HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982/05/26 - MINUTES (2) p
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2
APPROVAL Of MINUTES
• Minutes of the May 26, 1982 meeting were unanimously approved with the
following corrections:
Page 8/9 (Case 5.0223-CUP) - Discussion ensued regarding the use of the word
"variance". Commissioner Service stated that he did not use the term in his
motion. Planning Director stated that "variance" was used in the general
discussion in relation to the possibility of lessening development standards
to the degree desired by the applicant. Chairman noted that with a minor
revision the applicant could have requested staff approval with an AMM, and
the application could have been approved by the Commission on May 26.
Planning Director stated that the term "minor" was addressed by the Assistant
City Attorney in relation to the Commission approving minor alterations.
Commissioner Service commented that the minutes stated that the applicant is
to apply for a variance, but that is not the Commission intent and after
further discussion suggested that the term "variance" be deleted and the words
"revised plans" be inserted. Planning Director stated that the motion had
been to table the application for submission of plans conforming to the
ordinance, that the City Attorney stated that unless any variances were minor,
the Commission could not approve the item, and that perhaps the intent was
that if an application for a variation were filed it should be done within a
limited period of time and perhaps the motion had been misunderstood when the
amendment was added. Chairman stated (in reference to the Assistant City
Attorney's statement) that if the applicant wished to submit a variance, it
should be done within 90 days although there is a question as to whether a
• time limit can be set on the submission of a variance.
Commission consensus which was agreed to by the maker and the seconder was
that the submission of a variance was not the intent of the Commission and
that the motion should indicate submission of "revised plans", not a
"variance."
Page, 14, (Case 5.0219-CUP/TTM 16759) , add Condition #6: That the street
names be revised for more clarity.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
CASE 5.0225-PD-138. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for G. Roos for a PD
to allow a free-standing restaurant in conjunction with an existing
hotel on the southeast corner of Via Escuela/N. Palm Canyon Dr., C-1 &
R-3 Zones, Section 3.
(Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration
and action for filing and final approval . No comments received. )
Planning Director reviewed the project and recommended filing of a
Negative Declaration and final approval subject to conditions. He
stated that the seating is a maximum of 144, and that there is adequate
parking for that amount of seating.
• Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the
hearing was closed.
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3
CASE 5.0225-PD-138 (Cont'd. )
• Motion was made by Allan, seconded by Koetting, and unanimously carried
(Christian abstained) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and
approving PD-138 (Case 5.0225) subject to the following conditions:
1. That all mitigative measures identified in the environmental
assessment/initial study be implemented.
2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met.
3. That final development plans be submitted.
4. That the applicant comply with Section 9306.00 of the Zoning
Ordinance. (Based upon parking provided, the maximum number of
seats shall be 144. )
5. That the applicant comply with Section 9407.00 of the Zoning
Ordinance including submission of all final development plans
within one year of City Council approval .
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE
Commissioner Allan whose term expires June 30 thanked staff and Commissioners
for assisting her during her lengthy tenure. She especially thanked former
Commissioner Larry Lapham who assisted her in the beginning of her term and
Commissioner Service who helped her during the latter part. She also stated
that she felt that staff was a good one.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
TIME EXTENSION-TTM 14899 (Ref. Case 5.0170-PD-126) . Request by ASL ENGINEERS
for Friedman Ventures for a 12-month time extension for TTM 14899, a
subdivision to allow development of commercial office/warehouse/retail
complex on the northeast corner of Bogie Road/Mesquite Avenue, M-1 Zone
(I.L. ), Section 20.
Chairman abstained; Vice-Chairman presided.
Planning Director stated that the application had been continued from
the May 26 meeting for further review; that the PD is no longer necesary
• since the zoning has been changed to M-1 during the Indian zone change
hearings; and that the item will become an architectural approval case.
He noted that the tract map is still appropriate and staff would
recommend a one-year time extension with no additional conditions and
that Tribal Council also recommends approval .
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4
• TTM 14899 (Cont'd.)
Motion was made by Madsen, seconded by Koetting, and unanimously carried
(Christian & M. Harris abstained) approving a 12-month time extension
for TTM 14899 subject to all original conditions with no new conditions.
Tribal Council comments:
"After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning
Commission, and on the understanding that City Staff is recommending the
request be approved with no new conditions being added, the Tribal
Council approved the request for a 12-month time extension for TTM
14899."
DISCUSSION ITEM. Review of revised landscape concept for fire station located
on Racquet Club Rd./Via Miraleste, 0 Zone, Section 2.
Planning Director stated that the firemen are involved with building
inspection and training, and fire department staff is reviewing stations
with high maintenance landscaping for recommendations on lesser
maintenance types of landscaping. He stated that staff suggested raked
dirt with shrubs and annual flowers for fire station No. 3 as has been
done at an office building at 801 E. Tahquitz-McCallum Way. He noted
that it has been difficult to convince the landscape architects on the
• AAC that this is a good solution although they agreed at their June 7
meeting that the concept is viable. He stated that the concept could
apply to fire stations 2 and 4 but would not apply to station 1.
In reply to a question by Commissioner Service, Planning Director stated
that the Fire Department is aware that the raked dirt concept is not
maintenance free but would not need the use of sophisticated equipment.
Discussion followed on turf landscaping. Planning Director stated that
Earl Neel , a landscaping expert on the AAC, felt that turf is the
easiest over a long period of time. Commissioner Madsen stated that Mr.
Neel feels that gravel is the worst groundcover since it cannot be raked
nor walked on, and that turf is a low maintenance groundcover.
Commissioner D. Harris suggested that each case relating to the proposed
landscape concept be reviewed in the field.
In reply to a question by Commissioner Service, Planning Director stated
that the Fire Department staff is looking for a policy direction and
that Planning staff feels that there has been a change in the AAC so
that if the proposed landscape concept is submitted, it would be
acceptable to the Committee if well designed.
•
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5
• DISCUSSION ITEM (Cont'd. )
Commissioner Service suggested the use of polaroid pictures for review
of this type of landscaping proposal . He stated also that firemen
maintain their trucks and their stations, and that they do live in the
stations. He noted that perhaps the lower maintenance landscaping
should be explored but that no greenscape should be removed at the
stations on Racquet Club Road and Laverne Way, and that the City has an
obligation for better than average maintenance of its facilities. He
stated that Racquet Club Road standards of landscaping should not
apply to the City.
Planning Director stated that no greenscape would be removed.
Chairman directed staff to place the low maintenance landscaping concept
on the study session of June 16, at 3:00 p.m. in the Large Conference
Room (along with school landscaping maintenance at the suggestion of
Commissioner Koetting) .
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 3.268. Application by H. KAPTUR for J. Salkin for architectural
approval of miscellaneous revisions to site plan & elevations for a 61-
unit apartment/condominium complex on E1 Mirador between Mel
Avenue/North Indian Avenue, R-3 Zone, Section 11.
Planner III explained the revisions on the display board and stated that
the steep embankment can be irrigated; and that the metal carports will
have a wood fascia.
Motion was made by Allan, seconded by D. Harris, and unanimously carried
approving minor revisions to Case 3.268 subject to the following
conditions:
1. That carport roofs overlap by 18 inches.
2. That the carports be installed in three elements. (The windows
were approved unconditionally. )
•
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6
• CASE 3.333. Application by TAHQUITZ PROPERTIES for minor architectural
addition to commercial/professional office building located on Tahquitz-
McCallum Way, C-1-AA Zone ( I.L.) , Section 14.
Chairman abstained; Vice-Chairman presided.
Planner III explained the project on the display board.
Lengthy discussion followed on the proposed canopy (on which the AAC
recommended deletion) and the car stacking problem. Several suggestions
were offered by the Commissioners including one-way traffic in the
drive-thru area.
Motion was made by Koetting, seconded by Allan, and unanimously carried
(Madsen & M. Harris abstained) for a restudy of the canopy and
circulation problems and continuing the item to the June 23 agenda.
Note: Later in the meeting, motion was made by Koetting, seconded by
Christian and unanimously carried approving the landscaping subject to
the following conditions:
1. That the olive trees be increased to 42 inch box size.
2. That 24 inch box Ficus Nitida be installed at the end of each
traffic island.
3. That mounding and landscaping be incorporated in the southern
boundary of the site to screen the parking (subject to staff
approval ) .
CASE 3.473. Application by WARREN THOMPSON & ASSOC. for final landscape
development plans, located on Calle E1 Segundo, Andreas, Calle Encilia
and Amado Road, R-4 Zone ( I.L. ) , Section 14.
Planning Director stated that this was recommended for restudy by the
AAC and unless the Commission wished to discuss it, it would be
continued to June 23.
Motion was made by Service, seconded by D. Harris, and unanimously
carried tabling the item (later amended to removal from the agenda)
pending submission of revised plans.
•
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7
CASE 5.0188-CUP. Application by H. HUPE for architectural approval of minor revisions
• to elevations for construction of restaurant located on E. Palm Canyon
Drive/Calle Palo Fierro, R-3 Zone, Section 23.
Planner III stated that the restaurant is now two-story with upstairs
dining for which an elevator is required; that major alterations to the
site plan have been made; that the parking lot will meet code
requirements; and that no working drawings have been submitted.
Motion was made by Service, seconded by Koetting, and unanimously
carried approving the application subject to the following conditions:
1. That the dormers be consolidated to a single narrower element with
vertical stucco walls concealing the roof.
2. That the central spine element be increased in height by two to
three feet.
3. That the final design be reviewed by staff.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Planning Commission removed all items from the Consent Agenda.
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Cont'd. )
CASE 2.984. Application by M. BUCCINO for Riviera Gardens Homeowners Assoc.
for architectural approval of revised wall and landscape plans for
condominium project on Vista Chino between Via Miraleste/North Indian
Avenue, R-3 Zone, Section 2.
Planner III explained the project on the display board and stated that
the steep slopes on the project would be detailed by custom wrought iron
fencing.
M. Buccino, 274 N. Palm Canyon Drive, landscape architect for the
project, stated that the homeowners desire the fence for protection from
transients who are trespassing on the premises.
Motion was made by D. Harris, seconded by Christian and unanimously
carried approving the application as submitted.
•
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8
CASE 3.401. Application by S. CAVALLERO for J. Davies for approval of land-
scape plans for residence at 2395 Tigertail Lane, R-1-A, Section 25.
Planner III presented the project on the display board and reviewed the
history of the project stating that the house is painted an unapproved
color which the applicant does not wish to change; that the applicant is
in a severe financial condition because the contractor filed bankruptcy
after payment was received from the applicant; that the applicant cannot
afford to make changes; that the Southridge Homeowners Assoc. approved
all the revisions to the house but the City had not approved the
revisions; that the color of the house is in the stucco; and that
building permits have been issued on the project but could be abated.
In reply to a question by Commissioner Koetting, Planner III stated that
no work is being done on the house, and that the applicant has requested
installation of a security system which can be connected to the
temporary power supply.
Discussion ensued on the amount of action to be taken on the project
unless the problems are resolved.
Chairman commented that continued action on the project indicates
continuous approval .
Commissioner Christian stated that he was reluctant to continue giving
• approvals to minor items until the problems are resolved.
Commissioner D. Harris commented that he had understood that the
applicant was going to cooperate with the City but that it did not
appear that this was to be the case regarding the house color. He
stated that there are also architectural revisions that have not been
resolved, and that he would not support the application any further
until problems are resolved.
Commissioner Service noted that several famous architects who have
designed homes for famous people in the Southridge area have agreed to
requested revisions from the Planning Commission, and that the applicant
is not a special case; that he would not vote in favor of any further
proposals until the problems are resolved; and that sometimes houses
become occupied without building permits; and requested clarification
from the Assistant City Attorney.
Assistant City Attorney stated that the AAC and the Planning Commission
have the authority to approve architectural features on a piecemeal
basis and also have the power to demand that a complete architectural
program be submitted and approved as a single item and failure to submit
the entire package would be inability to approve any portion.
Chairman stated that the Commission would review the application again
when the package has been resubmitted.
• Motion was made by D. Harris, seconded by Christian, and unanimously
carried removing the item from the agenda until an entire package
addressing Commission concerns has been received from the applicant.
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9
CASE 3.309. Application by H. KASSINGER for approval of plans to enclose
existing outdoor dining area at Bank of Palm Springs Center, C-1-AA
Zone, Section 4.
Chairman abstained; Vice-Chairman presided.
Planning Director stated that the applicant was proposing an
indoor/outdoor relationship in the restaurant with doors and the ability
to air condition the area since the restaurant operators feel that no
one wants to sit outdoors, even in good weather, and that no parking
problems will result from the enclosure of the area; that the dining
area is on the north side which is too cool for outdoor dining in the
winter and too hot in the summer; and that possibly an application will
be received at a later date for outdoor seating.
Discussion followed on the enclosure conforming to the architecture of
the remainder of the building. Commissioner Christian stated that
although he did not feel the architecture was aesthetically pleasing, he
could see no problem with the aesthetics of the proposed enclosure.
Motion was made by Christian, seconded by Allan, and unanimously carried
(Madsen & M. Harris abstained) approving the application as submitted.
CASE 3.439. Application by M. BUCCINO for J. Cain for architectural approval
. of revised landscape plans for condominium complex on Vista Chino
between Cerritos Road/Sunrise Way, R-G-A (6) Zone, Section 12.
Motion was made by Christian, seconded by Allan, and unanimously carried
approving the application subject to the following conditions:
1. That vines be added to the walls on the west side subject to staff
approval .
2. That trees on the street boundaries be increased in height.
3. That if a perimeter wall is installed, the applicant submit
additional landscaping plans.
CONTINUED ITEMS
CASE 3.304/TTM 15945. Application by KWL ASSOCIATES for J. Cotton for
architectural approval and tentative tract map approval for four, 4-unit
condominiums on Avenida Caballeros and Vista Chino, R-2 Zone, Section
11.
(Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration
and action for filing. )
Continued to June 23 at the applicant's request.
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10
• ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA
TTM 18087. KWL ASSOCIATED for Andreas Hills, Inc. , for approval of TTM 18087
a subdivision of property for lot sales on Bogert Trail, W-R-1-B Zone,
Section 35 & 36.
(Environmental assessment & tentative approval . )
Removed at staff's request.
TTM 18569. S. MORSE for Watt Industries for approval of TTM 18569, a sub-
division of land for single family residential lots on Bogert Trail ,
south of Palm Canyon Wash, W-R-1-B Zone, Section 35.
(Environmental assessment & tentative approval .)
Removed at applicant's request.
ITEMS FOR RESTUDY
The following items were removed from the Planning Commission agenda
pending restudy. Application will be rescheduled for hearing only after
revised submittals have been processed.
• CASE 5.0090-CUP. SAFEWAY STORES for architectural approval of minor lighting
change on market located on East Palm Canyon Drive between Bogie
Road/Palm Hills Drive, C-D-N Zone, Section 30.
Restudy of the following items:
1. Screening of light sources.
2. Location of fixtures to the front of the canopy.
CASE 3.508 (Minor) . AMERICAN NETWORK for architectural approval of dish
antenna for Hotel 7 Springs on East Palm Canyon Drive, R-3 Zone, Section
26.
Restudy the following items:
1. Relocation of the dish.
2. Screening and/or sinking of the dish to ensure that it is not
visible from the street.
3. Painting of the dish to make it visually acceptable.
•
May 26, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11
COMMISSION REPORTS, REQUESTS AND DISCUSSION
City policy regarding dish antennas. Planning Director stated that the
Commission consensus was to review the dish antennas on an individual
basis; that the City's Antenna Ordinance covers the issue of placement
and architectural approval; and that the AAC had sent the dish antenna
in Case 3.508 back for restudy of the installation. He then reviewed
locations of other dish antennas in the City and stated that staff
recommended against structures (antennas, carports, swimming pools,
etc. ) in the R-1 Zone unless a PD application is submitted.
- Chairman stated that he wished to say goodbye to those Commissioners he
would not see again before his term expired on June 30, and felt that
the Commissions actions had been constructive and the City had benefited
from their tenure on the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Christian stated that he had distributed a packet to the
Commissioners regarding submittal procedures and would like to be
informed if it is addressed at a study session when he is not available
or after June 30 since he is not requesting reappointment to the
Commission.
- Planning Director reminded Commission that the Palm Springs Project Task
Forces will meet at the Hilton Riviera Hotel on June 9, at 7:00 a.m. for
further citizen input, and that the Commission is invited.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the
meeting at 3:10 p.m.
PLA J RECT
MDR/mi OR C
•
WP