Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-07 PC Study Session MinutesCITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES November 7, 2007 Large Conference Room, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 2:01 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present Present Year: FY 2007/2008 This Meeting: to Date: Excused Absences: Chair Marantz X 10 2 Vice Chair Hochanadel X 12 0 Cohen X 12 0 Ringlein X 11 1 Hutcheson X 12 0 Caffery X 11 1 Scott X 12 0 REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: The agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board (west side of Council Chamber) and the Planning Services counter by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, November 2, 2007. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS: (Three minute time limit.) Lin Juniper, Region Manager for Southern California Edison, provided details on a new sub -transmission project and noted the Commission would be receiving an invitation to the open house. There being no further comments, Public Comments was closed. 2. DISCUSSION.— Utility Undergrounding — Lin Juniper, Southern California Edison Region Manager for Public Affairs City Public Works Department City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of November 7, 2007 Craig A. Ewing provided information on the utility undergrounding ordinance and indicated engineering staff is present to provide further details. Commissioner Ringlein stated she has requested this topic as a discussion item and would like more information on the consequences of deferring to covenant, resources available and the benefits of utility undergrounding. Dave Barakian, Director of Public Works, provided further details on the difference between deferral to covenant, which allows the applicant to defer the cost, and an assessment district. The Commission further discussed the pros and cons of utility undergrounding. Vice Chair Hochanadel suggested a requirement could be imposed for developers to add the conduit and run laterals to the meters during the construction phase. Lin Juniper responded that only one or two developers have requested to have this done and noted that Edison has many resources available and would be happy to provide guidance and knowledge in this area. Marcus Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works, provided further details on the conversion process of overhead utility lines and the developer's responsibility in being proactive with the homeowners. Ms. Juniper reported that SCE and other state utilities participated in developing implementation rules for undergrounding existing overhead facilities. (Rule 20 is a legal document which governs how SCE converts overhead electrical systems to underground systems.) Ms. Juniper also provided details on the criteria for Rule 20A funding including legal and regulatory obligations. Ms. Juniper introduced Southern California Edison staff present: Mike Yarnell, Local Planner, Joe Cordero, Project Manager for Rule 20 and Fred Francia, Compliance Manager for the Eastern Region. Ms. Juniper provided details on the responsibility of other utilities and joint trench, noting each utility is responsible for costs associated with undergrounding existing facilities. Ms. Juniper noted that each year SCE submits a list of funds for allocation on an annual basis to the City of Palm Springs. Southern California Edison staff provided further details on the obligations of other utility companies (telephone and cable) regarding trenching and undergrounding. Ms. Juniper provided further details on Rule 20 B limitations. Chair Marantz requested clarification on the process for neighborhoods interested in an assessment district for their area. Mr. Cordero responded that it would consist of 2/3 C majority vote of the neighborhood and the cost would be paid by the homeowners. 2 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of November 7, 2007 Mr. Scott suggested the new City Council could establish goals and encourage neighbors to underground utility lines. Ms. Juniper provided further details on easements pertaining to Rule 20. Ms. Ringlein requested information in the event of a earthquake and the safety of underground utility lines. Ms. Juniper noted that it is more difficult to troubleshoot utility lines that are underground and reiterated that safety is their number one priority. Mr. Scott suggested setting up a subcommittee consisting of several members of the Planning Commission and staff to work with Southern California Edison representatives to discuss and encourage neighborhoods to underground utilities, as well as seek further direction from the City Council. Mr. Hutcheson concurred and suggested adding a timeframe to return this to the Commission. Mr. Fuller requested direction from the Commission on larger projects requesting boundary lines deferred to covenant and possibly establishing a city wide fee. The Commission discussed assessment districts and in -lieu fees. The consensus of the Commission was initiate a sub -committee to further address utility undergrounding. Staff reported this item would be placed on a future agenda. 3. DISCUSSION - BMW Signage David Newell, Assistant Planner, provided an overview on the proposed BMW signage and noted no decision would be made today. Mr. Caffery stated a concern with the up - lighting on the sign. The Commission further discussed the elevations, lighting and existing signage. 4. DISCUSSION - Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Mr. Ewing provided information on protocols establishing rules for the Commission, staff, and the community in conducting business of the Planning Commission. Mr. Ewing noted this could be a useful tool in addressing difficult situations and assisting in moving meeting forward. Chair Marantz commented that it is much easier to conduct the study session in the Council. Chamber to keep track of the 'requests to speak". City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of November 7, 2007 Vice Chair Hochanadel noted a concern when the motion maker has not announced his/her vote and the second is made. Mr. Ewing responded that a lot of the responsibility falls on the Chair in conducting the meeting and provided different scenarios and examples addressing the Commission's concerns. The Commission discussed limiting the number of speakers during public comments, and providing adequate time for the developer to present their project during a public hearing (5.2). Mr. Scott requested staff address correspondence submitted during the meeting. Staff responded information may be submitted anytime prior to and during the meeting and the Commission may decide to continue the project to review the information, make a decision or take a recess. Mr. Cohen noted the benefit of receiving more information on projects by attending the Architectural Advisory Committee meetings. Mr. Hutcheson noted that the voting procedure does not state that it is done by computer, addressed 9.2 study sessions consisting of future projects (page 19) and setting hours for the Architectural Advisory Committee meetings. Staff addressed the Commission's concern to hear large projects at their study sessions and reported that the City Attorney has found a solution by sending out public hearing notices to neighbors within a 500 feet radius of the project. Mr. Ewing stated that the presentation would entail of the project description and zoning compliance only and reiterated that environmental information, traffic studies and staff recommendation will not be provided. No action will be taken and the hearing will be strictly to provide information and to educate the Commission. 5. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS AND REQUESTS — Mr. Ewing provided in update on the upcoming projects for the meeting of November 14, 2007. 6. ADJOURNMENT — There being no further comments the meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m. of Plbnniho Services 4