Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
5/13/2009 - STAFF REPORTS - 1.B.
Page 1 of 4 Jay Thompson � _r - 1�� �1 J LN From: Ginny Foat ' =L L r S ' Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:46 PM Add9 Fj�+� 13 n,,� 5 ; To: Ginny Foat; Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Town and Country Issue C1-1 Y CLc,R„ From; Val Crotty [mailto:ahhhmen@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4AS PM To: Ginny Foat Subject:Town and Country Issue Dear Ms Foat, The City web page will not allow me to send an email. Says server error so I am sending this as written without the formalities due to time restraints. As follows; Thank you, Val J Crotty Good Afternoon Nh-Mayor and Council members, I am very disappointed in the people who believe in such a disposable society. Preservation is what has made cities like New York and even Los Angeles destination spots to visit, live and set up shop. PS could take a lesson from our greatest Cities and perhaps strive to emulate them to become great as well. Our riding the coat tails of the old Hollywood royalty who used to come here many malting homes as well and put PS on the map has waned considerably with no hope of reestablishing that past notoriety and public draw. Why do you think so much money has moved down valley??We need to keep the now few and far between charms that made this City desirable intact and maintained. A�)d / 7' 7,:7 }� 5/13/2009 Page 2 of 4 Please read my opinion as written in response to Peter Moruzzi's article in the Desert Sun today. As follows; I thank you in advance for studying my concerns and giving them the up most consideration, I have lived and mostly patronized PS exclusively so T know what I am talking about. This is a very grave matter. Respectfully, Val J Crotty PS resident and property owner since 1991 Flag this message Re: Town and Country debate Wednesday, May 13, 2009 2:37 PM From: This sender is Domaixrl<eys verified "Peter Moruzzi" <pmoruzzi@eaWilink.net> Add sender to Contacts To: ahhhmen@yahoo.com Cc: "Bill Butler" [Wb719@mae.com>, "Cody Stoughton" <cody.k.stoughton@gmail.com>, "Courtney Newman" <greco@earthlink.net>, "Chris Menrad" [cmenrad@earthlink.net>, "Nick-le McLaughlin" <psmodcom@earth]ink.net>, "Tony Merchell" <rapress@verizon.net>... more Thanks, Val, for your very thoughtful and supportive email. Please send this to our City Couwncilmembers (http://www.ci.palm-springs.ca.us/index.aspx?page=33 ) so that they can also 5/13/2009 Page 3 of 4 understand your perspective. Best regards, Peter >Dear Mr. Moruzzi, >I think there is no debate in regard to one of the only decent buildings in downtown Palm Springs. The Town& Country property in my opinion and the opinions of most everyone I know is that it is the best looking architecture in all of downtown. >I have lived in PS full time since 1991 and this is the property I "show off' to all who have ever visited me, and residents that have not viewed it before as well. >The Town & Country property has so much potential and could easily be a major "draw" to downtown on it's own if properly managed. There is nothing else like it anywhere in this valley and it stands as a testimony to the creativity and ingenuity of the times. >Every time I am downtown I am drawn to and walk around the courtyard. I love to imagine all the potential, it could be a little downtown all by itself'. >I can see it easily bustling with patrons, all shopping, relaxing and enjoying themselves. >Not unlike they do over at the property where "Kofri" is located. It is a great design (T&C) for people to sit and refresh themselves. a I can easily see where The Town & Country property would far exceed the popularity of the "Koffi" property and have patrons right in the heart of downtown for convenient patronization of all the downtown shops! 5/13/2009 Page 4 of 4 >Destroying all of this Historic potential will hurt all of downtown because for me (and I am not alone in this) there would be no motivation to even go downtown. It is just a long street with one storefront after another. Very boring. Nooks and crannies are what make a city interesting and memorable. You can go to any town for boring straight and narrows so why would anyone come to PS? >We need to make and keep this City interesting if we are to see any popularity return to PS. Most people who visit now find it unremarkable, And now they want to destroy the only noteworthy architecture in all of downtown! 7 > I cannot attend tonight's City Halll meeting but after reading your article in todays newspaper I had to do something to get my opinion heard. > I have been getting bored with PS and if they demolish the only character we have it will make my contemplation of moving much easier. >Thank you, >Val J Crotty 5/13/2009 Page 1 of 4 Jay Thompson ; E C' From: Craig Ewing Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:32 PM To: Jay Thompson l i.� l' •" Ek Subject: FW: Town & Country Center should go, past PaIP Springs chamber presidents say Jay, Received from Wessman Dev't Co. on Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan (on tonights agenda) Craig A. Ewing,AICP Director of Planning Services City of Palm Springs 3200 E-Tahquitz Canyon Drive Palm Springs,CA 92262 760-323-8245 From: Michael Braun [mailto:MBraun@wessmandevelvpment.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:23 PM To: Craig Ewing Subject: FW: Town &Country Center should go, past Palm Springs chamber presidents say From: Michael Braun Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:22 PM To: Michael Braun Subject: Town &Country Center should go, past Palm Springs chamber presidents say FYI Town & Country Center should go, past Palm Springs chamber presidents say STEFANIE FRITH•THE DESERT SUN•MAY 13,2009 al The Town & Country Center should not be a historic site and developer John Wessman should be allowed to put a new street where the center currently stands, according to a letter sent to City Hall by 16 past presidents of the Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce. The letter is signed by people including John Stiles, Andrew Jessup, Kay Hazen and Roman Whittaker. It says they petition the City Council to not designate the Town & Country Center (where Zeldaz and Grill-A-Burger stand) as a historic site or take any other action that would prevent the building of a new east/west corridor between Indian Canyon Drive and the Palm Springs Art Museum. /E�7 5/13/2009 Page 2 of 4 Wessman wants this road to help serve his proposed remodel of the Desert Fashion Plaza mall across the street. The City Council is expected to take action regarding the Town & Country Center tonight. In addition, several people who have written to The Desert Sun are in support of creating that new street. Michael Kassinger with Caldwell Banker Lyle & Associates wrote: "I believe that this center has had its day —as Bob Dylan once sang - "The Times They Are a- Changin" We need to change and adapt in order to survive the times we are living in today. The tourist that comes to Palm Springs wants to have a shopping experience that keeps up with the times. We will not attract vibrant, exciting and hip retail stores unless some of these buildings are razed and rebuilt keeping up with the times — how many model T Fords do you see on the road out there—they are in museums because they are obsolete. I'm not against preserving architectural buildings — but this property is not one of them. Just because a "name brand" architect designed a building or the building is old - does not automatically deem it as historical„" Sheila Cobrin with the Old Las Palmas Neighborhood Organization in Palm Springs wrote: "My family has owned a home here in the desert since 1959 when the city was a village. There was a movie theatre on Palm Canyon with a drug store right next door. The Chi-Chi was always packed with great entertainment, Ruby Dunes across the street was a great place (if you could get in) to star gaze and have fresh lobster on Friday and Saturday night. You never knew who you'd see strolling down Palm Canyon day or night. Even in those days the Town & Country Center was a place you'd walk by unless you had an interest in Orienral Art objects and would drop in the shop at the corner to browse. (2 of 2) It is my opinion that nothing should stand in the way of progress to bring some life and sustainability to our downtown (Main Street) area. By razing that facility the planned street from Indian Canyon to Belardo Rd (Museum Way)would be a win/win. People could walk (exercise), shop (good for business), eat (a must) and relax with a cup of coffee, iced tea or even a bottle of water. Let it go not every "old" building is 'historic'." 5/13/2009 Page 3 of 4 And resident Dean Gray wrote: "Although I love lots of the mid-century architecture that makes up Palm Springs, I am often baffled by those who wish to preserve something that was probably not built to last a 100 years. The Town & Country Center is certainly something I find very confusing. Did it ever have an entrance on either Palm Canyon or Indian Canyon. Zelda's always looks like it is closed and I cannot figure out hot you get into the place except by going down a small walkway past Grill a Burger. I did venture once back into the courtyard from Grill a Burger while eating there. It might have been interesting once, but if it is saved it has to be opened up. No one knows it is there. But if you want my opinion there are plenty buildings that could be preserved that are actually being used. The museum definitely could use some opening up too. The fact that it is behind the closed Fashion Plaza is not ideal. I am for reopening a few streets so tourists and local residents can find these gems." Check mydesert.com for updates on the council's decision and read more in tomorrow's Desert Sun. It is my opinion that nothing should stand in the way of progress to bring some life and sustainability to our downtown (Main Street) area. By razing that facility the planned street from Indian Canyon to Belardo Rd (Museum Way)would be a win/win. People could walk (exercise), shop (good for business), eat (a must) and relax with a cup of coffee, iced tea or even a bottle of water. Let it go not every "old" building is 'historic'." And resident Dean Gray wrote: "Although I love lots of the mid-century architecture that makes up Palm Springs, I am often baffled by those who wish to preserve something that was probably not built to last a 100 years. The Town & Country Center is certainly something I find very confusing. Did it ever have an entrance on either Palm Canyon or Indian Canyon. Zelda's always looks like it is closed and I cannot figure out hot you get into the place except by going down a small walkway past Grill a Burger. I did venture once back into the courtyard from Grill a Burger while eating there. It might have been interesting once, but if it is saved it has to be opened up. No one knows it is there. 5/13/2009 Page 4of4 But if you want my opinion there are plenty buildings that could be preserved that are actually being used. The museum definitely could use some opening up too. The fact that it is behind the closed Fashion Plaza is not ideal. I am for reopening a few streets so tourists and local residents can find these gems." Check mydesert.com for updates on the council's decision and read more in tomorrow's Desert Sun 5/13/2009 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: Ginny Foat Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:06 PM To: Ginny Foat; Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Item 1B From: Terry House [mailto:THouse@weho.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 11:29 AM To: Steve Pougnet; Ginny Foat; Rick Hutcheson Subject: Item 1B Mayor and Councilmembers Foat and Hutcheson- Please do not let Wessman blackmail our City. That's exactly what he's trying to do by shoving the demolition of the Town &Country Center down our throats,threatening to abandon Fashion Plaza. He has essentially abandoned it now, until he gets what he wants. The T&C is priceless,we'll never see it again. And the Palm Springs Modern Committee,for one, has shown alternatives to the so-called "essential"through street in another location. I am not in favor of a new through street from Indian Canyon to Palm Canyon in any case, at least one exists now and we don't have to tear down an iconic piece of mid-century architecture to get it. By opening up the casino to our main street, businesses on Palm Canyon may well lose out to the retail shops now in the casino. Thank you for your consideration. Terry House 2138 Berne Dr 325-4522 Terry House,Film Liaison City of West Hollywood B300Santo Monica Blvd We5t Hollywood CA 90069 T.• 323-848-6489 F: 323-848-6561 _ wePro.org/film �7 q �a C7f_I �G 5/13/2009 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson - _ From: Ginny Foat Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 3:58 PM To: Jay Thompson Subject: FW:Vote For The Future Of Palm Springs-Not The Past C it v From: Bob Jaworski [mailto:bjaworski.ca@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 9:30 PM To: Steve Pougnet; Ginny Foal; Rick Hutcheson; Chris Mills; Lee Weigel Subject: Vote For The Future Of Palm Springs - Not The Past T urge you to vote in favor of a new downtown Palm Springs, one that has a viable positive economic impact for the city, and one which will begin a pathway to a new future. Remove the obstacles in the way of this new pathway. Become a partner with Wessman and create a newness to our aging and ailing downtown. Do not let unused structures from the past hinder development. The time to act is not, do not delay action. Stand up and be counted. Just as Frank Bogart had a great vision for a wonderful city, you too can be remember for being the catalyst that created a new downtown for Pahn Springs. Please vote against saving the Town and Country Plaza as a historical site,remove this obstacle of future development, and let the progress begin. Thank You. Bob Jaworski Palm Springs Resident 5/13/2009 Page 1 of 2 Jay Thompson 7 ;.• _m. From: Ginny Foat Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:05 PM To: Ginny Foat; Jay Thompson J „;, Subject; FW:Town and Country Center From: markalbertson@acl.com [mailto:markalbertson@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 11:06 AM To: Ginny Foat Subject: Town and Country Center Dear Councilmember Foat: I would like to comment on the pending consideration by City Council of the historical status of the Town and Country property. Palm Springs is fortunate to have its collection of mid-century architecture. Without question, this important mid-century architecture meaningfully contributes to the character and success of Palm Springs as a world-class city in which to live and to visit, Palm Springs also is fortunate to have concerned citizens dedicated to preserving the mid-century heritage residents and tourists alike appreciate. As a resident of Palm Springs who appreciates the town's architectural heritage, I support the view that whenever possible these buildings should be retained and it is appropriate that preservation should be the default choice. But at times, issues broader than a simple choice between preservation or not requires actions against the interest of preservation. The decision whether to preserve The Town and Country Center is one. Palm Spring's downtown is in need of rejuvenation — some would say badly in need. The eclectic character of downtown Palm Springs sets it apart from the sameness of appearance of most other California city centers. But its layout does not promote the walkability sought by successful retail developers and operators. The downtown is too long to comfortably walk, especially during the warm season. The Palm Springs Art Museum, the City's most significant cultural amenity and a major example of high- quality mid-century architecture itself, is rendered inaccessible by the existing downtown layout. Density is insufficient to generate a feeling of energy. And its layout of parallel one-way streets is very un-green promoting driving between isolated stops along the Palm Canyon strip versus strolling connected blocks of retail all within a walkable diameter. Palm Springs also is fortunate to have private developers interested in risking capital to improve the City's built environment. An east-west retail street connecting the Museum to Indian Canyon seems an excellent opportunity to create a much needed center to downtown and an opportunity to connect two of the City's primary tourist destinations. 5/13/2009 Page 2 of 2 Creating an environment of blocks to walk without having to consider the length of the return trip would be a welcome change to the City's center and seems likely to invite incremental foot traffic and retail support. Some will suggest that no exception can be made to the goal of preserving our mid-century property inventory. After all it is argued, when does one draw the line before we end up "excepting" our way to eradicating our architectural heritage? Perhaps it is not that difficult to decide when to preserve or allow replacement. Some mid-century buildings, like some Colonial building, some Victorian building, some Arts and Craft buildings, some Art Deco buildings just are more obviously significant architecture and therefore make a stronger contribution to a town's character. Some mid-century buildings benefit from more pr ominent siting than others offering an ability to appear more significant than the building alone. Some just appear to be better architecture. I have no architectural training but it seems easy to appreciate buildings such as the Bank of America building, the Santa Fe Savings (Wessman) building, Chase Bank building and the Art Museum. I cannot say the same for the Town and Country property — not because I can discern a difference in architectural significance, or lack thereof, but because it simply does not appear to my untrained eye to be important architecture or significant in any way. Clearly any decision to allow demolition of the Town and Country Center is difficult and requires leadership. Whatever decision ultimately is made by City Council will not satisfy all of the town's constituents. It is a decision for which not everyone can be made happy. But everyone, even those who would oppose demolition o f the Town and Country Center, will share in the benefits of Palm Springs prospering. I urge you to support the development outline offered by Wessman Development despite the loss of the Town and Country Center rather than rigid adherence to preservation however worthy it is to preserve any individual piece of our architectural heritage. A vote by Council to preserve a semi-dilapidated property is a vote to defer progress in moving downtown forward and allowing it to regain its luster which is being siphoned off by competing Valley towns. Thank you for your consideration of my opinion. Respectfully submitted, Mark Albertson 955 N. Prescott Drive Palm Springs, CA 92262 Dell Mini Netbooks: Great deals starting at$299 after instant savings! 5/13/2oo9 LAW OFFICES OF I';-,r ' ; i u'1 EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, L L P A CAUFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ,,r� F,i_5 ; ;; W. Curt Ealy 71780 San Jacinto Drive,Suite X-3, Smily Perri Hemphill Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Diane C. Blasdel Telephone: (760)340-0606 Facsimile: (750)340-4666 May 12, 2009 Via Electronic Mail Craig Ewing City of Palm Springs 3200 E. 7ahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 RE! Museum Market Plaza Dear Mr, Ewing: In reviewing the City Council agenda for May 13, 2009, I note that the Council does not intend to re-open the public comment period. Although my client, John Wessman, is not the applicant for the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan ("SP"), as the property owner the SP has a critical impact on him. We therefore believe it is important to advise the Council of a few issues in advance of its deliberations on May 13. Recognizing Council's desire to obtain all relevant information in advance of the meeting so that they have time to consider the issues raised, my client has asked that I briefly summarize his remaining concerns regarding the SP. I would first like to thank Mayor Pouegnet and Councilman Mills for working with my client to assure that the currently proposed renovation plan for the existing Desert Fashion Plaza is incorporated into the draft SP as an allowed use. In light of the current economy, by facilitating the renovation plan as part of the SP the Council takes the first step in making downtown revitalization happen. As we have advised the City, however, the renovation plan's success is largely dependant on (1) being able to bring people into the downtown via hotel and/or residential development and (2) connecting the downtown area with the Casino and Convention Center areas. As originally conceived, the SP included more than 900 residential units which would have brought a ready made customer base to support the retail and entertainment uses planned for the area. Because of economic changes, those residential units are not financially viable, and yet, we must still provide a as�rg f 2ao 9 ��e'r�r ri o nr n L LAW OFFICES OF EAL Y, HEMPHILL &SLASDEL, LLP May 12, 2009 Page 2 broadened customer base to support the retail and entertainment uses planned for the renovation plan. Under the renovation plan, that broadened customer base must come from hotel guests in the area who can easily see and walk to the renovated Museum Market Plaza. The SP offers two important opportunities to achieve this hotel development through the hotel developments proposed on Blocks K (Town & Country area) and L (Palm Hotel Site). Block L is the location of a previously approved project known as the Palm Hotel. This property is the subject of an Owner Participation Agreement ("OPA") between my client and the Palm Springs Redevelopment Agency wherein the Agency relinquished its right to purchase the Winters property to Frank Tysen and in return, Mr. Tysen agreed to transfer all development rights from the Winters property to Block L for the development of the Palm Hotel project. That transfer of development rights did occur and is recorded. The City approved the Palm Hotel project, but was later sued. That lawsuit was lost solely because the City failed to provide the legally required findings in its approving resolution. The SP's treatment of Block L does nothing more than implement the previously executed OPA and allow the same Palm Hotel project which was already approved by the Council. The importance of that hotel project, however, is greatly heightened in light of the City's downtown redevelopment goals, and we therefore urge the Council not to delete Block L from the SP. The MMP area has always been a challenge from a development standpoint because it backs to the mountains which effectively cut the market area in half. Because it is therefore at the edge of its market area, the success of the MMP depends on being able to effectively and efficiently connect it with its remaining market area. Block K is the element of the SP that achieves that required connection, and therefore, the redevelopment of Block K is critical to the success of the City's revitalization efforts. Although some in the community seek to preserve the Town & Country Center because of the identity of its original architect, the City has several other structures by the same architects which are better representations of their original work. By contrast the Center was a remodel project for the Town and Country Restaurant and the architects were forced to use the then existing foundation and basement. The building, itself is not suited to today's market. Its low ceilings at 8 and one half feet do not meet current requirements for 12-16 foot ceiling heights, the entrance onto the courtyard as opposed to Indian Avenue and the poor performance of the courtyard shops in the Center have dictated both lower interest from tenants and lower rents for the Center. If Block K is deleted from the SP and the Center remains in place, the direct connection between the MMP and the Casino/Convention Center is lost. Under those conditions, there is every reason to LAW OFFICES OF EALV, HEMPHILL & BLASOEL, LLP May 12, 2009 Page 3 expect that the renovated MMP will suffer a similar fate as the existing Desert Fashion Plaza. We urge the Council not to sacrifice the. City's future in order to preserve a degraded remnant of the past in the form of the Town & Country Center. Rather we urge you to approve the SP's treatment of Block K in order to create the dynamic downtown that the City merchants and residents are seeking. 1cerel Emily P r i Hemphill Cc: Mayor and City Council Doug Holland Dave Ready yyCEPt.! r ^ L F . :.. TO: Palm Springs City Council ❑ JY p p FROM: Wanda Bird C!i Y CLEFJ SU13JECT: Petition from 17 Past Presidents, Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce I, and a very substantial number of citizens, especially business people, feel that the Town and Country site is a blight,rather than a viable part of our Downtown, and not worth saving at the expense of any other possible project. I took the subject petition to a Chamber of Commerce Past Presidents' gathering, and ALL present Past Presidents, fully agreed that the said site wasn't considered viable for decades and all eagerly signed. In fact,many others present wanted to sign, but,unfortunately, I did not have an applicable petition. I'm confident that many other Chamber members, former and current, as well as many business people would eagerly concur. Since the business community is most affected by the blighted site and would benefit by the proposed CORRIDOR, it is important that the Council is made aware of views other than that of Historical site proponents. Thank you for your consideration of our opinions. Wanda Hird 5-13-09 A PE7HTCtN TO T-9E PALFA spmtf vS CITY COUNCIL. Fmm Former Palm, Sptings Chamber.of COYP.'-Merce,, .Presidents Subject; The Museum Market Piay,a Proposed Draft Sptwcific-Plan Former Presidcutw of the Patin Spri vs Cik.mber e£Co;x rriercc rvepeekfuliy°petition the Urn Springs City Council ts'rot de 4?naie TO';'n&' co lrar,r Center as a Class 1 klistoric Site or take any oilier action that Nviii preven,the builc§i±ig or a zrew$asr/West corridor ponioft hetweea tadian Avrenuc and Mvoeum ti av, ail eswnziai component of the Mrweetim Market Pura draft.plan.. Respood' Yy submitted, M,-,y13, 2009 �i'k'r;a,ilrvrSSCf.h Palm_i Lir Ch)a, r's_�CCantnerN Narue( t �_ Siaesature __ _ ";'earfS 9c+��ed _ /Z yam. �8 :.� 4�-1=L-l�-L�—_._..._�i�JS- -r'_�� V �� �� y I ,Y lox -!c1 2sue T 7`5 ,0/ TO/0A- -5?/v&7z7-XGa7- 9 $ �� G PAUL ROSEN MAY 1 The Honorable Steve Pougnet C 0 Lem f Mayor of Palm Springs T, i�s�f' City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 Dear Mr. Pougnet, I am writing to encourage approval of Wessman Development's plan for the former Desert Fashion Plaza and the Town & Country Center. The new proposed street that would lead from Indian Canyon Drive to the Palm Springs Art Museum is sure to enhance the vitality of downtown by linking an important cultural anchor to the major commercial avenues. As a frequent visitor to our wonderful museum I have often lamented the isolation and lack of prominence of this imposing building. Although I cannot comment on all the particulars of Wessman's planned work I know that a well planned and imaginative renovation of the Fashion Plaza Can yield a great success. Mr. Wessman seems to clearly be on the right track as regards creating the new street; the sacrifice of a few buildings of middling architectural merit should not stand in the way of revitalizing downtown Palm Springs. I have owned a condominium in Palm Springs for the past six years and visit monthly from New York City where I practice architecture. During this time I have come to know and appreciate our very special community and so I urge you to approve pending plans to create a new street as part of the redevelopment of the Desert Fashion Plaza. Very truly yours, Paul Rosen Cc. Chris Mills Ginny Foat - Rick Hutcheson Lee Weigel Craig Ewing - . 5oj, AST 87'hS§#,EET- O-NEW'YORK CITY 10128 36o CABRILLO ROAD 0 PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92262 Page 1 of 1 Cindy Berardi From: Amy Minteer [acm@cbcearthlaw.com] Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 1:53 PM To: Steve Pougnet; Chris Mills, Ginny Feat; Rick Hutcheson; Lee Weigel Cc: cityclerk@palmsprings-ca.gov; Craig Ewing Subject: Options for the Town and Country Center Honorable Counalmembers, Please see the attached brief letter detailing the position of the Palm Springs Modern Committee and Friends of the Town and Country Center regarding the options for the Town and Country Center presented in the May 13, 2009 Staff Report- Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thank you. Amy Minteer Chatten-Brown & Carstens 2601 Ocean Park Boulevard Suite 205 Santa Monica, CA 90405 (310)314- 8040, ext 3 Fax: (310) 314 -8050 www.cbcearthlaw-cam -i Conservation begins with each of us:please consider the environment before printing this omad �J 5/11/2009 CHATTEN-BROWN & CARSTENS 2601 OCEAN PARK BOULEVARD SUITE 205 E-MAIL TELEPHONE(310)314-SO40 (( SANTA MONICA,CALIFORNIA 90407 ACM CHCc 11I HLAW COM FACSIMILE (310)314-9050 www-cbceartlilaw.com May 8, 2009 Via Email and Original to Follow via Overnight Express a Honorable City Councilmembers City of Palm Springs �v, � 7-i —I 3200 E. Tahquiiz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92263 ,w Re: Options for the Town and Country Center Honorable Councilmembers: `o On behalf of the Palm Springs Modern Committee and Friends of the Town and Country Center,we urge you to adopt Option 3 from the Staff Report's list of five options for treatment of the Town and Country Center as part of the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan (MMPSP). The adoption of Option 5 would also be acceptable. Option 3 should be adopted by the Council because the EIR for the MMPSP has identified the Town and Country Center as an important historic resource and it has also identified feasible alternatives to the demolition of the Center- The goals of the MMPSP can be )net without the extension of Museum Way between Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives. If the Council does not adopt Option 3, we would also support the adoption of Option 5. Option 5 eliminates Blocks K1 and K2 from the MMPSP and also eliminates the need for the Council to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant impacts to an historical resource. if the Council adopts Option 5, we request that you also adopt an ordinance that requires the submission of a project application prior to the approval of any demolition permit for the Town and Country Center. As an alternative to such an ordinance,the Council could move Fottivard quickly with the pending Class I historic site designation for the Town and Country Center. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Amy Minteer Attorney at Law Q & A on the Town & Country Center. Why Save It? Page 1 of 2 Dolores 5trickstein From: Peter Moruzzi [pmoruzzi@earthlink.netj Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 6:45 PM To: Recipient List Suppressed Subject: Q &A on the Town & Country Center.Why Save It? This Q&4 provides a different perspective on the value of integrating the Town & Country Center into a revitalized downtown. Please take a moment to read it. But first, to correct a misstatement by Mr. Braun, this Wednesday's (May 13tb) Council Meeting is a Study Session - not a regular meeting- and will NOT be considering the designation of the Town & Country Center. Why? Because the nomination has not even been heard by the Historic Site Preservation Board,which is the first step prior to a Council vote. Isn't the Town & Country Center just the ram-down Zeldaz? Actually, the Center is comprised of three buildings -not just Zeldaz -which together appear eligible for landmark listing according to the recent EIR. Buildings in much worse condition have been restored and brought back to life and so can the Center. What's so great about the Center? The Center was designed by renowned Los Angeles architects A. Quincy Jones and Paul It. Williams in 1948. Jones was a master architect who designed Sunnylands and, along with Williams, rehabbed Palm Springs' Tennis Club in 1950. Paul R. Williams was the architect for the extraordinary fagade makeovers of the Beverly Hills Hotel (1947-51) and our own El Mirador Hotel in 1953. He was also the most acclaimed African American architect to practice in the 20th century. That was 50 years ago. What about today We believe that rehabilitating the Town& Country Center will benefit the city's architectural tourism industry and provide needed retail tax dollars with new shops once it's restored. (See attached photo of what a rehabilitated Town & Country Center could once again look like). More on the rehab below. Brit what about the prooTJosed new east-west road? Mr. Braun insists that a new road must be plowed through the Town & Country Center to provide direct access to his project from Indian. But Andreas Road already connects Palm Canyon to Indian. Let's make it a two-way street again. We need a direct connection to the Spa Motel. Be careful for what you wish for. A new road directly linking Palm Canyon Dr. to the Spa Hotel/Casino will divert customers away from Palm Canyon's retail shops and lead them directly to the Spa's new retail shops. How can the Center be made viable again? Our approach to reintegrating the Center into downtown involves removing the property's south building to allow its large interior plaza to embrace Pabn Canyon Drive (see attached drawing). The popular Grill-a-Burger restaurant would be relocated to The Center's plaza area in a small building with outdoor seating. As a result, the Town & Country Center would be much more visible and its wide plaza would directly face a proposed open area leading to the Art Museum, further enhancing the pedestrian friendly focus of Palm Canyon Drive. But Mr. Braun says that the retention of the "Town & Country Center will block future redevelopment o the Desert Fashion Plaza. This is simply not true. The EIR and City Council discussions show that the 5/11/2009 Q & A on the Town & Country Center. Why Save It? Page 2 of 2 Fashion Plaza property can be successfully redeveloped without touching the east side of Palm Canyon Drive. Aren't the Center's retail ceiling heights too low? Take a look at the ceiling heights of the highly successful Corridor property containing Koffi, a bookstore, and many others. Those are the types of businesses that a rehabbed Center would attract. The Desert Sun on May G quotes Mr. Braun as sa yin , that the Wesrma_n_Dev_eloPlnent_Co. H411 not invest any rnonev into the Town& Country Center if it remains. Okay, but how is that any different from the lack of investment Mr. Wessman has made in maintaining the properly for the last 10 years? Perhaps one day a new owner will bring the Town & County Center back to life,but in the meantime, let's focus on replacing the Desert Fashion Plaza as our top priority. Thanks for your consideration. Peter Montzzi President Palm Springs Modern Comrnittee 5/11/2009 +1 'to hu,rl I7 [ III v-4 �h�1M1aYXam.di-d. r - y ,e iuYi+IwrM•MWW+'dn�..y+Sr�, r .a.., ! •�%gaXw,a..rrwi„rWe........�. � Ma+wX� M I �'IL11tl{�ll�i�ll�rltw{�Y�Wpi It i. M�Lu -.-• - i yY�tl�iyh'AJ',rryYtJagy Lip 1 i 1.�W..y(rNLiMnw�iwlMun.,� s ,(' fa T.ry�yX�,.Yii•,ran I � �.,r•i�w.l , "�+I+•f° , .� ,. .. -M 11 l �.wd lw�. Yl w.vW n, .A •y i 1.4 1, "H H. 1{•��1W� 1 'w,yLt lh'4• � .�•mi.rry ti.r. I r�yIM46rMpwp, Weir�p,r.iM,y,+ 4d.+�xh�lAbN 4 !uM1 � . y I - � r � - ��\ � ® - » - ® 2: Page 1 of 2 Dolores Strickstein From: Michael Braun [MBraun@wessmandevelopment.com] Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 12:21 PM To: Michael Braun Cc: Agua Caliente Development Authority 1; AMR; Barbara Elg; Becky Clark; Bette O'Camb; Blake Goetz; Board of Supervisors; Carol Templeton; Carol Wehrle; Carrie Rovney; Dolores Strickstein; Catherine Salazar-Wilson; Chief Martin; Cindy Uken; Craig Gladdens, Dale Cook; Debbi Allen; Denise Blotter; Denise Goolsby; Department Heads; Desert Trails Coalition; Don Duckworth; Douglas C. Holland; El Rancho Lodge; Glenn Paden; Howard Packer; Jan Truscott; Janet Sheraton; Jim Dunn; Joan Taylor; Joanne Bruggemans; John Hughes; Joy Meredith; Julia Glick- Press Ent.; Kathie Hart; Ken Lyon; Lauren Riddle; Lauri Aylaian; Lee A. Husfeldt; Lesa Bodnar; Linda Phalen; Lois Ware; Loretta Moffett; Lydia Ringwald; Mallika Albert; Marcus Fuller; Mari Lynn Boswell; Marilynn Hannon; Marina Karas; Marjorie Kessler; Martha Edgmon; Martha Higgins; Mike Fletcher; Nadine Fieger; Nancy Klukan; NEWS; Paula Sweat; Peter Hubbard; Peter Moruzzi; Phil Kaplan; Renee Montante; Rick Lee; Rick Mozzillo; Rita Gustafson; Roxane O'Neill; Sharon Ainsworth; Sharon Riddle; Steve Cramer, Steve Moore; Tara Glass; Terri Hintz; Toni Ringlein, Tony Merchell; Tribal Office-Julie Branchini; Tribal Office-M. Gomez; Trisha Sanders; Valerie Johnson; Vic Gainer; Vicki L. Oltean; Zara McMullen Subject: Please Join Us- May 13th City Council Meeting Palm Springs -The Fate of Downtown Palm Springs Please join us Wednesday May 13th for the council hearing at 6 pm discussing the Specific Plan of the Desert Fashion Plaza("DFP")and the decision to designate the Town Country Center historic. This is the time for everyone to decide the fate of downtown. Pahn Springs' continuous resignation towards status quo is preventing it from competing with other destinations. Worthy projects fail not because the opposition is very strong,but because the support is so weak. If you want downtown Palm Springs to have the opportunity to succeed in the next economic upswing, support our cause. A decision about the historic classification about the Town and Country must be made on Wednesday in order to move forward with the DFP. 1)Postponing the decision will force us to change our remodel plans once again and postpone the revitalization of downtown. 2)A decision thai requires that the Town and Country be saved wi It result in the postponement of any meaningful effort to revitalize downtown because the lack of a connection with the casino and convention center will doom any revitalization effort to suffer the sane: rate as the DFP under DeBartolo ownership. We now have the casino and convention center,but they become an asset to our community by linking them with our commercial district. if we fail to do that, any revitalization of the DFP will simply be making the same mistake DeBartolo made in the 1980's and will not revitalize the community. Please forward this c mail to anyone interested in the topic and feel free to e mail me with any questions before Wednesday evening Below a quick surmnary of our plans for downtown Palm Springs The design goal of Wessnian Development for the Desert Fashion Plaza is to create a lifestyle destination-an 18 hour environment where retail, and in the ruture,hotel and residential uses benefit from each other. Downtown Business Districts must be supportive of sociality and interaction otherwise they fail. Especially the retail 5/11/2009 Page 2 of 2 area should encourage social interaction and shopping. Wessnnan Development believes the submitted remodel plans with its new street connection from the Museum to Indian Canyon is the right plan to revitalize downtown Pahn Springs. Downtown needs multiple connections to enhance mobility and circulation. The Town and Country Center in its current state will not revitalize downtown. It will remain a major obstacle to create a necessary traffic circulation that will provide a sustainable environment for retailers to succeed in Downtown. Vehicular and pedestrian access makes for a greater degree of choice and spreads traffic. It supports the City's goal to create a sense of place. Declaring the Town and Country Center a Class 1 historic site will manifest status quo in downtown Palm Springs and most likely lead to the same non-action in downtown that the City has seen in the last 20 years. Michael Braun Wessman Development 300 S Palm Canyon Drive Palm Springs, CA 760-641-4046 www.wessmandevelopment.cem 5/11/2009 �7ALM S. G1 u m CgOFORN�P CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: May 13, 2009 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: PROPOSED DRAFT SPECIFIC PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS) FOR MUSEUM MARKET PLAZA (CASE 5.1204) TO ALLOW UP TO 955 HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UP TO 400,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE, AND UP TO 620 HOTEL ROOMS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF N. PALM CANYON DRIVE AND TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY, AND OTHER NEARBY PROPERTIES FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services SUMMARY On April 1, 2009, the City Council conducted a public hearing, received testimony, closed the hearing and continued action on the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan. In the discussion following the hearing, the Council covered a wide range of issues, in particular; 1) the Specific Plan's overall boundaries, 2) the treatment of existing facilities, and 3) the elements of the Plan's vision for the future. In order to provide adequate time to address these issues, staff has prepared this memo to address the Plan's boundaries and its treatment of existing facilities, as follows: • Incorporating a Desert Fashion Plaza renovation plan into the Specific Plan; • The treatment of the Town & Country Center by the Specific Plan; and • The inclusion or deletion of Blocks J (Mercado parking lot) and L (vacant hotel site). Following resolution of these issues, staff will schedule a Council discussion of the Plan's vision for the future, including setbacks, open space, and other issues. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Direct staff to make appropriate changes to the draft Specific Plan based on the issues raised in this memo. The Council may offer other direction as appropriate. BACKGROUND • On April 30, 2008 Wessman Development, Inc. presented to the City a draft Specific Plan for the Museum Market Plaza. ITEM NO. ' ' City Council Staff Report May 13, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 2 of 6 • On May 21, 2008, the City Council initiated a Specific Plan review process and directed staff to report on the conformance of the draft Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan with the Palm Springs General Plan, Downtown Design Guidelines and Palm Springs Zoning Cade. • On June 4, 2008, staff presented to the City council an initial look at the draft Specific Plan in light of the City's existing regulations, including staff comments and recommendations for subsequent review. • On June 13, 2008, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study on the project indicating that a draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) would be prepared on the proposed Specific Plan. The NOP comment period ran from June 16 to July 17, 2008. • On July 1, 2008 a public Scoping Meeting was held to receive comments on preparation of the draft Environmental Impact Report. • On July 16, 2008, the City Council received the list "alternatives" to the project that would be evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report. • On October 22, 2008, a draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was released for public comment. The 45-day comment period ends on December 8, 2008. • On December 3, 2008, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and directed staff to prepare a resolution recommending denial of the Specific Plan. The resolution was approved by the Commission on December 17, 2008. ■ On January 14, 2009, the City Council conducted a public hearing, accepted testimony, and continued the matter. • On April 1, 2009, the City Council continued the hearing to the meeting of May 13, 2009. It should be noted that on February 17, 2009, the applicant completed a "pre-application" for a remodel of the existing center. No subsequent project application has been submitted. ANALYSIS Introduction Following the receipt of a staff report (attached) and public testimony at the hearing of April 1, 2009, the City Council discussed the draft Specific Plan and EIR. The Council directed staff to address several issues, including the following: 1. Proposed Renovation Plan — The Council directed staff to incorporate the plan for renovating the existing Desert Fashion Plaza into the Specific Plan. 2. Town & Country Center — The Council identified the Town & Country Center is a key decision point for the plan. 2 City Council Staff Report May 13, 2009 Case No. 5.1204-Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 3 of 6 3. Specific Plan Boundaries and Blocks J and L - The Council appeared to establish a consensus that Blocks J (Mercado parking lot) and L (vacant hotel site) be removed from the Specific Plan. Proposed Renovation Plan - As noted above, the Wessman Development Company presented a plan to renovate the existing Desert Fashion Plaza through a City pre-application process on January 13, 2009- That review process culminated in a Planning Commission hearing on February 4, 2009 and staff letter summarizing the City's comments (see attached). Wessman Development has subsequently stated its concern that the Specific Plan may be a barrier to the renovation of the existing mall. In response, the City Council developed a consensus around modifying the Plan so that it is not an obstacle to re-use of the current buildings and site. Staff has prepared revised language for Section V "Administration and Implementation" that, among other things, identifies the renovation plan proposed in January 2009 as expressly allowed by the Plan and also sets forth a conformity review process for other renovation plans, should they be proposed. The draft language is attached to this memo. Staff believes that this language will satisfy the consensus view stated by the Council, and also notes that it has been reviewed and accepted by Wessman Development. In addition, staff will present the January 13, 2009 renovation plan for Council comment at the May 13, 2009 meeting. Reductions of the site plan are attached to this memo, and the City Council may offer comments at the meeting on the specifics of the renovation plan. Based on the Council's comments, revisions to the plan or the language of Section V may be appropriate. Town & Country Center - As noted in staff reports prepared to date on the draft Specific Plan, the treatment of the Town & Country Center is a key decision. The draft Plan proposes to remove the existing buildings so that a road may connect from Indian Canyon Drive through to the Palm Springs Art Museum to the west. A multi-story hotel is also proposed on the Town & Country Center site, identified as Blocks K1 and K2 in the Plan. The draft Environmental Impact Report notes that the Town & Country Center possesses architectural significance such that its removal would constitute a significant and unmitigatable impact to cultural resources. As a result, certification of the EIR and approval of the Specific Plan, as both documents are currently written, would also require the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations, as detailed in the April 13, 2009 staff report (attached). The Council has discussed the Town & Country Center in relation to the proposed Specific Plan, but no consensus has yet emerged. Staff believes that the Council's options are as follows: 1. Direct staff to re-write the Draft EIR to recognize that the Town & Country Center may be of architectural interest, but that its removal does not rise to a level of environmental significance. This would require recirculation of the Draft EIR. Staff does not support this option as there appears to be ample evidence to support the conclusions contained in the EIR, as written. f City Council Staff Report May 13, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 4 of 6 2. Identify that the Town & Country Center is of architectural and environmental significance, but that the goals of the project, including a direct vehicle path from Indian Canyon to the Palm Springs Art Museum, are more valuable to the community than preservation of the existing buildings. This conclusion would require the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Consideration. 3. Identify that the loss of the Town & Country Center is too great an environmental impact to be overcome by the goals of the project. This conclusion would indicate that a direct road between Indian Canyon Drive and the Palm Springs Art Museum is not as important as the preservation of the Center, or that other means of connecting the Art Museum to the downtown are available and acceptable. 4. Identify that the Town & Country Center is a significant architectural resource and that the provision of an east-west vehicle link is a critical objective of the Specific Plan. Determine that any decision on the final alignment of such access and its location relative to the Town & Country will be addressed concurrently with the consideration of a specific development project for Block K. 5. Remove the Town & Country Center from the Specific Plan. By deleting Blocks K1 and K2 from the Specific Plan, the Council would reduce the scope of the Plan to the west side of Palm Canyon Drive (primarily the Desert Fashion Plaza) and leave the fate of the Town & Country Center to a future planning decision.' Staff seeks a consensus from the Council on the Town & Country Center from which we will make necessary Plan or EIR revisions or prepare draft resolutions. Specific Plan Boundaries and Blocks J and L — At the April 1, 2009 meeting, there appeared to be a consensus developing around the deletion of Blocks J and L from the draft Specific Plan. Block J contains the parking lot behind and west of the Mercado Plaza and shares no boundary with the remaining blocks of the Specific Plan. Block L is the vacant site at the southwest corner of Cahuilla Road and West Tahquitz Canyon Way, and was previously the subject of the Palm Hotel development proposal. Wessman Development Company continues to assert that these blocks — especially Block L — remain vital to the overall development of the Specific Plan. The City Council has full latitude to establish the boundaries of the Plan, including removal of these or other blocks. If the Council's desire is to delete these blocks, the Plan would be recast around a smaller area. No change to the draft EIR would be required. CONCLUSION The draft Specific Plan remains a work in progress, and a number of issues must yet be resolved. However, staff believes that the issues identified in this memo appear to be those which the City Council discussed most at its last meeting. Resolution of these items would ' The Specific Plan and EIR's treatment of the Town & Country Center are separate from any action the City may take under Municipal Code Section 8 05 (Historic Resources). Further, the City Historic Site Preservation Board has initiated the process for designating the Town & Country Center as a Class 1 historic site, but has postponed action pending the Council's decision on the Specific Plan. _ (; 4 City Council Staff Report May 13, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 5 of 6 allow staff to move into finalizing the future vision for development, including the issues of density and height, open space, setbacks, and street alignments. NOTICE This hearing is continued from the April 1, 2009 meeting and notice has been provided, as required by law. No written communications on the project have been received at the time this report was prepared. Any subsequent communications will be presented at the meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared for the project and distributed to the City Council. The Environmental Summary Matrix (Section "M" of the DEIR) provides a brief overview of the anticipated impacts and recommended mitigation measures. Staff believes that the FEIR provides an adequate and complete description of the future environmental condition should the Specific Plan, as proposed, be implemented. The FEIR identifies three areas in which the proposed Specific Plan would create "significant and unavoidable (i.e., unmitigatable) impacts": • Aesthetics - Partial blockage of mountain views would be caused by the taller buildings, the Town & Country Center would be eliminated by development on Block K1 / K2. • Air Quality - Projected levels of emissions during construction (nitrogen oxides) and during operations (carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides) would exceed State standards. • Cultural Resources -The Town & Country Center - a historic resource, as defined by CEQA-would be eliminated by development of Block K1 / K2. A Statement of Overriding Consideration would be required in the event that the Specific Plan was adopted with the above impacts. All other impacts can be adequately reduced to less than significant levels through mitigation measures outlined in the FEIR. Craig A/Ewing ¢ P, -Mm-a�J. Wil / u [rector of PI`nnil g Services Assistant CittWnager, Dev't Services David H. Ready, Cit�M r 1 Attachments, 1. Staff Report (April 1, 2009) 2. City Council Meeting Minutes (April 1, 2009) 3. Draft Specific Plan Section V "Administration and Implementation (revised) 4. Pre-Application Letter to Wessman Development Co. (February 17, 2009) AF aJ City Council Staff Report May 13, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 6 of 6 5. Proposed Desert Fashion Plaza Renovation Plans (February 4, 2009) 6. Draft Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan (previously distributed) 7. Draft Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan EIR (previously distributed) �Op p RI.M sA4 iy V N c441FORa�P CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: April 1, 2009 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: PROPOSED DRAFT SPECIFIC PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS) FOR MUSEUM MARKET PLAZA (CASE 5.1204) TO ALLOW UP TO 965 HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UP TO 400,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE, AND UP TO 620 HOTEL ROOMS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF N. PALM CANYON DRIVE AND TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY, AND OTHER NEARBY PROPERTIES FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services SUMMARY On January 14, 2009, the City Council conducted a public hearing, received testimony and continued action on the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan. Subsequently, staff has met with each Council member to receive individual comments, which have been compiled and summarized in this memo. The Council will re-open the public hearing, take any additional testimony and, at its option, direct staff with regard to final action on the draft Specific Plan. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Open the public hearing, accept any testimony and close the hearing. 2. Direct staff to prepare draft resolutions based on Council direction, including the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report, adoption of Statement of Overriding Considerations, adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring Report, and approval of the Specific Plan, including any amendments, as appropriate. BACKGROUND • On April 30, 2008 Wessman Development, Inc. presented to the City a draft Specific Plan for the Museum Market Plaza. • On May 21, 2008, the City Council initiated a Specific Plan review process and directed staff to report on the conformance of the draft Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan with L City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 2 of 13 the Palm Springs General Plan, Downtown Design Guidelines and Palm Springs Zoning Code. • On June 4, 2008, staff presented to the City council an initial look at the draft Specific Plan in light of the City's existing regulations, including staff comments and recommendations for subsequent review. • On June 13, 2008, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study on the project indicating that a draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) would be prepared on the proposed Specific Plan. The NOP comment period ran from June 16 to July 17, 2008. • On July 1, 2008 a public Scoping Meeting was held to receive comments on preparation of the draft Environmental Impact Report. • On July 16, 2008, the City Council received the list "alternatives" to the project that would be evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report. • On October 22, 2008, a draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was released for public comment. The 45-day comment period ends on December 8, 2008. • On December 3, 2008, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and directed staff to prepare a resolution recommending denial of the Specific Plan. The resolution was approved by the Commission on December 17, 2008. • On January 14, 2009, the City Council conducted a public hearing, accepted testimony, and continued the matter. It should be noted that on February 17, 2009, the applicant completed a "pre-application" for a remodel of the existing center. No subsequent project application has been submitted. ANALYSIS Introduction Following the receipt of public testimony at the noticed hearing of January 14, 2009, the City Council continued action on the matter. The Council also directed staff to consolidate the comments of the City Council and develop recommendations for the Council's review (see attached meeting minutes). Additional background information is contained in the attachments. Following the January hearing, staff met or communicated with each Council member and received individual comments, which are summarized below. From these comments, staff has identified areas where it believes there may be consensus and areas where additional discussion may be needed. By working through each if the issues discussed below, the Council may develop an overall direction for the Specific Plan and thereby identify its preferred action. - C, U City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 3 of 13 Council Comments The following Council comments were provided to staff after the January hearing: Councilmember Hutcheson,- Highlights: ■ Reduce number of condos, hotel rooms, retail square footage and other uses from that proposed in the original plan; increase open space; preserve flexibility. • Preserve the open space-village square concept; it is key to the whole project area, and is the one thing the City is certain to be able to deliver. ■ Identify removal of blight as an important project goal. • Set overriding objective of "great" architecture, preferably consistent with our existing architectural palette (Modern or Spanish Colonial Revival) Changes /Amendments: • Reduce Specific Plan boundaries; delete Blocks J, K1 / K2 and L. • Extend Plaza shown in Block "B" through to Museum by including Block E-G-H • Support extended Plaza with a 75% open space requirement in Block E-G-H, as well as same height restrictions as in Block "B" • Maintain maximum height of 60 feet, with lower heights (30 to 45 feet) along project boundaries / edges. • Modify Appendix A to accommodate the above concerns before incorporating into action findings. Councilmember Weigel Highlights. ■ Allow variety of architectural styles, with no predetermined architecture. • Establish street setbacks and stepping of buildings as key goals of Plan. Changes /Amendments: • Exclude Block J in averaging of overall heights. • Establish setbacks and stepping of buildings in specific ways. Councilmember Foat Highlights: • Preserve the Town & Country center • Allow variety of architectural styles, with no predetermined architecture. • Introduce more public space into the main area of Block B and surroundings. Changes /Amendments: • Delete Blocks J and L from Specific Plan boundaries • Reduce maximum allowed heights • Reduce maximum allowed densities Mayor Pro Tem Mills Highlights: • Provide open space on Block B to preserve view corridor City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 4 of 13 • Allow angle parking on Belardo Changes /Amendments: • Consider deletion of Blocks J and L; keep Block K in Plan • Allow 64 feet maximum height for residential buildings. • Eliminate any enclosed floor area in Block B; allow kiosks • Create additional street-level open space on corners. • Allow balconies, but not enclosed spaces over right-of-way. • Allow "contemporary" architecture — more stylistic flexibility than "modern" Mayor Pougnet Highlights: • Use setbacks on Palm Canyon Drive to create welcome feeling Changes /Amendments • Consider deletion of Blocks L and J • Establish height limit of 60 feet. Based on these comments and the issues raised in the January 14, 2009 staff report and hearing, staff has identified the following issues for Council consideration. If the Council finds consensus on these issues, and any others it identifies, it may direct staff to prepare final resolutions for Council adoption Overall Vision The Council appears to accept the Plan's overall vision, One comment seeks to include the "removal of blight" as a project goal. Another seeks to include street setbacks and building stepping as key goals. Some modifications to Appendix A may be needed, based on final Council action. Recommendation: Consider adding removal of blight and building setbacks to Specific Plan vision, and include Appendix A, as may be modified. Proiect Scope Council comments show an interest in reducing the project's boundaries • Two seek to delete Block J (Mercado Parking Lot) and L (SW Cahuilla & Tahquitz); two others willing to consider their removal • One seeks to delete Block K-1 / K-2 (Town & Country); one seeks to retain it Deletion of the non-contiguous blocks (Blocks J, K-1 / K-2 and L) could be accomplished with without undermining the overall vision. Deletion of any block from the Plan would return it to the control of the General Plan, Downtown Urban Design Plan and Zoning Code, as follows: Block Current General Plan Current Zoning Proposed Specific Plan J Central Bus. District C-D-B Multi-Level Parking K-1 / K-2 Central Bus. District C-D-B Hotel L Small Hotel R-3 Hi-Density Res'I / Hotel City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No 5 1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 5 of 13 Recommendation: Consider deletion of outlying Blocks J and L. Consider retention of Block K-1 / K-2. Land Use Council comments on land use tended to focus on Block B and the significance of a village square within the project: ■ Three comments sought to expand the open space of Block B, either by enlarging Block B, or extending the open space into Block E-F-H, or by restricting development within Block B to kiosks. • One comment sought to preserve the Town & Country Center. Staff notes that a widened view corridor along the "Museum Way" street may still retain a desirable pedestrian street scale; however, larger open spaces will reduce the amount of land available for economic activity, as well as require a permanent maintenance effort to keep the space vibrant, clean and safe. Staff believes that the size of Block B is sufficient open space within the project area, especially as the nearby O'Donnel Golf Course will revert to public use in a few decades. In the proposed Plan, the Town & Country Center would be replaced by a hotel. If Block K-1 / K-2 is deleted, the Specific Plan would not have any authority over the Center and it would be regulated by the existing General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. If these Blocks are retained in the Plan, the Plan may identify the City's policy regarding the existing buildings. The EIR identifies that demolition of the Center would have a significant impact. The Council can identify its preference in the matter and direct staff accordingly. No Council comments were offered on the list of permitted uses (see January staff report). Recommendation: Establish a wider promenade along Museum Way; consider reducing the development potential of Block B to unenclosed structures and kiosks; identify the City's position on the issue of the Town & Country Center; and adjust the list of permitted uses, as identified in the January 14, 2009 report. Densities Two comments were provided on the project's densities, both suggesting that they should be reduced. One included a recommendation for preserving flexibility. As proposed, the Plan provides some flexibility by allowing higher densities for individual uses, but anticipating that the final mix of uses will be determined by the timing of market forces -- and at lower overall densities. As noted in January, densities are affected by decisions regarding maximum height and open space. In the discussion of height (below) the final Plan could establish a lower maximum height than currently proposed; if so, less development (and density) will result. Based on the Council's apparent consensus around a height limit of about 60 feet, staff believes that the density recommendations proposed by staff in the January 2009 report — including a bias toward more hotel rooms and less residential — remain valid and viable: City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 6 of 13 Type of Use Proposed Draft Project Staff Specific Plan Alternative "B" Recommendation Residential Units 955 765 300 Commercial / Office SF 400,000 300,000 300,000 Hotel Rooms 620 255 600 Recommendation: Approve the maximum densities, as recommended by staff above- HeLqht The strongest consensus was expressed around the issue of building height ■ All five Council members sought a lower maximum height: Two prefer a maximum of 60 feet; one set a height of 64 feet for residential buildings, one would delete Block J from the 60-foot averaging scheme (thereby bringing the height of other buildings closer to 60); and one gave no specific number. One comment sought to reduce the maximum height of Block E-G-H to 24 feet. As previously stated, staff does not support the height-averaging concept, but does believe that individual blocks can have different heights appropriate to their size, location and orientation to surrounding properties and views. The suggestion of a 64-foot limit for residential buildings would allow for higher first floors, which may be advantageous for street front retailing needs. Staff believes that hotels (instead of residential could warrant a taller building, as noted in the provisions recommended below. Recommendation: Adopt a revised maximum building height standard as follows: • Block A 45 • Block B 24 • Block C 60 • Block D & F 60/45 • Block E, G, H 60 • Block J (if retained in the Plan) 34 • Block K ( " " " ) 45 ■ Block L ( " ) 45 Additional provisions: 1. Buildings shall be lower (30 to 45 feet) as they approach the edges of the Specific Plan boundaries, especially along Tahquitz Canyon Way, east of Belardo, and along Palm Canyon Drive. 2. An exception to the "edge" policy is allowed at the corner of Tahquitz and Palm Canyon to create a landmark intersection statement, subject to approval by the City Council. 3. Blocks containing hotels may exceed the above height limits, subject to approval by the City Council. City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204-Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 7 of 13 Setbacks Open Space and other Standards A variety of comments were offered on the issues of setbacks and related standards: • One seeks to establish setbacks and the stepping of buildings in specific ways, while another identified the setbacks on Palm Canyon as a "welcoming" feature. One comment noted that street-level open space at the corners is needed, and one supported allowing open balconies to project into the right-of-way. The Specific Plan provides a block-by-block set of standards for setbacks, open space, maximum square footage, projections, outdoor uses, walls and fences, parking and other incidental issues (see Pages III - 10-17), Staff notes that the Plan's standards are similar or the same as the underlying C-B-D zone. A complex "step-back" scheme for each of the streets is also proposed to replace the uniform setback standard of the "high-rise" ordinance. Staff believes the step-backs proposed in the plan allow two story buildings on most street frontages to provide a reasonable relationship between building and street. Open space requirements are 35% minimum for all Blocks, except the open plaza on Block B, This plaza space would be 75% open space, allowing for some low-rise retail / restaurant uses. (As noted above, one Council comment recommended a 75% open space requirement for Block E-G-H.) Staff supports the open space limit on Block B, but not Block E-G-H. Lastly, staff believes that the heights, densities, setbacks and parking requirements provide sufficient guidance to development of the site and that the building mass chart may be superfluous. Parking is treated in the Plan at a base standard of one space for each 325 square feet of floor area for most commercial uses. This compares with the same standard for mixed use development in the Zoning Code's C-B-D zone. Hotel uses are to be parked at a slightly higher ratio than called for in the zoning code, and residential uses are generally identical. Signage is to conform to the provisions of Section 93.20.00 et seq. of the Zoning Code ("Signs"). Street sign banners and kiosk signs would be allowed, which staff support subject to approval of a program for each defining location, size and lighting, as necessary. Recommendation: Approve the development standards, as adjusted for the height limits sought by the Council, with the deletion of the maximum square footage table. Consider the allowance for open balconies to project into the right-of-way. Design --Architecture and Landscaping The Council addressed the issue of architectural and landscape design by focusing on the Plan's direction on architectural style: • Four comments agree that concentrating on "Modern" architecture is too limiting: One sought to emphasize "great" architecture regardless of style (but preferably consistent with Modern and Spanish Colonial Revival); two preferred no 'd City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 8 of 13 predetermined style; and one substituted "contemporary" for "Modern" to allow greater flexibility. Staff believes that adopting an open approach to architectural design allows more variety; however, staff remains persuaded that sustainability and conservation features will lead most designers to choose modern or contemporary styles. Again, most architectural styles developed in the last century will incorporate photo-voltaics and other sustainable technologies with greater elegance and integrity. Recommendation: Identify the primary architectural goals or theme for the Specific Plan. Road Network Among the Council members, only one comment was offered on the Plan's proposed road network: Allow angle parking on Belardo Road. The Plan presently includes angle parking on Belardo within the project area (west of Blocks A, B and C) so this comment is satisfied. (The EIR's Traffic Study recommends deletion of the angle parking shown along Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives.) As previously noted, staff believes that the creation of an internal street grid is the best way to establish a pedestrian-oriented downtown center. Also noted is the unique situation presented by Block K1 / K2. One of the most important decisions facing the Council in this project is weighing the trade-offs between preserving the Town & Country Center and the developing Museum Way from Indian Canyon Drive to the museum. The draft EIR fully explains the historic value of the Town & Country Center (see pages III — 61-69 of the draft EIR). In contrast, completion of the street as proposed in the Plan provides the following benefits: • Creates a visual link to the Desert Art Museum from Indian Canyon Drive and the Spa Hotel, • Provides a more complete street grid to facilitate traffic movement and allow more flexible access routes, and Fulfills one of the project's goals, as stated in the draft EIR: "Reintegrate the pedestrian and automobile back into the core of downtown by reconnecting Belardo Road and creating a new boulevard (Museum Way) from the Museum to Indian Canyon." Staff recommends that the Council carefully weigh these competing values, as well as the requirements for adopting a Statement of Overriding Consideration on the draft EIR prior to deciding its position on this issue. Recommendation: Approve the street plan, except for deletion of angle parking from Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon Drives. Identify the Council's preference regarding the proposed street in Block K1 / K2. ,L City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 9 of 13 Administration No comments were offered on the Administration of the Plan; however, recommends that the City's current arrangement of AAC recommendation, Planning Commission review and City Council oversight is appropriate. Recommendation: Delete the Museum Market Plaza Review Commission. Phasing No Council comments were provided regarding phasing. As previously noted, staff believes that establishment of the street grid is a key element for any "first phase". The property owner has indicated that the Plan needs to accommodate lesser renovation and remodel concepts without need for a wholesale Specific Plan amendment. Staff agrees, and notes that the scope and ambition of the Plan will likely take years to complete. Consequently, staff proposes that the Plan allow incremental improvements which move.toward fulfillment of the Plan. Such projects could be reviewed by the Council and approved as conforming. If acceptable to the Council, staff will,incorporate language to allow such determination. Recommendation: Include language that allows the City Council to determine that incremental or partial renovation / remodels conform to the Specific Plan. Plan Organization No comments received. Recommendation: Based on Council direction, staff will prepare the necessary ordinances and code language for final action. NOTICE Notice was provided to properties owners within 400 feet of the project and by advertisement in the Desert Sun. No written communications on the project have been received at the time this report was prepared. Any communications received subsequently will be presented at the meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL: (Note: This section is a complete reprint from the report of January 14, 2009) A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared for the project and distributed to the City Council. The Environmental Summary Matrix (Section "M" of the DEIR) provides a brief overview of the anticipated impacts and recommended mitigation measures. Staff believes that the FOR provides an adequate and complete description of the future environmental condition should the Specific Plan, as proposed, be implemented. The FEIR identifies three areas in which the proposed Specific Plan would create "significant and unavoidable (i.e., unmitigatable) impacts": 7 � City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204-Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 10 of 13 • Aesthetics - Partial blockage of mountain views would be caused by the taller buildings; the Town & Country Center would be eliminated by development on Block K1 / K2. • Air Quality - Projected levels of emissions during construction (nitrogen oxides) and during operations (carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides) would exceed State standards. • Cultural Resources - The Town & Country Center - a historic resource, as defined by CEQA -would be eliminated by development of Block K1 / K2. All other impacts can be adequately reduced to less than significant levels through mitigation measures outlined in the FEIR. Significant, Unavoidable Impacts and Project Alternatives The FEIR also examines a set of Project Alternatives to see if there are other ways to implement the overall project objectives while reducing potentially significant environmental impact - especially those which are considered significant and unavoidable. An analysis of several alternatives (see section V of the FEIR) shows that all alternatives - even the No Project option (re-use of the existing center) - results in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts. Impacts to Aesthetics and Cultural Resources are reduced by each of the alternatives, in some degrees to less than significant levels. For example, all alternatives include a reduction in maximum building height from the draft Specific Plan: • Draft Specific Plan: 74 feet • Preserve Town & Country: 74 feet • Alternative B : 65 feet • Staffs Recommendation: 60 feet • Alternative A: 57 feet ■ No Project 35 feet Therefore, staff anticipates that as building height is reduced, there will be a reduced adverse impact on scenic views. However, except for the No Project alternative, the impact will remain significant and unavoidable; the No Project alternative will have a less than significant impact. Additionally, all projects will introduce additional light, glare, sensitive receptors into the area; again the No Project alternative will have the lowest impact. As regards Cultural Resources, those alternatives that preserve the Town & Country Center adequately reduce the impacts to Cultural Resources. Staff believes that its set of recommendations, as contained in this report, also eliminates adverse, unavoidable impacts to Cultural Resources because it anticipates the preservation of the Town & Country Center. However, any alternative that preserves the Town & Country Center leaves one of the project objectives partially unfilled: Creation of a direct vehicular connection between Indian Canyon Drive and the Desert Art Museum. As previously noted, this is a key decision for redevelopment of the project area. City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 11 of 13 "Statement of Overriding Considerations" In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the City may approve a project that results in significant and unavoidable impacts, including those mentioned above. CEQA is an information disclosure law, not a mandate to achieve a particular environmental outcome. Section 21002 of the State Public Resources Code identifies the Legislature's intent in adopting CEQA: 21002. The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof. The City may conclude that "specific economic, social or other conditions" exist to override the concerns regarding one or more significant and unavoidable environmental impacts. If so, it must adopt a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" that identifies those conditions that warrant the acceptance of the resulting environmental impacts. The State CEQA Guidelines are more specific on the matter: 15093. Statement of Overriding Considerations (a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination, This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204-Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 12 of 13 The decision to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be founded upon "economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project". In addition, they must be explicit and must be based on "substantial evidence". One area that is recognized as a basis for an override is the set of project objectives. The City may determine that the project objectives are of such importance that their benefits "outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects". As noted in Section V of the FEIR, the project objectives are as follows: 1. Reintegrate the site into the economic, social and environmental fabric of the downtown. 2. Provide direct access to the Desert Art Museum from Downtown and Section 14. 3. Create an upscale, vibrant mixed use lifestyle center, including boutique shops, galleries, neighborhood conveniences, restaurants, residential units and boutique hotels, serving visitors and local residents. 4. Enhance the pedestrian environment and lower the dependence on the automobile by providing living, shopping and entertainment venues in a central location. 5. Encourage a variety of architectural designs, styles and heights with materials that include plaster, glass, stone, iron, masonry and concrete to create visual interest while utilizing the latest in green technology. 6. Reintegrate the pedestrian and automobile back into the core of downtown by reconnecting Belardo Road and creating a new boulevard (Museum Way) from the Museum to Indian Canyon. The question of an override must be addressed by the Council, because the proposed Specific Plan and all project alternatives adversely affect Air Quality. The Council may also determine that the project objectives - such as a through road from Indian Canyon Drive to the Desert Art Museum - or other factors support an override on Aesthetics (for building height and loss of the Town & Country Center) or Cultural Resources (again, the loss of the Town & Country Center). As previously noted, this is a key question raised by this project. Staff recommends the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the issue of Air Quality and will prepare a Statement on Aesthetics and Cultural Resources, should that be the direction of the Council. City Council Staff Report April 1, 2009 Case No. 5.1204—Specific Plan for Museum Market Plaza Page 13 of 13 Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Thomas J. Wilson, Director of Planning Services Assistant City Manager, Dev't Services David H. Ready, City Manager Attachments: 1. Staff Report (January 14, 2009) 2. City Council Meeting Minutes (January 14, 2009) 3. Draft Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan (previously distributed) 4. Draft Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan EIR (previously distributed) 5. Comments from January 14, 2009 public hearing (previously distributed) ; q City Council Meeting Page 4 of 9 34764 TO SUBDIVIDE 10.4 ACRES INTO ELEVEN PARCELS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 20TH AVENUE PPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST OF NORTH INDIAN CANYON IVE (CASE NO. TPM 34764): Sta eport Item 1.B. David Newl, Associate Planner, provided background information as outlined in th v taff report dated April 1, 2009. Mayor Pougnet ned the public hearing, and no speakers coming forward the public h ring was closed. Councilmember Mills re sted staff review the standards in the M-1 and M-2 zones, and noteda\quirement for an eight foot sidewalk, and requested the City Council c° nsider amending the conditions for a five foot sidewalk- r Councilmember Hutcheson suggest the Planning Commission should be part of the process of reviewing stards in the M-1 and M-2 zones. ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. 22460, "\Conditi TION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL TO SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 10.4 ACRES INTO RCELS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORF 20TH AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST DIAN CANYON DRIVE, ZONE M-2, SECTION 15;" ameiti _ ,No. ENG5 to require.. a- five (5) foot-_ sidewalk. Mncil tuber Foat, seconded by Councilmember Hutcheson and unanimdl, Isy carried on a roll call vote. The City Council recessed at 7:35 p.m. ., ,d The City Council reconvened at 7:45 p.m. 14. PROPOSED DRAFT SPECIFIC PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS) FOR MUSEUM MARKET PLAZA (CASE 5.1204) TO ALLOW UP TO 955 HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UP TO 400,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE, AND UP TO 620 HOTEL ROOMS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF N. PALM CANYON DRIVE AND TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY, AND OTHER NEARBY PROPERTIES: Staff Report Item 1.C. :J http://palmsprings.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view id=2&clip_id=662 5/5/2009 City Council Meeting Page 5 of 9 Craig Ewing, Director of Planning Services, provided background information as outlined in the staff report dated April 1, 2009. Councilmember Hutcheson requested staff address the process of future City Councils to amend the Specific Plan. Mayor Pougnet opened the public hearing, and the following speakers addressed the City Council. EMILY HEMPHILL, Representing Wessman Development, commented on the economic feasibility of developing the specific plan, height restrictions, and the current re-model plan by Wessman Development. RON MARSHALL, requested the preservation of the Town and Country Center. PETER MORUZZI, commented on the EIR and the preservation of the Town and Country Center. CHARLES SACHS, requested the City Council look at alternatives to keep the cost down and keep the views, watch the details. MICHAEL BRAUN, commented on the Town and Country, and the sufficiency of the EIR. JOHN TYMON, stated he was for preservation and restoration, commented on the Town and Country Center, and stated he is opposed to angle parking. No further speakers coming forward the public hearing was closed. Mayor Pro Tern Mills commented on the current application and process of the current renovation project, and requested the specific plan not inhibit a renovation project. Councilmember Foat commented on the renovation process and the late submission of testimony. Councilmember Weigel requested staff address the responsibility of current maintenance and renovations of the building, requested the City Attorney address the disposition of the Town and Country Center, the open space requirement, and the,renovation project. Mayor Pougnet requested staff address the impact to the Town and Country Center and the level of protection of a potential significant site. Mayor Pro Tem Mills commented on the future of the site with respect to the comments made in reference to economic feasibility, requested staff 2 ? http://palmsprines.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=662 5/5/2009 City Council Meeting Page 6 of 9 address the EIR projections, commented on the height limitations, the feasibility of the number of units, and stated the review, study, and effect the project can have on the area to the North is missing from the plan. Councilmember Hutcheson stated the Specific Plan is one of several paths for the Downtown mall, commented on the renovation plan, stated he would like a path for the near future, a plan to remove the Fashion Plaza blight, protect the historic structures, provide flexibility to provide connectivity for the Museum and the Spa Hotel, stated his opposition to the height averaging, commented on potential uses, economic conditions, and open space. Councilmember Foat stated she would like the City Council to review further models of the area. ACTION: 1) Close the public testimony portion of the public hearing and continue to May 13, 2009; and 2) Direct the City Clerk to post a Notice of Continued Public Hearing. Motion Councilmember Weigel, seconded by Councilmember Hutcheson and unanimously carried on a roll call vote. AL RAVERT, commented on Item 2.E., and requested the City Council approve the suspe on of the Noise Ordinance for the event. BOB ALEXA ER, commented on Item 5.A., and requested the City Council approve the amendment` the Walk of Stars criteria. DREW SWEATTE, co ented on the 45th Congressional District. N� CHARLES SACHS, commen on illegal tree removal at Case de Oro condominium complex. t COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS: Non` ,, CITY MANAGER'S REPORT: None. '\ 2. CONSENT CALENDAR: ACTION: Approve Items 2.A., 2.B., 2.C., and 2.F. IVlotion Mayor Pro Tern Mills, seconded by Councilmember Hutcheson and unanirtrously carried on a roll call vote. 2.A. REPORT ON POSTING OF THE AGENDA: ACTION: Receive and file Report on the Posting of the April 1,' ,009, City Council Agenda. Approved as part of the Consent Calendar. Staff Report Item 2.A. n,r http://paimsprings.granicus.com/MinutesViewei.php?view_id=2&clip_id=662 5/5/2009 Terra Nova/Museum Market Plaza Draft Specific Plan Section V—Administration and Implementation REVISED V. ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION A. Application Review Process The implementation tools for the Specific Plan will be Major Architectural Reviews, Conditional Use Permits and subdivision maps. Under certain conditions, Planned Development Permits may be required, if the condition meets the standards of'section V-B, below. The successful implementation of the Museum Market Plaza Specific Plan is critical to the lone term health of downtown Palm Springs. In order to assure an efficient and streamlined entitlement process, applications for areas within the Specific Plan will require special handling. This Specific Plan establishes a pen-nit streamlining process which will assure the thorough review of Major Architectural Review, Conditional Use Permit and subdivision applications_ 1. Application Requirements and Process Major Architectural Review applications will include the following in addition to the materials required as part of a standard Major Architectural Review application: a. A progressive calculation of building square footage and mass, provided on the site plan. The analysis shall include square footage and mass permitted for the applicable Block under the Specific Plan (Table TTI-3); square footage and mass approved to date; and square footage and mass proposed with the application. b. If the project is for residential of hotel use, a progressive calculation of the number of residential units or hotel rooms, provided on the site. The analysis shall include units or rooms permitted for the applicable Block under the Specific Plan (Table II-1); units or rooms approved to date; and units or rooms proposed with the application. c. If the project is for retail or office use, a progressive calculation of the square footage provided on the site. The analysis shall include square footage permitted for the applicable Block under the Specific Plan (Table II-1); square footage approved to date; and square footage proposed with the application. d. A calculation of parking required, parking provided within the applicable Block, and parking provided elsewhere in the Specific Plan area. e. If parking is proposed to be located outside the boundaries of the Block where the use is to occur, the application shall include a demonstration that sufficient parking occurs elsewhere in the Specific Plan area, and shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the use, to accommodate the use. f. If parking is proposed to be reduced for shared uses, a parking study, completed by a qualified traffic engineer or parking professional, utilizing recognized sources of data. V-1 G371d9 1 n Terra Nova/Museum Market Plaza Draft Specific Plan Section V—Administration and Implementation When found complete by the Planning Department, a public hearing for the Major Architectural Application shall be scheduled, within 30 days, before the Planning Commission, The Commission shall conduct a public hearing consistent with the procedures of the Planning Commission. Such hearing shall include any consideration under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), if required. The Commission, upon closing the public hearing, shall either request changes to the application and continue or table the matter; recommend approval to the City Council; or recommend denial to the City Council. The Commission's recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council For approval. The decision of the City Council shall be final. Recommendations of the Commission can be appealed to the City Council. Applications for Conditional Use Permits and subdivisions, not involving construction of new structures and only the use in question, shall be processed consistent with the provisions of Section 94.020.00 et. seq. of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance. Planned Development Permits, if required, will be processed consistent with the requirements of Section 94.30.00 et. seq. of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance. 2. 1!,4u5e4FR NUF �P1• nmissieff shall ;sl r l- . e wci+-sc-ar-cvvv-incn�..-ro--vr�-fc--�•n•C zram-r � _-- -. =mvc'=r�-vrn�c-.�-a�virnirl5.i.on�min cvvv-,il.,-n-m�=rs-ar-met-,�y r. .ro;l- Members , f 1,8 ! e ffi. al e-a-33I crI.,e Gem , ( , .. rn:•,. r Geu�i efi eijrrtn?•h-t,he (i.e. th..i e,;, lnr rh_ems r •«� .. , b � ./ti-mTG�r OTIC'.�' ri.�rst e-iSCO the nis,ien rrte...1_,,.. ::c':':;:,ter •«,..., «w., nl r i r:«. r„ •1 a .. >^- 1, «,,.-w. cvr"n,Taz cccc, ace i••a:^'^ ^"}irrl�"^�^' '-ct'�- '^^ ""^rb�]• ^` �' r��.H-thC' T Uise ..-.. Ai aza Review Gernmissieii, th., ern• a1J•1 b k'"``"`C-,.,-r*r-vr-rtcr. 2. Conformity Review Procedure. Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection C (Phasinb) of this Section V, a property owner within the specific plan boundary area may request a determination that a proposed project consisting in part of the rehabilitation, renovation, and/or remodel of existing buildings and facilities (a "Renovation Project") within the Specific Plan is generally consistent with the Specific Plan. a. The property owner shall fully complete and file a request for Conformity Review describing the proposed project and identifying the rehabilitation, renovation, and remodel components and file such other information as the Planning Director may require. The filing may be schematic and conceptual; precise plans or drawings shall not be required unless the submission is processed concurrently with an entitlement provided under the City's Zoning Ordinance. The filing and processing fees, if any, shall be assessed according to the City's resolution of fees and charges. V_2 6371401 '� LM1 Terra Nova/Museum Market Plaza Draft Specific Plan Section V-Administration and Implementation b. The Planning Director shall consider the request for Conformity Review and shall prepare written findings and recommendations to the City Council. The request for Conformity Review shall be considered by the City Council at a noticed public hearing pursuant Government Code section 6061. The City Council shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the request. The decision of the Council is final. C. In the review and consideration of the Conformity Request, the City Council shall consider whether the proposal reasonably furthers the goals or objectives of the Specific Plan, including without limitation Subsection C of this Section V. S. Specific Plan Amendments Specific Plan Amendments required to clarify standards or guidelines, make interpretations of permitted uses, or otherwise required which do not change development standards in this Specific Plan may be made by the Planning Director. Any amendment which changes uses, density, maximum square footage or units, development standards or circulation within the Specific Plan shall require review by the Planning Commission and City Council. C. Phasing In response to market conditions, implementation of the Museum Market Plaza is expected to begin with the renovation of the existing Desert Fashion Plaza Shopping Center. The current placement of buildings, parking, and pathways at the Center may be the basis for renovation in this first phase. This phase is not required to implement certain elements of the Plan intended for subsequent phases, including the full street grid system, the removal of the existing underground parking garage, and the provision of 75% open space within Block B. Renovation of all or a significant portion of the existing Desert Fashion Plaza Shopping Center which preserves opportunities for enhancing the connection between the Museum and the Casino/Convention Center area shall be deemed consistent with the Specific Plan. Nothing herein shall be construed as allowing or permitting any deviation from the maximum height or density requirements of the Specific Plan. An example of a renovation that is consistent with the Specific Plan's `renovation' phase is the Wessman Company's proposed "renovation plan" submitted to the City on January 13, 2009 ("Wessman Renovation Plan"), including any changes or revisions identified in the written comments of the Community Development Director dated February 17, 2009- The City specifically finds that the Wessman Renovation Plan is consistent with the Specific Plan and furthers the objectives of the Specific Plan in that the Wessman Renovation Plan (a) proposes the renovation of a significant portion of the existing Desert Fashion Plaza Shopping Center for retail, office and resort uses, as provided in the Specific Plan, (b) will facilitate the development 6171491 V-3 W Terra Nova/Museum Market Plaza Dral't Specific Plan rn Section V—Administration and Implementation of an east/west connection through the site to the Museum which does not currently exist, thereby contributing to the Specific Plan's goal of restoring the visual presence for the Museum that has been lacking since the construction of the Desert Fashion Plaza and creating the opportunity for direct access between the Museum and the Casino/Convention Center area, (c) will create, within the new east/west connection, areas for outdoor dining and other pedestrian oriented activities to draw customers to the Center and give energy to the downtown area, (d) with the addition of the east/west connection, it will create additional retail spaces with lively street frontages on the ground floor that do not exist within the current Desert Fashion Plaza, (e) will provide new opportunities for high quality retail development which will contribute to realizing the Specific Plan's goal of helping to create a stable and varied economy, increase the City's tax base and act as a catalyst for further redevelopment in downtown, and (f) by adding a theater and additional restaurants, it will achieve the Specific Plan goal of expanding recreational uses in the downtown which extend the hours of active use in the area. Subsequent phasing of the Museum Market Plaza will be determined by the market. Exhibit V-I illustrates how subsequent phasing may occur at the site, although it may be modified by market pressures, including changes in both the commercial and residential environments_ As shown in the Phasing Plan, the first phase of development, or the phase subsequent to any renovation project as allowed pursuant to this Subsection C or Paragraph 2 of Subsection A focuses on the construction of the Main Plaza, the installation oFthe new east-west roadway from the Museum to Palm Canyon Drive, the extension of Belardo through the site, and improvements to Palm Canyon Drive. Block A and C, focusing on the Main Plaza, are anticipated in Phase II of the project. This phase may also include the southern portion of Block E, G & H. Depending on demonstrated parking demand, Block 7 may be built in this phase, or in Phase 111. Block 7, Block D &F, and the northern portion of Block E, G & H are planned for Phase 111. Block K and Block L would be anticipated in Phase IV, but may be moved to earlier phases, if the market allows. v-a 637149 1 J � u u Terra Nova/Museum Market Plaza Draft Specific Plan Section V—Administration and Implementation Exhibit V-1 Phasing (INSERT PIIASING PLAN V-5 637149 1 m7 Terra Nova/Museum Market Plaza Draft Specific Plan Section V—Administration and Implementation D. Financing Although the Specific Plan occurs in an area which already contains most infrastructure, improvements and alterations will be required throughout the development of Museum Market Plaza, to allow for the intensity of use proposed. Financing for these improvements is likely to come from a number of sources, both public and private. In addition, the costs for the preparation of the Specific Plan can also be recovered. Some of the potential funding mechanisms are described briefly below. This list is not intended to be exhaustive or exclusive. The allocation of costs and the apportionment of fees pursuant to the provisions of this Subsection, including without limitation a credit on fees, may be provided in a owner's participation agreement or disposition and development agreement between a developer and the City of Palm Springs Redevelopment Agency or a development agreement between a developer and the City, Special Improvement Districts Special Improvement or Assessment Districts may be initiated subject to the approval of property owners or voters. They allow the municipality to issue tax-exempt bonds for public infrastructure improvements. Assessments are generally accompanied by a formal lien against each property which receives the improvements. Those properties benefiting from the improvement arc assessed an annual cost on then- tax bill. Assessments are proportional to the amount of benefit being received by the property owner. The assessments are generally paid over up to 30 years, but may be prepaid. Redevelopment Agency Participation The Museum Market Plaza is the catalyst to the long term economic health of Downtown Palm Springs. The area is also within the boundaries of the City's Redevelopment Plan. As such, developers and builders may negotiate with the Redevelopment Agency for direct contributions, tax rebates or other participation from the Agency's tax increment funds. Developer Impact Fees Developer impact fees can be used for a variety of improvements, and require the preparation of cost estimates and fair share distribution based on a "rational nexus" that the fee being paid is equivalent to the cost which would otherwise be incurred by the developer to provide his fair share of an improvement. Existing Impact Fees may be applicable to roadway improvements on Palm Canyon or Indian Canyon, or could be created to address the project's improvements. Conversely, most of the development within the Specific Plan area has in the past contributed to Development Impact Fee and TUMF fees, which may be, credited to the Museum Market Plaza construction. Landscaping and Li htinu Districts Landscaping and Lighting Districts may be created to provide a range of infrastructure improvements. Annual assessment would be raised from properties in the district. Funds may be used for construction and maintenance of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, paving, parkway landscaping and other facilities. The long term maintenance of the Specific Plan area's street system could be financed through this vehicle. V-6 6.171491 � G^ Terra Nova i Museum Market Plaza Draft Specific Plan Section V—Administration and Implementation Mello-Roos Districts Mello-Roos districts can be used to finance a wide range of improvements, including land purchases and maintenance. The creation of the district results in a special tax levied on the affected property owners. Mello-Roos district taxes are not tied to property value, but rather to a special tax formula based on the level of benefit received by each property. Specific Plan Pee To defray the cost of preparation, adoption, and administration of the specific plan, including all related studies and environmental documentation, the City Council should consider the adoption of a fee to be imposed upon all persons seeking approvals of the City or the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palm Springs which are required to be consistent with the specific plan in the manner provided under Government Code Section 65456. A portion of any amounts collected pursuant to such fee shall be used to reimburse any person who advanced or incurred costs for the preparation of the specific plan in excesb of such person's fair share of such costs as determined under the provisions of Government Code Section 65456. v-7 637149 1 C: � �p ppLM sA�' City of Palm Springs %n Department of Planning Services ° 3200 East TahquAz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, CA 92262 * *Amu Tch 760-323-8245 • Fa :760.322.8360 cQL/FORK\A February 17, 2009 John Wessman, Wessman Holdings, LLC 300 South Palm Canyon Drive Palm Springs, CA 92262 RE: Pre-App 09-001 Palm Springs Promenade — Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza at 123 North Palm Canyon Drive City Review Comments Dear Mr- Wessman, On January 13, 2009, the City received your pre-application for the renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza project referred to as Palm Springs Promenade. After review by staff (1/20/09), the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) (1/26/09) and the Planning Commission (2/4/09), we have prepared the following review comments for your use- Please note the review is preliminary, not exhaustive, and provides no approval of any aspect of the proposed project. The application submittal was comprised of the following documents: Sheet or document description: Issuance date. Pre-Application form 1-14-09 Sheet Al: Site Plan 1-14-09/rev 1-23-09 Sheet A1.1: Enlarged site plan of private street 1-14-09/rev 1 23-09 Sheet A1.2: Enlarged plan at east corner 1-14-09 SheetA2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2-4: Elevations 1-14-09/rev 1-23-09 Rendering of Ban, of America Building 1-14-09 DeBartelo site plans: Basement, Ground Floor, Upper Floor 5-7-93 GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION: Address: 123 North Palm Canyon Drive APN: 513-560-002, 004, 007, 008, 009 Zone: CBD General Plan: CBD Site Area: 13.14 ac (572,378sf) Owner/Developer/Applicant: Wessman Holdings, LLC Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade" Page 2 of 12 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This is a pre-application for a proposed major renovation of the existing Fashion Plaza Shopping Mall, to create a new east-west private street, renovate facades and reconfigure interior tenants spaces, construct a new two-story multi-screen movie-theater building on the site of the previous Pavilion tent structure, add second-floor restaurant/retail uses and a cross-street bridge, add off-street parking, paint and reconfigure the existing structured parking garage, remove the existing west side amphitheater and add new landscaping. BACKGROUND AND SETTING: The first phase of the Fashion Plaza Mall was constructed in the late sixties following the demolition of the Desert Inn'. A Planned Development District (PDD 147) was approved in the early 1980's which incorporated a major expansion and addition to the mall. I,. r C. 1967 Palm Canyon entrance to the new"Desert Inn Fashion Plaza" The first phase of construction of the Fashion Plaza was comprised of the strip of retails spaces that front Palm Canyon Drive. Later, additional anchor stores and other retail/tenant spaces were constructed behind this first phase and included construction of the hotel (now the Hyatt Hotel), the structured parking and additional interior mall space just south of the Hyatt. r , �i fIC f � �. `--".^s �. '•' irk ��.::, )� i r . r, Mir it^M�M.4crw ni vf,�l µ It 1 .A; ilnix411rrH{ 4 11�1 Z1 yl�''nn•�;.'.':w41i „ a �'1"el ry "�, •n,dl"b 1�r .. wr• M aT. G Aerial view of the subject site and existing mall. In 1985, the City Council designated the site of the former Desert Inn, now the Fashion Plaza, a Class 2 historic site. Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 • Web: www.palmsprings-ca.gov Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade" Page 3 of 12 The proposed renovation would include new fagade treatments, reconfiguration of tenant spaces and elimination of the main east-west interior corridor. The proposed new private east-west street would be located along the old main corridor by removing the roof in that area and reconfiguring the grade to create a two-lane street and sidewalks. The proposed addition of a movie-theater is proposed on the site of the Pavilion Theater tent (shown in the photo above). New second-floor restaurants and a bridge connecting them are included at the eastern end of the proposed new private street. The site is located in the heart of the Central Business District at the northwest corner of Tahquitz Canyon Way and Palm Canyon Drive. The following table shows the surrounding uses. Table 1.0: Surrounding land uses, General Plan, Zoning Land Use General Zoning Plan/Specific Plan EEast Hotel Hatt CBD CBD Commercial Oasis Building) CBD CBD Commercial Public/Quasi- ublic CBDInstitutional Museum CBD CBD STAFF ANALYSIS: Planning Department Comments —„contact Ken Lyon or David Newell (760) 323-8245 GENERALPLAN Density. The General Plan land use designations is Central Business District. The Fashion Plaza is in what is defined as "the Downtown Central Core'. The General Plan describes the Central Core and its proposed density and uses as follows: The downtown central core should be a vibrant, compact, and walkable center of activity in the downtown area. The core should be comprised of a central core area consisting of taller (max 60 feet) building surrounded by an equally vibrant, but shorter(max 30 to 45 feet) mixed-use (commercial/office/residential outer core area. (From Page 35 of the Downtown Urban Design Plan). The downtown Central Core and the Gateway areas may be developed with a maximum FAR of 3.5. If projects in these areas provide substantial public spaces or plazas, an FAR of up to 4 may be developed upon approval of a Planned Develop District or Specific Plan. The downtown Central Core may also accommodate up to 70 dwelling units per acre for residential or hotel uses if a PDD or SP is prepared and approved. (Page 2-7 of the Land Use Element.) Full conformity review of the project against the goals and policies of the General Plan will be incorporated if a formal development application is submitted to the City for this project. Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, C.A. 92263-2743 • Web: www.paimsprings-ca.gov Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade' Page 4 of 12 Downtown Urban Design Plan. The project appears to integrate many of the design standards outlined in the Downtown Urban Design Plan (DUDP). Specific review of the project against the parameters of the DUDP will be analyzed as part of a formal application submission to the City. ZONING ORDINANCE- The development standards for the existing Fashion Plaza are defined in Planned Development District 147 and PDD 257. Since these PDD's established the development standards for the Fashion Plaza, it is recommended that the proposed redevelopment of the site be submitted as an amendment to the existing Planned Development District rather than as a new PDD or a separate major architectural application. Where proposed new development deviates from that of the original PDD, or where the existing PDD has no defined standards for new elements (such as the proposed private street), it is recommended that the development standards for these new elements be defined and proposed when the PDD amendment application is submitted. Parking: Parking standards for the downtown are regulated by the Downtown Combining Parking Zone- The combining zone provides for relaxed parking standards for the CBD recognizing that it is primarily a pedestrian oriented part of the City. For mixed use projects, one off- street parking space is required for every 375 gross square feet of building area. Theater parking requirements are calculated in addition to this basic standard as noted below. 92.26.00(A)(6): Mixed-Use Developments, Which Exceed Twenty Thousand (20,000) Square Feet of Gross Floor Area: One (1) space for each three hundred seventy-five (375) square feet of gross floor area. In addition, theaters and restaurants within mixed-use developments shall also require parking in addition to the 1:375 ratio as follows: Additional Parking Required for: Size of Mixed-Use Restaurant area over 25% of Development Theaters "]' 'total area of development 20,000 - 100,000 7pacE;s/"ibb e seats 1 space/100 sq. ft. sq. ft. 100,000 - 200,000 3 spaces/10D seats 1 space/167 sq. ft, sq. ft. over initial 450 seats 200,000 sq. ft.+ 3 spaces/100 seats No additional spaces over initial 750 seats X . a. An application for a mixed-use development shall designate any proposed theater and restaurant use for the purpose of computing parking requirements. Theater and restaurant uses may not thereafter be added in a manner which would require additional parking in accordance with the above ratios unless the additional parking can be provided on site or in-lieu fees are paid to the off-street parking fund- Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 • Web: www.palmsprings-ca.gov =�3 Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade" Page 5 of 12 The project proposes 352,900 gross square feet of building space. The total number of off- street parking spaces required is 1009 based on the Downtown Parking Combining Zone. There are a total of 1,042 existing parking spaces and 138 new spaces for a total of 1,180, therefore the project as proposed would appear be adequately parked. A full parking analysis would be conducted if a formal application is submitted. Other design standards for off-street parking lots that would be reviewed as part of a formal development application would include: • Decorative paving • Shade • Bicycle Parking • Landscaping • Consideration of"Parking Plazas" (described in the DUDP) Other Zoning Code considerations that would be reviewed as part of a formal application include: • Setbacks • Height • Open space • Provision for off-street trash, recycling, and loading needs: • Architectural Review Development Review Committee (DRC) review: The "DRC" is an ad hoc committee of staff members from various departments within the City. They met with you on January 20, 2009 to review your case. The DRC comments for this pre-application included: 1. Applications to be filed: • Staff recommends any formal application on this project be submitted as a Amendment to the existing Planned Development District. 2. Potential studies required • Air Quality • Noise Study • Hydrology • Traffic • Other studies may be required at the time of the application. • Environmental Impact Report Engineering Comments -- contact Carol Templeton 760 323-8253 TRAFFIC A comprehensive Traffic Impact Analysis ("TIA") will be required for this Department's formal review and analysis of the Desert Fashion Plaza Redevelopment project. The applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer or traffic engineer, who shall coordinate with the Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 9 Web: www.palmsprings-ca.gov Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade" Page 6 of 12 City Engineer on the determination of a project study scope for the TIA. The TIA scope shall be required to focus on the following issues: 1. Review/consider the pedestrian oriented nature of the area and the increase in pedestrian activity created by the proposed redevelopment project; determine recommendations for design of project features (i.e. new pedestrian cross-walks) that promote the pedestrian activity of the area, as well as ensure traffic safety between vehicles and pedestrians within the area. 2. Obtain current traffic volumes during "season" (i.e. between October to April) for the mid- day peak hour (11AM to 1PM) and PM peak hour (4PM to 6PM) for all studied intersections and roadways, for a weekday, Thursday (PM peak hour only — to determine traffic model variations during "Villagefest"), and Saturday. 3. Determine trip generation rates resulting from the proposed project. This requires that land uses proposed within the project be determined and agreed upon by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to identify the final proposed land uses for the project and provide the overall land use densities (i.e. commercial/retail space (by square foot), and professional office space (by square foot) to the engineer it selects to prepare the TIA as soon as possible, The TIA should estimate the total trips generated by the current Desert Fashion Plaza (i.e. if reopened) and estimate the total trips generated by the Desert Fashion Plaza Redevelopment project; appropriate analysis should be included in the TIA to demonstrate the net overall increase of trips generated by the proposed project. 4. Analyze the on-site roadway intersection, the North Palm Canyon Drive project intersection (i.e. determine traffic signal relocation/modification needs), and analyze existing project intersections in the surrounding area that receive a minimum of 50 peak hour trips generated by the proposed redevelopment project, determine any necessary improvements required upon "project opening" or by 20 years following "project opening". Identify fair share contributions to required "future" traffic mitigation. 5. Analyze the City's "Villagefest" event and other parades/special events, and determine traffic impacts associated with the proposed project and closure of Palm Canyon Drive during "Villagefest" and other parades/special events; identify recommendations to ensure that commercial access and emergency services and access to the proposed project are maintained during "Villagefest" and other parades/special events. CIRCULATION We were advised that the applicant proposes new private streets within the DFP Redevelopment Project, consisting of the following: a new local east/west street extending from Museum Drive to Palm Canyon Drive; a new north-south street that is proposed in the center third of the site, but not intersecting any public street. The conceptual plans for the DFP Redevelopment project indicate parallel or 90 degree bay on-street parking spaces along the two new streets. Regarding the project's circulation, we have the following comments: 1. The proposed east-west travelway through the DFP site shall be private. The Engineering Dept. recommends that the proposed east-west private interior street be one-way Past Office Sox 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 • Web: wvvw.palmsprings-ca.gov c �^ _ cr eY Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza'Palm Springs Promenade" Page 7 of 12 westbound. A driveway entrance shall be constructed at the entrance of the proposed travelway onto N. Palm Canyon Drive, as well as onto Museum Drive. This travelway shall not be located over the underground parking garage because the parking garage roof is not designed to hold the weight of a fire truck. 2. The proposed round-a-bout shown east of the proposed movie theatre is not approved because it will create circulation problems because of passenger drop-offs for the movie theatre. The size of the proposed round-a-bout does not meet standard design criteria for a round-a-bout and needs to be analyzed by a traffic engineer. The round-a-bout area shall not be covered because it will impair the ability to use the fire department's ladder truck. 3. East of the proposed DFP entrance off Museum Drive, there is a north turn into an on-site parking area that is only approx. 25 ft. from the Museum Drive east right-of-way line. Potential traffic interruption onto Museum Drive could be caused by cars attempting to turn into this first parking aisle. This issue could be eliminated by making the new east- west street one-way west-bound. Section 93.06.00 "Off Street Parking" of the Palm Springs Municipal Code should be consulted. 4. The proposed north-south travelway should have a stop sign at the southeast corner of the intersection with the proposed east-west travelway. The circulation needs to be analyzed by a traffic engineer. DRAINAGE It is recommended that the applicant consider the following issues associated with stormwater runoff and water quality management: 1. A Preliminary Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan must be submitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to going to Planning Commission for project approval. 2. Nuisance water throughout the downtown Commercial Business District is a constant complaint from downtown merchants and the public. The applicant will be required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan for addressing nuisance water and for treating all on-site stormwater runoff. Provisions for intercepting all on-site stormwater runoff from the commercial/retail buildings shall be required such that requirements associated with the City's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit are satisfied. This project will be legally required to install measures in accordance with applicable National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Best Management Practices (BMP's) included as part of the new NPDES Permit issued for the Whitewater River Region from the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The applicant is advised that installation of BMP's, including mechanical or other means for pre-treating stormwater runoff, will be required by regulations imposed by the RWQCB. The new NPDES Permit issued by the RWQCB requires "post-construction" BMP's, which will be mandatory for this project. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to design and install appropriate BMP's, in accordance with the NPDES Permit (or additional requirements imposed by the City), that effectively intercept and pre-treat stormwater runoff from the project site, prior to release to the City's municipal separate storm sewer system ("MS4"), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the RWQCB. Such measures Post Office Sox 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263.2743 • Web: www.palmsprings-ca.gov G � Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza "Palm Springs Promenade" Page 8 of 12 shall be designed and installed on-site; and provisions for perpetual maintenance of the measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including provisions in Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) required for the development. SEWER 1. This Department recommends that the applicant review the City's new grease trap ordinance and obtain information from other jurisdictions with similar commercial/retail downtown projects to determine appropriate methods of ensuring grease, oils and other prohibited wastes are intercepted and removed from the sanitary sewer system. CONSTRUCTION PHASING 1. It is recommended that the project, if phased, be identified on a Phasing Plan. It is recommended that the applicant be required to submit a project schedule and be required to comply with City imposed limitations on work occurring within the project along Palm Canyon Drive. An outreach program and cooperative effort should be required between the applicant, the City, Main Street, and all downtown merchants, such that impacts due to the redevelopment of the Desert Fashion Plaza and subsequent construction of the movie theatre is minimized for all existing downtown merchants and the public. 2. It is recommended that the applicant coordinate all construction adjacent to and on Palm Canyon Drive with the City Engineer and other Departments as necessary to minimize impacts to "Villagefest", and all of the various special events and parades scheduled within the downtown Commercial Business District. The applicant should be held accountable to meeting an approved construction schedule, reviewed and approved by the City. The applicant should have a project superintendent or other agents that meet regularly with City staff and the City's Special Events Committee to ensure that scheduled renovation or construction activities do not conflict with proposed events downtown. STANDARD CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS 1. A complete list of standard "boiler plate" engineering conditions is available upon request. All typical standard conditions and requirements from this Department will be recommended as part of this project, as determined after further review of final site designs and plans. Fire Department Comments — contact Scott Ventura 760 323-8187 Upon initial review of the Desert Fashion Plaza remodel, the following comments have been identified by the fire department as issues of concern and will need to be addressed by the applicant: • Installation of additional fire hydrants will be needed on the center street. • Fire apparatus access road on the center street to be designed, and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (73,000 lbs. GVW) and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. • Fire apparatus access road on the center street to have a minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet. Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 • Web: www.palmsprings-ca.gov rl Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade' Page 9 of 12 • Fire apparatus access road on the center street to have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. • An unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches is required for fire apparatus access under the foot bridge. Current drawings show 19' vertical clearance under the foot bridge. • Proposed landscaping plans to include dimensions of trees when they are fully grown. Minimum unobstructed vertical clearance required for apparatus movements and access is 13 feet 6 inches. • Turning radii throughout the project will need to meet fire department requirements for fire apparatus movements. A minimum inside turning radius of 30 feet with an outside turning radius of 45 feet is required. • Proposed canopy along the center street presents an obstruction for ground ladder and aerial ladder operations. ADA Coordinator Comments — contact Don Duckworth (760) 323-8280 None at this time. Police Department Comments: - Contact Mike Hall (760) 323-8128 Staff recommends that the applicant conduct both commercial and residential neighborhood outreach community meetings regarding this proposal to seek support for the project and hear any concerns of the neighborhood regarding the proposed development. Architectural Advisory Committee, On January 26, 2009, the project was reviewed by the Architectural Advisory Committee. The AAC reviewed the project, and generally gave favorable comments which included: • Study in more detail the pedestrian experience, making sure adequate sidewalks and outdoor amenities are integrated that will draw pedestrians off Palm Canyon and down the proposed new side street. May need to remove more of the roof of the old mall along the proposed new street to provide better pedestrian consideration. • The outdoor space along Palm Canyon Drive north of Tahquitz needs to be 'energized'. • The parking lot southwest of the existing building, specifically behind California Pizza Kitchen and the AT&T Store needs more landscaping and shade. • Evaluate whether new street should be one-way or two-way vehicular traffic. Concern with traffic jams due to likely drop-off, stopping and vehicular standing on the narrow street. • Consider creating little spaces along the sidewalk of the new street for vender carts, public toilets, seating/gathering and other pedestrian amenities. • Consider a traffic circle at the west end of the new east-west street in front of the museum; design seems "messy and incomplete" in this area. • City should work with developer to assure design of street furniture ties in with downtown; this center should feel a part of downtown, not a separate entity. Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, CA. 92263-2743 0 Web: www.paimsprings-ca.gov Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade" Page 10 of 12 • Consider more second floor retail spaces along the east-west street • Avoid architecture that is overly stylistic that will quickly become dated. • Project would benefit from more "architectural rigor" and less "tacked-on elements". • Break up the vastness of the southwest parking lot to give it better pedestrian scale; consider extending the north-south street from the center traffic circle southward to align with Belardo (requires relocation of the south stair/escalator). • Open up and define the area in front of the museum. Planning Commission Comments: On February 4, 2009 the Planning Commission reviewed the pre-application and provided the following comments: Public Comments: F. Tysen: Harmonize with Downtown; Introduce more mixed architectural styles; Pay tribute to the former Desert Inn- R. Mollen: Feng Shui, V. Gainer: Gave examples of other successful retail centers (Third Street Promenade, Old Pasadena, Westfield Mall R. Lee: Asked how she can help make it happen. J. Meredith: Supportive B. Odeguard: Concerned about access to museum, wanted assurance that the DFP will visually and physically integrate the museum into the site plan fully. P Ogburn: Pedestrian flow should be enhanced; loss of sculpture garden is a problem, need reassurance that the theater building will not block the view of the museum. J. Tymon: Promenade connection along Arenas (staff believes he may have meant Andreas) to tie in to tribe's new hotel to the east. B Halloway: A good plan, more improvements could be made though. . C Cantrell- Where's the financing coming from? Where's the City's financial obligation coming from? What's the real plan for the street and the project's viability? Commission comments: Donenfeld: • Asked for clarification of theater construction "reverse design-build to suit" • Asked about City financing assistance. (Applicant: Financing from City hasn't been discussed yet, but some City financing is assumed.) • Asked about making east-west street wider. (Applicant. reduces rentable square footage and adds extra costs. • Asked about the remaining area within the enclosed mall. (Applicant explained issue of drainage and rain makes opening more of the mall unfeasible.) • Asked about timetable. (Applicant: Major tenants have expressed interest in a spring 2013 opening.) L. Hochanadel: Post Office Sox 2743 9 Palm Springs, CA. 92263-2743 9 Web: www.palmsprings-ca.gov Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade' Pagel 1 of 12 • Asked about theater design. (Applicant noted will be reviewed with ARC at the time an application is brought in by tenant's architects). • West end underground parking may need additional ventilation. T. Ringlein • Traffic light at PCD & new street seems important, or move from Andreas. • Would be good to be able to close off the private street for Street-Fair and other pedestrian-oriented events. (Applicant noted this was anticipated). • Suggested Palm and Indian traffic be returned to two-way traffic on both streets. (Applicant noted tenants would insist on two-way traffic on proposed private street). • The fabric over the street may block views of the mountains. (Applicant feels is not critical to views). • Enhance underground parking with some natural daylighting (skylights, light tubes, etc.) • Asked if the plan eliminates the extension of Belardo to the north through the site (as was shown on the Specific Plan). (Applicant replied the extension is not possible with this plan.) L. Cohen; • Consider enhancing pedestrian access to lower level parking, confusing.(Applicant noted there may be added access in the theater building). • Consider aligning parking lot driveway off Tahquitz with Belardo (Applicant noted parking deck is not level with street, and creating access may be very costly. • Second level restaurants are a good idea. Consider adding viewing platform to the restaurant area that is accessible before entering the restaurant (free to pedestrians). (Applicant explained proposed bridge may be wide enough to accommodate this feature). • Recommends keeping the lower level delivery tunnel. • Recommends not crowding the museum with new buildings; keep street width as wide as possible for views. J. Caffrey • Consider making some of the parking behind old I Magnin open pedestrian gathering space (Applicant noted parking is needed and furthermore, parking has been requested on the west side of the site by the museum.) ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT There is no environmental analysis required for pre-applications. At the time a formal application is submitted, an Initial Study will be prepared under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SUMMARY This completes the pre-application process. The City looks forward to receipt of a formal application on the subject project and to continuing working with you toward a positive outcome for this very important part of the City. If there are any questions on the information Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 • Web: www.paimsprings-ca.gov Pre-Application 09-001 Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza"Palm Springs Promenade" Page 12 of 12 provided herein, please do not hesitate to contact David Newell or Ken Lyon here in the Planning Department. Sincerely, Craig A. Ewing, AICP Director of Planning Services Cc David Ready, City Manager Thomas Wilson, Assistant City Manager Scott Ventura, Fire Division Chief Don Duckworth, Director of Building & Safety Carol Templeton, Public Works, Engineering Assistant Mike Hall, Police Captain, Operations Division Ken Lyon & David Newell, Associate Planners File Post Office Sox 2743 • Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 • Web: www.paimsprings-ca.gov LS r F"f*p^ A I�p�{�.4., f Er , hHY•`i J�` I" _ I�n�''�,rr•y� �rry a .�1rYW�y�p� �"'Ryb +.� Y"S'�/'.'��r r �M. �.I ^� I� � L„ -:$ ..�e liq 1 Irt rt rFii •I'{5 •✓�J..v')'iA%'r.:JINy; PR ,w ��� � � Q1� T rl •"r_M^"'n,W�• ,�YYo-y�"y i Irv � l. .riM X41r.. li1'1y 'y ��.��.�[. _ I. "• Q.: P,� s IV,o @v rv. =3 I I� 1{r fill m^�' _' Ii il�:i i '/��^1',i,'.•ra �n 1 ���Py ii�`y.�:..::'1�'1 ,,,'Fh '�. •.rl iRA9■��I��'�I�Y - '"rl' �� '1 i�s• '-3.'t�'I k7G+�,i'' Ia � 44s�a'11 �. � omnuoo �, 'a, iPL I- - Llr,�= �.. I),';'� 'y�-,�°^-OQGI�•lu aI W�:9��(��� f .�''�#I��r"va_ .I.p, ��Yi „ .1 12 r„ I .' .'�^I nr{�".��^Ix,[`iAi b, Ia'I • '����ary' 'r'%:�': ',F�fY'.1"lT?P{,.'p.r a...n:r,' �^V�ul i"ry l"ll w, �W . n ,',`\ r "rv. -. . •...� I'.'8:'$.^h��=n:'v-1:9:*�' �:.n,Irvh y-C•'� ` L•n ^iJ .r^_ '' �:'r.�'V.p-rP+� r -.�I-�'i�i.,ri. .Aeu.'Itlhav�W; _"?, Pn..i:Le.u.YY:.� :�i .•�:� -.�a�.ryr.� r.:ani ,..r.,y'y rl y yw"'� ridy� {��.r i'� '� -�i � �>✓re:" �, m it�' � �.'.i,..,i 5 4 °z3 �4 1,mt, ■ ' N f Q 77 Na �o 9 rr'Ip' I�' 3�'= J'4L"4v"�,:�'::.r �a/'b,"•,•rl'�,�p !.• � d'd''`"� "kr 2 rLr`Pn���,::1.ji,1�d:.t��'hi,/;'..Iti n"'tin%,_�i� ..�; i•1J� 19 y'l•,rY � N! 'Ar _ _ •_F,"y}'AIL`ho [ �?a��d P� - Nei$ N� III^� i It �L' �- ° l " © `` l f g 7 Fk �a VA 1 Y. f E .Vlm .gym Ili 1 � ,:yl Fm i F 1 �., r, win-am' 1 2 o as art•„R A2_1 19M9 "4 OEVELOPMEM COMPANY ELEVAT N5 Fasnlon ciaza -- 1 1� e� .4 L 9 - 4 .40 o eserE A2.2 ll'ESSA5A1:pEVELOPM1'ENf CD1.IPANY - ELEVARONS F Pi [3 J �� !- -�II! { I mar}; _ ��� . • �_ _ - .�, �fir L Y •..=s.�, ~. 6 ' �- -411%Yi? [ } ii_''r '�%�'9 -a' _'L.=.l. = _ _ _'I� OF P91VI FIR lum.., �� ME _ a a _ milt -�'•"_ e�r.�'=fires �e�. ':�:�-..ia _i. I��l�fll s��auv __•�. _ uuia4n -Fl � iY f A4%K; � i.•uli ' '�,4 Aj 1�0 +�Fx,urhfn a5r h'n 1 I r � 1 .1 _ r ^ 4�r{4", � s MDk.H PLAZA 1L." ":j L ....... . ..... r ga F. # tt A .7 � I _ Y _ OT Al- Ah M ja w-1 "Y DeBar(olo ..IM L.IEL IIAIf .'11H 112�,A1_111E� LEASING 110 9T"�PLx1,1 ll�..'H. PLOT PLAN P A 1 3 P F�I H 0 S U, A RL,,: CNI DRIVE 1`011LGl. 1,L _ li]iEl ___ H.IRiH F_A2.M1 I SO'JiH LA_.. .v E: 1 El s Tf❑�i �sr I _ - II { 1 DeBartolo S..I. LE'i LL -H- PLAZA asp-lAi¢ LEASING Ho�iu TH,Az nc A'so'IAr=s PLOT PLAN 523PAL":Mx A Lk s rA aYrriaps VEPALM F SFPIA CA21 14 HOTEL iH PL A2F .....sae....�.s.x �--4— .�..... ..� • .ii - F . .pFF a.l ` II ne• �.�� �" � III n tTlIZt Pro I N L. IL r �r z _lll l -1 P!!` 'lWv! '! II III i ! li =, i' °ki`:iI :R`.i 1fIF ai EL � w7?iH FL{2? � `•LGx a a.. rar° SplliN PL 42.'. - D� � lLOW" CrT�a tolo LO•" LE•EL PSF�IIL F-AN scan 'L=za 111x10IIL LEASING ,9PTH rL:.z.. csscarie� pLOT PLAN Pin L r1 s P r n c s 12] PAL41 CT11Y011 OPYc F A . iv.—Lox •r PAL41 SP.illi.'�5, 10. 92fi2 R ell `J Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: GinnyFoat ,",LP ; ' ' Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 2:58 PM To: gfinla@msn.com; Jay Thompson i A! S -;i%0 Subject: FW:About that Fashion Plaza CITY C L E 6?,' From: Ed Yoe [mailto:edyoe@dc,rr,com] Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 9:10 AM To: Steve Pougnet; Lee Weigel; Rick Hutcheson; Ginny Foat; Chris Mills Subject: About that Fashion Plaza If you guys take up anymore tinxe in deciding_ the fate of the Fashion 1'lara,then,soon You will lxave to consider IT a historic site. ZELDA% HAS to go for the greater good otall (47,000) of'us. Vote NO on designating that dreadful,ugly cinderblock a class one a historic site. ZFAA)AZ a strip club?...Looks like white trash hangs there... Anyway so let's get on with it APFROVE, the re-modeled FASHION PLALA wit•I► tlrrrr-way street. Ed Yoe d/ b/a 'edyoe.calEri Producer/Director/Artist' A0 Management President 954'A4t Ridge at Mountan Gate P'sh'n ,sfir'ing5, ..,3 62-L220 �i]?-3wri-3h92 ceil, �� Ho F3cebpck/NC] TW'!tterfNr Texting 1 5/6/2009 Page 1 of 2 Jay Thompson "ECml';' --------- From: Ginny Foat Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 3:05 PM 20H VO -6 Ei' 3= 1 w To: gfinla@msn.com; Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Town & Country Center CI T Y CL'r-f:I, From: John Peterson [mailto:johnspeterson@verizon.net] Sent:Tuesday, May 05, 2009 9:47 PM To: Steve Pougnet; Chris Mills; Ginny Foat; Rick Hutcheson; Lee Weigel Subject: Town &Country Center How did one man end up owning so much of the historic property in Palm Springs ? Perhaps he buys it cheap, and lets it deteriorate. The Santa Fe Federal Building a classic Palm Springs Site that has been well maintained. The Town & Country Center is also a classic building, but it has been allowed to deteriorate along with other buildings right in the heart of our City. Santa Fe Federal sits on a prominent corner, and everyone sees it. Town & Country is tucked away behind other buildings, and not a lot of people have actually seen the Center. Both the buildings are worthy of Palm Springs Landmarks. These properties need to be saved, and development in the downtown area must work around preserving the buildings. The Desert Sun has reported you will address the Town and Country Center in next weeks Council meeting. I urge you to find the buildings worthy of the best that our City has to offer. This needs to be a Class 1 Site. I azx> not in favor of turning the Desert Fashion Plaza into multiple 6 7 story buildings, but if that's the best the City can come up with, then so be it. I think a close examination of similar multi use projects in the City will shove that this is the wrong City for such projects. I am afraid that failure to save the Town & Country will result in demolition. The City will loose a great facility, and end up with another property that resembles the Rael Project. So many citizens think that Zelda's is 5/6/2009 Pabe 2 of 2 the Town 8s Country Center because that is what they see when they drive down Indian Canyon_ In reality The project is lovely , charming and neglected. Only a pride of ownership would have shown the project to its best. The current owner does not recognize that pride of ownership is essential. Please save the Town 8a Country, but its also important that you find the Santa Fe Federal Building is equally important. I don't normally send emaiks to the Council, but you rarely have such important projects on your agenda back to back. Thanks for reading this rambling email. 4, 5 5/6/2009 4ALM N City of Palm Springs 4� Office of[tic City Cleric °xn... 3200 P.Tahquue Cnuyun Way • Palm Springs, CgZorma 92262 CgOF�RN Tel: (760) �2i-,4204 • Pax (760) i22-8�32 • Wnb w%vwpalmsprmgs-cagnu NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Meeting of April 1, 2009, Public Hearing Item No. 1.C. PROPOSED DRAFT SPECIFIC PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS) FOR MUSEUM MARKET PLAZA (CASE 5.1204) TO ALLOW UP TO 955 HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UP TO 400,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE, AND UP TO 620 HOTEL ROOMS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF N. PALM CANYON DRIVE AND TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY, AND OTHER NEARBY PROPERTIES On motion by Councilmember Weigel, seconded by Councilmember Hutcheson, and unanimously carried this item was continued to Wednesday, May 13, 2009, at 61-00 p.m., to be held at the Council Chamber, City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The public testimony portion of the hearing was closed on April 1, 2009. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING State of California ) County of Riverside ) ss. City of Palm Springs ) I, James Thompson, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, certify this Notice of . Continuance was posted at or before 5.30 p.m., April 2, 2009, as required by established policies and procedures. ames Thompson City Clerk NOTICE OF CONT-Museum Market Plaza 04.01.2009.doc Post Office Box 2743 • halm Springs, California 92263-2743