Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/02/25 - MINUTES i PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall February 25, 1987 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 14 0 Hugh Curtis X 12 2 Martha Edgmon X 4 0 Brent Hough X 8 0 Earl Neel X 11 3 Gary Olsen X 11 3 Barbara Whitney X 11 1 Staff Present Marvin D. Voos, Planning Director Douglas Evans, Planner Robert Green, Planner Richard Patenaude, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Carol Vankeeken, Planner Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - February 23, 1987 Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Mike Buccino William Johnson Gary Olsen Tom Doczi Barbara Whitney Brent Hough Will Kleindienst Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Curtis/Hough ) approving the minutes of February 11 , 1987, as submitted. February 25, 1987 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/Neel ) taking the following actions: CASE 3.0053. Application by ED KANAN for architectural approval of revised Ian dscape plans and working drawings for an apartment complex on Ramon Road/Grenfall Road, R-2 Zone, Section 23. A. Landscape. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That there be consistent tree size in the parking lot (24 inch box) and the trees on the west property line (24 inch box). 2. That the triangular planters on the east property line as shown on the grading plan be installed. 3. That the screen walls on the west side of the parking lot be deleted. 4. That the shrubs at the perimeter be minimum 5 gallon. 5. That a concrete pad for a bus bench be included in the land- scaping. B. Working Drawings: Continued to March 11. CASE 3.0080. Application by CARMICHAEL DESIGNS for architectural approval of revised site plan and elevations for industrial building on Tachevah Drive/Montalvo Way, M-1-P Zone, Section 7. Restudy noting the following: 1. Screed lines to be integrated with elements. 2. That material changes not occur in the same plane. 3. Header above office area should be integrated into a horizontal element. 4. Horizontal lines are too random. 5. Wafflecrete areas to be blended through to stucco area, better integration. 6. Delete ceramic tile (proposed in lieu of glass block) . 7. Applicant to resubmit full plans: a. colored elevations b. cross-sections C. floor plans d. roof plans February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0080. (Continued) 8. That the revised site design is acceptable. 9. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. Abstention: Hough CASE 3.0116. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for Robert Poon for archi- tectural approval of revised preliminary landscape plans and building materials for a two-story, 94-room hotel on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Via Escuela/Vista Chino, C-1/R-3 Zones, Section 3. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Resubmit revised walls (perimeter) , retaining walls/Indian Avenue with return and finish noted. 2. All the perimeter walls should be mortar washed slump block, painted to match the building. 3. The wall at the Whitewater easement should be filled in (not open wrought iron). 4. Barrel tile (varigated) to be used, not "S" tile. �.... 5. Textured concrete pavement to be used at entries and porte- cocheres. 6. Palms should break roof line. 7. Vines on some of the walls. 8. Delete Carrotwood Trees. CASE 3.0171 (MINOR) . Application by WELLS FARGO BANK for architectural approval of automatic teller machine for bank at 1711 E. Palm Canyon, C- D-N Zone, Section 25. A. Approved automatic teller machine on the west side at the location of the former drive-up window subject to the following conditions: 1. Box out wall area from column to column and from grade level to canopy reveal . 2. Eliminate orange frame. B. Restudy of the automatic teller on the north side noting the following: 1. That two teller I.D. signs are unnecessary. 2. Eliminate overhead lights. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0171 (MINOR) . (Continued) 3. Enhance existing landscape. 4. Integrate ATM into overall architecture. 5. Brick to be matched and woven. 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 3.0141. Application by JETWAY SYSTEMS for Skywest Western Express for architectural approval of final detailed landscape, irrigation, and exterior lighting plans for aircraft maintenance and hush house facility, on Gene Autry Trail between Vista Chino/Ramon Road, A Zone, Section 18. Planner (Evans) presented the landscape plan. Commissioner Olsen committed that five palm trees were not enough for the long north face of the building. Commissioner Edgmon asked if the air conditioning equipment were ground-mounted. Planner stated that the equipment is swamp coolers, will be ground-mounted, screened, and are quite a distance from the street. Discussion followed on the number of palm .,, trees in the landscaping. Planner stated that the property on the north side is owned by the airport with no firm plans for the future although a similar facility could be constructed and it would depend on the orientation of the future project whether or not it blocked the view of the long face of the subject building. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. Shrubs in lieu of Ficus adjacent to the building on the east sides, use Zylosma or something similar. 2. The palms should all be 25 ft. minimum, and vary the groupings at the southeast corner of the building from a 30 ft. high maximum to a 12 ft. minimum. 3. That there be three clumps of palm trees on the north side using the same height ratio as the tree grouping, S/E corner of the building. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0176 (MINOR). Application by GARY DREW for architectural approval of new store front in the Desert Fashion Plaza on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Amado Road/Tahquitz Way, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planner (Green) presented the project and stated that the structure is in an alcove in front of the Desert Fashion Plaza. He described the materials of the storefront and the sign which is etched on the glass. He stated that the possibility of having glu-lam beams was- not dis- cussed by the AAC. Commissioner Hough commented that the storefront is physically not on the outside of the building. Chairman stated that laminated wood should be used not only for weathering purposes but for aesthetic reasons since the other exposed wood on the building is laminated. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That details of how the trellis beam and column structure connect shall be submitted. 2. Details of the column size shall be submitted. 3. That Glu-lam beams be used for the trellis. �.� 4. That a detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted (delete saucer and drain directly into grade). 5. That items 1-4 shall be submitted for staff approval prior to installation. CASE 5.0418-CUP. Application by CHRISTOPHER MILLS for Mark Hastings for architectural approval of detailed final landscape, irrigation and exterior lighting plans for a day care center on Racquet Club Road between Farrell Drive/Cerritos Road, R-1-C Zone, Section 1. Planner (Vankeeken) described the application stating that the mauve color was changed from the originally submitted hot pink. Commissioner Edgmon stated that the color is a concern, especially since the project is in a residential area. Planner stated that the application was brought before the Commission because of the City Council directive to restudy the colors. Commissioner Curtis noted that he had concerns about the accent colors which should be more subdued or changed in shade. M/S/C (Curtis/Edgmon) taking the following actions: A. Restudy of the colors of the building to tone down the accent colors. B. Approval of the landscape plans subject to the following condition February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 5.0418-CUP. (Continued) 1. That two fruit trees shall be added subject to staff review and approval . PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0424-CUP (CONTINUED) . Application by the MARRIOTT CORPORATION for a Conditional se Permit for construction of a 148 unit, 3-story hotel with an maximum height of 46 feet on the east side of Hermosa Drive between Tahquitz Way/Andreas Road, R-4-VP/C-1-AA Zone (I .L. ) , Section 14. (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration. No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the application be continued to March 11 at the request of the applicant. Planner (Green) stated that the architects are restudying the design, have not submitted new plans, and have requested continuance to March 11. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Neel/Whitney) continuing the application to March 11. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS This case was considered by the Tribal Council on January 27 and February 10, 1987. It was noted that the proposed Project complied with all provisions of the City's Zoning Ordinance with the exception of the side setback along Hermosa Drive. This proposed setback of 32' complies with Ordinance No. 779 ("Indian Land Ordinance"). After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council reiterated its previous actions to: 1. Approve the filing of a Negative Declaration with the mitigation measures noted in the Environmental Assessment. 2. Concur with findings contained in Planning Staff report dated January 28, 1987 and approved the granting of the Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions recommended by Planning Staff. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0425-PD-186 (CONTINUED) . Application by GEORGE JELKS for the Palm Springs Manor for a Panned Development District to allow construction o., of a 127 unit retirement facility at 1500 Baristo Road, R-G-A(8) Zone, Section 14. (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration. No comments received. ) Planner (Green) stated that the Commission at a joint Council/Commission study session indicated that it was in favor of the proposal and that an addendum to the staff report had been prepared for options for Commission action on the project. He stated of six options defined in the addendum, a development agreement may give the tightest controls. Planning Director stated that staff is reiterating its concern over changing the General Plan to increased density for projects not other- wise meeting identified housing needs, and that revisions to the General Plan should occur only if the Commission feels that the General Plan is wrong on the site (not because the Commission is sympathetic to the pro- ject) , and that the simplest action if the Commission is sympathetic to the proposal would be to amend the General Plan to higher density, and then process the application if the Commission wishes to approve it. He stated that if the General Plan is amended, any development would be processed at the higher density, would avoid the problems of preparing development agreements and setting criteria for seniors which are not appropriate land use questions. Chairman declared the hearing open. P. Selzer, Palm Springs attorney representing the applicant, stated that the applicant agrees to a General Plan amendment, that the developer although willing to negotiate a development agreement feels it is not necessary since the project will proceed without it. There being no further appearances, Chairman closed the hearing. Planner (Green) stated that staff had received a telegram from Robert Hirsh who owns the adjoining senior project, and who spoke at the last meeting opposing the project with concerns such as spot zoning, exces- sive density and over-concentration of senior projects in the area. He stated that Mr. Hirsh requested continuance to March 11 to be present to speak. Chairman stated that there are three choices - denial , amendment of the General Plan to allow residential high density, and amend the General Plan and prepare a development agreement. Planning Director stated that action could be denial which could be appealed to the Council or if the Commission wishes to amend the General Plan, remove the item from agenda pending a General Plan study for the site and renoticing of the project. He stated that both would be pro- cessed concurrently, perhaps in April . Commissioner Curtis stated that although the project is very well designed he was concerned about amending the General Plan to retrofit it February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0425-PD-186. (Continued) to a project proposal which is not accomplishing city goals. He stated that every developer is given the maximum density, and the property should not be changed from its zoning if possible. Commissioner Hough stated that he favored increased density and an amendment to the General Plan since it is a isolated pocket with R-4 density around it. He stated that he would prefer a General Plan amend- ment to a development agreement. Commissioner Olsen commented that he favored senior housing on the site because of its proximity to amenities such as the library and leisure services activities and that a General Plan amendment is viable. Planner described the surrounding zoning on the display board and also stated that the architecture was approved by the AAC although the land use is what is being reviewed. Commissioner Whitney asked if the General Plan were amended and the pro- ject was not approved, if there would be a problem in the future. Chairman stated that a development agreement could be prepared for a General Plan amendment to increase density, and that if this were done, any project could be built to the density since it would not be wise to re-amend the General Plan. He stated that his personal opinion is that amending the General Plan to High Density Residential is not spot zoning because the property has R-4 density on two sides. He stated that the Rose Garden project, which was built to R-G-A(8) density, is an unusual situation, and the project was constructed before the Indian rezoning was established. Commissioner Edgmon stated that the architecture is pleasing, that she does not favor spot zoning, but the subject property is surrounded by R- 4 so rezoning is not spot zoning. Planning Director stated that requests for increased density is some- thing that is seen more often by staff than the Commission because of the demand in the marketplace, and that it is one of the major failings of zoning since increased high density is often requested after high density has already been established. He reminded the Commission that another similar parcel (although not surrounded by R-4 and not Indian land) on the corner of Baristo and Sunrise is vacant and pressure has been applied to staff to rezone it to R-3 or R-4 for senior housing. He stated that the parcel would not assimilate into the neighborhood, but is close in for seniors, and that there is a likelihood that a density increase will be requested if a General Plan amendment is undertaken for the subject project. He stated that the policy of not increasing density has been in effect since 1973 and the policy could be affected by increasing density on the subject proposal . Mr. Selzer asked if the Planning Director's statements were in the staff report, because he felt that the applicant had the right to respond. Chairman reminded Mr. Selzer that the public hearing was closed. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0425-PD 186 (Continued) . Discussion followed on transition zoning. Chairman stated that the east and west sides of Sunrise have different zoning, that R-G-A(8) abutting `-' R-4 is not a smooth transition, that he could understand staff's idea that increased densities sometimes allows zoning to fail , and that he questioned whether or not R-G-A(8) anywhere in Section 14 is appro- priate. Planning Director stated that R-G-A(8) abuts R-4 in the entire section along Alejo, that the Rose Garden location is unfortunate, that zoning on the east side of Sunrise is different, but that there is development pressure for senior housing high density throughout the City. He stated that on that basis if the Commission feels the General Plan is incorrect it could be changed. Commissioner Curtis stated that he felt that there were other properties in Section 14 where the subject proposal could be built instead of trying to place it on property that is not zoned for it. M/S/C (Hough/Edgmon; ; Curtis/Whitney dissenting) continuing the item to be processed concurrently with the General Plan amendment to change the General Plan from Residential Medium to Residential High 30. CASE 5.0436-ZTA-CZ (CONTINUED) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of a Zoning Text Amendmento establish a "R" Resort Combining Zone for the purpose of protecting those properties citywide which have the potential for providing resort commercial uses from certain incompatible uses and to consider a change of zone to place the combining zone on certain pro- perties citywide. (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration; final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the application be continued to March 11. Planning Director stated that the zoning text amendment and zone change are being processed in response to Council directive to protect hotel sites, and to keep the land available, and that the Commission is being asked to approve a zoning text amendment to create an "R" overlay to protect hotel site properties from permanent residential projects and a zone change to place the overlay zone on the properties. He stated that the Tribal Council is requesting continuance to March 11 for more time to review the proposal , and that the major hotel areas to be protected are along the Highway 111 corridor of the City, with other areas being in the core of the City. He stated that an outright prohibition of apartments and condominiums would not be applicable in all multi-family zones, and that eventually Commission and Council would find benefit in allowing some residential projects in the "R" overlay in some instances. He stated that Palm Canyon and the Tahquitz corridors are protected along with the Tahquitz Cone and Convention Center area, and that an overlay at E1 Cielo and Ramon will be left off since the zoning is "P" which can be changed later if a hotel proposal is received. He stated that apartments are built at times when the use is economically feasible, not because i'ti's the best long range use for the property and February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0436-ZTA-CZ. (Continued) that the zones affected would be R-2, R-3, and R-4 where there are no significant alternatives except for hotels by right of zone (those zones on major thoroughfares allow other uses like restaurants and offices under a CUP). He stated that the C-B-D and the C-1-AA Zones will probably not develop as permanent residential , and that one measure that would limit impact would be to limit the overlay to those sites over one or more acres with sites under one or more acres to be allowed residential use by right of zone. Chairman stated that all the Commissioners' offices, except for Commissioner Edgmon, who has an office in Rancho Mirage are in the over- lay area and questioned whether or not these Commissioners should abstain. Assistant City Attorney stated that the Commission would have to have a procedure of necessity to determine which Commissioners could form a quorum for voting. Chairman stated that is difficult to believe that if the offices are only rented there is a conflict. (He stated that only Commissioner Neel owns his building. ) Assistant City Attorney stated that the difficulty arises in the fact that consideration in this zoning, if adopted, will have a significant effect on the value of the property, that in turn could have an effect on the landlord/tenant relationship and affect the entire development of the area. He stated that a quorum would have to be established with four members so three members have to be chosen with Commissioner Edgmon the fourth. In answer to Chairman's question, Planning Director stated that the City Council would have to act on the Zone Change and Zoning Text Amendment in the same manner. Assistant City Attorney distributed ballots and stated that Commissioners Edgmon, Hough, Olsen and Neel would be the Commissioners to act on the Zone Change/Zoning Text Amendment. The non-voting Commissioners left the room at this time. Planning Director described the configuration of the overlay zone on the display board. He stated that there are apartments and condo complexes in the area that would become technically non-conforming. If for example, a building were more than 50% destroyed and had to be rebuilt, it could not be rebuilt by right of zone. He stated that the lines drawn are arbitrary and exclude some areas, and that the overlay should be in place for fairness to the owners of those properties. He explained that a strong urban design element will develop where the overlay is earmarked, that resort related uses could be developed in the "R" Zone and that mixed use projects in conjunction with hotels could be developed later. He stated that staff is recommending that permanent residential uses not be allowed by right of zone, placed under a Conditional Use Permit, that the language is included in the General Plan currently which identifies areas for hotels, and that at the time February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0436-ZTA-CZ. (Continued) the General Plan text was written there were not very many apartments in the City. He explained that land use characteristics on a long-term basis can change with short-term demand for certain types of development. He stated that these facts should be considered by the Commission since hotels cannot be developed at just any time, since they require a more specific development program, and to meet short-term goals developers want to develop property for economic reasons, thus affecting long-term City goals. Chairman declared the hearing open. D. Christian, 1000 S. Palm Canyon, spoke in opposition, although he stated that he understood the City's philosophy to encourage hotels as an extension of the resort oriented C-B-D, but that the overlay does not have flexibility it needs, resembles a blanket prohibition of apartment and condominium development, and will be seen as downzoning. He questioned whether or not a mixed use would be acceptable on a large parcel , and Planning Director stated that it would be discussed during the hearing. Mr. Christian stated that residential uses will be allowed in a small mixed use facility but not on a major street such as Tahquitz. Commissioner Olsen explained that certain commercial uses in office buildings are available under a conditional use permit. Mr. Christian stated that the intent is restrict sites to hotel uses, and that there will probably never be that many hotels in Palm Springs. He stated that he has a project which will be affected by the overlay, and that his seniors project should be in the downtown area for convenience. He noted that if the overlay is a prohibition, the fact should be stated by staff, and that there will be comments from affected property owners, including the Indians. He suggested that uses that make sense should be allowed and every use on the Tahquitz corridor should be under a CUP and judged on its own merits. He stated that the land that is viable for hotels will have hotels constructed on it. M. Seegal , 20 year resident of Palm Springs, voiced objection to the overlay which he stated created an injustice to those owning property on Tahquitz and which would downgrade and devalue the property. He stated that he had a large investment in property on the overlay, and that he wanted to build a project that it is beneficial for the community and for seniors, and that more hotels are not needed since there are currently problems with filling hotel rooms. He stated that property owners cannot hold vacant land for an indefinite time and the overlay will be detrimental to the leaseholders and the Indians. He requested that his project and future projects be allowed to develop for the good of the people and commented that everyone eventually will become a senior citizen. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0436-ZTA-CZ. (Continued) `-- Mrs. Z. Seegal , stated that she had a vested interest in the project on Tahquitz where the overlay is planned, that the overlay would not be productive, that hotels are having difficulty, that she did not know how many more hotels can be accommodated in the City, that a glitzy hotel row is not the solution, that her project will be a good complex for seniors, and that the location was chosen because of its proximity to the downtown and other amenities. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that the questions raised such as counter pro- ductivity, the overlay, and mixed uses in large and small scale develop- ment, would be addressed in the public hearing on March 11. He stated that the overlay zone is not downzoning, that there is a strong case for impacting on R-3, and R-4 but little on R-2 or the commercial zones. He stated that the Commission has to realize that the Council directive is to save sites for hotels and resort uses and limit residential , and that the Commission or Council can change the overlay if it feels that the extent is too great or not great enough. He stated also that other changes can be made such as indicating areas for mixed use and for residential uses under CUP's. He stated, for example, that a question arose when Maxim's and the Desert Fashion Plaza were built regarding non-conforming uses such as the service station on Amado and Palm Canyon which hinders pedestrian traffic beyond that point, (and which will be abated) and also in the new Zoning Text office uses on the ground floor in the C-B-D would be under a CUP because the use does not encourage shopping and retail activity patterns which are the lifeblood of the downtown. He stated that mixed uses will be analyzed and reviewed on an case by case basis. Commissioner Hough stated that he felt that the overlay was not down- zoning if there is a Conditional Use Permit process for other uses. Commissioner Edgmon informed the Commission that she would not be attending the March it meeting, and Assistant City Attorney stated that it would make a major difference in Commission action. Planning Director stated that there would be a quorum without Commissioner Edgmon, but that the vote on the Zoning Text Amendment and Zone Change would have to be 3-0. Commissioner Olsen stated that he was happy there would be a CUP for control on the corridors. M/S/C (Hough/Edgmon; Curtis/Whitney/Lapham abstained) continuing the item to March 11. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS The Tribal Council recognizes the importance of tourism to the economical well-being of this Community, and will continue to be supportative of the City's efforts to enhance its competitive position in this market, including those efforts to encourage development of quality facilities related to tourism. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 13 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0436-ZTA-CZ. (Continued) �.. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following action: 1. Noted that the proposed "R" Resort combining Zone will be placed on properties citywide, including numerous Indian trust parcels. 2. In view of the significance of this proposed zoning text amend- ment, the Tribal Council respectfully requested that this Case be continued for at least two weeks to provide adequate time for the Indian Planning Commission, Tribal Planning Consultant and the Tribal Council to fully review the Staff Report on this matter. The Staff Report dated February 25, 1987 was received by those referred to above, on February 23, 1987. PUBLIC COMMENTS R. Gunderson, Mainiero, Smith Associates, project engineer, stated that he was present to answer questions concerning Case 5.0389-PD-177. 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 5.0389-PD-177 (Ref. TPM 21324). Application by EXPO ENTERPRISES for architectural approval of final development plans for a Planned Development District to allow development of mobilehome lots on the west end of Mesquite Avenue, R-TP/0-20 Zones, Section 22. Planner (Green) explained that the application is for Final Development Plans for a previously approved planned development district, that the original plan had 40 mobilehomes, but the new proposal has only 23 units with 2 different sizes available. He stated that there is a change to the plan in order to keep access to the Lykken Trail and for horse trailer parking space, and that landscape materials now form a natural right-of-way on the site. He stated that some of the mobilehome park units previously extended over the property line into Parkview Mobile- home Park, but the units have been pulled back and a landscape boundary formed, and that the AAC approved the landscaping. He stated that another change to the site plan is a debris basin to catch debris from a swale behind the units, that the City Engineer approved the design since the water leaves the site in the same flow as it enters, and that there has been an illegal building extension from Parkview over a drainage channel . He stated that in grading of the site some pads have been padded up slightly and some units remain above the Parkview units, that the road has been recessed for drainage (which has created fairly steep slopes in front of some of the lots, which may not be the best design) , and that staff recommends that some of the units be pulled back, and the grading of the slopes reduced, which is agreeable to the applicants. He February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 14 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0389-PD-177 (Ref. TPM 21324). (Continued) stated that the AAC reviewed the units and recommended that more infor- mation be submitted since the applicants indicated that there would be more than the two color options shown to the AAC. He stated that the AAC restudied the shade structure since the City feels the structure would twist and warp, that details of the trail and landscape were also submitted, and that a manager facility is indicated on the plan. He stated that because the area is a national historic site, a survey was originally required, but since there has been grading on the site, the study will not be fruitful , but an archeologist will be on-site when additional grading occurs. He stated that a soils report gave many mitigative measures for construction on the site and will be included in the conditions, and that landscaping restoration will be necessary on the debris basin. He noted that sewer facilities will be taken through Parkview by excavation under an easement agreement, and that landscape screening will be required for cuts in the area, and that debris and garbage will be removed from the site. He stated that the wooden trellis will be resubmitted to the Fire Department for review, and that the side yard setbacks meet the zoning requirements. Chairman explained for the benefit of the new Commissioners that the project was reviewed in lengthy meetings and was approved, that the units have been reduced from 40 to 23, that the residents of Parkview were not in favor of the project originally but access easement problems have been resolved, and that Final Development Plans are now ready for approval . Planner stated that the retaining wall along the back of the units for the runoff channel is 2k to 6 ft. high. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ) taking the following actions: A. Landscaping Plan. Approved subject to the following conditions. 1. That trees shall be located in each rear yard in a random pattern (50% minimum, 24" box). 2. That native landscaping shall be randomly spread over Mesquite Avenue north of the site and irrigated until estab- lished. 3. That textured paving shall be added at the entrance. 4. That details of requirements 1-3 above shall be submitted for approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. B. Grading Plan. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. that units shall be relocated towards the rear of lots to reduce the gradients in the front yard. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 15 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0389-PD-177 (Ref. TPM 21324) . (Continued) 3. Units. Restudy noting the following: 1. That the proposed trellis shall be revised to be more sub- stantial and less liable to heat distortion (Glu-lam structure is recommended) . 2. That the outline of proposed trellises shall be shown on the site plan. 3. That the site plan including trellis locations shall be resubmitted to the Fire Department for approval . 4. That details of colors shall be submitted. 5. That standard exterior details (e.g. windows/shutters etc. ) be submitted. 6. That a sample of asphalt shingles shall be submitted. D. That all recommendations (revised) of the Development Committee be implemented. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS CASE 5.0434-MISC.-DISCUSSION. Planning Commission discussion of City initiated landscape guidelines for the City of Palm Springs. Planning Director recommended continuance for the Parks Department to formalize the guidelines. M/S/C (Neel/Olsen) continuing the item to March 11. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council Actions. Planning Director stated that no major issues were on the Council 's last agenda. COMMISSION REPORTS OR REQUESTS. AAC MEETING FORMAT. Planning Director stated that the format has been changed at 5577TC so that staff uses microphones for presentations which allows staff to finish presentations before questions or comments are received. He stated that the Chairman repeats the AAC action as a motion into a tape recorder which is then given to the Word Processing Center for transcription. He stated that the meeting from a staff per- spective was smoother with the new format, that there were some problems with the tape and background noises, but that these minor problems will be resolved. He stated that levity at the meeting decreased because of the microphones and that the appearance and demeanor of the meeting improved. Commissioner Hough stated that the meeting was better for the applicants who could understand more clearly what was happening with their projects. February 25, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 16 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) COMMISSION REPORTS OR REQUESTS. (Continued) Chairman stated that the levity insults some applicants who are very concerned about their applications. Commissioner Edgmon stated that the meeting is more professional with the microphones on. Planning Director stated that the camaraderie was enjoyable but should be in another forum such as an annual AAC/PC meeting, and that staff was having to answer for actions of the AAC, which were difficult to defend, not so much for the recommendation, but for the manner in which it was done. He stated that the lay members of the Committee should not be intimidated by the architects. Chairman agreed, stating that if the lay members do not like the project they should say so. /(Ref. Case 5.622-CUP) FIRE STATION ON LAVERNE. Maintenance of the fire station and land- scaping was discussed. 71anning Director stated that the landscaping is being upgraded by the City, and that the maintenance of the station will be reviewed. Chairman stated that the station is in a residential area and should be as well maintained as the residences surrounding it. ADDED STARTERS. (Determination of eligibility for consideration. ) No action necessary (no added starters). RESOLUTIONS. Planning Commission adoption of resolutions for retired Commissioners. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney) approving Resolution No. 3850 commending Curt Ealy for his service to the community and Commission. M/S/C (Olsen/Hough) approving Resolution No. 3849 commending Hugh Kaptur for his service to the community and Commission. Chairman suggested that a luncheon be held for the retiring commissioners. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) SIGN APPLICATION. Application by W. HOWLETT for architectural approval of a c ange o a main identification sign for Royal Sun Hotel , 1700 S. Palm Canyon, R-3 Zone, Section 26. Restudy. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 3:50 p.m. PLANNING DrRECTUR MDR/ml PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall March 11, 1987 • 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 15 0 Hugh Curtis X 13 2 Martha Edgmon - 4 1 Brent Hough X 9 0 Earl Neel X 12 3 Gary Olsen X 12 3 Barbara Whitney - 11 2 Staff Present Robert Green, Planner Richard Patenaude, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Carol Vankeeken, Planner Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - March 9, 1987 Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Bill Johnson • Tom Doczi Barbara Whitney Brent Hough Gary Olsen Will Kleindienst Mike Buccino Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Neel/Curtis; Whitney/Edgmon absent) approving minutes of February 25, 1987, as submitted.