HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984/08/22 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Council Chamber, City Hall
August 22, 1984
... 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL F-Y 1984 - 1985
Present Present Excused Absences
Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date
Richard Service, Chairman X 3 0
Hugh Curtis X 2 1
Hugh Kaptur - 2 1
Peter Koetting X 2 1
Don Lawrence X 2 1
Paul Madsen - 2 1
Sharon Apfelbaum X 1 1
i
Staff Present
Douglas R. Evans, Planner III
Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney
George Parmenter, Traffic Engineer
Robert Green, Planner III
Margo Williams, Planner II
Richard Patenaude, Planner II
Diana Ericksen, Community Development Coordinator
Dave Forcucci, Zoning Enforcement Officer
William Hudak, Zoning Enforcement Officer
Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary
Architectural Advisory Committee Present - August 20, 1984
James Cioffi, Chairman
Earl Neel
Chris Mills
William Johnson
Hugh Curtis
Sharon Apfelbaum
Absent: Michael Buccino
Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
M/S/C (Lawrence, Apfelbaum; Kaptur, Madsen absent) approved minutes of the
July 25 as submitted and August 8, 1984 meeting with the following
corrections:
Aug. 8, 1984, page 13, Condition #2, Case 5.0303-PD-152: Change Site 2 to
Site 1.
Page 3, paragraph 3, Case 5.0323-PD-158, delete "realtor".
Page 14, paragraph 9 (last motion) Sign Application - Millers Outpost: Add
"Curtis" to dissenting vote.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2
CONSENT ACTION AGENDA
M/S/C (Lawrence; Koetting; Kaptur, Madsen absent) taking the following
actions:
CASE 3.735 (Minor). Application by J. DUPREE for Bank of America for archi-
tectural approval of enclosure of atrium at 777 North Palm Canyon Drive,
C-1 Zone, Section 10.
Restudy noting the following:
1. That the canop
y material be more .sym athic to the building.
9
2. That code enforcement personnel investigate the condition of the
existing canopy.
CASE 3.300. Application by R. JACOBS for architectural approval of final
landscape plans for industrial building located on Montalvo Way/Tachevah
Drive, M-1-P Zone, Section 7.
Approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That Polygoniun be replaced with Hall 's Honeysuckle or Cat's Claw.
2. That a suitable alternative be substituted for Mahonia Aquafolium.
CASE 5.0321-CUP. Application by J. Tammen for Balloons Restaurant for archi-
tectural approval of new entry to restaurant located at 440 S. Palm
Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15.
Continued for additional information and noting (1) that no supports be
used for the awning and (2) that detailed landscape plans be submitted.
Note: The Tribal Council did not meet in August and there are no Tribal Coun-
cil Comments for the August 22 meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CASE 5.0322-CUP (Continued) . Application by A. GUEVARA for a conditional use
permit for a ballroom-nightclub on Research Road between Farrell
Drive/Airport Road, M-1-P Zone, Section 12.
Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a negative
declaration and give final approval subject to conditions.
Chairman declared the hearing open, there being no appearances the hear-
ing was closed.
M/S/C (Curti s/Apfelbaum; Kaptur/Madsen absent) ordering the filing of a
negative declaration and approving Case 5.0322-CUP with the following
findings and subject to the following conditions:
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3
PUBLIC HEARINGS
,..,, CASE 5.0322-CUP (Continued)
FINDINGS
1. That the discotheque and dance studio can be considered under a
CUP in this location.
i
2. That the use compliments the resort function of this City and is
in harmony with the General Plan.
3. That the site as conditioned is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the use.
4. That the site relates to streets and highways properly designed to
carry the traffic to be generated by the proposed use.
5. That the conditions imposed are deemed necessary to protect the
public health, safety and general welfare.
CONDITIONS:
1. That the discotheque only be operated after the hour of 5:00 p.m.
(the remaining units are closed during this period) .
2. That the dance studio may operate during daytime hours. (Maximum
occupancy during this use shall be 24 persons including staff) .
3. According to available parking the use of premises be limited to
those specified in conditions 1 and 2.
4. That based on the available parking (72 spaces) servable floor
area of the discotheque not exceed 2,520 square feet, and the num-
ber of seats shall not exceed 216.
5. That the conditional use permit remains valid only on the condi-
tion that the lease agreement that guarantees the 60 extra parking
spaces remains in effect.
6. That the Commission retains the right to review the CUP on a com-
plaint basis.
7. That the applicant upgrade parking lot lighting standards per City
zoning ordinance requirements.
CASE 5.0317-PD-159. Application by JIMSAIR AVIATION, INC. for a planned
development district to allow a freestanding convenience market/gas
station/car wash facility located adjacent to the Palm Springs Airport,
off Gene Autry Trail between Tachevah Drive/Ramon Road, A Zone, Section
18.
Recommendation: That convenience market be denied and that there be a
restudy and resubmission of the automobile service center under a CUP
excluding the convenience market that may intergrate the carwash
facility.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CASE 5.0317-PD-159 (Continued)
Planner III (Evans) stated that the applicant requested a continuance.
Planner III (Green) presented the staff report and stated that the AAC
recommended a restudy of design and that the staff recommendation for
denial is based on the ordinance requirement for airport related uses
which serve users of the terminal (not the general public), and that the
proposal is a freestanding convenience store which does not relate to
the airport terminal and which use would be precedent-setting and is not
an accessory use. He stated, for example, that a restaurant use with a
separate access would not be meeting the intent of the ordinance and
described the present facilities within the terminal building.
Chairman stated that the Commission has denied a previous request for a
mini-market in conjunction with a service station. Chairman declared
the hearing open.
P. Selzer, attorney representing the applicants, requested a continuance
for the applicant to provide additional information concerning the usage
of the facility by pilots and other airport visitors.
W. Kleindienst, 3963 Calle San Antonio, stated that he has spoken in
favor of the convenience store/gas station in the past and suggests that
cases be reviewed individually, that he had provided staff with articles
concerning the unique problems of gas stations and their requirements
for adjunct marketing, and that he is aware of the Commissions stance on
mixed use.
There being no further appearances the hearing was closed.
Chairman polled the Commission to determine whether or not the study
session should be scheduled to review the mixed use. Commission consen-
sus was that a study session was not necessary.
M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen absent) continuing the application
till October 10, at the applicant's request, for submission of material
regarding use of the facility by pilots and other airport visitors.
CASE 5.0326-PD-136A. Application by W. KLEINDIENST for Westar Associates for
an amended planned development district to allow construction of a free
standing restaurant with drive through facilities on North Palm Canyon
Drive between Racquet Club/Via Olivera, C-1 Zone, Section 3, (Ref. Case
5.0209-PD-136)
Recommendation: That the Planning Commission approve Case 5.0326-PD-
136A subject to conditions.
Planner II (Williams) presented the project on the display board and
'*01 stated that staff has had concerns on the design of the project since it
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CASE 5.0326-PD-136A (Continued)
is the first project of its type fronting on Palm Canyon Drive and could
be precedent-setting.
She stated th
at the staff is concerned with the
exit point and also recommends additional landscaping and trellis detail
for further screening of the drive-through lane. Discussion followed on
the driveway width. Planner II stated that the radius had been expanded
to alleviate the problem.
Planner III (Evans) stated that a retaining wall may be required to
obtain enough berming for the project. Planner II stated that the AAC
had not recommended any changes and required the submittal of a sign
program.
Planner II stated that the curb will be pulled further back when Palm
Canyon is widened.
Chairman declared the hearing open.
P. Selzer, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant concurs
with the staff report and requested that the requirement for the exten-
sion of the trellis be deleted since it will create a tunnel effect and
is not necessary. He stated that the view from Highway 111 is satis-
factory, that there are several banks with drive-throughs on Palm Canyon
and two on Tahquitz with no berms and no landscaping, and that the
facility is well designed. He stated that the architect and representa-
tives of Carls Jr. 's were in the audience and requested an opportunity
for rebuttal of any negative comments.
The following people spoke in favor of the proposal :
J. Flanders, 2400 North Palm Canyon
Ms. L. Coltus, Manager of Linen and Things
Ms. W. Haynes, Manager of Loehmanns
D. Lennox, Manager of Famous Footwear.
W. Kleindienst, architect for the project, stated that the intent is to
have proper flow and circulation for the project, that the City traffic
engineer is satisfied with the radius, that the problem with conflict
between pedestrian and the automobile will be avoided, and that there is
a sufficient landscape screen. In response to Commission questions, he
stated that drive-throughs assist the economics of restaurants and that
the equipment on the roof will be adequately screened. He stated that
the condition could be included in the working drawings.
L. Olson, 107 Lime Street, Brea, California, representing Carls Jr.
stated that the drive-through element provides 45% of the total business
and that the beauty of the corner will make the facility outstanding.
Chairman stated that the Commission welcomed another aesthetically
pleasing facility to the Community.
Planner III stated that since the project is a PD, final development
plans are to be submitted within two years from the date of final
approval.
i
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6
PUBLIC HEARINGS
`wl CASE 5.0326-PD-136A (Continued)
x
Discussion ensued on staff concerns regarding the driveway width, the
trellis, and landscaping. Commissioner Lawrence stated that the trellis
and wall are not necessary.
Planner III stated that the wall will be required only if needed for
mowing and water runoff.
M/S/C (Lawrence, Curtis; Koetting abstained; Kaptur, Madsen absent)
approving PD 136-A with the folliwng findings and subject to the follow-
ing conditions:
FINDINGS
1. That the application for a drive-through restaurant under PD pro-
cedures is properly a use for which a PD may be considered in
order to amend the existing PD.
2. That the restaurant portion of the application is a use normally
allowed in the underlying C-1 Zone and is consistent with the
City's General Plan.
3. That drive-through restaurants are currently prohibited in the
underlying C-1 Zone..
4. That to properly consider the application the use prohibition
should be removed from the Zoning Ordinance.
5. That the site is otherwise adequate in size and shape to accom-
modate a restaurant of the size proposed including adequate park-
ing, setbacks, and landscaping necessary to adjust the use to the
site.
6. That the site is serviced by Palm Canyon Drive, a major thorough-
fare, and Racquet Club Road, a secondary thoroughfare, which are
adequately designed to accommodate the type of traffic expected to
be generated by this use.
7. That an Ordinance amendment is currently being considered allowing
drive-through restaurantssubject to a CUP.
CONDITIONS
1. That the applicant repair the driveway and appurtenances on the front-
age .of 'N. Palm Canyon Drive.
2. That all conditions of the Development Committee be met.
3. That a detailed sign program be submitted (including all si ns,
menu board, speaker box, and drive-through entrance signs, etc.jq.
4. That the architectural elevations be revised to integrate the
drive-through lane into the building design through a trellis
structure and landscaping or a similar structure.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CASE 5.0326-PD-136A (Continued)
5. That outdoor seating not be permitted unless adequate parking is
available.
6. That detailed development pplans including landscape plans be submitted
and approved as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
7. That final development plans be submitted within 2 years from the
date of final approval pursuant to procedures set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance.
CASE 5.0329-GPA. Initiation by the City of Palm Springs of an amendment to
the General Plan from . "Prof;essional " to General Commercial or
such other designations as the Commission finds appropriate for property
on the southwest corner of Sunrise Way/Ramon Road, RGA-8 Zone, Section
23.
Recommendation: That the Commission order the preparation of a draft
negative declaration, tentatively approve Case 5.0329-GPA by adopting a
new land use category of "Mixed Commercial" and that the General Plan be
implemented using a Planned Development District in lieu of a change of
zone with Case 5.0243-CZ.
Planner III (Evans) described the area in which the General Plan amend-
ment would be applicable, and stated that the staff recommends that a PD
which prohibits the highest traffic volume generators to avoid overload-
ing the intersection with traffic be submitted. He replied in response
to a Commission question, in the rezoning of Indian land the neighbor-
hood convenience store designation "dot" was removed from the General
Plan map, and that no list of uses has been developed although high turn
over uses will be prohibited.
Chairman declared the hearing open.
J. Wessman, 72200 Clancy Lane, Rancho Mirage, requested that the Commis-
sion preferably change the zoning to "Commercial" instead of a planned
development district due to the fact that the traffic generation will
not be as voluminous as the traffic reports indicate because the inter-
section already carries a high volume of traffic, which would not be
increased significantly by the proposed use, and also that the concept
of the use of the corner has not been determined. He requested a Com-
mission direction of whether or not a ranch type of market, such as the
Irvine Ranch Market, would be appropriate. He stated that the property
contigious to Alpha Beta will not be developed because it is too expen-
sive to cover the flood control channel . He stated that neighborhood
shopping center traffic creates less traffic throughout the City because
of its localized area and that his preference would be for a General
Plan amendment to "commercial" with zoning to remain R-G-A(8) , that a PD
be used for the project. He stated that improvements to the site will
improve the intersection of Sunrise and Ramon and that it is not spot
zoning since the zoning is already fragmented and that the site area is
not appropriate for residential uses since Ramon Road is a highway with
many commercial uses existing presently.
i
i
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CASE 5.0329-GPA (Continued)
In response to Commission question, Planner III (Evans) stated that the
statistics indicate that the traffic will increase in the area, and that
a traffic anaylsis may be required. He stated that the JHK Traffic
Report is accurate and has been verified by reports in the field, that
traffic statistics have not been used correctly by the applicant and
that staff has projected what might happen in the future at the inter-
section.
Chairman stated that 6000 trips as indicated in the staff report would
be 3000 cars with ingress and egress. There being no further appear-
ances, Chairman declared the hearing closed.
Assistant City Attorney stated that the General Plan amendement (GPA)
should either be processed with a zone change or, the GPA should be con-
tinued pending receipt of a PDD so there is no incompatability between
the zoning and the Master Plan (which is prohibited by State law) . Mr.
Wessman stated that delaying processing would be a problem since he can-
not approach a client unless he knows what use will be allowed on the
site.
Discussion followed.
Commissioner Koetting asked if the applicant wished to obtain a client
and submit a plan, which if approved, would allow a General Plan amend-
ment to be processed. He stated that the applicant should submit a con-
cept for the site.
Mr. Wessman requested that the Commission indicate appropriate uses
before any more time, money and effort is spent.
In response to Commission question, Traffic Engineer stated that futher
traffic anaylsis is needed and that high traffic generators should be
prohibited. That uses being discussed are high traffic generators.
Planner III (Evans) , in reply to Commission question, stated that the
staff recommends a new land use classification of "Mixed Commercial".
The Assistant City Attorney has indicated he would like to review the
staff recommendation to a conditional zone change to C-1 subject to
submission of a PD (in lieu of an architectural approval application) .
Assistant City Attorney stated that conditional zoning must be used
carefully since if a zone change is approved and the conditions are not
met, the property does not revert to the original zone. He stated that
a PD in lieu of a change of zone which is compatible with the General
Plan meets the requirements of state law, and that a PD application can-
not be considered by the Commission until a specific proposal is sub-
mitted therefore the PD should be processed concurrently with the
General Plan amendment.
Planner III requested direction from the Commission for the use, i.e. ,
"mixed commercial" or "straight commercial" which will then be discussed
with the City Attorney, and that a PD application would be preferable in
order to control traffic impacts. He stated that the environmental
assessment could be ordered prepared with review of the actual zoning
and General Plan amendment at the September 12 meeting.
I
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9
PUBLIC HEARINGS
., CASE 5.0329-GPA (Continued)
Chairman stated that the Commission does not want straight commercial
zoning because of the lack of standards and that a procedure is needed
to expedite the applicant's proposal . He stated that the Commission
could order the preparation of a draft negative declaration and advise
staff on the direction to take.
M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen absent) ordering the preparation
of a draft negative declaration and continuing the case to September 12.
Discussion followed on the type of zoning that is appropriate for the
corner.
M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen) For staff to prepare a recom-
mendation evaluating a commercial use on the corner and whether or not
there should be a General Plan amendment or a change of zone.
Mr. Wessman stated that he would like to build a mini neighborhood
center, and that he could not see how changing the General Plan to
"Commercial" would be appropriate if he would have to submit a PD appli-
cation that specifies the use. He stated that City processing is
lengthy.
Chairman stated that the Commission concern is on the scale of the pro-
ject at that particular corner and that the most preferrable category is
"mixed use" where the intensity of traffic can be controlled.
Mr. Wessman stated that a supermarket cannot be placed on the long,
narrow property and questioned whether or not the Commission wanted a
ranch-type of market.
Planner III (Evans) stated that the issue is not so much the General
Plan, but how the development can be obtained. He stated that a "Mixed
Commercial" use implementation method recommendation (zoning) can be
developed for Commission review September 12 after discussions with the
Assistant City Attorney and the Planning Director, who is on vacation.
Chairman polled the Commission on whether a ranch type of market use is
appropriate. Commission consensus was that it is an appropriate use.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
CASE 5.0312-J-MISC. Application by VTN CONSOLIDATED INC. for Flow Wind
Corportation for a Change of Zone (No. 4273) from W-2 to W-E for prop-
erty located south of the junction of Highway 62/I-10, Section 18,
Sphere of Influence.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
,.. CASE 5.0312-J-MISC. (Continued)
Planner III presented the project on the display board and stated that
the staff recommends either denial or deferrment of action until the
Sphere of Influence plan is adopted. He stated that if approved by the
Commission, staff recommends smaller turbine development close to the
highway and reduction in the number of turbines to create more open
space.
R. McClendin, representing Flow Wind Corportation, Livermore, Califor-
nia, stated that the turbines will supply energy for 1700 homes and pay
$500,000 a year in taxes, due to the value of the turbines, and that the
company will cooperate with the County and VTN in the environmental
aspects, and described the history of the corporation. He stated that
the generators are one of the largest generators of horsepower in the
valley and that a removal bond in the amount of $265 to $300 for each
machine will be posted as a County requirement. He stated that the
aluminum in the machines is valuable for recycling, that the words "Flow
Wind" on the blades will not be allowed because of County standards, and
that the machines will be either light gray or tan in color.
In reply to Commission question, Planner III (Evans) stated that the
machines are difficult to see in the photo display prepared by the
applicant but easily visible in the field. He stated also that there is
a Southern California Edison right-of-way for the Devers substation
utility corridor transversing the project, and that the energy produced
goes into the Edison grid system and will not affect energy costs to the
local consumer. He stated that the energy produced is not the cheapest
electricity developed, that the City Building Division is preparing a
cost anaylsis of co-generation versus wind energy, and that to reduce
costs to the public, the City would have to become a utility and sell
electricity.
Commissioner Lawrence stated that no taxes or energy is given to the
City by the machines, that the windmills will exist a long time since
they do not run, there is nothing that the Commission can do regarding
development of these projects, and that he wished that the Commission
did not have to review them. He stated that the City recommended
against the development of turbines south of the freeway.
M/S/C (Lawrence/Apfelbaum; Kaptur/Madsen absent) denying Case 5.0312-J-
MISC pending completion of a Sphere of Influence plan.
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 3.727. Application by PALM SPRINGS STORAGE PARTNERS, LTD. for architec-
tural approval of portable storage units in an existing walled-in
storage facility on Mesquite Road between Williams Road/Vella Road, M-1
Zone, Section 19.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS
CASE 3.727 (Continued)
C. Mills, the architect, 278-C N. Palm Canyon, described the configura-
tion and transport of the portable storage units and stated that although
they are portable, they are permanant in nature.
M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen absent) approving Case 3.727 sub-
ject to the following conditions:
1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met.
2. That there be no stacking of containers over the height of one
container.
3. That units be visually screened from the public right-of-way.
CASE 3.717 (Ref. TTM 14899-Revised). Application by FRIEDMAN VENTURES for
architectural approval of revised exterior elevations for an industrial
park on Gene Autry Trail between Sunny Dunes Road/Mesquite Avenue, M-1
Zone (I.L.) , Section 20.
Planner III (Green) presented the project on the display board and
stated that the landscape plan for Gene Autry Trail is being followed by
the applicant.
Chairman questioned the use of gun metal gray for the color of the
building.
Ms. E. Ricketts, project architect, stated that gray was chosen for con-
trast, and that uses would be light commercial for the building.
Discussion followed on the elevations of the project. Commissioner
Apfelbaum stated that the AAC had not reviewed the color. Ms. Ricketts
explained that the architects tried to comply with both the applicants
and the AAC's wishes.
Planner III (Evans) stated that the Building and Safety Director would
have to answer questions on the insulation quality of dark roofs. Ms.
Ricketts stated that the color makes no difference regarding heat reten-
tion.
M/S/C (Curtis/Koetting; Kaptur/Madsen absent; Apfelbaum/Service dis-
sented) approving the application subject to the following conditions:
1. That the vertical roof elevations be stucco.
2. That the rear portion of the roof elevation be angled.
3. That the revised elevations submitted August 22, 1984 are
approved.
4. That a 6" minimum variation in elevation be provided between the
vertical and sloped roof elements.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS
,., CASE 3.717 (Continued)
5. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met.
Chairman stated that he dissented because of the minimal (poor) design
of the building.
CASE 3.730 (Minor) . Application by N. CRISAFI for architectural approval of
fascia modification on property located at 4775-4777 Ramon Road, M-1
Zone, Section 20.
Planner III (Green) presented the project on the display board and
stated that the AAC recommended a restudy. He stated that the applicant
is requesting that the Commission consider the detailed landscaping plan
(which was not presented to the AAC) , and that the applicant will
redesign the canopy and paint the stucco and restripe the parking lot.
He stated that staff recommends approval of the landscape plan, deletion
of the parallel parking spaces on Ramon Road, revisions to the landscape
planter, and to refer details of the landscape plan to staff for
approval .
Discussion followed on Commission action.
C. Maxwell , representing the applicant, stated that the owner wishes to
revamp the building.
Chairman stated that he would provide Mr. Maxwell with the name of a
company which has a graffiti-proof product for the exterior of the
building.
Mr. Maxwell stated that when the building is occupied there will not be
a graffiti problem and requested permission to enclose the garage door
and stucco the opening.
Chairman stated that piecemeal changes cannot be considered. Mr.
Maxwell stated that only clean-up changes are being requested.
Commissioner Koetting suggested concrete or stucco or glu-lam materials
instead of a metal roof.
Mr. Maxwell stated that the Planning Director indicated that the site is
in a redevelopment project area and suggested that the applicant not do
extensive work on the building.
M/S/C (Lawrence/Koetting; Kaptur/Madsen absent) ordering a restudy of
the project including elevations, landscaping and parking.
CASE 5.0286-ZTA. Initiation by the City of Palm Springs for an amendment to
the Zoning Text for the regulation of drive-through facilities for all
commercial , industrial zones (except C-B-D-Central Business District
Zone), City-wide.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS
CASE 5.0286-ZTA (Continued)
Planner II (Patenaude) presented the staff report and stated that there
are no guidelines to review drive-through facilities, that Commission
and Council have indicated that drive-throughs may be appropriate, and
that staff recommends that they be allowed in the zones by CUP because
the process would remedy design problems of drive-throughs of the past.
He discussed amendments to sections of the Zoning Text and stated that
the amendment would include drive-through facilities for banks.
Planner III (Evans) stated that only restaurant uses would be required
to obtain a CUP for a drive-thru facility.
Discussion followed on problems with existing facilities. Planner III
(Evans) stated that retrofit is a problem for existing facilities, and
that drive-through facilities would be subject to design requirements.
Chairman stated that the ordinance would present a problem in some bank
drive-throughs because of a stacking problem, and that there should be a
greater stacking capacity so that cars are not stacked in the public
right-of-way.
In reply to Commission question, Planner III stated that the Traffic
Engineer reviews all projects which affect roadways.
Assistant City Attorney stated that the terminology "drive-through"
versus "drive-in" does not present a problem, but that he has not
reviewed the document.
M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen absent) ordering the preparation
of a draft negative declaration and continuing the case for further
review to September 12.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued)
DETERMINATION. Planning Commission determination that the Capital Improvement
Program is not in conflict with the City's General Plan.
Community Development Coordinator explained that the Commission deter-
mines that the CIP is in conformance with the General Plan as a formal-
ity, and that the CIP had been adopted in July.
Commissioner Lawrence requested that staff give guidelines on the next
CIP early in the process for Commission input before Council action.
M/S/C (Lawrence/Apfelbaum; Kaptur/Madsen absent) determining that the
CIP is in conformance with the General Plan.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued)
DETERMINATION. Planning Commission review of Desert Water Agency Capital
Improvement Program.
Planner III (Evans) stated that the staff will meet with the DWA in
reference to the CIP and Indian Avenue construction is of concern, since
the City does not want Indian Avenue being repaired during the season,
and that the hydroelectric facility at Snow Creek is an informational
item. He stated that the water mains are of concern on Highway 111
since installation of the mains maybe growth inducing. He stated that
the Commission could find all of the items except for the three dis-
cussed are in conformance with the City's General Plan, with the three
items to be reviewed at the September 12 meeting.
M/S/C (Lawrence/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen absent) determining that all of
the projects described in the DWA letter of July 16, except for the
Indian Avenue construction, the Snow Creek Hydroelectric Plant and the
Highway 111 water main installations are in conformance with the City's
General Plan. This motion was later amended with the consent of the
seconder to continue all items to September 12 for staff to prepare a
more detailed description of all proposed projects. Note: Commis-
sioners felt that more information is needed on the projects. Planner
III stated that input could be provided if the Commission felt that the
DWA were providing waterlines to an area where the Commission felt
service should not be installed.
Discussion followed on utility company representation on the City's
Development Committee. Planner III stated that some company representa-
tives attend, and that all agencies receive copies of applications. He
stated that the DWA aids staff in determining whether trunk lines are
needed for blowsand mitigation on projects.
REVIEW. Planning Commission review of TTM 20087, a PUD for a 48-unit cluster
housing development located in the City's Sphere of Influence south of
the Whitewater Channel west of Gene Autry Trail (formerly Palm Drive)
and east of Whitewater Club Drive, Section 6.
M/S/C (Koeting/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen) for a restudy of TTM 20087.
Noting the following:
1. On-site drainage and method of handling the retention basin over-
flow.
2. Flood control measures from adjacent Whitewater Channel .
3. Alignment and dedication (142' ) necessary for Whitewater Express-
way.
4. Circulation system design. (A buffer is needed between project
and adjacent properties.)
5. A minimum of a 15' separation between buildings.
6. More imaginative design.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued)
REVIEW (Continued)
7. Blowsand mitigation measures.
8. That visitor parking be provided.
9. That a wind break is necessary.
10. That the freeway right-of-way be shown.
11. That a buffer is needed between the adjacent property rear yards
and Loop Road.
REVIEW. Planning Commission review of proposed General Plan amendments to the
circulation plan for Riverside County for streets located in the sphere
area. (Windy Point/Whitewater area.)
Planner III (Evans) stated that the three "paper" streets are proposed
to be removed from the General Plan because of wind energy development
and that many streets have been vacated in the area and require dedica-
tion of property. He stated that staff recommends that action be post-
poned until the Sphere Plan is completed. Assistant City Attorney
stated that if the project is tabled it would have to be removed before
the end of the next meeting.
M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen absent) recommending to the City
Council that amendments to the circulation plan for Riverside County for
streets in the Windy Point/Whitewater area be postponed until the Sphere
Plan is completed.
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued)
SIGN APPLICATION (Continued) . Application by J. WESSMAN for Ralph's Market
for architectural approval for revised plans for a monument sign for a
supermarket in a neighborhood shopping center on South Palm Canyon Drive
between Morongo Road/Belardo Road, PD-131 (I.L.) , Section 22.
Continued to September 12 at the applicant's request.
CASE 3.724. Application by WATT-JACOBS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY for architectural
approval of a single family residence on Vista Chino Avenue north of
Whitewater Club Drive, R-1-C Zone, Section 1.
and
`�,.. CASE 3.725. Application by WATT-JACOBS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY for architectural
approval of a single family residence located on Sunrise Way/Joyce
Drive, R-1-C Zone, Section 1.
and
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 16
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued)
CASE 3.726. Application by WATT-JACOBS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY for architectural
approval of a single family residence located on Sunrise Way/Joyce
Drive, R-1-C Zone, Section 1.
Discussion ensued on trim and wall detail and overhangs of the single
family residences.
M/S/C (Koetting/Lawrence; Kaptur/Madsen absent) approving Cases 3.724,
3.725, and 3.726 subject to the following conditions:
1. That 80% of street trees be 24" box size except Eucalyptus which
may be 15 gallon size.
2. That Eucalyptus Citrodora be substituted with Eucalyptus
Polyanthemos and that Quercus suber be replaced with a suitable
alternate.
3. The detailed landscape and irrigation plants be submitted prior to
the issuance of building permits. Plans shall include mounding
and berming.
4. That the rectangular attic vent at the gable be replaced with a
round vent.
5. That the garage have a full-hip roof.
6. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met.
7. That all windows facing public right-of-ways be trimmed with a
wood trim or a brick windowsill .
8. That the roof overhang be extended to 24" or 30".
9. That all walls meet code requirements.
SIGN APPLICATION. Application by C. PAOLI for architectural approval of main
identification sign and awning as a cover for an outdoor dining area for
restaurant at 1211 S. Palm Canyon Drive (former Swiss Chalet location,
C-1 Zone, Section 23.
M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Kaptur/Madsen absent) for a restudy noting the
following:
1. That the awning tie into the arch element of the building.
2. That detailed landscape and irrigation plans be submitted.
3. That exterior elevations for the west side be submitted.
�, 4. That a parking lot redesign plan be submitted.
August 22, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 17
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued)
..r CASE 7.561-AMM. Application by D. ZEISLER for architectural approval of revi-
se7 plans for entry gate for single-family residence at 478 Camino Sur,
R-1-A Zone, Section 10.
M/S/C (Koetting/Curtis; Apfelbaum abstained; Kaptur/Madsen absent)
approving the application as submitted.
COMMISSION REPORTS, REQUESTS AND DISCUSSION
- Andreas Cove Country Club Field Trip (Case 5.0258-PD-145) . Field trip
is scheduled for September 8 at 7:00 a.m. with the Commissioners to meet
gate. Planner III Evans stated that staff
t the Indian toll a )
a (
9
responses to the applicant's comments in the EIR will be mailed to the
Commission on August 23.
- Andreas Cove Country Club Study Session (Case 5.0258-PD-145) . Review of
the conditions of approval scheduled for September 12, at 12:30 p.m. to
1:30 p.m. , in the City Council Chamber; remaining agenda items will also
be reviewed.
ADJOURNMENT
The being no further business to discuss the Chairman adjourned the
meeting at 5:20 p.m.
Planning ector
MDR/dre/ml
WP/PC MIN 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Council Chamber, City Hall
-- September 26, 1984
1 :30 p.m.
ROLL CALL F-Y 1984 - 1985
Present Present Excused Absences
Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date
Richard Service, Chairman X 5 0
Hugh Curtis X
4 1
Hugh Kaptur X 4 1
Peter Koetting X 4 1
Don Lawrence X 4 1
Paul Madsen X 4 1
Sharon Apfelbaum X 3 1
Staff Present
Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director
Douglas R. Evans, Planner III
Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney
Robert Green, Planner III
Margo Williams, Planner II
Richard Patenaude, Planner II
John Terell , Redevelopment Planner
Emily Perri , Economic Development & Housing Specialist
.► Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary
Architectural Advisory Committee Present - September 24, 1984
James Cioffi , Chairman
Earl Neel
Michael Buccino
William Johnson
Hugh Curtis
Sharon Apfelbaum
Chris Mills
Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
M/S/C (Curtis/Koetting) approving minutes o Zst2,> 1984 ith the
following correction: Attendance for Sharon Apfe -Vie-be
M/S/C---(-Law nce, Curtis; K tur, Madsen absent) approving the Minutes of
'September j2 with the follti�wing addition: Page 23, TTM 17260 and Case 3.645,
tWb motion . . . "a'I'd approval of TTM 17260".