Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/05/11 - MINUTES (2) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall . May 11 , 1983 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1982 - 1983 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Richard Service, Chairman X 19 1 Hugh Curtis X 20 0 Darel Harris X 18 2 Hugh Kaptur X 18 2 Peter Koetting X 18 2 Don Lawrence X 18 2 Paul Madsen X 17 3 Staff Present John A. Mangione, Director of Community Development Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Frank Marcks, Right-of-Way Agent Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Officer II Tom Lynch, Economic Development Housing Director John Terell , Housing & Redevelopment Specialist Douglas Evans, Planner III • Robert Green, Planner II Stephen Graham, Planner III Diana Ericksen, Community Development Coordinator Mary Isenberg, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - May 9, 1983 Larry Lapham, Chairman James Cioffi Chris Mills David Hamilton William Johnson, Alternate Hugh Curtis Earl Neel Peter Koetting Chairman called the meeting to order at 1 :30 p.m. M/S/C (Lawrence/Harris; Madsen absent) approving minutes of the April 27 with the following correction: Page 3 , paragraph 8 (Case 5.0251-CZ & TPM 18627) add to the motion: "Lawrence & Kaptur dissented" . May 11 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS • CASE 5.0259-CUP. Application by M. BUCCINO for Investor' s Real Estate for a conditional use permit to operate a private club within a condominium complex on the northeast corner of Amado Road/Avenida Caballeros , R-G-A(8) Zone (I .L. ) , Section 14. (Previously given Environmental Assessment in conjunction with Case 3.101 .) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission approve Case 5.0259-CUP subject to conditions. Planning Director stated that the application was continued for on-site review by the Commission of the existing facility which has operated as a private club for several years with no parking complaints; that on a few occasions, when special events were held, there has been overflow on Avenida Caballeros, but that eventually this street will be red-curbed which will alleviate the situation; that the conditional use permit could be reviewed by the Commission at any time there are parking related problems; that staff recommends approval subject to conditions , as amended in the staff report; that a condition could be added regarding parking with review of the CUP in the future if the parking negatively impacts the neighborhood; that the parking was open parking on much of the site; that the project incorporates a tract map so it could be sold as condominiums; that it would not comply with present • parking requirements for condominium projects; that the issue to be addressed is the private club within the condominium complex; that the northern La Mancha portion was approved originally as apartments and is operated as a short-stay hotel type of use; that if future owners of the condominiums would not own the recreational facilities, it would be appropriate to indicate this fact on the map; that timeshares are not allowed in the zone; that a hotel is not specifically allowed in the zone; and that the units are considered apartments until a map is recorded. Chairman declared the hearing open. M. Buccino, 274A N. Palm Canyon Drive, project designer, requested that the Engineering Division requirement to complete street improvements be deleted because the street would be damaged during construction that there is no practical purpose in terms of circulation; and that there have been no parking problems on the current project. K. Irwin, 1077 Granvia Valmonte, the applicant, stated that the member- ship for the proposed private club will be of low density since the appeal is for uncrowded privacy and recreation; that one of the attractions is ease of parking; that the operators of the club would be concerned if there were so many members that the project was overparked; that the site plan is flexible so that parking can be developed if it becomes a problem; that the operation of the project will continue in the same efficient manner; that there is the capacity for reciprocal • parking between the phases in the event it would become necessary; that it is basically a second home use without numerous cars; that there is unassigned, flexible parking; that most of the facility in the original and the proposed new club are duplications with some differences since the type of use dictates the type of facilities; that there are approximately 50 local members; and that the northern project does not have a map, but the southern portion includes a map. May 11 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 CASE 5.0259 (Cont' d.) Planning Director reiterated that staff notes that the leasehold on the private club is different from the condominium leaseholds; and the tract map should be amended to reflect this. Chairman stated that the integrity of the project is in the present ownership and management since the project is a complicated one. Mr. Irwin stated that he would hope that any future owner would manage the project with the same standards . Planning Director noted that CUP' s are reviewed annually only with a specific provision or by complaints, and that CUP's are granted to the property, not to individuals. He stated that the CUP is for a private club on the La Mancha Sur portion of the project. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that the project has a surplus of 21 parking spaces over what is required for the units; that street improvements have been completed on Avenida Caballeros but not on Amado Road; and that staff would recommend completion of street improvements adjoining each phase as the phases are constructed. Discussion followed on a timetable for construction of street improvements. Commission consensus was that street improvements should be required (with proper noticing to the applicant) it major projects in the area are constructed. Commissioner Harris stated that the project is under good management and an asset to the community; and the Commission should take action on it. Discussion continued on the amended conditions of approval . It was moved by Harris and seconded by Kaptur that the application be approved subject to staff recommendation Numbers 1 - 7, Development Committee recommendations, and with the added condition that parking be reviewed if it becomes a problem. Discussion followed on the conditions. Assistant City Attorney stated that the street improvement requirements are conditions of the map, not the CUP; and that the conditions of the CUP require amendment of the map to show the existence of the club. Planning Director stated that the map was not being reviewed and will be processed separately. Further discussion ensued relative to the fairness of requiring street improvements. Chairman stated that it would not be fair for the applicant in carving out the common area to receive double credit for the open space; and that a trade-off could be that when street improvements are needed, the City can require them with a proper period of noticing. 41 Discussion continued on street improvements . Chairman called for the question. The vote was as follows: May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 CASE 5.0259 (Cont' d. ) AYES: Curtis, Harris, Kaptur NOES: Koetting, Lawrence, Madsen, Service ABSENT: None The motion failed and debate on the question continued. Discussion on timing of street improvements ensued. Mr. Irwin stated that improvements for Phases III and IV will be constructed within two years and recreational and club facilities within 18 months; that there is an expensive street development scheme proposed on Alejo Road which has not been completed. Chairman stated that the City was requesting curbs and gutters. Commissioner Koetting noted that the C.C.& R. ' s should require a revocable membership if conditions of approval are not met for protection in case the applicant is not personally involved in the project. Mr. Irwin stated that he would like the membership to be flexible but that conditions should be approved by his attorney; that membership roles would be open for perusal by the City at any time; but that he would not like to have to submit an annual report on the membership. Assistant City Attorney stated for clarification of the street improvements condition, that if the permit for the use of the club impacts on the streets or creates a need for the street, it is a proper • condition; but that if the club does not cause a need for a street, it would be an improper condition to impose. Commissioner Harris withdrew his motion with the consent of the seconder. M/S (Madsen, Kaptur) that the application be approved subject to staff recommendations 1 - 7 with the exception that the Engineering requirement for street improvements be deleted. The vote was as follows: AYES: Kaptur, Madsen NOES: Curtis , Harris , Koetting, Lawrence, Service ABSENT: None The motion failed. Discussion continued. Commissioner Koetting stated that the project is well run and an asset to the community; that the 21 extra spaces are a comfortable amount; and that the City should require Amado Road improvements when needed. Some Commissioners felt that they could not support the application without requiring the street improvements. In answer to question by Chairman, Assistant City Attorney stated that the motion on the floor had to be ruled on or withdrawn before a substitute motion could be made. He explained again the street improvement condition regarding the CUP. Commission, after discussion, determined that a substitute motion was in order and could be voted on before an amendment. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 CASE 5.0259 (Cont' d. ) 0 Chairman summarized the issues. Discussion followed on whether or not street improvement requirements were a proper condition for the CUP. Mr. Irwin stated that he had constructed many street improvements , not all of which serve the project; that he had acted in good faith; that a reason for putting in the club is to benefit the community; requested that the street improvements be required at the time a major project is approved such as a convention center or a large hotel ; and that the requirements be in conjunction with something specific. Discussion continued on timing and street improvements. Planning Director stated that staff requested that street improvements be constructed adjacent to phases and that the reason Engineering is requiring all street improvements at the present time is because the La Mancha project is the oldest project in the City with incomplete street improvements. Mr. Irwin stated that he would accede to Commission conditions on street improvements in conjunction with a major development in the area. M/S/C (Lawrence/Koetting) approving CUP 5.0259 with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS: 1. That the private club applied for at the location set forth in the • application is properly one for which a CUP is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the proposed private club is necessary and desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with various goals and objectives of the General Plan, is abutting an existing private club, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses permitted in the vicinity in which the project is located. 3. That the proposed site of the private club is adequate in size and shape to accommodate yard setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and parking and other features required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses or land in the neighborhood. 4. That the site for the proposed private club is located on Avenida Caballeros , a major thoroughfare on the General Plan, and Amado Road, a secondary thoroughfare on the General Plan, of which both are properly designed and will be improved with the completion of the project to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use. 5. That an environmental assessment was previously given in conjunction with Case 3.101 and that a Negative Declaration has been issued. • RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That all previous conditions of approval for Case 3.101 and Tentative Tract Map 17430, as amended, be applicable to the project. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 CASE 5.0259 (Cont' d. ) • 2. That the extent of the private club be indicated on an amended tract map (17430) or a parcel map if the tract map does not proceed. 3. That prospective condominium buyers be apprised of the existence of the private club through the C.C. & R.' s. 4. That the CUP is not in force and effect until the amended tract or parcel map has been approved by the City Council . 5. That if parking problems occur in the future, the Planning Commission review the conditions of the CUP. 6. That the applicant be given six months notice by the Planning Commission to complete street improvements on Amado Road if the Commission and staff determine that improvements are necessary. Tribal Council comments: "This case was considered by the Tribal Council at its meeting of April 26, 1983. After review of the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 27 , 1983, and after consideration of the recommendations of the Indian • Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following actions: 1 . Reiterated its action of April 26 to concur with the findings outlined in Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 27, 1983, and approve the granting of a Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions set forth therein, with the following exception: a. Condition No. 3 was deleted. Inquiries to the City Staff did not identify the relevance of this condition to the granting of the CUP, nor the extent of the impact that was referenced in the attached memorandum from the Engineering Division. It must be presumed that the City obtained appropriate security covering the completion of the off-site improvements referenced in that memo. 2. Questioned the rationale for the revised and/or new conditions referenced in Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 27 which would require the preparation and processing of a revision to approved TTM 17430 for purposes of showing the existence of the private club, and require the revised TTM to be approved before the CUP is effective. The concerns relative to prospective buyers being apprised of the existence of the private club and the use of the • parking facilties by non-homeowners, would be more appropriately addressed in a prospective homebuyers awareness package, which would normally include C.C.& R. ' s, homeowner' s association bylaws, the Public Report, etc." May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 CASE 5 .0264-CZ. Application by D. TROUPE-BIGELOW for change of zone from R-G-A(6) to C-1 on Racquet Club Road between North Palm Canyon Drive/ Zanjero Road, R-G-A(6) Zone, Section 3. (Commissioner Kaptur left the meeting at this point. ) Recommendation: That the change of zone application be denied. Commissioners stated that the applicant had contacted them regarding the case. Planning Director presented the updated staff report and stated that R-3 uses such as restaurants and offices which are allowed under CUP would be precluded because Racquet Club Road is a secondary, not a major thoroughfare; and that the proposal , if approved, would be inconsistent with the General Plan and would set a precedent. (Commissioner Kaptur returned to the meeting. ) Chairman stated that the hearing was closed. A. Perrier, representing the applicant, reiterated his comments of April 27 stating that the zoning was commercial ; that the General Plan should be conformed to that zoning; that it should be a separate commercial development not associated with the two neighboring shopping centers; that costs arising from the assessment district will be prohibitive for • the applicant; and suggested a solution could be that the zone change receive "conditional zoning" with the applicant conveying to the City 35 feet of frontage on both lots and on other properties on the street. Assistant City Attorney stated that he was not conversant with the term "conditional zoning" which could be granted in certain limited situations; but that the applicant is offering to dedicate that portion of the property if and when the property is rezoned and therefore is not conditional zoning as such. C. Spittaro, owner of property at 344 W. Racquet Club Road, Gospel Church Board Member, stated that street improvements were made a condition of approval of the Westar project; that he had received a letter from the City stating that the offer of dedication is still in effect; that the property is not feasible for a rental because of its proximity to the street; and that he would give dedication if the Commission approved a zone change to commercial . D. Troupe-Bigelow, the applicant, stated that the Planning Director had indicated that the lots individually were too small to be zoned for commercial use but that the statement was not true. Planning Director stated that lots have to be 20,000 sq. ft. individually after the street is widened and the subject lots will be 18,000 sq. ft. after dedication. • Mrs. Bigelow stated that the lots will be 224' X 100' . Planning Director stated that there will be a 44 ft. dedication. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 CASE 5 .0264-CZ (Cont' d. ) • Mrs. Bigelow described her house as unsafe because it will be six feet from Racquet Club Road after it is widened; will be affected by traffic and truck delivery noise; and it has too close a proximity to people crossing the property enroute to other areas . She requested that the Commission consider these effects on her property even though it is not directly related to the zone change; and stated that the garage has been converted to a TV room; and that there would be no place to park when the street improvements were made. Chairman reminded the Commission that the application is for a zone change and that there are separate condemnation proceedings for property. F. Marcks, City Right-of-Way Agent, stated that the hearing is on a zone change and that technically the street improvements have nothing to do with the zone change request; that persons buying property should discuss eventual street improvements when they buy since the streets have been on the General Plan since 1964; that Westar has a condition to improve the streets because of increase in traffic from the project, but there would have been increased traffic even without the shopping center; that an offer had been made to the property owners; that if the right-of-way were granted, there would be no cost to the property owners; that the applicants have had a chance for the improvements to be put in with the granting of the right-of-way but they have chosen not to • do so; that the offer had been made to the owners of four pieces of property along Racquet Club Road; that Westar is also participating in the assessment district; that because of condemnation, every property owner will be charged their share of the cost; and that the City will not be charged anything since all costs are being charged back to the district. A. Perrier, attorney for the applicant, requested time to speak regarding assessment district costs to the applicant as was indicated in a letter to the Commission (on file in the Department of Community Development) . Discussion followed on whether or not the subject property could have been incorporated into the Westar development. Planning Director stated that it might have been approved since the City strives for integrated shopping centers. Commissioner Kaptur stated that the property had been impacted by City approval of the planned development districts on one side and across the street. Discussion continued on other residential properties abutting shopping centers. Planning Director stated that other uses can be placed on the subject property such as multi-family units; that the City has fought strip zoning along secondary thoroughfares; that when the subject property develops, it will have a proper setback of 74 feet from the current property line and noise attenuation in the construction; and that the fact that the house is there is irrelevant. • Discussion ensued relative to whether or not the house is relevant to the issue. Commissioner Lawrence stated that economics and fairness must be addressed; and that the zoning is not strip zoning. Commissioner Madsen stated that the change of zone would not impact the house, but the street widening would. May 11 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 CASE 5.0264-CZ (Cont' d.) • Chairman stated that the property owner would not be compensated through zoning but through the condemnation process and that the applicant could put a multi-unit on the property instead of the present single unit. Planning Director stated that the applicant could reapply for a change of zone after a six month period. Commissioners Harris and Curtis stated that they felt allowing the zone change would create pressure for more commercial property further and further into a residential area. Planning Director stated that there had been very few requests for C-1 Zoning. Planning Director stated that the conditions of the planned development districts buffer the subject property from noise and traffic. Commissioner Madsen stated that a change of zone would not solve the applicant' s problem. M/S/C (Curtis/Madsen; Kaptur & Lawrence dissented; Koetting abstained) denying the zone change based on the following findings: 1. That the proposed change of zone is not in conformity with the City' s General Plan which specifies residential , not commercial , use for the area. • 2. That the subject property (if the parcels are combined) is adequate in size to accommodate a C-1 use. Access to the site will be via the improved Racquet Club Road. The site adjoins commercial property to the west but is independent of the site and was not included within the master plan for the property. 3. The change of zone would represent undesirable fragmentary transition of commercial zoning into a residential zone and could constitute a precedent which for further such strip commercial development. CASE 5.0258-PD-145. Application by ANDREAS COVE COUNTRY CLUB, INC. , for Commission review of the Environmental Assessment/Initial Study for a planned development district to allow residential development including golf course on S. Palm Dr. south of the City limits within Section 2 , Riverside County. (Some I .L.) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the preparation of a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) focusing on issues indicated in the staff report. Chairman stated that he had been advised that because he owned property immediately adjacent to the applicant, he would have to abstain but that he would consult with his attorney on whether or not he can participate; and that he felt the project would have no effect on his property but that he would abstain at the meeting and reserve the right to participate in the discussion at the May 25 meeting. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 CASE 5 .0258-PD-145 (Cont'd.) • Planning Director stated that the environmental review would constitute the first phase of annexation and prezoning for the property. Planner III briefly reviewed the EIR and stated that the very comprehensive EIR document would be reviewed by several agencies; that 90% of the land is under Tribal jurisdiction (although allotted to several members) ; that many studies are underway; that there are several significant impacts; and that the AAC reviewed the preliminary plans on May 9 and noted the following concerns: 1. That the project site must be developed in a sensitive manner and that the project C.C. & R. ' s and planned development district conditions must assure that future developments maintain a sensitive approach. 2. That proposed security fence and/or rock mounding shall be shown in detail for each development phase. Specific details shall be required as a part of the preliminary planned development district approval . 3. That the Indian Canyon access roadway (Palm Canyon Drive) shall be designed as an integral part of the project whereby the quality of the experience is not sacrificed. • 4. That the developer should provide landscaping for all street scenes at the time of installation of streets. 5. That planned development district approval will be required for basic development (circulation, recreation facilities, etc. ) and that each future residential development will be considered under separate architectural approval application. He stated that there are several canyons involved in the development; that no extensive EIR will be needed; that the County reserves Indian zoning to the Tribal Council ; that the first phase improvements will include the golf course and flood improvements; that the site will be restored to its natural look after construction is completed; that some questions have been received from the public, i .e. , that one property owner in the southerly half section was concerned about access to his property; that another homeowner in Andreas Hills was concerned about construction related impacts; and that membership in the private residential country club was not discussed with staff. T. Wilkes , project architect from Laguna Beach, stated that the applicant was proceeding in a parallel course with staff; and that other members of the design/development team were in the audience to answer questions. There being no further appearances , the hearing was closed. Commissioner Curtis stated that it was a prime development which will restore the aura of Palm Springs. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 CASE 5.0258-PD-145 (Cont' d.) • M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Madsen/Service abstained) ordering the preparation of a draft EIR focused on issues addressed in the staff report/EA - Initial Study (on file in the Department of Community Development) . Planner II stated that due to the scope of the project which has several impact areas, staff will be presenting several impact issues to Planning Commission study sessions. He gave a synopsis of the time line and stated that it was a lengthy process. J. Rothschild, 1129 Tamarisk Road, representing the developer, stated that he hoped to proceed as soon as possible. Tribal Council comments: "It was noted that this case involves a major development of which some 450 acres (90%) are Indian-trust lands. The potential environmental impacts of the Project are of particular concern to the Tribal Council . After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following actions : 1 . Concurred with the findings and recommendations set forth in Environmental Assessment/Initial Study dated May 6, 1983. • 2. Noted that the Tribal Council has been working directly with a cultural resources specialist on a comprehensive survey and analysis of the Project' s impact on cultural resources. 3. Strongly urged that the Project' s potential impact on the quantity and quality of ground water resources be included as a primary impact area. The engineering and environmental documents submitted by the applicant to date do not contain all the data needed to fully evaluate the impacts on ground water resources upstream of the Project site, within the Project area, and downstream of the Project site. Information relative to proposed mitigation measures is not adequate. 4. Expressed a concern that the proposed importation of new species of plants and their potential impact on plant life native to the area is a matter that should be addressed by a qualified biologist. PUBLIC COMMENTS None May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 TENTATIVE TRACT AND PARCEL MAPS • Planning Director reviewed and explained the maps and the Planning Commission discussed and took action on the following map based on the finding that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for design and improvement, are consistent with the General Plan of the City of Palm Springs. A Negative Declaration has been ordered filed, if necessary, based on the finding that the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and subject to conditions as outlined. (Commissioner Harris left the meeting at this point.) TTM 8429-REVISED. Application by J. CRNCIC for approval of a subdivision of land for six residential lots on Via Miraleste between Tamarisk Road/Tachevah Drive, R-1-B Zone, Section 11 . (Previously given environmental assessment. ) Planner II stated that the map was originally reviewed in 1978 with the present configuration but it had expired and had been resubmitted by another applicant; that staff would recommend approval subject to submission of an AMM because of slightly substandard lots. M/S/C (Curtis/Koetting; Harris absent) approving TTM 8429-Revised subject to all recommendations of the Development Committee and • submission of an AMM for the substandard lots. (Commissioner Harris returned to the meeting at this point. ) MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS CASE 5.0274-MISC. Commission review of application by W. COBLE for E. Phillips for 198-space mobilehome park with RV storage in Sphere of Influence off Highway 111 on Overture Drive/Parkmead Drive, Northwest Planning Area, Section 30. Planning Director described the location of the proposed mobilehome park as being adjacent to an existing mobilehome park, not facing the highway and in the Palm Springs Sphere of Influence. He stated that the City Council and Planning Commission have, in the past, recommended against development of a mobilehome and RV park in the vicinity because of fire and police protection problems and the fact that if in the City the zoning would be urban reserve; that the Commission could comment on issues such as minimum setbacks and open space meeting City standards; and that the area will be annexed in the future. Chairman stated that he used to live in the area and that there is an existing mobilehome park adjacent to the proposed project and mobilehome park zoning also adjacent to the property; that a fire station and store are built in the area; and that he concurred with the parks meeting City standards. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 Commissioner Koetting stated that the streets would be more • aesthetically pleasing if they meandered. M/S/C (Koetting/Lawrence) recommending to the City Council that they forward comments to the Board of Supervisors that the mobilehome and RV park be approved subject to the park meeting City standards for setbacks and open space and that the site plan be revised to meet those standards and suggest that the internal streets be curvilinear in design. 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 3.544. Application by RENATO'S for architectural approval of small garden-type wrought-iron fence around outside dining area for restaurant at 495 North Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that the fence had been installed without permit. J. Algazzi , property owner, requested approval of the fence and stated • that it had been installed without Mr. Renato' s knowledge; that it keeps people from cutting across the yard; that it has new landscaping (flowers) ; and suggested that a rail matching the beam color be installed on top of the fence. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that the umbrella tables were not approved. Discussion followed on the aesthetics and illegality of the fence. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that there is a barrier as required by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board in the form of berms and landscaping; and suggested that the hedge originally approved be replanted since it has died. Assistant City Attorney stated that umbrellas not positioned and visible from the right-of-way and not a part of the architectural image are not subject to architectural review. M/S/C (Kaptur/Lawrence) that the wrought-iron fence be removed, that umbrellas and pole colors be tan (later amended to "research to determine whether or not the umbrellas can be dyed tan, for staff approval ") , and submission of a landscape, irrigation and exterior lighting plan. Commissioner Koetting stated that he did not believe that the umbrellas could be dyed but that they probably would be replaced within a year • because of the climate. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 CASE 3.473. Application by W. THOMPSON for Desert Associates for archi- tectural approval of revised site plan and elevations for future phases of residential condominium project surrounded by El Segundo, San Andreas, Alvarado Road/Amado Road, R-4 Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. Planning Director stated that the AAC had recommended a restudy. J . Jackson, the applicant, stated that he would answer questions . M/S/C (Harris/Kaptur) for a restudy noting the following concerns: That the end elevations be restudied and that revised final landscape, irrigation, and exterior lighting plans be submitted. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are routine in nature and have been reviewed by the Planning Commission, AAC, and staff. No further review is required, and all items are approved by one blanket motion upon unanimous consent. M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur) approving the following applications subject to all conditions of staff, Development Committee and the AAC as follows and ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration as indicated: CASE 5.0265-CUP. VAN LOM ARCHITECTS for Shari ' s Restaurant for architectural • approval of revised landscape plans (final development plan) for restaurant and existing shopping center on the southeast corner of North Palm Canyon Drive/Racquet Club Road, PD-113, Section 3. (Ref. Case 5.0127-PD-113) Condition: That the plant list be revised per note on the plan. Abstention: Koetting CASE 3.480. PRIDE LANDSCAPE for S. Marlow for architectural approval of land- scape plans for single family residence at 1610 Dunham Road, R-1-C Zone, Section 1 . Approved as submitted. • May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 ADDED STARTER CONSIDERATION. Commission consideration of a modification to owner/occupancy • restrictions affecting density controlled residential projects . Planning Director stated that the City Attorney had had concerns about the inequity of the owner/occupancy restrictions at the April 27 meeting but these have been alleviated and staff is recommending up to a 50% non-owner occupancy be allowed on all subsequent phases of DESERT DORADO (Case 5.0135-PD-110) ; HEERS (Case 5 .0141-PD-115) ; and AFCOM (Case 5.0144-PD-116) projects. Economic Development & Housing Director stated that the concession was allowed on the first phase by the City Council and the developers have asked it to apply on subsequent phases; that experience has been gained from the first phase; that there is still City approval of the initial sales prices for all phases and on-going resale control ; that it is staff' s opinion that the developers request is a reasonable one given the market demand and the fact that there is no economic efficiency in building less than a phase at a time; that with the approval , the housing stock will be maintained and approval will not degrade the stock; and that the City would not want unfinished projects. M/S/C (Lawrence/Kaptur) approving up to a 50% non-owner occupancy on all subsequent phases of the HEERS, DESERT DORADO, and AFCOM projects. • MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Cont' d. ) DETERMINATION 10.332. COMMISSION determination of parking standards for con- dotel project (not yet submitted) on Baristo Road between Avenida Caballeros/Hermosa Drive, R-4 Zone (I .L. ) , Section 14. Planning Director stated that the request had been made for a particular project but that a determination is more generic than specific and would apply to other projects; that the request for the determination is in regard to a project in an R-4 Zone that looks like a condominium but is operating like a hotel ; that the applicant is requesting hotel parking standards; that there is a problem in that even though it is operating as a hotel , there would be a tract map indicating a condominium complex; that there is no assurance that it will remain a hotel ; that direction from the Commission was needed; that the Granada Royale Hotel was approved with hotel parking requirements; that in the past kitchens have been allowed in condominiums but not in hotels; and that a "condotel " is one that is owned but may not be used by the owner and can be rented out by the hotel management. Commissioner Kaptur stated that it was an investment for smaller investors. Discussion followed on the requirement for meeting condominium parking standards. Chairman stated that he was concerned about the accessory uses affiliated with a hotel use; that there are two problems , i .e. , parking standards, and a problem resulting if the project ceases to exist as a hotel and the accessory uses remain even though they would not be allowed in conjunction with a condominium use. May 11 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 16 Discussion continued on the definition of a condotel and its appropriate • place in the ordinance. Commissioner Koetting stated that the term "condotel " should be redefined since it could involve several key sections of the ordinance; that he felt that there was nothing wrong with it being on a major thoroughfare; and that if the definition of a hotel is deleted to allow cooking facilities , there is no difference between that and putting a restaurant in condominium projects. Chairman stated that all types of accessory commercial uses which are not allowed in condominium zones can be put in hotels. Concensus was that the applicant should meet condominium parking standards and the item was continued to the June 15 Planning Commission study session. (Commissioner Kaptur left the meeting at this point. ) ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Cont' d.) CASE 3.578. Application by E. PIROZZI for architectural approval of enclosure of existing balcony and porch on single family hillside residence on Via Escuela west of Via Monte Vista, R-1 Zone, Section 3. M/S/C (Curtis/Madsen; Kaptur absent) approving the application as submitted. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont' d. ) CASE 5.0127-PD-113. Application by WESTAR DEVELOPMENT INC. for Planning Commission review of conditions of approval , particularly the requirement for separate conditional use permits for restaurant uses , in a 6-acre shopping center at the southeast corner of N. Palm Canyon Dr./Racquet Club Rd. , PD-113, Section 3. (Environmental assessment previously given in conjunction with original review of the case. ) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission approve that parking standards outlined in Section 9306.00 continue to be applied to the subject shopping center, that the PD and Development Standards be modified to delete the CUP requirement for food service. Planning Director gave a brief history of the center and recommended that conditions of approval be modified per the staff recommendation and stated that the application will be sent to City Council for final approval of the planned development district conditions. May 11 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 17 CASE 5.0127-PD-113 (Cont'd.) • Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances , the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Madsen/Lawrence; Kaptur absent; Koetting abstained) approving revised conditions of approval including applying normal parking standards to the development and deleting the requirement of a CUP for each food service facility. CASE 5.0260-ZTA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to add property maintenance standards to all zones within the City. (Environmental assessment & tentative approval . ) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission continue the item to the May 25 meeting. Planning Director stated that staff has no objections to continuance at the request of the Tribal Council . Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances , the hearing was closed. • M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Kaptur absent) continuing the item to May 25. Tribal Council comments: "A Planning Commission Staff Report and/or a draft of this proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance were not available at the Planning Department on May 9, 1983. In keeping with its policy to consider amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, City-wide, and to provide time for the Indian Planning Commission and Tribal Planning Consultant to receive, review and comment on this proposed amendment, the Tribal Council requested that Planning Commission action on this case be continued to the Commission' s regularly-scheduled meeting of May 25, 1983." CASE 5.0272-ZTA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for an amendment to the Zoning text establishing a land use permit process, City-wide, and amendments to the C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration and continue the item to the May 25 meeting. Planning Director stated that staff was reviewing the case to give approval of a discretionary permit at staff level with the right of appeal for the applicant if there is a disagreement with staff conditions rather than passing an ordinance for specific problems; that the amendment would apply to uses that create problems; and that staff would not object to coninuance as requested by the Tribal Council . May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 18 CASE 5.0272-ZTA (Cont' d. ) • Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances , the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Kaptur absent) ordering the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration and continuing the item to May 25 . Tribal Council comments : "It was noted that this proposed amendment to the Zoning text establishing a Land Use Permit process affects only the C-B-D Zone (Section 15) at this time. On the presumption that the Land Use Permit Process will ultimately be added to zones covering Indian-trust lands , the Tribal Council requested that Planning Commission action on this matter be continued to the Commission' s regularly-scheduled meeting of June 8, 1983. The Indian Planning Commission and the Tribal Planning Consultant have expresed an initial concern as to the need for such a permit, including the time and cost involved to prepare and process the application and supplemental material , and have requested additional time to review and comment on this matter." • CASE 5.0273-ZTA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for a Zoning text amendment to allow the creation of accessory apartment units in single family residential zones, City-wide. (Environmental assessment and tentative approval . ) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration and continue the item to May 25 . Planning Director stated that further review is necessary and an additional condition under Conditional Use Permit item No. 3 should be as follows : "j. The minimum square footage of the main dwelling shall remain as established elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance." He stated also that all references to zones in conjunction with PD' s should be deleted; that staff would have no objection to continuance to May 25 at the Tribal Council 's request. M/S/C (Madsen/Curtis; Kaptur absent) ordering the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration and continuing the case to the May 25 meeting. Tribal Council comments: "The Planning Commission Staff Report and Environmental Assessment/Initial Study dated May 11 , 1983, and the draft Accessory Apartment Housing Ordinance were received by the Tribal Planning Consultant on May 9, 1983. • May 11 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 19 CASE 5.0273-ZTA (Cont' d. ) To provide adequate time for the Indian Planning Commission and the Tribal Consultant to review and comment on a matter having potential significant impact on the City' s existing and future housing stock, the Tribal Council requested that Planning Commission action on this case be continued to the Commission' s regularly-scheduled meeting of May 25, 1983." TENTATIVE TRACT & PARCEL MAPS (Cont' d. ) TPM 18787. COMMISSION review of revised conditions of approval for a sub- division of land for industrial purposes on Ramon Road between Bogie Road/San Luis Rey, M-1-P Zone, Section 17. Planning Director requested continuance to May 25 for further staff review of the conditions. M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Kaptur absent) continuing TPM 18787 to May 25. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Cont' d. ) • TIME EXTENSION - TTM 18329. Application by MAINIERO/SMITH & ASSOCIATES for Equitec 80 for a 12-month time extension for property located between Bogie Road/San Joaquin Drive north of Mission Drive, M-1-P Zone, Section 18. Planning Director stated that the item was removed from the agenda since the length of time for maps was extended by 1982 revisions to the Subdivision Map Act. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Cont' d. ) CASE 3.572. Application by KAPTUR & CIOFFI for architectural approval of an education center addition to the United Methodist Church on the southeast corner of Calle Rolph/Alejo Road, R-G-A (8) Zone, Section 14. (Ref. Cse 2.686) M/S/C (Koetting/Madsen; Kaptur absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That working drawings be submitted for the approval of the AAC and Planning Commission. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 3. That detailed landscape, irrigation, and exterior lighting plans . be submitted. May 11 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 20 CASE 3.506. Application by R. GREGORY for Equitec 80 for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for airport business park on Bogie Road between San Joaquin Road/Ramon Road, M-1-P Zone, Section 18. M/S/C (Harris/Koetting; Kaptur absent) approving the application subject to the following condition: That five, 30-inch box multi-trunk Rhus Lancia be added (per notes on the plan) . CONTINUED ITEMS CASE 3.342. J. WALLING for K. Miller for architectural approval of revised landscpe and wall plans for hillside residence on Crescent Drive, R-1-A Zone, Section 10. Continued to May 25 at the applicant' s request. CASE 3.475 . JIMSAIR AVIATION SERVICES for architectural approval of addition of loading dock facilities for a fixed base operation at Palm Springs Municipal Airport, "A" Zone, Section 18. Continued to May 25 for submittal of final landscape plans incorporating all fencing and other improvements required to construct the facility. • ITEMS FOR RESTUDY The following item was removed from the Planning Commission agenda pending restudy. Application will be rescheduled for hearing only after revised submittals have been processed. CASE 3.438. PL KOLODEJ for architectural approval of working drawings and detailed landscape plans for single family hillside residence on Leonard Road, south of Via Olivera, R-1-A Zone, Section 3. Restudy noting the following concerns: 1. That the column on the rear be eliminated. 2. That the roof to the patio be horizontal . 3. That the separate wing roof elements be combined to form a part of the roof per notes on the plan. 4. That the carport be revised to reflect the proportions and detail of the house. 5. That vertical trees (desert species) be included in front of the house. • 6. That desert landscaping be added to the carport and to the graded portions of the site. 7. That the gravel color be a desert tone. May 11, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 21 COMMISSION REPORTS, REQUESTS AND DISCUSSION • - Light fixture demonstration at the airport. Commission invited to review energy saving light fixtures at the airport on May 12 at 8:00 p.m. - Shell sign on Ramon Road and Sunrise Way. Staff to review status. - Awning on former Aaron Brothers Building on South Indian Avenue. Staff to review colors and structural elements of awning in field. - Sign at intersection of East and South Palm Canyon Drive on building. Staff to review in field. - Old World Restaurant. Staff to review parking requirements and lease with UCB (for use of its parking lot) , and structural soundness of the building. - The former Peach and Frog location Sign above roof stating "Apartments This Way" . Staff to review in field. - Tour and luncheon at La Mancha, Thursday, May 9. Only two Commissioners were able to attend the lunch and tour of the existing facilities. ADJOURNMENT • There being no further business to discuss , Chairman adjourned the meeting at 6:00 p.m. PLANNING DIRECTOR MDR/mi WP/PC MIN