Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/05/25 - MINUTES T PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall • May 25, 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 20 1 Hugh Curtis - 20 1 Darel Harris X 19 2 Hugh Kaptur X 19 2 Peter Koetting X 19 2 Don Lawrence X 19 2 Paul Madsen - 17 4 Staff Present John A. Mangione, Director of Community Development Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Al Smoot, Building & Safety Director Ken Feenstra, Redevelopment Director Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Officer II Tom Lynch, Economic Development Housing Director John Terell , Housing & Redevelopment Specialist • Vicki Nelson, Economic Development Coordinator Jean Farian, Administrative Intern Brian Mayhew, Operations Analyst Douglas Evans, Planner III Stephen Graham, Planner III Diana Ericksen, Community Development Coordinator Mary Isenberg, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - May 23, 1983 Larry Lapham, Chairman James Cioffi Chris Mills David Hamilton William Johnson, Alternate Earl Neel Peter Koetting Absent: Hugh Curtis Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. • M/S/C (Lawrence/Harris; Curtis and Madsen absent) approving minutes of May 11 with the following correction: Delete final paragraph, page 4 (Case 5.0259-CUP) . May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS • CASE 5 .0275-PD-147. Application by E. DeBARTOLO CORP./DESERT FASHION PLAZA for review of the Environmental Assessment/Initial Study for a planned development district to allow remodeling and expansion of the existing Desert Fashion Plaza on Tahquitz-McCallum Way/North Palm Canyon Drive and redevelopment of the block north of the existing Desert Fashion Plaza to include the closure of Andreas Road, the development of additional retail space, parking facilities, and the development of a 207-room hotel , C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) focusing on issues identified by staff, Commission and the public. Planning Director stated that this was the first in a series of public hearings; that the meeting was a scoping session for environmental impacts; that the environmental consultants have been chosen; that one additional letter in opposition had been received; that the developers of the adjacent Cadillac Fairview project have requested that there be a joint venture for solution to drainage problems; that the plans will probably be revised; that the Tribal Council will comment in writing by June 8, 1983; and that staff would recommend continuing the case for design impact review at the meeting of June 22. Housing & Redevelopment Specialist reviewed the impact areas as follows : • air pollution because of increased activity in the area, increased rate of use of natural resources, population and employment problems, transportation and circulation problems, closure of Andreas, underground parking, and disturbance of historical sites. He stated that the JHK Transportation Study will be included in the EIR as well as an additional study being done by the DeBartolo Corporation; and that the Planning Commission could limit the scope of the traffic study if it wished. Planning Director stated that staff had reviewed with the DeBartolo Corporation Traffic Engineer, in an earlier meeting, the concerns to be addressed in the Traffic Study and that there had been an experimental closure of Andreas Road over Thanksgiving of 1982; that when the draft is completed, specifics can be addressed to be included in the draft; that staff had received a response to a questionaire distributed by the Public Information Officer which was in opposition to the project because of the hotel height, parking problems, and the high rise blocking the view of the mountains; and that comments received in response to the questionaire will be addressed as an appendix to the EIR. Housing & Redevelopment Specialist stated that the AAC had not reviewed the architectural elements or site plan because there was not a complete set of plans due to changes in the design. Chairman stated that the Downtown Development Advisory Committee (DDAC) • is charged with working with the developer on financing and the basic structure of the arrangements with the City, and that the Planning Commission does not address financial issues. Chairman declared the hearing open. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 CASE 5.0275-PD-147 (Cont' d.) • R. Garrett, marketing expert, 2600 S. Palm Canyon Dr. , Milton Jones Advertising Agency employee, spoke as a private citizen stating that the agency has no involvement with the project; that several high density complexes have been developed in the downtown which have not been successful by firms not familiar with the City; that tourists who do not know the area and who cannot see stores from the street frontage of the complex will not patronize the stores; that the select tenant spaces front on the street; that there has been a high turnover in projects where stores are not fronting on the street; and that the hotel will generate business but not in sufficient quantities to make the proposed mall viable. He requested that the Commission address the manner in which the project is oriented and stated that it is a financing situation, but is in conjunction with the design scheme of the project. R. Break, attorney representing Walter Marks, Desert Museum Board member, stated that he had requested notification of all hearings and had not been notified so he was not fully prepared; that in a cursory review of the initial study, he would suggest other impact areas such as noise generated by traffic, energy demand for public services and utilities (energy conservation techniques should be reviewed in the design) , and air quality both during construction and after completion of the project; that he would address a number of impact areas in a letter; that certain mitigative measures are proposed in the General Plan but that with the level of impacts being unknown, acceptable levels • cannot be determined; that the closure of Andreas will affect the museum and local businessmen financially; that a letter had been sent from the museum in opposition to the closure of Andreas Road; and that he would provide a copy of the letter to the City. H. Toor, Desert Museum Board of Trustees member, stated that the closure of Andreas Road would be detrimental to the museum; that underground parking will force traffic on Museum Drive and create an impossible traffic situation; that there have been several plans for the area and DeBartolo is the only one proposing to close Andreas Road; that other plans should be considered; that other plans have been submitted to the owners of the property but have not been submitted to the City; that he was Chairman of the ad hoc committee reviewing plans for the Fashion Plaza expansion and that one of the plans shows moving of Andreas Road and should be considered; and that the concept of retail activity had been discussed and the museum should be considered since it is an asset to the community and has never requested Redevelopment Agency funding. A. Rosenthal , 2157 La Paz Drive, retired Consulting Civil Engineer, stated that he was not opposed to the center as long as the environmental issues were addressed; that he was concerned about the traffic situation; that he understood the proposed closure of Andreas Road because of its offset and low traffic count; that there should be good access from north to south with access to the Desert Musuem; that the present proposal is not a good solution; and suggested that Belardo Road be extended to Cahuilla from Alejo to Ramon. He distributed a . sketch of a proposal to extend Belardo Road (on file in the Department of Community Development) to connect with Cahuilla Road. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 CASE 5.0275-PD-147 (Cont' d.) J. Metz, Management Consultant, 2203 Southridge, President of Desert Peoples United (DPU) , stated that he agreed with Mr. Rosenthal who is outstanding in his field and that consideration should be given to his proposal ; that closure of Andreas requires more study in view of the traffic noise which will affect the hotel since it is not viable to have noise affecting a luxury hotel ; suggested that the curb be painted red on South Palm Canyon Drive; that there will be more lookers than buyers initially which will effect the parking; that the DeBartolo Corporation spokesman indicated that the tenants will be of high quality; suggested that there be a guarantee to the City relative to this; suggested more review of the hotel because of lack of setback; and stated that the traffic situation should be addressed initially since traffic problems will defeat amenities that the Center proposes to provide. Chairman stated in clarification that he had attended the Chamber of Commerce Development Meeting and that it was indicated that the tenants will be of an upper and middle mix. Mr. Metz stated that a representative of the DeBartolo Corporation indicated that the calibur of tenants would be very high and that just building a shopping center will not do what the City wishes. He noted that the DPU would be opposed to the hotel because it might not be viable and because of noise and traffic impacts. • Mrs. L. Graves, 367 S. Patencio, DPU secretary, stated that she was in favor of the project and improving the downtown area but felt that there were many problems and suggested that the developers prepare a scale model of the project. She stated that concerning traffic, some consideration should be made of an overpass connecting the two proposed main stores; that she had not known of the experimental closure of Andreas last year; that there is air pollution from idling cars at the present time, especially on Amado and Palm Canyon; that the ingress and egress from the hotel would cause traffic problems on Amado. She thanked the Commission for hearing the project as the first item on the agenda. Mrs. L. Johnson, 3810 Camino Parocela, stated that she opposed the project due to loss of view of the mountain; that she understood that the six-story Spa Hotel was allowed because it was on Indian land; that historic places will be lost such as the Village Theatre and Palm Springs Hotel ; and that much traffic congestion will be generated at intersections near the proposed hotel . S. Ehrens, 2481 Cahuilla Hills Drive, suggested that two plans be presented - one with a hotel and one without. Commissioner Harris stated that the DeBartolo representative had indicated that the hotel is the anchor for the project. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. • May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 CASE 5.0275-PD-147 (Cont' d.) • Discussion: Discussion ensued on issues to be addressed in the EIR. Consensus was that a scale model should be prepared; and that a traffic study should be developed focusing on the block around Indian Avenue south of Tahquitz-McCallum Way and north to Amado Road as well as Cahuilla Road. Commissioner Koetting stated that the Desert Musuem had been an asset to the community and the effect of closing Andreas on the museum and the small hotel and shops in the area should be reviewed; and that construction impact should be reviewed such as ingress and egress during construction. Planning Director stated that the developer will photograph the area with a large ballon anchored at sixty feet which will simulate the impact of the hotel and present these for City review; that the Commission should make sure that any model prepared is not deceiving. Discussion: Discussion followed on other areas of concern. Commissioner Koetting requested that the sketch submitted by Mr. Rosenthal be reviewed. Commissioner Harris requested that the design of the hotel be broken by open space which will allow a view of the Desert Museum. M/S/C (Koetting/Lawrence; Curtis and Madsen absent) ordering an Environmental Impact Report focusing on the issues addressed by staff, Commission and the public and continuing the item to June 22 for review • of the preliminary design as it relates to the EIR. Chairman reminded the audience that there would be seven public hearings on the project. Tribal Council comments: "The Tribal Council ' s input to the Draft EIR will be submitted to the Planning Commission on June 8, 1983. CASE 5.0269-GPA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for an amendment to the General Plan for an Energy Element to provide for management of long-term energy resources, conservation of existing resources, and examination of possible alternataive energy sources, Citywide. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration and final approval . Comments received from realtors.) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and approve GPA 5.0269 as amended. • May 25 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 CASE 5.0269-GPA (Cont' d.) Building & Safety Director stated that there are two major concerns after input was received from the realtors in the community, i .e. , the technical portion of the element and statistics from it and the question of retrofit; that staff feels that the technical document is viable but in the interest of proceeding with an energy program, staff is recommending that the technical element be removed at the present time with further review when methodology has been developed for the Palm Springs area; that retrofit must be part of the Energy Element; that staff has removed the word "mandatory" from in front of the word "retrofit"; that all examples of retrofit have been removed from the Element but that the word has not been removed; that the 30 changes have been made in response to the concerns of the real estate industry; that there are two additional changes, one on page 31 and one on 32 which will be changed; and that staff would recommend adoption with 32 changes and exclusion of the technical element. Discussion: Discussion followed on the revisions made to the Element. Planning Director stated that one of the issues raised by Robert Fey, Vice-President of Board of Realtors, was that the Element was inconsistent with the General Plan; and that the items reviewed individually (first three comments in a letter from Mr. Fey - on file in the Department of Community Development) indicate that there are no requirements nor mandates that are not consistent with the General Plan. He then explained the three items. Chairman declared the hearing open. R. Fey, 2000 Madrona, Vice-President of Board of Realtors, stated that he appreciated staff' s timely response to his questions and then indicated the real estate community's concerns relative to the Energy Element. Commission reminded Mr. Fey that the document was an enabling one and not specific. Discussion continued with Mr. Fey who stressed that data developed for Palm Springs should be used and that the Board of Realtors would be willing to assist the Energy Commission in the development of pertinent data. He reiterated that the retrofit portion should be removed and staff stated that it should remain. Mr. Fey noted that he was also concerned about items in the Element becoming a law. Further wording changes were discussed; Mr. Fey stated that the Board of Realtors approved an educational program on energy conservation. W. Sorrentino, Energy Commissioner, stated that it was time consuming to review a document word by word in a public meeting; that the document should be reviewed as a whole and he recommended approval . R. Rothman, 2119 Los Patos Drive, stated that in response to a previous statement on termite inspection, that the inspection is not mandatory in the State of California but is in some cities; and that Mr. Fey' s comments are supported by the Board of Realtors. • Mrs. S. Sands, 567 Lujo Circle, realtor, questioned the need for adoption of an energy element immediately since there is controversy and asked staff if there was an energy shortage in Palm Springs. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 CASE 5.0269-GPA (Cont'd.) Building & Safety Director stated that it was an overall plan to conserve energy and would be reviewed thoroughly before adoption of any specific programs. Mrs. Sands questioned energy conservation in the City when a 207-room hotel is being considered which will use more electricity than would be saved by this Element. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Building & Safety Director stated that several housekeeping changes will be made in the Element before sending it to City Council . Discussion followed on terminology in the document and timing. Building & Safety Director stated it was important to take action on the document even though it is not to be presented to the Council until September because of summer vacations of staff who would be revising the document and because the document, as presented, is viable. Chairman stated that if responses to Mr. Fey's comments are included in the document, he would not support it since the revised wording changes the intent of the Energy Commission; and that there was no reason to remove any wording. Commission Kaptur stated that he had some concerns with Mr. Fey' s recommendations without their being addressed by staff. M/S/C (Lawrence/Harris; Service/Kaptur dissented; Madsen/Curtis absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and approving GPA 5.0269 with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS: 1. That an Energy Element will provide for management of long-term energy resources. 2. That an Energy Element will allow conservation of existing resources. 3. That an Energy Element will allow examination of possible energy sources. CONDITIONS: 1. That the recommended changes by the Energy Coordinator in his letter to the Planning Commission on May 24, 1983 be incorporated. 2. That the recommended changes in the letter addressed to the Planning Director by Robert Fey and received May 23, 1983, be incorporated. 3. That the wording "No Cost Basis" be removed on page 55. 4. That the word "may" instead of "can" be inserted relative to tax breaks, page 76. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 CASE 5.0269-GPA (Cont' d.) 5. That the technical data document be deleted as part of the Element until the Palm Springs technical data is available. 6. That all charts and graphs relating to Palm Springs be deleted unless they are directly related to the facts of the City of Palm Springs. Tribal Council comments: "This case was considered by the Tribal Council at its meeting of April 12, 1983. In view of the importance of the subject matter, the various and somewhat complex issues involved etc. , the Tribal Council requested additional time for the Indian Planning Commission and Tribal Planning Consultant to review and comment on this proposed Element. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following actions: 1 . Endorsed the stated goal fo the Proposed Energy Element, i .e. , "to present a comprehensive guide for energy planning that will serve the City now and into the future." 2. Since the proposed Element is intended to serve as a ug ide, the Tribal Council seriously questions the consistency of . those programs, policies, recommendations, etc. which would mandate implementation, with the intent of the Element. 3. Strongly recommended that the implications to mandate certain programs, policies, recommendations, etc. be carefully considered from the standpoint of their financial impact, cost-benefit, etc." PUBLIC COMMENTS R. Fey, 2000 Madrona, stated that there had been problems with the Home Occupation Ordinance, especially in its application in condominiums because of parking problems; that people with home occupations have obtained a City license and a home occupation permit; that he felt that the problem will end in court; that home occupations and their enforcement are not working; and that the City ordinance supersedes C.C.& R.' s restricting home occupations. Assistant City Attorney stated that if the Home Occupation Ordinance is being violated, the proper recourse is to independently investigate to verify the allegations and then if true, an office hearing would be held to revoke the home occupation permit and when revoked, the City could, in court, prevent the home occupation business from violating the Ordinance. He stated that Mr. Fey had brought this to the attention of • the City very recently. Planning Director stated that the complaint had been investigated but could not be corroborated by staff; and that City ordinances would not supersede C.C. & R.' s. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 • PUBLIC COMMENTS (Cont'd. ) Assistant City Attorney stated that the City only enforces City ordinances, not C.C. & R. ' s and that the C.C. & R. ' s control whether or not a home occupation is allowed as far as the homeowner' s association is concerned. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TTM 17043 & CASE 5.0078-PD-91. Request by ERVIN ENGINEERING for M. Dunn for a 12-month time extension for map and PD to develop 97 home sites south of Highway 111 , west of Palm Hills Drive, UR Zone, Section 32. Planning Director stated that no additional conditions have been required and that the Director of Community Development is working with the developer to remove stored construction equipment on the site; that staff will review the median strip on the road to the project relative to landscaping. M/S/C (Lawrence/Harris; Curtis/Madsen absent) approving a 12-month time extension for TTM 17043 and Case 5.0078-PD-91 to expire concurrently. The new expiration date will be June 17, 1984. In answer to question by Commission, A. Perrier, attorney representing • the applicant, stated that the applicant is proceeding with the project. 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 2.803. Application by ALEXANDER GROVUE for architectural approval of elevated sundeck with an existing private patio at 1111 E. Alejo Road, R-G-A(8) Zone, Section 14. Planning Director stated that the applicant was not present; that the AAC recommended lowering the sundeck so that it is not visible over the wall or that it be removed; and that staff recommendation was for continuance for the applicant to be present. Chairman continued the application to the June 8 meeting. • May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 . PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'd.) CASE 5 .0252-A-MISC. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS to review the proposed redevelopment plan and draft EIR for the "Tahquitz-Andreas Redevelopment Project Area." Recommendation: That the Planning Commission accept receipt of comments on the EIR, approve Resolution 3527 for the plan and send the plan and the EIR to the City Council . Planning Director stated that 5.0252-A is one of a series of redevelopment project areas which will be lettered "A" through "G" and that the draft EIR is being reviewed and comments received have been incorporated into the text with the Tribal Council preparing comments at a future date; that the case will receive final approval July 13 from both the City Council (in a special meeting) and the Planning Commission. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. Housing & Redevelopment Specialist stated that the Planning Commission is acting upon the Tahquitz-Andreas Plan also by approving a resolution, a draft of which was distributed to the Commission in their packets. M/S/C (Harris/Koetting; Curtis/Madsen absent) accepting receipt of • comments for the EIR, approving Resolution 3527 for the Tahquitz-Andreas plan, and sending the plan and the EIR to the City Council . Tribal Council comments: "The Tribal Council at its meeting of December 21, 1982, considered the Environmental Assessment/Initial Study for the subject project and concurred with the findings that a focused EIR should be prepared. The Tribal Council will be reviewing the Proposed Redevelopment Plan and Draft EIR and submitting its comments thereon prior to June 24, 1983." ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Cont' d. ) CASE 2.812. Application by FAIRWAYS VILLAS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. for archi- tectural approval of wrought-iron addition to existing perimeter wall on 34th Ave. , 0-5 Zone, Section 20. (Ref. TTM 4861 & Case 5.688-CUP. ) Chairman abstained; Vice-Chairman presided. Planning Director stated that the Commission cannot approve the application since the concept requires a significant ordinance change; and that a meeting has been scheduled with the Fire and Police departments and the Building and Planning divisions relative to security • problems in condominium projects. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 CASE 2.812 (Cont'd.) • Planner III stated that the units facing 34th Avenue are those most directly affected; that with a 30-foot setback, a wall four and one-half feet is allowed; that the applicants are asking for a six foot wall ; that wrought-iron is considered the same as a wall ; that there are no grounds for a variance since a variance considers land use and property issues, not health and safety issues; that there are other alternatives to increasing the wall height for security such as individual security on each unit, heavy, thorny plantings, etc.; and that another condominium project had undergone an extensive design process in order to erect a fence which has protected all units except the perimeter ones. M. Galleher, Fairway Villas project manager, stated that there had been numerous burglaries; that much money had been spent on security; that wrought-iron fences could not be constructed between the units because they are in small clusters; that staff's recommendation to place bars over windows and sliding glass doors will indicate a high crime or ghetto area which is not a positive advertisement for Palm Springs; that the homeowners would accept a five and one-half foot wall with plantings; and that access over the low wall on 34th Avenue is too convenient. Commissioner Lawrence questioned whether or not the burglaries were done by people having access to security gate cards. • Mr. Galleher stated that the adjacent condominium project had had the same security problems until the Fairway Villas were constructed. Further discussion followed on access to the condominiums. Mr. Galleher stated that the homeowners on 34th Avenue have tried to protect themselves by employing security companies. Consensus was that landscaping, until full grown, would not prevent burglaries; and that the ordinance should be reviewed in light of revising the wall height on multi-family projects. Mr. Galleher requested that Commission take action as soon as possible. Assistant City Attorney stated that if the application constitutes violation of the ordinance, the Planning Commission cannot act upon it. M/S/C (Lawrence/Kaptur; Curtis/Madsen absent; Service abstained) for a restudy with the recommendation to review alternate methods for fencing or safety (within the confines of the Ordinance) and staff to review the Zoning Ordinance for wall height for multi-unit projects. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 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 E1 Segundo, Andreas, Calle Alvarado & Amado Roads, R-4 Zone (I .L. ) , Section 14. Planner III stated that eventually the homeowners will have a similar security problem as the Fairway Villas. J. Jackson, the developer, stated that there had been no security problems thus far; that the developer employs a private security firm; and that a six foot wall was not contemplated because of the configuration of the site. M/S/C (Koetting/Kaptur; Curtis/Madsen absent) approving the application subject to the following condition: That revised final landscape, irrigation, and exterior lighting plans be submitted. (The applicant is to review the perimeter landscape with specific emphasis upon shrub materials added adjacent to the wall .) PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'd.) 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. • (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration and final approval . No comments received.) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and approve 5.0260-ZTA per staff recommendations. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances , the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that the intent is that if a property owner is in violation of the Maintenance Ordinance, the property would be declared a public nuisance; and that most people would comply because they do not want to appear before the City Council . Assistant City Attorney stated that if a Zoning Enforcement Officer states that a property is in violation of the Zoning Ordinance, the violation is a public nuisance and would be posted with the right of appeal by the property owner before action is taken to abate it; if it is not corrected, the City can charge the cost of cleaning it as a lien which will appear on the tax rolls. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that there must be guidelines for field officers for consistency. Discussion of architectural approval requirements and guidelines • followed. Planning Director stated that there have been problems posting public nuisances on Indian land; that the Tribal Council must concur in the maintenance requirements; and that staff would confer with the Assistant City Attorney regarding Indian Tribal concurrence. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 CASE 5.-0262-ZTA (Cont'd.) Assistant City Attorney stated that Indian properties would be treated the same as other properties except that the owner can appeal to the Tribal Council which then can overrule the City. M/S/C (Kaptur/Lawrence; Curtis/Madsen absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and approving Case 5.0260-ZTA based on the following findings per staff recommendations: FINDINGS: 1 . That this proposed zoning text amendment is necessary at this time to fully implement City policies and procedures. 2. That the proposed zoning text amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan goals and policies. 3. That the inclusion of property maintenance standards in the Zoning Ordinance will more effectively maintain the appearances of properties throughout the City. Tribal Council comments: "This case was considered by the Tribal Council at its meeting of May 10, 1983. A continuance was requested in order to provide time for the • Indian Planning Commission and the Tribal Planning Consultant to receive, review and comment on the Staff Report and a draft of the proposed Ordinance amendment. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following action: 1. Concurred with the intent and purpose of properly maintenance standards as set forth in the preamble to proposed Section 9319.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Expressed the concern that realistic as well as effective procedures should be established to properly enforce such standards. 3. Noted that the provisions outlined in the draft of Section 9319.00 appear reasonable and appropriate; however, the draft does not address the enforcement procedures. 4. Withheld final action on this case pending receipt and review of proposed procedures to implement the enforcement of these Property Maintenance Standards, to include method of notification (written notification to Tribal Council and local office of Bureau of Indian Affairs in cases involving Indian-trust lands) , designation of party to be cited, penalties, appeals, etc." May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 CASE 5.0272-7TA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for an amendment to the Zoning text establishing a land use permit process, Citywide, and amendments to the C-B-D Zone, Section 15. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration and final approval . No comments received.) Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. Chairman continued the item to June 22 for further staff review and revisions, per staff recommendation. CASE 5.0273. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for a Zoning text amend- ment to allow the creation of accessory apartment units in single family residential zones, Citywide. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration and final approval . No comments received. ) Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. Housing & Redevelopment Specialist stated that the access could not be • through the primary units because it is then not considered an independent unit; and that housing staff opposes the requirement that the accessory apartment not constitute more than 10% of the existing living area although the requirement remains in the Zoning text amendment. Discussion: Discussion ensued on minimum size of units. Commissioner Koetting stated that he was concerned with the 10% requirement since the units would be too small to be livable. Planning Director stated that existing illegally created accessory units must be brought into compliance or abated; and that they must obtain a CUP to be legal . M/S/C (Kaptur/Service; Koetting dissented; Curtis/Madsen absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and approving Case 5.0273- ZTA subject to the following findings and per staff recommendations: FINDINGS: 1. That this proposed zoning text amendment is necessary at this time to fully implement City policies and procedures. 2. That the proposed zoning text amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan goals and policies. • 3. That the inclusion of accessory apartment legislation in the Zoning Ordinance will provide an affordable housing alternative for low and moderate income persons and ease the critical shortage of affordable housing. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 CASE 5.0273 (Cont' d.) Tribal Council comments: "This case was considered by the Tribal Council on May 10, 1983. In view of the potential impact on the City's existing and future housing stock, the Tribal Council requested additional time for the Indian Planning Commission and Tribal Planning Consultant to review and comment on this proposed amendment. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following actions: 1 . Concurred with the proposed action of the City of Palm Springs to adopt its own regulations providing for the creation of second units in residential zones, in lieu of accepting standards that would be mandated by the State. 2. With the exceptions noted below, generally endorsed the proposed Ordinance since it appears not to have an adverse impact on existing and future residential neighborhoods, and does appear to effectively and equitably implement S.B. 1534. 3. Took exception with the following provisions of proposed Section 9318.00: • 1) That 10 percent limitation appears to be excessively restrictive and should be eliminated. The 450 square foot limitation adequately addresses the need to keep these units secondary to the primary residence. 2) Provision should be made to legitimize existing illegal units by some procedure less elaborate than a CUP. This may be a good opportunity to utilize the proposed "land use permit" procedure. At the least, some sort of Building Code compliance should be required to verify the health and safety of these units." MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Cont'd.) TPM 18767. 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. (Information only, no action necessary. ) • May 25 , 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 16 TPM 18787 (Cont'd.) • Planning Director stated that changes to the requirements were fairly insignificant; that City Council deferred the requirement for a six foot wall at the northern end of the property adjacent to the dump and Cathedral City and the wall will not be required until the property develops; that some of the fee structures were changed and some of the inconsistencies in the Development Committee recommendations were clarified; that common landscape development plans are only required on the frontage of Ramon and Bogie Roads; that landscaping of individual lots will be approved by the Commission; that an assessment district will be formed for ongoing maintenance of the landscaping; and that he did not know why there was special consideration given to the development of the property. DETERMINATION 10.333. PLANNING COMMISSION determination of an acceptable zone for an aluminum recycling unit, Citywide. Chairman stated that the action on the determination would affect other recycling efforts like Goodwill , paper recycling, etc. and that staff recommends that the applicants apply for a land use permit for recycling units in shopping centers and industrial areas. Planning Director stated that the use should be in the Ordinance rather • than in a determination and that the land use permit application is a good control at staff level . Chairman continued the item for 30 days to the June 22 meeting for inclusion in the land use permit process now being developed by staff. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Cont'd.) CASE 3.342. Application by J. WALLING for K. Miller for architectural approval of revised landscape and wall plans for hillside residence on Cresent Drive, R-1-A Zone, Section 10. Planning Director stated that when the application was submitted, there was a certain perspective and a certain set of conditions which has changed in the construction of the project; that the original retaining walls, although the approved color, were small , but in construction have risen to 12' to 16' in height which has changed the character of the house and its relation to the hillside. Discussion: Discussion followed on solutions to the problem including wall length, height, and color. Planning Director stated that the Commission is reviewing the entire issue of hillside impact. • Assistant City Attorney stated that the wall and building form an integrated unit; that if it had been built as originally approved, there would be no problem with the color; that under the circumstances, the Commission is justified in requiring a change of color to make the whole architectural concept palatable (because of the wall and building relationship) . May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 17 CASE 3.342 (Cont'd.) • Further discussion followed on measures to improve the homes compatibility with the hillside. Planning Director stated that some revisions were made because of errors in the topo map. M/S/C (Kaptur/Lawrence; Curtis/Madsen absent) for a restudy noting that the increased wall height adds a texture and co of r element to the hillside which was not originally approved in the architectural application, that revised colors are to be submitted for the wall and the building, and revised landscape plans are to be submitted addressing the impact of the increased height of the wall . CASE 3.475. Application by JIMSAIR AVIATION SERVICES for architectural approval of addition of loading dock facilities and final landscape plan for a fixed base operation at Palm Springs Municipal Airport, "A" Zone, Section 18. Assistant City Attorney stated that Commissioner Kaptur could participate in the discussion since he had not been employed nor received remuneration from the applicant in over a year. M/S/C (Koetting/Harris; Curtis/Madsen absent) approving the loading dock application subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That final landscape, irrigation and exterior lighting plans be submitted. 3. That watering of the site during construction be required per UBC standards. 4. That the exposed block match the exposed block on the rest of the project. 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 (Lawrence/Koetting; Curtis/Madsen absent) 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 3.137. P. WIRTZ for San Jacinto Builders for revised landscape plans for • office/warehouse building on Research Drive, M-1-P Zone, Section 12. Approved as submitted. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 18 CONTINUED ITEM CASE 3.573. BENEFICIAL STANDARD PROPERTIES for architectural approval of revised remodeling plans and new supermarket for Palm Springs Mall on Tahquitz-McCallum Way between Farrell Drive/Baristo Road, C-S-C Zone, Section 13. M/S/C (Koetting/Harris; Curtis/Madsen absent) continuing the application to June 8 for further review and submission of complete exhibits and noting the following: 1. That the proposed market roof elements be restudied (reduce mass); that additional color and/or materials be added on the west and south elevations; and that landscaping be added on the north elevation. 2. That the former Market Basket building be restudied with specific emphasis on roof element; the northeast corner of the building; and that landscape elements be incorporated between the building and the curb. 3. That the proposed beam element within the planting area on the Tahquitz frontage be emphasized and retained (it was suggested that this element be expanded into a trellis and that landscaping materials project through the trellis element) . 4. That the general landscape concepts are acceptable with the following exceptions: a. That the number of Jacaranda trees within the parking area be reduced and placement not be immediately adjacent to parking spaces. (Alternative material is suggested such as Ficus Nitida and/or Rhus Lancia.) b. That the landscaping details and concepts be expanded to incorporate the former Market Basket building and proposed Von' s building. C. That if pots are used, they should be a relatively minor element of the overall landscape, be substantial in size (36 inches plus) provided with automatic irrigation systems and adequate drainage. d. That a revised sign program be submitted allowing only major tenants exterior signs. e. That complete architectural details be resubmitted and that arches, columns, materials and landscaping be utilized as the unifying theme for the complex. Storefront detailing is significant and must be utilized as a unifying design element with specific areas being the Market Basket and Thrifty store fronts. May 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 19 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 3.583 (MINOR) . H. LAPHAM for Sizzler's Steak House for architectural approval of revised exterior revisions to restaurant on South Palm Canyon Drive between Mesquite Avenue/Sunny Dunes Road, C-2 Zone, Section 22. Restudy of the elevations and the addition of shade trees to the parking areas. Chairman requested that the applicant discuss problems with greenhouses with the Edison Company. COMMISSION REPORTS, REQUESTS AND DISCUSSION - Campaigning. Chairman noted that the City Attorney has advised in a letter that a law in effect beginning January 1, 1983 requires that Commissioners not be involved with campaigns for themselves or for other persons if applicants have appeared before the Commission within the previous 90-days and to disqualify themselves from voting on applications affecting persons or businesses who have contributed $250 or more to their campaign chests. Commissioner Lawrence requested that the City Attorney discuss the new law by telephone with each Commissioner. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 5:45 p.m. PLANNING DIRECTOR MDR/mi WP/PC MIN