Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/02/06 - MINUTES • CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES February 06, 2008 Large Conference Room, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 CALL TO ORDER: The meeting has been called to order at 2:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present Present Year: FY 2007/2008 This Meeting: to Date: Excused Absences: Chair Marantz X 16 2 Vice Chair Hochanadel X 18 0 Cohen X 18 0 Ringlein 16 2 Caffery X 17 1 • Scott X 18 0 Conrad X 1 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 Department counter by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, February 1, 2008. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS: (Three minute time limit.) Chair Marantz opened Public Comments and there being none, Public Comments was closed. 2. DISCUSSION - Scheduling street improvements and private Bar development. -Dave an Director of Public Works Dave Barakian, Director of Public Works, provided background information on the resolution approved by the City Council pertaining to street improvements and noted that the Director of Public Works has discretion to condition development projects to limit street construction during the five busiest months of the year (November through • March). City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of February 6, 2008 • Chair Marantz noted a concern with the traffic congestion due to the on-going street construction at Smoke Tree Commons and throughout the City during the busy season of the year. Mr. Cohen concurred noting that traffic in this area is very congested. Mr. Barakian responded that underground work for this project had to be performed, including new water pipes and sewer lines. Mr. Caffery suggested initiating time-line schedules for street improvement on development projects. Ms. Conrad commented that she is familiar with this project and suggested creating conditions for future development projects to address the project's projection schedule such as time-lines and lane changes. The Commission discussed safety issues, signal light timing and night street construction for The Springs project. The Commission discussed the time-frame from when a project has received its entitlements to the actual construction date noting the difficulty to condition a project with an actual date. Ms. Conrad suggested boiler plate language such as "should roadway closures be required in February and March, the Director of Engineering has authority to disperse the projects . . . ". Ms. Conrad stated this would encourage developers not to perform street improvements during the busy season. Mr. Ewing noted that the phrase "to encourage" has no enforcement and eventually the developer will calculate the costs and appeal the matter to the City • Council. He noted that the Council is ultimately in the best position to make a decision. Mr. Ewing noted that this condition is a good idea because it will provide flexibility and enforcement in the interim to see how the City Council feels about this issue. Chair Marantz noted a safety concern with no divider separating on-coming traffic especially on a major highway. Mr. Caffery requested engineering staff to check the timing for the signal light adjacent to the Smoke Tree Commons project. 3. DISCUSSION - General Plan Orientation — Mr. Ewing stated that the orientation on the updated General Plan would consist of several sessions and turned the meeting over to Ken Lyon. Mr. Lyon distributed a handout and provided a summary of the organization and purpose of a general plan. Mr. Lyon provided an overview on the organization of the 2007 General Plan including the chapters/appendices/EIR. He provided further details on the chapter for Recreation/Open Space and Conservation. Mr. Caffery noted that the parking section is very limited in the General Plan. Staff responded that the majority of parking regulations are found in the Development Standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff provided details on the process to update the Zoning Ordinance. • Staff clarified the relationship between the General Plan and the Zoning Code noting that General Plan provides a vision for the City. The larger the project the more focus 2 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of February 6, 2008 • on conformance of the General Plan; such projects would include General Plan Amendments, Zoning Code Amendments, Specific Plans, Planned Developments and larger development projects. The smaller the project the more likely it is covered in the Zoning Code such as RV Permits, Signs and Minor Architectural Review items. Staff noted that the previous General Plan contained many Zoning Standards which have been placed under "Bridge Policies" until they can be moved to the updated Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Lyon stated that the Downtown Urban Design Plan was prepared as a part of the General Plan but was processed at an accelerated pace because the City was facing several large development projects that were going to impact the downtown area. Mr. Lyon provided further details pertaining to the Central Business District and the downtown central core. The Commission further discussed downtown building heights, setbacks and the high-rise ordinance. Mr. Lyon requested that the Commission suggest any topics that have not been discussed at this meeting for further discussion at their next study session. Mr. Scott requested further discussion on: • 1. Calculation of the percentages for mixed-use projects in the downtown area such as the Art Colony and South Palm Canyon. 2, The concept of saving small hotels. 4. COMMISSION/STAFF REPORTS AND REQUESTS - Ms. Conrad suggested a joint meeting with the Architectural Advisory Committee to open up dialogue between the two groups. Vice Chair Hochanadel commented that a joint meeting between both groups was recently held and many of Architectural Advisory Committee members were not attendance. Mr. Cohen suggested the joint meetings to be held on a quarterly basis. Ms. Conrad suggested discussion to align philosophies of both bodies so that the majority of the work is done on projects before it is presented to the City Council. Mr. Caffery noted that was much more simpler when the Planning Commissioner could express his/her opinion during the Architectural Advisory Committee meetings. The Commission and staff discussed protocols for the Architectural Advisory Committee members. Mr. Ewing noted that several Pre-Applications have been presented to the Architectural Advisory Committee with noticing to the public. Mr. Ewing suggested a topic of discussion to include what is within the Architectural Advisory Committee's authority and what is outside of their realm. Staff commented that many cities do not • require the architectural review until the entitlements have been approved. The Commission discussed the sequence of the architectural review process. 3 City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of February 6, 2008 The Commission suggested the following topics for items of discussion: 1. Site Plans 2. Street Widths 3. Parking 4. Architecture Mr. Ewing stated that the Commission needs to know the direction of City Council so that the Commission can give direction to the Architectural Advisory Committee. Mr. Scott noted his preference to conduct the architectural review process after the entitlements have been finalized. 4. COMMISSION /STAFF REPORTS AND REQUESTS — Mr. Ewing reported that the Palm Mountain project has been continued for two weeks and the Spanish Inn is on the City Council Agenda for tonight. • 5. ADJOURNMENT - There being no further comments, the meeting was adjourned at 4:21 p.m. a' wing, Al Director of Plan n Services 4