Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/09/14 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall September 14, 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 X 3 2 Hugh Curtis X 4 1 Hugh Kaptur - 3 2 Peter Koetting X 5 0 Don Lawrence X 5 0 Paul Madsen X 4 1 Sharon Apfelbaum X 4 0 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Diana Ericksen, Community Development Coordinator Douglas R. Evans, Planner III Mary Isenberg, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - September 12, 1983 James Cioffi, Chairman Absent: Peter Koetting Earl Neel Chris Mills Michael Buccino Hugh Curtis William Johnson (Alternate) Sharon Apfelbaum Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. MSC (Lawrence/Madsen; Kaptur absent) approving minutes of the August 10 and 24 meetings subject to further delineation of conditions for Case 5.0276-PD-148, page 4 of August 24 Minutes. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 ADMINISTRATION ACTION • Chairman commended (with unanimous consent of the Commission; Kaptur absent) by resolution, former Commissioner Darel Harris and former AAC members David Hamilton and Larry Lapham for their years of service to the community. Laminated plaques of the resolutions and commission votes will be prepared for future presentation to the former City officials. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS CASE 5.0275-PD-147. Application by E. J. DeBARTOLO/DESERT FASHION PLAZA for review of the final EIR and preliminary plans 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 207-room hotel , Section 15. (Certification of EIR and approval of preliminary planned development district.) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission continue the case to the September 28 meeting. • Planning Director stated that preliminary planned development district plans will not be included in the September 28 meeting and are being separately noticed for the October 12 meeting; that the September 28 meeting has been renoticed for review of the final EIR; that Tribal Council and other comments with responses will be included in the final document; that continuation will not affect the processing schedule for the project; that no new plans have been submitted in response to AAC subcommittee concerns; that the architecture for the project will be reviewed October 10 by the AAC and October 12 by the Planning Commis- sion; that CalTrans concerns relative to the driveway off Palm Canyon Drive have been alleviated; and that the BCL report indicates that 70 vehicles will use the driveway system per hour on Palm Canyon Drive. Chairman declared the hearing open. J. Crocker, 330 W. Andreas, stated that he wished to ask questions of the developer but when told that there was no representative at the meeting, stated that he would defer comments. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Madsen/Lawrence; Kaptur absent) that the case be continued to the September 28 meeting for review of the final EIR. Tribal Council comments: "The Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this project has been received by the Tribal Office. In discussions with Planning Staff, it was noted that this item is recommended for a two-week continuance to permit public notification. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 The following preliminary comments are submitted regarding this project. • a. The EIR notes that this project may result in the exposure of archaeological and historical resources. The Tribal Council strongly recommends that the development of this property be subject to the mitigating measure on page 44 of the EIR; that is, that a qualified archaeologist be present during the excavation work. If any potentially significant resources are uncovered during excavation, work will be halted in that area of the site, and make appropriate mitigation recommendations. The Agua Caliente Tribal Council or its appointed representative should be consulted regarding all such finds. Further, the Tribal Council should approve the selection of the individual archaeologist employed to perform this task. The Tribal Council can provide a list of those archaeologists it considers qualified to do this work. b. The Tribal Council remains concerned about the circulation impacts caused by the proposed closure of Andreas Road in view of the present traffic congestion and parking deficiencies in the downtown area. All possible alternatives to the closing of Andreas Road should have been addressed in the EIR. C. The quantity of parking spaces provided in the proposed develop- ment appears to be deficient. On page 59 of the EIR it is noted • that City Ordinance requires 1,443 spaces whereas the plan shows only 1,315 spaces. This is a deficiency of 128 spaces. The EIR also indicates a shortage of parking spaces for exclusive use by the proposed hotel . Given the present parking difficulties in the downtown area, some mitigation should be imposed to correct this shortage. CASE 5.0276-PD-148. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOC. 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. (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 PO-148 subject to conditions. Planning Director stated that conditions of approval would include addendum conditions as follows: That there be 7,572 sq. ft. of medical office use; 7,800 sq. ft. of non-medical office use; and 728 sq. ft. of retail use in the building and that a covenant be submitted for approval of the City Attorney to bind the properties (with new public hearings in two years to determine whether or not the parking lot should be . constructed) , and that Indian Avenue improvements be installed upon approval of final development plans by the City Council . Chairman declared the hearing open. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 D. Christian, 1000 S. Palm Canyon, indicated that he was present to • answer questions. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that the covenant had not been prepared and would be part of the final development plans unless Commission requested that it be reviewed before final plans are submitted. Mr. Christian stated that final development plans would be submitted in the very near future. M/S/C (Koetting/Apfelbaum; Curtis/Madsen abstained; Kaptur absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and approving PD-148 with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed parking lot in the subject location is properly a use for which a planned development district is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the use is in harmony with the various elements and objec- tives of the General Plan and as conditioned is not detrimental to existing uses or permitted uses in the same zone and that the site is adequate to accommodate the use and all yards and setbacks . necessary to adjust the use to permitted and future uses in the neighborhood. 3. That the site for the proposed use relates ( in terms of vehicular movement) to streets and highways properly designed and improved to accommodate the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use. CONDITIONS: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That final plans, including C.C. & R. 's be submitted within 60 days of Council approval of the preliminary district and street construction begun within 60 days of Council approval of final development plans. 3. That a covenant be submitted for approval of the City Attorney which legally binds the ancillary parking lot delineated in appli- cation 5.0276-PD-148 to the primary Las Nadas property and insures that the properties cannot be sold separately. 4. That improvements to Indian Avenue be constructed upon approval of final development plans. 5. That the maximum square footage by use be as follows: 5,572 sq. • ft. in medical office use; 7,800 sq. ft. of non-medical office use; and at least 728 sq. ft. of retail use. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 CASE 5.0277-PD-149. Application by J. DAMERON for St. Theresa's Catholic • Church for a planned development district including revised exterior elevations for 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. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration, action for filing, and final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Commission approve PD-149 subject to condi- tions. Chairman declared the hearing open. J. Dameron, the architect, indicated his presence to answer questions and explained the dark brown color element on the colored elevations as detailing of wood and metal ; and that stucco plaster and concrete block were the components of the other elements. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Commission complimented Mr. Dameron on his fine redesign of the project. M/S/C (Koetting/Madsen; Kaptur absent) approving PD-149 with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: • FINDINGS: 1. That a church including the multi-purpose recreation building on the subject site can be considered under a PD application (as specified in the ordinance) in an R-1-A Zone on a major thorough- fare. 2. That the use is necessary and desirable for the development of the community, and is in harmony with the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to permitted uses in the zone. 3. That the proposal site is adequate in size and shape to accommo- date appropriate yard, landscape, and features required to adjust the said use to existing and permitted uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site relates to streets and highways properly designed and improved (by the Engineering Division conditions) to accommo- date the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use. CONDITIONS: 1. That final development plans including expanded preliminary landscape plans be submitted. The plans shall address screening of the exposed chain-link fence along Compadre and Vaquero Roads. 2. That details of the renovation/reworking of the partially surfaced parking lot to the west of the site be supplied with final development plans. 3. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 4. That a comprehensive phasing plan be submitted as a portion of the • final development plans. 5. That future phases which comply with the Master Plan be approved under architectural approval procedures. CASE 5.0289-CUP. Application by EISNER-SMITH PLANNERS for Palm Canyon Assoc. for a conditional use permit to construct a 58-foot bell tower for a 270-room hotel on E. Palm Canyon Drive between Cherokee Way/Southridge Drive, C-2 Zone (I.L. ), Section 30. (This action is categorically exempt from environmental assessment, per CEQA guidelines. ) Recommendation: That the conditional use permit for the tower be approved subject to conditions. Planning Director stated that the case had been continued from the August 24 meeting for further staff review and the preparation of a staff report; that the applicant had met with nearby homeowners who expressed their concerns at a meeting at City Hall on September 7; that the design of the tower was reviewed in conjunction with the original review of the hotel; that the concern of the homeowners was of view blockage and that a precedent could be established. He showed on the • display board site line studies prepared by the applicant indicating that only one degree of view would be blocked from a distance; and stated that other projects with high-rise elements have been approved although not constructed at the present time. In response to a question by Commission, Planner III stated that he did not know the roof material of the tower. Chairman commented that if the element were a campanile the opening nearest the top would be a window and that the elevation shown is a false window painted purple. Planning Director stated that the "window" is a recess in the plaster only, and that there is a stained glass logo sign which is backlit at night on the tower; that the maximum zoning is 35 feet but the high-rise zoning allows 60 feet plus 15 feet addi- tionally for screening of mechanical equipment. Chairman declared the hearing open. M. Peroni, ESP, 477 South Palm Canyon Drive, the applicant, stated that the architecture of the tower integrates with the architecture of the building and is an appendage, not a useable structure, and is not precedent setting; that the applicant met with the nearby residents on September 7 and presented the plans to them, and the residents felt that the tower would be precedent setting; that the tower does not contain a bell; that the roof is tile; and that he was present to answer questions. • Chairman remarked that the plans show that the tower roof is copper. Mr. Peroni stated that the architect would have to be contacted about the roof material , and that the Granada Royale in Palm Desert is one of the chain but is not represented by ESP. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 D. Hodder, 168 Desert Lakes Drive, Seven Lakes, reaffirmed the statement • of S. Hall who spoke at the August 24 meeting in opposition to the project because of its excessive height. He stated that the residents made their opposition known to the applicant at the September 7 meeting; and in reply to Commissioner Koetting's question, that the residents oppose any blockage of the view with a structure exceeding 35 feet in height. A. Webb, 2145 Southridge, stated that the residents do not want the tower (which protrudes from the main structure) since it will block part of the view; that the residents are worried about their property values; that many of the residents do not return until October; and that the tower will not be hidden in the mass of the building from his vantage point. Planner III stated that Mr. Webb's residence is approximately 1,000 feet from the tower. Commissioner Koetting commented that the tower is narrow and will be lost in the building mass. Mr. Webb insisted that he could see the tower since he is able to see a stop sign in the vicinity from his living room. Mrs. J. Salvo, 2153 Southridge, stated that she opposed the tower for the same reasons as Mr. Webb, and had heard that there was an alternate plan; she requested that the tower be reduced to the height of the rest of the hotel . There was no rebuttal by the applicant. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Planning Directorer stated that at the September 7 meeting with the residents, the architect indicated that if the tower were denied, it would be necessary to redesign the tower within the height limit but no contingency plans have been designed. In reply to a Commission question, Planning Director stated that the El Mirador tower is 60 feet and is not a precedent since there are others that have been approved. Chairman stated that it was not the height that was his concern, but the fact that the tower is not a real tower but serves as a sign for the hotel ; and that the tower should not have a reflective dome. Planning Director stated that the tower would be treated to weather to a matte green, and that the tower could be redesigned to integrate with the building mass. Discussion followed on the function of the tower and whether or not the CUP should be approved in concept with the tower to be redesigned. • Commissioner Koetting stated that the tower was not unattractive but could be more functional ; that if the portal were open, it would be a haven for birds; that he would support it if it were unlighted so it would not obscure anyone's view; that the stained glass is attractive; that the copper would tarnish; and that the project needs the tower element. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 Commissioner Curtis stated that the tower height will not be a problem . since there are other higher elements on that side of the street; although viewing it from above is not particularly satisfying butthe tower is needed on the project although it should be redesigned. M/S (Curtis/Koetting; Kaptur absent) to continue the case to September 28 for a redesign of the tower element including a window element revision and revisions to the dome and the lighting. In reply to a question by Commissioner Koetting, Planning Director stated that the same result could be achieved by using the planned development district process for details and function. Consensus was that a substitute motion would be made. M/S/C (Curti s/Apfelbaum; Kaptur absent) approving Case 5.0289-CUP with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS: 1. That the tower at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the ordinance. That the proposal is necessary and desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the General Plan and is not • detrimental to existing or proposed uses in the zone in which it is located. 3. That site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use and all of the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, and other features required to adjust the use to those permitted or future uses on land in the neighborhood. 4. That the site for the proposal relates to streets and highways properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use. 5. That the structure has been designed by a licensed architect (an ordinance requirement). 6. That the parts of the structure which exceeds the height specified in the C-2 Zone are decorative only. 7. That the project is exempt from CEQA since it is a minor archi- tectural appendage. CONDITIONS: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That the tower be redesigned noting the following: that the • window detail be more realistic; that the tower be designed to resemble a functioning bell tower; that non-glare materials be used for the roof or if copper is used, that it be treated to tarnish rapidly; that the tower be more fully integrated with the design of the building mass. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 Tribal Council comments: • "After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council approves the conditional use permit subject to the findings proposed in the City staff report dated September 14, 1983. CASE 5.0288-CUP. Application by ANDE INVESTMENTS, INC. for a conditional use permit to allow incidental retail sales at 653 Commercial Road, east of Juanita Road, M-1-P Zone, Section 12. Recommendation: That the Commission approve CUP 5.0288 subject to conditions. Planner III stated that there is a circulation problem in the area since trucks from the City, UPS, and other businesses use the residential street; that a retail use will increase the traffic; that there was no way to restrict truck traffic unless the City had a designated truck route; but that voluntary compliance could be requested by the City. Commissioners Curtis and Apfelbaum stated that they had been contacted by residents concerning increased traffic and noise that would be generated by the proposed use. Discussion followed on the original approval of the industrial complex housing the businesses. Chairman stated that originally the Commission was told that it would be a high quality project with well maintained landscaping, but many problems have arisen. Planning Director stated that he had met with a landscape architect relative to Security Storage and that maintenance has been withheld until upwind development takes place; and that the complex has been a source of ongoing complaints by neighbors. Chairman declared the hearing open. K. Lyons, attorney, 801 Tahquitz-McCallum Way, stated that the applicant desires to sell donated clothing and other items on a daily basis and will repair the gates on the trash enclosure and maintain the landscape; and that it was important to note that the use would not be a noisy retail use but a thrift shop type of operation. Planning Director stated that there has been an annual auction for the Northwood Institute (the applicant) at the Gene Autry Hotel . September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 Mrs. P. Bell , 585 Juanita Drive, stated that she had been assured by a • former Councilmember that the project would be pleasing to the residents on Juanita but there have been constant problems relative to maintenance of landscaping for the project; that she had been told by a former City official that there would not be truck parking in the front but trucks are parked there every day; that one time there had been a blinking neon light on one of the businesses in the complex (since abated); that she had no opposition to the thrift shop. She presented a petition of property owners on Juanita against the proposal and corrected a misspelling of a property owner who had sent a telegram attached to the petition. She stated that although Security Storage has an address on Tamarisk, the entrance is on Juanita, and that much traffic on Juanita has resulted from the entrance location. J. Colevus, 625 Juanita, also expressed opposition to the project because of traffic increase and described the numbers and kinds of vehicles using Farrell, Alejo, Commercial and Juanita because of the industrial complex. He stated that if there is a traffic light con- structed on Alejo Road and Farrell Drive, even more trucks will use Juanita to avoid the signal; that there are 14 uses in the commercial complex and not 61 spaces available as indicated in the staff report; that he was concerned about a proposal for a school to be established at the old Bird location which would also increase traffic; and voiced opposition to staff Finding No. 2 stating he felt that the use was not in harmony with the General Plan and is not necessary nor desirable. When questioned by Commissioner Apfelbaum relative to making Juanita a • deadend street, Mr. Colevus stated that it would be the answer to the problems of the residents; and that the location is not a good one for a store of any kind since there is no exposure nor access. P. Bell, 585 Juanita, voiced opposition stating that the complex is designed for light industrial , not retail use; that the use is not beneficial to the area; that the business will not benefit because the access cannot be seen; that the use should be in a store front; that parking is not adequate; that traffic will be increased; that it is adjacent to a residential area; that children will be endangered by the increased traffic; and that approval would not be in the best interests of the community, the residents, or businesses in the area. Mrs. B. Diener, 567 Juanita Drive, voiced opposition stating that the type of use requires impulse shopping which the proposed location lacks; that empty stores in the City would be more appropriate; that Commercial Road resembles a driveway, not a street; that people would use Juanita and look for an access to a storefront; and requested that the Commis- sion consider the property owners' arguments and deny the application. Mrs. L. Scott, 525 Juanita, stated that she had been told that the area across from her residence would be a park but it has become a "park" for junked cars; that she was also told that there would not be access into the area but that the entrance is on Juanita and people looking for UPS or Security Storage have become a nuisance to the residents; that the traffic has increased; and that the location would not be benificial to • the type of use proposed. Mrs. P. Colevus, 625 Juanita, stated that the agreed with her neighbors; that the Northwood Institute should be located somewhere else; that it is not local ; and that the money goes outside the community. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 Mr. Lyons, (rebuttal ) stated that he understood the concerns of the • residents but that the subject applicant was being punished for the present use of the complex; that the proposed use would not have an adverse effect; that there is adequate parking; and stated in response to a Commission question that he represented the property owners. Chairman stated that the issues seemed to have nothing to do with the proposal , but he was concerned with the lack of faith relative to landscaping on the buffer facing homes on Juanita; and noted that there is no reason to believe the property owners' assurances about landscape maintenance. He stated that the proposed use will not make the complex better and may be further detrimental . Mr. Lyons described the landscaping and stated that it is well main- tained; and that the property owners should not have to maintain land- scaping on Juanita. Chairman stated that when the application was originally made, the applicant stated that he would maintain the landscaping on Juanita. Mr. Lyons noted that he was unaware of this and had never reviewed land- scaping on Juanita Drive but would discuss it with his client; that there would be very few vehicles using the facility; and that no desired results would be achieved by denying the application since the traffic and landscaping maintenance problems have nothing to do with the pro- posed application. • There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that the complex was originally approved under three separate architectural approval cases with some consistency of detail in walls and landscape plans; that the owner is not local and is not aware of the maintenance of the landscaping; that one owner has retained a local landscape architect to design landscaping; that the neon sign was on an abated business and is now gone; that the M-1-P Zone allows fairly limited uses. He stated that the application was first described as a warehouse but that incidental sales are permitted only with a conditional use permit; and that the City has the ability to lien property for lack of maintenance. Commissioner Lawrence stated that the residents, not the applicant, were being punished and that it seems that a landscape architect was retained so that the subject application would be approved; that there are too few vehicles in the area to conduct a daily business; and that he could not support the application. Assistant City Attorney stated that the issues are the narrow ones pertaining to the application itself and conditions arising from the conditional use permit impacting the neighborhood created by the use for which the permit is sought; and that other problems could be discussed with the owner in another context. • Commissioner Curtis stated that the residents are not only opposed to the proposal but are opposed to retail sales in the area in general . September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 Discussion followed on retail uses of the ordinance. Planning Director • stated that staff supported the application because of the nature of the particular retail use. Commissioner Koetting stated that there are other locations for the business; that the problems of the residents on Juanita should be redefined; and that the proposed use could compound the problem. Chairman suggested that the information be given to the City Council and Code Enforcement to comply with the original approval ; that the resi- dents could apply to make Juanita a private street, (some of which have been approved recently) ; and that perhaps signage could be improved on Commercial Road. Discussion continued on signage of Commercial Road. Commissioner Lawrence stated that the residents on Juanita should appear before the City Council and state their concerns. M/S/C (Lawrence/Apfelbaum; Kaptur absent) denying the application based on the following findings: 1. That traffic will be increased on Juanita Road by the proposed use. 2. That the entrance to the proposed facility does not have access or visibility. • 3. That the use is more properly located in a storefront than in a light industrial zone. After further discussion, the following motion was made. M/S/C (Koetting/Lawrence; Kaptur absent) recommending to City Council and the property owner (via Code Enforcement) that staff will investi- gate previously approved landscaping and maintenance plans for upgrading the property for compliance; and recommending that the Traffic Engineer review the solution of the traffic problems including street signage. PUBLIC COMMENTS J. Sanborn, Sanborn-Webb Engineering, requested that TPM 18352 be approved since it is a revised map. He stated that the applicant concurs with staff recommendations. 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. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 TPM 18352. Application by WEBB ENGINEERING for R. Ellis for approval of • revised map and C.C. & R. 's for subdivision on Crossley Road, M-1 Zone (I.L. ), Section 20. (Given environmental assessment previously in conjunction with original map approval . ) Planner III explained that the only changes are modifications recom- mended by the Fire Department and Planning Division. He described removal of some Planning staff conditions such as architectural guide- lines for lots on Crossley Road (since each lot will be reviewed individually by the AAC); and that the condition for a custom bus shelter was removed. J. Sanborn, the applicant, stated that because of the need for water retention, the large lots will be placed in the rear of the project. Planning Director stated that review of the C.C. & R. ' s for landscape maintenance guidelines will be scheduled for the September 28 meeting (AAC review of September 26) . M/S//C (Koetting/Madsen; Kaptur absent) approving TPM 18352 subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee (as amended) be met. • 2. That the C.C. & R. 's relative to landscape maintenance be reviewed at the September 28 meeting. Tribal Council comments: "After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council finds the proposed revised map to be acceptable and approves the revised map and C.C. & R. ' for TPM 18352." TTM 19441. Application by HACKER ENGINEERING for Ronson Investments, Inc. for condominium conversion of existing apartment complex on E. Palm Canyon Drive/Golf Club Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 29. (This action categorically exempt from environmental assessment per CEQA guidelines. ) Planner III stated that the map is a condominium conversion of an existing apartment complex which meets code; that a condition would be placed that no remodeling would be allowed without written confirmation that the tenant left on his own volition; and that there are 63 units in the complex (noted for the record) . Discussion followed on flooding in the project. C. Mills, the archi- tect, stated that the water comes from E. Palm Canyon Drive; that, in response to Commission questions, tenants were notified in accordance with State Law that the project would be converting to condominiums; and that the landscaping and lighting would be improved as a separate Architectural Approval application. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 Discussion followed on possible time sharing of the project. Planning • Director stated that it would be possible but might take the form of resort shares ,which is a time share with less shares sold (eleven) . . Commissioner Lawrence stated that the C.C. & R. 's of the project could state that time shares would not be allowed. In response to question by Commission, Planning Director stated that 72 units in the $400 per month range would be removed from the rental market; that the project is not subject to rent control since it was built after the date of rent control restrictions but that the rental market in this range is not critical . L. Hart, 2800 Golf Club Drive, stated that the management has decided to allow children which is discouraged in most Palm Springs projects; and that the project was not designed well for security and lighting. Commissioner Lawrence stated that State Law requires that children be allowed. Mr. Hart stated that he realized that but there are ways to circumvent the requirement, and that the project does not discourage children. He described the flooding problems on the project during the last heavy rain storm and stated that drainage problems should be resolved. Planner III stated that in the storms of 1979/80, photographs were taken • of the area and showed that a large section of asphalt was loosened by the water flow and deposited downstream unbroken; that flood control indicates only shallow flooding but there is weed growth in the drainage channel which changes water flow direction. In response to Commission question, Planner III stated that a hydrology analysis could be performed by the City Engineer. Commissioner Lawrence stated that a flooding problem should be noted in the public report from the Department of Real Estate. In response to question by Commission, Planning Director stated that the final map would not be reviewed by the Commission unless the Commission requests it as a condition of the tentative map and that a flood report could be submitted for Commission approval but that the best action Would be to continue the tentative map and ask for additional informa- tion. In response to Commission question, Planner III stated that the channel was designed to accommodate a projected water flow when the project was built but that development downstream since the project was built is affecting the water flow; that there is no master plan of drainage in the area; that the water flow should be kept on the south side of the project; and that the City Engineer could review the project at the meeting but staff would prefer continuance. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 C. Mills, 278-C N. Palm Canyon Drive, the applicant, stated that he was • involved in the beginning of the project and that the channel was designed to accommodate a 100-year storm for both the north and south sides of the street; that the flooding occurs past the project. He requested action on the map since the impacts were addressed in 1977/78; and stated that the City Engineer's comments should have been made when the map was addressed recently by City Engineering staff. Discussion followed on the water flow problems. At the request of the Commission, Mr. Hart stated that he helped residents of the project leave the area with the aid of his diesel truck. Discussion continued on the flooding of the project during heavy storms. M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Lawrence; Kaptur absent) continuing TTM 19441 to September 28 for a hydrology report from the City Engineer. 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 3.583 (Minor) & SIGN VARIANCE. Application by H. LAPHAM for Sizzler' s • Restaurant for archiectural appoval of landscape plans and sign variance for business at 725 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-2 Zone, Section 23. Chairman was absent for a portion of the discussion; Vice-Chairman presided. Planning Director discussed staff recommendations for a monument sign and stated that there are grounds for a variance. In response to Commission question, H. Lapham, the applicant, stated that the remodeling (gutting) was indicated on the plans and requested approval since the restaurant will be opening for an international convention in the Fall . Chairman stated that he could not support a sign variance since other similar requests for a monument sign have been denied by the Commission. M/S/C (Curti s/Apfelbaum; Service dissented; Kaptur absent) approving the application for landscape plans and sign variance as submitted. Commissioner Koetting left the meeting at this time. CASE 3.609 (Minor). Application by M. HABER for architectural approval of revised plans for addition to existing lounge by enclosure of terrace for restaurant at 701 Baristo Road, R-2 Zone, Section 15. (Ref. Case 5.0266-CUP - Doubles Restaurant. ) September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 16 Planner III reviewed the application and stated that the AAC recommended • restudy feeling that the addition was out of proportion and bulky. G. Konqui, the architect, explained revisions to the building and stated that they were difficult to protray in a rendering since the building is glass and one element of the view is the interior. Discussion followed on the planters on the front of the building. Mr. Konqui stated that the glass is double glazed for sun control ; that the skylight will be closed three months of the year; that the air conditioning will be hidden behind the parapet; that the blue awnings depicted on the rendering are existing but will not be used; and that the new awning will be on the upper section of the old lounge and cannot be seen from the pool . Further discussion followed on the aesthetics of the building. M/S/C (Lawrence/Service; Curtis/Apfelbaum dissented; Kapter/Koetting absent) approving the application as submitted. NOTE: After the motion and before action was taken, Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that the AAC was concerned that the revised plans were not in accord with the basic Cody design; that the elements discussed were decorative only; that Mr. Cody had not intended that the building be enclosed; and that only a creative architect could make satisfactory • revisions. Mr. Konqui stated that the only revisions had been to extend the building and add the glass. Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that there was heavy reliance on the interior when the direction was on the architecture of the exterior. Further discussion followed on the proposed glass. M. Haber, the owner, stated that the Cody look continues inside the building and that the design adheres to the Cody look. Discussion continued on Commission review of the working drawings. Chairman advised the architect that staff would report any changes to what had been approved. Commissioner Koetting returned to the meeting. CASE 5.572-CUP. Application by W. VEITH for First Southern Baptist Church for architectural approval of revised phasing plan for church on the south side of Vista Chino, east of Avenida Caballeros, G-R-5 Zone, Section 11. Planner III explained that the applicant wishes to build the expansion building before the the sanctuary which is a change in the original phasing plan. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 17 R. Lewis, Paster First Southern Baptist Church, explained that the • immediate need is for additional space for overflow seating and additional educational space and the proposed revision enhances the overall plan if it is used for future development. Chairman stated that the aesthetics of the sanctuary building are not enhanced by the proposal . Further discussion followed on the aesthetics and function of the pro- posed revision to the phasing plan. M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Koetting; Kaptur absent) approving the application for a revised phasing plan subject to the following conditions: 1. That a preliminary master landscape plan, including phasing, be submitted. Street fronting landscaping is recommended to be com- pleted with the classroom addition. This condition shall be met prior to issuance of building permits. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 3. That Phase I elevations are approved subject to the open walk on the west side being left open. NOTE: Mechanical equipment shall be ground mounted or completely con- cealed by the roof structure. . In response to a question by Rev. Lewis regarding clarification, Chairman stated that minutes of the AAC meeting will be sent to him. 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 Lawrence, seconded by Madsen, (Kaptur 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 3.588 (Minor). SECURITY PACIFIC BANK for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for revised drive-up canopy and parking area, C-1 and R-2 Zones, Section 23. Conditions: 1. That all proposed trees be upgraded to 30-inch box size. 2. That the proposed Tulbachia Biolacea be restudied at staff level . 3. That the proposed ground cover (all annual ) be restudied so that perennial ground cover is utilized in larger areas. 4. That final irrigation and exterior lighting plans be submitted for staff approval . September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 18 CASE 3.205. R. BARNETT for S. Appel for architectural approval of working • drawings for project on Escoba Drive between Beverly Drive/E. Palm Canyon Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 24. Condition: That previously approved materials and colors (diagonal wood siding) be utilized. CASE 3.275. M. BLAZEVIC & D. BOGNA for architectural approval of working drawings for a condominium project at 260 W. Vista Chino, R-3 Zone, Section 3. Conditions: 1. That the street elevations comply with the preliminary approval . 2. That all windows be provided with overhangs per the previously approved elevations. 3. That all mechanical equipment be completely concealed by the roof structure. CASE 3.619 (Minor) . INTERACTIVE DESIGN for architectural approval of security gates for condominium complex on Amado Road between E1 Segundo/Alejo Road, R-G-A(8) Zone (I.L. ) , Section 14. Conditions: • 1. That a permanent curb/planting area be added adjacent to the fixed wrought iron gate (the 32 foot driveway only) . 2. That all recommendations fo the Development Committee be met. CASE 5.0063-CUP. RIVIERA RACQUET CLUB for architectural approval of landscape and minor architectural revisions to Tennis Club on the southeast corner of Via Escuela/N. Indian Avenue, R-3 Zone, Section 2. Conditions: 1. That the existing wrought iron fence detail (tennis racquets and spikes) be removed per the approved wrought iron details. (???) 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. MISCELLANEOUS ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ACTION M/S/C (Koetting/Madsen; Kaptur absent) taking the following actions per staff recommendations. SIGN APPLICATION. IMPERIAL SIGN COMPANY for architectural approval of in- stallation of exposed neon tubing outlining front entryway sign for the • Tennis Club and Restaurant, on Tahquitz Drive between Arenas Road/Baristo Road, R-2 & R-G-A(8) Zones, Section 15. Restudy. Acceptable in concept but proposed installation details require refinement. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 19 SIGN APPLICATION. IMPERIAL SIGN COMPANY for architectural approval of sign • program for Sunrise Square shopping center on the NW corner of Sunrise Way/Vista Chino, R-1-C Zone, Section 2. (Ref. Case 5.938-CUP) Restudy of the proposed location and design with the suggestion that the raceway be eliminated or completely concealed by the beam element. SIGN APPLICATION. PBS SIGN COMPANY for architectural approval of a gas rate sign for Shell station on the NW corner of Ramon Road/Sunrise Way, C-1 Zone, section 14. (Ref. Cases 5.0229-CUP/6.326-Variance) Restudy. Alternative No. 2 to be used for the general design and materials with a restudy of the mass proportions and height. SIGN APPLICATION. YOUNG ELECTRIC COMPANY for architectural approval of main identification sign for Shari ' s Restaurant in shopping center on the SE corner of Palm Canyon Drive/Racquet Club Road, PD-113, Section 3. (Ref. Case 5.0127-PD-113) Continued to September 28 for receipt of colored elevations. CASE 2.960. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE READING ROOM for architectural approval of trellis shade structure inthe Vineyard complex on S. Palm Canyon Drive between Baristo Road/Arenas Road, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Restudy. The existing shade structure design (canvas awning and/or wood • trellis element) to be utilized. CASE 3.403. POMONA FIRST FEDERAL for architectural approval of as-built land- scape plans for savings and loan on Tahquitz-McCallum Way between Avenida Caballeros/Hermosa Drive, C-1-AA and R-4VP Zones (I.L. ) , Section 14. Continued to September 28 for the applicant to be present at the September 26 AAC meeting. CASE 3.487. ACTFAP (Hamilton) for W. Lansdale for revised entry and landscape plans for single family residence on private road, 0-20 Zone, Section 25. Removed from agenda pending receipt of revised plans. CASE 3.434. B. BRUDER for architectural approval of revised detailed plans for outdoor restaurant at 101 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. NOTE: Case 3.544 was an incorrect number and location. Removed from agenda at applicant's request. CASE 3.611 (Minor) . J. TAMMEN for architectural approval of revised plans for planter and entry for restaurant at 440 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D • Zone, Section 15. Removed from the Agenda at the applicant's request. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 20 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) • SIGN APPLICATION. Application by IMPERIAL SIGN COMPANY for Colton Piano Com- pany for architectural approval of new main identification sign at 462 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. L. Hart, representing the Colton Piano Company, explained that the company has a generic sign which is common to all of its locations. He described the various alternatives the AAC had recommended. Planner III stated that the AAC felt that there should be a unifying element whether or not it was the styling of the letters or the color. Discussion continued on the unification of the piano company and Coast Federal signs. Commissioner Curtis stated that he felt that the letters should be straight, rather than slanted. M/S/C (Lawrence/Apfelbaum; Curtis dissented; Kaptur absent) approving the two signs (front and back of the building) with slanted letters the same height and color as the Coast Federal sign. Planning Director stated that on a complex with many signs, the program must be more stringent than a program in which there are two businesses in one large building. • SIGN APPLICATION. Application by W. HOWLETT for Nova Gifts for architectural approval of neon sign for business at 300 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planner III explained the proposed neon sign as a simple sign but difficult to construct. W. Howlett, sign designer, described the colors and installation of the proposed neon sign. M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Madsen; Kaptur absent) approving the neon sign as submitted. ADDED STARTER CASE 3.618 (Minor) . Application by J. PIPER for architectural approval of store front remodel and neon sign for business at 1078 N. Palm Canyon Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 10. Discussion with the applicant ensued regarding the neon sign installa- tion and remodel . Planning Director stated that it will be similar to the white neon sign • at the "Paper Lily" store. M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Madsen; Kaptur absent) approving the sign as submitted. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 21 CASE 5.0237-PD-142. Application by M. BUCCINO for 1st Nationwide Savings for • architectural approval of revised preliminary landscape plans for savings & loan office on E. Palm Canyon Drive between Sunrise Way/La Verne Way/Arquilla Road, R-3 Zone (I.L. ) , Section 26. Discussion ensued with the architect, M. Buccino, noting the AAC' s concerns about tree wells in small sidewalks and its recommendation that palms be clustered. The logic of a landscape termination at a major intersection and visibility of the signing were also discussed. Planner III stated that the entire design of the building rests on the landscaping, and that the revised design opened the visibility of the building. M. Buccino stated that the job was not viewed from a budgetary stand- point but to establish the architecture on the corner strongly since the previously approved landscape scheme was not restful; and that the massive desert plantings will have a strong impact on the street. Chairman stated that the landscaping was in the best interest of the client but was not integrated with landscaping of the rest of the property. Mr. Buccino explained the concept of making a strong statement in land- scaping for the project, and stated that he did not realize that the Planning Commission did not like the architecture of the building. • Commissioner Curtis noted that the landscaping of the rest of the complex is not pleasing and to have something different is preferable. Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that desert landscaping was appropriate and should be integrated on the back and sides with the remainder of the landscaping making a strong statement on the corner. Commissioner Koetting suggested a restudy with the Commission concerns noted. M/S/C (Koetting/Lawrence; Madsen dissented; Kaptur absent) for a restudy noting Commission concerns of lack of integration with the existing landscaping on the property and screening of the building with land- scaping. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS DISCUSSION. Planning Commission discussion of requirements for landscaping in public right-of-ways. Planning Director explained that the discussion began in conjunction with a City task force and was discussed with the AAC; and that the committee will work with staff to develop standards which will be given is to the Commission for review. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 22 Discussion followed on sizes of tree wells. Planning Director stated • that former AAC member Hamilton did not want tree wells in sidewalks on Tahquitz-McCallum Way originally. He requested a discussion and confir- mation of a street tree program by the Commission if the program were developed properly. Chairman stated that after reviewing an historical questionnaire sent to him by the Historic Site Preservation Board, the most important historic concept the Commission can recognize is to realize the value of palm trees to the community since they integrate the community and screen some aesthetic unpleasing buildings; that the Commission should be sen- sitive to the long-term consequences of tampering with a concept that gives the communty character; that the intensive right-of-way plantings on Sunrise Way and Palm Canyon Drive have been very successful ; that Tramway Road should be reviewed very carefully for landscaping; and that the J. Temple project landscaping is a fine entryway to the City. Planning Director stated that staff would develop standards with input from AAC members Neel and Buccino. NOTE: AAC comments of the September 12 meeting are as follows: The AAC recommended that landscaping elements continue to be considered within and adjacent to the public right-of-way. The AAC noted that the problems with trees uprooting curbs, gutters, and sidewalks could gener- ally be avoided by proper tree selection and irrigation. The AAC • recommended that small tree wells be avoided ( including Palm Canyon Drive and Tahquitz-McCallum Way). Several AAC members indicated willingness to work with staff to develop standards. DETERMINATION (Non Numbered) . Plannin Commission determination that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP? is consistent with the General Plan. Planning Director stated that the primary relationship between the General Plan and CIP is with streets, sewers, drainage, and the airport; that one area that is inconsistent (consistent in concept but inconsistent in the adopted plans) is the retention basins which are approved in concept but will be affected by Riverside Country Environ- mental Impact Report; that the Commission should not move ahead on this item until the plan is completed by the County; that money is going into new capital projects, i .e. , expansion and cogeneration; that the Com- mission has approved a plan to adopt a palm tree street tree program for Indian Avenue; and that a Citizens Task Force has been formed and has recommended broad leafed trees on the side streets leading to Indian Avenue and Palm Canyon Drive. Commissioner Koetting suggested that an additional left-turn lane onto Ramon Road be investigated at the corner of Ramon and Palm Canyon Drive. In answer to a question by Commission, Planning Director stated that the • $100,000 budget for City Hall refurbishing was requested by the Council and was to improve the facility, i.e. , flooring, but the plan is not developed and staff would keep Commission abreast of the progress. September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 23 Chairman suggested that the display boards in the Council Chamber be • removed with video film used to present planning projects and suggested that this concept be mentioned to the Council . He stated that he felt that the block grant money should not be used to develop an industrial site study. Planning Director stated that there is increased interest in economic development in the City, and that is the reason for the funding of the industrial site study. Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that the use of video films should be reviewed because she felt it would help an awkward seating situation at the AAC meetings; and that the $15,000 is not improving the living environment for low income residents. She stated she found the idea for the $15,000 study objectionable. Chairman reiterated that the $15,000 did not relate to the purpose of the block grant and that Fund 83 belongs to the Housing Element of the General Plan. He questioned the money's being used to develop Indus- trial site locations studies since the concept is irrelevant to the block grant program. M/S/C (Service/Koetting; Madsen dissented; Kaptur absent) that the CIP is consistent with the General Plan and that the Commission wishes to call the Council ' s attention to item No. 8 on Page 19 and Fund 83 (the partial use of block grant funds for developing an industrial site study) since it may not be consistent with the intent of the block grant • program. Commissioner Madsen noted that he dissented because he felt it was not in the Commission' s purview to make the findings regarding Fund 83. THIRD TIME EXTENSION - TTM 15493. Request by B. RAEHN for a 12-month time extension for TTM 15493, a subdivision for lot sales purposes east of S. Palm Canyon Drive at the City limits, W-R-1-B Zone, Section 35. M/S/C (Curtis/Koetting; Kaptur absent) approving a third and final time extension for TTM 15493 subject to all previous conditions of approval . ANNUAL REPORT. Planning Commission approval of annual report to City Council Discussion ensued on the configuration of the chart showing numbers of items processed. Commissioner Koetting requested that the item of each type (cases and maps) be noted as to whether or not approval was given and Planning Director stated that staff would add this information to the chart. • M/S/C (Koetting/Madsen; Kaptur absent) adopting the annual report and transmitting it to the City Council for review. TENTATIVE TRACT AND PARCEL MAPS (Continued) September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 24 TTM 17430. Application by HALLMARK ENGINEERING for Investors Real • Estate for a revised map and phasing plan for private club and condominium development on the northeast corner of Avenida Caballeros/Amado Road, R-G-A(8) Zone (I.L. ) , section 14. (Ref. Cases 3.101 & 5.0259-CUP) Planner III stated that the Development Committee comments have not been put into written format. He stated that Engineering is requesting all improvements with Phase I although improvements adjacent to phases may be acceptable to the Engineering Division. Discussion followed on continuation of the map to develop written Development Committee coments. M/S/C (Madsen/Kaptur; Koetting, absent) continuing TTM 17430 to September 28. Tribal Council comments: After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Com- mission, the Tribal Council finds the proposed revised map acceptable and approves the revised map and pahsing plan for TTM 17430. The Tribal Council has noted all other matters on the City Planning Commission agenda of September 14, 1983, since such matters do not . materially affect Indian-trust lands. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.610 (Minor) . Application by D. ROSENBERG for architectural approval of third island and installation of storage tanks for Exxon station at 4633 E. Ramon Rd. , M-1 Zone, Section 19. M/S/C (Lawrence/Koetting; Kaptur, absent) with the following condition: That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. ADDED STARTER - DISCUSSION ITEM Planner III stated that staff has been contacted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that Lifeline Reclamation, Inc. , a privately owned correctional facility is proposing to acquire 40 acres adjacent to Highway 111, Section 32 (adjacent to the hotel proposed by K. Heinrich) for a "care, shelter and agricultural training center" for court wards and juvenile delinquents. He stated that the BLM has rejected the application because it is incomplete and because of its inconsistency with the City of Palm Springs General Plan. He requested that the Commission discuss the proposal , noting that staff position would be to support the BLM denial of the application. Commissioner Apfelbaum left the meeting at this point. • September 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 25 Planner III noted that the zoning is G-R-5, which is zoned for guest • ranches and hotels (low density projects) but that government facilities are allowed under Conditional Use Permits. He stated that the area is in the Tramway Area General Plan, is an entryway to the City, and that the proposed correctional facility use is inconsistent with the General Plan and inconsistent with zoning in the area. M/S/C (Curtis/Madsen; Kaptur/Apfelbaum, absent) that the proposed correctional facility use is inconsistent with the City's General Plan and is inconsistent with the zoning in the area. COMMISSION REPORTS REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION Commission was reminded that there will be a joint dinner meeting with the City Council and the AAC at the Canyon Hotel , Canyon Suite, at 6:30 on Monday, October 17. Chairman appointed Commissioner Apfelbaum to the AAC, replacing Commissioner Koetting. (Alternates: Koetting and Service) ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m. PLANNING IR CTOR MDR/m WP/PC MIN