Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/04/08 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall April 8, 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 17 0 Hugh Curtis X 15 2 Martha Edgmon X 6 1 Brent Hough X 11 0 Earl Neel X 14 3 Gary Olsen - 13 4 Barbara Whitney - 12 3 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Al Smoot, Director of Transportation & Energy Robert Green, Planner Richard Patenaude, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Carol Vankeeken, Planner Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary • Architectural Advisory Committee - April 6, 1987 Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Barbara Whitney William Johnson Gary Olsen Tom Doczi Brent Hough Will Kleindienst Mike Buccino Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) approving minutes of March 25, 1987 as submitted. •April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 2 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA r 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/Edgmon; Whitney/Olsen absent) taking the following actions: CASE 5.0398-PD-180. Application by ROBERT MCCOY for Larry Pierce for archi- tectural approval of revised landscape plans and tower details for hotel on Indian Avenue south of Arenas Road, C-2/C-1-AA Zones (I .L. ) , Section 14. Continued to April 22 (at the applicant's request)for a restudy noting the following: Landscape 1. That there are insufficient landscape materials proposed (project is underplanted) . 2. That the landscaping does not do the project justice. There is not enough material to integrate the project with the landscaping of the rest of the City. 3. That the landscaping of the project should have a theme, and enhance the appearance of the building. The landscaping of the whole site should be evaluated. More materials, properly placed, should be added. Materials should frame and highlight the • building. 4. That more canopy trees should be introduced to shade the parking lots. 5. That canopy trees should be integrated with palms on Indian Avenue frontage. 6. That eucalyptus should be introduced on the north side of the site as a screen. 7. That trees should be grouped rather than placed in lines. 8. That loquats should be substituted with a suitable accent species. 9. That the trees on the Indian Avenue streetscape should have a varied alignment. 10. That the design of the trees in the pool area should be restudied. Tower Architecture: 1. That the tower appears top heavy. 2. That the design should be integrated more with the porte-cochere. • The current hip roof connection is awkward. The tower should look like a part of the porte-cochere. i April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 3 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA • CASE 3.931 (MINOR) . Application by H. M. TOUSSI for architectural approval of exterior dining area for restaurant in Desert Fashion Plaza on North Palm Canyon Drive, PD-147. (Reference Case 5.0275-PD-147. ) Restudy noting the following: 1. That a durable base shall be integrated into the wall as protection. 2. That two columns shall be deleted as noted on the plans. 3. That the cap detail be revised and enhanced. 4. That a landscape barrier (hedge) shall be introduced to the east side of the walkway. The landscaping of this planter shall have a unified design. CASE 3.0116 (Continued) . Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for Robert Poon for architectural approval of revised landscape and grading plans for a two-story, 95-unit hotel on North Palm Canyon Drive between Via Escuela/Vista Chino, C-1/R-3 Zones, Section 3. 1. Continued landscape plans to April 22. 2. Approved grading plans with staff review of the south property line wall to insure that it does not conflict with the soffit of the building to the south. Abstention: Curtis CASE 3.0192 (MINOR) - Continued. Application by G. HERRERA for architectural approval of revised plans for a bedroom addition to single family hill- side residence at 1055 Chino Canyon Road, R-1-A Zone, Section 4. Continued to April 22 for applicant to review the cohesiveness of the design. CASE 3.0194 (MINOR) - Continued. Application by D&A SHADE CO. for architec- tural approval of revised plans for an awning for Robbie Reed' s restaurant (formerly Jasper's) at 500 E. Palm Canyon Dr. , R-3 Zone, Section 23. Removed from the agenda at the applicants request. CASE 5.0389-PO-177 (REF. TPM 324) . Application by EXPO ENTERPRISES for archi- tectural approval of revised colors (portion 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. Removed from the agenda pending receipt of revised colors. CASE 3.0196 (MINOR) . Application by DONALD A. PINS for architectural approval • of a canvas patio cover for condominium at 3500 Ridgeview Circle North, R-1-C Zone, Section 19. (Ref. Case 5.0222-CUP. ) Approved as submitted. >April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 4 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA • CASE 3.0198 (MINOR) . Application by DENNYS INC. for architectural approval of revised exterior colors for restaurant at 1201 North Palm Canyon Drive, C-1 Zone, Section 10. Denied. SIGN APPLICATION. Application by the INTERNATIONAL HOTEL for architectural approval of flag program for entry of hotel , 1800 East Palm Canyon Drive, R-3 Zone, Section 24. Restudy noting the following: That the porte-cochere should be used as mounting base in place of the proposed mounting on the roof. SIGN APPLICATION. Application by FORTUNE SIGNS for Chen Ling Restaurant for architectural approval of revised main identification signs for restaurant at 787 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-1 Zone, Section 10. Restudy noting the following: That the new sign location should not be on building, and that the applicant should explore the possibility of a monument sign. CASE 3.989. Application by ROBERT RICHEY for Carpeteria for architectural approval of revised site plan for building on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Yorba/Alvarado Roads, C-1/R-G-A(6) Zones, Section 3. Approved subject to the following: • 1. That brown stripes be eliminated on the elevations. the 2. That / planter adjacent to the loading dock be extended. 3. That the width of the driveway be reduced to 22 ft. to provide pro- tection for stairs (maintain 24 ft. driveway entrance) . ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA CASE 3.0085. Application by WADE RITCHIE for Mark Blaich for architectural approval of revised site plan and elevations for a 4-unit apartment building on Junipero Avenue/San Marco, R-2 Zone, Section 3. Planner (Williams) stated that the project had been restudied several times; the AAC felt that the design was improved but still fragmented; that there was a split vote of the committee and the application was sent on to the Commission; and that the difference in the grading heights has been resolved. Commissioner Hough stated that the Committee felt that the balcony treatments needed improvement since they appeared to be "add ons". . M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) for a restudy noting that although the building design has improved, it is still fragmented and not cohesive. April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 5 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA • CASE 3.0163 (MINOR) . Application by TOZIER & ASSOCIATES for the 1st Trust Bank for architectural approval of an automatic teller machine for bank at 441 South Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planner (Green) stated that the application was restudied by the Commission and recommended for restudy by the AAC on April 6 because the Committee felt that the tile material of the surround was not suitable for the marble fascia of the building, and that the applicants had resubmitted a drawing of the detail including samples of revised tile which seemed to be too dark for the building and have not been reviewed by the AAC. He stated that if the Commission approves the revised application, staff can work with the applicant to find a better tile. M/S/C (Hough/Curtis; Whitney/Olsen absent) approving the revised appli- cations subject to the following conditions: 1. That a detail of the edge of the building facade and the proposed tile face be submitted. 2. That a ceramic tile be used in the recessed area and the walkway. 3. That the spaces separating the ATM from the edge of the recess be proportional . 4. That the color of the tile be resolved by staff. 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 3.0169 (MINOR) . Application by SAM PASCAL for architectural approval of an addition to an auto repair facility for Bensi 's Body Shop at 672 South Palm Canyon Drive (Sun Center) , C-2 Zone, Section 23. Planner (Green) stated that the canopy is an extension of the existing body shop and originally had no sides, and has been enclosed to contain the noise from the shop; that the AAC recommended that oleanders be planted as a screen to the north with a time limit for installation since the proposed hotel to the north will have a perimeter screening wall ; and that the AAC recommended that the mechanical equipment on the new building only be screened since screening of the existing equipment would be more obtrusive than leaving it unscree ned. Frank Bensi , Bensi 's Body Shop, Sun Center, agreed to the extension of a year to determine whether it is necessary to plant the oleander screen to the north. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Hough abstained; Whitney/Olsen absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: •April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 6 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.0169 (MINOR) . (Continued) 1. That a maximum time limit of one year for installation of the oleander hedge is approved. 2. That the mechanical equipment on the new building only shall be screened (screening of the existing equipment would be more obtrusive than leaving it unscreened) . CASE 3.0190 (MINOR) . Application by MICHAEL BUCCINO for Ken Irwin for archi- tectural approval of revised site plan and elevations for La Mancha Resort on the southeast corner of Avenida Caballeros/Alejo Road, R-G- A(8) Zone, Section 14. (Ref. Case 5.737-CUP. ) Planner (Williams) stated that the proposal is another phrase of the La Mancha project and will include a conference building, complete street improvements, and a connecting interior loop road, and that subsequent phrases will be returned to the Commission. She stated that the AAC recommended approval with conditions. Planning Director remarked that the Commission should review the pro- posal to refurbish the old house on the site. Discussion followed. Chairman stated that he felt the applicant should be allowed to refurbish the old house (which is used as a service building) . Planning Director stated that the removal of the old house is not a condition of . the original conditions of approval but was understood, and that a time limit for removal might be considered. He stated that if the applicant wishes to keep the house, architectural approval would be required. Planner stated that the proposed new wall would tie into the house and not enclose it. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) approving the application sub- ject to the following conditions: 1. Additional height proposed for conference center (28 feet) is acceptable. 2. Existing wire and pole fence to be replaced with previously approved perimeter wall . 3. That the major tree groupings as approved on the landscape plan be installed along Alejo and Avenida Caballeros frontage. 4. That the offsite improvements (curb, gutter and pavement) be pro- vided along Alejo. Full improvements in front of Phase I . 5. That the existing house on the site be refurbished if the appli- cant desires, and an architectural approval (minor) application submitted. 6. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be meet. -April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 7 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS • CASE 5.0434-MISC. (Continued) . Planning Commission discussion of City- initiated landscape guidelines for the City of Palm Springs. Planner (Green) stated that the City Manager requested that the Parks and Planning staffs prepare landscape guidelines for City projects; that the guidelines have been prepared with input from registered landscape architects, irrigation planners and the AAC; and that the document con- tains guidelines on design, irrigation systems, and procedures for installers and designers. Commission complimented the staff on the thoroughness of the document. Planner Director stated that the Commission should review modifications to the guidelines which could be adopted for private projects. M/S/C (Edgmon/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) adopting (by Resolution No. 3854) landscape guidelines as prepared by staff. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0400-ZTA (Continued) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of revisions to the Zoning Ordinance (all sections). (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration; final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Commission file a negative declaration and give final approval . Planning Director suggested that the item be tabled for a lengthy review at the end of the meeting. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Hough/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) tabling the item to the end of the agenda. CASE 5.0401-MISC. (Continued) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of revisions for local guidelines relating to objectives, criteria, and procedures for the implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pertaining to the environmental evaluation of public and private activities and the preparation of environmental documents. (This action is categorically exempt from Environmental Assessment per CEQA guidelines. ) Recommendation: That the item be continued to April 22. • Planning Director stated that the Environmental Planner has been working on the Andreas Cove EIR review and has not had time to finish the CEQA Guidelines. M/S/C (Neel/Hough;Whitney/Olsen absent) continuing the case to April 22. `April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0401-MISC. (Continued) TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS It was noted that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and State CEQA Guidelines require the adoption of local implementing guide- lines in 1978. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the tribal Council took the following actions: 1. Concurred with the proposed Revised City CEQA Procedure, noting that the time to prepare and process Negative Declarations will be shortened, and that the opportunity for public input on the scoping of significant issues will be continued, though not required by CEQA. 2. Concurred with staff's analysis that action to adopt these revised guidelines is categorically exempt from CEQA. CASE 5.0429-PD-188. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for Stuart Melnick Group for a Planned Development District to allow construction of a 150 unit apartment complex with a 30-room resident ancillary care facility on four acres on Tahquitz Way between Hermosa/Avenida Caballeros, R-4- VP/C-1-AA Zones (I .L. ), Section 14. • (Environmental Assessment; action. ) Recommendation: That the Commission deny the application. Planner (Williams) stated that the Commission approved the "R" Overlay Zone which promotes the tourist industry and staff will not be able to make the finding that the land use is appropriate for residential development because of the General Plan designation on the property and the proposal ' s proximity to the Convention Center. She stated that other concerns are the sewage system, circulation and traffic impacts, and the possible impacts on cultural research resources. She noted that the Tribal Council will comment on the design since the complex will be next to the Indian cemetery on Tahquitz Way, and that traffic and sewage impacts can be mitigated but land use goals cannot. She stated that staff recommends that an additional environmental study be prepared addressing the environmental concerns; and that the AAC reviewed the architecture and recommended first a denial and then a restudy on a second motion (citing building mass as a concern) and noting that the vertical element should accent a view corridor to the mountains. The AAC also recommended that greater and varied setbacks be developed. Planning Director stated that it is proper to evaluate new projects in a frame of reference of new or pending legislation such as the "R" Overlay Zone; that the Tribal Council finds that the project is not appropriate, and that the applicant was told by staff in the initial discussion that • staff would recommend denial because of inconsistency with the General Plan. He stated that a mixed use proposal might be appropriate, but that the applicant has not explored this possibility. Planner stated that the back portion of the site which is zoned "R-4VP" is about half the site (for calculation on the number of units) and the front portion `April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0429-PD-188. (Continued) is zoned C-1-AA (Commercial ) ; that the proposed sewer system would retain the effluent in a tank on-site and pump the sewage to the Treat- ment Plant in off-peak hours which is a workable but not desirable solution and difficult to enforce according to the City Engineer and the Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor. She stated also that the system is run by electricity and that there would be problems if the electricity failed and that a lateral installed at the developer's expense to the treatment plant is a possible solution. Planning Director stated that another project in town pumps sewer effluent because of the natural below-street grade of the property, but the excavated design of the subject proposal is the reason for the pumping of the sewage. He stated also that no effluent is stored on- site in the City at the present time. Chairman declared the hearing open. Oza Bouchard, 1356 San Mateo, Christian/Bouchard Associates, stated that the applicants have tried to comply with requirements of current zoning (using Indian density) ; and that the number of units (150) is below maximum Indian density; the project could be applied for by right-of- zone; that staff states that its recommendation for denial is based on the General Plan and the "R" Zone, the General Plan states that the Zoning should be implemented and must be flexible and adaptable and • protect the rights of individuals and the rights of property owners; that the lessee has kept the land for investment reasons and that the value is based on residential zoning. He stated that project denial devalues the property and also hurts the elderly who want to live close to amenities. He requested approval stating that the project will contribute to the overall welfare and economy of the community. Robert Fey, the applicant, 2000 Madrona, stated that the project is a residential hotel with many amenities and is in compliance with the spirit and intent of hotels except the users will be of longer term and no bed tax will be received; that mixed use could be explored, but that opening shops and restaurants and rental units to the public would jeopardize the security; that the language in the ordinance is archaic since it determines that any unit with a kitchen is an apartment and does not address suite hotels; that in any other City the project would be considered a residential hotel , not apartment; that the project will appeal to the affluent elderly who want to eat in restaurants and walk to downtown stores; that Section 14 is the only area close in for residents; that the elderly will move down valley or to other areas if Palm Springs cannot accommodate them adequately; and that Palm Springs is no longer the leader in major hotels, shops, and restaurants. He stated (in regard to staff report concerns) that the applicants are providing resort services and pleasing resort atmosphere; that the residents will support the Cultural Center and community events; that there is adequate acreage for the additional hotel rooms envisioned; • that traffic density will be less that of a hotel ; that the project meets the cultural resource needs of the City, and will help fill the need; and if the site has sewer capacity problems with the retirement facility, a hotel on the site will also have the same sewage problems. April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) . CASE 5.0429-PD-188. (Continued) Roy Fey, 2470 Caliente, stated that the staff is competent and is correct in its thinking on future trends for Palm Springs; that he has developed many condominiums and apartments in 31 years in the City and would not be developing a poor one; that the project is a good develop- ment; that he attended the Tribal Council meeting and was told that the "R" Zone does not yet cover the project site; that there are 150 units only (the additional 30 mentioned in the staff report are in the ancillary facility which would only be occupied by the residents) ; that there is adequate parking; that a mixed use project could be considered, but that its viability should be determined first by the Commission. Mrs. Zelda Seegal , 1650 Ridgemore, stated that she felt an outcast because of the reception by the City of the proposal ; that she wanted to buy into the complex to be close to amenities, and that she might move away because of the City's attitude although she had been a resident since 1970. David Christian, 1000 South Palm Canyon, stated that the City knows what the applicant is proposing; that there seems to be a conflict concerning the amount of sewage of the project compared to sewage of a hotel ; that if the project did not have medical facilities, it could be built by right-of-zone; that the project is viable for downtown; that the General Plan says the use is allowable; that large projects are denied by the City in power plays and become nightmares; and that the City should . rewrite the ordinance to allow large projects or keep the City a "sleepy little town". He requested that the Planning Commission either approve or deny the project so that the applicants can appeal to the Council . There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Planning Director stated that the seniors will support the Cultural Center but not the Convention Center and will not promote the desired tourist-oriented atmosphere along Tahquitz; that any large projects whether hotels or apartments would be required to mitigate sewer impacts, but that on-site residential is a concern and not presented as a specific road block; that projects on the west and across the street from the site are on a trunkline and would not have sewage problems; that the City Engineer is reviewing the sewer system by computer to determine if certain lines should be upgraded; that the original calcu- lations on the site are probably for offices or commercial uses which generate less sewage flows; and that the problem is that of a sewer line and not a plant capacity issue. Commissioner Hough stated that only hotel uses have been discussed, but the site could support a resort use, and there might not be a sewer problem with another type of use. Commissioner Curtis stated that he agreed with the restudy recommend- ations of the AAC since the architecture is massive, the project has • small setbacks, and that new corridors need to be opened. He stated that the Commission does not have to approve all the units allowed by right-of-zone. 'April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0429-PD-188. (Continued) Mr. Christian stated that many of the AAC comments are valid; that the height could be supported if the footprint were trimmed; and that originally the plan was designed in a right-of-zone context. Chairman explained that the mixed use concept as recommended by the Indians, has not been properly explored with the resort uses on the front and the apartments and health care facilities on the rear, and that a mixed use design would lower the number of units which would be a good compromise. He stated that the frontage on Tahquitz should be reserved for public use. Planning Director explained that in early discussion with the architect staff mentioned mixed use with the resort/commercial uses facing Tahquitz and apartments on upper floors over commercial and separate underground parking for commercial and residential ; that there would be operational problems such as odors, fumes, trash, and litter etc. which could be overcome; that the application could be continued for the applicant review as a mixed use project although it would be a major change for applicant. He stated that a recommendation for denial could be sent on to the Council with a direction to explore a mixed use that would meet the goals of the Council and Commission on the "R" Zone; that the project could be approved on that basis, but that an Environmental Assessment would be required since the project was processed environ- mentally for quick denial . • Discussion followed on Commission action. Commissioner Curtis stated that he thought the Council was not encouraging the use at the proposed location. Planning Director explained that the application could be sent to Council with Commission recommendations of mixed use, and then if dis- approved, could be appealed to the Tribal Council ; and that the Council needs Commission input. He stated also that the Council has been force- ful about expediency on the "R" Zone and may not want mixed use pro- jects. Chairman recommended that the action be a total restudy to address mixed uses, or that the applicant appeal directly to the Council to determine its direction on this type of use. Discussion continued on action for denial or for a mixed use. Chairman stated that there is a difference in fees between a restudy and a denial ; and that under a denial an applicant must pay additional fees when resubmitting the application. M/S/C (Neel/Hough; Lapham dissented; Whitney/Olsen absent) denying the project as presented based on the following findings: 1. That the economy of the City of Palm Springs is dependent in large on the tourist industry. • 2. That it is necessary to provide for land uses within the City which will encourage the growth of the tourist industry, one being hotel/resort uses. 'April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 12 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0429-PD-188. (Continued) 3. That competing land uses, namely multi-family residential uses, which are developed on parcels which are suitable for hotel/resort uses will deplete the land stock available for resort development. 4. That the General Plan designates the site for Resort Commercial development and the proposed project does not fulfill that goal . 5. That additional environmental analyses will be required to miti- gate identified concerns of traffic, sewer, land use, and cultural resource issues. Mr. Fey stated that he was glad action had been taken so that the project could be reviewed by the City Council . TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following actions: 1. Noted that an Environmental Assessment/Initial Study is referenced in the Planning Staff report dated April 8, 1987; however that document was not included in the agenda packets received from the Planning Department. Lacking this information the Tribal Council could not comment on the possible environmental impacts of the • Project. 2. Noted that Planning Staff report dated April 8, 1987, references the proposed "R" Overlay Zone and the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance with respect to a reduction in density on Indian Land currently permitted per City Ordinance No. 779. Since the "R" Overlay Zone has not been adopted and therefore not effective, and since the Tribal Council has not given its initial approval to any changes in Ordinance No. 779, including a reduction in densities, any references to these items in evaluating the merits of this proposed project, is inappropriate. 3. Concurred with Planning Staff's findings that the General Plan designates the Tahquitz Way frontage portion of the subject site as Resort Commercial , and that the proposed project is not consistent with the General Plan with respect to this item. 4. As an alternative to Staff' s recommendation for denial , the Tribal Council suggested that the applicant and Planning Staff explore the opportunity of developing a mixed use project consisting of a Resort Commercial Use on the Tahquitz Way frontage and an apart- ment/ancillary health care facility on the southerly portion of the site. • CASE 5.0430-CUP & TPM 21981. Application by RALPH HITCHCOCK for Southern California Edison for Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map to allow construction of an electrical substation and subdivide property on April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 13 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0430-CUP & TPM 21981. (Continued) Sunny Dunes Road between Calle Amigos/Thornhill Road, R-1-C Zone, Section 23. (Environmental Assessment; tentative approval . ) Recommendation: That the Commission order preparation of a Draft Negative Declaration; give tentative approval of both applications; and continue the applications to April 22. Planner (Williams) explained that the applicants want to remove existing improvements and relocate the substation improvements to the north two- acre parcel leaving the southern two acres vacant (and possibly sold in the future) . She stated that the noise increase for the new location is only one decibel and is well within the City's Noise Ordinance; that the AAC recommended approval subject to conditions with a restudy of the landscaping to select another species of trees for a better appearance from the street; that the existing wall will remain and a new metal wall section added on the Calle Amigo frontage; and that the applicants will maintain the entire wall including the southern portion of the property. Commissioner Edgmon stated that she had concerns about the height of the facility. Ralph Hitchcock, Southern California Edison, 1700 Tahquitz-McCallum Way, • stated that the capacity of the lines must be increased because of the growth of the area; that the transmission lines will be undergrounded from Gene Autry Trail to the site so that noise will be reduced; that the height will be reviewed in the context of safety standards; that the facility will be redesigned to eliminate a portion of the structure not necessary for the future of the station; and that the project manager (in the audience) would answer questions. Chairman suggested that the metal wall be eliminated and slump block to match the existing wall be constructed to integrate more favorably into the surrounding residential area. Mr. Hitchcock stated that the vacant parcel will probably not be used, but that an 8 ft. wall is a requirement and will be metal on the east and south boundaries, and a chain link fence and oleanders on the north and west property lines; that maintaining the metal wall would be better than removing it, but it could be eliminated; and that he felt that a metal wall has a better appearance. Chairman stated that he felt that metal gives an almost industrial appearance in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Hitchcock explained that the reason the metal fence was placed on the north boundary was because it has only a front view instead of a view from two streets, and that the idea was to reduce the view impact and maintain the safety standards. Regarding the danger of a metal fence, he stated that the • fence will be grounded as will all the steel work on the project; and that the steel racks and structures will accommodate additional circuits and transformers without redesign of the project, or further expense for the company. 'April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 14 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) . CASE 5.0430-CUP & TPM 21981. (Continued) There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. Chairman stated that he did not like the appearance of a metal wall and that an 8 ft. block wall would not be more expensive and would give a residential feeling to the project. Commissioner Curtis stated that a block wall is the best choice. He suggested that it be recessed. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) ordering the preparation of a draft negative declaration; tentatively approving the project (with a block wall instead of the proposed metal material ) ; and continuing the application to April 22. CASE 5.0433-CZ. Application by EL CIELO ASSOCIATES for a change of zone from "P" (Professional ) to "C-1" (Central Retail Business) on the northeast corner of E1 Cielo/Ramon Roads, "P" Zone, Section 18. (Environmental Assessment; action. ) Recommendation: That the Commission deny the zone change. . Planning Director explained the history of the project stating that there have been other proposals for the site; that mixed use could be considered, but the applicant has never moved ahead with the idea; that the former approvals have expired; that the surrounding properties are primarily residential and airport related uses; that it in a noise (N) area but is impacted more from street noise than airport noise; and that the application would result in strip retail ; that right-of-zone uses could be part of the development of the site; that if C-1 zoning were approved that the new "R" Overlay should be placed on the property to eliminate or reduce condominium and apartment usage; that the zone is really a downtown type of zone rather than a major thoroughfare type; that a General Plan Amendment is required before the zone change can be approved and that staff is recommending that the proposal because of its strip commercial and spot zoning nature which destroys the ambience of the neighborhood be denied. He stated that trip generation is difficult to determine, but the International Traffic Engineering Association figures indicate 118 trips/1,000 sq. ft. for shopping centers as compared to approximately 18 trips/1 ,000 sq. ft. for office buildings; and that letters in opposition have been received from property owners in the vicinity. He stated that alternative development could be pro- fessional offices and uses such as banks, restaurants, and health clubs under certain conditions, and hotel -or airport-related uses; and that the Airport Master Plan does not include this site and the Airport Commission has made no statement on the project. He stated that restaurants not associated with the airport could only be consideredif the • General Plan were amended. Michael Harris, the applicant, 600 E. Tahquitz-McCallum, stated that he and his partners have held the property for several years and want to - April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 15 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0433-CZ. (Continued) develop it; that in focusing on staff findings he feels that the project is in conformity with the General Plan which is flexible and has allowed the zoning to be changed once to "P", but that that office projects are not economically feasible because of the location and the market; that spot zoning is a correct label since uses on El Cielo could be con- sidered in that category. He stated that he would like the Commission to visualize the mixture of existing and future uses along El Cielo such as a Fire Station, a fixed base operator, an airport, a service station, a future hotel site, and also the commercial uses to the east along Ramon, as well as residential uses south of Ramon; and that the airport consultant recommended that the site be zoned commercial , but that the Airport Commission did not become involved in the zoning recommendation. He stated that the finding regarding the impact of setback standards on the "P" Zone could be mitigated by stipulation by the applicant that any building would not be over one-story and would have an open space and landscaped feeling; that a supermarket is not intended for the corner; that a restaurant is envisioned; that with the City Hall , government buildings, and activities on Ramon there is a base of people who would find a restaurant or a financial institution convenient; and that traffic would not be further impacted at an intersection which is of adequate size to serve the traffic. He requested that the zone change be considered as a continuation of the airport and M-1 usage on Ramon and not regarded as spot zoning, and that there was no specific proposal • in mind nor commitments until the city takes action on the site. Chris Mills, 121 South Palm Canyon, project architect, stated that he was aware that the "C" Zone has different setbacks from "P" or R-2, but that heights could be reduced to single-story; that the setback at the rear on the east property line is the same as R-2 zoning; that a plan would be submitted in keeping with establishmentson El Cielo such as a future airport hotel ; that a 5 ft. setback would not be acceptable or appropriate; and that the zone change is to allow uses that are more appropriate than the current zoning. The following persons spoke in opposition to the project: Dr. Louis Sotelow, 438 W. Bradshaw (Pueblo Sands Condominiums) Ray Brooks, 436 W. Bradshaw Suzanne Duckett, 3400 Ramon Sharon Karaks, 2952 Canyon Circle South Roxie Flacon, 3155 E. Ramon Erma Foley, 3400 Ramon Al Feldman, 421 Bradshaw Concerns cited by those in opposition are as follows: Will disrupt a quiet, peaceful area. Will destroy the view of Mount San Jacinto - The other three corners are developed to R-2 standards. April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 16 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0433-CZ. (Continued) - Residents have already protested the Zone Change to "P" in 1984 and now the applicants are requesting commercial , which is also objectionable. - There is no need for the proposal since the Palm Springs Mall is nearby. - The residential environment will be shattered because of urban blight. - Traffic impacts would increase crime and noise, and transients will increase. - A sleazy mini-mall would destroy the ambience of the show place area of the City. - The congestion at the intersection at Ramon and E1 Cielo will increase, and the Traffic Engineer should evaluate the proposal for increased traffic impacts. - Will cause egress problems for the residents of Pueblo Sands, and also further impact emergency access. - The proposal denies the rights of the middle class American to enjoy the fruits of his labor. - The proposal is inconsistent with the charm and character of the • existing residential development. - The zone change is not in conformity with the rest of the residential character of the area. - The proposal will destroy the ambience of the well designed airport. - The proposal will set a precedence for rezoning of R-2 to commercial . - Mini-shopping centers are problems everywhere because of their lack of character. - Staff recommendation is for denial and should be upheld. - Increased traffic will present a danger and hazard to families and children of the area. - The area is a gateway to Palm Springs and a traffic route for tourists and celebrities. - The zone change to C-1 would allow objectionable uses such as auto repair, fast food establishments, liquor stores, etc. - The R-2 Zone is slowly being eroded, which is not in the best interests of the City. - Rezoning will increase noise on already noisy Raman Road. ' April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 17 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0433-CZ. (Continued) The applicants will never have to address the problems since they do not live in the vicinity. Curt Ealy, 600 E. Tahquitz, stated that he was one of the applicants and had met with the Pueblo Sands Homeowners Board in a good discussion of the project; that he and his partners have held the property for several years and wish to develop it; that in the past two, two-story office buildings were proposed, neither of which were built because of lack of a market; that one of the staff recommendations originally was for a hotel which would have much more impact on the residential properties and could be 3-story; that he understood objections of the homeowners board to a hotel use, but that if a proposal on the corner were well- done and landscaped it would be an asset to the neighborhood; that the M-1 Zone to the east of Pueblo Sands allows manufacturing, industrial , and commercial uses which are all objectionable; that a development pro- posed by the applicants would be of high quality with a financial institution and/or a family restaurant and stores in the rear; that the applicants are long-time residents; that in observation of aerial photo- graphs there are many situations in the valley where commercial and residential uses cohabit compatibly; that commercial uses are a good buffer if the commercial use is facing the opposite direction; and that the proposal is not as offensive as it first appears. There being no further appearances, Chairman closed the Public Hearing. • Planning Director stated that he had just received another letter from a homeowner in La Palme condominiums with the same concerns. Commissioner Neel stated that the proposal would be better accepted if the applicants could show a specific plan with one-story structures. Chairman explained that it is difficult to show a proposal unless the applicant knows what use is allowed on the property. Commissioner Hough stated that the applicants would build a good project but that a General Plan amendment and zone change are major steps, that there is no guarantee that the applicants would be the property owners at the time of development, and that he had concerns about approving the zone change without a specific proposal . Chairman stated that the M- 1/R-2 juxtapostion was done several years ago and is unfortunate. He suggested a study session with the Council . Commissioner Neel suggested that a more specific plan be submitted. Planning Director stated that no firm date has been set for a joint study session with the Council , and that the application could be continued to a specific date. Chairman stated that the M-1 zoning around the Airport and the uses along Ramon Road could be reviewed and could be an agenda item at the annual joint study session with the Council ; and that the study session agenda would be posted on the exterior bulletin board on the west side of the Council Chamber but no action would be taken at the study session • (discussion only) . ' April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 18 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0433-CZ. (Continued) M/S/C (Hough/Neel ; Curtis abstained; Whitney/Olsen absent) continuing the application to May 13. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS CASE 5.0290-CUP. Planning Commission review of operation of Angelview Thrift Shop (as mandated by original conditions of approval ) at 462 North Indian Avenue, C-2/C-1-AA Zones, Section 14. (This item was continued from the January 14, 1987, Planning Commission meeting. ) Planner (Green) explained that the CUP which had been approved by the Council for three years had expired; that staff reviewed the situation in January and found several conditions not implemented; that a new manager asked for a 90 day extension; and that all conditions have now been implemented, i.e. , buildings in the setback have been demolished grafitti removed from the wall , the landscape upgraded, and the general • area tidied. M/S/C (Hough/Neel ; Curtis abstained; Whitney/Olsen absent) extending the CUP for operation of the Angelview Thrift Shop for five years. Expiration date will be November 2, 1991. CASE 20.088-B. Request by CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION to review a draft EIR by Southern California Edison for a utility corridor (Devers- Palo Verde #2500KV) within the Coachella Valley. Planning Director explained that the line is on the north side of I-10 and is already an impacted utility corridor; the EIR states that changes will be made to the existing 220 KV line; that staff has no problems with modification, but opposes the installation of any additional lines running through Snow Creek and the Windy Point area and recommends a relocation study because of the substation's proximity to the San Andreas fault. He stated that there is a problem with Devers because two major fault lines are close to the site. Ralph Hitchcock, 1700 Tahquitz-McCallum, Edison Company, stated that the line from Palo Verde, Arizona is 500,000 KV and the rebuild will be of the 220 KV line from Devers to the Metropolitan Los Angeles area; that the next step is a proposal for a second line; that there is a discussion with the Morongo Indians for a transmission corridor plan through the pass area to eliminate future concerns of the City; that the • request is relative to the EIR on the second line, which is parallel to the existing facility near the Fringed-Toed Lizard preserve; that the preserve officials have shown interest in the establishment of the second line to preserve the lizard habitat; and that the existing patrol April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 19 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) • CASE 20.088-B. (Continued) roads would be used during construction. He stated that additional con- struction would be spur routes. Chairman asked if Edison had concerns about staff comments on the EIR. Mr. Hitchcock stated that City comments concerning the proposal on the second line are answered by his answers; that the concerns are being mitigated and are within the application filed with the Public Utilities Commission. M/S/C (Neel/Curtis; Whitney/Olsen absent) recommending the following: 1. That the modification of the existing line is acceptable. 2. That no new line should be constructed to the west through Snow Creek. 3. That no additional reliance should be placed on the Devers sub- station because of its proximity to the San Andreas fault. CASE 3.902. Request by ROBERT HOWARD for reconsideration of conditions of approval for landscape plans for single family residence on La Mirada Road between Ramon Road/Sunny Dunes Road, R-1-A Zone, Section 22. • Planner (Vankeeken) stated that a condition of approval was that Stone Pines be planted in the landscaping but inadvertently Aleppo Pines were planted, and the applicant is requesting that they remain. Planning Director explained that there is a problem with the Aleppo Pines because of their tendency to have spider mite blight; that the rationale over several years has been to recommend alternative species of trees; that the applicant is aware of the situation and will treat the trees with an insecticide; and that the AAC recommended approval . Commissioner Neel stated that the trees can be sprayed but that they are almost completely dead before damage is noticed and that no one in the valley has a power rig that can spray 325 feet in the air which is necessary to fight the blight. M/S/C (Neel/Edgmon; Whitney/Olsen absent) approving Aleppo Pines subject to the following condition: That the trees be sprayed for spider mite on a regular basis. ' April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 20 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) • CASE 5.0322-CUP-DISCUSSION. Commission discussion of request by ADRIAN GUEVARA for a change in conditions of approval of a conditional use permit for a teen nightclub on Research Drive between Farrell Drive/Airport Road, M-1-P Zone, Section 12. Planning Director stated that the application was approved as a teen nightclub in 1984 and the applicant is now proposing to change the use from teen orientation to adult orientation; the conditions of approval have been addressed over the years; that no complaints have been received about the disco since last year; and that staff needs Commission direction on whether changing the use from a liquorless teenage nightclub to a restaurant with a liquor license requires a public hearing since the conditions did not prohibit the use originally. He stated that the owner of the land of the adjacent Department of Motor Vehicles property called staff to request information and was told that there would be a public hearing. Chairman stated that changing the use from a teen nightclub to a standard restaurant and cocktail lounge is less intense and has less impact environmentally then a gathering of teenagers. Commissioner Edgmon suggested a public hearing because of adding liquor. Planning Director stated that the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board posts a notice on the door of the establishment, but there is no notification by mail . • Assistant City Attorney explained that if the Commission finds that the change in emphasis regarding the use is within the scope of the existing CUP there is no necessity for a public hearing because the CUP would not be amended; but if the Commission fails to make a finding and the CUP conditions have to be either deleted or amended to accommodate the changed use, a public hearing would be necessary. Planning Director stated that there is no restaurant in the existing facility at the present time but the use is allowed by right-of-zone. M/S/C (Curtis/Hough; Edgmon dissented; Whitney/Olsen absent) determining that the CUP is not affected by the change in use. Planning Director stated that a major concern is the delivery of alcoholic beverages in that kind of setting, and that a time schedule and program could be resolved with the applicant, and if necessary returned to the Commission. He stated that the ABC has the juris- diction, but requests input from the City. CASE 5.0438-MISC. Planning Commission review of concept for airport noise compatibility program. Transportation and Energy Director requested Commission approval of the land use concept of the FAA Part 150 Noise Study; and stated that the airport-related portion will be sent to the Council on May 6; that the • study consists of an expansion of the 65 decibel "N" Overlay to the new CNEL 60 decibel contour around the airport which follows the line of major streets or lot lines; that no new mobilehome parks, churches or schools will be allowed in this overlay area and not suit covenants and April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 21 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) • CASE 5.0438-MISC. (Continued) avigation easements and soundproofing will be required; that some of the lots south of the line will be rezoned from Residential to "P" ; that land recently acquired on Gene Autry Trail and Farrell will be rezoned from M-1 to "A" ; that the overall noise compatibility study would be adopted in lieu of the old specific Plan and the General Plan map and text amended to reflect the changes; that the language has been strengthened for avigation easements regarding street noise and the plan also continues the use of energy codes. He stated that checklists of land use issues around the airport will be developed for Planning Commission use; that a noise barrier wall will be built as the north end of the runway to soften noise in the surrounding residential area; that he stated that the Federal Government is involved since the government approves the program and sends it back for implementation; that the Commission is asked to endorse the study for federal review; and that public hearings will begin after the federal comments to start imple- mentation of the program. He explained that some of the items are being rewritten into the new Zoning text; and that every item may not be adopted but the Government does not expect it since if item is inappro- priate, it will not be adopted. M/S/C (Hough/Curtis; Whitney/Olsen absent) endorsing the concept of the Airport FAA Part 150 Noise Study. CASE 20.103. Request by Riverside County for review of change of zone Case . 4875 for property located at the southwest corner of Interstate 10/Gene Autry Trail (Palm Drive) . Planning Director stated that he had not received additional necessary information that he requested in order to review the Zone change. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) continuing the case to April 22. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) M/S/C (Edgmon/Neel ; Whitney/Olsen absent) removing Case 5.0400-ZTA from the table. CASE 5.0400-ZTA (Continued) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of revisions to the Zoning Ordinance (all sections) . (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration; final approval . No comments received. ) Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration and give final approval to the case. Planning Director stated that staff-prepared material relating to the • Zoning Ordinance amendments have been given to the Commission; that coordination between the sections, minor legal rewrites, revisions to old language and housekeeping items remain to be done. He stated that the Indians have endorsed 98% of the changes although they have some April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 22 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0400-ZTA. (Continued) concerns regarding procedures and also on property development standards in the industrial zones and are also studying the revised Indian Ordinance (No. 779) . He stated that two ordinances (the RV Parking and Adult Entertainment Ordinances) will be placed in the new Municipal Code and will be sent to Council along with the Zoning Ordinance revisions. NOTE: A summary of the ordinance revisions discussed by the Commission and staff is attached as Exhibit "A" Two additional revisions are included as follows: R-1 Zones. 1. Requires parking to be on surfaces specifically designed for such use. 2. Permits bed and breakfast facilities under certain conditions. M/S/C (Neel/Curtis; Whitney/Olsen absent) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and giving final approval subject to conditions for Case 5.0400-ZTA based on the following findings. 1. That is has been 22 years since the last language revisions were made to the Zoning Ordinance. • 2. That multiple revisions through the last 22 years resulted in some cases of conflict in language and terminology. 3. That it is necessary and appropriate to keep the Zoning Ordinance updated and in conformance with the General Plan goals and objectives. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration; final approval . ) In a previous memoranda to the City Planning Commission, the Tribal Council has commended the Commission and Planning Staff for their efforts to update the City's Zoning Ordinance by "streamlining the con- tents, correcting errors and bringing the Ordinance into conformance with current operational policies and procedures". With certain reservation and exceptions, the Tribal Council has concurred in general with the proposed revisions contained in the various drafts of the Zoning Ordinance received over the past several months. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council took the following actions with respect to the following drafts of the Revised Zoning Ordinance: . CHAPTER 91 - INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS Rev: 3-13-87 1. Found that the revisions make specific reference to Indian Land in the preamble, and notes that new provisions are being adopted April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 23 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0400-ZTA. (Continued) which apply only to Indian lands with respect to identification, regulation, development, etc. of these lands. These revisions are consistent with the purpose of Ordinance No. 779 of the City of Palm Springs adopted March 13, 1967, and known as "The Joint Planning Procedure Ordinance" and with earlier agreement between the Tribal Council and City Council (Agreement No. 1324 dated July 26, 1977, and Supplement Agreement No. 1 thereto dated March 28, 1978) . 2. Concurred with the proposed revision to zoning designations and to procedures related to processing amendments to the zoning map, handling of violations, penalties, etc. CHAPTER 92 - ZONING REGULATIONS Rev: 3-6-87 1. Residential Zones Concurred with the proposals to combine the single-family zones and to combine the garden apartment zones, standardize parking requirements, add and delete uses permitted by the right of zone, conditional use permits or land use permits, modify development standards, and eliminate redundance. 2. Commercial Zones Concurred with the proposals to add and deter uses permitted by right of zone, conditional use permits or land use permits and to simplify development and performance standards 3. Manufacturing/Industrial Zones a. Concurred with the proposals to add and delete uses per- mitted by the right of zone, conditional use permits or land use permits, delete redundancy and simplify performance standards. b. Disagreed with proposed Property Development Standards which increase lot acres, lot widths and depths, setbacks, land- buffers, etc. As noted previously, these standards appear to be arbitrary and very restrictive when compared with those in other communities that are currently experiencing significant growth in quality industrial/business parks, and may not be attuned to the current market for industrial properties. C. Seriously questioned if the proposed statement that "These standards (Property Development Standards) may be altered where a specific development plan is approved under a Planned Development of a Conditional Use Permit or otherwise • approved Master Plan of development where the development meets the intent of this Ordinance: will mitigate the possible detriment created by these standards with respect to the City's ability to attract the types of industries April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 24 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0400-ZTA. (Continued) that contribute significantly to job opportunities and economic stabilization within a community. 4. "A", "N", "W", "0", "V-R", "CC" , "H" and "R" Zones Concurred with the proposals to combine certain zones, modify development standards, and add and delete uses permitted by right of zone or Conditional Use Permit. CHAPTER 93 - GENERAL CONDITIONS Rev: 5-8-86 Concurred with the proposals to modify development standards, delete redundancy and simplify procedures. CHAPTER 94 - PROCEDURES Rev: 5-8-86 1. Concurred with proposals to simplify and eliminate redundacy in certain procedures. 2. As expressed in previous memoranda, the Tribal Council feels very strongly that the following Ordinances and Agreements be included in Chapter 94 as separate and distinct sections: a. Ordinance No. 5 of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla adopted December 12, 1978, and known as "The Tribal Appeal Ordinance". b. Agreement No. 1324 between the Tribal Council and City Council dated July 26, 1977,. including Supplement Agreement No. 1 thereto dated March 28, 1978, which established current procedures, rules and regulations for processing land use matters involving Indian land. C. An updated edition of Ordinance No. 779 of the City of Palm Springs adopted March 13, 1967, and known as "The Joint Planning Procedure Ordinance". A draft of such an Ordinance prepared by Planning Staff and dated January 5, 1987 is being reviewed by the Tribal Planning Consultant. While this draft attempts to clarify and eliminate redundancy in the current Ordinance, it pro- poses certain revisions to Performance and Development Standards, i.e. , reduction in density for apartments and dwelling units, setbacks, etc. , which could significantly impact the development of Indian Land. The Tribal Council will respond to this draft after further review and recom- mendations by the Indian Planning Commission and Tribal Planning Consultant. • The Tribal Council appreciates the time and effort that the Commission and Planning Staff have spent on this matter. It is not the intent of the Tribal Council to delay the processing of this revised Zoning Ordinance and would April 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 25 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) • CASE 5.0400-ZTA. (Continued) suggest that the Commission may wish to forward this matter to the City Council for its review pending further con- sideration by the Commission with respect to the concerns which have been expressed by the Tribal Council . MISCELLANEOUS ITE14S (Continued) CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council Actions. No report given. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS OR REQUESTS. None. ADDED STARTERS. (Determination of eligibility for consideration. ) None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m. PLANNING CTO MDR/ml Attachment: Exhibit "A" ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS EXHIBIT "A" Chapter 91 - Summary • GENERAL Add wording to include intent and provisions of Ordinance 779 into Zoning Ordinance. 9100.06 Annexed territory to be zoned U-R Previously zoned R-1-C 9100.07 Add: B. Conflicting or ambiguous provisions. 9100.08 Changes to: D. Violations Ci • • ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Chapter 92 - Summary (Residential) R-1 Combined all R-1 Zones Requires parking to be on surfaces (R-1-A, R-1-AH, R-1-B, specifically designed for such use. R-1-C, R-1-D) (as of 4-8-87) Guest houses with kitchen permits bed and breakfast facilities facilities or oversize, under certain conditions. permitted with CUP. (as of 4-8-87) Change in HEIGHT provisions Maximum height of 24 ft. permitted with CUP. R-G-A Combined R G-A(6) & R-G-A(8) Zones Resort hotels permitted w/ CUP Change in DENSITY provisions to allow for extra unit. Delete OFF-STREET PARKING Standard parking provisions will requirement related to number apply. of bathrooms. R-2 Hotels without kitchen facili- Hotels Teems with kitchen facilities ties in 10% of guest rooms to in more than 10% of rooms to require remain USES PERMITTED. CUP. Change in YARD provisions to Encourages greater range of design permit variable setback line possibilities (50') for multi-story buildings. Delete provision in Standard parking provisions will OFF-STREET PARKING apply. section for bay parking. Simplify COVERAGE provison. R-3 Hotels (see R-2) Additional USES PERMITTED: Private clubs not as an accessory Private clubs as an require a CUP. accessory to a hotel . Change auto rental from CUP to LUP. • Delete following USES PERMITTED by CUP: Art galleries; movie, TV & radio studios. as of 4-7-87 Chapter 92 (Residential ) - Summary Page 2 • Change in BUILDING HEIGHT Encourages greater range of design provisions to permit variable possibilities. setback line (501 for multi- story buildings. Additional side/rear yard setback required for taller buildings. R-4 Hotels (see R-2) Add marquee allowance to Moved from MARQUEE section of Resort hotel standards PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Change auto rental from CUP to LUP. Delete following USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Libraries; art galleries; movie, TV & radio studios. Add following USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Convention Center; • private clubs. Delete minimum DENSITY. Add provisions for increased density on Indian Land. Delete CUP REQUIREMENTS. Provisions of Section 9304 will apply. Eliminate redundancy in PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. R-4-VP Reference USES PERMITTED & USES PERMITTED BY LUP & CUP to R-4. Delete PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT Reference R-4 & C-1AA provisions. AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. Stmpl*fy PERFORMAGE STANBARBS- T Delete entire zone. Unused; replaced by R-44P. • as of 4-7-87 t ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Chapter 92 - Summary (Commercial) • P Additional USES PERMITTED: Fortune-telling; tattoo parlors. Add PERFORMANCE STANDARD. C-B-D Delete financial institutions Require CUP. and liquor stores from USES PERMITTED. Hotels witheuf kitchen Hotels eeems with kitchen facilities in facilities in 10% of guest more than 10% of rooms to require CUP. rooms to remain USES PERMITTED. Additional uses permitted by LUP: Child care centers Offices above street level Offices on street level to require CUP to remain USES PERMITTED. Major changes in BUILDING Intent is to simplify provisions while SETBACKS & OPEN SPACE/ providing more amenities. • FLOOR AREA ALLOWANCE requirements. Simplify PARKING POLICY statements. C-D-N Additional USES PERMITTED: Food service facilities moved from Food service facilities, USES PERMITTED BY CUP. auto parts, athletic/health clubs, bicycle sales. Additional USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Car washes; veterinary clinic, outpatient only. Additional USES PERMITTED BY LUP: Child care centers Additional USES PROHIBITED: Intent of previous DRIVE-THRU Ordinance. Drive-thru facilities. as of 4-7-87 Chapter 92 (Residential ) - Summary Page 3 . C-S-C Additional USES PERMITTED: Also Reference to C-D-N; department Department stores stores moved from USES PERMITTED BY CUP. Additional USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Car washes; home improvement centers. Additional uses permitted by LUP: Reference C-D-N Zone. Increase maximum SITE AREA from 30 acres to 60 acres. C-1 Additional USES PERMITTED: Auto parts sales; beauty colleges; modeling schools. Hotels witheut kitchen Hotels reems with kitchen facilities in facilities in IOZ of guest more than 10% of rooms to require CUP. rooms to remain USES PERMITTED. Additional USES PERMITTED BY CUP: • Car washes; thrift shops. Delete following USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Movie, TV & radio studios. Additional USES PERMITTED Moved from STORAGE section; also BY LUP: reference C-D-N Zone. Florist displays; outdoor dining; paintings. Additional YARD requirement where zone abuts alley which is residential boundary. C-1AA Hotels without kitchen Hotel rooms with kitchen facilities to facilities in guest rooms require CUP. to remain USES PERMITTED. Additional USES PERMITTED: Specialty food stores; private game courts (as an accessory use). Delete following USES PERMITTED: Putting green. Delete following USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Movie, TV & radio studios. as of 4-7-87 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Chapter 92 - Summary (Industrial ) • C-M Additional USES PERMITTED: Motorcycle sales. Additional USED PERMITTED BY CUP: Adult entertainment establishments; car wash. Additional USES PERMITTED BY LUP: Auto parking ldts; Christmas tree sales; cocktail lounges & nightclubs; commercial recreational facilities; lodges & meeting halls. Additional USES PROHIBITED: Motorcycle rentals, repairs or service. Add provision for loading & storage in YARDS. • M-1-P Additional USES PERMITTED: Other retail uses require LUP. Auto sales agencies; bakeries; governmental facilities. Additional USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Adult entertainment establishments; car wash; hotels; truck & transportation terminals; retail sales. PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Provision for deviation from standards where PD or CUP is approved; requirement for larger lots along scenic corridors; requirement for landscaped buffers along interior yards; provision to permit 8' fences/ walls. Delete CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE OF SITE & BUILDING. • as of 4-7-87 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS • Chapter 92 - Summary (Open Space) A Additional USES PERMITTED: Governmental facilities; used car sales in conjunction w/ auto rental agency and video machines as accessory use. Additional USES PERMITTED BY CUP: Airport-related office buildings; Oideo arcades as primary use. Increase Front Yard requirement along scenic corridors. Add YARD requirements for aircraft hangars over 30' . N Change to NON-SUIT COVENANT COMBINING Reflects covenant currently in use; ZONE. usable for uses other than residential . • Add list of prohibited uses. 0 Combined all "0" Zones (0, 0-5, 0-20). Additional USES PERMITTED: Moved from USES PERMITTED BY CUP Commercial uses. Additional USES PERMITTED by CUP: Airport; cemeteries; commercial recreation; golf courses. CC Change child care center from CUP to LUP. H Add Historic Preservation Combining Zone. as of 4-7-87 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Chapter 92 - Summary (General ) All high-rise construction to be subject to approval of a PD instead of CUP. Land Use Permits - Additional USES PERMITTED: Christmas tree sales (in all Commercial Zones). Minor landscape requirements deleted in favor of archi- tectural review. Noise standards deleted with reference to Noise Ordinance. Change street type references to match General Plan terminology. as of 4-7-87 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Chapter 93 - Summary (General Conditions) i 9300.00 Substitute for A. : A lot, for the purposes of applying the provisions of this ordinance, shall be a parcel or unit of land which has been created under the provisions of the State Subdivision Map Act of, or any prior law regulating the division of land, or the local ordinance enacted pursuant thereto, or which was not subject to such provisions at the time of its creation. Substitute for C. : Two or more contiguous parcels or units of land held by the same owner, where any one of such contiguous parcels does not conform to standards for minimum parcel size and at least one of such non- conforming contiguous parcels is not developed with a building for which a permit has been issued, shall be merged pursuant to Sec. 9.61.030 of the Municipal Code. • Delete D. 9301.00 Delete SWIMMING POOL setback from structure. Add provisions for flag pole height, temporary storage facilities, guard houses. Add more flexible locational requirements for MECHANICAL EQUIP- MENT. Add: D. the Planning Commission may require greater yard standards than those required by individual zone districts for lots which abut specific corridors. 9301.01 Add lighting standards for TENNIS COURTS. 9301.02 Delete conditions for DRIVE-THRU Located elsewhere in FACILITIES. ordinance. • 9301.05 Delete special setbacks for Ramon Subject to standard Road & Palm Canyon Drive; revise zone district set- setbacks for Tahquitz-McCallum and backs. East Palm Canyon. as of 4-7-87 Chapter 93 (General Conditions) - Summary Page 2 09302.00 Minor changes to standards for WALLS & FENCES. 9303.00 Revisions to mechanical equipment standards above BUILDING HEIGHT. 9304.00 HIGHRISE buildings to be subject to P.D.D. Reduce coverage. Add provisions for height and setbacks on Indian Land. Add requirfent for underground parking. 9305.00 Add provision for CONTROLLED ACCESS. 9306.00 Revisions to GENERAL PROVISIONS. Add provision for mixed-use developments. Add shade provisions for parking lots. 9308.00 Delete section. Provisions of Noise Replace with ANTENNA ORDINANCE. Ord. will apply. 109311.00 Delete section. Provisions of House Moving Ord. will apply. 9313.00 Delete DENSITY CALCULATION FOR Subject to underlying LARGE-SCALE DEVELOPMENT. zone. Delete special SEWAGE TREATMENT Subject to requirement PROVISION. to connect to City sewer. 9316.00 Video machines/arcades permitted in "A' Zone. 9320.00 Revised standards for GRAND OPENING SIGNS. Add: (22) Sign, sale - Any sign, graphic, or collage that indicates a sale, by virtue of a special reduction, or percentage reduction, in price of merchandise, including, but not limited to, a close-out of merchandise, quitting business sale, lost-lease sale, moving sale or • overstocked sale. as of 4-7-87 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Chapter 94 - SLmmry (Procedures) 9402.00 Add Drive-thru Facilities to USES PERMITTED SUBJECT TO CUP. Add H.1. : Adult Entertainment Establishments Add provision for incorporating CUP & PDD developments. Delete APPEAL provisions. Subject to provisions of the Muni. Code. Add provision for screening for OPEN STORAGE YARDS. 9402.01 Add USES PERMITTED, SUBJECT TO LUP, including temporary parking areas and fences or walls within present or future public right-of-way (presently requires CUP as temporary structure). 9403.00 Formerly 9407.00 . Add provision for mixed-use PDDs. Add provision for submittal of conceptual development plan. 9404.00 Formerly 9403.00 Simplify list of areas and uses requiring architectural review. Add provision which authorizes staff approval of minor applications. 9406.00 Formerly 9405.00. Delete PROCEDURE provisions. Refer to CUP procedures. Delete APPEAL provisions. Subject to provisions of the Muni. Code. Add time limits for approval of VARIANCE. 9406.01 Formerly 9405.001. • Delete provisions for approval of Move to LAND USE permit TEMPORARY PARKING AREAS. section. Add provision for modification of TRASH ENCLOSURE/MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT location. as of 4-7-87 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall • April 22, 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 18 0 Hugh Curtis X 16 2 Martha Edgmon X 7 1 Brent Hough X 12 0 Earl Neel X 15 3 Gary Olsen X 14 4 Barbara Whitney X 13 3 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Robert Green, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Carol Vankeeken, Planner Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Mimi Timbrook, Zoning Enforcement Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - April 20, 1987 • Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Mike Buccino William Johnson Brent Hough (alternate) Gary Olsen Tom Doczi Will Kleindienst Barbara Whitney Martha Edgmon Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Neel/Hough) approving minutes of April 8, 1987 with the following correction: CASE 3.902, p. 19, paragraph 8, change "325" to "50". There were no Tribal Council comments.