Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984/03/28 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall March 28, 1984 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 15 2 Hugh Curtis - 15 2 Hugh Kaptur X 14 3 Peter Koetting X 15 2 Don Lawrence X 16 1 Paul Madsen X 16 1 Sharon Apfelbaum X 16 1 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Sigfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney George Parmenter, Traffic Engineer John Terell, Redevelopment Planner Michael Dotson, Planner II Douglas R. Evans, Planner III Robert Green, Planner II Dave Forcucci, Zoning Enforcement Officer Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - March 26, 1984 James Cioffi, Chairman Earl Neel Chris Mills Hugh Curtis William Johnson Sharon Apfelbaum Michael Buccino William Johnson Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Koetting (Lawrence absent) approving the minutes with the exception of Case 5.0310-MISC. (percolation ponds) since a page was inadvertently deleted; and with a revision to Sign Application (Spa Hotel) as follows: The motion should read (final motion, Page 8) : AYES: Kaptur, Koetting, Madsen NOES: Apfelbaum, Lawrence, Service ABSENT: Curtis M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Kaptur; Lawrence absent) approving Case 5.0310-MISC with the addition of the final page re: discussion and motion (see attachment to Minutes of 3-28) . March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 There were no Tribal Council comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0281-ZTA. (Incorrect Case No. on the Agenda) Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for an amendment to the Sign Ordinance and its inclusion in the Zoning Ordinance. (Environmental Assessment and tentative approval .) Recommendation: That the Planning Commission order the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration and continue the case to the April 11 meeting at 6:30 p.m. Chairman stated that the business community will be apprised of the time of the hearing through the media. He stated that if the Commission wished to discuss the Ordinance further it could be reviewed at the April 18th Study Session and continued for final review to the April 25 meeting. Commissioner Koetting suggested that input be received at the April 11 meeting and further review given to the Ordinance at the April 25 meeting as suggested by staff. Planning Director stated that copies are available in the Planning Divi- sion but little interest has been shown. Chairman declared the hearing open. R. Rothman, 2119 Los Patos Drive, member of the Sign Task Force stated that the Task Force was aware of the City Attorney's recommendation that content could not be regulated but felt that some regulation was neces- sary, and that the variance provision was not included in the Sign Ordi- nance because it is in the Zoning Ordinance (of which the Sign Ordinance will become a part) . He thanked staff for its help. Chairman declared the hearing closed. In response to Commission question, Planning Director stated that special banners are approved at the City Council level but that the sub- ject could be discussed on April 11. Discussion followed on the review process. Planning Director stated that staff would highlight concerns in a report to the Commission on April 11 and at the suggestion of Commission that the Chamber of Com- merce would be contacted for its input. M/S/C (Koetting/Madsen; Lawrence absent) ordering the preparation of the draft Negative Declaration and continuance of the case to the April 11th meeting at 6.30 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ITEMS TPM 19974. Application by SANBORN WEBB, INC. for Southern California Edison for approval of map for a division of land located north of Vista Chino between Indian Avenue and North Palm Canyon Drive, R-3 and C-1 Zones, Section 3. (Environmental assessment and tentative approval . ) Planning Director explained the location of the substation and stated that the Edison Co. is negotiating with the Stroke Activity Center for a portion of the property. He stated that the City Attorney has recom- mended that condition #2 under "Indian Avenue" be changed to state "that dedication may be reserved for future acquisition" and that condition #1 under "Traffic" has been changed to read "that the final approval of the width be determined on the landscape plan". Planner II presented the application on the display board, he stated that both driveways would be retained and maintained at the applicant' s choice, and that sidewalks are necessary to keep pedestrians out of the streets. Planning Director stated that oleanders would hide the chain link fence. R. Hitchcock, 1700 Tahquitz-McCallum Way, local Manager of Southern California Edison, stated that the company had submitted a landscape plan including a decorative wall at the location to replace the chain link fence and that staff had recommended this landscaped wall. He stated that a combination of wall and landscaping could also be submitted. He stated that he did not know how long the substation would remain and that the old business office is in escrow with the Stroke Activity Cen- ter. He stated that the northerly driveway is necessary for access to maintain the facility and that the company did not want to dedicate property within the substation fence line because of State safety requirements until the use is changed at which time another application would be made for a new use. He requested that Condition #2 under Palm Canyon be deleted because the company could not agree to costs of improvements to the property after it is sold. Discussion followed on dedication of the right-of-way on Indian Avenue. Assistant City Attorney stated that the City is asking for an offer of dedication. Chairman stated that the provision was not adequate. Assistant City Attorney stated that there was no point to accepting an offer of dedication until improvements are required, and it is just an offer that remains open. Further discussion followed on several approaches to the wording of a dedication agreement. Mr. Hitchcock stated that he would have to refer any dedication agreement wording to the company's legal counsel. Assistant City Attorney stated that word- ing could be resolved. Planning Director stated that both tentative and final maps will be reviewed by the Council at the same time. Discussion followed on the Edison Co. escrow agreement. Mr. Hitchcock stated that the agreement as presently written does not state that March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 TPM 19974. (Cont'd. ) Edison would have to pay for improvements for Palm Canyon Drive at a later date (after escrow closed) and that there will be a considerable amount of money spent by Edison on immediate improvements. He stated that he had no idea how additional costs would affect the sale. Plan- ning Director stated that the condition of dedication is one of the few mandatory actions on the property and that if improvements were neces- sary in the future, and there were no provision for improvements, the City would have to pay for them. Chairman stated that the dedication problem could be resolved with the staff but as far as the covenant with the Stroke Activity Center is con- cerned, it is the cost of doing business and that he supported staff's wording which stated that the dedication should be given immediately. He stated that the same condition would apply to anyone else's property and that it is mandatory and appropriate and timing is not the Commis- sion's concern. M/S/C (Madsen/Apfelbaum; Lawrence absent) ordering the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration, (noting that the Indian Avenue width should be resolved with staff and dedication and covenant on Palm Canyon re- quired)-,_ tentatively approving the map, and continuing the application to 4=11-84 for final review. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEM The Planning Commission reviewed plans, discussed, and took action on the following items involving architectural approval subject to the con- ditions as outlined. CASE 3.645 (Cont'd. ) . Application by HELTZER ' ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED for architectural , approval for 120-unit condominium project on Golf Club Drive between Waverly Drive/Cree Road, R-3 Zone (I.L.), Sec- tion 29. (Removed from Tentative Tract and Parcel Map Section.) (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration and final approval .) Planner III stated that the map has been removed from the agenda for revisions and action is for Commission response to written comments on the environmental assessment and architectural approval . He stated that Cathedral City is requesting (verbally) for a 60 foot right-of-way along the east property line although staff recommends 50 feet; and that Cathedral City's written comments, if received, will be relayed to Coun- cil. Discussion followed on the configuration of the site. Planner III stated that the open space areas have been improved. J. Almond, Maxwell Starkman Associates, the architect, explained revisions to the project and stated that the revisions had improved. Chairman stated that many of the units will be a distance from their parking and will be difficult to sell . Mr. Almond stated that the removed parking was preferable to penetration of roadways into the site. i March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 Case 3.645. (Cont'd. ) M/S/C (Koetting/Madsen, Lawrence absent) ordering the filing of a draft Negative Declaration and approving Case 3.645 subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That the end elevations on the single-story building be restudied, (suggestion was made that the overhang be increased in mass simi- lar to other elements on this elevation to be reviewed with the revised landscape plan) . 3. That the roof element per Section #4 be added to all elevations where possible. 4. That a revised preliminary landscape plan be submitted. 5. That details of the elevations be submitted prior to submission of working drawings. 6. That working drawings be submitted for AAC and Planning Commission review. 7. That a revised color and materials board be submitted. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS DISCUSSION - CASE 3.666 (MINOR) (Continued) . Commission review of design for historic marker for the Historic Site Preservation Board (HSPB) . Planner II explained the design of the historic marker and requested approval . He stated that the design was approved by the HSPB and the City will retain the design and the mold, that the graphic design will be rendered by an artist and that the main part of the graphic design will be the mountains. He stated that to prevent vandalism mounting hardware will be concealed, that the bas-relief element will be durable, and described the costs (per fact sheet on file in the Planning Divi- sion). Chairman stated that all elements of the City seal will be included in the Spanish gable design of the marker. Planner II explained that the marker lent itself to a horizontal shape because of the mountains, and that the process is a foundry one which cannot be done locally. He stated that various City seals differ in their depiction of Palm Springs elements, and that there could be one City seal and marker design but that he was not directed to consolidate the two. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis, Lawrence absent) approving the concept of the marker with the final design to be reviewed by the Commission. March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 DETERMINATION 10.340. Request for determination for a beauty college (trade school) use in a IT" (Professional) Zone. Planning Director stated that the approach, if approved, would be City wide in "P" Zones, that beauty colleges are now allowed in the C-2 Zone and that the Ordinance allows the Planning Commission to determine that a use is similar to another use that is allowed in the Zone. He state that conservatories, which are allowed, are a similar use, that an alternative might be to consider the beauty college as a private educa- tional institution on a major thoroughfare, under a C.U.P. and that the applicant has submitted parking studies showing the parking lot is only 40/ full . He stated that perhaps the application could be processed as an educational institution under a Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Kaptur stated that trade schools destroy the environment of professional zoning, and that the integrity of the "P" Zone should remain. Discussion followed on current locations of beauty shops and current zoning allowing trade schools. Planning Director stated that the use is more desirable in an upgraded area. Further discussion followed on possible locations for beauty colleges. Chairman reminded Commission that the determination would be for the entire City, not a site specific one. S. Sterniker, leasing agent for Equitec, stated that "P" zoning is simi- lar to trade schools and that a trade school would not disrupt the "P" �-- zoning. He stated that there is a lack of "P" zoning in the City and that if the use were allowed, it would complete leasing of the building. In reply to Commission question, he stated that in terms of commercial uses, retail uses such as flower shops and museums are allowed. K. Ross, property manager of Equitec Properties, stated that it was dif- ficult to differentiate from the uses allowed and a beauty college use and that he would be opposed if parking was inadequate but that it is not the case in this instance. He stated that in careful review his company felt the use would add to the professionalism of the complex. In reply to Commission question, Planning Director stated that a con- servatory is a small educational complex dealing generally with the arts. Chairman stated that there are many types of trade schools and that a trade school as a use is not appropriate in the "P" Zone. He stated that there is no lack of proper zoning for trade schools, and that the proposed location is good for a businessman since it is close to the high school but the use is not appropriate. Commissioner Koetting suggested a review of the Ordinance to extend uses in the "C" Zone to allow beauty colleges or trade schools. Chairman stated that review of the Ordinance was not being considered by the Com- mission. M/S/C (Koetting/Kaptur; Lawrence absent; Curtis abstained) determining that a beauty college (trade school) use is not appropriate in a "P" Zone. March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.665 (Continued) . Application by L. JOHNSON for revised plans for trellis for single-family hillside residence at 2332 Cantina Way, R-1-A Zone, Section 27. (Reference Case 6.339-Variance. ) Planner II stated that the trellis structure had been reduced in size by half and staff and the AAC recommended approval . M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Lawrence absent; Kaptur dissented) approving the application subject to the following condition: That a detailed land- scape plan be submitted for staff approval . SIGN APPLICATION (Continued) . Application by IMPERIAL SIGNS for the Spa Hotel for architectural approval of identification sign on Calle Encilia/Tahquitz-McCallum Way, C-1-AA/R-4-VP Zone (I.L.) , Section 14. L. Hart of Imperial Signs, the applicant, stated that AAC suggestions had been followed in the revisions to the sign. Zoning Enforcement Officer explained the sign application on the display board. Mr. Hart stated that the sign face would be dark brown stucco with beige stucco on the base and brass channel letters. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that each letter was individually back-lit with neon lighting., M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Madsen; Lawrence absent; Kaptur and Koetting dissented) approving the sign application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the base elements be vertical . 2. That a reveal be added approximately 2" be added between the sign and the base. 3. That the base of the Encillia frontage sign be increased in height to 18". 4. That the fountain have a circular form (Encillia frontage sign) . CASE 5.0303-PD-152 (Continued) . Application by R. GREGORY & E. JOHNSON for architectural approval of detailed golf course landscape plans and revised condominium elevations for golf course/condominium project at Ramon Road/Farrell Drive, R-1-C & W-R-1-C Zones, Section 24. Planner III described the areas of concern such as the bikepath proposed only on the east side of Farrell; stating that staff recommendation is a bikepath on both sides and that the AAC had made specific recommenda- tions. He stated that a proposal for the existing driving range on the site has not been received but that an application for a Zone change to March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 j Case 5.0303-PD-152. (Cont'd. ) i R-3 will probably be forthcoming. He stated that no final plans have been submitted for screening of the parking lot. Planning Director stated that staff and the Traffic Engineer felt that both a bikepath ath and a sidewalk are needed on both sides of Farrell .p 1 He stated that another is sue slue was the height of the berms along m dr g g Co pa e, SunnyDunes and El Cielo because the berming is so high that the f g g e golf course and open space can not be seen. He stated that staff desired Commission response to its recommendation to require visual penetration from all street frontages. He stated that the architecture had minor changes only. In reply to Commission question, he stated that the Master Plan of Bikeways shows the bikepath as a Class I which is sepa- rated from the pavement. He stated that a bikepath on one side and a sidewalk on the other side of the street would cause inconvenience to both bicycle riders and pedestrians. Chairman stated that he supported staff in its recommendation for a Class I bikepath since the public should benefit from the development of the open space. He stated that visual relief should be maintained on the streets, except the berming on Ramon Road. Further disucussion followed on the mounding. Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that there should be more open space than mounding and Commis- sioner Koetting stated that the mounding is a necessity for safety and to give the golf course character. Further disucussion followed. Discussion ensued on fencing. Commissioner Koetting stated that split rail fencing is a good solution. Planning Director stated that a split rail fence would be easily vandalized and that in discussions with the architect a post and chain (or cable) fence was considered. Discussion continued. Planner III stated that the City had never received damage claims from golf balls at the Municipal course. Chairman stated that the developer was informed in the beginning that he would have to resolve vehicle/bikepath/pedestrian conflicts and that the original con- ditions should not be changed. He stated that the conflict would be with cars being struck by golf balls. C. Mills, 278-C North Palm Canyon Drive, the architect, requested the deletion of the bikepath on the east side of Farrell, and stated that there are visual open spaces on Compadre, and that AAC recommendations are being considered on the bikepath between the condos and the fairway at the northern part of the course. He stated that the applicant wants to study the recommendation regarding the setback of 20 feet to the con- dominimums, that the fencing will be a pilaster type because of high maintenance of split rail fencing and in reply to a Commission question, that the berming is approximately what will be constructed. He stated that the berming on E1 Cielo will add interest to the golf course which was originally an open view but with a different use there is a need for protection. He stated that "windows" would be created in the berming, that the mountain view would not be obstructed, and that there is less loss of view with the golf course than if buildings had been constructed on the site. He stated that the applicant would review the berming again. March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 Case 5.0303-PD-152. (Cont'd. ) B. Stamps, Sacramento, California, golf course designer, explained the configuration of the holes and the reasoning for high safety berming on some of the holes. Discussion followed on the signalization of the intersection. Traffic Engineer stated that there is a push button for pedestrians and that all types of traffic will be controlled. M/S/C (Koetting/Apfelbaum; Lawrence absent) taking the following actions: 1. Landscape. Approved subject to: a. That the bikepath adjoining Phase 1 shall be setback 15 to 20 feet from the condominiums to the north. b. That a combination of berming, landscaping and excavation be used to screen the bikepath, if possible. (Railroad ties and similar landscape materials shall be used for retention in excavated areas.) C. That the further excavation of the adjoining fairway may be explored in conjunction with "b" or both. 2. Architecture. Approved the revisions proposed subject to enclo- sure of the ends of the stair treads in the open wrought iron design. Design to be at discretion of architect. 3. That a bikepath and a separate sidewalk shall be constructed on both sides of Farrell . 4. That mounds shall be left where appropriate. 5. That vistas shall be provided through the mounding wherever possi- ble. ADDED STARTER - ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEM CASE 3.309. Request by D. CHRISTIAN for H. Kassinger for review of details of revisions to the Courtyard/Bank of Palm Springs Center, a retail, office, and financial complex on Tahquitz-McCallum Way between Calle E1 Segundo/Calle Alvarado, R-4VP & C-1-AA Zones, Section 14. D. Christian, the architect, 1000 S. Palm Canyon Drive, requested direc- tion from the Commission and reaction to current and future revisions to the complex. Commissioner Kaptur stated that continuity was needed regarding signing, colors, and any additional revisions. Commissioner Koetting agreed stating that the center resembles an office facility, and that retail tenants should be in the front to bring the flavor of a retail center to the project. He stated that darkened win- dows do not help and that merchandise display and lighting would help the project. He stated that he did not like the display boxes that had been proposed and denied by the Planning Commission at the March 14 i March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 Case 3.309 (Cont'd. ) meeting, and that perhaps applicants should wait to see if the approved improvements will be a solution. Discussion followed regarding Commission concerns on the project. Com- missioner Apfelbaum stated that the AAC had discussed well-designed neon lighted signs as a possibility, and that lighting and decent signing are basic to the success of the center. She stated that continuity of sign- ing would be an asset and that the canopies are attractive but the display cases would not have solved any problems. Chairman stated that the Commission was requested to approve canopies on an emergency basis but requested that a master plan be submitted for future revisions and that the applicant has not provided the master plan. He stated that the canopies are good for what they are but not appropriate, that the appli- cant should submit a complete plan, and that the solution might hinge on the unbuilt building on the site as an important anchor. He stated that a light band could be substituted for the tile band which is an unexcit- ing element or another type of architectural element added to the building, that there is nothing in the windows to state that it is a retail center, and that windows should be decorated. Commissioner Kaptur suggested that the existing vacant stores on Tahquitz could be leased as retail . H. Kassinger, the developer, stated that only one large space had not been leased which might become a food center of some sort. Commissioner Kaptur suggested that windows become display cases and that the front spaces should be leased to retail businesses not offices. Mr. Kassinger described the problems of the center and stated that the canopies had received favorable notice. He stated that perhaps the tile and the signing could be changed. In reply to Mr. Christian's questions, Chairman stated that the client will have to decide the overall image he wants in order for the complex to resemble a retail center. Commissioner Kaptur stated that lighting is the best answer since the project cannot be changed. Mr. Kassinger stated that lighting might not be helpful since only the restaurant is open at night, and that the canopies have helped business. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ITEMS Environmental evaluation reports were received by the Commission for their review and study prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Further review may be dispensed with and all items approved by motion. M/S/C (Koetting/Kaptur; Lawrence absent) ordering the preparation of a draft Negative Declaration for the following cases and continuing them to the April 11 meeting. March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 CASE 5.0313-GPA. Adoption by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of a Technical Appendix to the General Plan Street Plan (JHK Report) developing a forecast of traffic growth. (Environmental assessment. ) CASE 5.0314-GPA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of an amendment to the General Plan Street Plan by deleting Sunny Dunes Road from Compadre Road to Sunrise Way as a collector/secondary thoroughfare; deleting Cer- ritos Road from Mesquite Avenue to Camino Parocela as a collector street; and deleting Compadre Road from Mesquite Avenue to Sunny Dunes Road as a collector, Section 24. (Environmental assessment. ) MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) DISCUSSION - PALM TREE LIGHTING. Commission review of experimental palm tree fighting fixtures on Palm Canyon Drive (Continued from 12-14-83 meet- ing) . Traffic Engineer stated that the Lighting Task Force has recommended that there be separate lighting fixtures for the trees and for the street safety lighting and that the prototype light in front of the Ramada Inn was inadequate for both purposes (Traffic Engineer's report on file in the Planning Division) . He stated that the Building Mainte- nance Superintendent is designing a fixture for the tree lighting and that the present safety lighting poses no liability but development of a substandard program would generate liability. He stated in reply to Commission question that marbellite fixtures are decorative. Planning Director stated that he has suggested standardization of lighting poles in the late 1970's, but the Commission and Council decided not to make any changes. He stated that the prototype fixtures cannot do all that is intended which is to both light the palms and provide safety light- ing. He stated that the palm trees are not of uniform height and it is difficult to meet safety lighting requirements. Commissioner Koetting suggested that staff studies of the downtown street scape be made available to the Commissions. TIME EXTENSION-TTM 18329. Application by MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES for Equitec 80 for a 12-month time extension for subdivision between Bogie Road and San Joaquin Drive, north of Mission Drive, M-1-P Zone, Section 18. M/S/C (Madsen/Koetting; Lawrence absent) approving a 12-month time extension subject to original conditions of approval (conditions of 7- 28-82 by the Planning Division on 6-16-82 by Riverside County Flood Con- trol). The new expiration date will be 5-19-85. March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 CASE 5.0312 (MISC-A) . Commission review of wind energy application by River- side County Planning (wind energy permit #18) regarding scenic highway setback reductions (in the sphere of influence) . Planner III stated that the applicant wishes to reduce City highway setbacks from 500' to 327' , that the area is flat, and it seems that there is no justification for the request. M/S/C (Kaptur/Koetting; Lawrence absent; Madsen, Service dissented) that the City Council relay the Planning Commission's concern to Senators and legislators that reduced setbacks should not be allowed on scenic high- ways or major freeways. Discussion followed on reduced setbacks and the proliferation of wind turbine machines. Planner III stated that staff is drafting a letter at Council request to the BLM regarding these con- cerns. Chairman stated that the Commission has more strength with County and regional offices than with Congress. Planner III described concerns of another wind turbine project near West Granite and stated that it will be reviewed in the future. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.667. Application by C. MILLS for architectural approval of office/warehouse building on Montalvo Way between Tachevah/Compana Drives, M-1-P Zone, Section 7. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Lawrence absent) approving the application subject to the following condition: That a five foot landscape buffer set off by a concrete curb be placed around the service yard of the complex. CASE 3.573. Application by D. SACHSON for the Palm Springs Mall for architec- tural approval of final elevations for the Thrifty Drug Store in Mall on Tahquitz-McCallum Way between Farrell Drive/Baristo Road, C-S-C Zone, Section 13. M/S/C (Kaptur/Madsen; Lawrence absent) approving the application subject to the following condition: That planters be added around the columns. CASE 6.343-VARIANCE. Application by J. KOLMEL for architectural approval of elevations for an addition to a residence at 1523 Rojo Circle, R-1-C Zone, Section 26. M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Lawrence absent) approving the application sub- ject to the following condition: That Dwarf Oleander and Desert Verbena be substituted for Lantana. March 28, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 CASE 7.556-AMM. Application by J. WADDINGTON for T. Eadie for architectural approval of archway and columns for residence at 620 Rose Avenue, R-1-13 Zone, Section 10. M/S/C (Curtis/Apfelbaum; Lawrence absent) approving the application sub- ject to the use of 16 inch block for the arch. SIGN APPLICATION. Request by J. WESSMAN for architectural approval of revi- sion to one entry sign to incorporate a logo for Ralph's Market for a shopping center on Palm Canyon Drive between Morongo Road/Belardo Road, C-1 and R-3 Zones (I .L. ) , Section 22. (Ref. Case 5.0177-PD-131.) i M/S/C (Kaptur/Apfelbaum; Koetting dissented; Madsen abstained; Lawrence absent) denying the sign application. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES Planner III distributed copies of the Platt (Case 5.0185- PD-132) Dunham (Case 5.0136-PD-111) EIR which addresses both projects although only the Dunham project has been resubmitted. Convention Center. Commission and staff discussed scheduling of a review of the convention center design concept. Consensus was to hold a special study session from 12:00 noon to 1:30 p.m. on April 11 in the Large Conference Room at City Hall. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the meet- ing at 5:30 p.m. &AaAV_ PLAN I e D ftlOR MDR/ml ATT: Final page for Case 5.0312- MISC. (Percolation ponds, minutes of 3-14- 84). r ' r PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall April 11, 1984 • 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 16 2 Hugh Curtis X 16 2 Hugh Kaptur X 15 3 Peter Koetting X 16 2 Don Lawrence X 17 1 Paul Madsen X 17 1 Sharon Apfelbaum X 17 1 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Sigfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney George Parmenter, Traffic Engineer John Terell , Redevelopment Planner Douglas R. Evans, Planner III Robert Green, Planner II Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Officer Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - April 9, 1984 • James Cioffi , Chairman Earl Neel Chris Mills Hugh Curtis William Johnson Sharon Apfelbaum Michael Buccino William Johnson Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Madsen, Koetting) approving minutes of March 28, 1984, as submitted. NOTE: Chairman stated that the public hearing scheduled for the meeting would be heard after agenda items of those persons in the audience were addressed. • PUBLIC COMMENTS NONE