Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-10-12riN MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1989 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wilson convened the meeting at 8:57 p.m. for the Joint Meeting with the City Council. He recessed the meeting immediately following discussion of the public hearing Item at 9:55 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 12:10 a.m. to complete the remainder of the agenda. 11. ROLL CALL Members Present: Member Jean M. Benson Vice Chairman Buford Crites Member Richard S. Kelly Member Walter H. Snyder Chairman S. Roy Wilson Also Present: Bruce A. Altman. City Manager Carlos L. Ortega, ACM/R.D.A. Executive Director David J. Erwin, City Attorney Shelia R. Gilligan. Secretary Robert Markey, Acting Director of Finance Ramon A. Diaz, Director of Community Service/A.C.M. Richard S. Folkers. Director of Public Works/A.C.M. Paul 5hillcock, ACM/Dlrector of Economic Development CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of September 28. 1989. Rec: Approve as presented. MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 B. REQUEST FOR RATIFICATION of City Manager's Approval of Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. RD-366, Presidents' Plaza Parking Lot Improvement. in the Amount of $3,300.00. Rec: By Minute Motion, ratify the approval of Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. RD-366. C. REQUEST FOR RATIFICATION of City Manager's Approval of Change Order No. 2 to Contract No. RD-366, Presidents' Plaza Parking Lot Improvement, in the Amount of $4,735.71. Rec: By Minute Motion, ratify the approval of Change Order No. 2 to Contract No. RD-366. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Change Order No. 3 to Contract No. RD-343. Sheriff Station Construction. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve Change Order No. 3 in the amount of $10,551.00 for entrance street work on Fred Waring Drive. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Substitution of Subcontractor for Sheriff's Station Construction. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the substitution of subcontractors for roofing and steel fabrication as requested by J. Murrey Construction, Inc., contractor of the Sheriff's Station. E. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF WORK on Contract No. RD-366, Presidents' Plaza East Parking Lot. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the request and authorize the City Clerk to record a Notice of Completion for Contract No. RD-366. Upon motion by Snyder. second by Crites, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented by unanimous vote of the Agency Board. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None V. RESOLUTIONS None 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ • VI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VII. NEW BUSINESS None Viii. CONTINUED BUSINESS None iX. OLD BUSINESS None X. JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING B. CONSIDERATION OF REOUEST FOR CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, CHANGE OF ZONE, AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROJECT AREA NO. 1, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND AHMANSON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (CASE NOS. GPA89-I. C/Z89-1. ZOA89-1). (Continued from the meeting of September 28, 1989.) Wilson: The next public hearing is consideration of a request for certification of Environmental Impact Report, Approval of General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Amendment No. 5 to the Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. 1, and Development Agreement between the City and Ahmanson Commercial Development Company, a hearing that has been continued from our meeting of September 28, 1989. For the record, i would like to state that I was not in attendance at the meeting of September 28. 1989. Since that time 1 have listened to the tape that was recorded of that hearing and 1 also read the transcript. verbatim transcript. of that hearing and feel that 1 am apprised of the issues that were discussed at the last meeting. The public hearing is still open but 1 will first ask the staff for a report and a response to issues raised at the last meeting. Diaz: Yes, Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. The proposal that you have before you is a culmination of a lot of months of work and effort. Actually, we can say a lot of years of work and effort. the beginnings of which 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • were the Year 2000 committee's work in the commercial area and that Year 2000 plan calling for the City of Palm Desert to retain its preeminence in the retail commercial area as well as a resort commercial destination area. Also, the Economic Development Advisory Committee has worked with the developer and applicant in reviewing the proposal, and they have recommended approval. The Planning Commission's public hearing process, where they recommended approval, not necessarily in the same manner as i will get to as far as the circulation is concerned. in addition, presentations have been made to the Chamber of Commerce and the El Paseo Merchants' Association. And finally your Core Commercial Plan called for, which was adopted by the City. called for rethinking and reanalysis of the particular parcels under consideration, particularly along Highway 111. Some of the key issues that were brought up at the last hearing, and of course, one was which alternative with regards to the future of Painters Path. There seemed to be consensus among the members of the Council that alternative B or this alternative that does not have a connection across the Channel with Painters Path would be the preferable of the alternatives as opposed to having Painters Path a through street. There wee some discussion of the possibility of, at the time of development, some kind of interconnect bridge between these two projects and your discussions today should lead us or let staff know exactly what is proposed here. With regards to this interconnect, you have a letter from legal counsel for Mr. George Fox that was submitted today Indicating that if the Alternative B is adopted, there could be possible litigation as a result of that because he needs that for access. I might indicate to the Council that at the time we were reviewing that particular plan, that access was not shown as necessary for that development. if it had been. we might have looked differently at that particular development. However, as far as the access to that Particular property is concerned and those easements, it is staff's feeling that is a private matter between the property owner and that we should make the decision that, I'm sure that we will make the decision that we feel is in the best interests of the City of Palm Desert with or without the threat of litigation. The other issues that arose was with regards to the parcel at Town Center Way and Fred Waring Drive and the uses that would be proposed along Fred Waring. At this Particular point in time, we do not have specific developments or 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12. 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • . • . • • • development plans before us. Those, again, would be subject to further public hearing and additional hearings. It would be staff's recommendation that we indicate that in terms of this particular parcel that along Fred Waring Drive that at the time of application, that the applicant develop this in a manner that will not duly impact Fred Waring in terms of aesthetic concerns as well as impact it in terms of intensity of development. One of the key items within this plan and proposal, of course, is the Item of the people mover, which is currently under study by a firm, and you received a first check for $10,000 today from the Town Center. The applicant has also agreed to pay for $10.000 of that study, and of course the City is paying for the other third. And that particular study will result in terms of the overall plan of a people mover to connect the entire commercial area, which would have a significant effect in terms of traffic flow and interchange of people moving from one area and one center to the other. The applicant will be conditioned to pay his fair share of the cost of implementing that. He does not object to that and that will be in the final development agreement that you will have before you. In terms of El Paseo, an issue that arose at the last meeting was how that Sun Lodge Colony was going to be developed. Again,' that would be subject to the precise plan of design for that particular site and it will be developed in a manner that is obviously compatible with our overall long-range goals and objectives and compatible with the type of development that is now occurring and complementary to the type of development which is now occurring along El Paseo in implementation of our overall goals to make El Paseo one of the best shopping streets, not only in the State but in the Nation. Staff would at this time like to state that, I think the purpose of the hearing this evening is first of all to conc►ude the environmental impact report comment period so that we can then at your next meeting present the response to those comments for your consideration. Obviously, the Council can then discuss those response to comments, but that would conclude then the comment period to the environmental impact report and to bring out any specific issues or concerns that had not been brought out at the previous meeting. And looking at the hour. that would conclude the staff report. Wilson: 'Are there any questions of staff before I take testimony? 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • * • • • . • • • • Crites: Do 1 then assume that responses to all the specific inquiries that we made two weeks ago will come two weeks from now? Diaz: Yes, your inquiries would be specifically addressed at that time. Crites: But they'll be addressed after the opportunity for the public to comment on those responses is over? Diaz: The, yes, the purpose of CEQA is you have the draft environmental impact report, the comments to those reports, and the response to comments. We do not have an endless series then of comments to the response and response to those comments. If the Council so wishes, at that particular point in time wishes to reopen the comment period. it can do so. Crites: Okay, thank you. Wilson: Okay, thank you. The public hearing is open. 1 would like to, again, make it clear that we would first like to have all public comment address the environmental impact report. After we have gotten all of the testimony on the environmental impact report from the public. give the Council another chance to discuss that. and 1 would like to close that public hearing on the environmental impact report end continue to take testimony then on the proposed change of zone, development agreement, and the other aspects of this complex project. Ortega: Mr. Mayor, this part of the hearing should be in conjunction with the Redevelopment. You remember that... Wilson: Thank you very much. Before we take testimony, 1 would like to call the Redevelopment Agency meeting to order and ask the City Clerk to call the roll. Gilligan: Member Benson. Benson: Present. Gilligan: Vice Chairman Crites. Crites: Present. Gilligan: Member Kelly. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT REOEVELOPNENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Kelly: Here. Gilligan: Member Snyder. Snyder: Here. Gilligan: Chairman Wilson. Wilson: Here. Okay, we are sitting as two bodies at the moment, the City Council of Palm Desert and the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency. We'll take testimony now from anyone who wishes to add additional comments on the environmental impact report. Yes, Mr. Simon? Simon: Mr. Mayor and City Councilmembers, my name is Gregory Simon. I'm Director of Ahmanson Commercial Development, 11111 (i always have to remember it's five l's) Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 2127. Los Angeles 90025. 1 Just wanted to start our comment period in the same manner in which Mayor Pro-Tem Crites closed the last meeting, and that was in a very up, very thoughtful, and a very positive manner. Since the last meeting, our staff has been meeting rather intensively with not only the City staff but with our consultants in addressing the very thoughtful issues that were raised. And we looked forward to being able to conclude the public comment section tonight in order that we can finalize and deal in its entirety with the comments relative to the EIR. We have very positive attitudes and responses to a presentation that was made on the people mover. It's genuinely exciting. I've had a chance to talk to Mayor Wilson about how we hope to be able to cooperate in getting the right type of people out here to give us their expertise. In addition and in the interim since our last meeting. Palm Desert has been the host to the international Council of Shopping Center, a deal -making session for the Western United States which is that everybody who would like to talk about having a tenant come in and serve their community fortunately all those tenants and merchants came to Palm Desert and from this position decided where they would like to go. And obviously we were able to garner a very strong interest in a broad base of the retail community to serve this valley, and i think in particular 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY • • • • • • • • OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Palm Desert stands highest among that. Thank you for your time. W ilson: Thank you for your comments. Additional testimony addressing the environmental impact report? Perrier: Yes. my name is Allen Perrier, and my address is 226 Santa Barbara in Paim Desert. And I'm here to state on behalf of Mr. Fox, he was unable to be here this evening and asked that i appear. And I did, this afternoon, deliver to the City Clerk a letter that apparently you have. And i would just sort of like to suggest that I think it's really time to sit back and to u nderstand that the Fox Canyon project is very significantly impacted by this concern that we have with respect to the circulation element, which I understand to be that the significant matter or at least one of the significant matters of your concern of the environmental impact report. And we had understood, Mr. Fox had, that a Painters Path, as far as the proposal as the developer was concerned, was to be bridged at the Channel and that Painters Path would, in fact, be completed as a public street as It now is a public street in the City. i made some inquiry. 1 don't believe that there's been anything done to vacate the public character of Painters Path, so it is a public street. Secondly, the Fox Canyon property has a 60 foot easement from the property to Highway I11 as it was several years ago, which is Painters Path. And it's a very valuable ✓ ight, and it has always been Mr. Fox's intent and while I haven't had a chance to review the proceedings there has always been an understanding that access to the property would be from Highway 111 as well as the north side. That's something we can delve into, but in my personal d iscussions with Mr. Fox, that's always been a factor. So the point i would like to bring out that I'm here trying to speak in some respects on behalf of the future owners of that project. While it has had some controversy with ✓ espect to it, i think it's a fact that it wi 11 be developed and it's I believe in everybody's best interest that it be developed to its finest quality possible. And ih my judgment that means reasonable access through this property. and it ought to be something that you can be proud of as far as access Is concerned to the property. You know, the players in some respects are still the same. it's the Ahmanson Company that sold off the property to Mr. Fox's predecessor. has granted the easement to Painters Path. And they're now in, and I believe they've 8 • n MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . got an obligation of good faith and fair dealing to deal with us in a reasonable manner with respect to that property. And that's a position I'll advocate and while that is a matter of, private matter. the fact that Painters Path is a public street and that our access is to Painters Path puts the City into the arena because the developer. i believe, made a reasonable request for the bridging of Painters Path. It seems to me it was recommended to you by the Planning Commission. I'm not an expert on traffic, traffic standards, or what is beneficial to the City, but it just seems to me and 1 am a citizen of the City, that it would make sense that there be some fashion in some manner that the El Paseo traffic could travel to the commercial development on the west side of the Channel without going onto Highway 111. 1 think that makes some sense. so as you get into this give some thought about Mr. Fox's easement. the rights of the people to have sensible access to their lots as they're going to be developed in the future. So, that's really all 1 have to say unless you have some questions. Wilson: i have a question, Mr. Perrier. Perrier: Certainly. Wilson: I'm a little unclear. The easement that the Fox, or that Mr. Fox has with the property owner runs... Perrier: May i show you? Wilson: Would you point it out please? Perrier: (unable to hear clearly) Wilson: Could you hand Mr. Perrier the microphone and also... Perrier: ...60 foot easement and it joins Painters Path. And that's where the easement is. Wilson: in other words. regardless of how we decide on this. the people In that area do have access to the City of Palm Desert down to Painters Path. down Painters Path to Fred Waring Drive, and then out to Highway 1 I I . Is that correct? Perrier: Right, and (unclear)...Painters Path was the Highway 111. which provided significantly better access that it does now. And we believe they have an obligation 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • of good faith and fair dealing to be fair with us at this time to provide us the same access. That's why we think, frankly, they're obligated to seek to bridge Painters Path in out behalf. W ilson: Mr. Crites. Crites: I'm amazed at how perceptions of what's good for folk change. Some years ago when Mr. Fox was a weekly ✓ isitor to our city concerning Fox Canyon, he spoke e loquently of keeping all of the traffic out of that area and sealing all that off from Painters Path and so on and so forth. And that he wished to use the existing bridge that crosses up near the little tennis court area, which is to the south of his project, as his primary access. I remember sitting at this side of the desk with Mr. Fox at that side and hearing Mr. Fox earnestly proclaim the usefulness of the rural access so that people were not bothered by traffic, etc., etc., etc. Now I'm sure that you will be diligent in going back through the transcripts and looking for all those comments and so on and so forth. But I'm just at least remarking that the flavor of this, the flavor of that, had the flavor of entirely different meals. Perrier: Well, my recollection is that access in both d irections was required by the City. That's my recollection of the facts. 50... But, that, you know, I'm sure we can find out and all I'm saying is if you had your choice of the access to your lot, my question would be which access would you prefer? And I'll state for those future owners of those lots. I think the benefits from the access to Highway III are measurably beneficial to the property. W ilson: Thank you, Mr. Perrier, for your comments. I think this additional input we will take under advisement when we address that issue of Plan A or B. The next additional testimony on the environmental impact report? Seeing none, I will ask the Council if they have anv additional questions or comments on the environmental impact report. Kelly; I guess 1 have to make sure my comments fit into the environmental impact report? Wilson: We'll let Mr. Diaz tell you... 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Kelly: He'll tell me if they don't. One of the things that came UP at the Recycling Conference, well on recycling, but came up at the Recycling Conference that has never come up at any other conference that I've been to on that particular subject. that is with all the new laws it is imperative that recycling be addressed in all zoning ordinances, which needs to be included in these zoning ordinances. Probably, that's an environmental impact. Where it fits in and how ft fits in I don't know. Wilson: i guess the question directed to staff is to whether or not that appropriately belongs in the EIR or part of the development agreement, some kind of... Otaz: We can address that in the general response to the comment and obviously we're working on the recycling within the zoning ordinance that would apply to this project anyway. Kelly: And another mitigation to the traffic along with the people mover is other public transportation and proper turnouts and conditions that encourage people to use public transportation. Wilson: Is that so noted? Diaz: Yes. Wilson: Mrs. Benson. do you have any additional EIR comments or questions? Benson: No. i don't have anything additional. Wilson: Mr. Crites, 1 don't see how you could have anything additional after listening to your exhaustive (unclear) last week, but we'll ask you anyway. Crites: i just have this five page summary of more, no. Those few comments from last week suffice. Wilson: Mr. Snyder. Snyder: My comments last week were sufficient. Wilson: In that case, I will hereby close the public hearing on the environmental impact report and direct staff to prepare appropriate responses and bring them back to us at our meeting in two weeks, if that's possible. Diaz: Yes, we will. MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 . . . . . . • • • . . . . . * . . * . . . * . . * Wilson: With that. I'll now. we still have... Crites: Excuse me, one question. is that sufficient time, I mean, we don't need to have this back in two weeks just to find out that it's really not done in a way that tends to the business to where we have to do it another time after that and so on and so forth. Does staff have a preference for two weeks or four weeks in terms of the preparation of getting this job done and getting it done well for Ahmanson, for the City, for the Council, for the whole works? Diaz: We believe that we can respond to the comments in two weeks. Wilson: Thank you. The public hearing is still open on the remaining issues dealing with this project. and those are the approval of the General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Amendment to Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. 1, and Development Agreements between the City and the Ahmanson Commercial Development Company. We will now take testimony in FAVOR of those remaining aspects. Ehrler: Mr. Mayor. members of the City Council, Dan Ehrler with the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce, Executive Vice President. On behalf of the Palm Desert Chamber Board of Directors, i just wanted to reiterate what was in our communication to you some months ago. After a very extensive presentation by the Ahmanson Company to a joint meeting of our Board of Directors, Business Economic Development Committee, and our Civic Affairs Committee, at which the presentation was made, the concept was presented, and then the Board took the action to support that concept for the implementation of this plan. And i just wanted to reiterate that. 1 believe that that communication was a part of, if I'm not mistaken Ray, a part of that FIR too, wasn't it? Diaz: Yes. i believe it was. Ehrler: 1 believe that was a part of that report as well, that written comment and then you've also received it before. So 1 just wanted to reiterate that support on behalf of the Board of Directors. I think the Ahmanson Company has demonstrated its commitment to the community to do the best they can to work out whatever arrangements will be most beneficial to the entire community, and they are to be commended for that and as the Chamber looks at 12 -........, MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • it, we think it will be ultimately a very beneficial project for years to come. Thank you. Wilson: Thank you very much. Next person who would like to give testimony in FAVOR of the proposals before us. Powers: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council, I'm Bill Powers, Chairman of the El Paseo Business Association. We are in support of the Ahmanson project. As a matter of fact, on October 5th, we passed a resolution, which 1'll read to you, and 1 have copies for the members. "At the October 5th, 1989, meeting of the Board of Directors of the El Paseo Business Association, the Board voted its unanimous support of the Ahmanson Development Sun Lodge project on El Paseo as well as the balance of their developments along Highway 111. By its resolution of support, the Board hopes this project will serve as a centerpiece for a strong and vibrant El Paseo." And as a member and Chairman of that Association, we look favorably on this protect because it wi l l add to what has been mentioned earlier about El Paseo being the class act of the desert and possibly California and maybe even the Nation. We hope that would be what could happen. But It's the vitality and the synergism and everything else of it all tying together that makes a lot of sense for us, and we endorse it completely. Wilson: Thank you very much, Mr. Powers. Additional testimony in FAVOR? Seeing none, 1'll call for testimony in OPPOSITION. Perrier: i would like to have the statements that I made previously made a part of the record as far as this matter is concerned and would ask that since apparently your consideration does include circulation, I don't see how and I don't understand what proposal you're making for the circulation on the west side of the Channel. I see no Public roads or anything or an acknowledgement of the existence of Painters Path. That's my only comment. Thank you. Wilson: Thank you. Additional testimony in OPPOSITION? For the record. did Mr. Perrier state his name for the tape? Mr. Perrier, who previously spoke and gave his address, just spoke. Name and address. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • .• • • • • • • • • • • • • r • r • • • • • Stage: I'm Joanne Stage at Sandpiper. I have one quick question. How many Tots does Mr. fox intend to develop? Could 1 just ask that Just as a personal? Unknown: 58. Stage: 58. So. okay. There are 306 units at Sandpiper that we're concerned about and of course then on up Edgehill there are quite a number of other units that are very deeply concerned about the traffic flow. And I came up with an idea, be it good or bad, and I'm going to present it again. And I don't, I really didn't understand Plan 1 of the Ahmanson plan that well, and I'd really like to see it again. I guess it's been vetoed and it was mainly because we didn't want the bridge over the Wash because we really feel strongly that we don't want more traffic on that area. Wilson: I'd like to correct the record. It hasn't been vetoed at this point. 1 think the consensus from the last meeting was that they favor the other proposal. but until the matter comes to a vote it's still on the table. Stage: Well 1 was just talking with the representative from the Ahmanson group and I just thought maybe that was something that we sort of tabled. But, may I just show you something just on the map? Wilson: We'll give you a microphone here that you can use. please. Please use the microphone because we are taping those Proceedings. Stage: Alright. When we had a mild rainstorm recently, the flood channel did its bit I guess, but an awful lot of the City will tell you of dirt and rocks and so on that is stacked against the channel and against Edgehill washed down onto Edgehill. It was a real mess, and a dangerous one. My proposal is that somehow that area be walled, that there be consideration for some sort of a wall, and a wider street at Edgehill giving a service road of a sort to Edgehill, with a stop sign. I'm sorry you're not able to see this... with a stop sign at thls very dangerous corner of Painters Path and Edgehill and a divided road. There's almost room, there's room for an ample two-lane road here now. But if this bank along Edgehill were cleared and the road were widened, there could be two roads, two lanes, and there could be a service road all along this area, which I would think might be a serious consideration that hasn't been discussed at this point. 14 4. 1 eaN MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . • • • • • • • • That's Edgehill. Then, turning here at this very bad Point, which is a big consideration, here you have not developed anything yet. And they've talked of giving Sandpiper a park, they've talked about putting up a wall, one thing or another. There is quite a wide. Painters Path is quite wide actually. And El Paseo has dividing islands that are even wider than the road, so that if this area were widened for a two -land road, since they're going to have an access road coming out of their new development, and if we were to have a service road along Sandpiper so that that would run not only for the good of the Sandpiper but mainly, yeah, for really for the good of Sandpiper. And, but it would also continue on up Edgehill for the good of the people that live along Edgehill who have built there for years in good faith, and there are many of them, many more than fifty. i think that might be something to consider, where right now there is land available to do that. The worst, one of the worst spots in our whole Palm Desert area was created when there was en access road coming out of TGI Fridays and The Wherehouse and all the rest of it, right onto El Paseo. There's no way to have good traffic control there, and they zip across there into El Paseo, and they zip across there onto Painters Path, and that i said last time. But I've given it a lot of thought, and 1 do think this extension might be interesting. Crites: Would you be willing to take your Innovative idea and visit with Mr. Diaz tomorrow about that? Stage: Yeah, I'd really like to do that. I didn't know who to see, but I will be glad to. Wilson: Mr. Diaz and Mr. Folkers both, I think. Stage: Thank you. Crites: We need to look at every option we can come through with and see what and evaluate them. Wilson: Additional testimony in OPPOSITION? Stage: My name is Don Stage. and I can't let my wife get the last word. i have, I'm really not In opposition to this protect at all. i Just want to clarify that we're talking about Plan B or Plan 2, which does not include a bridge. I was at the hearings when Mr. Fox was here, and I specifically stood here and said "are you going to put a bridge across the wash?". and they said. the Council at 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 that time said "No, we're not." Now, this gentleman understood they were going to have a bridge. 1 don't know. Maybe the tapes will show. But that was my understanding. And I see no reason in the world or the only reason to put a bridge across there to take care of 58 people on Fox Canyon. And 1 don't know that I'll live long enough to see that many people up on the hill. 1 hope not. Thank you. Wilson: Thank you. Additional testimony in OPPOSITION? Evers: I'm Dave Evers, 72450 Manzanita Drive. We live just across the street from Travelers Inn there on Fred Waring. And I'm not opposed to it. but I do have a concern about where 111 meets and Fred Waring, across from Reuben's Restaurant and Flying J gas station. Well we live right behind there. and we've, they've used that. where (unclear) development was going to put a farmers market there. And they've been using that for parking for, well, the worst problem we have is CalTrans. When they were in there widening Highway III and when Travelers Inn came in and the Wash was there and One Quail and the Mali. And we've been, the dust has, you know. But we're not against this, unless they're going to park there. If they use that for a parking area. then we are. Wilson: We will so note that. Evers: Okay, so they won't be traveling back and forth and rollers won't be going down our street any more. and trucks, and... We've got all kinds of pictures. So anytime you want to see them let us know. Thank you. W ilson: Thank you for your input. Additional testimony, P lease? Anyone in OPPOSITION? Is there anyone else. Yes, sir. Dresser: Good evening. My name is Dan Dresser, and i live at 43-900 Joshua Road in Palm Desert here. And I'd just like to reiterate what my neighbor just said because it was just awful and it was like living in a truck stop and so. as long as they don't park there 1 don't have anything against it either. Okay? W ilson: Thank you for your input. Any additional testimony? Seeing none, then 1 will call on the applicant. Is there anything he wishes to refute that might have been entered into the testimony this evening? 16 n MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Appl icant: Mr. Mayor, I would like to take the opportunity to consider all statements that have been made tonight in order to rebut if necessary, certainly to respond as we intend to respond at the next Council meeting. I'd like to take that opportunity. Wilson: Okay, with that understanding, we will keep this Public hearing open. It would be inappropriate to take action on this until we get the comments on the EIR and have the staff analyze this entire package and come back with a recommendation to us. Mr. Diaz, is two -week continuance appropriate? QiaZ: Yes. Wilson: Does Council have any questions of staff or of anyone in the audience or any questions before i entertain a motion to continue for two weeks this public hearing? Benson: I'd just like to say in regard to Buford's, too, that if two weeks is sufficient, we certainly don't want it on Tuesday before Council In order to digest the answers. Diaz: My staff, super Planner Phil Drell, will have the response to comments to you before the Tuesday before the Thursday. Wilson: It's called buck passing? Crites: it's his last act before officially retiring, right? Wilson: So now it would be appropriate to entertain a motion to continue this. Councilman Crites so moved. Councilmember Benson seconded the motion, and it carried by unanimous vote. X1. REPORTS, REMARKS, AND AGENCY BOARD ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION A. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR None 8. AGENCY COUNSEL None 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 1989 • . . • OOOOOOOOOOOOO • • • C. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY None XII. ADJOURNMENT Member Crites moved to adjourn to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8, Real Property Transactions and 54956.9 (a) and (b). Pending and Potential Litigation. Member Snyder seconded the motion, and it carried by unanimous vote. Chairman Wilson adjourned to Closed Session at 12:10 a.m. He reconvened the meeting at 12:50 a.m. and immediately adjourned with no action taken. ATTEST: ' SHEILA R. G1L IGAN, SECRE ARY TO THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMEN AGENCY OY WILSON, CHAIRMAN 18