Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/08/10 - MINUTES (2) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall • August _O, 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 2 Hugh Curtis X 2 1 Hugh Kaptur X 3 0 Peter Koetting X 3 0 Don Lawrence X 3 0 Paul Madsen - 2 1 Sharon Apfelbaum X 2 0 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Vicki Nelson, Economic Development Coordinator John Terell , Housing & Redevelopment Specialist Dave Forcucci, Zoning Enforcement Officer Douglas R. Evans, Planner III Robert Green, Planner II Diana Ericksen, Community Development Coordinator • Mary Isenberg, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - August 8, 1983 James Cioffi , Chairman Absent: Peter Koetting, Hugh Curtis Earl Neel Chris Mills Michael Buccino Sharon Apfelbaum (Alternate) William Johnson (Alternate) Vice-Chairman called the meeting to orier at 1:30 p.m. There were no Tribal Council comments. (The Tribal Council will not meet in August.) M/S/C (Lawrence/Apfelbaum; Service/Madsen absent) approving the minutes of July 27 as submitted. Planning Director stated that TTM 18a87 would not expire for another year and that Planning Commission action to recommend a time extension at the July 13 meeting was unnecessary. Assistant City Attorney stated that the motion was of no force and effect. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE iChairman was absent: Vice Chairman presided. Vice-Chairman stated that the DeBartolo project would be reviewed at 6:30 p.m. (Case 5.0275-PD-147) . Vice-Chairman noted that he would abstain on Cases 5.0279-GPA & 5.0264- CZ and Commissioner Lawrence would preside. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 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 designations as deemed appropriate for property located on Racquet Club Road between North Palm Canyon Drive/Zanjero Road, Section 3. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration, action for filing, and final approval . No comments received. ) Vice Chairman abstained; Commissioner Lawrence presided. Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and approve the General Plan Amendment change from • residential low 6 to general commercial in the Tramway area General Plan for the east side of North Palm Canyon Drive covering both sides of Racquet Club easterly to the east boundary of the existing shopping center on the south side of Racquet Club Road to a depth to include the Bigelow and the Spattaro property, and to include a planned development district in lieu of a change of zone as an implementation strategy. Planning Director stated that -he staff recommendation for a planned development district (PD) in-lieu of a change of zone was not adopted by the Commission in its tentative approval at the July 27 meeting and would not be part of the motion unless the Commission includes it; that the Assistant City Attorney, ii his report to the Commission, stated that the PD strategy was proba:ily not appropriate, does not represent zoning, and that in order to comply with State laws the zoning should be changed to a specific zone or the General Plan should not be amended. He stated that Planning staff feels that this approach is not appropriate and would create non-conformity, substandard conditions and could be challenged legally; that the PD could be adopted per staff recommendations. He cited instances in which a PD was approved in-lieu of a change of zone; stated that in this case the applicant is in opposition to the PD strategy; that the primary issue is strip zoning and the development of four or five small lots along Racquet Club Road; that one of the PD goals would be to merge the two lots with the eventual removal of the house; that the property adjacent to the north of the Bigelow and Spattaro properties would not be included and would • still be considered R-G-A (6) ; that different property would then abut commercial , and was the reason for the zone change being recommended for denial by the Planning Commission originally but that the Council felt the situation was unique and referred the case back to the Commission with a commercial zoning recommendation. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 CASE 5.0279-GPA. (Cont'd. ) • Discussion followed on the possibility of a zone change area on Racquet Club Road to allow commercial under a PD similar to zoning on Tahquitz- McCallum Way to allow offices. Planning Director stated that the R-2 zoning on Tahquitz-McCallum Way allows "professional" uses on a major thoroughfare but that commercial uses in an R-G-A(6) Zone as in the subject case do not seem applicable; and that a commercial use of a dwelling may occur which is not desirable although staff is aware of two houses in the City which have commercial uses in them. Commissioner Kaptur stated that if the City allows commercial uses in the old non- historic homes along Racquet Club Road, the houses would remain there for a long time. Commissioner Apfelbaum suggested a study session to resolve the differences between Planning staff and Assistant City Attorney recommendations. Assistant City Attorney explained that the ordinance requires that to establish a PD Zone, the applicant must have proposed a specific use of the property with a development plan before the Commission can consider a PD Zoning; that if a zone change were adopted, it does not preclude a PD later when a development plan is submitted; and that if the Commission desires, the area can be designated General Commercial at the time a PD plan is submitted. He stated that proper procedure would be to delay amendment of the General Plan until the applicant has submitted a plan and then change the General Plan and zoning simultaneously. • Planning Director stated that a concern of the Assistant City Attorney and the applicant's attorney is that the applicant would have nothing concrete such as a "commercial" designation on the property; that as a compromise, he suggested to the Assistant City Attorney that the PD be modified slightly so that it did not rely on the specific site plan but relied on C-1 Zoning for uses and development standards, and requiring merging of the lots and the removal of the house prior to any commercial uses taking place on the property; that the plan would then be processed as an architectural approval application with no further hearings required; that the PO would be on the property without a plan with specific uses being C-1 but that the City Attorney was not in favor of that proposal although staff felt there would be some land use and design control (although not absolute control). He stated that the PD in-lieu of a change of zone is legal zoning if it is implemented, and final development plans initiate a PD being placed on the zoning map and is a way to achieve orderly development of the area. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open. Mrs. D. Bigelow, Racquet Club Road, the applicant, stated that she would not raze her house unless the City wanted to buy it; that the zone change is costing her time and money; that the house is historic in that one early mayor of Palm Springs and the first surveyor formerly lived in it; that she had a specific plan to use the house for a commercial property until the property is redeveloped; that if the Commission does not approve the zone change, the issue will be taken to the Council • and/or the courts if necessary; that the City should compensate the property owners for its poor pllanning in allowing the shopping center; and that she would fight to the end, and requested that a decision be made. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 CASE 5.0279-GPA. (Cont'd.) • Mrs. C. Spattaro, adjacent property owner, stated that her property has been ruined by the shopping center; that she had been told to raze it; that she dedicated frontage property under threat of condemnation; that an explanation was needed; that she wants her property zoned commercial but not torn down to do it. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Commissioner Kaptur stated that he had sympathy for the applicant and that the Commission was willing to allow commercial uses on the property. Mrs. Bigelow stated that it would be at her expense, and that she would have no place to live. Commissioner Kaptur stated that the value of the property would be increased but that the "applican is requesting too much from the City" and that the buildings should be removed prior to commercial occupancy. Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that there are many issues which require resolution and the ramifications are far reaching. In response to a question by Commissioner Curtis, Planning Director stated that the motion should be to amend the General Plan to include addition of a "General/Commercial" category to the Tramway General Plan as outlined by staff, order the filing of a Negative Declaration. He stated that as tentatively approved on July 27, the implementation • strategy suggested by staff was not included; that mitigative measures for noise and land use require an alternative mitigation if the implementation strategy is not approved; and that action on Case 5.0264- CZ depends on the action on the General Plan amendment. M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur; Koetting abstained; Lawrence dissented; Service/Madsen absent) approving inclusion of a "General/Commercial Land Use" category in the Tramway Area General Plan, approving an implementation strategy to include a PD in-lieu of a change of zone, per staff recommendations, and ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration, with the following findings: (See Attachment "A") In answer to a question by Commissioner Lawrence, Planning Director stated that the action was not in agreement with the Assistant City Attorney's opinion. Further discussion followed on clarification of the motion and its ramifications. Planning Director stated that the homes could be used as residences on a non-conforming basis for ten years but that time extensions could be granted by the Commission. Discussion continued on applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Planning Director stated that a residence can be made to conform as a building depending on such -actors as occupancy, use, and fire protection. • Discussion continued on the u e of the residence and review of the action of July 27. Planning Director stated that the residence would not be razed but could convert to commercial after code revisions. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 • 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 as the Commission deems appropriate for property on Racquet Club Road between North Palm Canyon Drive/Zinjero Road, R-G-A(6) Zone, Section 3. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration, action for filing and final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission file a Negative Declaration and approve a planred development district in-lieu of a change of zone for Case 5.0264. (The action would be consistent with General Plan Amendment 5.0279. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open. Mrs. D. Bigelow, the applicant, stated that she had owned her home for ten years and is now surrounded by shopping centers; that she had dedicated 35 feet of her property frontage to the City after assurance by the City Council that her property would be rezoned to commercial ; that the front door of her home will be within ten feet of the street after widening; and that the only viable use for the property is commercial . There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. • M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur; Koetting abstained; Lawrence dissented; Service absent) approving the establishment of a PD in-lieu of a change of zone and the filing of a Negative Declaration in conjunction with Case 5.0264. (See Attachment "A") Commissioner Curtis questioned Commissioner Lawrence on the reason for his dissension. Commissioner Lawrence stated that he felt the house was impacted by shopping centers which have created a hardship for the applicant and that the property is a natural ore for commercial use. In answer to question by Commissioner Kaptur, Planning Director stated that the action was consistent with action on Case 5.0279-GPA. Assistant City Attorney stated that there was no disagreement between himself and staff, but a difference in interpretation of the law. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 CASE 5.0272-ZTA. Initiation by the C[TY 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. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration, action for filing, and final appr)val . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and approve Case 5.0272-ZTA. Planning Director stated that the Assistant City Attorney felt that the land use permit process was affected by State law on the conditional use permit process and subject to CUP noticing procedures; that the land use permit has been rewritten to elininate the ability to deny outright any uses in the zone but retained the ability to require conditions and allows the applicant to appeal conditions to the Planning Commission; that zoning changes in the C-B-D were not discussed at the July 27 meeting; and reviewed the DDAC' and staff recommendations for the permitted uses and new uses in the C-B-D Zone and the present and prohibited uses for the proposed CUP. Discussion followed on outside card rack display. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that enforcement is a problem. Discussion continued on the type of motion. Planning Director stated that there could be two actions: one on the C-B-D Zone; and one on the • land use permit process. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. Discussion followed on whether cr not to continue the case for further review. Vice-Chairman suggested that the land use permit be acted upon with the C-B-D use changes continued to a study session. He stated that the appeal fee should be deleted; that the large application fee is inappropriate; and that the procedure for the land use permit should be completed on a timeliness basis. M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Service & Madsen absent) approving the land use permit portion of Zoning Text Amendment 5.0272. M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Service & Madsen absent) continuing the C-B-D use changes portion of the Zoning Text Amendment to the September 28 meeting with review at the September 21 study session with the DDAC. • August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 CASE 5.0284-ZTA. Initiation by the CITE OF PALM SPRINGS for amendment to the • Zoning Text to allow recycling collection centers in various zones under land use permit. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration, action for filing, and final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and approve :ase 5.0284 per staff recommendations. Planning Director stated that recycling collection centers would be allowed in commercial zones except for the C-B-D and C-1-AA Zones under a land use permit process, and that a land use permit may be denied in a C-1 Zone where there is insuffizient setback but could be conditioned for screening if necessary; and that the collection centers would be allowed on developed commercial p^operty, not vacant land. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Kaptur/Apfelbaum; Service & Madsen absent) approving Case 5.0284- ZTA per staff recommendation. * * k CASE 5.0276-PD-148. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for E. Kaufer for a • planned development district to allow an offsite parking lot to serve an existing office complex on the northeast corner of Mel Avenue/North Indian Avenue (Las Hadas), R-3 Zone, Section 10. (Environmental assessment and tentative approval . ) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration and tentatively approve Case 5.0276-PD-148. Discussion ensued on the AAC recommendations. Planning Director stated that the plans are sufficient for review as a final planned development district (PD) and that tentative approval could be given for a final PD. Planner II reviewed the project on the display board and stated that heavy traffic is a problem on Irdian Avenue; that the proposed parking lot requires pedestrian to walk across Indian Avenue to enter the Las Hadas complex; and that the Traffic Engineer is not in favor of a crosswalk because of the heavy traffic flow. Planning Director stated that the Traffic Engineer feels that crosswalks are dangerous unless signalized. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open. D. Christian, 1000 S. Palm Canyon Drive, the applicant, stated that people have been requesting medical office space in the building because of its proximity to the hospital ; that it has adequate parking • presently; that the main reason for the parking lot request is for compliance with the ordinance; that the lot will allow for the remainder of the building to be used for medical offices; and that the parking lot will be controlled if the primary lot is used for employee parking. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 CASE 5.0276-PD-148. (Cont'd. ) • Planning Director stated that an alternative to the proposed lot would be to review a PD application for the existing parking; that the in-lieu parking ordinance allows only six spaces to be purchased and the purpose of the in-lieu is as a vehicle for a parking structure; and that the property could be tied together with a covenant for parking to be provided as necessary within a specified length of time. Mr. Christian stated that he did not know of plans to expand Las Hadas to the north; that the complex should be reviewed for parking within two years when the tenant occupancy is stable; that if a parking problem arises, the complex itself would be jeopardized; and that present parking is ample. Planner II stated that the complex was approved as a mixed use without a specific breakdown of uses. Planning Director stated that it is a non- medical office use by parking standards and would lack 40 parking spaces if the building use were 16,000 sq. ft. of medical . Vice-Chairman suggested that a firm parking requirement be determined. Discussion followed on the current tenant use and parking requirements for the mixed use facility. M/S/C (Lawrence/Kaptur; Service & Madsen absent) continuing the case to the August 24 meeting for staff o develop parking requirements and for • a legal covenant and conditions to insure that the proposed lot remained a part of the Las Hadas complex. CASE 5.0277-PD-149. Application by J. DAMERON for St. Theresa's Catholic Church for a planned development to construct a multi-purpose building addition to an existing church complex at 2800 E. Ramon Road between Compadre Road/Farrell Drive, R-1-A Zone, Section 13. (Environmental assessment and tentative approval . ) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration and tentatively approve Case 5.0277-PD-149 in concept with a restudy of the arciitecture. Planner II presented the project Dn the display board. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open. J. Dameron, the architect, stated that he was in favor of the project and would answer questions. • I August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 CASE 5.0277-PD-149. (Cont'd. ) Discussion followed with the architect on the concept and design of the project. Vice-Chairman stated that the conditions for the project are mandated and suggested that the applicant state any problems he has. In response to questions, Planner II stated that the Fire Department will finalize conditions when detailed plans are submitted. The applicant stated that because of the poor financial status of the church, the church building is being donated and requested relief from some of the improvements. Further discussion followed. Vice-Chairman stated that the improvements probably will not be waived, and that concerns should be discussed with staff. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Discussion ensued on the type of action. Consensus was that a phasing and plot plan should be submitted based on the redesign of the building (which had been recommended for restudy by the AAC) . M/S/C (Curtis/Apfelbaum; Service & Madsen absent) ordering the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration, a restudy of the architecture, and continuation of the case to the August 24 meeting. 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 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 Zones, Section 23. Discussion ensued on the advisability of having a restudy of the project since there were so many revisions in the AAC recommendation. Planning Director stated that there are usually no problems with this type of application and that in this case there would be no increased traffic impact on the adjacent easterly neighborhood. M/S/C (Kaptur/Apfelbaum; Service & Madsen absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the two northerly parking spaces be converted to planters with appropriate landscapinc. 2. That the wall adjoining the residential property to the south be increased to four feet, six inches in height with materials to match the existing materials. 3. That all recommendations oflthe Development Committee be met. • 4. That the remaining walls and landscaping be repaired and maintained. 5. That the landscape plans be restudied. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMM=SSION MINUTES Page 10 S. Dankmier the architect representing the applicant, objected to • several recommendations of the Development Committee. He stated that in discussion with staff, he was told that most of the items were existing conditions and could remain. Vice-Chairman explained that the conditions were basic Zoning Ordinance requirements. Commissioner Kaptur stated that :he applicant can resolve problems with staff and appeal to the Commission if necessary, but that he did not feel that the requirements were unreasonable. Mr. Dankmier noted that the applicants were surprised by the requirements and questioned their necessity. CASE 5.0218-CUP. Application by C. G. DUNHAM for architectural approval of working drawings for a condominium complex on Mesquite Avenue between Cerritos Road/Sunrise Way, R-1-C and W-R-1-C Zones (I.L. ), Section 24 (Ref. TTM 11559) . M/S/C (Kaptur/Lawrence; Curtis dissented; Service & Madsen absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the louvers in the front elevation of "Building I" be • retained per note on the plan. 2. That a second column be used to support patio covers in-lieu of the stucco wall . * * k 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. 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, action for filing and final approval . No comments received. ) Discussion ensued on the roadway system over the knoll . Planning • Director stated that after a field trip, there were Commission concerns relative to cut and fill requirements; that the applicant has presented an alignment which shows much cut and fill ; that lots are subject to architectural approval ; and that the same number of lots can be developed as were originally proposed. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 TTM 18087-Revised. (Cont'd. ) F. Razzar, 1350 S. Farrell Drive, representing Andreas Hills, stated that he did not think that the same number of lots were developable; that one lot would be lost; that the applicant would not quarrel with staff recommendations; that it was easier to circumvent the knoll; that the flag lot is an existing condition on the hill and is not above the height restriction on the previous map; and that the lot should be developed and will not scar the hillside. Vice-Chairman stated that the roadway configuration was illustrated on the rendering but that there was no configuration of the lot; and that the Commission must review the new configuration or the Council will not approve the map. Mr. Razzar stated that the size of the flag lot will determine whether or not it will be eliminated. Commissioner Kaptur suggested that in the motion, it be stated that there should be no lots or grading on the hillsides and that the Planning Commission can resolve grading problems when the lots are submitted for development. Discussion followed on the flag lot. Commissioner Kaptur stated to the applicant that only street grading should be allowed and that to obtain approval of a lot, grading must be done sensitively. Further discussion followed. Planning Director stated that he coul not • see access to the flag lot. Commissioner Kaptur stated that perhaps the lot should be held until it is reviewed in the field. M/S/C (Kaptur/Lawrence; Service & Madsen absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and tentatively approving TTM 18087 subject to recommendations of the Development Committee with the following added conditions and continuing the Map to the August 24 meeting: 1. That no grading be done until the lots are reviewed by the Commission when submitted for development. 2. That the revised tentative map be returned to the Commission for review of the lot plan based on the revised road plan. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS • M/S/C (Kaptur/Apfelbaum; Servi --e & Madsen absent) approving the following time extensions: TIME EXTENSION - TTM 16581. Request by MAINIERO, SMITH for Desert Dorado for a 12-month time extension for a subdivision to allow construction of single and multi-family residences on Racquet Club Road, 0-5 and N-0-5 Zones (I.L. ), Section 2. Approved subject to all original conditions of approval . New expiration date: October 15, 1984. TIME EXTENSION - TTM 17502 (Ref. Case 5.0107-CUP. Request by KWL ASSOCIATES for E. Morris for a 12-month time extension for a subdivision to allow construction of an office complex/professional condominium units on Tahquitz-McCallum Way between Sunset Way/Cerritos Drive, R-2 Zone, Section 13. Approved subject to all original conditions of approval . New expiration date: July 14, 1984. TIME EXTENSION - TPM 18051. Request by HALLMARK ENGINEERING for G. Burk for a 12-month time extension for a combination of two lots to create a single lot for tennis court on Bogert Trail , R-1-B Zone (I.L. ), Section 35. Approved subject to all original conditions of approval . New expiration • date: November 18, 1984. TIME EXTENSION - CASE 5.0053-CUP. Request by J. WHITE & L. HELD for a 12- month time extension for a CUP o construct 31, one-story condominiums on the northeast corner of E1 Cielo/Sonora Roads, R-1-C & W-R-1-C Zones, Section 19. Planning Director stated that the tract map was approved and recorded and the intent is to reactivate the CUP. He stated that there would be no grading in the flood plain. M/S/C (Curtis, Kaptur; Service g Madsen absent) approving a 12 month time extension subject to all original conditions of approval . ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Cont'd. ) CASE 3.573. Application by BENEFICIAL STANDARD PROPERTIES for architectural approval of revised plans for entry for the Palm Springs Mall on Tahquitz-McCallum Way between Farrell Drive/Baristo Road, C-S-C Zone, Section 13. Planning Director stated that tlhe Mall applicants will not raise the Walker Scott fascia element; havelowered the height of the tower to 35 • feet; and that the AAC recommended restudy of the tower and the entrance. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Service & Madsen absent) for a restudy of the entry element. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 CASE 3.592. Application by R. RICCIO for architectural approval of single family residence on West Dogwood Drive off Golden Rod Lane, R-1 Zone, Section 35. M/S/C (Kaptur/Apfelbaum; Service & Madsen absent) for a restudy. CASE 3.607 (Minor) . Application by EL MORO VILLA HOTEL for architectural approval of solar system additioi to roof at 350 E. Palm Canyon Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 23. Planning Director stated that the applicant has decided to construct the solar collector at 4 feet per staff approval and will not require Commission review. Removed from the agenda at the applicant's request. CASE 3.612 (Minor) . Application by NUTRI-JUICY for awning and sign for juice bar in Copper Square, 266 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Service & Madsen absent) for a restudy with • consideration of a box design or banner and increasing the width of the awning. A sign design is to be submitted with the awning detail . 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. Motion was made by Curtis, seconded by Apfelbaum, (Service & Madsen absent) and unanimously carried 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 3.520. FRIEDMAN VENTURES for architectural approval of revised site plan to replace 24, one-bedroom units with 24, two bedroom units for condominium project on Amado Road between Avenida Caballeros/Sunrise Way, R-4 Zone (I.L. ) , Section 14. Conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That the southesterly unit be relocated a minimum of six feet to the north. • August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 CASE 5.0032-PD-78 (Ref. Tract 10527) . ERVIN ENGINEERING for Canyon Heights • for architectural approval of minor site plan revision for Phase I of 93-unit condominium project on S. Palm Canyon Drive, W-R-2 Zone (I.L. ) , Section 34. Condition: That all recommendations of the Development Committe be met. TPM 18352. M. BUCCINO for R. Ellis for architectural approval of landscape plans for subdivision on Crossley Road, M-1 Zone ( I.L. ) , Section 20. Conditions: 1. That permanent headers be used. 2. That Eucalyptus Sideroxylon be substituted for Eucalyptus Ficifolia. 3. That the slump block wall on the northeastern boundary of the site be returned approximately 100 feet. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE The Planning Commission adjourned from 5:45 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. • CASE 5.0275-PD-147. Application by E. J. DeBARTOLO CORPORATION & DESERT FASHION PLAZA for comments on the draft EIR 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 in a block north of the existing Desert Fashion Plaza to include the closure of Andreas Road, the development of additional retail space, parking facilities, and a development of a 207-room hotel , Section 15. Recommendation: That the Planning Commission continue the case to September for review of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) . Vice-Chairman thanked the audience for attending and stated that the project schedule will be addressed during the course of the meeting. Planning Director reviewed the history of the project and stated that comments had been received primarily regarding the traffic impact; that several traffic studies had been completed; that the areas of concern can be resolved; that there will be impacts during the construction phase; that notices were sent to the businessmen downtown but many notices had been returned; that there has been concern with the image of the downtown; that most people feel that the project is a positive step; and that the AAC reviewed the project on August 8 and had extensive concerns about building design and character in relation to the "charm" • and "village character" of the City, and discussed the display model, site line studies, site plans, and massing concepts. He stated that the primary concern was the corner of Amado and South Palm Canyon Drive, and that the ramp situation off Palm Canyon was not compatible for pedestrians. He described the applicant's solution to the massing of the building and the visibility toward the mountains, the parking deck August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 CASE 5.0275-PD-147. (Cont'd. ) . and underground parking facilities, screening on Belardo Road, the hotel recreation and outdoor area, relationship with the Desert Museum, perimeter entrances, height of the building, driveway areas and vehicular entrances, landscaping, and parking lot control. He stated that the basic environmental impacts can be analyzed and assessed at the present time and that a representative from BCL who wrote the impact report was present. Vice-Chairman declared the hearing open and stated that responses to the draft EIR would be taken from the audience. M. Krupp, Community Systems Assoc. representing the DeBartolo Corp. , discussed revisions in response to staff and community concerns as follows: Closure of Andreas: The viability of the project, as well as the character of the downtown, depends on the closure and is based upon the coordination of the hotel with the existing mall and the Museum. Entrance Signing: Adequate signing will be provided for cars to be directed off Palm Canyon Drive. Traffic: Studies have been prepared for traffic movement layout and the parking validation program. The Tahquitz entrance is now parallel to North Belardo to facilitate a traffic signal in the future. • Hotel : Height within the zoning limits. Stairstepping and open areas alleviate mass. Pedestrian Scale and Character: Image is consistent with the community with pedestrian oriented desert village type of architecture and materials. Airiness of the Mall : Skylights will allow light to the Mall and maintain the climatic control and visibility of the mountains. Increased Parking: Parking conforms with City parking standards. Use will be incorporated with the merchants of the center and the downtown stores and will aid destination oriented people in using the entire downtown. Preservation of the Green Belt Behind the Mall : Unique environment merging the Museum and Mall with a sculpture garden green area as a focal point and which will be used for community activities. Transitional Character of the Hotel : Integrated retail and transitional space between the hotel and the mall as part of an atrium environment which will allow success for the hotel and the merchants. EIR Comments: Comments will be prepared prior to the August 31 • deadline. In response to questions from Vice-Chairman, Mr. Krupp stated that the most significant element provided by the project will be approximately 400 jobs and $200,000 in retail sales tax and $300,000 in bed tax to the City annually. He stated that the project will be a catalyst for more August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 16 CASE 5.0275-PD-147. (Cont'd. ) development improvement, cultural activites, and sales activity in the downtown area and will be a focal point for downtown growth and activity. Mrs. W. Hird, 2355 Brentwood, spoke in favor of the project stating that she had expressed support before the joint study session with the Council and DDAC; that the Chamber of Commerce was in favor of the project and was interested in keeping the unique vitality of the City since a stagnation of the downtown area makes it difficult to attract new investors; that the project gives the necessary opportunity for revitalization; that advantage must be taken of the opportunity provided; and that the Chamber finds that advantages of the project far outweigh the closure of Andreas Road. D. Brown, Vice-President of the Chamber of Commerce, expressed the Chamber's support and stated that the EIR should also represent "Economic Impact Report" since it will be generating a half-million dollars in sales and TOT tax and in jobs and opportunities for investment; that prospective merchants are excited about the project and feel that Palm Springs is finally being revitalized; that some of the members may be impacted by relocation but feel advantages outweigh the inconvenience; that environmental problems can be resolved during construction by communication; that there was no opposition to the height of the hotel; and that he had done a sightline study that had • shown that the mountains were visible from both Palm Canyon Drive and Indian Avenue. H. Dally, owner of the Sheraton Oasis, expressed support for the project and stated that it will revitalize the downtown. N. Hercules, 2443 Sierra Madre, owner of a store in the Desert Fashion Plaza, expressed support and stated that the project will bring in new businesses to the downtown and save Palm Springs from the fate of other cities; that the DeBartolo Corp. has a successful record and will retain the character of the City; that at one time he was concerned about his business being affected by the expansion but had decided to stay in his present location during the construction phase. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Discussion followed on review of the architectural features of the project. Vice-Chairman stated that he would like to have the design team and the applicant discuss the features first. Discussion ensued on traffic circulation on the Museum side of the project. Mr. Krupp stated that the parking deck had been lowered to the street level for openness and that another department store could be in the back on the second floor with a parking area developed so that visibility to the Museum would not be affected. He explained the configuration of the landscape area between the Museum and the shopping • center, entrance points, and loading area. He stated that the loading area would be screened by a wall and landscaping; that he did not know why Museum Drive was changed to Fashion Plaza Drive, but that it will probably become Fashion Plaza/Museum Road; and that the Museum can be seen from the Mall exit. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 17 CASE 5.0275-PD-147. (Cont'd. ) • Planning Director stated that relative to Museum visibility, the City is developing a more graphic Palm Springs type of signing including Desert Museum signing. Mr. Krupp stated that the DeBartolo Corp. has been discussing the project with the Museum representative and that there will be a kiosk type of system on Palm Canyon Drive listing City and Museum activities and the location of the Museum. Vice-Chairman asked staff to investigate the number of fire hydrants necessary to service the project. Mr. Krupp stated that during the construction phase, utilities will be available to the existing mall merchants. In reply to a question by Commissioner Curtis, Mr. Krupp stated that the design team is addressing concerns of the AAC at the present time; that these concerns were pedestrian scale, village atmosphere, and use and compatibility of the materials; that the design team's efforts will be to insure that the center is a complimentary structure to the community; and that at the September 14 meeting, detailed elevations, design theme, and concept will be presented. Planning Director stated that unless the Commission wished to review AAC Minutes, the item should be continued to the September 14 meeting. • Vice-Chairman reopened the hearing. J. Kramer, 230 W. Arenas, voiced concern over the traffic flow with the closure of Andreas since there have been unsuccessful projects after road closures. Mr. Krupp stated that the proposed project is different since although Andreas will be closed, traffic will still be permitted around the Museum area; that the project will not be economically viable if Andreas remains open; and that studies show that the closure of Andreas will have very little impact on traffic movement exiting on Palm Canyon Drive. Vice-Chairman stated that the closure was of a secondary thoroughfare, not a major boulevard as has happened in some cities. Mr. Krupp noted that a dialogue had been opened with the O'Donnell golf course representatives to review use of the parking facilities in conjunction with the shopping center, improvements around the perimeter of the course, and access to O'Donnell , and that any concerns of the O'Donnell representatives will be mitigated. Vice-Chairman stated that the five people who spoke in the public hearing expressed interesting points and that the project will be a • great asset to the community and the begining of a very good Redevelopment Agency program for the City. August 10, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 18 CASE 5.0275-PD-147. (Cont'd. ) Planning Director stated that staff has a revised tentative schedule for the DeBartolo project which can be obtained at the Redevelopment Agency office and staff would be available at the close of the meeting to answer questions. M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Service & Madsen absent) continuing the case to the September 14 meeting for review of the final EIR. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Vice-Chairman adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m. d��ty l�1G% PLANNING D�CTOR MDR/mi • • WP/PC MIN ATTACHMENT "A" • Case 5.0279-GPA FINDINGS 1 . That o new category of "General Commercial " would allow the orderly development of commercial facilities in the Tramway area of the City. 2. That an amendment to the Tramway Area General Plan to "General Com- mercial" land use for the area at the intersection of North Palm Canyon Drive and Indian Avenue is appropriate at this time to re- flect existing and developing land uses on the east side of Palm Canyon Drive and to include additional developed and undeveloped parcels lying northerly and easterly of existing and developing commercial uses along Racquet Club Road. 3. That non-conforming uses and substandard size lots will result if a change of zone to C-1 is the strategy employed to implement the General Plan. 4. That the planned development district technique can ensure the or- derly development of the General Plan in regard to the conversion of the non-commercial properties involved to commercial uses. • Case 5.0264-CZ FINDINGS 1 . That the proposed change of zone from R-G-A (6) to C-1 is in con- formity with the General Plan map but not in conformity with the General Plan report, specifically the implementation strategy which specifies that the conversion of the properties in question to com- mercial uses shall be by a planned development district in lieu of a change of zone. 2. That the subject properties are suitable for the commercial uses permitted in the C-1 Zone if properly developed, if the two sub- standard parcels in question are combined into one lot which would meet "General Commercial" zoning standards, and if the non-conform- ing use and building are appropriately altered. 3. That the proposed change of zone is not necessary and proper at this time and is likely to hinder the orderly development of appro- priate commercial facilities envisioned by the General Plan text and map changes as set forth in Case 5.0279-GPA for this property. • August 10, 1983