The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994-11-16MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1994 CIVIC (-ray it n COUNCIL CHAMBER * s s * s s* * * * * s s s * * * s* s s s * s• s s * * * * * * * * * s L CALL TO ORDER Mayor/Chairman Crites convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. and immediately adjourned to Closed Session for the purposes listed under Section IV. He reconvened the meeting at 5:15 p.m. H. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmember/Member Jean M. Benson Councilman/Member Richard S. Kelly Mayor Pro-Tem/Vice Chairman Walter H. Snyder Councilman/Member S. Roy Wilson Mayor/Chairman Buford A. Crites Also Present: III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. CLOSED SESSION Request for Closed Session: i 1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation pursuant to Section 54956.9 Initiation of Litigation pursuant to Subdivision (c): Number of potential cases: j. 2. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation pursuant to Section 54956.9 Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b): Number of potential cases. MtNUITS ADJOURNED JOINT MEEzre1G OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND Rrur, v ruOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • V. ORDINANCFS For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO. 764 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON SOUTH SIDE OF EL PASEO BETWEEN SAN PABLO AVENUE AND LARKSPUR LANE, Erdzt Title: Ahmanson Commercial Development Plan Amended and _Restated Development Agreement (Continued from the Meeting of November 10, 1994). Mr. Diaz stated that there were certain matters at the last meeting that the Council wished to have clarified. One was the issue of street improvements for San Pablo between Highway 111 and El Paseo, and he showed the plans for those improvements which called for alteration of Highway 111 and widening of San Pablo. The development agreement would be revised to require the developer to install certain improvements while other costs would be borne by other funding such as Measure A and TUMF. He offered to answer any questions. Mr.? Folkers added that there was a small amount of right-of-way to be acquired, and staff felt this would be less than $50,000. He noted that the developer in previous discussions indicated he would pay for any widening required within City -owned right-of-way. Mr. Diaz stated that other matters raised regarding the development agreement and related to the disposition and development agreement of the Redevelopment Agency involved the type of development that would be taking place and the amount of assistance being given. The matter was discussed by the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC), and a memorandum from the Chair of that committee was included in the packets. He said the Committee recommended that the development agreement be revised to assure that a major tenant (defined as a tenant of 30,000 to 50,000 square feet minimum) be provided as an anchor for this development, that the City not provide any funding beyond the cost of 200 parking spaces unless it is to benefit the entire downtown area, and asked that the Council consult with the EDAC, El Paseo, and other interested groups prior to approving the proposed agreement. He said there was discussion at the meeting relative to the anti -raiding provisions within the disposition and development agreement, but there was no action taken on that issue; however, the Committee indicated it would like to look into this matter a little further and come back to the Council with recommendations. He said there was one underlying issue on this entire project, and that was that the EDAC felt the City should not have a direct financial stake or partnership within this development. He said that issue had been taken care of. 2 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 *********************************:**** In terms of the issue of requiring a major anchor tenant, Mr. Diaz stated that the applicant had indicated he would be willing to revise the agreement to require that within the first 100,000 square feet of development one tenant would be a minimum of 10,000 square feet, there would be two 7500 square foot tenants, and a fourth 5,000 square foot tenant for a total of 30,000 square feet. He said the agreement as now stated had a requirement that 30,000 square feet be developed within the first 100,000 square feet in a minimum of 5,000 square foot stores. He said the applicant had indicated that there was difficulty in the ability to bargain if a major tenant is required, there is the real difficulty of whether or not a major tenant can be secured, and the project can be successful and proceed without a major tenant. With regard to the item on the 200 parking spaces and whether we should pay just the cost of those 200 spaces, he said staff felt the project would proceed, the City was securing a total easement over the entire parking area, not just 200 spaces, the City would be controlling that parking through a parking management plan that the City would review and approve, and in terms of making sure the parking easement is worth what the City is being paid, an appraisal would be done and the value of that easement would be determined as part of that appraisal. Staff felt that in response to the EDAC's request that the City not provide any funding beyond the cost of 200 parking spaces unless it is to benefit the entire downtown area, staff felt there is a benefit to the entire area. MR. WILLIAM BONE, applicant, addressed the Council and said he believed the parking arrangement was very fair and that there was great benefit to El Paseo and the City. He said they had bent over backwards with regard to the anti -raiding issue and felt that what had been worked out at the prior meeting was a very fair arrangement to protect shop owners and tenants in the City. He said they also agreed to accept the additional street improvement conditions and would pay for them. They also agreed to the larger sized mini -anchors as read by Mr. Diaz. Councilmember Benson stated that the Council had received a fax yesterday indicating that Madison Development was not negotiating with Saks and that there was not a good faith effort on that. Mr. Bone responded that he had a copy of that fax and that there was no truth to it. He said there had already been several meetings and that there was another the next morning at 9:00 a.m in New York with Saks and the Madison people and that they were negotiating in good faith. He said they would be showing Saks three alternative configurations of the site plan and they had worked with the architect since the last meeting in looking at all the ways it would meet what they had said were their desires. Councilman Kelly questioned the request of the EDAC relative to the City Council consulting with the EDAC, El Paseo Merchants, and other interested groups prior to approving the proposed agreement and asked Mrs. Sonia Campbell, President of the El Paseo Business Association, to respond. Mrs. Campbell, owner of Spectacular Shades, 73-910 El Paseo, said that discussions with Mr. Bone indicated there would be an anchor store and some mini -anchors. She said 3 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT 111r.r..iriG OF THE PALM DFSERT . CITY COUNCIL. AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *.* * * * yesterday was the first time she learned that something else would be done there. She felt a meeting needed. to be held with the El Paseo Business Association to get a consensus from the Board and the merchants as to what they think should be there. She felt an anchor store was definitely needed to bring people to the street so that they would then shop the rest of El Paseo. Councilman Kelly asked what Mrs. Campbell would see as an alternative if there was not an anchor store as far as moving ahead with something on that property. She responded that it could either be left empty or a nice hotel could be built at that location. She said the merchants were concerned that having the smaller stores at that location would take business away from the existing stores on El Paseo. Mayor Crites stated he felt the City could build 200 parking spaces for a lot less than the amount of money in this agreement. He said part of this was to make sure we have an anchor at that location. Perhaps Mr. Bone was correct in stating that mini -anchors were just as good, but he said his initial bias was that they were not just as good. He felt the El Paseo Merchants needed a chance to say yes or no to this and that the Council had the obligation to allow them to comment on this development and to listen seriously to it. He felt to go ahead and approve something like this when it is not what people though they were getting was a grave mistake. Councilmember Benson agreed and said it was her understanding all along that we were waiting for an anchor. Without the anchor, she felt this was just creating more of what we already have. She did not see the rush in going through with this without the proper input as to what the community affected by this development wants and getting the other input on the anti -raiding so that everyone is happy. Councilman Wilson stated that while everyone in the beginning dreamed of a major department store as anchor for this development, everyone was also aware for the last four or five months that this had been changed and that we had the option of expanding the square footage or going with a smaller 10,000 square foot mini -stores. He said his concern was with changing the negotiations in the eleventh hour. He said the Council was ready to approve this last week but had a concern about the traffic on San Pablo and that concern was addressed. Councilman Kelly stated it was his understanding that if Council adopted the ordinance at this meeting, it would be for 167,500 square feet unless there was an anchor, which would bring it to 197,500 square feet. Mr. Diaz agreed and said that anchor or no anchor, there would still be the condition about the first 100,000 square feet as outlined above. Councilmember Benson stated she still felt this should be deferred until the first meeting in December in order to receive additional input. 4 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilmember Benson moved to continue this matter to the meeting of December 8, 1994, to get further input from the EDAC as to the anti -raiding and the El Paseo Merchants' sentiment on the issue of anchor or no anchor. Motion was seconded by Snyder. Councilman Kelly expressed concern that the Council hear from everyone on El Paseo, not just the Board of the El Paseo Merchants. Upon further discussion, Mr. Diaz was directed to provide adequate notice to allow everyone to be represented. Mayor Crites called for the motion, and it carried by unanimous vote. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF DIRECTION RELATIVE TO FILLING THE SCHEDULED VACANCY ON THE CITY COUNCIL DUE TO THE ELECTION OF S. ROY WILSON TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. Mr. Erwin stated that once Mr. Wilson is sworn in as a member of the Board of Supervisors on January 3, 1995, there is incompatibility between the two offices, and he will be required to choose. He said he assumed he would choose to resign from the City Council, and this would create a vacancy on the Council. He said the Council had three options: 1) Within 30 days of the vacancy, the Council may call a special election for the purpose of filling that office for the balance of the term to November of 1995; 2) in that same 30 days, appoint someone to fill the office for the period of time; 3) take no action, in which case the City Clerk will cause a special election to be called. Councilman Wilson asked if there was anything that precluded the Council from immediately beginning the process of appointing someone to fill the vacancy if it chose to go with that option. Mr. Erwin responded that there was nothing that would preclude the Council from starting immediately, knowing that the vacancy would occur. Mayor Crites asked how soon an election would occur after January 3, assuming an election were to occur. Mr. Erwin responded that it would not be until June, 1995, and then there would be the regular election in November. He noted that the filing period for the November election would open in July. Councilman Kelly said he felt the best possible scenario would be for the people to elect someone to this vacancy; however, because of the timing and cost, he felt the only option Council had was to appoint someone to fill the vacancy. He suggested using the City newsletter during the month of December to explain the procedure to the citizens and why the Council decided to make an appointment instead of going to an election. He said this would also give citizens an opportunity to apply if they wished to be considered for this vacancy. 5 MIN V 1V.*.t ADJOURNED JOINT 14izz iwv OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND Asir. Y ivLOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 s s s s*# * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .* s s s s Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, determine that the Council vacancy would be filled by appointment and direct the City Clerk to include in the December newsletter an explanation of this process and invitation for citizens to apply if they wish to be considered for this vacancy. Motion was seconded by Benson. Mayor Crites stated that if it was appropriate between now and the first meeting in December, he felt the Council should review the current committee/commission application to see if there are any modifications that need to be made to it. He suggested having this available for that first meeting in December as well as a time procedure as to when applications will be accepted, when the application period closes, when the Council will make the selections, etc. Councilman Wilson suggested using the press to put out the word right away for people to start thinking about this. Councilman Kelly amended his motion to include sending out a press release announcing what the Council is considering. Councilmember Benson agreed to amend her second. Motion carried by a 4-0-1 vote, with Councilman Wilson ABSTAINING. Councilman Wilson apologized for putting his colleagues through this procedure and said that when he filed to run for County Supervisor, it was with the understanding that his term of office would end in November, 1994, and there would be no problem like this because there would have been a Council election. However, the County Clerk of Riverside County requested that cities move their elections to alternate years so that it would not jam up the ballots on even years. He added that this happened after he filed to run for the Supervisor seat. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATION OF THE SECTION 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR 515.5 ACRES BOUNDED BY FRANK SINATRA DRIVE ON THE NORTH, COOK STREET ON THE EAST, COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE ON THE SOUTH, AND PORTOLA AVENUE ON THE WEST, Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, Applicant (Continued from the Meeting of October 13, 1994). THE FOLLOWING IS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THIS PORTION OF THE MINUTES Kay BAC Buford A. Crites, Mayor/Chairman BAA Bruce A. Altman, City Manager RAD Ramon A. Diaz, ACM/Director of Community Development RO Richard Odekirk 6 DES _ ADJOURNED JOINT M i iiG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * , * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s.* * * * DC Dennis Chappell AC Judge Andy Cribb DB Don Barkett MK Monica Kelly HC Herb Clagget DBX Dick Baxley MO Michael O'Lure EP Eugene Peters JD Jeff Davis DS Dick Shalhoub BS Bill Shaw FT Fred Tretta DBK Duke Baker BP Bill Powers BM Bob Meara BT Bobby Tonnelli IT Terri Taylor ST Shane Tayes MS Matt Saltmarsh BP Billy Penoflor AS Anthony Schlect JB Judy Beasley JS Justin Silver KG Kathy Gonzales MH Matt Homme BB Bob Bonnett MM Mike Marshall DF Dianne Funk JV John Vuksic GP Gary Paskowitz CS Curt Selder HW Harold Waite SG Stan Green GF Gerald Forrest PS Pearl Shapiro CK Charles Krohn ?? Name not given KK Ken Kumviatis (spelling) BH Barbara Haas SL Sid Lemerman ALS Al Simonean HD Hank DiRoma LL Leo Longo 7 MINvir ADJOURNED JOINT MEEITNG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL, AND Rzut, r uOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NF Norman Farley MP Marlene Paisokopf DBY Debbie Byk AH Aaron Hasson JE Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired DJE David J. Erwin, City Attorney JK John Kane, Traffic Consultant GE Greg Endow SRW S. Roy Wilson, Councilman/Member RSK Richard S. Kelly, Councilman/Member JMB Jean M. Benson, Councilmember/Member WHS Walter H. Snyder, Mayor Pro-Tempore/Vice Chairman SRG Sheila R. Gilligan, City Clerk/Agency Secretary BAC Mr. City Manager, I believe we will begin this evening by having a staff report on this. BAA Yes, we'll lead off with Mr. Diaz, Mr. Mayor. RAD Yes, Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as you will recall, this matter was continued from your, I believe it was your October 13th meeting. The staff at this time would recommend that you certify the Environmental Impact Report. The purpose of this particular hearing is to receive any potential comments or any comments on the Environmental Impact Report. You have, for the record, received a copy of the Environmental Impact Report, the technical studies portion of that Environmental Impact Report, as well as the comments and response to comments on the Environmental Impact Report. The resolution that you have before you for adoption sets forth the findings to certify the Environmental Impact Report and indeed that all potential adverse impacts, significant adverse impacts, to the environment as a result of the proposed project that is outlined within the report can be mitigated to below the level of significance and there is a monitoring program to assure that as development occurs that the mitigation measures identified and set forth within that report will be implemented. Mr. Dick Smith of Smith, Peroni, the consultant firm that did the Environmental Impact Report, is in the audience as well as the entourage of consultants who worked on all aspects of that report to answer any questions that you might have. I think all of us are familiar with the Section Four area and the proposed developments on that. I might indicate at this time that certifying the Environmental Impact Report does not allow the development of in and of itself does not allow the development of any portions and specifically looking at the other items that you have, the Conditional Use Permit items that you have before you this evening for public hearing. At this time, if Council has any questions regarding the process or the report itself, staff or I'll zing it over to Mr. Smith who will be happy to answer those questions. 8 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT 14,z6ZiL TG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC Okay, we have in the past already addressed questions to staff and to the consultant at various times. Are there additional questions at this time before we undertake a public hearing? Okay, there being none, I would simply reinforce what Director of Community Development noted is that the first item on the Agenda is an item that looks specifically at the impacts of development on the land and surrounding areas. It does not approve or disapprove any particular projects, whether that be hotels or museums, sports complex, golf courses, anything else. Those all take separate and individual actions at hearings by this body. So, with that in mind, then, I will open the public hearing and will ask for those people, the traditional way to do this is to start by asking for those people who have comments that area favorable to the adoption of the Environmental Impact Report to speak and then that is followed by those who are in opposition. I'd note that if this goes on for long periods, what I may do with my Council colleagues' permission is at some point to stop and say let's take 30 minutes or so of people from the other point of view and break that up rather than just having a long parade from one point of view. So, given that, we'll do that. We will ask that people hold their comments because of the number of people to five minutes. And the City Clerk has gone out and purchased a brand new fancy timer and has a yellow sheet of paper that says 30 seconds and a red sheet of paper that says that's it. And I see at least about four people out there that are former public speaking students of mine so I expect certainly that group of people to be aware of those time limits and to abide by them. So, given that, I'll start by asking for those who wish to speak in favor of the adoption of this Environmental Impact Report. And you, when you come to the podium, need to begin by giving your name and address, please. RO Mayor Crites and City Council, I'm Richard Odekirk, 43-670 Lisbon Way, Palm Desert. I'll try to keep my presentation brief, as I'm sure it's going to be a long night, and you've heard from me enough times that you certainly know what our project's about. But for those in the audience that are new to this issue, we are a 21-acre sports and recreation facility that includes three world class softball slash youth baseball fields that are unique in their design as small scale replicas of famous major league stadiums. We'll also have a covered basketball and roller hockey pavilion, sand volleyball courts, youth soccer fields, a multi- purpose field, batting cages, and children's play areas all surrounding a family style sports restaurant. We have a lot of supporters that are here tonight. Some of you I know, some of you I don't. I'd like at this time to ask your cooperation and have you remember that not everyone in this room agrees with us here tonight. Our opponents feel that for the most part we have a good project, but they also feel that a mile away is too close. I ask that you treat them with respect and courtesy as I know they'll treat us. I want to remind the Council we've been working on this project for two and a half years. We've been before you seven times. On every vote you've taken, you've approved us. We've also been given unanimous approval every time we've gone to the Planning Commission. We have received unanimous approvals from your citizens committees like the EDAC, the Promotion Committee, and the Parks and Rec Committee. We have complied with your requests and agreed to have an EIR and an economic feasibility studies done on our park, and we have met with The Lakes, Desert Falls, and Silver Sands, and we explained in depth how our project was designed, 9 1 BLS 1 �. ADJOURNED JOINT kr r.iii G OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 • * * * * s s * * * * * * * * * a* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *. * * * * programmed, and managed in an attempt to educate them and ensure them that from nearly a mile away we would have no negative affect on their lives. But we haven't satisfied everyone. Some opponents object that we are pay for play facility, as if that were a negative thing. I've tried to point out that we're no different than any parks and rec sports program except that we do it better. City programs in softball, basketball, and volleyball are pay for play also. Their league and tournament teams all pay fees and our fees must be competitive to theirs. But we will run our programs more efficiently and certainly it'll be built to a far higher level of quality than any government run park in the country. Some opponents complain that we are an adult facility which seems to bother them. The truth is, we are for athletes of all ages. We have made arrangements to accommodate some form of youth activity every night of the week, rotating between baseball, basketball, soccer, roller hockey, football, and our batting cages. The opponents will tell you we don't belong on Section Four, that it's a residential neighborhood only. It's clear that this area does have residential in it, which their clubs area. But with the building of the Marriott, things began to change, and with the development of the Section Four project, the area will have two more golf courses, two hotels, more Marriott timeshare units, a golf clubhouse, and a conference center site. You'll also hear complaints about the traffic we'll generate. Well, the truth is that our sports project will account for only five percent of the entire Section Four traffic, except for the few times a year when we run a Saturday or Sunday afternoon charity celebrity game. And as far as parking for that is concerned, we'll have to handle our parking for that the same way that it is properly handled now for the Bob Hope Classic and the professional tennis tournaments. The light and noise issues have been addressed by the FIR experts who have studied them and determined that from a mile away they were not going to be a problem for the residents. And they also complain about the potential for bad element, gangs and trouble makers coming to our park. Let me touch on that for a second. We are a fully secured fenced facility, one entrance in and out with a security guard at the gate. Our job is to attract families. Our success as a business depends on that. If we allow gangsters, hoodlums, a bad element in our complex, our business will fail. Our security guard and us as management have to make sure that doesn't happen. You have my pledge that it won't. On top of that, those types of people, the bad element, they don't come to a sports facility, they want to go somewhere else. Let me close by saying that if you give us the chance, we will provide Palm Desert with the most beautiful, unique, and famous sports complex in the country. I'm available to answer your questions. At this point, I would like to introduce the president of our committee for the citizens who support the Palm Desert sports complex, Dennis Chappell. BAC Three of my colleagues have already asked me to remind folks that this public hearing is not about issuing a use permit to this facility. This public hearing is about the impacts of development on all of Section Four and all of the various things having to do with traffic and so on and so forth, water use, and everything else that are generated by the entirety of which the sports complex is certainly a component, and so if people would to address themselves to the EIR matters in this public hearing. 10 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * .* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s * * * * * * * * * DC Hi, my name is Dennis Chappell. I live at 74-800 Sheryl Drive, Palm Desert. Mayor Crites, fellow Councilmembers, what I'd like to first off do is express our endorsement from the Chamber and the Desert Contractors Association, of which I am president of, for the Section Four complex as a whole, but in regards to the softball complex, the big league dreams park, I'd like to make it a record of the Council tonight and to provide you with endorsement cards for this. We have 2500 cards, of which 700 have been pulled out that are not within the immediate area of Palm Desert and the sports complex. These I would like to make a part of the official record. Second off, the kind of people that has been mentioned in the past who go to these types of complexes and play in these types of teams have been made in a negative way. What I'd like to show to you is a team that I sponsor, softball team, adult softball team, and which I also play on, along with many employees. We also have as chiropractor, a CPA. These are the type of people that play in these leagues. I also support and sponsor youth leagues which my children play in, soccer and softball, as well as many people in this audience today. The vice president of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce and president of the Desert Contractors Association, we have a lot of people here that are in favor of this sports complex and the entire Section Four. We have a commitment from the developer that this complex will be built by local contractors in addition to the fact that it will be used by local people in this community. What I'd like to do instead of having everyone of those here who have asked to participate in this program, instead of having them come up one at a time, and I'd ask that the opposition do the same, that we have those who are here stand in support of this project, support of what it stands for for this community, for our children, for the adults, so that we can live in this community as young adults and old adults together. Would you please stand. We'd like to ask that when you get to the portion of the Council meeting for the Conditional Use Permit, that you don't take into consideration continual threats of those who don't want this city to grow and don't want the participation of all ages of this community, that you do not listen to those threats and that you look at those of this community who make up the entire community and not one section of the community. With that, I thank you. BAC One question, sir. Councilman Kelly would like to look at one of the cards just to see what it says and so on. RSK (unclear) DC Okay. BAC Send one around. Thank you, sir. DC Next I'd like to call on Judge Andy Cribbs, please. AC Good evening, Council. My name is Graham Anderson Cribbs. I live at 1322 Compadre Road, Palm Springs, California. I was introduced as a judge, it just so happens that in my daylight hours, as Mr. Erwin knows, I am a Superior Court judge sitting in Indio in 11 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MELETASIG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *•* * * * * * * * * * * * * * Department 227. However, my real station in life is what happens on the weekends. And what happens on the weekends are very important to me. I happen tobe one of those individuals who, excuse me, who has been involved in the desert for some 30 years at this point. My wife and family we settled here back in 1965. I came over here from San Diego, accepted a teaching spot or a position with the Palm Springs Unified School District, in an effort to obtain a coaching job. I taught with the Palm Springs Unified School District and coached there for some ten years, and so I feel that I have some expertise or background with regard to the youth and development of our community and the respect of what we're talking about with regard to what it is that we're dealing with here today. I want to make it absolutely clear, especially to Mr. Erwin, that I'm not here speaking to you folks as a Superior Court judge, okay? That is out the window, it happened to be mentioned, I'm acknowledging the fact that I happen to occupy that position, but that's really not why I'm here, okay? We in this valley have seen a remarkable transition for you folks that have been here for the past 30 years. This entire valley was a pretty slow moving place for a long period of time. We have come a long way since that time, things have gotten progressively better, and yet there is an element of our community that has gotten progressively worse over the years. Unfortunately, in my position as a judge, I have to deal with a . segment of the population that creates problems that have to be dealt with on a daily basis. We have seen remarkable growth in terms of the population that we have here, the athletic programs that we have been able to experience and witness, and our school systems throughout the valley. I think that with the advent of La Quinta High School being built, the recent development of Cathedral City High School, and the unbelievable overachievement, in my opinion, and success that Cathedral City High School had with regard to their athletic program, is a testimony to what it is that the teachers and other persons committed to the youth of this community stand for. It is my hope that as part of what it is that we're doing here tonight, that you people will go ahead and approve the Conditional Use Permit with regard to the piece of property that's being talked about for the development of this particular project. My involvement in this matter is not simply to come down here and talk to the Odekirks. I happen to have attained that magical age of 50 some four years ago, and so I have qualified to participate in what is now commonly referred to as senior softball. It is a slow pitch league, and I must tell you if there's anything that any of us can get involved in at age 50, it would be that kind of a program. In fact, I would encourage everyone that happens to be here to get involved in that so that we don't have a lot of 50 year old juvenile, or adult delinquents roaming our streets that I have to take care of at some time in the future. All joking aside, I think that this is something that we cannot afford not to approve ultimately. The advent and the adoption and the building of the recreational facility in Indio this past year was a remarkable achievement. I'm very disappointed to know that the City of Coachella, for whatever reason and I understand the pros and cons with regard to that particular situation, that they saw fit not to go ahead and develop their youth center for their own community. But it is the kind of thing and these are the kinds of things that we need to have in our desert valley so that we can as adults indicate to the youth of our community that we are interested in them, that we support them, and we're willing to go the extra mile in order 12 MINUTES _ ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * to provide facilities for them in an effort to keep them off the streets as we here them so often talked about. Thank you very much. BAC Thank you, sir. DB My name is Don Barkett, and I live at 76-354 Honeysuckle Drive, which is in Palm Valley Country Club, which is in the neighborhood of this parcel that we're talking about along with some others. I'm going to be very brief. I'm following youth because I'm 71 years old and I substitute teach in our public school system, and I find that when we have young people in organized sports, the majority of them are not the troublemakers and they're the ones who will help our community. I've lived here for nine years, and I've seen us grow from a small town to one of the most progressive small cities in the State of California, and I don't see how we can afford to stop the progress that this type of complex would give us in our community. Thank you. BAC Thank you, sir. MK Hello Mr. Mayor, hello City Council, my name is Monica Kelly, and I'm a business owner at 73-990 El Paseo, a resident at 45-800 Verba Santa in the City of Palm Desert. I am here in favor of the recreation facility. By not allowing this facility to take place will be depriving us who live here year-round and have children we are raising in this community. As a business owner, it will increase tourism, and as a mother it will be a safe, drug -free environment for our children in this community to take pleasure in. I would like to point out that the majority of these opponents to this development are not year-round residents of this community or have businesses here. Though they may use this as their legal permanent residence, they are not. By allowing them to railroad this recreational facility in our community will only stifle the growth of Palm Desert that we are all so desperately in need of and want for our city. You as City Councilpeople have been elected to serve the people in this area that best fits the growth in this community for all of us. I strongly urge you to do the right thing and allow us the recreational facilities that this city and the people who live here so desperately need for business and for the children of our valley. Thank you. HC Good evening, my name is Herb Claggett, I am a part-time, 30-868 Bloomsbury in Cathedral City, part-time instructor at College of the Desert and full-time instructor at La Quinta Middle School. My experience in the classroom with youth is makes it very easy for me to see in a short period of time which kids are at risk for gang membership and drug abuse. After talking with the kids for a few minutes, it's easy to see that the kids that are involved in after school activities such as athletics, dance, music, they're the kids that go on to lead productive lives and are the ones that are successful in school. This development will be a benefit for the future Councilmembers of this valley. We need more things like this to help them and give them positive direction to go with their lives. I think that if you approve this, all the people of Palm Desert will eventually benefit from it. 13 MR‘ Vilk ADJOURNED JOINT MEEtING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss'ssss DBX Good evening, my name is Dick Baxley, I live at 38-395 Nasturtium in Palm Desert, and I've lived here for about ten years. I would like to tell the City Council that this project is a wonderful project, and I think the entire city and all of its residents will truly benefit from it, and I certainly hope you are able to certify the EIR this evening. Thank you. MO Good evening, Mayor and Councilmembers. My name is Michael O'Lure, I live at, I reside at 73-170 San Nicholas, Palm Desert, California. I followed the project and I've heard the opponents about the sports park and traffic that it generates. But why aren't they opposed to the rest of the ambitious Section Four plan? The sports park is going to generate a very small percentage of the total traffic in this project. Why is it...excuse me, why is it only the sports park traffic that's objectionable in this thing? It seems to me that these opponents would be a lot more believable if they were concerned and opposed to the hotel, the conference center, the golf course traffic as well. They should stop picking on the sports park, and please vote yes on tonight's sports park. Thank you. EP My name is Eugene Peters. I live in Monterey Country Club, Palm Desert. I'm a retired educator. I've been a high school coach and a principal and... BAC You might speak a little bit closer to the microphone, sir. EP Very good. I came prepared to tell you how important the outside activities are to kids, which has certainly been my experience, but this is the environmental part, and I would like to comment on what I've heard are the concerns for lighting at this park, and if you will recall we at Monterey Country Club had the same concerns on the field lighting you put in the complex here. And I'd like to congratulate whoever is responsible for designing those lights. I think they're outstanding and they're different from other field lights that we've seen. And it throws very little light outside other than just the actual playing field itself. You don't get a lot of bleed off from the lighting, and I and many of my neighbors do not find them at all objectionable. And our property borders the ballfield. All there is is a 60 foot wide street between the two. And I'd just like to point out that if you use the same type lighting as I understand they will use, I can't imagine that that's going to be an objectionable problem. Thank you. JD Good evening. My name is Jeff Davis, I live at 73-373 Country Club Drive. The thing I'd like to point out to the City Council, if I may, is my lack of understanding the opposition to this project. The developer it seems has taken every step available to him in order to satisfy members of the City Council and members of this city, the citizens of the City, to show them that he is willing and able to put out a park that the City can be proud of, something that is going to be very special to this city. He has gone through the EIR, he has gone through a feasibility study for this project, and it has all come back very positively. There are a few members of our city that should be ashamed of themselves for opposing this project. I don't understand what, what they, what they see against the project, what their, what their fears are of the project, but the project is going to be something that they're not going to be 14 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT 14irr,iiaaG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND r ur,v r.WOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DS BS FT DBK ashamed of. The project is going to be something that's very special to this city. I urge you to pass the, the uh, the FIR and get on with this project. Thank you. Mayor Crites, members of the City Council, my name is Dick Shalhoub, I am the president of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce and also a member of the City's Promotion Committee. And I know that this part of the hearing is designed specifically for the impact study, and I want to let you all know that the Chamber wholeheartedly endorses it, we want to make sure that the development takes place in general, and in particular in particular we want to make sure that the complex is a viable part of any development that occurs in that area. We have examined this, we've been through it, we know it's a quality project put up by quality developers, and we see it as a complement to the vision that you've all created here for the City of Palm Desert. We urge you to move on with it. Thank you very much. Hello, my name is Bill Shaw, and I live at 42-242 Omar Place in Palm Desert. My wife and I own a piano store, Desert Organ and Piano in Rancho Mirage, and my wife teaches piano lessons, and we have over 100 children coming to our store a week to take piano lessons, and we see a great difference in what kind of children come out of our store by being organized in such a program. We feel the sports center would offer that same kind of program. It gives an alternative to all the problems that we have today that we're all aware of, especially with gangs and graffiti that comes out of gangs, the drugs and everything. We feel that this would be a great benefit for the children of the community. This is a growing community, and you're going to children, no matter what. It would be a great way to organize their time and I don't want to see the squeaky wheel get the grease. I hope everybody's listening tonight. Good evening. My name is Fred Tretta, I live at 72-479 Desert Flower Drive in Palm Desert. Good evening to Mr. Mayor and Councilpeople. I'm rather happily surprised to see so many people here tonight. I think it's wonderful because everybody believes that they're correct. I'm 73 and I still want to avail myself of whatever I can do as the 71 year old kid who spoke just a moment ago. I don't see how you can hold back progress. This is nothing detrimental to our place. I'm proud to be living here. You know, I've only been here going on five years. I'm a member of the Rotary, I'm a member of the Chamber, and I'm a member of the DCA. And while I do understand these people who don't it, I understand what they're thinking. And to a degree I could understand where their fears might lie. But with all the preparations and with everything that's been done in the two and half years of study, and with the presentations made to you good people up there, I think it is time to move on. It's something that we need, it's something we'll enjoy and it'll give all of us a lot of pleasure, but it will be good business. I thank you for your time. Good evening, members of the Council. My name is Duke Baker, I live at 73-435 Agave Lane in Palm Desert. I've lived here full time for 16 years, and during that time I've watched our city grow and grow and grow to become obviously the most important city in this valley, most important because it's widely recognized that we have the best stewardship, 15 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT 142re, wits OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *..* * * * BP the best managed city in the State of California. I've watched us grow geographically as more and more unincorporated communities around our area have requested annexation to our city, finding that this was the proper place to be and the proper political forum to be involved with. I've watched our population grow, not just in terms of numbers, but I've watched a dramatic change in the demographics. We're no longer a community of retirees, we're no longer a community of seasonal residents. We're a full time family community. The needs we've had to develop schools are a testimony to that. I've watched us grow economically. We all know that we're now the number one retail center in the desert. I've also watched the building of a long list of important projects. I want to name a few: the Palm Desert Town Center, Marshall's Center, Waring Plaza, Marriott's Desert Springs Resort, McCallum Theatre, the C.O.D. Driving, the Embassy Suites hotel, the rebirth of El Paseo, this outstanding Civic Center that we're meeting in tonight, the wonderful high school, Palm Desert High School, and the area out there the Lucky Center at Country Club and Monterey, the Ralph's Center at Country Club and Cook, and last on my short list the Joslyn Senior Center. And I'll take a minute to tell you that I was one of the seven people who founded the Joslyn Senior Center. Our president was the first Mayor of this city, Mr. Hank Clark, who some of you will remember. We started in an empty storefront on El Paseo. This marvelous facility that we have for our senior people in the desert would not be here if we had not had the benefit of assistance from the City of Palm Desert and conviction on the part of the City Council that this was a sound thing to do. I'm reciting this because I want to remind you that I hope you'll do the same thing with this project and provide something that's important and necessary for the young people in our community. Thank you. Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, my name is Bill Powers, and I'm a past president of the Chamber of Commerce and a member of the Promotion Committee and I run a business here in town at 41-700 Corporate Way. I truly understand some of the opponents' concerns. We all like living where it's secure, it's beautiful, in a community with a good mix of mature people and young families. In many ways I wish our valley could stay the same and never change, but change is inevitable, and our valley will change. There's an old saying that my aunt who is 87 reminded me of when I was coming down here. In order to stay the same, we must change. And I think if you think about that it's very appropo to what we're about here tonight. I know for a fact our population is going to change, it's going to grow rapidly here in the desert. We are looking at probably a half a million people in the next ten to fifteen years. The challenge you have as representatives of our city is to properly plan for that growth, and I think the City and you should be congratulated for the outstanding job you've done til now, and we expect the same in the future. The quality of our existing development is excellent. In planning for growth, you've got to provide for schools, for churches, for shopping centers, theaters, parks, and recreation centers. These centers are necessary, and if they're done right, they're very valuable for our society. All you have to do is look over here at the Civic Center Park, an outstanding achievement. I feel the same for our sports complex that's on later on in this and our environmental impact here needs to be improved and especially approve the complex later. And I thank you and I urge you to do that. 16 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT &tit 1 i14G OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND r ui yr i.OPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BM Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Bob Meara, I live at 1042 Via San Michael in Palm Springs. I'm here to make a plea on behalf of the people behind this project that you go ahead with this project. Firstly, with regards to the environmental impact of the program, I think that a strong similarity exists here in the intentions of the developers of this project to match it with the tennis facility in Indian Wells, and that is not obtrusive to the community, that it fits in well and actually does a lot more for the land that's there now and makes it very attractive as opposed to being detracted from it. Secondly, with regards to the economic development issue, and I really think this is clearly a strong economic development opportunity for the City of Palm Desert in regards to developing a source, a strong source of revenue and also embracing a project that really has fulfillment of a strong need. We can see here that there is a need for this project specifically and so there are two views on economic development. There is one that holds that we embrace good projects that have merit, that have done their homework and presented things effectively. And then there is the view that embraces the status quo, and I think that when you look at the people who are embracing the status quo, typically you look at people that have self-serving needs, people that are trying to keep what they have specifically without regard to the general nature- of the community. And I think that you're also looking ironically at people who, throughout their lives, have made things happen, who have sought needs and fulfilled them and been very successful. So it's kind of ironic that they would be the ones that would stop something like this which is doing the very thing that they have done. And I hope that when I'm in that kind of a position in the future that I would not stand in the way of something that is good for the community. Thank you. BT TT Good evening, Mayor Crites, members of the Council. My name is Bobby Tonnelli, I reside at 73-555 Shadow Mountain Drive, Palm Desert, California. I've been asked to relate to you that Steve Frisbie, the President of the Desert Communities Hotel and Motel Complex, has fully endorsed and supports this project. He also speaks for the Vacation Inn, Embassy Suites, Palm Desert Lodge, Travelers Inn, and Holiday Inn Express. All these hotels have previously written or contacted you, but they wanted you to hear their support again tonight. Thank you. Hi, my name is Terri Taylor, and I live at 330 Augusta Drive, which is located at Desert Falls Country Club in Palm Desert, and first of all I'd like to say that this project the first I had heard about it was about eight months ago, and I just thought, wow, this sounds like a great idea, and I can't wait til it comes to the desert. Just recently this week, I had gotten some information that this project was possibly going to be put on hold because of opposition coming from the country club that I lived in. Well, two concerns were number one, here I thought it was a great thing and now you know we've got opposition coming from where I live, which must mean they must have legitimate reasons to be concerned. So I proceeded with contacting several different people to find out exactly what was going on with this project and what the concerns of the homeowners in Desert Falls were concerned with. A few of those concerns were the lighting, the traffic, property values, and the types of people that would attract, be attracted to this type of a project. So I thought okay well what effect 17 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEEi1NG OF ME PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 s s s s s* s s«* a a** s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s would it have, what effect would the lighting have on our project where I live. So I walked around Desert Falls and I looked over to where the project was going to be, and I've driven the area several times in the last I guess couple hours today trying to make sense of all this, and I mean the lighting really is not going to have an effect on Desert Falls. I mean, I can't see, if you were to sit up against the wall that overlooks Cook Street out towards where the project is, I mean the telephone poles barely even cover this much of the bottom of the mountains, just like from eyesight looking forward, and so if you add some lights to that, well fine. You might see some lights out there, but there's also a project coming in between that and Desert Falls which is from what I understand it's going to be a seven story hotel complex which is some timeshare thing that's going on. I'm not real sure what's the complete project. But, so you put this in there and you're definitely not going to have problems with the lights. The traffic situation, the Section Four project that's going in, from what I understand there's like 23,000 cars projected to come through this area each day for the hotel, whereas the sports complex we're projecting maybe 1100 cars per day, which is like minute. When I asked the people that are opposing this why don't they do something against that, they say well they're too big, I mean, you know, I mean, they're just going to get in there and we can't say anything about it. So, fine, what are you doing, picking on the little guy that is sitting back trying to bring about dreams, and this is what it is, it's three guys that have gotten together to bring forth a dream that they have to our community. So anyways, what I did, to sum this all up, is I put together a petition, I'm going to read to you what the petition says and the results of what I got today. And this is just going out after one o'clock today trying to get people together for this. "As residents of Desert Falls Country Club, located on the corners of Country Club, Cook, and Frank Sinatra, we are in support of the Big League Dreams sports park. Given the concerns of homeowners opposing this project, and given the facts opposing such concerns, we strongly support this project and believe it will be a tremendous asset to our community. We take great pride in the city we live and have confidence in our Planning Department and City Councilmembers, including staff, to oversee that such a project will be well -planned and developed, to not only add credibility to our city in which we live but also show our support for our youth.. We trust our city won't allow this project to fall wayside to other neighboring cities. We support a prompt response in allowing this project to go forth and no longer be delayed." I went to every door that looked like anyone was inside. I went to 25 people, and out of 25 people, 19 are in support of this project, eleven...or two opposed, three declined to state, and one would like more information, of which I plan to take on Saturday to them. I feel that if I had more time, I could even, you know, go and find out what more people have to say about this project. One thing that I had mentioned in this petition about allowing this project to fall wayside to other cities, from what I understand, Palm Springs is sitting back waiting. If this thing does not go through, they're going to snatch it up. And also not to mention, a member from another city outside of Palm Springs called me and said, Terri, just leave it alone, I want it in my city, and I said, no, no, I live in Palm Desert, I want it in my city. And I'm not going to bring up the riffraff, I feel that issue has been addressed...I' m • sorry. Thank you. 18 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT 14.a..4iu4G OF THE PALM DESERT . CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *.*.* * * * BAC Thank you. ST Good evening, Council. My name's Shane Tayes, and I live at 73-373 Country Club Drive. I'd like to ask the opponents of the sports park one question. You're a mile away. There are two golf courses, two hotels, a conference center, timeshare units, and a lot of landscaping being built in between. How in the world are they going to see or hear the sports park, and how are we possibly going to mess up their lifestyle. This simply isn't fair, and I ask the Council to be fair in their decision. Thank you. MS BP Good evening, Mr. Mayor and fellow Councilmembers. My name is Matt Saltmarsh, and I live at 72-770 Willow Street. I'm a student at College of the Desert, and my friends and I have come tonight to support this awesome sports complex. I'm excited at the opportunity of playing there and possibly getting a job there. I'm surprised and confused that I'm hearing people complain about me and my friends signing cards supporting this complex. Don't they realize that we're future homeowners and city residents of this city? I'm also disappointed that the older people opposing this project are making us feel so unwelcome in this community. Please, vote yes tonight and provide us young people a quality place for recreation. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council. My name's Billy Penoflor and I live at 73-555 Shadow Mountain. I'd just like to say I get off work at five o'clock, and it's already dark out. I'd love to have the opportunity to play in the sports program after work. I can't golf after work, and even if there was light out, I couldn't begin to afford the rates. Even your new public golf course will charge during this time of the year. You of the Council have taken great care of the guy who golfs and has money. Isn't it right you now take care of the little guy, the working man. Please help us and approve this complex tonight. Thank you. AS Good evening, my name is Anthony Schlect and I reside at 77-777 Country Club Drive. I'd just like to say that there are a lot of people here tonight in the opposition that still think this park is a good idea and a necessity for this community. It's the location that they complain about, but if the Environmental Impact Report addressed all the potential problems of lights, noise, and traffic, the only thing left for them to complain about is the people it would attract. I'd like for them to tell us who they're objecting to — families, children, minorities, or just people less financially well off? From a mile away there's really no good reason not to approve this park. Thank you. JB Good evening, my name is Judy Beasley, I reside at 75-589 Desert Horizons Drive in Indian Wells. I'm a realtor with Grubb and Ellis Realty, and as a realtor and a permanent resident of the desert for the last 15 years, I'm somewhat concerned regarding the protests against this project. I understand that some of the protest is a concern about the property values. Developments such as the sports park and the Section Four development will enhance the 19 Maigab ADJOURNED JOINT MEE'rrNG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 *************s************************ JS KG BB desert and complement and increase the living lifestyle, the lifestyle of everybody that lives here. This has a positive effect on property values, not a negative effect. These amenities attract second home buyers and a permanent population base which positively equates to higher property values. People who live and move here are people who enjoy the outside and are active in sports such as golf and tennis. They are also interested in other sports activities as participants and spectators. The more entertainment activities that the desert can provide is an asset to the community and therefore to each housing community. The development of Section Four will also positively affect the environment. With this area developed, it will significantly cut down on the problem of blowsand and also the wind velocity from the west. This in itself will have a positive effect on property values, especially for the people who live in Desert Falls. With all of these items taken into consideration, I cannot believe that this development will negatively affect property values, rather it should increase property values. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers. My name is John Silver, I reside at 73-373 Country Club, and I just want to say how unfair these opponents are when they say it's okay for young people to wait on them in restaurants and be their servants but we're not good enough people to come into their neighborhoods and play our games, that we will ruin their neighborhood. I also don't know how they can be against something they know nothing about. What experience do they have of past projects of this nature cause a problem to them. This is a first class project with an intent to enhance the City. Please take in account the other inhabitants of the City of Palm Desert and approve this great project. Thank you. Good evening, my name is Kathy Gonzales, and my husband and I are small business owners here in Palm Desert. We have several reasons to be in favor of this project and development of this area, first of all because we have a small business, we know that the City lacks sometimes a lot of revenue during the rest of the year when the season is over. Out last season was a pretty short one. We feel that this will definitely attract people to the moderate businesses, not just to the high end which we as a city always attract, and we feel that this will also help all the businesses, not just El Paseo, but Palm Desert in general and the desert valley, too. Also, we have two sons, and I have to say that I got very tired of listening to them say well, there's nothing to do, there's nothing to do in Palm Springs, or there's nothing to do, so they would head out to other cities. I think this would be a wonderful thing to have here for the growth of this city, which we all know is going to be tremendous over the next years. I certainly favor a vote in favor of this. Thank you. Members of the Council, my name is Matt Homme, I'm from 73-911 Shadow Lake Drive. I'm here on behalf of Gordon Jensen, who's the president of Pony League baseball in the valley, in order to reaffirm his support for this project. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council, and staff. My name is Bob Bonnet, I live at 76-593 Begonia in Palm Valley Country Club. Having been a contractor and developer for over 35 years, I feel I have some experience in this area. I cannot see but a quality product that 20 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETANG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 s s s* s s s s s * s* s s* *** s s s * s* s* s• s s s * * * s s s* they're trying to produce, so I do' not see any way in the world we cannot go forward with this. I urge you to vote yes. Thank you. MM Hello, my name is Mike Marshall. I live at... BAC Would you pull the mike up a bit... MM My name is Mike Marshall. I live at 72-770 Willow Street here in Palm Desert. I have been told that the opponents of the park object to the celebrity games being held here. It's a weak argument, considering that they will only happen a few times a year. For example, the Bob Hope Classic, the pro tennis, they attract many more people, 10,000 to 20,000 people, and those are dealt with properly. Desert Falls recently held the Don Drysdale tournament. There were a lot of spectators there. Everybody had fun there, and it didn't ruin anybody's life. These people need to stop thinking of little things to worry about. It's unhealthy, it is just making them bitter over the little things that will be well taken care of. Please approve this project tonight. Thank you. DF Good evening, Mayor, City Council. My name is Dianne Funk. I live at 72-755 Pitahaya in Palm Desert, and I must say I, too, am opposed to change. I wish my little neighborhood was as lovely as it was 18 years ago when I moved there. I wish I didn't have to hear the traffic going up Highway 74. I wish I didn't have to drive home and see a large wall that has suddenly been put there by Ahmanson Development Desert Crossing. Even though we resist change, I think it's important that we work together to make sure that change works well within our society and within our civilization. I work on the Civic Arts Committee and I work with Ted Lennon and we work very closely together to make sure that Desert Crossing will be as wonderful for .our community as possible. I just came up here to read two things. Time Magazine, November 14th, Going Soft on Crime. October 24th the National Recreation and Parks Association released a nationwide study of prevention programs which offered compelling evidence that recreation and training can contribute directly to declines in crime and juvenile arrest rates. The message may be getting through. A small but growing number of mayors and judges, most of them Republicans, and breaking party ranks say that it is prevention, not inflexible punishment, that puts a dent in crime. And then I'd like to read, To Whom it May Concern. My name is Caroline Funk. I am 15 years old, and I am attending Palm Desert High School. I am a growing teenager just like the other hundreds of students at my school. The idea of the ballfields for the youth is a great idea. I am sure I am talking for a lot of other teens. We have been waiting for an opportunity like this for years. There's not a lot of things for kids to do in Palm Desert except for the exception of the YMCA. If you think about it, this could help the majority of kids with nothing to do get involved in a group activity within the community. People and kids can make new friends and there could be a lot less hatred and violence between people. This idea would be great for the community, families, and youth. So, please, let's work together and put this together. Sincerely, Caroline Funk. 21 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT Nir e.i i G OF 111E PALM DESERT . CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * • * * • • • • * * * * * * • .* * * * JV Hello, good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers. My name is John Vuksic, I reside at 38-145 Crocus Lane in Palm Valley Country Club, very close to the project. And I want to say that my wife and I are very excited about living in this community. It's a very sophisticated community and it's very progressive, and we are really looking forward to raising our family here, being involved in community affairs, and making an impact and possibly growing old here. And as, I know I speak for a lot of other new parents, as a new parent, I'm very excited about this project. I think it makes a lot of sense, especially in the location that it's in. It's far enough away, and as an architect, I know that if it's done well, it will only benefit everyone in the community and you know and I know that these fellows will do this project well. Thank you. GP CS HW My name is Gary Paskowitz, I'm at 73-373 Country Club Drive, and I just want to point out that a true community is where schools, shopping areas, schools, and parks are all in one area where everyone can get to them, not put out way out by the freeway. And that is what a community is. This project is right where it should be. Thanks. Hello, my name is Curt Selder, I live at 73-373 Country Club, Palm Desert, and I'd just like to ask the Councilmembers this. You are the elected members of the City, and not the opposition. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Harold Waite, and I'm a 14 year resident of Indian Wells. I'm coming here as a friend and a neighbor to discuss some of the things that we have done that you have to make some decisions on. For some time now, I've actually been quite active in political as well as civic affairs, and in this process for one reason or another I've had the occasion to tallc to several hundred of the residents of Indian Wells, and I can tell you that the majority of our people are extremely interested in the use that you folks make of your land, certainly as it affects our environment, it will affect your environment. And we're quite interested in seeing the right thing done in the right way, and we believe that your record for accomplishing that kind of thing is quite good, and we're impressed. You right now are actually faced with a decision that we were faced with several years ago when we were asked to either approve or disapprove the construction of two golf courses in our city, actually, loationwise and what we might consider to be downtown Indian Wells, if there is such a thing. Now among the developers of this property happened to be Charlie Passerell whom you remember as a famous tennis star, and part of Charlie's proposal included a sports complex which we now refer to as the tennis stadium. And you can well imagine the uproar of objections that our City Council and certainly our people were faced with when he talked about a tennis stadium to seat 10,000 people at one time. The uproar was almost deafening, so a consideration had to be made as to what the options are. If we didn't go through with this project, what are we going to do with that land? We had several hundred acres of land that was fallow, was wasteful, and which caused even health conditions with blowing dust and that kind of thing. So I think that four options were established. The first one, we'll call it Option A, and it was to approve the project as presented. Option B would be to disallow the project and favor a residential development, with construction of 22 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * .* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * « * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC SG single-family dwellings probably in the low density area of three per acre. The third possibility was change the zoning to allow certain commercial development. Then the last one, and not least, was leave the property as it is for future generations to decide so that we would east that dust now into perpetuity. After a tremendous amount of debate, and a lot of you were even a party to some of those debates and I think were certainly acquainted with a lot of people that were involved, and it was quite a bruehau for a long, long time, however, intelligence prevailed and Plan A was adopted. In other words, approve the project as presented. Now, this project has become a model for the use of City -owned r..,r c,. tJ throughout California and actually throughout the United States. We've actually got people visiting our city, looking at this project, and saying hey, how did you accomplish something like this in the middle of such a populated area. Ladies and gentlemen, it really did work. It has made our community one of the most desirable residential communities to be found anywhere, it has provided income for the city which ensures a healthy financial condition for many years ahead, while it still preserves the pristine appearance of our city. And as I say, it makes it an extremely desirable community to live in. I am not going to presume to make a recommendation to solve your problem. I can only say with authority that our similar problem was solved by seriously examining the options and alternatives and then making the proper considered decision. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to testify in favor of the acceptance of the Environmental Impact Report? There being no one, testimony will now begin for those people who are in opposition. Mr. Mayor, before we start the clock, I would like to ask a question in regard to your procedure. It is my understanding that this item deals with the Environmental Impact Report. The next item deals with the CUP. Is that correct? BAC That's correct. SG Other than perhaps two or maybe two or three people who spoke so far, there were only two or three who spoke on the environmental issue. BAC I suspect we will have people who are of mixed, you know, on both issues on this side as well, yes. SG Well, we would like not to. We would like to speak on this. The question is, are we going to, when the CUP comes up are these same people going to be coming back up and reiterating what they've said? BAC Both of these are public hearings. Anyone who is in this room is welcome to testify. My request, if my colleagues would agree to that, is that I would request that those people who have made their comments either favorably or without favor towards either the EIR or a Conditional Use Permit or both not repeat them. 23 ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s * s s s s * s s s s s s s s s s s SG Okay, thank you. BAC I think we're getting the testimony on both items on this and we probably will to some degree from other people now. SG Thank you. Well, I'll hold my comments to the Environmental Impact Report. My name is Stan Green. I live at 362 Muirfield Drive in Palm Desert at Desert Falls. In regard to the Environmental Impact Report, it's my feeling that not all of the issues that were addressed in the Environmental Impact Report have been mitigated. You did conduct an EIR on Section Four North Sphere project, of which the proposed project is a part. That EIR did address a number of issues, including light, noise, and traffic. However, that study did not adequately mitigate the impacts created by the development of the project. Specifically, it did not mitigate the noise created by crowds or loudspeakers when special events are held. It did not mitigate the problem of off -site parking vehicles during special events. An event which attracts 6,000 people will require 2,400 parking spaces, of which 320 are proposed to be parked on site. The remaining 2,080 spaces would have to be provided off -site and would require approximately 12 acres of land which would be stable enough to allow vehicles to travel over it. A site of that nature is not available in the immediate area. It did not mitigate the glare or flow of the 12 field lights which will obliterate the night sky in the general area of the proposed sports park. It was not correct in stating that "no significant unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated from development of this project. All identified impacts can feasibly be mitigated to below the level of significance." It was also not correct in stating that the project "is not a new type of development either in Palm Desert or in the North Sphere. it is similar to existing or proposed development surrounding the site and is the type of project envisioned for Section Four in the City's North Sphere Specific Plan." It was not correct in stating that the project "provides a variety of recreational opportunities for area residents at the sports park." It is submitted that the age and recreational activity level of the average resident in the area would not find them participating in softball, volleyball, soccer, or basketball league games proposed to be held there. Let me...let me say a few other things. One, this has become a very divisive issue, and it need not have been. It need not have been. No one objects to the project, excuse me, not everyone objects to the project. The only issue that those of us who have opposed .so far has been the particular site. The people that are here in favor of the project did not appear before you when it was proposed on Hovley and it was fine for them there, I'm sure, and it will be fme for them on Portola, I'm sure, and it would be fine for them at another location as long as they have the project. That's what they want. I really don't believe that there's anyone here who specifically wants it located 800 feet south of Frank Sinatra Drive on Portola. They want a project. You heard it from dozens of people tonight. They want the project. Give them the project. The only issue we have is the location based on the arguments that we've been presenting to you in regard to the Environmental Impact Report and that we'll give you in regard to the CUP later. On December 17th this matter was first brought to your City Council for conceptual approval of the development of a sports park in Palm Desert. This is December 17, 1992, that's nearly two years ago. In reviewing your minutes of that meeting, the subject of 24 MINUTES TITS ADJOURNED JOINT MEE1�ING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * location came up and Section Four was suggested. Councilman Kelly expressed concern for locating this project in Section Four for a variety of reasons. Councilman Snyder, while liking the idea of a sports park, agreed with Councilman Kelly that it should be in a different location, perhaps closer to the expressway. Councilperson Benson also voiced concern with Section Four. We appreciate your position then, Councilperson Snyder, Kelly, Benson, and hope that you'll stick by that position. BAC Thank you, sir. GF Good evening. My name is Gerald Forrest. I live at 10 Las Cruces in Palm Desert. I'd like to approach it completely different. I'm a 76 year old ogre who hates kids. That's said first. I think that's the way I've been found. People make me feel like this. I have grandchildren. I even like kids sometimes. I still ski so I'm not that old. However, the location of the site is exactly what we're talking about, not the sports project. It's being rammed down our throats over the last two years. I've been here three times, I think. And it's still (unclear) about. But my concern was the financial aspect. Why should we, as people, the taxpayer, finance the project which a bank certainly wouldn't touch? Because if the banks would take it, we wouldn't have these hearings about...we donate "$2.8 million" of our money versus $1 million of theirs, plus of course the land. And if it goes belly up, we're going to have a beautiful sanded over desert again because who's going to maintain it if it doesn't make money. Therefore, I think we should look at it very coldly, from a business point of view and location point of view. Palm, what is it down there, Price Club, and all these other beautiful locations, let's put it there where it belongs, in an industrial area, not into a residential area. I thank you. PS Good evening, honorable Mayor and Councilmembers. My name is Pearl Shapiro, and my husband and I live here full time in Palm Desert. In regard to the pay and play facility known as the sports complex, Permit Number 93.3 Section Four. I have submitted over 1,026 signatures, and I have an additional 12 signatures I will turn over to you, on a petition opposing the sports complex. This would be a decrement to the 55 age plus community, the convalescent hospital, the new church, and surrounding homes with the added noise, increased traffic, congestion, and parking of many vehicles in the area. We purchased our home here four years ago where we ran away from a park situation in the San Fernando Valley with the police helicopters going over our home several times a week because of God knows what. We feel that this development, the sports complex, will add too great an impact on this desert resort area with single-family and condo homes with the added building structure serving alcohol, special events, additional noise, loudspeakers, lights 12 to 15 light standards that will be 70 to 85 feet high with the sports complex open until 11 p.m. every night. This could bring in unsatisfactory elements from outside our fair city. This complex was proposed twice before and denied in other Palm Desert areas, and we strongly endorse the consideration of these other optional sites closer proximity to I-10. The residents of the area do oppose both locations, the property on Portola between Frank Sinatra and Country Club, and Cook Street and Gerald Ford. If you force us to choose, it's like putting neighbor 25 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 s s* s s s s s s * s s s s * s s s s s s * s s s s * * * s s s s *•* * s* CK 99 against neighbor. We hope the Mayor and Councilmembers will refuse to approve this proposed sports complex in our prestigious Palm Desert. We are not objecting to the sports park, just to its location, not in the area above -mentioned. It would be like a cancer on our beautiful valley, and if not stopped now while we have the opportunity, heaven knows what it might become later. I'm speaking for many residents in this area. Thank you for listening. Good evening, my name is Charles Krohn, 374 Oakmont, Palm Desert, Desert Falls. Like we said, we don't oppose this project. It's your location. You had the power, you could have the power, you could negotiate land trade to put this project on Dinah Shore and Monterey. You put it there, there'd be no opposition. We'd be home watching television. They did their homework, they did. They brought all the youngsters. I've got no problem about them. I was young too once. I came here in peace to live my life, the rest of my life, here in quiet. You want to put in on Dinah Shore and Monterey, that's great, there's nothing there. You build that there, people build around it, they know what they're getting into. We didn't have this choice when we bought in Desert Falls. I didn't have this choice, knowing that we were going to get a Cook Street interchange. Had I known then, I would not have been in Desert Falls, I might have been up at the Summit where it's wind free, by the way, if you're worried about the wind in this project. So, like I said, the project's great, I've got no quarrel with it, just put it on Dinah Shore and Monterey and you people can swing this. Come hell or high water, you can negotiate and we would be all pleased about it. Goodnight, thank you. Good evening, Mayor and City Councilmen. I've been listening to all the people up here, and what I hear is the cities of Coachella Valley grossly negligent in taking care of the kids. They want the kids to do something. My grandkdds after school, they have all kinds of ball games, soccer, football, baseball. In fact, the town won the world champ 1992 baseball, Trumbold, Connecticut. Why don't all cities here through their recreation have places for the kids to play without paying? Ken Kumviatis and I live in Palm Desert and I'm one of the senior citizens, but I live here all year long. And I, the only thing I object to and the tone here is that we're opposed to the youth and youth activities, and that's not the case at all. And I strongly object to the insinuations that that's what it is, and I was hoping in the opening speech that that would not be the tone taken. By the way, Mr. Roy Wilson, if you could organize like this one here, you would have had double the amount of votes that you had. But we're not opposed to the project. I think it's a good idea. I'm a tennis player, and I know it's hard to believe right now by looking at me, my son's a marathon runner and a biker, I think it's a great project, I just think it should be moved from the location there into some other way. And it certainly should be built, but not in that location, and we have filed over 600 petitions from residents of The Lakes not to be located there. But please don't say that that means we're opposed to youth and to children and to playing because that's not the case. Thank you. 26 ADJOURNED JOINT MEE'11 G OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *'* * * * BH My name is Barbara Haas, and I live at 238 Desert Falls Drive East, and I'm a full time resident. I've spoken before Council before. I will state again I am not against the project. I am against the location. But tonight I'm hearing several things that don't make any sense. I'm hearing things like 1100 cars per day traffic, when last Saturday at our Desert Falls meeting the developer said there's only going to be 200 people per day in that sports complex. 200 people a day are not going to bring in 1100 cars. If I'm wrong, then I apologize, but there are a lot of Desert Falls residents who heard that. Also, on our meeting on Saturday the developer said that the children would be playing for their championship games. Now we're hearing they're going to play every day. Which is it? The developer also stated he would back off on the large special events or the celebrity projects. That's where they make their money. If this is going to be a viable financial project that the City won't end up with, then they can't back off on all of these. I don't think anyone here is against children or young people having a facility. I think the facility is a good idea. I think it's in the wrong place. It belongs in a commercial area such as the previous speaker said down by Price Club, somewhere where it's not in the middle of a country club community to impact the style of living. This is not against the children, this is not against the young people of Palm Desert or anywhere else. Yes, they should have athletics, but I have problems with...things are being changed, being said one day one way and said another day another. And this is what we have complained about from the beginning. It's not the project. I think it's a good idea. It's the location. Thank you. SL Good evening. My name is Sid Lemerman. I live at 338 Desert Falls Drive East in Palm Desert. BAC Would you pull the microphone down just a bit. SL Sure. BAC Thank you. SL Biblical scholars have discussed who was the greater person: Noah or Abraham? Now, most scholars seem to agree that it was Abraham, and the reason given is that whereas Noah simply accepted God's decree of destroying the environment and followed without question, Abraham on the other hand argued with God for the benefit of the people. I am not so presumptuous as to compare myself to the patriarch Abraham, but I feel compelled to speak for myself and many of the residents of Palm Desert. Since I have been attending the Planning Commission meetings and the City Council meetings, I have been disturbed with what appears to be an annoyance on the part of staff that we, the residents of Palm Desert, organized to speak out about what we consider the destruction of our environment. By body language and at times inappropriate answers, whether sarcastic or flip, we have been made to feel that we are an intrusion. Apathy is the worst affliction. We are here because we care. Most of us have worked almost a lifetime and chose to live in this desert because of the aesthetics of an upscale residential desert community. The commercial property necessary 27 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT 14ullivG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * s* * s* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * •.s * * * for a city we assumed was to be developed for the benefit of the residents. We the residents living in proximity to this particular site do not want a pay for play sports complex in our environment. God was willing to spare Sodom and Gomorrah if ten righteous people could be found. We are sure that we're more than ten, and we deserve to have the current tranquility continue in our beautiful city. Last month Roy Wilson acted in a very ethical manner. Before the Council was a proposal to extend the hours of the street fair. Because he's a member of the faculty of C.O.D., he absented himself from the discussion and the vote because in his words he stated that he wanted to be sure there was not an appearance of conflict of interest. Since many of the residents of Palm Desert have contributed to your successful campaign and perhaps the developer or member of his family have as well, I would suggest that once again to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest that you again excuse yourself from this vote so that this would never be an issue. We wish you much success in your new position, and thank you for all you have done as a leader in our community. We have all just experienced an election. All candidates seem to have requested repeated over and over that it is the people who ultimately make the decisions in our great country. The staff is here to serve, and we know they work long and hard, but if you really believe that it is the people who determine what they want in the City, you must come to the conclusion that a pay for play sports complex with the selling of liquor is not in the best interests of the people in the residential area where you now propose the park. I am a retired teacher, a parent of three very athletic sons, one of who played football for U.C.L.A., and I am thoroughly committed to athletics. Young people need recreational areas. We just oppose this particular site. Thank you. ALS My name is Al Simonean. I live at 665 Vista Largo Circle North in Palm Desert. Mayor, members of the Council. What I'm seeing here today is every one of us have raised children. All of us know the value of sports. None of us deny that children need a place to play sports and have those activities. But what we have is a polarization here. The people that are opposing it are polarized with the people that are supporting the project. The people that are opposing the project basically have no opposition to the project. Again, I state, as probably ten other people have stated, the only thing that's polarizing your community is the location. Now all of us have sat out in the evenings and been able to hear the trains down by the freeway, even in the • still of the night, listened to the cars in the still of the night on the freeway, I live in the Desert Falls complex, and to place that unit, or that complex, that close to a residential unit, and basically all of us who purchased there at that time had no idea that this was evening being contemplated. So, again, we have a polarized community here, and the only thing that's going to solve that problem is to move it, and I would respectfully urge you to reconsider that. Thank you. HD Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Hank DiRoma. I reside at Desert Falls. I am a real estate attorney with offices at 1055 Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles. I live at Desert Falls four and five days every week and consider Palm Desert my permanent residence. I speak to you not only for myself but also for my son, Michael DiRoma, who is an attorney in San Francisco and who owns p.p.-it/ at Desert Falls. I also speak for my 28 DES ADJOURNED JOINT MEEtING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 s: s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s* s s s s s s s s s s s s: s s s s nephew, Michael Clark, who is an attorney and who owns a condo at Desert Falls. Therefore, I am speaking for three attorneys who have a serious interest in this matter. Two weeks ago the United States Supreme Court declared in a case before them that local governments had the power to dismiss employees who do not act in the best interests of local government. We lawyers are of the considered opinion that the Planning Commission members are not acting in the best interests of the local government which is the City of Palm Desert, and therefore come directly under the Supreme Court decision. The reason being because they propose the Portola and Cook County...uh, Cook Street locations. Of course none of us want to see anyone fired from his government job. That would not be necessary if you take a fresh look at this adult sports complex. The project will benefit only the commercial promoters who will walk away with their profits for the next 30 years, and the City of Palm Desert will suffer 30 years of lifestyle deterioration and 30 years of environmental damage if it is located either on Portola or on Cook. Getting back to the United States Supreme Court decision, implicit in it was the holding that complete governmental immunity is a thing of the past. The theory that the king could not be sued because the king could do no wrong is out the window. Therefore, the Supreme • Court decision applies to this City Council. I want to say with respect that we all hope you will act prudently both in terminating Planning Commission members who do not act in the best interests of the City by proposing these two locations and in protecting the taxpayers of Palm Desert. We all hope you will not be in dereliction of your fiduciary duty and we hope that you will not act in a manner that will subject you to sanctions. With reference to the Portola project, you have the four -page letter of objection submitted by Stan Green and the honorable Judge Einbinder. I will not repeat the many legal, legally sound objections contained, but I would like to again call your attention to Section 25.22.020 subsection E that permits a Conditional Use Permit only for a public park and a public recreational facility. This project is not a public park nor a public recreational facility. This proposed use is plain and simple a for -profit facility, and if necessary the courts will so declare. We are hopeful that you will not act in excess of jurisdiction and without legal authority in granting a CUP which will be void. Should we be mistaken, we are confident a court of law will not only declare it void but that the City Council acted illegally. With reference to the Cook Street project, you have the ten -page letter of objections of Mr. Green and Judge Einbinder. Again, all the objections which have been received, which have been reviewed by several attorneys, are legally sound. My only comment is to direct your attention to the fact that no environmental impact study has been made and no report issued on that location. That has not been done, and an EIR is required. One last point, and I will be finished. In the December...the December 30, 1933, so-called agreement to agree, it is our position that that contract is void because a material condition was not complied with. The financial feasibility study was to be made by a big six accounting institution. Apparently, someone hired a person from the economics department at the College of the Desert who has a company with a Post Office box number. Several attorneys who own property at Desert Falls are incensed at the way this project is being promoted. I respectfully submit that the statement I have made is not intended as a threat. On the other hand, I want to make it abundantly clear that if you force us, this matter will end up for the next two years in court. Thank you. 29 MIN uiga% ADJOURNED JOINT 1 u a i iigG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * s * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC When people were speaking in favor of the project, whether others liked or didn't like what they had to say, they were respectful of it, and there wasn't a single negative reaction, so I would also ask that the people that are favorable to the EIR allow opponents the same kind of respect. LL NF Good evening. My name's Leo Longo. I live in Palm Desert. I'd like to say Hi to Supervisor Wilson and Councilmen. I'm not a lawyer. I'm not even a public speaker or anything like that. I'm just a citizen of Palm Desert, and I'm one of the ones who came out here to get away from the crime and violence of my neighborhood, which was infested with parks and recreational facilities like this. I'm not against them. I've been playing baseball now for 42 years. As a matter of fact, I have a game tonight. My son is also on the same team as myself, and I've been coaching and managing him for over 20 years. I'd rather see the kids get high today on sports than I would watching them doing what they're doing today. And the only way that they can get high on sports is to have the facilities available to them. So like everyone else who has opposed this particular project, I'm only opposing the location of it, not necessarily the project in itself, just the location of it being where it's proposed to be because most of the people up here that are opposed to it came out here to get away from that kind of environment. If that kind of environment was here prior to us purchasing land in the Palm Desert area, it may not have happened. And all we ask of you to do is listen to both sides, evaluate what's going on here, and make your decisions accordingly. It's not that we're against it in any way, it's just that the facility that you people want to put it in, the area that you want to put it in, is where the objection is. And I'm a firm believer in sports, you've got to have it, and you've got to get the kids involved in it, and you've got to have the facilities that support it. We just don't like where it's put. Thank you very much. Good evening, members of the City Council. My name is Norman Farley. I'm pastor of the Seventh Day Adventist Church in Palm Desert which is located at 74-200 Country Club Drive. Thank you for letting me have this moment, brief moment to speak to you. I don't appear this evening either as one side of the fence or the other. But I have a concern. First of all, I'd like to compliment these young people. I hope to be out there playing some ball with them, at least crawling around the bases or doing something else. But they were very well r::.ra.;,,i tonight and with young people like this around I'm complimented and they should be complimented. My concern is this. We are going to operate a school which we have a use permit to do also. So I'm familiar with these sorts of things and, as you know, our school system is tied in with Loma Linda University and that sort of thing. We produce medical students, attorneys, this sort of person. We are raising the question of, and I'm particularly raising the question of, my worship service. We like quiet. I'm not a shouter, I'm not a hollerer, I'm just kind of quiet preacher. And I don't know the impact, environmentally, that this will have, either upon the Jewish synagogue, I've talked with Yasih Liebowitz and others, and I don't know the impact that this will have upon his worship service or mine either, but I would like to invite the City Council to consider the environmental impact of noise upon people who like to run very quietly considered church services, and I can't, I don't know what the synagogue uses, but I know what I use in 30 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s.s * * * MP mine...Bach. A little outdated, but it touches a certain element of human heart. And so I'd like to ask the City Council to consider the impact environmentally that it will have upon the several worship services that will be conducted in the area. If that is negative, then I love it. If it will have a decided impact and I'll have to shout, I wouldn't like that. Thank you very much for hearing me. Good evening, Councilmembers, my name is Marlene Paisokopf, and I'm a resident of Desert Falls. I know you've seen me here before speaking on issues that I feel are important, not only to the residents of Desert Falls, not only to the residents of Palm Desert, or even the Coachella Valley, but to society and life in general. I was moved to hear the conversation we heard early this evening by one group of people, the younger group of people, who rightfully spoke their feelings about wanting to have a sports facility. However, I also heard from these same people very little compassion for the older members, rather I heard snickering, and I heard a real alienation from those of us who are perhaps at a different stage of life. I heard from the older people perhaps from their advanced stage of life, more compassion in terms of the position of the younger people, in terms of saying, you know, we understand that a sports facility is something that might be appropriate but not in this location. I wonder how many people here who spoke about the fact that there are young people and without a recreation facility such as this the young people would have nothing to do, as if all young people are committed solely to a focus on a sports facility in their lives, and that without it there is boredom and there's no interest in other things, in other areas which young people pursue. I beg to say that this is perhaps a very narrow and very limited vision and that not all sports people as we are pushed to see in society, it's pushed into our face today, how many people who came from a focus sports orientation where they were worshipped as sports heroes, have wound up not as heroes to society. Societies that were formed strictly on a sense of sports, whether it was Rome, Greece, other areas of the world, we know what happened to them. I just bring this to your attention because I think it's important to see beyond one's nose, to see beyond simply the financial feeding that would come from people who are solely interested in this facility as how it's going to bring revenue to the City. I think that's too easy a way to look at it. Yes, there will be some revenue generated by this activity. How much, I wonder. And I suggest that the Committee seriously consider, and not act in haste, that there is, there was discussion about change, and how the people who support not having the facility are resistant to change. I beg to differ with that feeling. I think that one can have change without necessarily feeling that marching ahead and progress constitutes what this particular facility envisions. Thank you. DBY Members of the Council. My name is Debbie Byk, and I live in Palm Desert at Silver Sands. One of the things that we have not heard this evening that the Odekirks had initially described to us, were the 81 softball leagues in Southern California that will be using this facility. I have not heard anything about that, and I assume that these same leagues will be using this facility. Now, this Council seems to have great faith in the viability of this project, and if you do have this strong faith in it, it could be successful anyplace. When my neighbor, Marriott Desert Springs, was being proposed, people said wow, that's going into the windy 31 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MELiiNG OF THE PALM DESERT `f CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AH area. Well, I live these, and it's fine. So you...there is r..,r.tI either available to you, you have purchased property in the past, there's no reason why, if you feel this is going to be such as successful project, that you couldn't purchase property or, if you already to own property, relocate this project. I agree with everybody here, it sounds like a fine project, but you can still see the lights that are on the softball fields behind where we're sitting from Country Club and Portola. I congratulate you on eliminating the glare, but this project is going to be topographically on the highest point of that area. We will see those 65-foot high lights. We don't want to see them. This...where we are tonight is the most wonderful form of participatory democracy. We are...you are the closest to us of any other elected form of government. I think perhaps the school board may be closer than this is, I don't know, maybe it's on a par. But if you brought students in here tonight from a junior high school class and had them witness what we're witnessing here tonight, we people who are objecting to this site are most affected by this project at this site. They have learned "of the people, by the people, and for the people", we are the people. Our people are docents at the Living Desert, our people are volunteer ushers at the McCallum, my husband tutors at an elementary school twice a week, this is our community. You people have created a jewel here. We love it, and we thank you. Don't desecrate that jewel with this project next to us. Thank you. Good evening, members of the Council. My name is Aaron Hasson, I live at 238 Desert Falls Drive East. The first thing I'd like to say is I am completely for this project. I look forward to the possibility of playing baseball, roller hockey, softball, whatever is proposed in that project. I am opposed to where it's at. Most of the people who have come up in favor for this project, except for a very few, do not live in the area surrounded and affected by the project. They live up on Shadow Mountain, they live up on somewhere away from the project. I do not. I do not like the idea of the traffic, the lights, I am a person who likes my tranquility. I'm a person who works during the day just like a lot of the people here, and that's what I enjoy. I'm also a member of the Marriott Corporation, so I definitely wholeheartedly agree with the project itself, just not where it's being proposed. Thank you. BAC Is there anyone else who wishes to testify in opposition to the certifying of the EIR? JE Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, staff, my name is Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired. I live at 549 Desert Falls Drive East, Palm Desert, California. I would first like to ask a legal question of the attorney representing the Council. If I understand correctly, the Planning Commission, with respect to CUP 93-3, tabled that matter and continued it to December 6, 1994. If that is true, is the City Council still going to review that project here this evening, and if so, then I ask that they allow for the Planning Commission to do its job and whether they oppose it, whether they pass it or adopt it, at least if there are those who would want to appeal that decision, they would have the permissive 15 days to do so. DJE Mr. Mayor, may I? My understanding is that the Planning Commission last night did in fact continue the Conditional Use Permit hearing on 93-3 until December 6th. It is on the Council Agenda tonight. It is noticed as a public hearing. As is the practice of the Council, 32 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT Mi h iG OF THE PALM DESERT - CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * if it is noticed, whether the Council intends to take action or not, they will listen to anyone who wishes to speak. Any action by the City Council on Item Number C this evening would be premature. That would occur because the Planning Commission has not acted. JE In that same vein, Mr. Erwin, can you advise me as to why we have two 93-3 CUP's, one for Portola and one for Cook? BAC I'd suggest, sir, perhaps these questions would be germane when we get to those public hearings. JE I agree... BAC Okay. JE ...except that they are intertwined in this whole matter, in the Environmental Impact Report as well as the CUP's is one project. You haven't heard one person get up here who's opposed to the project or is for the project who has really said we don't like Section Four or we love Section Four, for the most part. You have, unfortunately, one project within Section Four which the EIR addresses insufficiently and inadequately, that is the base of the opposition to the EIR and the CUP plural. And that's the only reason I brought it up. I just wanted to know if anyone .had that response. First of all, I would like to congratulate Mr. Wilson on his rising to the need of the community and being elected as Supervisor. The County's gain will be the City's loss. On the other hand, I wish to address certain issues. As is indicated, this is the EIR that we are addressing. The EIR is inadequate. It does not address completely or fully those particular issues as were stated here before. That is, in regards to the traffic and in regards to the lights, in regards to the parking, the responses that were provided were inadequate knowing that this is a project that must make money or your anticipation is down the drain. And I'm not talking about the developer, even though we're spending $2.8 million of redevelopment funds and giving property either that is owned by the City or by the Redevelopment Agency, it's immaterial, for the project. And I'm not saying in the sense that we're giving it away, but allowing it to be utilized, approximately $4 million to the initial $1 million presumably to be provided by the developer. Nobody, and I don't care if it's Coachella, I don't care if it's Palm Springs or anyplace else, is going to give that kind of money to this developer to do it. If they will, let them do it. But the point is, as far as the EIR is concerned, when they don't address these issues completely, then there's inadequacy in the EIR. Now, I'd like to ask if you have in your possession a letter that was initiated by Mr. Green and myself. Would you please make that letter a part of the record. BAC We do. JE Okay. With that, I would like to state something that was stated to me over and over again, in the presence of others, so I'm not alone. And I'm wondering because of this if our protestation here tonight is valueless. The developer has indicted to me that he has three 33 1VIINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT Mi! k i TG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *. * * * * BAC members of the City Council in his pocket. Now we know, let me say this, we know that it couldn't be Mr. Kelly, at least up to today's vote, and we know it couldn't be Ms. Benson because they have consistently advised, on the record, that they oppose the project. All I'm asking is if it is a case where that is untrue, and I hope it is untrue, and it was just like salesman (unclear) their product, then I ask for a deliberation and as soul searching, knowing that this project was originally on Hovley, that's where it was supposed to be. People from the area came to you protesting that, and you acceded to their protests and said okay let's move it. When there was a chance that it could be a going project on Cook, you were willing to move it to Cook. We're asking you, move it again. Either exchange your r.,,r;,.l�► with somebody who has property that could be used, whether it be used near Price Club or thereabouts or do something in a positive way, but don't do it, especially with the EIR being inadequate. Thank you very much. Are there others who wish to offer testimony? There being none, then I would declare this public hearing to be closed, and at this time then it would be appropriate to ask members of the Council if they have questions of either staff or the consultants who prepared the Environmental Impact Report. Councilman Wilson, do you have any questions of either staff...I have just a couple of questions, if I may, of someone who helped develop the report in terms of traffic. ?? Yes, Mr. Mayor, thank you for giving me an opportunity to say something. I've sat through a lot of hearings and wanted to say something. BAC Okay, thank you. ?? In regard to your question, I would be responsible to answer that question because my firm did prepare the EIR. BAC Alright. We've heard a variety of... ?? Just let me finish. We, in preparing the EIR, hired what we feel are very competent experts in the field of noise, traffic, and light and glare. So I think it would be more ate since we have the subconsultants here to have them answer that question. If it's specifically in regard to traffic, we have somebody here that can answer questions. This is John Kane, by the way, he's our traffic consultant. JK I apologize for taking a moment to get up here from the back of the audience. And I am John Kane with the firm of RKJK and Associates. We prepared the traffic impact analysis which is an appendix to the EIR document and has been folded into that document. BAC Specific question. JK Sure. 34 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * .* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC Upon buildout of both golf courses, conference center, museum, timeshares, potential softball pay for play facility, and so on and so forth, what is the average daily traffic generation of this project? Let me refer to the document so I can make sure to give you exact numbers. Okay, the total project trip generation and by trip generation I mean, when I say a trip, a vehicle that comes onto the site and leaves again generates two trips, you know, so one vehicle may mean two vehicle trips. We've got 25,800 vehicles per day generated by the project. Now we did assume that based upon analysis of the mix of uses on site that 2,580 of those are essentially captured within this overall project. So the extemal trip generation, trips totally leaving the site, coming in and out of it, amounts to 23,220 vehicles per day. BAC Of that number, on the average day, what is your estimate of generation by the facility in question this evening, the sports park? JK The sports park is 1,050 vehicles per day. BAC Next...on days on which there are "special events" what's the maximum, what's the up end generation? JK For a special event, the number we were given was 5,000 attendees or patrons, and we estimated that that would generate 2,000 vehicles or 4,000 trip ends for a special event. BAC What's the largest generator of traffic on the Section Four? JK The largest single generator, it's a close...it's pretty close between the medical/professional office building, which is estimated to generate 5,640 vehicles per day, and the larger resort hotel, which is estimated to generate 5,080 vehicles per day. BAC Thank you. I have a question about noise, if I may. ?? The subconsultant on that is Greg Endow, Endow Engineering. BAC Two issues...one, a number of people referred to the issue of loudspeakers and noise. Can you speak to that issue in terms of your study. GE The noise generated by the sports park we evaluated in two different ways, the standard operation, and we looked at the special events, which would occur, I guess, on six days per year. In order to evaluate the standard noise levels, we visited an existing sports park and took noise measurements... BAC Which one? 35 i DES ADJOURNED JOINT MEE1ING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * s * s s * * s * * * s * * * s * * * * * * s s s * * * * * * * GE The one in Poway. And we took noise measurements during typical activities on a Saturday. We chose Saturday because after speaking to the people at the sports park, that was their highest typical daily operations. We chose the middle of the day, which they also said would be the heaviest populated. Based upon the noise measurements, they were typical ambient noise levels you would expect at a park. It was difficult to identify the noise specific to the games because it was of a more general nature. In order to evaluate the noise level associated with the special events, we attempted to find a facility or a situation which was closest in character. We took noise measurements at a stadium in Rancho Cucamonga where a minor league baseball team, the Quakes, are playing, and on the day in question they had an attendance of 6,000. This does have a loudspeaker system, and it seemed a fairly close match with what we understand will be the special event. Unfortunately, we don't really have a good idea exactly what the special event will be, so we just had to do what we thought would be a slightly worst case assessment of it. When noise measurements are taken, we identified them in our study, the noise levels, they were taken at a point about 150 feet outside of the outfield wall, it being the only practical place to make noise measurement. We extrapolated that finding to the various residences in the vicinity of the sports park and identified that in the study. The average noise level, which is the basis for the noise standards, we stated within the study and showed that the noise exposure from the sports park under the special events, at the closest proposed residence, which is about 1,000 feet away, would be approximately 58 LEQ. There were periods, of course... BAC Explain an LEQ. GE An LEQ means average energy, it's an average or a period of time it would be the noise, average noise level over a period of time. That is the basis for the CNEL measurements you might be familiar with in other noise standards. Noise by itself fluctuates wildly between peak noise levels and no noise levels, and so the average noise level represents a way to evaluate a wide variety of different types of noise sources. What we found was that the noise impact associated with the neighboring streets would be far greater than the impact associated with the sports park. The activity at the sports park in the special events would be audible, but that wasn't the criteria for being significant. That was lower than the standards associated with the various land uses and so that's why we concluded that it was not significant. BAC Thank you. ?? Mr. Mayor, let me just make one comment in regard to significance. It's our role in preparing an EIR to evaluate what impacts there are on the environment and to determine whether or not the impact is significant, adverse significant, and whether or not we can come up with mitigation measures to make it insignificant. I think there's some confusion once in a while that thinks that when you talk about mitigating that you're doing away with it entirely, the impact, just like with lights. You can't do away with the lights, you're going to see the light, but the question is can you provide standards that are going to mitigate it in such a way that it would not significant. I think that, you know, needs to be explained. 36 MINUTES , ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT . • CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * BAC Alright, that answers the couple of questions that I had. I have a request from one of my colleagues for a brief recess for...he sat long enough for a second. Roy? SRW Couldn't we wrap this one up and recess it (unclear) BAC Right, it's fine with me. Okay? Who would like to speak to the issues? SRW I think most of the testimony you heard tonight was basically is this the right location for the sports park or not the right location for the sports park. That really isn't what's before us, but what's before us is the Environmental Impact Report and assessment adequate to certify. And I think we have to make that determination. I would hate to see us get bogged down in the arguments of the merits of the sports park or not until we get on to the next hearing which is whether or not we issue a Conditional Use Permit for the sports park. So, we have heard, we heard from Judge Einbinder that in his opinion we have a letter basically documenting, but he feels the EIR is not adequate and basically challenging its viability. In reading the EIR, in listening to the questions answered, I, my personal feeling is that the EIR is adequate and should be certified. RSK Well, this particular item on the Agenda is the Environmental Impact Report for the entire Section Four and I think that there are so many favorable aspects of the development of Section Four that would enhance our City and enhance the area there. In my view, the sports park is not one of those enhancements, and I'm not against the sports park. I agree with many of the people that it's in the wrong place, and we, all of our deliberations as long as I've been on the Council, we have always made an attempt to recognize those residents that live in the immediate neighborhood of the projects that we're working on. You know, it's not right to accuse somebody of not being in favor of youth just because they happen to be a little bit older. And the fact is that this particular pay for play ballpark, and there is no way you keep it out of it, it's...half of the impact report deals with the sports park, so how could you ignore it? The fact is that the sports park is not for young people, it's for adults, and it's not for the adults of the City of Palm Desert, it's for the adults outside the area and in other parts of the Coachella Valley. The fact is that a very small percentage of the people that will play in that park will be from Palm Desert, and it's not like that we don't believe in providing facilities for our youth. We've got four baseball fields we just put in on this very site that we're.sitting on, and we have another couple across the street, and we have five that we built in the vicinity on the High School property and another one right down the street from the High School property. I count up nine or ten baseball fields that we have in Palm Desert that the City is furnishing, that's more than any other city in the Coachella Valley. To me, you know, I'm willing to workpn a sports park if it's in a place where it won't affect the residents in the neighborhood, and I'm willing to work hard to try to find a way to put one in a vicinity that's not...is not going to affect residential neighbors. But, but we are dealing with an Environmental Impact Report, and I think the Environmental Impact Report as a whole, because of all the good things that are going to happen, all the improvements and enhancements that it's going to make for the neighborhoods, that we should move ahead with 37 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * « * * * * * * * * *•* * * * * * * * « s.* « * * the Environmental Impact Report and deal, which we have on the Agenda, deal with the sports park as a separate item. BAC Okay. Ms. Benson? JMB I would agree with Mr. Kelly. I felt very bad sitting here thinking that the young people in the community thought that we hadn't done anything for them. When I think of the ballparks and the millions that we have spent out there, which is for free for them other than belonging to the little league groups and getting their uniforms and that, and the millions that we spent on the park out here and the tennis courts and the new ballfields, and everything that we've done, we've worked very, very hard to address the youth because for years we said well all you're doing is things for the seniors, and it's been years since we've done anything for seniors. The only thing that we have done is the Joslyn Cove Communities Center, and that is financed by three cities. Palm Desert was the leader in spending the first few million on the ballpark before we could even talk the other cities into helping. But we went ahead and did it. We said the youth needs a place, and we respect all those programs. And because we're against this one and the location, again as Dick and the rest of us said, we're not against the sports complex. I think we've showed where our heart, where the youth of the community and where our dollars is, and we've spent taxpayers' money providing recreation for the taxpayers. We have not spent taxpayers' money for a private development for sports for them. And that's what I object to. And again, getting back to the EIR, I do think that it deserves certification. I think that anything that goes in there after it's certified, this will certainly meet its test. BAC Mayor Pro-Tem Snyder. WHS Well, we've listened to a lot of things tonight. It seems like even a couple of us got accused of being biased, which I resent very much. I've been on this Council for a long time, and I'm proud of what we've done for this city. I think we have a beautiful city, I think we've been fair, we've been listening to people, we've been trying to find a way to make it a better city. I am retired. I have no axe to grind, I own no business property. I'm on this job and work hard at it to make this a better place to live, and I think that most of us here have been on this Council for a long time, and we have made this a better place to live. I've been here for 20 years, longer than that, and I have always tried to find a way to make this city better in all respects for everybody. I have not tried to live with a small group of people who tell me how to do things and not take into consideration the rest. We're elected to this Council to represent all the people, and it's our job to listen as we have tonight to all the people, the people who are for and against. We have to weigh what that brings to us, we have to have our staff tell us the problems that it may or may not bring, we have our legal people tell us our legal position, we try to take into consideration all of the factors that involve us approving or disapproving a program. What we are voting on here tonight at this moment, at this time, and in this particular instance, is the Environmental Impact Report on a project that we have been working on for a long, long time to improve the value of Palm Desert, to 38 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEE7a,G OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * •* create something in our Area Four area that has been a master plan that is going to make our city once more a better city and a more beautiful city with the things that we're putting in there. It hasn't been something that's come by that we accidentally did. I think that when we did this, we tried to cover ourself in all aspects to know that what we're doing is right. One of the things we did was to create an EIR. Nobody told us or directed us to create an EIR. We did the EIR because we wanted to know that what we were doing was correct and that what it would do in respect to the requirements of an Environmental Impact Report. The firm that we hired did a good job creating that Environmental Impact Report, and I am completely satisfied with it. And I would urge the Council to vote to approve the EIR as has been submitted. BAC I guess I'd take a second and step back to why we're involved in any of this at all. Obviously every city tries to balance its budget. So far we've been very successful in ending up with a balanced budget that increases reserves every year. We thank the City Manager and the staff and other people for doing that. We start off at a net disadvantage from most of the other cities in this Valley. By quirk of fate and because the City didn't have a property tax when Proposition 13 happened and so on and so forth, we set in a different place. The City of Palm Springs, for example, approximately the same population as the City of Palm Desert, last year had over $10.5 million directed to them by local property tax. The City of Palm Desert, with a higher assessed valuation, had $1,100,000. We start off almost $9 million in the hold versus our neighboring city as an example Palm Springs. Where do you capture $9 million to run a city? In our case, you capture that $9 million primarily out of two sources: transient occupancy tax or hotel bed tax on people who come to stay, and on sales tax. State legislature is looking at ways to grab part of the sales tax or else to distribute it by population, so it wouldn't make any difference if you generate the sales tax locally. If you have a thousand people you get that cut, if you have ten thousand people you get that size cut, if it, you know, bad deal obviously for Palm Desert, a good deal for some other communities. Point very simply being is that we have to look for ways five, ten, twenty years in the future to make sure we have enough money to run this city. One of the ways we can do that is through the use of Redevelopment funds to go out and to develop something like Section Four with golf courses, with hotels and various other kinds of things that send back to this city recurring revenues that the State of California can't get their fingers on. Given that then, given what we want to do, I'll address just simply issues on the EIR because there are about four or five of them that people have concerns over. One of the issues is traffic. Traffic consultant says 23,000 vehicles on the average a day, 1,000 of those from the baseball park. Consider that to be inaccurate, consider that to be inaccurate by 400%, you have 4,000 vehicles a day, you're still generating less than probably...you're generating less than 25 % of the total traffic from this complex from this one use. If traffic is a problem, people in this audience should not be opposed to the softball facility. As noted, they ought to be opposed either to the hotel, to the medical facility, to the use of the golf course. There are piles of other traffic generators, all of which are as large or larger than this particular facility. This facility is not the traffic generator. That is not, by my at least perceptions, a valid argument about why to reject this EIR. Secondly, parking. There are problems with 39 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEktING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 «««****««*««*****«**«***********«*«*«« parking for special events. I would hope that those people who are interested in that issue have looked at the conditions of the FIR which note, as an example on page 20, that before anybody can have a special event, they have to have a joint use agreement with adjacent land owners to provide parking for visitors. If they don't have that kind of agreement with adjacent land owners, and if the City does not approve the temporary paving and so on and so forth, they can't have one. So nobody's going to run out, have a special event, and park all over the streets. You've got to have the darned thing tended to, just like if we were to host a major golf tournament, you have to find a place to park those people, you can't let them run up and down the street. If somebody can't do that, they can't hold the event. Real simple and real clear. There's concern over the sale of alcohol. I think the best thing that we can do, whether the sale of alcohol is in a hotel, whether the sale of alcohol is in the clubhouse of the golf course, whether the sale of alcohol is in other places, is to make sure it's done properly. The conditions of approval for this Environmental Impact Report say that the Sheriff's Department not only has to review the plan to make sure that alcoholic beverages in this case are confined to a single location, and not only have to review it, if the Sheriff's Department doesn't approve it, they can't sell it. I don't know what tighter control you can have over beverage distribution than to have the people who enforce the beverage control laws make the decision about whether or not beverages can be sold there. I don't think that's a legitimate argument. In terms of lighting, again, number one we heard I think appropriately enough from a resident of a neighboring country club who was opposed initially to the lighting in the softball fields here which are very close to residences, pointing out there is no problem at least in his perception with ambient lighting. But even if he's wrong, the condition on page 49, Condition 46, notes that whether it's at the sports park or other places, you can't turn the lights on until there is a guarantee, as we did with the folks at Monterey Country Club, that the net ambient light level, in other words, that the average lighting in those neighborhoods, is not increased when these facilities are in operation. If the average light goes up, they can't use it. That was a condition we did at Monterey Country Club, and the condition was met in terms of the new kind of standards. The ambient light level did not go up. It took a while to get there, and until it got there, they couldn't turn the .lights on. And I think the same kind of condition has to exist here. If you can't meet the test, you can't do it. If you can meet the test, then that's no longer an issue. The other issue is the issue of noise, and noise consultants are interesting people. They speak in languages that I manage only dimly to comprehend, but I always nod at the end of it and know something has been said. I've gone outside this softball complex, which is bermed, it's not walled, but it's bermed, and stood out on Magnesia Falls now while it's being used and while people are on it. The amount of noise that carries over those berms 70 feet away is minimal. However, if we get around to looking at whether or not we should approve a Conditional Permit, I think once again we should do some things in there that in essence say that the ambient noise level at nearby residences, in this case 1,000 feet away, aren't going to increase by this or they can't do it. I think, again, you have to be able to guarantee people with lighting that the ambient light level doesn't go up, that you're not increasing a major traffic generator, that the net...people can still not like it, people can still not like the golf course, but at the final analysis, we have to make decisions, I think, that are based on data, and maybe there are 40 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEE1aziG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * «.« * « « « * * * « * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * « * * * * * * * other issues upon which we shouldn't actually put this facility there, and that's a separate question that we have to address. But in terms of environmental issues, I think the data set on the side that whether it's for the golf course or whether it's for the hotels and so on and so forth, that most of those issues are addressed. And there are guarantees written in that this City will enforce as they have enforced them in other places, and if people don't meet them, they won't have projects. Are there further comments, not on whether or not we should place this facility, but upon simply the certification of the Environmental Impact Report as being adequate? If there are not, a motion to either deny or accept the certification would be appropriate. WHS I would move that we... BAC Just a second. RAD Mr. Mayor, you have in your packet a resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, Certifying an Environmental Impact Report for a Proposed Section Four Site Plan Bounded by Frank Sinatra Drive on the North, Cook Street on the East, Country Club Drive on the South, and Portola Avenue on the West." BAC That's the very one that we will either accept or deny. RAD Right. That would be Resolution No. 116. BAC Okay. A motion to accept or to deny Resolution 116 is appropriate at this time. WHS I believe that with all the studies that have been made and the conditions that you just set forth and the manner in which the EIR was conducted, that it is indeed a satisfactory Environmental Impact Report, and I would move that this Council certify that report. BAC Is there a second to the certification of this report? RSK Second. BAC Mr. Erwin? DJE Certifying it by the resolution. BAC By this resolution. There is a motion and a second. Is there further discussion? There being none, please cast a ballot. SRG Motion carries by unanimous vote. 41 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT ME T1NG OF THE PALM DESERT ..� - CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC We will take about a five-minute recess and we'll come to the second issue which is also a public hearing that has to do with the Conditional Use Permit. NOTE: THE NUMBER OF THE RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL WAS 94-116. B. REOUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO A PLANNING COMIVIISSION DECISION TO APPROVE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 20-ACRE MULTI -USE, PAY FOR PLAY RECREATION FACILITY ON THE EAST SIDE OF PORTOLA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 800 PBE1' SOUTH OF FRANK SINATRA, Cass No. CUP 93-3 Section 4, Mrs. Barbara Hasson, Mr. William E. Swank, Sr., Mr. and Mrs. Ed Byk, Appellants (Continued from the Meeting of October 13, 1994). THE FOLLOWING IS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THIS PORTION OF THE MINUTES Key BAC Buford A. Crites, Mayor/Chairman DJE David J. Erwin, City Attorney BAA Bruce A. Altman, City Manager RAD Ramon A. Diaz, ACM/Director of Community Development JMB Jean M. Benson, Councilmember/Member RO Rick Odekirk RF Richard Friend BL Bruce Liegawicz ?? Name not given SG Stan Green SRW S. Roy Wilson, Councilman/Member CP Charles Perrone EF Esther Forrest DB Debbie Byke NF Norman Farley JE Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired WHS Walter H. Snyder, Councilman/Member RSK Richard S. Kelly, Councilman/Member CLO Carlos L. Ortega, ACM/Director of Redevelopment SRG Sheila R. Gilligan, City Clerk/Agency Secretary RJF Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works BAC The second public hearing this evening is consideration of an appeal to a Planning Commission decision to approve a negative declaration of environmental impact, and I guess 42 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEEL IG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * f * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .* * * * * * * * * * * * * DJE we should start right there and say ask the City Attorney, that portion of this action is really moot, is that correct? That's correct. Mr. Mayor and the Council will recall that was numbers of months ago when that was an appeal, the determination was to cause the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report which you have just completed. So the reference to the negative declaration is moot. BAC So that the hearing instead focuses upon the consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a 20-acre multiple use pay for play recreation facility at a location in Section Four. With that then, I'll begin by asking the City Manager for a staff report on this item. BAA Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Again, Mr. Diaz is going to give you a brief update on this one. Yes, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I believe all of us are familiar with the project in question, what the facilities contain, and I'll allow the applicant to describe it. At this time I would like to, on the resolution for the CUP 93-3, Section Four, there are a few conditions under the Department of Community Development and Planning conditions that should be revised based on statements and that that were made during presentations. First one would be, I believe it is Condition 9, hours of operation. Rather than as it now reads, it should read "hours of operations will be Monday through Friday, shall be from 5 p.m. to 11 p.m., with the site cleared of customers by 11:30 p.m. Saturday and Sunday hours will be from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. with the site cleared of customers by 11:30." As far as special events are concerned, Item #11, "Special events shall require a special permit to be issued by the Director of Community Development. A special event shall be defined as a single event intended to draw more than 200 persons." To that should be added "such events shall be limited to Saturday and Sunday between the hours of 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. These special events shall be limited to charitable sports events." There was some concern about concerts and that, so the only special event would be charitable sports events and what the Mayor had said during the EIR hearing in terms of the permits and that, all of those conditions continue to be in the resolution. Specifically, the loudspeaker condition, Noise Condition #10, there shall be no loudspeakers or public address system used at the facility that could be heard from r•'ur‘..Les adjacent to the site. That goes back to the ambient noise. Also, all mitigation measures set forth within the Environmental Impact Report pertaining to this particular use are also conditions of the CUP. The monitoring program, which is part of the EIR, also covers how it's going to be enforced. And that would conclude the staff report on CUP 93-3, Section Four. BAC Are there questions at this point to staff? 43 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT ME-iNG OF THE PALM DESERT —i CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s.s * * s 7MB And this CUP is in the part that is now designated as sports complex in the golf course complex. RAD Yes, yes. RAD It would be located approximately 800 feet south of Frank Sinatra Drive on the east side of Portola Avenue. BAC If there are no questions, then I will declare the public hearing be open and the traditional way in the State of California in which public hearings of this nature are conducted is that we'll begin with a presentation by those people who are the applicants, and again followed by anyone who wishes to offer support, followed by those who wish to offer opposition. And, very often, there are concluding statements from both points of view as well. RO I'm not going to take any of your time and ask any of our supporters to say anything further. You've heard the support that the community has for our project. All I will say on this matter is that you approved this matter once before, you approved us there, and even tonight in approving that EIR you addressed the concerns that my project supposedly creates, and you found it to be adequate to approve the EIR, that the mitigations were adequate. I'll be available for any questions. Thank you. BAC Does anyone on the Council have questions of the applicant? Are there those who wish to offer testimony in support of the applicant's request? RF Richard Friend, 72-810 Pitahaya Street, Palm Desert. Good evening, Mayor Crites and other members of the Council. I wasn't planning on speaking tonight, but unfortunately as I was listening to the comments of some of the people who were speaking in opposition to this, I was somewhat embarrassed. I've lived in Palm Desert for ten years, I've watched the City Council, and it embarrassed me to be a citizen of Palm Desert and have the suggestion made that some members of the City Council might have been swayed in some way, shape, or form, influenced. I would suggest that that sort of implication would at least deserve an apology because in my experience in living in a great number of places in the United States, the people standing in front of my are probably of the highest integrity of any group of elected officials I've ever known, and it does embarrass me to have people's...it's easy to suggest that somebody might have been influenced in some way, shape, or form. I think the majority of the residents in Palm Desert do not feel that way. In addition, I think you've seen tonight a prime example of what's referred to as NIMBY. It's a syndrome that's affected a lot of people, a lot of places in the United States. It refers to "Not In My Back Yard". The opponents who have spoken against this project have said we don't have anything against the project, we're just against where it is, and they would suggest that it's in their back yard. They would like it to be in someone else's back yard. Unfortunately, no matter where you put it, it will sooner or later be adjacent to some other property use. In fact, I would ask you to consider that argument, that it is in fact not in their back yard, it is 44 M1Nui� ADJOURNED JOINT MEL_AG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND wL v r i.OPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 • • • • s • • • • s s s s • • • s • • • • • s • • s • • • s • • • • • • • • BL 9', a significant distance away from them and, according to the Environmental Impact Report, any effect on them would be negligible at best if measurable at all. The second thing I'd like to say is I have a seven year old son, his name's Paul, he's been before you as a recipient of an art award. He plays in youth sports. The City of Palm Desert has done a great deal in the past few years in terms of providing ballfields and sports facilities, and I would suggest that it's not enough. The use those fields gets is extraordinary. The condition of the fields is poor, and even though this facility might not in fact be applicable to his use, it will take some of the pressure off the use of those fields by other teams. In light of these things, I'd like you to consider accepting this, passing this proposal. Thank you. Good evening, my name's Bruce Leigowicz, and I live at 39-675 St. Michael Place, that's in Palm Desert, and it's adjacent to Palm Valley Country Club on Country Club Drive, so I'm sensitive to the location of this project as other people are. You've heard a lot of the arguments for it, I certainly concur with those for the need and the quality of the project. I was here earlier this evening and left to go home. And in that venue I was thinking about this and what's going on and the incredibly difficult job you have, and I know you always do a great one, I'm sure you will do one here as well. I was thinking of the arguments that the people were making against it, and the majority of those people still liked the project. They saw the need, they had no problem with the project itself, and as previously mentioned, just don't put it this close to me. Well, as I drove home, I said let me go by Desert Falls Country Club and see exactly what's going on here. So I got out of my car, walked around the outside of Desert Falls Country Club on Cook Street, drove back down to Portola and saw that's about a mile, drove further down Frank Sinatra to the end of Desert Falls Country Club and it's maybe another mile, so from the far end it's almost two miles away from this project. I then went around and went inside the project and walked around, and I was looking at it, and there's lots of trees and foliage, and it's a pretty well protected project, it's not a big open space, and in all due consideration and respect to the people here, I asked myself how could lights a mile and a half away, only sixty feet high, and I believe the word someone used before was I think obliterate the evening sky. I find that hard to conceive. And what I might suggest is if the Council has not yet done so, maybe take a drive to Desert Falls in the evening and just walk around and ask yourself will the lights negatively impact this community or will it not, and I suspect you'll come to the same conclusion I have, that it's not going to be a disaster to their community. There's many other issues, but I went home and felt compelled to come back and make that statement because I think this project is important to the community. I plan on being here a long time. I think it's a positive, and thank you for your time and good luck in your decision. Without being redundant and using the term NIMBY again, we've been here once before on a different site, and we had the same problems with not having the adjacent homeowners wanting it next to them. We've had every project, just about every project that this Council has ever approved has had some sort of opposition here. We've had opposition, I imagine we've had plenty of opposition on Desert Falls before it was built. So we need to decide as a Council and people who are concerned with this community whether or not this is important 45 MR« u 1 ADJOURNED JOINT OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 s s s s s • s • • s s • • • • • • • • * • s • • • * * * s * s * • s $ • • * for our community. I personally know hundreds of people who are residents of Palm Desert who play softball, and I know hundreds of children who go to school here in Palm Desert who play soccer and softball. I have two children that play. I'm directly involved in playing and sponsoring teams as well as many of the other contractors and business owners in this community. Is this important for this community and the residents of this community, and if it is, then don't let the few outweigh the many. Thank you. BAC Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in favor of this request? There being no one, those who would wish to speak in opposition to this request. SG My name is Stan Green, and I live at 362 Muirfield Drive in Palm Desert. The project is inconsistent with the General Plan of the City. The stated objective of the land use element of the General Plan is to minimize conflicts between land uses created by drastic variation in intensity of uses, densities, and access requirements. This objective will not be maintained when the intensive use of a private commercial sports complex is compared with the use of a low density residential project. It also states that development should be directed in such a manner so as to minimize incompatible land uses. The proposed project must be with the uses of the adjacent residential uses. The project does not provide facilities for a private residential project; furthermore, the project does not even provide public facilities fo use by the residents of the City. Rather, the project contemplates a wholly incompatible lane use by a private sports complex to be intensively used during the day, in the evenings, ano on weekends primarily of non-residents. In addition, the EIR itself prepared for this project states that "a General Plan amendment will be required to ensure that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use element." The project is also inconsistent with the existing zoning ordinance. The zoning of that r,. ur .Ljr is R-1M and has to provide for the permanent placement of single-family dwelling units and is to stabilize and protect the residential character of the area and is to promote a better living environment through high quality development. The zoning ordinance also provides for the maximum building height for any structure in the zone to be 24 feet or two-story, whichever is less. And the zoning ordinance also provides that any project must comply with the parking and loading requirements of the City, Chapter 25.58. That proposed project is not allowed under existing zoning. We submit rather than stabilizing and protecting the residential character of the area, the commercial complex would de -stabilize the residential character of the area, could lead to decreases in 1,4 c,i,ty value, could potentially cause other problems not associated with a residential use, including the increased need for police enforcement and traffic control. Further, the building height limitation would be exceeded by the proposed (unclear) structure. Also, the project fails to provide adequate parking for special events. In addition, the EIR prepared for the proposed project requires that the zoning classifications be amended to ensure that zoning is consistent with the proposed general plan land use designations ane those of the North Sphere Specific Plan. There is also improper use under existini conditional permit provisions. The zoning ordinance specifically says that the r • .r . t j cal be utilized under a CUP for public parks and recreation, and that proposed project is not h public park or a recreational facility, but to the contrary is a private commercial venture 46 M Nu111at ADJOURNED JOINT MEL- _1G OF 111E PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * • * * * *• * • * * * * • * * * * * * * * • * • * • • * • • * * • f * * * • which will cater to the use primarily of non-residents. This distinction in character J. r r by the fad that existing City ordinances do not allow the sale of alcoholic beverages in a public park while it is contemplated the developer would be allowed to proceed with the sale of alcoholic beverages at the proposed project. In addition, the agreement entered into by the City with the developer on December 20, 1993, verifies that the project is a private development with the City leasing the land to the developer and loaning the developer up to $2.8 million toward the construction of the project. The fact that the funds to repay the loan are to come from "five percent private activity allowance of a tax-exempt bond" and that the requirement that "the project is exempt from all requirements of prevailing wage or not subject to payment of prevailing wages" is proof that this is a private commercial venture and not a public facility. There is also involved the non -valid use of redevelopment funds. Assembly Bill 1290, which is a community development law reform act of 1993, was passed by the State Legislature on September 10, 1993, signed by the Governor on October 8, 1993, and became effective January 1, 1994. That legislation, among other... BAC Mr. Green, you've used your five, but would you take a couple minutes, cause I know this is important, so... SG Thank you very much. BAC ...take a couple of minutes and bring an end to your thoughts. SG Almost done. BAC That's fine, that's why I'm saying that. SG I appreciate that. That legislation, among other things, restricts the use of redevelopment funds for public/private projects of more than five acres. The law did exempt any project which had been agreed to prior to January 1 of '94. While the City did on December 20, '93, enter into some form of agreement with the developer relating to this project, it is felt that the agreement is not consistent with the specifications of the legislation and therefore not valid in order to qualify for redevelopment funds. In a meeting held with your redevelopment director last Monday, he indicated that the reason that the project did not fall under that provision of the State law was because it exempted projects that generate sales and use taxes. He stated that the sales taxes generated were incidental to the project; however, a review of your own financial feasibility study prepared by Real Estate Analysis Services Company last March shows that the estimated annual revenue generated by this proposed project from food and beverage sales is $1,034,830 of taxable sales, which is 52.8% of the total projected annual revenue. Where I come from, a million dollars is neither incidental or insignificant. I indicated to you earlier that you had a previous Council meeting some statements were made about the location. I have one more. On July the 8th of 1993, the matter was once again before the Council when they determined not to locate it on Hovley. At that meeting, Councilman Crites, now Mayor Crites, stated that "he had thought living near a park was a 47 Mel its.! ADJOURNED JOINT Mk ING OF THE PALM Drabgafti CITY COUNCIL AND Rr uL, w r uOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * * * * * $ s * s s * s * s * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s * * * * good thing, but he said he now feels it's equal to living near a stockyard.' He did recognize the concerns of homeowners. Now I'm sure Councilman Crites is not interested in making us at Desert Falls, The Lakes, Silver Sands, Palm Desert Greens, Montecito, and the Mirage live near a stockyard. I don't think so. Thank you very much. BAC Mr. Green, Mr. Green, before you leave the podium, I'd at least like to place that remark in the context that I made it. I made the remark in the context that it's my perception that I've always thought of parks as being valuable but in listening to a lot of people it sounds like living near a park is like living near a stockyard. That's a very different interpretation than saying that I believe that. I was reflecting sentiments of people who were at a meeting and commenting on those sentiments. SG I merely took the statement out of the Minutes as a direct quote. BAC It is a direct quote, I'm just placing it in the context it was in. SG Alright. SRW Before we go to the next testimony, could I ask staff to respond, to verify that R-1M zoning. RAD Yes, the zoning is R-1M. As far as the Conditional Use Permit meeting the requirements of the R-1M zone, it does meet the requirements of the R-1M zone, the specific condition within the resolution as far as height is concerned is that height shall meet the requirements of the R-1M zone and this particular use is allowed with an approved Conditional Use Permit in the R-1M. SRW What would be allowed if we went ahead with the exact development of R-1M? RAD The R-1M zone, as Council will recall, was created to allow manufactured housing...premanufactured housing subdivisions. It was a way when the State first passed legislation requiring cities to allow modular housing for the City have a way of not allowing modular housing where we had conventional construction housing. In order to do that, we created the R-1M zone, and it allows a density of seven units per acre and allows manufactured housing. Now since that time the State law has changed, but that's what would be allowed under the R-1M along with the other uses, this with a Conditional Use Permit. SRW That's what I thought. Thank you. CP Again, my name is Charles Perrone, 374 Oakmont, Desert Falls. I wish to apologize for that outburst I had back there. I'm sorry, but when somebody says something that hits me, I see blood. Now, we did not homework, too. You people that donate a lot of land to this person to build something, what guarantee is he going to give the City if it belly flops and you get stuck with the r. ur.j? We get stuck with paying for it. Somewheres along the line, you 48 1 ? MIN V 11�� ADJOURNED JOINT MEL.....NG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * EF people have to assume some kind of responsibility to us. You turned down Eldorado, you turned that down, and you put it on Portola, when if you just gave it that much thought, you could have realized that it would have gone better at Dinah Shore and Monterey. Negotiate the r. r ... ty however you want it, they would have had all the parking space they needed opposite Dinah Shore, from there to the railroad track could have been all their parking space. Just give it some thought. Now I hope whatever you decide is proper and legal because if it isn't legal, if we have one inch of your error, we're going to make it a yard because you had your site, you had a perfect site where it was rent free and everything else, but you turned it down because of the resistance you got from the people. You're getting the same thing here. Whatever it takes to negotiate a property down by Dinah Shore and Monterey, you can put it there, you're low, you're down low. You dig a couple feet lower, you'd be rent free. Just give that some thought. Common sense is all you need. I have a lot of it, maybe I'll take this job, that's what you need. Thank you. My name is Esther Forrest, and I live in the Silver Sands project. And the members of the Council, Mayor, I'm sure that you have the care of the citizens or the concern of the citizens of Palm Desert at heart. I just don't want you to forget that we who live around that area are also citizens and voters, and I just don't want you to trash the area, for it is a lovely area now. Thank you. And I wish you would also take into consideration in spite of the EIR the fact that there is going to be alcohol sold on the premises, and it does create incidents, there will be fights, and in spite of all the EIR said, especially on sports there will be trouble. Thank you. DB My name is Debbie Byk, and I live at Silver Sands in Palm Desert. On special events at this project, if the developer comes to you with a request for a charitable concert, you can deny it or you can say that's fine. Well, you cannot tell us right now that there will be no concerts in that park because each request is an individual request from what I understand. So to say that there will be no concerts I think is a little premature. Secondly, when the staff and the developer met with our people over at Silver Sands, we were told that at the Hovley site, the closest residence was 800 feet. This site we are told the closest residence is 1200 feet. You're talking about a difference of 400 feet. What is 400 feet? It's really not that much. You listened to the people at Hovley, they had the very same concerns as we do. We hope you will listen to the people who are objecting to it at this site. Thank you. NF Dr. Farley, Pastor of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, also a permanent resident, and my residence address is 112 Camino Arroyo South, Chaparral Country Club. My wife and I love our city here, it's beautiful. Marion Katz just asked me to come up and congratulate Mr. Wilson on his new appointment. Our (unclear) for pro or con, you won't find my name on any ballots or anything else, and I appreciate this gentleman down here tonight, and I'd like to ask him a question. I'm going to have about 150 young people, the cream of the crop. Can my young people come and play at your park. RO It's not my park, but I'm sure they're more than welcome to come (unclear). 49 I MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT ME.-.ING OF TEE PALM i,t.uala NOVIII�F.� 16,199�4 CITY COUNCIL AND Rr u� LL OPMENT AGENCY * * * * • • * • * • * * • * * * * * * • • * * * • * • • • • • • • S. * • • * NF Can I find out? You see, we're spending public money here, and I'm just wanting to make sure my kids get good recreation. (unclear) NF I'm just wanting some information, so...do I take it that my children can come and play at your park? RO Yes, sir. NF Now, is that free of charge or is that paid? RO We're going to have some special events (unclear) We've had three church representatives come here (unclear) and we are offering programs for those people free of charge (unclear) NF I just wanted that as a point of information. Thank you very kindly. BAC And on the record. Are there other people who wish to offer testimony at this point? JE Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. My name is Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired. I live at 549 Desert Falls Drive East, Palm Desert, California. We've heard a lot of things tonight on earlier public hearings. This is a separate public hearing. I want to make it clear that, number one, I don't blame the Odekirks for trying to pursue their project, not at all. They're business people, if they can get a free ride, take it. When they get your approval, if you give it to them, they're going to be able to get money for their project and be wholly fine. Hopefully if you approve it they'll make money and it won't bother us. I don't think that's true, but I do have hopes. You're investing $2.8 million, perhaps legally or illegally, that's irrespective of the point. You're investing $2.8 million, providing rent-free for a time for the facility, the land, which may be worth another million dollars or thereabouts. Take cognizance of what you're doing. You're doing a project against the will of all the people that surround it. Sure, there are hundreds, maybe even thousands, or people that are residents of Palm Desert, forgetting about outside areas, that want the project, and they don't really care where it's at. But you have the people who are surrounding the area who don't want it, and they're just as firm in their convictions as those who want it. Think about it. I know you've had to think about it, you've had to toy with it, you've got papers that we've provided, our papers aren't technical papers, but they're clear enough I believe to indicate that there is some problems that we feel should be faced. Some of them are legal, some of them are practical, some of them are pleading problems, pleading in the sense that we are pleading with you as representatives of us to do what's right for us and yourselves. You'rr all supposedly residents of Palm Desert as well. Now maybe you don't live in the area tha is impacted by this particular project, but it has an impact on all the residents of Palm Desert more so perhaps of us. I just want you to understand that we are firm in our convictions. We believe that this project, although it has merit, and we understand that the only reason 50 MINv 'gab ADJOURNED JOINT MEEfr.AG OF THE PALM DESERT .-1 CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER. 16, 1994 * * * * * ,* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * that this is going forward is because of the City's interest. The City has a particular interest in having this going forward. Why? Money. We were told by your representatives of staff that the only reason you're going into this is money. You want money. You told us that today in a hearing. You said we couldn't have the monies from the real r.1i taxes. That was an election by this city, they elected not to be within the confines of those cities or among those cities that would benefit by property taxes. Now maybe it was before your time, perhaps not Mr. Wilson's time, but before, I'm talking about in regards to him being on the Council, but at least I know it was of election. You elected when you had the City started or thereabouts not to be within those cities that could take it. Now, unfortunately, Proposition 3 came in and it put you in a position where you weren't going to get the money, etc. etc. and the laws that were enacted after that. And perhaps you would like to have foreseen it, you did land bank, you did a lot of things that were hopefully to make money. This may be a money -making project for you, but it may be just as much a money -making project for you at some other location that you can swap or some other location that they will provide a low cost so that you can afford it, but the comments that were made, first of all, that it was at some place else which would be impacting other places, that's not true. As an example, if you took the place where Price Club is at, there's nobody there, and so that if anybody wants to build on that c.. tj will know that a sports park is there. We did not have that advantage. Thank you very much. BAC Are there others who wish to offer testimony at this time? Are you speaking in opposition? ?? No. BAC Let me just check and see if there are people who wish to speak in opposition. Okay. There being no other person, the Council could exercise do we wish to have a final statement by the applicant or is Council satisfied with the current testimony? SRW I'm satisfied with the testimony (unclear) BAC Unless there then is somebody who wishes to offer testimony in addition, I will then declare the public hearing to be closed and ask for comments and discussion by members of this body. IMB Well, I think everybody knows my position on it. I am not against the project, but I certainly am in using Section Four land in that location for it. So I would be against granting the CUP for it. BAC Go to the other side, all the way but a different way. SRW I think Judge Einbinder made a very salient point that everyone here opposing it has genuine feelings. They're concerned about the impact on their neighborhood, and as this Council knows and I think some testimony has indicated we hear that all the time, every time there 51 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT Mbar -LING OF THE PALM zmaxrms CITY COUNCIL. AND 'Wm, cr ,OPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 « « « s s # « s s s « « « « « « s « « s s s s « s s « « « s s « « « s s s s is a development. Believe it, we heard just as much testimony and concern from Monterey Country Club when we proposed to put four ballfields directly across the street from them. They were concerned, we promised them that we would mitigate the impacts, and we did. Now, we also heard some good comments about why not put it out on Dinah Shore where there is no one there and it won't impact them. And that was a good suggestion and this Council did look at that. We spent weeks examining and talking, we had staff talking to land owners out in that area, and we could not make an agreement that would be financially feasible for this project. We then looked at other sites and we thought we had a solution. We had heard from neighbors in that area. They didn't want the traffic to come into that neighborhood. They didn't like it being next to residential, and so with the cooperation with the proposed developer, we offered and went forward to the Planning Commission, that was the reason for delaying the Environmental Impact Report, with a r 6 r wAdzi to put it out on Cook Street and the future Gerald Ford Drive extended. That would be adjacent to commercial near the interchange that will go on at Cook Street. We though that was an ideal, and I still think it's a better location, but it's lower, the lights would not be as high, and the poles would not be as visible because it's down in a gully, it is away from most of the residential areas, it's closer to Desert Falls but away from all the other projects, it would have easy egress and ingress from the proposed interchange on Highway I-10 where people from out of town could come off the freeway, go to this site, and leave on the freeway. 1 thought it was far more advantageous to put it out there, but last night at the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission was threatened with a lawsuit by Mr. Green and Judge Einbinder that if they approved it without an Environmental Impact Report, which is what has held this project up for almost a year, that they would file a lawsuit if they went ahead with a negative declaration. So, that option is out to us. We heard concerns about alcohol on the premises. I heard no concerns when we approved the EIR on the entire Section Four about alcohol in the clubhouse, on the golf course, two golf courses across the street. I heard no concern about alcohol in the hotels, in the restaurants, that already exist across the street. So, I think that argument is singling just one project when it applies to many projects on that section of land. We heard arguments that the traffic would be a tremendous impact. We saw from the environmental assessment that the traffic on this project is minimal compared to what other traffic that would be generated on that section of land. We didn't hear any concern about the possibility that the Bob Hope Desert Classic could be played at one of those golf courses across the street, and the amount of traffic that could be generated there. We haven't heard any concern from the neighborhood about the fact that in two months or three months the Bob Hope Desert Classic is going to played at Indian Ridge just down the street from the homeowners that are here protesting traffic about this small complex. I think, and we heard arguments from Mr. Green that apparently he prefers manufactured housing on that site, the existing zoning over a ballpark or recreational development. I think this project, although I'd rather see it on Cook Street, apparently that isn't feasible. I'll support the Conditional Use Permit at this location. BAC Mr. Snyder. 52 MII'suim ADJOURNED JOINT MEE�TG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND Rzur., v LLOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 s s s s s s s s a s s s s s s s s s s s s s s * s * s * s * * s s s s * s * WHS Following up on presently Councilman Roy's comments, I agree totally with what he has said. Hurdler will tell you that we had our staff investigate several places that we might attempt to move this. One of the things we talked so freely about putting it way down there. When we looked at some of those areas, there is a problem. It's called infrastructure. You have to get lights and water and gas and sewers, and there aren't any out there. To do that, we're talking about $8 million worth of infrastructure to even move down into that area. To do that, there has to be a considerable amount of additional building, additional responsibilities, so that those costs can be distributed, not to one single item that would bear the cost of moving down there. So it isn't that we haven't looked at other alternative sites. We have, and we feel that this site is isolated away from close proximity. I sat here on this Council when we created the four ballparks here that has been talked about and had to discuss with the Monterey people whether we could control the program or not, and we have successfully controlled the program. I can harken back when we were just a village and that's all I wanted to be, and I unfortunately got roped into running for Council, which I'm not sure was the smartest move I've ever made. But I've enjoyed it and I have loved what I have accomplished with the assistance of all the people sitting here near me. We had the tremendous problem of deciding whether or not we wanted the Town Center here. Our city was just about equally divided with those who wanted it and those who didn't want it. We had that same tough decision to make then and we're making one tonight. Does this fit the City, does this really do the best for the most people. We're elected to do those for all the people, then we have to take into consideration everybody's problems, everybody's goods, and what is good and bad, add up the minuses and pluses and hopefully that we vote for the one that has the most pluses. Right now, I feel that this is a facility that our city can well take in, that we need. We worry about our younger ones, we worry about our older ones, but we forget about the ages from about 16 up that desperately need some areas of recreation. And because of these reasons and because of the full intense effort that the City has made to find how to do this and do it properly and that we've had market surveys to assure us that this is indeed a good feasible project, I'm going to vote for the CUP. BAC Councilman Kelly. RSK Well, I don't know that it'll do much good to express my feelings. I've done that several times. But basically we've recognized several projects recently that I felt were pretty good projects and we turned them down because adjacent residential residents opposed them, and we didn't really need them.. And we have more ballparks now than any other city, two gymnasiums that we just put in. If it were a storm drain or a school or a bus stop or something that we couldn't get along without, that would be one thing, but then it boils down after that problem, one of the problems I don't think you're going to be able to mitigate is lights until 11:30 at night, that basically have to be on until 11:30 at night because they're going to play until 11, they have to clean up. So I think there's a large compatibility problem, and I just feel like we have to take care of the people that are there now, and I know that the Coachella Valley Park and Recreation Department is working right now, and I'm sure it's going to happen, there's going to be a large complex that will have pay for play 53 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT ! i1NG OF THE PALM „r ir.A.Y CITY COUNCIL AND g.wr, v r uOPMENr AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 s s s * s * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * • * * * * for adults in it here in the Coachella Valley, and it will probably be bigger than this one, well I know it's going to .be bigger than this one, and it's going to happen. It's not like we're not going to have facilities. So I just think that it's not compatible, there's no way we can mitigate the lights, and all of those people that live there I wouldn't want it across the street from my house. I think...(applause)...I'm still willing to try to find a place for the park. If we can find a place, and there are other places, I realize there are financial problems, there's infrastructure problems, but I agree with the statement that if it's a good thing and if we do need it, then we can find a place for it where it doesn't affect a lot of people that have already chosen a place to live. JMB I guess I would just like to say one more thing is that I don't think it's that we're in the CUP for this project, I think we have to look at the overall north sphere and what we envision that Section Four would mean to the City. And whether it's one person or two people or three, in looking at it, if they tie up everything that is good for Palm Desert for the next two or three years while this is battled out in the courts, the City of Palm Desert is a loser, and the ballparks will never make up for what they lose. RSK You know, I think there's one thing that affects the Council worse than anything else, and that's when they see our community polarized. And, you know, we've seen this with this particular project now for almost two years, and I can't believe that someone that is really interested in the good of the City of Palm Desert would cause this much trouble for our city, and the trouble's not over. You know, if we approve this tonight, it probably won't happen for two, three, maybe four years, and we have the same problem of a polarized city. And I think it's very detrimental to our city, and I feel really bad that we've been put in a position to have to make a decision like this. SRW I kind of agree with that, and that's why we wanted to move it to Cook Street, and what did we see, we see wherever we move it, there's going to be opposition. And I think we could move it all around this valley, and the people would say not in my back yard, put in someone else's. And that's...and so, we're going to have to bite the bullet and say we're going to find a location, we're going to move forward, we can spend years, we've spent two and half years trying to locate this facility, and every time we try to move it, there's opposition. And I think at some point you have to say enough's enough, let's move forward. BAC Well, number one, the issue about Hovley Lane and that site's been addressed a number of times, and I at least want to give one person's on that. We came to that set of hearings just after I had returned from a sabbatical from the College. And when we listened to the site, there were obviously people who objected to it, there were people in favor of it. The reason that that site did not receive approval that night was not neighborhood objections. I was prepared to vote for the site because I think it's a reasonable site. When we were in the public hearing, the issue was said again and again by a number of people the site's too small and it can't accommodate what we're doing. And I don't remember who made the initial suggestion why don't we look at Section Four because of the amount of space that we 54 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEIthrANG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL. AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 • * • * • • • • • • * • • • • * * * * * • • * • • • • * * • • • • * • * * • had out there. Perhaps we'd have been better off not knowing we had larger space. I think the project was a good project on Hovley, I think it was adequately mitigated there, and the reason at least by my this one person that it was looked at in someplace else was not because of the fact that it was incompatible but was because it was a better location. And you can go back and look at all of those records aside from lifting a quote out of context and you might discover some of' those things as well. Number two, the issue about what happens if financially this doesn't work. I assume that the financial agreement still comes back before this body again. BAA Yes, it would come back before the Redevelopment body. Carlos, when, December some time? CLO If you take action tonight, we will have to do a 1290 report, and... BAC The answer is it will come back. CLO Well, the agreement will come back to you because right now there is no agreement. BAC Right, because there are some issues about financing that I think are legitimate questions and that we need still to take a look at and so on. CLO That's correct. BAC The issue about whether or not this is a valid use of redevelopment money, obviously there are people in the audience who think it isn't, our attorneys say it is, beyond that that's an issue that will just have to be addressed if people choose through the court system, and we'll find out because our best advice is that it is, but perhaps it is not. The issue about the fact that this is a private commercial venture, therefore not appropriate, one of the two golf courses that's to go out there is primarily going to be for the use of the Marriott timeshares, that's a private commercial venture. The hotels will be a pay for rooms venture. The golf will be a pay or play venture. The conference center will be a pay for use venture. And by stretching a little bit, the museum if we build it will be a pay for view venture. All of those are issues that are not free to the public. They are all going to be things that in some way or other require monies and to generate monies. And they will all have to some degree already taxpayer financing involved in it because we already own the land and are putting in a lot of the infrastructure with which people may or may not choose to agree. The issue about whether it would be better at Dinah Shore I think is a fairly good question, and I think if there • was a way to deal with the infrastructure costs, one of the reasons it's being placed anywhere, whether it's on Hovley or whether it's on Cook Street, or whether it's in Section Four, is because you don't have to generate long distances of utilities. You can't put something in a place where it costs you $6 million to run the facilities out to it. If we can find a way to beat that cost or find some way to share that cost or something, then perhaps a location out on Dinah Shore, Monterey, or someplace like that is feasible. I tend to agree 55 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEN.AING OF THE PALM DESERT NOVEMBER 16,1994 CITY COUNCIL AND .rr s'. r.�.OPMENT AGENCY ••*•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••• JMB with Councilman Wilson that the College site, because of its proximity to the freeway and the fact that it's lower than the existing developments in terms of elevation and such things as that, is probably a better site. But when you go back to the issues about which there are data, people talk about lights, we've got hotels that are a lot taller than any of those light poles that are going to have lighted windows all night, we've got no spillover over here...well, you were welcome to a r ... ,,.z.::on, and I also am going to have to look at data. There are no good data that there are lighting problems out there. I think we still need to look at noise to make darned sure there is nothing that aside from loudspeakers that go (unclear) there. A lady asked how do you guarantee there are no concerts — you write it in the Conditional Use Permit, there are no concerts, period, you can't apply for them, period. You can apply for sporting events, charities, but nothing else, period. And that tends to the issue. What I would like to do, as one vote, and what I would hope, what I intend to do it to vote favorable for this CUP but ask that we not act on the CUP until we have the opportunity to look at other sites and to see whether or not there is a location that is not an acceptable location, my bias is this is an acceptable location, but a better location that still remains economically feasible. If there is, so be it. I'm willing to do that, but I'm willing to do that on the condition that this is not an unacceptable site in terms of the mitigation measures and in terms of the issues. And you're right, Dick, we do listen to neighbors and so on, we ought to, yet I know times in which as an example for the public housing project right out here on Section Four where the majority of the neighbors were all opposed and 1 think your vote was right alongside mine that said, you're right, you're opposed, but the data say it's a good project, and it isn't going to cause harm. We do not always do those kinds of things. We look to see whether or not there is substantial data to cast a good ballot on, and the data in this case are data that affirm the ballot and the request. Remind you on the one on Indian Wells, on the one out here, the majority of the complaints came from Indian Wells, and the complaints that came from the Palm Desert ones, they went out and met with the residents and got...mitigated what they were concerned about before we all voted yes. BAC And they were will opposed. We have issues, so what would we like to do at this point? WHS I would like to make a motion that we approve the CUP and that we take into consideration your request that we continue to look for and determine whether or not there is a feasible alternate site that we can somehow put together the infrastructure, etc. and so forth that could let us move this project and that we approve the CUP as it is presently submitted. Would you care to amend that? BAC First of all, let's see if we have something on the floor for a discussion. SRW I'll second it to put on the floor with the... BAC Okay, there's a motion and a second. Mr. Diaz, you had your hand up. 56 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MEEkxNG OF THE PALM DESERT —' CITY COUNCIL AND Rr ur, r OPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 s « « « s « « « s s $ « « s « s s s « s « s s s « s « « « « s s « s « « * « RAD Yes, the resolution would be Resolution 94-117. It would be a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, Affirming the Planning Commission Decision and Approving the Construction of and Operation of a 20-Acre Multi -Use Pay for Play Recreation Facility Located 800 Feet South of Frank Sinatra Drive on Portola. BAC Okay. Mr. City Attorney, is it possible to pass a Conditional Use Permit but yet hold it pending the issues that I asked for? DJE I believe it is so long as you put a time limit on it. BAC Okay. DJE In other words, you approve it, that approval is to be effective a certain date with the right to withdraw that approval if you have a different location. BAC Or to continue to hold that approval? DJE Certainly, either. BAC Okay. JMB Now, does that affect bringing in the financial package for that one? DJE I think that would be deferred until it is final. SRW BAC I guess I need some discussion and clarification. We have looked out on Monterey, we've looked out in the Dinah Shore area, we've found basically because of the infrastructure costs and land costs and all of that that those aren't viable sites. Really, it's the College site to Gerald Ford and Cook Street that we found was economically feasible to go to, which I still think is the best site, but as long as we've got legal challenges to that site, we really can't continue to hold this project up forever while people make threats of litigation. Let me respond to that. Number one, when we get to Item C, which is the next one, which we can't do anything with because it's still in Planning Commission, I'm going to at least as one person ask that we direct staff to meet with Planning Commission or to, however this is ir•vr•;ately done, to initiate an EIR to look at that College site. Number two, I think the people in the audience deserve a public look at what we've found in terms of the cost of those other sites, I mean, they're hearing us say well, it's going to cost this amount of money, it's going to cost that amount of money. We ought to set it out on one page or whatever pages it takes and say alright, if we want to go out to "x", here are the kinds of monies that are involved in it in terms of utilities and land costs and so on and so forth, and here's what the project looks like. I think those data are appropriately public for people to see so that people can see here are the choices that are involved and here are the darned options and here are 57 ADJOURNED JOINT M b-AC NG OF ME PALM , s CITY COUNCIL AND ga.ub, r uOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER '16,1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s$ s s s s s e s s s s s s the costs. And people may agree or disagree with our decision, but at least they'll know the data on it. So both those things are things that I think ought to be done. SRW I have no objection to that. JMB Well... WHS Well, I think that they ought to know them because it hasn't been easy to sit here and have this kind of controversy. We don't want it. We didn't want it to begin with, we don't want it now. We wouldn't have spent all the time trying to find these other sites, and we didn't just disregard them, we disregarded them because financially they were totally unfeasible. And I think these people are entitled to know about that so that they don't think we just arbitrarily said the sky is blue and etc. and so forth. BAC And we can look at it again when we look at that data and see if there's a better site... WHS You'll see the cost of engineering, you'll see the cost of developing this. We've made an analysis of it, and I think you're going to be shocked at what these costs were running. And I think you're entitled to know it. And we'll be happy to share it with you. SRW My concern is that, again, this project has been stalled, delayed, for about two and a half years now, and I would hate to continue to stall and delay this project forever, because I think that's what some people would like to see happen, and I think we have to bite the bullet and say, no, an end to an end. But I have no objection to that as long as we have a reasonable time frame such as our next meeting in December to bring this data forward and to explore maybe those individuals who threatened a lawsuit on the Cook Street would reconsider their actions and work with us in relocating this project rather than opposing it wherever we try to put it. And maybe within the next two weeks, three weeks, we could get some resolution to that, so I would like to see a date specific do December 8th. WHS I agree, and I would encourage the people who have been involved in this program to come and let us show you the costs of these other programs and why this other site is a good one. JMB Well, if you pass the CUP tonight and go forward with "C" and ask the Planning Commission to have an EIR on this, then I think we're sending the Planning Commission mixed signals. I don't think they know that we know what we're doing when you're going to approve this site and then you want them to review the other site and do an EIR, we're just spinning our wheels. BAC That's fine, it's much easier to just simply approve this and be done. I'm trying to make sure that we honestly do look at what some people want us to do, which are other sites. If you're opposed to doing that, so be it. Then maybe we shouldn't. Would you prefer we not do that? 58 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT MErriNG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL. AND Rzur.vr.LOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 * * * * * *. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * JMB I'm against it in this location and I would consider the Cook Street one, yes, but I don't think that the CUP should be approved for Section Four and ask the Planning Commission to do an EIR on the other one before they've even reviewed it and think that we have passed the other site. I think...it's confusing to me, let alone to them. RSK That motion is on the floor as approval to put it in Section Four right where it is, as nothing else is going to happen if that passes, it's going to go right there. JMB And the Planning Commission is going to say well, the Council already approved it, what do we want to look at this for? BAC I wouldn't set this out there if I didn't have reasons to do it in terms of honestly looking at other things. You're welcome to an opinion. JMB (unclear)...years of getting anything done that will be progressive in the City that we worked so hard for to get out in Section Four to get that so it is a true gateway down Country Club, and I just think we're throwing it into the courts and we all know how long that takes. SRW It's true, and we also know how much money it costs, so I'm getting sick and tired of spending money for litigation, but sometimes you have to do that. Is the maker of the motion agreeable to putting the December 8th the date of... WHS Yes, I am. I would add that to my motion and I would hope that in that period of time we can properly look at any possibilities of another location and move on with this thing. I think we've had it long enough, I think it's time to make a determination. We have made, I think let's proceed. And my motion is to approve it and to hold it in abeyance until the next December 8th while we have the opportunity to show the people the possibilities of the other one, particularly the College site to see if they can't come to an agreement with us that this is a better site for them and for us. JMB I don't know how you can approve something and hold it in abeyance. WHS The attorney just told us we could. BAC The attorney just said we could. SRW Well, I'll reaffirm my second and also say, again, that I think the Cook Street site is a preferable site and it's too bad that it was challenged, but we do have an Environmental Impact Report in place on this location. That makes this location now desirable because of the challenge of the lack of an EIR on the other site. BAC If there is...is there further discussion? There being none, would you please cast a ballot. 59 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT ME 1NG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND g.r ui r .OPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * • * * * * * * • * * * * * * * * * * * • * * * * * * * • • * * * * SRG Has everyone voted? The motion carries by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers Benson and Kelly voting NO. ?? (unclear) your motion was (unclear) I don't understand. BAC Okay. Between now and December the 8th, a couple of things to happen. One is for staff to look at and ..,r w. „ for the public a look at the costs of the sites as an example that were mentioned this evening down on Monterey, Dinah Shore, Gerald Ford corners and all the rest of that in terms of the cost of r..,r — t j and the cost of infrastructure and so on and so forth and to take one more honest look to see whether or not there's a way to get there financially. That's one piece. And the second one is to let the Planning Commission have another shot at the site out on the far end of Cook by the freeway and to see whether or not we can gain any kind of agreement on that as an alternative. My honest conviction, and people can accept it or not, is to still be open to alternative sites while being willing to say, whether people agree or not, that this site is also an acceptable site. Does that clarify it, I mean I'm not asking if you like it, but I mean does it... ?? (unclear) BAC We will... • WHS Where you can see it. BAC We will make sure that... ?? Like where? WHS Here. BAC We're just going to...wait a second...when, at least a week before that time, whatever... BAA Dick, what do you think in terms of, you know, you've got a lot of the infrastructure costs. WHS You've got all of that already. RIF We should be able to have it ten days before the Council meeting. BAC Okay. So, people who would like a copy of that data before we get together again on the 8th, if you would, we'll take a recess right now, if you would either now or else tomorrow give your name and address to the City Clerk, we'll make sure that data are provided to you. Is that responsive? 60 MIRu it., ADJOURNED JOINT MEE: NG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ?? I have a question. Is that data going to contain what the costs are that you have already negotiated for, or are you going to renegotiate to determine if you would be able to get the infrastructure and the land at a lesser rate? Because if you're going to just give us the figures that you've already come up with (unclear). BAC Oh, the request is honestly to see whether or not along with what we've already done is there any way to go back and take another whack at this in some other direction to find another way to get there for alternatives. ?? (unclear) BAC And I'm taking another look at it. If you...we can also not do that. And we will stand in recess for five minutes. C. JtEOUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 25± ACRE MULTI -USE, PAY FOR PLAY RECREATION FACILITY TO BE LOCATED ON 25 ACRES OF CITY OF PALM DESERT OWNED LAND ZONED PC-2 AND PR-5 AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GERALD FORD (EXTENDED) AND COOK STREET (EXTENDED). THE FOLLOWING IS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THIS PORTION OF THE MINUTES Key BAC Buford A. Crites, Mayor/Chairman BAA Bruce A. Altman, City Manager RAD Ramon A. Diaz, ACM/Director of Community Development DJE David J. Erwin, City Attorney WHS Walter H. Snyder, Councilman/Member SG Stan Green JE Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired SRW S. Roy Wilson, Councilman/Member RSK Richard S. Kelly, Councilman/Member 0 Odekirk CLO Carlos L. Ortega, ACM/Director of Redevelopment SRG Sheila R. Gilligan, City Clerk/Agency Secretary BAC ...item C on the Agenda, also a request for a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. City Manager. BAA Yes, I believe Mr. Diaz, this one the Council can't consider tonight because it's still at the Planning Commission. Is that correct? 61 MIN ua23A ADJOURNED JOINT MF.bl NG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND nrrrz vrr.OPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * • • * * * *.* * * • RAD That's correct. You cannot make a decision on it tonight. BAA So we'd recommend that this be continued to that same date, right Dave? BAC Til the 8th? BAA I think...Ray, til the 8th or what? RAD Right, until December the 8th. But there was some comment about EIR and stuff, so...but you're right, December the 8th. DJE This has been noticed as a public hearing. The Council could hear anybody you wish, but I would suggest in light of prior actions that it be continued to December 8th. It also is premature since it is still at the Planning Commission level. BAC When will the Planning Commission consider this? RAD December 6th, two days before the 8th. WHS Should we merely continue the matter? DJE That would be my suggestion. BAC Okay. Because it is a noticed public hearing, should I open the public hearing? I would, then, open the public hearing on this matter and ask if there's anyone who wishes to offer testimony on it. SG Why not? Bat three for three. My name is Stan Green, and I live at 362 Muirfield Drive in Palm Desert. The letter that was submitted to you and the Planning Commission was prepared by myself and Judge Einbinder with the assistance of other people and in no way was it a threat of litigation. There is no mention in there of litigation. The letter indicated to you and was styled after the same letter that was submitted to the City Council a year ago in regard to the Section Four site that you had a project and a project required an EIR. And that's all the letter said was here are the points and authorities, the same ones that were used for Section Four and you determined then that yes, you had to have an EIR. And we merely reminded you that you were proceeding on another project and we didn't know what the impact was until you prepared an EIR. So we merely submitted the letter and sent it to you and said that. In addition, Section 33333.3 of the Health and Safety Code requires that any redevelopment project must have an EIR. So, in either case, whether we require it or not, you are required to prepare one, and that's merely what we requested. Thank you. BAC Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to offer testimony? 62 i DES ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 * * * * s $ * * * s * s * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s s * s * * * JE Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council, my name is Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired, I live at 549 Desert Falls Drive East, Palm Desert, California. I, again, want to refer this matter to the attorney, because I want to be sure if you are continuing it to December 8th, and I'm not sure if that's what your inclination is. But if it is, and you're going to be possibly acting on the matter if it comes before you, it would deprive the parties who, whatever the decision is, by the way, and I'm not saying it would be us, it could very well be in opposition to that, any party who has ordinarily 15 days to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission would be deprived of 13 days of that period if you acted upon it on the 8th of December. So the only thing I'm requesting is that if you would continue this matter, you would continue it after that 15 days has expired and then either party, whoever would be the "losing" party would have that 15 day opportunity. Otherwise, you'd be forcing somebody to do something in two days which they didn't...may not want to do if they would wait 15. BAC Okay. City Attorney, would you care to respond to that? DJE Judge Einbinder has a good point, I believe, in that process. I believe my suggestion that it go to the 8th because if on the 8th you have not found another site, the other action becomes final, and this one is really moot at that point. If it goes to the 8th and the other is not final, then certainly I think everyone should be allowed an appropriate time to appeal the other decision. SRW Question regarding that issue. Aren't we by putting it on the Council Agenda doing the appeal for the public by bringing it up from the Planning Commission. DJE In fact taking it to the same place an appeal would take it. You do eliminate the time involved in potentially preparing it. BAC The amount of time. DJE Yes. BAC Different question. If a majority of this body chooses to, could we direct staff to do the initial work that would be necessary to initiate an EIR on Cook Street? DJE Yes. BAC Save about three weeks of time. DJE Yes. BAC And such a thing like that. Because there are all kinds of preparations as to who you would choose and so on and so forth without committing ourselves to doing it? 63 MINUTES ADJOURNED JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND # s s s s * * * * * MEti1NG OF THE PALM Ur.erst� NOVEMBER 16,199a v.r ur. * r uOPMENT AGENCY s s s s s* s s* s s s* s* s s s* s *$ s s s DJE Yes. JE I'm not sure if that is going to be continued afterwards...when you say moot, that bothers me because you have an agency, i.e., the Planning Commission, that would act. Are you saying that on the 8th if it is your position for it to come to you, how would it come to you? It only comes to you on an appeal. WRS No, we can call it up any time we want. BAC We also have the ability to ask for an item to be brought to us. DJE Which is the same as an appeal. JE So are you saying at this point in time that you are going to exercise your right on the 8th to have an appeal? DIE What they're saying, I believe, and the way this is scheduled is it would be treated as if it is an appeal, and let the Council make the final decision. JE And...okay. I just wanted to be sure that we weren't denied in any way any time...anyone denied that period of time. Thank you very much. BAC Then the public hearing would be appropriately left open. DJE Correct. BAC Okay. I would ask if there's any interest among my colleagues about directing staff to at least do the initial work that would be necessary to select a consultant, etc., etc. and give us a time and date and everything like that for a possible EIR on the Cook Street site. SRW Because I favor that site, I would like to see us do that because if...it would seem to me that most of the analysis has been done, it needs to be reanalyzed in a different location, and perhaps we could even authorize staff to enter into a contract with the Smith firm to do a focused EIR on this project on that location. DJE WHS DJE BAC I believe that goes a little bit further than your Agenda. Okay, an emergency 4/5ths vote. But you can direct staff to start the preparation process. I think you'd have to determine the emergency and by 4/5ths vote place it on to (unclear) Did you get the picture of that? 64 ADJOURNED JOINT MEE?11NG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL. AND Rr ue,v r sAPMENT AGENCY - NOVE BER 16, 1994 • * * • * ••* s s s s * • * * • • • • * * * * • * • * * * * • • • • • • • • RAD 1 get the picture. Does Council want to know how long it would take to prepare the EIR? BAC No, what I want you to do, or at least one person wants you to do, is to sit down and take a good look at that before you (unclear) and look how expeditiously it can be done given the issues that need to be looked at. Mr. Green's correct in terms of the need for one of those. If we want to look at it, fair enough. Councilman Kelly, do you have a point of view about doing this? RSK Well, I think that if there's some way that we can start the process, we ought to start the process. I think there's little doubt in anybody's mind that that's a far better location. BAC Okay. RSK For several different reasons, it's lower, adjacent to the freeway, cuts down on traffic, you can go on and on. BAC Walter? WHS I... JE Excuse me, could I readdress the Council? BAC Yes. JE You have to appreciate that if you're going to be going on Cook Street and that's what your intention is trying to do, okay? BAC Our intention is to look at the issues. JE Well, but you have almost implicit in that 200 acres the requirement that an EIR. You have a college going in there. I'm not saying they're going in there tomorrow, but an EIR is going to be having to be required for the college. I don't know if there would be any reason to duplicate any efforts that you might want to do. That you might want to take up with staff. BAC I think that's a fair comment and one that staff needs to look at. 0 With all due respect, we understand what the Council is trying to do is to ease everybody's concerns, and I see you leaning the direction to go back to the Cook Street location. Now, if we had any assurance from our opponents that they were going to let us do this without a long delay, we'd be agreeable to talk about that. We approached this, we went through several months of trying to find a location that would make everybody happy. And every time we come up with this, we're faced with the same kind of delays. We're afraid that if 65 MNTM ADJOURNED JOINT MEta NG OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND Rr u� r.LOPMENr AGENCY NOVEMBER 16,1994 ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss__ you're going to get involved with an EIR on that location, it's going to have to wait until the college situation that participates in it, and we're looking at a year's delay to do that. And we're also looking at this. We have no assurance that if we agree to do that with you, that our opponents aren't going to file lawsuits on that location. So I don't know where we're going with this, and I don't know why we're going that way. SRW The college issue, the memorandum of understanding that we have says that there's no guarantee that a college campus will go there, but if indeed some day the economics of the State of California and the need develops that there would be a need for a university to serve this area, that it would go at that location. So it would be premature to do a college site ElR at this time until such time as there was a determination by the board of trustees that indeed we want to put the university there. 0 Well, we're certainly willing to cooperate with the City staff and the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency to solve the problems. But I don't want to jump from the frying pan into the fire and we had...I don't know what assurance you can give us that we're not looking at another six months to a year's delay. SRW Well, the only assurance we can give you...you have an approval effective December 8th it something more desirable can't be worked out and if indeed something can't be worked out then you've got Section Four. 0 Well, we'll do our best to work with you. SRW Okay. BAC Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to offer testimony. CLO Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to ask a question of the Council in a way, even though it's an Agency item. I just want to get some guidance on that. Is...a while ago, you asked a question about the business terms. Business terms now require us to do a report pursuant to 1290, and if indeed...and it is site specific because analyzes specific deal points with regard to that site, land values and all of that. And based on what I hear tonight, then I would rather that we hold that because in order for us to have that analysis pursuant to 1290 by the 8th, basically it has to be made available for public inspection by the 24th which is next week, and we already know that's not going to be possible. I was just alerting you of that. BAC You're saying that has to come to us at a later time. CLO It'll come to you (unclear)...the 1290 and it'll have a public hearing, etc., etc. BAC Okay, alright. If there's no further testimony, then I will leave the public hearing open and ask for a motion to continue this item and also until our meeting of December the 8th. 66 MINUMS ADJOURNED JOINT MEETWG OF TEE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER. 16, 1994 * * * * * * * * * * s s s * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $ * * * * * * * * * * WHS So moved. BAC Is there a second? Second. Implicit in that is the informal instruction then from Council to staff in terms of initiating...we all know what it is. (unclear) an EIR issue. There's a motion and a second, please vote. SRG Has everyone voted? Motion carries by unanimous vote. IX. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Wilson, second by Snyder, and unanimous vote of the Council, Mayor Crites adjourned the meeting at 12:05 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 22, 1995. ATTEST: SHEILA R. G 1 / GAN, CIT LEIIf CITY OF PALM DESERT, 1 ORNIA SECRETARY TO THE PAL DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUFOA. CRITES, MAYOR/CHAIRMAN 67