MINUTES

REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING

THURSDAY, JULY 14, 2011

CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER

73510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260

I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel convened the meeting at 3:00 p.m.

II. ROLL CALL

Present: Absent: Councilmember Cindy Finerty Mayor Jean M. Benson Councilmember Jan C. Harnik Councilman William R. Kroonen Mayor Pro Tem Robert A. Spiegel

Also Present: John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager/RDA Executive Director David J. Erwin, City Attorney Justin McCarthy, ACM for Redevelopment Stephen Y. Aryan, Assistant to the City Manager Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Russell Grance, Director of Building & Safety Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Janet M. Moore, Director of Housing Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works Frankie Riddle, Director of Special Programs J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Finance Director Steve Brooker, Fire Marshal, Palm Desert Fire/Riverside Co. Fire Dept./Cal Fire Andrew Shouse, Asst. Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff’s Dept. Grace L. Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk

III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A (CLOSED SESSION ITEMS)

None

IV. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

Request for Closed Session:

Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

1) Property: Lease Property - Parkview Professional Office Complex - 73710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite Nos. 201 and 203, Palm Desert Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Paul S. Gibson/City of Palm Desert Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Other Parties: Virginia Waring International Piano Competition Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment

2) Property: 72-240 Upper Way West (APN 628-130-007), Palm Desert Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/David J. Erwin/City of Palm Desert Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment

Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a):

a) Ruhnau, Ruhnau, Clarke & Associates v. City of Palm Desert/ Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. INC 10008463

Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b): Number of potential cases: 2

Conference with Legal Counsel regarding potential to initiate litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c): Number of potential cases: 1

Public Employment pursuant to Government Code Section 54957: Title of Position: City Attorney’s Office

Mr. Erwin asked for the City Council’s consideration of adding two items to today’s agenda for Closed Session:

1) Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8:

Property: APN 622-020-089 Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Justin McCarthy/City of Palm Desert/ Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency/ Palm Desert Housing Authority Property Owner: DesertArc Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment

2 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

2) Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a):

City of Palm Desert/Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency v. GHA Enterprises, Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. INC 10007782

Upon a motion by Kroonen, second by Finerty, and 4-0 vote of the City Council, with Benson ABSENT, the two aforementioned Closed Session items were added to the agenda.

With City Council concurrence, Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:01 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 4:05 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 Robert A. Spiegel

VII. INVOCATION - Councilmember Cindy Finerty

VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B

MR. CARL CIESLIKOWSKI, Spyglass Lane, Palm Desert, addressed the City Council regarding two issues he felt were important to the health and safety of the public. He provided a written statement to City Councilmembers, which was received for the record and is now on file in the City Clerk’s Office; it sets out both his concerns and suggested solutions. First, he was troubled about the drainage of water on El Paseo, which led him to contact Mr. Greenwood about his concerns. He believed there were not enough sewage lines to take away the nuisance water, and the water that does run off into the percolation areas was likely polluted. Secondly, he was concerned about the City’s dog parks, after having dog trainers, veterinarians, and other professionals advise him against using dog parks because of disease and other factors. He hoped his suggestions would be provided to staff for further feasibility review.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel said he would refer the issues to staff.

MS. ELIZABETH SEED, resident of One Quail Place Apartments, Palm Desert, stated that her lease there is renewed each August, including the requirement for income recertification for her rental rate. She has been waiting for the new rent amount but was told this week by a member of the Apartments’ management staff

3 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

that the City has not provided them with the new rent guidelines. In order for her to budget, it was necessary to know what the rent would be, and she was seeking assistance from the City Council for this purpose.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel assured Ms. Seed that staff would be in touch with her to resolve the issue.

IX. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS

None

X. CONSENT CALENDAR

A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 23, 2011.

Rec: Approve as presented.

B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 260, 261, 264, 265, 269, 270, and 271.

Rec: Approve as presented.

C. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Macroe Industries, LLC, 267 Santa Barbara Circle, Palm Desert.

Rec: Receive and file.

D. CITY COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.

1. Library Promotion Committee Meeting of March 16, 2011. 2. Marketing Committee Meeting of May 17, 2011.

Rec: Receive and file.

E. INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS’ REPORT on Agreed-upon Procedures Performed on the Measure “A” Transportation Fund for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010.

Rec: Receive and file.

4 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Streamlined Use of Vendors for the Special Programs Department for Solid Waste and Recycling and for Special Events by Granting an Exception to Bidding Requirements – Fiscal Year 2011-2012.

Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Grant an exception to bidding requirements for FY 2011-2012, as provided for by Section 3.32.090 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code; 2) approve the Special Programs/Events Vendor List attached to the accompanying staff report as presented.

G. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Streamlined Use of Vendors for the Corporation Yard by Granting Exception to Bidding Requirements and Approving the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) Vendor List and the Corporation Yard Various Vendors and Qualified Service Providers List – Fiscal Year 2011-2012.

Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Grant an exception to bidding requirements, as provided for by Section 3.32.090 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, for FY 2011-2012; 2) approve the OEM Vendor List; 3) approve the Corporation Yard Various Vendors and Qualified Service Providers List – as presented in the accompanying staff report.

H. REQUEST FOR DECLARATION of Surplus Property and Authorization for Disposal – Information Systems Department Miscellaneous Computer and Electronics Equipment.

Rec: By Minute Motion, declare items listed on the accompanying staff report’s Exhibit “A” as surplus property and authorize disposal as appropriate.

I. REQUEST FOR RATIFICATION of the Disposal of Surplus Property from The Desert Willow Golf Resort – Unsalvageable Equipment/Fixed Assets from the Kitchen/Building and Lakeview Terrace Expansion Projects.

Removed for separate consideration under Section XI, Consent Items Held Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes for Council discussion and action.

J. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Surplus the City’s CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) Ambulance Chassis and the Associated CNG Tanks.

Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize staff to surplus the City’s CNG Ambulance Chassis and CNG Tanks as proposed.

5 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

K. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Donate the City’s 2002 Ford Fire Department Electric Vehicle to the Riverside County Fire Department.

Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize staff to donate the City’s Fire Department Electric Vehicle to the Riverside County Fire Department.

L. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Utilize Vendors on an Authorized Motorcycle Repair Center List for Repairs to City-owned Police Vehicles and Communication Equipment.

Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize staff to utilize vendors on the Authorized Motorcycle Repair Center List as presented in the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department Memorandum dated May 12, 2011.

M. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Contract with Academic Supplier for Citywide Ink and Toner Supplies (Contract No. C31020).

Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the subject contract with Academic Supplier, Chula Vista, California, to supply ink and toner products to City offices for one year, with two possible one-year extensions.

N. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Contract with The Holman Group to Provide an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) (Contract No. C31030).

Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the subject contract with The Holman Group, Northridge, California, to provide an EAP and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute same – funds in the approximate amount of $3,300 annually are available in FY 2011-2012 Human Resources, Professional-Other Account No. 110-4154-415-3090.

O. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Renewal of Contract with the Law Firm of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore (LCW) to Maintain the City’s Membership in the Coachella Valley Employment Relations Consortium (Contract No. C21525).

Rec: By Minute Motion, approve renewal of the subject contract with Liebert Cassidy Whitmore (LCW) for membership in the Coachella Valley Employment Relations Consortium – funds are available in Account No. 110-4154-415-3121.

6 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

P. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT to Doug Wall Construction, Inc., in the Amount of $24,928 for Vacant Parcel A and Parcel D Lot Pad Stabilization at Desert Willow (Contract No. C30970).

Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Authorize award of the subject contract in the amount of $24,928 to Doug Wall Construction, Inc., Bermuda Dunes, California, for stabilization of vacant lot Pads A and D at Desert Willow; 2) authorize the Director of Finance to set aside the amount of $2,492.80 as 10% contingency for the subject project (use of contingency requires additional action); 3) appropriate $27,420.80 to Account No. 451-4663-454-4001 from the Unobligated Capital Project Properties City/RDA Fund.

Q. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. C29890 – Civic Center Re-roofing Project (Project No. 712-10).

Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $42,434 to the subject contract with Progressive Roofing, Manteca, California; 2) authorize the transfer of $42,434 from contingency to base for the project; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute Change Order No. 1 – funds are available in the Building Maintenance/Repair and Maintenance City Hall Account No. 450-4161-415-4001.

R. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF WORK for Contract No. R30200 – Deconstruction of Sagecrest Apartments at 73-775 Santa Rosa Way and Deconstruction of 73-805 Santa Rosa Way (Vizion’s West, Inc., Winchester, CA) (Joint Consideration with the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency).

Rec: By Minute Motion, accept the work as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the subject project.

S. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF WORK and Authorization for Additional Expenditure for Citywide Catch Basin, Storm Drain, and Under-sidewalk Drain Clean-out Project (Contract No. C30260, Project No. 501-11) (Advanced Sewer Technologies, Inc., Los Angeles, CA).

Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $11,080 to the subject contract with Advanced Sewer Technologies, Inc., Los Angeles, California, for additional facilities treated, and authorize the Mayor to execute same; 2) authorize the transfer of $3,981.20 from contingency to base for the contract; 3) ratify the City Manager’s authorization to appropriate funds in the amount of $7,098.80 from Unobligated FY 2010-2011 General Fund Reserves to Storm Drain Maintenance Account No. 110-4314-433-3320; 4) accept the work as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for Contract No. C30260 – Citywide Catch Basin, Storm Drain, and Under-sidewalk Drain Clean-out 2010-2011.

7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

T. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF WORK and Authorization for Additional Expenditure for the Citywide Lighting Inventory Project (Contract No. C30410) (RBF Consulting, Inc., Palm Desert, CA).

Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $2,122.40 to the subject contract with RBF Consulting, Inc., Palm Desert, California, for additional services performed, and authorize the Mayor to execute same; 2) authorize the transfer of $1,640.31 from contingency to base for the contract; 3) approve additional expenditure in the amount of $482.09 – funds are available in the FY 2010-2011 Budget, Account No. 110-4611-453-3092 – Public Works Park Maintenance - Professional Services; 4) accept the work as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for Contract No. C30410 – Citywide Lighting Inventory.

U. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Maintenance Security for Longs Drug Stores California, LLC – Precise Plan No. 07-01 (Longs Drug Stores California, LLC, Applicant).

Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize release of the Maintenance Security for Longs Drug Stores California, LLC (Case No. PP 07-01).

V. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Security for Ponderosa Homes II, Inc. – Tract No. 31490-1 (Ponderosa Homes II, Inc., Applicant).

Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize release of the security for Ponderosa Homes II, Inc. (Tract No. 31490-1).

W. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION of Out-of-State Travel for Director of Public Works to Attend the 2011 ITE Annual Meeting and Exhibit Conference – St. Louis, Missouri, August 13 -16.

Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Director of Public Works to attend the 2011 ITE Annual Meeting and Exhibit Conference, St. Louis, Missouri, August 13-16 – funds are available in Account No. 110-4300-413-3120 – Public Works Conference/Seminars/Workshops.

X. LETTER from United Way of the Desert, Congratulating City of Palm Desert Employees’ 2010-2011 Fundraising Campaign Totaling $11,311.81.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel requested Item I be removed for separate action under Section XI, Consent Items Held Over.

Upon a motion by Kroonen, second by Finerty, and 4-0 vote of the City Council, with Benson ABSENT, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented.

8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

XI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER

I. REQUEST FOR RATIFICATION of the Disposal of Surplus Property from The Desert Willow Golf Resort – Unsalvageable Equipment/Fixed Assets from the Kitchen/Building and Lakeview Terrace Expansion Projects.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated the City was disposing approximately $60,000 worth of property from Desert Willow Golf Resort. He asked if staff was selling it.

Mr. Espinoza responded the property was used for recycling material during the construction.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, ratify disposal of the surplus property associated with the subject projects from Desert Willow Golf Resort as listed on the accompanying staff report’s Exhibit “A”. Motion was seconded by Harnik and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

XII. RESOLUTIONS

A. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 62 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT NO. 31490-2 (Ponderosa Homes II, Inc., Applicant).

Mr. Greenwood stated this was a subdivision of an existing residential tract, Ponderosa Homes, which is located at Gerald Ford Drive and Portola Avenue on the north west corner. The action subdivides a piece of the property and allows for that property to be sold to another owner to develop homes on it. The request for approval is conditional upon tax certificates being delivered to the City. Staff advanced this item to avoid delays during the summer break so the development can proceed. He noted this item and the next one on the agenda are similar requests.

Councilmember Finerty moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2011-62, contingent upon the County Tax Collector signing the tax certificates. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

B. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 63 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT NO. 36335 (Ponderosa Homes II, Inc., Applicant).

Councilmember Finerty moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2011-63, contingent upon the County Tax Collector signing the tax certificates. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

XIII. ORDINANCES

For Introduction:

A. ORDINANCE NO. 1224 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT – PROVIDING A SECOND TIER OF BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES HIRED AFTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2011.

Human Resources Manager Lori Carney stated this was the next step required by the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) to create a lower tier of pension benefits for new employees. Responding to question, she confirmed the City had a hiring freeze and had not hired anyone in three years, but this will lay the groundwork for when new employees are hired. Further responding, she confirmed pension benefits will be less for new employees.

Councilmember Finerty moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 1224 to second reading. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

For Adoption:

None

XIV. NEW BUSINESS

A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A NEW MONUMENT SIGN LOCATED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF COOK STREET FOR THE FIRST TEE OF COACHELLA VALLEY Case No. SA 11-155 (The First Tee of Coachella Valley, Applicant).

Responding to question about who owns the property next door, MR. JOHN SNOW, representing the Applicant, confirmed they own the land all the way to Cook Street.

Councilmember Finerty commented the sign was very attractive and particularly liked the rock used with the concrete blocks.

Councilman Kroonen moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the location of a new monument sign within the public right-of-way located on the west side of Cook Street, subject to the applicant obtaining an Encroachment Permit through the Department of Public Works. Motion was seconded by Finerty and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

B. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF PURCHASE FOR 218,240 POUNDS OF GRASS SEED IN THE AMOUNT OF $172,293.51 TO SIMPLOT PARTNERS.

Councilmember Finerty stated she would move to approve because Simplot Partners did business in Palm Desert.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion, award the purchase of 218,240 pounds of grass seed in the amount of $172,293.51 to Simplot Partners, Palm Desert, California – funds are available in General Fund Account Nos. 110-4610-453-2190 - Supplies/Other, 110-4611-453-3371 - R/M Tri-Cities Sports Facility, and 110-4614-453-3370 - R/M Medians for the City’s portion, and Desert Willow Corporation will fund the balance.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated most of the seed will be used for Desert Willow’s Golf Course and Kemper Sports will be paying for it.

Councilmember Harnik seconded the motion, and it carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

C. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT TO COOLEY CONSTRUCTION, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $555,555 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE MONTEREY AVENUE RESURFACING, COLD-IN-PLACE RECYCLING PROJECT (CONTRACT NO. C30950, PROJECT NO. 752-12A).

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel asked what was Cold-In-Place.

Mr. Greenwood explained it was a similar process that was used in south Palm Desert last year where a recycling machine grinds the asphalt and mixes it with new oil and puts it back in place. He said there is no waste or hauling of old asphalt with this process, and it provides a new road instead of a small strip of new asphalt on top.

Councilmember Finerty asked if this was the same process being used at Ironwood, because it was a nice one. Mr. Greenwood said he didn’t know.

Councilmember Harnik stated she and Councilman Kroonen had the opportunity to watch the process on Shadow Mountain, which she thought was neat and efficient.

Councilmember Harnik moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award the subject contract for Construction of the Monterey Avenue Resurfacing, Cold-In-Place Recycling Project to Cooley Construction, Inc., Hesperia, California, in the amount of $555,555; 2) authorize the Director of Finance to set aside a 10% contingency for the project in the amount of $55,555.50; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute said contract; 4) authorize the City Manager

11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

to execute a Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Rancho Mirage for the construction on Monterey Avenue (Contract No. C30950A); 5) authorize the City Manager to execute a Reimbursement Agreement with the utility companies with facilities in the street – funds are available in the General Fund Account reserved for Street Maintenance, No. 110-4311-433-3320. Motion was seconded by Finerty and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

D. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT TO MATICH CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,472,000 FOR THE 2012 CITYWIDE RESURFACING PROJECT (CONTRACT NO. C30960, PROJECT NO. 752-12B).

Councilmember Finerty recalled last year staff combined the two years and received a better process. She wondered if staff was following the same procedure again this year.

Mr. Greenwood responded staff was using a variety of funds this year; therefore, it wasn’t using the same process, but it was getting excellent asphalt bids.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award subject contract for the 2012 Citywide Resurfacing Project to Matich Corporation, San Bernardino, California, in the amount of $1,472,000; 2) authorize the Director of Finance to set aside a 10% contingency for the project in the amount of $147,200; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute said contract; 4) authorize the City Manager to execute a Reimbursement Agreement with utility companies with facilities in the street; 5) funds are available in General Fund Street Maintenance Account No. 110-4311-433-3320, in Recycling Fund Street Maintenance Account No. 236-4311-433-3320, and in Gas Tax Street Resurfacing Account No. 211-4311-433-3320.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel asked if notification would be provided to the residents that lived along the streets that will be rehabilitated.

Mr. Greenwood answered yes, stating there was an impact of two or three days to the residents, but it produced a great product and positive comments in the end.

Councilman Kroonen seconded the motion, and it carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

E. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT TO ENGINEERING RESOURCES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,100 FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SECTION 29 RETENTION BASIN REPAIRS PROJECT (CONTRACT NO. C31040, PROJECT NO. 627-11).

Responding to question, Mr. Greenwood stated the funding for this project will come out of the Retention Basin Maintenance Reserve Fund. He said while the City was paying for the project up front, it will be reimbursed by the District. Further responding, he said the retention basin was originally installed by Desert Gateway Development and then adopted by Section 29 Assessment District. The retention basin was reconfigured when Section 29 took it over, but it suffered significant damage with the heavy rainfall this year.

Councilmember Harnik asked if the upcoming design will be able to prevent damage from such record rainfalls.

Mr. Greenwood answered yes, stating this contract is to redesign it in a way that will not fail.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award subject contract in the amount of $49,100 to Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc., Hemet, California, for Design Services for the Section 29 Retention Basin Repairs Project; 2) approve a 10% contingency for the project in the amount of $4,910; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute said contract – funds are available in Business Assessment District Account No. 289-4374-433-3320 – no General Fund money is being used for this expenditure. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE YMCA OF THE DESERT, AND THE CITY OF PALM DESERT AS IT RELATES TO PARTICIPATION IN THE AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM AT LINCOLN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (CONTRACT NO. C31050).

Ms. Riddle stated this item was approved every year, which is the After-School Program in the amount of $75,000. Responding to question, she confirmed the program was part of the budget.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the subject MOU between Desert Sands Unified School District, The YMCA of the Desert, and the City of Palm Desert as it relates to participation in the After-school Program at Lincoln Elementary School, and authorize the Mayor to execute same – funding in the amount of $75,000 is available in Account No. 110-4800-454-3892. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

G. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, PALM DESERT CHARTER MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND THE CITY OF PALM DESERT AS IT RELATES TO PARTICIPATION IN THE AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM AT PALM DESERT CHARTER MIDDLE SCHOOL (CONTRACT NO. C31060).

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the subject MOU between Desert Sands Unified School District, Palm Desert Charter Middle School, and the City of Palm Desert as it relates to participation in the After-school Program at Palm Desert Charter Middle School, and authorize the Mayor to execute same – funding in the amount of $75,000 is available in Account No. 110-4800-454-3892.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel noted Palm Desert was the only city in the Coachella Valley that provided an after-school program at both the middle and elementary schools.

Councilman Kroonen seconded the motion, and it carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

H. REQUEST FOR RENEWAL OF CONTRACT WITH EVERGREEN RECYCLING SOLUTIONS, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $75,000 FOR CONSULTING SERVICES RELATIVE TO THE CITY’S COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING RECYCLING PROGRAMS (CONTRACT NO. C30061).

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve the subject contract renewal with Evergreen Recycling Solutions, Inc., La Quinta, California, for Consulting Services relative to the City’s Commercial and Multifamily Housing Recycling Programs in an amount not to exceed $75,000, and authorize the Mayor to execute same; 2) authorize expenditure of funds in an amount not to exceed $75,000 from the Recycle Fund, Account No. 236-4195-454-3090.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated he’s seen enough Recycled Binney commercials and wondered if different ones can be shown. He said it was a good program, but just felt something new was needed.

Ms. Riddle responded new commercials were being created and some were being revised where the program had changed, such as the Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Program, which will probably be seen in September/October.

Councilman Kroonen seconded the motion, and it carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

I. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SILENT SECOND TRUST DEED FROM THE HOUSING MITIGATION FUND IN AN AMOUNT NECESSARY TO SECURE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COST, NOT TO EXCEED $25,000, ASSOCIATED WITH A DIRECT SALE IN DESERT ROSE.

Ms. Moore explained this was a direct sale from a seller to a buyer where the City can assist the purchaser to purchase directly. Based on what’s happening with Redevelopment, this was the only option at this point.

Councilman Kroonen moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve a City Silent Second Trust Deed from the Housing Mitigation Fund in an amount necessary to secure an affordable housing cost, not to exceed $25,000, pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5, as amended from time to time, for the direct sale of APN 634-242-007 in Desert Rose; 2) approve the Affordable Housing Restriction and Lien Agreement in favor of the City of Palm Desert, substantially as to form, and authorize the Mayor to execute; 3) authorize the Director of Finance to draw monies from the relative fund to facilitate the transaction; 4) authorize the City Manager or his designee to finalize and execute any documents necessary to effectuate the actions taken herewith – funds are available in Housing Mitigation Fund Account No. 214-4490-466-3901. Motion was seconded by Finerty and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

J. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN FALCON CREST AND KNOWN AS APN 624-430-016 (74506 FALCON LANE), IF NECESSARY, IN ANTICIPATION OF EXPIRATION OF THE FIRST RIGHT-OF-REFUSAL PERIOD, IN THE EVENT THE AGENCY IS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE SUCH OPERATIONS (JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY).

Ms. Moore stated this was a request for authorization to acquire property in the event the City/Agency received some legislative relief from litigation or otherwise in order to continue to operate. The owner notified the City of its intent to sell, and they were informed the City was in a holding pattern. However, in the interim, staff would like to have the approval to move forward in the event it can.

Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chairman Spiegel explained to the audience that staff was alluding to the possibility of losing Redevelopment funding, as would be all cities in California, based on what is being proposed in Sacramento.

Councilmember/Member Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Authorize acquisition of the subject property for the purposes of retaining affordability covenants and resale, if necessary, in anticipation of expiration of the 45-day First Right-of-Refusal Period in amount pursuant to the Affordable Agreement (approximately $245,952 [to be increased by reasonable closing costs and commissions]), in the event the Agency is allowed to continue such actions either by judicial “stay” or adoption of an Agency “Continuance Ordinance”; 2) approve Agency Silent Second and City BEGIN Third Trust Deeds in

15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

amounts necessary to secure an affordable housing cost pursuant to Redevelopment Law for either a direct sale or Agency resale from Housing Set-aside Fund and BEGIN Program monies; 3) authorize the Director of Finance to draw monies from the relative funds to facilitate the transaction; 4) authorize the Executive Director or his designee to execute any documents necessary to facilitate this transaction – funds are available in Acquisition Rehab and Resale Account No. 870-4492-464-4001, BEGIN Program Fund Account No. 214-4494-464-3901, and Homebuyer Assistance Account No. 870-4699-464-4001. Motion was seconded by Harnik and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

K. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE PALM DESERT MARKETING PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012.

Visitor Center Manager Donna Gomez stated the proposed Marketing Plan is meant to be a working document for Fiscal Year 2011-2011, which will help direct marketing efforts and dollars. She said the Plan was a cooperative effort with the Marketing Committee, staff, and Council Liaisons, which included input from the website and advertising agencies.

Councilmember Finerty asked if there was a way to measure the success of the Plan compared to how things had been done before.

Ms. Gomez responded there was better opportunity for measurement of specific goals and tactics, which was incorporated into the Plan this year.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the FY 2011-2012 Marketing Plan as endorsed by the City’s Marketing Committee. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

L. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF MEDIA PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012 AND AWARD CONTRACT TO JNS ADVERTISING FOR MEDIA-BUYING SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $258,000.

Visitor Center Manager Donna Gomez noted the staff report that details where advertising dollars will be spent in print and radio, and approval of this contract will allow JNS Advertising to place ads for the City.

Councilmember Finerty said she appreciated the detailed spreadsheet.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve FY 2011-2012 Media Plan as supported by the City’s Marketing Committee; 2) concur with the Marketing Committee’s recommendation and award Contract No. C31070 to JNS Advertising, La Quinta, California, in an amount not to exceed $258,000 for Media Buying and Related Services for FY 2011-2012; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute the Media Buying and Related Services Agreement on behalf of the City – funds are available in Advertising Buys, Account No. 110-4417-414-3221. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

M. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING MARKETING COMMITTEE BYLAWS, PERTAINING TO MEMBERSHIP COMPOSITION.

Visitor Center Manager Donna Gomez stated this item came up because the City has an agreement with the Palm Springs Art Museum, and as part of that agreement, the City has committed to the opportunity of allowing them to have a representative on the Palm Desert Marketing Committee. She said other discussions have included the composition of the Committee, and the current Resolution differs from the current make-up of the Committee. Therefore, she is looking for Council direction, and based on Council’s input, she can bring back a Resolution with new bylaws.

Councilmember Harnik asked if the provision in the Lease Agreement with the Art Museum stated “they shall have a representative,” or that “they may have a representative.”

Ms. Gomez responded the Art Museum may have the opportunity if they would like to.

Councilmember Finerty stated the Art Museum would very much like to be part of the Marketing Committee.

Councilmember Harnik stated another item for consideration was appointing a member representing real estate. In the Marketing Plan, the Committee is targeting segments for a second homeowner and potential home buyers, which she thought made good sense and was a great idea.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion, directed staff to prepare a resolution, amending the Marketing Committee Membership to increase it by two (2) members for a total of 11, in order to add one (1) representative from the City’s Real Estate industry and one (1) from the Art Museum.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated the Marketing Committee determines how it will spend its Marketing dollars, and it was important The Living Desert, The Gardens on El Paseo, JW Marriott Desert Springs, and Westfield be part of the Committee, because that’s where revenue came from to run the City.

Councilmember Harnik seconded the motion, and it carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

N. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AMERICA PROGRAM.

Mr. Wohlmuth stated an Energy Committee Meeting took place last week and another one is scheduled for July 19. In April after the AB811 Conference, the participants in the conference identified that the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Guidelines and Litigation outlined in their letter created a big problem for the City’s Energy Independence Program (EIP)/AB811 Program. In April 2011, staff presented a concept to the Council where the City would hire EcoMotion to assist the City in seeking legislative, executive, and judicial remedy from the FHFA letter. Since then, staff drafted a contract with EcoMotion, but they have bowed out of this process and didn’t sign the contract. The Council had authorized up to $25,000 for Phase One, but EcoMotion is not willing to do this. Staff provided the Council with a couple of options like hiring another consultant or look for another 501C organization, but the Energy Committee suggested the City wait to see what Boulder, Colorado, Sonoma, California, or Babylon, New York decides to do. Therefore, staff recommended Option No. 2, which is to wait and see for participants from other local energy programs in the United States who wished to contribute toward this effort, and if they wished to contribute, staff will revisit the matter at that time.

Councilmember Harnik asked if staff knew why Mr. Flanigan decided or chose not to be involved, because he was excited about it and had stated in a letter he looked forward to continuing this important work.

Mr. Wohlmuth answered no. However, he did know that Mr. Flanigan had received another healthy contract, which probably pushed his abilities. Additionally, he also has Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG\), which was probably one factor.

Councilman Kroonen moved to, by Minute Motion, receive and file the report on the Energy Independence America Program and direct staff to wait and see what participation may be forthcoming from some of the other U. S. local government energy programs (e.g. Sonoma County, Calif., Boulder, Colo., Babylon, NY), and if they wish to contribute toward this effort. Motion was seconded by Finerty and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

O. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING INSTALLATION OF THE PALM DESERT AQUATIC CENTER DEDICATION PLAQUE.

Councilman Kroonen moved to, by Minute Motion, direct staff to install the Palm Desert Aquatic Center plaque purchased May 6, 2011, at the entry to the facility.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel noted Councilmember Finerty called this item up.

Councilmember Finerty stated she had spoken with the Mayor about this issue, and they felt it was important that the plaque be amended to have the names of those who voted on it, which was the policy. However, it’s an unwritten policy, but it was similar to what was done with the Palm Desert Library. She went on to say that former Councilmembers Ferguson and Kelly were part of the subcommittee for the Aquatic Center and had devoted a lot of time, probably more so than the rest of the Council to make it happen. She said to leave them off the plaque was wrong and they needed to be remembered as part of it.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel said their names were already on the original plaque.

Mr. Wohlmuth pointed out that on the third page of the staff report was a rendering of the plaque, which showed they are on the original plaque as former Councilmembers.

Councilmember Finerty stated that if that was the case, then it was fine, but when the plaque was unveiled she could only see the first five names, because it was sunny that day.

Councilmember Harnik added that at the Budget Study Session when staff presented the Council with a mock up of the plaque, which is exactly as presented, the Council and Mayor voted and approved it.

Councilmember Harnik seconded the motion, and it carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

XV. CONTINUED BUSINESS

A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 91-5, REMOVING DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING CONDITION NO. 10 REGARDING EXCLUSION OF A SUPERMARKET; ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS IT RELATES TO THE PROJECT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15074 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.30 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW SUPERMARKETS NOT EXCEEDING 60,000 GROSS SQUARE FEET AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE REGIONAL COMMERCIAL PC (3) ZONE; AND EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS – FOR A PROJECT LOCATED AT 72-280 HIGHWAY 111, Case Nos. ZOA/CUP 10-228 (KKE Architects, Applicant) (Continued from the meetings of May 12, May 26, and June 23, 2011).

Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz stated this item was continued to allow the Applicant to address the traffic and noise concerns and develop and approve a backfill plan with Pines to Pines. The traffic and noise concerns have been addressed and approved by the City. Today, staff received an e-mail from Mr. Rob Bernheimer stating that both parties had reached an agreement on the backfill plan. He said staff had not seen a copy of it, but the Applicant and/or Mr. Bernheimer can address the backfill plan.

MR. ROB BERNHEIMER stated he represented the owner of Pines to Pines and confirmed an agreement had been reached and signed. He said there is a Memorandum of Understanding that places economic pressure on both parties to use all efforts to find a substitute tenant. He said there will be a store operating at the Pines to Pines Center at least through November of 2012, and hopefully by then, the pressure points along the way will bring about a new tenant. He said if the Council approved the proposed item today, the owners at Pines to Pines had a backfill plan it supported.

Councilmember Finerty asked what was the backfill plan and why didn’t the Council have a copy of it prior to today’s meeting.

MR. BERNHEIMER stated that unfortunately the agreement wasn’t signed until about an hour ago by Vons. He would be happy to provide the Council with a copy, but Vons asked that it remain a confidential document.

Councilmember Finerty stated the conditions for which the Council continued this item had to do with the traffic study and backfill plan. She felt the Council should see and review the backfill plan to make sure it was acceptable to the City. She was glad that Mr. Bernheimer and Pines to Pines were happy with the plan, but she liked to know what it is.

20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

MR. BERNHEIMER stated the Council can make that request to the Applicant.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel explained to the audience this item had to do with the relocation of Vons to a new location, which will provide the City with a much larger and better grocery market.

MR. BRIAN BRAATEN, Vice President of Real Estate for Vons, sent his regards to Mayor Benson and wished her a speedy recovery, stating her concerns were taken to heart as they tried to meet them dead on. He said at the May 12 City Council Meeting, the Applicant was asked to readdress the CEQA issues raised and to continue to work with existing landlords to formulate a cooperative understanding with regards to the eventual vacancy at Pines to Pines. He was pleased to announce that both tasks were accomplished. He said there were no significant impacts, even under the most adverse conditions, that could remotely occur associated with the traffic and noise. He said it took both parties till this morning to complete negotiations and reach an agreement. He said both parties were able to work out a situation where they could best work together to eventually find another tenant to fill the space. He said the agreement was signed this morning, and it obviously affected significant portions of the existing lease, which was why it was complicated; other issues included lawyers that went on vacation during this time of year. In recognition of efforts and thoughtful plans for the redevelopment of the vacant Mervyn’s building, and as a long-standing valued member of the Palm Desert business community, he asked the Council to approve the relocation to Fred Waring Plaza by removing Condition No. 10 of Resolution 91-5 and amending the current Zoning Ordinance to 60,000 square feet. He said they looked forward to the new Fred Waring Plaza, which will greatly enhance the shopping experience for consumers, revitalize the center, create new jobs, and increase sales tax revenue to the City. He asked the Council to support Vons with their vote today. Responding to question as to when the relocation would take place if the project is approved, he said there was still entitlement work to get done with building plans, permits, etc., and he wasn’t going to second-guess the process anymore, but the plan is to move in November 2012.

Councilmember Finerty asked what was the backfill plan.

MR. BRAATEN asked Councilmember Finerty to explain herself further, because she probably wanted to hear that he had a tenant opening in November; however, he didn’t have that tenant. He said he hadn’t been able to work with other tenants, because he didn’t have a space available to give.

Councilmember Finerty asked what assurance was there to the City that there will be a tenant, so that the City didn’t end up with another center that looked like the Mervyn’s Center.

21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

MR. BRAATEN responded he didn’t know if such an agreement could actually be possible where a backfill plan named a tenant.

Councilmember Finerty said she wasn’t asking for a name, but a guarantee that there will be a tenant at Pines to Pines.

MR. BRAATEN reiterated it would be impossible for anyone to provide that at this point in time, but there is a plan to work effectively to the best of both parties efforts to get that accomplished within the next one½ years.

Councilmember Finerty asked the Applicant if he was willing to provide the Council with a copy of the plan so it could be discussed in Closed Session.

MR. BRAATEN said a copy of the plan was a legal document associated with their lease. He suggested Councilmember Finerty speak to the City Attorney to find out whether it was appropriate for City Council to review lease documents and enter into negotiations between landlords and tenants. He asked the City Attorney to address that issue.

Councilmember Harnik thanked all the parties involved and knew how difficult it was to reach a meeting of the minds, which she appreciated.

Councilmember Harnik moved to waive further reading and: 1) Pass Ordinance No. 1221 to second reading, approving an amendment to Chapter 25.30 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code to allow supermarkets not exceeding 60,000 gross square feet as conditional uses in the Regional Commercial PC (3) Zone; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2011 - 15 and a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approve the findings for approval of ZOA/CUP 10-228 subject to conditions attached. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

B. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE CITY’S SPONSORSHIP OF PD STYLE MAGAZINE AND RENEWAL OF THE RELATED CONTRACT WITH THE DESERT SUN FOR SAME (CONTRACT NO. C29960) (Continued from the meeting of June 9, 2011).

Responding to question on how the Marketing Committee voted, Management Analyst David Hermann said the City Council referred this item back to the Marketing Committee, and at their June meeting, they voted unanimously to reiterate their position that the money spent on PD Style could be better spent to target visitors from outside the area. He noted there was an abstention on the vote.

Councilmember Harnik moved to, by Minute Motion, concurr with the recommendation of the Marketing Committee for sponsorship of PD Style Magazine. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

22 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

XVI. OLD BUSINESS

A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE REIMBURSEMENT OF ART IN PUBLIC PLACES FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $67,872.39 FOR “WILLOW” BY STEVEN RIEMAN FOR THE WESTIN DESERT WILLOW VILLAS (WVC Rancho Mirage, Inc., Applicant).

Councilmember Finerty stated the art piece was actually something she recognized and it was attractive.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the reimbursement of Art In Public Places Fee in the amount of $67,872.39 for “Willow” by Steven Rieman, the Public Art Component for Westin Desert Willow Villas located at 75 Willow Ridge, Palm Desert – funds are available in Account No. 436-0000-228-9900. Motion was seconded by Kroonen.

Councilman Kroonen stated he took the opportunity to drive by the location to look at the art piece and found it to be interesting and pleasing.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel called for the vote, and the motion carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

B. CLARIFICATION OF A PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED STAFF REPORT, RELATING TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL ENGINEER’S REPORT AND ORDER TO LEVY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012 FOR THE CITY OF PALM DESERT BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1.

Mr. Greenwood stated this item was to clarify an item that was on the agenda at the last City Council meeting. The Council asked if the assessment was increasing for this District and staff mistakenly reported it was not. The levy is actually increasing from $436.62 to $449.72, which is a 3% cost increase that is within the guidelines for this District.

Councilman Kroonen moved to, by Minute Motion, receive and file the report, regarding the annual approval of the Final Engineer’s Report and Order to Levy for the Palm Desert Benefit Assessment District No. 1 for FY 2011-2012. Motion was seconded by Finerty and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

23 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PLAN AND ENGINEER’S REPORT, ORDER OF THE FORMATION/RENEWAL AND THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND DECLARING RESULTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER PROTEST PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ALESSANDRO ALLEY PROPERTY AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012.

Senior Management Analyst Ryan Stendell stated this item was a five-year ballot for the Alessandro Alley Business Improvement District.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited anyone wishing to address the City Council on this matter to come forward at this time. With no testimony offered, he closed the balloting and directed staff to tabulate the ballots and report back.

Following reconvening of the meeting at 7:47 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel declared the public hearing closed.

Mrs. Klassen announced the balloting results as follows: Total Valuation Ballots Cast $21,649.72 Total Yes Valuation Ballots Cast $9,105.22 Total No Valuation Ballots Cast $12,544.50

Due to there being a Property Owner Protest, the Alessandro Alley Property and Business Improvement District WAS NOT FORMED.

Councilmember Finerty moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2011 - 67, declaring the results of a property owner protest proceeding for the Alessandro Alley Property and Business Improvement District, and approving certain related actions. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PLAN AND ENGINEER’S REPORT, ORDER THE FORMATION/RENEWAL AND THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND DECLARING RESULTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER PROTEST PROCEEDINGS FOR THE PRESIDENT’S PLAZA III PROPERTY AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012.

Senior Management Analyst Ryan Stendell stated this item was a five-year ballot for the President’s Plaza III Business Improvement District.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited anyone wishing to address the City Council on this matter to come forward at this time. With no testimony offered, he closed the balloting and directed staff to tabulate the ballots and report back.

24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Following reconvening of the meeting at 7:47 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel declared the public hearing closed.

Mrs. Klassen announced the balloting results as follows: Total Valuation Ballots Cast $24,044.64 Total Yes Valuation Ballots Cast $15,882.30 Total No Valuation Ballots Cast $8,162.34

Due to no Property Owner Protest, the DISTRICT IS FORMED.

Councilmember Finerty moved to waive further reading and adopt: 1) Resolution No. 2011 - 68, approving the Final Management District Plan for the President’s Plaza III Property and Business Improvement District for FY 2011-2012, and appointment of an Owner’s Association; 2) Resolution No. 2011 - 69, approving the Final Engineer’s Report for the President’s Plaza III Property and Business Improvement District for FY 2011-2012; 3) Resolution No. 2011 - 70, ordering the formation of the President’s Plaza III Property and Business Improvement District and the levy and collection of assessments for said District for FY 2011-2012; 4) Resolution No. 2011 - 71, declaring the results of a property owner protest proceeding for the President’s Plaza III Property and Business Improvement District, and approving certain related actions. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

C. CONSIDERATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR CEQA (CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT) PURPOSES; A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, PRECISE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR A PROPOSED 82-ROOM HOTEL AND 59-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT WITH ANCILLARY USES AND AMENITIES ON 4.97± GROSS ACRES OF CURRENTLY VACANT LAND (4.27 ± ACRES) AND TO-BE-VACATED FRONTAGE ROAD (0.7± ACRES) LOCATED EAST OF HIGHWAY 74, WEST OF OCOTILLO DRIVE, AND SOUTH OF THE IMAGO ART GALLERY – SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS IS KNOWN AS 45-640 HIGHWAY 74, Case Nos. DA/PP/CUP 09-507 and VTTM 36284 (PDH Partners, LLC, Applicant).

Principal Planner Tony Bagato displayed an ariel view of the project site from the Mitigated Negative Declaration Study that showed the location of the project, which is located off Highway 74 and south of El Paseo. The property consists of six (6) lots totaling 4.97 acres, which includes the frontage road if it’s abandoned as the project is approved; the site is currently vacant. Prior land uses on the site included a hotel before the City incorporated and a previous approval for a Red Lion Hotel. After that approval in 1983, the old hotel was demolished and the only thing left remaining was Le Paon Restaurant. The site slopes approximately 28 feet from the north. Adjacent property to the north is a Commercial property, the Imago Art Gallery; to the south is a multi-family residential condominium; to the west is Planned

25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Residential for Sandpiper; and to the east is a variation of multi-family, condominiums, and apartments. The property has six parcels, which has duel designation in the General Plan, one is Community Core Commercial and the other one is High Density Residential, 10-22 units per acre. The zoning of the property for all six parcels is zoned for Planned Commercial, which is PC(4) and a designation in the Scenic Preservation Overlay District (SP). That zoning was changed in 1983 as part of the Red Lion approval. He said the SP outlines some standards that the Architectural Review Commission is supposed to take into context when looking at massing and signage. The project has three main driveways into the property; the far north is the service driveway for all service, deliveries, and trash, which is all underground; the middle courtyard is the primary access to the project, which will have an internal driveway with internal circulation to underground parking with valet service 24 hours a day, seven days a week; and the third entrance lines up with Pitahaya, which will be a continuation of the existing frontage road, but also allows entrance into the condominium portion with valet service underground as well. The buildings will be used for an 82-room hotel and 59 condominiums, which include a spa, fitness center, meeting rooms, boutiques, shops, signature restaurant, ultra lounge, pools, and courtyards. The project is designed as a LEED certified project, and the Applicant has taken steps to obtain certification by incorporating some of the features highlighted in the staff report like EnergyStar appliances, Green-Sources Construction Materials, Energy Efficient Design, and are integrating Solar Panels on some of the rooftops. He displayed plans that illustrated the underground parking, which will provide 376 parking stalls. An alternate study was done that allows for 233 stalls with only one level of parking, which can be used if the cost of two levels is prohibited financially. This alternate study shows off site parking areas where there is more than 200 spaces available and in close proximity, which will require approval from those property owners if that option was pursued by the Applicant. All Employee parking will be provided on site with the 24/7 valet service available to them as well. At this time, because staff is unsure of the total parking demand due to the mix of uses, current application of the Ordinance requires 690 stalls. He contacted the Planning Department in Menlo Park by Palo Alto, which has a 121-room Rosewood Hotel and actually has a larger banquet and meeting space. In talking to their planning staff, their hotel only provides 225 parking spaces, yet in the three years that it’s been running, they’ve never had a parking problem or trouble with employees parking off site. Therefore, Rosewood has been able to accommodate parking with a much larger facility from that example. Traffic wise, staff reviewed the Traffic Study and found it to be accurate. The project proposes about 1,000 trips per day with trips peaking at 72 in the morning and 80 in the evening, which basically leads to no impacts for the level of service today. In comparison, the former Red Lion, which would have been a lower-level hotel with 248 rooms would be two- to three times more impactful. Given that this property is zoned for hotel usage, staff believes this is the best case scenario, because a lower grade hotel would require more rooms and more trips. Even the former La

26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Paon Restaurant would generate more traffic than this 82-room hotel given the 4- or 5-star features. He displayed the site plan prepared by the City’s Engineering Department that overlaid the footprint of the building with underground parking to illustrate the need for the frontage road, which the City would abandon in the future, if this project is approved. He said the underground parking would go into the frontage road and allow for more landscaping and beautification of the sidewalk in front of the project. Architecturally and building height wise, the developer used U-shape buildings to basically eliminate the impacts from Ocotillo Drive by bringing most of the building mass to the Highway 74 frontage. The building is International Style with Mid-Century Modernism. With regard to the height, the Zoning Ordinance requires that the overall height of a structure shall be measured from the average elevation grade. Therefore, this building is 35 feet to the roof line and 38 feet to the parapet from the average grade with a partial fourth floor. Section 25.56.300 states the building height shall be measured vertically from the average grade to the highest point. He said the third floor of the whole project complies with the Zoning Ordinance based on this requirement, and the partial fourth floor can be approved under the Zoning Ordinance through an exception that’s allowed in the Zone as well as the Development Agreement that’s being proposed. This project went to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) in April 2010; it held five meetings to look at the massing study. Initially, staff went out with the Applicant along with some residents from Sandpiper to do a Balloon Height Study. He said photographs of that study were in Council’s packet showing what the building would look like and the potential impacts. There was also Google Mapping done with massing blocks to illustrate further what the potential impacts would be, and based on those studies/reviews, the ARC asked for modifications. The project was reduced by 30,000 square feet and the building height was reduced. On July 13, 2010, the ARC approved the project on a 5-1-0-1 vote. Even after the approval, the Applicant continued working with surrounding property owners and reduced the project by another 12,000 square feet, which reduced the project in total 42,000 square feet. He displayed renderings of the initial elevation proposed by the Applicant, stating that although staff was in favor of the hotel, it was concerned about the massing. Originally, the entire building was four-stories with a height of 72 feet at the highest point, which was above the average grade. Then he displayed the current proposal, which has been approved by the ARC and Planning Commission. He said that in addition to the Balloon Study, staff recommended visual impact analysis and mapping studies to show the project in better context. Staff chose specific view points coming down from Highway 74, views from Sandpiper Circle, and views looking up Highway 74 from El Paseo. In summary, the Application came in 2009, and on July 13, 2010, the project received approval by the ARC by a 5-1-0-1 vote. On May 5, 2011, staff noticed the Initial Study and Environmental Assessment for the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Staff received 63 letters in opposition to the project, but two were withdrawn, and received 487 letters in support. The Planning Commission approved the project by a 4-1 vote in

27 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

June. The fiscal analysis for this project is that the cost of construction will generate $1.2 million from permits alone to the General Fund, and it’s anticipated there will be $1 million in Transient Occupancy Tax (T.O.T.), and create 200-300 jobs. The number of people it will attract to El Paseo cannot be calculated, but there will be people spending money there. In conclusion, staff is recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with all the studies identified. He said the impact analyses are less than significant, the project complies with sections of the General Plan for goals of the Commercial policies, and the City’s Zoning Ordinance allows for hotel use with height limits based on an average grade, as well as the partial above. He said the Scenic Preservation Overlay allows for the ARC to look at the massing; therefore, the building was specifically reduced as it related to massing. With respect to traffic, staff believes this 82-room hotel is the best hotel scenario, because it will not cause major impacts. He said the Development Agreement ensures for a luxury hotel with amenities, because it includes covenants that require this to be a 4- or 5-star hotel. A lower star hotel would require subsequent approvals, because that would change the traffic analysis and other studies done. He said the findings for approval have been included in the staff report and offered to answer any questions.

Councilmember Harnik asked what was the square footage for the Red Lion.

Mr. Bagato said he didn’t look at the total square footage, but knew it included tennis courts, ballroom facilities, and other amenities that Rosewood didn’t have, which could have been more impactful. He noted the tennis courts would have required lights. Further responding, he said the Red Lion was approved for 248 rooms, which included two restaurants.

Councilman Kroonen asked if there was a Development Agreement associated with that project.

Mr. Bagato responded there was no development agreement with that project, except for a Change of Zone and Precise Plan. He said the entitlements for that project expired, and the property has been vacant for the past 28 years, other than the restaurant that was demolished in 2009.

Councilman Kroonen asked who owned the frontage road.

Mr. Bagato stated the City owns the frontage road, which will require a public hearing at a later time to abandon it, if this project is approved.

Councilman Kroonen asked who owned the property, because he recalled there are several parcels involved.

Mr. Bagato responded the six lots are owned by the Applicant. He said there might be multiple people involved, but it was his understanding the Applicant bought the property before they presented the project.

28 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Councilmember Finerty asked if the property was owned by Rosewood Construction.

Mr. Bagato answered no, stating it was owned by Friedman Equities and PDH Partners is the LLC. He said Rosewood would be the managing operator, and the City had a letter of commitment from them on file, which was actually one of the letters in support. Responding to question, he confirmed it would be $1 million annually in T.O.T.

Councilman Kroonen said there seemed to be two options with regards to parking, one would be to utilize off-site parking; however, he understood that option had been abandoned.

Mr. Bagato explained approval of this project included both options, because both scenarios will work, but a parking management plan would be needed for the off-site parking, which would require recorded agreements between property owners.

Councilmember Finerty asked if financing was in place.

Mr. Bagato deferred the financing question for the Applicant.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited the Applicant to provide his presentation.

MR. MATTHEW JOBLON, Applicant Representative, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to present the project and wished Mayor Benson a speedy and healthy recovery. He said this project was extremely special and credited his team for all the hard work in arriving to this point. He said his team consisted of the following individuals: Land Use Attorney Andrew Fogg; Design Architect Richard Riveire (Rottet Studio); Executive Architect Dale Yonkin (Nadel Architects, Inc.); Environmental Consultant John Criste; Traffic Consultant Daniel Sato; and Community Outreach Representatives Robert Pippin and Robert Roark. He said there was a distinct and true need in the Desert for a 5-star hotel as all other major shopping districts in the United States had multiple 5-star hotels feeding them customers. He said there was a tremendous amount of wealth in Southern California that is not being serviced right now for a true Desert resort. He said the team got to this point by being lucky and fortunate enough to find this special site. He said they made a real effort to collaborate with the community and held more than 200 meetings, sent out 10,000 pieces of literature, and worked with professionals who specialized in programming 5-star hotels and sustainable projects. He said it was the goal of the developer to create a synthesis in order to become integrated in the integral part of the community. He invited Mr. Richard Riveire to speak on the design of the project.

29 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

MR. RICHARD RIVEIRE, Design Architect with Rottet Studio, stated Rosewood Hotels are one of the world’s premier hotel operators. They have properties all over the world, including the Carlyle in New York, Mansion at Turtle Creek in Dallas, and Las Ventanas in Mexico, all sterling and wonderful properties. As an architect, the amazing thing for him is that Rosewood looks at every project as completely integral with its site, location, and character of the community. He said each of their projects are different and have no house or brand style, because it’s about the location. He said the team spent a lot of time trying to understand the community and site to make certain the project really ends up being a 5-star property and one that is respectful of the architectural heritage. As a team, they bring a reputation and design skills to the project that reinforces the idea of Palm Desert’s gold standard for architecture. He said it will be a sustainable project, because every decision made will take into consideration the sustainability issue. The architecture of the project is actually signage at the 5-star level, particularly at the Rosewood level. He said signage is always a concern, but here the level and quality of the design become a great part of the signage, because they are looking for it to be low key, elegant, and sophisticated. He said the entry and pylons came into question, but they plan to use them as an art piece and homage to Erwin Hauer and the concrete geometry work he’s done and combine that with water to create visual patterns in an interesting way. From a design and architecture point of view, and taking into consideration the site and where it’s positioned on Highway 74, they recognized this type of building is seen on a bleak angle from Highway 74. Therefore, it drove the team to design to the massing and low-slung building with a very horizontal characteristic to it, which will include the elements of the sun shades, screens, and indoor/outdoor relationship. He said the building will give out a lot of visual texture on the facade and hopefully one that is constantly changing as the shutters and things get moved around. He said they tried to balance the constraints of the community, the site, and 5- star program, and believed they were able to come up with a wonderful synergy of those things.

MR. JOBLON displayed photographs of Rosewood hotel rooms, Porte cocheres, lobby areas, and spas to give the Council an exact idea of the quality of products they planned to build, which was consistent across Rosewood portfolios of 19 hotels around the world. When they first arrived, the goal was to make sure they had a real Community Outreach Program, which was the focal point of their strategy. He said for more than two years, they sought input from everyone possible and didn’t hide anything. They sent out literature, cold call people, provided a website, created a YouTube video, and held five ARC public hearings. Of the people that attended the ARC meetings, he personally approached each one that was in opposition to the project to address their concerns, and additionally held multiple meetings with Sandpiper residents. The first group they approached before they did any type of planning were the Ocotillo residents, and their four main requests/issues were the following: 1) No access or egress on Ocotillo Drive;

30 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

2) massing of the project to be pushed away from Ocotillo Drive; 3) landscaping to be provided on Ocotillo Drive side and use landscaping to screen the building; 4) no nighttime noise. He said those were the first guiding principals in trying to design this project, so the Ocotillo group played a major role in the outcome of the project, and it now has their full support. The Sandpiper community was the first to come out during the Architectural Review Commission meetings in opposition to the project, so numerous meetings were held. He personally went door to door to every single house in Sandpiper to drop off literature about the project and left contact information. A Balloon Height Study was done with City staff where residents of Sandpiper were present taking pictures. He said they chose the areas the pictures were taken from and actually had a tape measure to make sure the balloons were high enough and taken from the right locations; therefore, it was a comprehensive process. As a result of those conversations, the team made significant changes to the building by removing 30,000 square feet, changed the front of the four-story building as it became perpendicular to Sandpiper, and setback an additional 45 feet. As demonstrated from staff’s visual simulation, the four-story building can barely be seen from the two worse locations that can most be impacted within Sandpiper. They specifically circumvented no one from the process and tried to hear from everyone. For additional community outreach, they became active members of every single trade organization and engaged with the College of the Desert to build a relationship with them. For example, when he met with Mr. Jerry Patton, President of College of the Desert, they spoke about an intern program where students in the hospitality program could work at the hotel and get real life experience to build their resume. In turn, Mr. Patton could possibly be able to grow the Hospitality Program by saying they have an exclusive relationship with the Rosewood Hotel and the type of experience students can compete on to go there. He said there is a ton of different synergies between the two and other examples of how they can work with the community. He said they have done everything from a website, YouTube video, spoke to the media at all times regardless of how tough the questions were, because they wanted to make sure it was a complete open process. He reiterated they held more than 200 meetings in the community, mailed out 10,000 pieces of literature about the project, and made every effort to give everyone the opportunity to speak on the project. He recognized they didn’t speak to everyone, but it wasn’t for lack of effort. Another example of reacting to the needs of the community, a week ago at one of the meetings with City staff, there was concern about assurances that a 5-star hotel would be built. Well hours after that meeting, he called a relationship of his in Beverly Hills who had the same situation and researched how they handled it with that city. The next day, he e-mailed the City Attorney with language that was specific to make sure the City gets a 5-star hotel. In addition to the meetings held, staff mentioned they received 478 letters of support, and he received another 150 today; therefore, there are a total of 600+ letters of support. Additionally, they have 800+ people who are on their petition and support list. As part of the evolution of this process, there were five ARC

31 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

meetings, and at the first one, it was clear that some people in the community were not happy. So instead of moving forward and ignoring them, they took a step back and met with the people in opposition and modified the building significantly. He said it wasn’t just the community that was in opposition, because members of the ARC and City staff had issues as well, but he believed they have responded to all. He said today’s photographs illustrated the dramatic difference of their modifications to the initial one proposed. He said traffic seemed to be the hot button of discussion at the last Planning Commission meeting; therefore, his goal in this presentation was to provide more facts to give people a better understanding of the project. He said the project will result in no significant traffic impacts with 72 trips per hour in the morning and 80 trips per hour in the evening per. Years ago, the City Council approved a more negative impact project with no positive impact for El Paseo. As an example, a 3,000 square foot Taco Bell would have between 100 and 150 trips during peak hours, which was almost two times more than what Rosewood was proposing. The prior Red Lion hotel, which was a 248-room hotel with two independent restaurants, would have been triple times more traffic. Another issue that came up was whether there would be vehicle stacking issues, so they did a simulation that can be shown after the presentation. He said the fact is that all guests and resident parking is 100% valet, stating they had an efficient internal rapid valet system. Inside the Porte cochere they can stack 18 vehicles. As an example, peak hours’ maximum entry is approximately 60 vehicles per hour, and Rosewood’s capacity can handle at least 100 vehicles per hour, which were the result of the initial study, but when they did the simulation it showed they can handle 400 vehicles per hour with normal staffing. However, planned events can be properly staffed to accommodate a multiple of that number; therefore, parking and stacking will not be an issue for this project. He said they will be the models for implementing Senate Bill 357, which is Sustainable Development. He said all service vehicles can be controlled by having them come in during the off-peak hours. He said the comprehensive traffic study was approved by the City, stating he worked with staff until they exhausted that process. Where he believed the project was most impactful was in the benefits to the City, because the project is estimated to bring $2 million a year to the City in property taxes and T.O.T., it will provide 250-300 permanent jobs, and create 100-150 nonpermanent construction jobs, which should take a significant chunk out of the unemployment for Palm Desert. He said the total project was $125 million that will benefit the community, improve the location, and enhance the whole area. He said condominiums were selling for an average of $2 million+ per unit, which will drive neighboring property values significantly. He said there was an unquantifiable stimulus that will go to El Paseo, stating there will be 30,000+ people per year, conservatively, staying at this hotel and undoubtedly walk to El Paseo and be compelled to spend money there. The secondary economic impact is that it will generate significant business for local subcontractors and service providers. He said creating a synergistic relationship with El Paseo was key to the success of this hotel. He said they viewed this hotel as an anchor to El Paseo, similar

32 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

to Fifth Avenue or Madison Avenue in New York where they have the Four Seasons, St. Regis, and The Peninsula all in the same location. If one went to those streets anytime during the year, one can barely walk. Another example is Rodeo Drive where you have the Regent Beverly Wilshire anchoring it with the Montage Hotel one block away. He said these streets have thrived because they have high-end hotels bringing in additional revenue. He said specifically on El Paseo, pedestrian traffic will increase dramatically, which will drive up sales tax, property tax, lease and demand, and then the ends all be all, which is employment. He said Palm Desert will be the first City to have a true 5-star hotel and brand, which will bring new people and businesses to Palm Desert. For example, the property mentioned by staff, Rosewood Sand Hill at Menlo Park in Silicon Valley has become one of the hottest hotels for deal making in the venture capital world. He said undoubtedly, when people want to come to the Desert to look at deals or have a retreat, they will want to stay at the high-end hotel, especially when they just had an amazing experience at one. He also believed there was an amazing opportunity for an international crowd to come to Palm Desert as Rosewood has hotels all over the middle east, Asia, and Europe, which do very well and have built great brand recognition there. This project will continue to differentiate Palm Desert from other cities in the Coachella Valley and solidify Palm Desert as a luxury destination for business and leisure travelers. He said from an environmental standpoint, having a sustainable project played a major role in the design of this hotel. He said 5-star hotels have had difficulty surviving in the Desert, so before they embarked on this project, they did a comprehensive study of what not to do and what to do right to ensure money spent today will provide a successful project. He said they learned a couple of lessons from the Ritz Carlton in Rancho Mirage. For instance, having a small hotel with a low-fixed overhead was crucial, because during the summer, in the off-season, it is difficult for all hotels. Also, having large, luxury oriented rooms with high ceilings that make rooms feel spacious is important. Additionally, they need to make sure the program is appropriate, the hotel has a clear identity, and that it’s a true 5-star product with all the services that come along with it. The hotel will have 10,000 square feet of meeting space for boutique type of conferences catering to high-end personal events and/or high-end corporate retreats. He reiterated this project was dependent upon El Paseo and having it as an amenity, which is a key part of the project. He said the hotel was designed and programmed to fit into the indigenous urban fabric, and they worked with Southern California Architects, which specializes in environmental sustainable projects. He said creating public spaces within the hotel and establishing a connectivity to El Paseo to make sure it invites and encouraged the public and locals to the project was critical to the success of this hotel. He said PDH Partners is the LLC that owns the property today and consists of three different developers. Their combined track record for the past 40 years is a total of $4 billion in deals, building and investing in more than 9,000 residential units, built 1,700 hotel rooms, built 4 million+ square feet of office space in major metropolitan markets, and 500,000+ of

33 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

retail space. Some representations of projects built are famous, such as 40 Bond Street, New York, which sold out for the highest price per square feet in Soho, New York; the Delano Hotel in Miami Beach, which is one of the most famous hotels and drives the highest revenue thus far, despite it being 20 years old; The Gramercy Park, which is one of the most well–performing hotels in New York City; the 184th Fifth Avenue was a $240 million project, which was just completed. He said they took an old warehouse and cut a hole in the middle of it and converted it into 369 market-rate apartments, and the building canter levers over the east river in Brooklyn; The Cosmopolitan in Las Vegas was a $4 billion project that exists today, stating that when the developer defaulted the project, his team was brought in and took it over for nine months, and the Ritz Carlton in Baltimore. He said the team had tremendous experience, capital, and access to capital resources. One of the most important things they did was put together an A+ team that had tremendous experience in delivering a 5-star product. The Design Team Dale Yonkin and Richard Riveire are responsible for the Beverly Hills Hotel, the two new Presidential Bungalows, which the Prince and Princess just stayed recently, the Surrey Hotel in upper east side New York, the St. Regis Hotel in Aspen, and The James Hotel in South Beach, Miami. In conclusion, he said there was a distinct need for a 5-star hotel and the financial benefits to the community are tremendous, most of which can’t be quantified. He said the team was sensitive to site planning, and they made sure to listen to as many people in the community to try to incorporate as many of their concerns while still maintaining a 5-star brand and financially feasible project. Once they provide the first 5-star hotel to the Desert, the El Paseo experience will be altered dramatically for the positive. He said the City was dealing with a team with a track record of executing and getting things done. He noted there’s never 100% support for a project, and that includes his partners who have 40 years of experience, but this project had tremendous support as seen by the number of people in attendance supporting this project along with letters of support, which dwarf’s the nay sayer. He said they created a top-tier team with top architects, and they brought in a top brand with the focus on being able to deliver a project that can be built and executed, while taking into consideration all the needs of the community. He said the City of Palm Desert had always said they can wait for quality, well quality had arrived today. He thanked the City Council for the opportunity to present the project and offered to answer any questions.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this project.

The following individuals spoke in FAVOR of the project:

MS. KATHLEEN KELLY, 46100 Burroweed Lane, asked the City Council to promptly and expeditiously approve the request. She said with respect to speakers in opposition to the project, since 1983 surrounding residents have had reason to understand that a hotel was considered, which was an

34 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

excellent use for this property. However, it stretches human capability to try to envision a better application. She said the upscale nature of the proposal, limits units to a small number, by comparison, even to the 1983 Red Lion proposal, assured minimal impact to residents and provided maximum benefit to the City. She said the benefits to the City was not just revenue, but also attracting people to Palm Desert who can maximize its positive notoriety. The General Plan states, “The City of Palm Desert is the premier business resort and residential community in the Coachella Valley.” She thanked the City Council for all it has done to make that true today and urged the Council to promptly approve this request as a significant contribution to keeping it true and resetting the reputation of Palm Desert as a community that invites collaboration with the best elements of business and works with them.

MS. DEBORAH MCGARREY, 79335 Camino Del Oro, stated that as a member of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors and Chairperson of the Legislative Action Committee, she encouraged the City Council to approve staff’s recommendation. She said the benefits to the City as laid out by staff are: $1 million in T.O.T., 200-300 permanent jobs, and potential customers for businesses in El Paseo. She said the 5-star hotel will compliment El Paseo’s first class stores and restaurants.

MS. BARBARA deBOOM, 72559 Highway 111, Palm Desert, deferred because comments had been made by Ms. McGarrey.

MR. STEVE FUCHS read a prepared statement on behalf of MR. MIKE GRANUM as follows: “As one who lives right off El Paseo and will be impacted by what happens on this wonderful street, I want to offer my support of the architecturally pleasing and the much needed hotel. Assume for a minute that this hotel is approved and built, then fast forward 60 years into the future. Everyone is in the same Council Chambers packed wall to wall with citizens, but now on the agenda is an item to decide if the hotel is to be torn down. For 60 years now, this hotel has become a meeting place, watering pool, an oasis, and destination. Residents would be outraged that anyone could consider the unthinkable and lose this iconic piece. The vote would be 5-0 against allowing demolition to save the City’s masterpiece.”

MR. JERRY R. PATTON, President of College of the Desert, stated the guiding principal undertaken at the College is to work with businesses and industries to ensure the curriculum meets the needs of the business industry. He was contacted seven or eight months ago by Mr. Joblon of Friedman Equities to review the types of internships and collaborations he had with community colleges in other areas where his hotels are located. He said the College offered an AA degree in Hospitality Management and a transfer degree to California State University (CSU) in Hospitality Management as well. He said Hospitality Management is the study of different aspects of management and leadership as it relates to the industry, including such sectors as hotels, restaurants, travel services, gaming, and entertainment.

35 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

The age of being in Hospitality Management will enable students to find a job in the industry as well as transfer to a local university for a bachelor’s degree. The Management Program includes course offerings in the general overview of Hospitality, Operations, Culinary Arts, Finance, Business, and Labor Law. The most important point is the synergy between business, industry, and the College. For example, students doing internships at the hotels are provided real-world experience and building their resume is critical for employment. The College Advisory Committee is comprised of business and industry experts in their area, and they serve on the Hospitality Program to make sure the curriculum is relevant; they also serve as guest lecturers. He said there are many other ways the College collaborates with business and industry, and this hotel will provide COD students with another opportunity to have real-world experience. He encouraged the Council’s consideration of this request.

MR. PHILLIP SMITH, 300 Eagle Dance Circle, Palm Desert, stated he was Regional President of Sunrise Company in Palm Desert, and the President of the Desert Valley’s Builders Association (DVBA). He said DVBA did not endorse individual projects; however, its members are excited about the opportunities that the Rosewood Hotel would present to the building industry. He said many members have written letters in support of this project, and he, as a business person and 30-year resident of the Desert, is a strong supporter of the project. He said this project would be good for Palm Desert and the Valley and encouraged the Council to approve the project.

MR. MATT JOHNSON, 73-134 Bel Air Road, Palm Desert, stated he was the founding partner of Wilson Johnson Commercial Real Estate and property owner on El Paseo. He said many of the tenants supported this type of project. He said he reviewed both the original presentation and the modified one and thought the developer did a great job in blending their product with the community. He urged the City Council not to delay in supporting and approving this project.

MS. MIMI JONES, 72-700 Bel Air Road, Palm Desert, stated she supported the project and noted she drove up and down Highway 74 probably five or six times a day during the school year. She said she had a vested interest in this community as she was a resident, President of the Desert Contractor’s Association, and owns a local wrecking company. She believed this project will increase property value and help the Sandpiper Community and El Paseo merchants. She noted her father who is an artist and lives outside the Valley was delighted to have one of his sculptures on El Paseo, because this area was so prestigious. She said this hotel would be great for the community and thanked everyone who came to the Desert Contractors Association and been able to participate. She asked the City Council to support this project.

MR. EDDIE OLLMANN, General Manager at Westfield, Palm Desert, expressed support of the project and urged the City Council to approve it.

36 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

MR. DOUG BALOG, 73200 El Paseo, Palm Desert, stated he appreciated the opportunity to speak in favor of this development from the perspective of economics, a business owner on El Paseo, and President of Sandpiper. First, with regards to economics, he said this Country and the State are broke, which will eventually filter down to local communities that new ways will need to be developed to support the safety, police, and medical currently enjoyed. He said the cost of local government had to be overcome and one avenue was through small businesses, because they can generate and develop economic growth, and create jobs. He said this hotel will provide the City with the employment base needed, which are 200-300 permanent positions along with employing construction workers. He said the development of this project will increase pedestrian traffic along El Paseo, which will help merchants, restaurants, and landlords in trying to fill the vacant buildings. Secondly, as a business owner and broker for KW Luxury Homes by Keller Williams, he’s been on El Paseo for seven years and knew that a lot of the walk-in traffic came from major communities that are at a higher price point. The type of hotel envisioned here will entice those that can afford $700 a night or a $2 million condo, which will bring a lot of business to the art galleries, restaurants, etc., and his business as well. Thirdly, as a homeowner and resident of Sandpiper, be believed this project will enhance Sandpiper and affect home values in a positive way. He heard the negative comments about Sandpiper, but in the last two months he sold five properties there, one property was 251 Sandpiper. He sold that property to a contractor from Canada, Brent and Erin Frazier (sp?). The reasons for their purchase had to do with the proximity to the hotel and the fun along El Paseo. He said another unit was sold to a developer. Lastly, the alternative would be to leave the vacant lot there with no view or value to anyone. He said great cities had great down towns, so he asked the Council to support this development and think long term as opposed to what will happen in the next few days.

MR. FRED FERN, 73-061 El Paseo, Palm Desert, stated he was an investment advisor for almost 50 years and is involved with El Paseo, because he has ten buildings with clients there. He believed everyone, including those who raised concerns shared a common ground for this hotel. which was El Paseo. He said El Paseo was a wonderful street and it was amazing to see the growth, but the stores need to have a luxury hotel or something more to help the merchants, especially in this economic environment. He said the proposed hotel fit beautifully to what the concept is about long term. Secondly, this project needed the blessing of the City Council and what the forefathers had contributed in creating a wonderful City, which had to do with sales tax dollar, but not all from hotels. Thirdly, he understood the concerns about the height and what it will do to people’s existing views. However, in his many years as an investment advisor, he could look those people in the eye and say, from a common sense perspective, it will increase the property value of their home as previously stated by others. He spoke to the developer and was told they expected the hotel to be completed in the next two to four years. He believed this project

37 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

was positive for everyone concerned, which he believed was common ground for all.

MR. JOEL WALLIS, 46196 Cypress Estates Court, Palm Desert, stated he was with the Penta Building Group located on Highway 111 and Monterey Avenue, and he traveled in and out of there everyday, and it’s his observation that Highway 74 was not heavily impacted by traffic as presented. He said the project will help with job creation, because construction was a tough market right now, and he was familiar with the Rosewood brand and level of quality, which would be a great fit for Palm Desert and El Paseo.

MR. MARIO GONZALES, 3 Rancho Clancy, Rancho Mirage, stated he’s been building here in the Valley since 1978. He was a very good friend to Curt Dunham who was one of the first people who envisioned the El Paseo corridor. He said this was a great opportunity for the City for these developers and investors to commit these types of dollars, which was a big testimony of their belief and faith in this City. He said one of his partners John Wessman was not able to attend this evening, but wanted the Council to know he was in favor of this project as well. He said the hotel would be a huge asset to the City, and he was extremely in favor of the project.

MS. MARILYN IRVIN, Sandpiper resident, stated she served on the Sandpiper Board, but was only speaking on behalf of herself. She knew that Mr. Joblon had personally visited at least 100 homes in Sandpiper and had personally hung informational directives and invited people to meetings. She said Mr. Joblon wanted to have coffee and social hours, but the problem is half the residents in Sandpiper only lived in Palm Desert half the year. However, if they were in favor or against the project, they could very well have written the Council a letter. She asked the City Council to not stop progress, because this was a wonderful project.

MS. MELISSA MORGAN stated she was the owner of Melissa Morgan Fine Art on El Paseo since 2003 and lives in Sandpiper. She was disappointed to hear so many residents in one small development say they have enjoyed the view of a property they didn’t own, which is great they have enjoyed it, but the vacant property needs to get used. She said retail on El Paseo has been challenged and the potential revenue that will be created by this project is exciting, and it would be sad to see this 5-star hotel go to La Quinta or elsewhere. She said growth is never easy and everyone couldn’t be pleased, but collaborating with businesses is a prerequisite for communities to keep peace. She said this community is lucky to attract a project like this and hoped it will be supported.

The following individuals spoke in OPPOSITION to the project:

38 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

MR. CRAIG ARMSTRONG, 72748 Beavertail Street, Palm Desert, stated he didn’t appreciate the negativity and name calling in defense of this project, including being called a nay sayer by the CEO of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce, which leads one to believe there is much more than is being openly shared with residents. He said he and others were only asking reasonable questions and raising sensible concerns. One defense of this development is the threat that without it Palm Desert will make the same mistake Palm Springs did 30 years ago when it rejected a project, which he didn’t believe was the case here. He said there was a difference between opportunistic development and smart growth, because there is no single building, project, street, or business that defined Palm Desert. He said the luxury status the developer is attempting to convey should be based on service, honesty, and respect to its guest and community it resides. He said if developer and architect truly cared about architecture and community, they would not want to build a sore thumb, but a building that complimented the area and respected the integrity of the City’s building codes. He said, if that existed, there would be no need for the intense promotion this project had received or for residents to defend the community. He believed there was a breach of trust within the community, because of the size, scope, number of variances, exceptions given, and unanswered variables this project represented. He said this project was about maximizing sellable square footage and wrapping a bulking building with materials that were trendy or unique ten years to get the biggest slice of the market. He said the real question was whether this would be another out-of-date building with a huge footprint 10 or 20 years from now or a reasonable one that fit within the building codes and zoning requirements and maintained long-term integrity for the community. He asked the City Council to rely on facts, uphold the gold standard of development in Palm Desert, and not on variables of reports, studies, and promises made by paid promoters of this project.

MR. BOB PARKIN, 243 Sandpiper, Palm Desert, expressed concerned that this project had been hyped as a 5-star hotel to be operated by Rosewood Hotel & Resorts, yet no representatives from Rosewood have been present at the hearings. He heard staff mention Rosewood had submitted a letter of commitment, but he was only aware of one dated January 20, 2011, which is addressed “To Whom It May Concern.” In that letter is a statement that states, “In May 2009, Rosewood executed a non-binding letter of intent with PDH Partners, LLC, to provide eventual technical support and hotel management services for the property.” The Development Agreement (DA) didn’t mention Rosewood nor a 5-star hotel, which is the main subject of this hearing. He said the DA simply gives the developer a right to proceed with this project as approved by the Planning Commission. He said the DA was a 10-year agreement, which gives the developer exclusive control with the manner and timing of construction, so construction wouldn’t have to begin until nearly 10 years out. The DA also gives the Applicant the right to transfer this project to another developer, which could happen 30 days after the Ordinance is adopted. He said if that transfer took place, the City would

39 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

have no right of approval or disapproval over the new developer. The only thing required is for the transferor/applicant to provide a report on the qualifications of the transferee. He said for a project of this size, the City should have some right of approval over whom the new transferee will be.

MR. NEAL MAZE, 213 Sandpiper, Palm Desert, believed this project will destroy the Sandpiper community completely. He said Sandpiper contributed a lot of revenue to the City, because it had at least 50 rental units along Highway 74 that will be affected by the noise and size. It will also directly impact the other 46 units that are winter homes, including the previous speaker Mr. Parkin, who incidentally is a Judge and covered the legal side of this issue very well. He noted Sandpiper had 200 people going up and down El Paseo buying food and shopping there for 30 years. He said the developer claims to bring an equal number of people with their hotel, but Sandpiper people will probably no longer want to stay in Palm Desert, because this hotel will be too noisy and cumbersome. He was aware Mr. Joblon had spoken to Mr. Tom Rasmussen (sp?), but after their meeting, Tom elected to sell his house and move. Mr. Joblon talked to another guy in Circle 4 who also elected to sell his home and move, and another three are trying to sell their homes because of this project. Therefore, this project had already created hardship in the community and will continue to. He was also very concerned about the noise during construction, because it will subject him, and another 300 people in the winter, to 140 decibels of noise, dirt, and diesel for at least three years. He said there will be a decrease in revenue, because people will not want to stay in Sandpiper, which he thought was a travesty.

MS. MARGUERITE STETSON, 263 Sandpiper, Palm Desert, stated she’s lived at Sandpiper for 19 years, and she’s expressed her concerns about the project since it was first submitted to the Planning Commission. She believed those in Sandpiper have been left out of the special treatments, and rightly so, because they cannot see the value of this project. She said the mountain views for half the homeowners will be replaced by this massive structure. She heard the project management was providing cocktails and promises of special treatment after the hotel is completed. It is her understanding there will be luxury condos in the $1 to $2 million range with no golf course to offer. She said there were luxury hotels within four or five miles that have trouble keeping 30% occupancy in the summer and 50% in the winter, which didn’t sound like another hotel was needed. She questioned whether the developer had strong buyers for these $2 million condos, and is there some reason they believe these expensive hotel rooms will be filled with people who will go shop on El Paseo. She too, had concerns with the Letter of Intent from Rosewood Corporation and that the City was giving them the use of the right-of-way on Highway 74. She continues to be concerned about traffic, because the figures provided didn’t seem correct to her. She said there were all indications that this project cannot succeed and asked what will happen then.

40 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

MR. KARL RIMER, 74075 Candlewood, Palm Desert, gave praise for efforts toward building a 5-star hotel and appreciated the first and second floors, but was totally against the height of the fourth floor at 57 to 60 feet and against opening the door to more big box buildings. He drove to Palm Desert most weekends from Los Angeles for 30 years, yet he didn’t mind it, because it was worth it. He said Palm Desert was beautiful in his first visit and still was today, thanks to the height restrictions that hold residential to one story and commercial to two stories. He said the old City fathers were wise and forward thinking, asking everyone to just look at the results. He said Palm Desert had retained its charming village appeal as it has evolved into a City, proving that you didn’t have to build up to be a viable city. He said natural beauty was the look of Palm Desert’s success. He said the three/four story proposal is a serious insult to this City, to its residents, and tourist that came from all over the world to cherish and appreciate its beauty.

MS. JOAN TINGLE, 46179 Highway 74, Palm Desert, stated she lived in Sand & Shadows, which is about one mile from the proposed hotel. She said the Applicant mentioned how often they contacted people in the community, yet she hadn’t been. She noted she had been told by many that this project was a done deal and to not waste her time. She disagreed with the traffic figures given and is opposed to the whole idea of a hotel for the following reasons: traffic, construction, height and scale, no need for another hotel, and skeptical of the financing, because other hotels that were in construction had come to a stand still. Additionally, she noted an article in The Desert Sun stated the project had met resistance from nearby residents who were concerned about height and scale, but had support from other neighbors and much of the business community. Her comment to that article is that she and others in her community were not consulted. She was also concerned that this project would be voted on when many in her community who are snow birds were not here to give their opinion. She asked the Council to look at this project carefully before rubber stamping it.

MS. KIM HOUSKEN, 73237 Somera, Palm Desert, agreed with Mr. Armstrong’s comment, that just because concerned residents raised questions, didn’t mean they were opposed to the project or were nay sayers; many just don’t believe this is the right project for this location. Her biggest concern is that the zoning at this location is for the Planned Commercial Resort, and the definition in the Code is low-rise bungalow style hotels, which the setbacks are based on. She envisioned the La Quinta Resort with the wonderful bungalows there, which she felt was a far cry from what was being proposed. She said if the Council was interested in having a project of this magnitude, the setbacks would need to be increased drastically, because they are meant for a low-rise bungalow style hotel. She has a safety concern with the project, because there is no secondary access or fire road on the property. She was stunned to read the Fire Chief believed that fire fighting can be done from the curb on Highway 74 and on the curb on Ocotillo Drive, stating they can enter through the Porte cochere where the valet takes your

41 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

vehicle. However, that area isn’t wide enough for the fire truck to turn around, thus the truck will back out onto Highway 74. She couldn’t believe this was okayed and wondered if there was a prior precedence where there is no longer a secondary road for fire. She believed the CEQA documents had numerous flaws relating to traffic impacts on Highway 74, stating it was a poorly written document and offered to review many other details she had with it. Additionally, staff mentioned the ARC looked at the Scenic Preservation Overlay (SP), yet she reviewed the minutes and found nowhere that the SP was ever mentioned to the ARC nor the Planning Commission. She said this was a zoning overlay that Mr. Bagato looked at for one ½ years and seemingly never acknowledged, which is not an optional item, but that the ARC shall consider, including height, setbacks, landscaping, etc. She didn’t feel this project had been fairly evaluated by either ARC and Planning. Lastly, Mr. Joblon’s comment that his team had a track record of success, yet in her research of the eight Rosewood properties in the Forbes Travel Guide, formerly Mobile Travel Guide, none had received the 5-star label. Therefore, working with Rosewood Hotel was not necessarily working with a track record of success.

MS. CATHY P DAVIS, 233 Sandpiper, Palm Desert, stated she concurred with concerns already mentioned and would not belabor them. She said it didn’t make sense to add more rooms and housing to this struggling economy. She personally is concerned with the privacy that she will lose, because her condo will face the hotel and the mountains will be obliterated from her view. She noted her condo is rented out occasionally and believed this hotel will be a detriment to people wanting to return. She said the value of her property will decrease, because she went through a similar experience when she lived in Silicon Valley where a nice hotel was built next door and her home did not retain the same value as other homes. The reason given by people going to see her house was due to the hotel being next door.

MS. MARLA PAASCH, 72551 Pitahaya Street, Palm Desert, stated she lived on the street adjoined to the valet parking. She said this was not the first time to address the Council with regard to a gas leak and bad piping underneath the City. She said in 2007 there was a large gas leak that came from the road, and this was the seventh time she was addressing this issue along with a seven-page e-mail. She went on to describe the issues she believed existed and the dignitaries she’s spoke to about this matter. She said she was moving to Florida and was done dealing with this matter, because her child had been suffering from asphyxiation from the smell. Her main concern is that there will be too much traffic in an already congested area going from the proposed hotel to the park. She said the gas company was ready to do 35 homes and/or do something about it, but the City had stopped them. She said San Marcos is under investigation, because of their City Council, and the 1959 pipelines were not properly maintained, which was the reason for the gas leak and explosion in their area. She had nothing

42 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

against the nice hotel, but this was a residential community and believed the gas issue needed to be addressed before extending anything in the City.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated the City Manager will contact her regarding the gas problem. He said the City was currently installing new gas pipes under Highway 74.

MS. BRIDGET ZAPPIA, 40686 Via Fonda, Palm Desert, agreed the proposed project was a beautiful one, but it’s in the wrong location. She said Palm Desert had the gold standard and looked to Councilmembers to make builders adhere to it. She’s impressed with the outreach of the developer and the 200 meetings held, but the people she’s talked to were not invited. She said the City has a 300-feet radius noticing requirement when making changes to a property, but this project was much larger that she questioned why a larger scope of residents couldn’t be notified. She has gone door to door gathering signatures from people who were not aware of the project or thought it was a done deal. She offered to get that petition from her car if Council was voting on the project this evening, but preferred to hold on to it if the Council chose to wait for Mayor Benson. She was surprised to learn the ARC and Planning Commission approved a project that seemed to take particular interest on one side of the street of Ocotillo Drive, because in listening to their concerns, the developer made amendments, but hadn’t done anything to help Sandpiper. She questioned the traffic information and curious to know if the noise study was provided. Additionally, with regard to the 200-300 permanent jobs, she asked if there was a guarantee the developer will use local construction workers and if this project aligned itself with Coachella Valley Economic Partners (CVEP), because the City had invested a lot of money to training children of this community to return to Palm Desert, and will these jobs be fit for people to live and reside with respect to wages. Lastly, she asked if story poles could be provided for this project, because they were denied previously.

MS. JAN COFFYN, 363 Sandpiper, Palm Desert, stated she’s written several letters to the City with her name and contact information in the past year; neither she nor her neighbors have ever been contacted. She thought someone would seek out their address to ask for their opinion, but there’s been no interest in them. The developer has said that the view from Unit 3 will be negligible, which she felt was a subjective term; however, from her viewpoint it was very dramatic and major. She had no concerns about the quality, ethics of Rosewood, or against the 5-star hotel, because she believed it can be used, but thought it should be structured in conformity with the neighborhood and in harmony with Palm Desert. Additionally, the developer indicated he would plant vegetation to hide the hotel, and questioned why would Rosewood or any hotel want to hide their structure from Highway 74. She also didn’t know how this would increase the property value for Sandpiper, when she sits out by the pool with her friends and sees

43 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

a strip of light from the lighted hallway going down to their area. She asked how will that improve her property value and her enjoyment.

MS. IRENE BROMAN (sp?) stated she was a visitor and speaking on behalf of MR. MICHAEL O’NEIL who is a Sandpiper resident and could not attend this evening. She said Mr. O’Neil had the following requests and concerns: 1) Conduct an independent staking that documented accurate heights; 2) concerned about the reflective services of all the windows directly facing the Sandpiper units and amplified sound in any public area; 3) a guarantee that none of the condos would be turned into time shares or short-term rentals; 4) a guaranteed start date, duration, and completion of construction; and 5) power lines in the area to be put underground. In respond to the comment made that Sandpiper residents are concerned about losing views they didn’t own, she said people in Sandpiper are concerned their view will be a massive building and not the mountain views. Additionally, the minutes of the last meeting stated all deliveries will be taking place during off hours early morning, which meant there will be semitrucks driving through residential areas to load and unload deliveries.

MR. BOB PITCHFORD, 74825 Fairway Drive, Palm Desert, stated this project was too big for the site and resented losing a portion of the frontage road, which has a Scenic Preservation Overlay. He also resented the 12-foot setbacks on Ocotillo Drive. He said the Indio Mathis Brothers customer warehouse is about the height that will be experienced on Ocotillo Drive, and people walking on the west side of the street will have the same experience he had when looking up at a massive structure. He said the parkway can be hidden with landscaping, but the height will be intimidating. Also, the elevations on the frontage road have been softened with a lot of trees, which would be like driving through the Oregon Woods, but he didn’t believe that would be the finished look. He reiterated the project was too large in human scale.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel asked the developer if he wished to address the City Council before closing the public hearing.

MR. JOBLON responding to concerns raised, first addressed the non-binding Letter of Intent, stating Rosewood has a policy of not negotiating definitive documents with any developer that didn’t have the construction loan, but because they liked this project, they are willing to enter into a Letter of Intent pre-entitlements. Therefore, the plan is to commence negotiations with Rosewood once entitlements are achieved. As to financing and when the project will start, he said PDH Partners is a well-capitalized group with tremendous institutional relationships and have completed projects that out weigh the size of this project. For example, they just completed a $220 million project in Brooklyn, they managed The Cosmopolitan, which was a $4 Billion project, and he had numerous other examples. He said there are two components to construction, equity and construction debt, and PDH

44 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Partners is well funded. He said when the construction debt market returns, which no one had the crystal ball for knowing when that will be, the goal is to be fully prepared to move the project forward. He said statements made about the Development Agreement and PDH Partners wanting to sell are incorrect, because they have no intent to sell the property and have not engaged with any brokers to sell. However, there are things out of one’s control that could prohibit development, whether it’s personal, family, or the market, and frankly one should have the right to exit an investment. He has spent two years working with the City, but he and his partners have been on this project for four years; therefore, significant money had already been invested on this project. He said their intention is to build the project, because they are passionate about it and see the benefits it will bring to the community. With regards to Sandpiper, he said he went door to door and left an information packet on every single door, which was a fact. He said everyone from Circle 4 and back, who were in attendance at that meeting are in full support of the project, along with many of the Sandpiper people who are here today. He said Mr. Bagato has a photograph of him making a presentation to 35 people at what was Tom and Pam Rasmussen’s (sp?) house. He said he reached out to the Sandpiper Community and has held numerous meetings, and continues to want an open dialogue with them. In response for a guarantee of a 5-star hotel, he said the Development Agreement had language that stated they will provide a 500 square-foot room, which is 50 square feet larger than the Ritz Carlton. Additionally, they have agreed to spend at least $75,000 per door in Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment (FF&E) beyond the hotel room and common area, which is well above any 4-star hotel. By way of example, the Westin Hotel typically spends $50,000 per door on their new ones. In response to the height, he said the majority of the building is to Code, and the portion that are not, as written today, is set back significantly. As illustrated in one of the renderings, the most negligently impacted position, the four-story building is barely visible. He said the visual simulations show that the additional lines can barely be seen, which was all part of the planning. He said someone made the comment about a golf course and so forth, but currently there are 125 golf courses in the Desert. When they first looked at this project, which was about five years ago, they initially thought the hotel had to have a golf course. However, economically, not only did one have to find 180 acres for a golf course, you also need $20 million to build it. Then one would need an additional 50 to 60 acres for the residential to amortize the cost of the golf course, and a hotel in a seasonal market that made enough money to supplement the loss of the golf course. He was confident, from a financial feasibility standpoint, a 5-star hotel will not be built with a golf course in the Desert for a long time. He said today’s new model is more urban, more sustainable, and about using less land and really utilizing the space, yet this project had 55% open space on the site. He said the team dug into this project with regard to the feasibility to make sure its successful and made sense for a 5-star hotel anywhere in the Desert. Responding to comment about notification to residents, he said the City required a 300-feet radius

45 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

notification, but they sent out a one-mile radius notification, sent out a mailer to 3,000+ homes, did cold calling, and had people go door to door. He said it was impossible to meet with everyone, but they did send out 10,000 pieces of literature in mailings and did hold community meetings. He said one of the speakers said that Sandpiper had no skin in the game for this project, which he disagreed, because the whole fourth floor along Highway 74 was removed for Sandpiper, which happened after the ARC meeting and the meeting with the 35 people. He said the team drastically cut 30,000 square feet and remolded the whole project to specifically address their concerns. Additionally, he said there was no basis for the comment made that noise would be more than 140 decibels. As stated in the Planning Commission meeting and again today, he said they will comply with the comprehensive Noise Ordinance for the City of Palm Desert. He said traffic was raised numerous times by those opposing the project. However, he has worked with the City and an independent third party contractor to complete the traffic studies. He said the numbers show traffic is not going to be an issue, because there is so much excess capacity on Highway 74, and with the way they designed the hotel, they will be able to accommodate 400 vehicles per hour; the maximum actually going in per hour is 60. He said the figures show a spread and safe zone and that’s without any specific management plan where they can provide additional valet staff and use the secondary entrance. Lastly, he said the ARC reviewed every single issue, which included the Scenic Preservation Overlay District (SP). He said the Scenic Preservation Overlay was a point that was brought up numerous times, but the ARC finally thought it had been resolved. As for the story poles that were requested, the team opted to do the Balloon Study. He said the problem with story poles is that they’re not an accurate representation, because the building stepped back in so many places and areas that a bright orange story pole wouldn’t tell the true story at all. He said the visual stimulations were done by a certified third party, it’s accurate, and done by GPS where they can certify the accuracy of it, which tells the real story. He said a story pole didn’t include landscaping, tones, colors, and texture of the project, which played an important role. He offered to answer any questions.

Councilmember Harnik asked the developer to respond to the concerns raised about the window reflections and heat in the afternoon.

MR. JOBLON explained the front glass wall was actually a corridor/hallway and not rooms. The reason for it, is that it wouldn’t be a 5-star experience to face and watch Highway 74, so they had to single out that corridor/hallway. He said the glass will be tinted and set back 12 feet from the front of the building with a 12-foot overhang, and in the middle of that overhang at six feet, will be shutters. He said at no point will the sun ever reflect on that front glass, because by the time the sun went over the west mountains, the sun couldn’t reflect on that low of an angle. In response to comments about the noise coming from the hotel, he believed the glass wall, the 12-foot setbacks,

46 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

landscaping, and shutters served as buffers. Additionally, noise was addressed as part of the CEQA document, which came up as a nonissue.

With no further testimony offered, Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Finerty stated it was important to continue this item to allow Mayor Benson to vote. Secondly, she was the one that raised the issue about story poles, because she felt they were instructive and have been used throughout the City for many developments. She was advised that Rancho Palos Verdes, where there is residential and commercial construction and probably exceeding the height limit, are required to put up poles with flags strung together to outline the building shape, and they call it a silhouette, which remains through the whole planning process. She was amazed at the e-mail response to her request for story poles knowing full the City uses them, which stated “Overall we believe in balance when compared with detailed project-based simulations as the Applicant has provided. The contemplated story poles have a strong potential to actually misinform the community and Councilmembers rather than provide meaningful information about the project.” She found it amazing, because the letters in opposition tell basically the same story, as well as Mr. Armstrong’s and Mr. Pitchford’s comments. She said Mr. Pitchford compared the height to the Mathis Brothers building in Indio and many have said the building is too big in that particular space. She said letters have encouraged the Council to reconsider the size and site of the proposed development, because both the footprint and height are well beyond the City’s Building Code. The Council is urged not to sacrifice one of Palm Desert’s most beautiful and scenic neighborhoods with a building so out of proportion. She said the City had standards, which some referred to as the gold standard, because the Council has held the line when it came to upholding its ordinances and not going down a slippery slope. She said once a four-story building is allowed, there will be more requests to come. She recently met with a developer who already started to push the envelope on height with a development right across the street from El Paseo. She didn’t want to be like any other city or Orange County, and the reason people came to Palm Desert was for its weather, majestic views, beauty, and quality of life it offered. She said the Council is being asked not to sacrifice the City’s integrity for another short-sighted development and to uphold the zoning and design standards to protect long-term property values for its residents. She understood the City needed jobs and the economy was in the tank, which she was sympathetic to, but a project like this will dramatically impact Palm Desert forever. She believed the Council should have a continuation of this item, and in that time frame, there will be plenty of time to put up story poles to create a silhouette like they did in Rancho Palos Verdes. She said the story poles will allow people to see what 60 feet really look like with the understanding that part of the building will be four stories and there is a slope on Highway 74. She couldn’t understand why there was such resistance, and when people preferred simulation to the actual thing, which sent the wrong message to her as a Councilmember.

47 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

She’s never met with a developer who had refused or not wanted to put up story poles. She also had a strong concern for the financing of this project as mentioned by Mr. Parkin that it could take ten years to start the project. She said some say there is financing, but she questioned it, because not many hotels are being built. She said the Council had been looking out for a hotel for Desert Willow for years, but hadn’t found one yet. The major reason for it had to do with lack of financing, which is why the City recently ended up with timeshares at the Westin. She reiterated her preference was to continue this item to allow the Mayor to vote, because it was crucial to have all five Councilmembers present for a decision of this magnitude, and during that time, take advantage to allow the story poles to be put up.

Councilman Kroonen stated he was in favor of the notion/concept of delaying any action until there was full participation by all members of the Council. He said he heard a great deal of information this evening, but had come to no conclusion until he’s had time to review his notes, think through the whole project, and added that he was not in any way prepared to make any decisions this evening.

Councilmember Harnik stated she viewed the continuation of this item differently and urged the Council to continue until the next City Council meeting. She said this was a huge project, and this was a tourist town, which had been built on tourist dollars, sales tax, and Transient Occupancy Tax (T.O.T.). She said the late Councilman Kelly used to say “We can go forward or back, but we couldn’t stay in the same place.” Therefore, she believed the Council needed to look at this project long and hard, figure out where this City was going, and how it was going to accomplish it. She said the level of services the City currently had, that everyone appreciated and enjoyed, was not sustainable with the current level of revenue. She said the Council needed to review this closely to make sure it was making the right decision, and if changes need to be made, it will do so. She reiterated it was her wish to continue this item to the next City Council meeting.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated that when he moved here in the early 1980's, there was a hotel at that location, which had a lounge with a piano player called Baby Buddha. He said the piano player was very good and so was the food, but the hotel didn’t make it and the building was torn down. Then La Peon Restaurant came along, they had a fire, the restaurant was rebuilt, then the owners left and the building was torn down. He said those owners are now on El Paseo, which he hoped they do well there. His point is that something will happen on that vacant lot. He said for the City to have an empty lot of that size, on Highway 74 and next to El Paseo, didn’t make any sense. He wasn’t going to decide this evening whether this hotel was the right thing, because this item was going to be continued in order to get Mayor Benson’s input and thoughts.

48 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Mr. Erwin asked Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel to reopen the public hearing if it was the intent of the City Council to continue this item.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel re-opened the public hearing.

Councilmember Finerty moved to, by Minute Motion, continue this item until Mayor Benson returned and for story poles to be installed with the silhouette effect. Motion died for lack of a second.

Councilmember Harnik said businesses that came to Palm Desert, to conduct business and want to partner with the City, depend on the Council to act in a certain fashion. She said businesses need to depend on something and the Council couldn’t keep stringing them along whether the vote winds up being pro or a con, because they are business people, time is money, and things should be kept moving. Therefore, this matter should be taken to the next meeting, which is August 25, 2011.

Councilman Kroonen stated his original comment was to delay action until such time that Mayor Benson will return, because he thought it was inappropriate to take action of this magnitude without the full participation of all members of the Council.

Councilmember Harnik moved to, by Minute Motion, continue the public hearing to the meeting of August 25, 2011. Motion was seconded by Spiegel.

Councilmember Finerty asked if the motion maker was amenable to including the installation of story poles to her motion, since this project required a huge decision of such magnitude, which may negatively or positively impact the community.

Councilmember Harnik said that was not her motion.

Councilman Kroonen offered an amendment to the motion in sensitivity to Councilmember Finerty’s concern with regard to the story poles, for staff to explore the prospect of story poles, the pros and cons, and the ability or inability to do it.

Councilmember Finerty stated the City’s had story poles for every other project and couldn’t understand the resistance.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated a Balloon Study was done for this project.

Councilmember Finerty said she didn’t see the Balloon Study and would like to see the silhouette effect for a project of this magnitude, which she believed would be instructive. She didn’t want to end up with another Hagadone house.

49 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel noted that balloons were not used with the Hagadone house, but understood where she was coming from.

Mr. Bagato offered clarification that in most cases balloons had been used for hotels, because story poles didn’t go that high. She said one developer was able to do it for a 50-foot tall building, but it took telephone poles and had to delay approval, which was for the Westin. He said the City Council packet included photographs of the Balloon Study, which he could also provide in color.

Councilmember Finerty stated there was plenty of time now to get telephone poles.

Mr. Bagato agreed to look into it and explore it.

Councilman Kroonen said he had offered an amendment to ask staff to look into the possibility of getting story poles.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel noted staff had already agreed to do so.

Councilman Kroonen asked if the motion included his amendment.

Mr. Bagato stated staff can explore the options for story poles, and the findings can be relayed to the City Manager and communicated to the City Council via e-mail. He said staff preferred to continue this item to the meeting of August 25 because it wouldn’t require the City to re-advertise the public hearing. He said it also provided the public specific dates for people to show up, and if Mayor Benson couldn’t attend for some reason, the item could be continued to September. He said staff can be in communication about the story poles in between.

Councilmember Harnik asked if that meant the Council would return on August 25 for staff to report on whether it was yea/nay on the story poles.

Mr. Bagato explained staff will try to have the story poles up before the August 25 meeting. He said if staff couldn’t have the story poles installed, it will be communicated to Council with the reasons why, but if the story poles are installed, they will be available for viewing prior to the August 25 meeting.

Councilmember Harnik commented that staff already had something done with balloons that showed the height.

Mr. Bagato agreed, stating staff did a Balloon Study that was included in Council’s Agenda packet, which was done as part of the Architectural Review. He said with wind conditions here, one couldn’t get story poles up that high safely and keep them up for long periods of time. He said beach communities dealt with the Costal Commission that requires story pole

50 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

studies. However, here in the Desert, staff believes it’s best to look at photo simulations, in addition to the Balloon and Mapping studies. Therefore, staff directed the developer to provide more detailed oriented contextual visual drawings, which is more accurate from a professional standpoint. However, he understood that people like to see the poles and balloons up in the air, which staff had copies of from prior meetings to illustrate.

Councilmember Finerty asked about the height of The Holiday Inn.

Mr. Bagato responded a portion of The Holiday Inn building was four stories, and the top portion was 52 feet high. Further responding, he said a Balloon Study was used in that project where the balloons were attached to a rope and someone was holding it on the ground, which was very similar to what they did with this project. He said staff tied the rope to bricks and the developer measured the setbacks, height, and put the balloons up.

Councilmember Finerty responded it was really hard to tell from that, because when investigating, one would have to take the massing of the building and have a pole in each corner, as well as one pole on the downside, one at the three-story height, and one at the four-story height, understanding all will be different taking into consideration the slope. She said the City had always tried to show what the height would be and found it amazing that there was such reluctancy here.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel responded the developer did show the heights with the Balloon Study.

Mr. Bagato stated balloon studies have been used in most cases, because it’s difficult to get poles that are 50-60 feet tall. The only cases where they used poles were for the Starwood project and at Stone Eagle for a 24-foot housing project.

Councilmember Finerty asked staff to revisit what was done with Starwood and Stone Eagle where story poles were required.

Councilmember Harnik stated she was looking at the representations provided by the developer that were included in the City Council packet, which she thought were state-of-the-art. She said they weren’t balloons or story poles, but state-of-the-art, accurate computer driven graphics, and something that can be trusted. She reviewed them, because she is very visually oriented and needs to see to comprehend, and they represent exactly will be built. She wondered if a story pole would tell more than an actual picture of the evidence itself.

Councilmember Finerty said she wanted story poles, because they had served her well over the years when she served on the Planning Commission and on the City Council.

51 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Councilmember Harnik stated her motion stood, which was to continue this item to the meeting of August 25.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel called for the vote, and the motion carried on a 3-1 vote, with Finerty voting NO and Benson ABSENT.

With City Council concurrence, a recess was observed from 7:10 p.m. to 7:47 p.m.

D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE 2011 NEW YEAR’S EVE “ROCK ‘N’ ROLL” HALF MARATHON AND SPONSORSHIP IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $54,000 FOR DIRECTLY RELATED POLICE SERVICES FOR THE EVENT (The Competitor Group, Applicant).

Ms. Riddle stated this event was a little different in that it combined music with sports to create a unique appeal for participants. The sponsor has a great reputation and history of planning and producing these large scale events within communities such as San Diego, Los Angeles, Phoenix, etc., with participation of 20,000+ runners; this event is expected to attract 7,500 to 9,500 runners. The event is scheduled for Saturday, December 31, 2011, with the Marathon starting at the Indian Wells Tennis Gardens at 10:00 a.m. and ending at approximately 2:00 p.m., with post activities concluding at 3:00 p.m. at the Tennis Gardens. Responding to question, she said the run starts at 10:00 a.m., but actual road closures will begin at 9:00 a.m. She said the Applicant is requesting a $54,000 sponsorship for police services, which staff is asking that it be paid directly to the Police Department for services rendered; if actual costs are less, then that’s what will be paid. The Applicant entered into an agreement with the Marriott Desert Springs as one of the host headquarters hotels along with the Hyatt and Esmeralda in Indian Wells. As part of the Traffic Plan, staff is asking the City Council to add to the recommendation that an approved Traffic Control Plan is conditioned. Staff is working with The Competitor Group and Police Department to provide for traffic control that allows an ingress/egress for residents within the route to minimize impact to the community. She said traffic will be allowed through by Police Officers stationed at designated intersections. The Competitor Group has a comprehensive Community Impact and Public Relations Outreach Program, and once the event is approved, the City will include articles of the event in the Bright Side, City website, and provide press releases. The Competitor Group will put out door hangers or brochures on each of the residences within the route area to inform them about the event, route, road closures, and options available to them, which is part of the recommendation. She said the event includes ten bands, and their locations are indicated in the map that was provided as part of the staff report. Staff reviewed the locations and will continue to work with the Applicant to ensure that the types of bands selected are appropriate for the neighborhood.

52 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Councilmember Finerty stated that based on letters received, there are a number of homeowners that are concerned about being land locked on such an important day where they need to be running errands. However, she heard staff mentioned they want to condition the event with an approved Traffic Control Plan for ingress/egress where traffic will be controlled by officers to avoid having residents landlocked.

Ms. Riddle clarified that access to and from will be provided once the closures are in place, but once the run starts, Police Officers will allow vehicular traffic through when there are gaps between runners and they feel it is safe.

Councilmember Finerty asked how long will a particular neighborhood, like Venezia who is really opposed and has 94 homes, be impacted.

Ms. Riddle deferred the question to the Applicant.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited anyone who wished to come forward to speak on the matter to do so at this time.

MR. ALAN CULPEPPER, Director of Operations for The Competitor Group, said he handled the fun stuff, the knots and bolts of making this event happen, and played an integral part on the actual course development. He invited his colleague Dana Allen to first provide the Council with a bit of background information on The Competitor Group.

MS. DANA ALLEN stated she was with The Competitor Group and is joined by her colleagues Alan Culpepper and Bruce Walton. She said they are an organization that has been putting on Rock ‘n’ Roll Marathons and other such events. She said the very first Marathon they did was in 1998 in San Diego, and for 2011, they will be putting on 19 Rock ‘n’ Roll Marathons around the country. The Competitor Group’s office is based in San Diego, it has 230 employees working on events full time, it has four magazines that are published on a monthly basis, and a digital website (www. Competitor.com) that promotes the sports of running, cycling, and triathlon. This event came about because they believed Palm Desert was a fantastic destination where people would want to travel to complete. She said runners are affluent individuals who are fitness enthused, enjoy traveling, and while traveling they like to compete in events; they like to call them “running tourists.” The benefits of bringing an event like this to Palm Desert meant it will attract travelers for long weekends, participate in the event, spend money in hotels, restaurant, and shops, which will leave a great economic impact. She said Palm Desert was a destination that runners will find attractive, and because they have a data base of more than 500,000 runners, they have the ability to market to them year-round and recommend that on New Year’s Eve they spend it in Palm Desert. She offered to answer any questions.

53 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

MR. CULPEPPER stated the traffic plan is ongoing, in that as of today, he had another traffic meeting with police and traffic engineers to review all the details in order to maximize access to residents, whether that meant two-way traffic or an access route out. The goal for The Competitor Group would be to communicate that information to the various neighborhoods through their Community Outreach Program. In response to the Venezia neighborhood in particular, runners will be going northbound in the north bound lanes. He said Venezia has a fire exit on the north side on Hovley, which will be their access route out to head east bound to Cook Street. Responding to question, he said the only neighborhood where vehicles will be completely locked in is located to the west of Portola Avenue between Magnesia Falls and Fred Waring Drive for a period of one hour and 25 minutes. However, those residents can park their vehicle across the street by Lincoln Elementary School if they know they have an appointment or birthday party to go to during that designated time. People will be able to walk across the street, but not be able to drive a vehicle across the street. He said the traffic plan will also include main metering points on Cook Street and north and south bound at Fred Waring Drive. He said they will also increase access lanes with traffic control equipment.

Councilmember Finerty stated she understood Venezia residents will be able to exit at the fire gate on Hovley.

MR. CULPEPPER answered yes, stating on the west side of Portola Avenue, a two-way traffic lane will be created and monitored by police from Hovley Lane to Chaparral.

Councilmember Harnik stated she read the letter from the Dialysis Center and asked if the Applicant was able to address their concerns.

MR. CULPEPPER responded it was all new to him, in terms of the feedback from the residents, which is why they didn’t like to promote events too far in advance to the resident, because they want to make sure they are equipped to answer all questions relating to the route, access routes, metering points, and timing, which usually started 90 days out from the event. Once they have a full-blown outreach program, they work through homeowners associations, community groups, city meetings, and a distribution plan. They have found the door hanger to be the most effective, but each city has its own ordinance in terms of using door hangers. They usually send out direct mail based on a one-mile radius off the entire route for notification. However, direct mail tends to get lost and/or tossed if not seen. The key point is that they want people to know about the event and communicate what is happening, and they pride themselves on their Outreach Program, because most events didn’t do it, and if they did, it was limited. He said they have staff making sure churches, businesses, post offices, etc., knew what is happening and how it will affect them during certain time frames.

54 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel stated the City received quite a few letters, and he asked staff to contact each one of them to inform them of exactly what is happening, because people are assuming they won’t be able to get out of their neighborhood for the whole length of the event, which was incorrect.

MR. CULPEPPER agreed. He apologized for the outdated route included in the Council’s packet, because in working with police and traffic engineers, they have come up with ways to switch sides of the roads to create two-way access lanes for residents.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel asked the Applicant to meet with Ms. Riddle regarding the route and access points, because she will be the one making contact with all those residents who submitted letters.

MR. CULPEPPER offered to have his Community Relations Team start communicating with residents. He understood that words like “land locking” made people nervous, so he will make it clear to residents on the timing of when they will be able to get in and out. However, the one neighborhood that will be landlocked, will be informed it would only be for a short time frame.

Councilmember Finerty noted the Dialysis Center indicated that their 32 patients arrive between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. and then again between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. She said the Center was looking to maintain access to the clinic during those times.

MR. CULPEPPER said he will make sure to include them in their outreach plan.

MR. BRUCE WALTON, Executive Director of Government Relations, stated he was present to answer questions to support Dana and Alan and excited about coming to Palm Desert.

MR. KEVIN GROCHAU, 75253 Santa Fe Trail, Waring Place, Palm Desert, stated he received a notice in the mail and intended to write a letter, but instead came here to learn more about the event. He participated in the Tour de Palm Springs, which he enjoyed. He understood mitigation may be in order, but the City of Palm Springs stopped traffic to make it happen in their city, and it would be a good idea to have this event in Palm Desert.

With no further testimony offered, Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel closed the public hearing.

Councilman Kroonen moved to, by Minute Motion, approve: 1) The 2011 “Rock ‘N’ Roll” New Year’s Eve Half Marathon scheduled for Saturday, December 31, 2011, with the condition that a Traffic Control Plan is approved by City staff; 2) proposed event route and road closures; 3) band placement; 4) waiver of Section 11.01.140 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code - Amplified Sound; 5) waiver of Chapter 5.84 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code - Distribution of Literature, Peddling, and Solicitation; 6) sponsorship of the

55 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

event in an amount not to exceed $54,000 to be paid directly for Police Services rendered and paid directly to the Police Department from Account No. 110-4416-414-3062; 7) appropriation of funds in the amount of $54,000 from FY 2011-2012 Unobligated General Fund Reserve to Account No. 110-4416-414-3062 for this purpose. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

E. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDING TITLE 3, CHAPTER 3.46 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, UPDATING THE COACHELLA VALLEY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN / NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN, AND THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT MITIGATION FEE NEXUS STUDY DATED MAY 16, 2011, AND ADOPTING THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT MITIGATION FEE SCHEDULE APPLICABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT.

Principal Planner Tony Bagato stated this was a Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) related fees for the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan. He said there was a change because of the Nexus Study and the language was changed due to issues with funding and the recent downturn in the economy. Additionally, Eagle Mountain Landfill will no longer be able to be used as a funding source. The change will cause a minor adjustment to the current fee, and the new Ordinance will also allow for exemptions. The City has been in discussions with Ponderosa Homes, and it appears they will be exempt from this new Ordinance if they pull permits after October when this is enacted. He noted the fee could go down again by 8% when Desert Hot Springs negotiations are added to the Conservation Plan, which will require to be adopted if added. Additionally, if approved, the current fees for Commercial and Residential will be slightly lowered and also allow for up to a 45-year land acquisition instead of a 30-year land acquisition. He noted Katie Barrows from CVAG was also available to answer questions.

Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony on this matter. With no public testimony offered, he declared the public hearing closed.

Councilmember Finerty moved to waive further reading and: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 2011 - 73, adopting the findings and establishing the Mitigation Fee from the Nexus Study for the Local Development Mitigation Fee in satisfaction of requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act; 2) pass Ordinance No. 1226 to second reading, revising Chapter 3, Section 3.46 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code for the Local Development Mitigation Fee. Motion was seconded by Kroonen and carried by 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

XVIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS

A. CITY MANAGER

56 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

1. City Manager Meeting Summaries for the Period of June 15 - July 5, 2011. Rec: Receive and file.

With City Council concurrence, the City Manager’s Meeting Summaries for the period of June 15 - July 5, 2011, were received and filed.

2. Aquatic Center Usage Statistics

Mr. Wohlmuth said he’d provided City Councilmembers with a memo on Aquatic Center usage statistics for the first 10 days of operation. Subsequently, he’d received the next seven days’ worth of numbers, and on average the use is higher than the first 10 days – from approximately 600 people/day to just over 650 people/day. In answer to question about operation costs and revenues, given the usage numbers, he believed the facility was on track or better.

3. “Rainbow” Water Feature - Civic Center Park

Mr. Wohlmuth said at the next Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting on Tuesday, July 19, staff would be presenting a recommendation to remove the “Rainbow” Water Feature in Civic Center Park. He said now that the Aquatic Center was in full operation, it was the preferred location for kids to get wet. Further, he explained that the water meter serving the “Rainbow” Water Feature has the highest usage of all in the City Park System, with over $15,000/year spent on water there. Secondly, the unit has other maintenance problems, including its on/off switch and the drywell underneath it that captures all the water.

B. CITY ATTORNEY

None

57 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

C. CITY CLERK

1. Request for Appointment of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the 2011 League of California Cities Annual Conference to be Held September 21 - 23, San Francisco.

Councilman Kroonen moved to, by Minute Motion, appoint Councilmember Jan C. Harnik as the Voting Delegate for the 2011 League of California Cities Annual Conference. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Benson ABSENT.

2. Announcement of City Council Study Session, Thursday, August 25, 2011, at 2:00 p.m.

Councilmembers noted the date and time of the upcoming Study Session.

D. PUBLIC SAFETY

o Fire Department

None

o Police Department

None

E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

o City Council Requests for Action:

None

o City Council Consideration of Travel Requests and Reports:

None

o City Council Committee Reports:

None

58 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 14, 2011

o City Council Comments:

1. Funeral Service for Mrs. Betty Ford – Councilman Kroonen reported that he was privileged to represent the City at the funeral services for Mrs. Betty Ford on Tuesday this week at St. Margaret’s Episcopal Church. He said that it was a very meaningful service, with an appropriate outpouring of support from people throughout both the Coachella Valley and all over the country.

2. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority Workshop – Councilman Kroonen also commented that since the last Council Meeting, he and Councilmember Harnik participated in the CJPIA’s Two-day Workshop. He said there was a lot of good information provided, and he appreciated the opportunity to attend. Councilmember Harnik agreed.

3. Marriott Desert Springs Resort – Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel noted that he and Councilman Kroonen had lunch yesterday with Manager of Marriott Desert Springs and reported that they’d be opening a new restaurant this fall. It would be known as “Fisherman’s Wharf,” operated by the same proprietors as the Fisherman’s Market establishment in Palm Desert. He added that there was a lot of remodeling going on at the property, and they were also getting new beds and drapes for the rooms.

o Suggested Items for Future City Council Meeting Agendas

None

XIX. ADJOURNMENT

On a motion by Finerty, second by Kroonen, and 4-0 vote of the City Council, with Benson ABSENT, Mayor Pro Tem Spiegel adjourned the meeting at 8:23 p.m.

______ROBERT A. SPIEGEL, MAYOR PRO TEM

ATTEST:

______RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA

59