Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/07/13 - MINUTES I PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall July 13, 1988 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 21 3 Hugh Curtis X 23 1 Martha Edgmon - 21 3 Brent Hough - 22 2 Gary Olsen X 21 3 Barbara Whitney X 18 6 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos , Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Margo Williams, Planner Douglas Evans, Planner Dean Lewis, Traffic Engineer Richard Patenaude, Planner Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee, - July 11, 1988 William Johnson Absent: Gary Olsen, Alternate Tom Doczi Barbara Whitney, Alternate Will Kleindienst Martha Edgmon, Alternate {.� Mike Buccino Chris Mills, Chairman Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Hough/Edgmon absent) approving minutes of June 22, 1988 as submitted. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: The July 13 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 1:30 p.m. , Friday, July 8. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 2 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Hough/Edgmon absent) taking the following actions: CASE 3.0346. Application by DENNIE AUSTIN for architectural approval of revised plans for single family residence on Vista Drive/Via Livorno, R-1-B Zone, Section 3. Continued (pending receipt of revised plans) to July 27. CASE 3.0389 - MINOR. Application by GALLERY APARTMENTS for architectural approval of security gates for apartment complex at 1488 E. Ramon Road, R- 2 Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. Continued (pending receipt of revised plans) to July 27. CASE 5.0344-PD-164. Application by PERIDIAN GROUP for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for the frontage of the Wyndham Hotel on Tahquitz Way between Calle El Segundo/Avenida Caballeros, C-1-AA/R-4-VP Zones (I .L.) , Section 14. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the wall return along the frontage and stairstep. 2. That desert planting at the entry near the sidewalk be retained. 3. That several boulders 4 to 5 ft. in size be used on site and to be placed by the landscape architect. CASE 3.375. Application by DAVE HAMILTON for the City of Palm Springs/Riverside County Flood Control District for architectural approval of final landscape plans for the Tahquitz Creek Debris Basin. Continued to July 27 at the request of the Tribal Council . TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS 1 . Noted that the landscaping of the areas that will be disturbed by the construction of the Tahquitz Creek Debris Basin. Channel improvements, etc. is a very important element of the overall development that will be occurring on the Tahquitz Cone. 2. Requested that the landscaping plans be referred to the Committee formed by the Tribal Council to coordinate the design and construc- tion of the Interpretive Center, including related amenities, and to the planning consultant previously selected by the Tribal Council and the City of Palm Springs to prepare a site plan for these facilities. i July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 3 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.375. (Continued) 3. Requested that this case be continued pending receipt and review of input from the committee and consultant referred to above with respect to the compatibility of the proposed landscape elements with other design elements proposed for the Tahquitz Cone. CASE 3.0191. Application by GREAT AMERICAN MINI STORAGE for architectural approval of revised gate detail and main sign for office/warehouse buildings on Farrell/Research Drives, M-1-P Zone, Section 12. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Main sign - approved as submitted. 2. Gate - approved subject to painting to match blue trim. CASE 3.0211 - MINOR. Application by DAYTONA CONSTRUCTION for National Car Rental for architectural approval of revised colors for business at 2988 Civic Center Drive, A Zone, Section 13. Approved revised colors as submitted. CASE 3.0236. Application by TKD ASSOCIATES for architectural approval of landscape plans for a warehouse/office building on Valdivia Way between Tachevah Drive/La Campana, M-1-P Zone, Section 7. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.0277. Application by SCOTT DORIUS for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for a mini-storage facility on Gene Autry Trail between Mesquite Avenue/Palm Canyon Drive, M-1 Zone (I .L.) , Section 20. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.0405 - MINOR. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for outdoor dining for restaurant (Taco House) at 494 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the ficus be substituted with 24" box Crepe Myrtle. 2. That the Waxed Leaf Privet be substituted with Carissa per the plan. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 4 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 5.0357-PD-167. Application by LASZLO SANDOR for architectural approval of final development plans for a 119 unit apartment building on the northeast corner of San Rafael/McCarthy Roads, R-2 Zone, Section 34. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That field grown Olives and Canary Island Pines be substituted and integrated on the street frontage. 2. That trees at the south end of garage #1 to be provided to accent the entry. 3. That a maneuvering area be provided at the end of the two open parking areas (one adjacent to the units, the other adjacent to the drainage area) . 4. That the roof access ladders are to be screened inside the stairwells. 5. That there be a minimum of five foot distance between the garage and open parking at the north end of the property. 6. That a 10 foot wide decorative pavement area be provided at each entry driveway. 7. That details of the signs be reviewed by the AAC. CASE 5.0379-PD-174. Application by EQUESTRIAN U INC. for architectural approval of final development plans for an equestrian center to include boarding, horse rentals, and camp sites for equestrian use on Sonora Road, W-R-1-C Zone, Section 19. Approved as submitted. Abstention: Olsen CASE 5.0439-PD-189/TTM 22396. Application by COMMUNITY CONSULTANTS CORPORATION for architectural approval of final development plans for a service/commercial/industrial complex on the north side of Ramon Road adjacent to the airport, M-1 Zone (I .L.) , Section 18. Approved map layout as submitted; restudied landscaping noting the following: 1. That Filifera Palms be used instead of Robusta Palms. 2. That more accent is needed at the entry. 3. That the sidewalk and bikepath be combined into a single meandering path. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 5 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 5.0439-PD-189/TTM 22396. (Continued) 4. That the overall Ramon Road landscape design is weak and needs addi- tional interest and design thought. CASE 5.0477-CUP. Application by LOWELL WOODEN for architectural approval of a full service automated carwash on Ramon Road between El Cielo Road/Gene Autry Trail , M-1 Zone, Section 45. (Review of architecture only.) Continued to July 27 for review in conjunction with CUP Public Hearing. . CASE 3.0406 - MINOR. Application by GREAT WALL INTERSTATE, INC, for archi- tectural approval of revised plans for new awning, and dining patio and sign for restaurant at 362 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That final landscape plans be submitted for AAC review and that the landscape plans create a garden setting on the west side of the patio. 2. Sign approved as submitted. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA CASE 3.0401 - MINOR. Application by NORMA FREUND and ROBERT BRISTER for archi- tectural approval of screen installation on balcony edge at 958 and 974 Village Square north, R-4 Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. Planner (Evans) stated that the applicants want to screen the second story of their condominiums to confine pets and have privacy and protection. He stated that the Village Racquet Club CC&R's require pets to stay within the units. Susan Brister, 958 Village Square North, stated that she was told when she bought the condominium that the terrace was her property; that she had a de-clawed cat to protect; that she did not receive prior approval for the installation; that she was cited by the City; that the screening is invisible and the trim recessed; that the units face the wash toward Saturnino. She requested a waiver to allow the screening to keep pets confined, and stateckhe understood the recommendation for denial was because of the architecture. Chairman explained that if one of the screening applications is approved, all applications have to be approved and a patchwork of screening would occur all over the project. Mrs. Brister asked if the installation could be allowed as a prototype. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 6 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0401 - MINOR. (Continued) Chairman stated that it will be discussed. Mrs. Brister explained a photograph of the unit by stating that the glass on the four level split units was done by the Village Racquet Club, that in the CC&R's any renovation has to have prior approval ; that she was told that her installation was a code violation; that other residents have not installed screening and that the Village Racquet Club representatives say that she is in violation of the City code. Commissioner Curtis stated that the Commission is concerned over the exterior of complexes; that he is sympathetic with the application; and that the installation of glass on the bottom halfway across the units might be acceptable. Commissioner Olsen stated that the proposal will change the aesthetics of the project although the appearance is not bad, but that installation on 140 units would ruin the appearance of the project and that he was inclined to deny the application on that basis. Commissioner Whitney agreed that the application should be denied although she stated she was in sympathy with the applicant. Chairman suggested that the use of glass be considered because it would have a uniform appearance in the project. `... M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Edgmon/Hough absent) denying the application for a screen installation on the balcony edge. Chairman suggested that the applicant meet with staff to discuss the issue. Mrs. Brister asked if glass would be appropriate. Chairman stated that the other Commissioners did not think the glass is appropriate. CASE 3.0378. Application by JACK WESTON for Leah Easton for architectural approval of revised plans for single family residence on Chino Canyon Drive between Panorama Road/dead end, R-1-A Zone, Section 3. Planner (Patenaude) stated that the redesigned home shows reduced height, flows well with the topography of the site. He stated that the trim color will be white. Jack Weston, the applicant, stated that staff had presented the entire picture of the application. George Herrera, a neighbor, commented that the roof height is still too high and that he had just found out that the revised plans were on the agenda. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 7 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0378. (Continued) Chairman stated that the application had been reviewed many times in the past. Planning Director explained that the architectural approval items are not a public hearing but the neighbors abutting the project were appraised of the application and the adjustments to the house were in response to the complaints. He stated that the house height has been lowered and that Mr. Herrera can discuss the issue with the case Planner and can appeal Commission action to the City Council . M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving the application sub- ject to the following conditions: 1 . That the final landscape plans using the proposed preliminary plan palette and building colors be submitted for review by the Architec- tural Advisory Committee. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 3. That colors be resubmitted for AAC and Commission approval . CASE 3.0414 - MINOR. Application by MARK WEST for the Riveria Hotel for architectural approval of renovation of lobby building, pool area, and landscaping at 1600 N. Indian Avenue, R-3 Zone, Section 2. Planner (Williams) stated that the applicants are remodeling the Riveria Hotel and disagree with the conditions on the front entryway; that the applicants want to remove the statues and the present landscaped area and replace it with asphalt. She stated that flagstone will be used in the sidewalk next to the front building and to separate the driveways in the entry area, and that the AAC felt that the entry statement is important and should be enhanced with decorative paving. Mark West, Home Federal Savings and Loan, representing owners of the hotel stated that the target market will not be competitive with new projects because it is a renovation and costs must be taken into con- sideration. He explained that flagstone instead of asphalt throughout the area would be costly and the money should be placed in other portions of the hotel . Planner stated that a portion of the entry is proposed in flagstone and a portion in asphalt. Chairman suggested that the flagstone be deleted and decorative paving used. Mr. West stated that a specific entry statement will be made with flag- stone since it will go into the interior to the front desk from the exterior and make a statement. He stated that the entry has been moved back and that the cost of flagstone is not justified for the benefits returned. He remarked that the flagstone strip will give a sense of July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 8 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0414 - MINOR. (Continued) arrival and avoid confusion as to the location of the entry; and that any- thing but asphalt would be too expensive and also too expensive to main- tain. Chairman stated that the cost for flagstone compared to concrete is not an extraordinary amount of money, perhaps 10 to 11 thousand dollars. Planning Director explained that the asphalt would be reconstructed (not slurry sealed) . Mr. West explained that a higher cost was quoted to him. Mr. Whitney stated that she felt that flagstone is not compatible with asphalt. Commissioner Curtis suggested a restudy for the applicants to find an affordable material that is compatible. Mr. West stated that the AAC requirement was to consider a surface for the entire front entry area. He asked if it would be possible for it to be only under the porte-cochere (if there is a blending of surfaces) . Chairman explained that the AAC recommended a restudy. He recommended that the applicant meet with staff for direction. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Edgmon/Hough absent) continuing the application to July 27, for a restudy and for the applicant to meet with staff for direction. PUBLIC HEARINGS TTM 23557 (Continued) . Application by JOHN HACKER for Kenneth Hinsvark for ten- tative tract map to allow subdivision of 20 acres into 7 lots on the south- side of Camino Parocela between Fern Canyon Drive/Belardo Road, W-R-1-A Zone, Section 22. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration; no comments received.) Planner (Evans) stated that the Tribal Council has requested that the application be restudied for a review of the archaeological resources and a focused EIR done on the access to the Tahquitz Cone area. He stated that staff does not support the Tribal Council in regard to its concerns on access because there is access on La Mirada. He showed the boundaries of the project on the aerial map. In reply, to Commission Whitney's question, Planner (Williams) stated that there are CC&R's for maintenance. Chairman declared the hearing open. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) TTM 23557 (Continued) Kenneth Hinsvark, 7770 Sunny Dunes, and Bill Alexander, 555 W. Andreas Road, V, the applicants, stated that they agreed with the staff's comments. There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Edgmon/Hough absent) restuding TTM 23557 for a focused EIR on archaeological and regional resources. (The map will be renoticed for a future public hearing.) The restudy noted the following: 1. That details of the gate and common area be reviewed by the Archi- tectural Advisory Committee. 2. That a minimum setback of 15 feet be provided at each of the southerly corners of the tennis court. 3. That the entry statement be included in the common area and have a more pronounced appearance. 4. That the individual front yard setbacks be increased 10 to 15 feet greater than the minimum R-1-A standard of twenty-five feet because of the lack of right-of-way and private streets . TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS This proposed development is one of a number of significant developments that will be occurring on the Tahquitz Cone and immediate area in the near future, i .e, the construction of the Tahquitz Creek debris basin and channel improvements, the Interpretive Center and related amenities, etc. The impact of these developments on archaeological/cultural resources and on future access to developed as well as undeveloped properties are issues that are being addressed in connection with the construction of the Tahquitz Creek improvements and the Interpretive Center. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council strongly urged that this case be continued pending the completion of a focused Environmental Impact Report that will address the projects impact on archaeological/cultural resources and on access/circulation with respect to other developed as well as undeveloped properties in the area southerly of Ramon Road and westerly of Belardo Road. Previous and on-going investigations indicate there are significant archaeological/cultural resources extending into the project site. CASE 5.0400-ZTA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS of an amendment to Sections 9201.00 (R-1) , 9211.00 (CSC) and 9230.00 (Signs) of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposal would amend the height regulations for single family residential zones, allow model homes by land use permit in single- family residential zones, allow cocktail lounges and nightclubs at com- munity shopping centers, and amend the political sign regulations. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0400-ZTA. (Continued) Recommendation: That the Commission order the filing of a Negative Declaration; approve amendments to the Zoning Text. Planner (Patenaude) stated that the amendments are an additional cleanup of the recent ordinance changes as follows: R-1 (9201.01 C.) Allows for model homes/sales offices- with approval of a Land Use Permit. (9201 .03 B.6) Provides an exception to the height regulations to allow gabled ends, dormers, and front entrance treatments not exceeding 15 feet in height to encroach past the building envelope limits. C-S-C (9211.01 C.) Allows for nightclubs as a primary use with approval of a Conditional Use Permit in response to a request for a nightclub in the Palm Springs Mall . Signs (9320.08-1) Deletes time restriction for posting of political signs prior to elections. (9320.08-5) Increase time allotted for use of grand opening signs to 30 days. (Several ) Deletes references to provisions of Municipal Code Section 5.54 and substitutes Section 9402.00.H. Planner stated that the Tribal Council supported all changes. He explained that another change is to delete from the Zoning Ordinance reference to the Municipal Code regarding adult entertainment since regulations monitoring adult entertainment were not placed in the Municipal Code. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving zoning text amend- ments as noted above. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS Since these amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are City-wide in nature, the Tribal Council considered the potential impact of these proposed revisions on developed and undeveloped trust lands. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council concurred with the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. I July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0469-PD-86A/TTM 22885. Application by SANBORN/WEBB ENGINEERING for Falcon Lake Properties for a tentative tract map and revised planned development district to construct Phase 11-4 of Cathedral Canyon Country Club (condominium complex) on property west of Cathedral Canyon Drive, south of the Whitewater River channel , RTP/R-1-C Zones (I .L.) , Section 28. (Previously given Environmental Assessment in conjunction with PD-86.) Recommendation: That the Commission approved the case and map subject to conditions. Planner (Evans) stated that the application is the last phase of Falcon Lakes Country Club; that the AAC recommended approval of final development plans, and that the architecture is the same as the previous phrases. He stated that the Tribal Council recommends continuance because the applicants have not paid the Tribal Council fee for processing projects on Indian land, and that staff was in error in not informing the applicant of the Tribal Council fees. He recommended that the Commission take action subject to fees being paid to the Tribal Council . Chairman declared the hearing open. Eugene Kountz, 68733 Perez Road, Cathedral City representing Falcon Lakes stated that he concurred with the conditions and the fee will be paid to the Indians prior to consideration of the application by the City Council . i There being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving Case 5.0469-PD-86A and TTM 21885 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings• 1 . That the cluster housing and golf course development is properly one for which a Planned Development District is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the residential use is necessary and desirable for the develop- ment of the community, is in harmony with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing or future surrounding uses. 3. That the 12.7 acre site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses, including all necessary setbacks, yards, walls, structures, landscaping, and parking necessary to adjust this use to the surrounding neighborhood. 4. That the site is serviced by Cathedral Canyon Drive, a secondary highway, which is adequate in size and design to accommodate the type and quantity of traffic expected to be generated by this use. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 12 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0469-PD-86A/TTM 22885. (Continued) 5. That the approval of this revision to PD-86A and TTM 21885 is con- sistent with the approved master plan for Cathedral Canyon Country Club. Conditions• 1. That detailed final development plans, including design, landscape, irrigation, exterior lighting, grading and emergency access be sub- mitted for approval by the Planning Commission. Approval of final development plans for Phase 11-4 shall be final unless appealed to City Council . 2. That emergency access from Bolero Drive shall be operational prior to delivery or use of combustible materials. 3. That codes, covenants, and restrictions which include details of the maintenance of common areas shall be submitted prior to issuance of buildings permits and shall be approved and recorded prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 4. That an as-built master phasing plan be submitted showing all streets, street names and primary improvements. 5. That a 36 foot radius to curb cul-de-sac is approved except adjacent to Lot 7 where with a 43 foot radius to curb cul-de-sac shall be provided (this amends Engineering Conditions No. 3, On-site Streets) . 6. That all recommended conditions of approval from the Development Committee, dated June 29, 1988, be implemented. 7. That this project shall comply with all conditions of approval for PD-86 and Tract 13792 except as amended herein. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS Although it is not indicated on the Planning Commission Agenda, discussions with the applicant and city staff confirm that this case involves Indian trust land. It has also been determined that the Tribal Council fee for processing land use cases involving trust land was not paid as provided for by Tribal Council Resolution No. 24-86. The Tribal Council withheld comments on this Case and requested that the City Planning Commission continue this matter pending payment of the Tribal fees referred to above. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 13 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0475-PD-197/TTM 22362. Application by RALPH WILCOX for a planned development district and tentative tract map to construct a complex of 40 individual homes on 34th Avenue between Rush Street/Whitewater Wash, W-R-G- A(6) Zone, Section 20. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration.) Recommendation: That the Commission continue the application to July 27. Planner (Patenaude) described the project stating that there will be individual homes; that a PD was required because of zero lot lines and 5 ft. setbacks along the interior roads; that there will be gated private streets and common recreational facilities and that the project has 60% open space. He stated that streets should be widened to 36 ft. instead of 32 ft. or guest parking provided; and that although a single access is proposed the Fire Department requires an emergency access off 34th Street; that the plan shows a future entrance to Rush Street; that Engineering recommends that the entrance on 34th Street be aligned with Lawrence Street in the Crossley Tract for a more pleasing appearance, but that the applicant does not want to do this and the Traffic Engineer says it is not necessary. He stated that the AAC finds a six foot wall acceptable if it meanders and is offset; that the applicant wants a vacation of part of 34th Street for lots to be moved to the south, and that there will be a significant noise impact from the Whitewater Expressway. He stated that staff findings are appropriate for a Planned Development District and that the AAC recommended revisions to the architecture regarding overhangs for sun control and a change in the color of the roof and walls; that the '-' committee recommended that the common area be enlarged and a second swimming pool be added, feeling that one pool is not sufficient since rear yards are not large enough for private pools, and that the AAC also was concerned about maintenance on individual properties. Chairman asked if there were an AAC recommendation regarding the 5 foot setbacks. Planner stated that the AAC had no comment. Chairman stated that he felt that there would be a tunnel effect on Random Road since there is only a 5 ft. setback and no open space. Chairman declared the hearing open. Ralph Wilcox, 2091 Business Center Drive, Irvine, the applicant, stated that he had built in the desert for 12 years and purchased the subject property 8 years ago and a site plan and tentative map had been approved previously for the property. He stated that the homes will reach the middle income market for people orientated to the golf scene and in explanation to the AAC concerns he stated as follows: Security. Because of the area, security walls and gates are necessary. The walls will be protected with laser beams (at the top) and must be in a straight line, but it could be planted so that it does not appear straight, and that there is a neighboring 4 ft. wall over which people can jump. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 14 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0475-PD-197/TTM 22362. (Continued) - Plantings. There are swimming pool size lots and cannot be planted with trees but the problem can be resolved; and that with only 40 to 50 homes, one pool is sufficient and an additional pool will add $ 30 a month to the homeowners fee which was to be kept lower for moderate income buyers and for easier maintenance costs. Architecture. The overhangs on some of the units are not aesthetically pleasing and should be reviewed again by the AAC. The project meets Title 24 requirements because of dual glazed windows. - Entrance. The main entrance is the west to avoid sighting down the Crossley Tract. - Street Widths. 32 foot wide streets and additional parking for visitors is sufficient. - Entry Gates. Gates have been redesigned and should be acceptable. - Sidewalk. The existing sidewalk on 34th Street should be sufficient and not extended because pedestrian traffic should be excluded on 34th. Landscaping will be added to keep people away from the walls. - Street Dedications. The Mid Valley Parkway could be designed to miss the property entirely since it was not an issue when the project was originally approved. In the worst case situation if the project is designed correctly, the land could be deeded back to the applicant. Price Ranee. The prices will be in the set 100 to 121 thousand dollar range a good market because the competition is sold out above that figure). Lyle Wylie, 62616 Paseo de La Palma, Fairway Village, stated that the wall on the project should be an extension of the currently existing 4 to 42 ft. walls in the area. Ms. Sessin, of Cathedral City, whose grandmother lives in the area requested that the flood situation be resolved so that water flows into Lawrence Street and requested that the sidewalk be constructed for safety for children waiting for buses. There being no further appearances, Chairman declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Olsen stated that the application seems to have many unresolved problems to which the applicant has taken exception, and should be continued or restudied; and that the application has not advanced far enough to take action. Commissioner Whitney agreed, stated that she was concerned about access, and stated also that the map should be refined before action is taken. Commissioner Curtis stated that he did not like the elevations or site plan and was concerned about the conflict between the private property and the condominium aspects of the project. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 15 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0475-PD-197/TTM 22362. (Continued) Chairman stated that he had concerns about the site plan because of the size of the setbacks off the street which will have a stifling effect; and he knew the project is to address an affordable market, but he was concerned with the units being so close to the streets without any breaks. He stated that he felt that the project should be restudied. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Edgmon/Hough absent) continuing the application to July 27 for a restudy noting the following: 1. That the front exterior wall should be redesigned to break up the long straight section along the street. Landscaping should relate to the wall design. 2. That the entrance should be redesigned to accommodate an entry gate and turn around area. 3. The rear lots should contain 1 to 2 trees. Evergreen Pear should be as accent and not as a street tree. 4. That the size of the common area should be increased and a second pool provided. 5. That the building design should provide roof overhangs especially above the windows. 6. That the roof and wall tones should vary by type of unit. 7. That the fireplace cap design should be submitted. 8. That the Architectural Advisory Committee is concerned that there might be a conflict between the private property/condominium aspects of the project. 9. That interior setbacks should be reviewed. 10. That sidewalks along wall should be restudied. 11. That the height of each wall should be reviewed. CASE 6.361 - VARIANCE. Application by SALVATORE MARINO for a variance to reduce a rear yard setback by 10 feet for a house addition at 1160 El Alameda, R-1-C Zone, Section 11. (This action is categorically exempt from Environmental assessment per CEQA guidelines.) Recommendation: That the Commission deny the application. Planner (Patenaude) stated that the addition encroaches into the rear side yard, was built without a permit and was discovered by the Building Division when an electrical change out was requested, and that the appli- cant elected to apply for a variance. He stated that the lot is larger than most in the area and that staff could not make findings for approval July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 16 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 6.361 - VARIANCE. (Continued) and recommends denial . He explained that the existing structure is 5 ft. 6 inches from the side property line and should be 9 ft. and is line with the house and the rear setback encroaches 10 ft. into the 15 ft. setback. Chairman commented that the real violation is the rear yard. Planner stated that the addition is almost finished without permits but has not been finalized and it is not known whether or not the addition meets building standards. Alba Marino, 60 Alameda, the applicant, stated that she did not know that she needed a permit to add to the patio; that the project was a family one; and that the construction finalized as a room. She stated that she discovered she needed a permit when the electrical box was moved, and that she did not know that the construction was illegal because 80% of the neighbors have 5 foot or less setbacks. She said that she had a petition from her neighbors stating that the project was acceptabale to them. Chairman stated that the Commission is in a quandary because of the laws and codes which must be enforced; that in the movie colony area very few properties conform; that the alignment with the existing house creates a 52 ft. violation of the rear setback which is the problem and there is a safety factor because the structure was not inspected. He stated that the Commission does not want to create a hardship. Mrs. Marino asked if the inspector could inspect the construction. Planning Director replied that that would eventually happen. Commissioner Whitney asked if an exception could be made to consider the project. Commissioner Curtis asked how the project differed from other variances, and Commissioner Whitney stated that similar conditions exist in the area already. Ken Curtis, resident in the subject property, stated that there are four items on the staff report and that he has reviewed them with the appli- cant. He stated that the findings are: one groups view, that Mrs. Marino's brothers built the addition; that the addition had been discussed with the Director of Community Development; that no special privilege is being requested; and that the neighbors have similar condi- tions. He stated that the addition can be torn down and inspected and that 43 people within a 400 ft. radius signed a petition finding the addition acceptable. He stated in reply to a Commission question that there was no contractor on the job and that a sprinkler system could be put in the addition. Anita Bianca, a neighbor, stated that the area is well-kept and that the addition is nice with a lovely view and that across from Ruth Hardy Park there is an area which is unkept and debris strewn. �... Planner (Patenaude) stated that a letter had been received in opposition stating that rules are in the City for a reason and should be enforced. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 17 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 6.361 - VARIANCE. (Continued) Chairman stated that the addition is a code violation in building safety and that a variance finding cannot be made and the application must be denied. He suggested an appeal by the applicant to the City Council . Commissioner Curtis stated that findings for a variance cannot be made since the Commission would be violating the law if the variance were approved. Planner stated that the agent for Mrs. Marino was aware of the finding that had been made and was informed that there was little support for the variance. Planning Director stated that staff would contact the applicants to let them know what can be done. M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Edgmon/Hough absent) denying the variance based on the following: Findings• 1. There are no special circumstances that are applicable to the property which relate to its size, shape or topography. The site is level and larger than most other lots in the vicinity. 4 2. Granting of this variance would be a special privilege in that other �*- properties in the area would be entitled to request a reduced set- back based on reasons other than the physical constraints of the property. 3. Granting of the variance could be materially detrimental to the site and adjacent neighbors by adding to a structure that already crowds the side property line and reduces the rear yard by 67%. 4. The granting of the variance could adversely affect the objectives of the General Plan in that the development standards of the Zoning Ordinance were designed to enhance the open desert character often associated with Palm Springs. CASE 5.0480-CUP. Application by HOLDEN & JOHNSON, ARCHITECTS for Peter McKernan for a conditional use permit to construct a guest house with kitchen facilities, a paddle tennis court encroaching into the front yard setbacks, and a six foot high wall at 450 Vereda del Sur, R-1-A Zone, Section 10. (This action is categorically exempt from Environmental assessment per CEQA guidelines.) Planner (Evans) described the project and stated that it is a large estate and the CUP is for a guest house, paddle tennis court and entry gate. He stated that staff cannot find grounds for a proposed 6 ft. high wall . July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 18 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0480-CUP. (Continued) Chairman stated that there are 6 ft. high walls in many homes in the area. Planner replied that there are none on the abutting property or across the street from the project. He stated also that the paddle tennis court not have a fence and that kitchens in guest houses require a CUP so that they do not become rentals. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances the hearing was closed. M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving Case. 5.0480-CUP based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions . Findings• 1. That the proposed guest house, paddle tennis court, and entry gates are property one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Zoni,bg Ordinance. 2. That the proposed improvements, specificially the guest house, paddle tennis court and entry gates are desirable for the community, and are in harmony with the General Plan and are not detrimental to the neighborhood. 3. That the site being 1.1 acres in size and irregular in shape can accommodate the proposed improvements including all yards, setback, walls, landspacing, with the exception of the reduced front yard adjacent to the paddle tennis court in order to adjust said use to the neighborhood. 4. That the site is located adjacent to roadways which are adequate to handle anticipated traffic. 5. That conditions of approval including use, street improvements, utility service, night lighting and landscaping which will protect the health, safety and general welfare of the neighborhood. 6. That the requested six foot wall height cannot be approved under a conditional use permit and that a variance applicaion would be the appropriate procedure to consider such a request. Conditions• 1. That the subject property be used in accordance with Section 9201.00 (Single-Family Residential ) and the guest house shall be used as an accessory to the main house. The guest house shall be reserved for the exclusive use by guests of the property owner and shall not be separately rented or leased. 2. That the guest house be served through the same utility meters as the main house. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 19 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0480-CUP. (Continued) 3. That the walls within the 25-foot front yard setbacks shall not exceed 42 feet in height, except that the entry gates may exceed 42 feet if approved by the Planning Commission. 4. That night lighting for the paddle tennis courtt is prohibited. PUBLIC COMMENTS. None. CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 5.0449-PD-191 (Ref. Case 5.0282-PD-150) . Application by STEVE CROWE for architectural approval of final development plans for a 345 room hotel on S. Palm Canyon Drive between Sunny Dunes Road/Mesquite Avenue, C-1 Zone, Section 23. Planner (Evans) stated that the architecture has been revised and stays within the confines of the original planned development district and the primary changes are appearance of the main entry, a parking structure beneath the tennis courts added in the same location as the courts originally were; the ballroom height reduced, and an access area provided off Mesquite for overflow of vehicles. He stated that the setbacks around the perimeter are approximately the same as the original proposal ; that massing studies show reduced height; that the concerns of the neighbors originally were because of the height of the building; that there is a parking management plan showing valet parking, and that the elevations have changed from a Mediterranean to an Italian design. He explained that there are two new non-usable 73 foot high towers which the applicants feel is a necessary feature and which will not be visible from the residential area or the hotel . He described the underground service tunnel between the conference facility and the hotel kitchen and stated that the colors of the buildings have not been finalized, that the roof will be barrel tile and the surfaces of the buildings stucco with light fixtures that give an Old World appearance. He noted that the pool area is well landscaped with many water features and that the applicant has not chosen the decking material . He stated that the applicants plan to start construction September 6 and request final approval of the site plan and building elevations, that the Fire Department will have new conditions, and that the Sunline Transit Agency recommends a bus shelter, both of which the applicant is aware. Steve Crowe, the applicant and owner, stated he and the new architect are excited about the project changes; that the project will have a tradi- tional/classic appearance with well-designed landscaping, and the facilities will compete with down-valley destination resorts. He stated that the project will be the only Sheraton in the valley and that Sheraton has provided a major amount of capital . Paul Bernard, project architect, stated that a model was in the back of the chamber for the Planning Commission to review at the correct angle from Random Road; that the buildings will have a palatine feeling with July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 20 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 5.0449-PD-191 (Ref. Case 5.0282-PD-150) . (Continued) a grand public area and smaller, less grand details on the units; and that the materials are shown for the project with the color to be selected from the hue of the cast stone. Bill Drury, 641 San Lorenzo, owner of the Random House Hotel , objected to the high rise which was originally 60 ft. and is now 73 ft. Chairman informed him that the portion near the Random House is 40 ft. Mr. Drury stated that the planners had stated 50 plus feet. Planner stated that it is 40 foot high building. Mr. Drury stated that he felt that the height should be within the height limits of the city. David Christian, 1000 S. Palm Canyon, owner of property across the street, stated that he felt the project was a good one and hoped it would be built. There being no further appearances, Chairman declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Curtis expressed concern over the rear elevations facing Random Road which he felt were big and bulky with little relief. He stated that perhaps landscaping would hide part of the elevations and suggested reducing the height of the steeples. He stated that a 5 foot height would have the same effect as the proposed 15 to 18 ft. height. Planner reiterated that the building height on the Random Road side is 40 ft. from grade. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving final development plans for PD-191 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the towers be further studied for refinement of mass and details. 2. That final working drawings be submitted for AAC review. 3. That final landscape, irrigation and exterior lighting plans be submitted for approval . Tennis court screening adjacent to the wash and size of plant material were noted as potential concerns. 4. That a sign program be submitted. 5. That a grading plan be submitted. CASE 5.0463-PD-195. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for the Desert Sun Newspaper for architectural approval of revised final development plans for a Planned Development District to construct a newspaper publishing facility including a portion at a 50 ft. building height on Gene Autry Trail between �,,, Tachevah/Ramon Roads, M-1-P Zone, Section 7. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 21 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 5.0463-PD-195. (Continued) Planner (Evans) read the AAC recommendations and stated that there was a 2- 2 vote at the AAC on whether or not drivet should be used or stucco. He stated that the applicants want to use stucco with a specific performance specification for a good finish without waves and irregularities, but that two of the AAC members felt that the size of the building precluded a good finish. Chairman explained that drivet was developed to allow invisible patching in massive projects where there is a long time frame between phases of units and that that type of patch cannot be accomplished with stucco. He stated that the Desert Sun building is a single occupancy building and will be stuccoed all at once, so stucco rather than drivet would be acceptable as long as the undercoats are cured properly, and that this should be a condition of approval . David Christian, 1000 S. Palm Canyon, project architect, stated that the second phase, which is the production area will be precast concrete and the stuccoed area would not affect that phase. He stated that the cost for drivet is much higher ($250,000) than stucco and the applicant will guarantee a top quality plaster job. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the revised sign program is approved as submitted. 2. That the revised preliminary landscape plan is approved subject to the following: a. That street frontage mounding reach 5 feet in height. b. That parking lot shade trees be added. C. That date palms be considered adjacent to the entry drive. d. That final landscape, irrigation and exterior lighting plans be submitted. 3. That the perimeter wall be deleted. 4. That stucco with a specific performance specification (to be sub- mitted) be used in lieu of drivet. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 22 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TIME EXTENSION - CASE 5.0308-PD-155. Request by CURT DUNHAM for a 24-month time ✓ extension for a planned development district for a hillside development of single-family residences on S. Palm Canyon Drive between Cahuilla/Murray Canyon Drive, R-2/0-20 Zones (I .L.) , Section 34. M/S/C (Curtis/Olsen; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving a 24-month time extension for PD-155 subject to all original conditions of approval . The new expiration date will be July 13, 1989. _CASE LAND USE PERMIT (LUP) 20/20 RECYCLING CENTER (Continued) . Request by 20/20 RECYCLING CENTER for reconsideration of conditions for recycling center at Safeway/Rimrock Shopping Center, 4733 E. Palm Canyon Drive, C- D-N Zone, Section 30. Planner (Patenaude) stated that three colored recycling igloos were placed in the Safeway/Rimrock Shopping Center and are visible from E. Palm Canyon, that staff told the applicant that a land use permit was required, that the igloos were to be relocated to a corner of the parking lot in front, screened and placed on a pad, but the applicant appealed the placement on a pad and the Commission required the removal to the rear parking lot and eliminated the pad. he stated that staff has received a letter from 20/20 for reconsideration of the placement, because the applicant feels that they are out of sight and the amount of recycling has decreased. He stated that the applicant feels a visual impact is necessary for people to use the recycling centers; and that the applicants want to have frontage on E. Palm Canyon. He stated that staff recommends a concrete pad and that staff would recommend relocating to the front parking lot with a pad and screening from the street. Commissioner Whitney stated that the igloos should be visible and not screened. Commissioner Curtis stated that a Commission concern was that the igloos would proliferate and in certain areas cannot be screened. He stated that they should be left where they are and a directional sign errected to show their location. Planning Director stated that a convenience sign would be allowed by the Sign Ordinance. B.P. Hanrath, 20/20 Recycling, stated that proliferation of the igloos is a concern of the DOC and that his company has reduced the number of igloos by 25%. He stated that proliferation will not occur unless a large grocery opens; that the igloos are not visible from E. Palm Canyon; that the landscaping has as been increased; and that the igloos have to be visible to the shoppers. He circulated photos and stated that cars stand two inches taller than the igloos, and that another sign in the parking lot will be discussed with staff. He stated that business has dropped 38% in the aluminimum can business and 78% in glass; and if the igloos are allowed 'in the parking lot in front there will be a successful ` — program. He stated that people do not read signs and that perhaps one color on the igloos could be utilized (blue or white) with International signs for disposal items. I ADDENDUM July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 22A MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TIME EXTENSION - CASE 3.856. Request by LUCINDA ROMANO for a 12 month time extension of architectural approval for a four-plex on Cottonwood Road between Vista Chino/Chuckwalla Road, R-2 Zone, Section 11 . M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Edgmon/Hough absent) approving a 12 month time extension for Case 3.856 subject to all original conditions of approval . The new expiration date will be July, 1989. July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 23 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) CASE LAND USE PERMIT (LUP) 20/20 RECYCLING CENTER. (Continued) Chairman suggested that applicants meet with staff to place an igloo hidden by landscaping and stated that he did not like blue or red. Mr. Hanrath stated that the igloos are fiber glass and cannot be painted; that a run of 5,000 has just been done in blue or white; and that his company does not want a concrete pad because the program may be scrapped. Chairman stated that the Commission supports staff recommendation and that the igloos should be placed to lessen impact to staff satisfaction and the proposal brought back to the Commission. Planner explained that 20/20 has only one site, and that another company has the other sites in the City and uses reverse vending machines. M/S/C (Olsen/Curtis; Hough/Edgmon absent) for the applicant to work with staff on color, the pad, and placement and bring an alternative proposal back to the Commission. Commissioner Curtis left. DISCUSSION. Commission discussion of artists' studios/apartments in commercial zones, city-wide. Planning Director stated that a request has been received from an artist for a studio apartment and gallery use upstairs in the old Albert Frey building which could be explored under a land use permit. He stated that the use would not include artists using hotel rooms as a gallery. Chairman stated that there is a good mixed use in the apartments above the Old Spanish Plaza on S. Palm Canyon and that living above a business is a good idea. Chairman stated that he would bring in a book for staff to read on future socioeconomic and building trends. He stated that the book says that people of the future will be working and living in one area (living above their shops or businesses) . Planning Director stated that he did not think it would happen in large numbers in Palm Springs although staff suggested it in a return to the village atmosphere. Consensus: Concept was approved and will be reviewed in a Planning Commission study session on July 20, 3:00 - 5:00 p.m., Large Conference Room, City Hall . July 13, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 24 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council actions. No report given. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS OR REQUESTS. - Townhall Meeting/Pavilion. 7:00 p.m. Again discussing the downtown - possible architectural themes, angled street parking, incentive to have apartments above stores, etc. ADDED STARTERS. (Determination of eligibility for consideration.) None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 4:20 p.m. p.m. PLANNING DIRECTOR MDR/ml PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES . a Council Chamber, City Hall July 27, 1988 . 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 22 3 Hugh Curtis - 23 2 Martha Edgmon X 22 3 Brent Hough X 23 2 Gary Olsen X 22 3 Barbara Whitney X 19 6 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Margo Williams, Planner Douglas Evans, Planner Ray Balderas, Planning Technician Dean Lewis, Traffic Engineer Richard Patenaude, Planner Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - July 25, 1988 Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Tom Doczi • William Johnson Gary Olsen, Alternate Brent Hough Barbara Whitney, Alternate Mike Buccino Will Kleindienst Martha Edgmon, Alternate Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Curtis absent) approving minutes of July 13, 1988 as submitted. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE: There were no Tribal Council comments. Planning Director introduced Sherri Abbas a new planner. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: The July 27 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 1:30 p.m. , Friday, July 22.