Palm Desert City Council - Study Session, November 13, 2025

Transcript text

AI transcript text.

[00:03:45] Speaker: Um, you don't need to take roll call. We've got that.
[00:03:49] Clerk: Record will reflect all Council present.
[00:03:52] Mayor: Thank you. And why don't we just start? Is there anything you want to change order on, or let's just go straight ahead on the agenda as listed?
[00:04:02] Speaker: Great.
[00:04:03] Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Flores.
[00:04:06] Mr. Flores: All right. Thank you, Madame Mayor, members of the City Council. And also want to recognize Planning Commissioner Greenwood and Planning Commissioner Holt will probably be joining us any minute now on this first item, which is an update on our unified development code updates. We've been providing you periodic updates on this project. Before I turn it over to our consultant to walk through where we're at right now, we're really looking to, you know, we know as we go through this process these documents can be, you know, heavy in text and heavy to digest. So we want to walk you through where we're at, some of the policy decisions we're looking for, and some general feedback to keep going. City staff is reviewing the document that you all have in front of you to make sure it's consistent with, you know, feedback we've heard and consistent with City of Palm Desert goals and to clean up some of that. So, this is a bit of a...
[00:05:00] Carlos: Big picture informational session as well as asking some direction after we met with the subcommittee. So, I'm going to turn it over to Matt to walk through where we're at right now.
[00:05:16] Matt: Thanks, Carlos. Mayor, council members, commission members, good to be here. Thank you for the opportunity. So, as Carlos mentioned, we have a lot to talk about today. And this is really an information gathering session, but I thought I had an agenda slide there. I skipped over it. How do I go back? Pull that. That's fine. I have background on the project just to remind you where we are in terms of the overall project schedule and where this discussion fits into the big picture. And then we're going to talk about the findings of the annotated outline that laid the groundwork for the new zoning code update. And then finally, we'll talk about the administration piece, which is where we're spending the focus of our time right now, the administrative procedures that govern how development activity is reviewed in Palm Desert. So, with that, I have to put on my glasses to look at the remote. That's when you're getting old.
[00:06:13] Matt: A little bit of background about the project. We kicked this off in the fall of 2024. We've talked about this before. We talked with a lot of you all individually and collectively about the strengths and the weaknesses of the Palm Desert regulations. Got a lot of good feedback, and a lot of things are working very well with the current regulations, but there are opportunities for improvement. We summarized our feedback in the annotated outline and the assessment report that was in step two. And then we have now moved into the blue box there, step three, drafting of the new unified code. We're going to be drafting the code in installments. So the first of the three installments is administration and procedures, which we'll talk about today. We're going to then start to get into the more interesting pieces like the zoning districts that the city's divided into, the use table, the development standards, things like that that really distinguish Palm Desert. The testing piece will be once we get through the actual drafting of the code, we'll be getting into the testing piece that looks at hypothetical examples of development and looks at how the code might result in different levels of development quality once it's been drafted. The adoption phase is scheduled to be in the third quarter of this year, and we'll be talking about that later on, but at that point we'll have a consolidated draft of all the installments.
[00:07:29] Matt: Next slide. So if you recall in the assessment report, we talked about five different large themes for how to improve the regulations. We're going to focus primarily on theme one and theme five today: streamlining of the development review process and creating a more user-friendly code. To remind you about the assessment report, these are the recommendations that we identified for how to improve the procedures. It's not a broken system. We don't have to rethink how development is reviewed in Palm Desert, but we do have opportunities to fine-tune it and especially to think about are we doing development review in the most efficient way possible. The first thing that we looked at is kind of organizational. How is the document laid out? Your current regulations are organized by type of procedure. Is it a legislative procedure in which the governing body makes a decision? Is it a development activity that the planning commission might have a final say on? Is it a staff level decision? Instead of that, we're looking at organizing the different types of procedures by type. So, we have ordinance amendments, say an amendment to the text of the code, we have a rezoning, an amendment to the map. We might have a historic preservation procedure, we might have a design review, major or minor. So, if you can see that small print on the graphic in the middle, that's an example of a table where the code has been organized by procedural type as opposed to by the type of decision. So, it's a cleaner, more typical way to organize the zoning code. It helps the applicants figure out kind of who does what in an easier way. And so, just that organizational step is going to be important. Then for the different types of applications, evaluate the thresholds for various types of review. Have you identified the level of decision-making at the right step each part of the way? So, if you have a threshold between major review, design review, and minor design review, let's look at that threshold and do we have the right things going all the way up and requiring a public hearing, say, or do we have more things that might need to be at the staff level? Common review procedures, we'll talk more about that, but all the different steps that procedures go through will ensure that the code is accurately describing the way the procedures are laid out in practice, the way they're being applied in practice. And finally, establishing objective review criteria so people are assured that they're being treated consistently and fairly.
[00:09:52] Matt: One of the big things that I talked about was ensuring decisions are made at the appropriate level, defining the role of the ARC is an...
[00:10:00] Speaker: Important one. This is probably the piece where we got the most feedback from the stakeholders. ARC does a great job. You have a lot of regulations focused on design review in Palm Desert to protect your desert environment. The standards themselves may be working well. There is sometimes comment about the ARC maybe exceeding the authority granted by the strict text of the code, and also, you know, are they stepping perhaps sometimes on the toes of the planning commission in terms of design-related issues or non-design-related issues? And so clarifying that role is something that we talked about. The current regulations have a confusing distinction between zoning administrator and director of development services, and we need to clarify that and actually use terms that describe the organizational structures you guys have in place. Now, clarify the opportunities for minor modifications. If decisions can be made by staff, clarify exactly what those are, when you can do minor tweaks versus major tweaks.
[00:11:01] Speaker: All right, subdivision procedures is another major theme that we introduced. This is a place where staff has actually made a lot of progress already prior to starting this project. You all back in 2024 had started redrafting the subdivision ordinance to comply with the subdivision act at the state level. You had done some reorganization. I think you've carried the ball quite a bit, but we can do more to integrate that with the larger code update and to ensure that the overall document is consistent with the rest of the improvements that we're suggesting. There's more substance that we can look at there as well, expanding and clarifying the dedication requirements, for example. So those are the big themes. I think that's my last slide there.
[00:11:40] Speaker: And that was the last, you know, procedural theme from a user-friendliness point of view. We talked a lot in the assessment report about graphics and design.
[00:11:51] Speaker: Pardon, it's warm in here. We talked a lot about illustrating different parts of the code. You're going to see these types of illustrations primarily in the other parts of the document when we get into zoning districts, development standards, but you will see some graphic improvements and organizational improvements in this first step. And so I just wanted to remind you that that was a project theme.
[00:12:10] Speaker: So now we'll get into the working draft of installment one. This is the draft that was provided to you in advance. This is a core part of the first installment that we have presented to the subcommittee already. We've talked about that with them and we got some feedback, and we're hoping to get some additional feedback as we continue to flush this piece out.
[00:12:29] Speaker: I'm going to show you this table of contents from a different code first of all because the Sedona code that we worked on provides an example of where we're going in terms of the overall organizational model. This is the table of contents of the administration chapter of the Sedona, Arizona code on the right. And you can see that it's primarily anchored by, at the top, a summary table of review procedures. We're going to have one of those for Palm Desert, and then a step series of common review procedures. So those are the typical steps that most applications go through as they are submitted for a review in Palm Desert. That's the general lay of the land. And then all the subsequent pieces of this chapter have different specific development types like conditional use permit or plat that build off those common review procedures. That's the anchoring foundational principle of this organization that we're building towards with this draft. And so you'll see with the draft of the Palm Desert Code that we started to lay out here, how we're starting to build that out.
[00:13:33] Speaker: The first installment of the code is going to be the chapters dealing with general provisions. And that's the stuff that's kind of the legal foundation. What is the overall purpose of regulating land development in Palm Desert? What are the general enforcement provisions? What are the nonconformity provisions? How do you deal with things that were legal when they were first established but no longer comply with current standards? All things like that. You've gotten a draft of that in this first installment. However, it's very much a working draft. I want to emphasize a few things there. The non-conformities piece is a good example. You all have a lot of non-conformities in Palm Desert. We need to think about the non-conformity situation in a very kind of targeted way. And so we'll start to introduce the framework of how strict do you want to be with non-conformities now, but we really can't continue to flesh out that conversation until we get into the actual drafting of the standards, the parking standards or the use table. Then we can think about the different ways that a property might be non-conforming, and we can think about how strict you want to be with each of those different types of non-conformities. So we're starting to lay out the foundation here, but we'll get more into the details of the policy later on.
[00:14:42] Speaker: Then the next part of the chapter that you have is the administration chapter 257. And here's where I'll start to give you some more slides about the details that we've included. I just want to emphasize here it's a working framework, and so we've got a lot of things to talk about. Some of them are just kind of formatting and organizational, you know,
[00:15:00] Speaker: We've got a numbering system here that builds off the numbering system of the current Palm Desert regulations. Current regulations aren't consistent though in all their numbering, and so we've got to pick which one that we like. And so we'll have to work with the staff and work with you all. This starts to build a numbering string for each of the regulations that is consistent for the most part with y'all's current regulations. It's a little cumbersome, honestly, and some of these cross-references might get to be kind of lengthy as we move forward. And so that's the kind of thing, the nuts and bolts things, that we'll talk about with staff and you all, if you have feedback about how we can ensure that the referencing and the numbering is as clean and helpful as you would like.
[00:15:41] Speaker: Colors, fonts, all that kind of stuff, that's all part of this as well. And we're playing out, you know, examples of different things as we work on building this draft with staff. I think that's my last point on this slide. Obviously, a lot of the content is what we're going to be talking about with staff and you all. First of all, the summary table of different types of applications is on this slide. Here's a good example of where I'd like to change the colors. We introduced this pinkish color in our assessment report and we played it out here, but it might be a little pink. But regardless of that, this is an example. This shows how we've reorganized the Palm Desert procedures by organization type. This is one of the first things I said, so we've got a block of applications that deal with site development. So we have conditional use permits, use determinations, major design, etc.
[00:16:35] Speaker: And then, playing off the table, moving from left to right, we get into, first of all, we'll have a section reference. We'll fill that out once we have more of this drafted. And then we have a set of columns that deal with who makes the decision: Zoning Administrator, Architectural Review Committee, Planning Commission, City Commission. So, as we move across, you can see if an R is there, it's review and recommendation. If it's a D, it's decision. And if it's an A, it's appeal. And if there's a star there, that means there is a public hearing involved. And so, this is going to be, at a glance, our tool for deciding who does what and have we made the right decisions for Palm Desert about ensuring the system is efficient.
[00:17:15] Speaker: There are opportunities here to streamline. For example, we've already taken condo conversions, which you have in your current code. We haven't included them in this draft. We've said that the condo conversion piece can be in the conditional use permit section. That is in one of these footnotes. And we use a lot of footnotes as we're doing a draft code like this. And you'll see that in the draft, we use footnotes, we use commentary. And so, a big idea for a draft section would be in a commentary block. A lot of the technical notes for you are in footnotes. Those are a really good paper trail as we draft a code because we're ultimately going to have, you know, a couple hundred pages probably of drafting text. And we're going to need to remember why we did certain things, why we made certain decisions. All the footnotes go away in the adopted version of the final code.
[00:18:03] Speaker: Playing out the rest of these categories, we have, after site development, we have signs, we have subdivision, we have the code and plan amendments, UDC and plan amendments. And then finally, we have a category called flexibility and relief. So if you want to appeal something, if you want to maybe get a variance, if you want to step outside the box somehow, that's what that category covers. I think that's all I want to say about that table for now. On the bottom right of the slide, we start to introduce the common procedures. And so again, this is this anchoring framework for how all the different procedures will be laid out in the code. And there's a starting graphic there, from left to right.
[00:18:45] Speaker: These are the typical steps that most applications will follow in Palm Desert. And this is all draft right now. We're still going to talk about that with you all to make sure it reflects actual practice and to ensure we've gotten the details right. But this is a pretty good start for describing how you're currently dealing with any application type. Is there a pre-application meeting required, you know, or is it optional? Does someone come in prior to an application to get feedback on their concept?
[00:19:12] Speaker: Once an application is submitted, you know, what is a complete application? How do you determine if it's complete? What do you do if it's incomplete? What if you need more information? All that type of stuff is there. Application analysis: Once an application is complete, you can start to process it. What are the criteria by which you evaluate that? Is that done by staff? Is that done with referral agencies that staff sends the application to? How is it processed? And how do you determine if that application meets the criteria that you've set? Is there ultimately going to be a public hearing required, and if so, you know, what's the notice situation for that? You know, do you have to notice within a certain radius? Are there additional notices for certain activities required by state law? All those types of things are covered here. And decision, all the big stuff: How are we going to actually conduct a hearing and make a decision if we have a...
[00:20:01] Speaker: Hearing required on the code—some of that's going to be mandated by state law, some of it's going to be up to the local government. And then finally, in the final box, post-decision actions and limitations after the decision has been rendered. Can it be appealed? Can it be extended? Does it expire if certain activities don't happen? All of that type of information is there. That's a framework. That's a framework that might apply to a rezoning, could apply to a conditional use permit. The balance of this chapter, after these common procedures, we'll start to build on this framework and say, 'Well, the general rules apply,' or, 'No, we have some specific exceptions to those rules for this step.' What we're doing now with staff is working in the background on that piece, making sure that we have got the foundation right to cover exactly what Palm Desert wants to see. There's some policy options there. You know, do you want the review period for an application to be capped at an X period, or do you want to allow that to be more open-ended? Things like that have the potential to be discussed a little bit more in detail.
[00:21:08] Speaker: The graphic itself has some options as well. I've put that first graphic in the Palm Desert draft, but these are some options from other codes that show you some ways that we can play this idea out in different ways. Sedona, again, is at the top left. There's an example of where we have a common set of steps, and they supplemented the top headings with some subordinate information about each individual application. You know, for a rezoning that was required there, but a conceptual review hearing may be required. There were some specific provisions about historic district rezonings in Sedona, and so we had a reference to that. But again, these are all fleshed out in the code, but the table at a glance gives you a sense of how that procedure works that can anchor an FAQ or a handout if you want to have that about just each of these individual procedures. Another different code is at the bottom. They didn't want to have so much detail in their example, so they had less. That's just two flavors of how these can be structured. We can do them in a lot of different ways. We don't have to do them as horizontal flowcharts. We can explore other ideas as well, but a graphic is really helpful. People process information in different ways, and having some type of visual just to supplement the text is a really good way to help emphasize the key points and the organizational framework that you're trying to get across.
[00:22:35] Speaker: So that's how it's organized. I'm not going to give you more detail than that. There's a lot in the draft, but again, it's a foundation draft. And the way this is going to work is that we are going to continue to talk about this with staff to take your feedback and make sure that we've got that foundation right, and then we'll build out the balance of this chapter and call out all the exceptions to the different procedures and anything that we need to emphasize that's not covered there. The feedback that we were hoping to get from you all is just any comments you might have about the organizational approach that I've talked about—this whole idea of organizing by process versus, you know, legislative, administrative, etc. Are you comfortable with that? Do you have any comments or questions about that? The common procedures that we laid out, the way that we have identified the five or six steps, that approach where we call out the rules up front and then call out exceptions later. Are you comfortable with that? Do you have any comments or exceptions about that?
[00:23:34] Speaker: The pre-application conference is a tool that you have a lot of discretion on. Do you make it mandatory for the big stuff? You know, a rezoning, planned development, conditional use permit. Do you always make it optional? That's a question related to resources. You know, do you have the staff to handle pre-application conferences for all these different things? Do you really want to have them spending their time on that? It might result in better applications if you do, but it might be that you want to be more targeted than that and just have them required for the big stuff. That's what we typically see the most often. Same concept for the neighborhood meetings. This draft has a neighborhood meeting suggested where an applicant for, again, probably a larger project would go to the residents of the surrounding neighborhood and say, 'This is my big idea for my planned development or for my, what have you, my new gas station. And do you like the concept? Do you like where it's located? Do you have any feedback before I actually get into the details of the design?' The neighborhood meeting is something that a lot of communities use, but they often don't require it. It's just optional. They find that the best developers tend to do this anyway to reach out to the neighbors, but it can be a helpful backstop for stuff that you want to make sure you're getting feedback on early in the process. Another decision or a discussion point that the staff has, and we talked about in the assessment report, is the role of the...
[00:25:00] Speaker 1: ARC versus the planning commission. Um, it's, it's not a, it could just be a matter of, you know, trying to place a few more, um, not guard rails, but, you know, brackets maybe on the ARC review process to, to ensure that that is being conducted in a, in a, a disciplined, um, way. Maybe limit the number of times an application is required to go to ARC before they can make the choice to move on in the process. Sometimes we've heard that the ARC, uh, process can feel unending, and they feel like it can meander into discussions that aren't really anchored in text that's required by the code. Um, and it might be away straying into concepts that are more appropriately decided by other bodies, the planning commission say. And so, um, those are very generally comments that you all heard. We heard that from you, and, and we talked about it. So, um, that's, that's something that we now have an opportunity to start to look at and more to do. So, that's the presentation. Um, it's, uh, there's, it's all on the table, but again, this is information for y'all. It's starting to show you how the sausage is made in terms of how a code's put together. Um, it's, it's all, it, it is more interesting than it sounds. The procedural piece is the way that the city decides, you know, do we like this project? Does it, does it comply with all the, the work that you've put into plans and, and, and all the other work that you're doing? Um, let us know if we're on the right path, you know, and if you have any questions.
[00:26:32] Speaker 2: Thank you. Are there any questions or comments?
[00:26:36] Speaker 3: Please. Um, when you were discussing some of the elements that needed to be adjusted, you mentioned that this would help us become compliant with the mapped act or the map, the track, um, sorry, subdivision map act. Can you highlight what we needed to bring into compliance?
[00:26:53] Speaker 1: I, I, I tried to phrase that as ensure compliance with the subdivision map act. And I, I would not say that you're out of compliance right now. Uh, but you know, statutory, uh, details, uh, change often with every session, you know, in terms of, you know, review.
[00:27:08] Speaker 3: It's a living document. It's a living document. It's a living document.
[00:27:10] Speaker 1: Yeah. And so I just always think that as a lawyer, you need to step back and just make sure you're still in compliance with whatever the legislature's been doing. And so, um, that's, that's a, that's a, that's a good piece of it. The legislature in most states often gets more involved in subdivision and in the, the particulars of what local governments can or cannot do than they, than they do in typical zoning.
[00:27:30] Speaker 3: Okay. Can I add my—may I add my comments at this time? Um, I wanted to say that I greatly appreciate the timeline, and I imagine that this would help staff get a little bit less, um, frustration at them. If you can tell someone, 'Here's where you're at. There's still these things to go. Here's the process. It's, it's not me holding it up, and it's not anything where we're moving too slowly. This is the, the, the step that it's at.' And in terms of the pre-application conference, I can see the value, but also understand that this not only is a matter of staff resources, but also the applicant's resources. Have you seen anywhere that they maybe have like a, a video? I've seen, you know, different, um, just little pop-ups or something that does a, a quick two-minute how-to or anything that would be helpful tips.
[00:28:23] Speaker 1: How-to, yeah, that's, that's a key thing. Video, I'm not sure that I've seen a lot of those, but, um, very much have seen external resource materials that help people get through the process more efficiently. Um, user's guide, administrative manual, they're called different things. Um, New York City has—it's a big city—it's got a great, um, document about zoning, and it's kind of done in a cartoon way that shows people how to get through the document. That's, that's an extreme example there. But, um, a lot of communities have done, uh, supplemental documents, or maybe it's just even handouts or, or links on the website to show people, 'These are typical projects. This is, these are the steps that you would go through.' Um, yeah, we have a lot of examples to bring to bear. Um, so I, yeah, I, one thing I didn't mention is that you do have some, some lists of things in your code that can be removed because they are extremely technical in detail. Uh, maybe they go into a standards manual, or maybe they go into a, a list of submittal requirements, or maybe they go into a list of approved plant species. But all those types of things you're going to want to keep, um, updated on a regular basis without having to go through a full code amendment. Um, so we often recommend taking those out. You all have some of that stuff. Um, that'll also make the code shorter and easier to understand. That makes it more user-friendly. Um, I just feel like you have to come at that issue from how to get through the process from a lot of different angles. And we have a lot of good examples that we can talk about with you all.
[00:29:45] Speaker 3: That's always been something that I had mentioned before, that it's the standard attention span is you should be able to get to what you need within three clicks.
[00:29:52] Speaker 3: Yeah. And if we're saying, 'Here's all of these external things,' it may again feel more complicated, but I'm sure individuals understand this is a...
[00:30:00] Speaker 1: ...substantial process with legalities and formalities that have to go through.
[00:30:06] Speaker 2: Just real quickly on that point, the online interface, you know, is a key part of that user-friendly experience as well. And your three-click example is a really important point. And that's while it's not technically part of the drafting of the code, it's something that we can help y'all think through as you put this online ultimately to guide that experience.
[00:30:26] Speaker 3: And the last thing, I greatly appreciate the effort to define where ARC versus planning—that was an ongoing issue, as I'm sure you heard, and when the objective standards came in, that caused an uproar. So this would be helpful to help people understand where they are. Thank you. Good.
[00:30:45] Speaker 2: Please.
[00:30:47] Speaker 4: I will just go through your list here. Yes, I do like the new organizational approach and the flowcharts. I think that really helps a majority of people better understand the process, and the same would apply to the new common procedures. And the pre-application conference, also a yes, and we're already holding neighborhood meetings quite often, and so it is a practice I believe the City of Palm Desert is already doing. So yes, that's—and again, since I've been on the council, the role of the ARC has come up time and time again because we have a lot more turnover on that committee as well, and it can be very subjective compared to the planning commission where the members tend to be on that committee more and they seem to be less subjective, in my opinion, on the planning commission. So I believe clearly defined rules need to be in place.
[00:31:48] Speaker 2: That's great.
[00:31:49] Speaker 4: Between the two. And then there was one other thing you brought up about non-conforming use and how strict we want to be. I wasn't sure how to answer that because if there's a financial burden on—so you're saying if there's already a non-conforming use, to not allow it anymore? Is that what you're suggesting? They have one year and then no longer, is that what you're referencing?
[00:32:12] Speaker 2: Um, that's in the realm of what I'm talking about. But it's more a teaser for future conversations because we can be strict—there's a whole spectrum of how strict you can be on a non-conforming. And it could be you're strict at a different level for different types of things. Maybe there's a year for some things, but there's a longer period for other things. Maybe you're more strict with non-conforming parking than you are with non-conforming lighting or non-conforming use. So, I'm kind of saying that we're laying the groundwork for setting non-conforming policy now, but once we get into the standards later, we'll come back to that.
[00:32:49] Speaker 4: Thank you. And I—
[00:32:50] Mayor: I have a quick question for our City Clerk. We have Commissioners Holton and Greenwood here. How are they to participate? As they would, as we are?
[00:33:01] City Clerk: Yes.
[00:33:02] Mayor: Okay, thank you. So if you have any comments, please let us know, or any questions.
[00:33:10] Commissioner: Madam Mayor, thank you. One quick question is, as you mentioned this about the user interface and as the document goes online, you know, as an architect, I deal with a lot of codes, and things like UpCodes has become a pretty significant tool at my disposal now. The ability to hyperlink and bring up multiple components—those things, you know, as one code leads to another and leads to another. Will the adopted code have, you know, technological components to it that allows a better user interface and search capability by end users?
[00:33:54] Speaker 2: Hopefully, that's the goal. But I think it's TBD. You know, I think that's going to be a conversation with your clerk's office, a conversation with the planning team about their ultimate needs, resources. We definitely want to have it have both internal links that are helpful, but also external links to other documents like supporting plans or other regulations. But if you've already got a contract with a codification service like Municode or something like that, and you need to continue with that contract, that's going to potentially lay a set of constraints on you that you'll have to think through in terms of what you could really do within that framework. Some communities honestly take their zoning code out of that larger contract that they might have Municode for the bulk of the code of ordinances, but for zoning, because it's a more robust document, because you need to have more of that kind of connectivity with other things, they've decided to manage it internally in a planning shop. Henderson, Nevada, I know they did that for a long time. I think they probably still do. They had a Municode version that was the official version, but they also maintained a...
[00:35:01] Presenter: ...separate version of their zoning code that was available at that time. It was a very functional PDF. It's probably better than that now, but they wanted to have something that looked better than the Municode experience could provide. And so they were focusing on that user-friendly experience beyond Municode. Municode's gotten a lot better. And I can't remember right now exactly what codification service Palm Desert is using, but that's a conversation that's going to involve those types of variables. Everybody's thinking about the user experience now. And so even the codification services that are the old musty ones like Municode have really improved their capabilities to make it cleaner. And they used to not do illustrations at all. They used to not have any kind of color or anything. And they've gotten a lot better at what they can do. So it's a long-winded answer to say we'll focus on it. We'll help you guys think through what the best options are when this is adopted.
[00:35:52] Speaker: Thank you.
[00:35:55] Commissioner: Hi, and thank you, Mayor Harnick, for the invitation to comment, and city staff, and for your presentation today. I really appreciate the opportunity to be involved and the fact that the city's taking a look at revamping. This is, I think, very important to the city and everyone looking to develop within the city. And I agree, the use of hyperlinks is very helpful, and the hyperlinks going back to the charts. There's a lot of text in here that could be broken up, like you said, by the use of graphs and charts that could summarize the information and hope to clarify that to non-regular users of this document. I know just from my personal experience, the first time I came to the city to apply for a permit, I had the application that I had printed from online and was told that they no longer accept printed applications and everything can be done online. So maybe making a section, creating a section that speaks to the online platform and how users can interact with that, how applications are submitted, how comments are received, because oftentimes, you know, you'll have comments on a project and you won't know you have comments on a project unless you check in with the city or check into the site. So also maybe looking at the potential to revamp that. I don't know if that's been your experience, but, you know, revamping the online interface too, so that's simplified a bit, or maybe that emails can be sent out when comments are ready just to keep the ball rolling and the timelines tight for users, are my main comments.
[00:37:40] Presenter: Those are great comments. Yeah. And some of that stuff is a little bit more in the development review side and the ongoing software that they've been introducing to track applications and things, but it's definitely related to this. And how do you tie in that software with any potential new software for the zoning code? So, those are great comments.
[00:37:58] Commissioner: And personally, I would like you to look at limiting the number of ARC meetings. I think Palm Springs just adopted that last year or the year prior. I think it's limited to two meetings now. And their opinion, in speaking with city staff, is that it has made applicants actually become a little bit more coordinated in their submittal efforts because they know they only have so many meetings, and they can't keep delaying the submittal of requested items or changes to their applications. And then by the time it gets to us, you know, in Planning Commission, they say, 'Well, we've already been to five public meetings, you know, how many more are we going to have?' And they want us to figure everything out in our one meeting because they've already been to so many prior meetings. But I think that's already been previously discussed, it sounds like. So...
[00:38:49] Presenter: I'll jump in as a response to that and just say I don't want to make it sound like I'm throwing ARC under the bus. You've got a lot of thoughtful people that are trying very hard to implement a lot of diverse regulations, many of which are written in a way that makes them have to use their subjective judgment. They would like guardrails. We heard that quite a bit from them. They feel the applicant's frustration, and they're wrestling with some of the same ambiguities that create frustrations for the applicants. And so they're at the table here in wanting, I think, a little bit more defined system. So I didn't want to make it sound like they're just kind of off the beaten path. They understand you have smart people kind of dealing with a vague system, and they're here trying to help think through it as well.
[00:39:28] Mayor Harnick: Great. Thank you. Are there any questions or comments?
[00:39:32] Speaker: Go.
[00:39:33] Mayor Harnick: Please go.
[00:39:34] Councilmember: Oh, he's written a book over here. Okay, so quickly, the purpose of all this is to make our process consistent and predictable for the developer. How did our—maybe you don't know, but how did our—it might be better directed to our staff, but how did our current code get inconsistent, or how do we develop problems? I'm just curious so we don't repeat those same mistakes that may have been made in the past.
[00:40:01] Council Member: Yeah, I understand. But I mean, through this process, well, whatever. Okay. I'm just wondering if it was written incorrectly in the first place or if it was add-on to over the course of the years that made it cumbersome or inconsistent.
[00:40:12] Staff: I'd say piecemeal amendments over time.
[00:40:14] Council Member: I just want to make sure we don't do that again. Second, with the ARC, we talked about that obviously. Do you find that the problem is the ARC will make a suggestion, the developer comes back fixing whatever problem they found, and then at least... is the expression. Should we... is there a way to limit that, or how is that an avoidable problem?
[00:40:36] Staff: A couple of things. You know, you could limit the ARC process just by number of meetings, something like that. But also on the standards that they're expected to apply, you could provide more clarity, or maybe you think about different times when they should be looked at. We heard a lot of people say public art is not integrated well into the process. It's considered an afterthought, and it shouldn't be. It should be considered earlier. If the ARC review process was written in a way to make you think holistically about public art and how it should fit in with site design and grading and lighting and all the other things, then that's a way that you'd be better faithful to the intent of the public art regulations, and they would be more efficient at thinking about how all that stuff fits together. So, those are ways that we can address that problem with a project like this.
[00:41:23] Mayor: Okay, I have a couple of comments, and thank you for all of this. I know what a process this has been. So when we talk about the new organizational approach, I know you have been working with planning on this. So they are the best voices since they are the day-to-day voices on this. And what I see, a new organizational approach that is user-friendly and efficient makes perfect sense. And I'm sure that planning was able to give you feedback that upheld that thinking and how we can get to the best organizational approach. The use of pre-application conferences, I think, is so important. If you give somebody a roadmap right from the get-go, we're going to be efficient. We're going to do better. What that looks like is difficult. You had said, 'Well, do we do it for the larger developments? Do we do it for the smaller?' That's going to be something that's going to need to be sussed out. But the pre-application conferences certainly would cause fewer ARC meetings, and it would make a more efficient process. So, I like the idea of the pre-application conferences with these developers. They come in. Time is money. And if they sat down and they were provided with a roadmap how to get where they're trying to go most efficiently, most effectively, that's a gift to them and it's a gift to the city. So, I definitely support those. The use of neighborhood meetings, when you said that, and I have a question mark, does that mean would that include the team, the Palm Desert team, or is that developer and neighborhood community members?
[00:43:14] Staff: Mostly the latter. Yeah. You can have a staff member there, but you don't want to make that their responsibility, and you don't want them to have to moderate the meeting or take notes. It's really the applicant that's having to do that because that's a whole new staff requirement if you require that, and it becomes more of a city meeting versus theirs.
[00:43:31] Mayor: Okay. I just want to be abundantly clear on that. And then going to the role of ARC versus planning, it makes perfect sense, and everyone appreciates a good job description. And we need ARC to have clear and succinct guidelines just as we do, just as we all do. And it will lend itself to a more efficient process if the guidelines are sufficiently clear for them. And we have to make sure, as the pre-application conference will then cut back the number of times they're going to ARC, then if ARC is operating clearly and succinctly, that's going to cut it back too. And I like the idea... the perfect example is when you talked about public art should be integrated into the art experience, and that I agree with and support wholeheartedly. So if everyone's got a clear job description, we're all going to do better, and the developers will benefit from that. So, I love where you're going with this, and I think we are going in the right direction. Excellent. Thank you.
[00:44:47] Staff: Good to hear. Thank you.
[00:44:48] Mayor: Yeah.
[00:44:50] Council Member: All right. Any other comments or questions?
[00:44:52] Council Member: I do. I know you're looking to take our temperature here, and I agree with all the mayor's points.
[00:44:56] Staff: Excellent.
[00:44:56] Council Member: So, good.
[00:44:57] Council Member: There we go.
[00:44:59] Council Member: Anybody else have comments, questions?
[00:45:02] Council Member: Okay, I think we're moving it. I really appreciate all this work. This is certainly tedious. Thank you, mayor.
[00:45:08] Mayor: And you're getting those details and we appreciate that. Okay. There, should we just move down to 2B now? Okay. So, this is, we are on 2B and we are, Mr. Canon, please.
[00:45:35] Mr. Canon: Good afternoon. What I want to touch on today is some of the development agreement obligations that we've been working on with the developer, actually over the last two years. To give you just a little bit of background and the purpose as to why we're here: again, a little bit of background on the Millennium Specific Plan and Development Agreement; review some of those unmet obligations; also review ongoing maintenance responsibilities as a result of that development agreement; seek direction on proposed resolutions to those unmet obligations; and also seek direction on dissolving the master association that was established.
[00:46:20] Mr. Canon: So a little bit of background: the Millennium Specific Plan was adopted in March of 2015. And so when that specific plan was adopted, there was a development agreement that went along with that, that sort of laid out a number of obligations and conditions of how that development would occur. There was also a tentative map that was adopted at that time that essentially created the nine parcels that are out there today, as well as laid out the street network. And then there was a master association that was established, with their primary responsibility being maintenance of landscape medians and drainage facilities.
[00:46:59] Mr. Canon: And just to show you where we are to date with that specific plan: as you're aware, we obviously have Dave Irwin Park, the centerpiece, that construction will be commencing in the near future; Palm Villas, which has broken ground; Millennium Apartments, which just completed that development; we had the Holiday Inn; and then just to the north of the Holiday Inn, they're going to be adding a Staybridge hotel; and then to the south of the Holiday Inn, they're in for entitlements for a Home2 Suites hotel. And so we still have quite a bit of hotel development obviously occurring with the proximity to the interstate, which leaves parcel six still available for development, parcel four which is along the railroad, parcel three at Dinosaur, and then parcel two at the northeast corner of Gerald Ford and Portola. And so the four remaining parcels are still all owned by Palm Desert University Gateway, which is the master developer of the specific plan.
[00:48:11] Mr. Canon: And so in March of 2023, the developer had approached the city with a request to dissolve the master association and had requested that the city consider taking on those maintenance obligations that were outlined at that time. What we had responded back to him was that we needed to really look at the specific plan, development agreement, map approvals, essentially all of the approvals that had occurred to date, and really look at and put together a complete inventory of conditions that were either met or not met, as well as look at all maintenance responsibilities before we could even get to that discussion point. And so for over a year, year and a half, we held multiple meetings with the developer and unfortunately were never able to reach a resolution on any of those items. Right around sometime in the fourth quarter, I don't recall the exact month of last year, there was a change with the master developer. That partnership had changed; one of the partners was bought out, which sort of brought a different perspective to that master developer, but also a renewed effort to really work with the city and resolve all of those items. And so since that time, we've been working to try to resolve all of these items, which ultimately brought us here today. But we were able to, right off the bat, really work to resolve five items, and then we still had five items that were outstanding that we had continued to work through. And then in addition to meeting with them, we also met with the Genesis HOA president at least three times to
[00:50:00] Speaker: really address some of those unresolved issues. Primarily, one of their major concerns had to do with the installation of the screening of the railroad track where trees were supposed to be planted, and they were not.
[00:50:17] Speaker: And so, what I'll walk through quickly is the five items that we were able to work through to resolution. The first, and this one took some time, had to do with the installation of a median and landscaping for Zenith Way. And so, the image on the left is what was built. And when it came time to bring the item forward to accept that right-of-way, we told the developer that we would not accept it because it was inconsistent with the specific plan. There were plans that were approved; unfortunately, they were not consistent with the specific plan. There were comments that were ignored—I'm not going to hide that. But a lot of that speaks to where we were many years ago when departments didn't speak to one another. But what we ultimately were able to work through with the master developer is correcting that. And so, what we have today is what you see on the right, which is a much more, not just pedestrian-friendly, but much safer, not just for, as well as for vehicles. So, we have a channelization into that roundabout, as well as pedestrian crossings for future residents to enjoy the park.
[00:51:39] Speaker: The next, and this one came up a little bit later, was acquiring additional right-of-way for access into Dave Irwin Park. When Palms Communities was to develop, they were to acquire a portion of that parcel, Parcel 4, for right-of-way. And as we really started looking at how the park was being developed, we realized that additional right-of-way would be needed. And so, we worked with the developer and property owner to acquire additional right-of-way. And so, we actually have an item that we'll be presenting in December—I'm sorry, in December, yes, at the next meeting—for a purchase and sale agreement of approximately 2,200 square feet for right-of-way for access into Dave Irwin Park. And so, that was another item that we were able to resolve.
[00:52:35] Speaker: And then the other three—there's no pictures associated with these, but number three had to do with the cleanup of the channel behind the property, which was the former Mid Valley channel. So, as you know, this had started in 2023. During that same year is when we had Hillary, and at that time we had to go in and really clean up and regrade, not just the channel behind these properties, but a number of properties. And so, because we didn't seek reimbursement from any of the other property owners, we had agreed that we would not seek reimbursement from the master association. In addition, there was a requirement for the Mid Valley bike path that had required a payment of $773,000, rounded up. However, the City Council in 2017 had abandoned that project due to the entire Mid Valley bike path being abandoned and ultimately deleted from the CIP. And so, really, this was more of just a housekeeping item. Unfortunately, the development agreement was never amended or any other approvals amended to have that requirement go away. And so, again, this is just something that needs to be cleaned up. In addition, there was language regarding two retention basins on the City's park property: a western retention basin and an eastern retention basin. The eastern retention basin ultimately was eliminated, and so there's really no need for contribution from property owners because that basin doesn't exist.
[00:54:24] Speaker: And so, that led us to September of this year. And so, we finally got to a point where, of all of the remaining items, we had an agreement, at least from a staff's perspective, that we wanted to bring forward to City Council for consideration. And so, three of those had to do with unmet conditions or obligations from the development agreement. And then, two have to do with maintenance obligations that really are part of the development agreement, but really are more specific to the master association.
[00:55:01] Speaker: And so what we did is we looked at, of those unmet conditions and approvals, what some of those costs were associated with that. And so the first one included the installation of trees along the railroad track. And again, these numbers are for what it would cost to install these on the city portion property, i.e., parcel 8 or Dave Irwin Park. The trees that were specked were a mix of smoke trees. And I'm trying to remember what else, but I think the vast majority were smoke trees. And so that would have cost just over 300,000 at that time, in today's numbers. There was also landscaping that was required on Dinah Shore, perimeter landscaping. And so this is in that parkway area between the sidewalk and the street. And then there was a sidewalk that was not completed at the northeast corner of Port and Gerald Ford. And so I'll walk through these a little bit more in detail.
[00:56:00] Speaker: And so the condition for the tree line had to do with installation along that northern boundary prior to the issuance of the 80th building permit for planning area one, or this was as part of the genesis housing development. Unfortunately, while those plans were approved, that condition was neither enforced nor amended, and so it just went undone. I can't explain why or how; we just know that it didn't happen. What the developer has agreed to do is reimburse the city approximately 155,000 for the tree line cost when that parcel 3 develops. And then what they would also agree to do is match the enhanced screening when parcels three and four develop. And so if you recall from the park design for Dave Irwin Park, it was a mix between a wall, trees, and shrubs. So it's a much better design than what we would have had with a line of smoke trees, and quite honestly, they probably would have had to be removed anyways. But that was the resolution that had been proposed.
[00:57:18] Speaker: The second, again, had to do with the perimeter landscaping on Dinah Shore. And so while it was installed on the south side and west side of Dinah Shore, it was not installed on the north or east side bordering the city's property. And so again, the plan was approved showing that landscaping. However, it was not installed. Typically, when we have a large specific plan or other areas like this that are being master planned, that streetscape typically is installed at the same time. That way, if there are trees, they are grown at the same height. University Park is probably a good example of when those roads and landscaping went in, so you had a consistent look and feel throughout. We will be installing perimeter landscaping as part of the Dave Irwin Park project, differently than what was initially approved, but what the developer has agreed to do is essentially match our design when parcel 3 develops.
[00:58:26] Speaker: The other unmet condition had to do with the completion of the sidewalk at Portullan and Gerald Ford. So again, the approved plans included sidewalks and access drives. However, they were not installed. And so what you see here is where the sidewalks stop heading west on Gerald Ford, as well as that north-south connection. And so while the crosswalk is there and you can access it, you can't really walk anywhere, and we have seen individuals walking in the sand. And so the developer has agreed, as soon as possible, to install sidewalks per the approved plan. And so this will significantly improve the pedestrian connectivity in that area.
[00:59:17] Speaker: The next set of items have to do with ongoing maintenance obligations. And so the first has to do with maintenance of the westerly drainage facility. And while this is included in the master association, it really has nothing to do with the master association. I think it was just a repeat of what was in the development agreement. But this has to do with maintenance obligations for drainage that's located on the city's property. So, if you recall, there was this easterly drainage basin and a westerly drainage basin. The easterly is not needed. The way that was supposed to be set up, there was a...
[01:00:00] Staff: ...proportionate share. The way the Westerly was set up was anybody that's draining into it or using a part of it must pay for 100% of the maintenance costs associated with that. And so that cost overall was about 60,000. And then there was annual maintenance of that drainage channel, and then it was split between seven parcels. However, the only properties or developments that do use that drainage channel are Genesis, as well as future commercial lot two at the corner of Gerald Ford and Portola. And then the maintenance of the two landscape medians are also included in those maintenance obligations. And so again, just to get a little bit more into the detail as well as some of the proposed resolutions, this is a requirement in the development agreement master association CC&Rs as well as the Genesis HOA CC&Rs.
[01:00:59] Staff: And so it requires the city to begin billing Genesis for 100% of those maintenance costs upon completion of the Dave Irwin Park or whenever parcel 8 is improved. And then it does require the Genesis HOA to be responsible for maintenance of the on-site storage storm water conveyance system on their property. And so once it hits our drainage area, that's when we're responsible for the maintenance, but the lines themselves is the responsibility of Genesis. And so what staff is recommending is to amend that requirement to be based on a proportionate share as opposed to 100%. A lot of that, if you look at the size of that basin compared to what was initially conceived, obviously the park developed into what we have today, which we think is going to be a fantastic park, but included a much larger drainage basin. And so what we looked at was what that proportionate share that would be attributable to Genesis, it's just under 37%. And so their overall responsibility, again, these are estimates, would be about 22,000 a year.
[01:02:13] Staff: The second had to do with the drainage channel. And so as I indicated, parcel one does drain into the channel. They do have off-site storm water retention. And then parcel two has a connection that would eventually tie into it. And so those are the two parcels with the green stars. However, parcels three through seven are required to provide storm water retention on site but pay for maintenance. And here is where it gets even more confusing: the channel itself ties into the city's drainage system. And so as you see here in the picture, while we don't have any maintenance responsibilities, our storm water does ultimately flow into that area. And so there was this conception that there would be this overall system that would all be tied together. However, as those parcels developed, that never really came to fruition just due to grading and a number of other factors out there. And so the proposed resolution would be that the developer would actually deed that channel over to the city. There'd be no acquisition cost. And then what the city would look to do is some type of cost-sharing agreement similar to what's in place for the westerly drainage basin with Genesis and parcel two, because they do, in fact, drain into that.
[01:03:32] Staff: A little bit more of a background on this: at one point in time, this drainage basin or this channel was part of the Mid Valley channel. It was supposed to be deeded to the city at that time. When the Mid Valley channel was decided that CVWD was no longer going to move forward with it, there was a condition that City Council put in place that the city then at least get an easement over that property. However, we never got the easement because the master or the specific plan came in its place. And so there were a number of things going on. And so, as I said, that's trying to put it in simple terms. But again, we do have a connection, as you see, into that channel.
[01:04:20] Staff: I think I'm on number four, which would be the Zenith Way median. And so there's a maintenance cost associated with that. The master association documents spell out those percentage splits. I think at one point it was conceived that there would be a median the entire length. However, until parcel four develops, we don't know if a median will continue down Dinosaur. But what we do have is the median that's out there today. And so we would look to amend that to remove parcel five since they have no adjacency.
[01:05:00] Staff: ...to that median. And then there would be a proportionate share five years from acceptance. So in 2030, split between the adjacent property owners and sort of the same setup with the dinosaur medians and continuing with that. And so if the drainage channel does come under the city's ownership, the only purpose for the master association would be for the maintenance of the dinosaur and Zenith Way medians. And so really we looked at two options: one being continue with the master association, or agree to dissolve the master association. I will say, at least in the time I've been here, it has been a challenge with getting those medians maintained through a third party. And so that's why we were initially supportive of dissolving the master association. Again, it simplifies the administration of that, but also looking at just the long-term buildout of that when the master developer does ultimately sell those properties. They may or may not, but if they do, who will we then go after when things aren't being maintained? And so it really clarifies ownership and maintenance responsibilities. And so if it does dissolve, it really gives two options: one being a cost-sharing agreement then that the city would enter into with those adjacent property owners, or two, the city just take on those maintenance responsibilities. Obviously, there's pros and cons for both. I will say that while there is a cost associated obviously with the city taking on that maintenance of approximately 42,000 a year, like anything, when we have control over it, we know that it simplifies the administration of it. We have consistency throughout with the way that median is being maintained. When you have the ones on Portola or Gerald Ford, those are city-maintained medians. Trees get replaced faster, and there's just a faster response overall from the city. And so, I won't read all of these, but this is just kind of a summary of the various resolutions that we had, as well as sort of our justifications as to why we think it's a good idea. And so, what we're really asking this afternoon is Council's direction on Part A, confirmation of the resolutions for unmet conditions. And I did make an error on this one: there should be a number five, which includes the proportionate share for the Genesis HOA for that westerly basin. And then Part B is whether or not the master association should be dissolved, and if so, would it be Option 1 or 2? And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions.
[01:08:12] Mayor: I would just like to say, wow, that's a lot. Okay, questions.
[01:08:18] Council Member: I have a question.
[01:08:20] Mayor: You know what? Let's start over here. We haven't heard from Council Member Pedto.
[01:08:25] Council Member Pedto: The proposed resolutions. Who developed the proposed resolutions? Was it staff or staff in conjunction with the developer? Like, who's proposing it?
[01:08:37] Staff: It was staff in conjunction with the developer. There was a lot of back and forth in trying to resolve all of these items.
[01:08:46] Council Member Pedto: So, if we provide direction to move forward on these, the developer's already bought in on the—
[01:08:51] Staff: Correct. Yeah. Basically, what started in 2023 is what we said is we need to have at least an understanding that they're in agreement, and something that we could support before we brought it to City Council for final consideration.
[01:09:06] Council Member Pedto: Okay.
[01:09:08] Council Member Pedto: Couple of questions. The first one is, and I'm going to work backwards a little bit, because the master association question is more simple in my mind. But the question on—yeah, that slide you were just at—adds 42,000 a year to the maintenance budget. Adds it to the city's maintenance budget.
[01:09:31] Staff: Correct, for landscape median maintenance.
[01:09:34] Council Member Pedto: And that would be with a funding source from the properties, or we're taking on that expense with no income, no revenue stream?
[01:09:45] Staff: Under Option 2, the city would absorb those costs.
[01:09:54] Council Member Pedto: Is there an option for a cost sharing where, or not even cost sharing, but is—
[01:10:00] Speaker 1: Is there an option for some sort of maintenance district where we have revenue that funds? And the reason I'm asking is because we're seeing this in other places where people move and institutional knowledge goes away, and there's an expectation of people move in and they see a road and they expect that the city is the one taking care of it, and they assume that they're already funding it somehow. How it does increase their costs. But one of the other trade-offs that isn't mentioned is just the portability of residents moving in and out and the expectation that the city maintain stuff, and then HOAs lose that kind of—somebody was on the board, made that deal, and now they're not there and nobody knows. And you're shaking your head, so I think you've experienced this before.
[01:10:49] Speaker 2: Yes. Yeah, and I should have added, Public Works is working on another study session item to really look at, to speak to just what you brought, because we have this—this issue isn't isolated here. We have it throughout the city. There was a policy decision at one point, right, where we didn't move forward with landscape and lighting districts and created HOAs. And so we have some medians that are under a cost-share agreement or HOA maintains them. Some are maintained, like out at Ironwood, they're maintained very well. Others are not maintained well. But we also have some that were established purely for maintenance of entry features. And so there's a number of these items that I know Public Works will be bringing. And so whether we table, you know, options one or two, I think the bigger question is really A or B, and we can always come back to one or two as we have that overall discussion and how to deal with this citywide.
[01:11:59] Speaker 1: Do we have an estimate of the—on cons, says 'city oversight administrative burden cost'—do we have an estimate of what that cost is in relation to that 42,000?
[01:12:09] Speaker 2: It would be in addition to that. It would be that staff time. Obviously, billing, collecting, I would assume we would do it on an annual basis. It's just as properties develop, or if we end up, you know, changing out the landscaping in the medians. We had the project, right, that we just discussed for the median master plan. And so at some point in time, I would assume these medians are going to change to what they—how they look today to follow through with our master plan. And so how do we assess that? Does that all—do those changes get assessed to those property owners because we're not assessing them to others citywide? And so there's a number of other considerations that go in, or should it just strictly be for the maintenance?
[01:12:56] Speaker 1: I guess the point of my question is, would we be paying that $42,000 just in administrative overhead if—
[01:13:04] Speaker 2: No, the 42,000 is actual cost for maintenance. And so the admin cost would be separate, primarily staff time for Finance and Public Works,
[01:13:16] Speaker 1: But not close to that 42 number?
[01:13:18] Speaker 2: Correct.
[01:13:19] Speaker 1: Got it. And then one other question is on the resolved items, the Mid Valley Parkway and the channel cleanup. Just in rough numbers, looking like $1.7 million is the total of that. Am I to understand that the developer would be on the hook for that $1.7 million, theoretically, if there was a Mid Valley Parkway bike trail, bike path, and they were cleaning up the channel? So theoretically, we're forgiving $1.7 million's worth of conditions?
[01:14:02] Speaker 2: To some extent, because that project was canceled. We can't collect it because it's not for an established project. And then with respect to the channel cleanup, there is a provision, or the maintenance, there is a provision in the CC&Rs that do allow us to go in, like any other, and maintain it and then bill back. This was a little different because it was a result of Hillary. And so this was part of a larger—I want to say close to three million—and so we looked at what that proportioned share of that 3 million was. And since we didn't go after everybody else, so that's why we removed it here.
[01:14:53] Speaker 1: Okay. Let's see. This is probably going to seem like a silly question, but I'm going to ask it anyway.
[01:15:00] Council Member Trouy: The performance bonds for this developer have long ago been released. Correct?
[01:15:04] Staff: Correct.
[01:15:04] Council Member Trouy: Okay. So, the tools we have in our toolbox to force them to do what we want them to do are what?
[01:15:12] Staff: Limited with respect to the maintenance items. And the only, the biggest tool that we had essentially to force it was not to move the item without a staff recommendation to accept that right away, the zenith way. And so, that's why it was fenced off for a long time until those improvements were changed. But for the other items, we don't have really anything to force their hand. So to some degree we're at their mercy where this is just in good faith negotiation. We're hoping that they come through and do the right thing.
[01:15:51] Council Member Trouy: And so that's where we got to the point we are today. Correct?
[01:15:53] Council Member Trouy: Got it. Um, who owns parcel 2? Because I know that's been a point of contention is that continuation of sidewalk that—
[01:16:00] Staff: That is the Palm Desert University gateways. That is the master developer. So they own parcel 2, 3, 4, and 6.
[01:16:06] Council Member Trouy: So, the same group that built Millennium or Genesis here, sorry, the Genesis?
[01:16:13] Staff: They were the developer, master developer, and then they had a home builder build that part.
[01:16:19] Council Member Trouy: I'd like to see that sidewalk get built for sure because it's been a point of contention for those residents for a while. And then I'm going to open up a can of worms, but it's on my radar. That the traffic circles down there on Dinah Shore were built by the same developer in question here. Correct?
[01:16:36] Staff: I believe they were built—whether they were built by the master developer or the developer of Genesis, and Randy can probably answer better than I could. I wasn't here.
[01:16:49] Randy (Staff): Yeah, the same group of individuals, that developer, built those roundabouts.
[01:16:54] Council Member Trouy: Okay. And they're not really technically up to code or up to standards, and they have been causing problems with traffic and issues. And I just want to put everybody's—that may be something else coming down the pike here. I know we're supposed to hear it. Yeah. So anyway, that's just something—
[01:17:08] Staff: Kind of a shortcoming they had there.
[01:17:10] Randy (Staff): You are correct. There are some improvements that need to be made, and that's something we will be addressing next fiscal year.
[01:17:16] Council Member Trouy: Okay.
[01:17:16] Randy (Staff): Or requesting a budget for improvements next fiscal year.
[01:17:22] Council Member Trouy: Perfect. Okay, that's all I have.
[01:17:25] Council Member: Anything?
[01:17:25] Council Member: Yeah. So just adding to what Council Member Trouy was just asking in terms of Genesis. And in fact, we have the former HOA president, if not still the president of HOA, here in the audience. I know he's met with staff a few times. Have you gone over these particular items as well just to get feedback from—
[01:17:51] Staff: Yes. He was involved in, I believe, the September, the initial meeting that we had with the master developer. And so I do know that those two also have been in conversations, and then—
[01:18:02] Council Member: Is there any feedback that you can share?
[01:18:04] Staff: Other than my understanding is that they were in agreement.
[01:18:09] Council Member: Okay. Very good. And they're still waiting on the sidewalk, which we're addressing right now, which is great news. Okay. Thank you.
[01:18:17] Staff: Yes.
[01:18:17] Council Member: Okay.
[01:18:20] Council Member: I see all of the benefits of the pros and cons. One thing that does concern me is that little footnote, the fact that the conditions were not met originally to have the sand barriers or the shrubs or trees, whatever they were supposed to do. And I understand for a variety of reasons they were not done. I have a problem with them saying, 'Yeah, we'll fix it later. We'll fix that when those other things get done.' There are people that live there now that were impacted. They were promised that certain things were going to be done. The developer was going to meet these things, and it's been a few years, to my understanding. So, what was the reasoning for them to say we'll do it later?
[01:19:09] Staff: I honestly have no idea. Unfortunately, there wasn't like a memo to the file. There was no real—just being honest, there was no documentation, and that was what we struggled with. You know, ideally there would have been some because this was a condition that was put in place in the development agreement. That item should have come back, and the development agreement should have been amended, or some other action taken. And just being honest, that didn't occur, and I can't tell you why or why not. Yeah, that, as Mayor Pro Tem Trouy mentioned, this is good faith, just as it was good faith before that they were going to get this done. And personally, I would rather leave things as they are until we can get a—
[01:20:01] Council Member: A little bit more detail in terms of what else they're going to do to ensure that good faith. And I understand that our hands may be forced in some elements, but this is not a done deal. This is a living document and I am very concerned that they may try to slide something else in and find some little detail and come up with another reason and say, 'Well, we're going to wait until five develops or till six develops.' And that's not okay for the people that live there that will be in that surrounding community. Um, I appreciate the sidewalk. A lot of folks call it, uh, affectionately the sidewalk to nowhere. So, I know that that's going to be resolution, um, that's going to make a lot, a lot of, uh, residents happy. Another thing that came to mind in terms of sharing the cost, who would put forward the RFP for the work to be done? Because I know some of these challenges that happened before was under the assumption—the city assuming that the property owner was going to take care of it, the property owner thinking the city was going to maintain it. Just as Council Member Padetto said, we have to have that clarity because if we don't maintain that oversight, we can end up in situations that can be catastrophic both in terms of infrastructure and financially. So, just to toss those, those—my thinking out loud.
[01:21:34] Council Member: If I may, I just—if I can characterize what this appears to me is developer comes here, tells city, 'I agree to the conditions of approval,' they move on, and they don't do them. And then now we're negotiating to give them relief. And, uh, so that's what it appears to me. And to Councilman Trouy's point, and as you said, Richard, we don't have much leverage. So, at this point, they didn't do what they said they would do, and we're negotiating from a less weak point than if we were on it to begin with. So, I appreciate what you guys have done there.
[01:22:17] Council Member: Okay. So, I have a couple comments. When we talk and we're looking at—I'm going to start at the very bottom: maintenance of Dinosaur and Zenith Way medians. Now, if we went back to slide—well, in our book, it's 20, but I think it might be the prior slide, and we talked—that adds $42,000 to our annual maintenance. And here's what we found, and everybody's kind of stated this in one way or the other: they haven't stepped up. And that 42,000, unfortunately, is $42,000. But if we think we're going to run after them and we're going to push them to do it, how much does that cost us? And we have lousy-looking medians. So, that's one of those things. We're just going to have to bite the bullet and maintain those medians to Palm Desert standards. Uh, what are the other things that you have requested? Can we go back to what is the council direction requested? Um, to reimburse city and install enhanced screening along parcels three and four when developed. But when you spoke of that, it sounded like in many ways we were going to have a nicer screening than we would have were it just to be trees. Is that accurate?
[01:23:52] Staff: That is correct. So, if you recall from the design with the Dave Irwin Park, it was a mix of a wall, a screening wall. We didn't want to have a complete wall, obviously, for a number of reasons—one's for maintenance, but also making sure individuals aren't back there.
[01:24:07] Council Member: Um, right.
[01:24:09] Staff: And what the developer at least has committed to do, that we would ultimately bring back in an amended development agreement to hold them accountable for—or even if they were to sell that property, at least that requirement would be memorialized in an amended DA—is to take that design that we're putting in at Dave Irwin Park, and then they would agree to install it both on parcel three as well as parcel 4. So, you'd have that continued or that continuity of that design for Dave Irwin Park the entire length of the entire length of that northern boundary.
[01:24:46] Council Member: Okay. And without that, there is no real requirement for landscaping. And so you can have the nice wall that we have at the park and, you know, essentially missing teeth on either side.
[01:24:58] Staff: And the trees will add beauty and the...
[01:25:00] Mayor: The walls will be good for, you know, as stopping the wind and security. So, okay, going to the next one. Developer to match new dinosaur landscaping when parcel 3 develops. As long as we have this in writing and it is clear as can be, they know what they are obligated to and what they will be doing, then I think that is exactly what they should be doing.
[01:25:25] Staff: Our, our, Mayor, if I may, um, our intention was once we get this direction is to come, to come back with, with an amended development agreement. So, it is, it is memorialized.
[01:25:34] Mayor: Okay, those conditions are clear and everyone knows moving forward what needs to be done and everyone's held accountable, um, from this point on. Now, developer to complete sidewalk at Porto and Gerald Ford. I don't think there's anyone who's going to disagree with that. So, that definitely has to be done. Developer to deed drainage channel to city. I have a little bit of an issue and I look at this and we have to figure this out because we have lots of homeowners associations who like to have their own rules, and I understand they like their own rules. But when we were hit with Hillary, what we found out they didn't do was clean their drainage systems and a lot of people suffered. My suggestion would be that we don't go in, we don't have the staff to ask people to go clean drains, but we do have the staff to receive certificates that state annually they have had their drains cleaned. So, I would suggest that, I'm not sure about the developer to deed drainage channel to the city. I was a little unclear as you were telling that, that was a lot of, we had it, we didn't have it. It's partly we're going to, I'm unclear on that.
[01:26:51] Staff: Yeah. And, and, and it, it's, it is, it's, it's convoluted. Um...
[01:26:57] Mayor: That's, that's how I would describe it.
[01:26:59] Staff: Really, really, what it, what it, what it boils down to in the simplest terms, our drainage, what we did with section 29 ties into this channel. And so, so we looked at it as, it really should be, should it be seven property owners' responsibility to maintain it when only one right now is draining into it, and the city not be responsible for, for any of the maintenance when it's tied into our, to our overall, our overall system?
[01:27:29] Mayor: But it's kind of all the drainage is all tied in at one place or another. Should one person, should everybody be paying for the one person? No. The one person should vote for their, should be responsible for their amount of use. We need people to step up, the HOAs, and be responsible for their water management. So, I'm not sure if, am I speaking to the same issue?
[01:27:58] Speaker: Could I add something to this?
[01:28:00] Mayor: Well, let, let me get this answer if I...
[01:28:02] Staff: ...from another HOA then. So, and, and so what we would propose is because it's, it is connected, and I'll let Randy provide some additional, but, but we would, as part of the amended DA, there would be a cost-sharing component to that because Genesis is draining into that, that's their primary drainage point. Um, there would be a cost-share agreement that they would reimburse us their proportionate share, okay, of, of their, of their capacity.
[01:28:27] Mayor: So then they have a responsibility to maintain that drainage system.
[01:28:30] Staff: We would maintain it, but they would, they would pay a proportionate share, similar to what they're, what they're required to do on, on the westerly. And Randy, I don't know if you want to add any...
[01:28:39] Randy: Yeah, so when, when we're just discussing the drainage channel, it's, it's basically the channel that runs parallel to the railroad tracks, that's called the Mid Valley Channel. So, what we found during Hillary, um, there, the whole thing got filled in with soil, so it would have been difficult to go and do the city's part, skip a couple of hundred feet, do another part. So, logistically, it makes sense, um, if we do send a crew, just have, have them do it continuously. Um, it, pulling out equipment, there's a logistic factor to it, um, that just makes it a little easier for the city in this case to, to clean it and move on. So, um, keep, keep in mind that this, the water flows east and, um, what happens, that it crosses Cook Street and then it, it gets into the whole Spanish Walk area as well. So, um, there's a benefit to, to ensure that, uh, we're proactive, we're on top of it, and ensuring that it's cleaned up properly.
[01:29:42] Mayor: Okay. Thank you for that.
[01:29:46] Mayor: You have... Okay. And I want to go through, um, I want to finish up the rest of these. So, should the master association be dissolved was our question that we were to answer, um, and if so, direction on median...
[01:30:02] Speaker 1: ...maintenance. So we've kind of cleared up the median maintenance. I think you've heard many voices who've said, 'We'll take care of that because we can't afford not to,' I think is where that goes. Is there anything that I have not hit on in this?
[01:30:21] Speaker 2: The item that I forgot to add to this one was the—
[01:30:24] Speaker 3: Number five.
[01:30:24] Speaker 2: Number five, the proportionate share for Genesis' payment into their—whether they should pay for 100% of the maintenance of that westerly basin or their proportionate share, and our recommendation that it be the proportionate share.
[01:30:40] Speaker 1: And that makes sense. Okay, I addressed what was in front of us, and please... So, I agree with everything you said. And then your question, which I think you have answered now, developer to de-drainage channel to city, I believe is very important because four or five HOAs had major drainage issues after Hillary. And part of the problem was, as Mr. Chavez stated, debris was coming from the west that was not these HOAs' debris, and filled up their drainage basins as well. And some of the HOAs didn't even know they were responsible for their drainage basin.
[01:31:24] Speaker 4: And that's what we heard. People don't know what they're responsible for. Now, I don't know how we spoon-feed, 'Here's what your responsibility is.' You have an HOA, you have many times their ordinances override the city's. They have responsibilities, and they have to maintain their drainage systems. They have to keep them clean. But I appreciate what you're saying about when debris is coming down. And then I think what Mr. Chavez said and what you said makes sense, that we'll make sure that that's clean, and then there's a proportional charge for the use. But some of these HOAs that are unto themselves need to make sure that they are maintaining, so that doesn't become a problem to their neighbors. Other questions or thoughts?
[01:32:16] Speaker 5: Yes, one additional thought. After we had the tropical storm, I went, and I'm thankful that Mr. Chavez gave me a tour. And I think that the wording of 'debris' gives the impression that it's leaves and trees and branches, but a lot of it is silt. And to what extent are any of these HOAs going to get a qualified bid that's going to do the kind of work that we know is not going to impact our infrastructure? And I can see that just the consistency that is necessary to ensure we're not going to think that everything's moving along, hit that one clog, things don't go through, and we end up flooding somewhere else. And the fact that we lost so much ground cover and so much of the biomass that sits on top of—the biocrust is what they call it—we only know that in the future we're going to have more silt. This problem is only going to continue, and I think looking at it as a share of cost is reasonable because we're trying to avoid things. We need to be proactive on this. Have these numbers that are factored in—is this based on any current agreement on what projections, and have any future hydrology impact reports factored them in?
[01:33:47] Speaker 6: Yes, short answer, yes. When we redid the drainage channel or the drainage basins at the Dave Irwin Park, that reserve capacity that was for Genesis was taken into account. And so that's how we came up with that roughly 37% figure.
[01:34:15] Speaker 7: Okay. Well, it seems like the failure happened before in Hillary when we relied on the HOAs to maintain the drainage channels. And as much as possible, I suspect it would fail again given enough time. We may not see an event like that in 10 or 20 years. These agreements might get forgotten about. HOA administrations change over. As much as possible, I'd prefer to see the city handle the retention basin and drainage infrastructure. And then, just in the future, if this developer fails to live up to their agreement again, what is the ultimate recourse we have? And maybe it's a question for Israel. This may—I don't know, is it a legal—I mean, it's like that's the option of last resort, I would imagine. But what—
[01:35:05] Speaker 1: We'll draft up an amended development agreement and take a look at the penalty provisions and try to see if we can find a few more things that'll stick. We have another opportunity now since we're drafting something and everyone's signing that that's the new agreement. It's just under the current development agreement and the stage that we've reached, there isn't anything there currently, but that would be built in as we draft.
[01:35:27] Speaker 2: Thank you. And you had...
[01:35:29] Speaker 3: One last thing is relating to the two options. I agree with my colleagues. We're going to get the best product if the city does the maintenance, and I want the best of both worlds. I want the HOAs to pay for the maintenance. So, if we can figure that out either through associations or whatever it is, but that's one—I don't know if we can get there, but ideally that's where I'd like us to go.
[01:35:57] Speaker 2: Do you mean a full payment or a proportional payment?
[01:36:01] Speaker 3: Full.
[01:36:04] Speaker 2: I think proportionate would be more equitable. I would like to—can we, can you put the slide up and show us exactly which ones we're talking about maintaining? If I could see it, I think it would be helpful because if we're talking about on a main street, you know, that's questionable. If we're talking about the one that—see, okay, so this is Zenith Way?
[01:36:35] Speaker 4: Correct, where technology...
[01:36:40] Speaker 2: This is kind of in side and back of the project. Is that accurate?
[01:36:44] Speaker 4: Correct. And so to the west, or on the top of the screen, is where Palms communities will be developing.
[01:36:51] Speaker 2: I see.
[01:36:52] Speaker 4: And then off of the...
[01:36:53] Speaker 2: Okay, I see what you're saying. So this is between the two. So would there be a joint, or could there be—does it seem logical that there would be a joint payment agreement between Palms and between Genesis?
[01:37:11] Speaker 4: Correct, that's how it's established today. And so there would be an amendment required anyways, as I mentioned, because the parcel five does not have a median. But it could lend itself to, again, as parcel four develops, we may add additional medians that would then—those costs would then have to be shared if that's the route we take. But already, the way the master association spells out is that in 2030, five years after we accept it, there's a cost share between those properties that are adjacent. It doesn't say how, but really our thing was to take this out of the master association to manage. We would prefer it be managed by the city with either option one or two, whether it be the cost share or the other. And the same for Dinosaur. And so it would essentially be those medians from Portola down to Gerald Ford.
[01:38:12] Speaker 2: So those on the main streets, to me, those are our streets. But so many of the other HOAs have lighting and landscape districts, and there isn't one established here, is there?
[01:38:25] Speaker 4: There is not. And I think that goes back to that policy change at—I don't know when that occurred. And so I think that's what spawned ultimately this master association. Randy, I don't know if you have any more.
[01:38:40] Randy: Yeah, we're bringing an item in the near future to get City Council's direction as to proceed with looking into landscaping lighting districts. For some reason, again, there's nothing written down, we couldn't find anything, but there was a moratorium put into the new formation of the landscape and lighting district years ago. So we're just at the stage now where we're bringing these items forward to City Council to get—to do things a little different than the way things have been done in the past.
[01:39:16] Speaker 2: So let me ask this also. If we were to bring about lighting and landscape districts, would then Genesis or any of those other—you have a number of lots over there. Would they still be eligible to form a lighting and landscape district?
[01:39:36] Randy: That I don't know, and I would probably...
[01:39:40] Speaker 2: ...need to discuss that with legal?
[01:39:41] Randy: City attorney question.
[01:39:43] Speaker 2: Yeah.
[01:39:48] Speaker 2: Yeah. What I'm asking is, we have that whole area over there. There are several different entities. Are they able, and it's after the fact, some of it is to...
[01:40:01] Mayor: Come together and create a lighting and landscape district? Okay. Because that would solve that problem and make it something that would be workable. Okay. So those are some of our ideas. Do you have enough direction?
[01:40:22] Staff: I do, and thank you very much.
[01:40:23] Mayor: Okay. And I do have a blue card. This is a study session, so what I would ask you to do is please come to the open session at the regular city council if you would still like to speak then. Okay, so we'll leave as long as you have everything you need. We didn't just confuse you—and I'm sure we did to some extent. Feedback on the Key to the City policy, which is 2C, and we will have Mr. Martinez.
[01:41:01] Oscar Per Martinez: Honorable Mayor and City Council, I am Oscar Per Martinez, City Clerk Intern. Today I'm presenting the draft Key to the City policy, which establishes a formal process for awarding the ceremonial honor. This policy defines the purpose of the Key to the City as a way to recognize individuals or organizations whose exceptional and long-term contributions strengthen the civic life and development of Palm Desert. The first set of criteria focuses on community contributions. Honorees should demonstrate extraordinary and sustained efforts that enhance the quality and character of life in Palm Desert. Whether through service, philanthropy, leadership, education, business, or public service, recipients should also reflect our core values, which are integrity, stewardship, service, community, innovation, and teamwork. The second category recognizes individuals or organizations who bring distinguished visibility to Palm Desert. This includes achievements or appearances that enhance the city's image, contribute to cultural or economic vitality, or create a positive connection with the community. Examples include performances, collaborations, or participation in city or community events that promote civic pride or tourism. The policy also establishes clear boundaries and that the Key to the City cannot be issued in connection with political candidates, campaign activity, religious or political events, or activities contrary to city policy. This slide provides a visual example of what the Key to the City presentation could look like at future ceremonial events. That concludes my presentation. I am available to answer any questions, and I look forward to your feedback. Thank you.
[01:42:53] Mayor: Okay. Rico Blanco from the state of New York. All right, thank you very much. Are there—do you have any questions or comments for Mr. Martinez?
[01:43:06] Councilmember: I would just comment that welcome to the City of Palm Desert, and this is my very first presentation received from an intern, and you did a great job. Thank you. I'm so proud of our city to have this program, and thank you.
[01:43:19] Oscar Per Martinez: Thank you, I appreciate it.
[01:43:21] Mayor: Any other questions? Please.
[01:43:23] Councilmember: My question for you is, has there been any discussion on the number of appearances that would be suggested or required? Because it says in the additional report that honorees' appearance, performance, collaboration, or association. So, does that mean a number of events or certain expectations that would be required of an honoree?
[01:43:49] Oscar Per Martinez: I'd like to defer to the City Clerk for a response.
[01:43:52] City Clerk: Good answer, Councilmember. The idea behind the second criteria is that it'd be a promotional or marketing opportunity. So if you had a celebrity or an artist or something like that that was attributed to the city and doing a performance or something like that, you would be able to issue the Key to the City. It would need to be significant because the idea is that these keys are issued rarely. I think there was an example of Barry Manilow and the idea that he does performances at the McCallum Theatre and the proceeds go to charities since they're performed in Palm Desert, you could potentially make him an honoree.
[01:44:36] Councilmember: I was looking at this in terms of, if it wasn't a public figure, if this is a general member of the community, would they be expected to have more of a contribution? And as I was reading this, I was thinking, for example, when we select our Poet Laureate, they get a stipend for coming to these things. Is there any intention of requiring any...
[01:45:00] Speaker 1: ...individual that may not already be a celebrity to have any ongoing commitment?
[01:45:06] Speaker 2: Sure. So on the community contribution side, the idea is that it would be somebody who has sustained and meaningful commitment to the community, and of course that would depend on the discretion of the mayor and the mayor pro tem in making that decision on what is sustained and meaningful. But the idea would be it wouldn't be a one-time-off kind of contribution. It would be a community member who has made significant impacts on the community of Palm Desert.
[01:45:33] Speaker 1: And my other question is how much of this is geared at promotions and marketing? I see that a few times in there, and you know, having their appearance to have a tourism benefit, promotes civic pride or tourism. And I think that we may be confounding the two, where I love that we're looking at how to recognize somebody beyond the proclamations, which we already do, and we take a lot of time and effort, and we're proud when we recognize someone. But as we're looking at doing something so distinctly unique, I want to be sure that it gets at the heart of why we want to recognize someone and what we're doing for them, not what they can do for us.
[01:46:23] Speaker 2: Certainly. And the first approach at this criteria was the community contributions. The promotional marketing was in addition to. And for example, this really came about because we have somebody who retired from our commissions after 40 years of service. And the idea was giving them the clock that we give to somebody who completes one term or two terms just doesn't seem sufficient for somebody who served 40 years. And so this is really what created the idea of even creating this criteria, and the fact that in the past, keys to the city have been given out, but there was no criteria behind it. And so this was the idea of, before we do that, let's make sure we have some rationale behind it.
[01:47:07] Speaker 1: If I may, that was very helpful background because one of my questions was going to be when was the last time we've done this and if there had been some sort of written program. So, do you recall the last time we did a key?
[01:47:21] Speaker 2: So, I've been here for four years. We've not issued a key to the city. And in the past, we have no records as to when keys to the city were given out. They were at the discretion of the mayor at those times.
[01:47:33] Speaker 1: So, in 40 years that that individual has been here, it's likely that they haven't been given a key. I can see the value that we give the clocks, and they are beautiful clocks, but can't we think of something that's like you trade up? Where I think that the key to the city is very symbolic, and I'm just very tempted to compare how other cities use it as marketing because then it gets in the news. So-and-so was given a key to the city, and is it for that individual, or again, some of the language says it's to elevate our profile? And that's some of what kind of just doesn't continue to sit easy with me. Are we recognizing them, or are we using this as an opportunity for us to get in the paper? It just doesn't sit right. And then my other question is, when we have our proclamations, those are done and agreed upon by the mayor and the mayor pro tem, but I think something this substantial, if we're going to have the recognition, I think it should come before us and all five should decide. I think it's an honor where we all need to agree that this person is going to be elevated to that status to say all five of us are here and we support you. Not two people decided, we brought it forward, and here you go. I think we really have to supercharge the importance of why we're doing this.
[01:49:02] Speaker 3: If I may, I would say that I don't mind using it for marketing purposes. I think there's value to that. And I would agree that something as rare and as significant, my preference would be for the whole council to have an opportunity to vote and designate that honor. Any other comments or questions?
[01:49:26] Speaker 4: I think it's excellent. I think the work here is clear, concise, and I think the word you chose, 'impact', says it all. Whatever it might be, the person who served for 40 years or somebody who brings great, elevates our community like we work so hard to elevate it. It's impact. And when somebody brings that impact to our city, this is a wonderful way to say thank you. I do have a little tweak on the five, and I do think it's appropriate that it goes in...
[01:50:02] Council Member: ...front of the mayor, mayor pro tem. If it's agreed upon, then it comes to the five. If there is any dissension in it and it's like, 'No, this is not working,' and there's some language in here in the staff report that talks about how it would work if the mayor and mayor pro tem say, 'Yay, bring it to the council,' that's fine. But I think the work and the wording is excellent, and I think your presentation was excellent. So, thank you.
[01:50:31] Mr. Martinez: Thank you.
[01:50:32] Mr. Martinez: So, Madam Mayor, with your suggestion, we would bring this back to your next meeting, and we would have that it would be approved by the mayor and mayor pro tem. And then, if those two agreed, then it would come back to Council for full Council approval.
[01:50:47] Mr. Martinez: Does that seem appropriate?
[01:50:48] Council Member Kintania: I would go back to... I still have issues with the number of times that this has 'tourism' or 'tourism benefit.' I think it kind of takes away from it if that were the case. We'd put like a credit card slot to say, 'You're here, and you continue to fundraise by being here.' And again, this is not a reflection of you and your attention to detail. This is a great presentation, but just in my ethics and my integrity, and as it says here, one of the 'quality and character of life,' I don't think I would be consistent with my own character if I would have any hesitation for who is this really for. Because we have, what was it, 'positive connection or impact, meaningful and positive connection to Palm Desert, generate measurable or widespread community excitement, tourism benefit, or cultural significance, such as participation in a city-sponsored or community event that promotes civic pride or tourism.' So, this still lends to me that we have somebody great that comes and performs in the park, that I don't think should outweigh somebody that's given all of that time and service. Then it's like a celebrity giveaway, as it can be done because different councils may see a difference in who they want to honor. And then the other part, it says, 'generate measurable and widespread community excitement.' Has there been any thought into what measure, what kinds of things are tangible and measurable?
[01:52:22] Mr. Martinez: So, Council Member Kintania, the wording is intended to be fairly broad. So, it would be at the discretion of the mayor and mayor pro tem on how to apply these criteria. When it comes to having a meaningful and positive connection with Palm Desert that would generate measurable and widespread community excitement, the idea is that it would have somebody... again, this is ideally focused on somebody who has a widespread kind of outreach. And so, somebody who is a celebrity who has a wide following would become eligible in this criteria. But again, this is only one side of the criteria. There is a completely separate side for the community contributions. But on the promotional and marketing side, it is intended to be somebody who has a wide reach.
[01:53:12] Council Member Kintania: Thank you.
[01:53:13] Mayor: And the intent was that it would come back to all five council members under any circumstances. So, I think you have direction on this, and I see a lot of nodding heads. So, thank you very much, Mr. Martinez. Thank you.
[01:53:28] Mr. Martinez: Thank you very, very much. Thank you.
[01:53:30] Staff: And Madam Mayor, I just want to note the time. At 3:45 is when we really should be going to closed session for the one item that we have.
[01:53:38] Mayor: Okay. So, if we are not complete on the North Sphere Regional Park, is it acceptable that we then leave to go into closed session and then come back to complete it?
[01:53:48] Staff: Yes.
[01:53:49] Mayor: Okay. Thank you. Okay, so let's get that update on the North Sphere Regional Park.
[01:54:10] Sean Mureer: Good afternoon, Mayor, members of the City Council. I'm Sean Mureer, Community Services Manager in Public Works, and I bring to you this afternoon an update on the North Sphere Regional Park, or the park efforts in the North Sphere, the North Palm Desert, as we lovingly call it. And so, the agenda for this is to just give you a quick update on what we have in our existing parks, the recreational needs and opportunities that have been identified in the city, and then planning will come in. We have Carlos Flores to give an update on the UNSP plan and some of the negotiations that have happened with the college site, and then we'll go ahead and summarize and wrap it up from there. So, the largest park in the city is Civic Center Park. It's a 70-acre park. It does have all of those amenities listed. It's important to note that eight acres of...
[01:55:00] Speaker 1: ...that is dedicated to the aquatic center. There's also the YMCA building and the Desert Recreation District building there. But the list of amenities is expansive because it is such a large park.
[01:55:13] Speaker 1: Freedom Park is a 20-acre park, and that is more athletic field-based because there are the softball fields and then multi-purpose soccer fields. We do share some of that space with the nearby Reagan Elementary School...
[01:55:30] Speaker 1: ...and then Hovley Soccer Park, which is really based on soccer. Five soccer fields there, and it's the primary location where soccer happens in the city. There is also a disc golf course that's very heavily used at that park, and that 21 acres does include the parking lot. So you get quite a long list of amenities at that park in 21 acres.
[01:55:50] Speaker 1: So what do we need in the north area of the city? This public engagement process really started when Dave Irwin Park was being conceptualized. It was then just called North Regional Park project, and we went out to the community and started this public engagement process that you have heard about in the past.
[01:56:12] Speaker 1: We held five open-house community workshops at the iHub then, now the ERC, but also had nine different stakeholder meetings where we reached out to individual groups. I've got a slide that lists them all. We did six committee and commission meetings, so including planning commission, the resource preservation enhancement committee, and of course the Parks and Rec Committee. So several of those over the course of a few months. Sent out mailers to the entire North Sphere, that's kind of north of Fredware—sorry, Frank Sinatra Drive, and then also did an online survey through Engage Palm Desert to get community feedback.
[01:56:53] Speaker 1: These are some of the stakeholders that we met with: the YMCA and Desert Recreation District, our very large recreational groups, but we also went to the school districts, the baseball groups, the dog park people, and the list goes on.
[01:57:07] Speaker 1: So, what did we find out from that engagement? We found out some of the primary needs in the community are the athletic fields. The chart that I'm showing here is from one of the surveys that we did where pickleball was the primary sport that people were interested in doing, and I think that really speaks to kind of the people who we were reaching out to at that time. But the athletic fields are some of the primary needs, and we did also have a surprising turnout for disc golf, so don't underestimate the use of the disc golf courses in Palm Desert.
[01:57:40] Speaker 1: So for the North Sphere, focusing in on that area, we've got a couple of parks there and I've listed some of the amenities there, but they're relatively small parks. So, University Park East, which does provide a playground and a nice open field for people to play soccer and things like that in a just drop-in fashion. And then University Dog Park, which is our nice large dog park up there. And then of course Dave Irwin Park, which will be coming online very shortly. And that only lists some of the amenities that are in that park. Slide was only so big, but at a 27-acre park, of course, we're going to have some very large fields and pickleball courts and everything else.
[01:58:20] Speaker 1: But there are two other sites that we're looking at. One of them is the university neighborhood specific plan site, and then the other one is potentially at the Cal State University San Bernardino campus. So, those are not yet programmed, but the acreages that we're looking at there are about 22 plus acres for the UNSP site. And that should say 29 and a half acres for CSUSB. And now I'll bring in Carlos Flores, deputy director of planning, to give an update on UNSP.
[01:58:50] Carlos Flores: So UNSP site, you guys received an update on the overall specific plan efforts, but want to provide a focused conversation on the park site. So what you're seeing in front of you is the specific plan as it exists right now.
[01:59:03] Carlos Flores: So the big, you know, one major component of the effort to update this specific plan was to change its layout, and a big part of that was creating a park space here. So in just looking at just the 170 acres, which is what the city controls and is kind of that, if you can envision a triangle of Portola and Frank Sinatra in that area, the updated plan has increased the open space from 22 acres to 56 acres total of open space...
[01:59:32] Carlos Flores: ...as part of, you know, all the outreach and the input we received on this UNSP plan, as well as, you know, Sean's effort in terms of what do people want in a park, there was a lot of goals with this open space. A big part of it being consolidating for a park space, but also creating buffers between residential as well as allowing for buffers on both of the main roads. So, you know, we've gone from 22 to 56.
[02:00:01] Carlos: We identified 22 acres in that big green square. I'm talking elementary level, but that big green square there is what you know that consolidated park area, but it's 56 acres of open space, all of which can be programmed in one way or another. I think what one of the big feedbacks we heard that we saw right is disc golf. And you know, funny enough, disc golf, one of the best places we heard to put it is in retention basins. And so really using that area, that kind of diagonal effort, that diagonal area there. We know retention outside of its use is a big incentive for, you know, development to come in to be able to have a concentrated area for retention rather than, you know, requiring it on site. So we wanted to create a consolidated park space, but also allow these buffers for the commercial areas, for the mixed-use areas, for the retention, for trails. We could, you know, our goal right now is, you know, this plan here could be adopted and could still allow flexibility to accommodate the 22-acre park space and potentially increase that if need be once we get to final programming. So you could, again, speaking elementary level, that retention area, you could skinny it up, make it make it more narrow and put that space onto that 22-acre site, the buffers along your main roads there. You could make that more narrow and put it more into the park space. The other thing we wanted to add into the UNSP is to add flexibility in how it's developed. The park could be developer funded or partially developer funded. It could be through park impact fees. It could come, you know, there's different timing mechanisms, but added that flexibility on this site here.
[02:01:47] Speaker: Okay, thank you Carlos. Um, now on to the Cal State University San—
[02:01:50] Mayor: I'm going to ask you to hold that thought so that we can do the business that we have noticed that we will do at 3:45, which is closed session. We will be back afterwards and we need to pick this up. We have another additional item that we also need to take care of. So hold that thought and thank you and—
[02:02:15] Staff: And Madame Mayor, there's no public comment for closed session.
[02:02:18] Mayor: Okay. Thank you. So we are now—this is the Palm Desert City Council meeting and we are moving into closed session. This is November 13th, 2025, and we'll be going into closed session now.
[02:02:34] Staff: And then if I may, I think I believe we may have a planned recusal on one of these items and we could do that now. I usually try to rescue it on the back end, but—
[02:02:45] Councilmember: Yeah, I will—
[02:02:47] Councilmember: I will need to recuse myself from closed session due to proximity to real property that I own.
[02:02:52] Staff: That's the item B on that on that agenda. Yeah. Thank you.