Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-01-15MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2004 — 8:30 A.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Spiegel convened the meeting at 8:30 a.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilman Richard S. Kelly III. INVOCATION - Mayor Robert A. Spiegel IV. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmember Jean M. Benson Mayor Pro Tem Buford A. Crites Councilman Jim Ferguson Councilman Richard S. Kelly Mayor Robert A. Spiegel Also Present: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager/RDA Executive Director Robert W. Hargreaves, Deputy City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, ACM for Community Services Homer Croy, ACM for Development Services Justin McCarthy, ACM for Redevelopment Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Mark Greenwood, City Engineer Amir Hamidzadeh, Director of Building & Safety Philip Drell, Director of Community Development Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer Michael J. Errante, Director of Public Works V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING VI. PUBLIC HEARING JANUARY 15, 2004 A. CONSIDERATION OF A COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA Case No. GPA 01-04 (City of Palm Desert, Applicant). The following is a verbatim transcript of this public hearing: Key RAS Mayor Robert A. Spiegel PD Phil Drell, Director of Community Development RDK Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk JMB Councilmember Jean M. Benson BAC Mayor Pro Tem Buford A. Crites JF Councilman Jim Ferguson RSK Councilman Richard S. Kelly JC John Criste, Terra Nova Planning & Research, Palm Springs, CA RWH Robert W. Hargreaves, Deputy City Attorney PP Patrick Perry JL Jim Lewis CLO Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager DM Donna Matson DH Dale Hodges MG Mark Greenwood, City Engineer SW Stephen Wong LB Larry Brose RAS I think most of you are aware we're here this morning to discuss our General Plan. Before we get started, though, I'd like to thank the Committee members and two members of our Council that were on the Committee to develop the General Plan. This is one piece of the General Plan, this is the other piece. The two people are Councilwoman Jean Benson and Dick Kelly, and I thank you for all of your efforts. And I'd also like to thank the Planning Commission for the months that they took to approve the General Plan, and hopefully a lot of the questions that our citizens have needed to be answered have been answered. And we will go forward this morning taking a look at the General Plan. What we're going to have first is an overview of the General Plan and that should take about 45 minutes, something like that. Then we'll move to the Cornishe at Bighorn, then we'll go to north Highway 111, the alley parking expansion, and then to Portola south of Whitewater, and if we have enough time, to the northeast corner of Country Club and Monterey. Our objective is to adjourn very close to 11:30 this 2 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING PD JANUARY 15, 2004 morning. We will not finish the entire General Plan Update by that hour, and we will then be continued until January 29th at 8:30 in the morning. In other words, every other Thursday so this does not interfere with our regular Council meeting, nor does our regular Council meeting interfere with the General Plan. So with that, I'll turn it over to Phil Drell. Morning, Council, members of the public. I'd like to kind of...before our consultant, John Criste, starts his summary and overview, I'd like to set the stage a little bit about how we got here. As you remember, when we started talking about a general plan, I think in late 1999, early 2000, I wasn't overly enthusiastic about embarking on this process, for those who read my staff reports, but with the perseverance of Councilman Ferguson and then a friendly nudge from the Attorney General, we concluded that this is something we had to do. But it wasn't anything that I had any great expectations about, that we were going to accomplish anything significant. I was wrong. I think we have accomplished something significant. Again, sometimes you find significance in most unexpected places. Fundamentally, if you've read from the General Plan, it's a historical document, and that was probably one of the things we really needed. Our last General Plan was done in 1980 when we were six, seven years old and just beginning. So we needed something that would, again, describe the City as it is today and how we got here. And so there is a lot of information that has been collected about the City, every minute operation, aspect, and character of the City, which I think was very important to document, put down. The second thing it does, it establishes vision for the future. And the immediate discussion that you get into when you talk about the future is the issue of change. And there was a lot of sentiment, or some sentiment, that we want to avoid change and that really our goal should be to stay with the formula for which we have achieved success. But when you look back at the historical document, you learn that the history of the City is not about standing pat. A lot of the characters, a lot of the important features of the City that we kind of take for granted as part of that formula for success, when those decisions were made, those represented significant turns in the road. I remember my first City Council meeting I think I ever went to was over at Washington School on the approval of the Town Center Mall, which while we all take for granted is a member of the family, it was thought very differently at that meeting. This was a project that many predicted would destroy the City, destroy the character of the City, destroy El Paseo. And since then, we've made lots of decisions: the approval of One Quail Place; the approval of, for God's sakes, an eight -story, thousand -room hotel in a zone that only allowed a 24-foot-high building, the Marriott; approval of timeshares; approval of Desert Rose; the transformation of El Paseo, which although it occurred in small steps, it was seen with alarm by many people, culminating with the approval of The Gardens on El Paseo; Bighorn; Desert Willow; CalState. All 3 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 those were significant changes in direction for the City, and while virtually all of those we're all now very proud of, each one involved a great deal of anxiety, there was a great deal of controversy. And in each one of those, there were predictions of doom and disaster and fundamental change in the character of the City. But we had the courage to make those decisions, and I think we're all very proud of all those projects, and those are kind of the signature things that make Palm Desert special, and those are the things that now surrounding communities try to copy. So...the GPAC, once they were...what general plans force you to do is take the long view. Up to...in our normal planning process we focus on individual projects, one at a time, and the little details of those projects. And the General Plan forces us to get beyond that and look at the big picture. And in looking at the big picture, I think the conclusion of the GPAC was in the last remaining vacant land we have in the City, there was reason to alter our course a little bit. And when we get into those details of what has come out of GPAC and the Planning Commission, you'll understand hopefully the reasons and rationale for the recommendations. The other thing that that global view caused us to do was to look at our existing city and those areas of the City which, for whatever reason over the history of planning, dating back to long before we became a city, that we didn't come up with the most appropriate physical arrangement and those areas where we need to change existing development, which is in many respects more difficult than dealing with the new stuff. New stuff you have a blank canvas, you can kind of plan it out. You can try to imagine the ideal solution and try to implement it. When we're dealing with redevelopment of older areas in the City which no longer are appropriate in terms of their physical layout, you can't...you rarely can achieve the perfect solution. You have to compromise many places to figure out what can work better given the determinants of physical reality out there. And just because you can't achieve the perfect solution doesn't mean you can't and should not make it better. So those are kind of the...what I think we accomplished, I think we were able to go back and look at the areas of the City that...existing part of the City that could be changed. Most of the City, when you look at the land use map, is virtually unchanged from existing development. We, I think, have come up with an appropriate new vision for the remaining vacant land, and I think the other great accomplishment, I think even before this document has been approved, the idea of master planning and the realization that we have very little land left, and that the little land we have left deserves very, very, very careful attention. When you think there's unlimited resources out there, sometimes you don't give it that attention because you can always (inaudible) great project next year. I think what we realized is that kind of the polish to the apple is out there north of Frank Sinatra, and it's going to happen very quickly. And so it has kind of raised 4 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 the bar for the property owners out there in terms of their attention to coming up with really the best that can be done in terms of sophisticated planning for the permanent residents of the City. And I think we've already gotten significantly better plans submitted to us since we initiated this process. I think for the first time applying the most sophisticated planning/master planning concepts with which we've grown used to with our resort developments now being applied to permanent residential neighborhoods. And so I think, again, those things I think are already significant accomplishments, and you've already seen some of those in projects that have even come to you prior to these hearings. And so that's...again, as I say, I think we've accomplished a lot, and it's been definitely a worthwhile effort, and again, I'd like to thank also all the GPAC and Planning Commission and all the other Commissioners and public residents who've given a lot of good input. So now I'd like to introduce John Criste. RAS (Inaudible) PD Yes. RAS I was remiss. I did not ask for roll call. City Clerk, would you please take roll. PD We'll have to start over again. RDK Councilmember Benson JMB Here. RDK Mayor Pro Tem Crites BAC Present RDK Councilman Ferguson JF Here RDK Councilman Kelly RSK Here RDK And Mayor Spiegel RAS Here. I also didn't ask for Oral Communications. If there's anyone in the audience who wants to speak on any subject that does not involve the General Plan, please come forward now. Seeing no one... 5 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING (Inaudible) RAS Yes JANUARY 15, 2004 PD I would like to introduce John Criste. There will be lots of public comment on the General Plan, but if you want to talk about the State bird, then now is the time to speak. He is basically responsible for the pros in the plan and has put the whole thing together and organized it and really pretty much led the discussions at GPAC. To give...again, the first (inaudible) is to cover what I would call the more mundane but still important elements of the General Plan, so he can give a general overview of those and to take public testimony and take the Councilmen's comments on those. And the process we'd like to follow would be after each discussion section, we need feedback relatively immediately on whether they're acceptable or not so we can know that these are done and put them behind us and move forward. So, as I say, we probably ought...we're going to go element by element, and so if there are...probably easier to, at each one, to hear your comments, hear public comments, and then get some indication as far as your concerns...we're done or if there are more things you want us to come back with at the next meeting for those particular things, then that would be the time to give us that input. Thank you. BAC You said we were going element by element...is that consistent with what we have in this report? PD That general overview...John is going to go very briefly and kind of summarize the highlights of each element, hopefully in... (Inaudible) PD JC Yes. And, based on his...if, and again, there's some question on how expansive you want to hear...if you want to immediately comment on the degree of detail in the summaries, we want to hear that, too, and we can move on quicker. This is a process that took three hours at Planning Commission. We're proposing it would take only an hour here, and if we can do it in a half hour, that's to a certain degree your choice. It's no reflection on Phil, but I kind of feel like the introduction to a bad comedian that has to get up and do something for an hour. One of the things I'd like to first say is how really honored we have been to be involved with this process and with the City. And we have not taken our responsibility lightly. We have had honest and frank discussions sometimes that were at best frustrating to some folks but were extremely productive and I can't tell you a better experience we've been through on this sort of project. The staff 6 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 report outlines in general terms how we got here and kind of what we felt was the impulse that we were following to develop these materials. And as Phil pointed out, we have a lot of history we documented to try to see where the trends were that had been making the City successful, the basic values, and how can we get them into this document. We also had guidance from the General Plan State Guidelines. Some were more obligatory than others, but they really helped us form the structure of the document, and with the latitude that was provided, we established it as a multi -chapter bi-subject sort of document. And within that, we then grouped elements, and I thought what we would do is maybe deal with matters on a chapter basis, give you a broad overview in that regard, and then we can get into elements if you're interested in speaking to the specific elements. The first, and of course, most instructive really in the sense is the administration and implementation element because it explains the basis for the general plan and what kind of obligations we have in its development and the kind of information we're supposed to include. And then it also talks to some of the instruments we have available to implement the kinds of vision we have for the community through policies and programs and mapping, things of that sort, and also instruments like specific plans, which we have a few of in the City. The community development element is really the physical development chapter, rather, regards to physical development...how do we manage lands that are already developed, lands that are vacant and perhaps subject to development, how do we serve the traffic that is generated by human land use and the intensities of that land use and the types of land use. The issue of housing being a State -mandated subject that requires us not only to look at providing a good range of housing but to assure that those in our community that may be at an economic or social disadvantage are given some help through our housing programs. Also in the build environment integral to any good community are the parks and open spaces we have...element discusses that at length. Community design, which is a hallmark activity of Palm Desert and which has given it such strong character, and with that the arts and culture element which again is one of those things that isn't land use per se but it really creates place or an environment for you to do place making in your community. And then the economic and fiscal element which is to kind of look at from a cost revenue or a fiscal impact sort of way...what are we...are we helping ourselves or are we hurting ourselves, can we continue to generate revenues from the economic base we have to provide the services we say we're going to provide the community. The land use element probably is considered the most important in that it has the direct physical effect on the land, the first effect if you will. And we have definitions of the types of land uses that are mapped. They've been refined since the earlier maps. They also take into consideration what our neighbors have been doing to the east and to the west and the County to primarily the north. And it has set out definitions that 7 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 we think are adequately directive and yet flexible for Council and staff to work creatively with the development community. One of the biggest bugaboo issues we've had, we've dealt with at length, and occupied not a small amount of time with the Planning Commission, was the traffic and circulation. And as you know, we have a real balancing act we try to make here in the Coachella Valley of wanting to make things accessible and not to be burdened with long delays at intersections at the same time that we are inviting people to come to our community to shop and to dine and to go to school and to live. And so the consequences have been tough to work out, but we have been lucky in the sense that circumstances have provided for what I essentially like to call the real mid -Valley Parkway/Interstate 10, which we are now seeing rapid development at and more in tense development seen only elsewhere along Highway 111 for instance. So those are really the heart elements of the community design chapter, community development chapter. Later we have a few changes that have been requested of policies and programs. We also have some minor amendments to mapping that was in the General Plan including the (inaudible) classification map. Are there any...would anyone like to ask any questions with regard to these elements at this time? Seeing none, we'll move on, then, to the next chapter. Environmental resources chapter, again, as the logic has followed, groups those resources that we value or should value and need to deal with carefully. They include the archeological and historic resources, biological resources which are obviously a paramount issue in the Coachella Valley, water resources, also of paramount importance, air quality are issues are alluded to a few, but they're significant PM-10, maybe PM to point five and now ozone. And then energy and mineral resources. We are an energy resource. The Coachella Valley has been recognized as that even in advance of the wind development, with geothermal at the Imperial Valley site if you will, and the issues that we're faced with potentially high costs of electric power. Also other issues in that regard have to do with limited mineral resources, primarily sand and aggregates, that sort of thing. And then, of course, the open space and conservation element, which is a mandated element of the General Plan guidelines and is a broad -based view of open space and the need for conservation. The chapter on environmental hazards addresses also basic conditions that have to be considered when we manage urban development, and these include the geotechnical element. We're in one of the seismically most active parts of the world, not just the country, and we will surely have strong seismic events occur over the relative near to mid term, and we have codes and guidelines to follow and then also things the City can do to be prepared for that. This element also has a relationship to things like emergency preparedness and police and fire, and the General Plan throughout makes these kinds of cross references to 8 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 elements so that the reader can see what other policies and programs and background information may be relevant to that kind of an issue. Flooding and hydrology...Palm Desert knows the issues well, and they've been dealt with in an aggressive manner since the mid-70's and continue to be with things like the mid -Valley stormwater channel, those kinds of projects which will protect our developed areas of the City limits and then a large flood control project that is proposed or actually approved north of Thousand Palms and passing those flood waters further east and avoiding the impacts that currently occur in large storms to Interstate 10. The noise element is also a State -mandated element. Our concerns here primarily have had to do with noise associated with traffic. Since we are up at the interstate now, we have also the Union Pacific Railroad lines as a noise source, Interstate 10 is a significant noise source, traffic on both rail and the highway will increase, and you see the land use plan that has taken the opportunity to help buffer other land uses from those impacts with industrial and commercial and you'll see that as we go over that discussion of the university park planning area. Elsewhere, we have concerns along major arterials that even 20 years ago many of our residents that were moving into planned gated projects didn't realize or didn't consider that eventually we would have large volumes of traffic running on these major streets and that there would be noise associated with that. The Magnesia Falls Drive expansion highlighted some of those issues, and you know that our neighbor to the west, Rancho Mirage, is trying to cope on behalf of their residents with traffic noise. We have design principles in the General Plan and a lot of good information that will guide future councils and staffs on how to handle noise in the community. And then the hazardous and toxic materials element is really a sort of pedestrian element for us, thank goodness, because we don't have a lot of those kinds of issues in the Coachella Valley. Still, it's something worth discussing and managing. The last chapter has to do with public services and facilities, and it addresses the issues of water and sewer and electric utilities and other utilities and what our current state is somewhat in flux from a regulatory point of view still apparently, and the importance of these resources and being able to assure that they are extended and logical and in a cost-effective manner to serve development. The public buildings and facilities element has to do primarily with the City facilities, City Hall, other City buildings, the Corporate Yard, those sorts of things, and other facilities that the City has. Fire and police protection was an element that went through probably more committee and subcommittee kind of review than almost any other element except perhaps land use and circulation. And we had tremendous input from the Sheriff's Department and from the Fire Department as well. Schools and libraries, we had tremendous representation on the GPAC of the schools in our community, and they were 9 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JF JANUARY 15, 2004 vocal, and they had lots of great ideas, building off of what the City already does in terms of joint venturing with our educational institutions, and that has just been reinforced in the element. Health services was broadened substantially beyond just a discussion of, say, hospital facilities in the region and how they can serve us so that...to look at other sorts of things as well, broadening that discussion. And then, finally, emergency preparedness, which is a collaboration of work done by the City to show the means by which we would coordinate our various services to address floods and seismic events and those sorts of things. The structure is the same throughout for all the elements. There's a purpose statement which attempts to give briefly some logic for the element. Then there's a background discussion which is initiated with the government code sections, those sorts of references, where we are directed or mandated to address. And then background discussions of history, current conditions, and where possible projects for future conditions. And then tried to summarize the goals for the element and then developed policies and programs to implement, to essentially bring into effect the goal. And these were all reviewed, sometimes several times, with the General Plan Advisory Committee, modified, enhanced, and then finalized. We also have a glossary in the document for terms that you may not be familiar with. Subsequent to completing the draft and having gotten the final nod from the GPAC on the plan, we initiated the final phased of environmental analysis, which really primarily had to do with traffic and land use, matching those two up and making sure that our analysis was consistent with the regional transportation program that is already in effect through CVAG and making sure we're compatible with that. We were also tying in to the County General Plan, which, as you know, was adopted last fall as well, and so we have consistency with that document in our circulation also. We finished, then, the environmental, we transmitted the environmental document I believe in the beginning of September, and in November the comment period ended. We had a few comments that...we had few comments in total, I believe about ten, one that required a fairly expansive discussion, but otherwise it was a pretty straightforward process. And we have other items to go through, but I think that provides a pretty good overview of the General Plan and related environmental analysis. Question. In looking through, just as an example, the community development section and land use. You have a number of tables showing the total acreage that we have for residential, hillside development, commercial, industrial, and so on and so forth. JC Yes. 10 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JF JANUARY 15, 2004 And all of the summaries seem to bear the same heading, General Plan Preferred Alternative, which is, I'm assuming, what the recommendation from GPAC is. JC Yes. JF Do we have a comparative table to show what the existing acreage is in all those areas? JC Yes, and in that...you're in Section 3- JF 13. JC 13. JF I guess the question was a broader one. As we go through the General Plan, do we have reference points to the existing General Plan so we can see exactly what it is... JC Yes. Both the existing General Plan map, and if you look on page 318 you see it's just a summary for the, and 319, you'll see the statistical summary for the existing General Plan, including what was at the time the County's proposed new General Plan designations. They asked that we use their proposed designations rather than the old General Plan, and as it turned out we were...ultimately have recommended what's consistent with what they've adopted. So this does reflect both what the City has currently in place and what the County has newly adopted on table 3-5. RAS Any other questions? RSK I guess I didn't understand that completely...figured out what GPAC recommended and what the Planning Commission's recommendations are. When we look at the tables, I was looking at the same table... JF When we get there, you're going to have to walk us through. PD. Yeah, one of the.. .whether confusions ofcomplications, is that fundamentally south of Frank Sinatra, with the exception of the specific issues that we are going to discuss, there are no significant land use changes. There are apparent changes on the map, but what those have been in most respects actually those, we call them down designations, we tried to reconcile the actual physical development of property with the designations. A good example is Ironwood Country Club. Ironwood Country Club was designated as PR-7, seven units per acre. In reality it's developed at...which is a 11 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 medium density designation, and a lot of the initial analysis, it was...the potential buildout of that real estate was shown as PR-7. In the final map that you have now, we've designated that as low density residential which is consistent with what it is. But in, again, in actual fact, there were...again, other than those that are specifically noted to be discussed, there were no land use changes south of Frank Sinatra. What we have given you is...for that particular area north of Frank Sinatra, specific analysis comparing existing General Plan, the GPAC preferred alternative, and what is now the Planning Commission recommended alternative. And there you see identical tables, not in the...remember, the document you're looking at was produced in August. In your packet, there's a...in your list of additional exhibits and maps, those represent the specific analysis and comparison between the existing General Plan, the GPAC recommended alternative, and now the Planning Commission recommended alternative. One of the things we didn't give you, which is very similar to the Planning Commission recommended alternative and which is something that's analyzed in the EIR, was...there was a whole...there was a range of other alternatives that we put together for kind of gross comparison of something that we call the less intensive alternative, the more intensive alternative. That's not...you're not looking at...you want to look at... JF Thank you. (Inaudible) PD ...like this. You've got a bunch of...yes...you see, there's a table. There's a land use table which calculates acreage, prospective units, prospective...and again, we're going to...you know...our intention is not to get to this subject until another day, but...that is....when you look at the various versions that we've given you, which are, again, the GPAC alternative, the Planning Commission, and the existing General Plan, you can make exact side by side comparisons. The other confusion relative to comparing existing General Plan with the new General Plan is we have different categories. Our categories have changed, so it's somewhat difficult to do an absolute comparison...in these maps, we've tried to do that. Does that answer your question? JF PD Well, I guess what I'm asking is...is there one sheet of paper that compares the legends of all four of these, or do we just simply have to hold them like this? You have to look at them and look at the maps and look at the comparisons of each one. And like I said, the subject of university park, on our prospective agenda, is the last one. 12 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 BAC However, when we get to that subject there probably will be one sheet that does what is asked, right? PD If you want. Again, we did it...and we thought it was small enough scale that you could look at them all simultaneously. If you want them on...if you want just the table on one sheet, we can do that as well. BAC That's what I'm saying. PD We can do that as well. RSK So we can observe how many units were recommended by the GPAC and how many units were recommended by... PD Right. If you want it on one piece of paper, we can produce them on one piece of paper. BAC Great. Thank you. RAS Is it your intention now to go through each one of these until it's all finished? Is that the idea? PD No, it's up to you. If you want more detail on any specific element... RAS So if we don't want detail on fire and police, it will stay the way it is, is that correct? PD Correct. What's your pleasure? Or if there are questions on any of the elements based on your... JC If I can just make just a couple more remarks and then if you like we can go ahead and address specific elements. The only thing I wanted to do, again, before I let you go on to the next phase of this was to...we clarified the land use issue a little bit by how that evolved and where we are. There are some recommendations that you'll find here with regard to land use. One of them that has been handled in a fairly generic fashion and works pretty simply is that that area north of Interstate 10, we had some recommendations go back and forth, but we're essentially recommending what you'll find in the current maps in your documents as the least intense alternative. And that's still more intense than what the County proposes, but it addresses that pretty thoroughly. Then the other couple of policy issues that we had mentioned earlier, and then the transportation issues, Phil is providing some cost analysis that you'll find very useful, I think. And then a couple of policy areas within each General Plan. So, after eight hearings, there were a lot of 13 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 questions that were asked about some of these issues that I know have been general discussion, and we think that the amendments address a lot of those. And I'II be glad to answer any questions about any element as best I can. I would like to say, though, that on...we had reserved next meeting for circulation, and we can certainly address those questions now if you'd like, but we are providing a technical staff report to the Council which we provided to the Planning Commission earlier which you would find probably valuable to read before we got into that discussion. I guess that's it. RAS What's your pleasure? JF Well, comment. When I first got on the Council, we did a budget for the City which looked something like this. I felt like I was back in kindergarten because I couldn't understand it. And after seven years, I feel like I've finally gotten my fingertips on it, and we walk through that sort of department by department, and staff highlights for us any significant changes, and we say okay and move on. I'm a little uncomfortable taking this and this and saying unless you have any objections we're just going to talk about these four or five little problem areas. I realize that our two colleagues on either end have spent two years on this, and Buford and Bob and I are probably have spent the least amount of time of anybody in this room on this General Plan, and although I've done my best over the last several weeks to try and get around it, you can probably tell by my questions this morning that I still don't understand the charts and where all the cogent information is. So, however we proceed, I would like to at least have the highlighted changes from our General Plan made apparent to us, where they're significant, not certainly every single one. But I think on certain issues, even in public safety, the number of officers we have for 1,000 residents, I happened to work on that element through the Public Safety Commission...that's something the whole Council, I think, ought to have their attention brought (inaudible) decide on what level of service our streets are going to be, and in this little memo I got I just don't see those types of things being addressed. And if our only shot at anything that was not on here was that 30-minute overview, I'm a little uncomfortable. PD Again, this was a question we asked when we composed the memo. It took probably three hours at Planning Commission to go through the elements exclusive of the development chapters. You know, there's really...and I, again, my general impression is that in those other elements we have not made any significant changes. We did highlight, you know, in the memo, a prospective change in the language regarding police and fire staffing. And mainly establishing the goal of a ratio of police to population and fire service ratings, and here we're saying we'll change the language subtly to make it a goal and not a mandate. That's something we can...you know, the reason 14 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 why it's in there is something we thought you'd want to talk about. That is highlighted in the staff report, and that really brings up a, I guess, a relatively fundamental position the City might want to take relative to police and fire. But, again, it took...to go through a chapter element by element and discussion without...you know, you either go through those programs and policies, or you don't. It's really for you to judge what's significant. By reading the document or...but I would say, in general, they are a re - articulation of the policies that have really been pretty much in place for 30 years, so...and if the changes exist, they are very, very subtle, and you almost have to read each one of them and decide whether you agree with them or not. I don't know if there's a substitution for that, other than the fact that John reads them all out and we go over them one at a time. But, again, most of them are kind of mom and apple pie sort of policies, I don't think we... RAS I think you might let the Council decide that. PD Right. RAS And we have an Agenda that you've given us for today... PD Correct. RAS ...that has some specific areas that you want to address. Maybe when it gets close to the closing of our (inaudible) each Councilperson can make a statement as to what they'd like to see happen next. As long as we have this, let's go down this road and hopefully we'll get to the end of it. PD And as I say, there's really no substitute for reading it. You do not want to rely on our summaries or our determinations of what is significant. JF I didn't mean to give you the impression I didn't read it, Phil. PD No, but I'm saying that you don't want to rely on our...kind of like being half pregnant, you either have to do it... RSK You're referring to this document (inaudible) JF No (Inaudible) JMB (Inaudible) but wejust had it changed to enhance (inaudible) brought it more up to date... 15 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING RSK I was looking at this one he summarized. JMB (Inaudible) RAS But I think we'd like to see those. JMB Right JANUARY 15, 2004 RAS And...like art in public places, we get a great program...I don't know whether this changes it or doesn't change it...it may be something that we can just approve like that, but we ought to take a look at it. JMB Yes BAC As an example, perhaps at our second meeting we might very well take Items 4, 5, and 6 of the table of contents, which are the kinds of things you're talking about that appear to be very much the same but have some areas...I found a couple of things that are, I suspect, incorrect by accident and so on and so forth, and just check those off at our second meeting, just take 4, 5, and 6... RAS And get it done. BAC ...and I think we would have those done at the second meeting. PD Which I don't have that in my little memo...what are those... (Inaudible) BAC Environmental resource development... PD Oh yeah, right BAC Environmental hazards and public services and facilities. PD Right, right BAC Start at the second meeting with just 4, 5, and 6... JMB Changes that were made in those BAC I think we can be done with those in the meeting PD Again, I'm not sure there were any changes, but... 16 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING -- BAC Oh, there are some PD Okay BAC Well, there are things that are not correct in there PD Okay. Then we need that (Inaudible) BAC But that stuff we'd be done with in a fairly short time. JANUARY 15, 2004 RAS Then we'll go back to community development and keep that going until we agree. BAC And that's the one where we'll spend the rest of our time is Item 3. PD Right JF Let me frame the context (this mike has got incredible pickup)...let me frame the context of my comments. When I first asked the Council to consider doing a General Plan update, it was due to the fact that we had probably the most extraordinary tenure in terms of years of Councilmembers serving, and my impression was that 20 or 25 years ago when we adopted the first General Plan it was sort of a generic, off the shelf, we're going to fulfill our legal obligation and to, based on five years of the history of the City, what we think the City ought to do. Well, we've changed a heck of a lot in 25 years, and we've developed...we've learned from our mistakes, we've developed philosophies about doing certain things, we've achieved an incredible fiscal responsibility in terms of growth with types of developments that generate revenue for the City versus types of developments that generate expenses for the City. And my goal was to have a General Plan that reflected the collective institutional wisdom of my colleagues in a new document that would guide people for the next 20 years. And so when I hear things like we really haven't changed anything, my first thought is what have we been doing for two years. And, secondly, I know university village is important, but so are our mountains. I'm curious to see Buford's comments on the environmental section because of his work in that area. I'm curious to see Dick Kelly's thoughts on the transportation element because of all the years he's put in there, and I just want to know what those changes are. And so either we don't have them or as Jean said, we've made changes where we've tried to incorporate our philosophy and our success story into this document, but that's really what I want to look at. And if takes an extra hour, then so be it. 17 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 JMB I think that could be done, as Buford said (inaudible) BAC So as a proposal for the Agenda, then, at our next meeting we'd start with General Plan element 4, Environmental Resources, and go through those issues or changes. It may take 20 minutes or an hour and a half, whatever it is, and then element 5 and element 6. And then we come back to element 3 which has certain (inaudible) land use and so on as knowing that we've tidied up the rest of it. RAS Also, there may be additional information that staff would like to give Council on those specific elements as we go through them, whether they're approved or disapproved by staff. BAC Further thoughts that you folks have. RAS So, the first thing that we're going to be talking about is Cornishe at Bighorn. PD Okay. RSK This document is a staff report that came with the whole thing, and it went through the items and it started with hotel/motels and their recommendations, mixed use commercial recommendation, residential hillside recommendation, Cornishe at Bighorn, etc., etc. RAS Subsequent to that, January the 8th, our City Manager sent us a memo on the City Council General Plan review listing what we're going to be doing today, so... RSK I got the packet and I take the staff report and I figured that's what we were going to do. PD And, again, theoretically the staff report was actually done after the program, and these other items the precede Cornishe are...we can handle, actually, the one of them, the discussion of the hillside is probably relevant in talking about Cornishe, but... RAS Whatever your pleasure because I'm completely (inaudible) PD My philosophy is, and what we tried to do at the Planning Commission is try and get the easy things off the table as quickly as (inaudible) how you do the (inaudible) and try and get the questions answered so you don't forget about them at the end. And I think some of these easiest ones, hotels/motels, are hopefully are easy questions. If you have...and these first ones refer to the, again, one of the amended handouts you have in the packet, which is a 18 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 separate three or four pages of land use categories as (inaudible) drafted, the appropriateness of hotels wasn't included in all the residential zones. We're looking at page 3 of the staff report. And all that was done, which is different than the bound text you have, is in the land use definition. In the commercial zones we added that you could build hotels and motels. So...which is consistent with virtually all of our zoning ordinance, so that was just an omission and that's a change that was made. RAS And at this point you're asking the Council to agree with that. PD Correct. RAS But before we do that, is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak to that? Seeing no one, direction from Council... RSK I agree with it. (Inaudible) RAS I think so. (Inaudible) that's what I want. — PD Get off the table what we can. RSK A motion to take each one of those, or... PD Sure. RAS That's what I believe the City would like to have us do. RSK I move that we accept that recommendation. RAS Second? JMB I'll second it. RAS All in favor, please vote. PD The second addition that was made... RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote. PD ...was introducing the issue of mixed use, and some of you may have had some introduction of that recently, that one of the, actually not a new concept but it's a re-emergence of a planning concept of designing residential 19 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 projects in conjunction with commercial projects. It had all sorts of advantages relative to traffic and convenience and buffering commercial projects adjacent to residential zones, and so, again, two things were...both mixed use was included as a potential component of any commercial project, then we created a specific category for mixed use which, when we talk about the university park area that the Planning Commission specifically felt were ideally appropriate for mixed use development. Again, the way the language is written, the City retains complete control over where it goes, and its a completely discretionary decision by the City as to the quality and appropriateness of any design whenever it's included in a project. RAS We already have mixed use commercial in our City. Denise Roberge has a (inaudible) gallery through (inaudible), is that correct? PD Correct. We added that to our zoning ordinance some time ago, and so it was not included in our original general plan categories and so what this section adds that as a...30 years ago there was this idea of absolute, unequivocal separation of commercial and industrial, I mean commercial and residential development. And since then, I think there's been a realization that you can have very good projects where you put them together, and so we're adding it back into our land use categories. RAS Is there anybody in the chamber that would like to speak to that? Seeing no one, I'll ask for direction. RSK Question, first. In the staff report here, it says it refers to attached revised land use table. Is that the map? PD No. In your package of materials, there's a three- or four -page summary that includes... BAC Item III-9, page III-9. RSK What page is it? BAC Page III-9, Area III, Page 9, so if you go back, there's a whole pile...or, excuse me, Table III, Page 9. PD Well, it's really a list more than a table...describing all of the land use categories and what they mean and the sort of uses that are expected with that. RAS We're not approving that right now. We're just approving the fact that we can have mixed use, is that correct? 20 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING — BAC As a category. (Inaudible) PD Exactly, as a category. RSK Sounded like there was a table or something. RAS Is there a motion? JMB I move approval. RAS Second? BAC Yup RAS All in favor, please vote. RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote. RAS Next is residential hillside reserve. JANUARY 15, 2004 PD In this one, discussion somewhat gets us into our previous discussions on specific standards and ordinances and densities in the hillside. As originally drafted, the minimum density in the areas designated in the land use map as hillside reserve was one unit per five acres. That is currently not consistent with our current zoning ordinance and is currently...remember, we had Option A and Option B of our prospective ordinances...it is consistent with one of them but not consistent with the other. It precludes the other. Given that there has not been a determination on that particular issue, we modified it to, in essence, this range that we're proposing, which is one unit per acre to five units per acre, which is the range which is now being discussed in terms of our ordinances, is more restrictive than our current ordinance, which, I think, gets us down to three units per acre in some situations. But it encompasses the range that is being considered in the ordinance which is before the Council. Remember, ultimately, the General Plan provides a general range of designations. The zoning ordinance, then, focuses and, you know, that in a more precise way. So, given, I guess, two goals I have here...given that the Council has not yet made that decision and that, again, a very focused discussion I think that still needs to occur, I did not want to further delay the General Plan for all sorts of property owners who have issues that have nothing to do with the hillside... MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 JF Question. How would this recommendation be different had the Council voted to adopt Alternative B? PD It would...we could either stick with this because Alternative B is a range, is a density which is in this range, so we can do that. If we want to be...at that time, we can further amend this when that decision is made and tighten it down if we so choose. JF Well, how would you tighten it? I mean, what specifically? PD If Alternative B said no matter what your...whether you're flat or...well, I guess two things could happen. Given the fact that we don't know exactly where the lines of slope are, we haven't done a comprehensive slope analysis of our entire hillside that says this is the line, which is what you have to do with zoning ultimately. We might want to do that so we would say that these areas are 1-5 because Alternative B says no matter what your slope, you're not getting more than one unit per five acres. Option A provides, once we determine that something's less than 10%, it's entitled to one unit per one acre. Right now, the map designates the entire area, for example from the Whitewater, from the Palm Valley Channel, all the way up to the top of the hill is potentially hillside reserve, and then under our current ordinance that you do your site specific slope study that tells you where you fall, and that determines under Option A whether you're one unit per acre or one unit per five acres. Option B it's all... JF So, is the short answer if we had adopted B, we wouldn't have the option to have one per one in here at all. PD Correct. And at that time, we can simultaneously process an amendment to this to adjust it. JF Well, I asked the City Attorney to take a look at, since this isn't a zoning ordinance, it's a General Plan document which sets forth the policy for the City, whether or not all five Councilmembers were able to participate in the discussion and a vote on this exact issue. (Inaudible) answer to that question. RWH Right, we looked at that issue, and our conclusion is that all five Councilmembers could participate in the General Plan discussion. JF I think you might get the direction that you've been looking for. That's perfectly fine. 22 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 RAS We also understand that the County is developing a hillside ordinance that is quite restrictive, is that correct? PD I'm...again, I was shown a sample element from a different jurisdiction...as that ordinance is now written, it is actually significant less restrictive. Whether the County's intention is to take that framework of an ordinance and change the numbers, I don't know, but as it is now drafted, it actually allows more density and more grading than our existing ordinance. JF For clarification, I met with the supervisor for this area and the new planning director for the County, and they have expressed the desire in the wake of this last go which side of the line some residents want to live on, trying to cherry pick the more premium hillside ordinance that was the least restrictive and would allow the most, in my mind, adverse visual impact to the residents of this city. And they have expressed the desire to take our Alternative B and some of the more restrictive parts of that ordinance that I gave you and craft a uniform ordinance which they would then come back to the City of Palm Desert and ask for our joint consideration so that no matter where you lived along that ridge line, whether you were in Cahuilla Hills or the City of Palm Desert, the same building standards would be applied to you regardless. RSK PD JF Question. The General Plan is not intended to be specific, I thought. Can't we have...can't we address some kind of language in the General Plan that allows for the process we've been going through? And that is what the additional language that you see on Page 3. It says, "development densities and intensities shall be established consistent with slope, visibility and other site constraints." So that allows us, through the zoning ordinance, to define what those site constraints are and come up with standards that are appropriate. But, again, if we get...if you want to give us different direction at this point in time, that is what we're here for. Well, in my mind, we've already entitled most of the toe of slope at the one acre, one per one acre density. This is not a zoning amendment. This is a policy, and you used the one per one acre to the one per five acre, which apparently you're comfortable with that level of specificity. I guess I would prefer to just go one per five acre, and then when we do come time to craft the zoning ordinance and identify where...how broad that one per five will be is when we have this discussion with the property owners and so on and so forth. But as a general rule of thumb, the County General Plan is one per five, and I think we ought to be consistent. PD It's not yet one per five. The flat areas it's not one per five. 23 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING RSK RAS (Inaudible) JF PD BAC JANUARY 15, 2004 Well, I have a concern with putting numbers into this document because you may say this is the guideline or it's a general plan and we can deal with it, but I could see it becomes a rule, and when that time comes, we're going to be bound by it. Mayor Pro Tem Crites. Is not this entire map rules with numbers? They are very broad ranges, they are very broad ranges where we will ultimately assign specific zoning definitions within those ranges, and...which is what we're going to do with the hillside ordinance. Sure. We have a whole pile of specificity in here. We have stuff that lists 20 acres of this and 10 acres of that and all kinds of various kinds of things, and we'll differ on some of these issues about numbers of acres or densities or so on and so forth. And every one of these things has specificities that some people will or won't find acceptable. And I certainly, as one person, don't have any objection at all to Mr. Ferguson's concept. RAS Councilman Kelly. RSK JF Putting numbers of an objective on how many acres we're going to have in the City of something is different than putting a "you are allowed" something. And I'm going to probably have a problem with some of those numbers where we're saying stuff specific and refer to the map also. Well, all four of my copies of this map, whether it's Planning Commission recommendation, GPAC preferred alternative, what have you, under the designation of hillside reserve, it says one per five acres. The only thing that doesn't say that is this recommendation of yours. PD Correct. JF Well, that's a significant point, don't you think? PD Well, no. On those maps, there's no property designated hillside reserve, and that should have been changed, and the reason why we didn't focus on it is because there's nothing in the university park that's in the hillside. JF So the GPAC and Planning Commission never considered density for the hillsides? 24 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 PD No...the maps you're looking at and the charts you're looking at are only summaries of the land in the area designated. JF I can understand that, Phil, but did they not approve this legend that applies to the whole City? PD No, that's an error in this legend, that when they approved the change, and they approved it late in the process of their hearings, on the land use designation for hillside, we did not...you've identified...you know, again, you look at a map 50 times and there's tons of information on it, and some of the things you catch and some of the things you don't catch. One of the things we didn't change was the key on this particular map, but the... JF What about this map of the whole City? It says one per five. PD The change that you see described in the staff report is to have the hillside reserve at .2 to 1 dwelling unit per acre was the language recommended by the Planning Commission. They took a specific action. It was our mistake that we didn't get back to the maps to change the keys. We didn't think about doing it. Sorry. RAS Is there anyone in the Chamber that would like to address the hillside ordinance? Seeing no one, I would ask for Council direction. JF I would move that we go with the recommended changes by the Planning Commission except that we delete one dwelling unit per one acre as an option, and go with one dwelling unit per five acres. RAS Is there a second? BAC So seconded. JC (Inaudible) comment before you vote. As you understand, the General Plan leads to zoning. If you...you will not have the flexibility, unless you amend this provision again, to go to a density that is less than one dwelling unit per five acres. JF Sure we will. We can do just what Phil said, go back and amend it later. JC Amend the General Plan, that's correct. RAS We've got a motion and a second. Please vote. RDK Motion carries 4-1, Councilman Kelly voting NO. 25 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 RAS Next item is the Cornishe of Bighorn. PD For some reason, our overhead is fuzzier than it used to be. Cornishe of Bighorn, as you see at the bottom of the map, you see kind of a dark outline triangle which represents a specific 12-acre parcel which under our existing General Plan was and is designated low density, three to five units per acre, and it was zoned five units per acre, is zoned at five units per acre. Again, the project has a unique history. We have a current application. We're in the middle...beginning the process of analysis and environmental impact report. We've gone back and forth how to designate it, whether we should designate it hillside reserve or not. A portion of the property actually is currently designated hillside reserve, a very small portion. The language and alternative recommended by the Planning Commission is that, again, not to get the General Plan discussion involved in a very site specific, very contentious involved controversy that can bog down the bigger picture project, and since we're already embarked on a very specific analysis of this site, we are recommending, and we've created a category called a study zone, where we're keeping the existing low density residential designation, acknowledging in the test that this is a potential candidate for hillside reserve but leaving that determination to the result of this very detailed analysis that we're now embarking on. RAS We're doing a complete EIR on the site? PD We're doing a complete EIR. We have a complete, very involved, detailed site analysis and study that we're doing with the project and the EIR and felt that was the appropriate venue to go to that discussion, not enmesh the General Plan discussion in that controversy. RAS Well, the recommendation is to approve this to the study session and come back... PD Yes, the study area and make that final determination as part of our site specific analysis. RAS Is there anyone in the Chamber that wishes to speak to the Cornishe? PP Good morning, Mayor Spiegel, members of the City Council. My name is Patrick Perry. I'm an attorney with Allen Matkins in Los Angeles, and I'm here appearing on behalf of the Cornishe at Bighorn, which is the owner of the property that's subject of the current discussion. The property as Mr. Drell indicated is currently zoned low density residential, not zoned but designated in the General Plan as low density residential, which allows zero to five units per acre. The current zoning on the majority of the property is 26 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 planned residential with up to five units per acre permitted. The (inaudible) portion of the property is currently zoned hillside reserve, and that's subject to calculation of a slope density formula. Under the current General Plan designation and current zoning, up to 57 units could be developed on that property. In August of this year, the people at Cornishe at Bighorn submitted a tract map application to the City to subdivide the property. That tract map application did provide for up to 57 units on the property. They went for the maximum density. We then became aware of the General Plan update and possible redesignation of the property and became involved in the process before the Planning Commission. What the Planning Commission recommended, as we understand it, is that the property remain low density residential, subject to their review of the tract map application, and through the tract map process, a full environmental review process subject to a complete EIR, notice of public hearings and so forth, that the appropriate development potential of the property be determined through that process rather than through the broad City-wide General Plan update process. Accordingly, determined to maintain the existing designation of low density residential, which has in fact been changed through this process from...actually, it's three to five residential units currently permitted under the low density designation. Under the proposed General Plan designation currently before you, it's I believe zero to four units per acre for low density residential. We have some additional submittal materials that the City has required which we anticipate we'll be submitting next week...architectural drawings, there's some revisions to the actual tract map itself, the engineering drawings. We're providing a soils report and some other materials. The Planning Commission made it abundantly clear to me during their hearings that they will not support 57 units on that property, and we do not intend to submit a new application for 57 units. However, we do anticipate submitting an application which will be more than one unit per five acres, which would limit the development potential of the property to only two units, effectively reducing it from 57 units to two units, simply through the General Plan update process. So what we have requested and what the Planning Commission is recommending is that the development potential be established not on the basis of the general City-wide General Plan update but through the property specific review process, including the environmental impact report and public comments and so forth. And that the number of units be more appropriately determined as part of that process rather than part of this process. And we, therefore, urge you to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation. And I've available for any questions if you have any. RAS Anybody have any questions? Thank you very much. PP Thank you. 27 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING RAS Anybody else like to speak to the Cornishe? JANUARY 15, 2004 JL Jim Lewis, 43-210 Silktree Lane, Palm Desert. Mayor Spiegel, Council, I think you're going through the same struggle that we did on the GPAC meeting. As a participant of that committee, we went through the same process by which we're trying to come up with the general plan, a general idea of these elements. And while we were doing so, we would have developers come in with specific projects. And while it served to help us with an idea of the process, coming through the process of a general idea for the City and different things like, for example, an intersection near a residential area or traffic flow through an area that we know we're going to have to move houses to, you know, to get the circulation we need, etc., we made a decision, I feel, that we could not look at specific developments but that they basically were coming to us to kind of get an in to our General Plan. These elements...these things, issues, are very important, and...but I'm trying to communicate that I feel, as a committee, we felt that by getting down to a specific development issue, it would bog us down, that the General Plan needs to be a general document, for example, that somebody and the zoning commission can look at...and the Planning Commission can look at our zoning ordinance and say well, what is the plan allow us to do here? If somebody were going to widen a street, well, what does our General Plan, the traffic and circulation element, what does it allow us to do? And give us that general framework to work within, our different departments can work within that, and that's a big struggle for a General Plan in a city like ours to get specific enough, get broad enough, to give City staff, to give the committees and departments making these decisions enough information as to the goals of the City, Tong -term goals of the City, to make those decisions. And so I wanted to let you know, we struggled with that same balance in coming up with the General Plan. And I think...and then last two things we've talked about right now is we're getting to that point. The Planning Commission went through the same thing in their hearings. They got very specific conversation about specific projects and parcels and etcetera rather than looking at the larger plan, what do we want the hillsides to (inaudible). But at the same time giving the ability to the Planning Commission and Architectural Review, etc., giving them the tools to make those decisions within the General Plan. And again, as we've heard, we can go back and amend the General Plan, but that's...to me, that's like amending the Constitution. It should be a major thing to bring us back to that point to re - review what we want to see the whole city look like and the movement and growth in the City. So, I just wanted to take a moment to let you...just share a little bit about the same struggle we had in the meeting, the GPAC meeting, and kind of a warning that you may be getting a little bit too detailed. Thank you. 28 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING RAS Any other comments? JANUARY 15, 2004 PP Very quickly, I would like to point out that what we're asking for is that the existing General Plan designation be retained. We're not asking that it be changed in order to accommodate this project. We're asking that it be retained in order to allow the flexibility for the Planning Commission to come in and determine what the appropriate number of units is based on site characteristics in terms of topography, location, environmental impacts, access, availability of (inaudible)... JF Did you read the staff report? PP Yes. JF Seems to me that's what is being recommended. PP That is what's being recommended. What I'm hearing, though, is that a number of developers have come in as part of the process to try to affect the process in such a way to allow them to do something different than what was part of the GPAC recommendation. And that was not our intent. We were trying to keep things the same to allow flexibility. And if you look at the preferred alternative in the original General Plan and EIR, the GPAC recommendation was to maintain this property as well as all the surrounding property as low density residential, and there has been a change. This has actually been more restrictive than what the GPAC alternative did provide for. I just wanted to clarify that in case there were any questions. Thank you. RAS CLO RAS CLO RAS BAC Any comments by the Council? Does anybody else with to speak to the Cornishe at Bighorn? Mr. Mayor, just a matter of information. At a previous Council meeting, when the issue of the time line for the EIR for this project came up, you asked staff to give you a schedule (inaudible) schedule... Yes. I've only heard the one comment. I wonder if you want to have some discussion with Phil about that schedule and where it could be shortened or whether, you know, the Council feels comfortable with that schedule. Thank you. Comments from the Council? My only comment was in looking at it that I would hope that we would have something before us in late summer or early fall. 29 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 PD Relative to... BAC A done report to look at and be in the decision making process. PD You mean relative to this project? BAC Yes. PD We have not yet...we have yet to have a complete application, and we have yet to...and, again, that is not... BAC I know that's not your... PD ...that's not in our control, and I don't think...we're probably not going to get the deposit for the EIR until we do have a complete application. So, we provided you with a time line that showed if we start in December, the initial drafts would be available, at least to staff, in April. Since for now it looks like we're not going to get going until February, that's probably now going to be May/June. The consultant anticipated the entire process from day one to end of the City Council process, which obviously the last portion again is not under his control, it's to a certain degree under our control, would be a year, which is...on a project like this with an EIR, is not that unusual. Remember, the WalMart project process with an EIR...once the EIR is in, there's just...there's mandatory review and blah, blah, blah, and things that happen with EIR's that kind of dictate a certain length, unfortunately. RAS Thank you. What's the pleasure of the Council? PP We do anticipate we'll have our application materials in next week, and we do anticipate probably a six- to eight -month process for the approval for the full consideration of the EIR. RAS Thank you. What's the pleasure of the Council? JMB Move to approve the staff recommendation. RSK Second. RAS Please vote. RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote. RAS It's my recommendation now that we take a five-minute break because it's ten o'clock. 30 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 BAC That's a very specific thing. RAS That's very specific...that's site specific, yes. Thank you. (FIVE-MINUTE RECESS) The tape resumed in the middle of Mr. Drell's comments: PD ...I guess the PC word for alleys is now lanes. And, again, one of the things we looked at is examined all sorts of existing development or redevelopment policies that we've come up with in the last 20 years that had yet to be implemented. And this is one of them. This is the lane or alley behind the north Highway 111 frontage between Monterey and Las Palmas. One of the things actually we've discovered more recently was...and actually, we found a lot of these in the core commercial area...that these were actually right-of-ways that were dedicated by the original subdividers 50, 60, 70 years ago that sometimes the County accepted and sometimes didn't, and it was ambiguous who was maintaining, and some had never been maintained and had been deteriorating. Everyone assumed that they were public spaces, and technically they are, but one of the things that's going to happen is...throughout the area, Public Works is kind of making an inventory of all these remnant dedications that were kind of in limbo and, you know, we're the only people to take responsibility for them. But the feeling back in 1983 when we did the Palma Village Plan and then in '85 when we did the Core Commercial Plan, that this area of the commercial area had special handicap relative to future improvements and investment. Many of the lots are very narrow, they're 50 feet wide, which does not provide for efficient parking development. They're far too wide for a single loaded aisle but not wide enough for a double loaded, so you see in these photos that a lot of the parcels are less than optimally developed. And while there have been Tots of improvements elsewhere in the commercial area, this area has somewhat lagged behind. The solution...(inaudible) have to determine is that commercial property owners are often not willing to make significant new investments unless they can get more rent or more revenue. Revenue usually translates out into more square footage, and if they can't get more square footage, then a lot of these things have stayed pretty much the way they've always been. You can't get more square footage until you have more parking. Primarily, the resource for parking has been the frontage road. As you see in this picture, the frontage road capacity has been pretty much maxed out by the existing...and actually we have a fairly vibrant kind of small cottage industry sort of commercial go in there. And unlike other jurisdictions who kind of have done their redevelopment with a D-10, our philosophy has been let's find ways to work with our existing merchants to make the more successful ones more successful, those that want to expand allow them 31 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 ways to expand. And so we came up...the original plan was to take all those Tots you see outlined in yellow and turn them into parking, like a Presidents Plaza type of large parking facility. About half of them are vacant but half of them have houses on them, and given the various budget priorities and the costs and pain and tribulation of going in and condemning houses and residential zones...this is something we've kind of avoided over the last 20 years. So...but to a great extent, we've been able to address some of the problems with our facade improvement program, but what a lot of the property owners tell us is that the existing level of development doesn't even warrant a facade improvement, that since they have to still pay for half of it, even if we pay for half of it, that those properties don't warrant any investment since you're not going to get a nickel more in rent. So while we acknowledge that our original idea might have been a little bit too ambitious and, therefore, unlikely to ever get implemented, that it was still worthwhile pursuing some sort of parking enhancement and...one reason why...a lot of times people don't even want to...although a lot of those businesses have parking in the back, you don't even want to drive back there. It looks frightening when you drive back down that alley. So some degree of improvement was necessary, and as long as we were investing money in improving the alley, then we should try to also address the parking issue and see what opportunities were there to develop more parking while preserving the existing residential integrity. Another thing that happened, I guess, in terms of my mind...and I was the one who put this idea forward to begin with, to convert all these lots to parking...was kind of...the first example of it was Walgreen's, is where we actually had initial implementation. And while having houses backing up to commercial parking lots is also not so ideal, having commercial parking lots coming up to half of a street and dominating half of a residential street and you're looking...even at a well -landscaped wall, you're still looking at the back of a commercial building...that was not an ideal urban design for a residential neighborhood because ideally residential streets that have houses on both sides with front yards and not be looking at the back of even a well -landscaped commercial parking lot. So one of the first goals we looked at, and part of this was the result of testimony from some of the residential property owners who are going to be impacted by this policy, saying no, we think this is a perfectly wonderful place to live. Sure, it's noisy, it's not perfect, but we'd rather have our houses...this is kind of a unique neighborhood, it has great access to all sorts of things. As it's turned out, although just (inaudible) remember all the controversy over Walgreen's, the neighborhood has accepted Walgreen's quite enthusiastically now...to be able to walk down to almost to a corner...closest thing to a corner store and get all sorts of diverse services in walking distance has turned out to be quite beneficial to these people. So this is a wonderful neighborhood to live in, and they don't want to move. So, we came up with, first at GPAC, this alternative. And you can see it probably better in your exhibit you have 32 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 before you. It includes a double diagonal row down the center of what is now the alley, creating one-way circulation on each side. It generated, I think, 250-some parking spaces, requiring 46 feet of expansion. In doing that, it took out four or five homes. And by its nature, since they're one-way, it would require pretty much comprehensive acquisition and implementation in one bold stroke. Based on input from, again, some of those houses would have to be removed...and the other thing that you're seeing there, you're seeing some...the kind of white... RSK How wide is the alley with that proposal? PD The...I believe the travel ways, the one-way travel ways, would be... RSK The other one's 24, so (inaudible) PD Oh, no, the entire right-of-way would be... RSK I'm talking about the travel way for the cars. PD It would be one-way travel way and I think it's 15 or 16 feet based on our new... RSK One way? PD It's one way...each would be one way. See, when you have angled parking... JF It's two way separated by the parking. PD Yeah, there would be...when you have angled parking...on the north...the northern lane would be one way to the west, and then you see there are breaks in the parking that allows people to sort of go back. The southern one would be one way to the east. BAC Let me just try something. You're second option is 90 degree. PD Correct. BAC It doesn't take out people's houses, it just whacks a little piece of a yard. Let me just ask the question. Are any of my colleagues opposed to the 90 degree which preserves the neighborhood as versus the double angle? JF My only, and I wasn't at the hearings, so you can perhaps fill me in...my only other experience with 90 degree parking into the back yard of somebody's home is Gary Trion and Ray Winter, and that was a nightmare, and we 33 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING PD JANUARY 15, 2004 eventually had to buy their houses. With headlights going into the wall, and I see that you have a masonry wall, I don't want to get down into site planning this, but were the neighbors okay with the 90 degree parking? Yes. And they've...again, this is one of those situations, again...the Gary Trion situation was one where a kind of a condition was thrust upon them. We also had a unique situation...we had a very unique restaurant, about the only one that's active, like, until midnight...we had two residents, one of which happened to go to sleep at 4:30 in the afternoon because he would go to work at 2:30 in the morning, so we had kind of the perfect storm of... JF So the folks behind McGowan's and Castelli's, they're okay with this? PD They're okay. They would rather have the preservation of their neighborhood and their homes than...and that comes down to...again, there are benefits...in locating at the commercial/residential interface, there are benefits and burdens. BAC So the answer is yes. PD Yes, yes. RAS Does it change the number of cars (inaudible) JF Then my answer is no, I don't have a problem... BAC You get fewer with 90 than you do with the double angles (inaudible) PD This was the preferred plan by the residents who participated. BAC I think you get 80 less or something like that. PD Yes, it's about 80 less. So, basically in terms of bang for the buck, the less of an impact on the residences, and the fact that this could be...you know, I think we would want to fix up the travel way, but the implementation could occur in pieces. It would not have to...and we can...in those areas where it's getting too close to a house, we could say well, in this section, we're not going to do it. It can (inaudible) RSK JF Why would we want to do it in pieces? We could. 34 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 — PD We could. No, I mean we could...we don't have to. Ideally, this is something we do comprehensively. RSK We could do it when we had an application and encourage them to clean up their...to do a better job with their place, and they get some extra parking if they do it. PD Correct. We could...this becomes a budget priority for you guys which the Planning Commission ultimately... RAS Mayor Pro Tem? BAC One issue with this. I think this does really nice things, but I would like to see how we can attempt to get some form of commitment from a whole variety of the commercial property owners to make sure that they, in essence, re - facade the backs of their properties which now are going to become significantly more of a public place rather than simply an area for trash cans and mops and what have you. And I know some folks have already done that, and some folks have been less than diligent in such things. And if we make that investment, I'd like to see that kind of thing go with it so that we really have something that somebody would be proud to park back there. RAS Good point. JMB We could probably have a rear facade program as well as a front facade...but my other question... isn't this a Redevelopment Agency one, too? PD Correct. BAC Yeah. PD And we also have a Parking Authority, which also has the ability to do this sort of thing. JF But you also drew the comparison to Presidents Plaza. Is it contemplated that you would finance this the same way with the businesses contributing through an assessment district? PD Maintenance would be through an assessment district. Also...and this is something we've been doing...we've actually acquired some right-of-way already. With Castelli's, he owned the lot, so we got a public easement on the lot that he owns. Mark's Golf, we got a public easement on the lot behind him. 35 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 JF So to Buford's point, if they have to pay for it to be cleaned up, they're more apt to keep it clean in the first (inaudible) PD And they would participate to some degree in both the land acquisition and/or installation costs. RAS Are we undergrounding the utilities? PD Again, that's another bang for the buck...a budget priority issue. Again, if you add too many ornaments to the tree, sometimes the tree just falls down. JMB Getting the road and the parking fixed first would certainly be a priority. PD And, again, the other thing...what you're talking about is that these people have been in limbo for 20 years. We've got to decide to do it and do it but provide certainty as to what's going to happen. Yes, yes, yes. The second issue, if we're inviting more people back on the alley, and this is already an existing problem, you see San Marcos, we have the three circles...for some reason, San Marcos is the only one that actually connects actually out to Highway 111...it's used as kind of a bypass for all sorts of commercial traffic to San Gorgonio. Again, at the request of the property owners, we would be proposing the closure of San Marcos at the north edge of the parking area. While keeping it open for pedestrian traffic, it would stop vehicles from going through there. RAS Mayor Pro Tem Crites. BAC Do we have traffic counts on that particular little stretch of road? (Inaudible) BAC I would suggest that we delay that until we see what traffic counts are because one of the things we'll do is simply shift a lot of that to the east to the first available, which also has folks living along it and so on and so forth. Just before you get down to Circle K, there's another...I don't remember what street it is...it's the north/south that comes out by The White Sheet there. PD That's Las Palmas. BAC Okay, so in shifting...my point is, I'd like to really look at circulation on Las Palmas, circulation on San Marcos, and just see what those numbers are as they go through there before we...it may very well be a good decision but... 36 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 — RSK I agree with you we're getting too specific for a general plan when we start closing the roads... BAC Yeah...I would just like to delay that piece but would move that we endorse the 90 degree angled parking along what is called...oh, I'm sorry. RAS There are some people in the Chamber I think that would like to speak. Ms. Matson, I believe you'd like to address the Council? DM Yes, thank you so much. My name is Donna Matson. I own the property at 73-341 San Benito Circle, and if we move that over a little bit, you can see my home, which has been...the other way...which has been in my family for 40 years, and for the last 20 years we've sort of been waiting for the bulldozer to arrive, wondering what was going to happen to our property. And we're very pleased that you are considering taking only 26 feet, which would be part of our back yard, which means I can't build a garage, which I've been wanting to do for 20 years, but...anyway, the property along here says that they need, they really need parking. Well, for the last 30 years, Romeo's Steakhouse was very successful at this location, and now it's Mary McGowan's Irish Inn. And then next to that, the Kirkpatrick's had Kirkpatrick Electric, and then...and now it's the European Construction and the Crystal Court, which is basically the same as it's been for 30 years. And then we have the one vacant lot that we've had for many years, which is, excuse me, now Walt's Golf Shop, and that doesn't create a whole lot of traffic. And then we have the Red Barn that's been there for many years. So in the last 20, 30 years, there has not really been that much change. Is it because they don't have parking? Well, I don't know, I don't question that. And I'm wondering on the parking, if you do go with this plan, why can this not be angled parking instead of 90 degree like it is down at Ace Hardware? That angled parking coming down this way and going into an angle instead of 90 degrees, that seems to be very comfortable parking. Anyway, I appreciate your time and we would prefer your not taking any of our property. Is it really necessary to take residential home and property for parking for some shops along here? But if you go with the 25-foot, that is a compromise, and we can certainly live with that. Thank you very much. RAS Thank you very much. Mr. Brady, I believe you would like to speak? (Inaudible) okay. I believe you'd like to speak, sir? DH Hi, my name's Dale Hodges. I work for Everybody Cycles. Our office is in the Cook complex on Joni Drive, #10. And I'm just hoping to point out that given that the Council has accepted the concept of mixed use, that this is a perfect opportunity to consider something of mixed use. I was a little bit distraught to hear that the General Plan, or what I thought I heard was that 37 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 there's no changes south of Frank Sinatra. I would hope that the Council could see that if you keep doing what you're doing, you're going to keep getting what you're getting. And more parking lots means more of these single occupant cars and all this gridlock. This is a great opportunity. I mean, heaven forbid you have an auto -free zone in that alley. People can walk to work and so forth and so on. All over the world it's done, it's a no- brainer from this view here. Thank you. RAS Thank you. Question? BAC Mr. Drell, a comment was made about not doing the single as 90's but as angles. I know that costs us...so one on one, it will cost us a space or two on each end but, in general, is there a significant loss in terms of doing that? It is easier... JF Doesn't that make it a one-way street, though? PD It in essence makes it a one-way street. You can only get into...well, I can...with my Honda, I can get into any space. But for most cars, you can only get into an angled space going in one direction. BAC Right. But are you planning to leave this with the 90's as a two-way? PD Yes. BAC Okay. PD And part of the reason is that given the fact that this has to have deliveries and you need some width there anyway, but... RSK You don't want to go there. BAC Fair enough. RSK As Emeril would say, let's don't go there RAS Any other comments or questions from the Council? Hearing none... JMB I would make a motion to approve the Planning Commission recommendation. RAS So it would be 90 degrees. JF Second. 38 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JMB Right RAS There's been a motion and a second, please vote. RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote. JANUARY 15, 2004 RAS Thank you very much. Next item on our Agenda is the northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Country Club Drive. PD Don't we have Portola first? JF We have Portola and Rutledge. RAS Portola Avenue between DeAnza and Rutledge. CLO Mayor, I'd just like to note that you did receive a letter relating to Portola Avenue. BAC Yu p. PD I'm afraid we'll have to look at...what you need to do is pull out your own (inaudible) Portola... Portola is another area of the City that when it was originally developed and laid out probably 40 years ago and the lots were designed...people didn't look far enough in the future to know that every mile there would be (inaudible) street, and at that time it stopped at the Whitewater Channel. And we have a whole bunch of homes which front on the street and have driveways backing out on the street. We are...it was originally designed as two lanes. We're now going to four lanes. What we're doing is minimum improvements by widening on the east side of the street to achieve four lanes by eliminating, by tightening up the lanes and eliminating the parking. We have kind of a minimum...one of those double left turn lanes in the middle. North of Fred Waring, we didn't have to do any widening, we just eliminated the parking lane. What that does and what that's done...obviously there's a whole lot more noise and a whole lot more traffic now going by these homes. Just from a practical point of view, it's hard to back out of your driveway when you're...especially once you've removed the parking lane, which usually gives you seven or eight feet of buffer before you hit the traffic. Now we have the traffic lane 18 inches from the curb. So, from any land use compatibility point of view, this is not the most obvious place to have a single family home, especially if you have to back out of your driveway. So...and, that...the ultimate, and if you look at...you see the ultimate cross section for this street....this is...Portola is a street which connects...I think there are, like, at least...there's three elementary schools and a middle school on Portola and yet we have no bike 39 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 lanes because we've not been approving them. So, to create what we feel is a more appropriate cross section and given that this part of the City has some residential character, a street section is more attractive with landscaped parkways, a landscaped median. You see at Fred Waring the...right now, I believe we have a right turn and only a single through...we're going to need two through lanes at Fred Waring, which means actually relocating our existing free right. We're talking about adding more dual left...so we're going to have to do more widening. So, even under existing conditions, our feeling was that the existing land use is not all that appropriate. Once we start doing widenings, potentially some of that widening will have to come off of the west side, further shortening the front yards of those homes. And, so, this is a place where a land use change of some sort we feel is desirable. We had some discussion, and you have some correspondence relative to how we do that widening. You notice over here on the east side, which is pretty much opposite most of the affected single family homes, we have a condo project with some open space in front, which maybe could accommodate some of that widening with taking less of the front, but that's ultimately a decision that's going to happen down the line when we get to the fine points of how this project is going to proceed. The issue before us here with the General Plan primarily is that given what we know is going to be changing and has changed on Portola is the appropriate land use of those lots that front on the highway and that with driveways backing out. Again, there was general consensus that it probably should be changed. There was disagreement as to what that change should be. The options were...obviously are small office professional zone which in this case would be more similar given the lot sizes to what you're seeing on Monterey. You see the remaining depth even with the most widening in some areas is still over a hundred feet which allows for some sort of development. There was some thought that somehow the...that some sort of multi -family can go there. I'm not sure that the depth makes that particularly easy or solves any of the problems that the existing residences are subject to. And the last solution, the fourth, was our Fred Waring/Baja Park solution, the difference being there we had about 45 to 50 feet which made private development more of a challenge. Here we have south of Fred Waring average of over almost a hundred feet. North of Fred Waring, right where they're proposing at the intersection it narrows to 65 feet but then goes back to about 90 feet. So there are opportunities for private use and development of these sites as offices. And so it becomes an issue to a certain degree of what we want the street to look like and how much we want to pay for it. The Planning Commission ultimately decided that all three uses are potentially compatible -- medium density residential, small or low intensity office professional, or open space — and it becomes a Council budget priority. I kind of did a very rough -cut cost estimate of what the alternatives might cost. Given an ideal development scenario, office development won't cost us anything in that we 40 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 can get...if there's enough of a demand soon enough, we can actually even get the right-of-way dedication as part of the conditions of development, and they'll landscape their front yards and they'll maintain their front yards. Obviously...and the same could happen with the multi -family, but again that's a little more of a challenge. Obviously if we go with a Baja/Fred Waring project, based on those costs, I projected out what that sort of improvement would cost us and what annual maintenance costs might be. As a General Plan, again, we've designated it as mixed use, allowing both residential and office professional and obviously where we choose we can preserve it as open space. RAS Any questions of staff? BAC One. When we did this on Fred Waring, we had had years of significant numbers of residents coming to us in essence wanting out or wanting change and so on and so forth who lived along Fred Waring. I don't have any recall of that same phenomena existing here with people saying they can no longer tolerate living in their homes. We've got a couple of letters from people who obviously don't think any change is needed in that, and they would prefer to remain in their homes or prefer to have their homes remain there, and other people who note that residents of commercial...not commercial, but OP and such things, increases the number of people entering and existing driveways across sidewalks frequented by children and so on and so forth. So, I guess my question is, what percentage of this proposed action is for our civic convenience in terms of roadway, making it nice and wider yet, and so on and so forth, and how much of this is a response to actual neighborhood dissatisfaction with current zoning and living? PD I can first say...if you look at...your correspondence is from not these property owners, they're the property owners in second tier blocks behind them, four property owners on the...you have some correspondence from property owners north of Fred Waring that are on the east side which would not be...they presently...you know, they're in that residential project that backs...that actually has their back to the street, and they wouldn't be impacted. BAC Right, so you're not getting...my point is, there's no swell of folks... RSK (Inaudible) PD In the General Plan we look at things and we make...we don't just respond to complaints. 41 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 RSK I know, but we're asking the question to give us a better feel for what's going... PD The answer is...and we should have included...but basically we have a code enforcement...the one complaint we got was a...and I don't believe the gentleman's here...it was actually a code enforcement complaint relative to the...and it was...l believe it was this house right here...where there's a hedge...the neighbor has a hedge, and basically his tenant, and these are mostly rented houses, mostly rented property right now, and his tenant moved out because he felt unsafe backing out because of the hedge and asked us if we could somehow get his neighbor to cut down his hedge for him. We're still dealing with that problem. BAC Might I conclude that there is no... RSK Practically none. PD BAC Other than what you observed, and really the thing that you observed, I think more importantly, was Fred Waring...you saw the deterioration of property on Fred Waring over time as people stopped making an investment... But that was because we fiddle diddled around with we were going to buy it and not buy it for 15 years and nobody did a darned thing which is just like what we've had at the back of the "alley" that we just tended to. So that's...those are not equivalent issues, and we don't see the equivalent deterioration in property. Or I don't, and I drove down it this morning. PD Okay then...go ahead MG From a Public Works perspective, through this General Plan process...excuse me...we're looking ahead 20 years or so, and from a traffic circulation perspective, we think Portola Avenue definitely needs to be widened. So that's how we kind of stepped into this process, I think at least my perspective...okay, the road does need to be widened, how does that affect those properties there, and... JF What's the width of the current section of road along these lengths? MG North of Fred Waring, it's about 55 or 60 feet wide. JF So you're looking at going to 80 to 88 feet? MG Right, yes. South of Fred Waring it's a little wider now, 60, 65. 42 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JF JANUARY 15, 2004 My concern with the Fred Waring analogy is we added an extra lane, and the Baja Park was just the remnant parcels from the priority, which was to add another lane. Here I just see...what do we have, four lanes, two in each direction? Don't we have that currently? MG Yes. The lanes... JF (Inaudible) cut a swath through this residential neighborhood potentially in the future to just have wider two-lane access? MG The lanes that are out there now are very narrow just at the very smallest limit of being appropriate. There's no bike lane, and more importantly, there's no two-way left turn lane from Portola onto Fred Waring. In the morning now, during school hours, school drop off hours, southbound Portola turning left onto Fred Waring backs up well past Rancho Road, really halfway to the school. So we definitely need a two-way left turn lane in there. We definitely need to improve the southbound free right turn onto Portola, so that's how we get... RAS Mayor Pro Tem. BAC Okay, now, from a traffic point of view, you'd like wider lanes, but what we have works and folks...it meets the law, does everything else. What you really need, you say, is to have better intersections. That's what you need is at Fred Waring is to have dual lefts and ten rights and all the rest of that, right? MG That's a major part... BAC But that doesn't need nearly what you're proposing down to Rancho all the way down almost to Rutledge and so on and so forth. What that needs is potentially one or two properties on the northwesterly quarter of that intersection. MG Yes. BAC Is that a fair statement? MG Yes. Ignoring bike lanes... BAC Ignoring the other things. Bikes right now go right down those sidewalks, and that is a bike lane. People get on the sidewalk, ride down the sidewalk, and it's a "bike lane." 43 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MG Yes. JANUARY 15, 2004 BAC Folks walk on it, it's a walking path. So we're going to recreate on the street a bike lane that now is probably better off because it has a curb to protect it. You don't get a car up on the existing "bike lane" because it's a sidewalk, and it also has some power poles and this and that, so we could accomplish the intersection issue with a much less extensive program than is being proposed. Is that fair to say? That component. I know that's not everything... MG BAC JMB RSK RAS RSK RAS RSK RAS JMB JF RSK PD Yes, we could accomplish some of the goals, yes. Yes, okay. Thank you. I think some of theory behind the widening was with the Portola overpass coming in and eventually in the future that is going to impact Portola (inaudible) And the volumes (inaudible) kids that walk there and go there (inaudible) That was going to be my comment. They're right on the outside lane practically. As soon as Portola goes through and connects with Dinah Shore, Portola's going to be a major artery in our city, whether we like it or not. What we're doing is getting ready. We're not doing that... Whether we should do it now or just put it in the General Plan and wait or whatever, I think it's worthwhile. It's going to bring traffic off the freeway on Portola. Well, and if we're touting Portola as the backdoor to the Gateway and all the people that are going to WalMart come down Portola, I can certainly see in the next 20 years having a need to widen this. I wouldn't do it today by any stretch. (Inaudible) middle of the City. And the land use issue again lets the market decide. If people want to (inaudible) and start living. Again... 44 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 RSK Well it's more than that. Let us get to it, though, let us get to it. CLO Just to give Council a time frame, it took us ten years from the time that we decided we were going to do Fred Waring to do it. So certainly 20 years is within... RAS (Inaudible) probably won't be here when that decision is made. JMB That's true. RSK Who did you have in mind? BAC Don't say that, Dick will be bothering us next election. RSK That's right. PD Where the land use... RSK It'II be the same old question...are you running this time? PD With the land use discussion and whether you choose to avail it, the people...this is where it is relevant on Fred Waring. The people on Fred Waring did not have an out, they did not have a parachute. They were stuck with residential or nothing. They couldn't sell their property to get out. They had to...as it got worse and worse and worse, they had to suffer. This proposal gives that property owner a parachute that as the residential quality continues to deteriorate, they can convert it to a more appropriate use that actually benefits from that traffic. RAS Any comments from anybody in the Chamber? MG Let me just add one more thing. I don't want to belabor the point, but some of the Public Works concern is more immediate than 10 or 20 years out, too. We talked about the fact that yes, there are four lanes on Fred Waring or on Portola north of Fred Waring. But they are minimal, and there are issues there. This doesn't have the safety record that we want to continue with. We want to make it better, and particularly pedestrians and bicyclists is an issue that needs to be (inaudible) and that's where our recommendation's (inaudible) RAS JL Thank you. Now, anybody in the audience? Jim Lewis, member of GPAC. One of the issues we did also cover was, and it's been slightly touched here, is several of these issues were opportunities 45 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 for residents to come forward and basically tell us we've been hearing, we've been hearing, and nothing's happening, and we've been told for ten years, 20 years, that this is going to happen and we're in limbo, we can't do anything. And what we wanted to do was looking 20 years out, we know this is going to happen, Portola is going to be a major thoroughfare. We needed to let the landowners know what is going to happen, give them the uses, multiple uses, that they can be chosen from so they can either, you know, change their property, sell it, or live with it. In looking (inaudible) that we were wanting to tell them through this plan, this is what is going to happen, so you can get on with your life. And that's a very important point, whether it's Portola or the 111, you know, lanes, alley lanes. They need to know, and we need to move forward. Just as when we looked at the so-called moratorium, you know, landowners need to know what's going to happen, and so we need to go out and give them the parameters which the City's going to live within so that they can then get on with their lives. RAS Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak to Portola? If not... RSK I have a comment. RAS Please. RSK Well, I...for the very same reasons that we need to widen Portola eventually, to me that's the very same reason why we should not try to put development in there. The idea that that space would be too wide in there is not the same as our Baja Park and the expense, it seems to me...in my neighborhood, we have some vacant lots, and they get no water, no treatment, nothing, zero. And they are a real asset to our neighborhood. And we've been looking at open space on the flat land, and the idea of that open space to my mind has always been to look like...just like those vacant lots that are in my neighborhood. They're extremely valuable to the neighborhood. How many people do we know that have a lot next door and buy that lot so that they can preserve their view and leave it like it is? So for me, somewhere down the line we're going to have to widen Portola to make it safer for the kids going to school, and when we do that we should just leave the rest of it open space. What's the matter with some open space there? JF Don't you lose... RSK (Inaudible) open space in the mountains. Us guys that live on the flat land want some open space. 46 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JF JANUARY 15, 2004 I thought one of the options in providing office professional was to provide a sound buffer, and I don't know how much of a buffer you'd get with open space. RSK Open space would make a good buffer. PD Buildings...and actually we did heartestimonyfrom folks on Fred Waring who did comment that now that the houses are gone, regardless of the eight -foot wall, it's significantly louder now than it was before. It's an issue...again, the...that's why the recommendation was, you know, any of the three. If you feel it's absolutely inappropriate...and again, it becomes...I agree with Councilman Kelly...open space... RSK Well that's a different tact, isn't it? PD Open space corridors are wonderful. It reminds people that they're in the desert. When you look at the plan for university park, there is open space corridors. They do have a cost, even if you don't landscape them, but that's a budget priority that the City and the Redevelopment Agency can make, and that's perfectly fine. I agree with you on most things, you don't understand that. BAC I would just make the comment, along with Richard's comment about the value of open space, I think there's also value in not trying to then crowd a whole bunch of stuff with a whole bunch of driveways. You know, if the issue is that we don't want all this and people have problems with it, then (inaudible) and eliminate it and be done with it and don't create something that we'll be unhappy with the next time around, and we've always got space to actually... RAS So if we do this... BAC ...20 years later do something else with that. RAS If we do this and make it office professional possibly, then we may have to take their land to make it a six -lane road. BAC Yup. RAS You're darned if you do and darned if you don't. Okay. JF Question. The recommendation says designate to these lands limited permitted uses to residential medium density, office professional, or open 47 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 space. Does that mean all three of those would apply, or you want us to pick one of those three? PD The feeling was that all three could apply. JF Okay. PD The mixed use...the issue with development...if we decided that we needed three lanes when development came in we would require dedication of the third lane and development of the site consistent with the third lane. JMB I would move the Planning Commission recommendation. JF Well, would anybody... RSK Why can't you eliminate the office professional, the residential....why not just have our recommendation be open space when we do that? JF How in the heck is somebody going to sell their house at a profit when the buyer's going to get open space or can't come in for a permit to expand his use as residential? RSK Well, it should be...isn't residential residential...there's not supposed to be an incentive to sell it to make money. JF As I read the staff report, a good chunk of these estimates were offset by the incentives that people had to sell their homes to office professional so that we didn't have to go in and relocate them and buy their property. PD Correct. And remember, to a certain degree, then we are doing...in essence, we're saying that we anticipate, and which is exactly what we said on Fred Waring back in 1985...basically we're saying that sooner or later we're going to have to expand that road, we're not sure when, it might be 10 or 15 years down the line. And over time those...again, we put those property owners in a box. RSK No matter what we do, they're going to be in a box anyway. I can't imagine, and I'm sure going to vote against it, that we would ever widen that and put a bunch more driveways in there or put something where we're going to create more traffic because it's vital...with a school there, with the intersection there, with the amount of traffic you're going to have, why would we ever want to create driveways there? It would be worth a lot of money to us...it would be worth a lot of money to our traffic department to not have driveways. I can tell you, there's streets all over the town and all over our 48 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 community where we would be willing to pay a couple hundred thousand dollars per driveway to get rid of them so we can move traffic. The Mid - Valley Parkway is a good example. Every single driveway is worth $200,000 for us to get rid of it, and now we're going to create something...that just doesn't make any sense to me at all. PD Well, what we've done in most of our... RSK That's almost as bad as putting a dip instead of a bridge. PD What we've done with most of our office development, we have eliminated driveways. We probably...in the areas where we've done OP zones we've probably cut the driveways in half or more. JF At least. BAC (Inaudible) the volume by double. PD I'm not sure we've...no, if you look at those OP driveways, they're not...they don't get huge amounts...again, if... RSK Let me add one more thing to you. That is not a success over there on Fred Waring where we have mixed use because you can't call that medical center and that medical building a success when we have cars all over the neighborhood. It's not a success. PD Well, no, because we have a parking problem which we recognize... RSK You're going to create more problems there... PD My one last comment would be...and I have no problem with open space, and I don't think the Planning Commission has any problem with open space as a solution. What we don't want to do is put those property owners, again, in... RSK If they want to sell one, we should buy it. PD Okay, then that's an important policy then including in the open space... RSK And we could rent it for affordable housing until the time we come to do something. PD That's a very good... 49 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 RSK There's lots of ways to accomplish... PD And that should be part of the...remember, we have policies and programs...that should be a program that when things go on the market, we're a buyer. RAS There's a motion from Councilwoman Benson on the table, and that was to accept the Planning Commission recommendation. Is there a second? JF I'll second it. RAS There's a motion and a second. Please vote. BAC That's with all three. JF Yes, all three. RAS That's with all three, that's correct. BAC Okay, I will vote no. RDK Motion carries 3-2, with Councilman Kelly and Mayor Pro Tem Crites voting NO. RAS Next item on the Agenda is the northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Country Club. PD Again, this is another chapter in a long, long story. This is the site across, again the northeast corner, across from what used to be the Albertson's Center. We've had three our four proposals for commercial development on this property. Currently zoned medium density residential. The Planning Commission has actually recommended twice approval of commercial developments on this site. Their recommendation was, again, initial staff recommendation was, again, to make this another one of those study zones. This is a very site specific, design driven decision that really needs the intimate participation of that neighborhood, which we don't believe this General Plan discussion is appropriate. And so, I guess you might call it punting, but our recommendation was keep it at medium density residential with a study zone overlay, in this case acknowledging the potential for some sort of alternative land use, maybe some sort of commercial land use, whether it's office or who knows, but we're not in a position at this point to make that determination. We heard testimony from both the property owner and the property owner to the south across the street. Also there was some input from the City Manager for Redevelopment. Basically the property 50 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 owner across the street felt that any designation to a commercial use would inhibit his ability to lease the vacant Albertson's store. The subject property owner felt that competition should not be avoided but is good in our system of economics. In his plan he was anticipating a food/grocery use, and his food/grocery user was not afraid of competition and, therefore, why should anyone else be afraid of competition. The Planning Commission made the decision consistent with the property owner's desire and recommended a community commercial, in essence a neighborhood shopping center designation. Staffs recommendation is still holding with our...maintaining the medium density residential with the study overlay. RAS Questions? BAC Question. If we simply leave it exactly like it is, if we get a project that isn't compatible, that whatever Council, this Council or some other Council finds appropriate, they can make the determination that that's what they want to do, right? PD BAC Correct. The change...this is similar to what we're talking about up at Cornishe, that this is a site specific sort of (inaudible) that the change can occur when we get a project. But on that one we have an EIR underway and an application and a this and that and those are not things that are in front of us right now with this piece of property. PD The property owner is on the verge of filing an application but has not yet. BAC Right, the property owner isn't...anyhow, we don't have something in front of us now, so we could either...we could leave it the way it is until we see something and so decide, is that correct? PD That's absolutely correct. RSK What's it zoned at now? PD Medium density residential. It's actually eligible for a significant number of units because remember this is part of what was a larger piece of property at 70 units per acre, so the whole property was entitled to about 260 or 70 units. They built about 120 of them as part of Merano and therefore the balance could accommodate, you know, the balance of those, that initial entitlement. JF From a planning... 51 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING RSK In other words, the answer is... PD Medium density residential. RSK Medium density residential. JANUARY 15, 2004 JF From a planning perspective, is it desirable to put residential on the corner of two major arterials? PD It is an issue of community standards. In this town, it is definitely not an ideal desired place to live. But, again, in other communities, with the right design, it can be accommodated. So it's, again, it's one of those...l've seen areas in Los Angeles, obviously, where you have very high -end, very expensive residential housing on far busier intersections. RAS PD Why did you decide on making so many different commercial definitions? That doesn't make any sense to me at all, and I was only in the business 32 years. You've got a general commercial, you've got a neighborhood commercial, you've got a community commercial, and you've got a regional commercial. In my opinion, you've got a regional commercial and you've got a neighborhood commercial. And I have no problem with that...that's a question you have to...and I don't disagree with that...you noticed relative to industrial designations, we simplified them very dramatically, and we did distinguish and our original plan showed, although most of those sites got eliminated, a five -acre sort of project that has very low -scale commercial. The medium and...which...scale where you get a supermarket is another scale. The distinction between community commercial and neighborhood commercial is the one that's probably hardest to decipher. But I could agree with you, we would easily go to three instead of five. RAS You wish to make a comment? RSK About what? JC For simple reasons, there is value in having a menu. First of all, there is...it allows you to distinguish between the type of commercial development. (inaudible) property seems to be best for versus a type where it either wouldn't optimize the property or it would be in conflict with maybe schools or residential, for instance. A good example would be, obviously, the regional commercial. The regional commercial obviously is a large big box kind of operation. It creates synergies. So it also then needs compatibility, so if you're looking at, for instance, interchanges...it makes a lot of sense 52 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 because we create a tremendous draw with a regional facility, we need to pass (inaudible) to address that. I think Phil's comment about neighborhood versus community...actually, we have even had quite a bit of dialog amongst ourselves about whether or not we needed both of those. The general commercial serves as a kind of a catch-all because we have these pockets of small commercial...they don't fit a definition in terms of the scale, like a neighborhood shopping center would or a community regional. Ultimately, the zoning, when you implement, gives you even that much more flexibility to implement the zoning. I'm not defensive, mind you, I'm just (inaudible) RAS I still stand on my comment. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to address this? SW Morning Mayor, Councilmembers. My name is Steve Wong. I'm with the firm of Scanlon Kemper Bard at 1211 SW 5th Avenue... RAS Would you pull the microphone closer. SW We're at 1211 SW 5th Avenue in Portland, Oregon. Our firm represents the owners of the site directly to the south of the subject and wanted to just, again, voice our opinion as Phil had mentioned, that we oppose the proposed change to commercial on the northeast corner of Monterey and Country Club, and that's, you know...since Albertson's has moved across the street, we are actively courting a grocery operator to replace Albertson's. However, we feel that if the site across the street is rezoned, the threat of another grocery operator at that site will prevent us from replacing the Albertson's with another grocer, and our shopping center will suffer and continue to be in a very unstable state as it is currently. And, therefore, our studies have shown that we don't think that corner can support three grocery stores and, therefore, our opposition to the proposed change. RAS Thank you. SW Thank you. RAS Is there anyone else who wishes to address Council at this time? LB Good morning, Mayor Spiegel and Councilmembers. I'm Larry Brose with the Robert Mayer Corporation. We are the owners of the property. Our address is 660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1050, Newport Beach. Thank you for the opportunity to address you on this matter. There has been quite a bit of discussion on this question and the use...appropriate land use for our property. We've worked with staff, we've worked with our consultants, with commercial developer as well, and participated with the Palm Desert 53 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 Planning Commission when they went through their deliberations. During their course of review, they spent quite a bit of time, as I'm sure you're aware, addressing the merits, the pros and the cons, looking at the commercial opportunities, the opportunities and constraints that the site have as well as the market demands. The gentleman that spoke before me, we actually have done studies as well, and our studies, of course, demonstrate that there is a need, they demonstrate that competition is healthy, they demonstrate that we would have complementary uses based upon what we know their plans to be. I'm here to reiterate our support for the Planning Commission's recommendation to you. A letter was sent in...it would have been Tuesday...to your offices. Just quickly restating the highlights of the letter, there is a need and demand we believe is there. This trade area has actually lost a commercial use with the implementation of the Marriott Desert Shadows and the reduction of the commercial use right up the street. We think our property is a great location to replace that. Our property itself has what we believe the opportunities for a commercial center, the location, the infrastructure, the existing streets, the ingress/egress, the ease of ingress and egress, that will facilitate easily a commercial center. Our location at the two cross streets, Country Club and Monterey, of course as you know are extremely well -traveled and heavily traveled streets. The question you asked Mr. Drell with regard to the appropriateness of residential uses at that street...could be, but we think more importantly that a commercial use is a better use. Complementary uses...we understand from our information that the corner, rather the center to the south of us in the old Albertson's box(?) Is looking for a Gelson's type or Gelson's supermarket. With the Albertson's across the street now in Rancho being a typical supermarket, Gelson's being a very high -end market and then our intended uses of Wild Oats or Henry's being more of a specialty or ranch -style market. We believe that it is complementary to all of them and that we don't have a worry from our end going in to the center. I guess most importantly is what we're asking today is a question of land use as you're going through the General Plan and looking at land uses for now and in the future. It is correct we do not have a specific project application in. We actually have an application in for a General Plan amendment, but our project application has not come in. We would submit it if we have the entitlement today, go through the normal public hearing and review with our neighbors and such, and seek those project approvals to ultimately construct our center. We always envisioned this property to be a commercial center. Phil is correct, we've had two other applications before the City. We are pleased that the Planning Commission once again shared our conviction that this is a commercial use, land use, for this property, and we hope you will do the same. RAS Thank you. 54 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 — JF I have a question for you. Assuming the five of us sitting here are looking 20 years in the future and don't agree with the Planning Commission and decide that we just don't think commercial on that corner, one of the busiest intersections in our city, is appropriate. As a landowner, you've seen and heard all of our land use designations in the commercial arena this morning or office professional and residential and open space and the other. What would your second choice be? LB Second choice for this parcel? JF If it was not going to be zoned commercial. LB Our second choice would be to leave it alone, leave it as medium density residential. JF Okay. RAS Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you very much. Anybody else wish to speak to the Council? DH (Inaudible) put a little fire on this...fuel on this fire. My roots...l'm a pioneer in the health food organic industry and not really knowing what's going on on the existing old Albertson's. There's no reason Wild Oats can't move into that facility or Henry's. My roots are deep in this issue, I guarantee...unless somebody's putting in (inaudible) or something, but there's no reason to build across the street. What you have is fine. Thank you. RAS Any other comments? BAC I would move that we designate it as it is at the moment. JF Well, I have one comment and then I'II second your motion. (Inaudible) JF Yeah (Inaudible) JF What the owner wanted and... (Inaudible) MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JF RAS JANUARY 15, 2004 Okay. It seems to me...l met with the folks that are looking at going into the old Albertson's center yesterday. Jean and I met with them. And the observation I had was I cannot see eliminating an entire class of retail, banking, dry cleaning, other types of services for the mobile home residents at Palm Desert Greens, Sun Crest, the folks at Merano, because we're worked up over a grocery store. And I certainly, you know, will preserve to the future a Council decision to maybe look at some commercial mix there in the future. I personally think it's right for commercial. I don't think commercial draws traffic, I think it just feeds off of existing traffic. But I don't get the sentiment that...and I don't know all the history, but this Council does not want that. I guess my second option would have been to go with office professional so that the developer would have a clear signal of what we would like there instead of just a, maybe it could be open space, but the last thing I would want to see there is residential because I just don't think it makes good planning sense. I happen to agree with that, and as 1 said early on, there's only two commercials in my mind. One is neighborhood commercial, and that's like the corner of Country Club and Cook where we have a grocery store and we've got a drug store, we've got a couple of restaurants, and that's about it. And one is like a Westfield Shoppingtown and Target and etcetera etcetera. And that's a regional area, and that's very important to us. Another regional area is out where WalMart's going to go with Costco. That's strictly regional. And we know that Rancho Mirage, at least their current Council, will not widen Monterey from Fred Waring to Country Club to three lanes on their side. We're willing to do it on our side, but doing it on one side doesn't make any sense, so Monterey from Fred Waring to Country Club will remain four lanes. And that's going to cut down on the traffic; therefore, I'm totally opposed to another commercial piece on that corner. It's just going to drive traffic into an area that's congested already. So I would agree that office professional would be the way to go. I think that because of the closeness to Eisenhower and so on, there's a lot of things that could go in there that would be beneficial to the citizens of our city. But I certainly can't see another commercial development on that corner. (Inaudible) RAS I thought you spoke already. RSK (Inaudible) Anyway, I don't (inaudible) activity at night that's with commercial, that's with residential. So I'm opposed to changing it until we see a project. BAC In listening to what my colleagues have said, this might be a place for a mixed use that provides...and I think you could do this...that provides both 56 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 15, 2004 some fairly medium to high density residential and office professional in a combination that works on the site because it does have great access to, you know, to a lot of different places. It would be a good place for, I think, again, buffering the people and the OP back and forth with each other, and you could do something that's innovative and, I think, fun that could have value for the community, but...and I've chatted with Mr. Mayer for many. years and welcomed his point of view as he has had for those years, and I continue to have mine. There is no way that needs to be commercial. But looking for an innovative mix of offices and residential would be something that I could find useful. And so maybe a motion would be to have staff look at, for our next meeting two weeks from now, a designation that would fit what we've heard folks up here are looking for in terms of that mix. If that's okay with Jim? JF Yeah, I'd like to sit down with the property owner and come up with a concept that doesn't make sure that that lot sits vacant for 20 years. RAS We also had a motion on the table. BAC I'd withdraw and ask... JF I'II withdraw my second. BAC ...and keep this, then, for two weeks, continue it for two weeks and look for a designation that combines residential and office use in a way that is compatible with neighborhood values and with traffic and with area needs. RAS Is there a second? JF Second. RAS Any other discussion? Please vote. RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote. RSK I have an important item. RAS Please. RSK Since we just spent several thousand dollars for a lot of fancy furniture, do you suppose we could get rid of that old table out there that's been there for about two months? RAS I'll ask the City Manager if he's willing to take care of that. The one right down here. 57 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING RSK Right. It looks like it came out of the junk yard. JF The folding table. RSK The folding table. BAC That's out of the Mayor's office. RAS That's my desk. CLO We spent so much money, we can't afford a new one. JANUARY 15, 2004 RSK Well, if you can't afford anything for the Council Chamber, it's because you spent if all on the City Manager's office. CLO That is the truth. RAS Mayor Pro Tem. BAC It appears that the next item on our Agenda may take more than ten minutes. RAS Yes, it will. JMB It wasn't on this Agenda. BAC Well, I'm just noting that this might be an appropriate time to call the morning well done. RAS I would agree except that I'd like direction from Council. You suggested that next meeting we go right to number...what is it, 4, 5, and 6? PD And in talking to the consultant, what...and maybe this is what you intended...we're going to...I told him to go through the policies and programs in those elements to, in his mind, and he was the one who wrote them, in his mind, which of those were...represent a purely re -articulation of past policies and which represented some sort of new ideas. So, again...and it's...and unfortunately we're not talking about in comparing old with new...we're not talking about...we're talking about apples and plutonium to a certain degree. So it's kind of hard to make a comparison. But in terms of...when he was writing them, which, in his mind, did he think they were new ideas. And that's probably the best we can do. Does that sound like a reasonable way to approach that? 58 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING BAC JANUARY 15, 2004 In answering Councilmember Kelly's question, it would mean not starting next week with the university park but starting, two weeks from now, starting with, in essence, checking off items 4, 5, and 6 of the General Plan, those big chunks, and then coming back to this Agenda on land use stuff. That's at least... RSK Are we definitely...it would be nice if you'll tell me what we're going to do so we know what to study. RAS You're going to give us the staff report as to what we will be discussing at the next meeting. BAC I would move that that be our Agenda order for the meeting. JF I second it. PD Okay. The... BAC Now you can get down to how you want to accomplish that. PD I think that's going to be principally an oral presentation. BAC Whatever, but (inaudible) PD Well, we'll give you an Agenda that describes what we're going to do, but... RAS Please. PD Unfortunately, our consultant is going off to Paris or London (inaudible) but that is going to be...again, the approach is...is his impression, and I think you guys have to look through those same policies and programs and make that same judgment of which you think are new departures that need to be discussed and which things are mom and apple pie. JF CLO We will, but Mr. Criste, if you could in your presentation, I at least, as one Councilmember, am curious to see how you incorporated the philosophies and some of the things that we've developed over the years and documented them in here so that people that come after us can hopefully read it as well and follow the formula that we put (inaudible) Mr. Mayor, one of the items that at least I'm concerned about that the Council at least look at are those policies that don't have to do with land use but that nevertheless we have to look at that cost the City that in the future so that if we were to marry a General Plan with a Fiscal Plan... 59 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING RAS (Inaudible) JANUARY 15, 2004 CLO ...at least we will have your approval of yes, we're going to have so many firemen, so many policemen, so much open space, so that we can do an adequate job then of bringing you what I feel is a very important part. Also, to look at how we're going to manage that 10, 15 years from now, 20 years. RAS And you're going to be making that presentation or your staff will? CLO Well no, one of the things that I've asked is that at least you look at those things so that you can nod and say that looks good or no, we want to change that. JF RAS Well, also give Mark Greenwood a heads up. One of the things I'm going to be interested in is if we set a goal attainment for level of service of...everybody would say "A" if you just asked them in the abstract, but we don't have enough money to even get close to "A". As I understand the debate, it's (inaudible) land, it's somewhere down around "C," "D," or "E," and I understand there was considerable debate at the Planning Commission. I don't know how much fiscal policy crept into that debate, but I would like to see the numbers of what we think it would cost us to set "C" as the level. All right, we normally end with Oral Communications. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to address the Council on any other item? Seeing no one... For purposes of clarification. City Council action was taken on the followina items: 1. Hotels & Motels Approved the Planning Commission recommendation for Hotels and Motels. 5-0 2. Mixed Use Commercial Approved the Planning Commission recommendation for Mixed Use Commercial. 5-0 3. Residential Hillside Reserve (R-HR) Approved the Planning Commission recommendation for Residential Hillside Reserve (R-HR) with the exception of deleting the 1 dwelling unit per acre option. 4_1 (Kelly NO) 60 MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING 4. Cornishe of Bighorn JANUARY 15, 2004 Approved the Planning Commission recommendation to maintain the current R-L (Low Density Residential) designation with addition of the "S" (Special Study) overlay designation, acknowledging the potential for the R-HR designation and the need for site -specific study. 5=0 5. North Hiahwav 111 Alley Approved the Planning Commission recommendation to pursue the redesign and construction of enhanced vehicular access and commercial -serving parking on Alessandro Drive (extended) between San Marcos and Monterey Avenue, as set forth in the Commercial Core Area Specific Plan discussion in the Land Use Element. 5-0 6. Portola Avenue Between De Anza and Rutledae Approved the Planning Commission recommendation to assign a modified "Mixed -Use" designation to these lands, limiting permitted uses to R-M, O-P, or OS. 3-2 (Crites, Kelly NO) 7. Northeast Corner of Monterey Avenue & Country Club Drive Continued this matter to the meeting of January 29, 2004, with staff directed to look for a designation that would combine residential and office use in a way that is compatible with neighborhood values and with traffic and area needs. 5-0 VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Crites, second by Ferguson, and unanimous vote of the Council, Mayor Spiegel adjourned the meeting at 11:25 a.m. to Thursday, January 29, 2004, at 8:30 a.m. ATTEST: RA HELLE D RE SSEN, CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA %/k74., ROBERT A. SPIEgEL l'OR 61