HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/03/26 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Council Chamber, City Hall
March 26, 1986
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 17 0
Hugh Curtis X 17 0
Hugh Kaptur X 15 2
Sharon Apfelbaum X 16 1
Larry Lapham X 17 0
Curt Ealy X 12 0
Earl Neel X 8 0
Staff Present
Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director
Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney
Margo Williams, Planner
Carol Vankeeken, Planner
Richard Patenaude, Planner
Robert Green, Planner
John Terell, Redevelopment Planner
Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary
Architectural Advisory Committee - March 24, 1986
J. Cioffi , Chairman Alternate: Sharon Apfelbaum
Chris Mills
Earl Neel
Tom Doczi
William Johnson
Curt Ealy
Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
M/S/C (Curtis/Apf elbaum; Ealy absent) approving minutes of March 12, 1986 as
submitted.
s March 26, 1986 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 (Lapham/Apfelbaum; Ealy absent) taking the following actions:
CASE 3.995 MINOR. Application by ALLEN FENCE for architectural approval of
200 ft. of chainlink fence to secure mostly vacant property at 815
Panorama Drive (hillside lot), R-1-A Zone, Section 9.
Continued to April 9, 1986, for review by neighbors with the applicant
of an alternative plan.
CASE 5.0275-PD-147. Application by DEBARTOLO CORP. for architectural
approval of screening of lights under the parking structure and review
of sample of mechanical equipment screening for Maxim' s Hotel and Desert
Fashion Plaza located on North Palm Canyon Drive, between Tahquitz Way
and Areans Road, C-B-D Zone, Section 15.
Approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the metal material and finish only be approved as a flush
seam (no ribs to show)
2. That the details of locations of equipment screening be submitted.
3. That the light screening be submitted.
NOTE: The light screening was not submitted for the April 7 AAC
meeting.
CASE 3.963 (MINOR) . Application by AMERICAN SAVINGS for revised plans for an
automatic teller machine at 300 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone,
Section 15.
Approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the main wall extend beyond the cantilevered skirt a stud
width (5 to 6 inches) .
2. That the plaster screed be deleted.
9
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA
Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted
must be exercised within that time period unless extended.
CASE 5.0356-PD-168. Application by J. KOCOUREK for architectural approval of
revise ig t fixture type for water park on Gene Autry Trail , located near
Crossley Road, M-1 Zone, Section 20.
Planner (Green) presented the application and stated that staff is
recommending that a combination plan be submitted. He stated that the
proposal now calls for three pole lights to be 40 feet in height,
although the majority of the lights will be 10 feet in height with light
cast towards the ground; and that the AAC felt that the landscape light-
ing which gave character to the site might be lost. He stated that the
combination of an architectural and landscape lighting plan should be
reviewed in the field by staff with adjustments to be made at staff
direction; and that the 40-foot high lights are adjacent to the sewer
ponds.
Discussion ensued on the screening of the 40-foot height. Commissioner
Lapham suggested that clusters of palm trees be added adjacent to the
poles to soften the height.
M/S (Lapham/Neel ; Ealy absent) approving the application, subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the landscape lighting plan be submitted for staff approval
prior to installation.
2. That a combination of architectural and landscape lighting be
reviewed in the field by staff and adjustments made at staff
direction.
3. That palm tree clusters be planted adjacent to the 40-foot high
light poles to lower the silhouette.
CASE 3.819(Minor) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS a revised sign
program for the Palm Springs Civic Center. C-C Zone, Section 13.
Planner (Patenaude) presented the revised sign program and stated that
the AAC recommended a simple monolith design of concrete as was
originally presented in metal by staff.
M/S/C (Curti s/Apfelbaum; Ealy absent) approving the sign program as
follows: That the signs be a simple monolith style in sandblasted
concrete with no relief or design in the surface.
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS
Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted
must be exercised within that time period unless extended.
CASE 3.990(Ref. Cases 5.0170-PD-126 and 3.7171. Application by FREIDMAN
MNIUKLS for-S o�uilding Symms for architectural approval of a
multi-use industrial building in Champion Business Park on Gene Autry
Trail , between Sunny Dunes Road/Mesquite Avenue, M-1 Zone, Section 20.
and
CASE 3.991. Application by FRIEDMAN VENTURES for Shook Building Systems for
architectural approval for industrial building in Champion Business Park
on Gene Autry Trail, between Sunny Dunes Road/Mesquite Avenue, M-1 Zone,
Section 20.
Planner (Vankeeken) presented the project on the board and stated that
the AAC recommended that the buildings match those of the first phase in
proportion and appearance.
Planning Director stated that the landscaping which was of concern to
the Commission was monitored carefully and the runoff water is caught by
swaling. He stated that staff would monitor the remaining landscaping.
M/S/C (Curtis/Lapham; Kaptur abstained; Ealy absent) approving the
applications as follows:
�-' Case 3.990:
1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met.
2. That the buildings match the existing approved plans (first
phase) .
3. That the metal fascia have a slope.
Case 3.991:
1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met.
2. That the fascia wrap around the east elevation.
3. That working drawings be reviewed by the AAC and Planning
Commission.
4. That the buildings match the existing approved plans.
5. That glue-lam beams be added.
6. That the building proportion and height match the existing
buildings.
Project architect stated that he concurred with all recommendations and
was present to answer questions.
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5
PUBLIC HEARINGS
,.,. CASE 5.0391-CUP (Continued) . Application by C. MILLS for Moe Salem for a
Conditional Use Permit to allow a gasoline service station on the south-
east corner of Saturnino Road/Indian Avenue, C-2 Zone (I.L. ) , Section
14.
Planner (Williams) presented the case and stated that the applicant is
requesting that the original proposal be approved with a time limit of
15 years and review at the end of that period, and a five-year amortiza-
tion period be approved.
Planning Director stated that alternative actions could be to approve
the application as submitted, approve the use with a re-design of the
site, approve the property as it stands with a time limit, or denial .
He stated that, if the use is approved, staff recommends improvements
occur on the service station site to the Palm Springs Paint Store,
including resurfacing of the parking lot and the installation of land-
scape planters; and that with the rebuilding of Pal Joey's Restaurant
which was demolished by fire, the rear of the property will also be
improved. He recommended that the Commission include filing of a Nega-
tive Declaration in the motion.
Planner stated, in reply to Commission question, that the City cannot
require other buildings to be improved, but can require that the site be
improved.
Commissioner Curtis stated that the Commission probably has little
control over lessees in the front, if the applicant does not get
approval of the original mini-market/service station proposal .
Planning Director stated that in a conversation with the master lease-
holder, it was indicated that the other users control the building; and
that the ability to mandate improvements to the other buildings is
extremely limited, but that the site plan can be improved. He stated
that the City has less leverage with the property than it would have
with one owner and no leases involved.
Chairman declared the hearing open.
C. Mills, 121 S. Palm Canyon, project architect, stated that the appli-
cant requests that the original proposal be accepted with a 15-year time
period and that he would like an additional five-year amortization
period because of economics. He stated that although the lessee of the
paint store may be approached by the master leaseholder on improvements
to that location, there is nothing the applicant can do to the struc-
tures themselves. He stated that he would have to talk to the applicant
about the suggestions staff made on site improvements.
There being no further appearances, Chairman declared the hearing
closed.
Discussion ensued on the length of the leases. Chairman stated that he
felt that a ten year period and an additional five year amortization
period were preferable so that the Commission did not have to address
renewals.
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
CASE 5.0391-CUP (Continued)
Commissioner Lapham stated that the master leaseholder has no control
over the buildings and that an upgrade of the parking lot and the
rebuild of Pal Joey' s which will improve the rear of the property is the
best that can be done.
Commissioner Kaptur suggested five year reviews with the possibility of
extensions of five years.
Commissioner Apfelbaum suggested a compromise such as not requiring the
second story to be added to the gas station with the money saved placed
into landscaping and the resurfacing of the parking lot.
Planning Director stated that a redevelopment area could be extending
into the project which would cause a "buy-out" of the unused portion of
the lease.
Discussion continued. Chairman stated that there would be ten years
allowed to the applicant through the natural redevelopment process if
the use were terminated.
Redevelopment Planner stated that the Redevelopment Agency has the
option to buy a business, and that in the subject case the major value
is in the business and not in the building itself. He stated that
property can be acquired through negotiation and if not successful ,
condemnation.
Discussion continued. Commissioner Neel stated that the site and build-
ing should be brought up to standards. Mr. Mills stated that the appli-
cant had no problem with extending the planter at the north side of the
building and remodeling the building in the rear, but cannot afford to
lose the fourth lane of traffic in the front. He stated that the land-
scaping proposed originally would include a 62-foot planter mostly in
the right-of-way.
Planning Director stated that by eliminating the lane, the freestanding
sign would be eliminated and a monument sign or a sign on the building
would result. He stated that the appearance of the site should be that
of today (not the 50's) especially since Indian Avenue is being
upgraded. Discussion continued on the expansion of the landscaping.
Planning Director stated that if a wall were built to expand the land-
scaping area, the wall would be a target for errant drivers (unless the
landscape or walk were placed on the inside of the wall ) . Commissioner
Kaptur stated that nothing on the inside of the wall would be visible
which would be an improvement.
In reply to Commission question, Mr. Salem, the applicant, stated that
three instead of four lanes would reduce his business 60%. Planning
Director stated that the problem could be resolved by using the revised
plan, but the revision is major for only a ten-year time period. He
stated that the Ordinance requires a 750 sq. ft. building and that there
are no grounds to alter the Ordinance, but that the condition could be
made to comply with the Ordinance with a year allowed to develop an
Ordinance revision requiring less than 750 sq. ft. for service stations.
He stated that more than 400 sq. ft. is not needed for self-service
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
CASE 5.0391-CUP
stations, and that the increase in the square footage was in response to
review of the Shell station on Sunrise and Ramon and to avoid placing a
very small building in a sea of asphalt. He stated that the 750 sq.
ft. requirement was a compromise between the Ordinance size of 1000 sq.
ft. and the staff recommendation of 400 sq. ft.
Commissioner Curtis stated that the Commission was trying to include
restrooms and that was the reason a larger building was needed, and that
the Ordinance should be changed to allow a building size of less than
750 sq. ft. He stated that the time period of 15 to 20 years is too
long because of the possibility of inclusion of the site in the C-B-D
Zone and that although lease length is of concern to the applicant, it
is not of concern to the Commission. He stated that the use should be
reviewed every five years and that as many improvements as possible
should be obtained from the applicant.
Mr. Mills stated that a five- or ten-year period would not be acceptable
to the applicant because of the expense of the remodel . He stated that
the Commission is adding conditions and lessening the amortization
period which makes it more difficult for the applicant; and that 15
years plus a five year amortization period is what the applicant needs
for economic reasons.
Discussion ensued on the amortization period. Commissioner Kaptur
stated that it is not fair to require the applicant to incur inordinate
expense with the possibility of termination of the use at the end of
five years.
Discussion continued on the addition of a wall . Mr. Mills stated that
it could be added. Commissioner Kaptur stated that he felt that the
design problems could be resolved.
Commissioner Ealy arrived at the meeting.
M/S/C (Lapham/Curtis; Ealy abstained) ordering the filing of a Negative
Declaration and approving the application subject to the following con-
ditions:
1. That the time period for the improvements be 10 years with Plan-
ning Commission review at the end of the ten year period.
2. That the site area up to the paint store and automotive building
be improved.
3. That the site plan be redesigned per staff recommendations
(maximum landscaping), except that four lanes be retained.
4. That the landscape planter be extended on the north side of the
service station building to the property line.
5. That the building size is subject to Ordinance requirements.
6. That the sign for the station be placed on the building.
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
CASE 5.0391-CUP
7. That a wall be added to screen the site from Indian Avenue.
8. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met.
9. That the development Committee and AAC recommendations be met.
10. That detailed landscape, irrigation, exterior lighting and signing
plans be submitted prior to issuance of building permits.
Discussion ensued on a mini-market. Commissioner Kaptur stated that in
the subject case a mini-market should be allowed on the site and that it
would be far superior to the existing garage. Planning Director stated
that a mini-market is not allowed by the Zoning Ordinance, and that
other cities are requesting the Palm Springs Ordinance since they have
problems with the combination of a mini-market and a gas station. He
stated that the mini-market proposal was denied by the Council 5 - 0.
Mr. Mills stated that he had heard that a long-term lease was being
negotiated on the garage.
TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS.
This Case was considered by the Tribal Council at its meetings of
February 11, and February 25, and March 11, 1986.
After consideration of the recommendations of the Tribal Planning Con-
sultant, the Tribal Council took the following measures.
1. Reiterated its previous actions to approve the filing of a Nega-
tive Declaration with mitigation measures.
2. Reiterated its previous recommendations that in lieu of enlarging
the existing structure, the expenditure of resources be focused on
renovating/remodeling the existing service station, enhancing the
proposed landscaping and outside lighting, upgrading the
driveways/parking areas and providing additional screening and
buffering.
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 3.989. Application by CARPETERIA for architectural approval of commer-
cial building on North Palm Canyon Drive, between Yorba/Alvarado, C-1
and R-G-A(6) Zones, Section 3.
Planner (Vankeeken) presented the project on the board and stated that
the AAC recommended that the look be more commercial .
M/S/C (Kaptur/Lapham) for a restudy, noting the following concerns:
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued)
CASE 3.989 (Continued)
1. That the building have a more commercial (less industrial )
appearance.
2. That the showroom be integrated into the building.
3. That the (east) elevation be more attractive.
4. That the north boundary planter be reduced to five feet.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
TIME EXTENSION-CASE 3.216. Request by ADRIAN GUEVARA for a 12-month time
extension on a dance studio, store and office on Desert Park Road, C-1
Zone, Section 1.
Planning Director stated that the building was originally approved as a
dance studio, but is now proposed as a commercial building.
M/S/C (Kaptur/Lapham) approving a 12-month time extension for Case
3.216. The new expiration date will be 3-20-87.
TIME EXTENSION-CASE 3.259. Application by W & H BUILDERS for a 12-month time
extension for single-family residence on Sunrise Way, between
Francis/Racquet Club Roads, R-1-C Zone, Section 1.
In reply to Commission question, Planning Director stated that resi-
dences on Sunrise Way (which is an Architectural Approval street) are
required to have Planning Commission approval which is the reason for
the applicant's requesting a time extension.
M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Ealy abstained) approving a 12-month time exten-
sion for Case 3.259. The new expiration date will be 3-20-87.
CASE 5.0400. Planning Commission review of draft revised Zoning Ordinance.
Planning Director stated that all sections have been received from Word
Processing and reviewed by staff and will be mailed to the Commis-
sioners. He stated that the first meeting on the Ordinance will be
April 9.
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10
COUNCIL ACTIONS. Planning Commission update on City Council actions.
- New Fee Schedule. Planning Director stated that the new fee schedule is
in force, but that there is a 60-day grace period for residential
projects.
Convention Center. Planning Director stated that the hotel has been
submitted, and the architects have been requested to develop an
alternate design (resembling the hotel ) for the convention center.
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS - ADDED STARTERS (Continued)
Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted
must be exercised within that time period unless extended.
CASE 3.0016 (Minor) . Application by DeBARTOLO CORP. for architectural
approval of new storefront for store (Footlocker) in Desert Fashion
Plaza, 100 block of N. Palm Canyon Drive between Tahquitz Way/Arenas
Road, PD-147, Section 15.
Planning Director stated that the design submitted was unimaginative and
the AAC recommended a restudy.
M/S/C (Lapham/Ealy) for a restudy, noting the following concerns:
1. That the soffit have a stucco surface that matches the existing
building.
2. That the glass portions of the store front extend to the neutral
columns.
3. That revised colors be submitted.
4. That revised tiles be submitted with tile size included.
5. That complete revised drawings be submitted.
CASE 3.944. Request by R. VALENTINE for reconsideration of condition requir-
ing glue-lam fascia for hotel on the southwest corner of N. Indian
Avenue/Via Escuela, R-2 Zone, Section 3.
Planning Director stated that the AAC reaffirmed the requirement for
glue-lam beams instead of wood for the fascia.
M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis) reaffirming approval of the glue-lam fascia and
requiring the following:
1. That the beams be bolted to the facade.
2. That a soffit be placed under the fascia.
3. That there be a restudy of the awnings on the west elevation and
that awnings on the second floor windows be deleted.
March 26, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS - ADDED STARTERS (Continued)
CASE 7.628-AMM. Application by MARVIN FRANKEL for architectural approval of
addition to second story at 401 Merito Place, R-1-A Zone, Section 10.
M/S/C (Ealy/Neel ) approving the application as submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
COMMISSION, REPORTS AND DISCUSSION
League of Women Voters Forum. Commissioner Apfelbaum stated that a
League of Women Voters forum relating to the City Council election will
be held at City Hall on April 1, 7 to 10 p.m. , City Council Chamber.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the meet-
ing at 2:55 p.m.
PLA N NG DIRECTOR
MDR/ml
II
WP/PLNG MIN
i
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
• Council Chamber, City Hall
April 9, 1986
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 18 0
Hugh Curtis X 18 0
Hugh Kaptur X 16 2
Sharon Apfelbaum X 17 1
Larry Lapham X 18 0
Curt Ealy X 13 0
Earl Neel X 9 0
Staff Present
Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director
Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney
Margo Williams, Planner
Carol Vankeeken, Planner
Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Officer
Richard Patenaude, Planner
Douglas Evans, Planner
Robert Green, Planner
Emily Perri , Economic Development Coordinator
John Terell , Redevelopment Planner
Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary
Architectural Advisory Committee - April 7, 1986
J. Cioffi , Chairman Alternate: Curt Ealy
Chris Mills
Earl Neel
Tom Doczi
William Johnson
Sharon Apfelbaum
Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
M/S/C (Apfelbaum/Kaptur) approving minutes of March 26, 1986 as submitted.