Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/07/27 - MINUTES a. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall • July 27, 1983 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1983 - 1984 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Richard Service, Chairman - 1 1 Hugh Curtis - 1 1 Hugh Kaptur X 2 0 Peter Koetting X 2 0 Don Lawrence X 2 0 Paul Madsen X 2 0 Sharon Apfelbaum X 1 0 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attoriey Stephen Graham, Planner III Robert Green, Planner II Diana Ericksen, Community Development C3ordinator Mary Isenberg, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - July 25, 1983 • Earl Neel Absent: Peter Koetting, James Cioffi, Hugh Chris Mills Curtis, William Johnson (Alternate) Michael Buccino Sharon Apfelbaum (Alternate) Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. * * k * * There were no Tribal Council comments. Chairman was absent; Vice-Chairman presided. M/S/C (Lawrence, Madsen; Service, Curtis absent) approving the minutes of July 13 with the following revisions: Case 3.594. Page 15, new paragraph 9. Add the following: Planning Director stated that parking has been added proportionately to the expansion project, that the 7 space shortage was on the overall space based on requirements for an office use and was the architect's estimate. Commissioner Lawrence then stated that he cast a dissenting vote because the architect estimated that parking was deficient 7 spaces. Case 5.0252-A (Mist.) . Page 4, new paragraph 6. Add the following to Tribal Council comments: • 4. Noted that a cultural center should be included in and a part of the proposed convention center with the facilities not to be duplicated. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS • CASE 5.0272-ZTA (Cont'd) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for amend- ment to the zoning text, establishing a land use permit process, city-wide, 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.) Recommendation: That the Commission continue the hearing to August 10 for further staff review. Vice-Chairman stated that the staff recommended continuance because of concerns of the City Attorney, but that the public hearing would be opened. Planning Director stated that asterisks in the staff report indicate changes, and the bold type indicates DDAC comments. He stated that the land use permit would not be unique to the downtown but could regulate other uses which have enforcement problems but are now permitted by right of zone. He described staff development of the land use permit ordinance, stated that the DDAC has had major input, and that staff is not totally comfortable because of additional processing but feels that the ordinance can be structured to expedite applications. Vice-Chairman stated that there should not be an application or appeal • fee. Further discussion followed. Planning Director explained examples of discretionary approval and stated that permits will be processed in a timely manner, and that the word "Planning Director" in the amendment will be changed to "Director of Community Development" and that the City is considering posting property to notice land use permits for a ten day period. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Kaptur, Madsen; Service, Curtis absent) continuing the item to the August 10 meeting. CASE 5.0283-GPA (Cont'd) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for an amendment to the General Plan Street Plan to change West Amado Road between Palm Canyon Drive/Belardo Road from a secondary thoroughfare to a special collector. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration, order for filing and final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and approve Case 5.0283-GPA adopting a specific plan for Amado Road. • Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Lawrence, Madsen; Service;, Curtis absent) to file the Negative Declaration and approve Case 5.0283-GPA adopting a specific plan for Amado Road to match the adopted' specific plan for Amado Road between Palm Canyon Drive & Indian Avenue! July 27, 1983 PLANNING CCMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 • CASE 5.0284-ZTA (Cont'd) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for amendment to the zoning text, to allow Recycling Collection Centers in various commercial zones under a land use permit. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration, order for filing, and final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Commission continue the hearing until August 10 for concurrent processing with the land use permit zoning text amend- ment (Case 5.0272-ZTA) . Planning Director explained the staff recommended continuance in order to process the General Plan amendment concurrently with the land use permit zoning text amendment. He stated that staff would be considering collection centers in conjunction with established property, not on vacant lots. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Lawrence, Kaptur; Service, Curtis absent) continuing the case to August 10. • CASE 5.0264-CZ. Application by D. TROUPE-BIGELOW for a zone change from R-G-A (6) (Garden Apartments) to C-1 (Retail-Commercial) or such other zones that the Commission deems appropriate for property on Racquet Club Road between North Palm Canyon Drive/Zanjero Road, R-G-A (6), Section 3. (Environmental Assessment and tentative approval .) and; CASE 5.0279-GPA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Plan as follows: Change "Residential Low-6" to "General-Commercial" or such cesignations as deemed appropriate for property located on Racquet Club Road between North Palm Canyon Drive/Zanjero Road, Section 3. (Environmental Assessment and tentative approval .) Vice Chairman abstained; Commissioner Madsen presided. Recommendation: That the Commission tentatively approve Case 5.0264-CZ subject to conditions including an implementation strategy for a Planned Development District in lieu of a change of zone and tentatively approving General Plan amendments 5.0279 per staff recommendations; and continuing the case to August 10 for final action. Planning Director gave a brief review of the cases. He explained that if the zone change were approved; there would be a noncomforming use on • the two lots and the single family house. He stated that a letter on file in the Department of Community Development had been received from the applicant' s attorney, and then explained the staff environmental assessment/initial study. He ' noted that the applicant's attorney objected to not receiving immedi$te zoning, feeling that it is contrary to the government code regarding) consistency with the General Plan and July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 CASE 5.0264-CZ. (Cont'd. ) • zoning. He stated that the staff was recommending adding a new land use category of "General Commercial" to the Tramway Area General Plan and amending the land use plan to add a "General Commercial" land use desig- nation equal to the frontage of the shopping center along Racquet Club Road; that no property without frontage on major or secondary thorough- fare would be included in the amendment and that there are other proper- ties in the City with similar situations. He noted also that the because of the nonconforming to s and uses and if the zoning were changed to C-1, staff was recommending a Planned Development District in lieu of a change in zone, both as a General Plan implementation strategy and action for the zone change case. He stated that the Council feels that the situation in this case is unique. He stated also that City policy has been to discourage strip or spat zoning and the proposed zoning was broken in the most appropriate places in keeping with the Council ' s directive. He stated that the area was no longer a redevelop- ment project area and that staff' s best professional recommendation would be for denial as originally recommended. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open. A. Perrier, 3001 Tahquitz-McCallum Way, attorney representing the applicant, stated that the Bigelow property and the two adjacent lots are surrounded by commercial developent and should be designated as commercial zoning. He stated that Mrs. Bigelow has dedicated land for . street widening after the Council meeting in which the Council stated that commercial zoning was desirable. He stated that the staff recom- mendation to change the General Plan but leave the R-G-A(6) zoning on the zoning map is inconsistent with California law. He also stated that a Planned Development District should not be required since the Council has directed that commercial zoning be placed on the property. C. Spattaro, 245 W. Via Estrada, owner of property adjacent to the sub- ject property, also requested commercial zoning and stated that it was a directive of the Council . C. Nichols, 899 N. Palm Canyon Drive, stated that R-G-A(6) zoning is obsolete for the properties in the vicinity and requested that his property be treated in the same manner as those on Racquet Club. He noted that the only real use for these properties is for commercial use individually or incorporated into the shopping center and requested commercial zoning for his property to the same depth as the Bigelow and Spattaro properties. Mrs. D. Bigelow, 360 W. Racquet Club Road, the applicant, stated that she lived in the residence for ten years and had not planned on a shop- ping center being built in the area. She stated that she did not want to live in the residence any more because of the noise, traffic and air pollution and that a Planned Development District would be unfair since she cannot sell the home for use as commercial property. She stated that the City Council has recommended a commercial designation and • requested that the Commission consider her side and resolve the issue. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 CASE 5.0264-CZ. (Cont'd. ) • Commissioner Kaptur stated that the Planned Development District process for the shopping center impacted the applicant's property and the adja- cent two parcels; and that Mr. Nichols' property was not in the same situation. He stated that the zoge change should be allowed but only to applicant's parcel and the two adjacent parcels. Commissioner Lawrence stated that he felt the subject property was dominated by adjacent shopping centers. M/S (Lawrence, Kaptur) to approve a zone change from R-G-A(6) to C-1 for Case 5.0264-CZ and amending the General Plan land use plan from residen- tial Low-6 to General Commercial ;Case 5.0279-GPA) . Discussion followed on the motion, Planning Director stated that the motion did not give direction on the negative declaration or the mitiga- tive measures. He stated that the motion indicates that the General Plan would be tentatively approved as a change to "General Commercial" and the hearing continued to August 10. He stated that the zone change is for the Bigelow property only from R-G-A(6) to C-1 and that the motion would create instant nonconformity on lot size and use on all parcels involved (including a house in a commercial zone) ; and that the Planned Development District was a recommended mitigation to eliminate the nonconformities, and insure an appropriate commercial development. He noted that he was aware of no houses operating presently as commer- cial uses. In reply to Commissioner Kaptur's question, he stated that • for the Planned Development District strategy the recommendation of staff should be followed (including the implementation strategy) in lieu of a change of zone. Commissioner Kaptur withdrew his second. Mrs. Apfelbaum stated that a Planned Development District would be the best solution for more control and would have less effect on the Nichols' property. Planning Director stated that the rationale for a Planned Development District was to develop a specific site plan which would eliminate the potential for a nonconformity and for upgrading and integration of the use for adjacent property to current standards. He stated that the R-G-A(6) zoning underlying the Planned Development District would be a moot point, and that if the property use were to be changed, a plan would be submitted under a Planned Development District application. Discussion followed on conditions to incorporate into a new motion. Planning Director stated that staff would recommend a Planned Develop- ment District in lieu of change of zone which is a zone and adopted by ordinance by the City Council and becomes specific zoning for the property and would be therefore be consistent with the General Plan. In reply to questions from Mr. Perrier, Assistant City Attorney stated that the Commission had closed the public hearing, that staff has been • giving the results of its investigation and recommendation, and that the Commission has the power to reopen the public hearing. Vice-Chairman reopened the publiclyhearing. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 CASE 5.0264-CZ. (Cont'd. ) • A. Perrier (rebuttal) questioned whether a denial would be tentative or final since final denial would allow the applicant to appeal to the Council ; reiterated his client's concern that the zoning be consistent with the General Plan, and stated that there is only one zoning consistent with the proposed General Plan and it is commercial . Commis- sioner Madsen stated that the property south of Racquet Club has been developed under a Planned Development District and a Planned Development District would be consistent in the case of the subject property also. Further discussion followed. Mr. Perrier reiterated that the proper zoning designation should be commercial and not R-G-A(6) . He stated that the applicant would accept the use as nonconforming and requested that the applicant not be required to have a Planned Development District. He noted that the commercial zoning designation has controls and that the staff is stating that the applicant not use the house for commercial purposes. C. Spattaro (rebuttal ) stated that the church property was downzoned, and that the City Council will take the action it wants. He stated that the Planning Director was influencing the Commission. Commissioner Lawrence stated that he did not feel that a Planned Development District was necessary and that the applicant would not be asking for a zone change if the shopping centers had not been approved. • Planning Director stated that the motions could be separated to expedite the General Plan amendment. He stated that alternative mitigative measures could be implemented if so stated by the Commission. There being no further appearances, Vice-Chairman closed the reopened public hearing. Motion by Kaptur to tentatively approve the Planned Development District process for commercial use on the subject R-G-A(6) property (Case 5.0264-CZ) . There was no second. Discussion followed on whether cr not the General Plan amendment should be included in the motion for tha zone change. Planning Director stated that approval of the General Plan amendment should include all five con- ditions including an implementation strategy (staff recommendation #5) for the General Plan. He stated that the General Plan could be changed whether or not the zoning were changed, and that the zoning ordinance allows a Planned Development District in lieu of a change of zone as a strategy for developing property. He emphasized that an implementation strategy was needed. Discussion continued; Planning Director again reiterated the type of action required. Commissioner Kaptur withdrew his motion. M/S (Kaptur, Apfelbaum; Koetting abstained; Service, Curtis absent) ordering preparation of a Draft Negative Declaration, tentatively • approving a General Plan Amendment from Residential Low-6 to General Commercial (Case 5.0279-GPA) subject to staff recommendations #1 through #5, and continuing the public hearing to August 10. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 CASE 5.0264-CZ. (Cont'd. ) The vote was as follows: AYES: Apfelbaum, Kaptur NOES: Lawrence, Madsen ABSTENTIONS: Koetting ABSENT: Service, Curtis There was a tie vote and no action was taken. Assistant City Attorney recommended that another motion be made. Dis- cussion followed. M/S/C (Lawrence, Kaptur; Koetting abstained; Service, Curtis absent) ordering the preparation of a Draft Negative Declaration, tentatively approving inclusion of a "General Commercial" land use category in the Tramway Area General Plan, tentatively approving a General Plan Amend- ment to "General Commercial" on the property as recommended by staff for Case 5.2079-GPA, and continuing the case to August 10. Discussion followed. M/S (Lawrence, Apfelbaum) ordering the preparation of a Draft Negative Declaration and tentatively approving Case 5.0264-CZ for a zone change from R-G-A(6) to C-1 subject to staff recommendations #1 through #4 • (excluding staff recommendation #5) , and continuing the case to August 10. The vote was as follows: AYES: Apfelbaum, Lawrence NOES: Kaptur, Madsen ABSTENTION: Koetting ABSENT: Service, Curtis There was a tie vote; no action was taken, however, Mrs. Apfelbaum stated that she had misunderstood the motion and wished to change her vote to "No" (thus denying the zone change). Further discussion followed. Assistant City Attorney stated that all the issues will be discussed as a package and the deletion of staff recommendation #5 did not preclude the property becoming a Planned Development District. He states that the Commission had changed the General Plan to General Commercial with no recommendation for a change of zone (which would be an inconpatible zoning and General Plan situa- tion) . He suggested either another motion or continuation for two weeks for further thought and input anc stated that the applicant could appeal any action to the City Council . M/S/C (Kaptur, Apfelbaum; Koetting abstained; Lawrence dissented; Service, Curtis absent) orderinc the preparation of a Draft Negative . Declaration and tentatively approving a Planned Development District in lieu of a change of the zone for Case 5.0264-CZ as recommended by staff, and continuing the case to August 10 for final approval . Staff recom- mendations relating to the change of zone request are as follows: July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 CASE 5.0264-CZ. (Cont'd. ) • 1. Preparation of a Draft Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. 4. Continuance of the public hearing until August 10, 1983 to receive comments of a Draft Negative Declaration of final approval of General Plan amendment. 5. An implementation strategy to include a Planned Development District in lieu of a change of zone for commercial uses at this time, to insure maximum compatibility of any commercial uses in this residential neighborhood, as well as to eliminate noncon- forming uses in the zone. (Staff recommendations #2 and #3 dealt with the General Plan amendments necessary to consider the change of zone. ) PUBLIC COMMENTS C. Nichols, 899 N. Palm Canyon Drive, stated that the street referred to as Tramway Road is actually on the General Plan as Tram Way and to avoid confusion, should be changed to Tram Way. He requested a staff study and Commission action. Commission Kaptur stated that a name more in keeping with the desert • should be chosen. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS The Planning Commission reviewed plans, discussed, and took action on the following items involving architectural approval subject to the con- ditions as outlined. CASE 5.0218-CUP. Application by CURT DUNHAM for architectural approval of revised elevations for 44-unit coidominium project, R-1-C, WR-1-C Zones, Section 24. Planner II gave the AAC conditions from the June 20 meeting and stated that they were still valid. F. White, the architect, explained that the roof was brown barrel tile with a diffused coloration. M/S/C (Kaptur, Madsen; Service, Curtis absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That glue-lam beams with bolted joint be used for exposed wood • work. 3. That working drawings be su3mitted for the approval of the AAC and Commission. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 CASE 5.0218-CUP. (Cont'd. ) • 4. That flash roof tiles be added at random throughout the project (approximately 40% of the tiles) . MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TTM 14416-TIME EXTENSION. Request by ENGINEERING CORPORATION for a 12-month time extension for a map for condominium purposes on the northeast corner of East Palm Canyon Drive and Bogie Road, R-3 Zone, Section 30. Planning Director stated that the request was for a third time extension and staff recommendation was for approval subject to all original condi- tions and some revisions to the engineering comments (primarily for street construction standards) . Vice-Chairman requested that on all time extensions, a display be placed on the board to refresh the Commissioners ' memory on the projects. M/S/C (Kaptur, Lawrence; Service, Curtis absent) approving a final twelve month time extension subject to original conditions of approval , school impact fees (imposed 8-5-81) , and amended engineering conditions (memo dated July 22, 1983) . New expiration date August 6, 1984. • TTM 17430-TIME EXTENSION. Request by HALLMARK ENGINEERING for Investors Real Estate for a 12-month time extension of a map for condominium purposes on the northeast corner of Avenida Caballeros/Amado Road. R-G-A(8)(I.L. ), Section 14 (Ref. Case 3.101). Planning Director explained that the time extension keeps the map from expiring and allows the applicants time to revise the original map to show the private club for La Mancha Sur. M/S/C (Lawrence, Madsen; Service, Curtis absent) approving a twelve month time extension subject to the original conditions of approval and additional and amended engineering conditions (memo of July 22) . New expiration date: July 1, 1984. TENTATIVE TRACT AND PARCEL MAPS Planning Director reviewed and explained the maps and the Planning Com- mission discussed and took action on the following tract and parcel maps 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 based on the finding that the project will not have a sig- nificant adverse effect on the environment and subject to conditions as outlined. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 TTM 18087-Revised. Application by KWL ASSOCIATES for Andreas Hills, Inc. for . approval of a revised map to subdivide property for lot sales, W-1-R-B Zone, Sections 35 and 36. (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration and final approval ) . Planning Director explained the --onfiguration of the map on the aerial photograph on the display board. Discussion followed on Commission concerns. Planning Director stated that the map configuration is adapted to a plan submitted by the City for flood control protection, in order to protect the bridge over Palm Canyon Wash and to receive federal funding for the bridge project. He stated that the rationale for the 50-foot roadway width is that the twelve lots served by the road will not generate traffic needing an 80-foot width and the need for secondary thoroughfare improvement is some years away. He explained dedication offered on lot "B" and stated that there would be no improvements in the dedication area, but that the lot would be landscaped and maintained. In response to a Commission request, he stated that the homes would be above the flood plain area on fill . Vice-Chairman expressed concern about using fill in the flood plain. Planning Director stated that there is cut and fill for the road going across the toe of the mountains. R. Lotito of KWL Associates, 712 Eugene Road, representing the • applicant, explained the fill area, and stated that the cut would be hidden in the saddle and not obvious from the valley floor. Vice-Chairman requested a more detailed grading plan and stated that he was concerned that the mountain would be buried and the hillside scarred. Discussion followed on the proposed fill . Commissioner Kaptur suggested a field trip to the site with a representative of the Engineering firm present to answer questions and concerns. F. Razzar, 1350 S. Farrell Drive, representing Andreas Hills, Inc. , stated that the configuration of the developable acreage was mandated by the City and Flood Control and that grading has been reduced to the very minimum. He stated that alterations were made when the bridge was built, that the gap between the top of the saddle and the bridge is 15 feet to 20 feet and if filled there would be no development problem. He stated that he did not want action postponed since the map had not been processed expeditiously. M/S/C (Kaptur, Apfelbaum; Service, Curtis absent) for a field trip to the site on Wednesday, August 3, 1983, at 5:30 p.m. (meet at the east side of the bridge) . • July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Cont'd. ) • CASE 3.582. Application by A. WILKES for architectural approval of revised plans for a condominium/apartment hotel on Baristo Rd. between Avenida Caballeros/Sunrise Way, R-4 Zone ;I.L. ), Section 14. (Commission response to written comments on the Draft Negative Declara- tion action for filing, and final approval . No comments received. ) Planner II stated that a sewer study has been completed by the applicant in response to increased density after rezoning of the property and that only a portion of the twelve acre site would be developed with the remainder of the development deferred until the applicant submits an additional sewer study examining capacity of the line. He stated that project concerns were the inclusion of a restaurant and parking require- ments, and that the applicant has provided parking at the condominium standard which is the highest parking standard required by the City. He stated that the parking for the restaurant is proposed at hotel restaurant standards which are slightly lower than that of independent restaurants, and that the project could be occupied at 20% capacity by long-term residents. He stated that the alternatives would be to consider the project as a residential project with a restaurant, either a condominium if a map is submitted, or a mixed use hotel and condo- minium. He stated that the resort hotel land use is identical to a condominium with a restaurant. Planning Director stated that the project will be managed similarly to a • resort hotel and is an unusual type of project. He stated that the Granada Royale Hotel is also sinilar, but is located in a commercial zone which allows restaurants by right of zone. Vice-Chairman stated that he did not know that it was impossible to have a liquor license for hotel guests only. Discussion followed on the "Resort Hotel" definition. Planning Director stated that without a map, a project is classified as a resort hotel . Discussion followed on parking requirements. Planner II stated that if the use is a condominium with a free-standing restaurant there would be 12 additional parking spaces required, but that the applicant does not know at the present time what type of outside use the restaurant will have. Planning Director stated that there is enough parking if the project is a resort hotel, and that the City could control the use by stating that the restaurant cannot be open to the public, therefore no liquor license would be issued and the project wculd not be viable. A. Wilkes, project architect, stated that the project is a condominium/ hotel with all services provided and that a map would be filed. He also stated that it was not a time-share project. Planning Director stated that the ordinance does not allow an inde- pendent restaurant in an R-4 Zone and that if the Commission desires, it could take action to delete the restaurant which would allow the appli- cant to apply for a Planned Development District. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 CASE 3.582. (Cont'd. ) • Discussion follows on the location of the restaurant. Commissioners Kaptur and Lawrence felt that the location of the restaurant deep within the project would not cause problems. M/ (Lawrence) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and final approval subject to conditions. The motion died for lack of a second. M/ (Koetting) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration subject to Conditional Use Permit approval for a restaurant. The motion died for lack of a second. M/S/C (Madsen, Kaptur; Service, Curtis absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and tentatively approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That staff prepare a definition of "Condotel" for Commission review. 2. That staff prepare a recommendation for parking standards and accessories for condotels for Commission review. 3. That all recommendations of the Development Committee. 4. That exposed wood members be glue-lam beams. • 5. That samples of the roof tile be submitted for approval of the AAC and Commission with a brown tone preferred and tile showing a variation of color. 6. That the landscaping be restudied for reduction of a number of deciduous trees (especially around the pool, where palms are preferred) , to increase the number and variety of trees on the street elevations, landscaping of the eastern boundary, and sub- mission of detail landscape exterior lighting, and irrigation plans prior to issuance of building permit. Discussion followed on the restaurant use and the definition of a Condotel . Assistant City Attorney stated that at the time the tract map comes before the Commission, the Commission can impose conditions, i .e. , that the Condotel shall be operated as a hotel and not a permanent residence. CASE 3.602. Application by D. WEXLER for the City of Palm Springs for architectural approval of a Police Station on Tahquitz-McCallum Way between E1 Cielo & Civic Drive, G-R-5 Zone, Section 13. Commissioner Kaptur suggested that the 12-foot solid wall be broken by chain-link fencing heavily planted to screen the wall . • D. Wexler, 199 Civic Drive, the architect, stated that the police want a solid wall for security. Further discussion followed on the wall . Mr. Wexler stated that the wall is proportionate to the building and that landscaping and vines should be required. July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 CASE 3.602. (Cont'd. ) • M/S/C (Kaptur, Madsen; Service, Curtis absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That shade trees be added to the parking lot. 2. That the 12-foot wall be landscaped heavily and resubmitted to the AAC and Commission in the final landscape plan. 3. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. ADDED STARTERS CASE 7.535-AMM. Application by D. CHRISTIAN for architectural approval of entry gates in excess of 4-1/2 feet for a single family residence, R-1-C Zone, Section 23. Planning Director stated that th`s type of application may be reviewed at staff level in the near future. M/S/C (Apfelbaum, Kaptur; Madsen abstained; Service, Curtis absent) approving the application as submitted. • CASE 3.475. Application by JIMSAIR AVIATION for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for airport facility located on Bogie Road north of Ramon Road, A Zone, Section 18. H. Williamson, the applicant, stated that the AAC felt that the tree sizes were adequate. Planning Director stated that the Bogie Road concept has been followed. M/S/C (Madsen, Lawrence; Service, Curtis absent) approving the applica- tion subject to the following conditions: 1. That the proposed Bigonia Venusta be alternated with Bigonia Tweediana. Where the Bigonia Venusta is utilized, chicken wire fencing shall be placed upon the wall for support. 2. That entry areas in the primary driveway planters be augmented with soft mounding boulders, and boxwood beauty. The proposed Carissa shall be integrated into the boulders. 3. That Euclyptus Sideroxylon proposed in the planting island be spread out to give a more open feel to these areas on the Bogie frontage. 4. That the proposed landscape screen be used in lieu of the ordi- nance-required wall . July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 ADDED STARTERS - CASE 3.606-Minor. Application by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS • for architectural approval of repaint of the Welwood Murray Library located on the southeast corner of Tahquitz-McCallum Way/S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Discussion ensued on the original intregal green colored concrete on which the paint is peeling. Planning Director stated that staff recom- mended the ivory color of the Plaza and the AAC recommended additional accent banding. He stated that the staff recommendation is to put the building back to its original color and that if the Commission wanted the building sandblasted, it could be suggested. C. Koon, of the City Library staff, stated that the original green color is unattractive. M/S/C (Apfelbaum, Kaptur; Service, Curtis absent) approving the applica- tion subject to the following coniition: that the building may be sand- blasted to its original color, and if not feasible, that the AAC recom- mendation for colors matching the Plaza be used, with a graphic design such as is on the Plaza to be investigated and reviewed by staff. TENTATIVE TRACT & PARCEL MAPS (Cont'd. ) TTM 18879 (Sphere of Influence) . Application by HUGH KAPTUR for approval of a 12-lot subdivision for single-family purposes, Section 2 (T-5-S-R-4-E) • located adjacent to southern city limits, W-2 Zone. Planning Director stated that the project is in the sphere of influence on the South City Limit line and explained its configuration on the dis- play board. H. Kaptur, 600 Tahquitz-McCallum, the applicant, stated that the project is not in the City and the applicant would prefer not putting in dry sewers because there are no Desert Water Agency standards for the area, and that dry sewers might not be viable in the future. He discussed the project as being rural in character with lots priced at $300,000 and restrictive second-story features. He stated that there is access from Acanto Road and that the project will have a guard gate. M/S/C (Apfelbaum, Lawrence; Kaptur abstained; Service, Curtis absent) approving TTM 18879 subject to all City of Palm Springs Development recommendations. ITEMS FOR RESTUDY The following items were removed from the Planning Commission agenda pending restudy. Application will be rescheduled for hearing only after revised submittals have been processed. CASE 3.238. Application by L. WELLS for A. Dishner for architectural approval of final landscape plans for single-family hillside residence on Leonard Road, south of Via Olivera, R-1-13 Zone, Section 3. • Restudy noting the following: July 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 1. That a gulley be introduced on the street frontage to intercept water at the property line. 2. That an additional olive tree be added on the street elevation as noted on the plan. 3. That the same layout for the retaining wall shown on the prelimi- nary plan be used. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA CASE 3.588 (Minor). Application by SECURITY PACIFIC BANK for architectural approval of extension of existing drive-up canopy and revision of parking area, C-1/R-2 Zone, Section 23. Continued to August 10 at the app' icant's request. COMMISSION REPORTS, REQUESTS AND DISCUSSION Field trip for TTM 18087-Revised. Field trip will be on Wednesday, August 3, 5:30 p.m. Commissioners to meet on the east side of the bridge. • - August 10, Planning Commission meeting. Planning Director stated that there are two new public hearings beginning at 1:30 p.m. and there may be a delay of an hour before beginning the DeBartolo hearing at 6:30 p.m. (Case 5.0275-PD-147). ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Vice-Chairman adjourned the meeting at 5:30 p.m. PLANN N DIRTCR MDR/mi WP