Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/07/08 - MINUTES (2) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall July 8, 1987 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1987 - 1988 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Larry Lapham, Chairman X 1 0 Hugh Curtis X 1 0 Martha Edgmon X 1 0 Brent Hough X 1 0 Earl Neel X 1 0 Gary Olsen X 1 0 Barbara Whitney X 1 0 Staff Present iegg rieU- efkes, Assistant City Attorney Douglas Evans, Planner Robert Green, Planner Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Officer Margo Williams, Planner John Terell , Redevelopment Planner Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - July 6, 1987 Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Martha Edgmon Tom Doczi Mike Buccino Brent Hough William Johnson Will Kleindienst Barbara Whitney Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Olsen/Hough) approving minutes of June 24, 1987, with the following correction: TTM 22401, pp. 10 & 11. Substitute the following conditions for those in the unTe24inutes: 1. That the lots shall be subject to architectural review. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee shall be complied with except as amended below. 3. That all Mitigation Measures of the Environmental Assessment shall be complied with as follows: a. The project shall comply with Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code (Wind erosion control measures). July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 2 TTM 22401 (Co t'd a b. I%e final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance 1 (one) ft. + with the preliminary plan. f.. C. This approval does not include the grading of individual lots. Individual lots shall not be graded prior to submission of an application for a Building Permit for that lot, and approval of a Grading Permit for that lot. d. Pad elevations shall be as shown on the approved preliminary grading plan. e. The project shall be subject to the School Impact Mitigation fee. 4. An A.M.M. shall be submitted and approval for substandard area and dimensions prior to approval of final map. 5. That all right-of-way areas be kept free of boulders, rocks and slopes. 6. That streets shall be constructed according to standards required for hillside collector and culs-de-sac and, and without sidewalks except for adjacent to Racquet Club Road. 7. That the grading for lot #1.3 shall be lowered as far as possible. 8. That if a wall is necessary on the easterly boundary for drainage con- trol it shall be as low as possible subject to final review by the Planning Commission. If a wall is not necessary a swale with rip-rap lining should be used. 9. That if common mail boxes are proposed they shall be subject to archi- tectural review. 10. That native boulders shall be replaced after grading. 11. That specific requirements for curbs and gutters be deferred pending development of special standards for hillsides by the Planning Commission. July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 3 There were no Tribal Council comments. 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 (Whitney/Neel ) taking the following actions: CASE 3.947. Application by METROPOLITAN THEATERS for architectural approval of to the sign program for a 6-plex motion picture theater at 789 E. Tahquitz Way between Calle Alvarado/Calle E1 Segundo, C-1-AA Zone, Section 14. (Reference Case 3.309. ) Continued to July 22 for a field trip on July 15 at 2:00 p.m. CASE 3.0227 (MINOR) . Application by KAPTUR & CIOFFI for architectural approval of exterior revisions to the Vineyard shopping complex on S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Approved subject to the following condition That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. CASE 3.0245. Application by RICHARD FISCHER for architectural approval of revisions to the exterior of the Spa Hotel , 100 N. Indian Avenue, C-1-AA Zone (I.L. ), Section 14. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the corner addition on the balcony rail to be redesigned to eliminate enclosure as shown. 2. That an awning maintenance program be reviewed by the Planning Commission. 3. That shop drawings on both awning and balcony be submitted for AAC and Planning Commission review. CASE 3.0248. Application by ELEGANT AWNINGS for architectural approval of awning for business at 218 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Restudy noting the following: That the storefront should be left as is or create an architectural element (other than an awning) that is a neutral element. CASE 3.0243 (MINOR) . Application by DEE ANNA HOWARD for architectural approval of conversion of garage for architectural approval of conversion of garage to living area an extension of house for a new garage for a single family residence at 2480 Leonard Road, R-1-B Zone, Section 3. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the new entry extend from the face of the building. July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 4 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (CONTINUED) CASE 3.0243 (MINOR). (Continued) 2. That the roof color shall be an earth tone. 3. That a landscaping plan shall be submitted. 4. That the existing drive shall be removed prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 5. That details of the color of the roof, garage door and exterior shall be resubmitted for review. 6. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. Abstention: Neel CASE 3.0252 (Minor) . Application by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for arc i ec ura approval of proposed painting of downtown planters, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. The planters should be sandblasted to their natural concrete color. CASE 3.0123. Application by ROBERT RITCHEY for architectural approval of revised elevations and final landscape and grading plans for a shopping center on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Via Escuela/Zanjero Street, C-1 Zone, Section 3. �-- 1. The submitted change on architecture was denied. 2. Restudy of the following: a. That the landscaping be restudied, noting. that more canopy trees should be used, that the plan lacks continuity, that moundings should occur and that more shade in the parking lot is needed. b. That parking lot lighting be restudied noting the following: a fixture more compatible with the architecture be proposed. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT ACTION AGENDA Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. CASE 5.0424-CUP. Application by MARRIOTT CORPORATION for architectural approval of working drawings for 149 unit hotel on the east side of Hermosa Drive between Tahquitz Drive/Andreas Drive, R-4VP/C-1-AA Zone (I .L. ) , Section 14. Planner (Green) stated that the architecture was approved, but that the metal awning detail is to be returned to the AAC for review, and that the landscaping was recommended for -restudy. July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 5 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (CONTINUED) CASE 5.0424-CUP. (Continued) �. M/S/C (Olsen/Hough; Neel abstained) approving the architecture subject to the following conditions: That details of the awning shall be submitted and restudying the landscaping noting the following: 1. That a complete application including colored shrub/tree plans, legends detailing sizes and quantities of materials and full notes detailing size and quantities of all materials on the plans shall be submitted. (Note: "Contractor to complete quantity" not acceptable. ) 2. That Date Palms shall be relocated from confined areas. An alternate palm species to Date Palms should be considered for compact groups (eg. Washingtonia Robusta) . 3. Additional group of trees with a vertical growth habit shall be located against the three-story elements of the building (palms up to 30 ft. in height suggested) . 4. More variety in canopy trees should be used around the perimeter of the project. 5. Lower tree species should be used at the entry to relate to a pedestrian scale. Chamerops Palms also suggested. 6. One street tree should be located to the east of the Tahquitz Way entry (the remaining 3 palms should be evenly spaced). SIGN APPLICATION. Application by IMPERIAL SIGNS for architectural approval of revisions to main identification sign for Vagabond Inn, 1699 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-1/R-3 Zones, Section 22. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that new application is a plastic faced sign in variations of orange. Commissioners Olsen and Hough commented that the new sign is not as pleasing as the original and Commissioner Hough stated that the AAC discussed the problem but the Vagabond Hotels are a chain and are formatting their signs and the current Palm Springs sign does not, conform; and that the applicant is not proposing to increase the size. Commissioner Edgmon also commented that she did not want to approve a sign which is inferior to the original . Commissioner Whitney stated that she wondered how the sign would fitting on the existing pedestal . Commissioner Olsen stated that the Commission has faced the same problem before with the Palm Springs Mall when it was not comfortable with the colors and is going to be open for criticism again since although the layout and design are acceptable, the colors are an eyesore. Paul Bacon, 1699 S. Palm Canyon, one of the owners, stated that the colors could be softened; that the sign design and color are the chain July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 6 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (CONTINUED) SIGN APPLICATION. (Continued) format; that the current sign is old and not in good repair; that the hotel is losing business because the sign does not resemble the chain signs. He requested suggestions for the colors. Color chips and lettering were discussed at the board. Commissioners Neel and Chairman suggested softening the colors to earth tones, and Commissioner Olsen stated that the smallest sign of the three on the display board is acceptable. M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Whitney dissented) approving the smallest sign depicted on the display board, including colors, trim and frame. Chairman directed the applicant to meet with staff for color guidance to match the colors of the smallest sign. SIGN APPLICATION. Application by IMPERIAL SIGNS for architectural approval of revised main identification sign for the Desert Hospital Sunrise Building (former Palm Springs Medical Center) at 1695 Sunrise Way, P Zone, Section 11. Zoning Enforcement Officer explained that the present monument would be retained. He described the color of the lettering. Commissioner Olsen stated that he remembered that the original sign encroached into the right of way and there was Commission direction to move it back. He questioned whether or not the encroachment had been addressed. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that it would be difficult to move the heavily footed monument; that it is only slightly in the right of way; that it causes no visual traffic hazard; and that the monument was not in the right of way until the City made street improvements. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ) approving the sign application subject to the following condition: That the new landscape materials at the base of the sign be reviewed and approved by staff. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE 5.0425-PD-186 & CASE 5.0444-GPA (Cont'd) . Application by GEORGE JELKS or a planned eve opmen is ric in ieu of a change of zone from R-G- A(8) to R-4 and initiation by the City of Palm Springs for a General Plan Amendment including "Residential-Medium 8" to "Residential-High 43/30", relocation of a specialized park symbol , and deletion of a High School site for property on Sunrise Way between E. Arenas/E. Baristo Road, to allow construction of a 127 unit retirement facility, R-G-A(8) Zone, Section 14. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration; final approval . No comments received. ) July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED) CASE 5.0425-PD-186 & CASE 5.0444-GPA (Continued) Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a negative declaration and give final approval to Case 5.0444-GPA and final approval subject to conditions for Case 5.0425-PD-186. Planner (Green) stated that the General Plan has been changed in response to Commission direction at the June 24 meeting, i .e. M-8 changed to H43/30; H symbol deleted and the specialized park symbol (S); moved to the west part of the site overlaying the H43/30 designation and that a sewer impact fee would be required and Traffic Engineering condi- tions are to be met. He stated that all requirements and details had been stated in previous staff reports which he would repeat if the Commission required. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. Commissioner Curtis stated that the case has been addressed thoroughly and no further discussion is needed. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen) ordering the filing of a Negative Declaration and giving final approval to Case 5.0444-GPA and Case 5.0425-PD-186 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS �-� 1. That the retirement facility at the density of 29 units per acre is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by this Ordinance. 2. That the retirement facility is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, as amended and is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. 3. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood. 4. That the site for the proposed use relates to Baristo and Arenas Road,secondary streets properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed use after the mitigation measures imposed on this application have been implemented. 5. That the conditions to be imposed are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED) CASE 5.0425-PD-186 &CASE 5.0444-GPA (Continued) 6. That the proposed General plan amendment brings the -subject land into conformance with the surrounding General Plan designations and eliminates an existing anomalous designation created by the 1981 General Plan Amendments to surrounding Indian land. 7. That the proposed General Plan amendment eliminates the existing high school "H" designation which is no longer relevant. 8. That the proposed General Plan amendment relocates the existing special park "S" designation to its correct location. CONDITIONS That all recommendations of the Development Committee of July 8, 1987 be met, including Planning Division conditions as follows: 1. That final development plans be submitted in accordance with Section 9407 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That all mechanical equipment be screened. 3. That elevations and the roof plan be required to corporate undula- tions in the roof line. 4. That the southerly parking lot be revised to provide improved circulation and incorporate landscape concepts shown in the per- spectives. 5. That all mitigative measures identified in the Environmental Assessment/Initial Study of June 18 be implemented. CASE 6.356-VARIANCE & CASE 3.0216. Application by WALTER BOHLMANN for a variance foF a rear yar setback and architectural approval of an atrium/bathroom addition for a single family residence at 1022 Friar Court, R-1-C Zone, Section 10. (This action is categorically exempt from Environmental Assessment per CEQA guidelines. ) Recommendation: That Case 6.356-Variance and Case 3.0216 be approved subject to conditions. Planner (Evans) stated that the AAC recommended approval of the archi- tectural case and that the City Attorney recommended that the following be added to Finding #4 of the variance. . ."furthermore, strict applica- tion of the Zoning Ordinance provisions deprives the subject property of the privileges enjoyed by other properties under similar circumstances." He stated that because of the topography of the site the variance would not affect the abutting property; that the addition is partly con- structed; that the AAC recommended that the proposed overhang be removed July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED) CASE 6.356-VARIANCE & CASE 3.0216. (Continued) and a continuous wall constructed upward with a stucco parapet; and that one resident on an adjacent street has sent a letter expressing approval . Chairman declared the hearing open. Walter Bohlmann, 1022 Friar Court, the applicant, stated that he bought the house through a foreclosure and that it had been very neglected and was in need of total repair to meet neighborhood standards; that neigh- boring property owners have liked the improvements and have signed a document indicating their approval ; that a variance application was found to be necessary as the property was reconditioned; that a straight cutoff overhang would resemble a commercial building; and that the pro- posed design blends the addition into the neighborhood and makes it appear as though it had always been there. He stated that the entire structure is in a hillside and invisible to neighbors; and that the dissenting AAC member, Chris Mills, had not seen the photos of the site and felt that the overhang should be reviewed by the Commission; and that all the homes are Alexander homes and have the same overhang; that the overhang will be stuccoed as is the existing one to make it appear as though it were not be an addition, and that the home has gutters all the way around, including the addition. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. '•.� Chairman commented that if the addition cannot be seen from the street or from neighboring properties, its appearance makes little difference. Commissioner Hough stated that Mr. Mills felt that the straight cutoff overhang would have a cleaner line. M/S/C (Neel/Hough) approving Case 6.356-Variance and architectural Case 3.0216 with the following findings and subject to the following condi- tions. FINDINGS: 1. That the subject property is irregular in shape and is located in a hillside area. 2. that the adjoining property is elevated approximately 16 feet above the subject property. 3. That the proposed addition is facing an existing hillside slope. 4. That the granting of this variance does not constitute the granting of a special privilege in that other properties in the vicinity and under similar circumstances would be considered for similar setback encroachments; furthermore, strict application of the Zoning Ordinance provisions deprives the subject property of the privileges enjoyed by other properties under similar circum- stances. July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED) CASE 6.356-VARIANCE & CASE 3.0216. (Continued) 5. That the granting of this variance will not affect the public health, safety and welfare or be injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood. 6. That the granting of this variance will not affect the General Plan. 7. That the requested 6.2' setback is requested for a limited portion of the proposed addition. 8. That existing improvements, including wall and landscaping, screen the proposed addition from the adjacent property and public streets. 9. That the proposed addition is subject to architectural approval . CONDITIONS: 1. That all conditions of the Development Committee be met. 2. That staff review details of the addition. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. CASE 3.0193. Application by JAMES SHIGUR for architectural approval of Me Arts Arts Building on Tachevah Drive between N. Palm Canyon Drive/N. Indian Avenue, C-1 Zone, Section 10. (Environmental Assessment; final approval . No comments received. ) Planner (Williams) described the medical office building and stated that the upper elevation on the board is a revised submission. She stated that the AAC voiced a number of concerns, including the overall massing of the building as it related to the street and the existing buildings around it (Horwitch Galleries and El Mirador Tower) and recommended con- tinuance to July 22 for discussion and the July 15 AAC/PC Study Session. She stated that the parking standards meet the standards of the revised Zoning Ordinance which will be adopted by the Council on July 15; and that the building would be 32 feet high on Palm Canyon and 35 feet high on Indian She showed the building footprint as it relates to the street frontages. William Sharp, 1921 W. 11th Street, Upland, representing Berry Construction, stated that the basic philosophy is to reflect the needs July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 11. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (CONTINUED) CASE 3.0193. (Continued) of both the owner and the community; that the design is not to make an imposing architectural statement; that the criticism of the mass of the building is not well founded, although the plans presented could have been misleading; that after a meeting of the design team a rendering depicting the mass of the building was prepared to show its relationship to adjacent buildings; that he had worked for architect William Cody, of Palm Springs in the past; that he would not build a project out of character with the City; and that suggestions from the Commission that could be addressed would be. Jerry Leonardi , Berry Construction, project architect, read a letter (on file in the Planning Division) distributed to the Commission and stated that the project will be a good one; that massing is not a valid criticism because of the large setbacks provided; that the architectural features are more than what is necessary to enhance the beauty of the building; and requested that his statements be taken into consideration. Mark Empey, Best, Best and Kreiger, attorney representing the architect, stated that it is the applicant's desire to meet special concerns of the community and the project; that the corner is a high profile one in a redevelopment area and visible from Palm Canyon and Indian; that Commission concerns cannot be met unless well-articulated; that every recommendation of the staff has been incorporated into the design; that as a right-of-zone construction the mass could be larger; and that the design could be approved as is since there is sufficient material to approve it. He requested that specific findings on the deficiencies be made if the project is not approved; that the massing is not a problem because of the large setbacks; that the modifications are those suggested by staff; and that continuance to a study session would be tantamount to a fatal blow for the project. Commissioner Hough stated that due to the abstentions on the AAC only one architect and one landscape architect and two Commissioners voted; that he did not like the appearance of the building, but could not see what was wrong except for the mansard roof, and the reasons for taking the application to a study session were to have professional input. Commissioner Whitney stated that she agreed with Commissioner Hough that the building is not appropriate for Palm Canyon; is more like Los Angeles buildings; and that more time is needed for review of the project. Chairman stated it would be a mistake to tell the applicant how to change the building because it usually does not improve the appearance of a project, and that either a restudy or approval should be given although the Commission could not give approval as it is because it is poorly proportioned and poorly detailed, and the location is too valuable for a substandard-looking building. July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 12 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (CONTINUED) CASE 3.0193. (Continued) Commissioner Curtis asked if it were a 3-story structure. Planner stated that it is only two floors; that the cross section shows the parking and the building appears to be 3 floors. She stated that the project meets parking standards, setbacks and open space (minimally 14%) since parking is 85% of the lot. Commissioner Curtis stated that he agreed with the AAC and that the type of building has been seen too much and is substandard in appearance; and that the massing should be broken. He suggested that the applicants look at the Wessman medical office complex on Tachevah and Las Hadas on N. Palm Canyon. He stated that the roof detail is not in keeping with the type of building. Planner stated that the top elevation on the display board depicts the parking structure and trellis as seen from the surgical center lot looking south at the office building. Commissioner Edgmon stated that the mass is a primary concern, especially with its proximity to the hospital . M/S/c (Neel/Whitney; Olsen abstained) for a total restudy of the project and directing that the case be placed on the Planning Commission/AAC Joint Study Session of July 15 at 3:00 p.m. in the Large Conference Room at City Hall . Chairman left; Vice-Chairman presided. CASE 3.0209. Application by MARK BENEDETTI for architectural approval of singe family residence on E1 Camino Way between Mesa Drive/Crestview Terrace, R-1-C Zone, Section 27. Planner (Williams) described the configuration at the residence and stated that the height of 18 ft. + is not per the Zoning Ordinance, and should not be a problem because the two garages will be side by side; and that adjacent property owners were sent letters and no responses were received. She stated that the standard 25 ft. half street condi- tion could be changed to a hillside condition of 40 ft. and that the Engineering Division is deferring improvements. John Stanford, 74055 Hwy ill, project architect, stated that he had tried to contact the adjacent property owners, but had no response; that there is no view infringement beyond that of the garage which is on the side of the neighbor's garage; that the neighbors wall is into the site 4;g ft. , making a 15 ft. side yard rather than a 10, which allows addi- tional open space; and because of location of the house in a wash, the pad will be higher to drain into the street. �``' (Chairman returned. ) July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 13 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (CONTINUED) CASE 3.0209. (Continued) M/S/C (Neel/Olsen; Lapham abstained) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That a hillside street width of 40 ft. be allowed. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS CASE 5.0277-PD-149. Application by ST. THERESA'S CHURCH for a 1.2-month time extension for installation of street improvements for a multi-purpose building at 2800 E. Ramon Road between Compadre Road/Farrell Drive, R- 1-A Zone, Section 13. Planner (Green) stated that one of the conditions of approval of the multi-purpose building was the construction of Vaquero and Compadre; that the church requested that improvements be deferred and is now requesting a 3 year .deferment because of cost and that the staff recom- mendation is for a one year extension, which is easier to track by the city. John Gomes, 2493 Madrona, representing St. Theresa's Church, stated that because of the cost of the expansion of the church facilities, the improvements are being requested to be deferred and. that an assessment district may be formed which would allow for full street improvements and would be preferable. (Commissioner Olsen left. ) He stated that funds are being raised by a pledge drive to construct the rectory, and that the money will not be available until the end of the drive; that a half street will not solve any problems, and that a full street is necessary. He requested a three year continuance and stated that he hoped the assessment district would be formed. Chairman stated that the one-year time extension is necessary for pro- cedural reasons; and that it could be renewed each year; and that the church will receive an extension until there are traffic problems. M/S/C (Whitney/Curtis; Olsen absent) approving a twelve-month time extension for street improvements. The expiration date of the extensionis July 8, 1988. CASE 5.0356-PD-168. Request by OASIS WATER PARK for reconsideration of a landscape adaition for a planned development district for a waterpark on Gene Autry Trail/Crossley Road, M-1 Zone, Section 20. Planner (Green) stated that a condition of the certificate of occupancy was to install a fertilizer injector system, but that the applicant wants to hand fertilize and is requesting reconsideration of the condi- tion requiring the injector system. . r July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 14 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (CONTINUED) CASE 5.0356-PD-168. (Continued) He stated that the AAC expressed concern over the hillside plants and recommended an injection system, but also recommended that the Commission review the applicant's request. Commissioner Neel stated that the small tree wells on the hill could not be satisfactorily fertilized by hand and aninjector system is more efficient and that the only plant that might be adversely effected by the fertilization system would be the Octillo which needs little water. He stated that it is impossible to hand fertilize all the plants as well as an injector system can, and that every plant in his nursery is on a fertilizer injection irrigation system. J. Hazelrigg, 38280 Maricopa, the applicant, stated that he had talked with experts and was told that he could not use an injector system for all of his landscaping and that he was concerned that it would be unhealthful to use irrigation system water to wash down the carpets and the concrete in the water park. Commissioner Neel explained that the small amount of inorganic fertilizer in the water would not harm or make any surface unhealthful . He stated that if the injector system had been used in the beginning, there would be lush growth by now. Mr. Hazelrigg stated that the small gunnited planter areas are now in bloom. Commissioner Neel stated that any mixture of fertilizer can be ordered for the system, but that a 15-15-15 mixture would be most beneficial to all plants and not harmful to people. Mr. Hazelrigg noted that the injector system should have been made a condition in the beginning. Chairman commented that if the plants had been fertilized on a regular basis in the beginning, the injector system would not be required now. Mr. Hazelrigg stated that he needed a certificate of occupancy. Commissioner Neel suggested that the applicant discuss the amount and ratio of the fertilizer with one of the distributors. Planner (Green) stated that there is one condition imposed by the Director of Community Development remaining after the applicant complies with the installation of the injector system; and that is the sound wall around the wave machine to buffer noise affecting the Municipal Golf Park residents. Mr. Hazelrigg questioned the need for a sound wall since the wave machine cannot be heard from the golf course area. Planner (Evans) stated that the Commission should take action on the injector system only, and that the Director of Community Development has been working with the applicant regarding the Certificate of Occupancy. c July 8, 1987 PC MINUTES Page 15 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (CONTINUED) CASE 5.0356-PD-168. (Continued) Mr. Hazelrigg repeated that he had been told by the experts that he should not use the injector system for all plants. Commissioner Neel noted that Mr. Hazelrigg had received incorrect infor- mation because the system can be installed for all vegetation. He reiterated that the applicant contact a distributor of the system, and stated that it will save the applicant money in the long term. M/S/C (Hough/Neel ; Olsen absent) denying the applicant's request to eliminate the injector system (condition to provide a fertilization injector system was reaffirmed). CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council actions. No report was given. ADDED STARTERS. (Determination of eligibility for consideration. ) None. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS OR REQUESTS. M/S/C (Whitney/Edgmon; Olsen absent) cancelling the Planning Commission meeting of August 26. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m. c MDR/ml PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall July 22, 1987 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1987 - 1988 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Larry Lapham, Chairman X 2 0 Hugh Curtis X 2 0 Martha Edgmon - 1 1 Brent Hough X 2 0 Earl Neel X 2 0 Gary Olsen X 2 0 Barbara Whitney X 2 0 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Fred Hawkins, Director of Parks, Recreation and Library Douglas Evans, Planner Robert Green, Planner Richard Patenaude, Planner Margo Williams, Planner Carol Vankeeken, Planner Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary • Architectural Advisory Committee - July 20, 1987 Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Martha Edgmon Mike Buccino Barbara Whitney Tom Doczi Gary Olsen Brent Hough William Johnson Will Kleindienst Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Curtis/Neel ; Edgmon absent) approving minutes of July 8, 1987 as submitted. There were no Tribal Council comments.