Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd 656 Permitted Conditional Uses ZOA 91-2 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEP:...-MENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOF fT TRANSMITTAL LETTER I. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council II. REQUEST: Consideration of an amendment to the zoning ordinance as it relates to permitted conditional uses in the P Public/Institutional Zone. III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert IV. CASE NO: ZOA 91-2 V. DATE: August 22, 1991 VI. CONTENTS: A. Staff Recommendation. B. Discussion. C. Draft Ordinance No. 656 D. Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 20, 1991 . E. Related maps and/or exhibits. A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 656 to second reading. B. DISCUSSION: The proposed code amendment, if adopted, will permit a "swap meet- street fair" type of activity as a conditional use in the P zone which College of the Desert is zoned. Adoption of this amendment will permit the city to process a conditional use permit for the ongoing street fair at the college. This CUP then can be fully assessed and denied or approved subject to conditions which would be imposed on the operation. This proposed amendment was before planning commission at its August 20, 1991 meeting. If commission fails to recommend approval staff will so advise city council and this matter will be continued to a further date certain. Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by: Lh& c-1' � d�E SRS/tm MEETING DATE 'CONTINUED TO Inp D' C] PASSED TO 2ND READING ORDINANCE NO. 656 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 25.38 OF CODE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RELATING TO THE P- PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT. CASE NO. ZOA 91-2 The City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1 . That 25.38.030 of the Code of the City of Palm Desert, California, be, and the same hereby is, amended by adding to said section the following subparagraph. "Q. Outdoor sales of arts, crafts, clothing, goods, wares and other merchandise. " SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify as to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be published once in the Palm Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated within the City of Palm Desert, and the same shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this day of , 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: WALTER H. SNYDER, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California SRS/tm CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPA—.'IENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP T STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: August 20, 1991 CASE NO: ZOA 91-2 REQUEST: Amendment to permitted conditional uses in the P, Public/Institutional District Zone. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert I. BACKGROUND: As commission is probably aware there has been considerable discussion regarding the ongoing "swap meet"-"street fair" which operates at the College of the Desert. The city' s original position was that the city could not regulate activities on State owned property. This position has changed recently and the city attorney feels that the city can regulate functions on the college site if they are uses other than the primary operation of the junior college. In order that the ongoing swap meet-street fair can be reviewed and regulated we must first insert the use as a permitted conditional use in the P zone which the entire college is zoned. This will then permit the college or the alumni association to apply for the necessary conditional use permit and will allow the community to make their feelings known at a future public hearing. II. DISCUSSION: The draft resolution attached hereto will insert swap meet-street fair as a permitted conditional use in the P public/institutional zone ( section 25. 68.030 Q) . III. ANALYSIS: A. FINDINGS: 1 . That the zoning ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the zoning ordinance. 2. That the zoning ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted general plan. 3. That the zoning ordinance amendment will better serve the public health, safety and general welfare. STAFF REPORT ZOA 91-2 AUGUST 20, 1991 B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The director of community has determined that the proposed code amendment is a class 21 categorical exemption and no further review is necessary. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: A. Adoption of the findings delineated in the staff report. B. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. recommending approval of ZOA 91-2 to the city council . Prepared by , Reviewed and 'Approved by/ SRS/tm 2 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 AMENDING SECTION 38.030 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. CASE NO. ZOA 91-2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 20th day of August, 1991, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the zoning ordinance to insert subsection "Q" into section 25.38.030 (conditional uses in the public/institutional zone) ; and WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 21 categorical exemption for purposes of 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 approve a zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . That the zoning ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the zoning ordinance. • 2. That the zoning ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted general plan. 3. That the zoning ordinance amendment will better serve the public health, safety and general welfare. 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 commission in this case. 2. That the planning commission does hereby recommend to the city council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 91-2 as provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A. " • PLANNING COMMISSION R 1LUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CAROL WHITLOCK, Chairperson ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary SRS/tm 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 1 LUTION NO. 411 EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25.38.030 of the municipal code be and the same is hereby amended by adding to said section the following subparagraph. "Q. Outdoor sales of arts, crafts, clothing, goods, wares and other merchandise. " 3 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES . ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY - JULY 10, 1991 - 3:00 P.M. COMMUNITY SERVICES CONFERENCE ROOM 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. ROLL CALL Present : Absent: Dave Tschopp, Chairman George Berkey Diane Cox Don Hedlund Frank Goodman John Ceriale Hank Stokes Others Present: Walt Snyder, Mayor Bruce Altman, City Manager Paul Shillcock, ACM/Economic Development Director Dave Erwin, City Attorney Bill Adams, Attorney Representative Jim Richards, Planning Commission Liaison Carol Whitlock, Planning Commission Chairperson Dan Ehrler, Chamber of Commerce Donna Gomez, Secretary • II. DISCUSSION ITEMS: College of the Desert Street Fair Mr. Tschopp indicated that this item was referred by the Planning Commission for review and recommendation by the Economic Development Advisory Committee. Mr. Altman explained that there has been some controversy surrounding the COD street fair and that there are lawsuits currently pending. COD submitted a request to the City for a conditional use permit (CUP) and a zoning ordinance amendment (ZOA) to allow the use of their property for an open air street fair. Mr. Shillcock explained that Mr. Erwin was present in order to relate to the committee what points are appropriate for this committee to discuss. Any recommendations will be forwarded to the Planning Commission in their entirety. MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 10, 1991 Mr. Erwin explained that it was important that the committee treat this item as a normal agenda item under the purview of this committee. It should be addressed from an economic standpoint. COD is currently zoned "P" (public) which permits public uses subject to a conditional use permit. The litigation that has been filed is designated as a request for a writ of mandate which would be an order from the court directing someone to do something. The question is whether an open air retail market of this type is allowed even with a CUP. The lawsuit was filed by a recently formed group called Concerned Citizens of the Coachella Valley, Inc. Mr. Erwin indicated they had requested the names of the people involved with the group but have not received any further information at this time. Mr. Adams noted that it includes approximately 30 members ranging from Palm Springs to Palm Desert. Mr. Richards asked about the fact that this is State property which he has been told the City has no right to regulate activities or building. Mr. Erwin noted that this was not the case. He explained that if the City wishes to impose its zoning ordinance on community college land, they must give notice to the college board. The board then either votes to accept this or determines that they be exempt. That determination is to be made only for the educational facilities. The challenge is whether this determination was correct. Mr. Altman indicated a letters was written by the college board requesting that we do this. Mr. Erwin explained that there is currently a case in. the 4th District court which handed down a final decision that basically stated that an open air retail market was not a public use. Mr. Ehrler explained that there had been an agreement discussed between Palm Desert merchants and COD in which the City acted as facilitator. It was his understanding that certain merchandise would no longer be sold at the street fair. Mr. Richards asked if there is a past case law does it automatically make any other same activity illegal . MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 10, 1991 Mr. Erwin noted that there are other elements that come into play in this case that may allow it to be a separate issue (ie: COD pre-existed the City) . Mr. Stokes noted that the group is asking that the City be required to enforce their rules that would prevent outdoor selling on that site. He asked it the City were to approve the rezoning of the site would that pull the rug out from under the groups case. Mr. Erwin stated that it would. He noted that another position they may take is that City Council has the authority to use its discretion to not require enforcement. Mr. Goodman felt the zoning amendment and the law suit are only parts of the legal proceedings and that the real question was whether they actually want the street fair in Palm Desert. Mr. Altman noted that was part of the issue at hand and explained that the City has received a lot of criticism for not taking a stand on this issue. He noted that the process this item will go through will give the public an opportunity to tell us what they want. Mayor Snyder noted that he has received several arguments for the street fair and several arguments against it. He felt that it was about a 50/50 split. Mr. Goodman felt this should not be a decision for the people. He felt the City has a responsibility to maintain the property values and to provide a safe and healthy shopping atmosphere. Ms. Cox noted that this is an issue that affects all of Palm Desert, not just the street fair. She indicated she had spoken to several people about the events taking place in Palm Springs. She felt it was very important to watch what happens there. Ms. Cox was opposed to the vendors only paying a $20. 00 fee as compared to the rents charged on El Paseo. Mr. Tschopp felt the committee should concentrate on specific areas such as if the street fair is in the best economic interest of the City and what type of benefits it provides to the citizens of the community. The funds COD are raising are being used for college programs and scholarships. 3 MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 10, 1991 Mayor Snyder mentioned that COD has conducted a survey which showed that people come from as far away as Fontana just to visit the street fair. Mr. Stokes felt that the community would be in favor of keeping the street fair on an 8-2 basis. He hoped to have a solution that would work for both COD and the business community. He suggested doubling the daily fee for selling at COD and using the additional money charged for promotion of retail business in Palm Desert. Mr. Ceriale felt swap meets and discount centers were offensive but indicated that 's what people are looking for. They are asking the concierge at the Marriott where to find these places. He noted that the demand is there and if Palm Desert doesn ' t provide it, someone else will . He felt the street fair went against the grain of what Palm Desert is trying to attract, high end shopping. He noted he was aware of several wealthy people that shop at the street fair including the residents of Morningside Country Club where he lives. Ms. Cox noted that most of the vendors are not Palm Desert residents and are not spending much money here either. She felt another big problem was the Cabazon and Barstow factory outlet centers. Mr. Goodman suggested the vendors be made to pay an equal share or their fair share. Mr. Stokes suggested that they pay a significant fee and that a board be created to govern the street fair. The board could include people from the City, COD and the business community. Mr. Ceriale noted that if he was creating a street fair he would not want anyone from the town center or El Paseo to be on the board. There was some concern expressed over the possibility of opening up any "P" zoned property for this type of use with the approval of a conditional use permit. This would demand additional regulation by the board that was created. 4 MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 10, 1991 Mr. Tschopp felt it was important to assess what benefits and impacts are being brought to the community/city that are not being reimbursed. He asked if they would allow the street fair to operate and the City keep providing services and not charge for them. Mr. Goodman noted that people like to come to Palm Desert where they feel comfortable and not afraid. Mr. Tschopp noted that people are coming here from out of the area and staying over night and using the facilities. He felt that retail companies wanting to locate in Palm Desert might be dissuaded when they see the street fair. It could have a negative impact on these organizations looking for locations. Mr. Ceriale noted that his wife would still shop the street fair if it moved but she will also continue to shop at the Town Center and on El Paseo. Mr. Altman indicated that the only fees the vendors currently pay the City are sales taxes and business license fees. Mayor Snyder indicated that business license fees are based on gross receipts and the City gets 1* of the gross sales if accurate records are kept. He noted that there are no restrooms at the street fair and that the bus can ' t even stop at the designated bus stop because of the traffic/parking. Mr. Richards noted it was a challenge to the retailers to figure out how to get some of that business. Mayor Snyder noted that the street fair started as a vegetable fair and has grown over the last several years to what it is today. Mr. Stokes suggested they also reinstitute the same restriction on the type of items being sold. Mr. Adams indicated that any condition can be placed on the project with the CUP process. He noted that, although vendors may have year-long contracts with COD, they would have to comply after their contract expires. 5 • MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 10, 1991 Mayor Snyder felt they were heading in the right direction with the restriction of items sold and additional fees. He also suggested that additional conditions relating to restrooms, electrical hook ups and parking solutions be recommended. Mr. Richards felt that if COD knew they had an ongoing. thing they might be willing to make some capital improvements to better accommodate the street fair. Ms. Cox asked if other cities with this type of open air market had been contacted on how they monitor sales. Mr. Altman explained that there is very little they can do because most are cash sales. Mr. Goodman suggested customers be required to show a sales receipt at the exit. Mr. Richards asked whether it would be worth hiring someone for S20, 000 a year to enforce this. Mr. Altman noted that it is the State 's responsibility to enforce this and the City could not do it. Mr. Ceriale felt that the State should have some way of regulating these street fairs, especially with the budget problems their having. Mr. Stokes suggested they list the conditions that they would recommend be placed on any approval of a CUP. Mr. Altman suggested changing it to allow Sunday only which would provide sales when most other retail businesses are closed. Mayor Snyder suggested a list of conditions be imposed including proper signage, COD collecting additional fees, public safety, restrooms, etc. It was suggested that the City charge additional business license fees for open air sales. Mr. Stokes felt a street fair was suitable if it 's put under very rigorous conditions. Mr. Richards noted that the college provides a necessary asset to the community. He feels they have their back to a wall and this is their way of trying to raise some money. 6 MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 10, 1991 Mr. Goodman noted that there is nothing that states COD can ' t hold the street fair somewhere else. Mr. Richards suggested some type of recommendation that additional conditions be placed on the street fair that would include putting some money back into the affected parties and clean it up. Mr. Goodman indicated he would vote for a motion to that effect. Mr. Tschopp suggested that COD be reminded that all vendors must be in compliance with all sales tax laws, etc. Mr. Shillcock noted that this item will be before Planning Commission in September. Mr. Ehrler requested a copy of today 's discussion and any final recommendations. He noted that the Chamber basically has taken the same stand as the City by not taking a position. He noted they have received a formal request from Chamber members to take a stand. He would be taking the information from this meeting to the Chamber Board for discussion. Mr. Stokes felt it was important for the City Council to not take the easy way out which would gain the bitterness of the business community. Ms. Whitlock agreed that the direction the EDAC was heading was the way to handle the situation. Mr. Richards felt it was important to place conditions on the project that would make it only allowed in this one location. Mr. Adams noted that the Santa Ana case required an EIR for their swap meet. Mr. Stokes felt it might be useful for staff and two City Council members to meet with the principals involved before the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Richards didn ' t feel the timing was right for this since it has been going on for a long time. He suggested they proceed with staff preparing the recommendation. 7 MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 10, 1991 It was MOVED by Mr. Stokes, seconded by Mr. Goodman to recommend that additional restrictions and conditions be placed on the COD street fair. Suggestions listed should not be limited to these but could include the following: o Open weekends only o Additional significant fees be charged to be used for promotion of all Palm Desert retail business o Support Facilities - restrooms, electrical hook-ups, parking, etc. o Establish a board to oversee the street fair. To be made up of COD representatives, business community and City representatives o Reimbursement of any charges incurred by the City for services provided o Reinstitute limitations as previously agreed on the items for sale III. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS None I V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None V. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mr. Goodman, seconded by Mr. Stokes to adjourn the meeting at 4:25 p.m. /dlg 8 ` MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING _...1FtIF ION AUGUST 20, 1991 moved for a continuance. The motion died due to a lack of a second. Commissioner Jonathan made a motion to approve the findings as presented by staff. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Chairperson Whitlock, approving the findings as presented by staff. Commissioner Richards asked for clarification on the 25 feet height. Mr. Drell stated that it would be measured from the average curb elevation; the height would be measured from that curb and he would have to have a very minimum grade of slightly subgrade back where the second story would be located to achieve the 25 feet in height. Motion carried 5-0. Moved by Comm2s:;ioner Jonathan, seconded by Chairperson Whitlock, adopt _ng Planning Commission Resolution No. 1531, recommending to ,:ity council approval of GPA 91-2, C/Z 91-2, PP 91-8, and dEnial of VAR 91-2 subject to conditions as amended. Carried 5-0. C. Case No. ZOA 91-2 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for an amendment to permitted conditional uses in the P, Public/Institutional District Zone. Mr. Diaz stated that this hearing was not to discuss the pros and cons of the College of the Desert street fair, but the purpose of the hearing was to discuss the pros and cons of whether or not the city should allow open air sales in the P zone with a cor..-:iitional use permit. The net result of that would be that if the ordinance amendment was adopted ultimately by the city council and enacted, then an application for conditional use permit could be made and a public hearing on the specific permit applied for would be held before the planning commission. He stated that the ordinance was fairly simple and would amend the conditional use provisions of the P or public zone and basically that zone encompasses all public institutions of education, as well as certain other publicly owned parcels. He stated that an application for a conditional use permit would have to be made by the agency that would hold that parcel and the hearing would be before the planning commission. He noted that 7 1 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING �...1 ISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 letters in opposition had been received from the El Paseo Business Association, Cameron' s of El Paseo, and there was a letter before commission from the Chamber of Commerce opposing the ordinance change as it was written and recommending that the ordinance change be extended to other commercial zones so that privately owned property could also apply for a conditional use p3rmit. Staff did not have a problem with amending the wo::.dwng of the ordinance to include other zones or having a hearing on those other zones. He clarified that the hearing was .efore the commission without the conditional use permit application because of the litigation filed against the city requesting that the city terminate the street fair at the college and in order to demonstrate to the courts that the city was proceeding, the city had to proceed with the zoning ordinance amendment. Staff had requested that the hearing be delayed so that the conditional use permit and the zoning ordinance amendment would be heard simultaneously, but those persons filing the writ did not wish to continue the matter. He requested that those present wishing to speak on the ordinance change limit their comments specifically to the issue of the ordinance change, not to the pluses and minuses of the street fair at the College of the Desert. He advised that the appropriate time for that testimony would be at the time the conditional use permit hearing was held on that specific application should this ordinance amendment be enacted. He sta';ed that the ordinance amendment was also scheduled befui the city council on August 22, 1991 because of the time cc,r: 3=:raints and if this hearing were continued, then the counci._ .iearing would also be continued. He stated that the matter would go to the city council whether the commission recommended approval or denial because the ordinance change was requested at the council level . He explained that the ordinance amendment would allow the city to discuss the issues specifically at a separate hearing. Staff recommended to the planning commission that it recommend to the city council approval of the amendment and incorporate the request of the Chamber of Commerce that the ordinance be revised to permit the use in other particular zones with a conditional use permit. Chairperson Whitlock opened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. MR. DAN EHRLER, Executive Vice President for the Palm Desert Chznber of Commerce, informed commission that their boar of directors met at a special meeting to 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING _ ..KMISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 discuss 31. 1 form a position regarding the ordinance amendment . He read for the record the action by the board as ':rpliows: "This communication is to inform you of the position the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors has taken on the proposed City of Palm Desert request for an amendment to permitted conditional uses in the P/Public Institutional District zone. Following thorough discussion the chamber' s board of directors voted to recommend to you, the planning commission, and city council its opposition to the proposed ordinance which is on your agenda for action as tonight g it is written. Instead of the proposed ordinance, we respectfully offer an alternative ordinance or additional language to the proposed ordinance for your consideration. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors recommends its support for an ordinance which would allow open air sales to both public and commercially zoned locations in Palm Desert. With this suggested rrdinance, we also have deep and very serious concerns ; girding the controls which should be included in the con, .i.tional use permit process. Thus we request to be included in any comprehensive review process during conditional use permit approval procedures for any open air selling applications which come to the city. We strongly believe this is a question of fairness and the implementation of very specific responsible and appropriate conditions to conditional use permits. While open air sales are less than advantageous if left uncontrolled; supporting an ordinance which would open the conditional use permit process to commercial and public zoned entities would at least put the process on an even playing field. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce believes that allowing the process to exist on an equal basis would ultimately be most beneficial to the city, our businesses and shoppers. " On behalf of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, a very sincere word of appreciation for your consideration of this , ujgestion and if you have any questions regarding his process or the decision of the board, we can answer them. Commissioner Ricnards asked for an example of what the chamber had in mind (i . e. Town Center parking lot sale on a regular basis or one time) . Mr. Ehrler stated that they were requesting the equal application of the process by any entity; right now the way the ordinance was written it was only being 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING _MISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 offered to public institutional zoned areas to come to the city with an application for a use permit to hold such an event. He felt the same opportunity should be given to any commercially zoned entity as well. If a business or area where business is conducted wished to put on what would be considered open air selling, they would go through the same conditional use permit process. Mr. Diaz clarified that a one-time event could be approved in the present ordinance in the commercial zone with a special use permit apprcved by the director of community development. He stated that this ordinance was intended to be for on-going events. Commissioner Richards asked Mr. Ehrler for an example of this use in the commercial zone; Mr. Ehrler replied that if there were an open air selling concept that came about by a section of town on Highway 111 ( i.e. Palms to Pines shopping area) and the merchants there collectively wanted to do something that was defined as open air selling, in the same concept now being applied to the street fair, if they wanted to have it on a regular of basis or even specific months during each year, they should have the same opportunity to come to the city and apply for that opportunity to hold such an event. Commissioner Richards asked Mr. Diaz if the El Paseo merchants wanted to hold a Saturday or Monday event and wanted to hold it in the street Dr parking lot, would staff still have to comply with all parking and other regulations; Mr. Diaz responded that under the special use permit provisions a special permit culd be granted for a one time event. What the chamber was ,asking for was the same right to request of the commission the opportunity the have an ongoing event so that they could also request a street fair ( i.e. even on El Paseo) and there would be a public hearing on each specific request that the commission could approve, approve with conditions, or deny. He stated that the chamber was requesting that the same regulations apply to commercially zoned properties that is being granted to publicly zoned property. Mr. Ehrler concurred and indicated that at the same time they were expressing their concern about the conditions and wanted to take an active role in that process. Mr. Diaz clarified that the use would have to be done on privately owned property, not on public sidewalks. Commissioner Richards requested assurance that current ordinances regarding parking, etc. , would not be violated. Mr. Diaz concurred. 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING __MMISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 Mr. Ehrler stated that an owner of a commercially zoned area would have tho srsr,e opportunity to submit an application for a conditional u=. a permit which would be conditioned, was what they were askinc ; or, which he felt would be equitable to both the commercially zoned property owner and the public institutional zoned properties. Commissioner Jonathan asked for confirmation that under this proposal the applicant would have to go through a conditional use permit process; Mr. Diaz concurred. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the applicant was on commercially zoned property, could he go through the same request today; Mr. Diaz replied no and it was clarified that the wording would have to be added to this ordinance to say that it should also be applicable to other commercial zones. Commissioner Erwood asked if there were any rational basis for distinguishing between public and commercial zones. Mr. Diaz stated that staff would accept the recommendations of the chamber, stressing that this would allow them the opportunity to ask for the conditional use permit. Commissioner Downs concurred. Mr. Ehrler stated that it was a question of fairness in applying to both entities the same process. Commissioner Richards indica ;ed that the only way he could envision this in the commercial zone was for a developer to come in with a large vacant parcel with a lease on the land for a specific length of time and would segregate a portion for parking, provide public restrooms, etc. , and would mitigate any city requirements. Commissioner Jonathan suggested as an example the merchants in the Town Center coming to the city saying that their stores don't open until 11 :00 a.m. on Sundays and they would request an open air swap meet from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. , which he felt was a conceivable request, and he did not have a problem with the chamber' s request. Chairperson Whitlock asked if anyone else wished to address the commission. DR. PAUL CP.MPBELL, President of the El Paseo Business Associatio speaking on behalf of the business community and himse_.f, congratulated the commission on their courage any:.` wisdom in approving a controversial country club project. He did not feel the current request was a controversial problem and stated that what was really being considered was a law. He stated that previous city leaders set up an ordinance that prohibited open air 11 i i MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING .,.4.M: S 3ION AUGUST 20, 1991 selling and they did that for reasons they thought were valid. He felt some of those reasons were that they did not want to change the image of Palm Desert to look more like Palm Springs and did not want shoddy goods or stolen items, counterfeit items or that sort of thing made available to the general public in such an easy way. He felt that perhaps the most important part of their decision was the fact they didn' t feel the general tax payer should go through tax subsidies to support open air selling on public property. He asked why the city council and staff would minimize the value of the business coiarrunity, which they tended to do, and the other question was why would they rather change the ordinance ;Man to enforce the current one that was in effect. Is felt the answer was quite simple; it was politicall popular and that was the only reason it was before the commission. He mentioned that when a sample ballot was received from the State for an election, it gave an estimate of cost of what new laws changed would be brought to bear upon the tax payer. Since Mr. Diaz referred to the College of the Desert and street fair, he commented on the fact that they made in the neighborhood of $300, 000 per year to the alumni association. He said that they had no fight with that or with the use they put it, but nobody seemed to say anything about the loss of sales tax to the community and based on experts opinions of income around $15 million, that would mean the city would lose sales tax in the area of over $1 million per year at the current level, saying there was a cost involved which no one mentioned as far as what :he tax payer had to come up with in addition to subsidizin the street fair, or public selling. He hoped that the p: mining commission would show the same courage and wisdom that the predecessors had when the law was established originally and commented that, "If it works, don' t fix it. " MR. SHERMAN, of El Paseo, stated that he had a small suite at College of the Desert and informed commission that they sell new merchandise and pay their taxes, and they were not over priced, and he knew of retail businesses on El Paseo that bought merchandise at COD, then marked it up and sold it in their stores on El Paseo. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING .,.,MMISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 Mr. Diaz reminded commission and the audience that the hearing before the commission was not on the pluses or minuses of the College of the Desert; that would be heard at a separate public hearing if the ordinance amendment proceeded. MR. TED GU ,TON informed commission that he had a booth at the college street fair. He had a question about the ordinance, the city council, and the planning commission. He asked who was to justify the fact that the street fair had been in existence on that property for the last eight years. Mr. Diaz stated that the issue of whether or not the COD street fair was the same as what occurred in Santa Ana; that issue had never been decided and was not being decided at the present time. To the specific issue of those individuals wishing to stop the street fair--the Santa Ana decision was not before the city. The college voluntarily requested to apply for a conditional use permit and go through the public hearing. As far as the pros and cons and merits of the street fair and conditional use permit, the planning commission would make that decision. He indicated that if the planning commission de,: .sicn was appealed, the city council would make a determination He stated that the city would take all the testimony and :onsider the pros and cons and see if the application shci" d be approved, and if approved with what conditions, or whether it should be denied. Mr. Guston stated that was not his question; he wanted to know under what conditions has the street fair been able to exist and maintain its position and be in business for the last eight years. Commissioner Richards clarified that there had been some recent court decisions relative to the city' s ability to regulate non-educational uses on public property and the city attorney had directed the city to consider this ordinance amendment. Hither to this decision, it was understood by the city that it had no ability to regulate state-owned property activities. Mr. Guston s;ated that if that were the case, the city had no jus'-ification to issue licenses for people at the street fai - and that was in error also. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING LUMMISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 Mr. Diaz stated that business licenses were issued merely for the raising of .rwenue and the issuance of a business license had nothing to do with whether a particular act was legal by the zoning regulations. Mr. Guston stated that he hoped the commission would adopt the amendment and make the street fair legal in Palm Desert. MR. MEL JOHNS informed commission that his wife has a small business at the street fair and wanted to go on record as to comments by the El Paseo Merchants Association Chairman being allowed to make statements that were false. He stated that the businesses were licensed and paid taxes and through the city records it would show '_:rat the State reimburses a percentage to Palm Desert. HE E.lso indicated that he wanted to go on record that the s-:reet fair had some extra things such as fund raising, aAd events like that, that were good for the community and felt the public at large liked the street fair and wanted the street fair to continue. MR. DAVE GEORGE, President of the College of the Desert, informed commission that they had been working for the last year with the retail establishment in Palm Desert to fabricate some type of a rational, reasonable agreement. He stated that at some time in the future he would like to respond to Dr. Campbell ' s aspersions as to the nature of the street fair merchandise. He supported the chamber' s position of leveling the field and adding the provision for open air selling on commercial properties also. MS. JUNE TE,RAN, Executive Director of the Alumni Association, indicated that she was informed that at one of the lass ;ommission meetings through the minutes that there we:cQ some questions about some of the issues involving the street fair and asked if it would be appropriatE to address them. She noted that one question was the majority of the vendors were from out of the area and brought to the commission' s attention that at least 66% of the vendors were from the college district and the majority from the Coachella Valley. She stated that all the vendors were licensed by Palm Desert and the State Board of Equalization. Parking was an issue that had been brought up and she stated that the college itself 14 i ' • ' MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING .,.,1'4MISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 was adding two additional parking lots and the alumni association had approved $84,000 to put in two additional parking facilities at the campus. She said they had tried working with the local merchants and because Dr. George and the alumni association wanted to improve the image of the street fair, they had worked diligently to meet with the different merchant ' s groups, the vendors of their street fair, and college staff to come up with a new image that would enhance Palm Desert. She felt the street fair had a good image, but the new image would be of a country fair, or an old fashioned image, and they had recently invested several thousand dollars for new signs and had a $25,000 promotional budget to bring more tourists to the Palm Desert area and the PR firm hired to promote the street fair and Palm Desert. She stated they were willing to work with the local merchants and members of the community to route the buyers at the street fair up to their district. She reiterated that they were trying to improve it. She welcomed calls to her at the college for anyone wishing to hear solutions and plans that the college has for the street fair. MR. QUAKE, resident of Palm Desert for the last 15 years and busines3 owner in Rancho Mirage. He informed commission that he was the one who started this whole issue at city council, some of the reasons for not having enormous participation of the bad people, the retailer of the community, he went on record that after appearing at council with another group of people who were with him, that evening two of the stores that appeared with him had thei.: windows pelted and he had three threatening phone calls which he recorded with the City of Palm Desert, and for this reason would not give his address for the record. He stated that he was reluctant to come before the commission, but the swap meet being conducted on the College of the Desert property was illegal and he felt that it had probably been illegal for the past eight years. He felt that the biggest statement he made originally was that he was not anti-swap meet or street fair. It was his pleasure for it to be done in an area that was competitive with the retail community where the rents run, not the same as a covered store, in an area that had per!:ing, like at the Town Center or on El Paseo, in Cathedr :.l City, down town Palm Springs, or in Indian Wells. As it was being conducted right now, he felt the illegality was what he had been speaking about and the 15 • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING .,A,IIMI'.i`e.;ION AUGUST 20, 1991 fact that it was illegal and as a resident, he did not like what the chamber of commerce brought up because the next thing that would happen would be that Palm Desert would be known as "swap city" . He felt that ten acres mentioned by Commissioner Richards would be the perfect opening vehicle. He stated that the operation as enormous as it is had been running for eight years without an environmental impact report, which he felt was not to be believed. Commissioner Richards interrupted at this point and asked Mr. Quake to stick to the issue of the amendment to the ordinance. Mr. Quake said that he would like to go on record that he would ike the planning commission to not vote in favor of t:.e amendment and open air selling. Mr. Diaz clarified that he did not say that the activity at the college was illegal for eight years, but the summary by Commissioner Richards was correct regarding new legal decisions, and the specific decision on the activities currently taking place in the city had not been decided and they were trying to avoid all of that, which was the reason for the amendment to the ordinance, and then they could sit down and discuss the merits or demerits on the specific activity taking place. The amendment would give the city the right to discuss it and try to resolve those issues in Palm Desert' s usual manner. MR. HENRY HOYLE, 73-440 Broken Arro w in Palm Desert, stated that he had two businesses in Palm Desert and had lived here and been in business since 1973. He said it was very difficult for him to quarrel with the position of the chE tuber, because he felt they had a unique in mind, whici might be impossible to accomplish, but stated that as he observed in other cities, if Palm Desert does open up open air selling, as instituted by the College of the Desert, he was against the changes being made to allow the college to continue their swap meet and felt that Pandora' s box was being opened and the city council and planning commissions in other cities would be deluged with continual problems taking up their time because of the different problems open air selling would create. MS. JULIE BORNSTEIN, resident of Palm Desert and member of the Chamber of Commerce, addressed the commission as 16 • • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING ....MMISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 President of the Governing Board of the Desert Community College District. She said they were not present to debate the pros and cons of the street fair, though she wanted to make it clear that they were open to the community to do that in the appropriate forum and felt that Dr. George had attempted to deal with all the competing Tterests and interested groups and stated that she was al3c available to do that. She wanted to make their position clear that they had conducted the street fair for many years and it was a very crucial element to their funding, particularly in recent times of tight funding, and there was a new move to take more funding from education through the lottery. She said they had been conducting the use legally all these years and there was a new decision that came down regarding that affects of a street fair in another location under very different conditions, and it was their legal position that the street fair continues to remain legal even given that new court decision, irrespective of the feelings of the city attorney, which was what made lawsuits in that lawyers often have differing about the interpretation of lawsuits. She indicated she understood that the proposed ordinance was simply to give the city jurisdiction to now get involved in the street fair, because it had never had the juri•diction to do that before, as advised by the city attorney. She indicated that the college voluntaril' • submitted an application as a good neighbor, and stated that while they represent over 300,000 people in the community college district and three different counties, their home was in Palm Desert and they prize the good neighbor relationship the college has with the city council, government, and citizens of Palm Desert. She supported the ordinance as suggested by the chamber of commerce so that it would apply to any commercial property who might wish to submit to city jurisdiction in similar activities. She noted there had been a lot said about having a level playing field and treating business entities similarly, while she believed distinctions exist because they were a non-profit, educational institution, and not a commercial enterprise, but they did not have any objections to expanding the ordinance as suggested. She said they would be willing to submit to the jurisdiction of the city so that if the ordinance -•:as invoked, they would come back at a future time to di: ciss the pros and cons of the street fair and have an op3crtunity to correct misinformation given to 17 • • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING .....:OMISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 the commission by members of the community. She noted that even t..i; business community was divided; the chamber of commerce had one recommendation and the El Paseo merchants had another on the opposite side. While the community was divided, it was their goal to do what was best for the community and preserve for themselves the fund raising option that had become a crucial part of financing the activities that were being provided to the entire community. In closing she reiterated that they do support the ordinance, especially the original ordinance, but had no objection to the expansion proposed by the chamber. Chairperson Whitlock closed the public testimony and asked for comments by the commission. Commissioner Dons stated that he had no objection, as long as commercial zcines were also included. Commissioner Jjr_athan agreed. He noted there was a recommendation oy the city attorney and felt the amendment would create jurisdiction for the city to get involved and did not pass comment on the advisability of the street fair; just a legal vehicle to get the city proper. He had no objection to the revision cer the chamber of commerce recommendation. Commissioner Erwood felt it was important to note that this would give the public a chance to have a forum to litigate this issue before the commission and city council and have the right to have their voices heard, rather than a having a situation existing that the city would be incapable of doing anything about. He was in favor of the recommendation. Commissioner Richards stated that he wished to address some of Ms. Bornstein comments. He concurred that the college was not being in opposition to the city' s involvement and they had done what the city asked in submitting an application. He stated that he rag also involved in the economic development advisory committee and noted that committee was made up of a number of citizens and at a meeting with the majority, city manager, staff, the city attorney, and a number of outside citizens including Dave Tschopp, Diane Cox, Frank Goodman, John Ceriale, Hank Stokes, George Berkey, and Don Hedlund. He wanted the audience and staff to know that there was comment in detail and suggestions that this committee had on the merits or non-merits of this issue and if anyone wished 18 1 • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING .,.,MM..Z 3SION AUGUST 20, 1991 to obtain copies of those comments, they were available. He felt that Ms. Bornstein' s comments were correct; they were trying to clear up some legal technicalities and attempting to get the issue before a public forum to allow discussion. Chairperson Whitlock stated that she had nothing further to add and concurred with the staff recommendation and recommendation of the chamber of commerce. She requested a motion. It was moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner RiL.herds, to approve the findings as amended. Ms. Allen advised the commission that with respect to Mr. Ehrler' s request to include amendment to the conditional uses in commercial zones, it was not legally noticed and recommended that the commission only make a recommendation relative to the use in the P zone. Mr. Diaz stated that if this was the case, the commission should instruct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment to allow the use in the commercial zones for hearing at the September 17, 1991 meeting and staff would so inform council . Chairperson Whitlock asked if this item should be continued to allow have both actions simultaneously; Mr. Diaz stated that he would inform the council in the staff report that this was the commission' s position, that if the commercial zone allowance with the conditional use permit was not included, then the recommendation would be negative. He indicated that because the commission had to proceed with the ordinance separately, the :u,mmission' s decision was approval of both the commercial and ,iu►blic zones to be allowed with a conditional use permit and if council were considering it only in public zones, the recommendation was no. He indicated that commission could recommend that the council continue the hearing on the P zone until the commercial zone could be heard simultaneously. Staff noted that the matter was probably going to be continued anyway due to the absence and abstentions of some council members. Mr. Diaz clarified that the commission would proceed with the P zone, he would advise the council that they would not concur without the commercial zone being included, and commission was instructing staff to prepare an amendment to the ordinance for public hearing on September 17. Commission concurred. 19 i • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING .,..,KMISSION AUGUST 20, 1991 Action: Moved by Co.nnr.ssioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, apprcving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0. Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Richards, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1532, recommending approval of ZOA 91-2 to city council subject to the addition of the amendment to the commercial zone. Commission also instructed staff to prepare that zoning ordinance amendment for public hearing on September 17, 1991. Motion Carried 5-0. VIII. MISCELLANEOUS A. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES An oral presentation was given by Environmental Conservation Manager John Wohlmuth on proposed water efficient andscape guidelines. IX. ORAL COMMUNICA?':,,ONS MR. DAN EHRLER, Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice President, spoke on the behalf of the Board of Directors regarding their Annual Planning Conference and encouraged the commission to participate on October 17 and 18, 1991 . He felt the involvement of the planning commission would be beneficial in the process of planning their year, as they deal with many aspects of the city. Commissioner Jonathan volunteered his services. Mr. Ehrler indicated that the chamber was involved in Mr. Wohlmuth' s project on water efficient landscape guidelines, and noted that Mr. Wohlmuth was involved in the chamber' s environmental affairs subcommittee on water. He stated that their subcommittee had done a lot of research and activity with the informAtion Mr. Wohlmuth presented and the chamber gave its whole-hearted support to that effort and planned to be a distribution center through walk-ins, mailings to new residents, as well as utilizing their newsletter. Mr. Ehrler thanked the commission for their time and efforts for Palm Desert. 20 • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING ��MM SSI0N AUGUST 20, 1991 X. COMMENTS None. XI. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Downs, seconded by Commissioner Erwood, adjourning the meeting to September 17, 1991 . Carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9 : 15 p.m. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary ATTEST: CAROL WHITLOCK, Chairperson Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm 21 RECEIVED Pa e/f Oare/‘e '91 RUC 20 PEI 2 13 -- -.CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 72-990 HIGHWAY 111 PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 August 20, 1991 TELEPHONE: (619) 346-6111 TO: Palm Desert Planning Commission FROM: Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce RE: Proposed Ordinance Relative to Open Air Selling Dear Friends: This communication is to inform you of the position the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors has taken on the proposed City of Palm Desert request for an amendment to per- mitted conditional uses in the P, Public/Institutional district zone. Following thorough discussion, the Chamber's Board of Direc- tors voted to recommend to the Planning Commission and City Coun- cil its opposition to the proposed ordinance which is on your agenda for action tonight as it is written. Instead of the proposed ordinance, we respectfully offer an alternative ordinance or additional language to the proposed or- dinance for your consideration. The Palm Desert Chamber of Com- merce Board of Directors recommends its support for an ordinance which would allow open air sales to both public and commercially zoned locations in Palm Desert. With this suggested ordinance, we also have deep and serious concerns regarding the controls which should be included in the conditional use permit process. Thus, we request to be included in any comprehensive review process during conditional use permit approval procedure for any open air selling applications which come to the City. We strongly believe this is a question of fairness and the implementation of very specific, responsible and appropriate con- ditions to conditional use permits. While open air sales are less than advantageous if left uncontrolled, supporting an or- dinance which would open the conditional use permit process to commercial and public zoned entities would at least put the process on an even playing field. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce believes that allowing the process to exist on an equal basis would, ultimately, be most beneficial to the City, our businesses and shoppers. 1 r J Page Two Open Air Selling On behalf of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, a very sincere would of appreciation to you for your consideration of our recommendation. y si erely yours, (- Danie L. Ehrler Executive Vice President 2