Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-03-23MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, MARCH 23, 2006 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M. Mayor Ferguson convened the meeting at 3:01 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Member Jean M. Benson Member Buford A. Crites Vice Chairman Richard S. Kelly Member Robert A. Spiegel Chairman Jim Ferguson Also Present: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager/RDA Executive Director David J. Erwin, City Attorney Mark D. Greenwood, Acting ACM for Development Services Justin McCarthy, ACM for Redevelopment Stephen Y. Aryan, Assistant to the City Manager Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Amir Hamidzadeh, Director of Building & Safety Phil Drell, Director of Community Development David Yrigoyen, Director of Redevelopment & Housing Frankie Riddle, Acting Director of Special Programs J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Finance Director Steve Thetford, Asst. Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept. Travis Witten, Battalion Chief, Palm Desert Fire/Riverside Co. Fire Dept./CDF Grace L. Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk III. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION Reauest for Closed Session: Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 1 ) Property: Lease Property - Parkview Professional Office Complex, 73710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite No. 120, Palm Desert Negotiating Parties: Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/Paul S. Gibson/City of Palm Desert Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Other Parties: Green, Bryant & French, LLP Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment 2) Property: Right -of -Way Acquisition for Monterey Avenue/I-10 Interchange Modification (APNs 653-170-039/041/042) Negotiating Parties Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/Mark D. Greenwood/City of Palm Desert Property Owner: Newmark-Merrill/Prism Group Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a): a) Artistic Entertainment Services, LLC, d.b.a. Festival Artists Worldwide v. Coachella Valley Arts Alliance, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 05CC12907 Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b): Number of potential cases: 2 Conference with Chief of Police/Assistant Chief to consider Security of City of Palm Desert Public Buildings pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. Upon a motion by Kelly, second by Spiegel, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, Mayor Ferguson adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:02 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 4:00 p.m. IV. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING - 4:00 P.M. A. REPORT ON ACTION FROM CLOSED SESSION Action: None V. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS None 2 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of March 9, 2006. Rec: Approve as presented. Continued to the meeting of April 13, 2006. B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 181, 183, 187, 188, and 189. Rec: Approve as presented. C. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Steven Lee Curtis and Joline Elise Panico for Cosmo's, 73-155 Highway 111, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. D. CITY COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. 1. Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting of February 1, 2006. 2. Youth Committee Meeting of February 7, 2006. Rec: Receive and file. E. REQUEST FOR ADOPTION of Resolutions Authorizing the Destruction of Paper Records from the Department of Building & Safety that Have Been Digitally Imaged (November and December 2005). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt: 1) Resolution No. 06-38 - for November 2005 records; 2) Resolution No. 06-39 - for December 2005 records. F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Contract for Professional Services Associated with Benefit Assessment District Formation (Contract No. C23340A). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the subject contract with MuniFinancial, Temecula, California, in a total amount not to exceed $11,500 — funds are available in Account No. 610-0000-228-2100, per the Reimbursement Agreement with the developers of the Section 29 Assessment District. 3 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 G. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for Landscape Design Services for the Median Project on Portola Avenue from Chicory Street to Fairway Drive (Contract No. C25020, Project No. 926-06). Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Award the subject contract in the amount of $10,165 to David Evans and Associates, Inc., Ontario, California; 2) approve a 10% contingency for the services; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute said contract — funds are available in Account No. 400-4614-433-4001. H. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for Landscape Design Services for the Country Club Drive Median from Portola Avenue to Monterey Avenue (Contract No. C25030, Project No. 934-06). Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Award the subject contract in the amount of $43,475 to Community Works Design Group, Riverside, California; 2) approve a 10% contingency for the services; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute said contract — funds are available in Account No. 400-4614-433-4001. I. REQUEST FOR RATIFICATION of City Manager's Authorization to Purchase Two Air Conditioning Units for Corporation Yard. Rec: By Minute Motion, ratify the City Manager's authorization to replace two, obsolete air conditioning units at the Corporation Yard with the purchase of two high -efficiency units from Maple Leaf Plumbing, Heating/Air Conditioning, Palm Desert, California, in the amount of $16,000 — funds are available in Account No. 110-4330-413-3310. J. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Improvement Security for Tract No. 31346 (Centennial Homes, Inc., Applicant). This item was removed for separate consideration under Section VII - Consent Items Held Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes for discussion and subsequent action. 4 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 K. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Agreement for Marketing and Event Coordination for the 2006 Palm Desert Art of Food & Wine Festival, November 9-12 (Contract No. C23410A). Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with staff recommendation and enter into an agreement with Full Gallop Marketing Communications, Palm Desert, California, in the amount of $25,000 for advertising and event coordination for the Art of Food & Wine, and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement — funds are available in Account No. 110-4417-414-3222. L. CONSIDERATION of Legislative Review Committee Action — AB 1875 (Daucher) — Landscape Services. Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its February 28, 2006, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of support for the Mayor's signature with regard to AB 1875 (Daucher). M. CONSIDERATION of Legislative Review Committee Action — AB 2011 (Vargas) — Local Agency Investments. Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its February 28, 2006, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to AB 2011 (Vargas). N. CONSIDERATION of Legislative Review Committee Action — SB 1177 (Hollingsworth) — Development Standards - Density Bonus. Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its February 28, 2006, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to SB 1177 (Hollingsworth). O. CONSIDERATION of Legislative Review Committee Action — SB 1179 (Morrow) — Hazardous Recreational Activity. Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its February 28, 2006, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to SB 1179 (Morrow). 5 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 P CONSIDERATION of Legislative Review Committee Action — SB 1206 (Kehoe) — Redevelopment. Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its February 28, 2006, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to SB 1206 (Kehoe). Q. CONSIDERATION of Legislative Review Committee Action — SB 1210 (Torlakson) — Eminent Domain. Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its February 28, 2006, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to SB 1210 (Torlakson). R. CONSIDERATION of Legislative Review Committee Action — SCA 20 (McClintock) — Eminent Domain. Rec: By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its February 28, 2006, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to SCA 20 (McClintock). S. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of a Conveyance Agreement for Property Located Along Monterey Avenue Between Lowes and Desert Gateway (Contract No. C25040). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor or City Manager to execute the subject agreement with Myron Macleod. T REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of AudioNisual Services for 2006 "Summer of Fun" Concerts. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve two purchase orders for audio/visual services totaling $14,000 with Studio Instrument Rentals of Palm Springs, California, for concert sound and lighting equipment and professional staff for the 2006 "Summer of Fun" concerts. 6 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 U. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Review of Interpretation of Second Unit Size Limitation Language. This item was removed for separate consideration under Section VII - Consent Items Held Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes for discussion and subsequent action. 2. Update on Coordination with Riverside County on Developing Standards to Address County Projects within the City's Sphere of Influence. This item was removed for separate consideration under Section VII - Consent Items Held Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes for discussion and subsequent action. The following items were requested for separate consideration under Section VII - Consent Items Held Over of the Agenda by the respective City Councilmembers: J - Councilman Spiegel; U-1 - Mayor Ferguson; U-2 - Councilman Crites. Mrs. Klassen also asked that Item A - Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of March 9, 2006, be continued to the next meeting. Upon a motion by Spiegel, second by Kelly, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented, with continuance of the Minutes of the last meeting continued to April 13, 2006. VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER J. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Improvement Security for Tract No. 31346 (Centennial Homes, Inc., Applicant). Councilman Spiegel commented that the subject development was located on Alamo and Bel Air, and the land had been vacant for some time. He wondered when the developer planned to build houses there. Mr. Greenwood said the Public Works Department hadn't seen anything and suggested the Planning Department may have more information. Mr. Drell answered that the subject tract consisted of custom lots, and he didn't think any proposals had been received in his office yet either. He offered to check into whether the property had changed hands and what their intentions were. 7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize the City Clerk to release the subject improvement securities for Tract No. 31346. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by 5-0 vote. U-1. INFORMATIONAL ITEM: Review of Interpretation of Second Unit Size Limitation Language. Councilman Crites acknowledged the response from the Director of Community Development; however, it was lacking a copy of the letter that had been delivered to City Council requesting the response. He asked that consideration of this item be held until such time as all the data was present. Mayor Ferguson observed that Mr. Drell's statement in the Minutes of the meeting where the second accessory unit issue was addressed seemed to be in direct conflict with the statements in the informational report for this meeting. MS. KIM HOUSKEN, resident ofSomera, Palm Desert, read from a prepared statement, including exhibits, which was received for the record and is now on file with the City Clerk's Office. She recalled in 2003, the City adopted an ordinance specifying that a second unit be proportional in size to the main unit, with the second unit's maximum limit at 35% of the main unit's square footage. She was, therefore, concerned about the difference in application of the maximum limit when on February 7, the Planning Commission approved a 1,400 square foot second unit for a 2,800 square foot main unit. If applied in this fashion, she believed densities in R-1 neighborhoods could be doubled, pointing out that the intent for second units was in-laws, caregivers, etc., and cautioned the City Council to avoid the duplex -type homes it had seen in the past. She said it amounted to a double standard when the Planning Department considered a second unit to be 50% of the main unit if it is being carved out of something already there, while the correct 35% is being utilized when the second unit is either detached or being added onto a home. She asked for consistent application of the ordinance's intent, with 35% being allowed across the board, and questioned how many other second units had been permitted with over-the-counter approvals since the new ordinance was effective and what percentage was applied in those instances. She said had it not been for the variance required by the applicant on February 7, it would have gone unnoticed, which was very disturbing. Lastly, she wanted to know what could be done about the case that brought the issue to her attention, as ground had not been broken for the home as recently as yesterday. She noted that the home in question would have 48% lot coverage, but at 4,200 square feet, it was not in keeping with the neighborhood's character. She said by eliminating the 1,400 square foot second unit and carport, lot coverage would be reduced to 31 %, noting that the current ordinance specifies any new construction 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 associated with the second unit was required to comply with all setbacks, coverage, height and design standards, etc. She suggested that a public hearing be conducted any time either a second unit or an original home with a second unit in it was being built that would exceed lot coverage, acknowledging that public hearings could not be held purely for consideration of the second unit. Councilman Crites believed it would be appropriate to allow Mr. Drell opportunity to read Ms. Housken's letter, consider the calculations she presented at this meeting, and then take this matter up again at the next meeting. He specifically asked that the project prompting the issue be analyzed for how it can now be addressed, especially if it's covering 50% of the lot. Mr. Drell responded that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the variance, and it was approved as if it were a single home of 4,000 square feet. He said the case was not appealed by anyone. He added because the working drawings for it hadn't been approved, neither had the second unit there. He observed that the ordinance was inherently confusing —someone could build a 4,000 square foot single-family home on the site, without second unit, which was the originally permitted primary residence. A year later, the applicant could come in to request conversion of a certain amount of it for second unit, and he had provided the Planning Commission with the two alternatives for their consideration. He said it may not need to be continued; the City Council could provide direction to him that he could convey to the prospective applicant. He pointed out that this was actually the first second unit case he was aware of, explaining that the variance was approved based on extraordinary circumstances of the lot being extremely narrow and deep, the ordinance specifically provides coverage up to 50%, and the aforementioned was treated like other similar single-family homes in the City. Responding to question from Ms. Housken, he answered that the project went through the City's normal process of review by both Planning and Architectural Review Commissions. The size of the house was only evident as a result of the extreme lot depth; the actual frontage was rather modest, as the lot was less than 60 feet wide, with the actual footprint of the house as seen from the street being quite consistent and possibly smaller than most of the houses on that block. Councilman Spiegel moved to continue the matter to the meeting of April 13, 2006. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by 5-0 vote. 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 U-2. INFORMATIONAL ITEM: Update on Coordination with Riverside County on Developing Standards to Address County Projects within the City's Sphere of Influence. Councilman Crites said he appreciated the update provided. However, in his opinion, it should be noted that Palm Desert's General Plan for Cahuilla Hills certainly did not reflect what the City would do in that area if it were within the City or what the City had done in adjacent hillside areas, but reflects consistency with what the County does there presently. Second, he was curious about the County's "new design standards" and whether they will apply specifically to the Cahuilla Hills area. Third, he asked when the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) being prepared regarding the City's review of County projects would be coming before the City Council. Mr. Drell replied first, that the City's current General Plan didn't preclude application of its hillside zoning standards, which were 0 to 4. The City could apply zoning of 1 to1 0 or 1 to 50 acres, pursuant to the General Plan, which is very low density and actually encompasses the densities that would be in the hillside zone. Secondly, it was his understanding that 70%-80% of what the City considers County Cahuilla Hills would not be designated hillside; therefore, those hillside standards would not apply. The design standards would apply to about 20%-30% of the area. Lastly, he was not aware of any draft MOU prepared by the County yet but agreed to inquire about it. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, receive and file the report. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 4-0 vote, with Ferguson ABSENT. VIII. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 06-40 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, IN SUPPORT OF MEASURE TO SECURE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 06-40. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by 5-0 vote. 10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 B. RESOLUTION NO. 06-41 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO FORM THE SECTION 29 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, DECLARING ITS INTENT TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES BY THE CITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS BENEFITING SUCH ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FROM THE PROCEEDS OF IMPROVEMENT BONDS AND TAKING CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. Mr. Ortega commented that this was the other part of the City's attempts to get all the streets done in the area between Cook Street and Monterey Avenue with the Assessment District. He noted the report provided by staff and that they were available for questions. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 06-41. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 5-0 vote. IX. ORDINANCES For Introduction: A. ORDINANCE NO. 1113 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 15.04.020 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE (PDMC), AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, CBC SECTION 107.2, PERMIT FEES. Councilmember Benson moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 1113 to second reading. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by 5-0 vote. B. ORDINANCE NO. 1114 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.40 TO TITLE 15 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATIVE TO PLACARDS USED TO DENOTE CONDITIONS WITH REGARD TO CONTINUED OCCUPANCY OF BUILDINGS. Councilman Crites moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 1114 to second reading. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by 5-0 vote. 11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 C. ORDINANCE NO. 1115 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 741 AND 761, THEREBY REVOKING THE THROUGH COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PROHIBITION ON FRED WARING DRIVE AND DESIGNATING WASHINGTON STREET AND DINAH SHORE DRIVE AS TRUCK ROUTES. Mr. Ortega noted that although the subject matter was not a public hearing, several comments had already been received for it. In response to Mayor Ferguson's request, Mr. Greenwood stated that sometime ago, staff received a letter from the Desert Contractors' Association requesting the City take various actions regarding trucking. He said some of those actions had already been accomplished, others could not be, and he believed this was the last issue to be addressed. Specifically, they asked that the nighttime truck restriction on Fred Waring Drive from Highway 111 to Cook Street be rescinded. After reviewing the situation, staff found that the truck restriction was there because of the houses formerly fronting onto Fred Waring Drive between Deep Canyon Road and Portola Avenue; however, that situation no longer existed —the houses had been removed, the street had been widened, Baja Park was built, and soundwalls had been installed along the great majority of Fred Waring where housing still exists. The City continues to install soundwall and perform widening work on the east end of Fred Waring; given the request and the current situation, staff recommended the nighttime truck restriction be lifted. He said the staff report also addresses establishing a truck route on Washington Street, which currently doesn't exist, as well as making all of Dinah Shore Drive in Palm Desert a truck route. In answer to question, he said the nighttime truck restriction on Fred Waring only existed between Monterey Avenue and Cook Street currently; but portions in the City of Indian Wells had the nighttime truck restriction, and he noted that representatives from Indian Wells were in attendance today and likely wished to speak to the matter. Further responding to question about Indian Wells' communication indicating the matter had never been discussed with them, he said the staff report was mailed to them several days prior to this meeting. Councilmember Benson was concerned about the truck designation for Dinah Shore Drive, as she thought there were a lot of houses being built in that area. In response, she was advised that Dinah Shore was primarily an industrial area. MR. GREG DINEEN, of Greg Dineen & Associates, Wrightwood, CA, said he represented nine construction associations in California regarding transportation issues. He'd been working on this specific issue since December 2003 when Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia set up a meeting with 12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 Mayors of the Coachella Valley cities to work on uniform truck routes. He said Fred Waring was of specific concern in the City of Palm Desert, as well as in the City of Indian Wells, and he'd been working with both cities for more efficient truck routes. He related that when a truck was traveling down Cook Street and came to Fred Waring, there it was presented with a sign that announced "No trucks from 9:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m." He agreed with Mr. Greenwood that the problem as it existed in 1994 has been resolved; it was now a beautiful road with soundwalls. Additionally, he'd heard the earlier reference to the need for soundwalls on Cook Street, and his industry would agree with that suggestion; anywhere with a lot of truck traffic would benefit from soundwalls. He said the one thing that had to be looked at was efficient goods movement. At the time truck traffic was diverted, his group agreed with it for good reason; but there wasn't one now. The traffic that normally would be traveling those roads would be traveling in somebody else's neighborhood —trucks have to get where they're going. He observed that everyone in the Council Chamber relies on trucks for delivery of goods coming into the City to make deliveries; and the desire was for trucks to be on the roadways at night and not during the day. Efficient goods movement required more trucks being able to make their deliveries at night to keep the costs down for consumers. He said they applauded City staff for bringing the issue forward in the interest of both the industry and consumers. In answer to question, he said it was a 24-hour a day/7-day a week proposition throughout California, with various deliveries requiring various times at various destinations whenever they were needed, pointing out that he not only represented construction interests but the trucking industry in general relative to goods movement. MR. KEN WOOD, Manager of Elms Equipment Rental, Indio, CA, said they recognized the problems in being able to move equipment around the Valley as early as March and April 2003, and prior to 9:00 a.m. has been a problem for them on Fred Waring Drive, as it was for others to make their deliveries in the most direct and efficient way possible. His group undertook a study to look at all the various accepted truck routes in all the cities, and they found there were a lot of holes in the plan; they've since been trying to rectify that situation to make routes the most efficient for time and with the least amount of impact on the environment. Being unable to travel Fred Waring Drive before 9:00 a.m., they've had to utilize Highway 111, which places trucks on a more congested roadway; or they go out onto the freeway and come back in through Monterey, which takes them miles out of their way and makes a negative impact on air pollution and PM10 issues that everyone deals with in the Coachella Valley. He also referred to the meeting with Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, attended by various representatives from the cities, and on behalf of the Desert Contractors' Association, she pursued Assembly Concurrent Resolution 23, which passed both houses unanimously. He quoted a portion of the proclamation given to the Desert 13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 Contractors' Association in recognition of Resolution 23, which specified reduction of urban gridlock in Califomia and the adoption of traffic improvement techniques to reduce the time that trucks are within city limits and county areas and the levels of pollutants discharged, the Legislature strongly urged regional transportation planning agencies, along with cities and counties of the State and the Department of Transportation, to examine the flow of traffic to develop commercial trucking routes that provide the most direct movement through a city and county for this purpose. He pointed out that the State Legislature recognized the problem, and his organization brought it to the City's Public Works Department to ask for help in alleviating it. He appreciated the City Council's consideration. Councilman Spiegel noted the correspondence from Indian Wells Public Works Director Tim Wassil, communicating his city's opposition to lifting the ban of trucks on Fred Waring Drive where jurisdictional boundaries are shared, which consisted of Washington Street to Cook Street. He observed that meant Mr. Wood's business in Indio still couldn't go through Indian Wells. MR. WOOD agreed. He said the Toscana project north of Fred Waring Drive was in Indian Wells, so was that section of roadway. He used the example of a truck coming off the freeway, utilizing Cook because it is a primary road in the Thomas Brothers Map Guide to get to Highway 111, but if it's before 9:00 a.m., the sign he sees straight ahead in Indian Wells says he can't go that way, the same sign was posted eastbound on Fred Waring, as well as westbound into Palm Desert —there was nowhere for him to go. MR. TIM WASSIL, Public Works Director, City of Indian Wells, respectfully registered his city's opposition to lifting the ban of truck routes between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. for the following reasons: — Quality of life for residents of both Indian Wells and Palm Desert will be affected. — The current restriction between 9:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. is very reasonable, especially in light of the fact that most of the roadway, especially in Palm Desert and Indian Wells, runs through residential neighborhoods with backyards along Fred Waring Drive, and there was very little commercial until west of Monterey Avenue in the City of Palm Desert — After reviewing the staff report, his city disagreed with the interpretation of Sections 35701 and 35702 of the California Vehicle Code; their city attorney did not believe that lifting the ban in Palm Desert would automatically nullify the City of Indian Wells' right to restrict truck routes in its jurisdiction. However, if Indian Wells chooses to continue with the ban between 9:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m., trucks coming from 1-10 and traveling southbound on Cook Street to Fred Waring will be forced to turn right into the City of Palm Desert, 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 affecting its neighborhoods and traveling along its schools during hours that likely will be impacted by truck traffic. — His city disagreed with the issue of signage and trucks being caught unaware of approved routes, because the City of Indian Wells offered and was permitted to install advance signage on Cook Street as far north as Country Club Drive to let trucks know about the restriction ahead. Signs were present on Fred Waring Drive east of Washington Street as well. — If the truck is traveling in a site specific direction, there is no restriction; they could travel anytime directly to their destination. Responding to question about City of Indian Wells' intentions for widening Highway 111 to six lanes for more efficient east -west traffic flow, he said they were actually considering widening that route and would soon be before their City Council with a request to begin the environmental process. He further agreed with the comment that Indian Wells' restriction forcing everything to turn right would be a matter for attorneys to reach a conclusion. Upon inquiry about how much of Indian Wells' jurisdiction was located west of Cook Street on Fred Waring, he said it would be the section between Cook Street and Phyllis Jackson, which he estimated to be one -quarter of a mile, or about a block between the signals. When asked what specific harm would be done to Indian Wells if Palm Desert lifted the truck restriction between Monterey Avenue and Cook Street, with Indian Wells likely retaining the ban on its side at Phyllis Jackson, he said if a truck was traveling eastbound on Fred Waring Drive, as long as Indian Wells was allowed to place sufficient advance signage indicating the restriction up ahead, they would not have a problem with it. Mayor Ferguson commented that Palm Desert and Indian Wells have spent some $60 million widening Fred Waring to three lanes east and west only to ban trucks from traveling on it. Mr. Wassil answered it would be up to his City Council to lift the ban on commercial truck traffic if it chose to do so in the future. Mr. Greenwood clarified that the staff report's reference to Vehicle Code Section 35702 was included as a cautionary note that Palm Desert's actions could have an impact on its neighboring city; it was not a statement of fact. Councilman Crites observed that there was considerable opposition originally from Indian Wells when the prospect of widening Fred Waring Drive was initiated. Mr. Greenwood responded that staffs experience with Indian Wells had been a good one overall, and Mr. Wassil had been instrumental in getting the Fred Waring widening project accomplished. Councilman Spiegel commented that he felt Palm Desert had done an excellent job of widening Fred Waring, and then Indian Wells widened it; but past that and into La Quinta, it went down to four lanes and two lanes, then 15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 it opened slightly, and then you were in Indio, which was just as bad. He believed it was an overall problem for the entire area, not just Palm Desert's. He felt it would still be difficult for truck drivers to know where they could go in the other cities Responding to Councilmember Benson's concern for the Washington Street designation now that the Darby Road School was there, Mr. Greenwood answered that the school was located in the City of La Quinta, which had already designated its portion of Washington Street as a truck route, as were all the portions in the County. He went on to say the last time Palm Desert addressed truck routes was before the eastern part of the City was annexed. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly suggested looking at the entire truck route management plan. Councilmembers agreed, further suggesting that the Cities of Indian Wells, La Quinta, and Indio be included in the discussion for consistency of applying the truck route designation. Upon inquiry, Mayor Pro Tem Kelly said he didn't ever recall discussing Valley -wide truck routes while serving on CVAG's Transportation Committee, but agreed it was a good idea. Mayor Ferguson thanked Mr. Wassil for his input today and recalled the various discussions between the two City Councils six years ago that finally led to Indian Wells' agreeing to cooperatively widen Fred Waring. He was glad to hear they were also now considering widening Highway 111 and further looked forward to working with Indian Wells to consider a master plan for trucks. He empathized with both Mr. Dineen and Mr. Wood, because roads were meant for vehicles —they weren't playgrounds or for kids to skateboard on —but to move commerce and people from one end of the City to the other. He added to the extent that traffic could be pulled off Highway 111 and put on the $60 million new road with soundwalls on both sides from end to end, it made good sense to him. Therefore, he favored continuing the matter in order to look at the commercial traffic routing system overall. Councilman Crites asked staff to consider the commercial areas that have restrictions on the latest hour in the evening that receiving can occur (i.e., Albertsons Shopping Center at Deep Canyon/Highway 111), which may provide a time limit on through traffic at night. He felt the morning issue was a bigger one for local folks, more than someone needing to have traffic passing by at 2:00 a.m. Responding to question, Mr. Greenwood affirmed that trucks that were on their route from its origin to their destination could essentially travel on any 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 public street in the course of their business, except those streets with legitimate weight limits due to bridges, etc. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly commented that if a truck was headed somewhere on the east end, it needed to stay on the freeway until the exit closest to their destination. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly moved to continue consideration of Ordinance No. 1115 to the meeting of April 13, 2006. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 5-0 vote. For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO. 1112 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2.52 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS 2.52.420, 2.52.425, AND 2.52.430 RELATIVE TO ADVANCEMENTS WITHIN SALARY SCHEDULES. Councilman Crites moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1112. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 5-0 vote. X. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO A DECISION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE RELATIVE TO HISTORIC SITE CLASS DESIGNATION OF PALM DESERT LODGE, LOCATED AT 74-527 HIGHWAY 111 (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND DEEP CANYON ROAD), PALM DESERT Case No. HPC 06-01 (Palm Desert Lodge, LLC, Michael Noto, and George Demos as Trustee of the Demos Trust, and Daniel Brush as Trustee of the Peter Demos Living Trust, Appellants). Mayor Ferguson noted the earlier request to continue this matter to the meeting of April 27. Councilman Spiegel moved to continue this matter to the City Council Meeting of April 27, 2006. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by 5-0 vote. B. REPORT ON THE HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE. Mayor Ferguson commented that because this and the previous item were related, he wished to see it continued to April 27 also. Mayor Ferguson moved to continue the matter to the City Council Meeting of April 27, 2006. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 5-0 vote. 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 C. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF FACADE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE ENTERPRISE RENT -A -CAR CENTER LOCATED AT 73-088 HIGHWAY 111, PALM DESERT (Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Applicant). In response to Councilman Spiegel's comment about the high dollar amount, Project Administrator Bryce White answered that the Applicant did fit into the program, with footage of 180 feet (staff report reflects an incorrect amount of 120 feet), three parcels that are joined together. He said the City had attempted to work with the previous tenant at this location, Radioactive, to no avail; and the owner wasn't inclined to make any improvements, although he did paint the building to be similar to Castelli's Restaurant next door. It was felt the amount of money specified was considerably less than that which would have resulted from an Owner Participation Agreement, with this being one of the most blighted properties in the commercial area. Therefore, staff felt the requested funds would be well spent. He confirmed that Enterprise would be putting in over $1 million for the project. Further, he answered that there seemed to be sufficient support for the Alessandro Business Improvement District to be formed. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve $100,000 in Facade Enhancement Program consideration funds to Enterprise Rent-A-Car for "The Enterprise Rent-A-Car Center" located at 73-088 Highway 111 — funds are available in Account No. 400-4800-454-3875. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by 5-0 vote. D. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR PARKING LOT REHABILITATION AT 72-900 HIGHWAY 111 AND 45-480 PORTOLA AVENUE (CONTRACT NO. C24620, PROJECT NO. 750-06). Responding to question about Westfield's plans near the Highway 111 site, Mr. Ortega replied that they had considered it as an altemative for the new store coming to Palm Desert but had since decided otherwise. In further response, it was noted that the Police Department was already operating its substation from the former Visitor Center. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, award the subject contract to International Pavement Solutions, Inc., San Bernardino, California, in the amount of $67,200, authorize a 10% contingency and the Mayor to execute said contract for rehabilitation of the parking lots at the former Visitor Center (72-900 Highway 111) and the Portola Community Center (45-480 Portola Avenue). 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 E. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) REGARDING MEASURES TO MINIMIZE AND MITIGATE TAKE OF THE COACHELLA VALLEY FRINGE -TOED LIZARD. Mayor Ferguson noted his conflict of interest with the subject matter, and he recused himself from the Chamber. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor Pro Tem to execute the subject MOU Amendment. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 4-0 vote, with Ferguson ABSENT. F. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ALLOW A GRAND OPENING BANNER FOR A PERIOD OF 60 DAYS VERSUS THE CODE - PRESCRIBED 30-DAY LIMITATTHE HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER AT 35-850 MONTEREY AVENUE, PALM DESERT Case No. PP 04-13 Amendment #1 Banner (Lowes HIW, Inc., Applicant). Planning Manager Steve Smith stated that staff did not support the request for the extended grand opening banner, as it would pose a problem of precedence for denying such requests in the future. Councilmember Benson commented she felt everyone was aware that Lowes was there. MR. JACK MANDEL, Senior Site Development Manager for Lowes, Carlsbad, CA, said he was excited to announce that they officially opened for business yesterday and were pleased to be part of the City of Palm Desert. He explained that they asked for extra time for their banner because of the considerable amount of construction work going on in front of their store due to complications they'd experienced with Southem California Edison's moving of their transmission poles. The street improvements could not be completed until that happened, which he said has been over a year and a half since they applied for the relocation. Therefore, they wanted to display the banner until sometime after the street improvements were done, with more of a grand opening planned for that time; he estimated about 30 more days' worth of construction. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly felt the request was reasonable, especially with all the surrounding construction. Councilman Spiegel agreed, noting that Lowes had built a beautiful store in Palm Desert, but the City may have let them down in getting the stoplight moved and everything undergrounded so they could have a great entrance. 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 Councilman Crites disagreed that the utility undergrounding was the City's responsibility, it was Edison's scheduling. Further, the City didn't let anyone down; the presence of many cars and Tots of lights there indicated to him that the store was open. Mr. Greenwood commented that all of the street improvements in front of Lowes, including the traffic signal and utility pole relocation, were their responsibility. He felt their progress had slowed substantially, and the level of cooperation had also decreased noticeably now that the store was open. Mayor Ferguson also agreed it was well known to anyone in Palm Desert that Lowes was now open, especially after participating in yesterday's grand opening and visiting with many who'd already been to the store. He didn't feel the request would add any significant benefit and agreed with staff that the City would likely be inundated with requests for temporary banners if this was approved. However, he said the City would do whatever it could do otherwise to promote their store. In answer to question about relocating the stoplight, Mr. Mandel said it wasn't a matter of money, it was part of the construction process. The poles have to be out of the way to complete the pavement, curb, and gutter to establish the location for the base of the pole, which had to be in before the stoplight could be moved. He added that he was somewhat taken aback by Mr. Greenwood's comment about being uncooperative, because everything was contingent on Edison relocating the poles, but he said they were close to being finished. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, reject the request for a 60-day approval for the subject grand opening banner. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by 3-2 vote, with Kelly and Spiegel voting NO. Xl. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE RELATIVE TO IDENTIFYING A POTENTIAL HISTORIC SITE, PALM DESERT LODGE, 74-527 HIGHWAY 111 (Continued from the meetings of November 10 and December 8, 2005, and February 9, 2006). Mayor Ferguson suggested that this item also be continued along with the other two Historic Preservation items. Councilman Spiegel moved to continue this matter to the meeting of April 27, 2006. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by 5-0 vote. 20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 B. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2006 (Continued from the meeting of March 9, 2006). Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the Minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by 5-0 vote. C. RESOLUTION NO. 06-33 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ACTING FOR ITSELF AND AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF PALM DESERT COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (UNIVERSITY PARK) TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF ITS SPECIAL TAX BONDS, SERIES 2006A, IN A PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS ($50,000,000) AND APPROVING CERTAIN DOCUMENTS AND TAKING CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (Continued from the meeting of March 9, 2006). Mr. Yrigoyen commented that this action was the final leg in establishment of the University Park Community Facilities District (CFD). It would authorize the initial bond issue, which is the first series of $50 million; the CFD was initially approved for $70 million, and staff will be back to the City Council at a later date should the additional money be needed. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 06-33. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by 4-0 vote, with Kelly ABSENT. D. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION DECISION, DENYING A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF 14-FOOT HIGH SOUND BARRIER WALL SYSTEM (GLASS BLOCK TYPE) AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND PAINTER'S PATH (72-191 HIGHWAY 111), PALM DESERT Case No. MISC. 06-04 (South Beach Restaurant & Nightclub, Applicant) (Continued from the meeting of March 9, 2006). Councilman Crites moved to continue consideration of this matter to the meeting of April 13, 2006. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 4-0 vote, with Kelly ABSENT. 21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 XII. OLD BUSINESS NOTE: THE FOLLOWING ITEM WAS LISTED ON AN AGENDA ADDENDUM POSTED 72 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE PALM DESERT PARTNERSHIP DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. Mr. Ortega noted that representatives from the utility companies were present today, and he referred to the staff report provided. He felt the excellent report provided by Southern California Edison's Gene Rodrigues last Friday was pretty comprehensive about what the program involved. He said the new report provided today includes benefits from The Gas Company, whose existing programs were valued at approximately $2.7 million; and they will enrich the new program by $5 million, for a total $7.7 million commitment by The Gas Company. MR. FRANK SPASARO, representing Southern California Gas Company, said he was pleased to be representing his company in the Energy Efficient Partnership Demonstration Project with the City of Palm Desert. He noted that they had nearly tripled their current program effort for energy efficiency with more installations of high -efficiency furnaces, high -efficiency water heaters and pool heaters; and they planned to do some innovative installations of hybrid gas -electric technologies for air conditioning and water pumping, which were two big energy consumers in Palm Desert. Additionally, he said they planned to do more focus on new construction, as well as enhancing their focus on low-income customers in the area. Details of the report were still being worked out as they went, but they hoped to have them all worked out in the next month. He believed it was a very robust increase in natural gas energy efficiency and was excited about it. Upon question, he affirmed that the programs designed here were intended to be replicated elsewhere. MS. LINDA ZIEGLER, Senior Vice President for Southern California Edison, said she was also pleased to be before the City Council and wished to reiterate her company's commitment to energy efficiency. Over the next three years, they had set a goal of achieving over three billion kilowatt hours in savings; and as far as future generation in the State of California, its first resource would be energy efficiency — it was critically important to the future supply. She felt the subject partnership between Southern California Edison, Southem California Gas, City of Palm Desert, and The Energy Coalition, was a really good model going forward and could be a showcase for what could happen across California to bring energy efficiency to all the communities. She related some of the elements they were putting forth as demonstration 22 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 projects here really hadn't been done before, a key one being early replacement of air conditioning, with the City bringing ordinances and, hopefully, financing programs to make it happen. The partnership was really centered on each entity bringing their strengths together for success, and Southern California Edison heartily supported it and hoped the City did too. Mr. Ortega said in addition to the recommendations on the staff report, there was also a resolution that needed to be acted on for this matter in order to create the necessary staff positions and salary schedules. Councilman Crites moved to: 1) By Minute Motion, Approve the City's participation in the Palm Desert Partnership Project; 2) by Minute Motion, authorize the creation of the Office of Energy Management and the appropriate personnel; 3) by Minute Motion, appropriate $100,000 to promote the project campaign for City residents and businesses; 4) by Minute Motion, authorize an amendment to Contract No. C24690 with EcoMotion, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $20,000 for assistance with development of the Implementation Plan for the Palm Desert Partnership Demonstration Project; 5) by Minute Motion, direct staff to draft a new construction ordinance establishing minimum standards for energy efficiency; 6) by Minute Motion, authorize the Director of Finance to appropriate funding for the above expenditures from Unallocated General Fund Reserves; 7) waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 06-43, amending portions of Res. No. 06-34, Exhibit "A," Salary Schedule, Salary Ranges, and Allocated Classifications, to create two new clerical positions to be assigned to the Office of Energy Management. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 5-0 vote. Councilman Crites expressed appreciation to both utility companies for their remarkable willingness, flexibility, and commitment to ideas, from the local representatives to the corporate offices. He thanked City staff and the Mayor for their diligence in this effort as well. XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DDA) WITH GREGORY & GREGORY, LLC, AND SUMMARY REPORT FOR 0.14 ACRES LOCATED AT 74-039 SAN MARINO CIRCLE, PALM DESERT (JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY). Mr. Ortega stated the public hearing was necessary in order to solicit comment from anyone objecting to the sale of the subject property by the Redevelopment Agency. He noted the report that was provided and offered that staff was available for questions. 23 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 Chairman/Mayor Ferguson declared the public hearing open and invited anyone wishing to comment on the matter to do so at this time. With no public testimony offered, he declared the public hearing closed. Member Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt: 1) City Council Resolution No. 06-37, approving the sale by the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency to Gregory & Gregory, LLC, Palm Desert, California, of approximately 0.14 acres of real property on a parcel located on San Marino Circle, Palm Desert, California; 2) Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. 522, approving the sale to Gregory & Gregory, LLC, Palm Desert , California, of approximately 0.14 acres of real property on a parcel located on San Marino Circle in Palm Desert, California. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by 5-0 vote. B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CEQA (CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT) FINDINGS AND THE COACHELLA VALLEY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/NATURAL COMMUNITIES CONSERVATION PLAN (CVMSHCP/NCCP) IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT AND ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A LOCAL DEVELOPMENT MITIGATION FEE (Continued from the meetings of February 23 and March 9, 2006). Mayor Ferguson noted his conflict with this issue; he recused himself from the Chamber and asked Mayor Pro Tem Kelly to preside over this public hearing. Mr. Drell commented that the ordinance on the fee was not being considered at this time, as there were still some details to be worked out. Although, he noted that there was no great urgency, since the fee would not go into effect until permits were issued by the agencies, which he felt would provide the time necessary to resolve the remaining issues. He went on to say that while the City Council had previously approved the Plan by Minute Motion, this was the official resolution to adopt it. Upon question, he confirmed that it was ready for such action. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony SUPPORTING or OPPOSING the matter. With no public testimony offered, he declared the public hearing closed. Councilmember Benson moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 06-28, approving the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan and Implementing Agreement. Motion was seconded by Spiegel. Councilman Crites observed he'd heard comments around the Valley that Palm Desert supported the Plan because it already had growth and 24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 development, with other cities now taking the burden. He stated for the record that 20 years ago when the entire Coachella Valley had issues regarding fringe -toed lizards, it approved the second Habitat Conservation Plan in the United States. Almost all of the 29,000 acres that have since been conserved were directly north of the City of Palm Desert. He said they all could have been annexed into the City for all the same kinds of country clubs and commercial developments that other cities want to do. Therefore, Palm Desert had given at the bank of conservation and had gladly done so, not only there but also in buying hillside lands around it, and has also done a lot of other things for millions of dollars that it wouldn't have had to spend. He felt no hesitation in approving the plan with the knowledge that Palm Desert had cast its lot with both growth and conservation for the last 20 years. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly called for the vote, and the motion carried 4-0, with Ferguson ABSENT. C. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE APPROVED PRECISE PLAN TO ALLOW LIMITED OUTDOOR DISPLAY OF MERCHANDISE AT THE HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER AT 35-850 MONTEREY AVENUE, PALM DESERT Case No. PP 04-13 Amendment#1 (Lowes HIW, Inc., Applicant) (Regency HomesNersailles, Appellant). Planning Manager Steve Smith reported that Lowes was seeking an amendment to the conditions of approval to allow the limited outdoor display of merchandise. He referred to a rendering showing the alcove area to the south of the main store entrance, with mostly lawn and garden fumiture-type merchandise, and it would include a Woody's Hot Dog Stand in that area as well. He said outside of the Garden Center, they proposed display of live plant material, as well as storage and display of materials such as brick, block, etc., outside the Lumber Yard. Lastly, they proposed a series of up to six small storage sheds on display along the north wall of the building. At the Planning Commission Meeting of February 21, the request was approved on a 4-1 vote (Finerty NO); four persons from the residential tract to the west spoke to ask for a delay in the action. He said their concerns ranged from the Lowes sign, the unscreened building, the display of merchandise, the parking lot lights, to the general mass of the building. In seeking a delay, their goal was to encourage Lowes to participate in the landscaping on their side of the street, in that on Lowes' side of the street, there was a restriction on the size of plant material under the Edison power lines. However, the Planning Commission determined that in each case for the outdoor display of 25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 merchandise, it was displayed in an appropriate environment consistent with the customers' ultimate use of the products displayed and that they were an appropriate and logical extension of this type of business. He said other concerns of the neighbors relative to the signs, building mass, landscaping and lights were determined not to be germane to the item before the Commission at that time. He noted the March 3 timely appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, citing reasons that the outdoor display would be unsightly and have a bad visual impact on the surrounding area. Upon question, he affirmed that the proper scope of the appeal was outdoor displays, not the brightness of the Lowes sign. He went on to explain that a series of conditions was placed on the Planning Commission's approval, limiting the area, height, and expanse of the display in the four areas, with one amendment made at the Planning Commission meeting, which was outside the Lumber Yard area. Originally, he said a series of walls had been proposed to contain the display of merchandise; Lowes suggested an alternative to screen the area across the porte cochere, and that amendment was made with the Planning Commission's action. Subsequently, Lowes appeared at the Architectural Review Commission last week with that proposal, and it was approved. He said staff recommended the appeal be denied and the Planning Commission action be affirmed. Responding to question by Councilman Crites, Mr. Smith said Lowes would have to take out the concrete presently there and plant a series of vines to cover the screening material. Councilman Crites added that he hoped there was a master landscape agreement in place that would address the vines' viability. Mayor Ferguson commented that he and Councilmember Benson, Mr. Ortega, Mr. Smith, and Landscape Manager Spencer Knight all met with the Appellant, who hadn't planted any of their perimeter landscaping either. Therefore, both the Lowes and the Versailles Homes landscape plans were referred to the City's Landscape Committee for final review and approval. Councilman Crites referred to the north wall of the building where Lowes planned to display the small storage sheds, asking if they planned to use plantings or anything else to reduce the look of a bunch of storage sheds sitting outside. He's seen them in other places, and they quickly ended up looking like old, dented sheds sitting alongside a building, and he didn't think the trees planned for the site wouldn't be tall enough to provide adequate screening. 26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 Mr. Smith responded that when it reviewed the matter, Architectural Review said if Lowes went forward with this part of the plan, two things would be required: 1) Amendment of the landscaping plan; 2) screening of that area through a combination of landscaping and walls to avoid the appearance of a bunch of sheds along the side of the building, which would both require final approval by the City. Councilmember Benson asked how much garden supply would be displayed, because the rendering appeared to show a few trays here and there. However, on the site, there were rows and rows of it, and it looked like an outside garden. She recalled that when the store was originally approved, the City said it didn't want any outside displays in order to avoid having it look like Home Depot; and now having just opened, it looks worse already. She opposed having all that garden supply out there, although a few patio tables would be acceptable. Councilman Crites observed that perhaps at Home Depot the intention was good, but sometime afterward, the outside became all junked up; he agreed with Councilmember Benson that it could also happen in this case as time goes by. He asked what sort of mechanisms were in place to help the City ensure that the project retains some aesthetic sense. Mr. Smith replied he believed there were conditions specific to the Garden Center area where they were required to maintain a seven - foot clear pedestrian way in back of the loading zone across the front of the store; and that the display of live plant material associated with the Garden Center was limited to plant material only. Fertilizer, bags of soil, grass seed, potting containers, etc., were not permitted on the subject amendment. However, he offered to support any strengthening of language as may be desired by the City Council. Mayor Ferguson expressed his concern about the loosely worded, "...outdoor furniture and the like," which seemed rather open-ended. He said yesterday it looked absolutely spotless, and he and Mr. Ortega walked around and looked for outdoor display of materials. Other than the plants with keystone blocks in front of them, which he liked, he didn't see sheds or anything else. However, he agreed with Councilmember Benson's sentiment that Lowes not become like Home Depot; but if a limited exception was to be approved, first he wondered what sort of precedent would be set, and second how to make sure the exception was truly limited. Mr. Smith answered that with respect to the alcove area around the entrance to the store, there was a plan for it. The first premise is that 27 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 nothing can encroach into the seven -foot pedestrian area; and display of the merchandise needs to be what is shown on the plan submitted —a swing set, a tent, benches, barbecue grill, a hotdog stand. He confirmed that he would be able to discem what the City was approving, but he also felt the store manager needed to make a commitment to live up to it. MR. JACK MANDEL, representing Home Depot Stores, responded that their program was not the same as their competition, and he said they would live up to the condition. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly offered that a lot of his judgment would be based on what he'd seen already at their stores overall, which he felt were nice looking and well kept. Mayor Ferguson agreed, noting that the La Quinta store was very clean, but he didn't recall a lot of outdoor display of materials there either. Mayor Ferguson declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony on the subject case. MR. ROBERT WILKINSON, representing Regency Homes and Versailles Homeowners Association, 2 Chateau Court, Rancho Mirage, CA, restated the conditions of approval by the Planning Commission and provided displays of photographs taken over the past weekend that illustrated violation of those conditions by his perception. He was particularly concerned with the stacking of materials adjacent to the Lumber Yard, which was way beyond four pallets high and several deep. He confirmed that the photos were taken when the store was open for business. He went on to provide an illustration of the landscaping that was represented previously and the view shown, which he felt came close to screening from the street what might have been outdoor display of merchandise, although it probably wouldn't mature to that degree in his lifetime. Mayor Ferguson noted to Mr. Wilkinson the conditions being proposed, and City staff being asked about their enforceability and their intelligibility by Lowes. Upon asking him if he had a problem with those conditions, Mr. Wilkinson said he didn't think there should be any outdoor display of merchandise, as it would never be controllable with a multimillion dollar organization such as Lowes. Councilman Crites commented that with regard to criticism of the landscaping across the street from Versailles Homes, the tree selection for the landscaping done on its inside wall was also remarkably inadequate jacarandas don't grow well in the desert, 28 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 especially in a windy area; and bottle trees don't develop a canopy very early nor do they do well in the wind either. Therefore, he suggested that while the Appellant was illustrating how long it took for landscaping to mature, perhaps they should also take another look at their own plan with species that probably would not or should not be allowed anywhere in that windbelt. Upon question about widening the west side of Monterey Avenue, Mr. Wilkinson said he had a schedule of events that needed to take place before the Monterey widening and improvements can be initiated. He said it was delayed because of the need for relocating some of the guide poles associated with the power lines on Lowes' side of the street. He commented that today Edison was actually correcting the site of a guide pole that was relocated incorrectly two weeks ago. Further, he replied that it should be taken care of by June, and it would also be contingent upon the outcome of remedies being discussed today, such as the median island being discussed by the Cities of Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage. Additionally, he responded that as far as the plantings on the east side of their wall, it was dependent upon the street improvements and the tum lane to be installed. He said their landscaping was slated for May 25 and the related improvements to be complete —there was also sidewalk to be poured and a traffic signal to be moved, the deceleration and turn lanes —all waiting relocation of the guide poles. Now that they were moved, they could start; their landscape plans were approved in 2002 and were ready to go. Easements had been granted to Lowes to facilitate relocation of the overhead lines, and he felt they'd been good neighbors in postponing their plans —there would have been poles in the middle of the traffic lanes had they gone ahead with their plans without regard to safety or what was there. He suggested some consideration be given to the west side of Monterey Avenue for additional screening by Lowes, affirming that he was asking Lowes to participate in some additional landscaping for his development. He also asked that consideration be given for screening in the median island, with 250 feet of a nose for a tum lane at the intersection of Monterey/Gerald Ford, and the plan is cobblestone without any screening or landscaping/plant material whatsoever. Beyond that, he said there were trees that were about 80 feet apart, which would not provide a significant amount of screening for the Versailles neighborhood. He said when they left the Planning Commission, instruction was given after the fact to "work it out;" they'd made an effort to communicate without much cooperation. Mayor Ferguson related that after seeing correspondence from both sides in this matter, he didn't take favor with either. He went on to say 29 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 City representatives met with Mr. Wilkinson's employer yesterday, and the Versailles and Lowes landscape plans were reviewed, taking note of the fact that the Cities of Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage had yet another plan for the median, all three of which hadn't been touched. He was concerned that light was spilling over onto the homes in Versailles that had nothing to do with the subject appeal, so he suggested an approach where Lowes, the City, and Peter Solomon work together to modify their landscape plans, including Councilman Crites' comments about suitable plant palette, through the City of Palm Desert's Landscape Committee. However, that was a whole separate issue from outdoor displays, and he felt a solution had been suggested for the one thing that he thought was of significant concern and received such a concession from Mr. Solomon that the subject appeal was filed essentially to get Lowes' attention on the lighting problem. If the lighting problem went away, there would not be a concern about outdoor displays. MR. WILKINSON agreed that the vehicle was the outdoor display of merchandise, but when he hit on those issues with the Planning Commission, he was told that he deviated from the real concerns. He confirmed that the real concern was the whole picture —not only the outdoor display of merchandise but the light shed coming from the sign, and he thought the solution for one solves the other. Mayor Ferguson believed there was a potential solution for the one that wasn't the subject of this hearing, and he and his colleagues had offered comments about keeping the subject issue contained, which he felt solved both of Mr. Wilkinson's issues. MR. DAVE CLARK, resident of the Versailles development, Rancho Mirage, CA, said he visited the Lowes store Sunday and was very pleased with what he saw —everything was neat and clean, there was lots of room to walk around, and there was nothing sitting outside. He was impressed. But he was concerned about the request for outdoor storage, as he preferred everything be in its place nice and neat. He also visited the Palm Springs Lowes to see how it handled outdoor display and was shocked by the number of things sitting outside. He wondered why Lowes didn't build a bigger store in Palm Desert if it had so much merchandise that it needed to store it outside already; whereas, he could see where that this may be necessary 20 years from now when new lines of product were introduced. He recommended placing restrictions on any such storage to keep it out of public view and/or keep it nicely displayed. He also requested that there be restrictions on the type of item placed outside, also agreeing with the prior suggestion for screening; he felt 30 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 it would be better for all concerned. In response to question from Councilman Spiegel, he related that he could not stand to go past Home Depot because of all the stuff they had outside, in addition to the issues with the loading area in front of that store. He was pleased to see Lowes' nice loading area on the north side of the building. MR. MICHAEL SULLIVAN, with Regency Homes, said he looked at Lowes closely and felt the restrictions imposed by the Planning Commission in order to maintain the neatness of the store were warranted. Although, within the first week of their opening, he said Lowes didn't appear to be following those conditions, such as the planting area that came out to the yellow line without the seven -foot clearance. Additionally, he said the stacking of pallets was higher than four pallets (6'). If the City was to give them permission for outdoor storage, he felt Lowes should abide by the rules that were set for them. MR. MANDEL related that the store was just opened, and there was still quite a bit going on with that activity. Merchandise was sitting outside temporarily and was now inside the store. Regarding the stacking of pallets, he said the store manager explained to the Planning Commission that one pallet high just didn't work; there were special orders to be picked up by contractors that went under the Lumber canopy until that time. He said sometimes they have to be stacked high enough to fill the order, and part of the mitigation for that problem was their proposal for screening the front to alleviate the visual impact. Councilman Crites suggested adding Condition No. 6 to the resolution, which would state, "...Lowes agrees to correct violations of the above conditions if noted by the City within 24 hours." Mr. Mandel agreed, adding that they meant to do what they said they would. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Ferguson declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Crites moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 06-42, denying the appeal and affirming the action of the Planning Commission to allow limited outdoor display of merchandise at Lowes, subject to conditions, as amended to include Condition No. 6, stating that Lowes agrees to correct any violation of the outdoor display conditions within 24 hours of being notified by the City of such a violation. Motion was seconded by Spiegel. Councilmember Benson said she wanted to ensure City staff closely monitored the store for adherence to the conditions, as she did not 31 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 support any outdoor display or storage. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly agreed that there was a definite difference between display and storage. Mayor Ferguson called for the vote, and the motion carried by 5-0 vote. XIV. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER None B. CITY ATTORNEY None C. CITY CLERK None D. PUBLIC SAFETY o Fire Department None o Police Department E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. Stone Eaale - Councilman Crites provided the City Manager's Office with correspondence from Ms. Antoinette Carver, noting a number of issues having to do with the former drainage area/stream from the Stone Eagle Golf Project and the problems that have now occurred as a result. He asked that copies of the letter be made for all the City Councilmembers and for a response at the City Council's next meeting. 2. Visitor Center Sianaae - Councilman Spiegel said he and Councilman Crites recently met with the Visitor Information Center Manager and other City staff to look at sites for directional signs to the Visitor Center. He said Councilman Crites suggested a billboard; one has now become available 32 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2006 along Interstate 10 just past the exit to Palm Springs. Cost to rent the billboard for one year would be $70,000. Upon question, it was noted that the Marketing Committee had already considered the billboard but decided they didn't have a budget for it at this time. Councilman Crites suggested it either be sent back to the Marketing Committee for review, or if they have looked at it, talk about it at the next City Council Meeting. Mayor Ferguson stated for the record that it was probable that he represented the billboard company; therefore, he wouldn't be participating in that discussion. With City Council concurrence, it was decided to either refer the matter to the Marketing Committee, if it hadn't already been formally considered ,or place it on the next City Council Meeting Agenda. o City Council Committee Reports: None o City Council Comments: None XV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - C None XVI. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Crites, second by Ferguson, and unanimous vote of the City Council, Mayor Ferguson adjoumed the meeting at 7:05 p.m. ATTEST: RACHELLE D. KLASSE'ITY CLERK N, CK Th CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 33