Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989/05/10 - MINUTES 1 BANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINU7 Council Chamber, City Hall May 10, 1989 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 X 19 2 Gary Olsen X 17 4 j Barbara Whitney X 16 5 Brent Hough X 19 2 Martha Edgmon X 19 2 Chris Mills X 17 2 Michael Dotson X 18 0 Staff Present Douglas Evans, Planner Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Debra Goodwin, Planner Sherri Abbas, Planner John Terell , Redevelopment Coordinator Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Dean Lewis , Traffic Engineer Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - May 8, 1989 Brent Hough, Chairman Absent: Mike Buccino ram., Will Kleindienst William Johnson Tom Doczi Reuel Young Tom Doczi Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Olsen/Dotson) approving minutes of April 26, 1989 with the following corrections: Page 2, second paragraph: Delete "Approved"; add "Restudy noting the following:" (Case 3.0547) . Page 18, Paragraph 6: Delete condition No. 5. Add revised condition #5 as follows: : 11 5. That the architectural design concept should be reevaluated. The overall concept should be tied together (eg. mediterranean theme of hotel vs. contemporary theme of the exhibit area) . Particular attention should be �... placed upon scale, massing, and detail . A contemporary design theme should be considered for all facilities (Case 20.108) ." REPORT OF POSTING AGENT; Page 2 The May 10, 1989 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 5:00 p.m. , Friday, May 5, 1989. 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/Hough) taking the following actions: li CASE 3.0530. Application by TONY WEST for architectural approval of four-plex at j 488 Chuckwalla Road, R-2 Zone, Section 11. Restudy noting the following: 1. That the front elevation be restudied. 2. That the rear yard be developed as open space for unit 1. CASE 3.0531. Application by TONY WEST for architectural approval of a four-plex at 567 Chuckwalla Road, R-2 Zone, Section 11. Restudy. CASE 3.0481 (MINOR) . Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for median island on N. Indian Avenue between Las Vegas/Tramview Roads, "0" Zone, Section 34. Continued to May 24, 1989 for submittal of new plans. CASE 3.0557 (MINOR) . Application by WINNERS for architectural approval of wrought iron window grates and gated entry at 238 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C- B-D Zone, Section 15. Continued to May 24, 1989. Abstention: Mills. SIGN APPLICATION. Application by QUALITY PROJECT COORDINATORS for architectural approval of revised plans for a main identification sign for Motel 6, S. Palm Canyon Drive, PD-187, Section 23. (Ref. Case 5.0437-PD-187) Restudy noting that the design of the sign and the buildings are not com- patible. May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES ,w Page 3 CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0484 (MINOR) . Application by BRYAN TANNER (Access Controls) for architec- tural approval for security gates at 2601 Broadmoor (Summerset Springs) , R- 3 Zone, Section 29. Restudy noting the following: That the entries should be substantially revised to reduce conflicts. 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 3.0552. Application by JOSEPH CRNCIC for architectural approval of revised plans for single-family hillside residence on Ramon Road/Fern Canyon Drive, R-1-A Zone, Section 22. Planner (Abbas) explained that the application was restudied previously because of the mass of the building, the non-integrated pop-out entrance, and the grading (which is only a 5 ft. slope, not a 10 ft. and was misinterpreted by the AAC) ; that the AAC still felt that the building was too massive (2% too large for the below-minimum size of the lot) ; and that the AAC also felt that the house is too flat in appearance. Joseph Crncic, 3681 Kempton Drive, Los Alamitos, the applicant, commented that he was confused about the direction of the AAC and the Commission; that he has spent much money for revised renderings to bring to the Commission; that the design was approved in 1982 but was never constructed; that the only change is the entrance; that the revised entrance was thought to be better by several architects; that the drive can be eliminated if necessary; that the Planning Director and AAC member Reuel Young had drawn rough sketches for him of a revised entrance; that the upper portion of the house could be brought forward beyond the face as a compromise; and that he needed clear direction from the Commission on the design. In reply to Chairman's question, Commissioner Hough stated that some direc- tion was given at the AAC meeting by Reuel Young; that the entry was the biggest problem; that no revised plans were submitted on the circular drive recommended (or on the landscaping) ; and that the single biggest problem was the entry. Mr. Crncic stated that he felt he had complied with the sketches of the Planning Director and Mr. Young. Commissioner Hough remarked that he liked the 1982 design better than the present one. Chairman agreed, stating that the entry had no relation to the rest of the house. M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon) for a restudy noting the concerns of the AAC at the April 24 meeting as follows: 1. That the entry configuration of the roof, stairs, and driveway should be restudied. 2. That the driveway on the north side should be deleted. May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 4 • ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0552. (Continued) 3. That the landscaping plan should be revised. 4. That the building mass should be reduced. i CASE 3.0556. Application by JACK MARLIN for architectural approval of a commer- cial building at 1133 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-1 Zone, Section 10. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration; no comments received; action.) Chairman abstained; Vice-Chairman presided. Planner (Evans) presented the project and stated that the plan was well received by the AAC and that the firm of Kaptur and Cioffi were the archi- tects. In response to Commissioner Mills, Mr. Cioffi , the architect, stated that the space frame covered parking is roofed and is a light color. He stated that the trim would be red. Commissioner Whitnev and Edgmon stated that they felt that the trim color should not be red, Mr. Cioffi stated that sample color panels will be painted on the building for Commission review. M/S/C (Mills/Whitney; Lapham abstained) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That paint samples be painted on the building for Commission and AAC review. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. 3. That detailed final irrigation, exterior lighting, and landscaping plans be submitted for staff approval . CASE 3.0558. Application by MIKE GALLEGO for architectural approval of commer- cial building (auto repair) on Oleander Road between Ramon Road/Camino Parocela, M-1 Zone, Section 19. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration; comments received; action.) Planner Goodwin stated that the applicant revised the plans, and the AAC recommended approval subject to conditions. Wendell Veith, 556 S. Sunrise Way, project architect, stated that he con- curred with the AAC recommendations in lowering the roof and that there will be two feet of stucco under the metal roof to make a wedge shape. May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 5 i ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) i CASE 3.0558. (Continued) M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney) ordering the filing of a negative declaration and approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the roof on the office section be a simple triangular shape. 2. That the fascia be removed. 3. That the windows and door heads be at eight feet. 4. That the door be recessed 12 to 18 inches. 5. That the working drawings be reviewed by the AAC. 6. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. CASE 3.0562. Application by KIM CONNOR for architectural approval of revised plans for single-family hillside residence at 2249 Rim Road, R-1-B Zone, Section 25. Planner (Goodwin) stated that the AAC recommended approval subject to review of the spacing of windows and doors. Commissioner Hough explained that the Commission did not make spacing a condition (but a recommendation) for balancing the windows and doors. M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the roof on the mechanical room be moved. 2. That attention be paid to the massing and balance of the door and window spacing. 3. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. CASE 3.0566. Application by GREG HOUGH for architectural approval of a single- family residence at 2265 Araby Drive, R-1-B Zone, Section 25. Planner (Abbas) stated that curb and gutter installation should be deferred until development of the area, not waived as indicated in the Development Committee minutes; and that the grading problem which may make cars bottom out can be re-engineered. M/S/C (Olsen/Dotson; Hough abstained) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee, as amended, be implemented. 2. That the grade be re-engineered to prevent the bottoming out of cars. PUBLIC HEARINGS `.. Page 6 CASE 5.0510-CUP. Application by LAFF ROCK for a conditional use permit for a nightclub at 1000 E. Tahquitz Way, C-1-AA/R-4-VP Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration; no comments received; action.) i Chairman abstained; Vice-Chairman presided. Planner (Abbas) stated that there are three nightclubs in the project and j two restaurants; that required parking is 313 spaces and the project has 273; that dual use parking will be required; that the valet parking would add more space; and that the parking spaces with valet parking should be adequate. Chairman declared the hearing open. Bob Airhart, Voss Investments, the applicant, stated that there is a good tenant mix in the complex; that the design has been reviewed with staff and Commission; and that the center will become a valuable part of the Com- munity. Commissioner Whitney asked about the logo/sign that marketing represent- ative Marjorie Taft showed the Commission. Ms. Taft stated that the sign had not been designed and the logo shown will be on the stationery and business cards. Mr. Erhart explained that the company will be requesting a marquee which will be sensitive in design and the complex will have well-designed signs as well . There being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. Planner stated that planter sizes have been increased to make more luxuriant landscaping; and that landscaping was part of the original approval and the CUP is for the use only. M/S/C (Mills/Hough; Lapham abstained) approving CUP 5.0510 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: 1. That the proposed nightclub use applied for at 1000 E. Tahquitz Way is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the proposed nightclub use is desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the General Plan, and is not detri- mental to the existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is located. 3. That the site for the nightclub use is adequate in size (3.63 acres) and shape to accommodate said use including yards, setbacks, walls , May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES � ; Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0510-CUP. (Continued) landscaping and other features required in order to adjust said use to existing or permitted future uses of the land in the neighborhood. 4. That Tahquitz Way and Avenida Caballeros are properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the conditions imposed are deemed necessary to protect the i public health, safety and welfare. Conditions: 1. That the parking management plan as outlined in this report shall be adhered to. Significant changes in the uses shall require any neces- sary prior approval . 2. That maximum seating/occupancy shall be based on available parking. 3. That the Commission may review the parking/seating ratio and increase or decrease seating occupancy if the parking needs are consistently not being met on site. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS This case was considered by the Tribal Council at its regularly scheduled meeting of May 9, 1989. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal- Council took the following actions: 1 . Concurred with the findings as set forth in City Planning Commission Staff report dated May 10, 1989. 2. Approved the request for a conditional use permit to operate the three (3) nightclubs at 1000 E. Tahquitz Way subject to the condi- tions in staff report referred to above. CASE 5.0512-GPA. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for revisions to the Housing Element as a portion of the City's General Plan. (Ref. Case 5.0132-GPA) (Commission response to written comments on Draft Negative Declaration; no comments received; action.) Planner (Evans) stated that the Housing Element was discussed at length at the April Planning Commission study session; that Commission direction is needed for a rewrite of the element; that significant issues need to be addressed and a compromise will be reached addressing housing needs between the Housing and Planning staff; and that this item could be tabled and discussed at the end of the meeting. Chairman declared the hearing open; there being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. May 10, 1989 ,ft-,; PC MINUTES Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0512-GPA. (Continued) Commissioner Dotson asked about Section 1.0.2 (Growth Limitations) . He stated that there are no formal growth limitation in the document; that the General Plan would place limitations on growth and -that_ the concept should be discussed. He also questioned Section 3.B.1 (Land Availability) stating, that the Land Use Plan is indicated to be scheduled for review in the future. He asked it were a reference to the Land Use Element. Planner replied that the reference was to both the Land Use Element and the overall General Plan; that growth limitations may lower the number of housing units; and that growth trends are being monitored so that capacity of the sewer plant is not exceeded. Chairman explained that the General Plan is designed to meet existing infrastructure at buildout. Planner explained that every new General Plan Amendment is re-evaluated regarding infrastructure. M/S/C (Olsen/Dotson) continuing the public hearing to May 24, 1989. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS It was noted that a draft of the Revised Housing Element of the City of Palm Springs was received by the Tribal Planning Consultant and the Indian Planning Commission on May 8, 1989. 'v After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commis- sion, the Tribal Council requested that the City Planning Commission con- tinue the case to its next regularly scheduled meeting in order to provide time for the Indian Planning Commission to review and submit recommend- ations on the draft text. PUBLIC COMMENTS Tom Bronston, 5275 Lakeside Drive (Municipal Golf Course) , stated that he was waiting on a decision regarding the netting he installed in his back yard to stop golf balls; and that he thought it was on the agenda. Planner stated that perhaps the item could be put on the May 24 agenda; that it was discussed at the April Planning Commission Study Session regarding fencing on the golf course; that staff had discussed a redesign of parts of the course (to alleviate dangers) with the Golf Course Superin- tendent and that the City is going to decide whether or not the expenditure of money for a golf course architect to review the course is feasible. Mr. Bronston stated that the knoll discussed at the study session is a flood control embankment; and that the lone dissenter (Dan Delacy) stated that the net stops golf balls which then land in his yard. r May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC COMMENTS (Continued) Planner explained that Mr. Bronston's neighbor attended the study session and was concerned about the erection of the net because balls now fall into his yard. Mr. Bronston replied that several weeks ago Mr. DeLacy had a rope stretched across his yard to keep golf carts out and that either a rope or a fence could be built by his neighbor to stop the golf carts from entering. i I 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 3.0576. Application by CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATES for architectural approval of a revised storefront for restaurant (The Hop) in the Desert Fashion Plaza, N. Palm Canyon Drive, between Tahquitz-McCallum/Amado Road, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planner (Abbas) stated that when the AAC recommended a restudy, the issue discussed was whether or not to leave the split-faced block or cover it with stucco; that the AAC recommended the block and the applicant is only stuccoing underneath the arch; that another issue was the existing awning which the AAC did not like and the applicant has now changed it to a barrel shaped awning which is approved by the AAC, if it is not truncated and also a sample of the color is to be submitted. In reply to Commission questions , she stated that the arch was popped out for relief, and that there are two different businesses in the building, but one sign (since the second business is inside) . Commissioner Mills asked if the applicant preferred the barrel awning. David Christian, 1000 S. Palm Canyon Drive, project architect, stated it is not a major issue; that the awning would be one-fourth of a sphere; that it is a design previously used by the applicant. He stated that the restaurant will open in the fall . M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the awning on the main entrance on the southside of the building be barrel shaped (not truncated) . 2. That the awning color be approved by the AAC. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted °`' must be exercised within that time period unless extended. May 10, 1989 ,, PC MINUTES Page 10 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5,0312 - MISC. - 0. Application by MARK TECHNOLOGIES for WECS 71 to con- struct 47 wind turbines on Alta Mesa, one mile northwest of I-10/White- water, Section 3, outside of Sphere-of-Influence. Planner (Evans) that the AAC recommended denial ; but that the County pre- viously approved a portion of the project and the applicant is now requesting approval of the rest; that there are three different wind pro- jects in the area; that more turbines are proposed toward I-10 including some farther down than the turbines already approved; that if approved the BLM may approve eight more on the adjacent property; that AAC consensus was that the turbines should not have been placed there in the first place and should be denied; and that the Commission should review and concur with recommendations noted in the June 24, 1986 letter from the Planning Director to County Planning Commissioner Betty Beadling. In reply to Commissioner Dotson, he stated that there will be no impact from the west, but the new turbines will be visible from the east and pro- bably from Hwy 111 depending on the vantage point. He stated from a dis- tance and to most people there will not appear to be more turbines; that the area is very productive for wind energy; and the applicants want the turbines located on the ridgeline (which will make them prominent) ; that the County will address noise since it will not affect Palm Springs' resi- dences; and that the County noise standards are stringent. In response to Commissioner Whitney, he stated that environmental impacts have been addressed and that the County is now reviewing visual impacts and will prepare an environmental assessment; that the turbines effect on the �-' natural habitat is negligible since they do not disturb the ground (but may kill a few birds) . He stated that the project reviewed previously (April 26) is on Whitewater Hill ; that to the untrained eye there is little difference in numbers of turbines; that the lower turbines could be deleted; that the proposal could be reviewed as a gradual extension of the existing park and that the AAC recommended denial . Chairman stated that he would recommend to the County that there be better supervision of the wind farms since many of the turbines are not operating and should be removed. Planner explained that the financial structure is very complicated legally and it is difficult to abate the turbines; that the BLM is removing the derelict wind park in Cabazon by removing all equipment and starting all over again; that the Edison quarterly report indicated that less than 20% of the turbines do not operate; and that all the turbines do not operate at the same time because of different contracts but that they are operating on a fairly regular basis. Commissioner Whitney stated that the Commission should not allow anything that has so much impact and so little control . Planner stated that the site proposed is efficient since it is high on the ridgeline. Commissioner Mills asked about the bonding process for removing non- operating turbines. Planner stated that historically bonds are only $500; that the developers felt that the projects would be scavenged so they did not have to worry about removal ; that only copper is removed by scavengers because the rest May 10, 1989 PC—MINUTES Page 11 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0312 - MISC. - O. (Continued) of the equipment is too bulky; that the new bond amount should be $5,000 or more; that the County will try to get a reasonable bond; and that abatement is difficult because the operators get tax credits and fight to keep the turbines. Commissioner Dotson stated that he was concerned about the visual impact but the larger picture is that the turbines are the only clean energy alternative; and that he supported the industry. He recommended that Row G (turbines 22 through 34) should be eliminated. M/S/C (Whitney/Mills; Dotson dissented) recommending to the County that the 47 new turbines be denied based on the following findings: 1. That the property is highly visible from Interstate 10 and Highway 111 and from the western end of the Coachella Valley. ii 2. That development of the site has regional impacts which should be considered in the decision making process. 3. That ridgeline development should be discouraged because of the visi- bility of the site. should 4. That noise impacts/ continue to be analyzed independently which will insure that residents and residential properties are not impacted by the wind turbine noise. 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 3.0586. Application by WILLIAM G. KLEINDIENST for architectural approval of 8,000 square foot addition to Loehmann's Plaza, N. Palm Canyon Drive/Racquet Club Road, C-1 Zone, Section 3. Redevelopment Coordinator stated that the expansion is an extension of the eastern building to the south, elimination of some existing parking and replacement with new parking on a former pad site; that there is an error in AAC condition #2 (delete N. Palm Canyon Drive, add Racquet Club) and that the applicants were present. M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the on-site driveway adjacent to the Racquet Club entry be redesigned to allow easier traffic flow. 2. That a pedestrian link be provided from the parking lot to the bus stop on Racquet Club Drive. 3. That the new trash enclosure relocate to the west side of the service drive. May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES ; Page 12 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) i CASE -3.0586. (Continued) i 4. That the rear of the new building be landscaped. i 5. That the ribbon drainage be reviewed. j CASE 7.727. Application by MEL HABER for an administrative minor modification for increased height of house (2'9") at 700 W. Stevens Road, R-1-C Zone. Planner (Abbas) stated that the Commission initially approved an addition to the house for living quarters above the garage; that construction of the plan as designed is not possible because an additional two feet nine inches is required under an AMM; that neighbors have called in the past to com- plain about the height blocking the view even without the additional height proposed; and that the additional two feet nine inches is not framed pre- sently. Wendell Veith, 556 S. Sunrise Way, Project Architect, stated that the addi- tional height is ready to be framed; that the complaining neighbor lives 400 ft. behind the addition and up the hill ; that the additional height should not make a difference in the neighbor's view; and that in order to make the addition work without the height, part of the ceiling and roof of the house will have to be removed. Planner explained that part of the existing house is on an a different `.. level and that the original architect thought the house was all one level . Mr. Veith stated that the difference in height would be seen in the middle of the addition. In reply to Commissioner Whitney, Planner stated that the neighbors were complaining about the height of the original addition. Commissioner Mills stated that he had spent time in the area and that the height would not make a difference in the views. Commissioner Dotson stated that the two foot nine inch height is a large percentage and asked if it exceeds the Zoning requirement. Planner (Evans) stated that the Commission can approve up to 30 ft. on the hillside; that the Commission has to evaluate the loss of view, and that there is a large setback on the property and only a small visual reduction will occur. He stated that the site is an estate and no residences will probably he placed closer to the house, and if they are in the future, the applicants will know about the existence of the subject house. M/S/C (Mills/Hough; Olsen abstained; Dotson dissented) approving the appli- cation subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. �"' 2. That the massing of the original elevation be followed. May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 13 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS LUP. Application by CALIFORNIA AUCTION SERVICES for a one-day art auction May 28 at Maxim's Hotel , Section 15. Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that provisions for art auctions are in the Municipal Code; that no fees will be charged; and the only issue is that there has been an auction at the hotel within the past three months. Assistant City Attorney stated that no fees will be charged because the state regulates auctions in municipalities and no fees can be charged by municipalities except business license fees, although the revised Zoning Ordinance stated that fees were going to be charged. He commented that sales tax receipts would be the benefit to the City. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney) approving a one-day art auction at Maxim's Hotel on i, May 28. I ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) I Approval of architectural cases is valid for two years. The approval granted i must be exercised within that time period unless extended. 20.112. Request by RIVERSIDE COUNTY to review proposed construction equipment leasing facility at 27650 Executive Drive, north of Vista Chino, Sphere of Influence. ... Planner (Evans) stated that the original building is in the Countyand was built without a permit; that the building was red tagged on a remodel ; that it ,isa fairly large Butler building with accessory cedar wood buildings and a six foot wall and gates; that the applicants want to store heavy equipment for rental by U-Haul because of the large amount of resort and hotel development in the valley; that the building is a large box with balconies and a small tile roof, large doors, and swamp coolers on the roof. M/S/C (Olsen/Whitney) for a complete restudy of the project including building elevations, material , site plan, and landscaping. CASE 5.0459-PD-193. EL CIELO ASSOCIATES for discussion of parking lot lighting and landscape requirements for mixed use resort commercial at northeast corner of El Cielo Road and Ramon Road, P Zone, Section 18. I Chairman abstained, Vice-Chairman presided. Planner (Evans) stated that at the April 26 meeting an adjoining project (Case 3.0293) lights were reviewed and the Commission told the applicant to consider lights similar to those at the airport. He stated that the archi- tect for the subject project feels that the airport type of lighting is not consistent with his ideas for lighting his project since a sodium light is j not appropriate for a retail complex and would conflict with the building codes and architecture. He stated that the AAC agreed with the architect. i i May 10, 1989 ; PC MINUTES Page 14 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0459-PD-193. (Continued) Commissioners Whitney and Olsen remarked that the fixtures were reviewed but not the bulbs. Commissioner Hough stated that the AAC felt the lights should not be the same as those at the airport, although the fixtures are similar. Commissioner Olsen stated that the proposed fixture is the same as the fixture in Case 3.0293. James Cioffi , project architect, stated that he is working with the appli- cant on the adjoining property for lighting compatibility between the two projects and that there will be two different lighted areas for each pro- ject (one for each perimeter and one different type for the main berming row extending to the sites) and that the projects will tie together. M/S/C (Hough/Edgmon; Mills/Lapham abstained) approving the application sub- ject to the following conditions: 1. That the light source (bulbs) for both properties match. 2. That high pressure sodium lights (used at the airport) are not acceptable on a commercial complex. CASE 3.0555- (MINOR) . Application by MICHAEL BATES for architectural approval canopy cover and paint spray booth at 672 S. Palm Canyon Drive, C-M Zone, Section 23. Planner (Evans) stated that the application should be reviewed by the Commission because of actions taken by the commission on Motel 6 a few years ago; that the proposal is to add two `. bays immediately behind the Mag' Gas Station; that the AAC has recommended a restudy; that the appli- cant agrees with the recommendation of screening of equipment, but has con- cerns about the north property line landscape buffer and the existing barbed wire since plantings at the Motel 6 which is adjoining property are so small and the minutes approving Motel 6 do not reflect why the oleander hedge was deferred; that the AAC recommended a landscaping buffer of trees for screening from above; and that the AAC did not take action on the building although it is similar to to those in the vicinity. Commissioner Mills stated that the plant sizes at the Motel 6 site are too small and should be reviewed. Planner stated that he had not walked the site but knew that 24 inch box size, Rhus Lancia and 5 gallon shrubs were approved; that the auto repair shop owner : feels Motel 6 should provide the screening, not him. He stated that the mechanical equipment screen is an attractive, clean lined structure that slides over the swamp coolers and screens them from the top; and that staff recommends that one duct down the side of the building be left and painted out and the equipment screened. repair shop owner, Frank Bensi ,/672 S. Palm Canyon, stated that he did not mind screening the coolers but he felt that the oleanders should be planted by Motel 6 because the original conditions required it. He requested that the existing barbed May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES ,, Page 15 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE -3.0555 (MINOR) . (Continued) wire remained because offers protection against staff and vandalism of the expense cars he services since the wall can be jumped. He stated that the wall will be hidden by the Oleanders. Commissioner Hough stated that the AAC recommended trees, not oleanders, although the Commission previously approved oleanders. Planner stated that the trees are installed but resemble large shrubs but will reach 20 ft. in height and will be dense. He stated that the sizes of the trees will be reviewed by staff. Chairman commented that Motel 6 should screen the auto repair shop out of view, and should want to. Commissioner Hough agreed, stating that the applicant should not have to hide his building from Motel 6; and that staff recommends that the barbed wire be removed. i Commissioner Edgmon agreed. Commissioner Whitney asked about protection for the body shop if the oleanders cover the fence. Mr. Bensi stated that he has a guard dog, but it only watches the front, and that it is easy to break into the shop. He offered to bend the barbed wire horizontally so it does not show. Commissioner Mills stated that not bending the barbed wire might make the Motel 6 chain increase the size of its landscaping faster, but that either bending the barbed wire horizontally or planting oleanders would be accept- able. M/S/C (Hough/Olsen) approving the application subject to the following con- ditions: 1. That all mechanical equipment be screened. 2. That the requirement for the applicant to plant trees on his property adjoining Motel 6 be deleted. 3. That barbed wire be either bent over horizontally just below the wall level , or oleanders planted along the north property line. 4. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS CASE 20.113. Application by RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT for Commission review of a Conditional Use Permit for a Water Extraction facility for Palm Springs Water Company at the intersection of Highway 111/I-10. Planner (Evans) recommended that the item be continued for receipt efleva- tions. May 10, 1989 � PC MINUTES Page 16 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) CASE120.113. (Continued) M/S/C (Edgmon/Olsen) continuing the item to May 24, 1989. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council actions. - TPM 23123. Council approved parcel map in Las Palmas for Peter Mckernan. TPM 24346. Council approved map by John Wessman for industrial purposeson Ramon/Gene Autry. CASE 5.0400-ZTA. Council approved all Zoning Ordinance changes including off-site real estate signs, but eliminated signs from Tahquitz-McCallum Way, Tahquitz Way, and Palm Canyon Drive, subject to a one-year review and a requirement that the real estate industry devise a plan for money to support enforcement of the ordinance. Chairman commented that one of the Councilmen will police it and if violations are found, the ordinance will be repealed earlier than one year. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS OR REQUESTS. 1500 Unit Timeshare Application. Commissioner Edgmon commented that little direction was given to the applicant at the Joint Council/ Commission Study Session on May 9 regarding setbacks and height limitations for a 1500 room combined time share/hotel project on N. Sunrise Way. Chairman commented that he had never seen a large project such as this design placed on 30 acres with such concern, that he thought the plan is exciting and that there is no place in the City where 150 ft. setbacks are kept; and that 150 ft. is the closest the project will come to any other project. Discussion followed on setbacks and densit Chairman stated that the p ro- y ject will not impact anyone; and that tourism is the City's prime industry. Commissioner Edgmon commented that the project looms over the site. Chair- man commented that the undulating shape will break up the wind. Planner Evans stated that the case would be reviewed at the May 24 meeting. Commissioner Edgmon suggested stated that that painted color panels should have been required on the Motel 6 project. Chairman agreed, stating that the City should stop experimenting with trendy colors on major thorough- fares; and that the Motel 6 color combination clashes with the tile. Commissioner Olsen commented that there was much discussion recently on selection of a color consultant for the City. Commissioner Mills stated that the problem is that the Motel 6 is massive and that the three dominant colors do not work well with the tile. He stated that experimenting with trim colors is not a problem, and that Motel 6 should have painted a sample color panel . Commissioner Edgmon suggested requiring that projects paint color panels. Chairman noted that colors change from a small panel to a large building. Planner Evans agreed, stating that colors change with the time of day and the materials used as background. May 10, 1989 PC MINUTES , - Page 17 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) L' COMM-ISSION/STAFF-REPORTS OR REQUESTS. (Continued) WINNERS, 238 N. Palm Canyon. In reply to Commissioner Dotson's question, Zoning Enforcement Officer stated that the checkerboard wall is gone at Winner's Nightclub. MOTEL 6, S. Palm Canyon. Commissioner Whitney stated that the landscaping at Motel 6 is not pleasing and is very unsubstantial . Planner (Evans) stated that he would inform the Planning Director. ADDED STARTERS. (Determination of eligibility for consideration.) None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 3:30 P.m. PLANNING DIRECTOR MDR/ml WP/PC MINS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall May 24, 1989 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 X 20 2 Gary Olsen X 18 4 Barbara Whitney X 17 5 Brent Hough X 20 2 Martha Edgmon - 19 3 Chris Mills X 18 2 Michael Dotson X 19 0 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Douglas Evans, Planner Debra Goodwin, Planner Sherri Abbas, Planner John Terell , Redevelopment Coordinator Amy Hodgett, Housing Coordinator Tracy Gunneman, Economic Development Dave Forcucci , Zoning Enforcement Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - May 22, 1989 Brent Hough, Chairman Absent: Mike Buccino Will Kleindienst Tom Doczi William Johnson Reuel Young Jim Cioffi , alternate Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. M/S/C (Olsen/Hough) approving minut `s of May 10, 1989 )with the following corrections: Page 16, Paragraph 6; CASE 5.0511-PD-201. 700 unit timeshare/800 room hotel ). Change 150 ft. to 1500 ft. Change 1500 unit timeshare to "700 unit timeshare/800 room hotel " . Page 13, Paragraph 3; LUP. Delete "although the revised Zoning Ordinance stated that fees were going to be charged" , r Page 15, Paragraph 1; delete "staff"; add "theft". REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: The May 24, 1989 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 5:00 p.m. , Friday, May 19, 1989.