Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-01-24MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2013 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M. Mayor Harnik convened the meeting at 3:16 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Pro Tem Jean M. Benson Councilman Van G. Tanner Councilmember Susan Marie Weber Mayor Jan C. Harnik Absent: Councilman Robert A. Spiegel Also Present: John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Bo Chen, City Engineer Russell Grance, Director of Building & Safety Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Martin Alvarez, Director of Economic Development Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer Janet M. Moore, Director of Housing Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works Frankie Riddle, Director of Special Programs Stephen Y. Aryan, Risk Manager Kevin Vest, Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept. Bill Sullivan, Asst. Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept. Michael Bianco, Admin. Sgt., Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept. Grace L. Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk Upon question by Mayor Harnik, Ms. Klassen confirmed that today's meeting agendas had ail been posted in accordance with the Brown Act. 11I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A (CLOSED SESSION ITEMS) MR. GREGORY M. HATTON, 20281 Birch Street, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA, an attorney representing Lawrence Pasternack on Closed Session Agenda Item B. (1) below, noted that he'd just presented City Councilmembers with a binder of materials that were largely items presented to the Planning Commission with some MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 brief updates to which he called attention. Responding to question, he said most of the information that the City Council already had in today's agenda packet in a similar booklet was the same; the new binder provided some updates since the Planning Commission hearing on December 18, and it also responded to some of the information brought up for the first time at that Planning Commission hearing. He recalled for City Council previously being before them on this matter last fall prior to a Closed Session, begging the City to enforce Bighorn's setbacks. The City Council decided not to do that; consequently, his client filed a lawsuit arising out of setback violations on the lot immediately adjoining his in Bighorn, which had been put under construction prior to his first appearance before the City Council. He said the Superior Court entered a Preliminary Injunction, stopping construction on that site due to substantial evidence that building was occurring in the setbacks, and the City is a part of that. He added that they were concerned because in response to that lawsuit by one citizen, the only one who's ever complained about a setback violation at Bighorn in 15 years, the City's response is directed at litigation only for the purpose of attempting to win a lawsuit. He related that the update most important in the booklet just provided is the fourth tab labeled, "PC Hearing Excerpts," where quotes by Principal Planner Tony Bagato, along with Assistant City Attorney Hargreaves, are excerpted and give Council the Plaintiffs view on what are believed to be highly inaccurate statements about what's driving all of this. He felt this information was easy to understand, and if someone believes they are being taken out of context, also included is the Court Reporter's transcript in its entirety, which his client hired in order to transcribe the proceedings (Exhibit "P" in the new booklet). He went on to say that this is followed in Section 2, pages 13-14, where a number of excerpts and admissions relative to the City allowing the HOA to determine its own setbacks, as well as admissions about the fact that the primary purpose of the new setback plan is directed at the pending litigation, are provided. Therefore, the Plaintiff doesn't think for a number of reasons —some legal, some factual —that a City, which gets sued for, essentially, refusing to enforce its own setback laws, can respond to that lawsuit by changing the law, making what it's done wrong in the past legal. He said it wasn't the way the American system of government was supposed to work, and it wasn't right. He urged Council to take a close look at the "PC Hearing Excerpts" during Closed Session before it decides that the recommended course of action is the right thing for govemment to do. He reiterated that this was a lawsuit involving two parcels at Bighom; the City is a party to it, and the only conceivable purpose for changing the setbacks from the large estate -size that they are down to five feet on each side is to exonerate both the City's Planning Department and Bighorn itself for not enforcing the City's setbacks — there could be no other purpose. it's admitted to by Mr. Bagato in his statements. If no one has complained about the setbacks in Bighorn for 15 years, he wondered why it was all of a sudden now so difficult for Bighorn to comply with them. The "Deposition Excerpts" in the booklet show that neither Bighorn nor the Planning Department ever made any good faith attempt to comply with the setbacks at Bighorn, and that's why they are where they are today. He cautioned that the only plausible effect of the new setbacks would be to wipe out the claims by one American citizen that the setback laws have been violated — nothing else needs to 2 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 be changed. He referred to diagrams in the booklet under "Exhibit Tab B," that show starting in 2002, Bighorn had its landscape architectural consultants create lot diagrams for the development that are consistent with the current setbacks in place for 15 years (located on "Table of Development Standards," Tab "A"). He opined that there was no difficulty or magic in complying with the existing setbacks, but when compared to the deposition testimony of Bighorn executives (Tab "F") and City Planners (Tab "H"), it could be found that the reason they didn't comply with those easily diagramed setbacks for each of the lots was because they didn't want to. Now, after coming before City Council last fall to implore it to begin enforcing the City's setback laws at Bighom, a conscious decision was made not to do that. The City gets sued, and its response coming out of the Planning Department is to take care of it by changing the law to get rid of the lawsuit. He didn't think that could be done. IV. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION Reauest for Closed Session: A. Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: 1) Property: APNs 624-440-012, 624-440-017, 624-441-007, 624-431-029, 624-430-006, 624-431-011, 624-431-016, 624-440-006, 624-430-018, 624-440-019, 624-431-020, 624-440-008, 624-431-001 Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Janet M. Moore/City of Palm Desert/ Successor Agency to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency/ Palm Desert Housing Authority Property Owner: City of Palm Desert/Successor Agency to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency/Palm Desert Housing Authority Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment 2) Property: Lease Property - Parkview Professional Office Complex, 73710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite No. 116, Palm Desert Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Paul S. Gibson/City of Palm Desert Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Other Parties: Assembly Committee on Rules, State of California Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment 3 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 3) Property: 74-833 Joni Drive (APN 624-071-014), Palm Desert Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Martin Alvarez/Ruth Ann Moore/ City of Palm Desert Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment B. Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Govemment Code Section 54956.9(a): 1) Pasternack v. Fagel, Bighorn, and City of Palm Desert, Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. INC 1206949 C. Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Govemment Code Section 54956.9(b): Number of potential cases: 2 On a motion by Tanner, second by Weber, and 4-0 vote of the City Council, with Spiegel ABSENT, Mayor Harnik adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:27 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 4:10 p.m. V. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING - 4:00 P.M. A. REPORT ON ACTION FROM CLOSED SESSION. None VI. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - Mayor Pro Tem Jean M. Benson VII. INVOCATION - Councilman Van G. Tanner With City Council concurrence, Mayor Harnik suspended the agenda at this point in order to take up Section IX - Awards, Presentations, and Appointments, Items A - C, then returned to Section VIII - Oral Communications - B. VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B MS. JIMMICA GUESS, on behalf of Martha's Village & Kitchen, Indio, CA, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to host their Annual Thanksgiving Day 5K on El Paseo. She said it was a great success with approximately 1,926 participants and net proceeds of $71,000, for which they were very grateful. Today she 4 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 requested City Council to ask staff to come up with a long-term agreement for Martha's Village & Kitchen to use El Paseo for its Annual 5K event going forward. Mayor Harnik responded that she attended the event, it was great and very worthwhile participating. IX. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS A. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE THE SUPPORT AND EFFORT OF THE IXTAPA-ZIHUATANEJO SISTER CITIES ASSOCIATION AND RESIDENTS OF IXTAPA-ZIHUATANEJO TO ADVANCE THE SISTER CITY AFFILIATION WITH PALM DESERT, AND REAFFIRMING ITS SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP WITH IXTAPA- ZIHUATANEJO. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the framed proclamation and a key to the City of Palm Desert to Presidente Municipal Mr. Eric Fernandez Ballesteros. With the help of translator and Palm Desert Sister Cities Foundation Board Member Rose Mary Ortega, Mr. Fernandez Ballesteros responded very graciously and said that he and the delegation were very honored to be recognized today and be representing their city. He said even though it was a relatively small delegation on this trip, they traveled to Palm Desert to further the Sister City relationship and expressed sincere appreciation for all the hospitality they'd been shown. He noted that he was also here today representing a new administration for the City of Ixtapa-Zihuatanejo, and though it was new, it was even more important for them to come here and reaffirm the link that has been established. He added that they were also very appreciative of all that they have received from the Sister City of Palm Desert. Further, he said there was a great deal of culture in both communities, and to represent that cultural exchange, he presented Mayor Harnik and the City of Palm Desert with a bronze statue by a very well-known and renowned artist from the City of Ixtapa-Zihuatanejo -- a replica of a sculpture located in the marina there, representing a woman selling fish. B. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, DECLARING THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2013, AS "WALMART APPRECIATION DAY" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the framed proclamation to Palm Desert Walmart Supercenter Store Manager David Murphy and personally extended thanks for his tremendous support of and enthusiastic participation in the "2012 Shop With A Cop" Program. 5 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 Mlle C. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, DECLARING THURSDAY, .r JANUARY 24, 2013, AS "SERGEANT MICHAEL BIANCO APPRECIATION DAY" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Hamik presented the framed proclamation to Palm Desert Administrative Sergeant Mike Bianco in appreciation for his coordination and personal involvement in the "2012 Shop With A Cop" Program. D. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, DECLARING THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2013, AS "RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS APPRECIATION DAY" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. Representatives from the Palm Desert Fire/Riverside County Fire Department/Cal Fire were unable to be present for today's recognition. The framed proclamation will be delivered to them separately. E. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, RECOGNIZING KEN SCHWARTZ FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE AS GENERAL MANAGER OF J. W. MARRIOTT DESERT SPRINGS RESORT AND SPA, AND HIS FRIENDSHIP WITH THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. Mr. Schwartz was unable to attend today's meeting for this recognition. The framed proclamation will be delivered to him separately. F. PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY QUEEN SCHEHERAZADE AND HER COURT AS AMBASSADORS OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FAIR AND NATIONAL DATE FESTIVAL, FEBRUARY 15 - 24, 2013. MS. BARBARA CRESON, just -retired College of the Desert staff member and currently serving her eighth year as "Queen Mom" presented the Queen's Court: MS. MADISON GIVENS, Queen Scheherazade; MS. LINA EL-MAHMOUD, Princess Dunyazade; and MS. ABIGAIL BECKERT, Princess Jasmine. Each of the ladies greeted the City Council and provided background on themselves, and personally invited them and all present to visit and enjoy the upcoming Fair, February 15-24, highlighting the many events and activities to be held there this year. They thanked Councilmembers for the opportunity make this presentation and provided a supply of brochures for the 2013 event. X. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 10, 2013. Rec: Approve as presented. 6 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 138, 142, and 143. Rec: Approve as presented. C. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Jensen's Complete Shopping, 73-601 Highway 111, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. D. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Palm Desert Liquor, 40-205 Washington Street, Suite No. 104, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. E. CITY COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. 1. Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting of December 4, 2012. 2. Youth Committee Meeting of December 3, 2012. Rec: Receive and file. F. LETTER OF RESIGNATION from Kent Routh - Cultural Resources Preservation Committee. Rec: Receive with very sincere regret. G. AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS for the City of Palm Desert for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012. Rec: Receive and file. H. AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS for the Palm Desert Recreational Facilities Corporation for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012. Rec: Receive and file. I. LIMITED PROCEDURES REVIEW of Various Palm Desert Operators for Compliance with the City of Palm Deserts Transient Occupancy Tax Ordinance for Calendar Years 2010 and 2011. Rec: Receive and file. 7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 J. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Streamline the Use of Vendors for the Public Works Department by Granting Exception to Bidding Requirements and Approving the Landscape Services Division's Various Vendors and Qualified Service Providers List for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Grant an exception to bidding requirements, as provided for by Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 3.32.090 for FY 2012-2013; 2) approve the Landscape Services Division's Various Vendors and Qualified Service Providers List for FY 2012-2013. K. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Seventh Lease Amendment Between the Assembly Committee on Rules, California State Assembly, and the City of Palm Desert to Lease Suite No. 116 of the City of Palm Desert's Parkview Professional Office Complex. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the subject Lease Agreement and authorize the Mayor to execute same between the Assembly Committee on Rules, Califomia State Assembly, and the City of Palm Desert, for lease of Suite No. 116 at the Parkview Professional Office Complex. L. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Amendment No. 1 to Vision Service Plan Agreement to be in Compliance with the Affordable Care Act (2010 Health Care Reform) by Providing Coverage to Dependants Up to Age 26 (Contract No. C32510). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to approve Amendment No. 1 to the agreement with Vision Service Plan, providing dependant coverage up to age 26. M. FIEQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Amendment No. 6 to Contract with Delta Dental to be in Compliance with the Affordable Care Act (2010 Health Care Reform) by Providing Coverage to Dependants Up to Age 26 (Contract No. C27650). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to approve Amendment No. 6 to the subject contract with Delta Dental, providing dependant coverage up to age 26. 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 N. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF WORK for Contract No. C31670, — Accessible Pedestrian Signal Project (Project No. 562-12) (PTM General Engineering Service, Inc., Riverside, CA). Rec: By Minute Motion, accept the work as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the subject project. This item continued to a date uncertain. O. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Security for Precise Plan No. 06-01 (Vineyards) (Sinatra & Cook Project, LLC, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize release of the security for Frank Sinatra Drive Improvements for Precise Plan No. 06-01 (Vineyards). P. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Security for the Ironwood Country Club Entry at Mariposa Drive (Orr Builders, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize release of the security for improvements for the Ironwood Country Club entry at Mariposa Drive. Q. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Reimbursement of Art In Public Places Fees in the Amount of $5,992.20 for "Wisdom Given" by Alex Bashta III as the Public Art Component for the Oracle Plaza Project Located at 73-585 Fred Waring Drive (Shah Family Trust, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the reimbursement of Art In Public Places Fees in the amount of $5,992.20 for "Wisdom Given" by Alex Bashta III, the public art component for Oracle Plaza located at 73-585 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert — funds are available in Account No. 436-0000-228-9900. R. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the 2013 AEG Amgen Bike Tour of California. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the revised course map for the 2013 Amgen Bike Tour of California as presented. 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 S. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Purchase One Satellite Phone, in An Amount Not to Exceed $1,500, as Part of a FY 2010 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) Award. Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Authorize the City of Palm Desert's participation in a FY 2010 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) Award Project for the purchase of one Iridium Extreme11" 9575 Satellite Phone and required service agreement; 2) appropriate $1,500 from the Unobligated General Fund into Account No. 110-4130-411-2191 - Disaster -Emergency Account, and estimate revenue of $1,500 to Account No. 110-0000-331-1201 for this purpose. T. CONSIDERATION of an Exception to Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 9.58.010 - Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages on Public Property, for Various Private Events at the Palm Springs Art Museum -Palm Desert (The Galen) Located at 72-567 Highway 111. Rec: By Minute Motion, ratify approval of an exception to Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 9.58.010 - Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages on Public Property, for various private events, as indicated in the accompanying staff report's Attachment "A," at the Palm Springs Art Museum -Palm Desert (The Galen) located at 72-567 Highway 111. U. RECEIVE AND FILE Report Pursuant to Section 33080.1 of the Califomia Health and Safety Code (Joint Consideration with the Successor Agency to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency). Rec: Receive and file. Mayor Harnik stated staff requested that Item N be continued to a date uncertain. Upon a motion by Tanner, second by Benson, and 4-0 vote of the City Council with Spiegel ABSENT, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented. XI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None 10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 XII. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 2013 - 02 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A DIVISION OF THE PRESENT RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND ALLOWING EACH ELIGIBLE MEMBER TO ELECT WHETHER OR NOT HIS SERVICES SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM OR INCLUDED UNDER THE SAID CALIFORNIA STATE SOCIAL SECURITY AGREEMENT AS HEREINBEFORE PROVIDED; WITH SUCH "MEDICARE -ONLY" COVERAGE EFFECTIVE AS A SERVICE PERFORMED ON AND AFTER JULY 1, 2013 (ALLOWING THE CITY TO REMOVE THE MEDICARE EXCLUSION FROM CERTAIN EMPLOYEES HIRED BEFORE APRIL 1, 1986). Human Resources Manager Lori Carney stated this was a technical resolution that will accomplish a very simple thing. There are a couple of employees left who were hired prior to April 1, 1986, when Medicare became mandatory for public employees. Those employees hired prior to that time are currently not covered by Medicare, and they are not contributing the 1.45% of their salary toward the Medicare system or earning credit. By passing the proposed Resolution, it will allow the four employees to have an election and decide if they would like to participate in the Medicare system. She was aware of at least one employee who was interested in participating. Federal Law requires a 90-day waiting period from the date of adoption to hold the election. If the proposed Resolution is passed, staff will return in four months to actually make the division and allow those who wish to participate in the Medicare system to be covered by it. She said this will assist the employee to receive Medicare, and it will also benefit the City, because it will reduce the eventual retiree's health care cost. Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2013-02. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote with Spiegel ABSENT. 11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 B. RESOLUTION NO. 2013 - 0$ - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS RESOLUTION NOS. 03-49 AND 2011-75, ESTABLISHING A PALM DESERT MARKETING COMMITTEE AND ITS MEMBERSHIP REQUIREMENTS - ADDING A PROVISION ALLOWING FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATE MEMBERS TO THE PALM DESERT MARKETING COMMITTEE. Tourism and Marketing Manager Donna Gomez stated the proposed Resolution amends the Marketing Committee bylaws to allow for appointment of alternate members. Councilmember Weber moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2013-03. Motion was seconded by Tanner and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. XIII. ORDINANCES A. For Introduction: None B. For Adoption: None XIV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF GRANT AGREEMENT WITH CLIPPERCREEK, INC., FOR UPGRADE OF THE CITY'S ELECTRIC CHARGING STATION AND AUTHORIZE THAT MSRC GRANT FUNDING BE REDIRECTED TO IMPLEMENT A COMMUNITY PROGRAM TO INSTALL ELECTRIC CHARGING STATIONS/UNITS (CONTRACT NO. C32520). Ms. Riddle stated City staff was approached by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) staff and representative from ClipperCreek, Inc., to determine if the City was interested in participating in the Reconnect California Grant Program, which is designed to replace old obsolete electric charging units. The City expressed interest, and since the City was already approved for MSRC funding for the same project, staff is planning on taking the Reconnect California Grant funds to replace the units out at the Parkview Building and use the MSRC funds to install additional units in the community. She noted the Council had expressed an interest in working with the community to expand electric charging infrastructures out in the community. 12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 Simultaneously, the proposed agreement will also be reviewed by ClipperCreek, Inc., and Department of Energy (DOE), and if approved by all agencies, the City will move forward. If for some reason the City Council approves the agreement, and the other agencies don't, the City will revert back to the original program and use the funds to update the City's electric charging infrastructure. Mayor Harnik stated the staff report indicated that a Level 3 charging unit took 15-30 minutes to charge. She asked how long it took for the current ones to charge. Ms. Riddle responded it took six to eight hours depending upon how low the battery was, stating the chargers are used when people go shopping or have lunch. Further responding, she confirmed they can be used by NEV or golf cart type of vehicles. Mayor Harnik asked if there will be partnerships when determining where the charging stations will be located. Ms. Riddle explained that technically there will be partnerships, because most likely it will be on private property and require their electricity; therefore, the City will have to work out the details. Responding to question about the upgrade of the charging stations at the Civic Center, she said the Reconnect California Grant provides for the units and installation. Therefore, the old ones will be replaced with new upgraded units; the City's project will move forward regardless. Councilman Tanner asked what recharge level did the City currently have in its recharge systems. Mr. Wohlmuth stated the charging stations at the Civic Center were built 15 years ago, and they didn't have levels at that time. Additionally, they are not compatible with new electric vehicles. He said they have begun to standardize the chargers for manufactured electric vehicles like the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf, and the new charger that ClipperCreek is installing will be compatible with new electric vehicles. Councilman Tanner moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve the subject agreement with ClipperCreek, Inc., Rancho Palos Verdes, California; 2) authorize the Mayor to enter into said agreement with ClipperCreek, Inc; 3) authorize the installation of electric charging units at the Parkview Professional Office Building; 4) authorize staff to utilize MSRC Grant Funds to implement a Community Electric Charging Station Program at commercial locations within the City. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. 13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 B. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT TO WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,045 FOR THE 2013 CITYWIDE TREE PRUNING PROGRAM (CONTRACT NO. C32330, PROJECT NO. 932-13) (JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE PALM DESERT HOUSING AUTHORITY). Mayor Pro TemNice Chairman Benson stated the palm trees at Desert Willow have never been trimmed and wondered if they were included in this contract or will they remain in their natural state. Mr. Greenwood stated no palm trees were included in this contract because it's for broadly trees, and the pruning of palm trees is a separate contract. However, they are working at Desert Willow to trim some of the trees that are on the perimeter and subject to vandalism, but the interior palm trees will be left in their native state. Further responding, he confirmed the trees in the roundabout will stay intact. Mr. Wohlmuth recalled for the Council that in December 2012, there were five fires at Desert Willow, and as those fires were being investigated, staff looked for ways to mitigate the fire danger. Staff was directed to prune the skirts on all palm trees near existing buildings and on the exterior of the Desert Willow wall. He noted the vandals that lit the skirts haven't been caught. He said there are no plans to prune interior palm trees nor the traffic circle at Desert Willow Drive. Based on the pattern of vandalism, all of the fires were lit from the exterior of the wall. He said the fires carried into Holes 5 and 6 of the Fire Cliff Golf Course. He said it was a tough decision, but the theme of Desert Willow should remain native. However, in order to mitigate the fire problem, the decision was made to prune the skirts. He reiterated that no palm trees will be pruned at the roundabout circle. Councilmember/Member Weber asked staff to elaborate on the statement made with regard to Reliable Tree Care and the lack of sufficient reference information submitted. Landscape Manager Spencer Knight stated contract documents require a certain level of experience with the type of plant in a city setting, in short, working in roadways. He said the contractor didn't submit enough experience, which affects their ability to execute the contract effectively. Further responding, he said Reliable Tree Care has worked for the City before, but they typically service palm trees and broad -leaf trees, but they didn't have a lot of City experience. Councilmember/Member Weber stated it was unfortunate there was no one locally that could do the work. 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 Mr. Knight said there are local contractors that can do the work, but they chose not to submit a bid the second time around. He noted West Coast Arborist has worked for the City and they have a presence in the valley; therefore, they met the criteria for the City's bid documents. Councilman/Member Tanner moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award the subject contract for 2013 Citywide Tree Pruning Program to West Coast Arborists, Inc., Anaheim, Califomia, in the total amount of $100,045 (City - $74,250; Housing Authority - $25,795); 2) authorize the Director of Finance to set aside an additional 10% contingency in the total amount of $10,004.50 (City - $7,425; Housing Authority - $2,579.50); 3) appropriate a total of $28,374.50 ($25,795 contract amount and $2,579.50 contingency) to the respective Housing Authority Accounts within the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Housing Authority Operating Budget; 4) authorize the Mayor/Chairman to execute the agreement — funds are available for the portion of the contract relative to the City and Assessment Districts in Parks and Recreation Account Nos. 110-4610-453-3320, 110-4611-453-3320, 110-4611-453-3371; Repair/Maintenance Medians Account No. 110-4614-453-3370, and Assessment District Fund 200 Accounts; and for the Housing Authority, appropriate a total of $28,374.50 to the respective Housing Authority Accounts within the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Housing Authority Operating Budget. Motion was seconded by Weber and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. C. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO CONVEY REAL PROPERTY KNOWN AS APN 627-101-038 AND APN 627-101-039 FROM THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT (PROJECT NO. 656-06) (JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY). Mr. Greenwood stated staff had been working on this project for about four years, and the major component of this project is a free right -turn lane from Fred Waring Drive to northbound Monterey Avenue. It will include an ancillary lane along the frontage of College of the Desert on Monterey Avenue. A minor component of the project is a right -turn lane northbound San Pablo Avenue to eastbound Fred Waring Drive that requires right-of-way acquisition from a Successor Agency owned parcel. Staff recommended approval of the right-of-way dedication. If approved, staff will then go to the Oversight Board for further approval. Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Benson moved to: 1) Waive further reading and adopt Successor Agency Resolution No. SA -RDA 015, authorizing and approving the conveyance of real property known as APN 627-101-038 and APN 627-101-039 to the City of Palm Desert; 2) Waive further reading and adopt City Council Resolution No. 2013 - 04, accepting the conveyance of real property known as APN 627-101-038 and APN 01,,, 627-101-039 from the Successor Agency to the City; 3) By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor/Chair to execute any and all documents necessary for the conveyance. Motion was seconded by Weber and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. 15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 D. REQUEST FOR RESCISSION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT NO. C32050 TO CLOUDBURST ENGINEERING, INC., AND AUTHORIZE AWARD OF SAID CONTRACT TO SOUTH WEST PUMP AND DRILLING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $109,140.94 FOR THE DESERT WILLOW IRRIGATION PUMP RENOVATION PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 850-13). Councilman Tanner stated he would recuse himself from this item due to a financial conflict of interest and left the Council Chamber. Mr. Greenwood stated in November the Council awarded a contract to Cloudburst Engineering, Inc., for pump work at Desert Willow, and in trying to proceed with the execution of the documents, staff found the contractor had issues that prevented him from providing bonding as required by the City. Therefore, staff is asking Council to rescind award of the subject contract and award to the next lowest bidder, which is South West Pump & Drilling, Inc. Mayor Pro Tem Benson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Rescind award of the subject contract to Cloudburst Engineering, Inc.; 2) waive the bid irregularities and authorize award of Contract No. C32050 to South West Pump & Drilling, Inc., Coachella, California, for the Desert Willow Irrigation Pump Renovation Project in an amount not to exceed $109,140.94; 3) authorize the Director of Finance to set aside a 10% contingency for the project in the amount of $10,914.09; 4) authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 5) authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute any and all applications, agreements, and documents required by Southern California Edison to receive potential Cash Incentives and On -Bill Financing for the irrigation pump upgrades — funds are available in Course and Grounds Expenses, Account No. 441-4195-495-8092. Motion was seconded by Weber and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel and Tanner ABSENT. E. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS AND RELATED ACTIONS WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - RIVERSIDE COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM / LSSI FOR LIBRARY SERVICES THROUGH JUNE 30, 2013. City Clerk Rachelle Klassen stated that as the liaison to the City's Public Library on the campus of College of the Desert, they are eagerly awaiting the Grand Opening next Thursday at 10:00 a.m. As a part of, every year, the City contributes approximately $350,000 to have additional programs and services, including additional staff, hours, and materials that are above and beyond what the County system offers. This is a routine action, as noted with the 11 th Amendment to the Agreement, and the 8w Amendment to the second Agreement; it was an annual occurrence based on Council's approved budget for the Library Fund. Due to staffing changes at the County level, each person that got this project passed it onto the next, and the next, and some of those individuals have left, but finally it now had someone who 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 created the Agreements the City is required to execute, which covers services through the end of this fiscal year. Councilman Tanner moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve Contract No. C141611 - Eleventh Amendment to Agreement to Provide Library Services (Additional Staff) for the Event and Volunteer Coordinator positions, Part-time Computer Instructor/Lab Technician, Additional Librarians (1-Reference, 1-Young Adult), and Dedicated Receptionist/Library Assistant, covering services through June 30, 2013; 2) approve Contract No. C18028. - Eighth Amendment to Agreement to Provide Library Services (Additional Hours/ Bookmobile) for six additional hours of operation of the Palm Desert Public Library component of the Multi -Agency Library each Thursday and operation of Bookmobile Service for Palm Desert, covering services through June 30, 2013; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute said contracts; 4) authorize issuance of a City purchase order, favoring Library Systems & Services, Inc. (LSSI), Germantown, Maryland, in the amount of $35,000 for the purchase of materials for FY 2012-2013 — funding for all the above has been approved in the FY 2012-2013 Budget in Account No. 452-4662-454-4001 - no additional appropriations are necessary. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE FAMILY SERVICES OF THE DESERT 2013 "BUNNY HOP" 5K RACE AND EL PASEO ROAD CLOSURE BETWEEN OCOTILLO AND LANTANA. Ms. Riddle stated Mr. Vic Gainer approached staff to request the approval of the Bunny Hop Race that would benefit Family Services of the Desert. Mr. Gainer is the Race Producer who did the event for Martha's Village and Kitchen, who is basically utilizing the same course and the same event, with the exception of the beneficiary. Mayor Harnik stated she was glad to see there were some changes made based on the experience of the last event, and the last one was great. Mayor Pro Tem Benson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve Sunday, March 31, 2013, date for the Family Services of the Desert 5K "Bunny Hop" Race; 2) approve El Paseo Road Closure between Ocotillo and Lantana for the event. Motion was seconded by Weber and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. XV. CONTINUED BUSINESS None XVI. OLD BUSINESS None 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS .o A. CONSIDERATION OF A REMODEL AND EXPANSION TO THE EXISTING 111 TOWN CENTER TO ACCOMMODATE A NEW GROCERY STORE AND RETAIL USE — PROJECT LOCATED AT 44-459 TOWN CENTER WAY, Case No. PP/CUP 12-223 (Aubrey Cook McGiII Architects, Applicant). Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz stated the project site is located on the west side of Town Center Way between Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive. The site is bordered on its west side by the Palm Valley Storm Channel. In the past this site has been referred to as the Best Buy Center. The project consists of demolition of the existing Banner Mattress building and a portion of the former Best Buy building to accommodate a new Nordstrom Rack and a new Whole Foods. The Applicant is also modifying a portion of the parking lot with approximately 60 parking spaces to be redesigned directly in front of the Whole Foods building for better vehicle circulation. The Applicant is also relocating existing utilities for Southern California Edison (SCE) and a Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) main water line. Additionally, the existing median along Highway 111 is being modified to provide for a left-tum pocket into the shopping center for east bound traffic coming from Rancho Mirage. All turf will be removed for drought tolerant landscaping with the exception of the portion that the bank owns, which is located on the comer of Highway 111 and Town Center Way. He displayed renderings for Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack, stating Whole Foods will have two outdoor patios and an indoor patio. The building will have two towers, one facing the parking lot and one in the rear facing Highway 111. The entire building maintains an overall height at 27 feet for the main parapet, and it gradually increases to 421/2 feet for the architectural features over the main entrances of the two tower elements. The property is zoned Planned Commercial (PC), which has a maximum height of 35 feet. The proposed project height is in accordance with code, Chapter 25, General Provision Section 25.56.300. The Applicant is proposing two signs on each tower. Mayor Pro Tem Benson asked if the tower will have signage on both sides. Mr. Swartz answered yes, stating one sign would be facing Highway 111 and the other sign would be facing Town Center Way. He noted only one tower was for Whole Foods, and the other tower was for other tenants. Further responding, he apologized if the renderings showed three signs, it should only be two. He went on to say staffs recommendation for the height was based on the fact that from Highway 111 to the building pad, there is a 7- to 8-foot differential. He offered to show photographs of a crane that the Applicant used to demonstrate how tall the tower will be at 45 feet. Those photographs were used when the project went through the Planning Commission and are also in Council's packet. He said staff recommended approval of the project and adoption of the proposed Resolution. 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 Councilmember Weber stated she liked the project and the signage, because she likes driving down the street and knowing what the building is. Councilman Tanner asked whether the left turn into Nordstrom Rack and Whole Foods from Highway 111 was an out -of -control stop. Mr. Swartz said it was not. He displayed a photograph of the turn pocket at Larkspur Lane to show what the one on Highway 111 will look like, stating the pocket lane will provide 100 feet, which was enough space for four or five vehicles. Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated she was concerned with having signage on both sides of the two towers. She noted the City didn't allow signs on the back of the buildings on Interstate 10. She was known for being a great shopper, and she certainly didn't need a tower to show her where Nordstrom Rack is, stating everyone in town will find it. She is glad both stores are coming to Palm Desert, but it appears the Applicant is over signing the project, and if the signage on the front of the store is going to be the same in the back, it will be too bold and too much. Mayor Hamik asked if the storm channel ran along the west elevation of the Center. Mr. Swartz answered yes. Further responding, he clarified that one tower was for the Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack, and the other tower, which is where the former Cost Plus store was located, is for a potential third tenant. Councilman Tanner asked if that second tower will have signage on both the front and back of the tower. Mr. Swartz responded he wasn't positive if the second tower will have signage on the rear, because it wasn't visible from Highway 111. The Marriott has a lot of mature palm trees and eucalyptus trees that would block the signage. Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated that if that tower wasn't visible, it wouldn't need signage on the back. However, the tower would be visible from Highway 111 and Town Center Way. Councilman Tanner pointed out the project went through the Architectural Review Commission and the Planning Commission as presented to the Council this evening. Mr. Swartz concurred. Mayor Harnik declared the public hearing open, and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this project. 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 MR. DAVE MOORE, Senior Vice President, Harsch Investment Properties, stated this has been a process of quite a few years and it was a culmination of success to get to this point. He said City staff should be commended for the positive interaction with the Architectural Review and Planning Commission, and it was worth noting their advice and experience honed the project to what it is now. He said they have long-term ownership perspective where they typically develop or buy projects for the long term. As many are aware, the Schnitzer family has a long-standing presence here in the Desert and is also known for building quality projects at quality locations. He said this project will have positive economic impacts with a considerable amount of commerce going through, much more so than the previous consideration. He said the project is unique in that only about ten percent of the frontage points to Highway 111, which is the store's front door. Therefore, the design focused around how to get people from Highway 111 to the store, because it was further encumbered by being in a pool; the building is about seven to nine feet down off of Highway 111. The Center had tenants that left for higher visibility spots and is now 75% vacant, so they asked themselves how do they keep that from happening again, and in answering that question, the design is what drove the project. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Benson's comment about signage, he pointed out that Best Buy had signage on both the front and back of the building. He said they wish to give this building some prominence with the towers visually, which are at grade level to Highway 111. They originally had asked to treat the towers like a monument sign in the air with as many as four or five tenants. However, through the process and partnership with the City, they came down to having Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack on one tower, and have another tower closer to Fred Waring Drive, to give the Center tower appeal. He said they're two weeks away from announcing a third tenant, who will be of the same size and caliber, and they would like to offer that third tenant some tower presence there as well. If one looked at the totalitarian view of the design and orientation of this project to Highway 111, one can begin to understand the design. He said they intend to build a first-class shopping center of excellent quality. Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated she was not concerned about the towers, although, she didn't like them to begin with, but has accepted them for the reasons stated that they sit lower to Highway 111. She is objecting to signage on the back of the building, because the City has not allowed signage on the back of the buildings on Interstate 10. She didn't believe it was necessary, because she didn't believe people will have any trouble finding Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack. Especially, because they are a welcome addition knowing what they will bring to a community. MR. MOORE responded he appreciated the perspective and would welcome some discussion. However, their strategy or philosophy was to make the back of the building inviting, because it was visible from Highway 111; it will 20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 be seen through trees and vegetation. The goal was to treat the back of the building as an amenity to the Center, however some of the features may not translate well on the renderings, but the lattice work, columns, and architectural designs is so it didn't look like the back. With that in mind, using the signage helps create that sense of presence where people can say that's where the store is versus that's where they throw the trash or take delivery. He believed their philosophy had gained some support, but he was sensitive to Mayor Pro Tem Benson's issue. Mayor Harnik asked about the signage lighting on the back of the building. MR. MOORE said the lighting is channel illuminated letters with individual letters directly applied to the wall. Further responding, he said Best Buy was one big box with a price tag, which was a smaller version of the one they had in the front. Councilman Tanner asked when the Applicant anticipated starting and finishing the project if approved this evening. MR. MOORE stated they are in the process of applying for demolition permits, and the Building Department is awaiting the outcome of this evening's action. He hoped to start the process mid February and working through the fall for a third-quarter turnover. He said they build the shelves, ambience, exterior, and architectural upgrades, then the tenant makes their specific improvements. He said they are planning for a 2014 spring grand opening. MR. JORDAN SCHNITZER, President, Harsch Investment Properties, reiterated Mr. Moore's comments about the wonderful give and take process with staff, stating they work in six States, and the Council should be proud of its staff. Secondly, they've had homes in Palm Desert for 60 years now, so they don't just build and develop things to sell them. With respect to the architecture of the building, he said Architect Tom Aubrey from San Diego, who does stunning work was brought into the project. He noted the last 10 to 15 percent of the design is the toughest, because they put as much time in as they did for the first 85%. He said the design includes a lot of natural woods, natural materials, and natural stone that is quite different from what's been done in the Valley, which he believed will set an aesthetic standard as a jewel for Palm Desert. He said the goal is to get it right aesthetically in terms of the size of the letters, trellises, etc. As a point of human interest, Brian Williams, who is head of construction, is the grandson of renowned Palm Springs Architect Stewart Williams, and son to Sydney (sp?) who works at the Museum and is in charge of Modernism. He went on to say they are excited about the center, they have other tenants beyond the ones Mr. Moore mentioned are coming, which will reinforce the site and local tenants who have stood with them. He noted they plan to meet with the local 21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 tenants tomorrow, assuming they get approval from the City Council, to Nor discuss the timing and so forth. Mayor Harnik stated she was sensitive to Mayor Pro Tem Benson's concern about the signage on the back of the building, and asked if there would be more than three signs with the potential for more tenants. MR. SCHNITZER answered no. He said the goal for Architect Tom Aubrey was to not have the back of the building look like a loading zone; the intent was to honor the property. The columns on the back are of the same stone work that the front of the property will have. He said a lot of money is being spent aesthetically on the color and trellis, because in its totality it needs to be aesthetically pleasing. He believed this building will be much more aesthetically pleasing and respectful of the site than the Best Buy sign with its blue and yellow letters, which was quite garish. However, he understood it was their standard design that the City approved 20 years ago. Responding to question about the loading dock, he confirmed the loading dock is on the back side of the building. However, the stone columns are above the loading docks, almost floating above the base of the loading dock. He noted that through the process they addressed concems about deliveries, and they will be done early in the morning. He said Whole Foods is sensitive about the communities they are in, and although, the Planning Commission didn't place a requirement, they asked that it be it be emphasized to Whole Foods to be sensitive to the neighbors. However, there aren't any apartments close to the site. MR. JOE GAUGUSH, Broken Arrow Trail, Palm Desert, stated he had a technical question regarding the left-tum pocket as it's being proposed, which he briefly spoke with Director of Public Works Mark Greenwood. He said because of the geometric of the location, its proximity to the existing bridge, the curvature of the roadway, and the fact that Whole Foods is very successful, he believed that left-tum position needed a critical look. Mr. Greenwood agreed to review and work with the Applicant to make sure it is safe. Mayor Harnik stated she would appreciate it, because during the holidays she was aware of the vehicle back up at Desert Crossings and agreed it was a matter to be mindful of for safety reasons. Mr. Greenwood noted that eleven months out of the year there will be no problem, but during the holiday season staff may have to take a look. With no further public testimony offered, Mayor Harnik declared the public hearing closed. 22 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 Councilman Tanner stated the signage on Highway 111 was probably not going to be the primary signage, but it will increase the volume of activity at that Center. He said if he was a tenant there, he would probably tell people to look for the Nordstrom or Whole Foods sign, and he may be on the north side of the Center. Therefore, he wasn't concern over the signage. He commented that after serving seven years on the Planning Commission, he felt the signage was right on. Mayor Harnik commended the Architectural Review and Planning Commission for all their work to bring the project this far, because it turned into a wonderful project and knew the community was looking forward to it. Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt: 1) Resolution No. 2013 - 05, approving Precise Plan/Conditional Use Permit 12-223, including two tower elements and a portion of the building facades at 421 feet in height, subject to conditions; 2) Notice of Exemption Form "B." Motion was seconded by Weber. Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated that although it was against her better judgement, she will vote in favor because both stores are vital to Palm Desert. The City has wanted both stores for a long time, and she hoped the back of the building lived up to the expectations of the Applicant. Mayor Hamik stated she appreciated Mayor Pro Tem Benson's comments and concerns, because she felt the same. Mayor Harnik called for the vote, and the motion carried on a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. B. CONSIDERATION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ESTABLISHING UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CANYONS AT BIGHORN IN ACCORDANCE WITH PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 25.25.190 AND 25.24.330, Case No. DP 12-371 (Bighorn Development, LLC, Applicant). Principal Planner Tony Bagato stated the proposed Development Plan 12-371 is an amendment to an existing approved project that went back to 1991. The map that staff will be referring to was amended as a vesting map in 1997. This project is known as the Canyons of Bighorn, which incorporates two areas, the Planned Residential Zone and Hillside Residential Zone. The portion crosshatched is the portion staff will be referring to this evening. The other portion of the map is zoned Hillside Planned Residential, which has standards that apply to hillside homes, because they are visible to the public. The Canyons tends to be mostly below Highway 74, and not visible to the public. The berm with rod iron fencing with a lot of natural landscaping was constructed during the project's initial phase. It is zoned Residential, Low Density, zero to four units per acre in the General Plan. The last vesting 23 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 al map was approved in 1997, known as Vesting Tentative Tract Map 25296. ■r He said the hillsides are not part of the project. He displayed a map exhibit for his presentation that is also included in the staff report. However, when the initial project came through in 1991, it didn't have this map exhibit. The Planning Commission approved the project with standards of 5-foot setbacks on each side, 15-foot setbacks in the front, and 10 or 15 feet in the rear, which was adopted in 1991. The project went before the City Council in October 1991, and due to concems over the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) from the Bighorn Institute related to impacts to the Bighorn Sheep, the project was modified and retumed. When the Plan was retumed, the setback conditions were changed and was referred to the map exhibit. From staff's research, there was no specific planning reason why they changed the setbacks. The modifications were mainly to address Bighorn Institute's concem; therefore the project was downsized with a lot more open space and a buffer zone was created to lessen the impact toward the south side of the project. He said conditions were placed on the map, which stated all setbacks should be applied as stated in the map. What is interesting about the map, is that each one of the lot types is rectangular and/or square, which are based on lot size. He said the lot type is identified by a table that's in the map. One of the problems today is that many of the lots are irregular shape and they all have curved frontages; there isn't a straight street in the ins Canyons of Bighorn. When staff looks at a current map of Bighom, all the so streets are curvature, it has many cull -de -sacs and no rectangular lots. He said some lots are close to looking rectangular, but then there are some that almost look like a circle. Therefore, one can't determine where the setbacks are supposed to be applied, which is one of the issues. The other issue is that the maps were phased, and when that happens, lot numbers get changed. In the original map there is Lot 1 through Lot 372, but when a map is phased, it is re-created and the lot numbers change. Additionally, the sizes get changed through construction or through partial map waivers that combine maps or move property lines within Bighom. The goal of Bighorn is to work around the natural environment and try to maximize the views into the golf course and open terrain, and not necessarily their neighboring lots. Due to changes from phasing and merging of lots, the lot line configurations have changed. He said this Development Plan was proposed by Bighorn to help clarify some of the issues faced by staff and to create uniform standards that can be applied to all lots, but also providing Bighom the flexibility to maximize their design guidelines. He said front setbacks will be 15 feet, 10 feet for the rear, and 5 feet for the sides, which is similar to the conditions in 1991. There is a separation distance between buildings of 10 feet. Even though there are five-foot setbacks to the side property line, there is still a 10-foot distance between neighboring buildings. The maximum height is 20 nit feet, which is what the previous condition was within Bighorn. The lot coverage is stated at 60%, however, the previous approval didn't state a .,.i specific percentage, so there is some discussion on whether or not it falls under the Zoning Ordinance or if staffs recommendation is based upon 24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 Bighorn's Architectural Review Guidelines. He said the modification section was added for Director approval. He said it was staffs position that it was memorializing the standard of practice over the past 12 years he's been with the City and 15 years of Bighorn's development. Another reason staff supports the Development Plan is because Bighorn's Architectural and Landscape Guidelines were approved by the City with the CC&R's as part of the map. He said these guidelines set up each property to have a developable envelope for each lot as shown in Figure 2 of the Staff Report. He said Bighom guidelines create a circular area that identifies different development standards; it has a Building Envelope Boundary, which is mainly for driveway and utility improvements; a Transition Area that goes between the views into the areas they try to mitigate; and then there is the Natural Transition to the golf course and open space, which has to be protected. Finally, there is the pad for the home area. He said Bighom is trying to maximize views into the open space area and not the interior neighbors. In reviewing the analysis under the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff determined it was a Class 5 Exemption, because it was only modifying development standards for construction of homes, it didn't change the density of the project or the land use pattern, and it didn't physically change what one saw outside of Bighorn. He said there are no environmental impacts as these are pads that have already been graded. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Development Plan on December 18, 2012. The Planning Commission and City Council staff have sent out more than 500 legal notices, and only one letter was received for the Planning Commission, which is highlighted in the staff report. A second letter was received by the same party, which was different from the one received earlier. The following are the points raised in the letter and staff's response: 1) The Plan is not consistent with the General Plan as required by State law for specific plans. In reviewing this point, staff's position is that Bighorn is not a specific plan, because it's already a planned community development, and this was a Development Plan amending their setbacks. Additionally, staff didn't believe the Plan fell under State law, and secondly, the proposed Development Plan is consistent with the General Plan. Staff further cited from the Community Design Element Goals 2 and 3, and Policies 4 and 6, which are noted in the staff. As far as the Bighom Architectural and Landscape Design Guidelines, they are required under the CC&Rs to be approved by the City, and both were approved by the City in 1997; 2) The Plan does not comply with CEQA. Staff would argue that the Development Plan is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for "minor alterations to land without impacting the overall project," which staff believed was consistent with that exception; 3) The standards in Tentative Tract Map 25296 are clear and simple. Staff agrees the standards are laid out clear and simple, but when trying to apply them practically to lots that are not rectangular, it's not as easy. The standard practice was to let Bighorn approve them, but now that staff is having to look at them in more detail, it's not always clear which lot it's supposed to be, and how one can determine 25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 where the front and back is on comer lots; 4) The Development Plan lid interferes with the CC&Rs. He said the HOA requires the approval of the plans, and ultimately the City wouldn't get involved in civil issues. However, staff reinforces that it relies on the guidelines and Bighorn's approval, which is consistent with the CC&Rs approved by the City. He said Bighorn goes through a process of identifying the natural area, the transitional area, the private area, etc., stating Bighorn is looking out for the best interest in their community; 5) Bighorn has no right to seek approval, and it will negatively impact the majority of the homeowners. When this request was initially brought in, staff looked at it just like a re -zone to any other part of the City, noting that anyone can request to modify standards. He said it was currently being done at Palm Desert Country Club. Staff 's process is to determine what's in the best interest of the community and then makes a recommendation. The map shows that Bighom does have a vested interest with 26 vacant lots with a portion of them owned by Bighorn; the letter claims Bighorn owns 10%; 6) The objector claims the lots are rectangular and on flat land. The map exhibit shows that some of the lots are close to being rectangular, but they have a curved frontage, and they are not on flat land. The pad heights vary six feet from each other; some lots are 701, 706, or 712 feet from another. In some areas they drop significantly, which creates challenges when you have astringent setbacks. Therefore, flexibility provides better for the review and analysis. 7) Bighorn is seeking approval for litigation reasons. Staff is not really addressing this point, but believes the Development Plan is a benefit to the public and City, because it provides more flexibility and a standard that applies uniformly for all lots that are irregular shape. He said there are terrain issues out there, and the City has relied on the HOA approval for the past 15 years without any setback violations that he is aware of, and this will actually approve them, but they weren't done intentionally. Another issue that was brought up in the Planning Commission, but was not mentioned in their current letter, is that there is a conflict with BBK (Best Best & Krieger, LLP), which is not the case. In conclusion, he stated the Planning Commission and staff is recommending approval. There are findings in the staff report to address the approval. Councilman Tanner asked how many lots were available in Bighorn. Mr. Bagato responded there were 26 vacant lots remaining. The original map approved 372 lots, but because of lot mergers, etc., he didn't know the exact number. Further responding, he confirmed that based on his 12 years with the City, he was not aware of any complaints for setback issues in Bighorn. Mayor Hamik declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. law 26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 MR. ANDREW FOGG, Cox, Castle & Nicholson, LLP, stated he was representing the Applicant, Bighorn Development. He thanked staff for the work and presentation as they agreed with everything that was said. In response to the number of lots within the development plan area, there are 184 lots total with 26 lots (14% percent) undeveloped. In reviewing this, and it is important to make the distinction, this Plan does not affect the hillside lots. The subject lots are sunken down into the development and not visible from Highway 111; they are intemal and didn't affect the rest of the world, and really just an intemal Bighorn issue. He said this Plan will formalize the process that the homeowners' association (HOA) and the City has used historically. He said Bighorn has created a remarkable site that has been recognized by numerous architectural awards, and has also been recognized by the City. The general consensus is that it's well -planned, well - implemented, and a well -designed community, and the HOA takes that seriously. He said Bighorn has no interest in creating urban dense environments, because they are viewed toward maintaining an open space and keeping a consistent feel, emphasizing the views looking toward the golf course, which is the heart of Bighorn and the center to what everyone is oriented toward. He said this Development Plan will create a design envelope with established minimum setbacks. It will not be a zero lot subdivision with houses abutting right against each other, because it has those transition zones. It was important to understand that the Plan will allow flexibility to those who are closest to the development, which is the HOA's Architectural Landscape Control Committee. He said they understand how the terrain bears, how the corridors are created, and understand how the structures orient themselves toward the golf course and views internally within Bighorn. This Development Plan creates an envelope to put the house in the right place and maintain that feel and views. There may be instances where the setback may be 8 feet instead of 10 feet. The one resident who complained, his house is setback from the side yard from the property line somewhere between 8 and 9 feet. The house next door to him, which has actually sued, would also be setback 8 to 9 feet, because it's consistent and it works; it's a new structure in the exact same relationship to an existing structure. Also, the proposed Development Plan did not interfere with the CC&Rs in any manner, Bighorn will continue to adhere and implement them in the same way they've done; there will be no change in that process. He said zoning is an exercise of the City's police power; the CC&Rs can't trump the City's power. There are only very limited circumstances, in which, the City's zoning power can be delegated away, and the CC&Rs is not an example of that. Here, there is no impediment to making this Development Plan approved in formalizing these processes and create these minimum standards. He pointed out that not anyone can go out there and build to 5 or 10 feet by right, because the HOA will look at it and apply their expert opinion in making sure that things are developed properly. He said the Plan will benefit all, including the residents. Because of the recent issues raised, one can argue there is some uncertainty, but this Plan will provide clarity and 27 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 certainty. The structures out at Bighorn are approved and viewed as consistent. There will be no argument that any property value has been diminished or anything of that nature. In fact, they are enhanced and approved, and of course, that translates directly to the City's tax base, including property values to help the City's bottom line. Finally, he emphasized the HOA took an official position recently on this matter. They held a noticed vote in front of the entire community where no one spoke in opposition, and there was unanimous approval. A letter was submitted to the City memorializing that vote by stating the HOA is in full support of the Plan and urges the Council's support. He offered to answer any questions. MR. GREGORY M. HATTON, 20281 Birch Street, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA, attorney representing Lawrence Pasternack, stated he's been before the City so many times on this issue with photographs and diagrams; therefore, he wouldn't spend a lot of time repeating the same information. He noted he provided an update to the book that was previously given to the Council that addresses the Planning Commission hearing, which includes the same statements made by Principal Planner Bagato this evening. He has a response to those statements in writing; therefore, he believed the record was adequate. What he didn't hear this evening and still hasn't heard anywhere is the idea that there is some benefit to making these provision retroactive in time. He said retroactivity creates a number of legal issues and legal problems for the City that the taxpayers really need not bear the burden. He said Bighom wants to make this retroactively, because Bighorn has been sued for not complying with its CC&Rs and the City's setbacks incorporated into them. The City Planning Department has a similar interest, because despite repeated requests that it comply with the setbacks set at Bighorn, they did not do so. Therefore, Superior Court entered a Preliminary Injunction stopping construction and setbacks on one of the lots at Bighorn. He noted that his firm is involved in litigation in relation to this issue, and when Judge Evans heard about this new proposal and that it was based on the claim that it was difficult somehow for Bighorn to figure out its setbacks, his response was "They are just figuring that out now?" He said the Council has to take a serious look at whether it is being told accurate facts about the problem at Bighorn. He said in 2002 Bighom had no problem hiring landscape architectural consultants to draw the City's setbacks into all these "oddly" configured lots; therefore, Bighorn, the consultants, and the HOA knew what the setbacks are, because they are in black and white. He wonders if the HOA ever sent those setback diagrams down to the City's Planning Department to inform them that Bighorn knew what the City's setbacks are, because Bighorn asked for them 15 years ago. He keeps hearing about this original plan in 1991 that had 5-foot setbacks and smaller front and rear setbacks. So if one looked at that 1991 site plan that was being presented to the City, one will see a development that is much more akin to a Del Webb and Sun City type of development where the lots are rolled out side by side on the golf course. What happened between 1991 28 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 and 1996 is the true goal of the Bighorn change; they changed that development from tract style lots into custom estate Tots - 30,000 to 35,000 square feet, an excess of a half an acre. Bighorn also kept some villa lots down the hill in the north side of the development. Therefore, because of the different sizes of lots, Bighorn came up with a concept/plan that makes the setbacks bigger as the lots get bigger, and it has been easy for them to do that. Now after 15 years of that type of handling, one citizen has complained about it to Bighorn, the City Council, and the City's Planning Department to beg and plead for enforcement of the setbacks, but they didn't; therefore a judge started a Preliminary Injunction. And now, all of a sudden, Bighorn thinks it's time for a new Development Plan because there are 26 lots undeveloped and it will benefit the public. He said that's not what's really going on, what Bighorn wants is for the Development Plan to be retroactive, because they want to create a new law, under which, the City's Planning Department and Bighorn can be compliant with the very laws they have broken, which is what the Council is being asked to do this evening. He said the Council is being asked to enact a new law to exonerate the very people who broke the old ones, which is not the proper use of govemment. He begged the Council to take a careful look at the new materials provided, because there are clear and honest responses to the inaccurate statements and representations that have been made here and before the Planning Commission by both Bighorn and Planning Department. In conclusion, he said if the Council wants to get a good look at what the new setbacks would look like in practice, he asked them to look at before and after photos under Tab K, which demonstrates 5-foot setbacks. The setbacks that are being built on the lot next to Mr. Pasternack, the complaining party, were approved by Bighom and the Planning Department, which basically advocates its authority to Bighorn to approve whatever it wants. Those setbacks are 6' feet at the nearest point to Mr. Pasternack's property. The before pictures with the lush side yards that are suppose to exist between the estate house at Bighorn, and in the after photographs, the lush sides are wiped out, and that is just the structure. Bighorn wants there to be zero lot lines for swimming pools, so that one neighbor's swimming pool can connect with the other swimming pool legally. He said the proposed Development Plan is ludicrous, stating it was designed to create a defense in litigation for the City and Bighorn. MR. MARTIN MUELLER, Palm Springs, stated he has a law office in Rancho Mirage, and represents Dr. Bruce and Trudy Fagel who live next door to the objector, Mr. Pasternack, who is suing his client. His client is building a home at 1020 Cahuilla Falls, who also has another residence at Bighorn, but they are building a newer home at the Canyons. The Canyons' residence as proposed and planned is 8 feet from the property, not 6' . He said Mr. Pasternack's house is less than 10 feet from the property line. He noted he has lived and practiced here in the Valley all his career, and he is a golf nut that loves Bighorn's Country Club, because he's seen it developed to 29 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 iing literally the premiere residential golf course property in the Valley and moo anywhere in the Country. Bighorn has developed to the credit of the City and Bighorn developers, because of the flexibility in what was designed and approved, including the strong reliance staff has placed on the HOA and its Architectural Review Committee to approve developments with a vision toward this Bighorn aesthetic. He said what Mr. Pasternack and his Counsel have said to the Court in Indio, is that Bighorn is a cesspool of zoning violations. He said he's driven through the gates of Bighorn, been in residences, and played golf there, and it is not a cesspool. A person that sees Bighorn as a cesspool, not surprisingly, will threaten to sue the City, neighbor, and the developers of Bighorn. However, it's been 20 years of development at Bighorn, and there is only one unhappy neighbor and one unhappy member. He said when plans and development standards are changed, one may invariably see many neighbors coming out of the woodwork to object, but it's not the case here. The reality is that Bighom is a great project, because it's been developed the way that it has over the years. He said it was a reinstatement of the flexible standards, which is consistent with how clubs develop over time. He said the folks at Bighorn appreciate it, have approved it, as well as his client. He urged the Council to approve the Development Plan as proposed this evening. With no further public testimony offered, Mayor Hamik declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Tanner stated the question has been asked about how many complaints there have been, and Mr. Mueller and Mr. Bagato have answered that question. Therefore, the intent here is for the Council to do what is right for the majority. If there is a question, it has been answered by both staff and the City's legal department. Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2013 - 06, approving Development Plan 12-371 as proposed. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. XVIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER 1. City Manager Meeting Summaries for the Period January 1 - 11, 2013. With City Council concurrence, the Meeting Summaries were received and filed. 2. Department of Finance (DOF) Update 30 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 Mr. Wohlmuth recalled for City Council that he previously reported that the Palm Desert Oversight Board approved the Settlement Agreement with County of Riverside relative to the Regional Access Project (RAP). The Oversight Board Resolution of approval went to the State Department of Finance (DOF), and yesterday he received word that it had objected to the action. Therefore, he's notified RAP Executive Director Judee Cox, Supervisor Benoit and his staff that this has occurred, and he will work with the DOF and Palm Desert's legal counsel to attempt to sort out the matter and get it approved. Simultaneously, he hoped to soon get the UCR existing obligation approved for the 11.5-acre property transfer for development of an ambulatory medical center. As these Redevelopment issues are worked through, he assured Council that he would provide updates on the progress being made. Upon inquiry, he said staff will aggressively work toward resolution with DOF; however, he was unsure of DOF's timeline in this regard. B. CITY ATTORNEY None C. CITY CLERK 1. Reminder of City Council Study Session on Monday, January 28, 2013, at 9:00 a.m. in the North Wing Conference Room for the Purpose of Conducting Committee/Commission Applicant Interviews. Ms. Klassen reminded City Councilmembers of Monday's Study Session to interview Committee/Commission applicants. She said 33 applicants were recommended for interview, with 22 of them responding and able to be scheduled. The Study Session will begin at 9:00 a.m. with the last appointment set for 3:15 p.m. Councilmembers noted the schedule. 2. Announcement of City Council Study Session on Thursday, February 14, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. in the Administrative Conference Room to Discuss Palm Desert Country Club. Ms. Klassen noted the Study Session scheduled prior to the next regular City Council Meeting on February 14. Councilmembers made note of this scheduled Study Session. 31 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 D. PUBLIC SAFETY 1. Fire Department None 2. Police Department None E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL 1. City Council Reauests for Action: None 2. City Council Consideration of Travel Requests and Reports: None 3. Citv Council Committee Reports: None 4. Citv Council Comments: a) Mayors and New Councilmembers Academy - Councilmember Weber said that while she couldn't speak on Councilman Tanner's behalf, she had a wonderful trip to Sacramento to the League of Califomia Cities' Conference last week and got a lot of good education there. Mayor Hamik agreed that the trip the three Councilmembers made to Sacramento for the League Academy was very worthwhile, and a lot of good education was received. She also commended the League for all its good work toward the mission of keeping local control at the city level and appreciated all it did for Palm Desert. owl ..r ale rrr b) Thank You — Councilman Tanner thanked staff for all its hard work in preparing for today's agenda. 32 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013 c) Ixtapa-ZihuataneiQ Sister City Delegation — Mayor Hamik said this week Councilmembers also welcomed the Ixtapa- Zihuatanejo representatives, with a really nice event held yesterday. d) "Cruise Niaht El Paseo" — Mayor Hamik commented that she hadn't yet retumed from Sacramento for the first event held last Friday evening but understood it was a tremendous success. The next "Cruise Night" is scheduled for February 1, and she hoped everyone would come out and enjoy it. 5. Suggested Items for Future Citv Council Meetina Agendas: None XIX. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Tanner, second by Weber, and 4-0 vote of the City Council, with Spiegel ABSENT, Mayor Harnik adjourned the meeting at 6:14 p.m. ATTEST: RAC ELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA / 33 ^1 MO MI rr