Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/07/23 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall July 23, 1986 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1986 - 1987 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Larry Lapham, Chairman X 2 0 Hugh Curtis X 2 0 Hugh Kaptur X 2 0 Curt Ealy - 1 1 Earl Neel - 0 2 Gary Olsen X 1 0 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos , Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes , Assistant City Attorney Carol Vankeeken, Planner Richard Patenaude, Planner Douglas Evans, Planner Robert Green, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - July 21, 1986 Chris Mills Absent: J. Cioffi , Chairman Curt Ealy Tom Doczi William Johnson Earl Neel Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Olsen/Kaptur; Neel/Ealy absent) approving minutes of July 9, 1986 as submitted. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE: There are no Tribal Council Comments. July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 CONSENT ACTION ITEMS 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/Kaptur; Neel/Ealy absent) taking the following actions: CASE 3.0065 (Continued) . Application by PACIFIC OUTDOOR PRODUCTS for the Casa Blanca Hotel for architectural approval of freestanding awning for hotel at 1342 South Palm Canyon Drive, C-1 Zone, Section 23. Restudy noting the following: 1. That the fascia be wood. 2. That the support columns be larger (8 X 8 or 1.2 X 12) . 3. That the columns be wood or possibly even stucco 4. That details and sections of the construction be provided. CASE 3.888. Application by W. HOWLETT for Vineyard Limited Partnership for architectural approval of awnings for existing shopping center on S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Restudy noting the following: 1. Awnings to be same size as fascia. 2. Eliminate larger box awnings. 3. Entry awning shape to be redesigned (possibly box or square shape) and to extend beyond second post. 4. Details of each elevation/application to be provided. 5. Awnings not to "break" architectural features on brick wall . 6. Whole concept including Baristo Road frontage to be provided even though installation will be phased. CASE 3.947. Application by METROPOLITAN THEATERS for architectural approval of sign program (poster cases) and final landscape plans for 6-plex motion picture theater at 789 E. Tahquitz Way between Calle Alvarado/Calle E1 Segundo, C-1-AA Zone, Section 14. (Ref. Case 3.309.) 1. Approved the poster cases (sign program) as submitted. 2. Continued the landscape plans to August 13. July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 CONSENT ACTION ITEMS CASE 3.991. Application by SHOOK BUILDING SYSTEMS for architectural approval of working drawings for a multiple use building at Champion Business Park on Gene Autry Trail between Sunny Dunes Road/Mesquite Avenue, M-1 Zone (I .L. ) , Section 20. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That the metal roof element return and break the roof line. CASE 3.0054 (MINOR) . Application by HARRY HARRIS for Combs Gate Aviation for architectural approval of exterior remodel of airport fixed base operator building on El Cielo Road, "A" Zone, Section 18. Approved subject to the following condition: That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. CASE 3.0072 (MINOR). Application by D & A SHADE COMPANY for Quality Inn for architectural approval of awning on office entrance for hotel at 1943 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-1 Zone, Section 3. Denied per AAC recommendations that the awning concepts do not integrate with the building design. CASE 3.0073 (MINOR) . Application by D & A SHADE COMPANY for architectural approval of awning for Shoe Shack, 310 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Restudy noting the following: That a more permanent awning such as a fixed awning or second trellis be provided. CASE 3.0077 (MINOR) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for architectural approval of light fixture for Frances Stevens Park bounded by Alejo Road, N. Indian Avenue, N. Palm Canyon Drive, and Granvia Valmonte, 0 Zone, Section 1.0. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.0079 (MINOR) . Application by MICHAEL WILLIAMS for architectural approval of propane tanks for emergency power supply for nursing home in the 2000 block of N. Indian Avenue, R-2 Zone, Section 3. Approved subject to the following condition: That the propane tanks be screened with landscaping (to be reviewed and approved by staff) . July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA CASE 3.0078 (MINOR). Application by PORTALS for Arthur Friedman for archi- tectural approval of awning program for Tackett Center at 120 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Zoning Enforcement Officer described the revisions on the board stating that the proposal is an awning and repaint program 'affecting most of the storefront, with the concept being a well-coo_rdinaaed range of colors. He stated that the AAC did not come to a conclu- sion and sent the proposal on to the Commission, and that AAC comments concerned colors with some members feeling that less colors should be used. Discussion ensued on the AAC comments. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that the note to eliminate the awnings in the court yard was just a comment. Commissioner Kaptur stated that the proposal seems to be a "quick fix" of the center rather than a major renovation and gives a honky tonk appearance which is not what is acceptable in Palm Springs. He suggested either a more substantial renovation or a simple "paint and patch" approach with the same basic colors as exist. Commissioner Olsen agreed stating that he objected to the numerous colors and shades. M. Beatty, Portals, 73280 El Paseo, Palm Desert, the applicant, stated that the owner had contacted his firm after no action was taken with two architectural firms which had been commissioned to upgrade the project. He stated that the owner had asked for a proposal for awnings and color ways to enhance the art deco building, that the colors chosen (burgandies, whites , and light blues) are of the Art Deco period, that the Palm Springs T-Shirt Company had requested a similar color which had been turned down because of a lack of an awning program and that the AAC at that time had wanted a varied color combination. He stated that less numbers of colors reduce the impact, that the interior courtyard is dying which hurts the City, tenants, and the landlords, and that the colors are unusual and would draw customers into the interior. He stated that he understood that in the future outdoor activities may be promoted in the area to making a livelier appearance to draw customers , that there are less colors than could be proposed by individual tenants , and that the owner has also submitted revisions to the leather shop and ice cream parlor, with which he would like to proceed as soon as possible. Commissioner Curtis stated that the proposal is a "quick fix" to make the center more pleasing, but that the solution should be better. He stated that the interior could have colors and awnings, but that the proposal is too bold for the outside and is similar to a proposal denied by the Commission in the past. Chairman stated that he could understand the attempt, but that the concept is too flashy with too much attention drawn to the center and has too many colors . M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Ealy/Neel absent) for a restudy. Planning Director stated that staff would review the leather shop and ice cream parlor at staff level . July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0398-PD-180 (Continued) . Application by LAWRENCE PIERCE for a planned development district to construction a 91 unit, 3-story hotel on Indian Avenue between Calle Encilla/S. Indian Avenue south of Arenas Road, C-2 and C-1-AA Zones (I .L. ) , Section 14. (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration, no comments received. ) Planner (Green) gave the presentation stating that the project meets the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, and that staff recommends approval subject to conditions. He stated that staff based its recommendations on the site plan and massing, and that the AAC recommends approval , noting that detailing and massing are important. He stated that the PD could be approved and the site plan, massing, and detailing reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to the final planned development district submitt. He described the location, access, configuration of buildings and walkways, amenities, and landscaping. Commissioner Kaptur stated that he was concerned that the plan did not address existing problems of the site, but was forced onto it, that views from rooms are obstructed, and that the arch is not a design form to use in this situation. Chairman declared the hearing open. B. Schultz, project architect, stated that the design is functional for energy purposes since the arches shade the rooms (which is more important to the project than the view) . Commissioner Kaptur stated that the design is a "movie set" front and that the forced design is not the answer to the problem. He stated that the design seems to have evolved from preconceived ideas without addressing the function or the problems. In answer to the architect's question, he stated that a more honest approach to the design could be taken to resolve the design problems. Mr. Schultz stated that the rendering showed an improved more honest design, and -'ta--Spani'sh styled arches aid energy conservation. Commissioner Kaptur explained that it is difficult to have a Spanish concept for a three story structure, although it is possible, and that the design should be well done because of the downtown location of the hotel . He stated that he had no comment on the site plan because he had not reviewed it thoroughly. In reply to the architect's question, he stated that the arch design does not necessarily have to be round to have a Spanish flavor, and that many concepts are available to solve the problem. Mr. Schultz stated that he had looked at the Spanish type medical building across from the Desert Hospital as a guide and that the hotel will be softened by landscaping. There being no further appearances, Chairman declared the hearing closed. July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0398-PD-180. (Continued) M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Ealy/Neel absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration, a restudy of the architecture, and approving the planned development district based on the following findings and subject to the followings conditions: Findings is 1 . That a Planned Development District application/appropriate for consideration of this hotel application proposed. 2. That the hotel use is necessary and desirable for development of this resort community, is in harmony with the elements and objectives of the General Plan and is not detrimental to existing or future uses in the zone. 3. That the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, including yards , setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features required to adjust the use to existing or future permitted uses. 4. That the site is accessed by Indian Avenue and Calle Encillia, a major and secondary thoroughfare designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use. `.. Conditions 1. That detailed landscape, lighting and irrigation plans shall be submitted with the Final Planned Development District Application. 2. That a Final Planned Development District application shall be submitted in accordance with Section 9407.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. That all mechanical equipment shall be screened. 4. That structure shall be placed a minimum of 2 ft. from driveway (covered entry) . 5. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. 6. That the architecture be restudied . Commissioner Curtis commented that the Commission would like to review a design similar in quality to that of the medical building across from the hospital . July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0393-PD-178. Application by the MAYER GROUP, LTD. for a planned development district in lieu of a change of zone to R-4 (high density hotel and apartments) to construct a two story, 80 unit apartment complex on Avenida Caballeros between Baristo Road/Ramon Road, R-G-A(8) Zone (Garden Apartment Zone) , Section 14. (Environmental Assessment; tentative approval .) Recommendation: That the Commission order the preparation of a Draft Negative Declaration and tentatively approve the Planned Development District subject to conditions. Planner (Vankeeken) gave a brief history and report on the project and stated that 17 letters and one phone call (mainly from property owners of the Rose Garden Condominiums) have been received in opposition to the project. She stated that the AAC recommends a restudy of the archi- tecture noting concerns over detailing. Planning Director stated that staff has used the term "density bonus" as a term of explanation, although the applicant has not requested a density bonus, and that staff recommends that with any density increase that 25% of the units be set aside for low/moderate income housing to meet goals of The housing Element (as has been done with other pro- jects) . He stated that mitigative measures including a sewage study are also recommended. He noted that the zoning map shows garden apartment zoning surrounded by R-4, and that the project to the east is eight/acre (garden apartment density) . He explained that the project is consistent �... with the zoning and not deterimental to projects surrounding it, but was designed to meet minimum setbacks of open space standards and is probably minimal in the neighbors expectations. Commissioner Olsen stated that he was concerned about placing a higher density project next to a lower density project even with existing land- scape screening on the Rose Garden complex. Mrs. L. Valek, 471 E. Tahquitz, future project manager, requested approval stating that the community is changing drastically with new hotels and other amenities and that young executives would rent these types of units since they cannot usually buy property immediately. She stated that these apartments would be an asset to the City. J. Mayer, 251 N. Bowling Green Way, Los Angeles, the applicant, stated that he wanted to comply with the General Plan, that there are not many apartments in Palm Springs, that he has tried to create a good amenity package for renters, and that low and moderate income housing of 25% of the units will be provided, that the surrounding zoning except for the Rose Garden complex is 24-29 units per acre, and that the project is consistent with the area. Ms. R. Haig, property owner in the Rose Garden complex, stated that she was not objecting to the apartments but was objecting to the high density, that her condominium is only 25 feet from the parking lot of the proposed project, and that there are noise and tenant problems July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0393-PD-178. (Continued) emanating from the complex on the northeast corner. She stated that 29 units compared to 8 units is a tremendous contrast, would totally depre- ciate her property, and that there are vacant units available in the Rose Garden for renters . Mrs. E. Lerner, 1163 Tiffany Circle North, stated that there is an abundance of condominiums in the area and adding more would cause traffic and noise pollution, that the residents of the Rose Garden bought their homes because of the quietness of the area. She requested postponement of the hearing until fall when the residents return. There being no further appearances the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that the Rose Garden was built to R-G-A8 Zoning requirements, but that the zoning was changed to R-4 in the Indian land rezoning in 1981, that the proposal does meet setback requirements and that the Rose Garden has two story units backing to the Baristo Flood Channel . He stated that south of the proposal is the Masonic Temple, a sliver of land owned by the Desert Water Agency and a small piece of land owned by the flood control district. Commissioner Kaptur stated that he thought there was a federal law pro- hibiting unequal treatment because of changes to zoning. Planning Director stated that there is no federal law reqarding the situation, that it is a unique circumstance and one of the reasons the applicant is applying for a Planned Development District rather than a change of zone, that apartments create more impact that condominiums such as permanent residence (rather than seasonal ) which impacts parking (such as the Villa Serena Apartments which are 100% leased with guest parking on the streets) . Commissioner Curtis stated that the project should have a design similar to the Rose Garden and that the design is too bold for the small piece of land. He stated that the project should be reduced in scale with more diversity in the architecture, and less impacts of parking and traffic. Commissioner Kaptur asked if he had a conflict of interest since he is an owner of the Villa Serena. He asked whether the units were within 400 feet of the proposal . Discussion ensued on the possible abstention by Commissioner Kaptur. Planning Director stated that the Villa Serena is probably 435 to 465 feet from the subject proposal . Assistant City Attorney stated that Commissioner Kaptur should abstain from discussion or voting because of the appearance of a conflict of interest. July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0393-PD-178. (Continued) Planning Director stated that there will be more Commissioners in attendance at the August 13 meeting to review the project. Chairman stated that 80 units is over-impacting the site, but that R-G-AB Zoning is not appropriate on busy Avenida Caballeros. He stated that he would like to see a project designed to R-2 density with two stories on the street side and one story on the rear as a transitional buffer. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Kaptur abstained; Neel/Ealy absent) continuing the Planned Development District application to August 13 for more Commissioners to be present. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. 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 3.870. Application by ALEXANDER COLER for architectural approval of revised guest house plans for single family dwelling on Crescent Drive near the Tachevah Dam, R-1-B Zone, Section 10. Planner (Green) presented the application, and stated that Zoning Ordinance requirements have been met. M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur; Neel/Ealy absent) approving the application subject to the following condition: That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. Note: Based on the floor area of the guest house (5,408 sq. ft.) , the minimum area of the property shall remain 6.207 acres. (Zoning Ordinance requirements.) CASE 3.0022. Application by R. GENGLER for architectural approval of revised elevations for a five unit apartment complex on Saturmino Road/Calle Lilita, R-2 Zone, Section 13. R. Gengler, the applicant, requested that the application be tabled till the architect could be present. M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur; Neel/Ealy absent) tabling the application. CASE 3.0058 (MINOR).. Application by GOLDEN STATE SIGNS for architectural approval of revised main identification sign for Cafe Mahvalous in the Desert Fashion Plaza, N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Zoning Enforcement Officer presented the sign and stated that it faces the Desert Museum, has been reviewed by the AAC twice, and a split vote resulted from the July 21 AAC meeting. He stated that the sign has been July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS CASE 3.0058 (MINOR). (Continued) reduced from 30 to 20 sq. ft. , that the AAC was divided on the acceptability of the design, and that the "lips" are the organization logo. He stated that the regular sign is partially hidden by the trellis work on the building, and that the sign is ten feet from the ground. P. Lucas, Golden State Signs, stated that most of the sign is under the overhang of the back of the public entry way, that the sign size has been reduced, that the lips are a registered trademark, and that the only point of visibility is at the front entry of the Desert Museum. Commissioner Kaptur stated that he did object to the sign except for its location across from the Desert Museum. Commissioner Curtis stated that the sign could be better and that he did not care for the trademark. M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur; Ealy/Neel absent) for a restudy of the design and location. CASE 3.0076 (MINOR) . Application by GOLDEN STATE SIGNS for architectural approval of a new sign for Carl 's Junior restaurant on the northeast corner of Sunrise Way/Tahquitz Way, C-1AA Zone, Section 13. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that the company desires to change the sign to resemble the sign at the Carl ' s Junior on N. Palm Canyon Drive. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Ealy/Neel absent; Olsen dissented) approving the application as submitted. Note: Commissioner Olsen stated that he did not like the bright star logo even though it would be consistent with the one on Palm Canyon Drive. Commissioner Curtis left the meeting due to a previous appointment. CONTINUTED ITEMS: The following items were continued to the meeting of August 13 due to the lack of a quorum. CASE 5.0400-ZTA (Continued) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for revisions to the Zoning Ordinance (all sections) . CASE 3.0022. Application by R. GENGLER for architectural approval of revised elevations for a five unit apartment complex on Saturmino Road/Calle Lilita, R-2 Zone, Section 13. July 23, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 CONTINUTED ITEMS: CASE 3.0075 (MINOR) . Application by the PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT for architectural approval of a temporary trailer for classroom use at the Palm Springs Youth Center, WRIC Zone, Section 19. (Ref. 5.0025- CUP/Case 10.354-Determination. ) CASE 5.0410-MISC. Planning Commission review of DESERT WATER AGENCY capital improvement program (CIP) . CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Planning Commission Update on City Council actions. CASE 3.231. Request by SOMERSET SPRINGS for architectural approval of revised wall color for 90 unit condominium project on E. R)alm Canyon Drive between Gene Autry Trail/Broadmoor Drive, R-3 Zone, Sections 29 & 30. CASE 3.0083 (Minor) . Application by GLENN BACON for architectural approval of a restaurant/exterior remodel at the Vineyard shopping complex, 255 S. Palm Canyon Drive, CBD Zone, Section 15 (Ref. Case 2.960) . CASE 5.0411-MISC. Planning Commission review of a draft EIR for the Riverside County Redevelopment Agency for projects within the City's Sphere of Influence. CASE 5.0412-MISC. Planning Commission review of revision to South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1307 (a) affecting air quality. CASE 5.0144-PD-166. Discussion of windbreak plant material for performance to date and possible alterations to plant list for the AFCOM/Presley Homes project of mobilehomes and residences (low and moderate cost housing) on the northwest corner of Sunrise Way/San Rafael , 0-5 Zone, Section 35. (Continued for review of project landscaping in the field by staff and AAC.) ADJOURNMENT Chairman apologized to the applicants and the audience, explained that with Commissioner Curtis leaving, the Commission had no quorum, and adjourned the meeting at 3:40 p.m. to August 13. Pl� — PLANNING DIRECTOR MDR/ml I i i i i i I, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall • August 13, 1986 1 :30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1986 - 1987 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Larry Lapham, Chairman X 3 0 Hugh Curtis X 3 0 Hugh Kaptur X 3 0 Curt Ealy - 2 1 Earl Neel - 1 2 Gary Olsen X 2 0 Barbara Whitney - 0 1 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos , Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes , Assistant City Attorney Carol Vankeeken, Planner John Terell , Redevelopment Planner Tom Lynch, Economic Development/Housing Director Douglas Evans, Planner Robert Green, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary • Architectural Advisory Committee - August 11, 1986 J. Cioffi , Chairman Absent: Chris Mills William Johnson Earl Neel Tom Doczi Curt Ealy Chairman called the meeting to order at 1 :30 p.m. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Whitney, Olsen absent) approving minutes of July 23, 1986 as submitted. Commissioner Olsen entered the meeting.