Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0302 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - MARCH 2, 1993 7 :00 P.M. - CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE ... * * * * * � * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I . CALL TO ORllER Chairman Spiegel called the meeting to order at 7 : 03 p.m. II . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Cox led in the pledge of allegiance. III . ROLL CALL Members Present: Bob Spiegel, Chairman Diane Cox Sabby Jonathan Carol Whitlock Members Absent: None Staff Present: Ray Diaz Dick Folkers Bob Hargreaves Seyed Safavian Phil Drell Tonya Monroe Jeff Winklepleck "'� IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the February 16 , 1993 meeting minutes . Action: - - - - Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commission�r Cox, approving the February 16, 1993 meeting minutes as. s�i�ted. Carried 4-0 . V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Mr. Drell summarized pertinent February 25 city council act�'�ot�s. VI . CONSENT .�j�I.E�pAR None. VII . PUBI�JC. HEARINGS _.�;_ A. Continued Case No. RV 91-5 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for revocation of an approval to „", park a trailer in the front yard area on MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 private property at 74-691 Candlewood rr Street. Mr. Winklepleck reviewed the history of this case . He noted that at the February 2, 1993 meeting this matter was continued to allow staff to look into the block wall permit that was obtained by Mr. Barboza and issues involving screening of the RV from the street. Mr. Diaz distributed pictures that had been taken by Mr. Winklepleck that morninq. Mr. Winklepleck explained that when the area was completed, the RV would be parked between the block wall and the house with a six foot high gate in front lined up with the house for screening. Mr. Winklepleck stated that with these improvements complete, the applicant would not need an RV permit. Staff suggested a 30-day continuance to allow completion of the work and the item would be void. Chairman Spiegel o_pened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to address the commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one. Commissioner Jonathan asked that staff review the RV procedure--he did not feel the planning commission was the appropriate forum. Mr. Diaz indicated that at the last meeting the commission directed staff to look into the entire i,�1 ordinance. He agreed that there might be others in a better position to adjudicate this type of matter than community development department. Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, continuing RV 91-5 to April 6, 1993 by minute motion. Carried 4-0 . B. Case No. 4052 SA - EL PASEO COLLECTION, Applicant Request for approval of an excepticn to the city' s sign code (Section 25 . 68 . 300) to allow a wall sign above the 20 foot height limit at 73-061 E1 Paseo in the C-1 S.P. zone. Mr. Winklepleck explained that the applicant was requesting wall sign at 25 feet high from grade and read "E1 Paseo" in eight and a half inch gold reverse channel letters and "Collection" in nine inch gold reverse channel letters with a 24 inch capital C. On November 24, 1992 the architectural 2 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 ""' commission found that the sign fit into the architecture of the building and that locating the sign lower would be impossible because of window locations and below the windows would interfere with tenant signage. Architectural commission felt the additional height would not pose a problem. Mr. Winklepleck noted that one letter in opposition had been received from a resident in Sandpiper, Ms . Norma Brockly; she felt that the sign above 20 feet was not appropriate and E1 Paseo would lose its charm and character. Staff concurred with the decision of the architectural commission and recommended approval of the sign above the 20 foot height limit. Chairman Spiegel o ened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. DAVID FLETCHER, 74-095 Covered Wagon Trail, informed commission that he was the property manager and owner' s representative for the building. He clarified that the purpose of the sign was to identify the building as E1 Paseo Collection, but not conflict with the tenant signage. Chairman Spiegel asked if anyone wished to address the ""' commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one and the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Whitlock deferred to Commissioner Cox as a member of the E1 Paseo Business Association. Commissioner Cox said that she personally was concerned about making deviations to existing signs . Anything that would take eyes up and away was another way for accidents to occur on E1 Paseo. She felt the proposal was done in good taste, but might be opening up "Pandora 's Box" by providing additional signs on the sides of buildings . Chairman Spiegel asked about the height of the Club 74 sign and if it was above the limit. Mr. Drell felt it was close to the 20 foot limit. Mr. Diaz noted that staff was concerned about visibility, but in this case the architectural commission reviewed the sign and since the sign was to identify the entire building and not one specific tenant, they felt the additional five feet was warranted in conjunction with the design of the building. �. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 Commissioner Whitlock felt the signage was done in good taste � and would represent the entire building and she would move for approval . Commissioner Jonathan concurred. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Cox, adopting the findings as presented by staff . Carried 4-0 . Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Cox, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1611 , approving 4052 SA, subject to conditions . Carried 4-0 . C . Case No. 4060 SA - FIRST INTERSTATE BANK, Applicant Request for approval of an exception to the city' s sign code (Section 25 . 68 . 300) to aiZow a wall sign above the 20 foot height limit at 72-811 Highway 111 in the PC-3 S .P. zone. Mr. Winklepleck stated that this request was similar to the previous case. He explained that the current building had three signs on the parapet 36 feet from grade on Plaza Way facing north, east and west. The additional sign would match �.�r existing signs . He noted that the sign would read, "First Interstate Bank" in 18 inch letters and was 36 feet from grade also. From El Paseo there was an approximate ten foot grade differential between E1 Paseo and the grade of the building. From El Paseo the sign would be at 26 feet . Mr. Winklepleck indicated that the applicant was also requesting that the signs be back-lit. The electrical facilities were installed but never utilized. At the January 26 , 1993 architectural commission meeting the commission felt the sign fit into the architecture and recommended approval to planning commission with the exception that the south facing sign be non-illuminated. They did not want Sandpiper residences to be subject to the light at night from the sign. Staff recommended approval . Chairman Spiegel asked if the proposed sign was identical to the other signs ; Mr. Winklepleck concurred. Chairman Spiegel opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. WILLIAM BARKER, Image Media Group in Ontario, stated that he was representing the bank and the sign company. 4 � __ _ _-- MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 � He said that the new sign would not be illuminated. The present signs had been up for years and he was requesting illumination through the face of the sign, or halo lighting that would be light and would define the outside of the l�tters . He asked if there were any questions . Chairman Spiegel asked if anyone wished to address the commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one and the public testimony was closed. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he had a problem with this signage exception. He noted that the code allows exceptions in cases of exceptional circumstances in type or location and where the sign would not be detrimental to neighboring businesses . He did not feel either reasons applied to this case. He felt that aesthetically this area did not need another sign and was opposed to the request. Commissioner Whitlock asked if the illumination was removed if Commissioner Jonathan would still be opposed; he answered yes, because he did not feel there was a cause to grant an exception. """ Commissioner Whitlock stated that she did not object to tl� sign, but was opposed to any illumination. Chairman Spiegel concurred. He noted that the other sides already had a sign and E1 Paseo customers might find the additional sign helpful . He stated that he was opposed to any illumination because of nearby Sandpiper residences . Commissioner Cox agreed. Commission clarified that the additional sign was approved, but all signs would be non-illuminated. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Cox, adopting the findings . Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Jonathan voted no) . Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Cox, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1612, approving 4050 SA, subject to all signs being non-illuminated. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Jonathan voted no. ) . .�. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 . D. Case Nos . GPA 93-1, C/Z 93-1, TT 27710 AND DEVELOPMENT rf AGREEMENT - LOWE RESERVE CORPORATION, Applicant Request for recommendation of approval to city council of a general plan amendment from public facilities to very low density residential 1-3 dwelling units per acre, a zone change from public institution to PR-2, a development agreement and a tentative tract map for a 48 lot single family subdivision surrounding three golf holes on a 55 acre site located east of Portola and south of the Living Desert. Mr. Joy stated that this application was only a portion of a 600 acre, 250 unit country club that was mostly located in Indian Wells . Since the project encompassed two jurisdictions, only one could be designated the lead agency for environmental documentation. Indian Wells processed the EIR for the entire project since the majority of the project was in that city. The project was previously assessed and that was why there was no negative declaration or environmental impact report before the commission as part of the application. He explained that the general plan � amendment and zone change was necessary since the property was targeted as an expansion of the Living Desert originally. The land exchange along with Coachella Valley Water District was made 14 years ago with the understanding among the three parties involved that these 55 acres could be developed. A zone change on the property was requested in 1983 to PR-7 for the possibility of 385 units maximum. This was denied and now 48 units were being proposed along with three holes of golf instead. The legal notice mixed the unit number with the acreage number--he clarified that the request was for 48 units on 55 acres, which would provide one unit per acre maximum. In terms of project design, golf holes were used as buffers between proposed residences of the project and adjacent residences to the west in Ironwood, as well as for the Living Desert. Also adjacent to Ironwood was an access easement for the Ironwood maintenance yard which the applicant agreed with the homeowners association to relocate and construct a block wall in place of an existing chain-link fence with oleanders . In a separate agreement the applicant provided a landscape budget for the homeowners association. He noted that the Ironwood homesites were approximately 25 feet higher than adjacent homes in The Reserve, which were also setback 400 feet from the property line. There were two 6 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 ` lingering concerns from correspondence received. One was traffic impact. He explained that the project was subject to TUMF fees and signalization fees, but there was also a requirement by the public works department of payment of $116 , 000 for offsite traffic improvements at Portola/Highway 111 , Portola/Fairway, Portola/Haystack and Haystack/Highway 74 . The other issue was the tax money generated by the project and densities proposed in each city. While the density in the Palm Desert portion was a little higher than in Indian Wells ' portion, this meant more tax increment to Palm Desert ' s Redevelopment Agency. The density resulted in the site topography since the Palm Desert portion was flatter. He noted that the city' s economic development committee endorsed the project, as did numerous Palm Desert businesses . Staff received many letters in favor. Staff recommended approval of the project. Commissioner Jonathan said that he read the development agreement, but asked the city attorney what the city was gaining from the agreement. Mr. Joy answered that the zone change and general plan amendment were tied to this specific project so that if someone else came in and bought the property, they would have to build the approved project or the zoning and general plan would revert back to the current � zoning, which was public facilities . Commissioner Jonathan asked if that could be incorporated into a condition of approval, rather than a development agreement . Mr. Joy replied no, that zone changes could not be conditioned that way. Mr. Diaz clarified that with a development agreement, it enabled the city to place conditions of approval on the project without the strict nexus or relationship of the condition to the project. The developer would receive greater assurances that he wauld be able to proceed with the project and the city could require conditions of approval of the project without having to establish a nexus . Commissioner Jonathan asked if the city had a history of problems with development agreements; Mr. Diaz replied no. He said that the biggest development agreement the city had was with Western Allied, which was now Westinghouse--the only problem with that one was when Westinghouse took over, they reduced the project from 1200 units to 300 units . He said there had not been a bad problem with development agreements . Chairman Spiegel asked for clarification about the signalization the developer was willing to pay for; Mr. Joy explained that there were four different traffic projects the developer was being required to pay 25� of--the total amount was $116 ,000 . Normally that could not be required, but .�► 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 through the development agreement process that was being � requested. Chairman Spiegel asked if Haystack and Highway 74 could be signalized since 74 was a state highway; Mr. Joy indicated that the normal TUMF fees could not be used on Highway 74 since it was a state highway--that was why some of the money was being collected from the developer for that project. He suggested that instead of 25� of four different intersections, it might be lumped together and required that 100� of Highway 74 and Haystack be done. He said that it had been worked out with the engineering department and he deferred that to Mr. Folkers . Mr. Folkers replied that as far as Highway 74 and Haystack was concerned, public works was working with Caltrans to try and get a traf f ic signal there. One problem Caltrans had was a situation of their financial stability and they had indicated that at this point in time they did not have the funding. The city was trying to work up an agreement with them so that the city could go ahead and do the engineering with them paying for that and going ahead with a signal . When that process took place and the signal went in, the dollars from this project would help pay the local share. Commissioner Jonathan asked if $116 , 000 was the developer' s share; Mr. Folkers answered that it was the total for four locations--three locations were at 25� and one location was 15� . : � Chairman Spiegel asked if the city had been requested to give any redevelopment assistance to this project; Mr. Joy replied no, the applicant approached RDA at a very early date and that was completely ruled out. Chairman Spiegel indicated that Indian Wells agreed to $10 million; Mr. Joy stated he did not know the exact figure, but knew that RDA in Indian Wells agreed to reimburse the developer. He indicated that the applicant could address that issue. Mr. Joy felt that some of the funds were going toward flood control and improvements . Chairman Spiegel opened the public testimony and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. TEN LENNON, resident of the desert since 1974 , and President of Lowe Reserve Corporation addressed the commission. He explained that Lowe had been a business operator in Palm Desert since 1972 and operated the Shadow Mountain Resort and Racquet Club for some time and developed it. He had also developed in Indian Wells, Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage. The concept for the project, called "The Reserve" was to establish a very low density residential golf course community 8 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 `"' that featured the desert landscaping around the golf course; there would be 21 holes of golf and a driving range. He said there would be 250 units on 600 acres. Each building site would be detined on the plan as a building stamp and around that stamp they would re- vegetate desert or save existing desert around that land. He used an aerial photo to show the commission the location of the project and the portion that would be in Palm Desert. The project would be high-end and the idea was to come in off Portola Avenue with approximately a 1/4 mile entry that was just desert landscaping. Sculptures, desert landscaping and the first guard gate would be about a 1/4 mile in. The landscaping across Portola would be a continuation of the natural desert landscaping that the Living Desert currently featured. He said that the site was surrounded by golf and there were 48 units in the application. The site had 12, 800 square foot lots that would allow either patio homes or custom homes, similar to Bighorn lot sites . The club house was situated back against the mountains . He said they were staying totally out of the mountain area, and the mountain land within the boundary of their property ended up in the hands of the Living Desert at the end of the project. "'�' The clubhouse couidn't be seen except from the higher areas in the Ironwood Golf Course. The neighbors were varied. They included Ironwood Homeowners Association No. 5 and the balance of the property in Ironwood was controlled by the board of directors of the Ironwood Golf Club. Mr. Lennon said he had worked with them for three and a half years . He said that they were down to the final conditions and he extended their golf course into his property, but most particularly Ironwood needed their flood protection. They were currently suffering losses in the range of $30, 000-$60, 000 per year every time the water came through there. South of Ironwood was BLM property and Coachella Valley Water District. He would acquire 160 acres of the BLM property for the start of their flood control project. Upon completion of the flood control, they would deed that land to the University of California Ecological Reserve as a natural buffer to their 16, 000 acre reserve south of the project. In addition, they would provide gaod access through their project. Another neighbor was the Living Desert Reserve. They had completed an aqreement with the Homeowners Association No. 5 . Ironwood Golf required access and easement to get to their maintenance building and in the last year had extended their golf �.. 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 course into his property to get lonqer distance on some � of their tees and they were working to get them back that land and additional land on their fairway, as well as share some secondary accesses that was important to both of them. He indicated that the BLM situation they acquired through the Nature Conservancy; the money that acquired that land would then release 400-500 acres of the scenic mountain lands that would come under the Nature Reserve situation. One concern of the Living Desert was that they did not want to see The Reserve from their project, which was provided in their agreement with them. They had an excellent berm surrounding their project that was man-made and he would re-landscape the berm for them to their design and specifications . Both the University of California ' s staff and the Living Desert ' s staff were on the project ' s landscaping and architectural committee and would get to oversee almost all of the development as it went forward. They would stay on the board so that people did not try to later on plant grass in areas that called for desert treatment. In the Indian Wells portion of the project, they had received all of their approvals . That included the zone change, the development agreement and an owner-participation agreement. To make the property useable, their budget r1 was about $15 million in offsite improvements that included storm drain control, bringing offsite water to the project--all of that had been solved. They would spend a little more money because they agreed to satisfy some requests of the Sierra Club to take the channel to soft bottom, which required that it be made wider and they would lose some developable land, but they felt that aesthetically they would be more happy with it . They were working with Becktell Engineering and the Water District on that. In the City of Indian Wells, they approved the whole project to be in that city, so 250 units were required in that city. He told them that the project would be best if they could get 48 units onto the Palm Desert property. Any units built in Palm Desert would be deducted from the 250 approved for Indian Wells . He foresaw �.he project being 202 units in Indian Wells and 48 in Palm Desert. In starting this project, it had two guidelines going forward. He had always been intrigued by the old Smoketree Ranch in Palm Springs as a natural development and felt his project would be a step forward. Bighorn Country Club "beat them to the punch" and were of f to a good start, but they were taking it to the next level because they would 10 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 u.. not allow their homeowners to wall-of f between homes and there would be natural desert and animal pathways and wildlife corridors between the homes and along the golf course. They would end up with the project being approximately 64$-65� natural desert and almost 80�-85g open space and they would only develop lots on approximately 120 acres of land. Of the tax dollars that they created, they would get about 30� of the tax increment dollars . The $10 million could be over 20 years against their $16 million public improvement costs . In the 55 acres, they were submitting a general plan amendment, zone change, precise plan and development agreement. The development agreement would allow the city to ask for certain things they normally couldn't and the only mitigation of the environmental impact report was a three-way stop sign at Haystack. He felt that traffic was an important issue and a low density project was what they considered. He stated that their other option was a very high density low income affordable housing project that politically could go through and would be difficult to stop, but they chose the low density project. They hired a consultant to address traffic; they talked about concerns and mutually did a study and came up with the numbers . The �► traffic issue had always been a problem in the city' s eyes because of what almost happened with Sunterra was that Palm Desert was getting all the traffic and Indian Wells was getting all the benefit. This also happened with the Vintage Club, which did not help. There was also a problem with the Vintage where people were starting to park on the curbs and it was unsightly. He went to the Vintage Club and because they kept a computer printout of anyone doing business with the Vintage, businesses had to have a transponder to get through the gate. They kept track of everyone in their project and ran a printout and there were approximately 520 businesses that did regular business in the Vintage Club; 230 of the businesses were Palm Desert businesses . Above that 230, they do the majority of work at the Vintage Club--it was the architects, the landscape architects, the plumbing contractors, the service industry, and florists . He felt that about 60� of the traffic originated in the city and those same people/ businesses were currently serving Marrakesh across the street and Ironwood, and were already there and would add more business . Environmentally, they had a ratified EIR. The final issues were in satisfying the Sierra Club' s wish for a soft-bottom channel which they were `" 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 working on. One of the University of California ' s main �r concerns was that the blue palo verde tree as a major aesthetic and important biological feature of the project that they have agreed to keep as many or have more than what were currently there and to make it a feature plant of the project. Cal State Fullerton would do a ten-year grant on the study and Mr. Lennon would be providing the funding. They would do a front-end study, which they had already started, then would advise him how to save the plant and animal life in that area and would continue to monitor their project for ten years and end up with a report. The mountains would end up in the hands of the Living Desert; the BLM property in the hands of the University of California and the Nature Conservancy would acquire all the scenic mountain area. The last issue was economics . He said that a lot of the attitude of the public had been that Indian Wells would get the glory and Palm Desert wouZd get all the traf f ic. Mr. Lennon indicated that he looked at it as one community and the truth of the matter was that with the printout from the Vintage, there were only nine Indian Wells businesses working there. The majority of services would come to the City of Palm Desert. They had a project that on buildout would be in the third of $1 billion range. They were also looking at major �,,,r impetuous for the E1 Paseo Merchants Group and high-end shopping. Also major dollars to the Palm Desert Town Center. He said that he was able to convince the economic development council that it was important and that was how they got their endorsement. He said there were 70 Palm Desert residents that worked at the Vintage Club on a regular basis . The jobs this project would generate was over $2 1/2 million per year in payroll . There were over 25 people making over $40, 000 per year and approximately 100 people would make $20, 000-$25, 000 . He felt it was important to look at the project like a single community, not Palm Desert and Indian Wells, There were benefits to both and it was a rare situation in that there was no other access to this project . This was the only legal access . He said that in the last week or so the Silver Spur group wrote some letters and had some concerns . He had not been able to meet with them until lunch time, but felt they had a good meeting and they better understand the project and he understood their concerns and had agreed to continue working with them to see if something could be worked out with the city to improve their situation. 12 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 "� Commissioner Cox commended Mr. Lennon on doing his homework and presentation. She said that when he was talking about people using the Vintage and how many were Palm Desert residents and business people, Indian Wells did not really have a large business community, whether or not the access to this club would be to Portola in Palm Desert, or through Indian Wells . Either way Palm Desert would still benefit because those businesses would be used. Mr. Lennon concurred that that was correct. Commissioner Cox said that there was expertise in Palm Desert that the residents would use without the access being in Palm Desert. One of the letters asked about access through Deep Canyon and asked if that had been addressed. Mr. Lennon explained that the public did not have access through the Living Desert; this property was private property and Ironwood did not allow people on that property and south of them was the ecological reserve, who had problems with people coming through Ironwood and wandering into the ecolagical reserve and going under the fences . They were anxious to get the final buffer to keep that area preserved. He pointed out that the public had full access through the Living Desert and its trail system to get into the canyon and hike the trails . He had to provide security that his residents could not get into that system without going through the Living Desert, so they were restricting '�"' them to get into the canyons . Commissioner Whitlock asked Mr. Lennon if he was successful in meeting with Silver Spur. She noted that Janie Wright wrote them a letter on the number of units . Mr. Lennon replied that he did not see the letter from Janie Wright; he met with Mr. Cook and Mr. Weatherall and had seen their letters . Commissioner Jonathan said that the sole ingress and egress would be on Portola; Mr. Lennon indicated there were two access points on Portola--the existing continuation of the service road, which Ironwood shared and would be used by them only as an emergency secondary access; and their main entrance. He agreed that there would be turn-out lanes coming into and leaving the project to make it safer for that area. Commissioner Jonathan questioned that with that sole access , 250 homes--500 or more homeowners and the service industry coming in and out, was the three-way stop sufficient. He was surprised that a stop light was not recommended. Mr. Lennon said that he did not feel even a stop sign at that location was a smart move, but the city convinced him that trying to turn left on Haystack onto Highway 74 made since for a signal that was activated by � 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 cars . The traffic engineers did the environmental impact ,,,� report and they said that there would be an increase of approximately ten percent. Mr. Folkers said that the analysis that public works had done to date indicated that there was no need for anything beyond what the consultant was recommending. Mr. Lennon said that they would pay all $117 , 000 of that, not just 25� . Chairman Spiegel said that the commission was not privy to the environmental impact report and asked if there were any other mitigating items other than the three-way stop on Haystack. Mr. Lennon indicated that they would have to spend the money for the entry and redo the islands and there were tremendous mitigations that were generally tied to the agreement with the neighbors regarding landscaping, open space, approval processes of units, and fees to be paid. Al1 their buyers would have a life membership at the Living Desert . Chairman Spiegel noted that the tentative plan was to develop the entire area in about ten years; Mr. Lennon felt the time frame would be about eight years . Chairman Spiegel asked if Mr. Lennon would be building the homes or just selling the land. Mr. Lennon said he would probably do both. He indicated the lots would be around $250, 000- $750, 000 range average and homes would be $700, 000 and up. He also noted that on the redevelopment agency dollars was �+ that they were very substantial . A tremendous amount of the dollars even on the Indian Wells property went to the local school system. He said they had a project that would not tax the school system, and the sheri f f ' s and f ire department very little, because they had all private roads . He felt about $20 million of the Indian Wells site would go into the school system and another $3-$4 million in the first nine or ten years from the Palm Desert site. Chairman Spiegel asked if there was any other way to get into the site other than from Portola. Mr. Lennon replied no. Chairman Spiegel asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the project. MR. THOMAS SEACOOK, 73-512 Sun Lane in Palm Desert, representing 250 homeowners in Silver Spur Ranch, stated that he had a meeting with Mr. Lennon. He did not want to impede progress, but their location on the south and west side of Portola and Haystack would be impacted by the traffic increase. He said their primary entrance to Silver Spur Rancho was just south of the intersection of Haystack and Portola, so it would create a dangerous situation unless more attention was given. He asked 14 '� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 "� that care be given in the approval and that Mr. Lennon assure them that he will in some way handle the safety aspect of the traffic, whether it be by cutting Silver Spur into Haystack further back, which could be accomplished by the acquisition of a couple of vacant lots, and that was his purpose in being present. He asked that the safety of traffic and the Silver Spur Ranch residents be taken into consideration. MR. JOHN CRAIG, a Palm Desert landscape architect, 73- 200 El Paseo, said that he followed this project for two years and had seen a lot of projects . He felt this was a very high-quality project and this developer had done everything to be a good neighbor and he would like to see this project come to fruition. MRS . HARRY NUDD, a resident of 73-409 Little Bend Trail for the last 26 years in Silver Spur Ranch. She felt the development was wonderful, but was concerned about the traffic and getting onto Portola from Silver Spur Trail, which resembled the AM/PM Market on Portola and Highway 111 . She said it was disastrous trying to get out because the stop sign was so close to the entrance at Silver Spur Trail . There was no center line to get '�" out to wait for traffic to subside. She hoped the planning commission would seriously consider the traffic problem before approving this project. MR. DAVID RECUPERO, 48-$36 Mescal in Ironwood Five Homeowners Association, and was also a member of the liaison committee that worked extensively with Mr. Lennon over the last six months in terms of resolving issues in this project. He said that when the project was first brought to their attention, most of the homeowners felt strongly that they did not want to see any development at all on the subject property. They enjoyed the scenery and the beauty of the desert. With that concern, Mr. Lennon had been very cooperative in working with them in resolving issues . They understood and respected development and property rights of individuals and much preferred a development of this nature, rather than the 380 or so units that were proposed before. From that perspective, their association and members of the liaison committee supported the project. There were still a few concerns that needed to be resolved and Mr. Lennon entered into an agreement with their association and they hoped the agreement would be respected and had every indication +... 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 that it would be. One condition was that Mr. Lennon .,,� would prepare a photographic analysis showing what the development would look like from their homes . He had done that and this meeting was the first time they had gotten to see it. They would continue to work toward that resolution. He was also concerned about the density. He said that they would like to see the density reduced from the 48 units and would work toward that resolution before the project was ultimately approved; and finally, he wanted to ensure that the mitigation measures referred to as part of the environmental impact report still applied to the City of Palm Desert by reference. The three items were density, photographic analysis, and the provision of the agreement entered into with Mr. Lennon. He clarified that he was present as a liaison committee representative in support of the project. Commissioner Cox said that the commission received letters from the Kellys and their concern was about the density and they offered a second choice--she asked if the Kellys were involved with that committee. Mr. Recupero replied they were not part of the liaison committee, although he was aware of the Kellys . He saw their letter of concern and that was part of the input he received from the association � representatives , which was density. MS . GAIL BERGMAN, 73-622 Silver Spur Ranch, said that she met with Mr. Lennon that afternoon because she had serious concerns about the traffic that would use Portola and the danger that existed now. She felt that would only increase when continued development south of their area occurred. Mr. Lennon indicated that he was working with Ironwood for three and a half years--they just learned about the development through an article in the Desert Sun in December. They had tried to get information and were told that when it came to Palm Desert, that they didn' t have an environmental impact report for them to study. When they asked about the traffic study, they were told they could get selected pages of the study that was commissioned by Mr. Lennon. Today, he graciously provided them with a copy of that study. It was full of statistics, some of which she did not understand. Some of the estimates of traffic were based on the entrance to the Vintage on Portola. She felt there were more cars entering the Vintage on Cook that should have been included in that study. She asked that commission review that study more carefully before 16 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 '" moving ahead with the project. In addition, the traffic at the Living Desert didn't come up in the study and as more of the desert developed, more people would be taking their children to see the desert, so she felt there would be even more traf f ic to the Living Desert as a result of continued development. She said that she felt the project had a lot of appeal and economic impact, but encouraged the commission to weigh that against the liability of public safety. Mr. Lennon told them that about the redevelopment dollars coming into the city; she felt that before moving ahead with approving the project or as a condition of approval, the city and Mr. Lennon could work more carefully with Silver Spur to address some of their concerns on the entrance and exits on Portola. Chairman Spiegel indicated that there were no redevelopment dollars from Palm Desert. Mr. Diaz concurred. He clarified that the Palm Desert portion of the project was in the Palm Desert Redevelopment Project Area that was designed to create the Palm Valley Channel and other projects . So the redevelopment agency would be receiving increment from this area if the project was approved. The City of Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency would not be giving any money to the """ developer to offset his conditions of approval or costs . Those were out of his own pocket. Chairman Spiegel noted that Indian Wells was providing money for a flood control system. Ms . Bergman showed commission a sketch of how Silver Spur exited onto Portola and she felt it created a problem that she hoped the city would address, perhaps as a condition of approval on the project. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the residents of Silver Spur had thought about a solution to the traffic problem that they would like to see implemented. Ms . Bergman said they were thinking it might be safer to re-route Silver Spur Trail because it went at an angle over to Portola. They were thinking it could go over and empty onto Haystack and would be safer. They had just begun to look at it. She did not know how a signaZ wauld work because of the distance involved, but they would be willing to get together to work something out . Commissioner Whitlock noted that the problem with Silver Spur existed prior to this project with access onto Portola. She ..� 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNZNG COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 asked Mr. Folkers if the city had addressed this problem and „� what the city could do to alleviate the problem that the Silver Spur residents had now. Mr. Folkers said that up until the point of the analysis, they had never had the problem called to their attention. He said that they would look into it. MR. ED WEST, 43-725 Carmel Circle in Palm Desert, said that this was exactly the project he came about a year ago to support as a resident of the city. Then it was on Highway 74 , Mira Loma, and he felt this project represented Palm Desert the best. Low density, high dollars, low impact to the school system, low impact to the police department, low impact to the fire department because these homes would be built with modern technology, all the new codes, and well protected. He said he would love to see ten or 15 of these projects built in the city in the next ten years . His children were seven and ten years old and would benefit from the school system that would benefit from this project. He felt he would get better police protection because the three patrolman at night for the entire city might be increased to five, because they would not be spending two hours per night patrolling this neighborhood, they would be patrolling the neighborhoods that need more � attention. He said he would like to see this project go through. He informed commission that he was one of the business people in Palm Desert that was licensed in Palm Desert, worked in the Vintage Club and Ironwood and from his personal experience, he could not get into the Vintage Club from Cook Street. The impact on Cook Street was zero traffic-wise and he saw how many cars went in and out of the Vintage because of the season. There were times during the year when there was no traffic on Portola. He said the city was looking at a tremendous project with only a little inconvenience on Portola for four months per year. He felt that Mr. Lennon was willing to work with the city on traffic and if he was giving the city $118,000 for traffic lights at Portola and Haystack, why didn' t the city take that money and pay the other 75� to re-route the whole system to make it acceptable for the people who live there. The majority of the traffic after construction would be people who live there and they would want to come up Portola, not necessarily Haystack from Highway 74 . He was in favor of the project. 18 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 '� Commissioner Cox said that her main concern about the project had been traffic. She indicated that she drives that street every morninq about 7 : 00 a.m. going past the Vintage where there were cars lined up past the end of Marrakesh from contractors trying to get in and at the intersection of Haystack because of the short distance to where the turn-off would be to this project. She said those cars and trucks were just contractors going in on a daily basis, and gardeners . She asked where those cars would be put on the proposed project. Mr. Lennon said that if they got backed up, and they were going to take a lot of them on the project inside the service entry, they could park along the curb on the right-hand side. He said they would keep all construction vehicles onsite. Mr. West said that as a contractor he had a transponder. One of the major reasons that traffic backed up was because people were not using their transponders . They cost his company $410 per quarter for the transponders, but they could drive through the gate. He said that enabled them to know where he' s going, where he ' s working, and they have his license number. If there were gardeners or delivery people who didn' t have a transponder, traffic backed up. He noted that a major r"'' selling point of the Vintage Club was the high security. With Mr. Lennon' s main gate up high, even when the project was 25�-30� completed at buildout, by the time the traffic got up to the gate, they wouldn' t be backed up to Portola. MS. JANICE WRIGHT, 48-114 Silver Spur Trail, said she had lived in that area for 26 or 27 years, but they had always been somewhat inconvenienced on getting out onto Portola. She said that the stop signs they put on Portola created more of a problem because of the steady stream of traffic . She indicated that she only heard about the project about ten days ago from their newsletter. Their approximation of vehicles per day was seven trips per day per family multiplied by the 255, which was 1750 trips daily that would be additional traffic on Portola. She indicated that she takes her granddaughters to school down Portola and it was chaos now. In the early morning school times the trucks were backed up to Grapevine waiting to get in. She said she was not opposed to the project, but was concerned about traffic . r..r 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 Mr. Lennon indicated that one of Mrs . Bergman' s � questions was could Silver Spur and redevelopment agency spend money in that area. He said he didn ' t know if it could or not. He said that what he agreed to in the development agreement was $170, 000 for the four sites . One of the sites was Fairway and Portola, which he did not think was needed and would create traffic because if there was ever a signal there it would encourage people at that stop to make a quick right turn and go down Fairway, which the city wouldn't want. That was one location that would probably not get built. He said he wouZd agree in the development agreement that the money would go into a fund to be used potentially for this project and they wouldn' t restrict it having to go to those sites . If further studies warranted that, the city would have the ability to put the money in another direction. Chairman Spiegel closed the public testimony and asked for comments by the commission. Commissioner Jonathan felt it was a nice project and he did not have a problem with the density overall or the density in Palm Desert, but did have a problem with the traffic situation--not what the development would create, but the � overall problem that currently existed. The only mitigation required was a three-way stop and he did not see that; he felt there was a problem that had to be dealt with now. He liked project, but did see it as "the straw that broke the camel ' s back" , and he wasn't talking about financial burden, but a very real problem that needed to be solved before this project went through that could add to an already existing situation. He asked for suggestions from the other commissioners as a way to move forward with the project, but not prior to solving the overall traffic situatian. Commissioner Whitlock asked if the bulk of the traffic concerns that were voiced effected Silver Spur. She said that she participated in the economic development advisory committee meetings and after hearing their concerns and Mr. Lennon' s response, based on the testimony given, the safety factor and concerns of Silver Spur, the distance from Haystack to Silver Spur sounded like it was the biggest concern. Because the density of the project was so minimal compared to what could go in there, she felt the focus on the traffic as a result of this project might be in error. The city had been flagged to be alerted to the Silver Spur situation and she wanted to separate those two issues , if 2 0 "� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 �*+ possible. She didn't see with this type of project that the concerns should be the seven trips per day, and the fact that this was an eight year buildout. She wanted the city to key into a new problem that had been heard that had nothing to do with this project. Chairman Spiegel did not agree. One thing that hadn' t been discussed was construction equipment. That would be eight years of cement trucks, lumber trucks, etc. , and they had two ways of getting into the project--one was Haystack and one was Portola. The majority would be coming over Haystack from Highway 74 and he was surprised that no one was present from the Haystack area to address that issue. Commissioner Jonathan noted that another issue was the way development and solution of problems occurred, was as new developments occurred "red flags" go up and people come in and tell commission about problems and that was the time to solve those problems . He agreed with Commissioner Whitlock that the two problems were separate and there was already a traffic problem there, but he felt that because of the way the system worked, this was an appropriate time to solve it. He didn' t want to cause undue delay and was in favor of the project, but was reluctant to move forward knowing there was '�"' an existing problem. He would feel more comfortable solving that problem first, and he did not think it was limited to Silver Spur, but there was a problem at Haystack and Portola in general . Commissioner Whitlock asked public works how the city would get involved at this point to help resolve commission concerns that would still allow this project to proceed with the appropriate recommendations to city council . Mr. Folkers said that there was a perceived problem; at this point in time public works did not have a problem at the intersection of Silver Spur and Portola. People may have to look for traffic, but it was not a real problem. As far as the flow along Haystack with construction equipment, whenever there was a project, they had to get into the project by the shortest route. That meant if they were coming from Indio, they would come up Highway 111 and Portola; if from the Monterey area or the freeway, it would be Monterey and coming across either Haystack or Mesa View depending where the project was or any of the streets in between. They were supposed to use the major streets whenever possible, but for a concrete truck or lumber truck to get to the site, they were supposed to use a major street up to a point, but would still have to use local streets . As far as all the ..�. 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 construction activity taking place, it had been going on the .�/ whole seven and a half years since he worked for the city. Traf f ic had to come in and service a development and when future development comes in they would be the recipients of the noise, dust and traffic while their adjacent neighbors were being built. Chairman Spiegel stated that he understood that, but 95� of the project was in Indian Wells, not in the City of Palm Desert. Mr. Diaz noted that the with the issue of access, the opinion that had been received three times was that access to Portola could not be denied. Whether all 250 homes were built in Indian Wells or however many in Palm Desert and Indian Wells, the access was from Palm Desert. That was the legal issue and even if it wasn' t legally the issue, the city would be required to provide access through the more environmentally sensitive areas . Commissioner Jonathan said that they weren' t talking about denying access from Portola, they were talking about adequate amelioration of the negative impact that would be created through that access . He felt the response from public works underscored the problem--they had resident after resident saying there was a major traffic problem and the city saying that there wasn't. Until it was adequately determined whether or not there was a true problem and a solution, it � would be inappropriate to go forward. He asked if the � applicant had any solutions . Mr. Folkers noted that it was public works ' responsibility to monitor Palm Desert and they would start monitoring the intersection at Silver Spur and Portola starting tomorrow. If there was a problem that the city had not been aware of, then they would take mitigating action. That was part of their job and they would do that, but felt the two issues were mutually exclusive . He said that the proposed project if approved wouldn' t break ground for eight to ten months, regardless of what public works came up with, and if it was a short term solution, they could have something in the next three or four months . Chairman Spiegel asked if Portola going down from two lanes and a bikepath and golf cart path to one lane because of the narrowness of the wash just north of Haystack was a problem. Mr. Folkers replied that he didn't have a problem, and they hadn' t had any accidents . Commissioner Whitlock noted that one of the residents had offered a good suggestion with the pie-shaped piece of land that bordered Haystack, Silver Spur Ranch and Portola and maybe some research as to who owned that land--she had seen a drainage ditch through there because she traverses that street daily as well--and there might be some sort of 22 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 �► easement there already and maybe something could be done with the pie-shaped piece of land to re-route Silver Spur's entry. She did not know if it would fall under the jurisdiction of the city to look into it, in addition to the traffic study public works would do or not. Mr. Lennon said that he would like his project to go forward, and suggested that the money that was over and above the environmental impact report "mitigation dollars" that they agreed to put up for traffic issues, he would agree that if the city decided after its study that they wanted to delegate the money to just this issue. The only change they had as a potential solution was to acquire at least two pieces of private property-- two residential lots to change the street access and if it was changed, but felt the city would not want someone to make a stop at Haystack, make a right turn and have to make another left turn in front of on-coming Haystack traffic and that would be the next solution to coming into the project, and that wouldn' t eliminate the existing Silver Spur Road, so people would come in double ways and right-of-ways would have to be acquired on two properties . He heard it said that it was two different issues and wasn't all his project ' s fault and '"""' had been a problem they have had, but they would make it a little worse. They agreed to put up $25, 000 for that intersection and whatever solution the city wanted to put up; he was agreeing that all the other solutions could go into that one pie if the city decided that. Mr. Diaz noted that one problem to try and avoid was to attempt to design a traffic solution at the meeting; he asked Mr. Joy if this were to be recommended for approval and moved on to city council, what date it would go to city council . Mr. Joy replied that the city council hearing date would be March 25 if the project proceeded. Mr. Diaz said that if this matter was moved to city council in April to give staff more time to look at potential Silver Spur solutions, then commission could remark on the solutions before the council meeting, or the commission could continue the matter. Mr. Folkers said that he could have a report to planning commission by the first meeting in April . That would give staff enough time to get the matter to the first council meeting in April . Commissioner Jonathan said that he was not comfortable giving approval right now and would move for continuance to the first meeting in April and hear back from public works as to ... 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 results of the traffic study and two or three alternative rf solutions that could be discussed for traffic on Portola. While the problem was not caused by this proposed development, it was dangerous to mix the two issues because when major development occurs was when the opportunity to solve the problem occurs as well . Therefore, he felt it was appropriate to seize this opportunity to take care of an existing problem as well as prevent an increase of that problem. Chairman Spiegel reopened the public hearing to allow continuance of the item to April 6, 1993 . Action: Moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Cox, continuing CPA 93-1, C/Z 93-1, TT 27710 and Development Agreement to April 6 , 1993 by minute motion. Carried 4-0 . MR. DIAZ SUGGESTED A FIVE TO TEN MINUTE RECESS TO ALLOW THE NEXT APPLICANT TO SET UP PLANS. COMMISSION CONCURRED. CHAIRMAN SPIEGEL CALLED FOR A SEVEN MINUTE RECESS AT 8 : 45 P.M. -- THE MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 8 : 56 P.M. E. Case Nos . GPA 92-1, C/Z 92-5, PP 92-8, TT 27673, PM 27634 - GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Applicant � Request for approval of a general plan amendment from medium density residential to planned district commercial , change of zone from PR-7 to PC-2 , precise plan, subdivision, parcel map, and Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for a 304 ,422 square foot retail commercial center on 39 acres at the northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Country Club Drive. Mr. Drell noted that originally this plan included a small residential subdivision on its north boundary that was later deleted and this plan before commission did not have a subdivision. There was no residential component. He reviewed the history of the project and how it came to the city. Over the last two years staff heard rumors of a Walmart wanting to come to Palm Desert. There were many preliminary contacts and at each contact staff tried to discourage the developer and property owner from bringing such a project to the city. There had been previous proposals at this corner--a Target center was proposed four 24 ~ MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 ` or five years ago, and in each case staff informed the developer that this was one of the most congested intersections in the city and that any plan that would consider bringing in a major retail complex would have to solve that traffic problem and staff felt that was insurmountable for any one project to deal with. When staff heard Walmart was going into La Quinta and Cathedral City, staff felt they took their advise and went on either side of Palm Desert and did not expect to hear from them again. Staff was wrong. While cities around Palm Desert provided the developer of Walmart centers with significant financial incentives to locate in their cities, Palm Desert not only did not offer financial incentives, but provided definite dis-incentives and discouragements relative to their chances and obstacles they would face if they tried to locate in the city and in particular at this intersection. They persevered. The plan involves two sorts of issues : the first being purely technical with the existing conditions at that intersection of Monterey and Country Club and existing traffic conditions and traffic conditions in the future created by the growth of traffic in general and the contribution of all projects that have been approved around this corner in Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage; and the specific design of the center. The comment when the project �''' appeared to be going forward was they were committing to deal with this traffic problem. It was an intersection that could rival Highway 111 and Monterey as one of the most heavily traveled and one of the three busiest intersections in the valley. This was not a place where more traffic should be attracted to but if they insisted, they should give us a study or plan that both addresses the current existing congestion and mitigating all the new impacts this project would create. Secondly, staff knew that Country Club had a reputation as being primarily a residential area with smaller neighborhood serving commercial centers distributed throughout it. At the present time because of limited development, only the Country Club center had been developed, but in the general plan there was neighborhood serving centers at Portola/Frank Sinatra, Frank Sinatra/Monterey, and Gerald Ford/Monterey. The purpose of the centers was to provide convenient neighborhood services to the large number of residents that would eventually live in that area. Because of the existence of the Monterey Lucky' s Center, staff felt this particular corner did not need to be developed with more commercial . They knew if a center was going to be successful, it had to be extraordinary. It had to somehow be designed so that it would fit with the perception of Country Club as a location for country clubs . rr.► 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 It could not have the overt commercial appearance of the � Lucky' s center, which was developed traditionally with high visibility of the shops and the parking lot. The buildings were close to the street, it was relatively small, but its impact was high. The developer took this direction and hired a traffic engineer, worked with the city' s traffic engineer, and produced what staff felt was one of the most comprehensive traffic studies that had been done in Palm Desert and probably in the whole valley for a project of this type. It studied over 20 different intersections and accounted for the cumulative impacts of over 50 other developments . As much as anything else, the traffic study addressed the regional impacts of development throughout Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage, more than it studied the specific impact of the project. When looking at the total conditions that exist at all the intersections, even Monterey and Country Club, the contribution of this project to the problems at each one of the intersections was relatively small , Sometimes there were straws that break the camel ' s back and it was hard to say who was contributing to the straws--this project or the 58 other projects approved in Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage who pride themselves on the rigger of their own studies . They came back with a document which went through rigorous critique by the city' s traffic � engineer and the traffic study was revised again. The City �i of Rancho Mirage made some points of criticism and it was revised again. The result was the document passed out. On pages 17 and 18 the table showed projected traffic impacts , current existing conditions, what currently approved projects in the area would result in, the mitigations recommended, and what the project would contribute. He said that in virtually every case the most severe problems were created by the existing conditions and the projects that had already been approved, for which there would be virtually no means of mitigation. There was a program in the valley called the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee which implemented a regional transportation plan for which all commercial developments would make a contribution. Unfortunately, that regional program addressed the overall problems, but not the individual problems at local intersections . That left most of these intersections without significant mitigation. It was then studied what impact this project would have with proposed mitigation. In each case with the mitigation being proposed by the study with this project, conditions and traffic flow through the major intersections would be better with the project than without the project. The most seriously impacted intersection in the whole study was Monterey and Country Club. With the Full buildout of all of ; 26 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 `� the existing approved developments in the area, in approximately 1995 there would be a traffic level F. To his knowledge there was no planned mitigation from CVAG or any other public agency to mitigate the impact of that intersection. The project included the buildings, parking lots, onsite developments, as well as complete redesign and reconstruction of all four legs of the Monterey/Country Club intersection, which would address all impacts from this project, and was 13� of the traffic . Traffic going east on Country Club and turning south on Monterey, that traffic would be mitigated by the project as defined. There would be dual-left turns at each leg, three lanes of through traffic, exclusive right-turn lanes going north from westbound Country Club similar to Monterey and Dinah Shore at the Price Club. This project included addressing both the existing problems , including those in Rancho Mirage, and itself . From a technical point of view, while this project would add traffic and cars through that intersection, the report concluded that the technical analysis of delay and level of service would be less after the project was built than today, and surely delayed less than if the property remained vacant and the natural growth of traffic continued or if the project developed as residential and natural growth of traffic continued. He said that staff has found that the traffic ""' studies in that they are speculative in nature in trying to predict the future, had been fairly accurate and to a certain extent might even over-state the problem. When the Price Club/Home Club center went in there was a general perception that there would be chaos at that intersection because of that commercial center. The reality was that there was almost an imperceptible impact from that center on the intersection. The major traffic on these large arterials was the result of through traffic going in one direction at the same time--usually commuters either going to and from the city, to the college during school, from Palm Desert to Rancho Mirage and other destinations . It was not a result of local traffic going to a specific neighborhood serving use. A project like this and the Price Club attracted traffic fairly uniformly throughout the day, therefore the impact of what would appear to be a greater number of trips spread over a 15-18 hour period was far fewer trips concentrated during the commuting hours in the morning or afternoon. Rnother example was the Palm Desert Town Center at one million square feet. It did not have a material impact on the Monterey/Hiqhway 111 intersection. Most people traveling down either of those roads were not going to the Town Center, they were going to destinations far away, because these are arterial highways and their main traffic volume were the +... 27 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 long-distance specifically timed commutes . From a technical r1 point of view the plan proposed by the developer appeared to satisfy staff ' s concerns of addressing the existing problem and mitigating their own problem. In addition to the Monterey/Country Club intersection, other intersections listed on page 28 of the study that were significantly impacted were addressed and mitigation measures recommended. The specific responsibility of that mitigation was assigned to the development relative to the volume of traffic which the project contributed to--those intersections included both Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage and their impacts ranged from as low as 2� for Bob Hope and Dinah Shore to a high of 15� for Portola/Country Club. The report attempted to estimate what mitigation expenses would be for those intersections to achieve what they felt was the ideal level of service. The report also assigned a dollar responsibility for the mitigation of all the intersections and the project included the payment of those mitigation fees for each one of the intersections based upon a mutually agreed upon total project intersection improvement cost, which would be negotiated between the City of Palm Desert and the City of Rancho Mirage. Thirdly, the project would contribute to the normal traffic mitigation which was the TUMF fee. When the system was set up that was the only mitigation a project would be responsible for, plus the improvements directly adjacent to � the project, which would be the building of curbs and gutters . The total mitigation expense for this project including contribution to the surrounding intersections and TUMF fee will be between $2 million and $2 . 5 million. It meant that it would solve the problem at this intersection, it also meant that the valley as a whole had that much more money to devote to solving problems elsewhere. That was the solution for the traffic problem and could be solved with enough money. In most cases projects could not afford to contribute this much money for a problem. The City of Rancho Mirage in their letter to commission dated today said they commonly required this sort of mitigation for project approvals . It was his experience that most developments conditioned this way would never proceed, which was the case in Rancho Mirage and most projects approved with this sort of mitigation never got done and the existing problems never addressed. This project was unique in its ability to bear the burden of this mitigation program. Mr. Drell felt the second issue was whether or not this type of project fit in this area regardless of what it would contribute. Was a commercial center of this size so inherently obtrusive and destructive to the neighborhood 28 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 � character that no matter what was done the negatives would out-weigh the positives . The developer asked staff what could be done to address that problem and staff felt that neighborhood character was a philosophical problem. Other than making it invisible and not like a shopping center could they address the concerns of the residents who saw their area as a residential area, not a commercial development. The developer asked what could be done; staff said that normal setbacks in commercial zones were 32 feet and instructed them to make them 100 feet. They agreed. He indicated there was a problem with commercial centers on the back ends and a Iot of architecture was usually put on the front and sides, and the backs were loading areas; that back end had to be invisible--he did not want anyone to be able to see it from the surrounding areas . They agreed. He told them the architecture could not look like a Walmart; it had to look like the best example of any commercial development that had been done in the valley. They hired a preeminent Palm Desert architect mainly known for building very expensive homes and he designed the center. Mr. Drell told them the landscaping had to be extraordinary. The developer went out and got an option to buy a whole date palm grove, not the small trees or the huge ones, but prime 30 to 40 foot producing trees . Each time he asked for something they did it. The result was a ""' center with 100 foot setbacks, three times the normal ones, a date palm grove along Country Club, somewhat less on Monterey but still significant; architecture which could rival any center that had been built in the valley; and a general level of commercial intensity significantly lower than other centers. He said that the project inherently had the advantages and avoided many of the prablems that had plagued the Monterey center across the street. The Monterey center was built on a small site and the buildings had to be pushed right up against existing residences . The greatest impact from the center was on the ones who had to look at the back of the building, hear the trash trucks, and hear the deliveries . The proposed center was not directly located next to any residential use. On the north side was a golf course fairway; on the east side was vacant land; on the west and south sides were streets . Staff was still concerned that even those who looked out onto the golf course paid a lot of money for that view and did not want to look into the back of a commercial center. Therefore staff required the grade and berming to be created in such a way that the line of sights would not intersect those buildings from those fairway mobile homes . As each issue came up, he got lots of suggestion from residents as to their potential objections for a commercial center on this property and relayed every suggestion to the .�.. 29 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 developer. From a technical point of view the project �i incorporated every single possible design element to diminish the intrusive nature of what was a huge shopping center. He felt this design succeeded as well if not better than any he had seen. Mr. Drell noted that the City of Rancho Mirage presented a report to commission analyzing the traffic study and pointing to the impacts identified in the traffic study as evidence of the need for an environmental impact report. The purpose of an environmental impact report was to provide information relative to likely impacts of the project. By virtue of a traffic study being part of an environmental impact report did not give it any more significance of meaning or credibility. The question was did the traffic study adequately address the problem, the mitigation measures, the impacts of the project, and how was the responsibility for those mitigation measures assigned and were they likely to happen. Typically that was the biggest problem because mitigations were so diffuse as to who was responsible. In this particular case the developer was taking responsibility for all of the mitigations which he was responsible for. The more obvious environmental impact that most people associated was the destruction of the environment. This was a pristine area of sand dunes which would be destroyed whether it was because of a golf course, an Annenberg Estate or a commercial development. This valley ri has a system of dealing with that called the Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan which was designed to protect a huge area of similar dune habitat north of I-10 . Each developer of dune habitat south of I-10 contributed to the purchase and management of that preserve. The very existence of that preserve depends on sites like this developing and fees being paid. The development of this site would contribute to the preservation of the sand dunes through the creation of the preserve. In addition to the lizard fee, all associated dune flora and fauna were preserved as a secondary benefit. He said that based upon those technical considerations, the design of the project, the existing conditions at that intersection, the mitigation of both the existing conditions and impacts of the project as included in the traffic study and conditions of approval, staff was recommending approval of the proposal . Commissioner Cox asked Mr. Drell to address the noise pollution. Mr. Drell replied that on table 4-2 on page 44 it showed what the ambient level with project would be and the increase. He said that this was a very noisy environment to begin with because of the traffic volumes at this intersection. The existing noise levels were at 70 decibels . 30 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 "M' At this level the doubling of traffic would produce a 3 decibel increase in noise, and 3 decibels was what was humanly perceptible to notice outside of a laboratory. If the traffic doubled because of this project, the change would be barely noticeable. He said that this was because of the expediential curve that required greater and greater noise to make that noise heard. What was shown was that the typical increase was less than one decibel . Most of the typical increases were eight tenths, two tenths, faur tenths, six tenths-- all of which were far below the range of human hearing to discern. Commissioner Cox noted that this was roadway noise, not noise going into the project, around the back, loading and unloading, and backing up trucks . She asked if there was something in the report to address that. Mr. Drell said that what the report said was that when you are already in a noisy environment, that with the exception of trucks going early in the morning when it was fairly quiet, it would not be possible to discern a car driving at 10 miles per hour in a parking lot and was a quiet vehicle compared to a car traveling 60 miles per hour. The major noise at that intersection was people stopping and starting. Traveling at a slow speed in a parking lot in an already noisy environment contributed virtually nothing, which went back to the desiqn of the rear of the center where the """ loading and unloading would occur. The physical barrier of the berm and the wall and the physical distance between that and the nearest unit, the impact of the traffic on Monterey and Country Club would far overwhelm the impacts of the sound generated by the site itself . A physical barrier of that size was usually fairly effective in stopping that noise. Chairman Spiegel said that if this center did not happen, the flow of traffic at the intersection would deteriorate to F. He asked if that did happen and it did deteriorate to F, what would the city do. Mr. Drell replied that the city would either do nothing, or the city would spend the money to correct the situation. The city's priorities would depend on where money would be spent. At the same time, it would have to be figured out where the money would come from and this project would also be assessed for the cost of redesigning the Monterey Interchange, probably paying for an existing assessment on the existing extension of Monterey and the existing Interchange. But like other traffic problems, at a certain point in time when it becomes so severe that movement just can' t flow, money would have to be spent to correct it. That meant in this case $1 . 5 million would be diverted from some other problem to this intersection. .�.. 31 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 Chairman Spiegel opened the public testimony and asked the �/ applicant to address the commission. MR. FRANK GATLIN, Gatlin Development, complimented Mr. Drell on his detailed presentation. He said that going back to the history of the project, he asked himself the same questions about how one developer could afford to take these kinds of problems and solve them on his own off of one project and how could he accept all the conditions that were placed. For the audience and commission, the way that it was accomplished was through a coordinated effort between two of the most aggressive retailers in America today and that was Von' s Grocery and Walmart Stores . Combined with the landowner reducing the land costs to an acceptable level they were able to put the project together, make it work, and solve the problems without having to ask the city for any assistance. Going back in history, this was a project he looked at six to eight months before really jumping in and going ahead with. He said that he had currently developed about 12 Walmart Centers in the last two and a half years along the I-10 belt and he asked himself why fiqht one that would be so hard--his reason was that his tenant wanted to be here, it was a good site, and would be a good development. It took a lot of � money and guts to tackle all the problems that this project presented. They were told early on about the almost unsolvable traffic problems; that aesthetically that even if they could develop an open air shopping center that would live up to Palm Desert ' s expectations; and the neighborhood impact--could they do it in a way that did not decrease the value of homes and was actually a value. He said that no matter what he did, it would still be a Walmart and a grocery store. He brought this project to the city council about a year ago to a study session and gave a presentation. The way it was presented to council was that if he could solve the traffic problems and aesthetically impress the commission and council in a tasteful way and might be a benefit to the area through jobs, sales tax, as well as aesthetics and traffic solutions . He said that while the council did not vote on it, he left with enough encouragement that if he could solve the problems, they would consider the project and might have favorable support. After that he went to the grocery tenant to get support so that he could put the project together in a manner that would work; then he went to the land owner and asked him similar questions as to what it would take 32 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 +� to make the project work. He got the green light to go forward and started with the traffic study. He noted that traffic was a problem everywhere, but traffic was mitigatable. If enough money and infrastructure was put into it, it might not be perfect, but it could be done. His big question was whether the traffic was mitigatable. He was convinced that he could not only make it better than it was today with his project, but he could improve it with about 50 other projects scheduled to take place in and around Palm Desert by the year 2000 . With that information they set out to design aesthetically one of the most well-done shopping centers in Palm Desert, and anywhere in America to solve those problems. He presented a slide presentation that showed the landscaping, water feature, architectural features, and elevations from all directions . He said that the center was designed to give it a village-like effect. He indicated that the project was designed to sit 22 feet lower than the rear property, which created a berm and a berm wall with a fence on top of that and landscaping to completely buffer the project and make it totally invisible from the rear. The areas were well- screened and the loading areas and turn-arounds were undetectable from the street and about every thought """ that went into the center that was humanly possible was done. The lighting was specially designed to light the parking lot and not the sky. The next problem was the traffic . When a 90 second or greater time delay at an intersection occurred it was rated a level F. This intersection was rated an F minus . There was as high as a two or three minute delay at peak times now. By adding $1 . 5 million into offsite work on that immediate corner, it could be fixed. They had a combination of right-turn lanes in every direction, so when traffic was stacked up on Monterey, right turns could be made. Instead of having one straight-throuqh lane, there were three dedicated lanes continuing straight through combined with dual left-turn lanes . Traffic was not a problem when it was moving down a block, but when it built up at the intersection. If that problem could be solved, that concern was mitigated. With this project and some 50 plus other projects, after the project was completed the level would be down to a D or maybe a C. Down from 90 second three minute delays to approximately 30 second at maximum peak time. A development like this at peak morning traffic wasn't even open or maybe just a few stores would be, but the impact was more toward the afternoon. He said that the traffic study was done ... 33 MINUTES PRLM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 for the city by a traffic engineer the city felt was �i acceptable. They didn' t study just this intersection, but everywhere. He believed that problem was cured. The concern with impact on the local neighborhoods in an area deemed to be multi-family or light residential at seven units per acre that would hold approximately 280 residents or multi-family units at this location. He said that if the Lucky development wasn' t across the street, he would not be applying. Zone changes were made to be able to change areas that had grown around it. They were requested when there was more good from the project than bad, or a situation where the developer had cured problems and made it where it was feasible to do a development. The one concern was how to solve the problems . They tried to analyze each and every residence that would be immediately impacted. People two miles down the road shouldn' t be impacted by the development, but the surrounding ones . A lot of people perceived a development as bringing more traffic to an area, but this development was not designed to pull traffic from 15 or 20 miles . There were already two Walmarts on either side of Palm Desert. This development was designed to be a neighborhood community shopping center to service the local residents . It made no sense for people five and six miles away to come to .,rt that development. The customers would be Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage local customers . He tried to meet with the different groups and met with the community immediately behind it, even though it was not in the City of Palm Desert, and did not leave anyone out just because they were not in the city. They met with that group and walked out of that meeting with the feeling that maybe a lot of people were uninformed and a lot liked the project. He hoped a lot of the negatives had gone away. Another group, by lowering the development down and making it where it couldn' t be seen, they were going to work to put in a path for golf carts on the site and hoped to have ten to 12 spaces for people to come in with their golf carts, charge up free of charge while in the store, and be able to leave. He tried to work it out so that these residents could come there without even hitting the street, even though it was legal to travel on the streets . The other neighborhood was Sagewood, which was across the street. Other than them, he couldn't see any other residences directly impacted by the development. Their big concern was traffic coming in and out of their neighborhood. He was told a lot of traffic making shortcuts from Monterey to 34 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 � Country Club went through their neighborhood and was a big problem. A suggestion was made that if gates were installed zn their subdivision it might solve the problem. He worked on that and made a presentation in their clubhouse, but there was only about 12 people who showed up. At that meeting when he announced the plan to fund the gating, the concern was voiced that right now they have public streets that were being taken care of and maintained by the city, and that they didn' t want any additional burden on their homeowners association. After further study, they determined the cost wasn' t a huge number, it was big, but not huge. It was something that could be supported by going back to the land owner for more help in conjunction with the tenants . It was then decided to get people out to see what the project was and they got a meeting room and set up a space and sent out formal invitations to encourage people to come out. There was about 25$ turnout and they made the offer that they would be willing to put in enough money into their association that would permanently maintain the maintenance of all the streets including slurry, resurfacing, and sweeping on an annual basis and to be able to put the money into the association and let it be invested on a long-term condition where just the '"'" interest alone would cover the maintenance of those items . He said they were willing to have the project conditioned that they work this out with Sagewood. If the number was determined to be higher, they would match whatever number it took if it was within reason. They would get two or three consultants and determine what that number was to be able to permanently reserve to solve that problem. He said he felt a little better when he left that meeting. He indicated there was a group of developers, land owner, and tenants that were basically willing to do whatever it took. Chairman Spiegel noted there was a large area in Palm Desert that was zoned retail that was still vacant and asked why Walmart picked this particular location ( i .e. Highway 111 Ahmanson Center) . Mr. Gatlin said that one reason was that because the project was not going forward now, and because the property was priced too high. It was not just a little bit too high, but a lot too high. When adding those numbers without any mitigations, he would be before commission asking for Palm Desert to share the sales tax and give back several million dollars to even have a r.�. 35 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 chance of making the project work. It just would not � pencil-out on that location. When he started looking toward the freeway, it started infringing on the Cathedral City store. He added that they went in front of the economic development committee and got unanimous support from them. The architectural commission also gave their unanimous support. Chairman Spiegel asked if anyone wished to address the commission in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . Chairman Spiegel noted tha� if comments were the same as comments already given, it was not necessary for everyone to speak unless they had something different to add. MR. KENNETH GLASSMAN, President of Friends of the Environment of Palm Springs . He said that the commission was being asked to review a proposed development at the corner of Country Club and Monterey by Gatlin Development Company. This project was 304 , 000 square feet and would have a Walmart Store, supermarket, six shops, and five restaurants . It would be built on 36 acres . He noted that the Marshall ' s shopping center was 15 . 3 acres and the proposed center at Cook and Country Club called the Carver Project was 25 acres . The project would have 1,800 parking spaces . The land ar was presently zoned medium density PR-7 residential and the commission was being asked to rezone the land to PC- 2 commercial . When the Gatlin organization purchased the land or gained an option on it they knew that residential zoning applied. Now they were trying to have the property up-zoned to commercial which would increase the value of the land and would allow them to build a commercial development. The corner of Monterey and Country Club was now one of the busiest in the Coachella Valley and because of the concerns about the impact of the new project on traffic and circulation, a traffic study was initially done in a small way on January 14 , 1992 supplemented in October, 1992 and expanded in January of 1993 . To the best of his knowledge, the firm was selected by the developer and the study was paid for by the developer. The traffic study included cumulative impacts for 56 other projects planned or approved in Palm Desert or in Rancho Mirage and provided current statistics as well as projections for the year 2000 . Some of the statistics were the Walmart project would generate an additional 20,200 daily two-way trips if approved and built . If the project was developed residential, only approximately 36 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 '� 2 ,500 daily trips would be generated, a difference of almost 18, 000 . He said that he took the figures from documents provided by the City of Palm Desert to him. The projection for the year 2000 on page 71-A exhibit 40 of the traffic impact analysis report, the following daily traffic volumes in the year 2000 were expected to impact this intersection. "Country Club east of Monterey - 51, 800 daily trips; Country Club west of Monterey - 32 ,400 trips; Monterey north of Country Club - 48,200; Monterey south of Country Club 44 , 300 trips . " He said that to put the figures in perspective, the existing daily traffic volume on Highway 111 between Fred Waring and Bob Hope was approximately 37, 000 . He felt the figures were horrifying. The staff report which recommended approval of the project stated that the developer would be able to mitigate the volume of traffic by the addition of more lanes, traffic signals, striping, and internal signing. Because the project required a general plan amendment and a zone change, there could be no existing environmental impact report which might be utilized in environmental assessment. Instead of ordering an EIR on the project, staff recommended a mitigated negative declaration. Friends of the Environment disagreed. The traffic and '""' circulation impacts alone he felt "cried out" for an EIR. He was prepared to cite particular CEQA regulations to support his position. He noted that staff also stated that the developer would contribute $2 million or more dollars to improve the traffic circulation and resolve other mitigations . It was also stated that if the project was denied, and residential development occurred, the traffic congestion would increase because there would not be sufficient funds to improve the level of service and safety conditions at this corner and he was gratified to hear Chairman Spiegel ask the question about what to da if this continued. He said that Friends of the Environment was confident that the cities of Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage, and also CVAG would try to cooperate to use available funds including Measure A tax dollars and TUMF fees to see that traffic conditions were brought down to level LOS D and eventually LOS C and that the safety concerns of the citizens would be satisfied eventually. He said that staff stated that the general plan amendment and zone change to commercial designation was consistent with the general plan policy to provide convenient neighborhood services at major intersections . Friends of the Environment disagreed. This was not a r.• 37 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 neighborhood convenience center and because of its size � it exceeded the PC-2 zone standards . There was no shortage of commercial and retail facilities in the area to service the needs of the residents . Highway 111 was a short distance, as well as Price Club and the related development at Dinah Shore and Monterey. The new center was proposed at Cook and Country Club with Ralphs and there was a Lucky' s center across the street. In addition, almost all the land between I-10 and Country Club Drive on Monterey in Palm Desert was zoned for future commercial development. On page 25 of the traffic report dated January 29, 1993, they called for widening Monterey to six lanes, three in each direction just like Highway 111 all the way from I-10 to Highway 111 . If this went forward, he felt there would be another Highway 111 going down Monterey. Friends of the Environment were also concerned about a potential increase in crime, accidents, and vandalism. The staff report stated that there was no correlations with increased crime when commercial development was created next to residential . This might be true, but he didn't see anything in the reports that he was given from any law enforcement agency verifying this . He felt there was no question that more people, not bad people, congregating into an area would bring with them more ,�,� autos, more car accidents, more break-ins, more graffiti, and more vandalism. The Planning Commission of Palm Desert was a recommending body to the city council regarding proper land use within the guidelines of the general plan. In reaching land use decisions it must evaluate the impacts on people and property. Therefore, Friends of the Environment asked the planning commission to deny the request for a general plan amendment and zone change because: 1) the site was not appropriate; Z) it would attract significant additional traffic to an already congested intersection; 3) it would have a negative impact on adjacent residents; 4 ) it would reduce residential property values in the area and, perhaps, the most compelling reason was the large majority of residents in the neighborhood didn' t want it . He indicated that people in Sagewood, people in Suncrest, Lake Mirage, Palm Desert Greens, Silver Sands, Wilshire Palms, on Vista Dunes and Vista Sol have all been contacted by Friends of the Environment through their presidents and organizations and was led to believe that the large majority of the people were opposed. He thanked the commission for listening to him and hoped that because this was such an important item 3 8 '� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 �•• and emotional item that no decision would be reached and the item continued after hearing everyone ' s comments . He requested that because of the size of the project and the emotion relating to it that when the meeting was scheduled at a future meeting, that this item be placed on the agenda as the only item because he felt that a lot of people, particularly the older ones, who at a certain time in the evening would not come out when it was after 10 : 00 p.m. and that within the confines of the commission 's priorities that this be scheduled as a public hearing by itself . MR. RON WILCOX, 77 Lake Shore in Lake Mirage, stated that he was president of the homeowners association. He said that he was quite impressed and had almost been convinced that 20,200 cars a day would not create more traffic, and there would be no pollution and no noise. He said that in good faith and in good conscience �hat he was a police afficer for ten years--mitigation meant that the street was widened and more cars were put on it. An increase in stop lights and the stop lights worked faster, more speed and more noise was created. He felt that 20,200 additional cars could not be put on Monterey and Country Club and not have an effect. A `r�' project of this magnitude and size could not be made to disappear. He said that they bought their homes and were the adjacent neighbors . They had a large investment in Lake Mirage and most of them put all of their money in the property and most lived there year- round. He invited commission to see their community and he would take them for a boat ride--there was a 25 acre lake with quiet, electric boats . They go out every evening with the drinks to watch the moon go down. On the 4th of July they had a party and watched the fire works . It was quiet and serene, which was why they bought there. They also bought there knowing that there was a general plan. He said that they had two meetings in the last month pertaining to the secondary issue on Country Club regarding a re-zoning. In their community meetings he thought that almost everyone consulted a general plan and relied on the fact that there was going to be residential communities around them. Not commercial . That was why he purchased in that location. Looking back at the history of Country Club Drive, it was his feeling and his association' s feeling, that if this project was approved, they didn' t just lose the corner, but all of Country Club north and east of it. A dilemma would be created. He said that as he walked +�.. 39 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 about the city hall facility, he saw a lot of � accommodations on the wall--one from La Quinta and other cities regarding Palm Desert' s cooperation with other cities . He noted they were not voters in the city and did not have a strong voice, but it was time to act like neighbors . He lived and worked as a police officer in the city of Torrance and watched that city be destroyed by projects like this one. He said that at the South Bay Mall at Christmas time it was a two-day journey. This was what he felt Palm Desert would produce for them at Christmas and holiday time. He did not feel they would be able to get out of their project, or even turn right. They had a small community and this was a chance to keep it pristine, clean and nice. He wanted to see residences and walled communities in that location. He asked that they be considered, as well as additional traffic and crime, and this not be made a done-deal at this time. MR. COLE BIERACK, a resident in Sagewood, said that this project was packed with emotion for them because of what happened to them when the Lucky' s came into existence and what they were led to believe versus what they suffered from now was night and day. His family looked at the property that Gatlin was trying to develop not � from emotion but from the standpoint that sooner or later something would be developed there. Something that the city would have to be proud of and that they as residents had to live with for the rest of their lives . Sagewood development, while it did not abut the development, was directly across the street and they would be tremendously impacted by it. The developer proposed gates for them, which they considered once before, and providing funds for them to maintain their streets . He appreciated that, but also looked at the other aspects of the development. Sooner or later someone would develop that property; it was not an ideal place for residents . They already had an apartment complex just to the east, Lucky' s facing them, and if the property had to be developed--and it was not ideal for residents being adjacent to a major highway, which it would become--it had to be decided what was best for the community and for them at Sagewood. If the property had to be developed, what the developer proposed was the best that he could see right now. The developer met everything that the planning commission asked of him and if they had to go with something, it should be with the best. He felt that if Mr. Gatlin' s proposal worked for 40 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 � the city, and everyone might not like it right now, but in two or three years from now without another Lucky' s, they would need that shopping center. He said that his neighbors knew how bad it was during the weekends with the traffic and trying to get into there. He indicated that everyone in his development hesitated to go there unless they walked--it was that bad for them. If the community was gated, and if the center was built with the landscaping proposed, he didn't think the city could find a better development. It might not be pleasant for everyone, but progress could not be stopped, so it should be addressed and the best development obtained. MS . HELEN MANCO, owner of the northwest corner of Country Club and Monterey, the block all the way to Vista Dune. She said that in her estimation, there was no finer development than this development that was being proposed. She had never seen it before, but felt it would be a tremendous improvement for that corner. The corners looked like motley backyards where people were dumping things . When something like this was developed, it was something to be proud of and as far as the gentleman who thought the world would come to an end with a commercial development like this, he should get '""' himself an island because there no such a thing as controlling the future of traffic, business and development. She said that she had been here 30 years and owned this property for 15 years . She gave an acre of the land to the county to put in Monterey so that there would be transportation on Monterey. Her idea was to give the developer the zoning and the development would enhance the whole area and the city would benefit from it financially. MRS . MARSHA DORFNER, Vice President of Sagewood Homeowners Association, and a real estate appraiser, as was her husband. She said that they looked into the gating on a personal level before Walmart was ever �alked about and she and the president spoke to public works about it and came away with the impression that it was not feasible to have gates at Monterey because there was not enough setback room. That was approximately one year ago. She was asking that this be figured out before a decision was made. From a professional opinion, she felt the development would bring down the property values . With the gates as proposed for them, they would mitigate the impacts somewhat . The noise wouldn't be stopped, but at least they would not have ..� 41 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 people browsing through their neighborhood. She was � asking that the commission find out about the gates before a decision was made. MR. EDWARD L. MAZZURI , 111 Lake Shore Drive, asked the traffic engineer if there were any studies done as to what would happen if it rained and closed Monterey. He said he was curious as to the depth of the report. Mr. Drell answered that rain had not been addressed in the report . Mr. Mazzuri said that the commission should be realistic. He informed commission that he was a recent resident to the valley, but he had enough sense to know that in rainy weather he could not go down Monterey to Highway 111 . He said that if there wasn't a group that could figure out what would be done if it rained, then the report wasn' t worth anything. Mr. Drell said that the city was currently acting to solve the problem by having a bridge over Monterey so that it wouldn' t be closed. Mr. Mazzuri asked when the bridge was going in and who � would pay for it. Mr. Folkers replied CVAG might be able to help the two cities . The bridge was under design right now and the plan showed that if the bridge had been started in February, it would have been completed in December, however some redesign of the existing plans was necessary, so it would probably be February or March of 1994 . , Mr. Mazzuri said that there was a situation here where he couldn' t go down Monterey, so all the traffic flow studies had to be increased for rainy days, which nobody bothered to do. Chairman Spiegel clarified for Mr. Mazzuri that according to Mr. Folkers the bridge would be done in approximately one year. Mr. Mazzuri asked what would happen if the bridge was not done. Mr. Folkers said it would be the same situation that the city faced over the last 30 or 40 years . 42 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 �•• Mr. Mazzuri asked what would happen with the additional project and Monterey could not be driven upon to Highway 111 . Mr. Drell replied that people probably wouldn' t be shopping at that center at that time. He said that when these closures occur, the city gets tremendous complaints from merchants on the wrong side of the channel that their business decreased significantly. Mr. Mazzuri said that he could have brought out 15 instances that evening when this group was totally unprepared to make a decision. He felt that Mr. Gatlin did a good job and was smooth, but there was a tremendous amount of answers that weren' t there. He said that he had only one question and knew that Monterey closes when it rains--nobody told him anything about it and he doubted the veracity of all of the reports . Until he got a report that told the commission what happened to all this traffic if Monterey was closed and when the bridge was being built, that project should not go in. He felt it was premature and more study was needed. ""r' MR. SANFORD SKLAR, resident of Suncrest Country Club, said that his comments were based upon the traffic impact analysis report dated January 29 . He felt the report was deficient and did not address the effect of traffic on those residents that were closest to the proposed project. Specifically residents at 5uncrest, San Tropez, Las Serenas, and Sagewood. In the 125 pages of text, exhibits and tables, there was no mention as to what mitigation measures would be taken to provide exit and entry to these areas . Some of the numbers in the report he felt were suspect. The October 28, 1992 report had 25 traffic generating projects integrated into the report. The current report had 56 such projects integrated into the report. The prior report had a contribution of 19 ,730 trips per day to the perspective project. The later version had an increase to 20, 200 trips per day. He didn't understand how an increase of 125 identified traffic generating projects could contribute only an increase of 2 . 38% to the trips per day at the proposed project. He felt the report was also deficient on page 2 in that it permits access to the project from four locations . Three of the locations were called restricted left-turns . The plan didn't fully consider the potential traffic hazard caused by 18 � 43 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLRNNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 wheel trucks supplying the proposed project . These � trucks and trailers would be required to cross four Zanes of opposing traffic onto two of the busiest arteries in the area. The report was deficient in pages 8-11 in the section on traffic forecasting methodology and used general terms such as "the traffic generation potential of the site is estimated by using appropriate vehicle trip generating equations or rates for the desired land use" . "These origins and destinations are based on the demographics census data and existing travel patterns in the area. " "Traffic assignment was typically based on minimization of traffic time which may or may not involve the shortest route depending on prevailing operating conditions and travel speed. " Mr. Sklar felt these were great words, but noted there was no mention in the report as to the accuracy of the methodology. He asked where the hard data was to substantiate the traffic forecasting theory and what had been the measured results of previous projects by Gatlin Development Company and their consultants for a site similar to the proposed area. He felt the report was deficient also on pages 9 and 10 . The Institute of Transportation Engineers, ITE, Trip Generation Manual was cited in the report. A formula was given for percentage of pass-by trips . The percentage of pass-by � trips was defined as "an equation for estimating shopping center' s attraction over the course of a typical evening peak hour" . He said that the report somehow used this formula for attracting trips to a shopping center to decrease the forecasted evening hour proposed trips by 360; however, he noted that all of the functions of the formula were not identified. He felt it would be interesting to learn what the magical functions were that could reduce traffic to a proposed project by 25� . He stated again that the report was deficient on page 11, the trip generated forecast comparison of residential versus commercial section compared PR-7 and PC-2 zoned uses . He noted that PR-7 would generate 2 ,460 two-way trips per day. PC-2 would generate 20,200 two-way trips per day. He stated that his represented an increase in traffic of 721� . "The fees which would be paid by the developer would more than offset the relative change in traffic due to the project. " He asked how the payment of fees could mitigate a 721� increase in traffic and a substantial decrease to the quality of life of the nearby residents and all motorists who use the Monterey/Country Club intersections . He indicated that the deficiencies he 44 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 � noted required asking questions : 1 ) What if the proposed area traffic mitigations, pages 23-26, did not function as planned? 2 ) What correlation did the city have as to how well the traffic forecasting methodology had worked on previous Gatlin Development Company projects? 3) If the system did not operate, who would be stuck with a horrendous traffic congestion problem? He felt that if the proposed project were approved with all the objections, the City of Palm Desert and the residents in the immediate area must have mandatory performance guarantees . He strongly recommended that a system of monetary penalties based on measured traffic performance become part of any agreement between the City of Palm Desert and Gatlin Development Company. He noted that Mr. Gatlin brought his presentation to them on February 15 and he saw the model and looked at all the trees and was impressed. He said that he made a phone call to the Coachelia Valley Water District and spoke to someone in the office of Dave Parkinson, a water management specialist, and found out that palm trees were on the extremely high end of the water usage plant scale and that the Coachella Valley Water District would be reluctant to approve any palm trees in any site. They recommended drought resistant, water efficient plants "'" and trees instead. MR. WALTER PENNEY, 73-077 Palm Desert Greens North, stated that a number of residents took exception that this was already put in cement, because everything read "we have, we will, etc . " He said that the reason he was addressing the commission was that he felt they were not considering the bottom line: Walmart had one store in Cathedral City and one in Indio, and when going through the middle west, the commission would see how many businesses were being put out of business because they were such great merchandisers . He asked if anyone had asked the mall what they felt about this shoppinq center. MR. ED WEST, 43-725 Carmel Circle in Palm Desert, said that yes, Walmart was a great merchandiser, but he had a couple of points he wanted to bring up. There might be 25,000 generated traffic trips per day and sincerely hoped that Walmart would draw that many people because that was approximately five percentage of the whole population of the area based on 400, 000 people. He noted that a comment was made earlier by Commissioner Jonathan that on another item he felt that the city ... 45 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 should seize the moment before voting on another issue. � Mr. West felt that it was time to seize the moment and here was an opportunity to have a developer develop the highway and give the city a safer, wider place to drive. He did not feel that anyone would dispute that the 25, 000 trips per day sounded ludicrous . He did not feel there were that many cars per day or that Walmart would generate it, but if they were going to generate that much business, he would love it. He wanted a nice street to go with it and the project built so that ten years from now if there was an interstate from the highway to 74 with a nice six lanes going either direction, everyone would feel safer. If everyone hated the concept of the Monterey buildout, he asked if everyone wanted to take their money for the highway and to build Cook Street over the wash. He felt this was an opportunity. The project aesthetically looked good, it was 22 feet down so that nobody could really see it, and that the road would be improved to take it from an F rating to a D and possibly a C. He stated that he was impressed. He felt the result would be a pretty project, with a facade something like the city hall, which looked like the same architect did it. When talking about traffic gridlock, he asked how many people shopped at Lucky' s on Country Club at 4 : 00 p.m. to 5 : 00 y� p.m. He said that there was gridlock in the lanes there and felt another grocery store was needed. Lucky' s was always full . He stated that his wife was so in favor of the project that she took her own time and walked about and got 22 signatures from friends and neighbors, all residents of Palm Desert. He submitted it to commission. He said that his wife was tired of driving to La Quinta or Cathedral City to shop at a Walmart. MR. JOH�IIE GARY, an architect, stated that he used to do this for a living and pointed out that a consultant could be hired to prove anything. He also indicated that he did a lot of environmental impacts in the Coachella Valley, his client was the water district, so he knew what the people had been talking about . He said that he lived in Suncrest and walked his dogs all over, usually around Lucky' s at 6 : 00 a.m. to 6 : 30 a.m. and he saw six to ten big trucks unloading and making loud noises; he smelled the restaurants getting ready to make donuts, and this went on all day for the people who bought homes in Sagewood. He said that when looking at the map, they shoved Walmart right next to his house and their golf course green was less than 100 feet wide, so 46 � MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 '� he would be 120 feet from five fast food stores that started cooking at 6 :00 a.m. He indicated that anyone facing five fast food markets, plus a trash operation 100 feet away would vote against the project. He asked that commission consider the human impact. He said his solution was that with all the cammercially zoned land available, they shouldn' t be picked on. MS . ARLENE HONEYCUTT, 165 Lake Shore Drive in Lake Mirage, said that the applicant did not come to talk to them at Lake Mirage. She said that she wanted to address the human element. She was a widow and spent all of her money and brought it here to the desert so that she could buy on Country Club Drive, which was probably the finest real estate end of the business . From one end of Highway 111 to the other end of Country Club there were some of the finest country clubs there. She hoped Palm Desert was going to cooperate with Rancho Mirage as they have in the past, and they continued to see Palm Desert as part of them. She said the area was a continuation of some of the finest real estate and did not know why the city would be interested in entertaining a commercial division on residential land, unless it was the underlying bottom line of the dollar. """'' She felt the Desert Springs Marriott would not be any happier than the residents of Lake Mirage, Thunderbird or the Springs . Also, when people think of the Coachella Valley, they thought of a lifestyle. She was talking about a lifestyle with serenity, loveliness, no crime, and she moved here from the San Fernando Valley, where there was a shopping center across from her house and a liquor store and gas station. It made an impact on her children and she was willing to move and come here to get away from that. She did not want it "caty corner" from Lake Mirage and did not want to have to deal with it. Also, she felt the trust of the council was to keep things in a planned community. If she saw that the city was able because of the fact that certain people could come in with un-numbered amounts of money and presented it to them, and they changed the zoning, that said that she could not trust them. And the next piece of land down the street that was bigger and better than Walmart who wanted to come in could come in and do the same thing. There would be another Los Angeles and San Francisco, not a Palm Desert or Rancho Mirage. MR. JACK CORZINE, 73-751 Joshua Tree in Palm Desert, stated that he was an active member of the chamber of .r.. 47 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 commerce and enjoyed that position, He had taken the �„r► city tour with the city manager and various staff and advised the audience to do the same. He said that he appreciated the fact that this city had been planned with an excellent plan in mind and had used people like Nordstrom to come in as a member of a committee to develop the year 2000 program. He said that the city had a way they were going and was second to none in the country. He indicated he left Newport Beach and moved there in 1962 and had a nice house, when he heard an airplane one day. They said not to worry about it, because they would only hear small airplanes--not a big airport. That turned into John Wayne Airport. That city sold out. He said that Palm Desert has not sold out and it has a program that was a residential area. He indicated that tonight was not whether or not the commission was going to give into Mr. Walmart and his wishes, but whether they were going to stick to the city' s plan. He felt the plan was good, with the corridor down Highway 111 with beautiful new stores and businesses that they were trying to bring along and make them successful in a year that had seen failures that would probably not be seen in this country again. Big names had gone down and were still going down. He stated that he was not saying that Walmart was bad, but � they could give lessons to people around them on how to survive after they moved in because little businesses will fail and couldn't stand up to their pressure. He asked that commission remember what the city started with and kept with it. MS . ANNE GOLDMAN, 40-355 Sugarbush Court in Sagewood. She said that she moved here from Wisconsin and before that Michigan. The reason she bought in Sagewood was because it resembled most the communities she left behind. It had sidewalks, a private area for children to play, and felt her children would be safe there and was reassured by the realtor that everything was residential around her. She felt this was a zoning issue and had nothing good or bad to say about Walmart. She wouldn't care if it was a Sears that moved in there, she just didn' t want anything to move in that location and for it to stay residential, and to keep it the way it looked now as long as possible. For the noise level, yes , it was already noisy and they almost didn' t buy there because of the noise. She felt that adding more noise would make it noisier. She also didn' t "buy into" , 4 8 '� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 '� having the gates; she wanted the property to stay the way it was . MS. SANDY ROBINSON, 75-618 MacLaughlin Circle, stated that she was in favor of the project. She felt it was ridiculous that Palm Desert ' s tax dollars were going to all the surrounding cities. Street improvements were needed, parks were needed, and she had to take her son to La Quinta to play basketball because there weren' t enough parks, basketball courts, or baseball diamonds for the children to play in and felt those dollars should be kept here. She said that she cuts through Sagewood because the intersection was horrible. She stated that she would not shop at Lucky' s because of the intersection. She had four letters in favor of the project from Palm Desert residents and one was in Palm Desert Greens . She hoped the decision was made in favor of the project and the tax dollars kept in Palm Desert. She said that she lived on Walmart' s side of Country Club and she could not get to a store when the streets washed out and would like to be able to just go down the street to go to the store, or to just go to dinner at a restaurant that was close. She felt that something was needed on their side of the wash. +�.► MR. MEL LIEBERSON, 39-863 Reche Lane in Palm Desert Greens, said that he submitted petitions with hundreds of names against Walmart and wanted those petitions entered into the minutes of this meeting and wanted the commission to enter into the minutes all the phone calls and letters received pro and con and the ratio aqainst Walmart entered into the minutes . He added that he had the pleasure of working with Mr. Ernest Hahn, the biggest developer of shopping centers in the world, and he said "if it looked like a Walmart, smelled like a Walmart, it was a Walmart and would lower the neighborhood" . MS. ANNE CLIFFORD, resident of Suncrest Country Club, stated that the project looked very nice with the beautiful trees but nobody mentioned that they shoved the whole back along Suncrest Country Club. She said they bought there because there were beautiful views and could look at Eisenhower at night with lights in the distance and could go out at night and the lights in the distance were lovely. They could go out at night and it was quiet. Now they would have lights and trucks which would be there early in the morninq or late at night so �.. 49 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 they wouldn't interfere with the movement of traffic . � She asked about her street because they have to go out onto Country Club and before this ever happened she felt it was worth her life to get out there and with the added traffic no one had considered them. She stated that the intersection would not help them at all because they would have more cars if they were going to go to Walmart and did not understand because there was lovely property out on Monterey by Gerald Ford where they could dead-end the street and it would not impact anyone. She did not know why it should be in a location where so many people would be effected. Residents bought with the idea that nothing would be there because the city said it would be residential . She said she would like the commission would consider what they had to lose because of this project. MR. BOB SMITH, Manager at Lucky's Store at Monterey and Country Club, informed commission that he lived in Cathedral City. He felt that what was heard tonight was that this was an area of serenity and tranquility and people moved here to get away from the hustle and bustle and to raise their families and enjoy their later years in a peaceful, clean environment. He said that Lucky' s was going to build another store to try and take some of ,�,� the traffic away from the already overloaded store on Monterey and Country Club. The new store would be at Country Club and Washington. Several customers told him they would shop at the one on Washington because they had to drive so far to get to the one in Palm Desert. For some of the residents that were concerned about the overrun of customers, they would not have to deal with that once the Washington store went up. He noted there would also be a Ralph' s at the corner of Cook and Country Club and that would take more of the traffic away from that intersection. He said they would get back to a neighborhood community store. He indicated that when looking at the Von's Pavilion in Rancho Mirage, above the top of their building they had graffiti on it already. There were some broken windows in the shopping center and those kinds of things would be attracted to that neighborhood once another retail center was developed, because more people would be drawn in and there would be an environment that would come as an attraction to that shopping center. Another issue was that along with competition they would have to split the pie up and in some cases some retailers could not make it or survive. There would be some shut-down ` 5 0 °1r __ _ _ _ _ _ -.. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 "� buildings and paper in the windows . He asked if the city really wanted a community where they would have to look at cardboard and paper in the windows with shut- down spaces . He said that maybe even Lucky stores could not make it if another supermarket was put across the street. He asked if the city wanted a shopping center that would have that negative effect. He recommended that the commission look at it, review it, and take the neighborhood comments into consideration and there was commercial property all the way to the freeway. He felt the people here expected ta have a community that they could call their own that would be peaceful and beautiful . MR. JOE SWAIN informed commission that he has lived in the Coachella Valley for 16 years . He said that he came from Huntington Beach area where gridlock was something that was just lived with. Mr. Swain indicated that when he came out to the desert he worked for Sunrise Company and they taught him a lot of things about being sensitive to the environment because they typically came into rural areas and they were sensitive to issues . He noted that when Rancho Las Palmas went in the neighbors had equestrian communities gathering nearby that didn' t '�" want condos right next to them. They provided buffering on fairways that mitigated a substantial portion of that. He said that the commission was looking at a project that was also going above and beyond the call of duty from the normal standard. He felt that was socially responsible from pleasing aesthetics of the project and how it integrates, the quantity of palm trees, and asked if the palm trees were coming from out of the area or from the Coachella Valley already and grown here in Palm Desert. He felt the trees would be beautiful . As far as the quantity of water they use, he did not feel it would be any different from Palm Desert or La Quinta or another location that they were coming from. He said that this project was correct with the buffering, the architectural ingredients, and would be beautiful and the commission would be right to approve it , MR. TIM BARTLETT, 73-382 Salt Cedar in Palm Desert, said that he was a commercial reaZ estate broker in Palm Desert. He said that he was in favor of the project, but one topic was traffic . He indicated that traffic studies were designed on peak performance of a center. Looking at the drawings, the tenants would not be r.�. 51 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 drawing people from Palm Springs, through Cathedral City ,�,� past the Walmart to come here. They were not drawing people from Indio or La Quinta past that Walmart there. The market area was basically Palm Desert and a portion of Rancho Mirage. That was where their clients were and that was why they wanted to be here. Looking at existing residences, most of the current residential development was south of Country Club. Most live in that area. Future growth and traffic studies were designed to accommodate future growth that would be in the north sphere. Those people if they were not coming to a commercial development on Country Club, were coming down Monterey to a commercial development on Highway 111, which would generate greater traffic down Monterey. What Walmart was asking for was a centrally located commercial development which would not feed the existing residences south of Country Club, but the future residents that would go north of Country Club. People were coming to the valley because it was a great place to live. His conservative estimate was that the population would double in the next three or four years . He believed that Walmart had created a first class shopping center and the planning staff had imposed very stringent conditions for their development through setbacks and landscaping. He felt the city was in an �„� opportunity to seize a very good development that was aesthetically pleasing, mitigates the traffic problems , creates tax revenue for the city and serviced the community. Walmart did their homework. They did not come here because they liked the location, but because there clients and patrons were here in Palm Desert. He believed they had gone way above and beyond the requirements set by most cities . This was not just another Walmart. The current Walmarts that currently exist in La Quinta, the traffic mitigation, noise and 20, 000 cars were not there today because the population did not support it. The traffic was based on a future development and most of that future development was in the north sphere, so the traffic would not be coming down from the southern area, but from the northern sphere. He was in favor of the project and felt the city was in a position to build a fine shopping center. MR. GERHARD BEFELD, owner of Suncrest Country Club, which borders the proposed project on the north and east. He noted that in the traffic report in the executive summary on page 5, they pointed out that their assumptions were not based on Cook being completed in 52 � __ MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 '� any way. He found that disturbing because of having first-hand knowledge of what happened on Bob Hope once Monterey was opened. That used to be a tremendous traffic problem there and because of the better freeway exit, a lot of traffic left. He said that his point in bringing that up was that he didn 't believe that even if nothing happened that Monterey and Country Club would turn into an F intersection because of other things the city was planning. There was a lot of traffic that would go down Cook to the service industriai area. He felt this project was about traffic and mitigation. The commission had heard from some of the residents that the concern was the golf course and the loading docks backing up right to the golf course. He said that the berm being presented to the commission was not entirely accurate. He indicated that the berm stopped and only continued to the corner and did not protect the complete golf course or the residences . He felt it was slightly misleading when the developer said that the project was lowered ZZ feet because the floor 1eve1 of one of the Suncrest homes was 230 feet above sea level, which was the floor level of the Walmart and the Walmart was 38 feet tall . He was not totally opposed to the project because he couldn' t see living in a residence at the ""� corner of Country Club and Monterey. He said that he was disturbed by the fact that the project had grown and grown. It had always been presented to him as some commercial and half residential and the mitigation would be occurring to new residences which were moving in fully aware of the fact that there was a store there, rather than moving next to existing residences and then attempting to mitigate the situation. MR. HERMAN SANOLE, resident of Suncrest Country Club #11, said that he wanted to point out something in the traffic study. He said that on the northeast side of Country Club they were putting in six lanes . On the west side of Monterey it would still be two lanes . He asked how they would get around that. He said they would go from four lanes going into two lanes and that would be difficult. He indicated that he had seen to mitigation of that particular problem. He was also concerned about the noise situation. The people that lived in the Suncrest whose homes abutting the property line were the ones who would receive the brunt of the noise that would develop from the Walmart, but also Von' s . They would also have to put up with waste disposal that would probably go on all night because �... 53 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 they service late at night or early morning . He felt �/ the noise created by the dumpsters being picked up and dumped and the trucks with their mandatory beeping noises when they back up was what Suncrest would have to put up with. He stated that if the developer could mitigate those problems then maybe they should go ahead. MS . HOLLY BECK, resident of Suncrest, stated that she would live about 5, 000 feet from the dumpster and dump trucks with the smells and noises for both Von' s and Walmart. She felt it was a wonderful project, but wished it was further away from her. She did not feel it was appropriate right on top of a residential section. She said that no one had talked about all the fumes from the gasoline. She commented that if second- hand cigarette smoke caused cancer, what about the tons of pollutants that would come from all this traffic in and out of the parking lot. She noted that the prevailing winds were from the west and they would get the fumes across their park all the time. She said that if the developer could do something about that, he could try. Chairman Spiegel closed the public testimony and asked for comments by the commission. �i Commissioner Jonathan informed commission that he would be abstaining from discussion and voting on this matter, reluctantly, because he was a resident at Sagewood. Although he had no conflict of interest in a financial sense, to avoid any appearance of a potential conflict he felt it would be appropriate for him to abstain. Commissioner Whitlock said that she was in information and paperwork/statistic overload and suggested a continuance. Commissioner Cox agreed. Chairman Spiegel said that he was in favor of voting. He commended Mr. Gatlin on the plan, which was by far the best Walmart that he had ever seen and he was in retail for a number of years, but in his opinion he felt it was wrong to put it on that corner. There was a lot of commercially zoned land in the city of Palm Desert and Palm Desert was currently over-stored. When the mall opened up ten years ago it opened up completely filled; now there was over 15 vacancies today. The Marshall ' s center across the street from the mall had many empty stores; Circuit City had empty stores; E1 Paseo 54 "r MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 1993 +r had empty stores and Highway 111 also had empty stores . The commission approved the Ahmanson Center that hadn't been built yet on Highway 111 and Painters Path, and also being built was a center at Fred Waring and Town Center Way that was not totally leased out. Besides that, there was plenty of commercial land. He had nothing against Walmart and felt they were wonderful merchants . He read some studies where Walmart was so good that they put people out of business . He understood that was what happened in retailing, but felt that Walmart would be an advantage to the city in the right location and the corner of Monterey and Country Club was not the right location. Mr. Diaz said that if it was continued, he would suggest two weeks . He indicated that this would be the first item on the agenda. He noted that the next meeting would be March 16 . Chairman Spiegel reopened the hearing and asked for a motion to continue. Commissioner Whitlock said �hat she would appreciate the additional time and would move for continuance. Action: "' Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Cox, continuing GPA 92-1, C/Z 92-5, PP 92-8, PM 27634 to March 16, 1993 . Carried 2-1-1 (Chairman Spiegel voted no, Commissioner Jonathan abstained) . Mr. Diaz informed the audience that this item was continued to March 16 at 7 : 00 p.m. and additional notices would not be mailed. VIII . MISCELLANEOUS None. IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. X. COMMENTS Commissioner Cox commented that she really did not want to continue the Walmart development, but was real concerned `.. 55 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 about the pile of paperwork the commission received at the � last minute. She said she was trying to peruse it and get through some of the things she thought were important that were brought up and it seemed like they had paperwork overload. Trying to get through that and listening to everything else going on, she asked if there was a way to tone that down. Mr. Drell replied that unfortunately everything on the desk with the exception of the noise study were things that just came in today or the day before. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the policy could be changed so that submittals were a minimum of one week before planning commission meetings . Mr. Diaz replied no, and would have been surprised if this item was decided in one evening. Here there was a great deal of testimony to evaluate. What would probably occur at the next meeting was that the people would be present, but the testimony had mostly been said. He said that the city could not require that the information be in a week before because they could present it at the meeting. He did not think there was anything wrong with continuing an item. Commissioner Cox said that there would be a signal at Monterey and staff was talking about one at Sagewood. Mr. Folkers said that it would be the driveway west of Sagewood . that would tie-in with their main driveway. Chairman Spiegel � asked if it would be the same situation as La Quinta where there were additional stop lights put on Highway 111 . Mr. Folkers said that the distance would be about every quarter mile, not every 300-400 feet. He also said that the city was working on a signal at Suncrest so that Suncrest and San Tropez would be signalized within one year. Commissioner Cox noted that between Portola and Monterey there would be a light at Portola, Palm Desert Greens, Suncrest, Sagewood, and Monterey, which was a mile apart. Mr. Folkers concurred. Mr Diaz stated that the probiem was that everyone wanted to be able to get out of their home easily, but wanted to go fast through everyone else' s neighborhood. He felt that was something that had to be remembered and the traffic department attempted to move the traffic in a safe as well as rapid manner. Commissioner Jonathan asked for an update on Cook Street. Mr. Folkers said that tomorrow morning at 10 : 00 a .m. he was meeting with the State Office of Emergency Services and the Federal FEMA people about trying to get a Bailey Bridge in that location. If that was going to take too long, they would re-build it and it should be open Friday. He said that one reason they hadn't been working was the series of storms 56 � __- MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 ""� that had been forecasted. Before a week ago Friday they had the road completely rebuilt at 8 :00 p.m. , then when the water started going over the top because they didn' t get the 100 yards of concrete that had been ordered for the next day poured, it washed it right out. They had lost it six times . They would continue to work to try and keep Cook Street open and would make another attempt. He said that they tried to get the marines from Twenty-Nine Palms, but all their engineers were in Samalia. Inspite of the delays, he was hoping that by June they would have the all-weather crossing that would be four lanes, plus nice wide lanes for bicycles, golf carts and pedestrians . He clarified that the original date was April 23 . Commissioner Jonathan noted that he had seen some furniture stores on Cook Street with plastic signs hanging from their roofs . He asked if those signs were in compliance with the sign ordinance. Mr. Diaz said that he would have code enforcement check them out. Commissioner Whitlock asked for a response regarding the question about gates not being allowed at Sagewood because there was not enough stacking room. Mr. Folkers said that it was rather confusing. If it was done like for Shadow "" Mountain with a gate house, the first two houses immediately east of Monterey on Sagewood wouid be effected. There would not be enough storage. However, they were told that the fire department was willing to go with just emergency gates out by the street further out, so it wouldn't be the same. Those gates would only be used for emergency, not a normal vehicle entry system. In that case people would come in and out of Sagewood off Country Club. Gates could be used under those circumstances . Chairman Spiegel asked how that would be decided, and if it would be a majority vote by the residents . Mr. Folkers said that under the former situation of having a normal gate system, he pointed out to the residents that something would have to be done about either buying or qetting access from the two people whose driveways or houses would be effected by the gate house and as a result that plan was dropped. If it became a non-public street, the cost for maintaining would be involved. Commissioner Whitlock stated that their association CC&R' s would have to be amended because the streets would go from public to private, so it was an issue within the association. �.. 57 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 2 , 1993 XI . ADJOURNMENT � Moved by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adjourning the meeting to March 16 , 1993 by min motion. Carried 4-0 . The meeting was adjo ed at 1 : 2 .m. . �1�I�/ ' RAMON A. DIAZ, Sec ary ATTEST: � v� _ ' �� '.l� G� / ROB R A. SPIEG , n Palm Desert Plannin Commission /tm � � 58