Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/09/24 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall September 24, 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 5 0 Hugh Curtis X 5 0 Hugh Kaptur X 4 1 Curt Ealy - 4 2 Earl Neel X 3 2 Gary Olsen X 4 0 Barbara Whitney X 2 1 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Carol Vankeeken, Planner Douglas Evans, Planner Robert Green, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - September 22, 1986 `+..� J. Ci offi , Chairman William Johnson Chris Mills Gary Olsen Tom Doczi Barbara Whitney Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Neel/Olsen; Ealy absent) approving minutes of September 10, 1986 as submitted. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA 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 (Olsen/Neel ; Ealy absent) taking the following actions: CASE 3.0101 (MINOR) Continued. Application by DUNES HOTEL for architectural approval of revised wa 1 plans for hotel at 390 S. Indian Avenue, C-2 and C-1AA Zones, Section 14. Withdrawn at the applicant's request. CASE 3.944 (MINOR) . Application by VALENTINE HOTEL for architectural approval of revised detailed landscape plans and revised elevations for hotel at 2095 N. Indian Avenue, R-3 Zone, Section 3. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That stucco be added to three walls of the mechanical enclosure on the roof. (As noted on the plans). 2. That the existing tile roofed entry be revised to have a flat roof. 3. That the fascia on the east elevation match the fascia on the north elevations. 4. That the battered walls on the roof wind enclosures be removed. �... Straight walls as previously existing shall be used. 5. That more trees be added. 6. That details of quantities of all materials be submitted. 7. That items 5 & 6 be submitted for staff approval . CASE 3.0108 (MINOR). Application by J . E. J. RUMMENY for Mondi for arc itectura approval of storefront in the Desert Fashion Plaza at 215 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, PD-147, Section 15. Approve as submitted. CASE 3.0111 (MINOR) . Application by MELVIN SCHWARTZ for the Gold Rush for arc itectura approval of revisions to window in jewelry store at 112 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.458. Application by RUBEN POPLAWSKI for architectural approval of previously approved canopies on industrial building, 888 Research Drive, M-1-P Zone, Section 12. Approved as submitted. September 24, 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 3.758. Application by KAPTUR & CIOFFI for Rattner Investments #III for architectural approval of detailed landscape plans for apartment complex on Farrell Drive between Hwy 111/Sonora Road, R-3 Zone, Section 24. Planning Director stated that the resubmitted detailed landscape plans deviate from the preliminary plans because of a drainage Swale on E. Palm Canyon which caused disruption of the orderly tree alignment originally approved, but that the applicants have requested a return to the original concept. He stated that the AAC recommended after reviewing the grading plan that the swale be included in the plan as an enhancement and a feature of the design, which has resulted in the departure from the original regimented tree concept, but after review of the resubmittal at the September 22, AAC meeting the committee agreed to the original concept of the regimented tree program. Planning Director stated in response to Commission question that the trees are in a double line and not proposed to be lighted, as opposed to single row of lighted palms on Palm Canyon Drive and that the single row of lighted palms begins to vary east of Sunrise Way. Chairman stated that the regimented style of the tree program complements the concept of the regimented elevations of the project. M/S/C (Neel/Curtis; Ealy absent; Kaptur abstained) approving the �. regimented (regularly spaced) date palm of uniform height. CASE 3.960. Application by PALM SPRINGS MALL for architectural approval of ina landscape plans and working drawings for the north side of an existing shopping center on the northwest corner of Tahquitz-McCallum Way/Farrell Drive, CSC Zone, Section 18. Planning Director stated that working drawings have been removed from the agenda pending receipt of plans, that the commission will review the landscape plans, and that the landscape architect was not on the mailing list and not in attendance at the AAC meeting of September 22. He stated that the AAC recommended a restudy along specific guidelines and the landscape architect reviewed the recommendations with staff and agrees to the restudy conditions except for the recommendation to upgrade the size of the carob trees for the parking lot to 36 inch box size from 24 inch. He explained that staff feels that the size should be upgraded because carobs grow slower than accompanying ficus trees and because trees in the west parking lot (that had been growing since the 60' s) have been removed. J. Cummings, 402 Boyd Street, Los Angeles, project landscaper, stated that he has had discussions with the owners of the project who feel that since 45 existing palms have been saved and 24 inch box size carobs have filled in well in the first phase of the project, 24 inch box size is adequate. Planning Director stated that there is no approved landscape plan, that no trees have been planted on the lot in question, and that staff and September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.960. (Continued) the AAC feel that the Commission expected the mature trees to remain. He recommended that the new plan have upgraded tree sizes because of the unauthorized removal of the mature trees. Commissioner Neel stated that it takes 18 months for carobs to grow from 24" to 36" in size and that 36" is needed in the bare parking lot. M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur; Ealy absent) taking the following actions: Working Drawings - Removed from the agenda pending receipt of plans. Landscaping - Approved subject to AAC recommendations including 36 inch box size Carobs. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ITEMS CASE 3.0106 (MINOR) Continued. Application by CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for architectural approval of revised plans for a building addition to the Village Green to house a country store, South Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. (Commission response to written comment on Draft Negative Declaration; action for filing; and final approval . No comments received. ) Planning Director stated that an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment was prepared for the September 10 meeting since it is a requirement for all City projects, and that the architecture was restudied. He stated that there are buildings obscuring the sides of the store, except possibly the south elevation. Discussion ensued on the stuccoed side walls and landscaping. Commissioner Kaptur stated that the building will appear to be a movie set since the sides are done in a standard stucco, and the front has been designed to be authentic. Planning Director explained that the proximity of the building to property lines requires stucco on the sides (per Fire Department regulations) , and that the stucco will be raked and textured. Commissioner Kaptur suggested that a textured sample of the raked stucco be applied for approval before the building is finished. Chairman stated that the old stucco was troweled rather than raked. Commissioner Whitney questioned the landscaping plans for the project. Planning Director stated that landscape plans including tree forms will be required. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.106. (Continued) M/S/C (Whitney/Kaptur; Ealy absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and approving the architecture subject to the following conditions: 1. That the wood wall at the porch be recessed so that it is set back on a different plane than the stucco wall . 2. That detailed landscaping, irrigation and exterior lighting plans be submitted. 3. That a texture sample be applied to the building (for staff approval ) . 4. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0342-MISC.-A (Continued) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for a change of zone from -R- C to W-0, 0 (or such other designation as the Commission deems appropriate) for an expansion of DeMuth Park (addition of two new softball fields) south of Mesquite Avenue between Mountain View/Vella Road, W-R-IC Zone, Section 19. (This item was given an Environmental Assessment previously in conjunction with the Case 5.0342-MISC. ) Recommendation: That the Commission approve a zone change from W-R-1C to W-0. Planner (Evans) presented the staff report and described open space, zoning, configuration, and location of the soccer and softball fields. He stated that the City filed a negative declaration in conjunction with the grant application for the softball facilities a mitigative measure would be to have a parking management plan for major softball tournaments although there is a large amount of city owned land available for parking. Chairman declared the hearing open. L. McQuillon, 7375 El Placer, requested the definition of a "major tournament" as a criteria for parking management to avoid congestion in the neighboring residential area. Planner stated that it would be Community Services Department sponsored regional or larger tournaments, with teams from out of the area. He stated that local day-to-day activities with local teams would not be required to have parking management. He summarized by stating that the September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0342. (Continued) impact on parking would have to be evaluated on the tournament characteristics since stating a definitive number of people and teams is difficult. He noted that day-to-day events would be monitored but no major events have been planned yet. J. Gutau, 3670 Mesquite, spoke in opposition to the expansion of the park stating that the present parking is sufficient, that the area has become a beer haven with broken bottles and broken lights, that he is paying taxes for everybody's littering, that the parking lots are not used, that many residents do not want the expansion, that people use the outside areas as bathrooms, and that the ballplayers and spectators cause noise and disturbance in the neighborhood. In response to Chairman's question, Planner stated that no complaints have been received concerning the present softball operation, but that some disturbances occur in every park, and that the police department has not indicated any problems. Mr. Gutau stated that the police do not patrol the area very often. Commissioner Curtis asked if more restrooms were needed. Planning Director stated that there is a bathroom located between the two softball fields on the park plan but it is listed in Phase Two. Commissioner Kaptur stated that if the testimony of Mr. Gutau is accurate the Park Department management is breaking down, and that before expansion is approved City staff should prove it can manage the park in a better manner. He stated that unless he has proof of better management he would vote against expansion, and that management should be reviewed by the City similiarly to City review of management in the private sector. Commissioner Olsen questioned whether there is a program in place to monitor the parks and recreation program. Planning Director explained that the monitoring is done on a complaint basis, but that DeMuth Park ballfields are recognized as well maintained facilities with few cleanup problems since the players clean-up debris, and Park Department crews work on weekends to maintain the facilities. He stated that the intensity of the lights has resulted in complaints and that a condition of approval is that fast growing trees be planted on the perimeter to shield the lights. He suggested a report from the Community Services Commission, or a meeting with that group for discussion of the problem. Commissioner Olsen stated that the Commission is focusing on the two softball fields, but at the time of build-out of the park, perhaps there will be too many people using the facilities for its size. He stated that the City should adequately prepare to address problems of a huge park. In response to Commission question, Planning Director stated that there is much interest in softball in the area and although the fields would have local use, they are designed for tournament play with the September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0342. (Continued) possibility of several thousand of people in attendance (who would add to the City's economy) , but that the frequency of the tournaments is unknown at the present time. Commissioner Whitney stated that she had lived in the area and seen some of the incidents of which Mr. Gutau spoke as a result of activities of people outside of the area. She suggested that the Police and Community Services personnel be more visible. In response to Commission' s question, Planning Director stated that there are park rules and regulations of which groups are made aware before they use the facilities. He stated that the Community Services Commission can review guidelines for use of the fields, but not as a condition of the zone change. Planner stated that a marketing study prepared in 1984 recommended additional softball fields for local residents and to draw people regionally and nationally into the City. He stated that the report could be reviewed by the Commission. Planning Director stated that the zone change will be reviewed by the Council . Commissioner Kaptur stated that the Council should address management problems of the park, since the Planning Commission reviews planning only. M/S/C (Kaptur/Neel ; Ealy absent) approving Zone Change 5.0342-MISC.-A based on the following findings: 1. That the proposed public park use and change of zone from W-R-1-C to Open Space is consistent with the General Plan if the property is designated "Parks and Recreation". 2. That the proposed 9.85 acre site is adequate in size, is located on a secondary thoroughfare, and is a logical expansion of the existing DeMuth Park facilities. 3. That the proposed change of zone is necessary and desirable at this time and is not likely to cause significant impacts to surrounding properties. 4. That a negative declaration of environmental impact was filed on October 25, 1984, in conjunction with a grant application for the expansion of DeMuth Park. Commissioners noted to Council that the Commission is concerned about the management of the park and adequacy of police protection and wish the Council to review these matters. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0400-ZTA (Continued) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of revisions to the Zoning Ordinance (all sections). (Commission res onse to written comments and Draft Negative Declaration; final approval . Recommendation: That the Commission continue the Zoning Text Amendment to October 8 at the request of the Tribal Council . Planning Director stated that he had fully intended to recommend final approval and inclusion of Tribal Council concerns in the ordinance, but the Tribal council asked for a two week continuance for further review and that would be staff's recommendation, although the planner involved in the revision would be on vacation. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Curtis/Kaptur; Ealy absent) continuing the Zoning Amendment to October 8 at the request of the Tribal Council . TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS Nothing that the proposed revisions to the Zoning Ordinance are City- wide in nature and will affect both developed and undeveloped Indian trust land, this case was initially considered by the Tribal Council in August 12, 1986. In a memorandum to the City Council and City Planning Commission, the Tribal Council requested that certain Ordinances and Agreements relating to the use and development of Indian trust lands be incorporated into the revised Zoning Ordinance; and expressed concerns with certain property development standards being proposed for the M-1 and M-1-P Zones. Supplemental material covering additional revisions to various sections of the Zoning Ordinance including the concerns referred to above was received by the Tribal Planning Consultant on September 22, 1986. The Tribal Council , at its meeting of September 23, 1986, requested scheduled meeting in order that the Indian Planning Commission and Tribal Planning Consultant may have time to review and comment on this supplemental material . The Tribal Council has noted all other uses and matters on the City Planning Commission agenda of September 24, 1986, since such matters do not materially affect Indian Trust Lands. CASE 5.0414-CUP. Application by ROBERT LEMLEY and WILLIAM R. GARNER for reactivation of a conditional use permit for a restaurant and bar at the northwest corner of Calle Palo Fiero/East Palm Canyon Drive (formerly Jaspers) , R-3 Zone, Section 23. (Ref. Case 5.0188-CUP and TPM 17875. ) (Environmental Assessment was previously prepared in conjunction with Case 5.0188-CUP and TPM 17845. ) Recommendation: That the Conditional Use Permit be approved including architectural approval subject to conditions. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0414-CUP. (Continued) Planner (Vankeeken) stated that the staff report was prepared with the assumption that exterior restaurant elevations would be revised, but that the applicant has decided to leave the exterior and parking as they are. She stated that the AAC approved the landscaping subject to removal of some of the oleanders at the corner. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. Note: Although the architect was in the audience he did not desire to speak. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Ealy absent) approving CUP 5.0414 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings 1. That the application for a Conditional Use Permit for a restaurant in an R-3 Zone is property authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the proposed use is necessary in the development of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing or possible future uses in the vicinity. 3. That the site is serviced by East Palm Canyon Drive, a major thoroughfare, which is adequate to accommodate the type and amount of traffic expected to be generated by this use. 4. That during the previous operation of this facility as a restaurant that no negative impacts were identified and no serious complaints were received from surrounding property owners and/or residents. Conditions That conditions of the Development Committee of September 8, 1986 be implemented. 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 3.0053 (Continued) . Application by ED KANAN for architectural approval oT apartment comp ex on Ramon Road/Grenfall Road, R-2 Zone, Section 23. Planning Director stated that the application was continued from the September 10 meeting at the applicant's request, and that the applicant was concerned over some of the Engineering conditions, but that he is now in concurrence with conditions except for the bus shelter and bus stop requirements. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.0053. (Continued) Planner (Williams) stated that the Sunline Transit Agency recommends the bus stop and turnout. E. Kanan, 2325 Wilshire Blvd. , Santa Monica, the applicant, stated that he was in concurrence with the conditions except for the bus shelter and the bus turnout, that he had tried to develop the project previously with no success and is now trying to build apartments because of the rapid growth of the City and the need for apartment housing. He stated that the turnout should have been provided with the recent paving of Ramon Road and that there is a bus stop bench within 150 feet of hi,s project. In reply to Commission's question, Planning Director stated that bus stop and turnout provisions are required on high volume corridors such as Ramon Road, and that staff recommends that they be provided as part of the project for integration into the architecture. He stated that Sun Line decides what is needed by the volume of traffic and that bus stops can either be on private property with an easement or on City right-of-way depending on the design of the project and location of the curb and that Sunline maintains the structures after they are constructed. He stated that if there is a bus bench within a 150 feet of the project it will be moved to the project location. Commissioner Kaptur stated that the bus stop should be provided by the bus company. Chairman questioned whether or not 19 units generate the need for a shelter. Planning Director stated that Sunline has identified the site as a shelter location. Commissioner Curtis questioned whether or not the applicant was notified that a bus stop was required since it could infringe on the property and and affect the development. He stated that if the applicant was not notified, he would have a problem with the requirement. Planning Director stated that a developer would not be notified on revised street improvements and whether or not the property would be infringed upon is not known at presently exist. He stated that several other condominium projects have been required to construct bus stops and that a simple shelter such as that at Mesquite County Club would be adequate. He reviewed the history of bus stop design in the City, stated the concept of trees and raised planter was disapproved by the State in issuing a grant for shelters, and that Sunline then submitted the present design, which was denied by the Commission and approved by the Council . He explained that Sunline indicated that it wanted the requirement in the Development Committee conditions with the design being coordinated with Planning. He noted that if the Commission finds the condition onerous, it can delete the bus shelter. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.0053. (Continued) Discussion continued. Commissioner Kaptur again stated that he felt the requirement is a convenience not a necessity, and that Sunline should pay for it. Discussion ensued on projects which have installed bus stops. Planning Director explained that the 100 unit project at Racquet Club and Indian has installed one. Commissioner Olsen noted that the Mesquite Country Club and Cherokee Village Projects have also installed stops, but that these projects have over 100 units each and have a need for such a convenience, that in light of the small size of the proposed project it is not necessary to require the bus shelter, and that the turnout will eliminate needed landscaping. Planner stated that the turnout is a condition of the Traffic Engineer. Commissioner Olsen reiterated that the small size of the project makes the condition a burden. Planning Director continued explanation of the requirement and suggested that the condition be tabled without forfeiting the appeal rights of the applicant. He stated that the requirement could be scheduled for the October 15 Planning Commission study session, and that perhaps _ a landscape plan could be submitted with the Sunline Agency placing a bench at the landscaped site. Discussion continued on the bus turnout requirement. Planning Director stated that the Traffic Engineer feels that the turnout is necessary if there is a bus stop and that Sunline feels that the location is appropriate because of its proximity to the intersection of Caballeros and Ramon, and Camino Real and falls into the high density category. He stated that the transit agency recommends a bus stop on projects on Ramon Road. Commissioner Whitney suggested that the bus stop issue be continued for further review at a study session. M/S/C (Kaptur/Olsen; Ealy absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That sun control elements be added to exposed windows (3' minimum overhang) . 2. That the balcony details be revised as follows: a) Utilize a more heat durable design. b) Screen balcony. 3. That barrel tile be used in lieu of "S" title. 4. That the patio wall "returns" on the Ramon elevation be revised. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.0053. (Continued) 5. That working drawings be submitted. 6. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented, except for the bus stop which is deleted. 7. That the bus stop turn out requirement be reviewed by the Commission at a later date (after the study session of October 15) . Commissioner Curtis requested that a sketch be prepared for the October 15 study session showing the location of the turnout in relation to the property; Commissioner Whitney requested that staff give a brief background of bus stops in the City at the study session. Commissioner Kaptur stated that major cities do not have bus turnouts on major thoroughfares. Commissioner Olsen suggested that Indian Avenue and E1 Cielo corridors also be reviewed. Planning Director explained that the entire City will be reviewed regarding bus shelters and that the Caltrans bus stops were approved previously. He stated that bus stops on heavily traveled thoroughfares cause problems. In reply to Mr. Kanan' s question, Chairman stated that the turnout is not a requirement for the project, but may be one after the October 15 study session discussion. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3,0080. Application by CARMICHAEL DESIGNS (MIKE CARPENTER) for architectural approval of revised plans for industrial building on Tachevah Drive/Montalvo Way, M-1-P Zone, Section 7. Planner (Williams) stated that the AAC recommends approval as submitted and approved deletion of landscaping on the north side of the building, after revisions in the relief of the elevations. M/S/C (Kaptur/Neel ; Ealy absent) approving the application subject to the following condition That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.0112 (MINOR). Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of review of palm tree replacement study by Community Services Department. Planning Director stated that some of the palms along Palm Canyon have grown so high that their effect has diminished at street level , and that the Community Services Department is reviewing the concept of changing the trees, but the AAC wanted time to review the proposal and recommended continuance for a field trip, possibly with the Community Services staff. He stated that some trees could be removed and replaced with smaller trees, although a fifty to sixty foot palm tree is costly to relocate, that some of the merchants have indicated that it is not appropriate to remove healthy trees, and that the original concept was to have taller Robustas at intersections and Filifera at intermediate intersections, but that the concept has been lost through theinter vening years. He stated that no trees will be replaced at the present time. Commissioner Curtis requested a slide presentation showing the palm trees along Palm Canyon Drive. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Ealy absent) for indefinite continuation for field review and review at the October 15 study session. CASE 3.0013 (MINOR) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for a review of standards for tree sizes in conjunction with parking lot shading requirements. Planning Director recommended continuance stating that staff is working �...� on a study to show the size and spread of shade trees as both occur since the new Zoning Ordinance has a requirement that parking lots have a percentage of shade designed at the beginning of a project. He stated that he would schedule the tree study for the October 15 Planning Commission study session. M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Ealy absent) continuing the item to October 22. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3286. Planning Commission Resolution honoring Simon Eisner for his th year in the planning field. Planning Director stated that staff was contacted by one of Simon Eisner's sons to contribute to a book of letters and resolutions commending Mr. Eisner for his 50th year in planning, and that Mr. Eisner helped found land use planning in California and was responsible for the State Planning Act. He stated that the resolution would be forwarded to one of the sons. M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Ealy absent) adopting Resolution 3286 commending Simon Eisner for his many years of contribution land use planning in California. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS NOS. 3824 AND 3825. Planning Commission Resolutions of Commendation for past Planning ommission members. Planning Director explained the resolutions and explained that they would be adopted by the Commission, plaqued, and presented to the retired Commissioners at a luncheon or Planning Commission meeting. M/S/C (Kaptur/Olsen; Ealy absent) adopting Resolutions 3824 and 3825 commending former Chairman Paul Madsen and former Vice Chairman Sharon Apfelbaum for their contributions to the City during their tenures on the Planning Commission. 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 3.505. Application by CHEROKEE VILLAGE for main ID sign for Cherokee Resort, northwest corner of E. Palm Canyon Drive and Cherokee Way, R-G- A (8) Zone (IL), Section 30. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that a water detail at Cherokee Village was reviewed and approved previously with a sign to be submitted separately, and that the sign materials are poured concrete with a feather logo and enamel lettering to prevent water damage from ` sprinklers. Discussion ensued on the colors and design of the sign. Commissioner Olsen stated that he could not pinpoint his concern about the design at the AAC meeting, but feels that the dangling feather on the sign is wrong. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that the feather is 8 to 9 feet long in baked enamel and the sign is totally 4 feet by 14 feet. Commissioner Whitney asked about the thickness of the feather. Planning Director replied that it is thin, and that the feather is the Cherokee Village logo. Commissioner Curtis remarked that the colors of the project are terracotta and slumpstone. Commissioner Whitney stated that the colors do not conflict with the project. Commissioner Olsen noted that he felt that the feathers would be a target of vandalism. Planning Director stated that he had concerns that the proportions do not fit the original concept, that no scale drawings of the total frontage have been submitted, that the sign would not be easy to read because of the colors, and that the letters should be delineated. He stated that the feather does not integrate with the design. M. Palmer, 72600 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, sign designer, stated that the feathers on the sign are back to back and facing the same direction, and that the feather symbol is an important part of the advertising campaign for the resort. He stated that the lighting will focus directly on the sign, that the two feathers together give some dimension, and that the landscaping colors will integrate with the sign. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.505 (Continued) Commissioner Neel commented that the AAC recommended approval without a dissenting vote. M/S/C (Neel/Kaptur; Ealy absent; Curtis/Olsen dissented) approving the sign as submitted. NOTE: Commissioner Curtis dissented because of the sign colors and the fact that the sign does not integrate with the landscaping; Commissioner Olsen dissented because of the feather extending beyond the sign design. He stated that it would have been better if the feather were enclosed within the design. CASE 3.0105 (MINOR) . Application by RICHARD FISCHER for Palm Springs Spa Hotel ssociation for architectural approval for revisions to porte- cochere, 100 N. Indian Avenue, C-2, C-1AA Zones (IL), Section 14. Planning Director explained that the AAC had recommended restudy based on the Commission concern expressed at the September 10 meeting on proportions and overall concept of the porte-cochere. He stated that the architect was not aware of the concerns and was not at the AAC meeting September 22 although his associates were. Planner (Williams) stated that a scaled down version of the porte- cochere was reviewed by the AAC, which recommended restudy because the committee felt the sign was out of proportion with the hotel . (Also, �--' the AAC did not find the canvas awnings acceptable. ) R. Fischer, 2121 Tahquitz, project architect, stated that the design was developed at his client's direction, would be more massive to give a sense of arrival , _ and that the new porte-cochere fits the tone of the decor. He stated that the pyramid shapes on the porte-cochere will be repeated on other parts of the hotel for unity. He described other revisions being undertaken at the hotel , and stated that the client would probably accept the revised porte-cochere, but needs Planning Commission direction. In reply to Chairman's question, Planner stated that the AAC recommended restudy of the revised design. Commissioner Olsen stated that the design is foreign as viewed from Calle Encilla although it might be more pleasing if viewed from the inside looking outside. Mr. Fischer explained the design revisions to the hotel driveway and stated that the asphalt will be replaced by stamped concrete. Commissioner Whitney remarked that the AAC did not find the pyramids acceptable, and did not want the design to relate to the interior or to the hotel design across the street. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 16 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.0105 (MINOR). (Continued) Chairman stated that the pyramid design does not relate to the exterior of the building, that he agreed with the AAC that a new design approach should be taken, that the Planning Commission cannot design the porte- cochere for the architect, and that the AAC wants more integration with the building. Mr. Fischer stated that he thought he understood Planning Commission direction although he was somewhat confused about the pyramid shapes since they are on the side and he did not know why they could not be on the front. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Kaptur abstained; Ealy absent) for a restudy noting the above concerns on overall design and concept of the porte- cochere. CASE 5.0275-PD-147. Application by DESERT FASHION PLAZA for review of punch list items, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planning Director stated that staff has been working with the Desert Fashion Plaza representatives to solve concerns regarding items that do not conform to the approved plans. He stated that the Planner assigned to the case (Green) has done an outstanding job of coordinating and monitoring details of the project, and that the punch list has been reduced from hundreds of items to ten. He stated that the remaining ten items were appealed to the City Council , and that Council remanded them to staff, and that staff recommended that the Commission make final recommendations back to the Council . Planner (Green) presented the 10 item punch list and the recommendations of the AAC. (See conditions at end of case. ) G. Osborne, San Antonio, Texas, DeBartolo representative, stated that he was appealing the ten issues on the basis of the DeBartolo interpretation of the agreement entered into with the City. He stated that the company has performed in accordance with the provisions of the agreement and the issues were addressed in a letter to the City dated September 10, with the appeal based on the economic feasibility regarding major items such as screening of the mechanical equipment. He requested that the Commission evaluate the issues of appeal on the basis of the agreement with the City. Chairman explained that the Commission reviews architecture and architectural details, not the agreement, and that issues of the agreement should be addressed by the DeBartolo representatives to the Council . Mr. Osborne stated that the DeBartolo Corporation undertook the project on the basis of certain design criteria and conditions set forth in the participation agreement. Chairman explained that the project is a City Council (not a Planning Commission) project, and that the Commission is aiding the Council by reviewing details of final architecture. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 17 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0275-PD-147. (Continued) Commissioner Kaptur noted that the Commissioners were not apprised of the terms of the agreement between DeBartolo and the City. Planning Director stated that the issues of the effect of the development agreement on the various items is an appropriate one for the Council to address. He stated that the ten conditions listed with the exception of the lighting on Amado were a portion of the conditions of approval which were reviewed by staff, the AAC, and the Commission and that the Development Agreement addresses timeliness of response and adherence to approved plans. He stated that there may have been ambiguities and communication problems, but that the Planning Commission reviews architectural elements not timing and communication, and that the Commission should make the Council aware of the architectural issues. Commissioner Curtis questioned whether or not the DeBartolo representative was aware at the outset that the items listed were subject to approval . Mr. Osborne stated that he was trying to put the issues into context with the agreement documents and that the letter of September 10 to the Council states that DeBartolo feels that it has conformed in accordance with the agreement, and that the corporation wishes to finalize financing and conclude the project. He stated that the last ten issues need resolution before a certificate of occupancy can be issued, that some of the items are no longer under conditions of the participation agreement, that two of the items are "add-ons" and that DeBartolo is trying to avoid any additional work to obtain the certificate of occupancy. Chairman explained that the Commission cannot make a decision that any of the items are involved in the development agreement. T. Milner, N. Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, DeBartolo representative, requested that design issues be discussed and further direction given by the Commission. Chairman explained that the final punch list conditions must be met before a certificate of occupancy can be issued, that the Commission agrees with the AAC recommendations, and that the Commission is aware that DeBartolo has on-going agreements with the City Council . Planning Director asked if the Commission had alternate suggestions that could be discussed. Chairman stated that the AAC is the body responsible for review of architecture. Commissioner Kaptur stated that the punch list items should be reviewed by the Council for its determination based on Planning Commission recommendations and the applicants' input, and that the Commission can only make recommendations to the Council although the recommendations may not be what the Council approves. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 18 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0275-PD-147. (Continued) M/S/C (Kaptur/Curtis; Ealy absent) recommending to the Council that the AAC recommendations of September 22 be approved. The recommendations are as follows: Mechanical Equipment Screening 1. That the remaining mall roof-mounted mechanical equipment left after the installation of the Phase II second story shall be screened. Details shall be submitted for city approval . 2. If the Phase II second story has not been built by September 22, 1988 all mall roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened. Details shall be submitted for City approval at this time. Light Fixtures 1. That details of a revised fixture shall be submitted for City approval . Painting of South Parking Deck 1. That vines shall be espaliered to the exterior (street) walls of the structure. Trellis Lights 1. That details of a revision shall be submitted which shows screening of the light source. Chain Link Fence on South Deck Ramp 1. That a framed chainlink fence shall be used. Missing Palms in Front of Saks 1. That an as built plan of the planter shall be prepared and a revised planting plan shall be prepared for City approval for this area. Parking Kiosks 1. Restudy noting that a revised design shall be submitted. Lighting Along Amado 1. That a revised lighting plan shall be submitted. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council Actions. TPM 21270 (C.G. DUNHAM) . Council approved TPM 21270. September 24, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 19 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) COUNCIL ACTIONS. (Continued) Water Study. City task force reviewed water availability in the City. Staff wi1T-monitor and apprise Commission. Staff does not know how interactive the group was with the DWA. (Chairman stated that the DWA indicated the water agency was not involved in the study). CASE 5.0406-PD-183. Applicant J. WESSMAN requested that the carwash application Fe-sent back to the Commission for review of the plan without the carwash. Moderate amount of public input at the Council meeting, and the Council divided on the appropriateness of the carwash on the site. Mr. Wessman will probably place the carwash on Gene Autry Trail . DUMPSTERS AT THE SHERATON PLAZA HOTEL. Placement of the dumpsters reviewed by staff. ui ing Division issued encroachment permits and extended them for fifty days. Future problems will be resolved by prohibiting encroachment on any right-of-way for the bins, except in CBD Zone where there is no other choice. Future requests for the bins will be reviewed by Zoning Enforcement staff and Planning Director. Bins are being used at the Sheraton for warehousing of carpeting. The bin blocking the view at the corner of Andreas will be moved back into the parking lot. CASE 5.0344-PD-164. Staff will review legality of signs on Convention Center an ote construction site. - CASE 3.960. Blowsand from the Palm Springs Mall is causing visibility problems at the high school varsity football games Friday nights. Staff will review. AAC MEMBERSHIP. Staff is reviewing list of names for new members. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss Chairman adjourned the meeting at 4:25 p.m. anning 91fledtor MDR/ml WP/PC MIN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall October 8, 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 6 0 Hugh Curtis X 6 0 Hugh Kaptur - 5 2 Earl Neel X 4 2 Gary Olsen X 5 0 Barbara Whitney X 3 1 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Carol Yankeeken, Planner Richard Patenaude, Planner Robert Green, Planner Margo Williams, Planner • Jerry Gonzalez, Traffic Engineer Tom Graham, Building & Safety Director Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - October 6, 1986 J. Cioffi , Chairman Absent: Tom Doczi William Johnson Mike Buccino Chris Mills Gary Olsen Barbara Whitney Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Neel/Curtis; Kaptur absent) approving minutes of September 24, 1986 as submitted.