Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 10-69 MISCELLANEOUS USES 2010 CITY OF PALM DESERT.:- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEvEtf?Pfv Emr``• "- STAFF REPORT REQUEST: THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130, LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES, TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. SUBMITTED BY: Tony Bagato Principal Planner APPILANT: City of Palm Desert CASE NO: ZOA 10-69 DATE: May 27, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 1213A Exhibit A, Chapter 25.130 City Council Staff Report, dated April 22, 2010 City Council Minutes, dated April 22, 2010 Recommendation Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No.1213A to second reading for approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Discussion On April 22, 2010, the City Council rekiewed the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment, closed the public hearing, and referred the case back to staff to clarify the grandfathering of existing businesses allowingthem to expand, reduce, or relocate. In response to City Council's direction, staff added the following section: Section 25.130.030 Applicability C. All miscellaneous uses existing on Highway 111 and/or El Paseo on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be allowed to expand, reduce, and/or relocate their business on Highway 111 or El Paseo in accordance with the following provisions: Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses May 27, 2010 Page 2 of 2 1. Separation distance of 500 feet from the same miscellaneous use (i.e. a tattoo establishment must be 500 feet from another tattoo establishment); 2. No change in ownership occurs as part of the expansion, reduction, and/or relocation of the miscellaneous use. The modification to the ordinance will allow the grandfathered businesses to expand, reduce or relocate the existing business as long as it is 500 feet away from a similar use, and the ownership must remain the same. The proposed modification accommodates the existing businesses while addressing the concerns of having a high concentration of these businesses in one area in the city. In addition to the grandfathering modification, staff has added body branding and/or body scarring establishments to the list of miscellaneous uses that would be regulated by this ordinance. Currently, there are no body branding and/or body scarring establishments within the city. Other cities have addressed this type of business, and staff believes that it is appropriate to add this to the ordinance. Submitted By: Department Head: Tony Ba ato Lauri Aylaian Principal Planner Director Community Development Approval: �+ �1T LAC7IOPi LL , ', PROVEDROVED DENIEDT77�7�,�r Jo ohlmuth, ity Manager RECEIVED OTHERL�uLl�,d1�.�/ MEET _ AYES. air NOES: an ABSENT ABSTAIN: VERIFIED BY• 1 �� Original on File with city ci64,s Office GAPlanninoTo y BapaiMW FIbsTomals0afl Repons=A11069 Mbe UseslGly Council Miac Vses Reviae .dm ORDINANCE NO. 1213A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVNG A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 16`" day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request and by its Resolution No. 2524 has recommended approval of ZOA 10-69; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 221h day of April, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the said amendment: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, ORDINANCE NO. 1213A programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, Califomia, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That Section 25.130 is hereby approved as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 2: That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effect thirty(30)days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 27'" day of May, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including body branding and/or body scarring establishment, tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment' means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. B. "Body branding and/or body scarring establishment" means a business providing body branding, i.e. impressing or burning a mark or figure on the skin of a person with a 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A hot object or flame; and/or body scarring, i.e. any method by which a scar is applied to or left upon the skin of a person. C. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. D. "Fortune teller or palm reader" means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. E. "Independent massage establishment" means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. F. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. G. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. H. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. I. `Tattoo establishment" means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. C. All miscellaneous uses existing on Highway 111 and/or El Paseo on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be allowed to expand, reduce, and/or relocate their business on Highway 111 or El Paseo in accordance with the following provisions: 4 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A 1. Separation distance of 500 feet from the same miscellaneous use (i.e. a tattoo establishment must be 500 feet from another tattoo establishment); 2. No change in ownership occurs as part of the expansion, reduction, and/or relocation of the miscellaneous use. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1. Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: THAT THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130, LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES, TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner APPILANT: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO: ZOA 10-69 DATE: April 22, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: ordinance Exhibit A, Chapter 25.130 Planning Commission Minutes dated 16 March 2010 Legal Notice Recommendation Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No.1213 to second reading for approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Planning Commission Recommendation At its meeting of March 16, 2010,the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council of ZOA 10-69 adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code by Resolution No. 2524 on a 3-2 vote, with Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voting no. Executive Summary Approval of staff's recommendation would approve a zoning ordinance amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. This change would prohibit certain new miscellaneous uses along Highway 111 Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 2 of 4 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune tellers or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, independent massage establishments, and bail bonds establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non-conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. The intent of the ordinance, which was prepared at the request of the Planning Commission, is to promote a better visual character of Palm Desert as a destination resort community along the main core commercial area of the city. Background Regulation of tattoo establishments has been discussed at several times in the City of Palm Desert, dating back to December of 1997 when the city had only two tattoo establishments on Highway 111. The City Council discussed regulating the location of tattoo establishments as part of an ordinance dealing with the location of adult businesses. After discussion, the City Council chose not to identify tattoo establishments as adult entertainment businesses. At that time, the City Council determined that tattoo establishments were no different than barber or beauty shops offering personal services. Since the original discussion in 1997, there has been an increase in the number of tattoo establishments; there are currently six tattoo establishments, of which five are located on Highway 111 in the commercial core of the city. At the November 10, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner DeLuna asked staff to research potential regulations on the location of tattoo establishments because of the high number of them in one area of the city. On December 15, 2009, staff presented four possible approaches for regulation regarding tattoo establishments. After the discussion regarding the possible approaches for regulation and concerns regarding singling out tattoo establishments, the Commission discussed how other uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo (such as smoke shops, independent massage establishments, pawn shops, and fortune tellers) could be included in this discussion. The Planning Commission's intent was to preserve a visual quality along the City's main commercial corridor in order to preserve the quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Staff also recommended that existing businesses be considered grandfathered in along Highway 111. At the March 16, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, staff proposed ZOA 10-69 identified as Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses. The Commissioners had a long discussion and listened to testimony from tattoo business owners who would be potentially affected by this ordinance. The owners were worried about being landlocked, and not being able to relocate to a larger or smaller location on Highway 111. O:W%nnl,gV(sWn SMAAWOM6Ie haft Ws Ord&rWod mbco (3).A Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 3 of 4 Discussion The miscellaneous uses identified in the ordinance were included under the belief that they do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo. In fact, if they discourage high-end or premium retailers from locating in the area, they are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in enhancing and preserving a higher quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Currently along Highway 111 and El Paseo there are five tattoo establishments, eight independent massage establishments, one palm reader, and three smoke shops. Under the proposed ordinance, the existing uses will be grandfathered in as permitted uses, and will be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Ail new miscellaneous uses would be subject to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment regulations and all other applicable regulations. No new miscellaneous uses would be established along, or within 300 feet of, the rights-of-way for Highway 111 and El Paseo. Miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all commercial or service industrial areas of the city where not otherwise prohibited by code, with a 1,000 foot separation requirement from a same use. For example, a tattoo establishment must be 1,000 feet from another tattoo establishment, but not from other miscellaneous uses listed in this section. In order to determine the distance, a straight line would be measured from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. Staff does not foresee significant adverse impacts to the existing businesses since they will be allowed to continue their usage. New businesses would not be impacted, since there will still be many areas of the city in which they are permitted. Environmental Review The proposed amendment is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")(Cal. Pub. Res. Code, section 21000 et seq.) and its implementing regulations based on the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Staff has determined that no significant impacts will occur because miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code. Conclusion Palm Desert is known for being a resort destination, and Highway 111 and El Paseo are important commercial corridors of the City. Preserving the commercial viewsheds requires unique land use provisions to promote a high quality visual character for Palm Desert. GAPIennlnpV(eWn 3weftWo,NMccellene Oml4c MWr W old(3).ece Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 4 of 4 The purpose of this ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote a higher quality of development along the city's commercial corridors, and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code helps achieve the General Plan vision, promoting and preserving a high quality of development along the city's primary entryways of Highway 111 and El Paseo, while protecting the interests of the existing businesses. Fiscal Analysis The fiscal impact to the City associated with adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code is negligible. it can be argued that the miscellaneous uses do not contribute to the economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo. The City of Palm Desert receives nominal sales tax from smoke shops and pawn shops, while the other uses provide services that do not generate sales tax. Submitted By: Department Head: X 4e�— Kevin Swartz auri Aylaian Assistant Planner Director Community Development CITYCOUNCILACox Ov f APPROVED DENIED RECEIVED OTHER.—. M. Wohlmuth, City Manager MEET D ?1 a • ' /p AYES: 1 , Y NOES: ABSENT! ABSTADVr VERIFIED 8% Orwaal as Flb with City rk9 Office * By Minute Motion, refer the Case back to staff for clarification regarding the grandfathering of existing businesses at this time as to what they can do in the future (i.e., expansion, downsizing, reloation) including an appropriate process for such consideration. 3-1 (Kelly No, Ferguson ABSENT) GAP1anrunMKWk16MMAWorMAisceNar mORAW repen MWm 0)Ax ORDINANCE NO. 1213 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVNG A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 16`h day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert and recommended approval to the City Council of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22"' day of April, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the said amendment: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, ORDINANCE NO. 1213 programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council on this matter. SECTION 2: Palm. Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.130 is hereby amended and restated as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 3: That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 22nd day of April, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1213 EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment" means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. B. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing' does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1213 C. "Fortune teller or palm reader" means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. D. "Independent massage establishment" means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. E. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. F. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. G. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. H. "Tattoo establishment" means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance coded in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1. Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo, B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). 4 ORDINANCE NO. 1213 C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 they would be approving, the resolution which defines outcroppings and indicates that destruction of the outcropping is prohibited. What he stated deletes from that resolution any reference to the ridgeline map. Chair Limont asked if there was a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, approving the findings. The motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Campbell voted no). Mr. Erwin stated that the other item that they mentioned was the potential survey. He asked if they would want to convey to the Council a suggestion with regard to the ridgeline map. If they wished to do that, it would be a matter of merely the Chairman of the Commission, if that was the wish of the Commission, conveying that information to the City Council. Chairperson Limont asked if they should do that as a Miscellaneous item or as part of this. Mr. Erwin said this. Basically that has been the discussion so far. He suggested a motion and second and a vote requesting the Chairperson to convey that information to the Council. It was moved by Commissioner Tanner, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, by minute motion, authorizing Chairperson Limont to convey to the City Council a request for a survey by a licensed professional engineer to identify ridgelines in the HPR zoned area. Commissioner Schmidt stated that she did not want to discount the work that Mr. Stendell and staff have done on this and encouraged them to have that as a starting point. Mr. Erwin said that could be included in the conveyance. Chairperson Limont called for the vote. The motion carried 5- 0. ("See additional discussion on pages 18-19, items 1 and 3") D. Case No. ZOA 10-69—CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for a recommendation to the City Council to approve a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz reviewed the staff report. He noted a change on Page 4 of the resolution under E, Miscellaneous Uses, where it listed thrift stores. The words "thrift stores" should be replaced with "independent massage establishments." Staff recommended that the 10 I MINUTES ALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16, 2010 Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Mr. Swartz informed the Commission that staff also advertised this item to all the businesses mentioned in this ordinance. They also handed out copies to individuals at the counter, but only received one response in writing. That response was before the Commission from Bert Bruning of Palm Desert Tobacco. Mr. Bruning was recommending that the Commission add on Page 4 under G under smoke shops the wording to the sentence half way down the page that states, "A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products." Mr. Bruning wanted to add at the end "excluding cigarettes." Mr. Swartz asked for any questions. Commissioner Schmidt asked why they would exclude cigarettes. Mr. Swartz said that in speaking with him on the phone, he sells higher end tobacco and he was worried about an influx of lower-end tobacco cigarette stores. Commissioner Campbell asked if he meant one like the establishment in the Palms to Pines center. Mr. Swartz said yes, he was worried about an Influx of stores such as that. Commissioner DeLuna asked what it would take to add "excluding cigarettes". Did they just add it in to anything they approved? Mr. Erwin said they are permitted to add or delete anything that they wish when they finally make a decision with regard to this resolution. They were absolutely free to add it if they wished. Chairperson Limont opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to address the Commission in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. MR. BUDDY HAYNES, 73330 Highway 111, Suite 5, asked if the existing tattoo shops on Highway 111 would be considered grandfathered in, but if they were to move a year from now down the road, would they still be permitted to stay on Highway 111 or would they have to locate off of Highway 111. Mr. Erwin said if he moved the location, it would have to be off of Highway 111. Mr. Haynes asked if that was off of Highway 111 permanently. Mr. Erwin said yes. 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH-16. 2010 Mr. Haynes didn't agree with the change. He couldn't speak to the other Miscellaneous Uses, but if he had a 99-year lease at his present location versus a two-year lease, he didn't see what the difference would be if he was to move two doors down or stay at the same spot. With the economy fluctuating, if business gets slower and he needs to downsize, he would still like to stay on Highway 111. Or if business got better, he would like to move to a bigger building. He recommended that those already on Highway 111 should be able to choose if they would like to leave where they're at and still stay there, but at just a different address. He wanted them to put in a compromise or addition to the ordinance. MR. TROY LAWRENCE, 73-640 Highway 111, said he wasn't there to dispute anything, he was there to commend them for hearing them out initially and letting them speak their piece when this came out. The City was able to listen to what they had to say and make recommendations, listen to their advice. He did agree with it and there was only one thing to add and it didn't have anything to do with his business. There was another business they might want to consider to try to monitor and it was right next to him and it had to do with adult toys and stuff like that. He knew that wasn't in there, but he was willing to bet that was something that might come up, so it something they might want to try to spearhead before they start having some of those start popping up down the street, Once they have this ordinance, and he wasn't sure there was anything to control that, but once they see they are set in stone where they're at, someone might get an idea to start working their way down Highway 111 and then they would be right back here with that issue. He commended them again for letting them take care of business and that's why they live and work in this city. Commissioner Tanner asked what type of business he was referring to next to his establishment. Mr. Lawrence said it is called Skitzo Kitty; it's adult things. Mr. Bagato indicated that there is an existing city ordinance that deals with adult entertainment. When that business was initially approved, it was supposed to be mainly a lingerie store. If they have expanded that beyond the realm of what they would define as lingerie, they could look into it. Adult book stores are currently not allowed on Highway 111. Mr. Lawrence said it seemed to be fairly decent; however, he just wanted to bring it up to make sure it didn't get out of control. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16.2=QM Commissioner Tanner asked for confirmation that it is addressed in an existing ordinance. Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Locations are supposed to be in industrial areas like Cook Street or off of Dinah Shore. Staff would look into it. Commissioner Campbell asked Mr. Lawrence if he was happy to be grandfathered in. Mr. Lawrence replied extremely happy. Commissioner Campbell asked if he owned the building or if he was renting or leasing. Mr. Lawrence said he was leasing right now. Commissioner Campbell asked if his landlord knew he couldn't move anywhere else because it wouldn't be allowed on Highway 111 and his rent went up, what he would do then. Mr. Lawrence said it was controlled by a management company and he knew there were stipulations and laws that they aren't allowed to do that. He has known the gentleman, Mr. Otto Lupia, for 15 years and he didn't think he would take advantage. Commissioner Campbell said that was just him. What about the other tattoo owners? They may have that possibility where they are caught like that and can't move anywhere else. Mr. Lawrence couldn't speak for the others, but concurred. MR. JAMES LIVINGSTON, 73338 Highway 111, Suite 5, said he is co-owner of Inksanity Tattoo. He wanted to address what Mr. Haynes said earlier as far this being grandfathered in. if his lease Is up within two years, he would like the option to move two doors down or a street down on Highway 111. Another issue was they were excluding permanent cosmetics. Permanent cosmetics were no different from what he does. It's the same thing. They break the surface of the skin just as much as he does. They use the same needles; the machines might be different. By excluding them, the tattoo industry, they needed to involve permanent cosmetics also with them. He wanted to bring that to everybody's attention; it had not been mentioned. To move them and not letting him be able to open a business within five years down the road if his lease is up, that should apply to them too. He said about 38% to 40% is tourist 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 9010 business from out of town. They come from Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, and Orange County. There was no one else wishing to speak and Chairperson Limont close the public hearing. Commissioner Tanner knew they talked about tattoos and permanent makeup; he asked if there was any distinction between them. It clearly was similar. Mr. Bagato stated that according to the State and Riverside County Health and Safety there is no difference. They talked about from a Health Department view there is no difference. But staff was asked to look at the impact in terms of a resort community in the commercial core and a concentration of them in one area. They didn't treat them with beauty salons because they weren't looking at them from a health and safety standpoint, but from land uses that are compatible in a resort community for visual character along the commercial core when the concern was first brought up. That s why they separated the two. But by the Health and Safety Code, they are completely the same. Commissioner Campbell's recommendation was that they leave everything as is. She didn't think by removing the tattoo parlors and the tobacco shops on Highway 111 that it was going to make Highway 111 look any better. it needed a complete revamp and to leave them as it Is, and when they have other applications, go ahead and have a conditional use permit that would come In front of the Planning Commission to approve or not approve them. Commissioner Tanner asked if that was a motion. Commissioner Campbell said yes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, to keep the current ordinance and have the applications come before the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit. Commissioner DeLuna asked if there was anything they had talked about that would limit their vicinity to schools, parks, or churches. Commissioner Campbell explained that would come with the conditional use permit when it comes before them. Commissioner DeLuna thought they decided at the last meeting that requiring a CUP for this type of business was not the best solution. They already decided that. Commissioner Campbell explained that it hadn't been voted on yet. Commissioner DeLuna indicated that it was in the staff report. And they asked staff to analyze other land use compatibility requirements. Commissioner Campbell said that was true. 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT P ANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16, 2010 Commissioner Schmidt asked for clarification. Commissioner Campbell said her motion was to leave everything as it is and have any application come before the Planning Commission for consideration where they could approve a conditional use permit or deny it. Commissioner DeLuna asked if she was asking them to deny what staff was recommending. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner Schmidt reiterated that she was requesting them to do nothing. In relation to how they would vote, Commissioner DeLuna asked ff that meant they vote no for staff's recommendation. Mr. Erwin pointed out that they were talking about conditional use permits and there were no existing conditional use permit requirements for these businesses. Commissioner Campbell said they could go ahead and require a conditional use permit for these services. Mr. Erwin said if that was the desire of the Commission, staff would need to bring back to them an additional recommendation to include these as conditional use permit requirements in other zones. Chairperson Lfmont requested clarification that Commissioner Campbell was recommending that they deny staffs recommendation to change the current ordinance and direct them to come back with a conditional use permit requirement. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner DeLuna asked if that was the motion that has been seconded. Commissioner Tanner said that would be his second. Commissioner DeLuna requested that they clarify one more time what they were voting on. Mr. Erwin understood the motion to be made to deny the staff recommendation; to instruct staff to bring it back to the Planning Commission with the additional requirement of conditional use permits for these businesses in other locations. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt clarified that a yes vote would be in favor of denial. Mr. Erwin concurred that a yes vote would be in favor of denying the staff recommendation and instructing that they come back with something additional to this ordinance that would impose conditional use permit requirements on these businesses in other locations other than Highway 111 and El Paseo. Commissioner DeLuna reiterated that a no vote supports the staff recommendation. Mr. Erwin confirmed that a no vote would support the City staff recommendation. Commissioner Schmidt said they would have to take a separate action again on the resolution if Commissioner Campbell's motion fails. Chairperson Limont concurred. 15 MINUTES ALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Commissioner Tanner asked if there was still room for discussion. Chairperson Limont said yes. Commissioner Tanner said his concern has been aired twice here and that it is for local establishments on Highway 111 currently. The long-term leases or ownership property secures that presence on Highway 111. His concern was for a short-term lease or an owner just deciding at the conclusion of that lease that they no longer want to have this particular establishment in their building. They could say no, they are not going to extend the lease. This denied an already established performing business in the city of Palm Desert the opportunity to continue that endeavor on Highway 111; that's where they want to be. At the same time, he wanted it understood when adopting the requirement for a new CUP that they suggest that there is no more room for these particular types of establishments and that they not eliminate the opportunity for established businesses to continue, either in a smaller place or a larger place on Highway 111. Because the way he understood it, once they are out of that one particular spot, they are no longer going to be able to lease, even if they come to the Planning Commission because a conditional use permit will say no more establishments of this type. Mr. Erwin clarified that a conditional use permit wouldn't say that, this ordinance says that regardless of a conditional use permit. If they wished to put in the ordinance that they could move, then they would have to talk in terms of same location, similar location and determine if they then are required to comply with the other distance restrictions from other operations; can they expand their business, etc.; a number of things. Commissioner Tanner said he had a difficult time taking the ability of one to make money away at the whim of a building owner or what have you. Commissioner Campbell stated that her motion still stood to come to the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit and Commissioner Tanner had seconded the motion. Commissioner DeLuna asked if in the worst case scenario what they were talking about occurs, they are not precluded from doing business in another location in the city, they are just precluded from being on Highway 111; Service Industrial zones or such other designated zones could still accommodate the business, just not the location. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Mr. Erwin asked for clarification that the conditional use permit as he understood it would not apply on Highway 111 or El Paseo, but would apply in other zones within the city off of El Paseo. He had the feeling that perhaps they were talking about a relocation of one existing on Highway 111 and El Paseo requiring a conditional use permit. He asked if that was what he was hearing. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Mr. 16 MINUTES ALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MAR U tR = Erwin said that if an existing business on Highway 111 wants to relocate to Highway 111, they go through a conditional use permit process. Both Commissioners Campbell and Tanner concurred. Mr. Erwin said that anyone who wished to locate on Cook Street or a place like that also required a conditional use permit. Commissioners Campbell and Tanner both concurred. Commissioner Schmidt noted that her fear in requiring a conditional use permit is that it runs with the land. It doesn't terminate when the end of a lease terminates. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt said that if the ownership changes, it's still allowed. Mr. Erwin said that was correct, unless they restrict that in their granting of the conditional use permit. They do have the ability to do that, if they specify that it is for a particular operator so that they make it so that it does not run with the land. Without some restriction on it, it would run with the land and be available for that location. Commissioner DeLuna said that in that case, it could conceivably allow someone to stay in that location with the same use and allow someone relocating to start the same business in another location, so in effect they would have two businesses? Mr. Ervin said no, it would not expand into two businesses; it would still be just one business. Chairperson Limont noted it would be comparable to how we treat stand alone massage parlors. The CUP is to the owner, to the person operating the business. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner DeLuna asked if it would then affect the owner of property, not the lessee. Mr. Erwin said it may, he didn't know. Chairperson Limont said they could condition it to the person leasing and it could go with their business license. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Chairperson Limont noted there was a motion on the floor and called for the vote. The motion failed 2-3 (Chairperson Limont, Commissioner DeLuna and Commissioner Schmidt voted no). Mr. Erwin advised Chairperson Limont to see if there was any other motion the Commission wished to make. It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, approving the findings and recommendation as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2524, recommending to the City Council approval of ZOA 10-69 adding Chapter 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16, 2010 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, as amended by changing the words "thrift stores" to "independent massage establishments" in E of Section 25.130.020 Definitions and adding the words "excluding cigarettes" to G of Section 25.130.020. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). 1X. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell reported that the next meeting would be March 17. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Chairperson Limont also reported that the next meeting would be March 17. C. PARKS & RECREATION Commissioner Tanner stated that they had a presentation by the City Attorney regarding the Brown Act and reviewed upcoming events and discussion items. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt said they met last Monday and primarily it was updating and the City Attorney spoke about the Brown Act and the need for everyone to adhere to it. The next meeting would be in a month. XI. COMMENTS 1. Commissioner DeLuna said she apparently missed something when they were discussing the definition of rock outcroppings and that part of the motion that got bifurcated. She had something that she wanted to include in the definition and missed the opportunity because she didn't realize what the process that was occurring would exclude any further discussion on the section of the rock outcropping. She didn't know the proper forum to address that. Mr. 18 CITY UE PNERI DESERI 77-Sto FAm W\klm.Uknv, Pei M Urexf,Cei a nknu y226o-2S7N rcu 76o 146-0611 1A�:760 141-7098 mIM palm.L+•n..mF CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 NOTICE OF INTENT BY THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 26.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Cade will prohibit certain miscellaneous new uses along Highway III and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops,fortune teller or palm readers, smoke shops,billiards or pool halls,and bail bond establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non- conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. PROJECT LOCATION: Along Highway 111 and El Paseo within the City of Palm Desert. PUBLIC HEARING: SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, April 22, 2010, at 4:00 p.m. In the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drlve, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing, Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. General questions related to the ordinance can be directed to the City of Palm Desert Planning Department at 760-346-0611. PUBLISH: Desert Sun Rachelle Klassen,City Clerk April 11,2010 Palm Desert City Council MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 With City Council concurrence, Mayor Finerty called a recess at 4:52 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 4:54 p.m. XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, ADDING CHAPTER25.130-LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES-TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE Case No. ZOA 10-69 (City of Palm Desert, Applicant). Principal Planner Tony Bagato stated this was a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to add a section for Miscellaneous Uses that are identified in the Ordinance. At the November 10,2009, a Planning Commissioner requested staff to research potential regulations onto tattoo establishments. The City currently had five establishments on Highway 111, and there was a concern with having certain business types along the City's prime commercial corridors of El Paseo and Highway 111 as a resort community. On December 15,2009,staff presented four possible restriction types and stated that if there was a concern over the image of businesses,staff felt there were other businesses that should be in that category as well along with tattoo establishments. On March 16, 2010, staff presented the Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) and locations of Miscellaneous Uses. Those uses are identified in the Ordinance as bail bonds and body piercing establishments, billiards or pool halls, fortune tellers, independent massage parlors, tattoo shops,and smoke shops,which are categorized as mainly smoke shops that sold paraphernalia. He said it wouldn't include high-end cigar shops or cigar lounges, because those did exist on El Paseo. The uses would be prohibited on Highway 111 and El Paseo, but allowed in other C1 or Service Industrial Zones with a 1,000-foot distance separation from a similar use. He said a tattoo establishment would have to be 1,000 feet away from another tattoo, but could be next to a massage parlor or smoke shop. He said the City Council packet included a map that illustrated the current Miscellaneous Uses that would be grandfathered under the Ordinance. Staff received one letter from Ink Sanity Tattoo voicing their concern over the fairness of the Ordinance and asking for the opportunity to expand or downsize if they had to, but the current non-conforming uses would not allow it and would require a separate Zoning Ordinance Amendment. They asked that perhaps tattoo parlors can be removed from the Ordinance,however,because this item was originally requested by the Planning Commission, staff recommended that it remain. On March 16 the Planning Commission recommended approval on a 3-2 vote with Commissioners Tanner and Campbell voting NO. He offered to answer questions. Mayorand Councilmembers noticed they did not have a copy of the map with the identified current Miscellaneous Uses along El Paseo and Highway 111. 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 City Clerk Rachelle Klassen confirmed the City Clerk's Office did not receive a copy of the map and that's why it was not included in Council's packet. Mr.Bagato displayed the map and pointed the locations of the Miscellaneous Uses and tattoo establishments on Highway 111. Further responding, he confirmed there were five establishments within 1,000 feet of each other. Councilman Spiegel asked what were the restrictions used by other cities in the Valley. Mr. Bagato responded the cities of Rancho Mirage, Indian Wells, and La Quinta didn't address miscellaneous uses in their Code, but actually prohibited tattoo shops as well as other uses. However,the City of La Quinta allowed fortune tellers with a Conditional Use Permit(CUP),but tattoo shops are prohibited in most of the cities. He said Cathedral City was looking into restricting the same uses Palm Desert was proposing to their new area off Highway 111 and Palm Canyon, the revitalization down town. Further responding, he agreed Palm Desert probably had the most tattoo parlors because it was the most business friendly toward them. Councilman Kelly commented he couldn't read the map that was being displayed from where he was sitting. Councilmember Benson stated the staff report indicated there were currently five tattoo and eight independent massage establishments that would all be grandfathered. She said the intent of the Ordinance was to prohibit new ones. Mr. Bagato agreed,stating the existing establishments could not relocate.He said once an establishment closed for more than six months, they would no longer be able to re-open in the same location. Further responding, he confirmed the proposed Ordinance was not intended to put establishments out of business. Responding to request, Mr Bagato agreed to go back to his office to make copies of the map that illustrated the current Miscellaneous Uses that would be grandfathered under the Ordinance. NOTE: At this point in the meeting, and with City Council concurrence, Mayor Finerty suspended consideration of Public Hearing A in order for staff to provide the requested map. She continued with the remainder of the City Council, Redevelopment Agency, and Housing Authority Agendas, then returned to Public Hearing A. Mayor Finerty noted Mr. Bagato had concluded his staff report, and the Council was resuming with questions regarding the map. 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 Mr. Bagato described the area of focus,which was between Portola Avenue and Town Center Way just before Desert Crossings. Responding to question, he said most of the businesses and tattoo establishments were between San Pablo and Portola Avenue, Mayor Finerty declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. MR. BUDDY HAYNES, Owner of Insanity Ink II Tattoos, 73-338 Highway 111, Palm Desert, stated he assumed the Council received the letter he wrote, which stated he didn't agree with the proposed Ordinance, but he understood. However, he asked the Council to consider placing tattoo shops in its own category. His business was fortunate that it had another three years on his lease for his shop, but it included a hair salon. He said business was goad, but if it got better or declined, he still wanted the opportunity to relocate across the street or next door and still abide by the proposed 1,000-feet distance. He understood why the City didn't want his business close to El Paseo and agreed it probably didn't belong there. He said his partner James Livingston had monitored all the foot traffic his shop received from being on Highway 111 for the past two months and can show the Council the amount of clientele it received. He was curious what Council meant when it stated that Palm Desert's image was a"tourist town,"because up and down Highway 111 were restaurants, a gun shop, a hardware store, and pet grooming store, so he didn't quite understand how tattoo shops got stereotyped in the miscellaneous category. He hoped the Council will take into consideration to set tattoo establishments aside, because if he had to add onto his business or move next door, what would be the difference. He appreciated the fact that his business would be grandfathered, but the proposed Ordinance dictated how his business can grow or downsize,which was not a way to become successful. He offered to answer questions. Councilman Spiegel stated on the north side of Highway 111 was a parlor with a huge sign that said "Tattoo." MR. HAYNES responded it was not his establishment. He said his shop shared the same wall with McGowan's Pub and is four doors down from the Fled Barn. He said a Planning Commission member was quoted in the newspaper as stating that being open late hours attracted crime, which he found appalling, because there was no statistic with the Riverside County Sheriffs Department that would support the statement. He said his shop and other restaurants stayed open late, but they did not attract crime. He said they were hard-working people, and he watched out for his community, because he was born and raised here and lived here since 1980. He was proud to be part of this City, because it's been good to him and fellow citizens. 18 I MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 MR. JAMES LIVINGSTON, Co-Owner of Insanity Ink II Tattoos, 73-338 Highway 111, Palm Desert,requested the City rewrite the Ordinance, because a tattoo and permanent cosmetic were the same thing, yet permanent cosmetic was not included as Miscellaneous Uses. He offered to answer questions. Councilman Spiegel requested that Lieut. Shouse provide the Council with his thoughts on the matter. Lieut. Shouse stated the Police Department had not received an inordinate amount of calls for service regarding tattoo parlors. He said tattoo parlors did not come up on the radar as being an issue for the Police Department. He said the Department had more problems with bars in town and other locations. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Finerty declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Kelly stated the proposed Zoning Ordinance was very arrogant even though he wouldn't get or have a tattoo, but he recognized there was a whole different culture out there that liked tattoos and had them. He said how could he be so arrogant as to say he didn't agree with their culture and have them kicked out,which he didn't understand. He noticed that pool halls were also included in the proposed Ordinance,yet as a senior in high school, he had a 40 hour a week job, played basketball,dated Mary Helen, and in his spare time he hung out in the pool hall, and he just got recognized as citizen of the year yesterday. He said he valued the education he received at the pool hall. Another thing that amazed him was that Palm Desert had the best in the Valley, because many people have told him Quick Massage located at 74-125 Highway 111, Palm Desert,was a wonderful place to get a massage. He didn't frequent massage parlors, but a lot of people do like them. He recognized the City had problems with massage parlors, in fact it had one case on the agenda this evening, but that was the jab of the City Council to take care of it. He said the City had problems with its parks, it had to mow the grass and trim the trees, but just because it had to be done, didn't mean they had to get rid of its parks. He said the City will have to continue to monitor the massage parlors to make sure they followed the Ordinance. As far as he was concerned, he thought the proposed Ordinance was very arrogant. He said if the Council wanted Palm Desert to be upscale and have the best shops, then it should get rid of its utility poles, maintain the streets, paint the white lines on the road, and make it so that the establishments and stores are the place to be. Then the City will automatically have the best places and wouldn't have to worry about these zoning ordinances. Councilman Spiegel stated he was torn with the matter, because he would like to make Highway 111 prestigious as possible. Whether the Red Barn and other establishments on Highway 111 were prestigious, he sometimes 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 questioned, but he wasn't sure how to turn it around or if it was possible. However, he agreed with Councilman Kelly and Mr. Livingston's and Mr. Haynes'concern, which was that the landlord or owner of a building can raise the rent and there was nothing that could be done by the tenant. Councilmember Benson stated the City had too many Miscellaneous Uses and it was the City's fault for allowing them in the first place, but to say that if a business didn't succeed it couldn't relocate, may be wrong because they may succeed where the rent is lower. She said the Ordinance needed to state that no new parlors will be accepted on Highway 111, but existing ones are grandfathered with the right to expand or downsize. She said the Council needed to be more lenient with existing establishments, because they came in when it was allowed. Responding to question,Mr.Erwin stated the proposed Ordinance as written did not allow existing businesses to move to another location. Certainly if the Council desired, a hearing process or process to allow existing establishments to expand, depress, or move to other locations can be established as long as they complied with the distance requirements. He offered to craft some language to that effect. Councilman Spiegel and Councilmember Benson thought that would be fair. Councilman Spiegel stated the City had plenty of massage and tattoo establishments, and it didn't need anymore, but disagreed to locking in existing establishments to a location. Councilman Kelly stated it was a free country and the economy should take care of itself, because it dictated how many restaurants or grocery stores a City would have. He said the Council should not get into the business of controlling how many businesses it should have. Councilman Kelly moved to deny staffs recommendation. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion, refer the Case back to staff for clarification regarding the grandfathering of existing businesses at this time as to what they can do in the future(i.e., expansion, downsizing, relocation)including an appropriate process for such consideration. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 3-1 vote, with Kelly voting NO and Ferguson ABSENT. 20 -%r -L97 Olp CITY OF PALM DESERT.;. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNIT Y'DEVELOPMEmr-- -m— STAFF REPORT REQUEST: THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130, LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES, TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. SUBMITTED BY: Tony Bagato Principal Planner APPILANT: City of Palm Desert CASE NO: ZOA 10-69 DATE: May 27, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 1213A Exhibit A, Chapter 25.130 City Council Staff Report, dated April 22, 2010 City Council Minutes, dated April 22, 2010 Recommendation Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No.1213A to second reading for approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Discussion On April 22, 2010, the City Council relviewed the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment, closed the public hearing, and referred the case back to staff to clarify the grandfathering of existing businesses allowing4hern to expand, reduce, or relocate. In response to City Council's direction, staff added the following section: Section 25.130.030 Applicability C. All miscellaneous uses existing on Highway 111 and/or El Paseo on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be allowed to expand, reduce, and/or relocate their business on Highway 111 or El Paseo in accordance with the following provisions: Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses May 27, 2010 Page 2 of 2 1. Separation distance of 500 feet from the same miscellaneous use (i.e. a tattoo establishment must be 500 feet from another tattoo establishment); 2. No change in ownership occurs as part of the expansion, reduction, and/or relocation of the miscellaneous use. The modification to the ordinance will allow the grandfathered businesses to expand, reduce or relocate the existing business as long as it is 500 feet away from a similar use, and the ownership must remain the same. The proposed modification accommodates the existing businesses while addressing the concerns of having a high concentration of these businesses in one area in the city. In addition to the grandfathering modification, staff has added body branding and/or body scarring establishments to the list of miscellaneous uses that would be regulated by this ordinance. Currently, there are no body branding and/or body scarring establishments within the city. Other cities have addressed this type of business, and staff believes that it is appropriate to add this to the ordinance. Submitted By: Department Head: Tony Ba ato Lauri Aylaian Principal Planner Director Community Development Approval: Jo ohlmuth, ity Manager GNPlennnp\Tony Bepsto\Wom RftTe matslStaft NeWds%20A\1669 Misc USsSTiry C .dl Mile Us%MNsb.Eoc ORDINANCE NO. 1213A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVNG A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 16'n day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request and by its Resolution No. 2524 has recommended approval of ZOA 10-69; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22�n day of April, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the said amendment: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, ORDINANCE NO. 1213A programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That Section 25.130 is hereby approved as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 2: That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effect thirty(30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 271" day of May, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including body branding and/or body scarring establishment, tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment" means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. B. "Body branding and/or body scarring establishment" means a business providing body branding, i.e. impressing or burning a mark or figure on the skin of a person with a 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A hot object or flame; and/or body scarring, i.e. any method by which a scar is applied to or left upon the skin of a person. C. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. D. "Fortune teller or palm reader" means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. E. "Independent massage establishment" means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. F. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. G. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. H. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. i. 'Tattoo establishment" means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. C. All miscellaneous uses existing on Highway 111 and/or El Paseo on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be allowed to expand, reduce, and/or relocate their business on Highway 111 or El Paseo in accordance with the following provisions: 4 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A 1. Separation distance of 500 feet from the same miscellaneous use (i.e. a tattoo establishment must be 500 feet from another tattoo establishment); 2. No change in ownership occurs as part of the expansion, reduction, and/or relocation of the miscellaneous use. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1. Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: THAT THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130, LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES, TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner APPILANT: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO: ZOA 10-69 DATE: April 22, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: ordinance Exhibit A, Chapter 25.130 Planning Commission Minutes dated 16 March 2010 Legal Notice Recommendation Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No.1213 to second reading for approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Planning Commission Recommendation At its meeting of March 16, 2010,the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council of ZOA 10-69 adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code by Resolution No. 2524 on a 3-2 vote, with Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voting no. Executive Summary Approval of staff's recommendation would approve a zoning ordinance amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. This change would prohibit certain new miscellaneous uses along Highway 111 Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 2 of 4 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune tellers or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, independent massage establishments, and bail bonds establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non-conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. The intent of the ordinance, which was prepared at the request of the Planning Commission, is to promote a better visual character of Palm Desert as a destination resort community along the main core commercial area of the city. Background Regulation of tattoo establishments has been discussed at several times in the City of Palm Desert, dating back to December of 1997 when the city had only two tattoo establishments on Highway 111. The City Council discussed regulating the location of tattoo establishments as part of an ordinance dealing with the location of adult businesses. After discussion, the City Council chose not to identify tattoo establishments as adult entertainment businesses. At that time, the City Council determined that tattoo establishments were no different than barber or beauty shops offering personal services. Since the original discussion in 1997, there has been an increase in the number of tattoo establishments; there are currently six tattoo establishments, of which five are located on Highway 111 in the commercial core of the city. At the November 10, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner DeLuna asked staff to research potential regulations on the location of tattoo establishments because of the high number of them in one area of the city. On December 15, 2009, staff presented four possible approaches for regulation regarding tattoo establishments. After the discussion regarding the possible approaches for regulation and concerns regarding singling out tattoo establishments, the Commission discussed how other uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo (such as smoke shops, independent massage establishments, pawn shops, and fortune tellers) could be included in this discussion. The Planning Commission's intent was to preserve a visual quality along the City's main commercial corridor in order to preserve the quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Staff also recommended that existing businesses be considered grandfathered in along Highway 111. At the March 16, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, staff proposed ZOA 10-69 identified as Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses. The Commissioners had a long discussion and listened to testimony from tattoo business owners who would be potentially affected by this ordinance. The owners were worried about being landlocked, and not being able to relocate to a larger or smaller location on Highway 111. G.VWnln9%KeNn Sw "Z\Mff"bcelten O, reportm OM MAM Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 3 of 4 Discussion The miscellaneous uses identified in the ordinance were included under the belief that they do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo. In fact, if they discourage high-end or premium retailers from locating in the area, they are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in enhancing and preserving a higher quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Currently along Highway 111 and El Paseo there are five tattoo establishments, eight independent massage establishments, one palm reader, and three smoke shops. Under the proposed ordinance, the existing uses will be grandfathered in as permitted uses, and will be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. All new miscellaneous uses would be subject to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment regulations and all other applicable regulations. No new miscellaneous uses would be established along, or within 300 feet of, the rights-of-way for Highway 111 and El Paseo. Miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all commercial or service industrial areas of the city where not otherwise prohibited by code, with a 1,000 foot separation requirement from a same use. For example, a tattoo establishment must be 1,000 feet from another tattoo establishment, but not from other miscellaneous uses listed in this section. In order to determine the distance, a straight line would be measured from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. Staff does not foresee significant adverse impacts to the existing businesses since they will be allowed to continue their usage. New businesses would not be impacted, since there will still be many areas of the city in which they are permitted. Environmental Review The proposed amendment is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")(Cal. Pub. Has. Code, section 21000 et seq.) and its implementing regulations based on the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Staff has determined that no significant impacts will occur because miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code. Conclusion Palm Desert is known for being a resort destination, and Highway 111 and El Paseo are important commercial corridors of the City. Preserving the commercial viewsheds requires unique land use provisions to promote a high quality visual character for Palm Desert. O:IPlenningWmin 5w nl\WoMMl c lleneou6 Orftc IMM mlec oN(3).doc Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 4 of 4 The purpose of this ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote a higher quality of development along the city's commercial corridors, and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code helps achieve the General Plan vision, promoting and preserving a high quality of development along the city's primary entryways of Highway 111 and El Paseo, while protecting the interests of the existing businesses. Fiscal Analysis The fiscal impact to the City associated with adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code is negligible. It can be argued that the miscellaneous uses do not contribute to the economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo. The City of Palm Desert receives nominal sales tax from smoke shops and pawn shops, while the other uses provide services that do not generate sales tax. Submitted By: Department Head: Kevin Swartz uri Aylaian Assistant Planner Director Community Development CMYCOUNCILACp IJ ov t APPROVED..-_ ./W DF,NIrD RECEIVED OTHER M. Wohlmuth, City Manager MEETi AYES: aFl t NOES. ABSEIM ARSTAINr VERIFIED RYt / OfW#Al on FIN wtri City II('4 Oface * By Minute Motion, refer the Case back to staff for clarification regarding the grandfathering of existing businesses at this time as to what they can do in the future (i.e., expansion, downsizing, reloation) including an appropriate process for such consideration. 3-1 (Kelly NO, Ferguson ABSENT) G.wlennkoKeuln SmdAftrdM scelieneous OMcc report mlec ord(3).dw ORDINANCE NO. 1213 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVNG A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 26.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 16th day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert and recommended approval to the City Council of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22nd day of April, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the said amendment: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, ORDINANCE NO. 1213 programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council on this matter. SECTION 2: Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.130 is hereby amended and restated as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 3: That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 22"d day of April, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1213 EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1, The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment" means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. B. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1213 C. "Fortune teller or palm reader" means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. D. "Independent massage establishment" means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. E. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. F. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. G. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. H. "Tattoo establishment" means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1. Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111: 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). 4 ORDINANCE NO.1213 C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance, The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 MINUTES ESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 they would be approving, the resolution which defines outcroppings and indicates that destruction of the outcropping is prohibited. What he stated deletes from that resolution any reference to the ridgeline map. Chair Limont asked if there was a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, approving the findings. The motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Campbell voted no). Mr. Erwin stated that the other item that they mentioned was the potential survey. He asked if they would want to convey to the Council a suggestion with regard to the ridgeline map. If they wished to do that, it would be a matter of merely the Chairman of the Commission, if that was the wish of the Commission, conveying that information to the City Council. Chairperson Limont asked if they should do that as a Miscellaneous item or as part of this. Mr. Erwin said this. Basically that has been the discussion so far. He suggested a motion and second and a vote requesting the Chairperson to convey that information to the Council. It was moved. by Commissioner Tanner, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, by minute motion, authorizing Chairperson Limont to convey to the City Council a request for a survey by a licensed professional engineer to identify ridgelines in the HPR zoned area. Commissioner Schmidt stated that she did not want to discount the work that Mr. Stendell and staff have done on this and encouraged them to have that as a starting point. Mr. Erwin said that could be included in the conveyance. Chairperson Limont called for the vote. The motion carried 5- 0. ("See additional discussion on pages 18.19, items 1 and 3") D. Case No. ZOA 10-69—CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for a recommendation to the City Council to approve a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz reviewed the staff report. He noted a change on Page 4 of the resolution under E, Miscellaneous Uses, where it listed thrift stores. The words 'thrift stores" should be replaced with "independent massage establishments." Staff recommended that the 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Mr. Swartz informed the Commission that staff also advertised this item to all the businesses mentioned in this ordinance. They also handed out copies to individuals at the counter, but only received one response in writing. That response was before the Commission from Bert Bruning of Palm Desert Tobacco. Mr. Bruning was recommending that the Commission add on Page 4 under G under smoke shops the wording to the sentence half way down the page that states, "A retail tobacco establishment Is an establishment that generates less than 500/6 of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products." Mr. Bruning wanted to add at the end"excluding cigarettes." Mr. Swartz asked for any questions. Commissioner Schmidt asked why they would exclude cigarettes. Mr. Swartz said that in speaking with him on the phone, he sells higher end tobacco and he was worried about an influx of lower-end tobacco cigarette stores. Commissioner Campbell asked if he meant one like the establishment in the Palms to Pines center. Mr. Swartz said yes, he was worried about an influx of stores such as that. Commissioner DeLuna asked what it would take to add "excluding cigarettes". Did they just add it in to anything they approved? Mr. Erwin said they are permitted to add or delete anything that they wish when they finally make a decision with regard to this resolution. They were absolutely free to add it if they wished. Chairperson Limont opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to address the Commission in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. MR. BUDDY HAYNES, 73338 Highway 111, Suite 5, asked if the existing tattoo shops on Highway Ill would be considered grandfathered in, but if they were to move a year from now down the road, would they still be permitted to stay on Highway 111 or would they have to locate off of Highway 111. Mr. Erwin said if he moved the location, it would have to be off of Highway 111. Mr. Haynes asked if that was off of Highway 111 permanently. Mr. Erwin said yes. 11 MINUTES DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Mr. Haynes didn't agree with the change. He couldn't speak to the other Miscellaneous Uses, but if he had a 99-year lease at his present location versus a two-year lease, he didn't see what the difference would be if he was to move two doors down or stay at the same spot. With the economy fluctuating, if business gets slower and he needs to downsize, he would still like to stay on Highway 111. Or if business got better, he would like to move to a bigger building. He recommended that those already on Highway 111 should be able to choose if they would like to leave where they're at and still stay there, but at just a different address. He wanted them to put in a compromise or addition to the ordinance. MR. TROY LAWRENCE, 73-640 Highway 111, said he wasn't there to dispute anything, he was there to commend them for hearing them out initially and letting them speak their piece when this came out. The City was able to listen to what they had to say and make recommendations, listen to their advice. He did agree with it and there was only one thing to add and it didn't have anything to do with his business. There was another business they might want to consider to try to monitor and it was right next to him and it had to do with adult toys and stuff like that. He knew that wasn't in there, but he was willing to bet that was something that might come up, so It something they might want to try to spearhead before they start having some of those start popping up down the street. Once they have this ordinance, and he wasn't sure there was anything to control that, but once they see they are set in stone where they're at, someone might get an idea to start working their way down Highway 111 and then they would be right back here with that issue. He commended them again for letting them take care of business and thars why they live and work in this city. Commissioner Tanner asked what type of business he was referring to next to his establishment. Mr. Lawrence said it is called Skitzo Kitty; it's adult things. Mr. Bagato indicated that there is an existing city ordinance that deals with adult entertainment. When that business was initially approved, it was supposed to be mainly a lingerie store. If they have expanded that beyond the realm of what they would define as lingerie, they could look into it. Adult book stores are currently not allowed on Highway 111. Mr. Lawrence said it seemed to be fairly decent; however, he just wanted to bring it up to make sure it didn't get out of control. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Commissioner Tanner asked for confirmation that it is addressed in an existing ordinance. Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Locations are supposed to be in industrial areas like Cook Street or off of Dinah Shore. Staff would look into it. Commissioner Campbell asked Mr. Lawrence if he was happy to be grandfathered in. Mr. Lawrence replied extremely happy. Commissioner Campbell asked if he owned the building or if he was renting or leasing. Mr. Lawrence said he was leasing right now. Commissioner Campbell asked if his landlord knew he couldn't move anywhere else because it wouldn't be allowed on Highway 111 and his rent went up, what he would do then. Mr. Lawrence said it was controlled by a management company and he knew there were stipulations and laws that they aren't allowed to do that. He has known the gentleman, Mr. Otto Lupia, for 15 years and he didn't think he would take advantage. Commissioner Campbell said that was just him. What about the other tattoo owners? They may have that possibility where they are caught like that and can't move anywhere else. Mr. Lawrence couldn't speak for the others, but concurred. MR. JAMES LIVINGSTON, 73338 Highway 111, Suite 5, said he is co-owner of Inksanity Tattoo. He wanted to address what Mr. Haynes said earlier as far this being grandfathered in. If his lease is up within two years, he would like the option to move two doors down or a street down on Highway 111. Another issue was they were excluding permanent cosmetics. Permanent cosmetics were no different from what he does. It's the same thing. They break the surface of the skin just as much as he does. They use the same needles; the machines might be different. By excluding them, the tattoo industry, they needed to involve permanent cosmetics also with them. He wanted to bring that to everybody's attention; it had not been mentioned. To move them and not letting him be able to open a business within five years down the road if his lease is up, that should apply to them too. He said about 38% to 40% is tourist 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING GAMMISSION MARCH 16. 201 business from out of town. They come from Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, and Orange County. There was no one else wishing to speak and Chairperson Limont closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tanner knew they talked about tattoos and permanent makeup; he asked if there was any distinction between them. It clearly was similar. Mr. Bagato stated that according to the State and Riverside County Health and Safety there is no difference. They talked about from a Health Department view there is no difference. But staff was asked to look at the impact in terms of a resort community in the commercial core and a concentration of them in one area. They didn't treat them with beauty salons because they weren't looking at them from a health and safety standpoint, but from land uses that are compatible in a resort community for visual character along the commercial core when the concern was first brought up. That s why they separated the two. But by the Health and Safety Code, they are completely the same. Commissioner Campbell's recommendation was that they leave everything as is. She didn't think by removing the tattoo parlors and the tobacco shops on Highway 111 that it was going to make Highway 111 look any better. It needed a complete revamp and to leave them as it is, and when they have other applications, go ahead and have a conditional use permit that would come In front of the Planning Commission to approve or not approve them. Commissioner Tanner asked if that was a motion. Commissioner Campbell said yes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, to keep the current ordinance and have the applications come before the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit. Commissioner DeLuna asked if there was anything they had talked about that would limit their vicinity to schools, parks, or churches. Commissioner Campbell explained that would come with the conditional use permit when it comes before them. Commissioner DeLuna thought they decided at the last meeting that requiring a CUP for this type of business was not the best solution. They already decided that. Commissioner Campbell explained that it hadn't been voted on yet. Commissioner DeLuna indicated that it was in the staff report. And they asked staff to analyze other land use compatibility requirements. Commissioner Campbell said that was true. 14 MINUTES PALM ERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Commissioner Schmidt asked for clarification. Commissioner Campbell said her motion was to leave everything as it is and have any application come before the Planning Commission for consideration where they could approve a conditional use permit or deny it. Commissioner DeLuna asked if she was asking them to deny what staff was recommending. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner Schmidt reiterated that she was requesting them to do nothing. In relation to how they would vote, Commissioner DeLuna asked if that meant they vote no for staffs recommendation. Mr. Erwin pointed out that they were talking about conditional use permits and there were no existing conditional use permit requirements for these businesses. Commissioner Campbell said they could go ahead and require a conditional use permit for these services. Mr. Erwin said if that was the desire of the Commission, staff would need to bring back to them an additional recommendation to include these as conditional use permit requirements in other zones. Chairperson Limont requested clarification that Commissioner Campbell was recommending that they deny staffs recommendation to change the current ordinance and direct them to come back with a conditional use permit requirement. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner DeLuna asked if that was the motion that has been seconded. Commissioner Tanner said that would be his second. Commissioner DeLuna requested that they clarify one more time what they were voting on. Mr. Erwin understood the motion to be made to deny the staff recommendation; to instruct staff to bring it back to the Planning Commission with the additional requirement of conditional use permits for these businesses in other locations. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt clarified that a yes vote would be in favor of denial. Mr. Erwin concurred that a yes vote would be in favor of denying the staff recommendation and instructing that they come back with something additional to this ordinance that would impose conditional use permit requirements on these businesses in other locations other than Highway 111 and El Paseo. Commissioner DeLuna reiterated that a no vote supports the staff recommendation. Mr. Erwin confirmed that a no vote would support the City staff recommendation. Commissioner Schmidt said they would have to take a separate action again on the resolution if Commissioner Campbell's motion fails. Chairperson Limont concurred. 15 MINUTES PALM Q93F81 PLANNj(t Q COMMISSION MARCH 16. 201 Commissioner Tanner asked if there was still room for discussion. Chairperson Limont said yes. Commissioner Tanner said his concern has been aired twice here and that it is for local establishments on Highway 111 currently. The long-term leases or ownership property secures that presence on Highway 111. His concern was for a short-term lease or an owner just deciding at the conclusion of that lease that they no longer want to have this particular establishment in their building. They could say no, they are not going to extend the lease. This denied an already established performing business in the city of Palm Desert the opportunity to continue that endeavor on Highway 111; that's where they want to be. At the same time, he wanted it understood when adopting the requirement for a new CUP that they suggest that there is no more room for these particular types of establishments and that they not eliminate the opportunity for established businesses to continue, either in a smaller place or a larger place on Highway 111. Because the way he understood it, once they are out of that one particular spot, they are no longer going to be able to lease, even if they come to the Planning Commission because a conditional use permit will say no more establishments of this type. Mr. Erwin clarified that a conditional use permit wouldn't say that, this ordinance says that regardless of a conditional use permit. If they wished to put in the ordinance that they could move, then they would have to talk in terms of same location, similar location and determine If they then are required to comply with the other distance restrictions from other operations; can they expand their business, etc.; a number of things. Commissioner Tanner said he had a difficult time taking the ability of one to make money away at the whim of a building owner or what have you. Commissioner Campbell stated that her motion still stood to come to the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit and Commissioner Tanner had seconded the motion. Commissioner DeLuna asked if in the worst case scenario what they were talking about occurs, they are not precluded from doing business in another location in the city, they are just precluded from being on Highway 111; Service Industrial zones or such other designated zones could still accommodate the business, just not the location. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Mr. Erwin asked for clarification that the conditional use permit as he understood it would not apply on Highway 111 or El Paseo, but would apply in other zones within the city off of El Paseo. He had the feeling that perhaps they were talking about a relocation of one existing on Highway 111 and El Paseo requiring a conditional use permit. He asked if that was what he was hearing. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Mr. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16 2010 Erwin said that if an existing business on Highway 111 wants to relocate to Highway 111, they go through a conditional use permit process. Both Commissioners Campbell and Tanner concurred. Mr. Erwin said that anyone who wished to locate on Cook Street or a place like that also required a conditional use permit. Commissioners Campbell and Tanner both concurred. Commissioner Schmidt noted that her fear in requiring a conditional use permit is that it runs with the land. It doesn't terminate when the end of a lease terminates. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt said that if the ownership changes, it's still allowed. Mr. Erwin said that was correct, unless they restrict that in their granting of the conditional use permit. They do have the ability to do that, if they specify that it is for a particular operator so that they make it so that it does not run with the land. Without some restriction on it, it would run with the land and be available for that location. Commissioner DeLuna said that in that case, it could conceivably allow someone to stay in that location with the same use and allow someone relocating to start the same business in another location, so in effect they would have two businesses? Mr. Erwin said no, it would not expand into two businesses; it would still be just one business. Chairperson Limont noted it would be comparable to how we treat stand alone massage parlors. The CUP is to the owner, to the person operating the business. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner DeLuna asked If it would then affect the owner of property, not the lessee. Mr. Erwin said it may, he didn't know. Chairperson Limont said they could condition it to the person leasing and it could go with their business licens e. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Chairperson Limont noted there was a motion on the floor and called for the vote. The motion failed 2-3 (Chairperson Limont, Commissioner DeLuna and Commissioner Schmidt voted no). Mr. Erwin advised Chairperson Limont to see if there was any other motion the Commission wished to make. It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, approving the findings and recommendation as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2524, recommending to the City Council approval of ZOA 10-69 adding Chapter 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH Is. 2010 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, as amended by changing the words "thrift stores" to "independent massage establishments" in E of Section 25.130.020 Definitions and adding the words "excluding cigarettes" to G of Section 25.130.020. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell reported that the next meeting would be March 17. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Chairperson Limont also reported that the next meeting would be March 17. C. PARKS & RECREATION Commissioner Tanner stated that they had a presentation by the City Attorney regarding the Brown Act and reviewed upcoming events and discussion items. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt said they met last Monday and primarily it was updating and the City Attorney spoke about the Brown Act and the need for everyone to adhere to it. The next meeting would be in a month. XI. COMMENTS 1. Commissioner DeLuna said she apparently missed something when they were discussing the definition of rock outcroppings and that part of the motion that got bifurcated. She had something that she wanted to include in the definition and missed the opportunity because she didn't realize what the process that was occurring would exclude any further discussion on the section of the rock outcropping. She didn't know the proper forum to address that. Mr. 18 CITY 0f P0EO11 OESERI 7)—Sio FRIo WARM.I)NI\'1 PALM Urn xr.(:At n nxnu 92 AO-t578 nL,76o )46—o6n , 'Aa:76o 10-71118 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO.ZOA 10-69 NOTICE OF INTENT BY THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code will prohibit certain miscellaneous new uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops,fortune teller or palm readers,smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non- conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. PROJECT LOCATION: Along Highway 111 and El Paseo within the City of Palm Desert. PUBLIC HEARING: SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday,April 22, 2010, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. General questions related to the ordinance can be directed to the City of Palm Desert Planning Department at 760-346-0611. PUBLISH: Desert Sun Rochelle Wasson,City Clerk April 11.2010 Palm Desert City Council MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 With City Council concurrence,Mayor Finerty called a recess at4:52 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 4:54 p.m. XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, ADDING CHAPTER 25.130-LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES-TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE Case No. ZOA 10-69 (City of Palm Desert, Applicant). Principal Planner Tony Bagato stated this was a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to add a section for Miscellaneous Uses that are identified in the Ordinance. At the November 10,2009, a Planning Commissioner requested staff to research potential regulations onto tattoo establishments. The City currently had five establishments on Highway 111, and there was a concern with having certain business types along the City's prime commercial corridors of El Paseo and Highway 111 as a resort community. On December 15,2009,staff presented four possible restriction types and stated that if there was a concern over the image of businesses,staff felt there were other businesses that should be in that category as well along with tattoo establishments. On March 16, 2010, staff presented the Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) and locations of Miscellaneous Uses. Those uses are identified in the Ordinance as bail bonds and body piercing establishments, billiards or pool halls, fortune tellers, independent massage parlors, tattoo shops,and smoke shops,which are categorized as mainly smoke shops that sold paraphernalia. He said it wouldn't include high-end cigar shops or cigar lounges, because those did exist on El Paseo.The uses would be prohibited on Highway 111 and El Paseo, but allowed in other C1 or Service Industrial Zones with a 1,000-foot distance separation from a similar use. He said a tattoo establishment would have to be 1,000 feet away from another tattoo, but could be next to a massage parlor or smoke shop. He said the City Council packet included a map that illustrated the current Miscellaneous Uses that would be grandfathered under the Ordinance. Staff received one letter from Ink Sanity Tattoo voicing their concern over the fairness of the Ordinance and asking for the opportunity to expand or downsize if they had to, but the current non-conforming uses would not allow it and would require a separate Zoning Ordinance Amendment. They asked that perhaps tattoo parlors can be removed from the Ordinance,however,because this item was originally requested by the Planning Commission, staff recommended that it remain.On March 16 the Planning Commission recommended approval on a 3-2 vote with Commissioners Tanner and Campbell voting NO. He offered to answer questions. Mayor and Councilmembers noticed they did not have a copy of the map with the identified current Miscellaneous Uses along El Paseo and Highway 111. 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 City Clerk Rachelle Klassen confirmed the City Clerk's Office did not receive a copy of the map and that's why it was not included in Council's packet. Mr. Bagato displayed the map and pointed the locations of the Miscellaneous Uses and tattoo establishments on Highway 111. Further responding, he confirmed there were five establishments within 1,000 feet of each other. Councilman Spiegel asked what were the restrictions used by other cities in the Valley. Mr. Bagato responded the cities of Rancho Mirage, Indian Wells, and La Quinta didn't address miscellaneous uses in their Code, but actually prohibited tattoo shops as well as other uses. However,the City of La Quinta allowed fortune tellers with a Conditional Use Permit(CUP), but tattoo shops are prohibited in most of the cities. He said Cathedral City was looking into restricting the same uses Palm Desert was proposing to their new area off Highway 111 and Palm Canyon, the revitalization down town. Further responding, he agreed Palm Desert probably had the most tattoo parlors because it was the most business friendly toward them. Councilman Kelly commented he couldn't read the map that was being displayed from where he was sitting. Councilmember Benson stated the staff report indicated there were currently five tattoo and eight independent massage establishments that would all be grandfathered. She said the intent of the Ordinance was to prohibit new ones. Mr.Bagato agreed,stating the existing establishments could not relocate.He said once an establishment closed for more than six months, they would no longer be able to re-open in the same location. Further responding, he confirmed the proposed Ordinance was not intended to put establishments out of business. Responding to request, Mr Bagato agreed to go back to his office to make copies of the map that illustrated the current Miscellaneous Uses that would be grandfathered under the Ordinance. NOTE: At this point in the meeting, and with City Council concurrence, Mayor Finerty suspended consideration of Public Hearing A in order for staff to provide the requested map. She continued with the remainder of the City Council, Redevelopment Agency, and Housing Authority Agendas, then returned to Public Hearing A. Mayor Finerty noted Mr. Bagato had concluded his staff report, and the Council was resuming with questions regarding the map. 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 Mr. Bagato described the area of focus, which was between Portola Avenue and Town Center Way just before Desert Crossings. Responding to question, he said most of the businesses and tattoo establishments were between San Pablo and Portola Avenue. Mayor Finerty declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. MR. BUDDY HAYNES, Owner of Insanity Ink II Tattoos, 73-338 Highway 111, Palm Desert, stated he assumed the Council received the letter he wrote, which stated he didn't agree with the proposed Ordinance, but he understood. However, he asked the Council to consider placing tattoo shops in its own category. His business was fortunate that it had another three years on his lease for his shop, but it included a hair salon. He said business was good, but if it got better or declined, he still wanted the opportunity to relocate across the street or next door and still abide by the proposed 1,000-feet distance. He understood why the City didn't want his business close to El Paseo and agreed it probably didn't belong there. He said his partner James Livingston had monitored all the foot traffic his shop received from being on Highway 111 for the past two months and can show the Council the amount of clientele it received. He was curious what Council meant when it stated that Palm Desert's image was a"tourist town,"because up and down Highway 111 were restaurants, a gun shop, a hardware store, and pet grooming store, so he didn't quite understand how-tattoo shops got stereotyped in the miscellaneous category. He hoped the Council will take into consideration to set tattoo establishments aside, because if he had to add onto his business or move next door, what would be the difference. He appreciated the fact that his business would be grandfathered, but the proposed Ordinance dictated how his business can grow or downsize,which was not a way to become successful. He offered to answer questions. Councilman Spiegel stated on the north side of Highway 111 was a parlor with a huge sign that said "Tattoo." MR. HAYNES responded it was not his establishment. He said his shop shared the same wall with McGowan's Pub and is four doors down from the Red Barn. He said a Planning Commission member was quoted in the newspaper as stating that.being open late hours attracted crime, which he found appalling, because there was no statistic with the Riverside County Sheriffs Department that would support the statement. He said his shop and other restaurants stayed open late, but they did not attract crime. He said they were hard-working people, and he watched out for his community, because he was born and raised here and lived here since 1980. He was proud to be part of this City, because it's been good to him and fellow citizens. 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 MR. JAMES LIVINGSTON, Co-Owner of Insanity Ink II Tattoos, 73-338 Highway 111,Palm Desert,requested the City rewrite the Ordinance, because a tattoo and permanent cosmetic were the same thing, yet permanent cosmetic was not included as Miscellaneous Uses. He offered to answer questions. Councilman Spiegel requested that Lieut. Shouse provide the Council with his thoughts on the matter. Lieut. Shouse stated the Police Department had not received an inordinate amount of calls for service regarding tattoo parlors. He said tattoo parlors did not come up on the radar as being an issue for the Police Department. He said the Department had more problems with bars in town and other locations. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Finerty declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Kelly stated the proposed Zoning Ordinance was very arrogant even though he wouldn't get or have a tattoo, but he recognized there was a whole different culture out there that liked tattoos and had them. He said how could he be so arrogant as to say he didn't agree with their culture and have them kicked out,which he didn't understand. He noticed that pool halls were also included in the proposed Ordinance,yet as a senior in high school, he had a 40 hour a week job,played basketball,dated Mary Helen,and in his spare time he hung out in the pool hall, and he just got recognized as citizen of the year yesterday. He said he valued the education he received at the pool hall. Another thing that amazed him was that Palm Desert had the best in the Valley, because many people have told him Quick Massage located at 74-125 Highway 111, Palm Desert,was a wonderful place to get a massage. He didn't frequent massage parlors, but a lot of people do like them. He recognized the City had problems with massage parlors, in fact it had one case on the agenda this evening, but that was the job of the City Council to take care of it. He said the City had problems with its parks, it had to mow the grass and trim the trees, but just because it had to be done, didn't mean they had to get rid of its parks. He said the City will have to continue to monitor the massage parlors to make sure they followed the Ordinance. As far as he was concerned, he thought the proposed Ordinance was very arrogant. He said if the Council wanted Palm Desert to be upscale and have the best shops, then it should get rid of its utility poles, maintain the streets, paint the white lines on the road, and make it so that the establishments and stores are the place to be. Then the City will automatically have the best places and wouldn't have to worry about these zoning ordinances. Councilman Spiegel stated he was torn with the matter, because he would like to make Highway 111 prestigious as possible. Whether the Red Barn and other establishments on Highway 111 were prestigious, he sometimes 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2010 questioned, but he wasn't sure how to turn it around or if it was possible. However, he agreed with Councilman Kelly and Mr. Livingston's and Mr. Haynes'concern, which was that the landlord or owner of a building can raise the rent and there was nothing that could be done by the tenant. Councilmember Benson stated the City had too many Miscellaneous Uses and it was the City's fault for allowing them in the first place, but to say that if a business didn't succeed it couldn't relocate, may be wrong because they may succeed where the rent is lower. She said the Ordinance needed to state that no new parlors will be accepted on Highway 111, but existing ones are grandfathered with the right to expand or downsize. She said the Council needed to be more lenient with existing establishments, because they came in when it was allowed. Responding to question, Mr. Erin stated the proposed Ordinance as written did not allow existing businesses to move to another location. Certainly if the Council desired, a hearing process or process to allow existing establishments to expand, depress, or move to other locations can be established as long as they complied with the distance requirements. He offered to craft some language to that effect. Councilman Spiegel and Councilmember Benson thought that would be fair. Councilman Spiegel stated the City had plenty of massage and tattoo establishments, and it didn't need anymore, but disagreed to locking in existing establishments to a location. Councilman Kelly stated it was a free country and the economy should take care of itself, because it dictated how many restaurants or grocery stores a City would have. He said the Council should not get into the business of controlling how many businesses it should have. Councilman Kelly moved to deny staffs recommendation. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion, refer the Case back to staff for clarification regarding the grandfathering of existing businesses at this time as to what they can do in the future (i.e., expansion, downsizing, relocation) including an appropriate process for such consideration. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 3-1 vote, with Kelly voting NO and Ferguson ABSENT. 20 CITY Of P M OESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE n PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 9 2 260-2 5 7 8 TEL: 760 346—o6EE FAX: 760 341-7o98 info@palm-desert.org May 12, 2010 To Whom It May Concern Re: Location of Miscellaneous Uses — Section 25.130 Dear Business Owner: You are receiving this letter because you operate a business that is impacted by the new ordinance described above. This ordinance will apply regulations for the location of Miscellaneous Uses defined in the ordinance. Miscellaneous uses include body branding and/or body scarring establishment, tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. The ordinance was presented and discussed at the April 22, 2010, City Council meeting. After the discussion during the public hearing, the 'case was referred back to staff to clarify the grandfathering of existing businesses to allow them to be able to expand, reduce, or relocate their existing business on Highway 111 or El Paseo. In response to City Council's direction, staff has modified the ordinance. In addition to the grandfathering rules, staff added body branding and/or body scarring establishment to the list of uses. The modifications are highlighted in yellow in the ordinance attached to this letter for your review. The modified ordinance will be presented to the City Council on May 27, 2010 at 4:00 pm in the Council Chambers. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at (760) 346-0611 ext 480. You may also contact me at the following e-mail address: tbagato@cityofpalmdesert.com Sincerely, Tony Bagato Principal Planner o, „..........,, D c 1 LJ TOWN CENTER WAY �� 0 1 a� b I I.i' - D ;`rAANDPIPER� i11p�fU1 N l/•g�iN'J�L. �� � od5r �� I-Y�r=) fI/ ��bz�JIDs_..-FI,AI,R pI AV- E __ lfl l V A1 00-JO1C(( Rw^ A;a Y_ * ..-44 .. ......- �� d' rill !� l �tiFRONTAGE 1 Y 1;IMONTEREYgy ZIie � � D-SAIAVGNEDT2O= N� cof_ Oa a lz z ►:� • ► ■ n / �' '\ 1; gypo�'1'1 f—_�t �s 1 „ SAN �3 3�pl L� SAN \\ - IARCOSVE--I-m Or MARCOS -- _ _-m -I Cn � Z C - / \�C �D AVE-- °� ' 'AVE __ �__ _m OI Y w m'_ SAN.AN ELMO p m m J _ El El - TZ I 11� SAAV--Q O - D Z -OD_ J Zk-LUPINElN. D - �LAS.P\ AS AVE ;- U) 2• 111 0 5 <I _ D Z n' I ALLEY LAS 1 m ^ O_-SAN-PABCO AVE C- ` FLORES LN_Tj` - rTl — — --A • _ �S�AN.RABb AVE-J- O a �N O rJ / ( ,''�-AVE D I \I( -1-EL GE 01 m _ LARKSPUR LN + �OY✓� y! -�, D- v m D I rR�.°-�--- L�fr � Y, SAVE-' �r ��T)`/r is Ii LSLUA(Al-/ /. 1II�'I III iI oz n' i /-�,9I __- O Off.-p_..__ -1_l , ---� SAN P ( _ L A J 'T.34 mA - 1 D y_LL pt1 / :� ' A S; C n `� T `:�f R6Y' / FRUSSELI Ii Ll/ �" � 1y ,� .TI T/ J Fl z �N�� �1 a ram, 1 $9p',/T / D�_ HER LINGO LN _ PRICKLY PEAR .�S9h'r � SAN J JOSEI L�A_V�E1 V LN V E..T �-Q VE A I � -- V TnUr T 73338 tlyw 111 Suke W5,Palm Desert, CA 92260(760) 776-0919 AGENDA PACKET April 15,2010 SECTION MEETING DATE y` a oZ !C) Palm Desert City Council The City of Palm Desert — cn, , . 73510 Fred Waring Drive e Palm Desert,California 92260 C >n To Whom It May Concern: V., First, we would like to thank you for taking the time to read this,and also to say thank you in regards to grandfathering our business, Ink Insanity 11,in regards to the recent proposed ordinance to outlaw certain business establishments from locating on CA Highway 111 and El Paseo.Though the gesture is greatly appreciated,we still feel that there are several issues that the Council should review before a final vote is taken. It is understandable that the city would want to make sure certain elements are out of El Paseo,as a large amount of the income is brought in through the tourist industry, but this proposal seems to be taking a personal stance toward tattoo and massage parlors.With the recent handful of raids upon massage parlors, it's understandable why you would feel that you wouldn't want these type of establishments within the city limits; but we feel that having tattoo parlors placed in the same category is a mistake.Yes, it is understood that the ordinance in question also outlines fortune tellers, bail bondsmen,and pool halls along with tattoo parlors and massage parlors as businesses that are considered unsavory while on El Paseo or CA Highway 111, but there are currently none of these types of businesses in the vicinity now or at the time the ordinance was proposed. Due to this, it seems that it is the tattoo establishments that has come under fire.We strongly agree with Commissioners Van Tanner and Campbell when they expressed concern that our establishment and others like it might become victim of unfair rent increases due to the passing of this ordinance.Our current landlord has given us the approval to renew our lease and even increase it to a three or five year lease,but we cannot say that this would be honored if another landlord were to come to the complex. We were also confused as to why permanent makeup facilities were not included on this list,as it uses the exact same procedures and tools that it does to tattoo artwork onto skin. In all fairness,this ordinance should have to pertain to those establishments just as much as ours. It seems that the ordinance seems to stereotype the type of clientele that tattooing has in an outdated manner.Tattooing is no longer a taboo practice that is reserved for miscreants and troublemakers, in fact, many patrons of tattoo establishments also have the means to shop some the high end stores of El Paseo.Our own clients are not only confined to locals, but many of them are visitors from out of town,and several of our clients come specifically to our shop from out of state bringing in money for not just ourselves, but for local restaurants,shops and hotels. On a personal level,this ordinance will put our business in a position to neither grow nor decrease in size,even though we are grandfathered in to our site.Currently,we have made sure to utilize every inch of our facility to its full potential. Not only is the site used for tattooing, but there is also a full service salon on premises with two stylists that have a combined experience of ten years in their field.We have tried very hard to make sure that there is not an inch of space that isn't used effectively so that we are not wasting any excessive electricity.Where the problem lies is if for some reason we no longer have the stylists and we need to decrease the size of our facility to make sure we keep our space utilized properly,or if we out grow our location we will not be allowed to find another space suitable for us on Highway 111 which will cost us several thousands of dollars in business. If the shop would be allowed to move to another location still on Highway 111, it would be in a prime location that our patrons could locate us,even if we did move from one building to another,as long as it was located on the same street.The loss of that opportunity could possibly cause the livelihood of three individuals who are all patrons and citizens of the city of Palm Desert. Ink Sanity 11 is not a second business or a hobby,it is the actual livelihood of James Livingstone,and the failure of the shop would take away from his family's income.James is a nationally known artist who has been tattooing since 1984,many of those years tattooing here in Palm Desert and the Coachella Valley. Being featured in several nationally publications including,Skinart, Tattoo, and Savage magazine,and his work has also been seen in music videos on the Country Music Television station,James has a wide clientele who will travel several hundreds of miles for him to work on them.Several employees of the city of Palm Desert and the various police departments in the valley have been tattooed by him,and he has a very good reputation in the valley as being a strong and fair businessman. In fact,Cathedral City Country Club has approached the shop to partner with them in advertising.His business partner,Buddy Haynes is born and raised in Palm Desert having very strong ties to the residents of the city,and is very passionate about the economic success of his home town. Though,the ideas of Tattoo shops might be undesirable to Palm Desert,we have the support of all the other shop owners surrounding us.They feel better knowing that there is someone on property to help watch out for their businesses well being and lock up when we close at midnight,especially when we are in between two establishments that serve alcohol.There is no alcohol or drug use permitted in or around Ink Sanity II,and since we opened in June 2009,there has been no crime in the immediate area. If there has been crime in and around Highway Ill(such as the robbery of Tri-A-Bike and the other bike shop located close to Mad Hatter Tattoos),those crimes were committed in the early hours of the morning when all tattoo shops have been closed for hours,thus proving that our late hours are not connected to crimes in any surrounding areas. All we ask is that you please review the ordinance for fairness,and if you do decide that it should be passed that provisions be put in place to grandfathered businesses giving them a chance to expand or shrink in size and remain close to where they are already established;or tattooing be placed in its own category that is separate from the of er businesses considered in the"miscellaneous"category. Sincerely, James Livingstone and Buddy Haynes Owners of Insanity Ink II Tattoos I e•a°e o°oo °ooe°o e°���•e a eo^ee oo e o �°•o o° a°eo°e ea ee eee °e a°s o e a^°os •°e e e o aowa`e°o o e o•wo o e o e�°Oo a°e°0 0 o°e e °ee peso ° e°ooeoe p •,e a eoe eee e o• r°°eoe000e�ao00°°e°a°000°�Oe°e°e°o°°°ooe a°ooeoo° ee°e°oo°O""e°°°e°°ee pOeOaoe°O •eoeo °o•°o°o a"•aeoe° ^°oo°e° `oo°p es°eo• 00°000 0000°0 oC oo eee°°° °°000000^ o°e oo°pep °o°°o°a°oeeo•°• ° o°os o~ a°0°°°o°°^O °o°o°e°oo°s^ a°seee°oo oo°o e°Od 00 o;eo p 7 000000p o 0000 � e�^>0000°°°0°°0 °e°o°0000•`�° p=oo°a°o°o°o°p°°tea"So°o°o�°se<° °°p °>°ems?? P,P.iv,vi99.PP9P,PRe:v9V,PP9A,P.Bao;o.9°P9P.9P,P°P°v.°o:.05,9'9°P'P°P°P,°f,°a,ewA,9,9`9'P°P,°9,°9°e°k.a,PR°0°P°9.a°;o.9A,P.P.99.P,Pa°v.. �v.9,9,9.9P,PRP°R°°.,$.V.P°,9'9°9°9°P°A.v.°v.s9.PP.9o.PP.P.°vo3.v`,PP;o"oe°8I°gig•. oee,e,e P' a ;pooP9.P, pe .•ee va OOo°e va eo e,•ee°es °..a°p ope es / e�°vooe eed oa�!1 e°;pavo .°pooeo ev o°o°p°e°p e � °pp o0 0 0 0 0 oa oe000veQeo oe oo°e ti aWHEREAS, Jarnes Livingston, • 1 ' spent °peen ooe c 0 •0pe000°voa hours to 1 organize one of the donation effortsHistory; v e°e 0 0 OOe,eo°O�o- o Op o�0 1 °°p p Yed o 0 o a°opod' WHEREAS, a^b°e peep eea ooaeo•a oP Livingston, 1 of • Icitizens, spear headed the coordination of donation efforts for the victims of "oeeeeoe°ea° +�eo 00 o °p Hurricane Katrina; s°ee^°oo 1 0 oeepev ooeP oo�p°,poe°eo op000 o ao °o•e°v'o WHEREAS, A I ea1 local volunteersdrove 1 trucks oql °°o°e eed �^• • • • o ..e 1 1 °p a • . • • supplies 1 • Pepe°oppo °eeee°°eoeo collectedfromdonations; 1 e o eee°ovo oo"aen o a o oee WHEREAS, their abundant donation efforts proved to be the O••- oya eeoeoea 000°oe,eeo o eo °ee eo oPlargestprivate relief • • date; 1 o e°e°ooe°o ee io� o e o0 o- e°o°°e o- ` ^•O aoe°eWHEREAS, Ink Sanity and local volunteers oe°o°o 0°O,oeoeeeo_ a eooe°o°o � •o,eoepsoheroic with their hardwork, • 1 determination °"osvictims • disasterHistory. v OQOQeeove a o °°°O°0°eoueOpe 0 0O°oe o s _pe o0ep0 °O NOW, THEREFORE, Nees / \ • • 1 . • • • . 1 1 / • • 3-!�e o°oo°e �,ee ' °eopoo vesocommend and applaud dedication• • 1 tireless effortsof 1 local �e�oeooe e e °oeeovolunteers for their capacious hearts and acts of kindness to the victims of 0o vo Hurricane Katrina. p eee°ee ° eeoee e °o o,o I�Q000vopo�e i 0 . p � p°p°p°e°cev ,f �•eeFp°e 000°,,°ep .•.� o ea, ee°eee ��o e4 Robert E. Mage 11 .A MayorCit .o,e ase e°o°e°°^e6 • a°O oee°e,00eve e. 'f v 1 Lake Elsinoreooe Re°e°o °o,eeo 0o i' ooe so° e°", o �OpO°eyu o°o e•O^s - W. W lo^°e MOWd pe ed {6°d pe;a a a e o o°eoe 'B ° ea eoe a,ad446E� � ,u �e E'd'ddE46 , eddddd'd'EE ; ddddddEEe e oe°a8°e"e,°eo°e°;e°,°�ogeve°e°e°;> ee+a• .r �e e° G ;°°oeeo o•ee 0000e°aw°000e°o°g:g°p °e o° dddEE6'oo oddEddEE �e ddd��,<°ee 0 opooe op 000 ° o eope ° ° °ve a°e°oee eG o eoe°°e°o� o o°o°eee°e woes.,•:r ero,�e s°e°=°�^°o°e°000: :ve a e°e°e° a°peseeeoo e. o°e p°oo°�°ooeee°'�ease o°repo^°° °'°�a°°e °e pp egegp„•,o °e°oa° •eeeve a 000e° ovo e° aeoovee °e°ovo°e eoa°e,eo a eeo•°e r"oQoa'ee^°"�•sep,.°oo,a�yo a a"°esao A August 1,2008 NOTICE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TATTOO,BODY PIERCING and PERMANENT COSMETIC PRACTIONERS In accordance with Assembly Bill 186, Section 119303 of the California Health and Safety Code, this notice is to inform every person engaged in the business of tattooing, body piercing or permanent cosmetics of the County's implementation of the annual inspection fee. Effective January 1, 2009 all body art practitioners practicing in the County of Riverside are hereby required to: 1) New Practitioner ReWstrants - Pay a one-time registration fee of twenty-five dollars($25),to the Department of Environmental Health. 2) Continuing/Existing Practitioners— Pay an annual inspection fee of one hundred five dollars($105),to the Department of Environmental Health. Please be advised that the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health has previously assumed the costs related to annual inspection services. However, due to the decline in the economy this Department can no longer shoulder such costs. Existing practitioners will begin receiving annual invoices in the amount of$105.00 dollars due, effective January 1,2009. More information of Assembly Bill 186 can be found online at httt3://info.sen.ca.gov. If still questions, feel free to contact this Department directly at: (951) 955-8982 (Western County),or(760)320-1048 (Eastern County Office). CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: THAT THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130, LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES, TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner APPILANT: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO: ZOA 10-69 DATE: April 22, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: ordinance Exhibit A, Chapter 25.130 Planning Commission Minutes dated 16 March 2010 Legal Notice Recommendation Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No.1213 to second reading for approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Planning Commission Recommendation At its meeting of March 16, 2010,the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council of ZOA 10-69 adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code by Resolution No. 2524 on a 3-2 vote, With Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voting no. Executive Summary Approval of staff's recommendation would approve a zoning ordinance amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. This change would prohibit certain new miscellaneous uses along Highway 111 ' I Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 2 of 4 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune tellers or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, independent massage establishments, and bail bonds establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non-conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. The intent of the ordinance, which was prepared at the request of the Planning Commission, is to promote a better visual character of Palm Desert as a destination resort community along the main core commercial area of the city. Background Regulation of tattoo establishments has been discussed at several times in the City of Palm Desert, dating back to December of 1997 when the city had only two tattoo establishments on Highway 111. The City Council discussed regulating the location of tattoo establishments as part of an ordinance dealing with the location of adult businesses. After discussion, the City Council chose not to identify tattoo establishments as adult entertainment businesses. At that time, the City Council determined that tattoo establishments were no different than barber or beauty shops offering personal services. Since the original discussion in 1997, there has been an increase in the number of tattoo establishments; there are currently six tattoo establishments, of which five are located on Highway 111 in the commercial core of the city. At the November 10, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner DeLuna asked staff to research potential regulations on the location of tattoo establishments because of the high number of them in one area of the city. On December 15, 2009, staff presented four possible approaches for regulation regarding tattoo establishments. After the discussion regarding the possible approaches for regulation and concerns regarding singling out tattoo establishments, the Commission discussed how other uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo (such as smoke shops, independent massage establishments, pawn shops, and fortune tellers) could be included in this discussion. The Planning Commission's intent was to preserve a visual quality along the Citys main commercial corridor in order to preserve the quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Staff also recommended that existing businesses be considered grandfathered in along Highway 111. At the March 16, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, staff proposed ZOA 10-69 identified as Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses. The Commissioners had a long discussion and listened to testimony from tattoo business owners who would be potentially affected by this ordinance. The owners were worried about being landlocked, and not being able to relocate to a larger or smaller location on Highway 111. 09PIenn ngV v SWaez\W V V As (lane s OrNtt repW mist oN(3(.tloc Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 3 of 4 Discussion The miscellaneous uses identified in the ordinance were included under the belief that they do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo. In fact, if they discourage high-end or premium retailers from locating in the area, they are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in enhancing and preserving a higher quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Currently along Highway 111 and El Paseo there are five tattoo establishments, eight independent massage establishments, one palm reader, and three smoke shops. Under the proposed ordinance, the existing uses will be grandfathered in as permitted uses, and will be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. All new miscellaneous uses would be subject to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment regulations and all other applicable regulations. No new miscellaneous uses would be established along, or within 300 feet of, the rights-of-way for Highway 111 and El Paseo. Miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all commercial or service industrial areas of the city where not otherwise prohibited by code, with a 1,000 foot separation requirement from a same use. For example, a tattoo establishment must be 1,000 feet from another tattoo establishment, but not from other miscellaneous uses listed in this section. In order to determine the distance, a straight line would be measured from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. Staff does not foresee significant adverse impacts to the existing businesses since they will be allowed to continue their usage. New businesses would not be impacted, since there will still be many areas of the city in which they are permitted. Environmental Review The proposed amendment is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA°)(Cal. Pub. Res. Code, section 21000 et seq.) and its implementing regulations based on the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Staff has determined that no significant impacts will occur because miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code. Conclusion Palm Desert is known for being a resort destination, and Highway 111 and El Paseo are important commercial corridors of the City. Preserving the commercial viewsheds requires unique land use provisions to promote a high quality visual character for Palm Desert. O:WIann1n9\KeNn Sv 04M"AM&elleneaes Ord report nA a (3).dw Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses April 22, 2010 Page 4 of 4 The purpose of this ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote a higher quality of development along the city's commercial corridors, and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code helps achieve the General Plan vision, promoting and preserving a high quality of development along the city's primary entryways of Highway 111 and El Paseo, while protecting the interests of the existing businesses. Fiscal Analysis The fiscal impact to the City associated with adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code is negligible. It can be argued that the miscellaneous uses do not contribute to the economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo. The City of Palm Desert receives nominal sales tax from smoke shops and pawn shops, while the other uses provide services that do not generate sales tax. Submitted By: Department Head: Kevin Swartz auri Aylaian Assistant Planner Director Community Development CITYCOUNCILAC7F0 N ov APPROVED /w DENIED RECEIVED OTHER M. Wohlmuth, City Manager MEET a • /p AYES: r NOES: ABSENM Y ABSTAINS VERIFIED BYs 1 OrWnW On File with City rk's Ofiica * By Minute Motion, refer the Case back to staff for clarification regarding the grandfathering of existing businesses at this time as to what they can do in the future (i.e., expansion, downsizing, reloation) including an appropriate process for such consideration. 3-1 (Kelly NO, Ferguson ABSENT) G.NmanMngwevin SVla(Izmorm�wlWnmus orma repan misc ord(3).oac ORDINANCE NO. 1213 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVNG A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 16'h day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert and recommended approval to the City Council of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22nd day of April, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the said amendment: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, ORDINANCE NO. 1213 programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council on this matter. SECTION 2: Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.130 is hereby amended and restated as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 3: That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 22nd day of April, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ,ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1213 EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment" means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. B. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1213 C. "Fortune teller or palm reader" means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. D. "Independent massage establishment" means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. E. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. F. "Pawn shop' means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. G. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. H. "Tattoo establishment" means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1. Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). 4 ORDINANCE NO.1213 C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH I 2010 they would be approving, the resolution which defines outcroppings and indicates that destruction of the outcropping is prohibited. What he stated deletes from that. resolution any reference to the ridgeline map. Chair Limont asked if there was a motion, Action: It was moved by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, approving the findings. The motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Campbell voted no). Mr. Erwin stated that the other item that they mentioned was the potential survey. He asked if they would want to convey to the Council a suggestion with regard to the ridgeline map. If they wished to do that, it would be a matter of merely the Chairman of the Commission, if that was the wish of the Commission, conveying that information to the City Council. Chairperson Limont asked if they should do that as a Miscellaneous item or as part of this. Mr. Erwin said this. Basically that has been the discussion so far. He suggested a motion and second and a vote requesting the Chairperson to convey that information to the Council. It was moved by Commissioner Tanner, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, by minute motion, authorizing Chairperson Limont to convey to the City Council a request for a survey by a licensed professional engineer to identify ridgelines in the HPR zoned area. Commissioner Schmidt stated that she did not want to discount the work that Mr. Stendell and staff have done on this and encouraged them to have that as a starting point. Mr. Erwin said that could be included in the conveyance. Chairperson Limont called for the vote. The motion carried 5- 0. ("'See additional discussion on pages 18-19, items 1 and 3") D. Case No. ZOA 10-69 —CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for a recommendation to the City Council to approve a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz reviewed the staff report. He noted a change on Page 4 of the resolution under E, Miscellaneous Uses, where it listed thrift stores. The words "thrift stores" should be replaced with "independent massage establishments." Staff recommended that the 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16._2010 Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Mr. Swartz informed the Commission that staff also advertised this item to all the businesses mentioned in this ordinance. They also handed out copies to individuals at the counter, but only received one response in writing. That response was before the Commission from Bert Bruning of Palm Desert Tobacco. Mr. Bruning was recommending that the Commission add on Page 4 under G under smoke shops the wording to the sentence half way down the page that states, "A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products." Mr. Bruning wanted to add at the end "excluding cigarettes." Mr. Swartz asked for any questions. Commissioner Schmidt asked why they would exclude cigarettes. Mr. Swartz said that in speaking with him on the phone, he sells higher end tobacco and he was worried about an influx of lower-end tobacco cigarette stores. Commissioner Campbell asked if he meant one like the establishment in the Palms to Pines center. Mr. Swartz said yes, he was worried about an influx of stores such as that. Commissioner DeLuna asked what it would take to add "excluding cigarettes". Did they Just add it in to anything they approved? Mr. Erwin said they are permitted to add or delete anything that they wish when they finally make a decision with regard to this resolution. They were absolutely free to add it if they wished. Chairperson Limont opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to address the Commission in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. MR. BUDDY HAYNES, 73338 Highway 111, Suite 5, asked if the existing tattoo shops on Highway 111 would be considered grandfathered in, but if they were to move a year from now down the road, would they still be permitted to stay on Highway 111 or would they have to locate off of Highway 111. Mr. Erwin said if he moved the location, it would have to be off of Highway 111. Mr. Haynes asked if that was off of Highway 111 permanently. Mr. Erwin said yes. it MINUTES eALM Dr;SERJ PLANNING COMMISSION MA CH 16. 2010 Mr. Haynes didn't agree with the change. He couldn't speak to the other Miscellaneous Uses, but if he had a 99-year lease at his present location versus a two-year lease, he didn't see what the difference would be if he was to move two doors down or stay at the same spot. With the economy fluctuating, if business gets slower and he needs to downsize, he would still like to stay on Highway 111. Or if business got better, he would like to move to a bigger building. He recommended that those already on Highway 111 should be able to choose if they would like to leave where they're at and still stay there, but at just a different address. He wanted them to put in a compromise or addition to the ordinance. MR. TROY LAWRENCE, 73-640 Highway 111, said he wasn't there to dispute anything, he was there to commend them for hearing them out initially and letting them speak their piece when this came out. The City was able to listen to what they had to say and make recommendations, listen to their advice. He did agree with it and there was only one thing to add and it didn't have anything to do with his business. There was another business they might want to consider to try to monitor and it was right next to him and it had to do with adult toys and stuff like that. He knew that wasn't in there, but he was willing to bet that was something that might come up, so it something they might want to try to spearhead before they start having some of those start popping up down the street. Once they have this ordinance, and he wasn't sure there was anything to control that, but once they see they are set in stone where they're at, someone might get an idea to start working their way down Highway 111 and then they would be right back here with that issue. He commended them again for letting them take care of business and that's why they live and work in this city. Commissioner Tanner asked what type of business he was referring to next to his establishment. Mr. Lawrence said it is called Skitzo Kitty; it's adult things. Mr. Bagato indicated that there is an existing city ordinance that deals with adult entertainment. When that business was initially approved, it was supposed to be mainly a lingerie store. If they have expanded that beyond the realm of what they would define as lingerie, they could look into it. Adult book stores are currently not allowed on Highway 111. Mr. Lawrence said it seemed to be fairly decent; however, he just wanted to bring it up to make sure it didn't get out of control. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING CpMMjSSinN MARCH 16. 2M Commissioner Tanner asked for confirmation that it is addressed in an existing ordinance. Mr. Bagafo said that was correct. Locations are supposed to be in industrial areas like Cook Street or off of Dinah Shore. Staff would look into it. Commissioner Campbell asked Mr. Lawrence if he was happy to be grandfathered in. Mr. Lawrence replied extremely happy. Commissioner Campbell asked if he owned the building or if he was renting or leasing. Mr. Lawrence said he was leasing right now. Commissioner Campbell asked if his landlord knew he couldn't move anywhere else because it wouldn't be allowed on Highway 111 and his rent went up, what he would do then. Mr. Lawrence said it was controlled by a management company and he knew there were stipulations and laws that they aren't allowed to do that. He has known the gentleman, Mr. Otto Lupia, for 15 years and he didn't think he would take advantage. Commissioner Campbell said that was just him. What about the other tattoo owners? They may have that possibility where they are caught like that and can't move anywhere else. Mr. Lawrence couldn't speak for the others, but concurred. MR. JAMES LIVINGSTON, 73338 Highway 111, Suite 5, said he is co-owner of Inksanity Tattoo. He wanted to address what Mr. Haynes said earlier as far this being grandfathered in. If his lease is up within two years, he would like the option to move two doors down or a street down on Highway 111. Another issue was they were excluding permanent cosmetics. Permanent cosmetics were no different from what he does. It's the same thing. They break the surface of the skin just as much as he does. They use the same needles; the machines might be different. By excluding them, the tattoo industry, they needed to involve permanent cosmetics also with them. He wanted to bring that to everybody's attention; it had not been mentioned. To move them and not letting him be able to open a business within five years down the road if his lease is up, that should apply to them too. He said about 38% to 40% is tourist 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNIN • COMMISSION MARCH 15, 2010 business from out of town. They come from Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, and Orange County. There was no one else wishing to speak and Chairperson Limont closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tanner knew they talked about tattoos and permanent makeup; he asked if there was any distinction between them. It clearly was similar. Mr. Bagato stated that according to the State and Riverside County Health and Safety there is no difference. They talked about from a Health Department view there is no difference. But staff was asked to look at the impact in terms of a resort community in the commercial core and a concentration of them in one area. They didn't treat them with beauty salons because they weren't looking at them from a health and safety standpoint, but from land uses that are compatible in a resort community for visual character along the commercial core when the concern was first brought up. That's why they separated the two. But by the Health and Safety Code, they are completely the same. Commissioner Campbell's recommendation was that they leave everything as is. She didn't think by removing the tattoo parlors and the tobacco shops on Highway 111 that it was going to make Highway 111 look any better. It needed a complete revamp and to leave them as it is, and when they have other applications, go ahead and have a conditional use permit that would come in front of the Planning Commission to approve or not approve them. Commissioner Tanner asked if that was a motion. Commissioner Campbell said yes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, to keep the current ordinance and have the applications come before the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit. Commissioner DeLuna asked if there was anything they had talked about that would limit their vicinity to schools, parks, or churches. Commissioner Campbell explained that would come with the conditional use permit when it comes before them. Commissioner DeLuna thought they decided at the last meeting that requiring a CUP for this type of business was not the best solution. They already decided that. Commissioner Campbell explained that it hadn't been voted on yet. Commissioner DeLuna indicated that it was in the staff report. And they asked staff to analyze other land use compatibility requirements. Commissioner Campbell said that was true. 14 I MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 201 Commissioner Schmidt asked for clarification. Commissioner Campbell said her motion was to leave everything as it is and have any application come before the Planning Commission for consideration where they could approve a conditional use permit or deny it. Commissioner DeLuna asked if she was asking them to deny what staff was recommending. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner Schmidt reiterated that she was requesting them to do nothing. In relation to how they would vote, Commissioner DeLuna asked if that meant they vote no for staffs recommendation. Mr. Erwin pointed out that they were talking about conditional use permits and there were no existing conditional use permit requirements for these businesses. Commissioner Campbell said they could go ahead and require a conditional use permit for these services. Mr. Erwin said if that was the desire of the Commission, staff would need to bring back to them an additional recommendation to include these as conditional use permit requirements in other zones. Chairperson Limont requested clarification that Commissioner Campbell was recommending that they deny staffs recommendation to change the current ordinance and direct them to come back with a conditional use permit requirement. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner DeLuna asked if that was the motion that has been seconded. Commissioner Tanner said that would be his second. Commissioner DeLuna requested that they clarity one more time what they were voting on. Mr. Erwin understood the motion to be made to deny the staff recommendation; to instruct staff to bring it back to the Planning Commission with the additional requirement of conditional use permits for these businesses in other locations. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt clarified that a yes vote would be in favor of denial. Mr. Erwin concurred that a yes vote would be in favor of denying the staff recommendation and instructing that they come back with something additional to this ordinance that would impose conditional use permit requirements on these businesses in other locations other than Highway 111 and El Paseo. Commissioner DeLuna reiterated that a no vote supports the staff recommendation. Mr. Erwin confirmed that a no vote would support the City staff recommendation. Commissioner Schmidt said they would have to take a separate action again on the resolution if Commissioner Campbell's motion fails. Chairperson Limont concurred. 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH i6. 201 Commissioner Tanner asked if there was still room for discussion. Chairperson Limont said yes. Commissioner Tanner said his concern has been aired twice here and that it is for local establishments on Highway 111 currently. The long-term leases or ownership property secures that presence on Highway 111. His concern was for a short-term lease or an owner just deciding at the conclusion of that lease that they no longer want to have this particular establishment in their building. They could say no, they are not going to extend the lease. This denied an already established performing business in the city of Palm Desert the opportunity to continue that endeavor on Highway 111; that's where they want to be. At the same time, he wanted it understood when adopting the requirement for a new CUP that they suggest that there is no more room for these particular types of establishments and that they not eliminate the opportunity for established businesses to continue, either in a smaller place or a larger place on Highway 111. Because the way he understood it, once they are out of that one particular spot, they are no longer going to be able to lease, even if they come to the Planning Commission because a conditional use permit will say no more establishments of this type. Mr. Erwin clarified that a conditional use permit wouldn't say that, this ordinance says that regardless of a conditional use permit. If they wished to put in the ordinance that they could move, then they would have to talk in terms of same location, similar location and determine if they then are required to comply with the other distance restrictions from other operations; can they expand their business, etc.; a number of things. Commissioner Tanner said he had a difficult time taking the ability of one to make money away at the whim of a building owner or what have you. Commissioner Campbell stated that her motion still stood to come to the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit and Commissioner Tanner had seconded the motion. Commissioner DeLuna asked if in the worst case scenario what they were talking about occurs, they are not precluded from doing business in another location in the city, they are just precluded from being on Highway 111; Service Industrial zones or such other designated zones could still accommodate the business, just not the location. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Mr. Erwin asked for clarification that the conditional use permit as he understood it would not apply on Highway 111 or El Paseo, but would apply in other zones within the city off of El Paseo. He had the feeling that perhaps they were talking about a relocation of one existing on Highway 111 and El Paseo requiring a conditional use permit. He asked if that was what he was hearing. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Mr. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Erwin said that if an existing business on Highway 111 wants to relocate to Highway 111, they go through a conditional use permit process. Both Commissioners Campbell and Tanner concurred. Mr. Erwin said that anyone who wished to locate on Cook Street or a place like that also required a conditional use permit. Commissioners Campbell and Tanner both concurred. Commissioner Schmidt noted that her fear in requiring a conditional use permit is that it runs with the land. It doesn't terminate when the end of a lease terminates. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt said that if the ownership changes, it's still allowed. Mr. Erwin said that was correct, unless they restrict that in their granting of the conditional use permit. They do have the ability to do that, if they specify that it is for a particular operator so that they make it so that it does not run with the land. Without some restriction on it, it would run with the land and be available for that location. Commissioner DeLuna said that in that case, it could conceivably allow someone to stay in that location with the same use and allow someone relocating to start the same business in another location, so in effect they would have two businesses? Mr. Erwin said no, it would not expand into two businesses; it would still be just one business. Chairperson Limont noted it would be comparable to how we treat stand alone massage parlors. The CUP is to the owner, to the person operating the business. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner DeLuna asked if it would then affect the owner of property, not the lessee. Mr. Erwin said it may, he didn't know. Chairperson Limont said they could condition it to the person leasing and it could go with their business license. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Chairperson Limont noted there was a motion on the floor and called for the vote. The motion failed 2-3 (Chairperson Limont, Commissioner DeLuna and Commissioner Schmidt voted no). Mr. Erwin advised Chairperson Limont to see if there was any other motion the Commission wished to make. It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, approving the findings and recommendation as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2524, recommending to the City Council approval of ZOA 10-69 adding Chapter 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16, 2010 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, as amended by changing the words "thrift stores" to "independent massage establishments" in E of Section 25.130.020 Definitions and adding the words "excluding cigarettes" to G of Section 25.130.020. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell reported that the next meeting would be March 17. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Chairperson Limont also reported that the next meeting would be March 17. C. PARKS & RECREATION Commissioner Tanner stated that they had a presentation by the City Attorney regarding the Brown Act and reviewed upcoming events and discussion items. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt said they met last Monday and primarily it was updating and the City Attorney spoke about the Brown Act and the need for everyone to adhere to it. The next meeting would be in a month. XI. COMMENTS 1. Commissioner DeLuna said she apparently missed something when they were discussing the definition of rock outcroppings and that part of the motion that got bifurcated. She had something that she wanted to include in the definition and missed the opportunity because she didn't realize what the process that was occurring would exclude any further discussion on the section of the rock outcropping. She didn't know the proper forum to address that. Mr. 18 CIIV Uf P0 [ Hit DESERI 73-510 FRi o WARINL DRry9 PALM DIALKT.Cd11NIRN1A 92260-!5711 TEi:76o 346—o6n JA3:76o 341-7-98 mL+ "I..a....,..,K CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO.ZOA 10-69 NOTICE OF INTENT BY THE: CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLA14EOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code will prohibit certain miscellaneous new uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops,fortune teller or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non- conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. PROJECT LOCATION: Along Highway 111 and El Paseo within the City of Palm Desert. PUBLIC HEARING: SAID public hearing will be held cn Thursday,April 22, 2010, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and plate all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of th,3 hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is ¢vailable for review in the Department of Community Development at the above add ess between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you ;hallenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in wri.len correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. General questions related to the ordinance can be directed to the City of Palm Desert Planning Department at 760-346-0611. PUBLISH: Desert Sun Rachelle Klassen, City Clerk April 11,2010 Palm Desert City Council CITY DF P111M DESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 9 22 6 0-2 578 TEL: 760 346-o6n FAX: 760 341-7098 into@palm-dcscn.nrs CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 NOTICE OF INTENT BY THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONING ORDNANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code will prohibit certain miscellaneous new uses along Highway 111 and El Pa:3eo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non- conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. PROJECT LOCATION: Along Highway 111 and El Paseo within the City of Palm Desert. PUBLIC HEARING: SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, April 22, 2010, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hear ng. General questions related to the ordinance can be directed to the City of Palm Desert Planning Department at 760-346-0611. PUBLISH: Desert Sun Rachelle Klassen, City Clerk April 11, 2010 Palm Desert City Council �O N Q T1 �YN N a Q N Q i W 1I 0} 0 N Q ro N Q � N` C aQ O _ s .f°3LMn oo f 0(c V. LaFQJQ —Z 0 fA ztcw Q c ` a m f->q N w Q co w O � h z a FS U C M r !rt a m NO w Of u 0 Q.{ 0 Q I)n a w o o � z � 3 a w � o v n Nil , CITY 01 P0IM DESERI 73-5io FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 260-2 5 78 TEL A FAX::76 346—760 34i-7o9898 inFoOpalm desert.org May 12, 2010 To Whom It May Concern Re: Location of Miscellaneous Uses — Section 25.130 Dear Business Owner: You are receiving this letter because you operate a business that is impacted by the new ordinance described above. This ordinance will apply regulations for the location of Miscellaneous Uses defined in the ordinance. Miscellaneous uses include body branding and/or body scarring establishment, tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. The ordinance was presented and discussed at the April 22, 2010, City Council meeting. After the discussion during the public hearing, the case was referred back to staff to clarify the grandfathering of existing businesses to allow them to be able to expand, reduce, or relocate their existing business on Highway 111 or El Paseo. In response to City Council's direction, staff has modified the ordinance. In addition to the grandfathering rules, staff added body branding and/or body scarring establishment to the list of uses. The modifications are highlighted in yellow in the ordinance attached to this letter for your review. The modified ordinance will be presented to the City Council on May 27, 2010 at 4:00 pm in the Council Chambers. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at (760) 346-0611 ext 480. You may also contact me at the following e-mail address: tbagato@cityofpalmdesert.com Sincerely, Tony Bagato Principal Planner % ,,,,,o,......,,.,.,. ORDINANCE NO. 1213A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVNG A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 161" day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request and by its Resolution No. 2524 has recommended approval of ZOA 10-69; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22th day of April, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the said amendment: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, T ORDINANCE NO. 1213A programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That Section 25.130 is hereby approved as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 2: That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 271h day of May, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council 2 w ORDINANCE NO. 1213A EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including body branding and/or body scarring ,establr' ishmenf, tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment" means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. FB "Body branding and/or body scarring establishment" means a business providing body.branding, i.e. impressing or burning a_mark or figure on the skin of a person with a 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A hot object or flame; and/or body scarring, i.e. any method by which a scar is applied to or left upon the skin of a person. C. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. D. "Fortune teller or palm reader ' means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. E. "Independent massage establishment' means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business.service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated.wil Wocated on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. F. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. G. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. H. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. I. "Tattoo establishment' means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, I'ip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. C. All miscellaneous uses existing on Highway 111 and/or El Paseo on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be allowed to expand, reduce, and/or relocate its business on Highway 111 or El Paseo in accordance with the following provisions: 4 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A 1. separation distance of 500 feet from the same miscellaneous use"(i.e. a tattoo establishment must be 500 feet from another tatt&o dstablishment); 2. No change in ownership occurs as .part of`th_e_ �expan`sion, 4reduction; and/or relocation`of the miscellaneous use. Section'25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1. Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code,except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be"1,000 feet from another 'pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably,foreseeable indire.et.physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 T n/J m V v 0 n � D_ o ° D O in T tii ; O �(� m i1+ p o k Al N J O D -� O O O_ r pa.61 O •+ O 9 l!� (D 2 3 z Co (D D N t b LS - to = Q Iq = ns �Crb w anc o ' 0 mbz 0 La -I rr-t m .� !J fJ lA lq > o N uwreo l U zn = exam oN� �;w�� 9 zua N N 0 O :5 40 � ° N N� I Q 9 lJ 0 /y CIIV Of P R [ M 01 1 R I 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 260-2 5 78 TEL: 760 346—o6FF FAX: 760 341-7098 info@paim-de.icrt.org May 12, 2010 To Whom It May Concern Re: Location of Miscellaneous Uses — Section 25.130 Dear Business Owner: You are receiving this letter because you operate a business that is impacted by the new ordinance described above. This ordinance will apply regulations for the location of Miscellaneous Uses defined in the ordinance. Miscellaneous uses include body branding and/or body scarring establishment, tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. The ordinance was presented and discussed at the April 22, 2010, City Council meeting. After the discussion during the public hearing, the case was referred back to staff to clarify the'grandfathering of existing businesses to allow them to be able to expand, reduce, or relocate their existing business on Highway 111 or El Paseo. In response to City Council's direction, staff has modified the ordinance. In addition to the grandfathering rules, staff added body branding and/or body scarring establishment to the list of uses. The modifications are highlighted in yellow in the ordinance attached to this letter for your review. The modified ordinance will be presented to the City Council on May 27, 2010 at 4:00 pm in the Council Chambers. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at (760) 346-0611 ext 480. You may also contact me at the following e-mail address: tbagato@cityofpaImdesert.com Sincerely, Tony Bagato. Principal Planner i0^•nnu,rtae<u rua ORDINANCE NO. 1213A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVNG A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 161h day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request and by its Resolution No. 2524 has recommended approval of ZOA 10-69; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22'h day of April, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request.by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify approval of the said amendment: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, ORDINANCE NO. 1213A programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That Section 25.130 is hereby approved as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 2: That the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 27`h day of May, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, Mayor ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council 2 1 ORDINANCE NO. 1213A EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following fifidinos 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including [ody _ branding and%or body Tscarring Fs kb�i shment, tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of. Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment" means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. E. "Body branding and/or body scarring establishment" means a business providing body branding,_i.e. impressing_or burning a mark-or figure_on the skin of a person-with a_' 3 w ORDINANCE NO. 1213A hot object or flame; and/or body scarring, i.e. any method by which a scar is applied to or left upon the skin of a person. C. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. D. "Fortune teller or palm reader" means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. E. "Independent massage establishment" means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a"resort, country club, hotel, or health club. F. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. G. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. H. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. I. `Tattoo establishment' means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. C. All miscellaneous uses existing on Highway 111 and/or El Paseo on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be allowed to expand, reduce, and/or relocate its business on Highway 111 or El Paseo in accordance with the following provisions: 4 r ORDINANCE NO. 1213A 1. Separation distance of 500 feet from the-same.,miscellaneous use,(i.e' a' tattoo establishment must be 500 feet from another tattoo establishment); 2. No change 'in ownership occurs as ,part of=the expansion, ,reduction,' and/or relocation of the miscellaneous use. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1. Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of EI Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section.25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1 ,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,OO1) feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). "" "' ' ' , - C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it.would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project. as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 '�'�' •err i• '-•77 �••'•` ♦ ♦r�•. �'r ate- -- � REM • ♦ ♦ �'� �_ p'�1 III p . p. • mm -- -- -- ■■ ■ ■ • :: - 1 ■ ■ � : IM ■■ ■■ - -- -- �� ■■ j; ■■1 C� 1 NOW ■ - err �i■■■ . ■ G o' : II: .III . '':«•' ° � � 111 � �� ■■ d ■1 �■ ■■ :l1�'■ ■■ ■■ -a �� ■ ��lili ..................... �e''tF� � ��-y 1. �,11 �� t,♦ � � ME Ell r ,« 11 -- . ■ �� � jj � ■ j �iiw ■ All AIR PLAZA WAY A VIEW IIIIJ• ��- -- � i��i •���1:.� � ■ -�.1 11.E : . :. IN Im MEN _ IN __ __ ON IN lum Elm ON Elm Elm ■ - 1 . 1� IN IN __ U Imo , . ::. ■ ■ 1=■ IS 0 NoON IN , IN OR IN IN IN IN ON OR • I Mm : . ■ i ■ ME@ /fir. .■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ ��■ ■ ��11 ■ i �`:t t Rz. Sr � � i� 1 ♦♦11 ■ ■ - AMC; ��■■: • ,•- IIIIJ �����1 ' ��%�, ' �. �III � 11\� ■ ■ ■■ 1■ ■� ■� �,�.� � i � •fir i CITY Of Pn1M 01 1 P I 73-510 FREI) WARING DRIVE. PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 2 60-2 5 7 8 TEL: 760 346-o6ii FAX: 760 341-7o98 info@paim-desert.org PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF ACTION Date: March 17, 2010 City of Palm Desert Re: ZOA 10-69 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its regular meeting of March 16, 2010: THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZOA 10-69 BY ADOPTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2524, AS AMENDED. THE MOTION CARRIED 3-2 (COMMISSIONERS CAMPBELL AND TANNER VOTED NO). Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) da s of the date of the decision. Lauri Aylaian, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission AM cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal ��,WRU OX.¢Y(In...F. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 they would be approving, the resolution which defines outcroppings and indicates that destruction of the outcropping is prohibited. What he stated deletes from that resolution any reference to the ridgeline map. Chair Limont asked if there was a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, approving the findings. The motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Campbell voted no). Mr. Erwin stated that the other item that they mentioned was the potential survey. He asked if they would want to convey to the Council a suggestion with regard to the ridgeline map. If they wished to do that, it would be a matter of merely the Chairman of the Commission, if that was the wish of the Commission, conveying that information to the City Council. Chairperson Limont asked if they should do that as a Miscellaneous item or as part of this. Mr. Erwin said this. Basically that has been the discussion so far. He suggested a motion and second and a vote requesting the Chairperson to convey that information to the Council. It was moved by Commissioner Tanner, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, by minute motion, authorizing Chairperson Limont to convey to the City Council a request for a survey by a licensed professional engineer to identify ridgelines in the HPR zoned area. Commissioner Schmidt stated that she did not want to discount the work that Mr. Stendell and staff have done on this and encouraged them to have that as a starting point. Mr. Erwin said that could be included in the conveyance. Chairperson Limont called for the vote. The motion carried 5- 0. ("See additional discussion on pages 18-19, items 1 and 3") D. Case No. ZOA 10-69 — CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for a recommendation to the City Council to approve a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz reviewed the staff report. He noted a change on Page 4 of the resolution under E, Miscellaneous Uses, where it listed thrift stores. The words "thrift stores" should be replaced with "independent massage establishments." Staff recommended that the 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING GOMIIAI ;SION MARCH 16. 2010 Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Mr. Swartz informed the Commission that staff also advertised this item to all the businesses mentioned in this ordinance. They also handed out copies to individuals at the counter, but only received one response in writing. That response was before the Commission from Bert Bruning of Palm Desert Tobacco. Mr. Bruning was recommending that the Commission add on Page 4 under G under smoke shops the wording to the sentence half way down the page that states, "A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products." Mr. Bruning wanted to add at the end "excluding cigarettes." Mr. Swartz asked for any questions. Commissioner Schmidt asked why they would exclude cigarettes. Mr. Swartz said that in speaking with him on the phone, he sells higher end tobacco and he was worried about an influx of lower-end tobacco cigarette stores. Commissioner Campbell asked if he meant one like the establishment in the Palms to Pines center. Mr. Swartz said yes, he was worried about an influx of stores such as that. Commissioner DeLuna asked what it would take to add "excluding cigarettes". Did they just add it in to anything they approved? Mr. Erwin said they are permitted to add or delete anything that they wish when they finally make a decision with regard to this resolution. They were absolutely free to add it if they wished. Chairperson Limont oaened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to address the Commission in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. MR. BUDDY HAYNES, 73338 Highway 111 , Suite 5, asked if the existing tattoo shops on Highway 111 would be considered grandfathered in, but if they were to move a year from now down the road, would they still be permitted to stay on Highway 111 or would they have to locate off of Highway 111. Mr. Erwin said if he moved the location, it would have to be off of Highway 111. Mr. Haynes asked if that was off of Highway 111 permanently. Mr. Erwin said yes. 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Mr. Haynes didn't agree with the change. He couldn't speak to the other Miscellaneous Uses, but if he had a 99-year lease at his present location versus a two-year lease, he didn't see what the difference would be if he was to move two doors down or stay at the same spot. With the economy fluctuating, if business gets slower and he needs to downsize, he would still like to stay on Highway 111 . Or if business got better, he would like to move to a bigger building. He recommended that those already on Highway 111 should be able to choose if they would like to leave where they're at and still stay there, but at just a different address. He wanted them to put in a compromise or addition to the ordinance. MR. TROY LAWRENCE, 73-640 Highway 111, said he wasn't there to dispute anything, he was there to commend them for hearing them out initially and letting them speak their piece when this came out. The City was able to listen to what they had to say and make recommendations, listen to their advice. He did agree with it and there was only one thing to add and it didn't have anything to do with his business. There was another business they might want to consider to try to monitor and it was right next to him and it had to do with adult toys and stuff like that. He knew that wasn't in there, but he was willing to bet that was something that might come up, so it something they might want to try to spearhead before they start having some of those start popping up down the street. Once they have this ordinance, and he wasn't sure there was anything to control that, but once they see they are set in stone where they're at, someone might get an idea to start working their way down Highway 111 and then they would be right back here with that issue. He commended them again for letting them take care of business and that's why they live and work in this city. Commissioner Tanner asked what type of business he was referring to next to his establishment. Mr. Lawrence said it is called Skitzo Kitty; it's adult things. Mr. Bagato indicated that there is an existing city ordinance that deals with adult entertainment. When that business was initially approved, it was supposed to be mainly a lingerie store. If they have expanded that beyond the realm of what the would define as lingerie, the could look into it. Y 9 � Y Adult book stores are currently not allowed on Highway 111. Mr. Lawrence said it seemed to be fairly decent; however, he just wanted to bring it up to make sure it didn't get out of control. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Commissioner Tanner asked for confirmation that it is addressed in an existing ordinance. Mr. Bagato said that was correct. Locations are supposed to be in industrial areas like Cook Street or off of Dinah Shore. Staff would look into it. Commissioner Campbell asked Mr. Lawrence if he was happy to be grandfathered in. Mr. Lawrence replied extremely happy. Commissioner Campbell asked if he owned the building or if he was renting or leasing. 9 Mr. Lawrence said he was leasing right now. Commissioner Campbell asked if his landlord knew he couldn't move anywhere else because it wouldn't be allowed on Highway 111 and his rent went up, what he would do then. Mr. Lawrence said it was controlled by a management company and he knew there were stipulations and laws that they aren't allowed to do that. He has known the gentleman, Mr. Otto Lupia, for 15 years and he didn't think he would take advantage. Commissioner Campbell said that was just him. What about the other tattoo owners? They may have that possibility where they are caught like that and can't move anywhere else. Mr. Lawrence couldn't speak for the others, but concurred. MR. JAMES LIVINGSTON, 73338 Highway 111, Suite 5, said he is co-owner of Inksanity Tattoo. He wanted to address what Mr. Haynes said earlier as far this being grandfathered in. If his lease is up within two years, he would like the option to move two doors down or a street down on Highway 111. Another issue was they were excluding permanent cosmetics. Permanent cosmetics were no different from what he does. It's the same thing. They break the surface of the skin just as much as he does. They use the same needles; the machines might be different. By excluding them, the tattoo industry, they needed to involve permanent cosmetics also with them. He wanted to bring that to everybody's attention; it had not been mentioned. To move them and not letting him be able to open a business within five years down the road if his lease is up, that should apply to them too. He said about 38% to 40% is tourist 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2M business from out of town. They come from Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, and Orange County. There was no one else wishing to speak and Chairperson Limont closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tanner knew they talked about tattoos and permanent makeup; he asked if there was any distinction between them. It clearly was similar. Mr. Bagato stated that according to the State and Riverside County Health and Safety there is no difference. They talked about from a Health Department view there is no difference. But staff was asked to look at the impact in terms of a resort community in the commercial core and a concentration of them in one area. They didn't treat them with beauty salons because they weren't looking at them from a health and safety standpoint, but from land uses that are compatible in a resort community for visual character along the commercial core when the concern was first brought up. That's why they separated the two. But by the Health and Safety Code, they are completely the same. Commissioner Campbell's recommendation was that they leave everything as is. She didn't think by removing the tattoo parlors and the tobacco shops on Highway 111 that it was going to make Highway 111 look any better. It needed a complete revamp and to leave them as it is, and when they have other applications, go ahead and have a conditional use permit that would come in front of the Planning Commission to approve or not approve them. Commissioner Tanner asked if that was a motion. Commissioner Campbell said yes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Tanner, to keep the current ordinance and have the applications come before the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit. Commissioner DeLuna asked if there was anything they had talked about that would limit their vicinity to schools, parks, or churches. Commissioner Campbell explained that would come with the conditional use permit when it comes before them. Commissioner DeLuna thought they decided at the last meeting that requiring a CUP for this type of business was not the best solution. They already decided that. Commissioner Campbell explained that it hadn't been voted on yet. Commissioner DeLuna indicated that it was in the staff report. And they asked staff to analyze other land use compatibility requirements. Commissioner Campbell said that was true. 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 Commissioner Schmidt asked for clarification. Commissioner Campbell said her motion was to leave everything as it is and have any application come before the Planning Commission for consideration where they could approve a conditional use permit or deny it. Commissioner DeLuna asked if she was asking them to deny what staff was recommending. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner Schmidt reiterated that she was requesting them to do nothing. In relation to how they would vote, Commissioner DeLuna asked if that meant they vote no for staff's recommendation. Mr. Erwin pointed out that they were talking about conditional use permits and there were no existing conditional use permit requirements for these businesses. Commissioner Campbell said they could go ahead and require a conditional use permit for these services. Mr. Erwin said if that was the desire of the Commission, staff would need to bring back to them an additional recommendation to include these as conditional use permit requirements in other zones. Chairperson Limont requested clarification that Commissioner Campbell was recommending that they deny staff's recommendation to change the current ordinance and direct them to come back with a conditional use permit requirement. Commissioner Campbell concurred. Commissioner DeLuna asked if that was the motion that has been seconded. Commissioner Tanner said that would be his second. Commissioner DeLuna requested that they clarify one more time what they were voting on. Mr. Erwin understood the motion to be made to deny the staff recommendation; to instruct staff to bring it back to the Planning Commission with the additional requirement of conditional use permits for these businesses in other locations. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt clarified that a yes vote would be in favor of denial. Mr. Erwin concurred that a yes vote would be in favor of denying the staff recommendation and instructing that they come back with something additional to this ordinance that would impose conditional use permit requirements on these businesses in other locations other than Highway 111 and El Paseo. Commissioner DeLuna reiterated that a no vote supports the staff recommendation. Mr. Erwin confirmed that a no vote would support the City staff recommendation. Commissioner Schmidt said they would have to take a separate action again on the resolution if Commissioner Campbell's motion fails. Chairperson Limont concurred. 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16, 2010 Commissioner Tanner asked if there was still room for discussion. Chairperson Limont said yes.. Commissioner Tanner said his concern has been aired twice here and that it is for local establishments on Highway 111 currently. The long-term leases or ownership property secures that presence on Highway 111. His concern was for a short-term lease or an owner just deciding at the conclusion of that lease that they no longer want to have this particular establishment in their building. They could say no, they are not going to extend the lease. This denied an already established performing business in the city of Palm Desert the opportunity to continue that endeavor on Highway 111 ; that's where they want to be. At the same time, he wanted it understood when adopting the requirement for a new CUP that they suggest that there is no more room for these particular types of establishments and that they not eliminate the opportunity for established businesses to continue, either in a smaller place or a larger place on Highway 111. Because the way he understood it, once they are out of that one particular spot, they are no longer going to be able to lease, even if they come to the Planning Commission because a conditional use permit will say no more establishments of this type. Mr. Erwin clarified that a conditional use permit wouldn't say that, this ordinance says that regardless of a conditional use permit. If they wished to put in the ordinance that they could move, then they would have to talk in terms of same location, similar location and determine if they then are required to comply with the other distance restrictions from other operations; can they expand their business, etc.; a number of things. Commissioner Tanner said he had a difficult time taking the ability of one to make money away at the whim of a building owner or what have you. Commissioner Campbell stated that her motion still stood to come to the Planning Commission with a conditional use permit and Commissioner Tanner had seconded the motion. Commissioner DeLuna asked if in the worst case scenario what they were talking about occurs, they are not precluded from doing business in another location in the city, they are just precluded from being on Highway 111; Service Industrial zones or such other designated zones could still accommodate the business, just not the location. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Mr. Erwin asked for clarification that the conditional use permit as he understood it would not apply on Highway 111 or El Paseo, but would apply in other zones within the city off of El Paseo. He had the feeling that perhaps they were talking about a relocation of one existing on Highway 111 and El Paseo requiring a conditional use permit. He asked if that was what he was hearing. Commissioner Campbell said that was correct. Mr. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 21M Erwin said that if an existing business on Highway 111 wants to relocate to Highway 111, they go through a conditional use permit process. Both Commissioners Campbell and Tanner concurred. Mr. Erwin said that anyone who wished to locate on Cook Street or a place like that also required a conditional use permit. Commissioners Campbell and Tanner both concurred. Commissioner Schmidt noted that her fear in requiring a conditional use permit is that it runs with the land. It doesn't terminate when the end of a lease terminates. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner Schmidt said that if the ownership changes, it's still allowed. Mr. Erwin said that was correct, unless they restrict that in their granting of the conditional use permit. They do have the ability to do that, if they specify that it is for a particular operator so that they make it so that it does not run with the land. Without some restriction on it, it would run with the land and be available for that location. Commissioner DeLuna said that in that case, it could conceivably allow someone to stay in that location with the same use and allow someone relocating to start the same business in another location, so in effect they would have two businesses? Mr. Erwin said no, it would not expand into two businesses; it would still be just one business. Chairperson Limont noted it would be comparable to how we treat stand alone massage parlors. The CUP is to the owner, to the person operating the business. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Commissioner DeLuna asked if it would then affect the owner of property, not the lessee. Mr. Erwin said it may, he didn't know. Chairperson Limont said they could condition it to the person leasing and it could go with their business license. Mr. Erwin said that was correct. Chairperson Limont noted there was a motion on the floor and called for the vote. The motion failed 2-3 (Chairperson Limont, Commissioner DeLuna and Commissioner Schmidt voted no). Mr. Erin advised Chairperson Limont to see if there was any other motion the Commission wished to make. It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, approving the findings and recommendation as presented by staff. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2524, recommending to the City Council approval of ZOA 10-69 adding Chapter 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 16. 2010 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code, as amended by changing the words "thrift stores" to "independent massage establishments" in E of Section 25.130.020 Definitions and adding the words "excluding cigarettes" to G of Section 25.130.020. Motion carried 3-2 (Commissioners Campbell and Tanner voted no). IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell reported that the next meeting would be March 17. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Chairperson Limont also reported that the next meeting would be March 17. C. PARKS & RECREATION Commissioner Tanner stated that they had a presentation by the City Attorney regarding the Brown Act and reviewed upcoming events and discussion items. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt said they met last Monday and primarily it was updating and the City Attorney spoke about the Brown Act and the need for everyone to adhere to it. The next meeting would be in a month. XI. COMMENTS 1. Commissioner DeLuna said she apparently missed something when they were discussing the definition of rock outcroppings and that part of the motion that got bifurcated. She had something that she wanted to include in the definition and missed the opportunity because she didn't realize what the process that was occurring would exclude any further discussion on the section of the rock outcropping. She didn't know the proper forum to address that. Mr. 18 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REQUEST: THAT THE CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130, LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES, TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner APPILANT: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO: ZOA 10-69 DATE: March 16, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Exhibit A, Chapter 25.130 Legal Notice Recommendation Recommend to the City Council approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Executive Summary At the November 10, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner DeLuna asked staff to research potential regulations on the location of tattoo establishments. On December 15, 2009, staff proposed four possible approaches for regulations and recommended one of the approaches. The Planning Commission discussed the four regulations proposed by staff and came to the conclusion that they want to eliminate the visual impact of tattoo establishments along the City's main commercial corridors, Highway 111 and El Paseo. There was also discussion regarding singling out tattoo establishments, and how other uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo such as smoke shops, independent massage establishments, pawn shops, and fortune tellers could be included in this discussion. The Commission asked staff to come back with a proposed Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses March 16, 2010 Page 2 of 5 zoning ordinance amendment. Staff has prepared a new Section for the Zoning Ordinance that would be identified as Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to prohibit certain new miscellaneous uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune tellers or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, independent massage establishments, and bail bonds establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non-conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. The intent of the ordinance is to promote a better visual character of a destination resort community along the main core commercial area of the city. Background: Regulation of tattoo establishments has been discussed at several times within the City of Palm Desert dating back to December of 1997 when the City had only two tattoo establishments on Highway 111. The City Council discussed regulating the location of tattoo establishments as part of an ordinance dealing with the location of adult businesses. After discussion about regulating tattoo establishments, the City Council did not want to identify them as an adult entertainment business. At that time, the City Council determined that tattoo establishments were no different than a barber or beauty shop offering a personal service. Since the original discussion in 1997, there are currently six tattoo establishments, of which five are located on Highway 111 in the commercial core of the city. At the November 10, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner DeLuna asked staff to research potential regulations on the location of tattoo establishments because of the high number of them in one location of the city. At the December 15, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, staff presented four possible approaches for regulation regarding tattoo establishments. The four approaches were: 1 . Eliminate tattoo establishments within the city's commercial core along Highway 111 and El Paseo. Eliminating tattoo establishments in the commercial corridor would assist in preserving the quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Highway 111 and El Paseo are the major retail corridors of the city, and tattoo establishments do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of the city. Highway 111 serves as the primary connection to other desert cities east and west. Indian Wells and Rancho Mirage do not allow tattoo establishments, because they are not addressed in their respective municipal codes. This is causing an influx of tattoo establishments in Palm Desert along Highway 111. Prohibiting tattoo establishments along Highway 111 and EL Paseo may help prevent any deleterious impacts from a concentration of tattoo establishments on Highway 111 , thereby reducing or eliminating the G:\Planninq%K In S1 dz%WordMscellaneous OrdWc nsc ord!¢port tinal.doc Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses March 16, 2010 Page 3 of 5 adverse secondary effects of such uses in the area. Tattoo establishments would be permitted outright in other zones and areas of the City. 2. Require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in all zones, except residential, for a tattoo establishment to open business. These zones are the PC (Planned Commercial) District, PCD (Planned Community Development) District, (S.I) Service Industrial District, C-1 (General Commercial) District, and O.P (Office Professional) District. This would include Highway 111 and El Paseo. The ordinance could be written to require a CUP in all zones, but prohibit them along Highway 111 and El Paseo. If a CUP is required, tattoo establishments must be approved by the Planning Commission to establish the business. The Planning Commission could approve a tattoo establishment with conditions of approval placed on the business, or could deny an application if it was believed that the business is not located in a appropriate location. The CUP would focus upon the safety and welfare of the client, community, and property. Conditions of approval for a CUP would also regulate hours of operation, number of employees, parking, and signage. A CUP would be approved for the property, not the business owner, and it could be revoked if a business is operating outside the terms of the conditions. Requiring a CUP for this type of business is not the best solution because it requires staff to analyze other land use compatibility requirements, which would show that tattoo establishments are typically open from 3 pm to 1 am, and do not create parking problems since most other businesses in the same location would be closed. Other than the hours of operation, tattoo establishments are similar to beauty salons, barbers, and other businesses offering personal services from a land use perspective. Therefore, the legal findings for approving or denying the CUP will be difficult for staff to make. 3. Allow tattoo establishments within all zones, except residential, without prohibiting them within the commercial core, but place a proximity prohibition to similar establishments. An example would be to restrict tattoo establishments so that no such establishment can be within 500 or 1,000 or 1,500 feet from another, and/ or schools, child care centers, municipal parks, and places of worship. 4. Like other local cities, prohibit outright tattoo establishments and other uses the Planning Commission may consider as well. These cities do not address tattoo establishments in their municipal codes, therefore do not allow them. However, the legal grounds to deny new tattoo businesses may be difficult for the City of Palm Desert, since there are seven tattoo establishments doing business today. After the discussion regarding staff's four possible approaches for regulation, and concerns regarding singling out tattoo establishments, staff recommended approach GAPlanningWevin SwaftMordlMispellaneous OrNPc mien oro repoh final.00c Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses March 16, 2010 Page 4 of 5 No.1, eliminating tattoo establishments along Highway 111 and El Paseo, in order to presence the quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Staff also recommended that existing businesses be considered grandfathered in along Highway 111. A business owner for Mad Hatter Tattoo, Mr. Troy Lawrence, voiced his concerns to the Commissioners. Mr. Lawrence felt that tattoo establishments were being singled out and that his business contributes jobs and revenue to the city and shouldn't be viewed any differently than any other business. Mr. Lawrence didn't agree with potentially being relocated off of Highway 111 where he has conducted business for over 10 years. Discussion: Tattoo establishments have always been considered a personal service such as a barber shop or beauty salon and are allowed in the commercial zoning district without any restrictions. When staff was directed to research possible restrictions because of the concern with a resort community having a high concentration of tattoo establishments in the commercial core, staff recommended that they be restricted from Highway 111 and El Paseo to preserve and enhance the visual character of the commercial core. Once the intent of the restrictions was identified, staff believed that there were other potential uses that could negatively impact the commercial core if there was a high concentration of them as well. Based on improving the visual character of the commercial core, staff created a new ordinance for what is referred to as "Miscellaneous Uses." Miscellaneous uses including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune tellers or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo., They are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in enhancing and preserving a higher quality of development along the city's primary entryways. Currently along Highway 111 and El Paseo there are five tattoo establishments, eight independent massage establishments, one palm reader, and three smoke shops. Under the proposed ordinance, the existing uses will be grandfathered in as permitted uses, and will be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. All new miscellaneous uses would be subject to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment regulations and all other applicable regulations. No new miscellaneous uses would be established along, or within 300 feet of the right-of-way for, Highway 111 and El Paseo. Miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all commercial or service industrial areas of the city where not otherwise prohibited by code, with a 1,000 foot separation requirement from a same use. For example, a tattoo establishment must be 1,000 feet from another tattoo establishment, but not from other miscellaneous uses listed in this section. In order to determine the distance, a straight line would be measured from the GAPlanning%win Sw Hd Word Mi ellaneous On ft mise ord mpod final.dm Staff Report ZOA 10-69, Location of Miscellaneous Uses March 16, 2010 Page 5 of 5 nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. With the proposed ordinance, staff doesn't foresee any direct or indirect impacts to the existing businesses since they will be allowed to continue their usage. New businesses would not be impacted, since there will still be many areas of the city in which they are permitted. Environmental Review: The proposed amendment is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")(Cal. Pub. Res. Code, section 21000 et seq.) and its implementing regulations based on the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Staff has determined that no significant impacts will occur because miscellaneous uses would be permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code. Conclusion: Palm Desert is known for being a resort destination, and Highway 111 and El Paseo are the commercial corridor of the City. Preserving the commercial viewsheds requires unique land use provisions to promote a high quality visual character for Palm Desert. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote a higher quality of development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Staff believes adding Chapter 25.130, Location of Miscellaneous Uses, to the Palm Desert Municipal Code will assist in promoting and preserving a high quality of development along the city's primary entryways of Highway 111 and El Paseo, while protecting the interests of the existing businesses.. Submitted by: Department Head: Kevin Swartz Lauri Aylaian Assistant Planner Director of Community Development G TianninBNKevin Smdz\WorcNMlscellaneous OrMPc mist ore mpod Iinal.dm PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO: ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 161" day of March 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the recommendation to the City Council of said request: 1 . The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. PLANNING COMMISS.�N RESOLUTION NO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of ZOA 10-69, attached as Exhibit A. PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert , 9 Planning Commission, held on this 16th day of March 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: M. CONNOR LIMONT, Chairperson ATTEST: LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 I PLANNING COMMISS.. A RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.'010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1 . The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. , "Bail bond establishment" means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. B. "Body piercing establishment" means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. 3 PLANNING COMMISS.. 14 RESOLUTION NO. C. "Fortune teller or palm reader' means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. D. "Independent massage establishment" .means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. E. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, thrift stores, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. F. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. G. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. H. "Tattoo establishment" means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1 . Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). 4 PLANNING COMMIS RESOLUTION NO. C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that nay one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, on the day of 2010 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CINDY FINERTY, MAYOR ATTEST: RACHELLE KLASSEN, CITY CLERK 5 CITY " f P H [ M DESERT 1 71-510 FRED WARINC. DRIVE • PA[M I)F-IFR I,CAI IFOR\IA p.,6o-2578 TEE:76o 146-o6n rAN:76o 141-7098 Infu4'palm-d.un neg CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 NOTICE OF INTENT BY THE CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code will prohibit certain miscellaneous new uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non- conforming and .will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. PROJECT LOCATION: Along Highway 111 and El Paseo within the City of Palm Desert. PUBLIC HEARING: SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 16, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to,the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun Lauri Aylaian, Secretary March 3, 2010 Palm Desert Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2524 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 16th day of March, 2010, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the City of Palm Desert for approval of the above noted matter; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", Resolution No. 06-78, in that the Director of Community Development has determined that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the recommendation to the City Council of said request: 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions. 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert. 4. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the City of Palm Desert. 5. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. PLANNING COMMISSIr ' RESOLUTION NO. 2524 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of ZOA 10-69, attached as Exhibit A. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 16`" day of March, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: DELUNA, SCHMIDT, LIMONT NOES: CAMPBELL, TANNER ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE CONNOR LIMONT, Chairperson ATTEST: LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSI RESOLUTION NO. 2524 EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES Sections: 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose 25.130.020 Definitions 25.130.030 Applicability 25.130.040 Location Section 25.130.010 Findings and Purpose A. This ordinance is based on the following findings: 1 . The proposed Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the established goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; 2. As described in the General Plan, the City of Palm Desert is the premier business, resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley, whose three core economic interests are: retail commercial, resorts and tourism, and educational institutions; 3. Highway 111 and El Paseo are significant commercial corridors of the City, with viewsheds that require special land use provisions to promote a quality image of Palm Desert; 4. Miscellaneous uses, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments, do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of Highway 111 and El Paseo and are antithetical to the core economic interests of the City, as defined by the Economic and Fiscal Element of the General Plan; 5. Eliminating miscellaneous uses within these commercial corridors will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways; B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards and procedures to promote quality development along the city's commercial corridors and throughout the city in general, in support of the goals, programs, and policies established in the Economic & Fiscal and Community Design Elements of the General Plan. Section 25.130.020 Definitions A. "Bail bond establishment' means any establishment where bail bonds can be purchased. B. "Body piercing establishment' means an establishment where, for commercial purposes, the act of penetrating the skin to make generally permanent in nature, a hole, mark, or scar. "Body piercing" does not include the use of mechanized, pre-sterilized ear-piercing system that penetrates the outer perimeter or lobe of the ear or both. 3 PLANNING COMMISSI, RESOLUTION NO. 2524 C. "Fortune teller or palm reader" means someone who, for commercial purposes, claims to see the future and reads customers' fortunes. D. "Independent massage establishment" means a massage establishment as defined in Section 5.87.020 where the primary and predominant business service is the practice of massage as defined in Section 5.87.020. An independent massage establishment is not an establishment that is associated with or located on the premises of a resort, country club, hotel, or health club. E. "Miscellaneous uses" include tattoo establishments, body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, independent massage establishments, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. F. "Pawn shop" means a business that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. G. "Smoke shop" means an establishment that primarily sells tobacco products (as 0 defined in Section 8.34.010) and generates at least 50/a of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia (as defined in Section 8.34.010), including such paraphernalia that may be used with illegal drugs. A smoke shop is not a retail tobacco establishment. A retail tobacco establishment is an establishment that generates less than 50% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco paraphernalia and generates more than 80% of its gross revenue from the sale of tobacco products, excluding cigarettes. Retail tobacco establishments are exempt from this ordinance prohibition. H. "Tattoo establishment" means a business providing tattooing, i.e. marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. A tattoo establishment does not include beauty salons, health spas, and/or similar establishments that provide permanent makeup on the skin of the face, including, but not limited to, the permanent coloring of the eyebrows, lip line, and eye line. Section 25.130.030 Applicability A. All new miscellaneous uses shall be subject to these regulations and all other applicable regulations. B. All miscellaneous uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be considered permitted uses, and allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Section 25.130.040 Location A. No miscellaneous uses shall be established in the following locations: 1 . Along Highway 111 or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of Highway 111; 2. Along El Paseo or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of El Paseo. B. Miscellaneous uses are permitted in all areas of the City where not otherwise prohibited by code, except as provided in Section 25.130.030(A), but may not be within 1,000 feet from a same use (i.e. a pawn shop must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, not other miscellaneous uses listed in this section). 4 PLANNING COMMISSI, RESOLUTION NO. 2524 C. The measure of reference distance in this section shall be a straight line from the nearest property line containing the miscellaneous use to the nearest property line of an affected use or other miscellaneous use, without regard to intervening structures. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of the Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable. SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Pursuant to state and local environmental regulations, it has been determined that the regulations encompassed in this ordinance are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. 5 g n° u.xo n..o •�' " "OWX-+oel HOVLEY LN E HOVLEY LN E ` e'r� � '"• 9 B 5ii n,tu wr �•} :u. 4vep4 .r, �O4 d• Jk �M YpQ`�M ' � 8 � naa �L 7 } """+•+x R6 ab E`opd.� F ! ��'p'o @ 16 �Q6 �p .,.rc<. 'e dg AGNESN FALLS DR un,uw.. MAGNESIA FALLS OR MAGRESIA FALLS DR h r ;G 4G.,.u9 C<w3t �Cj .wn. :.. �a q' • � s 3 +m.wt J u FRED WAR/NG OR ewu.E� REPWRRING-D _ FREPWRRWG-V e..a<xo.....e a g JPIS z 2 •, � °y.al �•. .. B r � �R.w,r� iJ v S 4 •P�"' w.. �3Sr naT... ■�sNm,ou N,>..n.om .�,...o.o FE tt •� ..u.00w,a. tt Phi n Ell EL PASEO no...a SPAS' i} ✓"�,S 0 G p4.V ° LOCATOR MAP- '�" PALM DESERT .� TATTOO PARLORS e , c• ��, DATE: '"��"" l 0/2009 MINUTES I PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 200 XI. COMMENTS 1. Commissioner DeLuna stated that she has an ongoing concern about the number, location and concentration of tattoo establishments in and around Palm Desert. She didn't know, particularly in some locations, if that's the image that Palm Desert would like to have. She asked staff to please look into the notion of either limiting them or forming a draft ordinance to limit the number and scope of tattoo establishments. Ms. Aylaian said staff would certainly do that. 2. Commissioner Limont asked if a large banner was approved on the northeast end of El Paseo for the empty lot. Ms. Aylaian said she would .have Code look into the matter and see if there were any permits. 3. Chairperson Tanner stated that the Veteran's Day event at Freedom Park was very nice and well attended. 4. It was confirmed that the next meeting would be December 15. The December 1 meeting was canceled. XII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:18 p.m. LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary ATTEST: VAN G. TANNER, Chair Palm Desert Planning Commission AM 5 Y27D Ci r r `CLLRA 'S QMCE PALS' DESLRT, CA PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) 2010 MAR -4 PM 12: 47 STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of the County aforesaid;1 am over the age of eighteen -------------------------- years,and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been - - - - adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the No 0890 CITY OF PALM DESERT Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO.ZOA 10fi9 California under the date of March 24,1988.Case NOTICE OF INTENT BY THE CITY OF Number 191236;that the notice,of which the PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION annexed is a printed co type not smaller TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE P PY(set in YP PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A than non pariel,has been published in each regular ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT HAPTERand entire issue of said newspaper and not in any OFDING M SCELLANEOUS 25 USES.130 LOTO TITHE supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the March 3 b,2010 Palm Dosed Municipal Code will prohibit cenein miscellaneous new uses alongg Highwayyy Ill and to Paseq including tattoo are-body Tor lm taadam,ents,pawn srypps�ladune eler 11 palm readers,smoke shops,billiards or pool has, , and bail ubondses establishments. All eat n mis forma e- - ous uses will be considered legal noncantarminq All in the year 2010 and will be allowed to Continue business until such business is no longer in operatlm. PROJECT LOCATION: Aloe9 Highway 111 I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the are-EI Paseo within the Cary of Pain Desert. foregoing is true and correct. I PUBLIC HEARING: 1 SAID 00ublic head&gg will be held on Tuesday. Dated at Palm Springs, lifornia this---3 ,—day March tic,2010,at fi:00 p.m.ln the Council Cham- ber at the Palm Dosed Civic Center,73 510 Fred I Waring Drive, Palm Dosed, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to of------ March ,2010 attend and be heard.Written comments concern. I trig all hems covered by this public hearing rwtlw shall be accepted up to the dale of the hearing.In. I formation concerning the pr=P ,d project andlor _ negative declaration Is avallabte for review in the Department of Communi Development at the -- I above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. ----------- — ----—---------- and q e55:00 p.m.Monday through Friday.If you chal- Sig a llmiad to rthe aising only those issues you orou �ao- one else raised at the public hearing described In this notice,or In wrlten ccrrespondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the I public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun March 3,2010 Lauri Aylaian Societe rY Palm Desert planning Commission PUBLISH:311110 CIIIf Uf P1. IM DESERT 73-5jo FRFD WARINc DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-0611 FAx: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.org CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 10-69 NOTICE OF INTENT BY THE CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ADDING CHAPTER 25.130 LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS USES TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Adding Chapter 25.130 Location of Miscellaneous Uses to the Palm Desert Municipal Code will prohibit certain miscellaneous new uses along Highway 111 and El Paseo, including tattoo and body piercing establishments, pawn shops, fortune teller or palm readers, smoke shops, billiards or pool halls, and bail bond establishments. All existing miscellaneous uses will be considered legal non- conforming and will be allowed to continue business until such business is no longer in operation. PROJECT LOCATION: Along Highway 111 and El Paseo within the City of Palm Desert. PUBLIC HEARING: SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 16, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun Lauri Aylaian, Secretary March 3, 2010 Palm Desert Planning Commission �.-- City of Pal esert Speaker'Card Meeting Date: 4)-�S� r / I If you are attending a City Council, Redevelopment Agency, or Planning Commission meeting and would like to address the Board, please complete the following Information and give It to the City Clerk and/or Secretary in adva ce of themeeting. Thank you. Name: �lC �i X16, 7o Address: �% //�(/—/J���S��c l would like to speak under. 1. Oral-Communications Section about: �l2%Tn(-2 1 ii7 O/�f 2. Regular Agenda Item No. 3. Public Nearing Item No. In Favor Of In Opposition to Completion of this card is voluntar." You may attend and participate In the meeting regardless of whether or not you complete this document. Its purpose is to aid staff in compiling complete and accurate records. Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY — DECEMBER 15, 2009 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tanner called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Members Present: Van Tanner, Chair Connor Limont, Vice Chair Sonia Campbell Nancy DeLuna Mari Schmidt Members Absent: None Staff Present: Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Jill Tremblay, Acting City Attorney Bob Hargreaves, Deputy City Attorney Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Missy Grisa, Assistant Planner Ryan Stendell, Senior Management Analyst Christina Canales, Assistant Engineer Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Schmidt led in the pledge of allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Aylaian summarized pertinent December 10, 2009 City Council actions. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS MMOP MR. TROY LAWRENCE, representing 73-640 Highway 111, Palm Desert, explained that he was present to discuss the tattoo issue. Chairperson Tanner explained that the issue was a Miscellaneous Item on the agenda and preferred to defer his comments until that time, if it worked out with Mr. Lawrence's schedule. Mr. Lawrence said that was fine. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15, 2009 these six homes are any of those 19. There wouldn't be any 25-foot tall homes. Mr. Lennon said what they did when that happened, the ordinance was increased by a couple of feet and the building plans were done and completed, and so it was allowed. They went out and identified where it was against the mountains and it wouldn't have any effect. He confirmed it would not affect these. Commissioner DeLuna asked how high these homes would be.. Mr. Lennon said these have a max of 20 feet. He thought only a percentage could be at that height, so it's the original approval they've had from day one. Chairperson Tanner asked for any additional questions. Commissioner Schmidt said she would save them (for study session). Chairperson Tanner asked if they needed a motion. Mr. Bagato advised that the public should be given an opportunity to speak to the public hearing. Ms. Aylaian said they might want to ask if anyone in the audience wished to speak in favor of or against the project. There might be someone who came here this evening to speak who is not able to make it to the next meeting, so this gives them an opportunity to speak now. Chairperson Tanner asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to the public hearing. There was no one. Chairperson Tanner asked for a motion to continue the public hearing. A potential study session, field surveys, and public hearing date was discussed. Action: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, continuing the public hearing to January 19, 2010, with direction to staff to schedule field surveys and a study session prior to the January 19, 2010, public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Discussion of potential regulations to tattoo establishments in the city of Palm Desert. Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz explained that at the Planning Commission meeting on November 12, 2009, there were concerns 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15, 202 2 expressed about the number, location and concentration of tattoo establishments on Highway 111 in Palm Desert. Staff was asked to research potential regulations on the location of tattoo establishments. Staff identified six tattoo establishments on Highway 111 and one located along Joni Drive within the city limits. Staff proposed four possible approaches for regulation. He said that Planning Commission might choose to recommend one of staff's proposals to the City Council, or an alternative recommendation. If the intent of the Planning Commission is to eliminate tattoo establishments along the city's main commercial corridors, Highway 111 and El Paseo, then staff recommended regulation number one. Staff also identified how some of the neighboring cities regulate tattoo establishments and outlined the City Council's discussions back in December of 1997 and January 1998. He asked for any questions. Commissioner DeLuna asked for clarification. Mr. Swartz said there were a total of seven. Mr. Swartz said there are six on Highway 111 and one on Joni Drive. On the map in front of them, there was one shown on Cook Street, but that was actually the Hovley Business Park. Chairperson Tanner asked if there was one planned there. Mr. Swartz replied no. Chairperson Tanner invited public comments. MR. TROY LAWRENCE of Mad Hatter Tattoo #2 located at 73640 Highway 111 in Palm Desert, stated that he is the owner of the tattoo establishment and has been for the last 14 years. His establishment has been located at that address for the last 14 years. He wasn't here to refute the regulation of tattoo establishments, however, if possible to educate and enforce the regulations within the city. But he did have a few arguments about possibly trying to locate them off of Highway 111. He was sure they have looked into a couple of definitions, one being 653 of the California Penal Code. As used in this section, to tattoo means to insert pigment on the surface of the skin of a human being, or an animal if they choose to, so as to produce an indelible mark or figure visible through the skin. That would also take them to the Health and Safety Code of 119300 permanent cosmetics, also known as permanent makeup. Cosmetic technique which employs tattoos which is permanent pigmentation of the dermas as a means of producing designs that resemble makeup, also known as permanent makeup. Mr. Lawrence said his statements would be that he has been open for 14 years in the city. He'd like to think of himself as decent within the city. He pays his taxes, paid for his city permit, his signs and his 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15 2009 building are within code, and he makes sure of that, and so does the City; he's been warned before. To let them know, for his particular business, they've had no calls for service for public safety except for one because they had someone stealing. That's their legal right to call the local law enforcement to have them come out and apprehend the suspect or person in question. Every year he provides new equipment for the inside of the shop. He repaints the inside of the shop and that's money he doesn't have to spend, but he does that and he goes to the local Ace Hardware in Palm Desert to buy these products. His storefront, and he apologized he didn't have any photographs of the storefront, but if they get to meet again he can prepare that, it doesn't appear to be an eyesore since the storefront is up to code. As far as tattoos and body piercings go, at no time has this establishment or industry caused alcohol abuse, DUI crashes or public intoxication. As they all know, Highway 111 and El Paseo have a lot of these establishments strewn throughout the city. At no time has his establishment or the tattoo industry in Palm Desert caused any of those problems. They haven't caused anyone to die in a crash because of alcohol or to be involved in a fight because of alcohol. It's just simply tattooing. Mr. Lawrence said he was here to offer his services to the City and to the Commission to help the regulations, because he himself and one of his employees were concerned with the fact that a couple opened up fairly close to him and he was concerned and hoped the City was going to have some sort of regulation for this type of businesses cropping up here and there. As a reminder, he's been there 14 years and hasn't been a problem. Nobody at his establishment has been a problem, and he just hoped that it wasn't because people didn't like tattoos. He happens to be a fan of them and has quite a few, although you can't tell. The tattoo industry has tattooed retired law enforcement, attorneys, and judges, all over the United States. They've tattooed rich people and people who struggle to pay for the tattoo and they give them a break sometimes. To run an establishment such as a tattoo industry, he pays for yellow pages which isn't cheap, he pays for the electric bill, the phone service, the lease and they frequent the 7-11 quite a bit to buy sodas for the people who come in and get tattooed or are going to pass out from getting a piercing or a tattoo. So they keep another establishment up and running. He knew they've all visited 7-11 and knew some people don't drink, but they still have to drive by the 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 115, 202 bars and all the restaurants strewn throughout the city. They try to maintain privacy at the shop and they have some people sit out front once in a while and hang out, but they don't cause any problems. In many instances, his people know if they see a problem to call the local law enforcement and try not to handle it themselves and let them do the job. Mr. Lawrence reiterated that he's been there for 14 years. Yes, there are some shops that just showed up. He would be more than happy for them to be relocated and make it a lot easier for him. However, it was just like another clothing store that opens up down the street and the competition continues. They do what they can and provide a service for the rich and the poor, professionals, and that's what they try to do. He hoped they would like to contact him through the business to offer any professional help as far as any kind of regulations. He knew they were through the County; they are registered through the County Health Department. They are inspected every year and they have certificates, and his body piercer has also been to classes and he has certificates and documentation to prove that he just doesn't go out and poke holes into people; he's very professional. His appearance may not be professional to some people's standards, however, that's just part of the industry and a little bit of a commitment issue, so that's just how certain things go. Again, he hoped they met again on advisory issues and he'd like to help them out as much as possible. He asked for any questions. Commissioner Campbell asked if his employees require a license like in cosmetology or any other person who tattoos eyebrows or eyeliner, they require a license. Are his employees required to have a license? Mr. Lawrence said they are required to be registered through the County Health Department. They don't have an actual license where they go to a school; it's an apprenticeship. It's almost like someone who wants to be a carpenter. They get with somebody who is willing to learn and they go through the motions and are taught how to tattoo. Commissioner Campbell said they are licensed. Mr. Lawrence said yes. Commissioner Schmidt noted that Mr. Lawrence offered some suggestions as to regulations for these establishments. She asked if he could set that to writing and get it to staff so that they could look at it. 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 115, 200 Mr. Lawrence said absolutely; he would love to set a standard because from what they understand, Riverside County Health Department is very new on these issues since tattoos in this county, (il)legal tattoo shops have been cropping up. And he knew that they have a lot of people tattooing out of their houses right now. He couldn't verify where they are at, but they run into some people who want to get something fixed and they ask them and they say someone tattooed out of their garage or house. That's one thing they like to avoid as well. They say look, you don't have to get a tattoo through us, but if you're going to go somewhere, check the sterilization process and they would show anybody what they do. They show the Health Department what they do to keep it sterile and to provide any type of hepatitis C or blood pathogen issues, which all his guys are educated on those issues. They've also taken a little bit of first because a lot of people pass out and they have to worry about that kind of thing. His guys know that it is a strict policy to check ID's. If at any time they have someone who is trying to use someone else's ,identification, to call him or call local law enforcement. That is a misdemeanor and they will take it and hold onto it. Most of the time those people leave, but they like to document it. Commissioner Schmidt said it would be helpful, certainly to her, if he wouldn't mind. Mr. Lawrence said he would love to do that. Chairperson Tanner thanked Mr. Lawrence for his patience in waiting for this item. Mr. Lawrence thanked them and said he would be talking to them soon. Commissioner DeLuna said her concern continues to be, even increased over when she first asked staff to do some research, she didn't realize there were six on Highway 111. She couldn't tell here, but it's about six blocks, so that's one on every block. As she has driven by, she sees people loitering outside; they are open until 2:00 a.m., so she does have some ongoing concerns about public safety, about the image we present to people; that is our commercial corridor, El Paseo and Highway 111. She thought they tried to hold themselves to a higher standard just because of the type of city that we are we go to great pains to establish high standards. Neither Indian Wells nor Rancho Mirage deals with them 26 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15, 202 or allows them, so they all seem to gravitate toward Palm Desert. If we thought we only have five and now we have six, and mirroring the speaker's sentiments, we have a concentration of them and it can be a land use issue. They could be perceived as adult entertainment and regulated. They could be required to have a conditional use permit; there were all kinds of things. She thought the next step they had to do was ask staff to go to City Council to review the current zoning ordinances pertaining to the tattoo establishments. She asked if that was correct. Mr. Bagato said it depended on their direction. Staff outlined four possible ways of dealing with them. Mr. Lawrence suggested he could submit in writing and Mr. Bagato didn't know if they wanted to continue this issue to see what his recommendation is and then come back with that based on Commissioner Schmidt's comments. Commissioner Limont, said that staff recommended that if they are concerned with the number of tattoo parlors, that they study their regulation. That was their recommendation. Mr. Swartz said that was correct. Commissioner Limont asked that staff take regulation one and with the input from Mr. Lawrence. Commissioner Schmidt asked if she was referring to item number one in the staff report. Commissioner Limont said yes. At the very end it says that if their intent is to eliminate tattoo establishments along the city's main commercial corridors, Highway 111 and El Paseo, then staff is recommending regulation number one. So maybe if they were to proceed with this to get moving forward to take regulation one, she thought they needed to look at what an owner of 14 years had to say. His input was excellent. But come back with information or a proposal. or recommendation for taking regulation one and putting it into the ordinance. Her only concern was what happened to the existing ones. This is someone who has been in business for 14 years. Commissioner Campbell said you can't just take their license away, it would be just like having on El Paseo the clothing stores and art galleries. Commissioner DeLuna thought those were a little different. Chairperson Tanner also thought they had a situation where he brought up how many bars we have along Highway 111. Are we going to then decide that is something we want to eliminate because it's our commercial corridor? Commissioner DeLuna indicated this is a public safety issue; they are breaking skin. Commissioner Campbell said they are licensed. There is no prostitution there. Commissioner Limont thought it was more perception than anything. Chairperson Tanner thought she nailed it on the head. Commissioner Campbell asked about eyebrows or eyeliner or lips. That is the same thing. Commissioner DeLuna said those places aren't strictly for that purpose, they are usually part of salons that offer other services besides just tattoos and body piercings. 27 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15 2009 In reading all of the material, Commissioner Schmidt thought instead of only using number one, they should take all of these recommendations and incorporate them into an ordinance that has some teeth in it. She agreed, she didn't know about eliminating existing establishments or if they can do that, but they could certainly not allow any more. She didn't know about existing, that would take a legal opinion to require a CUP in all zones, which then regulate them more strictly. Under two, it says Planning Commission may approve a tattoo establishment with conditions of approval placed on the business, or may deny an application if it believes the business was not located in an appropriate site. She said it was a wonderful staff report and she wanted to take it all and put it into an ordinance. It then talked about a proximity prohibition, which she thought was terribly important; keep it away from schools, keep it away from all the rest of it, children, care centers, parks, places of worship. It has some real merit to her. As a matter of fact, she would like to see if there are any marginal tattoo establishments existing that aren't meeting muster, then they should take a look at getting rid of them. But at the moment she didn't have any evidence that they aren't all like Mr. Lawrence, doing a good job, if he is doing a good job. In the end they would have an ordinance that has some real teeth in it. Commissioner Campbell also mentioned hours of operation. Commissioner Schmidt agreed, that applies when it comes under a CUP, they put all those requirements in. Ms. Aylaian clarified that the four approaches listed in the staff report were mutually exclusive. It wasn't something they could combine. One approach said they prohibit them in one area of town along the commercial core. They allow them everywhere else. Another approach says they allow them anywhere in town as long as they have a conditional use permit. Another approach says they allow them anywhere in town as long as there is a certain radius between one and another. So each one has a different approach and of them, there is at least one at a staff level they would recommend against. They thought it would be a little ill-advised and that was approach number two. She was getting a feel for what the Commission was looking for and that's what they were trying to establish. What she was hearing is that primary concern is for our commercial core, for the image this projects of Palm Desert to people who are driving through. And if it is a prohibition in that area, they could certainly take that approach and allow it other places. Or if it is a limited number in that area and a radius around each of the businesses in that area that was an approach they could take. But they can't combine all four without being riddled with conflicts. Mr. Bagato's thought was that they needed to look at drafting an ordinance similar to the adult entertainment ordinance, but tattoo shops are not adult entertainment, that had already legally been defined in the late 1990's by lumping them under the Palm Desert Health Code, but the issue was related to appropriate uses related to the 28 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15. 2009 commercial core, and if they are going to talk about tattoo parlors, they also have one smoke shop that operates the same hours that can create the same problems if they have five or six more smoke shops. So maybe they should look at uses that they feel, if there are too many of them, are not compatible. Again, they were looking at restrictions for stand-alone massage establishments and they could look at them all together as one ordinance and in that ordinance they can create proximity distances, hours of operation, and then they are just a permitted use as long as they operate within those terms. If they operate outside of those terms, then they are in violation and their business license is revoked. A CUP isn't advised because there is no land use authority they could place over them, but they could put hours of operation. For example, on adult entertainment, they say they cannot operate between 9:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m., so if someone came in and wanted to open 24 hours, they couldn't. It isn't allowed. So they could look at something like that and he would talk to the City Attorney on how they would approach this for not just tattoos, but kind of regulate some other businesses in there since they were looking at massage anyway and also smoke shops if the point is trying to create, if our commercial core is important and key to our commercial core of the city and they have a concern that some of the businesses may create, then they should look at drafting something that addresses all those in one ordinance. They could also come back with any police reports or activities associated with any of these tattoo parlors. They kind of did this preliminarily and according to the initial studies, they didn't have any reports associated with any of the tattoo establishments in the city. But they could get actual on file records, but from verbal calls to the lieutenant, we had none. Commissioner Schmidt asked about the condition of moratorium, was it in effect? Did they ever do it? Ms. Aylaian said there is no moratorium. Mr. Bagato said there is a moratorium on massage until August. But right now this is defined no different than a beauty salon, so if someone came into the City to request a permit for a tattoo establishment, they could not stop them because under the Health Code, they are defined the same as a beauty parlor and we allow beauty salons within commercial zones. Commissioner Schmidt said they were basically talking about stand-alone body piercing. She asked about body art. Was that the permanent makeup? Mr. Bagato didn't know if there was a different definition; he would have to research all the terms associated with the art of tattooing. Commissioner Schmidt didn't know much about tattooing, but had recently seen that they prefer to be called body art. Commissioner Campbell asked how many women have tattoos. Chairperson Tanner and Commissioner Schmidt said lots. Some people that perform the tattooing are amazing artists. Chairperson Tanner thought Commissioner DeLuna would like to get further clarification and maybe include Mr. Lawrence. He's been here 29 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15, 2009 14 years and apparently knows what he's doing and is well respected in the industry. Let's include him and let him create something for them. He agreed with Mr. Bagato and other Commissioners, he thought they could take parts of each of these suggestions and roll them all together. He didn't know if they were going to be able to do anything about the existing, but certainly the new ones that are applying and create a standard that is going to not be objectionable to our commercial corridor. There are other things that people are objecting to in our commercial corridor and we aren't closing them down. Commissioner Schmidt thought they needed a legal opinion on the existing establishments and their parameters with them and then they need a draft ordinance to encompass as much as possible that is of course legal in regulating. Chairperson Tanner asked if they could close an establishment down if they're open, running and up to code. Acting City Attorney Jill Tremblay said there would be some problems with closing down an existing establishment. Commissioner DeLuna asked if they could grandfather those six in so that if any one of them closed down, the location would be eradicated. Commissioner Schmidt said that was the question she wanted to explore a little bit when they say CUP. A CUP continues even though the ownership might change; she asked if that was correct. Mr. Swartz concurred. Mr. Bagato clarified with new CUPs. But the current ones weren't required to have CUPs, so we can't make them go back and get a CUP. Commissioner DeLuna asked if they could be grandfathered so that if they go out of business they don't get replaced. Mr. Bagato said if they don't meet the terms of the new ordinance, yes. Unless they heard specific direction to prohibit them off of El Paseo or Highway 111, the new ordinance restrictions would have distance requirements. Given the fact that Highway 111 is probably only eight to nine blocks as it is, and six of them have tattoo parlors, he didn't anticipate any new ones really being able to come in, even when some of the other ones close down because it is pretty well covered throughout the street. Commissioner Limont asked if they could put a temporary moratorium on them while the study is being completed on any new ones. Ms. Aylaian said it would be similar to what was done with massage establishments. City Council can establish a temporary moratorium and within 45-days they come back and have a public hearing to see if there is a need to continue the moratorium. Chairperson Tanner asked if they could actually do that, because we have a conditional use permit for a massage parlor, for the usage. This wasn't similar to that; it was like a beauty parlor. They were able to put permanent makeup on and they fall under that category. They don't fall under a tattoo parlor CUP, do they? Mr. Bagato said no, but if they are 30 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15, 2009 looking at restrictions on them, they can still pass a moratorium on that specific use, because we are considering new standards, but without it being a moratorium on the agenda, he didn't know what the procedure would be, if they would have to do it as an urgency item and have to first add it to the agenda. It wasn't published and maybe the City Attorney could address that. Ms. Aylaian said staff would come back at the next meeting with some information on what they could do as far as a moratorium goes if that's the way they would like to go. Commissioner Schmidt cautioned about including permanent makeup establishments. There were quite a number that have been in the city, not the least of which was in the J.W. Marriott Hotel, and the Esmeralda and maybe the Hyatt. Commissioner DeLuna noted that they were talking about stand alone establishments. Commissioner Schmidt agreed that there were a number of those as well. Commissioner Campbell thought that the people who do tattoos now could probably do a better job on eyebrows. Chairperson Tanner said they couldn't paint permanent makeup and tattooing parlors with a different brush. Mr. Bagato explained that the Health Code defines them as the same. Staff has been working with the City Attorney to look at restrictions in other areas. Other areas have restricted them, not just locally, but in other cities throughout California, so there are other jurisdictions that have taken approaches to treating them differently, but the Health Code does not treat them differently. Until now, based on what happened in the late '90's, we have not treated them differently because we were told not to. Commissioner Schmidt thought it would be interesting to know what is required to be a permanent makeup artist, what kind of credentials, licensing, etc. Chairperson Tanner asked if that was versus tattooing. Commissioner Schmidt said she would like to know that as well. Commissioner Campbell explained that was why she asked if they needed a cosmetology license. They are licensed with the Health Department. Commissioner Schmidt noted that he said they are registered and that was a big difference. He has a license and they are registered under it she assumed. She would also like to know that. She summed up that staff would do some work on this and then revisit it. Chairperson Tanner concurred. Mr. Bagato said staff could bring it back at the second meeting in January. Chairperson Tanner asked about Mr. Lawrence's input. Commission discussed it being helpful taking Mr. Lawrence's comments into consideration, but not basing the entire ordinance on his comments. Commissioner DeLuna asked for clarification regarding a temporary moratorium for stand-alone tattoo parlors in the El Paseo and Highway 111 corridor and asked if they could do that. Ms. Tremblay didn't think so. Commissioner Campbell said no, because it wasn't under a CUP. Ms. Aylaian asked if they would let staff get back to them on that. She didn't 31 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15. 2009 think so since they don't issue separate licenses for them, but staff would get back to them. Chairperson Tanner asked for any additional discussion. There was none. Action: None. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell said their next meeting was December 16, 2009. B. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont indicated their next meeting would be in January. C. PARKS & RECREATION Chairperson Tanner explained they met a couple weeks ago with updates on everything and also discussed bike paths and a bike- friendly Palm Desert. It was noted that the City Council approved a contract for architectural design services for $980,000. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt said she didn't attend. Ms. Aylaian said the only update they had was on the Palm Desert Country Club, which is now open again for business and the main golf course, the executive course, was expected to open in a couple of weeks. The Code Enforcement folks are continuing to monitor the condition of the course and the owners are trying to negotiate their business plan for bankruptcy procedures that are going through and hoping for a good season. XI. COMMENTS Principal Planner Tony Bagato reported that the meeting for January 5, 2010 was canceled. 32 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REQUEST: DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL REGULATIONS TO TATTOO ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner DATE: December 15, 2009 Background At the Planning Commission meeting held on November 10, 2009, Commissioner DeLuna expressed concerns about the number, location and concentration of tattoo establishments on Highway 111 in Palm Desert. Commissioner DeLuna asked staff to research potential regulations on the location of tattoo establishments. The following information describes the history of previous attempts to regulate these establishments. At the December 11, 1997, City Council meeting there was a request for consideration of an amendment to the Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC) to regulate tattoo businesses within the City. The City Council wanted to amend Chapter 5.88 of the PDMC to regulate tattoo establishments as adult businesses. There was a long discussion, one Councilman didn't agree, because he did not find tattoo businesses offensive. Two Councilmembers were concerned with treating tattoo establishments as adult businesses since they are located based on proximately and didn't want to impact other areas. The City Attorney stated, "There would be an impact if there is no ability to locate an adult business in the area because a tattoo establishment is there." The Council agreed, and took the direction by the City Attorney to direct staff to look into the ordinance again, and not have it included in the definitions of an adult business. The discussion was continued to the meeting of January 8, 1998. At the January 8, 1998, City Council meeting there was no discussion, since the City Attorney asked that this matter be continued to the next meeting of January 22, 1998 when a regulatory ordinance will be presented. At the January 22, 1998, City Council meeting the City Attorney briefed the Council that as of January 1, 1998, a new legislation was is in effect. The State Department of Health Services had stepped into the field to regulate all of the business activity of tattooing, creating regulations, for each individual county health department to regulate. The City Attorney recommended that the City not attempt to regulate the business of tattooing. The Council agreed and adopted the City Attorney's report. • Staff Report Tattoo Regulations Discussion December 15, 2009 Page 2 of 4 Discussion Staff has identified six tattoo establishments on Highway 111, and one located along Joni Drive, within the City limits (vicinity map attached). Staff has also researched other cities to identify possible regulations on tattoo establishments. Indian Wells: Does not address tattoo establishments in their municipal code, therefore they are prohibited. No business owner has applied for a business license. Rancho Mirage: Does not address tattoo establishments in their municipal code, therefore they are prohibited. No business owner has applied for a business license. Cathedral City: Allows tattoo establishments subject to a Conditional Use Permit. In 2001 their City Council expressed concerns regarding tattoo establishments located on East Palm Canyon. At their September 24, 2009 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution prohibiting tattoo establishments along East Palm Canyon. Cathedral City's Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that they approve a zoning ordinance amendment to Cathedral City Municipal Code Sections 9.30, 9.34, 9.36, and 9.96 to prohibit the location of tattooing and body piercing establishments along East Palm Canyon Drive or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of East Palm Canyon Drive. The Findings of approval adopted by Cathedral City's Planning Commission were: 1. The proposed Zone Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the established goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan; 2. The proposed Zone Ordinance Amendment finds that East Palm Canyon Drive is a significant corridor of the City and requires special land use provisions; 3. Since tattoo and body piercing establishments will not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of East Palm Canyon Drive the proposed Zone Ordinance Amendment will prohibit tattooing and body piercing establishments along East Palm Canyon Drive or within 300 feet of the right-of-way of East Palm Canyon Drive; 4. The proposed Zone Ordinance Amendment will enhance the public health, safety, and general welfare for the residents of the City. C.\Doaments end Smin,Akm.rt,.W,Dowments\TnU.discussion PC rt.n.d. Staff Report Tattoo Regulations Discussion December 15, 2009 Page 3 of 4 At the October 28, 2009 Cathedral City, City Council meeting, the City Council requested that staff include massage establishments, pawn shops, fortune tellers, bail bonds, and other similar uses into the ordinance. Palm Desert: If the Palm Desert Planning Commission believes that tattoo establishments portray a negative image or less desirable business appearance, staff proposes four possible approaches to regulation. The Planning Commission may choose to recommend one of staff's proposals to the City Council or an alternative recommendation. Since there are currently seven locations within the City, existing businesses may be impacted by any proposed modifications and staff would have to address grandfathering or relocation within any proposed zoning ordinance amendment. 1. Eliminate tattoo establishments within the City's commercial core along Highway 111 and El Paseo. Eliminating tattoo establishments in the commercial corridor will assist in preserving the quality of development along the City's primary entryways. Highway 111 and El Paseo are the major retail corridors of the City and tattoo establishments do not contribute to the positive development or economic vitality of the city. Highway 111 serves as the primary connection to other desert cities east and west. Indian Wells and Rancho Mirage do not allow tattoo establishments, because they are not addressed in their respected municipal codes. This is causing an influx of tattoo establishments in Palm Desert along Highway 111. Prohibiting tattoo establishments along Highway 111 and EL Paseo may help prevent any deleterious impacts from a concentration of tattoo establishments on Highway 111, thereby reducing or eliminating the adverse secondary effects of such uses in the area. Tattoo establishments would be permitted outright in other zones and areas of the City. 2. Require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in all zones, except residential, for a tattoo establishment to open business. These zones are the PC (Planned Commercial) District, PCD (Planned Community Development) District, (S.I) Service Industrial District, C-1 (General Commercial) District, O.P (Office Professional). This would include Highway 111 and El Paseo. The ordinance can be written to require a CUP in all zones, but prohibit them along Highway 111 and El Paseo. If a CUP is required, tattoo establishments must be approved by the Planning Commission to establish the business. The Planning Commission may approve a tattoo establishment with conditions of approval placed on the business, or may deny an application if it was believed that the business was not located in an appropriately. The CUP will focus upon the safety and welfare of the client, community, and property. Conditions of approval for a CUP would also regulate hours of operation, number of employees, parking, and signage. A CUP would be approved for the property, not the business owner, and it may be revoked if a business is operating outside the terms of the conditions. C:Dmmems and Seningftswe Nly Documeas\Tanno dismssion PC repon.doc w Staff Report Tattoo Regulations Discussion December 15, 2009 Page 4 of 4 Requiring a CUP for this type of business is not the best solution because it requires staff to analyze parking and other land use compatibility requirements. These analysis would show that tattoo establishments are typically open from 3 pm to 1 am, and do not create parking problems since most other businesses in the same location will be closed. The legal findings for approving or denying the CUP will be difficult for staff to make. 3. If the Planning Commission is willing to allow tattoo establishments within all zones, except residential, without prohibiting them within the commercial core, then a proximity prohibition can be placed in the zones. An example would be to restrict tattoo parlors so that no other one can be within 500 feet, or 1,000 feet or 1,500 feet from each other, and/ or schools, child care centers, municipal parks, and places of worship. 4. Other local cities have outright prohibited tattoo establishments and the Planning Commission may consider that as well. These cities do not address tattoo establishments in their municipal codes, therefore do not allow them. However, business owner has challenged one of these cities and the legal grounds to deny the business may be difficult for the City of Palm Desert since there are seven tattoo establishments doing business today. Recommendation: If the intent of the Planning Commission is to eliminate tattoo establishments along the City's main commercial corridors, Highway 111 and El Paseo, then staff is recommending regulation No.1. The Planning Commission may also decide on an alternative recommendation to the City Council. Submitted by: Department Head: Kevin Swartz otauri Aylaian Assistant Planner Director of Community Development CNDoc nnents and SetiingsVssvanzWy DacumentskTanw discussion PC report doc CITY OF MENIFEE ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINAL ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF URGENCY ORDINANCE ESTALISHING A MORATORIUM ON TATTOO ESTABLISHMENTS MEETING DATE: February 2, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Martyn, City Attorney Carmen Cave, Ph.D., Community De elopment Director REVIEWED BY: George Wentz, City Manager SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Final One-Year Extension of Moratorium on Tattoo Establishments RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Conduct a public hearing 2. Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 2009-25, providing for the final one-year extension on the moratorium on tattoo establishments. INTRODUCTION On March 17, 2009, the City Council approved a 10 month and 15 day extension of the original 45-day moratorium on tattoo establishments to allow the City to continue to review whether or not there should be a permanent moratorium on such establishments. This ordinance will extend that moratorium for the final one-year period allowed by law. DISCUSSION An often problematic use in California cities are tattoo establishments because of the actions associated with or required by the agent performing tattooing, body piercing, branding and scarification. This conduct. (as opposed to the message which may result from the actions) raises a number of serious health and safety concerns. For that reason, a number of Southern California cities have strictly regulated such a use and others have banned them. The County proposed but did not adopt such an ordinance. Tattoo "parlors" may be established in a separate business or along with another commercial business. This ordinance does not apply to actions by doctors (including routine ear piercing) or actions by veterinarians or on animals (including branding). Since the 10 month and 15 day extension of the moratorium, the Planning Commission considered a permanent ban on several occasions and proposed certain zoning for tattoo establishments. The City Council determined not to proceed with the zoning which would allow such establishments but to continue to review this matter, especially since no tattoo establishments presently wish to locate in Menifee. As explained at the October 6, 2009 � I City of Menifee Staff Report Extension of Ordinance No. 2009-25 Extending Moratorium on Tattoo Establishments February 2, 2010 meeting where the City Council considered this matter, this one-year continuation can be terminated by a permanent ordinance at any time. (See minutes of October 6, 2009 meeting). Therefore, this matter will be reconsidered before the end of the one-year period ALTERNATIVES Allow unregulated tattoo establishments. FISCAL IMPACT None. ATTACHMENTS Ordinance No. 2009-25 Minutes from October 6, 2009 City Council meeting 2 ORDINANCE NO. 2009-25 AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENIFEE EXTENDING THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON TATTOO PARLORS WITHIN THE CITY FOR ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR The City Council of the City of Menifee does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. FINDINGS The City Council finds as follows: A. Recently there have been established throughout California cities "tattoo" shops, studios, parlors and/or other commercial enterprises that engage in the act of creating of permanent or semi-permanent body markings and/or providing body piercing, branding, scarification and tattooing services(hereinafter referred to as"tattoo parlors'). B. There have been documented health risks associated with the actions taken in these tattoo parlors. C. Riverside County Land Use Ordinance No. 348, adopted by reference by the City, does not specifically prohibit a tattoo parlor use. D. Other California cities either prohibit or closely regulate tattoo parlors on health and safety grounds; E. Staff has recommended and the City Council has determined that there is an immediate need to study the use and location, if any, of tattoo parlors within the community in order to protect public health, safety and welfare by those within this community. F. State law (Government Code Section 65858) allows the City to adopt an interim urgency ordinance which places a moratorium on a use which will be studied by the City in order to prevent the possible approval of such a use while a comprehensive ordinance is developed; G. Govt. Code Section 65858 provides that this ordinance initially may be adopted for 45 days without notice or hearing, which may be renewed after notice and hearing for 10 months and 15 days and thereafter for an additional one year, for a total of no more than two years; H. The ordinance initially was adopted for 45 days on February 17, 2009 and then on March 17, 2009 was extended for 10 months and 15 days after a noticed public hearing at which all those wishing to speak were heard; and I. City staff is in the process of gathering information regarding the good and bad effects of such use, the experience of surrounding cities and the regulations adopted by such cities; J. After another pubfic hearing on February 2, 2010, the City Council has determined to extend the ordinance for the final one year period allowed by law. City of Menifee Ordinance No. 2009-25 Extension One Year SECTION 2. EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY PROHIBITION OF TATTOO PARLORS AND SIMILAR FACILITIES (a) Findings: The finds set out above are true and correct. (b) Definitions: For purposes of this ordinance, the following words shall have the meaning respectively ascribed to them by this Ordinance: (1) As used herein, the term "body piercing" means perforating the skin for the express intention of insertion of any object including, but not limited to,jewelry. (2) As used herein, the term "branding" means the process whereby heat is intentionally applied to the flesh of a person such that it burns the skin and forms a permanent scar. This includes, but is not limited to, use of hot metal, electric current, and chemicals. For the purposes of this ordinance, this term shall only apply to people and not to animals. (3) As used herein, the term "scarification"means a form of body modification that involves cutting into the skin and "aggravating" the wound to produce scarring in a particular design or pattern. (4) As used herein, the terms"tattoo, tattooed, or tattooing" refer to any method of placing designs, letters, scrolls, figures, symbols or any other marks upon or under the skin of a human with ink or any other substance, resulting in the coloration of the skin by the aid of needles or any other instrument designed to touch or puncture the skin. (5) "Tattoo parlor" means shops, studios, pariors and/or other commercial enterprises that engage in the act of creating permanent or semi-permanent body markings and/or providing body piercing, branding, scarification and tattooing services. (c) Tattoo pariors or other commercial enterprises (or portions thereof) that engage in the acts of body piercing, branding, scarification or tattooing services are prohibited within the City of Menifee during such time as this ordinance or any extension thereof remains in effect. This ordinance does not apply to existing tattoo parlors if properly zoned, licensed and operated in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. (d) This ordinance does not apply to actions considered medical procedures by the State Board of Medical Examiners including piercing of the ear with pre-sterilized single use stud-and-clasp ear piercing systems or to procedures by licensed veterinarians. 2 Y City of Menifee Ordinance No. 2009-25 Extension One Year SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE Pursuant to Govt. Code Section 65858, this ordinance shall take effect at the end of the 10 month and 15 days extension adopted on March 17, 2009 and shall be of no further force and effect one year from that date. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY the following 4/5th vote this 2nd day of February, 2010. Wallace W. Edgerton, Mayor ATTEST: Kathy Bennett, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Elizabeth Martyn, City Attorney 3 11ffiv1lTEs REGULAR PALM DESERT CrPY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 11, 1997 • • • • • • • • • • s • • • • • • • • • • s • • • • • • • • • • Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, approve from the unobligated general fund $73,815.00 for the purchase of six Cairns IRIS Thermal Imaging system helmets for the fire department per the Cove Commission formula. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. �RF.QijF4T FOR CONSIDFRAT� OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE TATTOO ESTABLISHMENTS AS BUSINESSES. Mr. Diaz noted the report in the packets and stated that Code Compliance Supervisor Hart Ponder was available to answer any questions. Councilman Spiegel stated that he had asked for this amendment to the City's Code. Councilman Spiegel moved to: 1)Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 862 as an urgency ordinance, amending Chapter 5.88 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code to regulate tattoo establishments as adult businesses; 2) waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 863 to second reading amending Chapter 5.88 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code to regulate tattoo establishments as adult businesses. Motion was seconded by Kelly. Councilman Crites stated that he would be voting against this motion. He said he suspected that most people really cared about this. He said he had a lot of students at the College who choose to engage in what they call "body art" and that he had not found any difference in the grade points of those with tattoos as opposed to those without, nor had he noticed any difference in moral values between those who do and those who don't. He said what they chose to do in terns of having tattoos on any portion of their anatomy was their own business. He added that the did not feel this was an 'adult" issue in the same way that things are regulated that are pornographic or have moral implications. He said people have to be adults to do this, they have to be adults to go in any buy alcohol, they have to be adults to go and do a variety of other things, and he did not have any problems with regulating this and with signage, etc. However, he felt tattoos are no longer the domain of bikers and people who wake up the next morning wishing they hadn't. He added that he felt the Council was responding to an image and to a word and that it was not a reasonable request. Mayor Benson stated that this ordinance was not against having tattoos parlors, it was to regulate where they are located. Councilman Crites said he did not see what was morally bankrupt about having a piece of art placed on a certain portion of one's anatomy and why that had to be only done in a Service Industrial area of the City of Palm Desert. He added that he felt the same regulations should apply to it that apply to a number of other things about which the City has restrictions. He said he felt this ordinance was overly restrictive. Councilman Ferguson asked whether current regulations required that if a new tattoos business wanted to be permitted and exist in the City of Palm Desert it would have to do so pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit. 33 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL.MEETING DECEMBER 11, 1997 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s Mr. Drell responded that this was not the case and that this would be considered a personal service similar to a hair stylist or barber. He said in the adult entertainment ordinance it was permitted use and did not require a Conditional Use Permit. In essence, what this ordinance would do is to remove it as a permitted use in the C-1 zoning and relegate it to the Service Industrial zoning. Councilman Ferguson stated that he knew we were rapidly approaching a time when we might be constructively abolishing adult businesses due to the placement of churches and other types of things in the City. He asked whether moving this and treating it as an adult business would somehow impact what we have left. Mr. Drell stated that once an application is received to locate a tattoo parlor, one of the restrictions is distance from one tattoo parlor to another adult business. He said that once one or two are located in the Service Industrial, additional area becomes quite constrained. Councilman Ferguson asked if this would then jeopardize the City's ability to restrict adult businesses. Mr. Erwin stated that there would be an impact if there is no ability to locate an adult business in the area because a tattoo parlor is there. Councilman Crites slated that if we have a tattoo parlor there and it requires a certain number _ of feet between them, etc., and we have someone who comes in with some other business, we may not have a spot that legally allows that business, and Mr. Erwin agreed. Councilman Kelly stated that we do know we want strict regulations on an adult bookstore, and if we start putting things in there that we cannot defend, it will weaken the one that we are really serious about. Mr. Erwin stated that if it is the Council's desire, staff will look at the ordinance again and not have it included in the definitions of an adult business. He said there were ordinances in other California cities that provide regulations and even prohibit these businesses. He said staff could look at providing another form of regulation so it does not impact the adult business ordinance. Councilman Spiegel withdrew his earlier motion and moved to continue this matter to the meeting of January 8, 1998. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. H. RF JEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF ASSOCIATE SPONSORSHIP OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FAIR AND NATIONAL DATE FESTIVAL. Ms. Lori Moss addressed the Council and stated that the Festival was requesting associate _ sponsorship in the amount of$20,000. She noted that the Board of Supervisors had decided not to accept any tobacco sponsors. She added that this year's festival would have heavy 34 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL.MEETING JANUARY 8, 1"8 rollback. Until that date, local customers, small businesses, and residents could look at the options and after March 31st select their energy supplier. He added that staff would have more information for the Council after the Cove Commission considers the RFP and looks at Henwood's proposal. Councilman Crites asked whether there was anyone from the Council who was going to San Francisco to the League of California Cities Conference on Energy. Councilman Ferguson responded that he and Mr. Wohlmuth were going to attend. Councilman Crites stated that he might also wish to go for CVAG purposes as Chairman of Energy & Environment. He stated he also had a comment to his two colleagues who are members of the Cove Commission. He said this was beginning to feel a little bit like the people who used to come back to the Council every few months for the People Mover and get another $15,000 or $20,000 to go do something else. He said the only people who were moved were their salaries, and . Henwood was beginning to remind him of that same issue. He said he was sure his colleagues would be diligent in trying to find out what will be provided by this company. He added that from what he read in the report, it confirms Council's initial suspicions that the amount of money out there to be saved is above the 10%. Councilman Kelly stated that what the decision was based on is for$15,000 we can put out an RFP and then the companies out there can all submit proposals for the Commission to make a decision as to whether or not to do something. Councilman Ferguson noted that minutes of the Cove Commission would show that representatives from Palm Desert were rather skeptical about government getting involved in the energy market. %I. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. RREQUMT FOR ( ONSMERA77ON OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE TATTOO ESTABLISHMENTS AS BUSINESSES. (Continued from the meeting of December 11, 1997) Mr. Erwin asked that this matter be continued to the next meeting and stated he would have a regulatory ordinance. Councilman Kelly moved to continue this matter to the meeting of January 22, 1998. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. 21 r MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 22, 1998 sssssssssssssssssssss : sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. p$FCF.NTATION BY WASHINGTON CHARTER SCHOOL STUDENT AMBASSADORS AND CHOIR. Mrs. Carole Horlock, Principal of Washington Charter School, stated that she took great pride and pleasure in telling friends who live in every other part of the country about the relationship that Washington Charter School has with the Palm Desert City Council. She introduced the school's ambassadors who each spoke briefly and thanked the Council far i�generosity and support of the school. The school choir then performed a special g B. 1. Update on Interchanges: a. I-10/Washington Street b. I-10/Monterey Avenue Mr. Folkers reported that the bridge deck would be poured the next day for the west portion of the I-10/Washington Street Interchange. He added that the final punch list was being done for the Monterey Avenue Interchange and it should be done in the — next month. 2. Progress Report on Utility Deregulation Mr. Wohlmuth reported that the Cove Communities Services Commission met to discuss the Commission sending out an RFP/RFQ for aggregation services for the Cove. He said the Commission passed a motion to send out an RFP/RFQ for a cost not to exceed $18,000.00 to perform this function. He said the idea when bids are received, staff will find out how much lower than the 10% Edison is giving for the electric reduction as of January 1. He said it was anticipated the process would take between 11 and 15 weeks, with the Commission to consider taking action some time in May to execute a contract for those services. I%. CONTINUED BUSINESS OA, REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE TATTOO ESTABLISHMENTS AS BUSINESSES. (Continued from the meetings of December 11, 1997, and January 8, 1998). Mr. Erwin stated that this originally was to be added to the adult entertainment ordinance. He _ noted there was new legislation effective January 1, 1998, wherein the State Department of Health Services had stepped into the field to regulate all of the business activity of tattooing, 10 f N9NUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 22, 1998 ssssssssssssssssssssssss * s * sssss : ssssssssssssssssssssss creating regulations, passing it down to each individual county health department to regulate. He said the area that was not covered was the zoning and land use aspects. He recommended that the City not attempt to regulate the business of tattooing. He added the Planning Department had in process the zoning regulation with regard to location of tattoo establishments, and this would be before the Planning Commission next month. Councilman Spiegel stated that it was his understanding that this would also cover body piercing. Mr. Erwin responded that it covered all types of piercing, drawings, labelings, etc. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, adopt the City Attorney's report. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. X. OLD BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PALM DESERT SOCCER PARK(CONTRACT NO. C13140, PROJECT NO. 686-96), APPROVAL AND ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR ASSOCIATED UTILITY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND ART FEES, AND APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT NO. C 11360 FOR ADDITIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES. Associate Planner Jeff Winklepleck reviewed the staff report, noting this was the second time this project had bid. He stated this was the first project bid by the City as non-prevailing wage and that approximately 11% of the total cost ($348,000) had been saved. Councilman Ferguson stated that the City had saved $348,000 by letting this out to bid under a charter as opposed to a general law city, and Mr. Winklepleck agreed. Mr. Winklepleck added that 12 bids had been received. He recommended approval of the four items as outlined in the staff report and offered to answer any questions. Councilman Spiegel stated that in reviewing the bids, there was a difference of approximately $55,000 between the lowest bidder, Valley Crest (Santa Ana), and the third lowest bidder, Simon Company (Indio), a local company. He said as he understood it, because Palm Desert is now a charter city, it does not have to go with the lowest bidder. Councilman Ferguson asked whether staff had selected Valley Crest with that in mind. Mr. Winklepleck responded that staff s recommendation is based on the fact that Valley Crest is the low bidder. He said he could not comment on whether one is better than the other and that both are qualified. Councilman Ferguson stated that Mr. Erwin had briefed the Council in study session that the City does not have to go with the lowest responsible bidder and could take the best bidder using 11 StaffKEETI DATE— - Er NTINUED TO I _ Q 9 ❑ PASSED TO 2ND READING TO. The Honorable City Council FROM:Hart H. Ponder, Jr., Code Compliance Supervisor SUBJECT: Urgency Ordinance to Regulate Tattoo Parlors as an Adult Activity DATE: December ]], 1997 RECOMMENDATION:Approve Adoption of Urgency Ordinance 862 Amending Chapter 5.88 of the City Municipal Code to Include Tattoo Parlors (Role Call Vote) BACKGROUND: Penal Code Section 653 prohibits minors from obtaining a tattoo. By virtue of this requirement, staff is recommending that Tattoo parlors (including body piercing) come under the same zoning requirements as other Adult Activities/Entertainment. By placing Tattoo Parlors under the Adult Business Requirements, the City would put appropriate requirements in place to maintain City Licensing, Zoning and Operational Standards with these types of adult businesses. As an example, the only location that a tattoo parlor may conduct business is in the service industrial zone (SI). Notwithstanding this requirement, the business cannot be within 500 feet of(as an example) institutions of learning, churches, public parks and even other adult businesses. An application for a permit is required. Current law requires the Health Department to make an inspection of the premises for any health violations. This Ordinance sets out an amortization of legally existing businesses that are Nonconforming as the result of this Ordinance. The time frames are set out on page two of the attached ordinance. The City Manager may, on a case by case basis extend amortization up to a total of two years if the business owner can show an "extreme hardship. " The business owner can make an appeal to the City Council if the business owner does not agree -a; x G(;u &Yh&Cfgt.Manager's decision. _-PROVED. DENIED �w'CFIVED, 0 HE 9 MEETING DATE�� "'Zltif�T• E , ErCCITINUEDTO 1'�` "��- SENT: y ❑ PASSED TO 2ND READING W TAIN: IRYFir.D BY: SENT BY: 12- 4-97 :10:40AM :BEST, BEST,& KRIM- 7603400574:# 5/ 7 ORDINANCE NO. 862 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL UA' THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 5.88 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE TATTOO ESTABLISHMENTS AS ADULT BUSINESSES. WHEREAS, the practice of tattooing may spread communicable diseases through improper tattooing techniques, and endanger the health and welfare of Citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, Penal Code, Section 653 prohibits the tattooing of minors; and WHEREAS, Chapter 5.88 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code provides for the regulation of adult businesses; and WHEREAS, an emergency exists which requires and compels the City to act to preserve the public health, safety and welfare pursuant to Government Code, Section 36937, in that tattoo establishments are not currently regulated by the City and should be immediately regulated in order to protect the health and welfare of the City's residents; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California,) does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. That the Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. That Section 5.88.020 ("Definitions") of Chapter 5.88 ("Operation of Adult Entertainment Establishments") of the Palm Desert Municipal Code be amended as follows: A. Section 5.88.020 (A) (10) be added to read as follows: "10. `Tattoo Establishment' means the business of marking or coloring the surface skin of a human being by insertion of pigment under the surface of the skin by pricking with a needle or otherwise, so as to produce an indelible mark or figure visible through the skin and shall include any business cunducting body piercing (other than solely earpiercing) , body branding or similar activity. "Tattoo Establishment" shall not include any treatment administered in the practice of medicine by a physician licensed to practice in this state, w.numrn�roni SENT BY: 12- 4-97 ;10:40AM ;BEST, BEST,& KRIM 7609400574;# 6/ 7 or under the personal supervision of such a Physician, or the application of permanent make-up or cosmetic reconstruction by a licensed cosmetologist, electrologist, or nurse, who has received additional training in the procedures, practices and techniques of permanent make-up application and cosmetic reconstruction, including the appropriate sanitary practices." B. The current section 5.88.020 (A) (10) be renumbered as Section 5.88.020 (A) (11) . Section 3. That Section 5.88.060 ("Amortization of Nonconforming Uses") be amended in its entirety to read as fol.l ows: "5.88.060. Amortization of Nonconforming Uses. The provisions of Title 25 of this Code dealing with nonconforming uses shall. not be applicable to adult entertainment establishments as defined in this Chapter. Instead, the following amortization schedule shall apply to all adult entertainment establishments which do not conform to the terms of this Chapter but otherwise are legally existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this Chapter, or any amendment thereto, which renders the establishment nonconforming. A. For an adult entertainment establishment legally existing in the City for a period of no less than six months: 2 years; B. For an adult ment establishment- legally existing within rthe nCity for a period of no less than three months: 180 days; and C. For an adult entertainment establishment legally existing within the City for any period up to three months: 90 days; and D. The City Manager is authorized to grant extensions of the amortization period, up to a total of an additional two years, upon application by the adult entertainment establishment based on a showing of extreme hardship. The decision of the City Manager to unnawiruwni -2- SENT BY: 12- 4-97 :10:41AM :BEST, BEST,& KRIM- 7603400574:# 7/ 7 grant or deny a hardship extension shall be appealable to the City Council within fifteen (15) days of the City Manager's decision." Section 4. This ordinance is passed pursuant to Government Code, Section36937, sinnthe a nt re st easuof Public health, safety and welfare. Section 5. This ordinance is hereby declared to be an urgency measure and to be in full force and effect immediately upon passage by a 4/5 vote of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, pursuant to Government Code, Section 36934. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, on the Of 1997, by the following roll call vote: day AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JEAN BENSON, MAYOR ATTEST: City of Palm Desert, CA By: SHEILA A. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, CA APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: DAVID J. EAwiN, City Attorney City of Palm Desert, CA aenuuwxno�q, -3_ SENT BY: 12- 4-97 ;10:39AM ;BEST, BEST,& KRIM 7603400574;# 2/ 7 ORDINANCE NO, 863 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 5.88 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE TATTOO ESTABLISHMENTS AS ADULT BUSINESSES. WHEREAS, the practice of tattooing may spread communicable diseases through improper tattooing techniques, and endanger the health and welfare of citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, Penal Code section 653 prohibits the tattooing of minors; and WHEREAS, Chapter 5.88 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code Provides for the regulation of adult businesses; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1 . That the Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. That Section 5.88.020 ("Definitions") of Chapter 5.88 ("Operation of Adult Entertainment Establishments") of the Palm Desert Municipal Code be amended as follows; A. Section 5.88.020 (A) (10) be added to read as follows: "10. "Tattoo Establishment" means the business of marking or coloring the surface skin of a human being by insertion of pigment under the surface of the skin by pricking with a needle or' otherwise, so as to produce an indelible mark or figure visible through ,the skin and shall include any business conducting body Piercing (other than solely earpiercing) , body branding or similar activity. "Tattoo Establishment" shall not include any treatment administered in the practice of medicine by a physician licensed to practice in this state, or under the personal supervision of such a physician, or the application of permanent make-up or cosmetic reconstruction by a licensed cosmetologist, electrologist., or nurse, who has received additional training in the procedures, practices and techniques of aAnawaawm SENT BY: 12- 4-97 ;10:39AM ;BEST, BEST,& KRIEGER 7603400574;# 3/ 7 permanent make-up application and cosmetic reconstruction, including the appropriate sanitary practices.- B. The current Section 5.86.020 (A) (10) be renumbered as Section 5.88.020 (A) (11) . Section 3. That Section 5.88.060 ("Amortization of Nonconforming Uses") be amended in its entirety to read as follows; "5.88. 060. Amortization of Nonconforming Uses. The provisions of Title 25 of this Code dealing with nonconforming uses shall not be applicable to adult entertainment establishments as defined in this Chapter. Instead, the following amortization schedule shall apply to all adult entertainment establishments which do not conform to the terms of this . Chapter but otherwise are legally existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this Chapter, or any amendment thereto, which renders the establishment nonconforming. A. For an adult entertainment establishment legally existing in the City for a period of no less than six months: 2 years; B. For an adult entertainment establishment legally existing within the City for a period of no less than three months: 180 days; and C. For an adult nt establishment legally existing within rthe nCity for any period up to three months: 90 days; and D. The City Manager is authorized to grant extensions of the amortization period, up to a total of an additional two years, upon application by the adult entertainment establishment based on a showing of extreme hardship. The decision of the City Manager to grant or deny a hardship extension shall be appealable to the City Council within fifteen (15) days of the City Manager's decision." Section 4. ''rhe City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published RM"ID103741 -2. SENT BY: 12- 4-97 ;10:40AM ;BEST, BEST,& KRIEGER- 7603400574;# 4/ 7 once in the Palm Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated within the City of Palm Desert, JEAN BENSON, MAYOR ATTEST: City of Palm Desert, CA By: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, CA APPROVED A.S TO FORM: By; DAVID J, ERWIN, City Attorney City of Palm Desert, CA wtn,urn, -3- 1L- G'al , 1•YUrw ,lN:..71. UGJI.a MICIICR" UlaJYl/uao,x ar � ORDINANCE NO. AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 5.88 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE TAT'1'O0 ESTABLISHMENTS AS ADULT BUSINESSES. WHEREAS, the practice of tattooing may spry' diseases through improper tattooing techniques, ^� health and welfare of citizens of the City; and V}J WHEREAS, Penal Code section 653 prohibits the t, minors; and WHEREAS, Chapter 5.88 of the Palm Desert Municipa. Code provides for the regulation of adult businesses; and WHEREAS, an emergency exists which requires and compels the City to act to preserve the public health, safety and welfare pursuant to Government Code, Section 36437, in that tattoo establishments are not currently regulated by the City and should be immediately regulated in order to protect the health and welfare of the city' s residence. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of Lhe City of palm Desert, California, does hereby ordain as follows: Section That the Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2_. That Section 5.88.020 ("Definitions") of Chapter 5.88 ("Operation of Adult Entertainment Establishments") of the Palm Desert Municipal Code be amended as follows A. Section 5.88.020 (A) (10) by added to read as follows: "10. "Tattoo Establishment" means the business of marking or coloring the surface skin of a human being by insertion of pigment under the surface of the skin by pricking with a needle or otherwise, so as to produce an indelible mark or figure visible through the skin and shall include any business conducting body piercing (other than solely earpiercing) , body branding or similar activity. "Tattoo Establishment" shall not include any•treatment administered in the practice of medicine by a physician licensed to practice in this state, or under the personal supervision of sucn a physician, or the application of permanent RIMI2WFN0378i ..._... ... ac .. ..• . �aam .ua..a., ... .a..a ,uu a.uua� va w:a rouv•R v, u make-up or cosmetic reconstruction by a licensed cosmetologist, electrologist, or nurse, who has received additional training in the procedures, practices and techniques of permanent make-up application and cosmetic reconstruction, including the appropriate sanitary practices ." 13. The current Section 5.88.020 (A) (10) be renumbered as Section 5.88.020 (A) (11) . Section. That Section 5.88.060 ( Amortization of Nonconforming Uses") be amended in its entirety to read as follows: "5.88.060. Aaortization of Nonc�rmin-o ' Ilses. The provisions of Title 25 of this Code dealing with nonconforming uses shall not be applicable to adult entertainment establishments as defined in this Chapter. Instead, the following amortization schedule shall apply to all adult entertainment establishments which do not conform to the terms of this Chapter but otherwise are legally existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this Chapter, or any amendment thereto, which renders the establishment nonconforming. A. For an adult entertainment establishment legally existing in the City for a period of no less than six months: 2 years; B. For an adult entertainment establishmeriL legally existing within the City for a period of no less than three months : 180 days; and C. For an adult entertainment establishment legally existing within the CiLy for any period up to three months: 90 days; and D. The City Manager is authorized to grant extensions of the amortization period, up to a total of an additional two years, upon application by the adult entertainment establishment based on a showing of extreme hardship. The decision of the City Manager to grant or deny a hardship extension shall be appealable to the City Council within fifteen nxmawxumiai -� (15) days of the City Manager' s decision." Section 4. This ordinance is passed as an urgency measure pursuant to Government Code, Section 36937, in the interest of public health, safety and welfare. Section 5. This ordinance is hereby declared to be an urgency measure and to be in full force and effect immediately upon passage by a 4/5 vote of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, pursuant to Government Code, Section 36934. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, on the day of 1997, by the following roll call vole: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JEAN BENSON, MAYOR City of Palm Desert, CA ATTEST: By: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, CA APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: DAVID J. ERWIN, City Attorney City of Palm Desert, CA WUWIEU03711 -3- SENT BY: 12- 4-97 ;10:33AM ;BEST, BEST,& KRIM- 7603400574;# 1/ 7 F BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 39700 Bob Hope Drive„Suite 312 P.O.Box 1555 Rancho Mirage,California 92270 Telephone; (760)569-2611 'I'decopier. (760)340.669E TELECOPIER TRANSMISSION DATE: December 4, 1997 FAX NM — _ PHONE NO. Mary Gates 340-0574 PROM: Dave Erwin RE: Ordinances for tatoos-regular and urgency TUMNa.: NcI.oFPncBs INCT.[mnvGCovr4t 7 1 MRSSACE: Original to Follow: No Please call if you need anything else. — — — — — — — CAVI'lON-COMWIEM7ALa •ffM DOC[IIyIENI 13MNCY TELF.COPWD I0 YU11 MAY CONTAIN INRORMXj-jON PRUrEC11,D HY IIigATIORNIiY•CLI$N17WOgg YROI7l7("f 1'RIVlI•EOE. It is Wwdcd only for the pernm W whom it is eddremed. Tfycm aru not the intendod re¢ipimt a M MWM"?edagmt,thr,ttlus 19 noeiae to yw that dweanioation, is dacomcot is prohib tad.distributim or cwpying of th If tUl wus received in cares,pie=®II us at am and destroy the dm m®t. TF YOU E PMZIENCEANY DIFFICIILTY WrM T7p QUNd7Y OR COMPI.F.'MM&S OF IMS'IRANSM138ION.PLEASE CALL VA1TC1iN AI• (760)569-261 I. nMYUB1ML•U74 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 23, 1997 sssssssassssssssssssssssssssss : sssssessssssssssssssss do many highway infrastructure projects. Since the Cook Street corridor is the next major project to be undertaken, this would provide a day trip to look at what has been done and meet with some of the people involved in Tempe, Scottsdale and Phoenix. Councilman Crites moved to add this item to the Agenda. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the AIPP Subcommittee Field Trip to the Phoenix, Arizona, area for Friday, October 24, 1997. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. D. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. RROUEST FOR APPROVAL of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between State of California and Torres-Martinez Indian Tribe. (Mayor Richard S. Kelly) Mr. Diaz apologized for the fact this item should ben have been agendized as New Business. He stated there is an agreement by the State of California regarding Highway 86 and the right-of--way being purchased by the Torres- Martinez Tribe. Mayor Kelly asked if this was something which should be considered in Closed Session. Mr. Diaz stated that yes, it should be discussed in Closed Session due to potential litigation. Mr. Hargreaves added this had already been listed as one of the items for Closed Session consideration this evening. 2, 1 fights at College of The Desert Mayor Pro Tempore Benson asked for staff to generate a report regarding the lights at College of The Desert (COD). A constituent had asked her whether COD had added lights on top of existing lights, and what the City is doing about this. Mr. Diaz responded that staff was aware of the situation and it will be considered during Closed Session under pending litigation, the number should be 4 potential cases rather than 2. G>i:&M=nager l- Councilman Spiegel addressed a memorandum from Council regarding tattoo parlor regulations. Councilman Spiegel moved to add this item to the Agenda. Motion was seconded by Snyder and carried by unanimous vote. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, refer the matter to the Zoning Ordinance Review Committee for consideration and comment. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by unanimous vote. 17 e V \ J INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM CITY OF PALM DESERT TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RAMON DIAZ, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: TATTOO PARLOR REGULATIONS DATE: OCTOBER 20, 1997 The report pertaining to tattoo parlors, identified in my last newsletter, has been completed. It is attached. Council may wish to refer this matter and report to the Zoning Ordinance Review Committee for consideration and comment. Y DIAZ drs CITY COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED �. RECEI 01 OTHFR Attachments MEETIO DATE - AYES: '40ES: 3BSENT: ABSTAIN: n %1ERIFIED BY: ricinal on File wit Gity Clerk ' s Offi.rE MEMORANDUM TO: Ray Diaz, City Manager FROM: Hart H. Ponder Jr., Code Compliance Supervis DATE: October 17, 1997 SUBJECT: Tattoo Parlor Regulation On the State level, AB 186(Attachment"A"), approved by the Governor October 7, 1997, requires local Health Officers to establish public health and safety standards for tattooing, body piercing, or permanent cosmetics. This state-mandated program will require the above referenced businesses to be registered with the county by December 31, 1998. On the municipal level, regulation is a mixed bag. Most of the municipalities throughout southern California require no extraordinary regulations targeting tattoo parlors. However, the foregoing is a sample of various forms of regulations that do currently exist: The City of Cathedral City: City Ordinance 420 (Attachment"B")regulates tattoo parlors much in the same manner as AB 186. However, the ordinance goes further regulation wise. Operator cleanliness, apparel regulations, use of stencils and approved dyes are some issues addressed in this ordinance. The City of Cathedral City requires a Conditional Use Permit per the provisions of the City Zoning Ordinance. The City of Palm Springs: The City will only permit tattoo parlors along with Fortune-telling in areas zoned"P"Professional(Attachment"C"). In this zone, signage and advertisements are very restricted per the City Zoning Standards. The City of Culver City: Tattoo parlors are considered an"Adult Business" (like massage parlors or adult bookstores)and must be approved through an appointed committee and then through a public hearing process. They conduct a background investigation on all business owners wanting to operate an adult business in Culver City. The City reports that no tattoo parlor has passed successfiilly through this process(The background check by the police may be the catch, according to City Staff) they are sending the written process to us via US Mail. Discussion: Each process has its merits. A combination of"tools" (health, zoning, police involvement and placing tattoo parlors in an"Adult Business" category)would ensure a standard of safety and quality that current City policy requires of other businesses. Notwithstanding the above, related activities like body piercing and permanent cosmetics could be addressed also. If you desire more information, please let me know. Staff awaits your direction in this matter. 2)' 1997- CA AB 05/13/97 Amended 3) 1997 CA AB 06/18/97 Amended 4) 1997 CA AB 186 07/02/97 Amended 5) 1997 CA AB 186 07/14/97 Amended 6) 1997 CA AB 186 08/29/97 Amended 7) 1997 CA AB 186 09/09/97 Enrolled 8) 1997 CA AB 186 10/07/97 Enacted Please enter the number of your choice or <Return> for another bill => 8 --- Retrieved bill text is approximately 5 pages long --- Available formats : C Stream <c>ontinuously P <P>rinter format (page numbers & page breaks) S Stop at every <s>creenful E <E>nd -- exit this program Which format => c To save this report, begin your downloading or printing procedures now. Then, press <ENTER> to continue => In bill text, brackets have special meaning: [A> <A] contains added text, and [D> <D] contains deleted text . California 1997-98 Regular Session 1997 CA AB 186 Enacted 971007 Brown CHAPTER 742 FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE OCTOBER 7, 1997 APPROVED BY GOVERNOR OCTOBER 7, 1997 PASSED THE ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 9, 1997 PASSED THE SENATE SEPTEMBER 2 , 1997 AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 29, 1997 AMENDED IN SENATE JULY 14, 1997 AMENDED IN SENATE JULY 2, 1997 AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 18, 1997 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 13 , 1997 ASSEMBLY BILL No. 186 CHAPTER 0 An act to add Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 119300) to Part 15 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to health. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL' S DIGEST AB 186, Brown. Tattooing, body piercing, and permanent cosmetics . Existing law provides that it is a crime to tattoo or offer to tattoo a person under the age of 18 years . Existing law establishes the California Conference of Local Health Officers which consists of all legally appointed local health officers in 'the state . Expenses f no more than 2 meetings c` the conference per year are a charge aga•_ _st the local governmental it and expenses for attendance at special meetings of the committees of the conference called by the director are a charge against any state funds available for this purpose. This bill would direct the California Conference of Local Health Officers to establish sterilization, sanitation, and safety standards for persons engaged in the business of tattooing, body piercing, or permanent cosmetics . The standards would be based, to the extent appropriate, on the Bloodborne Pathogen Standard of the Department of Industrial Relations, modified as necessary for the purpose of protecting consumers from transmission of contagious diseases through cross-contamination of instruments and supplies. The bill would require that the standards be submitted to the State Department of Health Services by July 1, 1998, and that the department distribute the standards in written form to all county health departments . The bill would authorize the California Conference of Local Health Officers to periodically review the adopted standards and amend them as necessary. Because the bill would increase the costs of local government by requiring the conference to develop certain standards, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require practitioners of tattooing, body piercing, and permanent cosmetics to be registered with the county in which they practice, obtain a copy of the department ' s standards and commit to comply with the standards, provide the county health department with a business address and the address at which the regulated activities are conducted, and pay registration and inspection fees, as specified. The bill would also require county health departments to annually inspect the locations where tattooing, body piercing, and permanent cosmetics are practiced, thus imposing a state-mandated local program. Counties would be permitted to adopt any regulation that is not in conflict with, or is more comprehensive than, these provisions . In addition, this bill would establish a task force to be chaired by the president of the California Conference of Local Health Officers, with participation by representatives of specified groups . The task force would be formed for the purpose of recommending legislation to regulate these areas, and would be required to report to the Legislature by January 1, 1999 . The bill would provide that these provisions shall not be interpreted to restrict the activities of a licensed physician and surgeon. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state . Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement, including the creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund to pay the costs of mandates that do not exceed $1, 000, 000 statewide and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed $1, 000, 000 . This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions . This bill would provide that it would become operative only if AB 99 of the 1997-98 Regular Session of the Legislature is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 1998 . THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS : SECTION 1 . Chapter 7 :ommencing with Section 11 ^100) is added to Part 15 of Division 104 c the Health and Safety Cod( to read: CHAPTER 7 . TATTOOING, BODY PIERCING, AND PERMANENT COSMETICS 119300 . For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply: (a) "Tattooing" means to insert pigment under the surface of the skin of a human being, by pricking with a needle or otherwise, to produce an indelible mark or figure visible through the skin. (b) "Body piercing" means the creation of an opening in the body of a human being for the purpose of inserting jewelry or other decoration. This includes, but is not limited to, piercing of an ear, lip, tongue, nose, or eyebrow. "Body piercing" does not, for the purpose of this chapter, include piercing an ear with a disposable, single-use stud or solid needle that is applied using a mechanical device to force the needle or stud through the ear. (c) "Permanent cosmetics" means the application of pigments to or under the skin of a human being for the purpose of permanently changing the color or other appearance of the skin. This includes, but is not limited to, permanent eyeliner, eye shadow, or lip color. (d) "Department" means the State Department of Health Services . 119301 . The California Conference of Local Health Officers shall establish sterilization, sanitation, and safety standards for persons engaged in the business of tattooing, body piercing, or permanent cosmetics . The department shall provide the necessary resources to support the development of these standards . The California Conference of Local Health Officers shall consult and adopt, to the extent appropriate, the Bloodborne Pathogen Standard (Section 5193 of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations) of the Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health. The standards shall be directed at establishment and maintenance of sterile conditions and safe disposal of instruments . The standards may be modified as appropriate to protect consumers from transmission of contagious diseases through cross-contamination of instruments and supplies . The standards shall be submitted to the department for review and consultation by July 1, 1998 . 119302 . Within 30 days after standards are adopted by the department, the department shall distribute those standards in written form to all county health departments . 119303 . (a) Every person engaged in the business of tattooing, body piercing, or permanent cosmetics shall register by December 31, 1998 , with the county health department of the county in which that business is conducted. A registrant shall do all of the following: (1) Obtain a copy of the department ' s standards from the county health department, sign an acknowledgment upon receipt of the standards, and commit to meet the standards . (2) Provide the county health department with his or her business address and the address at which the registrant performs any activity regulated by this article. (3) Pay a one-time registration fee of twenty-five dollars ($25) , to be paid directly to the county health department . (4) Pay an annual inspection fee of one hundred five dollars ($105) to 'the county health depE vent . (b) This section does not preclude a county from charging an additional amount if necessary to cover the cost of registration and inspection. (c) Fees established by this act shall be used exclusively in support of activities pursuant to this chapter. 119304 . Every county health department shall conduct annual inspections of the locations at which registrants under this article conduct regulated activities. 119305 . (a) A county may adopt any regulations that do not conflict with, or are more comprehensive than, the provisions of this chapter or with the standards adopted by the department . (b) This chapter does not limit a county' s ability to require a registrant to obtain any business license or permit that the county finds appropriate . (c) In those jurisdictions where the local health officer and the environmental health director are in separate departments, the county or city shall have the option to choose the entity responsible for functions pursuant to this subdivision. 119306 . A person who fails to register as provided by Section 119303 or violates the sterilization, sanitation, and safety standards after December 31, 1998, shall be subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars ($500) per violation. This penalty may be collected in an action brought by the prosecuting attorney of any county or city and county in which the violation occurred. All penalties collected shall be retained by the county. 119307 . On or after January 1, 1999, any person seeking to engage in the business of tattooing, body piercing, or permanent cosmetics shall comply with the provisions of this chapter. 119308 . The president of the California Conference of Local Health Officers shall act as the chairperson of a task force to be formed for the purpose of recommending legislation to the Legislature concerning licensing, training, sanitation, and other subjects deemed necessary to protect the health and welfare of persons seeking the services of practitioners of tattooing, body piercing, and permanent cosmetics . The task force shall be composed of 10 persons to be appointed by the president of the California Conference of Local Health Officers, and shall include a representative from the State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, a physician and surgeon licensed in this state, a representative from a nonprofit professional body piercers ' association, a representative from a nonprofit professional tattooists ' association, a representative from a nonprofit professional permanent cosmetic association, a representative from a nonprofit professional cosmetology association, and a representative from an organization representing the interests of local health departments . The president of the California Conference of Local Health Officers may appoint the remaining three members from any other groups that may, in the judgment of the president, be of assistance. The task force shall present its recommendations to the Legislature by January 1, 1999 . 119309 . This chapter does not restrict the activities of any physician and surgeon licensed under Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 2000) of Division 2 . SEC. . 2 . Notwithstan 3 Section 17610 of the Go��- rnment Code, if the Commission on State , _dates determines that thi; ct contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code . If the statewide cost of the claim for reimbursement does not exceed one million dollars ($1, 000, 000) , reimbursement shall be made from the State Mandates Claims Fund. Notwithstanding Section 17580 of the Government Code, unless otherwise specified, the provisions of this act shall become operative on the same date that the act takes effect pursuant to the California Constitution. SEC. 3 . This act shall become operative only if Assembly Bill 99 is also enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 1998 . END OF REPORT 10-16-1997 01:47PM Cathedral City Reception 619 770 0398 P.01 %"DINANCE NO. 41P j /{N ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CATHEDRAL CI7Y MENDING SECTIONS 31 6, AND 6, OF DIVISION B, AN6 SECTION 1, OF DIVISION C, ARTICLE Ill, OF THE ZONING i ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY, j PERTAINING. TO TATTOOING ESTASLISK MENT'S, AND DETERMINING SAID ACTION AS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT. i I I I The Co Council of the City of Cathedral City does FIND as follows: i WHEREAS:Tattooing establishments have.the potential to rlegativ* affect public health, safety and general welfare; and { WHEREAS: The location of tattooing establiihmertts can.negatively effect corrtmunity interests by depreciating rental rates and propeq values if located where street vfe%O image is Critical or where there are sensitive neighboring uses; and WHEREAS: The operation of tattooing establishments can haver negative public health ipiplications when such business is not operErted'according to thin highest accoptable'health criteria; and WHEREAS:The City Council does hereby frndlthatthe regulation of tattoolrig establishments is in the best interest of the community; and i WHEREAS:The Planning Commission held ajpubtic hearing on S6pte.mtler 6, 1995, and 'made the findings included herein as a port of a tecomm"ation for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City' of Cath@dral Citj DOES ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Pursuant to state and local environniental:guidelines, itas;been determined that the Zoning Ordinance changes encompassed in this Or+dinancie are not con6idered to hive a significant impact on the environment and the proposed,,action is further deemed to be classified as a Categorical Exemption pursuant the State'and City environmental regulations. SI:C N Z, The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cathedral City,.tieing Ordinance 80,las amended, is hereby amended by adding to the list of Cond'Itlonal.Uses ,onfained in paragraph c, of Sections 3, 5, and 6, of Division B,Article IV, as follows: j Tattooing Establishments (as defined by Chapter 5.34 of the.Cathedral City Municipal Code) ------------- { Post4tw brand fax transmittal memo 7671 a ofP,gf To �. ' I alVttdr 1 FaIfI' FA1LM1 n�.b'19 10-16-1997 01:48PM Cathedral City Reception 619 770 0398 P.03 . i ORDINANCE NO. 420 MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT 9535 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CATHEDRAL �TY, AMENDING CHAOTER 5"OF THE CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY MUNICIPAL C'OO By i ADDfNG CHAPTER 5.34, REQUIRING THAT A P IT BE OPTAII D j AND !CERTAIN OPERATIONAL STANDARDS BE MET P IOR i f0 OPERATING A TATTOOING ESTABLISHMENT Allk D DEEMING'THE j PROPOSED ACTION TD BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT.:' The City Council of the City of Cathedral City does ordain as tollows: i SECTION 1:: Pursuant to State.and local environmental guidelines,4 has been defeirmiried that act the amendment encompassed in this Ordinance is not consider an have a significant a dv arse impact on the environment and the proposed action is deemed to be classified as a Categdrical E$emoon. SECTION 2:; A new chapter, to be numbered 5.34, hereby ie,added to the Ca�edral; City Munidipal Code, to read as follows: 5:34.010 Definitions. 5134.020 Permits required. 5:34.030 Maintenance of premises. 534.040 Source of dyes and inks. 5:34.050 Maintenance of pigments, dyes and equipment. 5i34.060 Maintenance of stencils. ' 5 34,070 Tattooing operations—Skin condition of customers. 5i34.060 Tattooing operations—Potential health risks. 534.090 Tattooing operations—Health conditions of operator. I 534.100 Tattooing operations—Smoking. 5:34,110 Tattooing operations—Apparel of operator. 5.34.120 ' Tattooing operations—Cleanliness of operator. 534.130 Tattooing operations—Shaving. 5:34A40 Tattooing operations—Skin preparation. 5;34.150 Tattooing operations—Use of stencils. 5.34,160 Tattooing operations---Use of approved dyes; 5134.170 Tattooing operations—Use of sterile dyes. 5 34.150 Tattooing operations—Use of sterile equipment. 51.34.190 Tattooing operations—Discarding of certain equipment. 5.34,200 . Inspections—Health services fee schedule. i 5.34.210 Penalties. &34101 Deffnittons. As used in this chapter, unless the context othdrwise'rEqui�es, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them respective#y: 'Health officer'means that person of office deslbnated by.orde of the City!Coundl ' or by contract approved by the said Council as the person or office having responsibildy for the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter. 10-16-1997 01:47PM Cathedral City Reception 61g 770 03ge P.m SECTION 3' .,,e Zoning Ordinance of the City of Ce(I Aral City, being O�dtnianoe 80, as amended, is hereby amended by adding to the Gst of Conditional Uses contained in,paragraph d,'of Section 1, Division C, Article IV, as follows: I Tattooing Establishments (as defined by Chapter 5.34 of the Cathddral City Municipal Code) SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in'full force a d effect . ' thirty(30)days�afler passage. SECTION'S. POSTING: The City Clerk shall within 5 days rafter'the pa ge of this ordinance, cause it to be posted in at least the 3 public places desinated by'r fsokition of tine City Council; shall cee* to the adoption and posting of this ordinance;and shall cause this ordinance and its certfication, together with proof of hosting,to be entered in the book of ordinances of this City. The for9going ordinance was approved and adoptied at a meeting of!the City Council held oA October 11 , 1995 by the foitgwing vote: Ayes: Council members Any, Di Grandi, Pettis,i veiasggez and Barry Noes: None i Absent: Nwie i MAYOR II ATTEST: I CITY CLERK i APP AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CO TENT: r � , iTYpftRNEY CITY MANAGER I 2 - 051 10-16-1997 01:48PM Cathedral City Reception 619 770 0398 P.04 , 'Operator' means any person, whether the proprietor of :ano&ee person, administering a tatclo to any customer of a tattooing establishment. "Proprietor'.means the person having general 0ontrol and management over the conduct of business!at a tattooing establishment, whether or not such person Is the legal!owner of the premises or the business. "Tattoo" means an indelible mark or figure faced.uponi a body by insertion of pigment under the skin or by production of scars. u ' for the.business marking.or "Tattooing establishment" means premises � ofj 9 coloring the skin with tatt oos, and all furnishings, equipment, instruments 'es and init , and other co g 9 � eq pm dyes facilities maintaineditherisin incidental to such use. For the purposes of this Ordinance soy business conducting body piercing, other than solely ear piercing, body branding or similar activity, are subject to the requirements herein regarding tattooing establishments. 5 34.020 Permits required. It is unlawful for any person, association,`firm oricorporetien to engage in, conduct or carry on, or permit to be engaged in, conducted:or cdrriedi on, in or upon any premises within the city,the business of a tattooing establishment without prior approval of a!Conditional Use Permit per the provisions of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 6�34.030 Maintenance of premises. (a)All tattooing establishments shall be equipped WM rurining hot and ooki water, with adequate toilet feciCdies and with all such appliances,furnishings and miaterials as may be necessary to enable persons employed in and about such establishments to comply with ithe r@quirefnents of this chapter. .(b)The floors, furnishings and equipment of tattooing est4bifshments shall be kept clean at,all times during business hours. For purposes of this section, a floor`shall not be;considered clean:If It has not been swept and mopped within the preceding twerity-four hour period. (c) All operating tables in tattooing establishments shall'be constructed of metal with white enamel or porcelain finish, stainless steel, or other impermeable suifaces.: (d) Eadi tattooing establishment shall have adequate lighting and verailation. For purposes of this section, lighting or ventilation shall be considered as inadequate If It falls to comply with a standard prescribed by the health officer. (e) No tattooing establishment shall be used as a steeping robin or dormitory: . 0.34.040 Source of dyes and inks. (a) Proprietors of tattooing establishments shalt on requdst'of ttte CIq or.a hesith er offic , submit in writing to the the City or a health officer the source of all dyed or inks retained for use in tattooing operations, and thereafter shalt notify the same in writing of any dyes or inks obtained for use in tattooing operations from any source other than those previously submitted. (b) No dyes or inks from any sources which har'ie been dlsapproved'tiy the city or a health officer shah be retained available for use in tattooing operations. ass.ss 2 . ` 048 10-16-1997 01:49PM Cathedral City Reception 619 770 039E P.05 i 6.34.060 Maintenance of pigments, dyes and equipment. No pigment, dyes or agijipment shall be retained available for use in tattooing operations unless cleaned and;sterilized as provided in this section. For purposes of the section, "equipment shall induce needle tubes, towels, blade holders, wiping cloths, paper towels and napkins, charcoal, gauze bandages (unlessipurchased in individual sterile packages), and all similar items. (a)All equipment shall be thoroughly cleaned before being sterilzed. liistrurnents shall be cleaned with soap or detergent by use of a brush. The interior of beedle.bar4s.shall be brushed.:After cleaOng, equipment shall be thoroughly rinsed under irunning fresh tap water. i (b)All equipment shall be sterilized by autoclaving. Each piewcif equipment shag be individually wrapped with paper in an approved method for autodaving: Metal foil may not be used. Tattooing needles sball be threaded through the metal tube that attaches to the tattooing;Vibrator and attoo g 9 9 shall be placed in a glass (or autodavable plastic test tube)with a cotton plug for autoclaving. Wiping tissues shall be sterilized in a single pack to be used for one tattoo and then be discarded. A11 packs shah be marked with temperature recording tape or labels. (c) Dyes or inks shall be used from containers With a cap that completely covers ' the opening and is al;tached to the neck of the dye container, sterilized in an at#cdavo aftef first tieing filled with the dye. Dye shall be handled utilizing aseptic techniques and the dye containers filled with dye shall*be sutoclaj ed at least once a week or more often if necessary to keep the dyelfn a sterile condition: The dyes may be placed In Teflon squeeze bottles that will withstand autoclaving. (d)Steam starilization.of the above listed equipment shall be,accomplished in an autoclave with at least fiftaen pounds per square inch (261°F)for at least fiftean;minutes. Other means of sterilization may b� approved by the City or the health officer. (a)All sterilised dyes, pigments and equipment shall be stored in a manner which ' will insure sterility at the time of use. (f) Proprietors shall maintain sufficient sterilized equipment aveilable.at the beginning.of each workday to allow completion of such workday without requiring re4teuiiizoon of suds equipment. . 6..34.060 (Maintenance of stencils. No stencil,whether new or uaed; shall dei retained in a manner available for use in any tattooing operation unless it has been preclaaned drid disinfected in the following manner. (a)Each stencil must be precleaned by being scrubbed with soap and pn ish tb the extent necessary to remove all ao=nula*m of carbon and Vaseiine W the efted grgoves of the stencil (b) Each stencil, after being predeaned and dried, must be dsinfectgd by tieing soaked, design-cut side down, in a dosed container of seventy percent alcohol for not less than thirty minutes at room temperature. i (c) Each stencil, after being disinfected,shall be air dried for not less than thirty minutes by being suspended in a manner exposing both sides to the air, and thereafter shOl'be stored for next use in a.degn envelope. uc�osgs 3 , a 4 4 10-16-1997 01:50PM Cathedral City Reception 619 770 039e P.06 6.34.070 Tattooing operations—Skin condition of customers. Nolattooiqg operation . shall be performed(on skin surface areas containing rash, pimples, boils or infection;of otherwise. manifesting any evidence of unhealthy conditions. 6.34.080 Tattooing operations—Potential health risks. The establishmentjowner shall provide written information as required by the City or health officer.about tilood?bome disease and their transmission to all tattoo operators and maintain records to verify operator rebeiptiof this information. The tattoo operator shall inform the customer of any potential health risks:involyed whenever the skin is violated. 6.34.090 Tattooing operations—Health conditions of operator: No tattoolr operations shall be performed unless the operator is free of communicable diseases and(pustular sW6 lesions. 5.34.100 Tattooing operations—Smoking. No operptor'shall smoke whits performing a tattooing operation. 5.34.110 Tattooing operations—Apparel of operator The operator must Wear a dean, light colored, short-sleeved smock while performing the tattooing operation. i 5.34.120 Tattooing operations—Cleanliness of operator: No:operator shall perform a t.aftooingi operations with unclean hands. For purpose of this section, hands shall not be considered clean unless they have be3en'thoroughly washed with soap from a single service dispenser and warm water vigorously rubbing all surfaces of lathered hands for a least ten seconds; followed by thorough rinsing under a stream of water. Hands shall be dried using single service towels from a dispenser or hot air blower. If a liquid soap is used, the dispenser shall be cleaned and filled with fresh soap only when empty. Tattoo operators shall wear protective gloves while handling needles or blades, or doing any , procedure that maycause bleeding. Gloves shall be discarded between each customer. i 5.34./30 Tattooing operations--Shaving. No tattooing operation invblving.ghaving shall be performed unless the skin is washed with soap prior to the shaving:and unless the blade used in shaving is previously unused and unless the blade holder has been autoclaved since Its previous uses. 5.34.140 Tattooing operations ---Skin preparations. No tattooing operattori shall be performed unless the skin is adequately prepared prior to the operation. For purposes of this section, skin shall be considered properly prepared if it is thoroughly washed with soap following :shaving and . . thereafter scrubbed gently three times with seventy percent isopropyl alcohol, using a separate sterile gauze pad each such time. 6.34,160 Tattooing operations—Use of stencils. Np tattooing operation involving the use of stencils shal(be performed unless all of the following requirements have been corholied with: (a) Each stencil must be precleaned pursuantito Section' 5.34.660. j (b)Each stencil,having been predeaned,rnustibe wiped W th sterile gauze soaked in seventy percent alcohol and air dried immediately prior to its use In the tattooing;operation. (c)Petroleum jelly used for stencils must be obtained from a collapsible tube Which has not previously been used in any tattooing operation and must be applied to the skin with a strip gauze which has not pre*usly been used in any tattooing operation and 'must be applit d to the skin With a . sterile gauze which::has not previously been used. MCAus,ss 4 - 048 PCT. -16' 97(THU) 15:06 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TEL: 760 322 8360 P. 002 I � � SECTION 9208.00 "P" PROFESSIONAL ZONE The "P" Zone is intended to provide for the development of a professional district with necessary related retail commercial uses and other compatible facilities. `-� SECTION 9208.01 USES PERMITTED A. USES PERMITTED Buildings,structures,and land shall be used and buildings and structures shall hereafter be erected, altered, or enlarged only for the following uses. All uses shall be subject to the property development standards in Section 9208.03. 1. Artist's studios, including on-premise galleries, 2. Conservatories, 3. Drafting and art supply store. 4. Florist shop, 5. Fortune-telling &similar psychic activities,subject to the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, 6. Hospitals. 7. Libraries. 8. Medical land Sickroom equipment and supplies. 9. Medical, dental and biological laboratories, 10. Museums, 11. Offices' executive, administrative and clerical offices. (excluding building trade contractors, except those with a state license with an A-1 or B-1 classification). 12. Optometrist. 13. Pharmacy. 14. Secretarial and clerical Services. 15. Tattoo parlors. 16. Accessory uses customarily incident to the permitted uses and located on the same lot therewith. 17. Convalescent homes.j°" 1410-7`9Z B. SIMILAR USES PERMITTED BY COMMISSION DETERMINATION The Commission may, by resolution of record, permit any other uses which it may determine to be similar to those listed above, and not more obnoxious or detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or to the other uses permitted in the Zone, as provided in Section 9401.00. All uses shall be subject to the standards in Section 9208.03, "P" 9208.00 - 73 - 10-16-1997 01:50PM Cathedral City Reception 619 770 0399 P.07 5.34160 Tattooing operations—Use of approved dyes. No tattooing operation shall be performed using dyes or inks of a type that has been disapproved for use by the City.or health otitcer. 5.34.170, I .Tattooing operations — Use of sterile dyes. No tattooing operation shall be performed unless thg following requirements have been complied:with: (a)The dye or ink used for the tattoo must be dbtained from pre-ste4ized dire or ink bottles and, priorito the tattooing operation, aseptically transferred tram,such bottle into sterile paper Cups which have not previously been used In any tattooing operation. No ref I104 of tho dye cup is permitted. (b) No dye or ink shall be used in which needles used on another person have been dipped. 5.34.180 Tattooing operations--Use of sterile aqu'rphiaft NoYattooing operation:shall be:perfori•ned using equipment that has not been cleaned and sterilized in the manner:set forth in Section 5:34.OBR 5.34.150 1 Tattooing operations -- Discarding of eertlain equipment. Operator; snail discard,the followind items immediately after use in any tattooing operation. '(a) Slades used in shaving; (b)Tubes and gauze used in application of petroleum jelly used for stencils; (c) Paper cups used for dye or ink. M2.00 Inspections -- Health services fee. A health officer shall periadically make inspections oftattooing establishments located in the city to determine if the proprietor!or opeator oYsuch establishments are complying with the provisions of this chapter. A health service fee is to be paid by the proprietor'or opeWor of the tattoo establishment. Such fees are to be paid directly to the City or the health officer, whicliever is required by the City. If a health inspection program is not ire place this provision shall be void and retained by the county as reimbursement for said services related to this chapter. 5.34.910 ` 'penalties. Each of the following acts or omissions shall constl*a misdemeanor and upon conviction therefor shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars. (a)Any performance of a tattooing operation by an operator in violation of any requirement or prohibition imposed by this chapter. (b)Any failure by proprietor to maintain a tattooing estab%hmaht'in conformity with. the requirements ofthis chapter. For purposes of this subsection, each day upon viAiich such a failure to conform occurs shall constitute a separate violation. 5 i