Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989/12/13 - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Council Chamber, City Hall December 13, 1989 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL F-Y 1989 - 1990 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting to Date to Date Larry Lapham, Chairman X 11 0 Gary Olsen X 9 2 Barbara Whitney - 10 1 Brent Hough X 7 4 Martha Edgmon X 11 0 Chris Mills X 11 0 Michael Dotson X 11 0 Staff Present Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Siegfried Siefkes, Assistant City Attorney Douglas Evans, Planner Dave Forcucci , Planner Debra Goodwin, Planner Sherri Abbas, Planner Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Architectural Advisory Committee - December 11, 1989 Brent Hough, Chairman Absent: Tom Doczi Reuel Young -- Will Kleindiens t Mike Buccino William Johnson i Chairman called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. I M/S/C (Whitney/Edgmon) approving minutes of November 22, 1989, as submitted. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: The December 13, 1989 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 1.30 p.m. , Friday, December 8, 1989. December 13, 1989 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/Dotson; Whitney absent) taking the followings actions: CASE 3.0630. Application by A.R. KEEBLE for architectural approval of general office/warehouse building on Valdivia Way, M-1-P Zone, Section 7. Restudy noting the following: 1. That the stucco and window treatment color should be a varied shade pattern as depicted on the original . 2. That the mechanical equipment screening solution is unacceptable. The equipment should be roof mounted. i 3. That no exterior scuppers are allowed. Revise roof drainage plan. 4. That the landscape plan be restudied. Areas of concern include j overall design, use of materials, and additional trees should be j added. CASE 3.0692. Application by CHANDULAL PATEL for architectural approval of revised plans for -p a 56 unit hotel at N. Palm Canyon Drive/Vista Chino, C- 1 R-3 Zones Section 3� / i to . Order the filing of a Negative Declaration; and approved the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be met. 2. That the grading of the pool area be lowered. 3. That the sign program be submitted for approval . CASE 3.0704 (MINOR) . Application by MICHAEL LYNN for architectural approval of revised exterior plans for a building at 844 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-1 Zone, Section 11. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.0706 (MINOR) . Application by by CHRISTOPHER MILLS for architectural approval of revised plans for children's pool and play yard at the Wyndham Hotel , 888 E. Tahquitz Way, PD-164 (I .L.) , Section 14. Continued to January 10 at the applicant's request. �-` Abstention: Mills December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 3 CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) SIGN APPLICATION. Application by VICTORY SIGN IND. , LTD. for Mikasa China for architectural approval of main identification sign at Loehmann's Plaza on N. Palm Canyon Drive and Racquet Club Road, PD-136 Zone, Section 3. Approved subject to the following condition: That the letters be reduced to 14 inches on the south side of the buildings. CASE 5.0439-PD-189 - TIME EXTENSION. Application by COMMUNITY CONSULTANTS CORPORATION for a twelve-month time extension for a planned development district for a mixed use commercial/industrial complex on the north side of Ramon adjacent to the Airport, M-1 Zone (I .L.) , Section 18. Approved subject to the following condition: That all original conditions of approval be met. New expiration date will be December 3, 1990. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS This case was previously considered by the Tribal 1Council at its meeting i of October 24, 1989. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission the Tribal Council reit erated its action of October 24 1989 98 to concur with the i d'f n ings and conditions outlined in City 9 Plannin Staff Report dated October 25, 1989, and to approve TTM 25112 for condominium purposes subject to the conditions referred to above. CASE 3.0141 . Application by MIKE BUCCINO & ASSOCIATES for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for Skywest Airlines on Gene Autry Trail between Vista Chino/Ramon Road, A Zone, Section 18. Restudy noting the following: That the plan needs a more sensitive solution, not so linear. CASE 3.0547. Application by GEORGIO HERRERA for architectural approval of revised landscape plans for a single-family hillside residence on Chino Canyon Drive, R-1-A Zone, Section 3. Approved as submitted. CASE 3.0720 (MINOR) . Application by PALM SPRINGS SHADE CO. for Hot Tomatoe for architectural approval of awning for business at 167 N. Indian Avenue, CBD Zone, Section 15. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 4 . CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0720 (MINOR) . (Continued) Approved as submitted. 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 3.0557 (MINOR) . Application by WINNERS for architectural approval of revised wrought iron window coverings and gated entry for nightclub at 238 N. Palm Canyon Drive, C-B-D Zone, Section 15. Planner (Goodwin) stated that the applicant installed wrought iron without approval and the wrought iron was "denied by the Commission. She stated that the applicant submitted a new design and alternative designs and that the AAC recommended approval of design SK3 with the color left up to the staff for approval , but not green as it was originally. She stated that black is the preferred color. M/S/C (Hough/Dotson; Whitney absent; Mills abstained) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the SK3 design is the approved design. 2. That the color is to be approved by staff. CASE 3.0684. Application by IGNACIO GONZALES & ASSOCIATES for architectural approval of a 97 room hotel (Courtyard Inn) at 201 Vista Chino, R-3 Zone, Section 11. Planner (Goodwin) stated that the AAC felt that the site was too crowded, needed more landscaping, and that the architecture is too boxy. Commissioner Hough stated that the site is difficult but that the AAC felt that another design could be developed. Ignacio Gonzales , 123 S. Mission Drive, San Diego, Project Architect, stated that the design is the result of height restrictions, setbacks , and economics; and that landscape setbacks and height requirements have been met. He stated that the building is horizontally sweeping and low rise and that there was another building design for the site that was never built because of economics . He stated that he did not know how much open space was stamperete. Commissioner Dotson stated that it looked as though there were a high percentage of stamperete, but that the open space is not usable. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 5 CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0684. (Continued) i Mr. Gonzales stated that parking is on grade and stamperete was used in the parking areas and also additional landscaping is proposed. Planning Director stated that the ordinance does not limit the amount of stamperete used for open space; that the Commission policy is 5 to 10% and there are no statistics on decorative paving for the project. Commissioner Mills asked how the project is accessed. Mr. Gonzales replied that the access corridors are on the perimeter for a balcony effect, for depth throughout the building; and that doors and windows are inside the corridor area. He stated that there are hidden through-wall air conditionersand that access to the pool is through the lobby. Commissioner Dotson remarked that the sun area is awkward since the pool is surrounded closely by buildings. Mr. Gonzales replied that the exposure is southerly and the building is stepped back to allow sunlight into the area. Chairman stated that the building has an industrial feel rather than an live feeling because of the massing, and that hotels in Palm Springs should be residential in feeling. `.. M/S/C (Olsen/Hough; Whitney absent) for a restudy noting the following: 1. That the site is overcrowded. 2. That the building design is too boxy and industrial looking. 3. That morelandscaping be incorporated into the design. CASE 3.0696. Application by BIRD PRODUCTS CORPORATION for architectural approval of corporate office headquarters on Gene Autry Trail between Vista Chino/Tachevah Road, W-M-1-P Zone, Section 7. Assistant Planning Director stated that the AAC recommended approval of the architecture and a restudy of the landscaping for better integration with the building; that the applicants are requesting a building height of 53 ft. (with occupied space up to 30 ft.) to accommodate two parapet levels and a large skylight over the atrium; and that the AAC felt with the size of the site, the additional height was not a problem. He stated that the parking spaces are substandard at 15 ft. since zoning requirements are 17 ft. which accommodates most cars; and that to accommo- date the 17 ft. space the building would have to be expanded. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 6 CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0696. (Continued) In reply to Commissioner Dotson, Chairman stated that staff has no concern j over the mix of compact and standard size spaces and that the applicant's's requesting deferral for 69 spaces for the private health club and that 354 spaces are provided; and that to accommodate the deferral a covenant will be required to add the spaces if there is an ownership or use change. In reply to Commissioner Edgmon, Assistant Planning Director stated that the skylight is open to the ground floor and that the next parapet is 6 ft. wide. In reply to Commissioner Mills, he stated that five trees in tree wells form a landscape screen against the glass on the west; and that the applicants feel that glazing the glass and planting the trees will offer enough shade for the interior in the summer. Thor Conlon, Bird Corporation, 3101 E. Alejo requested exemption to allow smaller parking spaces since the spaces are for the 140 employees; stated that the parking will accommodate additional employees in the 106 subterranean spaces; and that additional surface parking will be provided for up to 300 employees. Commissioner Olsen stated that he had no concerns about the size of the parking spaces or the high atrium. Noel Looney, NML Partnership, 2290 Park Drive, Palm Springs stated that the entire structure for the parking is like a basement and supports the structure above; that parking had been developed to complement the structure and stay within the budget; that a project had been developed in Riverside with 15 ft. space lengths and 22 ft. backups and the subject design exceeds those requirements. He stated that some full size cars have to be anticipated; and that there are 36 stalls underneath for standard cars. M/S/C (Olsen/Hough; Edgmon dissented; Whitney absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions : 1. That landscaping be restudied to better integrate with the building. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee (as amended) be implemented. 3. That parking spaces are approved at 15 ft. in length. PUBLIC HEARINGS TTM 25010 (Continued) . Application by J.F. DAVIDSON for Paul Mitchell for tentative tract map to convert an existing 72 unit apartment complex to condominiums at Golf Club Drive/E. Palm Canyon Drive, W-R-3 Zone, Section 29. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 7 i PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) i TTM 25010 (Continued) . (Continued) Planner (Goodwin) gave the staff report and stated that the problem of conversion of apartments to condos and the loss of rental housing has been resolved with the Economic Development Department; and that the name of the complex is the "Desert Sun Apartments Chairman declared the hearing open. Jerry Dupree, J.F. Davidson Company, Palm Desert, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant concurred with staff conditions and with Economic Development for mitigation regarding the loss of affordable units. There being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. M/S/C (Mills/Edgmon; Whitney absent; Dotson abstained) approving TTM 25010 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: 1. That a tentative tract map is the appropriate application. 2. That the existing apartment project, subject to the condition regarding additional parking, is adequate for a condominium conversion. �..� 3. That conditions have been imposed to insure that the proposed map will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. 4. That the proposed condominium conversion is consistent with all elements of the City's General Plan. 5. That the project is served by E. Palm Canyon Drive and Golf Club Drive which are designed to handle the quantity and type of traffic generated by this type of land use. Conditions• 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee dated November 21, 1989, be implemented. 2. That the proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City codes, ordinances , and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations. 3. That a parking monitoring plan shall be established to determine if the auxiliary parking lot (AA Case 3.0592) is necessary to meet the project's parking requirements . Developer shall submit a bid on the cost of construction of said lot and post a cash bond for that amount in the name of the City of Palm Springs and the homeowners association. A determination shall be made on the necessity of the December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 8 i PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) TTM 25010 (Continued) . (Continued) auxiliary parking lot within 12 months of commencement of unit sales. If the determination is made that the additional parking is not necessary, the bond shall revert to the developer. 4. That covered parking shall be increased to a total of 72 spaces prior to approval of the final map. An architectural approval application shall be submitted and approved for the additional carports . Setbacks are to be met on the north property line or an administrative minor modification submitted for a reduced setback. 5. That approval from the Economic Development Division shall be obtained prior to final approval of the map regarding the removal of affordable rental housing into condominiums. TTM 25112 (Continued) . Application by BARCON DEVELOPMENT for a tentative tract map for condominium purposes located on Avenida Caballeros/Saturnino Road, R-4 Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. (This project was given an Environmental Assessment previously in conjunction with architectural approval of Case 3.0553.) Planner (Abbas) stated that the application was approved architecturally previously and the map was continued to give tenants in the existing half �--' of the project an opportunity to meet with the developer to work out issues ; and that staff was not involved in the discussions. She stated that there were people in the audience regarding the project. Chairman declared the hearing open. Erwin Golds, Barcon Development, Eclectic Street, Palm Desert, stated that the previous controversy was because homeowners were bothered by the density and the proposed single bedroom units ; that meetings had been held and matters resolved with the homeowners ; that the original density would be retained and two bedroom units built instead of the one bedroom units, and asked for approval of the map as a footprint. Dave Cooper, Hacker Engineering, Project Engineer, stated that he was present to answer questions . There being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. Chairman explained that there would be 59 condominiums in the project. M/S/C (Mills/Dotson; Whitney absent) approving the application based on the following findings and subject to the followings conditions. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) TTM 25112 (Continued) . (Continued) Findings 1. That the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed development. 2. That the proposed subdivision will not have an adverse environmental impact. 3. That the tentative tract map is an appropriate application for the proposal . 4. That the approval of the proposed tentative parcel map will not be a detriment to the public health, safety, and welfare, or injurious to the surrounding development. 5. That the approval of the tract map will not adversely affect the General Plan. 6. That the proposed map is consistent with the approved site plan, Case 3.702-A. Conditions• 1. That all of the Development Committee conditions dated October 25, 1989, shall be met. TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMENTS This case was previously considered by the Tribal Council at its meeting of October 24, 1989. After consideration of the recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission, the Tribal Council reiterated its action of October 24, 1989 to concur with the findings and conditions outlines in City Planning Staff Reprot dated October 25, 1989, and to approve TTM 25112 for condominium purposes subject to the conditions referred to above. CASES 5.0531-GPA/5.0531-A/5.0511-PD-201. Initiation by the CITY OF PALM SPRINGS for a General Plan amendment from "Airport Noise and Blowsand" and "Parks and Recreation" to "Large Scale Mixed Use Resort" ; an initiation of an amendment of the Master Plan of Sewers ; and an application by INTERCAL PSCC for a planned development district in lieu of a change of zone for an 800 room resort hotel and a 700 room time share condominium project including a tennis complex, outdoor stage, and accessory facilities on N. Sunrise Way between the Whitewater Wash and the easterly extension of San Rafael Road, 0-5/W-0-5 Zones, Section 36. (A final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be considered for certifi- cation by the Commission and the Draft EIR has been circulated for public December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0531-GPA/5.0531-A/5.0511-PD-201. (Continued) review for a period of 30 days pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .) Assistant Planning Director explained that the two phased report on the project would be given by himself and the Case Planner; and that letters had been received from Sunline Transit Agency and from the applicant. He stated that the applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment from "Airport Noise and Blowsand" and "Parks and Recreation" to "Large Scale Mixed Use Resort" (LSR) ; that the circulation element would be amended to realign Sunrise Way and the the Master Plan of Sewers amended to add sewer lines. He stated that a floating dot will be used to designate the new designation of LSR; that the existing realignment of Sunrise Way creates a dangerous curve and should be changed from an easterly curving pattern to a due north pattern directly connecting with the Palm Springs by-pass ; that changing the alignment of Sunrise will necessitate the redesign of access to the property from that street; that staff recommends that the applicant purchase the triangular piece of property adjacent to allow construction of an entrance road from the revised Sunrise Way alignment; and that a minor redesign of the front of the hotel will probably be necessary because of the realignment of the street. Planner (Abbas) stated that the project is a 700 unit time share and 800 room hotel with several development issues which were discussed at the AAC meeting, i .e. height of buildings, open space requirements, setbacks , and parking; that the applicant is buying the Palm Springs Country Club; that the height proposed was recommended for approval by the AAC (portions are 7-stories at 76 ft.) although the ordinance allows only a 60 ft. maximum height; that the location of the project is in an area where views would not be obscured by the height; that the open space requirements of 60% are not being met (applicant proposes 50 to 55% excluding the golf course) ; that setbacks were the most controversial issue since Zoning Ordinance requirements are not being met on the southeast corner of the project which will be adjacent to future residential development; that the AAC recom- mended a 1:1 setback, with two members stating that larger setbacks should be required at that corner; that the parking is not meeting underground parking requirements although staff feels that with a parking garage and covered parking, and trellises the proposed parking can be approved (50% of the parking would be covered instead of underground) ; that the project is buffered to the streets; that some changes may occur when Sunrise Way is realigned; and that as an example the Marriott Hotel and Resort has 1.6 parking spaces per room which is approximately the same ratio as the subject project if the parking requirements staff recommends are used Assistant Planning Director stated that dedication improvements on the Palm Springs By-pass portion of the Mid-Valley Parkway are being discussed with Riverside County Flood Control District officials to establish alignment of the channel ; that right-of-way dedication is not required currently because there is a 200 ft. easement adjoining the property which should have room for the channel and the bypass; that the first paragraph of Development Committee Condition #8 regarding dedication of right-of-way should be deleted; that the developer will pay approximately one million four hundred December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0531-GPA/5.0531-A/5.0511-PD-201. (Continued) L thousand dollars ($1,400,000) in TUMF fees; that Sunline is asking for bus stops and shelters on all roads leading to the project which is an exces- sive requirement since there is a City sponsored roadway improvement pro- gram for Vista Chino which should include bus stops; that the project is providing off-site improvements; and that street improvements will be funded through the TUMF fee, sales tax, and when other property in the area develops ; that the timeshare/condo ratio should remain flexible to allow a different combination of the two uses (800 hotel units minimum) if neces- sary; and that the units could vary from 1440 to 1500 depending on the acreage of the project. Chairman suggested stepping the three story buildings in the southeast area from 1 to 3 stories with the one-story next to the property line. Commissioner Olsen asked if Flood Control were near a solution on the channel alignment. Assistant Planning Director stated that approval of the Intercal project will hastened the Flood Control decision on alignment; that the general agreement is that the easement could be used for the roadway; that the Director of Community Development is comfortable with the developer not providing the right-of-way at the current time; and that a condition could be placed that the applicant post money for landscaping and maintenance of the easement. �—' In reply to Commissioner Dotson, he stated that there is access to the Coachella Valley Water District property through a right-of-way immediately to the northwest, and that if the Sunrise alignment is changed there will not be a direct connection to the Mid-Valley Parkway for the project. Chairman declared the hearing open. Randy Jeffers, project architect, 1055 Wilshire Blvd. , Los Angeles, stated that the design concept works for the hotel guests as well as the City in its visibility in the area; that the design emulates the mountains behind it to the east and west; that the floor plan mitigates the wind and creates strong areas each with its own character; that there is a high percentage of landscaping; that the adjacent golf course helps to provide open space; that the building mass undulates and reduces the massiveness ; that the corner setback discussed could be changed to 1:1 ratio if necessary but is just a corner of the building which should be considered in developing a recommendation; that the parking plan will have 1900 spaces without impacting the project; and that Intercal is excited about the project which will contribute to the City as a whole and is a very strong element. Dale Stein, representing Intercal , stated that Intercal will be proceeding and pushing the Mid-Valley Parkway forward with Flood Control and the City, and that a landscape buffer is desired between the condominiums and the 4- lane highway, and also on another road on the other side next to the dike which will also be landscaped. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 12 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0531-GPA/5.0531-A/5.0511-PD-201. (Continued) There being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Hough stated that the only setback issue is the southeast corner and that the AAC recommended by a 3-2 vote that the ratio be 1:1. Commissioner Edgmon agreed. Chairman stated that Intercal should keep in mind that the setback at that corner is a concern and that the applicant will resolve the problems. He stated that the design is excellent and the project outstanding. In reply to Commissioner Dotson, Planning Director stated that the Tennis Center land use permit for special events could be revoked if necessary and Assistant Planning Director stated that the golf course is private. In reply to Commissioner Dotson's questions about Development Committee Condition #7, Assistant Planning Director stated that one-half of the street improvement is all that is required to service the hotel although the developer may construct the entire roadway which would include the median island; and that the median island would probably be deferred because it is not necessary at this time because of only half of the street being improved. Commissioner Dotson asked if there were a need to underground existing off- site lines (Development Committee Condition #23) . Assistant Planning Director stated that undergrounding is only required across the front of the property and to the next off-site pole, by Ordinance. Commissioner Dotson stated that he liked the project design but was concerned about precedent setting regarding height limitations and the fact that the atrium breaks the mountain ridge line. Mr. Jeffers stated that in discussions with the AAC the Committee felt that the Atrium is important as a beacon and also to the interior of the hotel ; that it gives the hotel landmark reference; and that it is not an imposing element. He stated that the 7-story height is limited in the total foot- print and only exceeds Ordinance requirements by 1% if penthouses are con- sidered, which are allowed in the Ordinance. Commissioner Dotson commented that staff recommended adhering to the Ordinance and asked about views of the project from the Mid-Valley Parkway. Mr. Jeffers stated that the panorama will be landscaping with wind screens. Dale Johnson, president of Intercal , stated that the atrium is for identi- fication; that there will be landscaping between the hotel and the Mid- Valley Parkway; that the hotel is well designed and the finest of its type; and that it will not impede the views of any individuals. He stated that the atrium will provide a beacon for the hotel , the City, and the northern part of Palm Springs. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 13 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0531-GPA/5.0531-A/5.0511-PD-201 . (Continued) Commissioner Hough commented that the atrium only will break the ridgeline and that it is lighted and airy, is similar to the ridgeline, and is not a boxy structure. Commissioner Olsen commented that the mountains are large and the atrium should not impact the view. M/S/C (Olsen/Edgmon; Mills abstained; Whitney absent) taking the following actions regarding Cases 5.0531-GPA, 5.0531-A, and 5.0511 PD-201 based on the following findings: Findings : 1. That a Planned Development District and General Plan Amendment are the proper applications for this project as the developer is pro- posing altered standards from those required in the 0-5 Zone and that the present General Plan designation is inconsistent with the pro- posed project. 2. That the proposed use is suitable and desirable for the community in this location. 3. That if the proposed General Plan Amendment is approved, the proposed project would be consistent. �-' 4. That the 48 acre site is adequate to accommodate this project with the exception of the golf course which is currently on an adjacent site. 5. That Sunrise Way, Vista Chino, the Palm Springs By-pass as mitigated to be improved in the E.I .R. , will be adequately designed to accom- modate any traffic generated by this project. 6. That although the short-term impacts cannot be fully mitigated, the ultimate construction of the Palm Springs By-pass and the Mid-Valley Parkway will reduce the traffic impacts on the local streets to a level acceptable to the community. 7. That the conditions and mitigation measure imposed are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the com- munity. 8. That a mitigation monitoring program is required for the areas of traffic, water, air quality, housing and noise in order to reduce the overall environmental impact. 9. That the City has evaluated all other project alternatives and finds II that the location reduces the potential amount of impact on the adja- cent properties by being located at the northern edge of the I I I i December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 14 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASES 5.0531-GPA/5.0531-A/5.0511-PD-201. (Continued) developed portion of the City and that the potential financial bene- fits in increased property values, sales tax, transient occupancy tax and property tax will greatly benefit the City. 10. That the Planning Commission and City Council have reviewed and con- sidered the Final E.I .R. and recommends its certication. Conditions• 1. Approval of the General Plan Amendment and map and text (Case 5.0531 GPA) . 2. Approval of amendment to the Master Plan of Sewers (Case 5.0531-A) . 3. Approval of the General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to realign Sunrise Way to a due north direction. 4. Certification of the final EIR for approval of preliminary planned development district subject to conditions (Case 5.0511-PD-201) . 5. Approval of the Planned Development District subject to the Development Committee conditions dated 12/13/89 unless otherwise amended as follows: a. Deferring the issue of the setback on the southeast corner of the project until final development plans are submitted. b. Requiring a landscape buffer zone to be maintained by the applicant between the hotel and the Mid-Valley Parkway. C. Approval of the massing with height study which is to be pre- sented in architectural drawings . d. Approval of overall building height as submitted with the atrium encouraged at 110 ft. e. Approval of highrise setbacks as proposed except for the south- east corner of the project. f. Requiring that the parking structure be articulated in archi- tecture to match the building. 6. Approval of 50% covered parking instead of 50% underground parking. CASE 5.0529-CUP. Application by REZA FARSAD for a conditional use permit to allow construction of a medical office between Indian Avenue and Mel Avenue, R-3 Zone, Section 11. (Commission response to written comments on draft Negative Declaration; no comments; action.) I I December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 15 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0529-CUP. (Continued) Commissioner Edgmon left the meeting. Planner (Forcucci ) stated that the AAC liked the site plan and architectural concept but felt that the architecture itself should be restudied to change the corner elements of the building for better integration with the roof and to make them more substantial ; to redesign the freestanding stone elements; and to subdue the detailing of the building. He stated that one response had been received from the public noticing and that the correspondent owns a small hotel to the east and is in favor of the development. Planning Director explained that the CUP can be approved subject to restudy of the architecture or the application could be continued to January 10. Chairman declared the hearing open. Reza Farsad, the applicant, stated that he wanted to build a beautiful building on the unkept vacant lot. There being no further appearances; Chairman declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Mills stated that the site plan is fine. M/S/C (M ills/Dotson; Edgmon/Whitney absent) approving the application based on the following findings and subject to the followings conditions: Findings: 1. That the use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a CUP is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the said use is desirable and in harmony with the various objectives of the General Plan and is not detrimental to the existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. 3. That the proposed use is not detrimental to the general public health, safety, or welfare. 4. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use including yards, setbacks, walls, landscaping, and other features. i i December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 16 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) CASE 5.0529-CUP. (Continued) Conditions: 1. That the proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City codes, ordinances, and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations. 2. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. 3. That final landscape, irrigation, exterior lighting, sign, and fencing plans be submitted for approval of the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office prior to submittal . 4. That the architecture be restudied to address detailing and proportioning. PUBLIC CONNENTS - None. CONSENT ACTION AGENDA (Continued) Commissioner Olsen left. CASE 3.0698. Application by CHARLES L. LINDSEY for architectural approval of 35- unit apartment complex at 2201 S. Palm Canyon Drive, R-2 Zone, Section 27. Planner (Goodwin) explained that the project is two-story and the development standards require a 150 ft. setback from single-family zoning which can be varied 50 ft. by the Commission; and that the AAC felt the project was not sensitive to the hillside and recommended a restudy. Planning Director explained that four major projects have been applied for on the property with several being designed in the concept shown because the toe of the mountain protrudes into the site; and that a variance was approved previously and is requested by the applicant to be left in tact. He stated that the pads have become hillocks through the years; that the configuration is a low plateau next to the street, not a rolling hillside; that the applicant worked with staff on mitigation measures for the site; and that he had not attended the AAC meeting to explain the background. Commissioner Hough stated that the AAC's ideas on the project were where the applicant started; and that the comments were on the architecture, the retaining walls in the back, moving parking to the front, utilization of the flat section of the property, and sensitivity to the hillside. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 17 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0698. (Continued) Bill Reed, project architect, 17291 Irvine, Tustin, stated that the project is a result of many meetings of staff and months of work; that in less than five minutes at the AAC it was restudied; that the AAC did not understand what he has tried to accomplish; that to reduce retaining wall height he was planning to raise the southerly building 5 ft. ; 40 percent of the site is rock and undevelopable hillside; that there is single-family housing to the north; that the project is separated into four buildings for a residential appearance, especially from above; that grades can be adjusted to mitigate problems; that moving the project north would cause lack of privacy for the neighbors; that the project is set back 80 ft. from the property line; requested that approval be given and the details resolved with staff; and also requested Commission input. Commissioner Dotson asked why there were so many individual buildings rather than one or two. Mr. Reed stated that the project was designed that way because of the residential properties surrounding it. Commissioner Mills stated that he agreed with the AAC regarding sensitivity to the mountain; that the previous project was designed massively and blended with the mountain; and that the four lots should be unified in some way, perhaps by a wall . He stated that he did not like roof-mounted mechanical equipment. .. Mr. Reed stated that the mechanical equipment is under the roof and covered by the roof projection. He stated that one of his plans had a stepped down garden wall on the length of the property which was taken out in a later plan. Commissioner Mills stated that architectural changes have to be made as well as using a wall ; that the buildings were a repeat of the same form; and that there should be a village appearance to the project. Mr. Reed replied that he felt the appearance should be residential because of the residenceson two sides. Commissioner Dotson stated that he agreed with Commissioner Mills' comments and that there is no movement in the buildings on South Palm Canyon. He stated that looking down driveways is also a problem and that the project resembles architecture in Tustin, not in the desert, and does not catch the character of the beautiful mountain area. Mr. Reed stated that he looked at buildings in Palm Springs before he designed the project and they had flat roofs with center courtyards which was built in Tustin many years ago; that the colors in the desert are more contemporary; that any projection on the buildings is a projection of living space; that they are busy buildings; and that the inside of the i I i December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 18 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0698. (Continued) building should be comfortable but the outside did not interest him. He stated that there were constraints on the site; that he appreciated the input of the Commission; that his projects are well maintained and not low- cost apartments, and have quality materials and interiors . M/S/C (Dotson/hough; Olsen/Whitney/Edgmon absent) for a restudy of the application noting the following: That the project needs to be sensitive to the hillside. CASE 3.0705 (MINOR) . Application by THOMPSON ARCHITECTURAL GROUP for architectural approval for last phase of the Plaza Villas condominium on Alvarado Road, R-4 Zone (I .L.) , Section 14. Planner (Forcucci ) stated that the architecture was the same as the previous phases of Casa Villas; and that a representative from the homeowners association was in the audience. Jerry Murphy, Long Beach, representing Board of Directors of Plaza Villas, asked for continuance to January 24 because of requests and suggestions from the homeowners for changes; that the corporation indicated that it would not negotiate and would review the list as suggestions only; that the requested changes would not add more than 1% of the cost of the property to the project; that the next board meeting is January 13; that the changes �✓ are simple for example, moving the location of the pool to the center of the complex, adding a second restroom similar in size to the first one and including an exercise area; an additional small covered parking area; and a small wall in front of the parking area to eliminate the glare of car lights in living rooms. Planner stated that the developer is reversing the location of the units and spa for more accessibility. Mr. Murphy continued to list several other minor requests such as round instead of square spas and metal caps on the exterior doors to prevent peeling. Chairman stated that the Commission cannot delay the planning process for operational items since the Commission addresses conformance to approved plans and architecture. Mr. Murphy requested that the item be continued for a meeting of the homeowners and that the entire project would be under one homeowners association if two-thirds of the existing homeowners agree although it is difficult to obtain the two-thirds vote necessary. Commissioner Hough stated that it was not fair to delay the applicant , especially since it seems that he is willing to move the pool location and small items could probably be negotiated. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 19 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) CASE 3.0705 (MINOR) . (Continued) Planning Director stated that the Commission could approve the application subject to detailed review and plan check and direct the applicant to work with homeowners on issue with staff to report back to the Commission. Chairman stated that the applicant should meet with the homeowners and Commissioner Mills agreed. Planning Director stated that staff suggested to the architect that he meet with the homeowners and resolve the matters before the meeting, but evidently did not get it done in time. M/S/C (Mills/Hough; Whitney/Edgmon/Olsen absent) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That all recommendations of the Development Committee be implemented. 2. That the requests of the adjacent homeowners association be reviewed and progress reported at the time of submittal of final plans . 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 5.0421-PD-185. Application by DESERT HOSPITAL for architectural approval of revised helipad and emergency access locations for the Desert Hospital expansion plan on N. Indian Avenue between Tachevah Drive/El Paseo El Mirador, R-4 Zone, Section 11. Planning Director stated that a 3-0, 1 abstained vote is needed since only four Commissioners remained; that the Council had approved the Master Plan concept and building layouts of the hospital expansion but deferred the location of the helipad and emergency room access back to the Commission; that the hospital has restudied the location; that staff recommends on one of the schemes submitted that the connection between the ambulance entry and the main entry be closed; that the heliport is now proposed to be located on top of the two-story emergency building which is an additional 100 ft. back from Tachevah and up in the air which will buffer the use; that the AAC recommended approval ; that the hospital has requested relief from two conditions, i .e. , widening of Tachevah and the one year review period for the heliport. He stated that the widening of Tachevah is on the master plan as a secondary throughfare and widening is mandatory but the street could remain as it is according to the Traffic Engineer if downsized on the General Plan; and that it can be designated as a collector which is a concern to him. He stated that the key concern is the hospital's request for the relief of the one-year review of the helicopter operations because of expense of the roof top facility, that the hospital feels that it is in a Catch-22 position from its perspective and that the condition should be deleted; that a resident of The Palms , a street near the hospital stated December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 20 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0421-PD-185. (Continued) that the helicopters are back in operation and landing on the emergency parking lot once a day; that the Hospital Planner states that there have been 5 flights since November 26; that no upward limit of flights has been placed as part of the conditions; that if the condition is deleted there is no nexus to review the number of flights ; that staff understands the hospital 's concerns about expense but a possibility of unlimited flights is a concern; that the hospital is seeking relief also from traffic signalization costs; and that he had concerns about deleting the review period for the heliport; (the Tachevah widening and the signalization issues can be reviewed at staff levell Mike Fontana, Hospital Planner, stated that the hospital has complied with the issues of the City Council by placing the helipad on a rooftop location and reconfiguring the emergency access to Indian Avenue; that alternative #1 on the board is preferable to #2" but details can be resolved; that the hospital is willing to pay its proportionate share of costs of signalization but did not feel that it was fair to pay 100% of the Indian Avenue signalization; that the hospital could have done a good job on the ground location of the helipad and been held accountable but on a rooftop at almost triple the cost, the review should be deleted because of the high cost and the fact the the use could be eliminated after the money were spent. Chairman asked to have an explanation of the CHP order to allow emergency landings. Mr. Fontana stated that after January, 1989 a Public Safety Officer can designate an area next to or near a medical center as an emergency landing zone and that this happened on November 26th. He stated that the hospital had an assignment of 22 cases to December 6 with 3 landings and two flight orders cancelled. He stated that as of December 12 there had been 8 landings in 21 days ; that part of the landings were Marines ; that landings of the CHP helicopter are probably because the CHP helicopter is in the valley on a test; that the ambulance carriers are calling the helicopters out; and that after the end of the year there will probably be a more normal use of the emergency landing site. Planning Director stated that a question could be asked of the CHP Area Commander, Captain Benoit, as to the conditions for use of the parking lot as a landing site. He stated that he would contact Captain Benoit and that the Division of Aeronautics Regulations are vague as to the application of glide slope requirements and safety people policing the site to keep pedestrians away from the blades. He stated that there is a possibility that the CHP could land on a number of facilities approved by them. Mr. Fontana stated that when the last hospital Master Plan was reviewed the hospital shifted away from Miraleste and its focus , and that the requirements placed at that time may no longer apply, i .e. , high wattage street lights on several corners near the residential areas around the hospital ; and that a neighbor to the east is complaining about the glare December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 21 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0421-PD-185. (Continued) from the parking lot lights coming into the windows. He requested that the condition be deleted. Commissioner Hough stated that he could understand the hospital 's concern about constructing a helipad and possibly being told the use could be stopped after a year-end review, but that he was reluctant to have no way to control the use. Mr. Fontana stated that he did not know what criteria could be placed on the helipad. Chairman asked if trauma center doctors have a chance to say whether of not patients are to be brought to the center by helicopter. Mr. Fontana stated that he believed they did since the pilots are in contact with the doctors before the landing, but the use is emergency only. Chairman asked if the doctors were made aware that bonafide emergency landings only could be made; and some landings made at the Airport. Mr. Fontana replied again that the landings are for emergency and trauma purposes only. Chairman stated that if people are picked up in a remote area the doctor could say the patient should be delivered to the Airport not the trauma center. Commissioner Dotson stated that he was concerned about the definition of "emergency" since the trauma center director stated that he was going to bring all his patients in by helicopter even with less major injuries such as a broken leg; that a time period should be a condition of approval , and that it is easy for the hospital to demonstrate the types of cases that are being landed by helicopter. Mr. Fontana gave a list of days and the types of cases that were landed by helicopter. He stated that the hospital would be happy to share the information with the Commission and that the helipad would have a reasonable use. Commissioner Dotson asked the definition of "a reasonable use" since the helicopter test program may become a permanent one. Mr. Fontana stated that he did not know if it would become permanent since several other areas are also vying for the helicopter. Commissioner Dotson questioned whether or not if the revised location for the helicopter were approved, the landing pattern would change. Mr. Fontana replied that the approach pattern will still be from north to south and west to east; that the pilots are not controlled by the hospital ; December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 22 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0421-PD-185. (Continued) that the hospital cannot guarantee accountability; that the approved location will be night-lighted and marked and hopefully overflight occurrences will be minimized; and that flight paths would be filed with the FAA. He stated that in a recent case a Marine pilot came down the Indian Avenue/Palm Canyon corridor and circled the neighborhood twice to find the landing site; but that he did exit over the commercial area. Planning Director stated that the condition for review should be kept and that the situation is "Catch-22" because of the orders issued by the CHP; and that some control of the situation by the City has been lost; that if the number of landings at the temporary site should become a problem the City could interface with legislators to avoid the problem; that the CHP helicopter is very visible because it is also in the air looking for criminals and flies around the area over and over; and that the emergency helicopter should be used reasonably. He stated that the other issues (street and safety lighting and Tachevah widening) can be revolved with staff prior to final Council review. Commissioner Dotson stated that the access to the emergency room is convoluted, especially since people using the excess will not be in the best frame of mind and perhaps there should be a straight route off Indian to the emergency room. Planning Director stated that he felt the route was fairly straight. `-' Mr. Fontana stated that many routes were designed to achieve getting people in and to avoid vehicular conflicts; that the entrance was relocated to Indian Avenue; that it is true that a parking lot has be crossed to reach the emergency area but that signage will help; that there is a connection through the ambulance lot to the parking lot so people do not enter the ambulance entry and deadend in the small lot; that the road and curve cuts de-emphazize the alignment to Olivos; and that the connection is necessary between the two parking lots to make the circulation system work. Planning Director stated that signage should alleviate any problems; that cars coming west on Tachevah will probably use the ambulance entrance anyway; and that he still supported the original design. He stated that the AAC recommended parking lot design #2; that the connection to the parking lot should be closed and signage developed for directions. Chairman suggested a gate with an automatic operator to the ambulance area. Mr. Fontana stated that design #1 is preferred by the hospital and reiterated that the requirement for the hospital to widen the street could be deleted and the City could widen it if necessary. Chairman explained that the Commission was not asking the hospital to widen the street, until it is reviewed as a collector. • December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 23 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 5.0421-PD-185. (Continued) Planning Director stated that existing conditions on the hospital should not be changed, but that the requirement for widening Tachevah could be held in abeyance. M/S/C (Hough/Dotson; Olsen/Edgmon/Whitney; Mills abstained) approving the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That the location of the heliport is approved. 2. That access scheme #2 is approved. 3. That the one-year review period of the helipad operations remains. 4. That staff will review the General Plan status of Tachevah with the widening of the street held in abeyance until the study has been completed. 5. That staff will review the hospital 's participation in the cost of signalization and traffic lights at the intersections around the hospital . 6. That all other recommendations of the Development Committee be met. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS ADDED STARTERS. (Determination of eligibility for consideration.) CASE 3.0671. M/S/C (Mills/Dotson; Edgmon/Whitney/Olsen absent) determining that Case 3.0671 is eligible for consideration. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 30671. Application by BEN URMSTON for Ronald Gilbreath for architectural approval of revised plans for a single-family hillside residence on Cantina Way between S. Palm Canyon Drive/dead end, R-1-A Zone, Section 27. Planner (Abbas) stated that the applicant restudied the design and made modifications to the elevations; that the house is similar to the original proposal but rounded on the edges and has softer stucco tones; that the applicant provided pictures of the site and a brochure demonstrating the look of cribbing; that the AAC again felt that the house was too large and boxy for the site and also insensitive to the hillside; and that the committee also recommended a restudy of the incorporation of cribbing into the wall . She stated that the applicant meets Zoning Ordinance of 25% coverage; that cribbing (concrete gridding) comes in several colors; that boulders could be used to soften the look of the cribbing; and that the AAC felt that cribbing was a harsh solution for a retaining wall . December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 24 1 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 30671. (Continued) '�-- Ben Urmstom, 38 Sierra Madre, Rancho Mirage, the applicant, stated that angling the wall into the hill and shaping it with stones and boulders was reviewed and that cribbing is called "hidden hillside retaining wall " in Placentia; that rock structures would tie into the cribbing; that it provides a cost effective method for retaining the hill and accomplishing AAC recommendations ; that boulders and landscaping design would be left up to the AAC on submission of landscape plans but the the use of cribbing is the issue with the AAC. He stated that without retaining the lot on the mountain it is a unbuildable lot and that cribbing accomplishes retention; that the bank is unstable according to the soils report and requires stabilization to provide a safe building site and approval by the Engineering firm; that there is fill on the site and caissons cannot be used because it is not known how far drilling would have to take place; that dead men structures do not work in fill ; that shotcrete could be used over the surface of the major areas and that landscaping and Eonite would be used to soften the cribbing. Chairman stated that he did not like the appearance of cribbing. Commissioner Hough stated that the AAC recommended a gunnited wall . Mr. Urmston remarked that gunnite could be used to cover the cribbing and that the proposed wall would be 4 to 16 feet high and back to 4 feet and as it winds around it would be 130 ft. in length but would not be seen all at one time. Chairman directed the applicant to provide the Commission with all four elevations of the house. Planner asked if the Commission felt there were too much house for the site. Chairman stated that he felt that the house mass could be acceptable but that the design needed to be improved. Commissioner Dotson asked the use of the penthouse on the plans, and Mr. Urmston replied that it was an office for the owner. Planning Director stated that the lot is not illegal and is part of a 7-lot subdivision; and that he did not know the reasons for the instability of the soil . Mr. Urmston stated that the lot was possibly created with debris from the road building above it. Commissioner Mills asked if the soils report indicated that the wall should be built close to the edge. Mr. Urmston replied that only a minimum amount of moisture could be introduced into the soil because of the small amount of fill and the large boulders and that there was no inication in the report of the wall location. December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 25 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ITEMS (Continued) CASE 30671 . (Continued) Commissioner Mills stated that cribbing is acceptable in an industrial area but not in a single-family zone unless the house material were cribbing or blended so it resembles a single element and that he did not like man made rocks and boulders. Chairman suggested that the cribbing be plastered over. Commissioner Hough stated that the AAC recommended that the cribbing be hidden and the house made less massive. Commissioner Mills remarked that the house is not too large for the lot if designed well ; that in the AAC vote members Young and Buccino had no problems with the cribbing. M/S/C (Hough/Mills; Whitney/Olsen/Edgmon absent) for a restudy noting the following concerns: 1. That the method of retaining has to blend with the design of the house. 2. That the overall design of the house had to blend better with the site and surrounding hillside. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS OR REQUESTS. - Resignation of AAC Member. AAC member Buccino has submitted a letter of resignation to the committee. Staff is to ask another landscape architect to apply. - Planning Commission Study Session. Regular study session will be held on December 20 at 3:00 p.m. in conjunction with an adjourned meeting. The meetings will be held in the Large Conference Room at City Hall . - Volunteers. Staff asked for Commission volunteers to meet with staff and the Economic Development Commission (EDC) for a planning program on the General Plan issues. - Cancellation of Meeting. The December 27th meeting of the Planning Commission has been cancelled. r" December 13, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 26 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (Continued) CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS. Update of City Council actions. No report given. CASE 3.0457 (MINOR) . Application by WALT COLGLAZIER for Joanne Coffey for architectural approval of landscape, irrigation, and exterior lighting plans for a car rental agency at 550 Vella Road, M-1 Zone, Section 19. This item was placed on the agenda in error and was deleted. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 5:05 p.m. to December 20 in conjunction with the regularly scheduled study session. The meetings will be held at 3 p.m. in the Large Conference Room, City Hall . PLANN IRECTOR I MDR/ml PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Large Conference Room, City Hall December 20, 1989 (Adjourned Meeting of December 13, 1989) ROLL CALL F-Y 1989-1990 Present Present Excused Absences Planning Commission This Meeting To Date To Date Larry Lapham, Chairman X 12 0 Gary Olsen X 10 2 Barbara Whitney - 10 2 Brent Hough X 8 4 Martha Edgmon - 11 1 Chris Mills X 12 0 Michael Dotson X 12 0 Staff Present: Marvin D. Roos, Planning Director Douglas Evans, Assistant Planning Director . Debra Goodwin, Planner Sherri Abbas, Planner Mary E. Lawler, Recording Secretary Chairman called meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. M/S/C (Hough/Dotson; Whitney/Edgmon absent) adjourning the meeting at 3:05 p.m. since there were no cases to discuss. REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA The agenda of the adjourned meeting of December 13, 1989, (held on December 20) was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Planning Division Counter by 3:00 p.m. , December 15, 1989.