER for a Conditional Use Permit to allow youth center facilities use on the south side of Mesquite between Mountain View Drive and Orange Avenue, W-R-1-C Zone, Section 19. Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration and action for filing. No comments received. Planning Director presented the staff report and stated that the youth center facility was in an area on the edge of Demuth Park and that the application was being recommended for approval subject to conditions. Commissioner Ehrens asked if the water transmission problem had been solved on the property and what off-site improvements were required. Planning Director stated that the transmission of surface water to an acceptable point was a condition of all projects and that off-site improvements would be the standard curb and gutter and sidewalk requirements. Commissioner Ehrens asked if the improvements included sidewalks, since there were no sidewalks in the area, and that requiring the Youth Center to install a sidewalk would be an additional financial burden to them. Planning Director stated that the Development Committee had recommended that a sidewalk be installed on Mesquite. Staff and Commissioners then discussed a dead-end street (Desert Way) in the development across from the park and Planning Director stated that the reason the street was not extended was that there are two parcels of private property that were not in the development that were in the way of the extension. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION. MEETING MINUTES Page 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0023-CUP (Continued) Commissioner Harris stated that he failed to see the need for the sidewalk requirement since there is no sidewalk on the same side of the street. Planning Director stated that he did not know what the future plans were along Mesquite Avenue but that the standard plan for future development i was that sidewalks be installed. i Commissioner Harris asked if the Planning Commission could stipulate that a sidewalk be built by the Youth Center if the City built one on the same. side of the street. Planning Director stated that this could be stipulated. Further discussion centered on the street that was not extended and the drainage problems caused by the stream of water which would run near the north side of the building and the expense of the channelization of the water. Planning Director stated that this was the first time the drainage problem had arisen. on this project. Commissioners Harris and Ehrens expressed concern over this drainage problem and Commissioner Ehrens stated that the City has the responsibility for solving the problem since they created it when theysold the property; Acting Chairman then declared the hearing open. John Hollinger, 1089 Olive Way, President of the Youth Center Board of Directors, then spoke in favor of the project. He stated that for several years the Youth Center had been trying to obtain a site from the City in various locations as well as on private land and that they had finally come to terms on this particular piece of property. Mr. Hollinger stated that he was amazed at some of the conditions of the Development Committee. He then demonstrated on the blackboard the location of a driveway the center was installing on Mesquite and the location of a future street devised by staff. He stated that this street leads only to the south side of the park and would be a single use street for parking purposes.. He stated further that the center would apply for .curb and gutter later if it became necessary. Mr. Hollinger then discussed the area in which the water would be drained which is a low area on the property and would become filled with water and be very dangerous for children in the area, and that the dead end street in the nearby development should be extended on into the low area to alleviate this flooding. Mr. Hollinger went on to discuss the recommendation regarding curbs and gutters. He stated that the center was an integral part of the park and that the only portion of the park where there were curbs and gutters was October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0025-CUP (Continued) on Mesquite and had been installed 15 years ago. Mr. Hollinger stated that he felt that there should be no other recommenda- tions other than those which already exist, and that the Youth Center is financed by the United Way and does not have a great deal of financing, but still hopes to bring a needed service to youth of the area. Richard A. Harrison, 577 E. Sunny Dunes, project architect, then spoke and stated that he had checked the drainage problem with the engineering department and that an impasse had been reached since there were only two alternatives: (1 ) Run the pipe to bring water onto the parking lot, which is undesirable, or (2) Run pipe into the park and channel the water there, which is also undesirable. Commissioners and Mr. Harrison discussed this drainage problem further and could not reach a logical solution. Acting Chairman asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in opposition to the project. No one responded. Planning Director then outlined on the blackboard the reasons why the street had not been extended in that area as follows: (1 ) There is no right of way because of the private property involved and a condemnation proceeding would have to be initiated to complete the street, and that (2) The City extended Mesquite two years ago and no curb improvements were made on the park side because a portion of the street had to be rebuilt by the developer of the homes on the north side of Mesquite. Commissioner Allan asked why the street into the park was required. Planning Director stated that the street was in the plan for future park development. Commissioner Lapham stated that he would like the Engineering Department to solve the water transmission problem. The other Commissioners agreed and this item was continued to the October 26, 1977; meeting of the Planning Com- mission. CASE 5.0028-CUP - Application by KPSI RADIO CORPORATION to allow the maintenance and operation of an existing radio transmitter tower on the south side of the extension of Escoba Drive near E1 Cielo Road, R-1-C Zone, Section 30. Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration. No comments received. The following was received from the Indian Planning Commission: "The Indian Planning Commission, in accordance with recommendations of the Tribal Planning Consultant, approved the above request to maintain a long existing radio broadcasting tower, as recommended in the City staff report, with the exception of staff's Condition No. 2, which appears impracticable in the instant case. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0028-CUP (Continued) Attention is further called to the fact that the agenda title should be corrected to correctly indicate the location of the facility on the South side of the exten- sion of Escoba Drive." Planning Director stated this project was on the south side of the extension of Escoba as noted by the Indian Planning Commission. He then gave a history of the tower from its inception in 1958. Photographs were also circulated depicting plantings on the site. Acting Chairman then declared the hearing open. Elliott Field, 1380 Tamarisk Road, the applicant, then spoke in favor of the project. He stated that the staff report was very well done and that he hoped for approval for continued use of the site. He stated that there was one point he wished to address, and that was the requirement that additional trees be planted on the site. He said that there were copper radials under the ground and that a deep rooted tree could not be planted there because of interference with radio reception. However, a tree such as a tamarisk could be planted and KPSI would be willing to comply with the City°s recommendation. Robert Mohler, 2399 Blando Road, then spoke in opposition. He stated that he was a prospective buyer of one of the homes on Escoba, and that he felt that the tower was unsightly. However, he had not realized that it had been there twenty years. There being no further appearances the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chase asked if towers. such as this one were always painted red and white. Mr. Field stated that they were red and white to conform with FAA and FCC mandates. Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Allan, and unanimously carried (Ortner absent) approving this application subject to all the conditions of the Development Committee and ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration. CASE 5.0032 PD-78 - Application by CANYON HEIGHTS ASSOCIATES (Robert C. Spriggs) for Planned Development District for condominium and single family home project of 347 units located at South Palm Canyon Drive at Murray Canyon Drive (west side of South Palm Canyon) R-3 & W-R-1-A Zones, Section 34. This property received an Environmental Assessment under Case 5.697-PD-39. The following was received by the Indian Planning Commission: "The Indian Planning Commission, in accordance with recommendations of the Tribal Planning Consultant, requests that the above matter October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0032 PD-78 (Continued) be continued for the following reasons: 1 . No plan of the proposed development has thus far been made available to the Tribal Council . 2. The key map accompanying the staff report warrants review and pos- sible correction. Said key map indicates that no portion of the site includes an existing R-2 Zone area, whereas the said report recites on page one thereof, that an R-2 Zone is included in the site, and is involved in density calculations. " Planning Director stated that a project had been approved for development in 1972 by a previous applicant. The new applicants have proposed a similar development except that the tennis club facility with indoor courts has been dropped, as well as the bachelor-type units in favor of a total residential condominium development. He further stated that plans were available to the Tribal Planning consultant, but had not been requested. Planning Director then stated that there was an error on the key map, and that the property was indicated 760 feet south of its actual location. Commissioner Lapham asked if the key map showed the property in the incor- ,; rection location, were the notices sent out to property owners legal , or should this item be continued so that a check could be made to see if_Allwere noti- fied. Planning Director stated that they were legal because the property owners' list had been prepared by the title company from an assessor's map, not from the incorrect key map. Acting Chairman then declared the hearing open. Robert C. Spriggs, the applicant, then spoke in favor stating that he hoped there would be no continuance because of the noticing, and that he and his associate would be glad to answer questions regarding the project. Paul Thoryk, 1157 Columbia Street, San Diego, the project architect, then described what he had attempted to accomplish in the design of the project by integrating the condominiums into the terrain. James Schlect, 383 S. Palm Canyon,. representing owner of one-third of the property and lessor of the remainder of the property then spoke in favor of the project stating that there was a construction deadline in the near future, and he hoped that nothing would keep the project from moving ahead, and that the Indian lessors and the Bureau of Indian Affairs were well aware of this project. Edward Jones, a resident of Rancho Mobile Park, then spoke in opposition to the project stating that a traffic problem on Palm Canyon would be created by the project. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0032 PD-78 (Continued) Planning Director stated that a traffic study had been made on the original project and that the street system in the area could handle the traffic, and that the original plaft- with its tennis courts had generated more traffic than the present plan. Since there were no further appearances, the public hearing was closed. Further discussion then ensued regarding traffic in the area and Planning Director stated that a study was now in progress by the Engineering Division regarding traffic circulation on these streets. Commissioner Ehrens asked if any traffic study was being made at the island on South and East Palm Canyon. Planning Director stated that the study was only approved for the planned development district at the present time, and stated further that the Commission was only approving a concept because this planned development district goes to City Council for final approval, at which time the basic circulation system and other parameters would be formulated. Planning Director also stated that as each phase of the project comes in, it can be evaluated by the Planning Commission. After a brief further discussion regarding the noticing of the property owners in the area, motion was made by Allan, seconded by Chase, (Ortner absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and approving this application subject to recommendations as outlined in the staff report, CASE 6.298 (Variance) - Application by COASTAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (El Dorado Homes, Phase II) for a variance from density requirements on project lo- cated on Marscal Road between Via del Norte and Mira Vista Way, R-G-A (6) Zone, Section 3. Environmental Impact Report previously prepared on this project in 1972. Planning Director stated that this project was considered for review in 1972, and that building permits had been issued for the existing 52 units in .1973 and 1974, and that no new construction has taken place on this project since that date. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 6.298 (Variance) (Continued) He stated that subsequent to issuance of the building permits for this project the zoning had been changed from limited multiple family residential to residential —garden apartments. Planning Director stated further that the planning ,staff has recommended. to the applicants that they apply for- a variance to complete this project as originally planned based on their ability to show hardship if they are not allowed to complete this project as originally planned. Planning Director stated that correspondence_has .been received from several property owners within 400 feet of the property opposing this new construction, and that staff was recommending a continuance of . - the hearing in order to allow additional time for the homeowners' associa- tion of Casa De Oro (Phase I) to have a membership meeting. Acting Chairman declared the hearing open. No one spoke in favor of the project. Mary Bower from Long Beach spoke in opposition and requested that a conti- nuance of four weeks be granted so that the homeowners in the area can or- ganize and attend the meeting. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. This item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 9, 1977. PUBLIC COMMENTS Steven R. Smith, 3345 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, an attorney represen- ting two property owners in the Annexed Area No. l site of the Downtown Re- development District then spoke regarding what the Planning Commission is being asked to do regarding the annexed area. He stated that the Commission is being asked to amend the preliminary plan for the central business dis- trict project and to approve the boundaries for the added area and direct staff to submit the amendment to the Community Redevelopment Agency for Annexed Area No. 1 . Mr. Smith stated further that the Commission was being asked to declare this to be a project area, and that there a number of legal consequences of that. He then read Section 3320.1 of the Health and Safety Code which states that the project area is. "an area of the community which is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to effectuate the purposes of this part. " He stated that the Planning Commission has no jurisdiction, and that it cannot declare this area to be a project area when it is not blighted. Mr. Smith also read Section 3321 which describes the scope of the project October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC COMMENTS (Continued) area and then asked the Planning Commission to reject the request of the redevelopment agency to annex this area. Edward Jones of Rancho Mobile Home Park, then spoke regarding the fact that the residents of the park had heard that the park was to be disbanded by 19805 which would result in many elderly people being homeless. Commissioner Lapham stated that the Planning Commission had no jurisdic- tion over whether or not an owner wished to closed a business, and that the best idea would be for the park residents. to contact the Indian owners of the land. Mr. Jones then stated that he hoped that if the Planning Commission has any jurisdiction if this item comes up for consideration in the future that the elderly people in the park should be given some consideration in their pursuit of an enjoyable life. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ITEMS - CONSENT AGENDA Environmental evaluation reports were received by the Commissioners for their review and study prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Further review may be dispensed with and all items approved by motion. Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Chase (Ortner absent) and unani- mously carried that a draft Negative Declaration be prepared for review and comment on the following items: CASE 5.0003-CUP - Environmental assessment on request by RICHARD A. HARRISON for Conditional Use Permit to construct a night club/cabaret on the east side of North Palm Canyon Drive, between Via Escuela and Vista Chino, C-1 and R-3 Zones, Section 3. CASE 5.0033-CUP - Environmental assessment on request by CAIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & C. G. DUNHAM for Conditional Use Permit to construct a complex of single story.condominium units on north side of Mesquite between Cerritos Road (extended) & Sunrise Way, R-1-C & W-R-1-C Zones, Section 24. The following was received from the Indian Planning Commission: "The Indian Planning Commission, in accordance with recommendations of the Tribal Planning Consultant, approved a Negative Impact .. Declaration in the above case." October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 10 TENTATIVE TRACT AND PARCEL MAPS Planning Director reviewed and explained the maps and the Planning Commission discussed and took action on the following Tentative Tract and Tentative Parcel Maps, based on the finding that the proposed subdivisions, together with the provisions for design and improvement are consistent with the General Paln of the City of Palm Springs and will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, and subject to conditions as outlined., TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 11092 - Request by KWL ASSOCIATES for the Vineyard, Ltd. for approval of Tentative Parcel Map 11092 for property on the north- west corner of S. Palm Canyon Drive and Baristo Road, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration and action for filing. No comments received. Motion was made by Chase, seconded by Allan (Ortner absent) and unanimously carried recommending approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 11092, subject to all conditions of the Development Committee. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 10635 - Request by EUGENE C. LACEY for approval of Tentative Tract Map 10635 area on Cameo Way between Joshua Tree Place and Camino Real ) R-2 Zone, Section 26. This item is categorically exempt from environmental assessment. Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Harris (Ortner absent) and unimously carried recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 10635, subject to all conditions of the Development Committee. LEGISLATIVE ACTION CONSIDERATION by the Planning Commission for approval of Annexed Area No. 1 to the Preliminary Plan for the Palm Springs Central Business District Re- development Project. The following was received from the Indian Planning Commission: "The Tribal Council , under dates of September 13, and 27, advised the City of Palm Springs as follows: 'The Tribal Council , in general accordance with recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, is of the strong opinion that additional and extensive written information should be available to the public and prior to further, formal consideration of the proposed annexation, in the following areas of interest: 1 . An objective estimate of the total cost to the public, with `� explanation of reasons therefore. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 11 LEGISLATIVE ACTION (Continued) 2. The generation and distribution of tax monies, and the proposed use and distribution - of tax increments, if any, from the proposed hotel expansion. 3. The type and application of proposed bonding procedures. 4. The diversion, if any, of general tax funds from normal avenues of expenditure, i .e. , public works, administration, recreation, etc. ` On this date, October 10, the Indian Planning Commission reiterated the above position. " Redevelopment Director read from the staff report (Preliminary Plan) the criteria used as the basis of redevelopment projects which may include the visitor commercial land use; the fact that streets may be constructed or streets extended or abandoned or modified to improve vehicular and pedestrian circulation in the area; the requirements regarding population densities; and minimum..standards_reduired .by tho. Palm Springs zoning ordinance regarding permitted uses in the area. He also stated the Attainment of the Purposes of the California Redevelopment Law; conformance with the General Plan as it pertains to the project; relationship to the prior preliminary plan for the project which was adopted by the Planning Commission in 1973 and the impact by the pro- ject upon residents and the the surrounding neighborhood. Redevelopment Director then described on the map the areas and uses surrounding the project and the area surrounded by the Central Business District. He stated that the area was surrounded by R-3 uses, and that the :proposed project area is surrounded by..higher_densi.ty uses at the present time. Redevelopment Director then stated that there seemed to be a misunder- standing of the uses of redevelopment. He stated that redevelopment is a process_- it is not a pre-determined and pre-designed public improvement or series of public improvements. It is important to understand this distinction because as a process, redevelopment must of necessity be flexible and general in order to enable a community to use the redevelop- ment process to achieve the goals and objectives of the redevelopment plan. He stated further that as a process, redevelopment is a unique activity for a public agency to engage in. By reason of its method of tax allocation financing, it depends for its success on private decisions and private investment. The uniqueness of redevelopment - and essential to the under- standing of the process - is that it unites private investment with public goals and public funding. The heart of this process is that nothing happens until there is a private decision to build or rehabilitate in the project area. Unless some other source of public funding is available, there is no public funding for redevelopment until additional taxable values are created in the project area by private investment. Public improvements and public expenditures in the project area may eliminate blight and carry out the redevelopment plan, but generally this objective is achieved only to the extent that the public activity generates new taxable, -private invest- ment in the project area. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 12 LEGISLATIVE ACTION (Continued) Redevelopment Director. then read the resolution amending the boundaries of the Palm Springs Central Business District Redevelopment Project and ap- proving amendment to the Preliminary Plan for Annexed Area No. 1 which the Planning Commission was being asked to approve. Commissioner Allan asked if the Planning Commission approved the project, would the area become a project area. Redevelopment Director stated that if approved the documents go forward to the Redevelopment Agency which institutes the beginnings of a study for an . eventual public hearing. Commissioner Allan then stated that she did not have any problems with tax increments because it seemed to be'the backbone of any redevelopment agency, but that this particular project had given the Commission doubts because the Commission has to be responsible for projects already approved. She went on to state that another hotel had been approved in the area and that hotel would also bring in revenue.. Also the traffic is congested in that area and would become a major problem for the City to solve. After further discussion with staff regarding all aspects of this pro- posed project, motion was made by Allan, seconded by Chase (Ortner absent) and unanimously carried denying approval of Annexed Area No. l to the Preliminary Plan for the Palm Springs Central Business District Redevelop- ment Project. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 13 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS The Planning Commission reviewed plans, discussed and took action on the following items involving architectural approval , subject to the conditions as outlined: CASE 5.997 PD-76 - Application by `MITCHELL LAUFORD & ASSOCIATES for Architec- tural Approval of FINAL detailed development plans for completion of an existing shopping center located at the southeast corner of Tahquitz- McCallum Way and Sunrise Way, C-D-N & P Zone, Section 13. Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Allan (Ortner absent) and carried unanimously approving the plot plan and elevations as submitted with restudy of the landscaping plan, and (per recommendation of the Traffic and Parking Commission) closure of the northerly driveway on Sunrise Way. CASE 3.008 - Application _by CALMARK PROPERTIES, INC. for Architectural A - proval of 136 unit apartment complex Mature Adult Apartments on northeast corner of Calle El Segundo and Saturnino, R-4 Zone, Sec- tion 14. Motion was made by Chase, seconded by Allan (Ortner absent) and unanimously carried approving this application subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the window eyebrow overhang's be increased to 2 112 feet in depth. 2. That the end elevations of the balconies be plastered. 3. That detailed landscape, irrigation, and exterior lighting plans be submitted. NOTE: AAC felt that the project was architecturally marginal , but they felt that it was acceptable due to the fact it was aimed at lower and moderate cost housing for the elderly. CASE 3.010 - Application by HUGH M. KAPTUR for Tumanjan Investment, Inc. for Architectural Approval of 88 unit apartment project at southeast corner of Ramon Road and Compadre Road, R-2 Zone, Section 24. Motion was made by Chase, seconded by Ehrens (Ortner absent,. Harris voting "No") and carried approving this application subject to all conditions and adding upon amendment by Chase that staff work out the design of the drive- way entrance, delete the requirements that the roll curb be removed on Theresa, and denying the request for additional bay parking. Additionally, the applicant must submit plans for the 6 unit complex and also must submit detailed plans for colors and materials, landscape, irrigation and exterior lighting. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 14 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.013 - Application by GARY W. KNUTSON for A & P Associates for Archi- tectural Approval of 10,200 sq. feet retail/office complex located on Calle Encilia, C-1-A-A Zone, Section 14. Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Chase (Ortner absent, Harris abstaining) and carried approving this application subject to the following condition: Submission of landscape, irrigation, and exterior lighting plans. ADDED STARTERS CASE 2.892 - Application by JOHN WESSMAN for Carl 's Jr. Restaurant for Archi- tectural Approval of landscaping plans. On request by applicant, motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Chase (Ortner absent, Harris abstaining) and carried approving landscape plans for the Carl 's Jr. area only. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 11132 - Request by HALLMARK ENGINEERING, INC. for James and Liliane J. Elkins for approval of Tentative Tract Map 11132 on 4* acres located on the corner of Ramon Road and Hermosa Drive, R-2 Zone, .. Section 14. Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Allan (Ortner absent) and unani- mously carried approv ni g Tentative Tract aNl—p 11132 subject to all condi- tions of the Development Committee, and additionally, that a 10 foot wide meandering bike path along Ramon Road be added to the project. CASE 5.993-CUP - Application by RONALD A. FRAGEN for Architectural Approval to change the exterior material from a poured-in-place concrete to a deep fluted concrete block on a professional/office building on Tahquitz-Mc- callum Way between Cerritos Drive and Saturmino Drive, R-2 Zone, Section 13. Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Chase (Ortner absent) and unanimously carried approving the material change subject to the specific color of the block receiving staff approval . DETERMINATIONS DETERMINATION by the Planning Commission concerning the vacation of a portion of Virginia Road, Section 3. - Vacation of this street to be in conformance with the General Plan of the City. •- Motion was made by Ehrens, seconded by Chase ('Ortner absent) and unanimously carried finding that the vacation of a portion of Virginia Road in Section 3 was in conformance with the City's General Plan Street Plan. October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 15 DETERMINATIONS (Continued) DETERMINATION by the Planning Commission concerning the annexation of 5 acres in Section 29. The Commission had no comment regarding this annexation. CONTINUED ITEMS The following items were continued: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 11147 (Continued until a variance application is heard) - Request by HALLMARK ENGINEERING for W. Foster for approval of Tentative Parcel Map 11147 (area between Santa Rosa Drive and Ramon Road) R-1-A Zone, Section 15. CASE 3.007 (Continued for additional information) - Application by JAMES E. BROWN for Architectural Approval of 84 unit apartment project single i and two story) at 3400 East Ramon Road, R-2 Zone, Section 18. CASE 3.011 (Continued for redesign) - Application by HALLMARK ENGINEERING, INC for Richard J. Morreale for Architectural Approval of preliminary site plan, exterior building elevations, color and material selections, and prelimi- nary landscape concepts for 28 unit one and two story project on southeast corner of South Palm Canyon Drive & Laverne Way, R-T-P Zone, Section 26. DETERMINATION by the Planning Commission concerning the classification of "mopeds"with relationship to zoning restrictions. Continued to October 26, 1977). The following was received from the Indian Planning Commission: "The Indian Planning Commission requests that further information be provided as to definition of the problem purportedly confronting the City. As stated in the agenda of October 12, the relationship between a newly distributed private vehicle, and a "zoning restric- tion", is somewhat obscure. " October 12, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 16 ITEMS FOR RESTUDY The following items were removed from the Planning Commission agenda pending restudy. Applications will be rescheduled for hearing only after revised submittals have been processed. CASE 3.002 - Application by ALLWEST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION for Amado As- sociates, Inc. for Architectural Approval of 88 condominium units (area bounded by Amado Road, Hermosa Drive, and Andreas Road) R-G-A (8) Zone, Section 14. CASE 3.006 - Application by COBLE, BRAMLETT, SNEDAKER CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY for Architectural Approval of single-phase con- dominium project on property one block east of Caballeros on the north side of Ramon Road, R-2 Zone, Section 14. CASE 3.009 - Application by PALM SPRINGS MORTUARY (International Funeral Services) for Architectural Approval of alterations and additions to commercial building (the Palm Springs Mortuary) at 4107 Sunny Dunes Road, M-1 Zone, Section 19. There being no further business, Acting Chairman adjourned the meeting at 5:15 p.m. PLANNING DIREC OR JAM/mi PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall October 26, 1977 1 :30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to Date Vyola Ortner, Chairman x 28 5 Carrie Allan - 17 3 Steven Chase x 26 6 Sig Ehrens x 29 3 Michael Harris x 17 2 Larry Lapham x 32 0 Robert Ostertag x 1 0 Staff Present John Mangione, Planning Director Marvin D. Roos, Senior Planner Mary Isenberg, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - October 25, 1977 Sig Ehrens Hugh Kaptur Lazlo Sandor Richard Harrison Earl Neel Chairman called the meeting to order at 1 :30 p.m. and welcomed a new member, Robert Ostertag, to his first meeting. Approval of Minutes The Planning Commission minutes of October 12, 1977, draft distributed, were approved as corrected,.;- �., Corrections: . Page 3, Para.graphs 1 & 3 - The word ",other in both paragraphs is changed to "same". Page 3, Paragraph 6 is changed to rea� as follows: "Commissioners Harris and Ehrens expressed concern over this dr inage problem, and Commissioner Ehrens stated i'hat the City has the responsibility for solving the problem since they created' it before they sold the property.' Page 6: Full Paragraph 8 is chartged to read, "James Schlecht, 383 S. Palm Canyon, represent> ng owner of 1/3 of the property and lessor of remainder of the pro- perty then" spoke in fl-kYorl". . .".