Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1216 8:30 a.m. MINUTES ADJOURNED MEETING PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION • 8:30 A.M. TUESDAY - DECEMBER 16, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Campbell called the meeting to order at 8:32 a.m. II. ROLL CALL Members Present: Sonia Campbell, Chairperson Sabby Jonathan, Vice Chairperson Cindy Finerty Jim Lopez Dave Tschopp Members Absent: None Staff Present: Phil Drell, Director of Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney (arrived at 8:47 a.m.) Steve Smith, Planning Manager Mark Diercks, Transportation Engineer Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Engineer Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary Also Present: John Criste, Terra Nova Planning & Research III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. IV. PUBLIC HEARING Any person wishing to discuss any item not otherwise on the Agenda may address the Planning Commission at this point by stepping to the lectern and giving his/her name and address for the record. Remarks shall be limited to a maximum of five minutes unless additional time is authorized by the Planning Commission. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16. 2003 W A. Case No. GPA 01-04 and the Draft Environmental Impact Report as it relates thereto - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for consideration of a Comprehensive General Plan Update and the Draft Environmental Impact Report as it relates thereto. Mr. Drell explained that in the staff report there was a summary and actions translated into Discussions, Policies and Programs of the actions the Commission had taken so far. In addition, there was a brief synopsis of the Housing Element, the Economic Fiscal Element, Parks and Recreation Element, and the Arts and Cultural Element, and then they would go over the final changes to the map. Mr. Criste addressed the commission. He noted that as they touched upon last time, one of the mandated elements of the General Plan is the City's Housing Element. It was really meant to address all the housing needs, that is all the economic sectors of the community, but the bottom line mandate is to assure that an equitable amount of affordable housing is provided as well within both county and city jurisdictions in California. The element outlines, and was really dictated to, by relevant regulation. They introduced the matter in that regard so they could see how mandated we are. When they looked at the previous programs, the previous version of the Housing Element has had, and talk about how it's being funded and implemented and the success we've had in addressing what is called are Regional Housing Needs Assessment numbers which are generated by local regional Southern California Association of Governments. He believed those numbers were to be amended again in 2006 so they would visit this again for the 2006 revisions, but hoped those revisions would be very minor. He said they reiterated and addressed new programs to help meet our numbers and to also address in principle the issues of affordable housing and the full mix of housing. They spoke to the city programs that have been implemented in the past and have been successful in facilitating affordable housing. And as with the other elements, they have goals, policies and programs which assure they will be effectively implementing a housing element which addresses our needs. He said he would be glad to answer any questions. Chairperson Campbell asked if there were any questions. There was no response. Mr. Drell asked if anyone from the public wanted to comment on the Housing Element. �rf 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 MR. TOM NOBLE, 42-620 Caroline Court, Suite 101 in Palm Desert, addressed the commission. He thanked the commission for the opportunity to speak. He wanted some clarification as to whether or not the public would be asked to speak on each aspect they would be going through. He was interested in several pieces of property and one in particular. He said he could mention his concerns now, which would be a reiteration of earlier comments and correspondence or he could wait until they got to that point, but he wanted to reserve his right to comment when they got to the portion dealing with the northwest corner of the intersection of the extensions of Portola and Dinah Shore. Chairperson Campbell stated that Mr. Noble would have an opportunity to do that when they went over the map. Mr. Criste stated that the next element to cover, and he was going out of the order of the staff report but it was more in order with the General Plan, was the Parks and Recreation Element which started on page III-120 of the Draft General Plan. He informed them that this was also tied to the Open Space and Conservation Element in that they obviously have a broader perspective of recreation and the value of lands for that purpose, for passive recreation as well, and appreciation. They provided a pretty detailed background discussion describing the various types of parks, how they are typically characterized, what their typical sizes are, the kinds of functions they serve at different levels of the community ranging from pocket parks or mini parks right up to the regional parks and the community scale parks they had been discussing. Table III-41 summarized the current park inventory and provided some code on the kind of facilities that are in each of the parks. The City GIS folks prepared some nice exhibits that they had been able to include in the General Plan showing existing park facilities. They described these facilities further. They talked about future parks and the need to amend this to some degree and as much as Homme Adams is essentially an established park now. But they talked about regional park facilities and additional facilities that serve recreational needs of the city. And then also financing and the reference to applicable state law, specifically the Quimby Act, funding programs that are available, and the need for a master parks and recreation plan to really put greater detail in the parks planning for the city and right up to facilitating capital improvement programs and things of that sort. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 The other half of the element had to do with addressing trails and bike paths and those kinds of non-motorized routes or accesses, some into wild wilderness areas like the new trail system associated with the multiple species plan. And then on- street trails or paths that address bicycle needs and those sorts of things. In that regard they had a lot of back and forth with the Circulation Element so these two complemented each other in that regard. He said they spoke first in detail to the hiking trails and they could see a nice exhibit from GIS on Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 and also golf cart trails in the city and the hiking trails and where they are located. The whole region was shown, but primarily focused on those within the planning area. The kinds of costs associated with developing new trail systems and programs and mechanisms for doing that, then the future directions, two goals and a series of policies and programs meant to enhance an already pretty meaningful parks and trails system in the city. He noted that the Multi Species Plan was probably going to come out at the beginning of the year and integral with that was not only addressing the Santa Rosa/San Jacinto Mountains Trails Plan, but also guidelines for the integration of public access and trails into the reserve system that was going to be acquired as part of the Multi Species Plan. He asked for any questions. Commissioner Finerty commented that at their last meeting on December 2 they talked, and actually passed a motion, to set aside 25 acres for a large community park in the north sphere. She asked if they needed to spell that out in this particular element. Mr. Drell said yes,they should talk both about the series of neighborhood parks that they are including there, plus the community park. Commissioner Lopez asked if the motion would be incorporated into this element. Mr. Drell said yes, it would be incorporated into the exhibit of future parks and with a description program of planning and describing their function. Mr. Criste said it would be specific to that geographic area. Commissioner Lopez had a question/clarification as far as the relationship between the Circulation and the Parks and Recreation Element as it pertains to bike paths and golf cart paths. He asked how that process worked when they go down the line with the Circulation Element and talk about golf cart and bike paths throughout the new sections of the city. He asked if those were incorporated in the Parks and Recreation Element or the Circulation Element. Mr. Criste said in two areas. Mr. Drell confirmed it would be in both. Commissioner Lopez asked how they work together on that. Mr. Drell said they reinforce each other and basically say that every time we build a road, we put in a combination golf/circulation access to at 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 tow least get someone here to there. They modify that in some cases, but to make sure that every area in the city has that access to it. There are certain situations where they have, for example, on the Rick Evans commercial project, there they ran the golf cart circulation down Main Street and not around the free right-turn at Cook Street and Gerald Ford. But every project, every street improvement they have to address and make sure that golf carts and bicycles can get from point A to point B in the best, most safest convenient manner. Commissioner Lopez asked if those decisions, or at least the initiation of conversations was done by the Traffic Engineer or by the Parks and Recreation, or both. Mr. Drell said it would be in coordination to figure out where. Mr. Criste said it was really a Community Development function, but was multi-agency because it involved Public Works. Mr. Drell confirmed that Public Works would build the roads and do the engineering of the roads. Mr. Criste said it was a parks and recreation function, but they have assigned most of those kinds of responsibilities to Community Development and that seemed to be appropriate. Going back to the discussion about amending the Park Element with the community park, the large 25-acre park, Commissioner Jonathan thought they also agreed on passive view corridor type parks interspersed throughout the area on land where available. Mr. Drell said it was kind of as shown on the plan, so they should discuss the concept of passive natural open space corridors. Mr. Criste stated that the Community Design Element also addresses in a more generic sense at major arterials or major roadways with view corridors that consideration of additional parkway and landscaping be provided. He asked if he was speaking specifically to the university park area. Commissioner Jonathan said yes, where there is opportunity for the City. Just a discussion recognizing that open views are a valuable resource, and acquired as part of the general Park and Recreation Element. Mr. Drell said or Open Space. Commissioner Jonathan concurred, it is to create open space. Mr. Drell said there would be a mention in Parks and Recreation, Open Space and Community Design. Mr. Criste asked if they could also mix it with a generic application and make a specific reference to the university park as part of that. He asked if they could handle it that way because then it also empowered them for other discretions and future cases where they could say that they have a great view shed and an extra five feet would be great. Commissioner Jonathan concurred. Commissioner Tschopp recalled that the discussion also hinged on making sure that these view corridor parks were affordable and attainable. Mr. Drell concurred and hoped that in the university park area they could combine it with the practical 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 considerations of grading and grade separation that is going to have to be an inherent part of the design of some of those areas. So by virtue of their engineering design they are going to have to have some areas that will most likely have to be landscaped just to take up grade. Mr. Criste asked if there were any other questions. Chairperson Campbell asked if there were any comments from the audience. There were none. Mr. Criste said next was the Arts and Culture Element. He explained that a lot of work went into it involving a lot of committee meetings, input for various city committees, and staff as well. He said it was a major issue when they consider the enhanced effect that concern for arts and culture has had in the city and was giving it character and a place in the region as well. They outlined the various cultural resources the city has and not limiting it just to those within the city limits, but most were city limit specific. The impacts of arts on the economy, they spoke to that also. Opportunities that continue to arise for integration of community arts and culture into community design issues as was in the previous element which they covered some time ago. Cultural affairs projects and events, how they create both a social cohesion as well as an enhanced cultural context. Great examples they had been able to scatter throughout, existing work that has already been done, and spoke briefly to future directions, had three goals and several policies and programs to further implement the work already being done. He asked for any questions. There were none. Chairperson Campbell asked if there were any questions from the audience. There were none. Mr. Criste said finally, the Economic and Fiscal Element was not a mandated element. It is a product to some degree and also synergistically developed with the analysis they did on each of the various alternatives. This element really highlighted the trends. It was kind of a trends analysis that we've had in the city. It speaks to the evolving, broadening local economy. They referenced the retail commercial, the resort and development market. And now the educational institutions as three legs of our economic foundation. They spoke to demographic trends and show how they've been evolving over time, both locally and on a regional basis as well. He said they were very specific about the fiscal aspect of things, the cost benefit analysis of land use and the ability to generate revenues to support governmental services. They also spoke to things like industrial development, valuation trends, 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 `w and a major theme in the General Plan is the open space or natural assets as also being economic assets that we want to protect and highlight in a constructive way. Again, they run through some additional data, especially some detailed snapshots on different times of the general fund through 97-98 to 2001, seeing trends in that regard. He said it is a pretty detailed discussion. Then they have several goals, four goals, and a host of policies and programs which very much carry out the management program that has been in effect for some time. He asked for any questions. Commissioner Finerty noted that they talk about the growth in taxable sales and TOT, but asked if there was discussion or if there should be about the money the State is going to be taking away from the City. Mr. Criste explained that the situation has been fluid for about ten years and it is difficult to predict from year to year what is going to happen with the revenue stream that the State may have access to. He said they can really, what they did was knowing what they did know and the current conditions, were able to at least give a current context. So if things start happening, decision makers like the commission could at least start to see what the relationship is between some claim to a revenue stream that they currently have that the County or State might want to tap into. Otherwise, it was sort of a what does the legislature %W or governor think this week sort of game and was difficult to predict. Commissioner Finerty said it looked like there was a trend now where they would be taking more and more, but she understood that nothing has been cast in concrete at this point. Chairperson Campbell asked if there were any other questions of Mr. Criste. There were none. Chairperson Campbell asked if there were any questions from the audience. There were none. Mr. Drell thought that Mr. Criste might also want to comment on his response to comments. Mr. Criste concurred. Mr. Criste pointed out that the commission had in their packets copies of the verbatim statements from a host of letters they got. Most of the letters had to do with General Plan questions by property owners and residents. That sort of thing. But he thought nine letters or something like that constituted comments on the environmental document and required our responses. One, which is the first letter, is pretty extensive and essentially they covered the General Plan in its entirety to clarify what questions the letter presented. The others were largely informational. CVWD wanted some data corrected or changed. Edison was pretty much broiler 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 plate. And a couple of property owners had environmental concerns which they tried to explain and address. He asked if there were any questions. There were none. As a point of order, Commissioner Lopez asked if they needed to do a minute motion on these elements. They were doing that previously. Mr. Drell said that sounded like a good idea. Chairperson Campbell asked if he wanted to combine all the elements together. Mr. Drell said basically the ones Mr. Criste presented, if they wanted to take an action now. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the elements as discussed. Motion carried 5-0. Moving onto Land Use, Mr. Drell stated that he presented the commission with two new maps. One was the citywide map which he believed incorporated the changes. He said that every time they looked at something like this there were always a couple of little mistakes that had to be corrected. Starting at the south, he said they were showing the Comishe at Bighorn property as residential low with the study designation around it. They also converted the arc to the west of it which they had also shown as low and in reality that was part of the buffer which was dedicated to the California Department of Fish and Game for open space. That was now Public Reserve. Moving north, they were showing a mixed use designation on Portola shown in purple and orange stripes which was Professional Office and Medium Density Residential. Moving north in terms of changes, the little office site on the north side of the Whitewater Channel was changed. At Country Club and Monterey was Community Commercial. They got to the revised recommended alternative for University Park. The changes made at Gerald Ford and Portola, they extended the high density into what was Public Facilities and then leaving five acres of mixed use. Also, shrinking the high density to the east and extending the medium density into it so the mass of high density was smaller. Making the parks a little bit bigger, especially the one in the northwest quadrant which was a one-acre park and they made it more like a two-acre park once they took the roads out of it. Two acres was probably as small as they wanted. It still allowed for usable active areas like basketball courts and volleyball courts. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16 2003 tow In looking at what we have left, he was showing the 25-acre community park directly across Portola which encompassed 25 acres of those five acre parcels that the Redevelopment Agency owns as at least a plausible site for it. It fronts on Portola and also the parcel directly south off of what would be Shepherd Lane was in design. He recalled they approved conditionally a Jewish Community Center there at that comer and it was his understanding that they were proceeding. So in terms of compatibility, directly south of it they had a non residential use. Therefore, if they put the more active uses out toward Portola and the somewhat quieter uses toward the west, it provided a plausible location for a community park remembering that the Civic Center Park is in the midst of residential uses and somehow people have been able to live with it. Also the soccer park. By definition they wanted the parks easily accessible by residential uses because those were the people who use it. By design they tried to minimize the adverse impact at the perimeters. He shifted some of the multifamily up onto 35th. That had kind of a couple of positive benefits. One of the things he had been trying to argue for, and it went into that openness at the street concept, that when they design uses on major streets that can front on that street instead of backing on that street, they end up with a greater openness in setback off the street as opposed to when they back on the street, they typically end up with a wall 20 feet off the curb and a kind of a mediocre little 12-foot landscape strip. When they can front a project onto a street, they typically end up with 30 or 40 feet before the buildings, they put some parking in front and he thought they got a far friendlier face on the street than the back end of a project and a wall relatively close to the curb. So putting multifamily onto 35th, which will take a fair amount of traffic, has some urban design benefits in addition to putting some multifamily housing in close proximity to what is going to be a fairly intensive employment center which was that industrial area. He also extended the office professional area down Gerald Ford. He explained it has the same benefits of putting uses with their face to the street as opposed to the back of the street and makes a more attractive street scape. When they buy their houses, many property owners didn't necessarily understand the objection of backing onto a major arterial until after several years there of having to shout in their backyard when having a picnic. There are better uses to put on a major street then a single family home. He believed that summarized the changes. On the land use generalized summary of acreages, they were slightly down. He thought they lost about 50 units. The open space/parks increased by some 35-40 acres partly because he is showing the park that is going to be associated with the 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16. 2003 K-8, plus the 25-acre community park, plus the slight adjustments to the neighborhood parks. Commissioner Jonathan asked for clarification on what revised table Mr. Drell was referring to. Mr. Drell explained on the plan itself there is a new table. Commissioner Jonathan asked Mr. Drell to highlight the changes between the staff recommended alternative from the less intense. He asked what the major shift was. Mr. Drell replied that the major shift was the increase in parks, partly because they added the 25-acre park, specifically identified the 10-acre park that would be associated with the K-8 school, and then the slight adjustments in size to the neighborhood parks. Otherwise, he thought the high density had gone down a little bit. He didn't have it before him, but thought it was 110 acres and was now 103. Commissioner Finerty said that wasn't true. It went up one acre and went up 13 units. Mr. Drell said the objective was to try and keep it the same and then it was a matter of how his GIS guy finally drew it out. Chairperson Campbell thought they were very well dispersed now. Mr. Drell agreed. He said they tried to keep it generally the same. Part of the unit loss was a result of the fact that they now have 25 acres less residential because they created a park. The built number of units might be more or less depending on what the project applicants come in with. Commissioner Lopez asked about north of 1-10. Mr. Drell said in the GPAC recommended alternative they substituted the less intense alternative. The land use summary only dealt with the area from Gerald Ford to Frank Sinatra through Monterey - Dinah Shore. Commissioner Finerty asked for clarification. At the last meeting they talked about how per State law they couldn't go below the current number of projected units. If she was reading that correctly, they would take that off of the existing General Plan which shows 4,047 units. She asked if that was correct. Mr. Drell said it was correct. Regarding the residential units indicated in the mixed use designation, Commissioner Jonathan asked if they could reasonably expect that to be more toward high density than low density. Mr. Drell said yes. His assumption was that low density and commercial are not particularly compatible. They are also dealing with very expensive real estate. The positive synergies were more likely to occur. One comment about town houses is that the reason town houses work is they give the people the town. If you take out the amenities of the countryside, you want to give them the amenities of the town. So it is that proximity of the convenience, UW 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16 2003 shopping and excitement which urban areas or developments like the Rick Evans project convey. That is part of the trade off in terms of positive residential environment that they have when they reduce people's yard space, their private open space, and substitute public amenities that occur in an urban setting. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the total supply of high density and medium density exceeds 3,000 housing units. That is a pretty good dent in meeting the housing demand that is projected to be created as a result of the University. Mr. Drell concurred and said it still allowed them to set aside 230 acres, which is almost that same acreage, for open space. Commissioner Finerty said that when she came up with the suggestion to try to disperse that block of high density, when they had drawn the map and what she thought she was going to see in the high density that would be furthest east right by Gerald Ford, rather than it coming down like the shape of the state of Florida, she thought it would go across to kind of line up with where the business park started. Mr. Drell asked if she meant extending the medium density further to the east. Commissioner Finerty concurred. Mr. Drell said what it showed, probably in that section doubling the medium density and was an exchange of probably another 20 acres of medium for high. Commissioner Finerty said she didn't know how many acres that would represent. Mr. Drell said roughly he thought maybe 15 acres medium for high. Commissioner Finerty said she crunched some numbers and came up with a little over the 4,000 units and it would be setting aside 174 acres for the medium density, 80 acres for high and 450 for low. That pretty well dispersed it to be 33%for low, 30.4%for medium, and 36% for high. That would be eliminating the mixed use with that uncertainty of those 333 units. She guessed her calculation was trying to reflect if that line had been drawn across to the business park for high density and then the medium density had been extended further east. That put them a little over the 4,000 units so that they were still in compliance with the state law. They were meeting their need for medium and high density housing and perhaps dispersing it a little bit more. Chairperson Campbell asked if she wanted to do away with the mixed use on Gerald Ford. Commissioner Campbell said her idea was to do away with all the mixed use and kind of what they saw was what they got. So the high density would be extended west at the corner of Portola and Gerald Ford and then the medium density could be extended out toward the corner of Frank Sinatra and Cook, but not going all the way to the corner although going further out. The same with the mixed use at Gerald Ford north of the community commercial. That would be medium, but bow she wasn't advocating moving the medium density all the way out to the main street. 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16. 2003 She was just suggesting they keep a little buffer there of some sort of community commercial, but extending the medium density all the way out as best they could while still leaving the buffer at major streets. Chairperson Campbell asked if she was speaking of Frank Sinatra and Cook. Commissioner Finerty said that was correct. It would also be in that area just north of the community commercial. The exception would be at Portola and Gerald Ford, that mixed use she would just put as all high density. Chairperson Campbell agreed and on the corner of the mixed use at the corner of Gerald Ford and Portola since on the west of Portola they have office professional anyway, and could bring that out medium density. From their last meeting she wasn't in favor of mixed use on the comer of Frank Sinatra and Cook. So she was in favor of changing it to medium density residential with a buffer of some kind. Commissioner Finerty asked if she would be in favor of extending the medium density residential, clarifying the located as east from Gerald Ford and Portola. Chairperson Campbell said she didn't have problem with that mixed use right there because of the location, so high density residential could be combined with the mixed use. She didn't have a problem with that one. Commissioner Finerty clarified that where they saw the medium density and then all the high density kind of surrounding it, if they were to extend the medium density out to Gerald Ford and then they could draw a line from where the medium density stops and then where the business park begins, draw a line there and keep everything above that as high density. Chairperson Campbell agreed. Chairperson Campbell asked for other comments. Commissioner Jonathan asked if they were having discussion now or if they were going to take public testimony first. Chairperson Campbell said they would be taking more public testimony unless the commission had more questions for Mr. Drell. Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak. MR. JEFF SHROEDER, Vice President of Ponderosa Homes, 400 South Farrell, B-103 in Palm Springs, addressed the commission. He explained that they are the owners of about 120 acres at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford and Portola. He said that maybe after he talked, or maybe after everyone talked here, that they have all made several changes up there and they were having some trouble tracking what the commissioners were talking about, so they would kind of like to know. But he wanted to state that they have owned this property for about a year and were somewhat new in town. Their first project is in La Quinta and they excitedly picked up this property about a year ago, partly because of the great things they heard about Palm Desert. The property has about 80 acres currently zoned for residential and 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16 2003 err the balance is zoned commercial. Understanding that they knew that a general plan process was in place, and was a little upset when the moratorium took place, but they were used to working with communities to come up with the best solutions for property and development, so they were pleased to be able to work with staff here and Mr. Drell to try to come up with a solution based on the original General Plan Advisory Committee plan. They met sometime back, he thought in April or May, initially with Mr. Drell and all the land owners in that area between Portola and Monterey north of Gerald Ford. Basically after a lot of discussion with Mr. Drell, they agreed that they all needed to work together to come up with a plan that would satisfy the City's needs and the property owners' desires. It took a little bit of work, but they got to an agreement to work together and spent a fair amount of time working on a plan that they could all live with in terms of the uses, including the School District. They worked closely with the School District. So that plan was presented as an alternative that staff thought was acceptable and unfortunately, and this was the last meeting when things started to move around as he knew that would, but he wanted to say they were a little concerned with some of the direction that had been taken on their property. �.. Particularly regarding the high density property on 35th. He had a copy of their plan. Commissioner Finerty asked Mr. Shroeder to show the commission the exact property he was addressing and identify the high density and the 80 acres. Mr. Shroeder did so. Commissioner Finerty noted that she had that property listed as being owned by American Realty Trust and asked if he purchased it from them. Mr. Shroeder said yes, last November. He said they came up with a plan that had the 40 acres north at medium density, 4-10 to the acre. He said they weren't apartment builders, they are single family home builders and build very nice communities and they were concerned with trying to figure out apartments into a project there. But what they did agree, after several discussions with Mr. Drell and they understand what he is trying to accomplish, and they could live with a 4-10 acre density because it would over time give them the flexibility to try and find a solution whereby they might be able to make eight, nine or ten acres of that higher density and still r..► do the single family on the balance and still come under ten acres. So if they 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16. 2003 took ten acres at 20 and 30 acres at five or six, they would still be under ten to the acre. So they felt that was a fair compromise because they didn't know exactly where the market would be going in terms of the product. They could do the 80 acres in kind of a traditional project that they were proposing which is 8,000 and 10,000 square foot lots in a very nicely planned community and then kind of see how things develop and do some smaller lots and maybe some apartments even. But by locking it down at that higher density, they were afraid that took the flexibility away from them and kind of a little bit threw a wrench into the plan they all came to as a group, which included the high density adjacent to the commercial and then also adjacent to the school site. Commissioner Finerty requested that Mr. Shroeder identify the commercial site within the 80 acres. Mr. Shroeder said that currently the 40 acres (which Mr. Drell was pointing to) is zoned commercial. Commissioner Finerty clarified that what they were showing as medium and high density residential is zoned commercial currently. Mr. Shroeder said yes, under the current General Plan. Commissioner Jonathan asked if he owned that property. Mr. Shroeder said they own all that property. Mr. Drell pointed out what was designated as Service Industrial. In the original GPAC alternative, he said this was designated a combination of medium and high. Commissioner Jonathan asked what Mr. Shroeder was asking or suggesting that designation should be? Mr. Shroeder said their original plan, which was the staff preferred alternative a month or so ago, the 4-10 medium density residential. That combined with the adjacent property. When their group came up with this plan they felt that the high density was appropriately placed next to commercial and across a major collector from lower density residential and then also on 35th, but , across from a collector street across from a school site. Those were fairly good locations for the higher density residential, at least at this point. And 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16 2003 right now on their property, it was a little more difficult how they were going to plan out with that particular designation fixed because then they would go from 4-10 to 10-22 without a dividing line. They thought it was a little easier to plan for the future if they had a little flexibility on that site. Commissioner Finerty asked if Mr. Shroeder could see why they wanted to move some of that high density around because the high density was so clustered in that one area. Mr. Shroeder said he understood what they were trying to accomplish, but he did think the previous alternative, which was also a representation of what some of the property owners agreed to, they were trying to create a there there with the university and trying to create a community that would have some kind of attraction to it and he thought that took away from it a little bit when they started spreading out those densities and reduced the effectiveness of that plan. There was some concern on that. Commissioner Finerty asked if Mr. Shroeder wanted to cluster the high density together. r.. Mr. Shroeder thought if they spread it out, they reduced the ability to create an attraction with the kind of mix of uses they would have surrounding the university. He didn't agree with spreading it out. Commissioner Finerty asked if Mr. Shroeder was to put apartments somewhere on the 80-acre site what would be the easiest location for him. Mr. Shroeder said it is 120 acres and from a physical standpoint, there is slope on the property. It slopes about 100 feet from Gerald Ford down to Dinah Shore. But if they were going to put it in, probably the location where it is now was probably the best location if they were going to put it anywhere. With the 4-10 designation on there, there was enough flexibility in that designation to allow that to occur if that is appropriate for that site in the future. Right now they weren't preparing a plan for the 40 acres. They were preparing a plan for the 80, but he told Mr. Drell that they were going to kind of wait and see how things went and work with him on looking at some higher density on that 40 acres. He thought it took away the flexibility to designate it higher density now. r.► 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 Commissioner Finerty asked him if the commission felt it was better to spread out the higher density and part of his 40 acres needed to be high density, if the area they chose he felt would be the best? Mr. Shroeder said if it was their choice, yes. Commissioner Finerty thanked Mr. Shroeder. Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone else wished to speak. Mr. Drell said he wanted to clarify a little bit on what his perception was of what they agreed on. His perception of the medium density was not low density and high density and there are many builders throughout Southern California who have very successfully integrated all three together in one project. But again, the designation description for medium density is predominately single family product. If there is a problem integrating medium with high, then there was surely a problem with low to high. So his concept for the medium density was not the extremes, and achieving the average, and it was a different housing product to provide a variety of housing and a variety for those that want to purchase a single family home which is missing from the market. Hypothetically speaking, Commissioner Jonathan asked if a property owner were to come in, and they have a designation on 120 acres that is low, medium and high and the city specified that designation in specific areas, but if a developer came along and said, "Here's my 120 acres and I would like to put high density here, medium here and some low here," there was nothing to prevent the property owner from doing that and there was always the possibility that staff, commission and council would look at that and say, "Hey, that's great, it accomplishes the count we need and the flow and everything else." Mr. Drell said that was correct. Commissioner Jonathan said that while they were playing the averaging game, it wouldn't preclude them from looking at specific applications and saying if it made sense. Mr. Drell said that was correct. The core idea is that there will be, in these general proportions, a mixture of these various housing types and he didn't want the applicant to think that providing 30 acres at four units per acre and 10 acres at 20 units per acre is consistent with what he believes to be the General Plan intent or their agreement. In those areas where they are showing medium density, he was hoping they would get medium density which is predominately single family product. That's the whole objective of the medium density. To bring back an affordable single family product. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16 2003 MR. TOM NOBLE addressed the commission. He said he was speaking again about the piece of property at the northwest corner of the intersection of the extensions at Portola and Dinah Shore. He wanted to call the commission's attention to two letters he previously provided to the commission; the one September 15 addressed to Mr. Drell and copied to the commission and then another to Mr. Drell on October 7. The October 7 letter had a little colored map they had done showing at that point in time the GPAC's proposal for those 29 acres. The staff preferred alternative now was what he thought the use of the property ought to be. There had been some discussion of putting high density residential in that area for reasons set forth in his letters. He thought that was not good planning and would make the property much more difficult to develop. So he wanted to once again go on record as supporting the current staff preferred alternative. He felt the property needed to stay for a business park, light industrial use. Also as a point of order, his recollection from the last meeting was that a number of these issues that were just discussed were voted upon by the commission. One of the things that struck out at him was the intersection of Frank Sinatra and Cook, the northwest corner. He was wondering if these matters were to be revisited and revoted upon again. He was trying to figure out when something is completed from the commission's point of view or when they might be brought up once again. Commissioner Jonathan thought they were heading to, hopefully very soon, a final recommendation with regards to the land use element. He didn't think they had a final motion on it, and asked if Mr. Noble had any comments on any part of it. Mr. Noble said no, it more a point of order. It was his understanding that some particular physical locations were voted upon at the last meeting and he didn't know if those votes were final or being reopened or what the procedure actually was. Commissioner Jonathan asked why he was asking and if he had a comment on any of those he would like to make. Mr. Noble said he was trying to move forward. If something was voted on, a piece of property that he had an interested in, he was wondering if it was done. %NW 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 Commissioner Finerty said Mr. Noble would still need to stay in touch because the Council could totally reverse whatever the commission has done, so it was really a moot point right now. Mr. Noble said he understood that and appreciated it, but his question was if the commission would be revisiting the same piece of property on other occasions. Commissioner Finerty thought the north sphere, the university park concept, is a work in progress right now. And regardless of what the commission does, the Council could change it so she wouldn't advise getting too worried about it until the Council had their say. Mr. Noble thanked the commission. MR. MIKE MARIX, 128 Vista Monte in Palm Desert, addressed the commission. He said they own most of the property between Gerald Ford and Frank Sinatra and Cook and Portola except for the portion the Redevelopment Agency purchased for a golf course. The suggestion pertaining to medium density versus high density in the specific location extending it east he thought was a practical matter. It wouldn't work because of the topography. It's a very severe slope situation in there and the likelihood of 5,000 square foot lots was slim to none. So if indeed staff is looking for small lots, conventional single family houses, it isn't going to happen. They couldn't physically do it on a fairly severe slope. So he thought the appropriate designation is what was shown previously and can then through the town house concept, the 4-10 density, group buildings to compensate for the slope and the constraints imposed by virtue of a severe slope. This piece, as previously suggested, like the other piece runs at least 100 feet of drop from the high point in the golf course area to the corner of Cook and Gerald Ford. He also got the impression from the last meeting that they had concluded their land use determinations as to the southeast corner of Portola and Gerald Ford for a mixed use piece and like wise the piece that Mr. Noble spoke of. So he, too, was confused and thought that had been decided last week and he was at that meeting. Those were his thoughts and asked if there were any questions. Commissioner Jonathan asked if he had the Cornerstone ro ert . P P Y 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16 2003 %W Mr. Marix replied yes. Commissioner Jonathan asked if that extended to what is designated as medium density residential. Mr. Marix said yes, they have everything except what is designated commercial and the City's golf course. Commissioner Jonathan thought Mr. Marix's comments were directed toward the part that is zoned medium density residential. Mr. Marix said that was the recommendation that he heard and interpreted, and like others he was a little confused. Commissioner Jonathan said he would clarify the confusion. As Commissioner Finerty said, this is in process, so they would finalize it today in terms of their final recommendation to Council. If nothing else, they may have gotten to some degree of finality last time, but it wasn't final until today, so they were still looking at it and digesting it. They would be making a recommendation to Council today. So Mr. Madx's concern was the medium density piece? Mr. Marix said yes, the extension of it. Mr. Drell thought it was in reference to Commissioner Finerty's suggestion that the medium density extend and encompass all of this other area as well. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Marix was saying that the reason for that is the slope made it difficult to build high density? Mr. Marix said no, the slope made it impossible to build small lots, single family houses, 5,000 square foot lots. And he heard, perhaps incorrectly, that it was the hope of staff that there would be some small single family detached housing in there. Commissioner Jonathan asked if that was in high density. Mr. Marix said in medium density. Commissioner Jonathan noted that it was currently indicated as high density. 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 Mr. Marix said that the suggestion this morning was that it be changed to medium density. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Marix's preference was for high density as shown now. Mr. Marix said absolutely. Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone else in the audience wished to address the commission. There was no one. Chairperson Campbell asked for commission comments. Just to clarify at the northeast corner of Gerald Ford across from the high school, Commissioner Tschopp asked if there was some discussion about making that mixed use at the last meeting. Mr. Drell said that was correct and pointed out where it was shown. He said there used to be ten acres of this quasi public use which they thought in the absence of an actual application didn't make any sense and as part of the shifting around, they took five of the ten and extended the high density into it and then left five acres of mixed use. Commissioner Tschopp said on his previous map, and he may have made an error, but he showed that area as mixed use, and also showed the northeast corner of Gerald Ford across, east of the high school. Mr. Drell said the commission has had discussion of shifting this mixed use over and he thought their direction was to keep it as shown, remembering that based on the quality of design in the project, they could approve mixed use anywhere. This was just saying that this is an especially appropriate place for it. And of course they should remember, as is always the case, the County tried to cast things in stone and he didn't know how successful they were going to be, and this is our best guess right now and that three years, four years, five years—some of their most successful projects have been projects they hadn't even conceived of until a developer brought them to the city. Marriott Desert Springs, Shadow Ridge, the Gardens on El Paseo were good examples. So he wasn't Moses bringing down the ten commandments here. General plans would always be works in progress. Commissioner Jonathan asked if they were in commission discussion. Chairperson Campbell said yes. Commissioner Finerty asked if they were at the point where they could close the public hearing. Commission agreed. Chairperson Campbell closed the public hearing and asked for commission comments, knowing this was final. Commissioner Jonathan said at the last meeting they really focused on individual pieces and then asked staff, because they made so many changes, to redraw it so 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 they could see what they did, so they can reconsider anything they felt warranted reconsideration. He thought they could tinker with this all year long, but he was comfortable where it is right now. As they start with the university area and move west, they have community commercial going to some mixed use, to high density residential with industrial business park, to a school, to more residential medium and high, and industrial and regional commercial when they end up at Monterey. He thought it was a good flow. It achieved the numbers that he thought he was comfortable with after quite a bit of tinkering in terms of residential units, both in the mix of high, medium and low density. Could this be changed and improved on? Maybe, probably. But he thought they could keep doing this forever. So he was comfortable with this in its present form in terms of making a recommendation. That this can proceed to Council. To address the bigger picture of what they are trying to accomplish in this area, he recognized the need to address the various demands generated by the University. At the same time he also recognized the fact that the University is a regional facility. He thought Mr. Criste's report indicated that the Coachella Valley population is somewhere around 300,000 at this point. He didn't think it was a reasonable expectation that all students would live in Palm Desert. He thought in fact specifically that they wouldn't. He didn't think it was the sole responsibility of the city of Palm Desert to meet the demand that will be generated by this regional facility. At the same time, he thought the city must share in that responsibility and the balance they have now he thought meets the city's fair share of that responsibility. Commissioner Finerty commented that as she has stated over and over in basically all the land uses she firmly believes that the least density is the best. And that's mainly because of their quality of life, congestion, traffic, and water. She has often said she doesn't want Palm Desert to turn into another Orange County, so she approached this as to how they can stay within state law, still provide adequate medium and high density residential, and then putting in as much medium residential as possible. The example she discussed earlier this morning achieves that. She reiterated that the mixed use comes out 450 acres to be set aside for low density, 174 for medium density and 80 acres for high density. That gives a nice balance and 36% of that is still high density and put them just a little over the 4,000 units as required by state law. She felt that would be the best mix. Commissioner Lopez said in a general overview, the recommended alternative, not just for the university park but the larger map, he thought staffs recommendation, the recommended alternative overall did a great job of putting together all they had talked about over the last several months for them and commended them for a great 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16. 2003 t .ri job on this. Getting down more toward the university area, he concurred with Commissioner Jonathan and believed they could probably beat this thing to death for another 60 days, but what they have before them is a flow and is their best shot at what could be out in this particular area. He drives it every day and can appreciate the comments regarding the slope and could see some challenges out there as it pertains to medium density in certain areas, although he thought when they looked at the flow of the potential medium and low to high, he thought it flowed very very well. He loved the fact that they have added parks and is something that was his biggest concern as it pertained to the amount of park space they had. He still thought there was room for additional park facilities on the Redevelopment Agency land. He thought there was too much land there for a golf course anyway. But there is opportunity for them to really be creative in those particular areas. He liked the flexibility of mixed use. It gave them the opportunity to look at different aspects as it pertains to where it is currently located. It gives the developer some flexibility also. He liked the way everything seems to flow on this particular recommended alternative and the university park as it pertains to housing. He thought they had met the needs of what he believes would be, and he would prefer the needs to be met in this area realizing that it will be a university, that is a responsibility for the Coachella Valley, but it was nice to know that they would have this housing area relatively close that would mitigate perhaps some undue traffic concerns that he would have in that area. There is an awful lot of ability for these folks to either ride bikes, walk, or whatever it might be in those particular areas. It was rather a long walk, but bike riding and so on and so forth with proper circulation elements which would be needed to put bike paths in and get creative as to how they can provide venues for this biking. When they go to Santa Barbara and they see the bike paths that drive around that university, they see thousands of bicycles and very few cars. That is what he was envisioning as they got to this. But he liked what was before them today. He could appreciate some of the concerns, but he liked what they had before them today and commended them for attempting to grasp everything they had talked about. Commissioner Tschopp said it seemed difficult to summarize all the thoughts given the mounds of data and study and so forth that has been put forth by GPAC, the staff, the consultants, the land owners and various other parties, but just to kind of summarize, although he shared some of the concerns that Commissioner Finerty pointed out on the higher density, he thought this was a general plan and the comment pointed out earlier that it does allow flexibility in the future was something i they needed to keep in mind. He thought the key again, as he said before, is in the 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16 2003 • o design and implementation and the cooperation and foresight of the City and landowners and so forth to make sure the General Plan is that. A general plan that can then be used to make development that truly works and works with everything else that is happening. He thought it had been pointed out that there are some limitations in that area, both from weather and topography, as well as traffic and things of that nature. And the development of the college. What he was saying was there could be some tweaking here, but was something they can leave up to the future and that they adopt the General Plan as recommended by staff today. At the same time just reiterating that the key is in the planning, and the implementation, and maybe even the change of certain areas so that the plan is implemented the way that the intent is today and maybe not exactly as it is drawn on the map in certain areas. Chairperson Campbell said that after seeing the new map they received, she thought it was very well spread out. She was very happy with the area up at Gerald Ford and Portola on the west. She still wasn't happy with the mixed use on the corner of Frank Sinatra and Cook, but it wasn't something she would vote against the General Plan on just because of that, because anything could come before them, for different land uses, or even Council could change all of this completely. two Regarding the high density residential, the Florida state shaped area, the developer pointed out that it wouldn't be feasible for homes and they could go ahead and look at a map and say what they want to do, but again, the topography is something else like Commissioner Tschopp mentioned. They might want it one way, but it might not work. So that wouldn't bother her. The mixed use also on the corner of Portola and Gerald Ford could go ahead and have some changes, but overall she would go ahead and agree with staff on this. They could go ahead and pick it apart and she was against some things, but she would go ahead and stay with the plan as it is now. Action: Commissioner Jonathan said he would go ahead and make a motion to approve the General Plan Land Use designation or to recommend a general plan land use designation as indicated in the recommended alternative. Commissioner Tschopp seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Finerty voted no). Mr. Drell said that in front of them was a revised copy of a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of the Draft General Plan as the commission amended it, including the Final EIR relative to the response to comments and all the various other aspects of their actions. Commissioner Jonathan asked how that changed ;r from the one that was in their packets. Mr. Drell said it had some blanks in it. 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16. 2003 Basically they filled in the blanks and it had some formatting things that didn't conform with the way we do resolutions. Commissioner Jonathan asked if there were any substantive changes. Mr. Drell said no. Commissioner Jonathan asked the commission if they were prepared for a motion on that. Chairperson Campbell said Yes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2239. Mr. Drell said it was with the understanding that in making the motion on the resolution they are making the motion for all the whereases. Commissioner Jonathan concurred. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lopez. Motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Finerty voted no). Commissioner Lopez reiterated his comments before that he thought staff did a marvelous job on this. It had been a long, long process. He thought they spend the right amount of time. Some might have thought the commission took too much time, but he thought they spent the right amount of time and what they put together was outstanding and he thanked everyone for their long hours and patience. Commissioner Tschopp also congratulated the people in the audience. He said their input had truly been helpful. Mr. Drell said that with a little bit of arm twisting they had really started to come up with very creative, high quality designs which he thought would make this an extraordinary area and unique in this valley. Commissioner Jonathan said that high density does not need to mean low quality. Our standards have always been high in this city and he didn't see that changing in any way. Mr. Drell concurred. Commissioner Jonathan also added congratulations to GPAC and staff for doing a great job, to John Criste and his staff, and he thought the process really took longer than any of them wanted going back to the beginning to over two years ago, but he thought the end result would justify all that effort, all that time and all those resources. Chairperson Campbell noted they had a lot of paper work, a lot of work, maps to look at, and she thought everyone did an excellent job. She also stated that the Planning Commission should be congratulated. Everyone agreed. 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION 8:30 A.M. DECEMBER 16, 2003 V. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Chairperson Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:58 a.m. (Commissioners Lopez and Finerty indicated that they would be absent from the evening meeting.) PHILIP DRELL, Jecretary ATTEST: v ONIA M. CAM BELL, Chairpe on Palm Desert Planning Commission /tm 25