Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/3/2003 - STAFF REPORTS (4) 41 I DATE: Septembe4OW2003 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning & Zoning CASE NO. 5.0344 - APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS AND AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS FOR ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL OF A PARKING LOT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CALLE EL SEGUNDO AND ANDREAS ROAD (PRAIRIE SCHOONER), R-4 V-P ZONE, SECTION 14. RECOMMENDATION: Thatthe Planning Commission will review this item at its special meeting on September 03, 2003. The Planning Commission action will be presented at the City Council meeting. SUMMARY: The proposed developmentof the Prairie Schooner site as a parking lot forjoint Casino and Convention Center use is being reviewed through the Architectural process. Due to a lack of quorum at its August 13 and 27, 2003 meetings, a special meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for September 03, 2003. Staff will present an update and recommended conditions of approval at the City Council meeting. BACKGROUND: On May 07, 2003, the City Council approved a General Plan Policy and Planned Development District No. 164,and Mitigated Negative Declaration forthe expansion of the Palm Springs Convention Center and related site improvements. As part of the environmental review for the expansion project, the City included the Prairie Schooner property as a future parking lot location with 475 parking stalls. During the construction of the Spa Casino, the Prairie Schooner site is being used as a construction trailer campus, and construction and employee parking via a Construction License Agreement approved by the Redevelopment Agency in November, 2002. On September03,2003,the Community Redevelopment Agency will consideran amendment to the Construction License Agreement to reflect the number of parking spaces analyzed in the Convention Center Expansion Mitigated Negative Declaration. As the Tribe is proposing to develop the Prairie Schooner property as a parking Iotwith 475 parking spaces, adequate environmental review of the proposed site under the California Environmental Quality Act has been achieved. The parking lot will be available for use by the Casino per amended lease agreement and for the Convention Center. This joint use of this facility is consistent with the intent of the Convention Center Environmental Assessment and will provide additional parking for both the Convention Center and Casino. 119 r Pat Johanson, Chair Coachella Valley Coalition for Responsible Sovereignty 15 Stanford Dr Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Planning Commission Redevelopment Agency City of Palm Springs 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 September 3, 2003 Dear Members of the Planning Commission and Redevelopment Agency, The attached summary report and appended documentation is submitted to the City of Palm Springs by the Coachella Valley Coalition for Responsible Sovereignty. It is our hope that the City will give serious consideration to the concerns and facts expressed in these pages. The approval for the Prairie Schooner parking lot project should not go forward. Instead, in Iight of the facts presented, the City should conduct a fuller review of the proposal and give residents the time to review this proposal. The project requires a complete Environmental Impact Report, which would give the public the opportunity to be involved in the project decision. Reams ectfun Patricia A. Johar'�en, Chair Coachella Valley Coalition for Responsible Sovereignty Attachments: September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 1 Contents Overview............................................................................................................................. I CA Health and Safety Code (§ 33426.5) prohibits Redevelopment Agencies from entering into any agreement that supports, enhances or promotes gambling, casinos of whateverkind......................................................................................................................3 The Redevelopment Agency's transfer of the parcel in this manner is unlawful...............4 What is the fair value of the land?...............................................................................4 The project is not consistent with the City's redevelopment plan and is not the highest andbest use for the parcel...............................................................................................5 Public contracting rules require the agency to solicit bids for the parking lot project....6 The City has failed to comply with environmental rules ....................................................6 An Additional Public Review Period is Required...........................................................6 It is reasonably foreseeable that the casino will increase the number of slot machines and thereby traffic and environmental impacts beyond those identified in its previous studies..............................................................................................................................6 This casino parking lot project is substantially different from what was studied in previous environmental reports and will have significant environmental and social consequences...................................................................................................................7 Noise ...........................................................................................................................7 Traffic..........................................................................................................................8 Inadequate Scope in Project Study Area.....................................................................8 Lightingand Aesthetics...............................................................................................9 Parking ........................................................................................................................9 Stephen Orosz, A Certified Traffic Engineer, Says the Proposed Project Changes are Significant and City's Environmental Study is Inadequate ...............I...................... 10 This casino parking project interferes with the Redevelopment Agency's ability to create adequate affordable housing............................................................................... 10 This casino parking project is a component the casino expansion project that will have significant environmental and social consequences that also require study ................. 10 The Tribe's traffic study planned only 1,300 parking spaces, now the Tribe is building3,000 ........................................................................................................... 11 Alternatives ................................................................................................................... It Other consequences of this casino will include ............................................................ 12 Impactson public safety............................................................................................ 12 Impacts on affordable housing problems.................................................................. 12 Impactson schools.................................................................................................... 13 Impacts on Palm Springs Taxpayers......................................................................... 13 New language in the latest proposed agreement will reduce the opportunity for public scrutiny of this deal and open the City to uncontrolled liabilities..................................... 14 Overview The City Attorney reported in a July 30 City Council meeting that the Tribe has determined that it needs more parking immediately to accommodate customers and employees at its new casino when it opens on November 11 of this year. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 2 That same day, the three members of the City Council acting as the Palm Springs Redevelopment Agency (Hodges, Reller-Spurgin, and Oden), voted unanimously to "amend an existing construction license agreement" that was created to allow the Tribe to use the City's `Prairie Schooner' parcel as a short term construction staging and parking area for its casino across the street. The amendment to the license agreement sets up a new deal for the Tribe to construct a permanent parking lot on the City's parcel—including 200 spaces of casino valet parking—and use it for 20 years. The September 3, 2003 version of the license agreement places no restrictions on the Tribe's use of the parking lot, other than in those occasions when the convention center might need extra parking. The City attorney explained that normally, the transfer of public property rights and the construction of a parking lot triggers a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) process and an EIR under state law, but he explained that the Tribe feels it couldn't have the construction of the parking lot completed in time for the November opening if it didn't have immediate indication of the City's willingness to transfer the parcel to the Tribe for use as a casino parking lot. The attorney said the amendment to the construction license creates a three-year agreement that will give the City enough time to complete the requirements for the long- term lease to the Tribe, and give the Tribe the immediate indication it needs so that the Tribe can begin construction of the parking lot. The attorney said there was legally nothing binding the City to create a DDA transferring the parcel to the Tribe and authorizing reimbursement for construction expenses, but "the Tribe fully expects to be repaid its $2 million by the City."r This action by City Council circumvents state law about the construction of the parking lot and its transfer to the Tribe. The attorney made it clear that the amendment to the license agreement was being done in lieu of completing all the state's legal requirements for the transfer, but he implied that the Tribe's situation constituted an emergency. He said, "If you approve this, you need to approve the DDA.' 2 City Council and the public will be severely limited by the license agreement when it comes time to negotiate the final DDA. A group of residents protested the agreement at the time the City Council voted on it: they complained that the agreement itself had not been made public and residents had not had a chance to review it prior to the vote. A few days later, when they obtained a copy of the agreement from the City, they determined that it was improper and sent a letter to the City. That letter identified a Brown Act violation, an Environmental Quality Act violation, and Health and Safety Code violations. The letter promised legal action if these deficiencies were not corrected. In response, the City intends to rescind the agreement, amend it, and pass a substitute. In its substitute agreement, the City is apparently seeking to use the Tribe's sovereign immunity to shield the City's actions from public scrutiny and review of the agreement. While the Tribe waived its sovereign immunity with all matters related to the land ' See videotape of July 30,2003 Redevelopment Agency meeting. 2 Ibid. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 3 transfer in the first agreement, the revised version contains a full-bodied assertion of immunity. The effect of this could be that citizens have no remedy in court to challenge the propriety of the agreement. Despite the City's revisions, residents still believe the agreement to have the Tribe construct a casino parking lot on the city's land is improper for the following reasons: • State law prohibits the use of redevelopment agencies for the support or promotion of gambling; • The agreement violates the requirements for the transfer of public property; and, • The City has failed to comply with state environmental laws governing public projects. Another troubling aspect of the revised parking lot agreement is the City's attempt to shield its actions from public scrutiny and legal through a new assertion of tribal sovereign immunity. Given the evidence, we also don't believe the payments reflect the market value, much less the highest and best use for the property—and the evidence from the City supports this assertion. CA Health and Safety Code (§ 33426.5) prohibits Redevelopment Agencies from entering into any agreement that supports, enhances or promotes gambling, casinos of whatever kind The relevant section reads: "an agency shall not provide any form of direct assistance to: (c) A development or business, either directly or indirectly, for the acquisition, construction, improvement, rehabilitation, or replacement of property that is or would be used for gambling or gaming of any kind whatsoever including, but not limited to, casinos, gaming clubs, bingo operations, or any facility wherein banked or percentage games, any form of gambling device, or lotteries, other than the California State Lottery, are or will be played.... (e) This section shall not be construed to apply to agency assistance in the construction of public improvements that serve all or a portion of a project area and that are not required to be constructed as a condition of approval of a development described in subdivision (a), (b), or (c), or to prohibit assistance in the construction of public improvements that are being constructed for a development that is not described in subdivision (a), (b), or (c)." v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 4 The current license agreement for casino construction staging on the redevelopment agency's parcel appears to be quite illegal, while the City is attempting to legitimate the long-term agreement for the parking lot, based on its nearby convention center. The State's redevelopment law clearly prohibits redevelopment agencies from assisting casinos, and the Palm Springs license agreement allowing the use of city property for casino construction staging appears to be in clear violation of that provision. The code does make an exception for public improvements that are being constructed for a different development (such as a convention center), and that is "the eye of the needle through which the City wants to put this camel." The City is seeking to justify how the parking lot on the Prairie Schooner parcel would serve the Convention Center. The Prairie Schooner parcel would be the last rational choice for additional convention center parking. The City Attorney implied that the Prairie Schooner parcel was to be used for construction staging, should the convention center expansion be approved, which is further indication that it was the casino and not the convention center that is the real beneficiary of this deal. In the meeting, City Councilmembers did argue that the City's new convention center needed additional parking and that the "license agreement" contained provisions that would enable sharing. The city attorney identified that 200 spaces in the lot would be used for valet parking. The Redevelopment Agency's transfer of the parcel in this manner is unlawful The City used the amendment to the construction license agreement instead of following state law governing the transfer of city property. This deal sets up a long-term transfer of the use of City property (a de facto lease) to another entity, which should trigger a report under Section 33433 of the CA Health and Safety Code that requires a financial analysis and its publication at least 10 days prior to a decision. We have no evidence that the City has conducted analysis to show that the proposed deal is the highest and best use for the property and the taxpayer expenditures. Furthermore, the deal calls for the Redevelopment Agency to repay the Tribe for the construction of the parking lot that will be used by the Tribe's casino. While the City currently has a $4.7 million general fund deficit, the Tribe casino is notoriously highly profitable and expanding rapidly—yet pays no local taxes. This begs the question: why would the redevelopment agency spend $2 million for a casino parking lot? What is the fair value of the land? In September 2000, the City Redevelopment Agency received an offer from a hotel developer to pay $1.8 million for the site, or roughly $1.96 million in today's dollars.3 If built, the hotel would have contributed additional revenue in the form of payments of "Transient Occupancy Tax"rumored to be in the neighborhood of$1 million per year. The present value of$1 million over 20 years is $12 million. 3 See September 20,2000 memo to Redevelopment Agency from Redevelopment Director. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 5 The City is willing to lake much less from the Tribe--especially because the City is agreeing to reimburse the Tribe for the $2 million parking lot to be built on the parcel. The lease includes a 75% rent discount to the Tribe for the first ten years. After the Tribe gets reimbursed for the parking lot, the required annual payments will be $268,000 for the final ten years of the lease term.4 • The net present value of these lease payments is $1.89 million. Using an 8% cap rate, and a market rent of$268,000, the market value of the parcel would be $3.3 million, significantly less than a $2 million parcel with $2 million in improvements, and much less than the revenue that would come from the sale of the land to a hotel and the consequent TOT payments. The deal calls for the Tribe immediately to spend $2 million up front for the construction of a parking lot on City owned land adjacent to its new casino, and the City will repay the Tribe for its costs. In his briefing to Council, the attorney said the only limit to the Tribe's use of the City's parking lot would be that on those occasions where there was a big show at the Convention Center. According to the description provided by the attorney, the Redevelopment Agency will net$68,000 for the first ten years (Tribal rent of$268,000 per year less $200,000 reimbursement for construction costs). For the balance of the term, the Redevelopment Agency will receive payments of$268,000. (If the City intended to follow state law, it would be required to release an appraisal for the property that would help determine whether the price is fair.) In his July 30 briefing to Council, the City Attorney said the City will begin the required procedures—including public hearings and appraisals—for the EIR and the DDA as soon as possible, but the amendment to the license agreement would allow the Tribe to move ahead with construction as it desires. The attorney said it would take six months to do the DDA; The opening of the Tribe's new casino is roughly 70 days away from September 3, 2003, the date of approval of the license agreement amendment. The project is not consistent with the City's redevelopment plan and is not the highest and best use for the parcel The City's most recent redevelopment plan identifies hotel development as the highest and best use for the Prairie Schooner property.5 In 2000, the City received an offer of $1.8 million ($1.96 million in 2003 dollars) to build a hotel on the subject property.6 Annual Transient Occupancy Tax payments associated with a hotel on the property would have gone to the City's general fund. Assuming these TOT payments to be $1 million per year, the City's total net revenue from that sale of the property would have been $14.5 million. Under the proposed agreement, the City nets only $68,000 per year for the first ten years and $268,000 for the next ten years. These payments total less than the minimum acceptable return for this property worth $4 million ($1.96 million land value plus $2 million worth of improvements). First Amendment to the License Agreement,September 3,2003. s 2001 Redevelopment Plan of the City of Palm Springs 5 September 20,2000 Memo from John Raymond to City Council v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 6 Public contracting rules require the agency to solicit bids for the parking lot project Prior to the agreement, the City failed to solicit bids for the construction of its parking lot, which is an additional violation of the state code. Prevailing wage laws will also apply to this public project. The City has failed to comply with environmental rules According to the City Attorney, the Tribe wants to complete the parking lot for the opening of its new casino—approximately 90 days. In its July 30, 2003 vote to approve the project, the City erroneously made no environmental analysis of the project (at that time, the project called for the construction of 600 spaces). The City received a letter objecting to its approval and apparently intends to rescind its July 30 approval and adopt an alternate resolution on September 3. In this alternate resolution, the City intends to rely on a "Mitigated Negative Declaration" filed for a 475 space parking lot as part of its convention center expansion in May 2003. However, that environmental filing made no mention of the project's use as a casino-related activity. An Additional Public Review Period is Required If the City intends to adopt a negative declaration for approval of the project, it must publish notice of that intent and provide a public review period of not less than 20 days. (Public Resources Code section 21092 (a) and (b) and CEQA Guidelines section 15072.) It is reasonably foreseeable that the casino will increase the number of slot machines and thereby traffic and environmental impacts beyond those identified in its previous studies The casino has filed plans with the City of Palm Springs to increase by approximately 131 percent the number of parking spaces that it reported in its previous Traffic Impact Study Update.7 According to plans submitted to the City thus far, the number is projected to increase from 1,313 to approximately 3,036. This increase provides evidence of the casino's intention to increase the number of its customers. A November 2002 story in the LA Times reported, "the Spa Casino could eventually contain 50 table games and 1,400 slot machines."s According to the story, "The band plans to expand the new Spa Casino within five years into a $400 million complex stretching across several blocks of downtown Palm Springs."9 The casino's 2002 Traffic Impact Study ties some of the project's environmental impacts to the number of customers, which is in turn linked by the casino's report to the number of slot machines.10 Without commenting on the validity of this claim, it is reasonably foreseeable that the casino will increase the number of its slot machines as soon as See Parking Lot Plans submitted on August 8,2003 by Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. s Scott Gold, "Indian Casinos on a Roll: The number and quality of California Establishments are up markedly, and they're poised to give Nevada a run for its money." Los Angeles Times, November 22, 2002. 9 Ibid. 10 New Spa Casino Traffic Impact Study Update, October 23, 2002,page 1-1. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 7 possible and consequently will increase the number of its customers. These increases will further increase the environmental and social impacts of both the Prairie Schooner project and the casino project. This casino parking lot project is substantially different from what was studied in previous environmental reports and will have significant environmental and social consequences The City Redevelopment Agency is claiming that the environmental effects of this parking lot project were analyzed in a previous environmental document adopted on May 7, 2003, entitled "Environmental Assessment for the Palm Springs Convention Center Expansion and Associated General Plan Amendment". That claim is incorrect on several points. First, the proposed use for the Prairie Schooner parcel as a casino parking lot is a major and significant change in the previous project description that will have significant additional impacts including noise, traffic, parking, air quality, etc., and these additional impacts have not been analyzed. That document did not discuss the use of the Prairie Schooner parking lot for casino patrons and employees. Third, these are substantial changes to the project, and the City cannot rely on its old, outdated project description. Additionally, the previously adopted agreement for the casino to use the Prairie Schooner lot included employee parking. The new version of the proposed agreement does not contain that provision. This leads us to believe that the employee parking lot at the corner of El Segundo and Ramon may in fact be a permanent facility. Neither the Tribe nor the City have provided an alternative explanation. In sum, the new proposed use of the Prairie Schooner parking lot for casino patrons is a substantial change of substantial importance that will have significant effects, including noise, traffic, parking, lighting and aesthetic impacts not discussed in the previous document. Therefore, it is improper for the City to adopt this project proposal. Noise The City's environmental study of the noise and traffic impacts from the Convention Center expansion project is based upon the projected demand profile for the Convention Center, and does not include or discuss the impacts of the casino. "Traffic volumes in the year 2004 (the opening year of the proposed expansion) with and without the project were analyzed to determine the project-related impact on motor vehicle noise levels in the vicinity." The City's existing plan states: "During the evening peak hour, a total of 29 project-related vehicles are expected to enter and/or leave the west parking lot via the driveway on Andreas Road. The noise generated by project-related vehicles will be very similar to the noise currently generated by the on-street parking activity that occurs along both sides of Andreas Road in the vicinity and most likely lower than the noise generated by the use of this lot by the City of Palm Springs as a construction vehicle staging area, Consequently, project-related noise increases expected in the vicinity of the proposed west parking lot, while not always inaudible to the residents of the adjacent residential development, are considered insignificant." V.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 8 The study predicts its growth in noise impacts to correlate directly to the rate of expansion in conference attendees, and makes no mention of casino operations and attendance.11 The study's `peak use scenario' is derived from Convention Center activity, not casino activity (for example, see page 2-6). We also point out that that study does not appear to incorporate the impacts of the new casino on its noise level analysis, which is an important deficiency. For example, the study states, "The convention center does not host a significant number of late night parties so the parking lots are typically clear by 10 p.m. or midnight." The casino operates round the clock and will clearly generate significantly different noise impacts at this project site.12 The City's report contains no management control plan for noise impacts that will ensue from the use of the Prairie Schooner lot by casino patrons and valet. Additionally, the mitigation measures adopted in the City's convention center document are not reflected in the Tribe's parking lot design. Specifically, the City's plan reads, "The location of the primary west parking lot access point at the southwest corner of the lot (on Calle El Segundo, as far as possible from existing residential land uses located north of Andreas Road and east of Calle El Segundo) will reduce the potential for intrusive noise events on residents." 13 The location is different in the Tribe's proposed plan. Additionally, the parking lot set-back presented in figure 2-3 of the City's environmental declaration appears to be reduced in the Agua Caliente's design for the Prairie Schooner submitted to the Planning Commission. Since these two items were a component of the City's mitigation strategy, these elements of the new project are inconsistent with that plan. Traffic Inadequate Scope in Project Study Area The City of Palm Springs requires traffic studies to address all intersections with a minimum project traffic impact of 50 trips in the peak hour. The use of the Prairie Schooner site by the casino necessarily expands the number of affected intersection beyond the scope identified in the City's existing traffic study. Just as in the noise study, the City's environmental study uses "Historical convention activity levels and current convention center traffic peaking characteristics [to] provide a means of identifying a current `design day' that reflects a weekday peak use scenario."14 The City's study makes no mention of a casino-related use or a scenario involving the use of the Prairie Schooner parking lot by casino patrons. While the existing traffic analysis simulated and studied future traffic conditions that would ensue from the Convention Center expansion, it did not examine the traffic conditions that will ensue from the use of the parking lot by casino patrons.15 Palm Springs Convention Center Expansion Noise Impact Study, Endo Engineering,March 2003.p.2-2 —2-3. 12 Testimony of gaming industry expert,Maya Holmes,Research Director,Culinary Union,Local 226, Las Vegas,Nevada. 13 Page 4-10. 14 Page 1-2. "The Tribe also hired Endo Engineering to prepare its"New Spa Casino Traffic Impact Study Update" dated October 2002. In that document, the project description stated,"a total of 1,313 parking spaces will be available for the new proposed gaming facility." However,the Tribe's current parking lot development v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 9 The City's study reports: "The proposed expansion of the Palm Springs Convention Center will generate an increase of 1,380 daily trip-ends. During the mid-day peak hour, 138 trip-ends would be generated (83 inbound and 55 outbound). During the evening peak hour, 184 trip-ends would be generated (9 inbound and 175 outbound)."16 By contrast, a recent casino traffic study based on just 1,313 projected parking spaces (roughly 3,000 are actually being constructed) anticipated 533 trip-ends would be generated by that project during the evening peak hour (or as many as 1,200 assuming the number of trip-ends is directly correlated to the number of parking spaces). Lighting and Aesthetics The Tribe reported in an August 13, 2003 Planning Commission meeting that it intends to use parking lot lighting for its casino that exceeds to maximum candle-power allowed under the City Code. (put that citation in the record) The use of such lighting will have an adverse impact on surrounding businesses, homeowners, and users. Because the City adopted its lighting guidelines to protect the existing character of the City, the cumulative effect of the casino's parking lot lighting that exceeds the standard will necessarily have a harmful effect on the character of the entire downtown area of Palm Springs. Parking The license agreement adopted by the City and the Tribe on July 30, 200317 called for roughly 600 parking spaces to be used by casino customers, employees, and convention center patrons. The revised agreement reduces the number by 125 spaces and removes any mention of employee parking. The revised document's failure to discuss provisions for employee parking highlights the lack of any public study on the parking impacts of the apparent decision to eliminate employee parking from the Prairie Schooner site. If the proposed new agreement contemplates that employees will park in the street, then the impacts of this decision need to be studied. projects will result in approximately 3,000 parking spaces,calling into question the assumptions and findings of its previous traffic study that projected 1,313 spaces. There is a 236%difference between the number of parking spaces studied in the Tribe's traffic analysis and the actual number being built. The casino's actual parking plan also includes a number of off-site parking lots in locations not studied in its 2002 traffic analysis. For example,that study did not include in its project description the Tribe's proposed 440 space parking lot at the corner of Calle El Segundo and Ramon. It did not analyze any impacts of that lot on adjacent intersections,despite the City's requirement that projects with a minimum of 50 trips must do so. 16 Environmental assessment for the Convention Center,page 5-1. "First Amended License Agreement"adopted by Resolution 1225 of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palm Springs,July 30,2003. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 10 Stephen Orosz, A Certified Traffic Engineer, Says the Proposed Project Changes are Significant and City's Environmental Study is Inadequate We are submitting a letter from Steve Orosz, a Certified Traffic Engineer that provides expert testimony that the proposed change in the project is significant and will generate significant environmental effects, including traffic and parking effects. The significant environmental effects from the change in the project include: The effects of combined convention center and casino use of the parking lot has not been studied and is likely to have significant environmental effects. Orosz writes that based on the discussion in the most recent report for the convention center, there would be no available parking in the Prairie Schooner lot during peak demands at the casino and the convention center. He writes, "As such, the contemplated use of the Prairie Schooner lot by the Casino is misleading and would lead to additional periods of insufficient parking in the Convention Center/Spa Casino area. Furthermore, Orosz reports that the City's study provides no information on how the proposed casino valet system will operate. "A comprehensive parking analysis showing the peak parking demands of the convention center and spa casino is needed to document the potential environmental effects that the combined use of the Prairie Schooner and surrounding parking lots would have."18 This casino parking project interferes with the Redevelopment Agency's ability to create adequate affordable housing The proposed $2 million expenditure by the Redevelopment Authority for a casino parking lot will reduce the Agency's ability to create adequate affordable housing. Prior to its acquisition by the Redevelopment Authority, the Prairie Schooner lot provided affordable housing and low-cost homeownership in the form of a park for manufactured homes.19 The City's termination of that use contributed to the City's existing deficit in affordable housing. The decision to replace that use with a casino parking lot for a tribal casino built at taxpayer expense contributes to the City's failure to provide adequate affordable housing. This casino parking project is a component the casino expansion project that will have significant environmental and social consequences that also require study Based on information that has been made public, the Tribe intends to build six or seven parking lots containing approximately 3,000 parking spaces in downtown Palm Springs within the next 90 days. "Steve Orosz,Certified traffic Engineer,Letter September 3,2003. '9 Public testimony of Palm Springs Planning Director,August 13,2003 Planning Commission hearing. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 11 The Tribe's traffic study planned only 1,300 parking spaces, now the Tribe is building 3,000 In the last meeting, the Planning Commission approved an employee parking lot of over 440 spaces in the middle of a residential area,20 Residents provided detailed and specific testimony of their personal knowledge of the significant adverse effects of this lot: Unsafe traffic conditions at the corner of Ramon and El Segundo Residents reported a high number of traffic accidents—which in some cases included collisions between motorists and neighborhood homes and buildings—as a result of unsafe conditions at the corner of El Segundo and Ramon. The effects of the increased traffic on neighborhood streets Residents expressed concerns about the effects of increased traffic on neighborhood streets. Public safety concerns Residents reported concerns about the public safety issues that would arise by the juxtaposition of increased casino traffic with residential areas.21 The adverse effects of lighting on the night sky Tribal officials reported that casino parking lots will operate outside of existing City standards with regard to lighting. The presence of large brightly light casino parking lots operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week, is incompatible with existing municipal standards and existing residential uses in the neighborhoods. The adverse impact on the neighborhood and architectural character by the parking lot The casino parking lot is surrounded on all sides by residential uses. During the Planning Commission public hearing, residents identified a series of aesthetic impacts that the casino parking lot would have on their neighborhood, from excessive lighting to the lack of adequate shielding and buffering around the parking lot. The Tribe refused to discuss whether it had searched for any alternatives to this site (which is a quarter mile from the casino) When queried by Planning Commissioners, a Tribal official declined to discuss alternatives to the employee parking lot at Ramon and El Segundo. Alternatives The cumulative traffic, noise, lighting, and aesthetic impacts of the City's convention center expansion project and the related casino expansion project demand the search for 21 Case 5.0667, Palm Springs Planning Commission,August 13,2003. 21 Public Testimony from August 13,2003 Planning Commission meeting,incorporated herein by reference. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 12 alternatives. One possible alternative to reduce the wide variety of adverse impacts on residential areas would be to construct a parking garage or a series of garages to isolate the impacts of the casino parking lots from residents and residential neighborhoods. Another alternative not studied by the Tribe is the use of satellite parking lots outside the residential and historic district of downtown Palm Springs. Other consequences of this casino will include Impacts on public safety Public safety costs associated with casino expansion will have a significant impact on the city and its residents. The Palm Springs Police Department estimates "that the new [119,000 square foot] casino will result in a 15% increase in the number of daily calls for service at the casino and in the downtown."22 Yet Police Chief Gary Jeandron is quoted in a Desert Sun article that the police department is in a hiring freeze and vacant positions in the police department will not be filled 23 Increased demand resulting from the casino in the context of the Police Department's hiring freeze will result in slower response times. According to the Police Department, the financial impact of the new casino will cost the city $435,433 in the first year of operation alone.24In addition to the direct cost of casino expansion on public safety spending, residents of Palm Springs have experienced increases in crime since the introduction of casino operations in the downtown area. Between 1996 and 2001 property crime rates across the state fell 27%, while the property crime rate in Palm Springs increased 18%. Impacts on affordable housing problems The City of Palm Springs has publicly acknowledged that the expansion of the Spa Casino will have an impact on the availability of housing in the city. The City, responding to the Tribe's projection that their new Spa Casino would employ 975 people, made the following observations: "The City has identified a considerable need for family rental housing in the City, which is the most expensive and most difficult to develop. The largest source of funds available to the City is the low and moderate income housing set- aside from redevelopment tax increment. Since the Tribe will probably not pay property taxes on the casino, it will not generate tax increment or housing funds to the Agency or City."25 As a consequence the City recommended to the Agua Caliente Tribe that "the City and Tribe should develop a cooperative program...to develop new affordable housing.s26 The Tribe rejected the recommendation and has provided no analysis on the impact on affordable housing as a result of casino expansion. 21 Conformity report,submitted by the Palm Springs City Manager to the Palm Springs City Council, December 5,2002,page 7. Z'Darrell Smith, "Palm Springs DARE,police league may fall victim to budget crunch." The Desert Sun. September 3,2003,page 113. 'A Conformity report(December,2002),p. 7. 15 Conformity Report(December,2002),page 7. Rather than using$2 million in tax increment revenues to build a casino parking lot,the redevelopment agency could be building affordable housing. "Conformity Report(December,2002),page 7. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 13 Impacts on schools Schools in the Palm Springs Unified School District(PSUSD) are negatively impacted by the Spa Resort Casino and its expansion. A recent survey of Agua Caliente Casino in Rancho Mirage, also owned by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, indicates that about 45% of non management workers have children.27 The estimated total number of children for the Agua Caliente Casino in Rancho Mirage is 435 28 That one casino thus contributes over 400 children to area schools, with the vast majority (approximately 70%) attending a Palm Springs Unified School District school. There is no reason to expect that the Spa workforce will be markedly different from that of the Agua Caliente Casino. The Spa will be contributing at least 400 more students to area schools. Moreover these children will have extra needs: we estimate that anywhere from 40-75% of the children of Agua Caliente Casino workers are poor enough to qualify for subsidized meals. Again, it is reasonable to assume that the same will hold true for children of the Spa workforce. The casino does not pay property tax, nor does it pay corporate taxes, (a major source of revenue for the state general fund)29 Public schools receive the greatest part of their revenue from a mix of property tax and the state's general fund. If the Spa Casino were taxed, once the first phase of expansion is completed, it would be contributing about $2.5 million annually to public schools. While it will not pay taxes, the Spa Casino will contribute students and student needs. Property taxes and aid from the state's general fund are the sources of revenue for the general budget of state public schools. The Spa Casino, when its first phase of redevelopment is completed, would pay approximately $2 million in property taxes (50% of which would go to schools) if the casino were taxed. The state corporate tax rate of 8.84%, if levied on the Spa Casino's estimated profits (assuming only 1000 slot machines, generating an estimated$42.5 million in annual profit) would mean over $3 million to the general fund. Approximately 40% of the general fund is used for public schools. Thus, the Spa Casino will not be paying schools over$2.5 million dollars per year. Impacts on Palm Springs Taxpayers A recent article in the Los Angeles Times detailed some of the impacts of the casino on Palm Springs taxpayers. According to the article, city officials reported the Tribe did not have to pay the city $47,000 for a building permit. Nor was it obliged to pay the $47,000 city construction tax or the $3,000 state fee used to map earthquake faults. The tribe saves $45,000 a year by not paying the city's 5% utility users tax. Property taxes, imposed at 1% of fair market value, would exceed $2 million a year.3o "Dr.Eric Nilsson,Angela Jamison,and Dr.David Fairris, Wages and Healthcare Benefits of Workers at Agua Caliente Casino. UCLA Institute of Industrial Relations.March 2003 28 Capell&Associates,Shifting the Cost: Who Pays the Health Coverage of Workers at the Agua Caliente Casino?March 2003. 21 See Dan Morain,"State Tax Breaks Help Indian Casinos Rise,"Los Angeles Times, August 10,2003. 30 Dan Morain,"Many Indians Exempt from State Taxes," The Los Angeles Times, July 25,2003. v.2 September 3, 2003 CVCRS Letter Page 14 New language in the latest proposed agreement will reduce the opportunity for public scrutiny of this deal and open the City to uncontrolled liabilities New language in the proposed agreement appears intended to immunize the City from court review of this transfer of publicly owned property to an Indian tribe. While the City obtained from the Tribe a waiver of sovereignty on issues related to the parking lot deal in the July 30 agreement, the City now proposes to limit the remedies of its residents, other jurisdictions, and the State of California with respect to this agreement. As a direct result of the City's newly proposed language, if a resident files a complaint related to this deal, the Tribe will file a motion to quash service of summons on the ground that the Tribe will assert a sovereign immunity from uncontested suit— specifically enabled by the City's newly proposed language. The City actually has sought to have previous suits against the City dismissed on the same grounds. The City's new proposed language could have the effect of making no remedies available to residents and the state who seek to review this agreement. To borrow from the decision in Lundgren v. City of Palm Springs, "The City has no power to surrender, impair, or embarrass the State's exclusive, sovereign civil or criminal jurisdiction over land, including the State's jurisdiction to prohibit or regulate gambling on such land." An additional result of this newly proposed language is that Palm Springs taxpayers will not receive the indemnification and assistance in defense against lawsuits and claims that developers usually provide against any claims arising from the government approvals and arising from operation of the proposed facility. Kahn writes, "One can also safely predict that at some point in the near future, casino patrons will be injured on or near this puking lot (auto accidents,pedestrian slip-and-falls) and sue the City agency.'>st September 3, 2003 Memo to Planning Commission and City Council from Andrew Kahn v.2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING REVIEW AND COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED PARKING LOT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CALLE EL SEGUNDO AND ANDREAS ROAD (PRAIRIE SCHOONER), R-4 V-P ZONE, SECTION 14 WHEREAS,on May07,2003,the City Council approved a General Plan Policyand Planned Development District No. 164A,and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the expansion ofthe Palm Springs Convention Center and related site improvements; and WHEREAS,as part of the environmental review for the expansion project,the City included the Prairie Schooner property as a future parking lot location with 475 parking stalls; and WHEREAS,the Tribe is proposing to develop the Prairie Schooner property as a parking lot with 475 parking spaces, adequate environmental review of the proposed site under the California Environmental Quality Act has been achieved; and WHEREAS,an Architectural Approval application was submitted bythe Cityof Palm Springs and theAgua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians for architectural approval forthe parking lot; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed parking lot at a special meeting of the Planning Commission on September 03, 2003, and has made a recommendation to approve the proposed parking lot with conditions stated herein; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission found thatthe parking lot is of the highestquality of design and materials; and WHEREAS,the City Council is in agreementwith the review and comment of the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Palm Springs, California, has reviewed the proposed parking lot and approves with conditions herein attached by reference (Exhibit A). ADOPTED this day of , 2003. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA i City Clerk City Manager Reviewed and Approved as to Form: ( (// I EXHIBIT A Case Nos. 5.0344 Prairie Schooner Parking Lots September 03, 2003 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Beforefinal acceptance of the project, all conditions listed belowshall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,the Directorof Planning,the Chief of Police,the Fire Chief ortheirdesignee,depending on which department recommended the condition. Any agreements, easements orcovenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved bythe City Attorney. PLANNING 1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance,Municipal Code,oranyotherCity Codes,ordinances and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations. 2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body,advisory agencies,or administrative officers concerning Case 5.0667 and 5.0344. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim,action,or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense,the applicant shall not,thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify,or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing,the City retains the right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein,except,the City's decision to settle orabandon a matter following an adversejudgementor fail ureto appeal,shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks,bikeways,parking areas,landscape,irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property,in a first class condition,free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and agencies having jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be included in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 4. TheAqua Caliente Band of Calhuilla Indian staff shallworkwith the Cityto establish future improvement plans along the easterly parking lot boundary(Calle Alvarado). 5. Up to 475 parking spaces, inclusive of handicap spaces, shall be provided. 6. Final design, including meandering sidewalks, lighting, and landscaping shall be compatiblewith the Convention Center northerly parking lot. Copy of plans have been provided for comparison purposes. -/ R. 6. Standard parking spaces shall be 17 feet deep by 9 feet wide; compact sized spaces shall be 15 feet deep by 8 feet wide. Handicap parking spaces shall be 18 feet deep by 9 feet wide plus a 5 foot walkwayatthe right side ofthe parking space;two(2)handicap spaces can share a common walkway. One in every eight(8)handicap accessible spaces, but not less than one(1), shall be served byan 8 foot walkway on the right side and shall be designated as "van accessible". 7. Handicapped accessibility shall be indicated on the site plan to include the location of handicapped parking spaces, the main entrance to the proposed structure and the path of travel to the main entrance. Consideration shall be given to potential difficulties with the handicapped accessibility to the building due to the future grading plans for the property. 8. Compact and handicapped spaces shall be appropriately marked per Section 93.06.00.C.10. 9. Curbs shall be installed at a minimum of five (5)feet from face of walls, fences, buildings, or other structures. Areas that are not part of the maneuvering area shall have curbs placed at a minimum of two (2) feet from the face of walls, fences or buildings adjoining driveways. 10. A photometric plan shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Zoning for review and approval. Said plan shall be consistent with lighting level approved for the Convention Center northerly parking lot, including lighting standard height and specifications. 11. Parking lot light fixtures shall align with stall striping and shall be located two to three feet from curb face. 12. Islands of not less than 9 feet in width with a minimum of 6 feet of planter shall be provided every 10 parking spaces. Additional islands may be necessary to comply with shading requirements. 13. Shading requirements for parking lot areas as set forth in Section 9306.00 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be met. Details to be provided with final landscape plan. 14. Parking stalls shall be delineated with a 4 to 6 inch double stripe - hairpin or elongated "U" design. Individual wheel stops shall be prohibited; a continuous 6" barrier curb shall provide wheel stops. 15. Concrete walks with a minimum width of two(2)feetshall be installed adjacentto end parking spaces or end spaces shall be increased to eleven (11) feet wide. 16. Tree wells shall be provided within the parking lot and shall have a planting area of six feet in diameter/width. ENGINEERING Please complete all Engineering Conditions of Approval listed below and return a copy of this list, along with the requested information to the Engineering Division. The conditions are in compliance with requirements contained in the Cityof Palm Springs Municipal Codes. Anyquestions pertaining to these conditions should be referred to the Cityof Palm Springs Engineering Division, Private Development Plan Check,(760)323-8253 x8742. Beforefinal acceptance of the project,all conditions listed belowshould be completed to thesatisfaction of the City Engineer. STREETS 17. Any improvements within the public right-of-way require a Cityof Palm Springs Encroachment Permit. 18. Submit street improvement plans prepared bya Registered Civil Engineertothe Engineering Division. The plan(s) should be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. PRAIRIE SCHOONER PARKING LOT CALLE EL SEGUNDO 19. Construct a 28 feet wide commercial driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 205. 20. Construct TypeCcurbramps,oneithersideofdriveway, meeting current California State Accessibility standards and in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 214. 21. The existing curb and gutter should remain in place except for curb cuts necessary for driveway approaches. ANDREAS ROAD 22. Constructa 6 inch curb and gutter, 32 feetsouth of centerline along the entire frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 200. 23. Construct a 28 feet wide commercial driveway approach in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 205. 24. Construct TypeCcurbramps,oneithersideofdriveway,meeting current California State Accessibility standards and in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 214. 25. Construct a 6 feet wide meandering sidewalk behind the curb along the entire project frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 210. The sidewalk shall be colored Portland cement concrete with an admixture of Desert Sand, Palm Springs Tan, or an equal color approved by the Engineering Division. The exact layout and configuration of the meandering sidewalk shall be as required and consistent with related landscaping plans. 26. Construct a minimum pavement section of 3 inch asphalt concrete pavement over 6 inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal, from edge of proposed gutter to a clean sawcut edge of pavement along the entire Andreas Road frontage in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 110 and 325. If an alternative pavement section is proposed, the proposed pavement section should be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using "R"values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. DRAINAGE 27. All stormwater runoff across the property shall be accepted and conveyed in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer and released to the existing drainage system in Calle Alvarado. Storm Drain improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 28. Drainage swales shall be provided adjacent to all curbs and sidewalks, 3'wide and 6"deep, to keep nuisance water from entering the public streets, roadways, or gutters. GRADING 29. Submit a Precise Grading Plan prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer orqualified Architect to the Engineering Division for review and approval. A PM10(dust control)Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Department prior to approval of the Precise Grading Plan.The Precise IR'Ll Grading Plan should be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. 30. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit, issued from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board(Phone No.760-346-7491)is required forall project sites greater than one acre in size. A copy of the executed permit shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to approval of the Grading Plans. 31. The area in which this project is situated is indicative of desert soil conditions found in manyareas of Palm Springs. The Engineering Division does not require a soils report. This does not mean that subterranean conditions unknown at this time may not affect construction done on this site. 32. Contactthe Building Departmentto getinformation regarding the preparation of the PM10(dustcontrol) plan requirements. 33. In cooperation with the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and the California Departmentof Food and Agriculture Red Imported Fire Ant Project,applicants for grading permits involving a grading plan and involving the export of soil will be required to present a clearance document from a Department of Food and Agriculture representative in the form of an approved"Notification of Intent To Move Soil From or Within Quarantined Areas of Orange, Riverside,and Los Angeles Counties"(RIFA Form CA-1)prior to approval of the Grading Plan.The California Department of Food and Agriculture office is located at 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert(Phone: 760-776-8208). GENERAL 34. In accordance with Chapter 8.04.401 of the City of Palm Springs Municipal Code, all existing and proposed electrical lines of thirty-five thousand volts or less and overhead service drop conductors,and all gas, telephone, television cable service, and similar service wires or lines, which are on-site, abutting, and/or transecting, should be installed underground unless specific restrictions are shown in General Orders 95 and 128 of the California Public Utilities Commission,and service requirements published by the utilities. The existing overhead utilities along Andreas Road meetthe requirementto be installed underground. It is recommended that an investigation be made of the nature of these utilities, the availability of undergrounding these utilities with respect to adjacent and off-site properties. ON-SITE 35. The minimum pavement section for all parking areas is 2-1/2 inch asphalt concrete pavement over4- inch aggregate base with a minimum subgrade of 24 inches at 95% relative compaction, or equal. If an alternative pavement section is proposed,the proposed pavement section should be designed by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer using"R"values from the project site and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. 36. Any utility trenches or other excavations within existing asphalt concrete pavement of off-site streets required by the proposed development should be backfilled and repaired in accordance with City of Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 115. 37. All proposed utility lines should be installed underground. 38. The original improvement plans prepared for the proposed development and approved by the City Engineer should be documented with record drawing "as-built" information and returned to the Engineering Division prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.Any modifications or changes to approved improvement plans should be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to construction. /A r _,a 39. Nothing should be constructed or planted in the corner cut-off area of any driveway which does orwill exceed the height required to maintain an appropriate sight distance per City of Palm Springs Zoning Code Section 93.02.00, D. 40. All proposed trees within the public right-of-way and within 10 feet of the public sidewalk and/or curb should have City approved deep root barriers installed per Cityof Palm Springs Standard Drawing No. 904. TRAFFIC 41. A minimum of 48 inches of sidewalk clearance should be provided around all street furniture, fire hydrants and other above-ground facilities for handicap accessibility. Minimum clearance should be provided through dedication of additional right-of-way or widening of the sidewalk. 42. All damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement legends and striping associated with the proposed development shall be replaced as required by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 43. Construction signing, lighting and barricading shall be provided for on all projects as required by City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. As a minimum, all construction signing, lighting and barricading should be in accordance with State of California, Department of Transportation,"Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones"dated 1996,or subsequent additions in force at the time of construction.