HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/6/1982 - MINUTES CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
` APRIL 6, 1982
An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Palm Springs , was called to order by Mayor Doyle, in the Council
Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz-McCallum Way, on Tuesday, April 6, 1982,
at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Field, Ortner, Rose and
Mayor Doyle
Absent: None
The meeting was opened with the salute to the Flag and an invoca-
tion by Councilwoman Ortner.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY : No business
• APPROVAL OF MINUTES :
It was moved by Field, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, that the minutes of March 17, 1982 be approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1 . C.U.P. CASE 5.0219 - PALM PROPERTIES (PETER TYNBERG)
Consideration of appeal by Peter Tynberg from Planning
Commission denial of a conditional use permit to reduce
setbacks for ten tennis courts within proposed 34-lot
subdivision (Tract 16759) .
(78)
Director of Community Development reviewed his report,
dated April 6, 1982, stating that the Commission denied
the permit and the reasons therefor; that the developer
desired to precise the lots and determine which would
be suitable for tennis courts; that no conditional use
permit would be required if all setback requirements
had been met; that the applicant did not wish to pro-
vide that large of a lot size, since in predetermining
site for the tennis courts, it would be known by anyone
buying into the tract that such circumstances would
exist; that the approach was unique, in that a CUP is
usually applied for in order for input from surrounding
property owners ; that the staff supported the request
to a certain degree, as detailed in his report, and
that the option was to reduce the size of the courts.
fie explained the various setback requests as contrasted
to standard requirements.
Mayor declared the hearing open.
Peter Tynberg., 1599 Via Norte, appel I ant, stated that
the tract will be maintained by a homeowners ' association
and will have a gated entry; that the Planning Commission
and staff agreed that the interior setbacks were diI erent
in concept in that people who were buying into the tract
would know what they were getting and would accept certain
variances; that most interior setbacks are 5 ft, wii:h no
setbacks on those courts which are side-by-side, which
the Commission did not disagree with; that wester-ill and
• southerly exterior borders would abut similarly zoned
property, with 10-ft setbacks suggested for both, and
which staff felt was reasonable and tolerable for sideyard
neighbors; that the courts and landscaping must be approved
by the Architectural Advisory Committee; that the courts on
Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 2
1 . C.U.P. 5.0219 ,-TVNBERG (Continued)
Bogert Trail have a 10-ft setback, with an additional
10-ft from the wall to the curb, making a 20-ft setback
from the curb; that any home near the northerly or
easterly borders of the tract would be at least 400 ft.
away; that there will be a bike trail and 10-ft of
landscaping on the wash side; that lines of the tennis
courts will be softened on the northerly and easterly
perimeters through architectural approval ; and that
because of a last minute adjustment in the approach to
the bridge, the corner will change somewhat because CONT 'D
of need for additional dedication. (78)
There being no further appearances, Mayor declared the
hearing closed.
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that in predetermining the sites
for the courts, some consideration should be given to
lesser setbacks since people will be aware of that
fact at the time of purchase; that the reason for a
conditional use permit is to require mitigation measure
to offset setbacks on an individual basis and consider
input by surrounding property owners ; that one concern
would be Bogert Trail ., in that the height of the court
would exceed maximum allowed in the yard area, and
perhaps the standard setback should be maintained;
that he did not see any problem with reduced setbacks
on interior streets; that the established rear yard
setback was established for protection of privacy
for adjoining lots; that one letter of opposition was
received; and that notice was sent to properties within
400 ft. from the boundary of the project.
Mayor stated that he would have no problem with reduced
setbacks for the lots along the wash ; that complaints
received in the past relating to tennis courts has been
with respect to rear and side yard setbacks; that; although
disclosure to prospective buyers may be true, those
buyers may complain that proper setbacks should have
been enforced; that his primary concern related to
Bogert Trail and he did not think it would be proper v
to allow a reduction without people who will be effected
to express their opinion; that he agreed with the Planning
Commission 's comment with regard to developing lot sizes
big enough to handle all zoning desired; and that he
felt the Commission 's action should be upheld.
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that it was not uncommon to consider
such variations with regard to the wash area, but he
would be uncomfortable with the precedent of designing
a project which had to ask for exterior variances for
tennis courts, because the fact that in doing so perhaps
the standards should be questioned; that the wash area
is a special circumstance and a CUP is a proper tool to
consider in that respect; that he believed some adjustments
could be made to accomodate the courts, e.g. , rethinking
of some of the lots and how they are divided; that a
CUP will be required in order to approve the setbacks
between the property lines, with regard to the private
streets, and to setbacks along the wash if that is to
be allowed; that perhaps a more proper action would be
4
Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 3
1 . C.U.P. 5.0219 -TYNBERG (Continued)
to refer this matter to the Planning Commission with
some thinking of the Council in this regard rather
than denying it totally and having the applicant
start the process over; and that he believed the
applicant is desirous of pursuing tennis courts CONT'D
on the property. (78)
It was moved by Rose, and seconded by
Ortner, that the Planning Commission be overruled
regarding its decision as to those courts which back
up on the wash and sustain its decision on the other
courts.
In answer to question by Council whether this would
require the applicant to start over, Director of
Community Development stated that the motion would
'' lay to rest the question of a conditional use permit,
and would approve 5-ft setbacks along the wash and
CUP that would require standard setbacks along exterior
properties and approve reduced setbacks along private
streets.
' Above motion carried by the following vote:
AYES : Ortner, Rose and Doyle
NO: Field
ABSENT: None
2. ZONING CASE 5.0216 - 1ST WISCONSIN NAT'L BANK (C.HELLMAN)
Recommendation : That the Council consider appeal by
Carey Hellman, representing said bank, from Planning
Commission denial of zone change request from R-3 to
C-1 for property on the SW corner of Sunrise Way and
E. Palm Canyon Drive, P.D. 69.
(149)
Director of Community Development reviewed his report,
dated April 6, 1982, noting that the application is
to facilitate the development of a savings and loan
branch office; and that the Planning Commission denied
the request based on the use/zoning constituting spot
zoning which would represent a significant precedent
for similar R-3 properties, which was supported by
the Tribal Council .
In answer to questions by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that the site is one acre, and would
accomodate residential condominiums by right-of-zone;
that regarding Great American Federal Savings & Loan
facility (formerly San Diego Savings & Loan) on the
east side of Farrell Drive at Tahquitz-McCallum, the
property was originally zoned C-D-N, under which the
project was built, but was bisected by the construction
=� of Farrell Drive in connection with development of the
P.S. Mall ; that it remained C-D-N until 1973-74; that
its current status is non-conforming; that he would
not equate that situation with the proposed site which
has been R-3 and a change in zoning and the General
Plan would constitute spot zoning ; that the R-3 allows
r office buildings, however, the provision was intended
to address a number of small lots on Tahquitz-McCallum
and on Indian Avenue, which if developed would only
accomodate 3-4 units and be difficult to develop,, and
that the provision would give that ability under a
conditional use permit in R-2 and R-3 zones on major
thoroughfares.
_ A_
4d I
Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 4
2. ZONING CASE 5.0216 (Continued)
Mayor declared the hearing opened.
Carey Hellman„ appellant, displayed site and floor
plans and stated that the Tribal Council recommenda-
tion was against the C•-1 but did not address the
application for a savings & loan on the site; that
he did not believe condominiums would be desirable on
the site or would ever be a reality; that a restaurant CONT'D
could be placed on the site, with subterranean parking; (149)
that the intersection is a. critical location, and the
Traffic Engineer favors the proposed project singe it
will only entail 45 parking spaces; that he would, be
willing to close access onto Palm Canyon Drive; that he
believes the San Diego Federal Savings & Loan facility
relates to the proposed project in terms of similarity
of the intersection, i .e. , shopping center and high
residential , and that the proposed facility would be "
approximately one-half of the size and there are only
a few cars parked at the San Diego facility at any
given time; that he believes the proposal is a good
solution for the subject intersection; that if it is
denied, they will have a fallow piece of property;
that the Indian landowner has agreed to assignment
of lease to First Nationwide Savings; that the adjoin-
ing condominium homeowners I association has supported
the project; that the site would be 40% landscaped open
space; and that the Palm Canyon Drive entrance would be
170-180 ft. from the intersection.
Leonard Fowler, spoke in support of the proposal , stating '
that more traffic would be generated if a restaurant
were located there; and that a bank would only be using
the area during weekdays.
In answer to question by Beverly Price, 1655 E. Palm
Canyon, Mr. Hellman stated that the driveways into
the facility and into the condominium recreation
parking area would be separate so that one ingress/
egress could not be used for the other; that he
was willing to work with the homeowners ' association;
and that the savings and loan on Farrell has been
non-conforming for many years and does not seem to
be objectionable and appears that it will remain there.
Mr. Hellman also stated that the facility is proposed
to contain a 30-40 person community room, which is
a service customarily provided by savings and loans
and if objectionable on the basis of increasing
traffic, it could be eliminated; that he would be
willing to work with CalTrans and the homeowners '
association to look at closing the adjoining driveways
on E. Palm Canyon Drive., which currently exist,
since the main amount of parking use for the recreation
area occurs on the tennis court side of the project,
which is on Twin Palms Drive.
Sidney Hartman, 1630 Calle Marcus , spoke in opposition
to the project, commenting on the lack of profitability
of savings and loans in the country and the lack of need
for additional facilities in the community; and stated �
he, would like to see the area landscaped, perhaps
with a fountain, which would add to the aesthetics and
investment of the condominiums.
r
00,
Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 5
2. ZONING CASE 5.0216 (Continued)
Ed DeBarta, Sr. Vice-President of First Nationwide Savings,
stated that it is a $7 million association, the fifth largest
in the nation, and one of three which showed a profit in 1981
for savings and loans over $1 million; that it has offices in
85 cities in California, as well as offices in New York and CONT 'D
+ Florida; and that they would like to be part of the community. (lag)
Mrs. Price spoke in support of the project, stating she believes
the use is best for the property, which she felt was fast
becoming an eyesore.
In answer to questions by Council , Director of Community Develop-
ment stated that he believed the lease on the site was probably
split from that for the condominiums; that a restaurant was
previously approved for the site in conjunction with a condominium
• hotel ; that the project did not materialize in that manner, and
the units were sold as condominiums.
There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed.
Councilman Rose stated that all things being equal , a savings
and loan would be preferable to a restaurant, and additional
condominiums would not be practical ; that the landowner does
not appear desirous of maintaining the property and it is not
likely to expect that it would be made into a park setting;
and that a way should be found to allow the use, which makes
sense in terms of other uses at the intersection.
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that a restaurant could be put in place
as the situation now exists.
Councilman Field stated that he would tend to agree with the
neighbors recommended use rather than a restaurant; and questioned
.1 whether conditions could be imposed to ameliorate the excess traffic
flows in the area if the savings and loan were approved.
Director of Community Development stated that conditions as
to locations of driveways could be made.
Mayor stated that he did not support spot zoning and the line
must be drawn with respect to proper uses in residential zones;
that he understood the rationale as to restaurants as ancillary
uses on Palm Canyon Drive; and that he could see allowing the
proposed use, but had concerns as to the proper mechanism to
enable that to occur.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that she was not opposed to the use,
although she was concerned about the 170-ft distance from the
intersection at Sunrise, and moved to approve the project,
subject to closure of the ingress/egress on Palm Canyon Drive;
said motion failed for lack of a second.
It was moved by Rose, and seconded by Field, that this matter be
4 returned to the Planning Commission with request that a method be
found whereby the use can be accomodated, and then returned to the
Council , and with admonition that the Commission address traffic
on Sunrise Way and Palm Canyon Drive, i .e. , ingress/egress on
Sunrise Way.
Councilwoman Ortner stated she approved of the project, but was
opposed to the motion, and foresaw problems simply referring it
to the Commission without direction.
Mayor stated that the direction is to find a proper mechanism within
the City's ordinances.
' Councilman Field stated he understood the direction to be to enable
the proposed installation to be in-place, with admonition to solve and
address traffic on E. Palm Canyon and Sunrise Way.
Said motion carried, Ortner voting No.
d
)Q6
Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 6
3. AIRPORT LAND ACQUISITON - RES. OF NECESSITY
Recommendation: That the Council approve Resolution of
Necessity to acquire Parcels B, G & J, pursuant t.o ADAP
Grant 6-06-0181 -09, for Airport purposes and approve review
appraisals in connection therewith.
Transportation Director reviewed his report, dated (51 )
April 6, 1982, stating that the parcels relate to the
clear zone.
Mayor declared the hearing open ; there being no appear-
ances, the hearing was closed.
Resolution 14197, determining interest, convenience and
necessity and approving review appraisals, was presented;
after which, it was moved by Field, seconded by Rose, and
unanimously carried, that Resolution 14197 be adopted.
a
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
a) Ron Kubler questioned whether it was legal to renew
a city services contract, i .e. , waste disposal , one
year prior to expiration of the existing contract
without going to bid; whether there were any con-
cessions made by the parties to the renewal , particu-
larly by the City and, if so, what were the concessions.
City Manager stated that the process was legal , and
that he would be happy to review what Mr. Kubler
means by concessions.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that the question was '
posed to her previously, and that she has looked
at the documentation and found there was nothing
illegal about it.
Councilman Rose stated that there was a dispute, at
the time of renewal , with Waste Disposal Services
regarding some monies that might be due the company
and part of the negotiation resulted in the company
giving up that claim; and that he understood that
type contract did not require public bidding. `
LEGISLATIVE ACTION : +
4. P.D. 131 (WESSMAN) - FINAL PLANS
Recommendation : That the Council approve final development
plans for Phase I of commercial complex on the west: side +
of S. Palm Canyon Drive, between Morongo Road and 'West (116)
Belardo Road, (Item reviewed in detail at last study session)
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that South Palm Canyon, south of East
Palm Canyon, is offset and a person travelling north
would have to look to the northwest and across a vacant '
area in order to see the south elevation of the building;
that a number of natural materials will remain on the
property, as a result of removal of the trailer park,
such as mature trees, until that portion of the property
is development in future phases.
UU
` Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 7
4. P.D. 131 (Continued)
Councilman Rose expressed concerns regarding the starkness
of the south elevation, recognizing that future development
would soften the effect•, and the turn into South Palm
Canyon from East Palm Canyon. He stated that the street
{' design appears to be a strange means of carrying through CONT'D
traffic on a major street, which will restrict traffic (116)
and necessitate a significant decrease in speed, possibly
causing a dangerous situation. He stated that he was
not prepared to vote on this matter at this time, and
would prefer a continuance in order to receive assurances,
particularly from the developer, with regard to the
appearance of the south elevation, and input from the
Traffic Engineer concerning the street design.
s Councilman Field stated that the Council 's concerns
regarding Belardo and South Palm Canyon have been
a matter of record, and that he believed the area
will be subject to modification, but that it will
not occur until the phasing for that portion of the
property is completed and he would caution that it be
solved, as well as the drainage, and be given close
scrutiny by future Councils and Planning Commissions.
Mayor stated that he would favor a continuance; that
some landscaping will mitigate the impact of the south
elevation; that the street design may be acceptable
from an engineering standpoint, but questioned its
practicality; and that he would prefer these matters
be delayed until the next meeting, with further
discussion at the April 20 study session.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Field, and unanimously
carried, Ortner abstaining, that this matter be continued
to April 21 , 1982.
' 5. ANNEXATION 22 - CROSSLEY TRACT
Recommendation: That the Council initiate proceedings
to annex the Crossley Tract, and set hearing date
thereon for May 5, 1982.
In response to question by Council , regarding concerns
expressed at the last study session about correction
of code violations, Director of Community Development
stated that there are a total of 11 violations, 4 of (54)
which have been resolved and the remainder are being
addressed by the County; that it was uncertain at this
point what the status will be of those remaining viola-
tions at the time of annexation; that the violations
relate to building code type violations; and that it
may be necessary to take a "wait-and-see" posture and
get an update from the County at time of annexation as
to its intent to follow-through with the necessary
legal requirements for correcting the violations.
It was the consensus of the Council to insure that
the violations are corrected before the area is annexed.
Resolution 14198, initiating proceedings as recomm?nded,
" was presented; after which, it was moved by Ortner,
seconded by Rose, and unanimously carried, that
Resolution 14198 be adopted.
Slyc�
Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 8
6,. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - FOOD HANDLERS
Recommendation: That the Council approve amendment to
the Municipal Code to establish regulations for food
handlers within the City. ;
Councilman Rose stated that he was not especially
satisfied with the response by the County concerning
enforcement; that the program is somewhat of an
improvement over that which exists; and that perhaps (103)
it can be built upon.
Councilman Field stated that the comments by the
County at the study session indicated that the
program was more an educational factor than anything
else, and he would support it for that purpose.
Mayor read title of Ordinance, as follows :
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 6.07, REGULATION
OF FOOD HANDLERS.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Field, and unanimously
carried, that further reading be waived, and that: the
Ordinance be introduced for first reading.
7. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION - CHANGE ORDERS
Recommendation: That the Council approve Change Order
No. 5 to contract with Dillingham Construction Co. , to
increase contract $28,128. '
(127)
Minute Order 3068, approving the Change Order as
recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved
by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and unanimously carried,
that Minute Order 3068 be adopted.
8. SCHOOL IMPACT MITIGATION (Matter continued from previous
meeting)
Recommendation : That the Council adopt a voluntary
program under CEQA, for mitigating the impact of develop-
ment on schools within the P.S. Unified School District. (114)
Mayor stated that the Tribal Council has not had an
opportunity to review this new proposal and recommended
that it be continued; and that he concurred with the
recommendation, and additionally that this matter be +
scheduled as a public hearing.
It was moved by Ortner, seconded by Field, and unani-
mously carried, that this matter be continued to
April 21 , 1982, as a public hearing item.
y
00i
Council Minutes
4-6-82 Page 9
9. BOGIE ROAD - CHANGE. ORDERS
A
Recommendation : That the Council approve Change Orders
3, 4, 7, 10 and 11 , for a net increase of $427,245.39
for contract with W.F. Maxwell , for Bogie Road bridge,
including widening to four lanes.
Minute Order 3069, approving change orders as (136)
recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved
by Field, seconded by Rose, and unanimously carried,
that Minute Order 3069 be adopted.
CONSENT AGENDA:
10. Resolution 14199 approving sufficiency of petition and
s authorizing proceed with design work for Assessment District 140, (56)
street improvements along portions of area bounded by El Cielo,
El Placer, Sunny Dunes and Camino Parocela.
11 . Resolution 14200 approving amendment to the Allocated Positions
and Compensation Plans to provide for Community Development (61 )
Coordinator in-lieu of Assistant to Director of Community
Development.
12. Minute Order 30.70 authorizing participation in RSVP for loth
year, in amount of 5,122, and agreement with the City of Desert (73 )
Hot Springs for continued operation thereof.
13. Minute Order 30 71 approving amendment to agreement irrith AYSO (109)
1 relative to soccer field lighting improvements at DeMuth Park,
Agreement #1749.
14. Resolution 14201 approving second 12-month time extension
for Tentative Tract Map 15827 for property on East Palm Canyon
Drive, between Seven Lakes Drive and Cherokee Way, for condominium (137)
purposes, Hallmark/Palm Canyon Assoc.
15. Resolution 14202 approving Tentative Tract Map 18370 for (137)
property between Ramon Road and Sonora and between Sunrise Way
and E1 Cielo, Webb/P. Trenchard (re : PD 127) .
16. Resolution 14203 approving the vacation of a certain public
service easement within Section 26, being a 10-ft wide easement (145)
dedicated on tract map for Twin Palms Estates #2, and situated
5 ft on each side of the common lot line between Lots 1 through 6,
relates to Regent International Hotel .
17. Resolution 14204 approving destruction of certain Finance
records more than two years old. (151 )
18. Resolution 14205 approving Tentative Tract Map 12676 second (137)
12-month time extension, for property on the NW corner of
Racquet Club Road and Cardillo Road, Ervin/Rocco Zappone, 14-lot
subdivision.
19. Resolution 14206 and 14207 approving Payroll '& `Claims.
20. Resolution 14208 amending the budget to appropriate $3,000 for
travel & training purposes for the Historic Site Preservation Board.
It was moved by Ortner, seconded by Field, and unanimously carried,
that Resolutions 14199 through 14208, and Minute Orders 3070 and
3071 be adopted; Rose abstaining on Resolution 14202.
J1U
Council Minutes .
4-6-82 Page 10
21 . SENIOR CENTER - SUBLEASE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
Recommendation : That the Council approve an amendment '
to agreement between the County and the P.S. Senior
Center Inc. for older American Act funds relative
to constructing an extension to the existing parking (117)
lot, renovations to the multipurpose room and a
vehicle lease.
Minute Order 3072, approving amendment as recom-
mended, was presented; after which, it was moved
by Rose, seconded by Field, and unanimously carried,
that Minute Order 3072 be adopted.
22. P.D. 116 - FINAL PLANS PHASE I
Recommendation : That the Council approve final develop-
ment plans for Phase I of Planned Development District
116, Fredricks Development Corp. , 100 acre site in (116)
Section 35.
In answer to question by Council , David Graf, representing
developer, stated that the first phase will contain 53
units, 32 of which will be mobilehomes on permanent
foundation, and adjacent to that will be 21 "stick-built"
units, which will be identical except for the manner of
attachment; the units will be equal in price; and tenta-
tive prices range from $48,500 to $68,500 for units
ranging from 800 sq. ft. to 1160 sq. ft.
Resolution 14209, approving final plans as recommended
was presented; after which, it was moved by Field„
seconded by Rose, and unanimously carried, that
Resolution 14209 be adopted.
REPORTS & REQUESTS:
23. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS - Received & Ordered Filed
a) Fire - 1981 Annual
24. CITY COUNCIL reports or requests - None
i
y
25. PUBLIC reports or requests - None
26. STAFF reports or requests •• None
ADJOURNMENT 4
There being no further business at 9:25 p.m. , Mayor
declared the meeting adjourned.
UDITH UMICH
City Clerk
ti
1� �