Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985/10/09 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall October 9, 1985 • 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1985 - 1986 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Paul Madsen, Chairman X 7 0 Hugh Curtis X 7 0 Hugh Kaptur X 6 1 Sharon Apfelbaum X 6 1 Larry Lapham X 7 0 Curt Ealy X 2 0 Vacant Position - - - Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director William Hudak, Zoning Enforcement Officer Robert Green, Planner Carol Vankeeken, Planner Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - October 7, 1985 J. Cioffi, Chairman Absent: Tom Docze • William Johnson Chris Mills Earl Neel Curt Ealy Sharon Apfelbaum Michael Buccino, Alternate Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Curtis/Ealy) approving the minutes of the September 25, 1985 meeting as submitted. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES: There were no Tribal Council comments. M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Curtis) adopting Resolution #3767, commending former Planning Commission Chairman, Ric Service, for his outstanding contributions to the community during his tenure on the Planning Commission. • October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA • Approval of architectural cases is valid for two ,years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. M/S/C (Curtis/Apfelbaum) taking the following actions: SIGN APPLICATION (Reference Case 3.711) . Application by R. RICCIARDI for M. Hemstreet for architectural approval of main identification sign for 125 unit hotel on North Palm Canyon Drive between Vista Chino/Via Escuela, C-1 and R-3 Zones, Section 3. Approved, subject to the following condition: That the finish of the monument be sandblasted. CASE 3.716. Application by H. ROBERTSON for architectural approval of revision to entry for Seven Lakes Country Club, Seven Lakes Drive, R-G- A(8) Zone, Section 30. Abstention: Madsen. Approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the berm at the entry be reduced in height to 2 feet. • 2. That the air conditioning unit be re-located from the roof of the gate house and screened with landscaping. SIGN APPLICATION (Reference Case 3.814) . Application by EXCALIBUR MOTOR CAR COMPANY for architectural approval of relocation of previously approved identification sign for business at 335 East Sunny Dunes Road, C-M Zone, Section 23. Abstention: Ealy. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.890. Application by DUPLANTY ARCHITECTS for Canyon Associates for architectural approval of a 38-unit condominium project on South Palm Canyon Drive between Cantina Way/LaVerne Way, R-2 Zone, Section 27. (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration; order for filing; and final approval . No comments received. ) Ordered the filing of a Negative Declaration; and final approval , subject to the following condition: That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA • CASE 2.812 (Reference Case 5.688-CUP) . Request by R. RICH for Planning Commission review of wall not in conformance with approval of color and materials in Fairways Condominium complex on the northeast corner of 34th Street/Crossley Road, G-R-5 Zone, Section 20. Approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the wall cap be removed. 2. That a stucco coat be applied to the wall to match the color and texture of the surrounding development. Note: Slurry seal is not acceptable. NOTE: The item was later removed from the Consent Action Agenda and separate action taken to continue the matter until the October 23 meeting. CASE 3.645. Application by HELTZER ENTERPRISES for Planning Commission reconsideration of approval of carports for condominium project on Golf Club Drive between Waverly/Cree Road, R-3 Zone (I.L.) , Section 29. Approved, subject to the following condition: That glu-lam beams be used for the substructure. CASE 3.902. Application by R. HARRISON for R. Howard for architectural approval of a single family residence on La Mirada Road between Ramon/Sunny Dunes Roads, R-1-A Zone, Section 22. Approved, subject to the following condition: That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA SIGN APPLICATION - RECONSIDERATION (Continued) . Request of I. MAGNIN for reconsideration of sign location and height in Desert Fashion Plaza on North Palm Canyon Drive between Amado Road/Tahquitz Way, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planning Director stated that the sign was approved by the Commission at 38 feet from grade because of the architecture of the building, but the Council felt that the height should be 28 feet; and that the AAC felt that the sign was acceptable in either location proposed (38 feet from grade or 28 feet from grade) . He stated that the sign may or may not be necessary since it is on the back of the building facing the parking lot • and the Desert Museum; and that the 38-foot height is twice the height of any sign in Palm Springs. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA • SIGN APPLICATION - RECONSIDERATION (Continued) . Discussion followed on the visibility of the sign from the various loca- tions. Planning Director stated that the applicants probably thought that the higher location was approved. Commissioner Lapham stated that the re-location is preferable, but would set a precedent since the height is 38 feet, which is above Sign Ordinance requirements; and that hopefully the applicant will decide to eliminate the sign. Planning Director explained that the Sign Ordinance allows modification of standards because of unusual site conditions, but that special circum- stances do not exist in the subject application. Partial consensus was that the 28-foot height is more in keeping with the village character of the City. M/S/C (Curtis/Apfelbaum; Lapham dissented) approving the sign at 28 feet above grade. CASE 3.849 (MINOR) . Application by S. SACKLEY for a architectural approval of revised roof tile for a single family residence on 3320 Andreas Hills Road, R-1-C Zone, Section 1. Planning Director stated that the AAC recommended the original white tile or Navajo white color rather than the gray tile which was submitted • by the applicant as an alternative. M/S/C (Lapham/Kaptur; Apfelbaum dissented) approving the tile with a satin finish and in Navajo White. Note: Commissioner Apfelbaum dissented because she felt that the tile was too white. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0371-PD-173 (Continued) . Application by J. WESSMAN for approval of a planned development district for a mixed use of commercial, retail and office on Sunrise Way between Ramon/Sunny Dunes Roads, R-G-A(8) Zone, Section 23. (Commission response to written comment on Draft Negative Declaration; order for filing, file approval . No comments received.) Chairman abstained; Vice Chairman presided. Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and give final approval , subject to conditions. Assistant City Attorney stated that because of abstentions on the • Commission (Madsen, Ealy, Kaptur) one Commissioner could be counted to make a quorum, but may not discuss the item or vote; and that any vote taken would have to be unanimous among the three Commissioners. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS • CASE 5.0371-PD-173 (Continued) . Planner (Green) presented the project and stated that the previous Commission action was that the PD be sent to Council after Planning Commission approval with traffic study conditions developed by staff. Planning Director added a seventh condition of approval , as follows: That the uses on the site be as found in the C-D-N section of the Ordinance for clarity, that the Planned Development District is approved in lieu of a change of zone. Planner stated that staff found originally that the traffic has an adverse affect on the street, but in the revised findings, the wording has been changed to "may have" an adverse effect. Chairman declared the hearing open. J. Wessman, 72-200 Clancy Lane, Rancho Mirage, the applicant suggested that condition #3, regarding the carwash exit be made a condition of the traffic study; and that #5 requiring a traffic study should state "focused traffic study". Planning Director stated that the sidewalk width on Sunrise can be resolved with the applicant in the final development plan stage since bikepaths south of Ramon will not be developed in the near future. He • stated that improving Sunrise to the centerline is a requirement, but could be discussed with Engineering regarding the possibility of an overlay, and that there would be no problem in allowing flexibility in conditions regarding parking around the carwash. He stated that a certificate of compliance will probably be processed instead of a map and that flood control fees would be required. Discussion followed regarding the traffic study and ingress and egress. Mr. Wessman stated that all Commission concerns would be addressed. There being no futher appearances, Chairman declared the hearing closed. M/S/C (Lapham/Curtis; Ealy, Kaptur, Madsen abstained) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and approving the application with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: REVISED FINDINGS: 1. That the overall use applied for is properly one for which a Planned Development District application is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the use is in harmony with the General Plan. 3. That the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the • use, including yards, setbacks, walls, landscaping and other features required to adjust the use to existing and permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS • CASE 5.0371-PD-173 (Continued). 4. That traffic to be generated by the use may adversely affect the adjoining streets and the intersection of Ramon and Sunrise Way. CONDITIONS 1. That all conditions of the Development Committee dated July 18, 1985, shall be complied with. 2. That all mechanical equipment shall be screened. 3. That the exit to the carwash shall be revised to accommodate parked cars adjoining the exit and ancillary driveways. 4. That the Final Planned Development District application shall be submitted in accordance with Section 9407.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. That a traffic study which analyzes the impact of the proposal on the adjoining roads and intersection shall be submitted prior to submission of the Final Planned Development District application with the type of study (focused or total) to be resolved with the applicant by staff. . The Planning Commission reserves the right to impose conditions as necessary as a result of the traffic study. Note: Such condi- tions may affect the layout of the site and. configuration of adjoining streets. 6. That signs shall be subject to a separate application. 7. That the uses approved shall comple with the requirements of the C-D-N Zone. CASE 5.0375-ZTA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance for regulation of neon lighted signs city-wide. (This action is categorically exempt from environmental assessment per CEQA guidelines.) Recommendation: That the Commission give final approval to Zoning Text Amendment 5.0375. Planning Director presented the staff report. He stated that the proposed ordinance would further regulate the use of exposed neon signs; that the City Council has expressed concern over the neon image in the community; and that proliferation is a concern as well as the internal use of lighted neon signs. He explained the five policies recommended • by staff for neon regulation, and stated that bright white and red are recommended to be generally prohibited, due to their brightness and intensity; that staff recommends one change to the ordinance regarding the adjustment of the lighting level ; and that the five policies October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS • CASE 5.0375-ZTA (Continued) . developed be adopted. He stated that the issue was not the size of the sign, but the intensity; and the ordinance could be amended to designate that lighted signs in general be smaller. Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that she felt that the smaller the neon sign, the more dynamic and effective it is. Chairman declared the hearing open. W. Howlett, P. 0. Box 312, Palm Springs, sign designer, stated that specifics are desirable since they give a designer parameters. He stated that clear glass red neon should be the criteria, that intensity should be defined, and suggested that the ordinance require that 60 or 120 milliamp transformers not be used in Palm Springs. He stated that the time lag between field review and modifications to signs may be a hardship on a merchant; and that the criteria for no exposed mechanical equipment is viable. He stated that architectural neon sign outlininq building shapes will probably be forthcoming; and that prohibiting specific colors is probably not desirable since red can be effective. He stated that signs should be reviewed as a whole; and that 30 milliamp transformers should be the maximum size. Commissioner Kaptur stated that he was concerned over requiring equipment on a sign to lower intensity since it will be expensive; and • that the first few signs will be costly for applicants, but as experience is gained, criteria will be established on intensity, thus making a neon application less expensive. Planning Director stated that staff learns from experience and has found that rust colored signs lit by red neon become red at night, that the policies established for neon may be established for all lighted signs; and that the Olive Oyl ' s red neon sign was conditioned for diminishing of intensity, if required. Mr. Howlett stated that prohibitive costs occur on small signs when mechanical equipment is added. Mrs. D. Hodges, 2122 E. Baristo, President of the Merchants and Citizens Association, requested continuance for review of the staff report and recommendations by the Merchants and Citizens Association. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed for the October 9 meeting. Commissioner Curtis stated that he was in agreement with staff recommendations, that internal lighting is a concern which might not be able to be resolved. He questioned staff' s recommendation #1 regarding general prohibition of red and white neon. He asked about masking the neon. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS • CASE 5.0375-ZTA (Continued). Planning Director explained that the policies have not been discussed with the sign industry; and that depending on the design a smoked plexi- glass face could be used in front of the neon for adjusting the lighting. He stated that in some instances white and red neon can be appropriate. Chairman stated that he preferred lack of specificity of the policy and suggested that the wording regarding red and white neon be generally "discouraged" rather than "prohibited". Planning Director stated that a combination of conditions could be used and the policy provisions could address major issues with design issues and surroundings taken into consideration. Commissioner Lapham suggested that the colors red and white be deleted and that a statement be made that intensity and starkness of signing is a concern. He stated that he felt that the expense of a Conditional Use Permit for a neon sign is not warranted. Planning Director stated that appropriateness of individually proposed neon signs in an area can be enforced. Assistant City Attorney stated that architectural review in general . addresses architectural features in the area and could result in a review of a sign proposal . Planning Director stated that staff is trying to avoid specificity in materials because it narrows the range of latitude in the statement, and that lac', of specificity also allows future technological advances to be add ressej. Discussion followed regarding deletion of policy #1. Commission directed staff to revise the policy addressing Commission concern (general prohibition of red and white neon) . M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Curtis) continuing the public hearing to October 23 for discussion of staff revisions to policies regarding neon sign regulations. CASE 5.0380-CUP. Application by P. RIGANO AND ASSOCIATES for Pacific Southwest Realty Company (Security Pacific Bank) for a conditional use permit to allow a bank parking lot adjacent to a bank facility on Calle Ajo between Ramon Road/South Indian Avenue, R-2 Zone (I.L.) , Section 23. (This action is categorically exempt from environmental assessment per CEQA guidelines.) Recommendation: That the Commission give final approval , subject to • conditions. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS . CASE 5.0380-CUP (Continued) . Planner (Green) presented the project on the board. He stated that access from Calle Ajo, was expressed as a concern by the AAC, but was not in the minutes; and that the applicant is concerned about changing the rolled curb to a standard street curb (to bring the street to normal standards) . Commissioner Lapham stated that he disagreed with the AAC recommendation that there be no access from Calle Ajo since traffic would be required to cross the teller lane which would create a traffic hazard. Chairman declared the hearing open. P. Rigano, Redlands, project architect, requested elimination of the requirement for a standard street curb since there is rolled curb along both sides of the street and because he had been told that the curb would be painted red in the future. He also requested that the 5-foot sidewalk requirement on Calle Ajo be deleted since the applicant pro- poses to provide less than a 5-foot sidewalk which would integrate with the residential neighborhood similar to the one on the bank frontage. He requested that the driveway requirement of 24 feet be revised since the lane was narrowed to 18 feet to discourage two-way entry into the island; and requested that the requirement for utility undergrounding be deleted because of the expense. He stated that the project was deferred . from its approval in 1977 because of red-lining of the curb. Planner stated that the condition had been discussed but was not included in the conditions of approval . Mr. Rigano stated that there would be standard lighting not directed toward neighboring property in the parking, that the lot would not be lighted all night; and which would be compatible with the neighborhood. G. Stashkov, neighboring property owner, stated that he was in favor of the proposal, requested that red curbing not be done because it would not blend with the street, that he had heard that a sidewalk would be provided, that there is no place to park, that the bank should provide parking for its employees, and requested a chain across the driveway at night to prevent car parking. He stated that he approved of the sub- dued lighting. He requested that the bank make arrangements to keep the property clean in the interim between approval and construction. E. Shatz, 600 Wilshire Blvd. , Los Angeles, bank representative requested approval, stating that the project has become more expensive since 1977; and that the bank did not want to make improvements which are not required for other property owners. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that applicants often ask for waiver of conditions of the Development Committee; although, it is not common for • the conditions to be waived; and that covenants are often employed for improvements such as undergrounding of utilities. He stated that the requirement for a standard curb could also be placed under a covenant; and that the driveway width could be resolved with the Engineering October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS • CASE 5.0380-CUP (Continued). Division. He stated that the project was not abandoned because of red curbing, but because the City insisted that the lot be used for employee parking and the policy of the bank at that time was that employees not park in the bank parking lot. Mrs. W. Hird, Security-Pacific Bank, stated that the lot will be marked "Bank Employee Parking Only". Planning Director stated that the lighting plan will be reviewed with the landscape plan. M/S/C (Lapham/Curtis; Ealy, Kaptur abstained) approving CUP 5.0380 with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS: 1. That the parking lot use is properly authorized for consideration in the R-2 Zone under a Conditional Use Permit. 2. That the parking lot is necessary to reduce on-street parking which is adversely affecting Calle Ajo. 3. That the use is in harmony with the General Plan and is not detrimental to existing or future uses in the neighborhood. • 4. That the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the parking lot, including yards, setbacks, walls, fences, and land- scaping. 5. That the site accesses Calle Ajo which has been properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use. 6. That conditions imposed are necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. 7. That the teller driveway lane be narrowed from 24 feet to 18 feet. CONDITIONS: 1. That detailed landscape, lighting and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits (including details of any parking lot lighting and landscaping between the property line and sidewalk) . 2. That signage shall be added to the entry designating the lot for employee parking only. The sign shall be subject to a separate application. 3. That bank employees shall be allowed to use the parking lot at all times. • 4. That the lot shall be constructed in accordance with Section 9306.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS • CASE 5.0380-CUP (Continued) . 5. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 6. That undergrounding of utilities and curb improvements be deferred under a covenant until adjoining property develops or any redevelopment of the area occurs. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE R. Rich, applicant in Case 2.812, requested that the case be discussed, although approved on the Consent Action Agenda. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS DETERMINATION 10.354. Request by PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT to allow continuation school usage on same property as Palm Springs Youth • Center. W-R-1-C Zone, Section 19. (Ref. Case 5.0025-CUP. ) Planning Director explained that the School District is requesting that a trailer facility be allowed on the Youth Center property for a temporary period, and that there are both architectural and land use issues involved. He stated that the zoning is R-1-C, that the Youth Center is operating under a CUP, and that the School District prefers the location because of access to a gymnasium. He stated that staff finds that it is an ancillary school use because of zoning of the park (0) which allows a school under a CUP if a school is already identified on the General Plan. He stated also that the staff recommendation to allow the use is because of its temporary nature. He recommended that an architectural approval application be submitted for the facility, and that it be moved behind the Youth Center. He explained that the Commission could require that the trailer be moved and could allow the use as a temporary use, but if permanent, the CUP for the Youth Center must be amended. He explained that the facility should be better integrated or moved. W. Hawkins, Superintendent of Schools, stated that he was present to answer questions. M/S/C (Curtis/Apfelbaum; Ealy abstained) determining that a continuation school usage on the same property as the Youth Center is an appropriate temporary use for two years, and requiring that the trailer be moved behind the Youth Center and an architectural approval application be • submitted for the trailer facility. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) • DETERMINATION 10.353. Request by DESERT HOSPITAL for Planning Commission determination to allow an auxiliary hospital thrift shop to be located on non-hospital property located in a C-1 Zone. Planninq Director stated that the request is to allow the hospital to use the Southern California Savings Building as a thrift shop and that it is C-1 Zone, and that the issue is the difference between a high- quality merchandise use as opposed to a general thrift shop use, since generically there is no difference. He stated that staff is considering that the proposal is an ancillary hospital function which could be applied for with a CUP, but the application for a CUP is costly. He stated that the use perhaps could be moved to the hospital grounds on the E1 Mirador property, and that staff feels that the wording should be germane since staff is uncomfortable with a thrift shop in the C-1 Zone. In reply to Commission question, Assistant City Attorney stated that the Zoning Ordinance is not being usurped since it makes provisions for determinations, but that a determination is precedent setting. Planning Director stated that a CUP process exists for allowing an ancillary use in any zone, but that a determination would be precedent setting. He stated that there might be a way to be specific without setting a major precedent; and that wording such as "as an accessory use to" could be added. He stated that Angel View Thrift Shop was required to obtain a CUP. • M. Fontana, Director of Planning and Marketing for Desert Hospital , stated that it was not known whether the use would be temporary or not, that the El Mirador property is not appropriate since there is no infra- structure in the building, and that it would be very costly to renovate. He explained that the bank building is ready for occupancy and if approved, income could be raised for the hospital immediately. He stated that the items sold will be of high-quality. Discussion followed on the precedent setting nature of the request. Planning Director stated that allowing the use temporarily while a CUP is being sought is not satisfactory since it would be in existence and money and time would have been spent; and that there has not been a thrift shop use in the C-1 Zone since St. Vincent DePaul years ago. He suggested that another term besides "thrift shop" be used. Mrs. M. Brechlen, realtor, requested that the operation be thought of as a resale shop and requested that the use be allowed with a one or two year periodic review. Planning Director stated that terminology is difficult to develop for the use and that antique shops have never been defined. Assistant City Attorney stated that if a determination is made that the use is allowable in a C-1 Zone, it is applicable city-wide in C-1 Zones. • Planning Director suggested that a land use permit for a specific use be used in lieu of a determination; and that the Commission could determine that other thrift shops might not fall into this category. October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) . Mrs. R. McLaughlin, Desert Hospital board member, requested consider- ation of the use as a natural extension of the auxillary fund raising activities which would be year-round. Assistant City Attorney stated that the land use permit section of the Ordinance states that the land use permit process may be initiated only where the use is authorized by the section in which the property lies; and that the only other use allowed by determination in the C-1 Zone are re-cycling and collection centers. He stated that the Commission would be extending the definition inordinately by authorizing a land use permit; and that in his opinion, a thrift shop is a use permitted by right of zone already. M/S/C (Curtis/Lapham; Madsen dissented) approving a land use permit for the Desert Hospital Auxillary Thrift Shop with guidelines to be developed by Desert Hospital and Planning staffs. Note: Chairman dissented because he felt that the use should be under a CUP. Commissioner Lapham left the meeting. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. CASE 3.903 (Minor) . Application by JENSEN'S for architectural approval of revised colors for market in existing shopping center on the southeast corner of Sunrise Way/Tahquitz-McCallum Way, PD-76, Section 13. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Lapham absent) approving the application as follows: 1. Repaint of the building is approved, subject to the use of Ameritone Copper tint BM8-30 for the trim color. 2. That the sign be restudied, noting that the height of the monument be decreased; that the width of the monument be increased; and that the sign be located in a planter. CASE 3.909 (Minor) . Application by AMERICANA CANYON HOTEL for architectural approval of replacement of balconies on the north side of hotel at 2805 S. Palm Canyon Drive, R-2 Zone, Section 35. • Planning Director explained the changes proposed to the balconies and discussed the wrought iron material . October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 ARCHITECTURAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.909 (Minor) (Continued). M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Lapham absent) approving the application, subject to the following condition: That the new railing design match the size of the existing wooden railings as much as possible. (Metal of increased size may be used in lieu of wood. ) CASE 2.812 (Reference Case 5.688-CUP) (Continued) . Request by R. RICH for Planning Commission review of wall not in conformance with approval of color and materials in Fairways Condominium complex on the northeast corner of 34th Street/Crossley Road, G-R-5 Zone, Section 20. M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Curtis; Lapham absent) to reconsider Commission action on the Consent Action Agenda. Planner (Vankeeken) stated that most of the walls in the complex are stucco and match the building color, but that the applicant is requesting approval of a slump stone wall which is built without permits, and that staff recommends that it be stuccoed. Rich Rich, Wack Wack Circle Fairways Condominiums, explained the configuration of his property and stated that the walls are not visible, except from one interior street location, and that the wall will confine his dog and enhance his privacy. He stated that many of the units have walls, and that wall was approved by the condominium architectural committee and the board of directors. Commissioner Kaptur suggested that an inspection of the complex be made in order to determine a prototype which could be approved for the entire complex. Planner stated that she had only observed one wall in slump stone which was not quite as visible and of lower height than the applicant' s. Planning Director stated that the City will require that the walls obtain permits. M/S/C (Kaptur/Ealy; Lapham absent) continuing the application to October 23 for further field review. SIGN APPLICATION (Ref. Case 3.869-Minor) . Appliction by GUCCI 'S for architectural approval of a main identification sign for store in the Desert Fashion Plaza on N. Palm Canyon Drive, one block north of Tahquitz Way, CBD Zone, Section 15. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Lapham absent) approving the sign as submitted. • October 9, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 • CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Planninq Commission update on City Council actions. Case 3.692 - Carports Appeal . Council approved the carports with the design recommended by the applicant as opposed to the AAC recommended changes. Council felt the low cost of the project allowed the use of the industrial-type of carport, although the Council does not want proliferation of the design on other projects. A field trip will be taken by the Council , AAC, and Planning Commission when the carports are installed to review them aesthetically. - Maxim's Sign Appeal . The small monument sign was approved by the Council (6 feet, 3 inches high) . Staff feels that the applicant will not like the sign after it is erected and will be back to the Commission for approval of a better design. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 4:45 p.m. lJ Y\4 LANNING ' DIRECTOR 0 MDR/ml 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall October 23, 1985 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1985 - 1986 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Paul Madsen, Chairman X 8 0 Hugh Curtis X 8 0 Hugh Kaptur X 7 1 Sharon Apfelbaum X 7 1 Larry Lapham X 8 0 Curt Ealy X 3 0 Vacant Position - - - Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Richard Patenaude, Planner Douglas R. Evans, Planner Robert Green, Planner Carol Vankeeken, Planner Fred Hawkins, Director of Community Services Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee Present - October 21, 1985 • J. Cioffi , Chairman William Johnson Chris Mills Earl Neel Curt Ealy Sharon Apfelbaum Tom Doczi Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Ealy/Curtis) approving the minutes of the October 9, 1985 meeting as submitted. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES: There were no Tribal Council comments. •