Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/08/10 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall August 10, 1988 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1987 - 1988 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Gary Olsen X 23 3 Barbara Whitney X 20 6 Brent Hough X 23 3 Martha Edgmon X 23 3 Chris Mills X 1 0 Mike Dotson (not sworn in) Larry Lapham, Chairman X 23 3 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Margo Williams, Planner Douglas Evans, Planner Sherri Abbas, Planner Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement John Terell , Redevelopment Planner Dean Lewis, Traffic Engineer Richard Patenaude, Planner Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - August 8, 1988 Chris Mills, Chairman Absent: Gary Olsen, Alternate William Johnson Barbara Whitney, Alternate Mike Buccino Brent Hough Martha Edgmon, Alternate Tom Doczi Will Kleindienst Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Hough absent) approving minutes of July 27, 1988 as submitted. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE: Chairman welcomed two new Planning Commissioners, Chris Mills, architect and long time resident, and Michael Dotson, former Palm Springs Planner, now associated with a valley engineering firm. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: The August 10, agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 1:30 p.m. , Friday, August 5. August 10, 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 (Olsen/Edgmon; Hough absent)) taking the following actions: CASE 3.0262. Application by ALEXANDER COLER for architectural approval of a revised site plan/grading plan and revised elevations for a single-family residence on Patencio Road/O'Donnell Golf Course, R-1-A Zone, Section 15. Continued tennis court grading plan to August 24; restudy of elevations. CASE 3.0419-MINOR. Application by CANYON ASSOCIATES for architectural approval of exterior remodeling of the Canyon Collection (formerly Vineyard) Shopping Complex, 245 to 285 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. (Reference Case 2.960.) Removed from agenda for submittal of revised plans. CASE 3.0123. Application by ROBERT RITCHEY for Heritage Ranch Corporation for architectural approval of a sign program for a retail shopping center located on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Via Escuela/Zanjero Street, C-1 Zone, Section 3. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That an opaque background be used for illuminated signs. 2. That the metal edging be painted to match the trim. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 3 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0335. Application by JOSE DECOSTA for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for single-family residence on Girasol Avenue between Cabrillo Road/N. Racquet Club Road, R-1-B Zone, Section 3. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1 . That additional trees be added to the front yard. 2. That the tree material and sizing to be reviewed by staff. CASE 3.0344. Application by CLAUDE SMITHERN for architectural approval of an addition and remodel of single-family residence at 2267 Janis Road, R-1-B Zone, Section 3. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the roof color be submitted for staff approval - color to be a medium tan. Remainder of roof to match when reroofed. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. CASE 3.0412. Application by DON WILLIAMS for architectural approval of a commercial/industrial building at 716 Eugene Road, M-1 Zone, Section 19. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the mechanical equipment be screened. Details are to be pro- vided to staff. 2. That details of the roof drainage be reviewed by staff. Scuppers are not to be encouraged, a roof drain system with downspouts enclosed in exterior walls, daylighting at the pavement is encouraged. CASE 3.0429. Application by WILLIAM KLEINDIENST for Marty Comes for archi- tectural approval of a new 2 story elevator and elevator machine room on property on Farrell Drive at Ramon Road, P Zone, Section 13. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.458. Application by RUBEN POPLAWSKI for architectural approval of a sign program for office/warehouse complex and research business park, Research Drive between Farrell Drive/Computer Way, M-1-P Zone, Section 12. Approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the letters be 12 inches in height and 12 inches deep. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 4 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.458. (Continued) ` 2. That the letters are to be pegged out from the wall surface. 3. That all signs be same color (Creme) . 4. That all signs follow this format and no logos shall be included in the sign program. CASE 5.0449-PD-191 (Ref. Case 5.0282-PD-150) . Application by STEVE CROWE for architectural approval of rough grading plans for a 345 room hotel on S. Palm Canyon Drive between Sunny Dunes Road/Mesquite Avenue, C-1 Zone, Section 23. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.0361 . Application by ROBERT NEILL for architectural approval of revised plans for a single-family hillside residence on Araby Drive between palo Verede/Cholla Place, R-1-B Zone, Section 25. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.0376 (MINOR) . Application by MARRIOTT CORP. for architectural approval for working drawings for Bob' s Big Boy Restaurant at 1501 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-1 Zone, Section 10. Restudy noting the following: 1 . That a cross section of the awning attachment along the north and south sides of the building be provided. 2. That details of the shielding for the lights be submitted. 3. That the plylap as proposed is not acceptable and that the materials are to be as originally approved, which is a 1 by 6 shiplap of clear Douglas Fir or Cedar. CASE 3.0414 (MINOR) . Application by MARK WEST for the Riviera Hotel for archi- tectural approval of working drawings for hotel renovations at 1600 N. Indian Avenue, R-3 Zone, Section 2. Approved as submitted. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 5 CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0418 (MINOR) . Application by DAVID CHRISTIAN for the Comedy Haven for architectural approval of remodeling of exterior of building for night- club/discotheque at 266 S. Palm Canyon Drive, CBD Zone, Section 15. Approved architecture only (not the use change) subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the planter height be reviewed and possibly lowered. 2. That the colors for the exterior be restudied. 3. That the mechanical equipment be screened. 4. That approval of a conditional use permit is required prior to the issuance of permits. CASE 5.0463-PD-195. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for the Desert Sun News- paper for Planning Commission review of plaster specifications for a news- paper publishing facility on Gene Autry Trail between Tachevah/Ramon Roads, M-1-P Zone, Section 7. Continued to August 24, 1988. TPM 21921/20.102. Initiation by RIVERSIDE COUNTY for Commission review of final landscape plans for a mobilehome and RV sales lot for property located on Garnet Road, west of N. Indian Avenue, Sphere of Influence. Approved planting concept. Restudy of the plant list and desert trees and shrubs are to be considered. CASE 3.0406 (MINOR) . Application by GREAT WALL, INTERSTATE, INC. for architec- tural approval of revised landscape plans for restaurant at 362 S. Palm Canyon Drive, CBD Zone, Section 15. Approved subject to the following condition: Final landscape details to be reviewed by staff. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 6 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. CASE 3.0272. Application by VOSS INVESTMENT PROPERTIES for architectural approval of working drawings for retail/restaurant complex on the northeast corner of Avenida Caballeros/Tahquitz Way, C-1-AA Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. Chairman abstained. Planner (Williams) stated that the AAC reviewed a change in the roof material which was originally approved in a flat terracotta tile and is now proposed to be black tile; that the dissenting votes on the AAC were because of the roof tile change in relation to the other buildings, which are not proposed to be changed. Commissioner Mills stated that part of the dissension was because the members felt that the tile cap on the wall should be eliminated. Robert Voss, project developer, 1027 Avenue B, Redondo Beach, stated that he wants the project to be compatible with the other buildings on Tahquitz Way; that the elevations were designed by a local firm; that strong tenants were sought; such as New Otani Corporation from Japan which is a large prestigious corporation; that the appearance and design is a compromise between the desires of the Japanese firm and the City standards; that the Japanese want a few subtle changes to the architecture for uniqueness and visibility; that the capwork proposed on the wall is common in Japan and parts of Los Angeles; that the cap will not detract from other businesses --' in the complex and will give identity as anupscale major restaurant (anda hotel in the future); and that the firm hopes to capture the next season's market. Commissioner Whitney asked that the subtle changes be described. Commissioner Mills, also a member of the AAC, stated that he had voted against the wall cap and the change in the roof tile for the restaurant, because the changes are not proposed for the remainder of the complex. Mr. Voss stated that he did not want all the buildings to have the new tile; that the Japanese want a subtle difference from the other buildings; that his firm views the changes as a compromise; and that the buildings will be the same as originally proposed with subtle changes for identity to the restaurant. Commissioner Olsen commented that making one roof totally different from the rest of the complex is not a subtle change. Planner explained that the cap will be on the walls around the restaurant along Caballeros. A question arose on whether or not there was a quorum since Commissioner Dotson had not been sworn in, Commissioner Hough was absent and Commissioners Edgmon and Lapham had to abstain. Assistant City Attorney stated that abstaining members of the Commission can be counted as a quorum. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 7 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0272. (Continued) Commissioner Mills asked if the proposed black tile could be put on the other buildings. Mr. Voss explained that the black tile effects the energy calculations and that the Japanese will pay the additional cost of the for their building, but that he feels he cannot add the cost to the rest of the project. Commissioner Mills asked if the applicant could use a similar tile in a different color which may be more effective for energy calculations. Mr. Voss answered that he would have to discuss the impact on the appearance, but did not have a problem conceptually. Commissioner Olsen suggested a motion be made to review the other roofs in the complex in the future. Hugh Kaptur, 700 E. Tahquitz, project architect, stated that the project was not designed to have an oriental theme and that he had reservations about making the entire project oriental in appearance, but he respected the wishes of the Japanese firm for identity. He suggested that the Commission approve the project with the exception of the tile and the wall cap which can be reviewed later. He stated that the action would allow the developer to continue without delay and that he would review roof tiling, perhaps in the same color or different in texture, with an associate archi- tect in San Francisco, to have the same color throughout. M/S/C (Mills/Whitney; Edgmon/Lapham abstaining; Hough absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the mechanical equipment be grouped and painted out to match the roof. 2. That there be a notch in the garden wall area (southeast corner of building.) to provide visibility to pedestrians in the parking lot. 3. That the proposed 5 ft. 6 inch wall , within the required setback, is acceptable provided that landscape berming occur along Caballeros frontage so that the affective height of the wall , along Caballeros, is reduced to the Ordinance requirement of a maximum height of 42 ft. 4. That there be no tile cap on the 5 ft. 6 inch wall . 5. That revised roof tile be reviewed and approved at a future date. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS CASES 5.0478-CUP/6.363-VARIANCE. Application by LARRY BERKOWITZ for a condi- tional use permit to light an existing tennis court including a variance in height restriction for light standards at 580 Stevens Road, R-1-A Zone, Section 10. (This action is categorically exempt from Environmental assessment per CEQA guidelines.) Recommendation: Denial of the variance; approval of the CUP, subject to conditions. Planner (Williams) explained that night lighting of the tennis court is subject to a CUP and the light pole height is limited to 10 feet above the court surface in single-family residential zones, and the applicant is requesting a variance for additional height. She stated that neighbors voiced opposition to the lighting at the July 27 meeting; that staff recom- mends approval of the CUP for lighting, but denial of the variance for height because there are no grounds for a variance. She stated that a height standard in excess of 10 feet was recently approved on the Alexander Coler property, but was a different situation, since there is a large set back and the light standards were setback 180 feet. She explained that the west side of this court was 7 feet below grade and 3 feet below on the east side. In response to Commission question, Planning Director stated that the tract in which the subject property lies is subject to architectural approval and that the entire tract is not considered hillside regarding �.. requirements but that the subject property is. Chairman declared the hearing open. Larry Berkowitz, 580 W. Stevens Road, the applicant, stated that he wanted to show a video to correct a few misstatements, to answer questions, and to answer neighbors objections to the lighting; and that Herb Bieber, a tennis court lighting expert and landscape architect Michael Buccino were in the audience to answer questions. He stated that he was no longer con- sidering a 23-foot height; that a 18-foot height was adequate; that the purpose of the higher lighting is to extend night time play; that he did not play late at night; that he did not see what noise tennis balls cause; that he uses a ball machine; that there is no 10-foot lighting height according to manufacturers he has contacted. He stated that 10-foot lights would have to be placed sideways on the court; that tennis players no longer lob balls; that the 1976 Ordinance was passed before technology was advanced; that the Commission has granted variances in the past; that the light he wants has shields and that the court was originally planned to be lighted, as one of four courts back to back on a master plan. He discussed the surrounding properties and stated that the other lots are vacant; that one person now voicing opposition originally did not disapprove the lighting proposal ; that his court is 7 feet below grade, not 6 inches as one of the neighbors had stated; that the neighbor's court is 12 feet below his grade, with a house between, so the neighbor cannot see the court; that one of the neighbors voicing opposition stated that there were no lighted tennis courts in Las Palmas and that his lights would disturb her, but that she has oleanders obscuring the view. He described several locations and heights of lights in Las Palmas and showed a video of the neighborhood. He August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0478-CUP/6.363-VARIANCE. (Continued) �- described in detail the view his neighbors had of his property and the proposed court and lighting. Herb Bieber, Bieber Lighting Corporation, 626 S. Isis Avenue, Inglewood, stated that his firm is an old one which manufactures all kinds of outdoor lighting; that he has installed many tennis court lights including those of celebrities; that he has put cutoff shields on the lighting fixtures; that he has helped many cities design light ordinances; that shielding is less extreme if courts are set back. He showed a light fixture and shield and stated that the shield confines the light and directs in downward to the center of the court and that no light source can be seen by the neighbors because of shielding and because the proposed court is sunken. He stated that 6 feet of pole height would be seen above the fence and that the lighting does not need shields because the court is sunken, but that shields would be provided. He stated in response to Commission question, that six lights are proposed and that with 10 foot high poles there would have to be five on a side and that 10 foot high lights will have a poor appearance. He stated that six lights would have far less glare than ten and that the glare is directed downward so that the neighbors would not be able to tell whether or not the lights were on or off. He stated that ten lights would cause more reflective light and give a halo effect. Mike Buccino, Palm Desert architect, stated that he felt the application for a variance is justified and that a 18-foot height is a legitimate request based on other cities' criteria; that the Palm Springs ordinance is ,., unrealistic and should be reviewed; and that trees will be clustered around each light fixture. There being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. At Chairman's request, Assistant City Attorney read the findings necessary for a variance and stated that two situations occur on a variance - a threshold situation which requires that certain determinations be made before the Commission has the power to grant a variance, and once the threshold is past, the Commission has the discretion to pass a variance or not (Section 9406.00 of the Zoning Ordinance and also a section of State Law) . He stated that some of the findings are that special circumstances have to exist; that the project is not detrimental or injurious to the public health, safety or welfare, and will not adversely affect the General Plan. Chairman explained that the Zoning Ordinance requires a 10-foot height as a maximum in single-family residential areas; that the Commission would have to find hardship or topography such that a special privilege would not be granted. Commissioner Olsen stated that he felt the applicant's video made the point that the neighbor across the street could not see the court and lighting; that he had concerns about the future development of the lots adjoining if lighting is approved, and he did not want a situation where someone would be restricted in the development of his property. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0478-CUP/6.363-VARIANCE. (Continued) Commissioner Edgmon stated that her concerns are regarding the future development of the lots; that the neighbors do not have a valid complaint; and that she would like to see the property. Commissioner Whitney agreed, stating that she would not want to take action solely on a lighting expert's testimony without further review, and asked if the current Zoning Ordinance has kept abreast of technology. Planning Director explained that the status of new ordinances is kept in mind as technology advances and sensitivities change. He stated that the Commission could review the ordinance at a study session; that the ordinance was prepared in 1976 with the help of experts, including Mr. Bieber; and that there is an 18-foot height limit in multi-family and commercial zones. He stated that 10-foot standards were adopted in single- family areas to keep scale of lighting and structures low, and that the technology has not changed significantly since 1976; that screens control lighting but are bulky, and that a review should be made on whether single- family residences should be protected or whether or not sensitivity has changed through the years. He stated that one of the addresses mentioned by Dr. Berkowitz (424 Vista Chino) has no permits for tennis court lighting, and that other than the height variance for Alexander Coler's property he did not recall any lights being approved. Chairman stated that he was on the Commission in 1976 and it took a year to develop the ordinance for tennis court lighting because the Commission wanted to develop strong standards, because there were none, and that testimony from experts was received and the 10-foot height was adopted with a caveat for special circumstances, if applicable. Planning Director, in reply to Commissioner Whitney's question, stated that not all of the existing lighting has been subject to review, but that there are old courts with old lights, probably without permits, in the last dozen years and that enforcement is by complaint. He stated that staff would review the addresses to determine whether or not tennis court lighting has been installed. He stated, in reply to Commissioner Mill 's question, that a 10-foot fence is allowable for a sunken court with lights on top of the fence for a total height of 10 ft. above the final grade. M/S/C (Olsen/Mills; Hough absent) approving CUP 5.0478 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings 1 . That the night lighting of tennis courts in an R-1-A Zone is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the recreation-type use is acceptable for the development of the community is in harmony with the various elements of the General Plan, but would extend a noise factor into the evening hours. 3. That the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the tennis court which already exists and the night lighting which is proposed. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0478-CUP/6.363-VARIANCE. (Continued) L-- The lighting at the maximum height of ten (10) feet should not cause a visual disturbance to the surrounding properties due to grade differences and existing mature landscaping. 4. That the proposed use should not generate any traffic in addition to that expected for the main house, and should not affect the local street system. 5. This property is similar in nature to others in the area. There are no unusual aspects of this site, such as topography lot size or lot shape that would enable the grounds for variance to be established. Conditions 1. That additional trees or shrubbery be planted between the wall and tennis court to further screen the light fixtures on the easterly and northerly property lines. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. The Commission denied the variance from the 10-foot pole height based on the following findings: 1 . That there are no special circumstances applicable to the subject property whereby the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning classification. 2. That the hillside topography of the site while beneficial in screening the proposed lights from lower adjacent properties has the reverse impact upon adjacent properties that are elevated. 3. That a ten (10) foot height limit in past applications has proven to be effective and has not reduced the quality of play. The requested variance would establish a precedent and special privilege for lights to exceed ten (10) feet in height. 4. That the granting of the variance may be detrimental to properties in the vicinity due to increased light and glare. 5. That the goals and objectives of the General Plan street a high quality of life for all residents of the City. While a private tennis court is a desirable element to the owner, the benefit derived could diminish the quality of the evening hour from adjacent properties. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 12 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 6.362/TPM 23769 (Continued) . Application by PATRICK KELLY for a variance for substandard lot frontage and a tentative parcel map for subdivision of 1 lot into 2 on the west side of Prescott Drive, north of Mountainview Place, R-1-A Zone, Section 10. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration; action.) Recommendation: That the Commission approve the variance and map. Planner (Evans) stated that the application had been continued from the July 27 meeting, that the applicant proposes to reconfigure the lots to the original subdivision design, and that there are neighbors who object to the subdivision of the lot, feeling that the estate appearance on the frontage would be lost. Chairman declared the hearing open. Patrick Kelly, 2822 Wagon Trail , Diamond Bar, owner of the property, stated that from the minutes of the July 27 meeting, which he did not attend, there was a statement which said that the applicant told one of those voicing opposition that the houses would be in the $250,000 range. He explained that he did not know the person and did not speak to anybody about a $250,000 range on the houses. He stated that one of the statements that most of the lots in the block are larger than his lots is erroneous since when that neighbor bought the property 8 years ago there were 2 lots not 1; that splitting the lot would not downgrade the neighborhood, because any home built would be 4,000 sq. ft. and a minimum of $500,000; and that he had paid $375,000 for the lot. He stated that his homes will not downgrade the area of 30 to 40 year old homes; and explained that a previous owner assembled the parcels on August 15, 1986. Karl Beckley, Hacker Engineering, 490 S. Farrell , project engineer, stated that most of the lots are standard, that most have developed as intended in the original subdivision, that that the property legally was two lots until 1986, not one, although it might have been listed as one by the tax assessor's office. He stated that neighbors basing their opposition on the estate frontage theme is not substantiated and that Mr. Kelly continues the overall theme. Lianna Von, real estate agency, 1040 E1 Conquistador, stated that most of the homes in the area are 25 to 30 years old, and that she has had some frustrating times in trying to find adequate homes in the area that do not have to be remodeled, and that people go down valley because of the lack of new homes in Las Palmas. She stated that two new homes will enhance the value of the other properties in the area. Phil Klatchko, 177 S. Civic Drive, attorney representing Katherine Ponder at 261 Hermosa, north of the applicant's property, stated that his client remains steadfast in her opposition because the current requirement in the R-1-A Zone is 130 feet of frontage and the 102 frontage with the new lots will destroy the estate appearance of the area. He stated that the current standards are higher and a lesser frontage should not be allowed. There being no further appearances, Chairman declared the hearing closed. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 13 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 6.362/TPM 23769 (Continued) . (Continued) Commissioner Whitney stated that the neighborhood is varied in lot sizes, that a lot split would not be detrimental , and that two new properties will enhance the neighborhood. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Hough absent) approving TTM 23769 and Variance 6.362 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings 1 . That the subject property is located within the Merito Vista Sub- division and the proposed lot configuration, including width, depth and overall area, is consistent with surrounding properties. 2. That the proposed lot configuration is exactly the same as previously subdivided under the 1925 Merito Vista map. 3. That the proposed lots do not comply with lot width requirement but exceeds all other requirements of the R-1-A Zone. 4. That properties which abut the subject property are 102 feet in width. 5. That the granting of this variance and approval of the parcel map will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience or welfare or injurious to surrounding properties. 6. That the granting of the variance will not affect the General Plan and the approval of the parcel map is consistent with all elements of the General Plan. Conditions 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. TTM 23764. Application by KNUTSON CAPITAL INVESTMENTS CORPORATION for approval of a tentative tract map to subdivide a 40 acre parcel into 36 individual lots for industrial development on Crossley Road/San Luis Rey/Sunny Dunes/Mesquite Avenue, M-1 Zone (I .L.) , Section 20. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration; no comments received.) Planner (Abbas) stated that staff is recommending continuance for the City Engineer to evaluate new information from Riverside County Flood Control District, which has been recently received. She showed the location on the map. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no appearances; Chairman continued the hearing to August 24. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 14 PUBLIC COMMENTS. None. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. CASE 3.0424 MINOR -HOA. Application by ROBERT GAMBERG (Palm Springs Country Club HOA) for architectural approval of a security wrought iron enclosure at 2565A Whitewater Club Drive, R-G-A-8 Zone, Section 1. Planner (Patenaude) stated that several owners of the Palm Springs County Club have put in security wrought iron in their patio areas without architectural approval , that the applicant is requesting the same type of security fencing, and that the AAC was sympathetic with the request because of vandalism in the complex, but felt there was a better approach. Commissioner Olsen asked if , the homeowners supported Mr. Gamberg's application. Planner replied that the homeowners association gave approval , but in the past residents were not told to obtain an architectural approval . He stated that new management at the complex has instructed the homeowners to comply with City permits and stated that there are several similar installations in the project. Robert Gamberg, 2565 A Whitewater Club Drive, stated that the units are in .• clusters throughout the project and that in his cluster one third of the units have installed security fencing. He described the design and stated that there has been much vandalism and intrusion into the complex, that there are only a few families that live permanently in the condominiums, and that more security is necessary. He explained that his installation has been approved by the board and accepted by his neighbors; that because of the length of time to process the application a new contractor had to be hired and the installation is going to be more costly. Chairman stated that the Commission would not vote for denial because there are so many of the installations in the condominium complex; but that staff should find the best design and make it a prototype. Planning Director stated that the installation would be reviewed in the field before the end of the week. M/S/C (Edgmon/Olsen; Hough absent) approving a security installation, with staff to determine the best design as a prototype. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 15 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) SIGN APPLICATION. Application by ROBERT RITCHEY for architectural approval of main identification sign for the Bank of America in the Palm Springs Mall on the southwest corner of Tahquitz-McCallum Way/Farrell Drive, C-S-C Zone, Section 13. (Ref. Case 3.960.) Zoning Enforcement Officer (Forcucci ) stated that the AAC recommendation was limited to the design of the sign and a restudy of the colors; that an application had been made previously and denied for an identical sign and that the bank feels that without a identification sign its existence is threatened. He stated that in the remodel of the mall all the signs for the smaller businesses were removed and only major tenant signs were allowed. John Kazmir, Bermuda Dunes, Mall Manager, requested approval of an identi- fication sign for the bank stating that the sign was removed in the remo del , that the bank did not know the removal was permanent, and that it was not discussed with anyone except the City. He stated that the bank wants the sign reinstalled or they will leave the mall . He requested guidance and approval of an identification sign. Peggy Pauley, 465 N. Monterey, Palm Springs ., Bank of America Manager, stated that the sign was taken down and the bank personnel were told it was being stored, and that the bank did not realize the sign variance had been denied. She said that no one can find the bank and signing is needed. Chairman stated that the bank is not a major tenant in square footage, but the total volume of business exceeds many of the tenants, and that banking is a service to the community and signage must be allowed. Planning Director explained that the Commission restudied not (denied) the Bank of America sign; that staff can work with the bank and work out a sign, although there will be a difficult situation because of the architecture, and that the architecture could be shifted to accommodate the element. Chairman suggested that the recesses of the building be used for signage. Planning Director stated that allowance of the sign can create a problem regarding other clients' signs on the frontage. Chairman stated that the other businesses are not as important as a bank. Commissioner Mills stated that the AAC essentially approved the modifi- cation by a 4-2 vote with the dissenters feeling that the sign should be an architectural panel and not recessed; and that the basic opposition was to the color because of all the other colors in the mall . Mr. Kazmir stated that the Bank of America has requested that the red portion of the sign be in the maroon of the K-Mart "K" and Thrifty's sign. Commissioner Edgmon stated that the blue color is the problem with the AAC. Mr. Kazmir explained that the letters B of A could be maroon, that the logo would remain as it is, and the only part that would be blue is the return of the letters back to the building. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 16 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) SIGN APPLICATION. (Continued) Chairman suggested an alternative color to the white such as light beige, and that recommendations should be made to the applicant's architect. Commissioner Edgmon reiterated that the objection was the blue of the return. Robert Ritchey, Palm Desert, the applicant, stated that on the original submittal the area for the sign is brought out by widening a small portion of the recess below the sign as a base to carry the theme across the portion continued on the base and that the blue is a very dark navy blue with the appearance of black from a distance. Commissioner Whitney stated that she did not like the red, white and blue color even if the mall were beige. In reply to Commission question, Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that the main bank downtown has ivory faced letters and a logo was denied. Mrs. Pauley stated that there are 850 Bank of Americas in the state. Zoning Enforcement Officer explained that the applicant could start with a sign design and work with staff, and the sign brought back to the Commission. Chairman stated that the Commission will work to get a sign, and that the applicant should work with Planning staff on colors. M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon; Hough absent) for a two week continuance for the applicant to work with staff on appropriate colors. 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 3.0428. Application by TERRY FREEMAN for architectural approval of 168 room hotel (Compri) located on the corner of Tahquitz Way/Avenida Caballeros, C- 1-AA/R-4-VP Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. (Environmental Assessment.) Planning Director stated that the hotel and site plan had been reviewed at a Commission study session and that the AAC recommended restudy. M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon; Hough absent) continuing the application to August 24 for restudy noting the following: 1. That the repetitive nature of the architecture needs to be addressed. 2. That sun protection is necessary on the second and third floor window areas. 3. That a straight-on elevation of the porte-cochere is to be submitted. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 17 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 3.0428. (Continued) `—� 4. That a cross section of the screening of the air conditioning unit be provided. 5. That the landscape plan should address the courtyard area and create a more intimate space. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS CASE 5.0457-MISC. PLANNING COMMISSION review of Notice of Preparation for the Proposed Designation of Regionally Significant Construction aggregate (sand and gravel ) Resource Area in the Palm Springs Sphere-of-Influence. M/S/C (Whitney/Edgmon; Hough absent) tabling the application. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted must be exercised within that time period unless extended. CASE 3.0259-A. Application by MICHAEL BUCCINO for Harold Matzner for archi- tectural approval of a revised parking and pool area and grading plan for a �...,. single family residence at 555 Patencio Road, R-1-A Zone, Section 10. Planner (Evans) stated that the proposed plans will cut into the hillside; that the AAC reviewed it and recommended a restudy, stating that the lower terrace should be reduced in size, some plantings deleted, and a portion of the project eliminated, and that the AAC encouraged a more natural landscape plan. He stated that the landscape architect has revised the plan, but the AAC has not reviewed it. Commissioner Mills and Edgmon stated that the revised plans did not address their concerns. Mike Buccino, landscape architect, stated that the client will not skimp on the landscaping; that masses of boulders engage the wall ; that the one cut for parking is 24 feet back of the edge from the eye brow and will be difficult to see; that the development can be hidden by massive boulders; that the edge in the back of the property should be solidified for safety; that Palo Verde trees will be used as screens; and that a soft color in plantings (native materials) will be used. Commissioner Mills asked the purpose of the cut on the lower driveway. Mr. Buccino stated that the area will have two parking spaces for guests. Commissioner Mills commented that the applicant has six spaces on top of `... his garage and a three car garage currently. Mr. Buccino remarked that no one can see the parking described. August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 18 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0259-A. (Continued) Chairman stated that he felt uncomfortable in approving revised plans which the AAC has not seen. Commissioner Mills stated that a field trip was advantageous to him. Commissioner Edgmon stated that the word "obtrusive" was the first word she thought of when she saw the plans, no matter how well done. Commissioner Olsen commented that he wanted to have a site visit and Chairman commented that the people who have seen it have recommended a restudy. M/S/C (Olsen/Mills; Hough absent) continuing the application to August 24 'with a field trip to be scheduled prior to the meeting. CASE 3.0328. Application by CENTER BELARDO for architectural approval of working drawings for a two-story commercial building on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Alejo Road/Amado Road, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. M/S/C (Whitney/Edgmon; Hough absent) tabling the application. SIGN APPLICATION. Application by WESTAR, INC. for Rancho Home Improvement Centers former Lucky Center) for architectural approval of main plaza identification sign on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Racquet Club Road/Via Olivera, PD-113A, Section 3. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that Rancho Home Improvement Center will be occupying the former Lucky Market on Palm Canyon and Racquet Club and want a modification in the existing sign program in changing the name of the center, and that the present identification signs will 'be removed including Shari 's Restaurant sign for a monument sign with the Rancho Home Improvement Center and Shari 's. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney; Hough absent) approving the application subject to the followings conditions: 1. That the column be beveled to match the existing. 2. That the "Rancho" color be approved at staff level . August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 19 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0457-MISC. PLANNING COMMISSION review of Notice of Preparation for the Proposed Designation of Regionally Significant Construction aggregate (sand and gravel ) Resource Area in the Palm Springs Sphere-of-Influence. M/S/C (Edgmon/Whitney; Hough absent) removing item from the table. Planner (Evans) stated that the State has an obligation to describe and analyze sandy gravel or mineral resources throughout the State; that the mass of the Whitewater River flood plain has been identified as a sand and gravel resource area; that 67 billion yards are under mining permit, and that an EIR has begun. He stated that the critical element is that it is necessary for the City to respond to the designation by amending the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to reflect sand and gravel resources and any actions for projects abutting the area would have to take the designation into consideration. He explained that the Whitewater area would be mined as well as an expansion of Massey Sand & Rock Company on Indian Avenue; and that the valley is looked upon as a major resource, but that it is a regional designation, not state-wide, and that some City concerns are an elimination of land use conflicts, natural ecosystems, air quality and setbacks to residential areas. He stated that one City control is that the State cannot approve a mining operation and cannot override a local agency on permits; and that the EIR will be returned to the Commission when it is complete. Chairman stated that the City should annex to the freeway to protect the entry and that the Council be informed of this request and that the Council be informed of this request. M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon; Hough absent) concurring in staff recommendation is over and above State recommendations in the EIR as presented by staff and reiterating that annexation to the freeway (to the cut-off at I-10 and up Indian Avenue to the City limits) is necessary. CASE 5.0489-MISC. PLANNING COMMISSION review of the proposed Path to Clean Air: Policy Proposals for the 1988 Air Quality Management Plan prepared by SCAQMD and SCAG. Planner (Evans) stated that no action is needed and that the control measures will affect aspects of day to day living as the valley grows, people are employed, and more emissions occur. M/S/C (Edgmon/Whitney; Hough absent) acknowledging staff concerns regarding policy proposals for clean air. CASE 8.148. PLANNING COMMISSION approval of Lot Line Adjustment/Certificate of Compliance for property on the west side of N. Palm Canyon Drive between Via Escuela/Vista Chino, C-1 Zone, Section 3. M/S/C (Whitney/Olsen; Hough absent) approving Lot Line Adjustment, Certi- ficate of Compliance 85.148. Y August 10, 1988 PC MINUTES Page 20 ADDED STARTERS. (Determination of eligibility for consideration.) None. CASE 3.0328. Application by CENTER BELARDO for architectural approval of working drawings for a two-story commercial building on N. Palm Canyon Drive between Alejo Road/Amado Road, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planner (Williams) stated that the AAC had minor concerns on the project which will be resubmitted with final landscaping plans. M/S/C (Olsen/Mills; Hough absent) approving the application as submitted. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council actions. Case 5.0400-ZTA. Council approved zoning text amendments. - Carls Junior Sign. Council approved roof lighting but denied the sign on the parapet. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS OR REQUESTS. Oasis Water Park Status. Park will close after each summer season. The cost of heating the water on cool nights is very high. The use and layout are difficult to operate as small areas (all parts of the park have to be open to accommodate patrons) . The park has purchased the Cherokee Village condominiums and hopes to have a portion as a timeshare. It is marketed as a package with the waterpark. No condition was made that the park stay open year round. Frame and Stucco Buildings. Commissioner Whitney commented that she is tired of frame and stucco buildings and would like to see more interesting architectural statements to bring in corporate clientele. Planning Director stated that that Chairman of the EDC is reviewing changes to the Commission and a meeting between the Commission could be scheduled to discuss joint issues. Commissioner Mills stated that the problem lies with the client who prefers stucco (which has a short building life) and that stucco is not the answer for large structures. Liquor Barn Signs. Staff has discussed cleanup of the property with the owners and landscape maintenance before the new sign is erected. Old Gilligan's Island. Applicants not moving ahead with exterior remodeling, mostly interior changes are being done. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss,, Chafiftan adjourned the meeting at ti..o 4:45 p.m. PLANNINV DIRECTOR MDR/ml PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES *Emergency Operations Center, City Hall August 24, 1988 . 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1988 - 1989 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to date Larry Lapham, Chairman - 3 1 Gary Olsen X 4 0 Barbara Whitney - 3 1 Brent Hough X 3 1 Martha Edgmon X 3 1 Chris Mills X 2 0 Michael Dotson X 1 0 Staff Present Douglas Evans, Planner Sherri Abbas, Planner Richard Patenaude, Planner Ray Balderas, Planning Technician Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Dean Lewis, Traffic Engineer Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - August 22, 1988 William Johnson, Vice Chairman Absent: Gary Olsen, Alternate • Mike Buccino Barbara Whitney, Alternate Tom Doczi Chris Mills Will Kleindienst Martha Edgmon, Alternate Brent Hough Commissioner Olsen (Acting Chairman) called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Mills/Hough; Lapham absent) approving minutes of August 10, 1988 as submitted. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE: There were no Tribal Council comments. *Meeting held in Emergency Operations Center due to power outage at City Hall . * * * * * REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: • The August 24, 1988 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 1:30 p.m. , Friday, August 19.