Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:01]

>> MAYOR MILLER: PLEASE LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE START THE CITY COUNCIL

[1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL]

MEETING FOR THE INDIO AT 5:00 AND FOR THE INDIO WATER AUTHORITY.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE ALL THE ME PRESENT.

TWO OF THEM ARE VIA THE TELECONFER GOVERNOR'S ORDERS.

WE ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE PEOPLE ON THE TELECONFERENCE.

WE HAVE THREE INSIDE THE DAIS UP HERE IN CI CHAMBERS.

WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO GO ON TO THE INVOCATION.

THE CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT ENDORSE THE CONTENT OF THE INVOCATION AND DOES NOT ENDORSE INVOCATIONAL SPEAKER PARTICULAR RELIGION FAITH OR BELIEF BUT WE HAVE RICK SALAZAR FROM CHURCH TO LEAD US IN PRAYER AND THEN I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH THE FLAG SALUTE.

IS THE PASTOR HERE?

>> PASTOR.

>> OKAY.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RISE WITH ME.

>> DEAR GOD, TODAY WE COME TO YOU WITH A HUMBLE HEART AND ASK YOU TO BE A GUIDE IN THE COUNCIL MEETING AND WE ASK THAT YOU GIVE WISDOM T THE COUNCIL ON EVERY DECISION ON TODAY'S AGENDA.

WE CONTINUE TO PRAY FOR THE HEALTH AND THE SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THOSE AFFECTED BY THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

IN THE NAME OF JESUS WE PRAY.

[5. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL EXTERNAL/INTERNAL BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND REPORT ON MEETINGS ATTENDED PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53232.3(d)]

AMEN.

>> AMEN.

PLEASE PUT YOUR HAND ON THE HEART TO HONOR THE FLAG OF THE COUNTRY AND ALL THE PEOPLE WHO PROTECTED IT.

PLEASE BEGIN.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF TH STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

AMEN.

THANK YOU, PASTOR.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR INVOCATION.

WE WILL MOVE ON TO -- WELL, THE CITY ATTOR HERE RIGHT NOW.

WE'LL GO AROUND THAT.

WE WILL MOVE ON TO NUMBER FIVE, THE REPORT COUNCIL EXTERNAL AND THE INTERIM BOARDS COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES.

MR. FERMON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HANDLE THI OFF?

>> MR. FERMON: SURE.

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE IN ATTENDANCE.

MOST OF MY COMMITTEES WERE DARK THIS MONTH.

BUT I DID S A ZOOM CALL MEETING WITH -- I ZOOM CALL MEETING WITH THE HOMELESS COMMITTEE.

WE HAD SOME UPDATES FROM TOM COX AND FROM GREG RODRIGUEZ ON WAS SOME OF THE NUMBERS IN THE VALLEY AS IT PERTAINED TO THE HOMELESS POPULATION IN THE COVID CRISIS.

AND MR. RODRIGUEZ TALKED ABOUT PROJECT RO WHICH OUR COUNTY COMMENCED PRIOR TO OUR INITIATING THIS EFFORT.

AND DURING THIS PROCESS, COUNTY WIDE WE HA APPROXIMATELY 600 OF THE HOMELESS FOLKS TO HOTELS AND APPROXIMATELY 177 OF THOSE FOLKS ARE HERE IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY.

PROJECT ROOM KEY HAS WRAP-AROUND SERVICES, M AND PATHWAY TO PERMANENT HOUSING.

AND DURING THAT PROCESS, WE HAVE ALREADY PE HOUSED 60 FOLKS DURING THIS EFFORT.

SO, THAT IS THROUGH PROJECT ROOM KEY WITH THE COUNTY.

AND THAT WILL CONCLUDE MY REPORT.

I DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER ACTIVITIES GOING ON THIS MONTH SINCE OUR LAST MEETING.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER FERMON.

MAYOR PRO TEM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO?

>> MS. HOLMES: SURE.

I HAD FOUR MEETINGS.

THE FIRST WAS THE PALM SPRINGS C.V.V.

GOSH, THAT WAS NOT A HAPPY MEETING.

WE GOT WORD OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WERE LAID OFF.

FORMALLY AT THAT MEETING.

THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY IS JUST HIT HARD.

AND GETTING HIT HARDER EVERY DAY.

WE ALSO FOUND OUT THAT TOM NOBLE WHO HAS DON EXCEPTIONAL JOB WITH THE PALM SPRINGS AIRPORT TRULY EXCEPTIONAL.

BROUGHT IT IN TO THE 21ST CENTURY AND THEN SOME.

HE HAS ACCEPTED ANOTHER POSITION IN FLORIDA.

FOR FAMILY REASONS.

THAT IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF HIS FAMILY NOW RESIDES.

SO, RECRUITMENT IS GOING ON.

WE CERTAINLY WISH MR. NOBLE WELL BUT HE WAS FORCE IN THE SUCCESS OF THAT AIRPORT.

SO VERY, VERY SORRY TO SEE HIM GO.

REALLY, THE REST OF THAT MEETING WAS A CONVE AROUND HOTELS.

SOME OF WHOM, THEIR DOORS ARE OPEN.

MANY ARE NOT.

PREFERRING INSTEAD TO WAIT UNTIL EARLY SEPT OCTOBER.

BEFORE THEY BRING STAFF BACK.

JUST TO GET A SENSE.

[00:05:01]

ON ANOTHER SIDE OF THAT, VRBO VACATIONAL RENTALS SEEM TO BE GOING STRONGLY, OR STRONGER THAN HOTELS.

SO THAT IS WHERE WE STAND WITH THAT.

IT'S JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE TIMES THAT WE ARE LIVING THROUGH RIGHT NOW.

THE OTHER MEETING I HAD A COUPLE OF THEM, M CONSERVANCY.

THE ONE ITEM OF NOTE HAS TO DO WITH THE LIVING DESERT.

I THINK IT IS NEAR AND DEAR TO EVERYONE HERE.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT IN THE COMMUNITY AND TO KEEP IT IN THE COMMUNITY.

IT HAS TO DO WITH THE PROP 68 GRANT THAT WE APPROVED.

IT'S A $277,000 GRANT.

TO ALLOW THEM TO BE MORE SUSTAINABLE AND DO THINGS ON SITE.

SO THOSE DOLLARS ARE GOING TO BE USED FOR F WOODCHIPER OR THE COMPOSTER.

REUSE OF THE WASTE SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE SENT OUT AND THEN IT GOES AWAY.

THEY WANT ALL OF THAT ON SITE.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO REUSE IT IN THEIR AREAS.

THEY ARE ALSO GOING TO INSTALL FIVE ELECT VEHICLE CHARGERS.

AND THEY ARE GOING TO BE PUTTING UP BILINGU ON SUSTAINABILITY.

THIS GRANT REALLY REPRESENTS THE FIRST STEP IN THE WHOLE SUSTAINABILITY CONCEPT FOR THE LIVING DESERT.

I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

REALLY, ALSO PASSED THE CLIMATE CHANGE AND DESERT RESILIENCE POLICY.

THE WHOLE MEETING, MUCH OF THE MEETING WA SUSTAINABILITY.

LET'S SEE.

WHAT ELSE? ATTENDED THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

YOU KNOW THAT WAS SUCH AN EXAMPLE OF HOW TO DO A ZOOM MEETING SUCCESSFULLY.

IT WAS GREAT INFORMATION.

AND IT WAS FUN.

I WOULD HAVE NEVER IN MY WILDEST DREAMS THO COULD HAVE FUN ON A ZOOM MEETING WITH I DON'T HOW MANY PEOPLE.

A HUNDRED PEOPLE ON THAT CALL.

IT WAS INTERESTING.

IT WAS LIVELY AND INFORMATIVE.

IT WAS A LOT OF THINGS.

THAT WAS VERY, VERY GOOD.

ALSO THE LEGAL OF CALIFORNIA CITIES MEETING.

THAT WAS ON MONDAY NIGHT.

IT'S ALL GOOD INFORMATION.

WE HEARD FROM THE OFFICE OF GOVERNOR NEWSOM.

THERE WAS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THERE.

THE ONE THING I THOUGHT WAS EXCELLENT HAD TO DO WITH THE CITY OF PARIS.

THEY HAVE BUILT OR IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING A JOB PLACEMENT CENTER.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS THE ENVY OF ANY COMMUNITY.

20,000 SQUARE FEET, TWO FLOORS.

IT HOUSES A COMPUTER LAB, A NURSING LA MANAGEMENT SKILLS, AREA AND THE CLASSES IN LEARNING.

IT'S REALLY AN OUTSTANDING FACILITY.

IN WHAT IT DOES AND HOW IT PREPARES THE YOUTH AND OTHERS IN THAT COMMUNITY TO EXCEL IN THEIR SIGNIFICANT.

YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT IS SOMETHING TO PUT ON OUR WISH LIST.

IT'S REALLY AN OUTSTANDING ORGANIZATION THERE.

LET'S SEE WHAT ELSE DID WE DO? OH, I ATTENDED THE COACHELLA ANIMAL VACCINATION CLINIC ON SATURDAY.

HUGELY ATTENDED.

THEY HAD TO CLOSE IT A LITTLE BIT EARLY THERE WERE SO MANY ANIMALS.

ONE CONCERN I HAVE -- AND SCOTT, I KNOW IT' BROUGHT UP TO YOU.

PLEASE ALLOW ME TO ADDRESS A WIDER AUDIENCE.

LICENSING ANIMALS IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT.

HOWEVER, DURING COVID, OR FOR SIGNIFICAN TIME DURING THIS PANDEMIC, THE COUNTY, THEIR WEBSITE DOES NOT ALLOW YO LICENSE ANIMALS.

SO, IF I GET THIS RIGHT, THE FEES GO UP, AND THE SERVICES GO DOWN.

I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

I KNOW THAT COACHELLA ANIMAL NETWORK WANTED TO LICENSE VIA PAPER AND TO BE ABLE TO TURN IT IN.

THEY COULDN'T DO ANY OF IT.

SO WE HAD A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE IN THIS AT THE AVC CENTER OF PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO VACCINATE AND DO A AND THEY COULDN'T DO IT.

WE NEED TO FIX THAT.

HOW DO WE FIX IT? IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

OTHER THAN THAT, IT WAS REALLY GREAT TO SE FOLKS REALLY WANTING TO VACCINATE ALL THE ANIMALS.

[00:10:04]

IT WAS AN AMAZING SITE TO SEE THE NUMBER THAT WERE THERE IN 114-DEGREE HEAT WITH ANIMALS.

BIG ONES, LITTLE ONES, ALL SHAPES AND SIZES.

SO THANKS TO COACHELLA ANIMAL NETWORK FOR TREMENDOUS EFFORT THEY HAVE PUT THROUGH OVER THE YEARS TO MAKE SURE OUR ANIMALS HERE IN INDIO ARE TAKEN CARE OF PROPERLY.

THAT, MAYOR, ENDS MY COMMENTS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM HOLMES.

MS. AMITH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO NEXT?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THE ONLY COMMITTEE I ATTENDED WAS THIS M HAD A ZOOM CONFERENCE CALL AND MEETING OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FAIR AND THE NATI DATE FESTIVAL BOARD.

IT WAS VERY SOMBER MEETING.

AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE ARE FACING THE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO HOLD OUR 75TH ANNUAL RIVERSIDE COUNTY FAIR IN FEBRUARY OF 2021.

THE SUPERVISOR HELPED US EXPLORE SOME OPTIO WE CAN ALTERNATIVELY USE THAT SITE.

BUT, OF COURSE, WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT USING IT FOR HOSPITAL AND COVID CASES AND THE TESTING SITES, IT KIND OF LIMITS O ABILITY TO CREATE AN ATMOSPHERE FOR COMMUNITY EVENTS.

SO AT THIS TIME IT'S NOT SPECIFIC AS TO WHAT WE WILL BE DOING BUT WE ARE PLANNING TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF COMMUNITY EVENTS T BE DRIVE-THRU ORIENTED.

SO THAT WE CAN MINIMIZE THE EXPOSURE TO LARGE GROUPS.

WE HOPE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF EVE COMMUNITY CAN PARTICIPATE THAT IS AFFORDABLE, LIKE THE FAIR HAS ALWAYS BEEN.

AND IT WILL BE SAFE TO BRING EVERYONE TOGETHER.

THAT COMPLETES MY REPORT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MS. AMITH.

MR. ORTIZ?

>> MR. ORTIZ: HI.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR JOINING US TODAY.

I RECENTLY HAD A MEMBER WITH SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF TO BRAINSTORM ON RENEWABLE ENERGY AND GET PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES ARE FOR THE FUTURE OF HIGH DOE GENERAL POWER IN THE CITY OF -- HYDROGEN POWER IN THE CITY OF INDIO.

I HAD A MEETING WITH THE CONSUMER ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

ONE INTERESTING PART OF THAT MEETING WAS OUTAGES THAT HAPPENED IN MECCA WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE LOST POWER DUE TO THE POWE LINES FALLING DUE TO HIGH WINDS.

I'VE BEEN GETTING CONFLICTING INFORMATION THE HELP THAT WAS GIVEN TO SOME OF THE FAMILIES.

DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS FROM COUNTY STAFF AND I.A.D.

I HOPE TO GET SOMEONE AT THE COUNTY AT THE NEXT MEETING TO MAKE SURE WHEN THE ACCIDENTS HAPPEN TO THE RESIDENTS WE ARE OFFERING THE CORRECT HELP TO THE RESIDENTS WHO LOSE POWER.

THIS MORNING I ALSO HAD A MEETING WITH THE COACHELLA VALLEY ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP.

THEY ARE STILL SEEING TRENDS OF PEOPLE LEAVING CITIES SO THEY ARE LOOKING AT HOW TO MARKET THE VALUE FOR PEOPLE SEEKING TO LEAVE CIT WE CAN STRENGTHEN THE WORKFORCE IN THE BRING A HEALTHY BALANCE SO WE MINIMIZE DISPLACEMENT OF ANY OF OUR LOCAL FAMILIES.

THEY MENTION THE IMPORTANCE OF THE RESIDENTS FILLING OUT THE CENSUS SO THE REGION CAN AFFORD INFRASTRUCTURE.

AGAIN, ON AVERAGE, WE GAIN $20,000 IN THE REGION FOR EVERY PERSON WHO FILLS OUT THE CENSUS.

PLEASE FILL IT OUT.

IF YOU HAVEN'T YET IT'S MYCENSUS2020.ORG.

ONE OF THE MAIN ISSUES FOR BUSINESSES RIGHT NOW IS PUBLIC HEALTH.

SO THEY ARE RUNNING A MASK UP CAMPAIGN T NORMALIZE THE USE OF MASKS

[00:15:02]

FOR THE RESIDENTS.

THEY ARE STILL ASSISTING LOCAL BUSINESSES CONSULTING AND OBTAINING THE P.P.P.

LOANS AND THE COUNTY GRANTS.

RECENTLY, THEY ATTRACTED AN ELECTRIC HELICOPTER COMPANY TO MOVE THEIR OFFICES TO THE VALLEY.

THEY ARE ALSO WORKING WITH THE COUNTY TO R AEROSPACE COMPANY FROM THE E.U.

TO BERMUDA DUNES AIRPORT.

RIGHT NOW WE ARE COMPETING WITH GEORGIA TO SEE WHO CAN WIN THAT RELOCATION.

WE ARE HOPING TO BRING THEM TO BERMUDA DUNES.

THEY ARES A LOOKING AT THE DATA FROM THE P.

-- ARE ALSO LOOKING DATA FROM THE P.P.P.

LOANS AND THE BANKRUPTCY LISTS AND THEY A FOR TRENDS TO HELP US ATTRACT BUSINESSES PREDICT WHICH BUSINESSES WILL NEED HOLE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

ONE ISSUE I BROUGHT UP IN IN THE MEETING WA ALL THE BUSINESS CLOSURES AND THE SCHOOL CLOSURES WE ARE SEEING PEOPLE LOOKING START BUSINESSES FROM HOME.

FOOD BUSINESSES OR ONLINE SHOPS OR PERSONAL SERVICES.

SO I'M ASKING OUR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER DIRECTING STAFF TO WAIVE BUSINESS LICENSES FOR THE TIME BEING OR LOWER THE FEES FOR BUSINESS SO THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE THESE BUSINESSES TO WITH THE CITY.

AND TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO GET BUSINESS HELP FROM THE INDIO CHAMBER.

IF WE COULD HAVE A DISCUSSION AT SOME POINT SOON THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR TODAY.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: VERY INFORMATIVE.

THE BUSINESS LICENSES, THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN BRING UP.

I AGREE WITH YOU.

MAYBE THE FIRST YEAR TO START THEM UP AN GOING.

WE'LL FIGURE THAT OUT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INFORMATIVE PRESENTATION.

MYSELF, I HAD A COUPLE OF MEETINGS THAT WERE ACTIVE.

ONE WAS THE SUN LINE TRANSIT AGENCY.

I SIT ON THE BOARD FOR THEM.

IT WAS OUR BUDGET TIME.

EVEN THOUGH COVID HIT THEM HARD.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE RIDING BUSES BECAUSE OF CONCERNS AND ALSO PEOPLE NOT WORKING, THEY ARE ABLE TO BALANCE THE BUDGET U SOME OF THE RESERVES.

AND AT THE SAME TIME UTILIZING CARES MONE GOT TO GO FORWARD.

THE BUDGET IS BALANCED.

THEY ARE CONTINUING TO USE THE ROUTES BUT THEY LOOK TO CHANGE THEM TO CONTINUE TO BE FEASIBLE WITH THEM.

BUT ALSO NOT TO LOSE MONEY.

KEEP THAT IN TUNE.

ANYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO SEE IS SUNLINE.ORG.

I WILL TELL THE ROUTES -- IT WILL TELL THE ROUTES AND IF THERE IS SOMETHING CHANGING.

WE ALSO GOT A PRESENTATION BY THE GENERAL MANAGER WHERE EVERY BUS IN THEIR FLEET WILL BE RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2035.

WHICH IS GREAT NEWS.

VERY, VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

WE HAVE AN OUTSTANDING STAFF AT SUN LINE DOING EXCITING THINGS WITH THE HYDROGEN CELL BUSES.

WE ARE THE STATE-OF-THE-ART AND THE ENVY O LINES THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES.

MY HAT IS OFF TO THEM.

ON THE CVAC, THE CITY MANAGER AND I WERE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

WE DID A ZOOM MEETING.

JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS THERE.

A LITTLE MORE CUMBERSOME BUT WE DID THE BUDGET FOR CVAG.

IT WAS APPROVED AND AT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

AND OUR ROTATION GOES IN, THE CHAIRMAN WAS MR. GROOBI, THE CHAIRMAN OF ALA CALIENTE AND HIS TERM ENDED IN JUNE.

THIS MONTH IN JULY I WILL TAKE OVER AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FOR THE REMINDER OF THE TERM.

SO THAT IS EXCITING TO DO THAT.

THANK YOU, MS. AMITH.

SHE WENT WITH THE CITY AND NOT THE ACTUAL INDIVIDUAL.

THAT IS WHY WE ARE IN ROTATION.

AND HONORED BY MY PEERS.

I USED TO BE THE CHAIRMAN OF IT.

I HAVE BEEN THERE FOR A YEAR AND THEY NAMED ME THE VICE CHAIR TO HELP THEM, WITH GRANTS THEY ARE GETTING NOW CAME WHEN I WAS THERE.

VERY HONORED FOR THAT.

I WANT TO THANK JACK LOPE RANCH, PUBLIC SAF AND FIRE.

THEY HOSTED FIRST RESPONDERS LUNCHEN AT JACK LOPE, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS CLOSED.

THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND RESPONDERS WERE ABLE TO GET

[00:20:18]

KIND LOVE, I GUESS YOU WANT TO SAY.

THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING THEIR TAILS OFF.

HE HOSTED A LUNCHEON AND WE HAD A GREAT TURNOUT OF THE CAL FIRE TEAMS. INDIO FIRE, IS HOW I CLASSIFY THEM AND T P.D.

THANK YOU, CHIEF.

PLEASE CONTINUE TO THANK THE TROOPS.

MR. MARCUS WILL SOMETHING FOR HIM WHEN W CHANCE.

THEN THE LAST ONE IS REALLY ON THE COVID-19.

YOU KNOW, WE ARE GOING BACK AND FORTH.

YOU HAVE TO BEAR WITH US.

YOU HAVE HEARD THE NUMBERS.

YOU SEE EVERYTHING THAT GOES OUT THERE.

WE AGREED TO DO MASKS UP FRONT.

EVERY ONE OF OUR BUSINESSES HAS A MASK TO GET REQUIRED IN.

THE CITY OF INDIO HAS A SURGE GOING ON L OTHER OF THE CITIES THAT ARE BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE TO WORK.

WE HAVE THE MOST ESSENTIAL WORKERS.

WE ARE BY FAR THE LARGEST CITY.

BUT OUR NUMBERS ARE 2,014 OFFICIALLY TODAY OF COVID CASES.

WE HAVE 46 DEATHS.

WE NEED TO START TO GET A HANDLE ON THIS.

THE GOVERNOR HAS CLOSED DOWN ALL THE BUSINESSES.

BUT WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO UTILIZE COMMON SENSE AND THEN USE THE FOUR GUIDELINES.

ENHANCED CLEANING.

MAKE SURE YOU ARE MASKING UP.

ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE NOT AROUND YOUR FAMIL FRIENDS.

THIRDLY, SOCIAL DISTANCING.

FOURTHLY, WHEN YOU DO IT, WASH YOUR HANDS CONTINUAL BASIS.

WE NEED TO HELP EACH OTHER TO HELP STOP THE SPREAD.

UNFORTUNATELY THE GOVERNOR HAS CLOSED STUFF DOWN.

[6. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND INFORMATION]

BUT WE NEED TO PROTECT NOT ONLY OURSELVES THE FAMILIES WE LOVE AND THE PEOPLE AROUND US.

EASIEST WAY TO DO THAT IS FOLLOW THE RULES GET OUT OF THIS.

THERE IS NOBODY WILL TELL US HOW THIS THING TURNS OUT.

I KNOW WE ALL WANT OUR FREEDOM AND INDEPEN BUT IN THE MEANTIME WE HAVE TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO PROTECT EACH OTHER AND OURSELVES GET THE BUSINESSES OPEN.

THANK YOU.

END MY REPORT.

MOVE TO ITEM 4.

THE REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION.

HOLD ON.

CITY ATTORNEY -- MR. FERMON, I WANT TO LET YOU.

YOU ARE WORKING ON THE CENSUS.

CAN YOU GIVE US AN UPDATE ON HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS?

>> MR. FERMON: I WANT TO CONTINUE FOR THE MAYOR'S COMMENTS ABOUT COVID.

WHAT COVID-19 HAS DONE TO THE ECONOMY AND THE CITIES, IT MADE US TIGHTEN OUR BELTS WITH THE BUDGET.

NOT JUST THE CITY OF INDIO.

EVERYONE.

THAT MAKES THE CENSUS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT FOR FOLKS TO GET THIS FILLED OUT.

WHAT THE CENSUS DOES, IT AFFECTS THE AMOUNT FUNDING WE GET IN THE COMMUNITIES AS IT PERTAINS TO SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS, FIRE DEPARTMENTS.

AND ALSO NEW HOMES, BUSINESSES.

AND IT ALSO AFFECTS THE NUMBER OF SEATS W IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

REPRESENTATION IS VERY IMPORTANT IN OUR COMMUNITY.

WHAT THE PUBLIC ALSO HAS TO UNDERSTAND INFORMATION THAT YOU ARE PROVIDING CANNOT NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER REASON OTHER THAN THE CENSUS.

IT'S AGAINST THE LAW FOR YOUR INFORMATION TO BE USED.

I KNOW THAT IS A CONCERN WITH SOME OF THE TALK TO.

SO, PLEASE, TAKE A COUPLE OF SECONDS TO GO ONLINE.

CENSUS 2020.

FILL OUT YOUR CENSUS.

YOU CAN CALL AND GET YOUR CENSUS FILLED OUT.

AND IN AN EFFORT TO SUPPORT THAT MYSELF ALONG WITH SOME OF THE OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS WITHIN THE CITY OF INDIO AND REGIONALLY WILL BE TAKING PART IN A CARAVAN THIS SATURDAY STARTING AT THE MILES PARK IN INDIO AT 8:30 A.M.

WE WILL BE DRIVING THROUGH SOME OF THE COM MAKING FOLKS AWARE OF THE CENSUS.

GIVING YOU KIND, FRIENDLY REMINDER.

WE WILL CONTINUE THROUGH THE COMMUNITIES.

WE WILL CONCLUDE IN COACHELLA AT BAGDUMA PARK.

AND WE ARE GOING TO BE HARPING ON THIS.

I WILL.

I WILL BE VERY ACTIVE ON CENSUS.

LIKE I SAID INITIALLY, WE ARE HAVING TO BELTS WITH FUNDING.

RIGHT NOW MORE THAN EVER THIS IS GOING TO B IMPORTANT THAT THE COMMUNITY PARTICIPATES IN IT.

RIGHT NOW, THE CITY OF INDIO HAS THE LOWEST FOLKS WHO FILLED OUT THEIR CENSUS.

I WANT TO BEAT THE OTHER CITIES.

SO LET'S DO IT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ABSOLUTELY.

>> MR. FERMON: THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT.

[7. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA]

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU FOR GETTING BACK IN.

I WANT TO THANK LEILA FOR HER DEDICATION SURE THAT SHE IS LEADING THE CHARGE FOR THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS.

IT REALLY IS VERY IMPORTANT, NOT ONLY TO BE COUNTED BUT FOR THE DOLLARS THAT COME BACK FOR THAT.

WITH THAT, I WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4, REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION.

CITY ATTORNEY?

>> YES, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

THE CITY COUNCIL MET IN CLOSED SESSION FI LISTED IN THE CLOSED SESSION AGENDA EXCEPT FOR THERE IS NO REPORTA ACTION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, CITY ATTORNEY.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 6.

THE CITY MANAGER REPORT.

MR. SCOTT?

>> THANK YOU.

I DON'T HAVE MUCH.

EARLIER TODAY, I SENT THE COUNCIL SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE C.A.R.E.S.

ACT FUNDING THAT HAS ALLOCATED TO CITIES.

INDIO DESIGNATED FOR THE 1.12 -- 1.12 MILLI ALLEGATION.

THERE IS STILL, WE ARE STILL WORKING ON UNDERSTANDING PRECISELY WHAT IS ELIGIBLE WITH THOSE FUNDS.

THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA IS THE SAME AS WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ESTABLISHED IN AUTHORIZING THE CARES ACT.

BUT HOW IT TRANSLATES TO WHAT CITY IS AL SPEND IT ON IS STILL SOMEWHAT UP IN THE AIR.

WE ARE STILL WORKING ON THAT.

I BRING IT UP NOW ONLY BECAUSE THERE IS A FRAME WITHIN THE FUNDS HAVE TO BE SPENT.

AND IF IN FACT WE COME UP SOME THOUGHTS A CAN USE SOME OF THIS MONEY,

[00:25:09]

BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING IN AUGUST, IT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL FOR US TO ACTUALLY DO A SPECIAL MEETING TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

TIME MAY BE OF THE ESSENCE IN ALLOCATING THE FUNDS.

SO WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO FIND YET.

ALL THE CITIES ARE GOING THROUGH THIS TOGETHER.

THERE WAS A WEBINAR LAST HOUR THAT SCOTT PARTICIPATED IN SO WE MAY SHORTLY HAVE INFORMATION ON THIS.

BUT I WANT THE COUNCIL TO KNOW WE ARE WORKING ON IT.

IF NEEDED I'LL ASK FOR A SPECIAL MEETING TO WHAT TO DO WITH THE FUNDS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 7.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA.

TIME SET ASIDE FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS OR COMMENTS ON A SPECIFIC ITEM MAY BE SUBMITTED VIA THE CITY CLERK'S WEBSITE.

CITY CLERK, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ON THE LINE?

>> I HAVE ONE PERSON.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ON THE LINE?

>> ON THE PHONE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

>> OKAY.

NO ANSWER.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

SO IF NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE THAT WANTS AND NOTHING TO BE READ IN THE RECORD.

>> LET ME CHECK ANY E-MAIL REAL FAST.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MOVE TO THE CONSENT -- >> I DO HAVE ONE.

I DO HAVE ONE TO READ.

OKAY.

THIS MESSAGE IS FROM ASHLEY VEGA.

"GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.

I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY SAYING I WISH I C PERSONALLY BUT I READ ON MY

[8. CONSENT CALENDAR]

BEHALF AS I'M STUCK AT WORK.

I'M ASHLEY.

YOUNG ACTIVIST IN EAST COACHELLA VALLEY AND RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF INDIO.

IN THE CURRENT SOCIAL CLIMATE, POLICY REA REALLOCATION OF FUNDS IS A MAIN FOCUS.

AS YOU MAY KNOW, IT HAS LED TO AS A CITY MANAGER, MARK SCOTT SAID A CONCERN OF THE SPECIFIC ITEMS ON THE BUDGET.

IN THE LAST MEETING, MR. SCOTT MADE AN EM ON THIS CONCERN BEING UNFAIR SINCE THE COUNCIL REVIEW THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

YES, THE BUDGET HAS YET TO BE REVIEWED.

YES, IT IS NOT THE FINAL BUDGET.

BUT AS MAYOR GLENN MILLER SAID IT'S PRETTY ACCURATE.

IT WASN'T THROWN TOGETHER.

[9.a. A public hearing to adopt Resolution 10165, granting a 12-month time extension for Tentative Tract Map No. 37075 and Resolution 10166 granting a 12-month time extension for Tentative Tract Map 37076 for a project located within the Northgate Specific Plan/Master Plan area]

MR. SCOTT SEEM TO PERCEIVE THE OUTRAGE AS A REACTION TO THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD.

I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM MR. SCOTT IT IS AN O AND REACTION TO OUR OWN REPRESENTATIVE OFFICIALS.

INEFFICIENTLY DISTRIBUTING A LARGE MONEY AND FUND TOWARD SOMETHING THE PEOPLE HAD SENT OVER 50 COMPLAINTS ON.

I FIND IT NECESSARY TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THE PEOPLE, DON'T WISH FOR THE ECONOMY TO GO FALL.

IN ORDER FOR THE COUNCIL TO REVIEW OPTIONS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET.

IT IS ALSO MORE IMPORTANT, MORE THAN NECES REMIND EACH REPRESENTATIVE THAT YOUR TASK AS ELECTED AND NONELECTED OFFICIALS PAID WITH TAXES.

WHEN THE PUBLIC REACHES OUT TO DEMAND REALLOCATION TO THE FUNDS TO SOCIAL SERVICES AND EDUCATION IT IS YOUR JOB TO USE YOUR POWER GIVEN BY THE PEOPLE TO ADJUST THE DRAFTED BUDGET RATHER THAN DECIDE AS INDIVIDUALS THAN THE EFFORTS PUT IN THE BUDGET.

IT IS MORE VALUABLE.

MR. SCOTT EXPRESSED FUNDS AVAILABLE TO DO PROJECTS WE WOULD HAVE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO A YEAR AGO.

OR LONGER AVAILABLE -- ARE NO LONGER AVAILABLE.

IF THE FUNDS WERE AVAILABLE LAST YEAR, WHY PROJECTS DONE? OUR REPRESENTATIVES ALONG WITH OUR CITY M IT CLEAR THAT REALLOCATING FUNDS IS NO ISSUE WHEN IT IS CONSTANTLY DONE TO OUR SOCIAL SERVICES.

YET, IT CANNOT BE DONE TO THEIR OWN POCKETS TO BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY.

BUDGET IS NOT FINAL.

THAT HAS BEEN MADE CLEAR.

SO I MAKE IT CLEAR IN RETURN THAT REALLOCATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AND DISCUSSED.

ASHLEY." THAT IS IT, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

MOVE TO ITEM 8 NOW THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

"A" THROUGH "I." IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO PULL AN ITEM OR ANYBODY WHO HAS COMMENTS? WE CAN GET A MOTION.

[00:30:04]

>> MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONCEPT CALENDAR.

>> MAYOR MILLER: FIRST BY COUNCILMEMBER FERMON.

SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MAYOR PRO TEM HOLMES.

ROLL CALL, VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER AMITH?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER FERMON?

>> MR. FERMON: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER ORTIZ?

>> MR. ORTIZ: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLMES?

>> MS. HOLMES: AYE.

>> MAYOR MILLER?

>> MAYOR MILLER: AYE.

PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0.

NOW TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THE CITY ATTORNEY WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING ON ITEM "A." >> YES.

ON ITEM 9A, MAYOR MILLER -- EXCUSE ME.

ON THE TRACT MAP 37076.

THERE ARE NEW RULES NOW WITH RESPECT TO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

AND BEFORE THE RULE WAS WITHIN 500 FEET YO CONFLICT.

BUT NOW THE RULES HAVE BEEN REVISED SO YOU HAVE TO DO AN ANALYSIS IF YOUR PROPERTY IS WITHIN 500 TO 1,000 FEET.

A VERY PORTION OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN TH HOME AND OUTSKIRTS OF TENTATIVE MAP 37076 LOCATED IN THAT DELTA BETWEEN 500 AND 1,000 FEET.

BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO A FURTHER ANALYSIS, I SUGGESTED TO THE MAYOR THAT HE RECUSE HIMSELF IF THIS ITEM SHOULD COME BACK AGAIN WE WILL LOOK AT IT FURTHER.

HE WILL RECUSE HIMSELF FROM BOTH OF THE ITEM THOUGH IT ONLY AFFECTS MAPS 37076 AND VICE MAYOR HOLMES WILL TAKE OVER.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

>> MS. HOLMES: OKAY.

ITEM NUMBER 9A, PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT R 10165.

GRANTING A 12-MONTH TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 37075 AND RESOLUTION 10166.

GRANTING A 12-MONTH TIME EXTENSION FOR THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 37076 FOR A PROJECT LOCATEAGE WITH THE NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN/MASTER PLAN AREA.

MR. SNYDER?

>> THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR PRO TEM AND THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

AS NOTED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM PERTAINING TO TIME EXTENSION REQUEST FOR TWO TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS.

AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE LEILA THE SENIOR PLANNER TO GIVE A STAFF PRESENTATION AND QUESTIONS THAT THE COUNCIL MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU.

>> GOOD EVENING, MADAM PRAYER PRO TEM AN PLANNING COMMISSION.

I'M LEILA, THE SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE C DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

AS MR. SNYDER STATED, THE PROJECT BEFORE YOU IS TIME EXTENSION FOR TWO TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 37075 AND 37076.

THE LOCATION OF THESE TWO TRACT MAPS ARE WI NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN.

WHICH IS THE 75 IS WITHIN THE RED CIRCLE APPROXIMATELY.

AND THEN THE 76 WITHIN THE YELLOW SQUARE.

THE RECTANGLE.

SO THE TRACT 76 BASICALLY WILL BE AJISSANT WITH THE -- ADJACENT WITH THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL FACILITIES.

THE OTHER IS ADJACENT TO CURRENT RESIDENTIAL HOMES.

THE TRACT 37075 PROPOSES 49 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND 9.9 ACRE LOT.

THE OTHER TRACT PROPOSES 66 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON ABOUT 13.85 ACRES SITE.

THE HISTORY ON THIS PROJECT IS ORIGINALLY THE NORTHGATE, A SPECIFIC PLAN APPROVED IN 2007.

BOTH MAPS WERE APPROVED BE OCTOBER, ON OCTOBER 19, 2016.

FOR TWO YEARS.

ONE TIME EXTENSION WAS GRANTED.

ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION GRANTED TO THE APP OCTOBER 19, 2019.

THE SECOND TIME EXTENSION WAS GRANTED LAST YEAR BY THE COUNCIL TO OCTOBER 19, 2020.

THE NEW PROPOSAL IS ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION.

AND THE REASON FOR IT THE APPLICANT IS WITH ESCROW AGREEMENT WITH THE BEAZER HOMES AND ONE OF THE CONDITIONS ON THE ESCROW AGREEMENT IS THE CONTINGENCY UPON ANOTHER TIME EXTENSION.

IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES THIS TIME EXTENSION, BOTH MAPS WILL EXPIRE OCTOBER 19, 2021.

AND STILL THE MAP COULD RECEIVE THREE ADDI TIME, ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSIONS.

AND ONE ADMINISTRATIVE TIME EXTENSION BY THE DIRECTOR.

[00:35:14]

BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, RECOMMENDS ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION 10165 TO APPROVE BOTH TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER IF YOU HAVE ANY QU ME AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS JOINING TELECOMMUNICATION AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

>> MS. HOLMES: OKAY.

BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING DOES COUNC ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> I DO BUT I CAN'T SEE YOU.

>> LEILA, I PRESUME.

>> YOU CAN'T SEE ME, COUNCILMEMBER AMITH?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: NOW I CAN SEE EVERYBODY.

SO DO WE HAVE PROOF THIS IS IN ESCROW.

AND IF SO, I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT BEAZER TIME THE PROJECT.

IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN 2016.

SO I'M, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR THIS PROJECT.

I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THAT.

>> SURE.

AS PART OF THE STAFF REPORT, I HAVE ATTACHED A COPY OF THAT ESCROW AGREEMENT AND ALSO THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO PROVIDE MORE DET THE TIMELINE.

>> FOR BEAZER?

>> NO.

THE APPLICANT FOR THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, MR. PAUL OLIVER.

>> WELL, HE CAN'T ANSWER WHEN CONSTRUCTIO TO START, I DON'T THINK.

IF HE CAN, THAT IS GREAT.

THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.

>> MS. HOLMES: I THINK AT THIS POINT I WI PUBLIC HEARING.

IN LIEU OF A GAVEL, PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>> YEAH, MR. OLIVER, I THINK COUNCIL WOMAN LUPE RAMOS AMITH WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE INFORMATION ON THE TIMELINE FROM BEAZER WHEN THEY ARE GOING TO START CONSTRUCTION.

>> HOPEFULLY YOU CAN HEAR ME.

GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.

CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCILMEN.

THIS IS PAUL OLIVER, THE APPLICANT OF THE ROYAL VISTA PARTNERS FOR NORTHGATE 48 AND 69.

THE CURRENT TIMELINE FOR THE BUILDER TO COMPLETE THE DUE DILIGENCE AND -- WELL, EVERYTHING GOT DELAYED BECAUSE OF COVID.

SO I HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THIS.

IT IS PROBABLE GOING TO BE APPROVE -- PROBABLY GOING TO BE APPROVED IN NOVEMBER AND LAND DEVELOPMENT WOULD START THE LATE FOURTH Q FIRST QUARTER 2021.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I'M LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORT.

I SEE THE PURCHASE FOR PULTE GROUP? I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BEAZER.

>> SO, ORIGINALLY, WE ACTUALLY OPENED ESC BEAZER.

THEN COVID HIT.

THEN BEAZER PUT EVERYTHING ON HOLD.

THEY NOTIFIED US AFTER WE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION WITH THE CITY.

THEY NOTIFIED US AT THE END OF JUNE THEY WERE GOING TO WALK.

WE WENT OUT AND REMARKETED IT.

WE HAVE AN OFFER FROM PULTE AND OFFER FROM THE L.G.I.

HOMES TO PURCHASE.

WE ARE GOING BACK AND FORTH TO SEE WHO WE FORWARD WITH.

BUT THE TIMELINE IS PROBABLE THE SAME.

ALL OF THEM ARE LOOKING FOR THE SAME THING.

THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MAP IS EXTENDED SO THEY DON'T GET STUCK WITH PURCHASING THE PROPERTY WITH THE MAP OUTSTANDING.

WE STILL HAVE TO FINALIZE THE ENGINEERIN HAVE TALKED TO JUAN RIA ABOUT.

WE KNOW THOSE STEPS THAT WILL BE TAKEN.

IT WILL TAKE TWO MONTHS TO FINISH THAT WORK.

AND THEN THEY WILL CLOSE.

SO THE TIMELINE IS STILL THE SAME.

>> OKAY.

I NEED TO GET BACK TO STAFF.

I NEED TO ASK THEM A QUESTION NOW.

>> MS. HOLMES: GO AHEAD.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THANK YOU, MR. ONIFER.

I REMEMBER YOU CAME AND SPOKE WITH US LAST YEAR.

[00:40:01]

STAFF, SO GIVEN THAT THIS PROPERTY IS TRANSITIONING HANDS AND GIVEN THE CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS WITH THE PANDEMIC, DO WE HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO CONSIDER A TWO-YEAR EXTENSION TO GIVE ENOUGH TIME FOR THE ESCROW TO CLOSE AND FOR THE NEW OWNER TO START HIS PROCESS?

>> PER OUR ORGANIZE THIS SAYS 12 MONTH.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE COUNCIL CAN EXTEND TO TWO YEARS.

I WILL DEFER THE ANSWER TO MS. DIAZ IF I MAY.

>> CITY ATTORNEY DO YOU HAVE THE ANSWER?

>> SHE INDICATED THE ORDINANCE IS 12 MONT BELIEVE THERE IS THE ABILITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE THE ADDITIONAL TIME EXTENSIONS.

LET ME LOOK AT THE CODE REALLY QUICKLY UN MR. SNYDER KNOWS OFFHAND IF IT'S 12 MONTHS PER THE CODE? IT'S 12 MONTHS PER THE CODE?

>> THE CODE SAYS 12 MONTHS.

>> SO WE WOULD HAVE TO DO EXTENSION PERIODS.

SO AFTER THIS EXTENSION, I BELIEVE THEY ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THREE MORE EXTENSIONS.

SO THAT IS THE WAY IT WOULD WORK.

IT KEEPS -- >> WHY ARE T ELIGIBLE FOR THREE MORE EXTENSIONS?

>> PER THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, THEY ARE E SIX YEARS, I BELIEVE.

SO, THAT IS THE ELIGIBILITY -- >> THIS IS YEAR.

THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING.

>> THE FIRST APPROVAL WAS 2016.

SO THE FIRST TIME THEY GET TWO YEARS.

SO THAT IS WHY THEY GOT TWO YEARS.

THEN THEY HAD TWO MORE EXTENSION.

>> SO THAT IS FOUR YEARS.

IF WE GIVE THEM THIS ONE THAT IS FIVE YEARS.

SO THEY ONLY HAVE ONE MORE YEAR EXTENSION.

>> THEY GET SIX EXTENSIONS.

SO -- >> SIX EXTENSIONS.

>> YES.

>> WHY CAN'T WE DO A TWO-YEAR IF WE DID IT BEFORE?

>> LET ME LOOK AT THE CODE.

>> GO AHEAD WITH THE PRESENTATION.

WHEREVER WE ARE AT.

>> JUST THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL FOR THE TRA IS TWO YEARS.

AFTER THAT IT'S EVERY 12 MONTHS THEY CAN EXTEND IT.

>> WE CAN ONLY EXTEND IT FOR 12 MONTHS.

>> DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THE PRESENTATION OR ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I CONCLUDED MY PRESENTATION.

I'M AVAILABLE HERE FOR QUESTIONS.

>> OKAY.

I WILL LOOK AT THAT.

>> IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WISHES TO S PUBLIC HEARING? COUNCILMEMBER FERMON OR COUNCILMEMBER ORTIZ? ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO.

I'M OKAY.

>> OKAY.

NO ONE ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK.

>> TO JUST ADD TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER AMITH WAS SAYING, WE CAN AFTER THE 12-MONTH EXTENSION BY THE COUNCIL THE DIRECTOR ALLOW ANOTHER 12 MONTH ADMINISTRATIVELY.

SO WE CAN ENTERTAIN THAT.

SO IT WOULD BE TWO YEARS BASICALLY.

>> OKAY.

SO IF THE COUNCIL DESIRES TO EXTEND, I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO RECOMMENDING THAT WHEN THE NEW BUYER COMES IN THAT THE STAFF HAS THAT AUTHORITY.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT.

>> IF I CAN JUMP IN.

SO IN READING THE CODE, IT SAYS THAT THE CI MAY APPROVE ADDITIONAL EXTENSION PROVIDED THAT THE TOTAL EXTENSIO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TIME FRAMES PRESCRIBED SUBDIVISION MAP ACT.

[9.b. A public hearing to adopt Resolution No. 10164, levying the annual waste charge for Fiscal Year 2020-2021]

SO IT DOES READ THAT YOU ARE NOT LIMITED TO MONTHS.

IT DOES INDICATE THAT THE DIRECTOR HAS THE ABILITY TO DO A ONE-YEAR ADMINISTRATIVE EXTENSION.

SO, YOU CAN IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

I WOULD NEED CONFIRMATION FROM THE PLANNING STAFF THAT THERE IS THE ABILITY TO DO A TWO-YEAR TODAY WITHOUT A PROBLEM.

THAT IS THE WAY THE CODE READS.

>> YEAH.

THERE IS NO PROBLEM AS FAR AS PLANNING S CONCERNED.

>> SO THAT HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

>> OKAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL IN APPROVING OR NOT? IN TERMS OF A MOTION?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: CAN I MAKE A MOTION?

>> YES.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I WOULD LIKE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 10165 GRANTING A 24-MONTH TIME EXTENSION FOR THE TENTATIVE TRACT MA AND RESOLUTION 10166 GRANTING ANOTHER 24-MONTH EXTENSION FOR THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 37076.

TO EXTEND THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THE BOTH M OCTOBER 19, 2022.

MR. ONIFER, I REALLY HOPE THIS COMES FORWARD FOR YOU.

>> I SECOND IT.

>> GREAT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER AMITH AND SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER

[00:45:02]

FERMON.

ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER AMITH?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER FERMON?

>> MR. FERMON: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER ORTIZ?

>> MR. ORTIZ: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLMES?

>> MS. HOLMES: AYE.

>> IT PASSES 4-0.

BRING THE MAYOR BACK.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

I HOPE IT GETS BUILT SOON.

THANK YOU.

>> MS. HOLMES: BEST OF LUCK WITH THAT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

SO WE MOVED ON TO ITEM 2.

"B." ITEM "B," WH PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.

10164, LEVYING THE ANNUAL WASTE CHARGE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021.

MR. WASSIL?

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL.

TIMOTHY WASSIL, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.

[9.c. Public hearing to adopt Resolution No. 10167, approving Engineer’s Annual Levy Report for the Landscape and Lighting Districts (Numbers 01-22, 24-29, and 31-54) for Fiscal Year 2020/2021, and Resolution No. 10168, ordering the levy and collection of assessments within the fifty-two Landscape and Lighting Districts for Fiscal Year 2020/2021]

THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS TO LEVY THE ANNUAL WASTE CHARGE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021.

SO THIS IS FOR BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.

BASICALLY THE RATE IS GOING UP PER P.P.I. PRICE INDEX OF 1.43% PER THE AGREEMENT THAT BERTECK.

THAT INCREASES THE RESIDENTIAL RATE BY 89 GOING UP TO $17.66 PER MONTH.

IT INCREASES THE MONTHLY CHARGE FOR COMMER $3.20 GOING UP TO $124.90 PER MONTH.

IT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION TO CONDUCT AND HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING.

IF COUNCIL SO DESIRE TO ADOPT THE RESOLUT 10164 LEVYING THE ANNUAL WASTE CHARGE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021.

MR. FRANK ORLETT AND SARAH TOYOTA FROM STAFF ARE HERE FOR ANY PARTICULAR QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MR. WASSIL.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE WE O PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY.

WITH THAT, WE'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR MR. ORLETT FROM BERTECH HERE? OKAY.

NO.

CITY CLERK, COMMENTS?

>> NO COMMENTS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

WITH NO OTHER DISCUSSION, THEN, I'LL CLOSE HEARING.

WHAT IS THE WISH OF THE COUNCIL ON ITEM "B"?

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION LEVYING THE ANNUAL WASTE CHARGE FOR FISCAL 2020-2021.

>> SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: FIRST BY MAYOR PRO TEM HOLMES AND SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER FERMON.

ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER AMITH?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER FERMON?

>> MR. FERMON: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER ORTIZ?

>> MR. ORTIZ: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLMES?

>> MS. HOLMES: AYE.

>> MAYOR MILLER?

>> MAYOR MILLER: AYE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT.

MOVE TO ITEM "C," PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT R NO.

10167 APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S ANNUAL LEVY REPORT FOR THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NUMBER 01-22, 24-29, AND 31-54, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2021/2021 AND RESOLUTION NO.

10168 ORDERING COLLECTION OF THE ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE 52 LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICTS FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021.

MR. WASSIL, GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

I'M STILL TIM WASSIL PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY.

THE ITEM BEFORE YOU WAS HEARD AT THE LAST C COUNCIL MEETING.

ACCORDINGLY YOU SET THE PUBLIC HEARING TODAY.

IT'S OUR RECOMMENDATION TO HOLD A PUBLIC H CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND ADOPT BOTH RESOLUTION.

THE FIRST APPROVE THE ANNUAL LEVY REPOR LANDSCAPE AND THE LIGHTING DISTRICT NUMBER 1-22, 24-29 AND 31-54.

FOR FISCAL 2020-2021.

AND ALSO NO.

10168 ORDERING THE LEVY AND COLLECTING THE ASSESSMEN WITHIN THE 52 LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICTS SAME FISCAL YEAR.

THE PROCESS TIME LINE IS TODAY IS A PUBLIC AND THE ASSESSMENT WILL BE FILED WITH ASSESSOR ON AUGUST 10.

I HAVE MS. SUSANNA HERNANDEZ FROM WELDON AND PAUL STALMA HERE IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OR OUR CONSULTANT FOR THE QUESTION?

[00:50:02]

MS. AMITH, GO AHEAD.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: EITHER MR. SCOTT OR MR. WASSIL.

I HOPE YOU REMEMBER MY COMMENTS FROM LAST TIME.

THERE IS NO MENTION IN THE STAFF REPORT ON PLAN OF ACTION TO PUT A STOP TO THE L.L.D.

WE ARE SUBSIDIZING.

I KNOW THIS IS JUST ASSESSING L.L.D.S AGAIN.

BUT CAN IT BE ADDRESSED IN THIS?

>> YOU ARE RIGHT.

I MADE MY COMMENT ABOUT THAT IN THE E-MAIL THAT I SENT OVER THE WEEKEND THAT WE ARE JUST SIMPLY THROUGH ON WHAT WE STARTED AT THE LAST MEETING.

WE DID GET COUNCIL DIRECTION ON HOW TO PROCEED ON THOSE CASES.

WE WILL FOLLOW THAT DIRECTION.

BUT WE COULDN'T DO IT BY TODAY.

SO WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY IS JUST LEVYI FISCAL YEAR.

>> RIGHT.

I UNDERSTAND YOU GOT COUNCIL DIRECTION TO PROCEED FOR THIS YEAR.

BUT I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO COME UP WITH SOME PLAN SO THAT WE DON'T KEEP SUBSIDIZING THESE FOR PERPETUITY.

>> I AGREE.

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED TO DO.

BUT IT'S ONLY BEEN TWO WEEKS SINCE THE COUNCIL MEET SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T DONE IT.

>> THIS ISN'T THE APPROPRIATE VEHICLE TO THAT WITH?

>> I DON'T -- THIS DOESN'T -- >> NO.

>> THIS DOESN'T BEGIN TO DO THAT.

NO.

>> CITY ATTORNEY SAID NO?

>> THIS IS JUST THE LEVY FOR THIS YEAR TAX BILL.

>> THIS IS THE LEVY, THE PROCESS OF THE LEV STARTED TWO AND A HALF MONTHS AGO.

IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU WERE DISCUSSING WITH THE GENERAL FUND CONTRIBUTION IT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.

AND ALSO IF I RECALL CORRECTLY IT'S TO GO AND TO ASSESS OR TO TAKE A VOTE IN ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENTS AND TAKE OFF THE -- AND INCLUDE AN ANNUAL INFLATOR WHICH ISN'T THERE.

THAT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT PROCESS.

>> WHAT I CAN COMMIT TO IS WE WILL COME B COUNCIL IN THE NEXT MONTH WITH THAT PLAN LAID OUT.

SO THAT -- >> MS. RAMOS AMITH: RIGHT.

[9.d. Public hearing to adopt Resolution No. 10169, approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Resolution No. 10170 adopting the Citrus Plaza II Specific Plan for a 9.19 acre vacant parcel of land located east of Jefferson Street and approximately 700 feet north of Avenue 50 (Assessor’s Parcel Number 602-090- 006)]

YOU KNOW, THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE RESIDENTS INCREASE IN THE TAX IS VERY LOW.

WE ALL KNOW THAT.

BUT I WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR TO THE RESIDENTS IF THEY DO NOT WANT TO INCREASE THEIR ASSESSMENT, THEN THE CITY IS GOING TO CEASE SUBSIDIZING IT.

>> CORRECT.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THAT IS REALLY WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE COME BACK.

>> YES.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ANYTHING ELSE? I THINK WE ALL AGREE IN THAT.

HOW WE GET THERE IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S PROP 218, WE'LL HAVE TO GO INTO THAT.

WE DON'T ALSO WANT TO DESTROY OUR COMMUNI BY LETTING THE LANDSCAPE GO AND DIE.

SO WE HAVE TO LOOK BACK IF THERE IS SOME KIN FUNDING WE CAN GET FOR, YOU KNOW, LOW MAINTENANCE LANDSCAPE SOMEHOW OR SOMETHING.

NOT EVEN FOR I.W.A.

IT COULD BE FROM SOMETHING ELSE.

THERE WILL BE A LOT OF OPTIONS TO THIS, MR. SCOTT.

>> I AGREE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: WE ARE HERE AND WE ALL AGREE BUT HOW WE GET THERE IS GOING TO BE A UNIQUE SITUATION.

>> YEP.

THAT IS WHY IT TAKES MORE THAN TWO WEEKS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: YEP.

AGREE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING OF STAFF OR THE CONSULTANT? OKAY.

OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM "C." IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS OR WOULD TALK TO THE CONSULTANT? ANYBODY ON THE LINE OR ANY COMMENTS THAT NEED TO BE READ IN THE RECORD? NO? NO? OKAY.

THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IT WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.

10167, APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S ANNUAL LEVY REPORT FOR THE LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICTS NUMBERS 01-22, 24-29, AND 31-54 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 AND RESOLUTION NO.

10168 ORDERING THE LEVY AND THE COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS WITHIN THE 52 LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021.

>> MAYOR MILLER: WE CAN TAKE IT TOGETHER? I TAKE IT? OKAY.

GET A ROLL CALL VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER AMITH?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: NEIGH.

>> COUNCILMEMBER FERMON?

>> MR. FERMON: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER ORTIZ?

>> MR. ORTIZ: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLMES?

>> MS. HOLMES: AYE.

>> MAYOR MILLER?

>> MAYOR MILLER: AYE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: PASSES 4-1 WITH NAY ON MS. AMITH.

THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING IS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 10169 APPROVING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORI REPORTING PROGRAM FOR RESOLUTION NO.

10170 IDON'TING THE CITRUS PLAZA II SPECIFIC 9.19 ACRE VACANT PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED JEFFERSON STREET AND APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 50.

WE HAVE IT WITH YOU, MR. SNYDER?

>> YES.

GOOD EVENING.

MAYOR PRO TEM AND THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

[00:55:02]

THIS EVENING AS THE MAYOR INDICATED THAT IS A PICKLY HEARING ITEM.

I WILL ASK THE ASSOCIATE PLANNER ROSY TO -- PUBLIC HEARING ITEM AND I WILL ASK THE PLANNER ROSIE TO GIVE A PRESENTATION.

YOUR CONSIDERATION WAS PRECEDED BY THE WOR PLANNING COMMISSION OVER SEVERAL MONTHS THIS AND THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THEY DID FORWARD RECOMMENDATION TO YOU THA IS EXPLAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

WE'LL EXPLAIN TO YOU IN THE PRESENTATION.

ANY ACTION TO APPROVE THE PLAN DOES NOT MEAN THERE IS ANY APPROVAL OF ENTITLEMENT.

THIS IS IN ESSENCE FORM OF ZONING SO YOU APPROVE THE LAND USAGE, DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS.

BUT ANY FUTURE PROJECTS THAT MIGHT OCCU BOUNDARIES OF THE PLAN WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ENTITLEMENT REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHETHER IT BE THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT O DESIGN REVIEW SO ANY ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL IS A POLICY ACTION TO ESTABLISH SPECIFIC ZONING OR THE LAND USE DEVELOPMENT AND THE DESIGN STANDARD PROPERTY IN QUESTION.

WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ROSEIE LUA THE ASSOCIATE PLANNER THE PROJECT LEAD TO PROVIDE THE COUNCIL WITH A STAFF REPORT AND ANSWER A QUESTIONS THAT THE COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MR. SNYDER.

MR. LUA?

>> GOOD EVENING.

I'M ROSY LUA ASSOCIATED PLANNER WITH THE C DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

SO TODAY I BRING YOU THE CITRUS PLAZA II S PLAN.

PUBLIC HEARING ITEM FOR A SPECIFIC P ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.

THIS PROJECT LOCATED 700 FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 50.

AND ON THE EAST SIDE OF JEFFERSON STREET.

9.19 ACRES.

AS YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING SITE CONDITION I PROPERTY.

IT HAD SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING THAT HAS S DEMOLISHED.

IT IS PRETTY FLAT IN SOME AREAS.

IT'S GOT SOME CONTOURS.

NOT YET GRADED.

HERE THIS PICTURE IS A PICTURE SHOWING THE BOUNDARY.

THIS PICTURE HERE FROM THE SIDEWALK VIEW LOOKING SOUTH.

YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING CITRUS PLAZA SHOPP CENTER.

THIS IS THE MARIO'S BUILDING.

THERE IS AN EXISTING BIKE LANE AS WELL AS THAT CONNECTS ALL THE WAY TO AVENUE 48.

HERE, THIS PICTURE IS A VIEW FROM THE FUTURE CONNECTION FROM DRIVE UP CONNECTION POINT FACING THE RENAISSANCE PROJECT.

I WILL GO OVER A LITTLE BIT OF THE AERIAL HERE.

WE HAVE AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL HOME TO TH NORTH.

WE HAVE THE DESERT RIVER ESTATES.

LARGE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PRIVATE CO CATERCORNER HERE.

DIRECTLY EAST WE HAVE A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT THAT IS CURRENTLY SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION FOR REVIEW.

WE HAVE THE EXISTING CITRUS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER.

MOST FAMOUSLY KNOWN FOR ROUTES.

AND ANYTHING WEST OF JEFFERSON AND SOUTH AVENUE 50 IS OUR PARTNERING CITY WHICH IS THE QUINTA.

SO, A SPECIFIC PLAN IS GOVERNED BY STATE LAW.

AND THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SAYS THE SPECIFIC PLAN IS A REGULATORY DOCUMENT AUTHORIZED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AS KEVIN MENTIONED THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED AND HAS APPROVED THE RECOMMENDATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN TO CITY COUNCIL.

WE HAD ONE MEETING IN FEBRUARY.

WE HAD ANOTHER ONE IN MAY.

ON THE MAY 27, 2020 MEETING, THE PLANNING C APPROVED BY A 5-0 MOTION TO RECOMMEND THIS TO YOU.

SO THAT IS WHAT WE ARE HERE FOR YOU TODAY.

A FINAL APPROVAL WILL BE BY CITY COUNCIL.

THE MAIN CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIFIC PLAN IS ITS CONSISTENCY TO ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN.

OUR ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN HERE AT THE CITY OF WAS APPROVED IN SEPTEMBER 18, 2019.

SO, WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS PARCEL, AND ITS CON TO THE GENERAL PLAN, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH A SERIES OF REVIEWS.

I WILL GO THROUGH THOSE WITH YOU.

THIS PARCEL HAS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.

[01:00:04]

AND AGAIN, I'LL GO THROUGH THE POLICIES WITH YOU AS I GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.

THE CITRUS PLAZA II SPECIFIC PLAN IS COMPRISED OF LAND USES, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN STANDARDS.

SO TODAY WE ARE NOT APPROVING A SPECIFIC S PLAN OR SPECIFIC BUILDING OR ANY OF THAT NATURE.

IT'S JUST A REGULATORY DOCUMENT THAT WILL B FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL.

SO, IF SOMEONE WILL COME IN WITH A DEVELOPME KNOW, ANY STRUCTURE, THEY WILL HAVE TO GO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A DESIGN REVIEW OR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

PRIMARILY PROPOSED FOR THE 75,000 SQU GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL, DRIVE-THRU AND SIT DOWN RESTAURANTS, PERSONAL SERVICE USES, FUELING STATION WITHOUT A STORE AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

THE CONCEPT FOR THE SPECIFIC PLAN IS MODERNIZING THE COMMERCIAL CENTER.

SO IT IS, IN ITS VISION A LIFESTYLE OF THE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY BETWEEN THE PATHWAY AREAS, PLAZAS, PATIOS, SHADED AREAS, WATER FEATURES AND INTERACTIVE ART.

PLAZAS WITH ART.

ALSO THE CONNECTION FROM THE JEFFERSON STREET IN TO THE PLAZA.

SO, IT IS INTERCONNECTING FROM JEFFERSON THE WAY IN FROM THE BUILDING TO BUILDING, USE TO USE, AND IF THIS PROJECT DOES GET CONNECTED TO THE CITRUS PLAZA, THE EXISTING CITRUS PLAZA, THEN THERE WILL BE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS TO THAT PROJECT.

AS OF RIGHT NOW IT COULD BE A STAND-ALONE OR IT CAN BE CONNECTED.

THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME IS PALLET OF THE CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS AND IT WILL COMPLEMENT THE EXISTING STYLE AND THE COLOR SCHEME.

IT IS FILLED WITH THE DESIGN THAT CONSI ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTERS FOR THE HIGH QUALITY, APPROPRIATE MATERIAL FEATURES, ORIENTED ARCHITECTURAL TRELLISES AND AWNINGS TO CREATE A VISUAL AESTHETIC PLEASING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND UNIQUE BUILDING FACADE.

THESE ARE CONCEPTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVI APPLICANT.

THIS IS THE CONCEPT FOR THE ENTRANCE WHERE WE HAVE AGAIN LOTS OF PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS FROM JEFFERSON STREET AND PATHWAYS LOT OF TREES AND THE BUILDINGS WITH THE ARCHITECTURE STYLE.

HERE ARE PLAZA, WATER FEATURES AND BENCHES.

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

WE HAVE LANDSCAPING TO EMPHASIZE THE USE OF AND TREES AND FLOWERING ACCENTS FOR THE WALKABILITY OF THE PROJECT.

WE HAVE A LANDSCAPE COVERAGE THAT WILL BE 10% INCLUDING ALL SETBACKS TO BE LANDSCAPED.

YOU WILL SEE HERE THE PICTURE OF THE EXISTIN CITRUS PLAZA.

THIS IS THE FRONTAGE.

THIS CONCEPT WILL CONTINUE ON TO THE PROJEC PROJECT TO THE NORTH.

LIGHTING WILL CLAUDE TREES AND SHRUBS, LIG LIGHTING WILL INCLUDE TREES AND SHRUBS, LIGHTS PATHLIGHTS TO PROMOTE THE WALKABILITY, THE HIGH VISIBILITY PATHWAY AND THE PLAZAS.

THIS HERE IS THE EXISTING LIGHT POLE IN THE CENTER FOR CITRUS PLAZA.

THIS CONCEPT IS TO BE CONTINUED ON TO THE PLAZA.

IDENTIFICATION SIGN AS WELL HERE AT THE EXIS TO BE CONTINUED ON.

THE SAME CONCEPT FOR THE FRONTAGE.

HERE IS THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE FOR THE FUELING STATION.

YOU WILL SEE FURTHER IN ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO NOT HAVE THE SIGNAGE ON THE CANOPY.

SO I "X" THAT OUT FOR YOU.

BUT THERE WILL BE A MONUMENTATION SIGN PROPOSED.

WE DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN APPROVED TODAY.

THESE ARE JUST CONCEPTS.

BUT WE HAVE WORKED OUT SOME CIRCULATION FOR THE PROJECT.

WE HAVE YELLOWS THAT ARE PROPOSED.

SO THEY ARE PROPOSED.

ONE ENTRY WAY HERE AND THEN THE SECOND ENTRY WAY FURTHER NORTH.

IT'S A RIGHT IN AND A RIGHT OUT.

RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT.

THERE IS NO STREET LIGHT THAT BEING CONSI THIS MOMENT.

SO THERE WILL BE IMPROVMENTS FOR A POCKET IN.

[01:05:03]

THIS IS THE EXISTING POCKET IN THE RENAISSANCE PROJECT.

THIS PROJECT ALSO HAS CONDITIONS TO IMPROVE 50 IN TERMS OF STRIPING.

THIS STRIPING WILL CHANGE WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE HERE.

THIS IS PROBABLE A LITTLE HARD TO SEE.

BUT IT WILL NOW STRIPE THIS AREA A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

HOWEVER, THIS STRIPING WILL ONLY TAKE PLACE PAVILION PALMS PROJECT, WHICH IS THE PROJECT THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED RIGHT NO BY THE CITY OF LA QUINTA TO THE WEST.

WHEN THEY APPROVE AVENUE 50 IT WILL COMPLETE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT FOR THE CITRUS PLAZA II SPECIFIC PLAN.

AS YOU CAN SEE VISUALLY, YOU KNOW, IMPROVEMENTS HERE DO NOT ALIGN WELL WITH WHAT IS EXISTING CONDITION OF AVENUE 50.

SO THIS WILL COME IN THE FUTURE.

I JUST INDICATED OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE TURNING MOVEMENTS, BECAUSE IF THIS PROJECT DOES CONNECT, THEN THESE EXISTING DRIVEWAYS WILL ALSO BE ACCESSIBLE.

SO THIS IS WHERE THE ANALYSIS COMES IN.

STATE LAW SAYS A SPECIFIC PLAN WE NEED TO CONSISTENCY IN AN ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN.

WHEN WENT THROUGH 14 POLICIES OF THE GENERA PLAN.

AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.

I WILL GO THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER FIRST.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER AREA SAYS IT PROVIDES FOR THE AREAS WITH THE WIDE VARIETY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING RETAIL, COMMERCI RESIDENTIAL AND OTHER AMENITIES AND THE GATHERING SPACES FOR THE RESIDENTS.

WE REVIEWED AND ANALYZED THIS AGAINST THE PROJECT.

WHERE THE PROJECT THAT IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERATION IS A MIXED USE PROJECT.

IT'S A MIXED USE OF NOT NECESSARILY A VERTICAL MIXED USE BUT A HORIZONTAL MIXED USE OF RESIDENTIAL AND IT CAN ALSO BE A STANDALONE OR CONNECTED.

SO IT HAS A NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING RETAIL GENE COMMERCIAL.

SO IT ALIGNS WELL WITH THE ALLOWED LAND USE.

IT ALSO ALIGNS WITH THE DENSITY UNIT OF TH DENSITY UNITS PER CAKEER.

AS IT IS BEING PROPOSED.

IT ALSO HAS OTHER ELEMENTS WE LOOKED AT CONNECTIVITY.

AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WHERE WE'VE GOT PEDEST GREENWAYS, OPEN SPACE WHERE WE TOOK CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF PLAZAS AND GATHERING SPACES.

AS WELL AS BRINGING THE STREETS -- SORRY, BRINGING THE SHOPS FORWARD ON TO THE STREET.

FOR THIS BUILDING FORM AND CHARACTER.

WHERE WE HAVE MORE RESIDENTIAL PRIVACY IN BACK AND WE HAVE THE SHOPS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD TOWARD THE SIDEWALK.

THESE ARE THE 14 POLICIES.

I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM BUT I WILL REVIEW SOME OF THEM THAT ARE IMPORTANT.

AGAIN, THIS IS IN ITS ENTIRETY.

SO THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN REVIEWED.

ANALYZED WITH THE GENERAL PLAN 2040.

YOU CAN SEE HERE THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE VERY SPECIFIC.

OTHERS THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST GIVE US GUIDE T SPECIFIC PLAN.

AGAIN, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW AS KEVIN HAS P MENTIONED.

THE GENERAL PLAN IS A POLICY.

IT'S NOT THE REGULATORY DOCUMENT.

SOME OF THESE FIT IN PERFECTLY AND OTHERS NOT.

I'LL GO THROUGH SOME OF THEM.

THIS IS ONE OF THEM.

THIS IS THE SUB AREA.

WHICH IMPLEMENT STRATEGIES IDENTIFIED FOR EACH DISTRICT SUB AREA IN INDIO IN THIS GENERAL PLAN.

SO WE WENT THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDAT 2040 WE IDENTIFIED SOME AREAS.

THE SUB AREA THAT FALLS WITHIN THIS PROJE SOUTHERN NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE SOUTHERN NEIGHBORHOOD WRAPS AROUND THE DISTRICT.

IT'S GIVING US SOME STRATEGIES.

THIS IS POLICY NOT REGULATORY.

BUT WE DID GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THESE ST SEE HOW THE SPECIFIC PLAN WAS CONSISTENT POLICIES HERE.

THE SOUTHERN NEIGHBORHOOD LIES BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, FESTIVAL DISTRICT OPPORTUNITY FOR RURAL RESORT LIFESTYLE WITH THE EASY ACCESS TO COMMERCIAL, AMENITIES TO MIDTOWN AND DOWNTOWN.

SO IT DOES PROVIDE AMENITIES TO THE AREA.

THE QUIET SECLUDED LIVING ENVIRONMENT CLOSE TO THE INDIO ART AND THE

[01:10:02]

ENTERTAINMENT HUB OF FESTIVAL GROUNDS PROVIDE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A UNIQUE VALUABLE PROPOSITION AND CAN HELP SUPPORT THE PLAN'S PRIMARY GOALS FOR SUPPORTING THE SUCCESS OF THE IMPORTANT CENTER OF COMMUNITY LIFE.

SO THESE FIVE STRATEGIES -- SORRY.

THE FOUR STRATEGIES.

KEEPING THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABLE.

WE SAW THAT THERE WAS COMMERCIAL, AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL.

IT WAS A BALANCE OF THE USES.

IMPROVE MULTI-MODEL ACCESS TO THE MIDTOW FESTIVAL DISTRICTS.

ALTHOUGH THESE ARE PRETTY FAR ALONG, WE TOOK VERY GOOD CARE TO LOOK AT THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS.

OUR FRONTAGE.

MAKING SURE THAT THERE WAS THAT CONNECTIVI REST OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.

KEEPING THE 20-ACRE MINIMUM.

AGAIN, THIS IS A POLICY, NOT A REGULATORY.

STATE LAW DOES NOT HAVE A MINIMUM FOR SPECIFIC PLANS.

NOR DOES OUR MUNICIPAL CODE.

SO TECHNICALLY WE CAN HAVE A ONE-ACRE PARCEL COME IN WITH A SPECIFIC PLAN OR 100-ACRE PARCEL FOR A SPECIFIC PLAN.

WE DID TAKE A LOOK AT THE FACT THAT THE PROJECT COULD BE CONNECTED TO THE PROJECT TO THE SOUTH AND ALSO AS A STANDALONE PROJECT.

IT'S SELF-SUFFICIENT ON ITS OWN.

ALLOW TO CREATE SYNERGY OF ACTIVITY AND EVENTS IN THE FESTIVAL DISTRICT.

AGAIN, CREATING A MIX OF USES WHERE WE CAN CREATE AND ATTRACT THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS SPACES.

WE FELT THAT THAT WAS IN LINE WITH THE F DISTRICT.

ESPECIALLY DURING THE TIME WITH THE FESTIVALS.

OTHER POLICIES.

AGAIN, YOU KNOW, BALANCE OF LAND USES.

SPECIFIC PLAN PROVIDES BALANCED LAND USES HORIZONTAL MIXED USE OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.

THIS GIVES A FLEXIBILITY OF DEVELOPMENT TO RESPOND TO EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE CONDITIONS.

QUALITY DESIGN.

IT PROPOSES A CONSISTENT ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER OF THE HIGH QUALITY MATERIALS, MIXTURE OF THE BUILDING MATERIALS SO TO COMPLEME THE EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER TO THE SOUTH AND ALSO TO PROVIDE ITS OWN CHARACTERISTICS.

ANOTHER POLICY WE LOOKED AT WAS THE NEW RETAILERS.

WE EVALUATED THE MODERNIZING OF THE COMMERCIAL CENTER, WHICH PROMOTED THE INTERCONNECTION OF PEDESTRIAN FEATURES; SUCH AS, WALKWAYS, PLAZA AND PATIOS.

THAT PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUPPORT ENT OF THE NEW RETAIL USES.

THESE ARE JUST SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS WE PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

I'LL JUMP IN TO THE TIMELINE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETE DECEMBER 11, 2019.

ALLOWED US TO REVIEW THIS PROJECT WI GENERAL PLAN.

ON FEBRUARY 3 THE APPLICANT HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING AT THE CITRUS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER.

STAFF WAS THERE IN ATTENDANCE AND WAS THE ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THE POLICY AND THE REGULATIONS.

AND IN OBSERVATION.

ON FEBRUARY 26, WE HAD THE FIRST PLANNING C MEETING.

WE HAD A MAILING WITHIN OUR 300-FOOT RADIUS.

WE HAD A MAILING NOTIFICATION TO A LIST PROVIDED BY THE CITY CLERK.

AS WELL AS OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES.

AT THIS MEETING WE HAD ABOUT 15 INDIVIDUALS TESTIMONY.

ONE WRITTEN.

WE HAD A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE PROPER THE NORTH THAT WAS INCLUDED THE STAFF REPORT.

THE MAIN CONCERN IN THE MEETING WAS THAT I INITIAL PROJECT WE HAD A 50-FOOT HEIGHT HOTEL.

WE HAD VIEWS THAT WERE IMPACTED.

OR RESIDENTS CONCERNED WITH THE VIEWS BEING IMPACTED BY A 50-FOOT HIGH HOTEL.

THERE WERE TWO PROPOSED DRIVE-THRUS OF CONCERN.

AND THE OTHER CONCERN THAT WAS EXPRESSED I INTENSITY OF THE PROPOSED USE AND THE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUND NEIGHBORHOODS WAS JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT, YOU THE RESIDENTS WERE IN LINE WITH.

SO PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUED THE PUBLIC ITEM TO A DATE UNCERTAIN.

SO, THEY PROVIDED WITH US A DIRECTIVE.

THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS CONCERNS.

EXPRESSED IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO, THE APPLICANT TO MEET WITH THE DESERT ESTATES HOMEOWNER

[01:15:01]

ASSOCIATION, WHICH WAS MAJORITY OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE PROVIDING THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.

AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT TO MEET WITH THE CITY STAFF.

HERE IS THE ORIGINAL SPECIFIC PLAN THAT W NOVEMBER 2019.

IT INCLUDED THREE PLANNING AREAS, 75,000 SQUARE FEET.

THIS IS WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE MAIN CONCERN WAS.

THE 150-ROOM HOTEL.

50 FEET HIGH.

WHICH WAS PERMITTED USE WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

OR IF THEY WERE NOT GOING TO BUILD THE HOTEL, IT WOULD BE A 30 TO 38-UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

SO IT WAS ONE OR THE OTHER.

TO BE A STAND-ALONE PROJECT OR CONNECTED DRIVE-THRUS, FUELING STATION, AND AGAIN THE THEME AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED IN TERMS OF MODERNIZING THE COMMERCIAL CENTER AND THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME.

SO, AFTER THAT MEETING, THE APPLICANT M HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE.

THIS COMMITTEE WAS COMPRISED OF DESERT RIV HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD MEMBERS AS WELL AS RESIDENTS AS DESERT RIVER ESTATES.

IN THE CONCLUSION OF THAT MEETING WA RESIDENTS DID NOT AGREE WITH THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

THEY DID NOT FEEL THAT THE SPECIFIC PLAN WAS IN LINE WITH THE SURROUNDING USES.

SO, ON MARCH 27, THE CITY RECEIVED DETAILED E-MAIL FROM THE APPLICANT REGARDING THE APPLICANTS COMMUNICATION WITH THE HOME COMMITTEE.

WE RECEIVED REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN.

SO, THIS IS WHERE WE STARTED WORKING AL APPLICANT TO SEE WHERE WE WOULD AMEND THE PLAN.

SO THIS DETAIL HERE IS WHAT THEY PRESENTED TO US.

THEY WENT FROM THREE PLANNING AREAS TO T PLANNING AREAS.

THEY ELIMINATED THE 150-ROOM HOTEL.

BUT THEY KEPT A HOTEL OR A MOTEL USE AS A CO LAND USE.

THEY CREATED HEIGHT MAXIMUMS OF TWO STORIE COMMERCIAL USE.

INCLUDING A HOTEL.

THEY UPPED THEIR UNIT FOR MULTIFAMILY FROM 45 TO 90 UNITS.

I HAVE A SLIDE TO EXPLAIN THE DENSITY BR MAXIMUM 30-FOOT HEIGHT OR TWO STORIES IF THERE WOULD BE MULTIFAMILY.

I HAVE TWO ILLUSTRATIONS.

THIS IS NOT CONSIDERED HERE.

THESE WERE ILLUSTRATIONS PROVIDED.

THIS IS THE ILLUSTRATION FOR COMMERCIAL AND THIS IS THE ILLUSTRATION FOR MULTIFAMILY.

IF THERE IS MULTIFAMILY IT'S 30 FEET OR TWO STORIES.

IF THERE WOULD BE A COMMERCIAL AREA IN PL AREA TWO, THIS HERE, THEN THE HEIGHT LIMIT 35.

DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS AND THE FUELING STATIONS HOURS OF OPERATION 6:00 A.M.

TO 10:00 P.M.

AND ELIMINATION OF THE CANOPY-MOUNTED SIGNAGE AND INCORPORATE CREATIVE AND MODERN DESIGN THEME.

THEY AMENDED THE REAR SETBACKS.

AND THE SIDE SETBACK.

FOR 10-FOOT STEP BACK FOR ONE STORY AND TWO STORY.

IF THE PROJECT TO THE NORTH OR TO THE EAST CHANGE ITS ZONING TO NOT BE RESIDENTIAL THEN THERE WOULD BE NO MINIMUM SETBACK.

ALSO AMENDED THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR TEN FEET FOR COMMERCIAL USE IN PLANNING AREA ONE AND TWO.

SORRY ABOUT THAT.

THIS IS A TABLE HERE THAT IS A CUT-AND-PAS SPECIFIC PLAN.

WHICH IS THE REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN DATED 2020.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE A VARIETY OF USES.

NOT NECESSARILY JUST THE ONES THAT I MENTIONED COULD BE PERMITTED.

EACH PLANNING AREA HAS USES, PERMITTED, NOT PERMITTED OR CONDITIONAL USE.

THIS COLUMN HERE IS THE EXISTING ZONING.

WHICH IS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.

AS YOU CAN SEE, WHEN WE HAVE HERE AUTOMOTIVE FUELING FACILITIES, IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE EXISTING ZONING.

SO IF WE DID NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC PLAN IT WO CONDITIONAL USE.

THE SPECIFIC PLAN SHOWS IT AS A PERMITTED PLANNING AREA ONE AND A

[01:20:04]

NON-PERMITTED USE IN PLANNING AREA TWO.

AS WELL AS FOR RESIDENTIAL.

RESIDENTIAL IS NOT PERMITTED UNDER THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONING.

IT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREA ONE.

IT WOULD BE PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREA TWO.

THE REASON WHY WE HAVE PERMITTED WITH AN AS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER IN GENERAL PLAN ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL, SO THAT IS WHY WE HAVE THIS YEAR.

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THE HEIGHT WITH THE 3 HEIGHT LIMIT IF TWO STORY FOR PLANNING AREA ONE.

WE ALSO HAVE A 30-FOOT HEIGHT TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL.

35-FOOT TWO STORY FOR COMMERCIAL.

AND WHAT THEY PROPOSED HERE FOR THE SETBACKS.

ALL RIGHT.

SO HERE IS THE BREAKDOWN ON THE ORIGINAL SP AND THE REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN.

THE ORIGINAL SPECIFIC PLAN WAS ALIGNED MO RESIDENTIAL HIGH ZONING THAT IS CURRENTLY IN ZONING CODE THAT INCLUDED 2.5 ACRES.

PROVIDED BREAKDOWN WHERE WE HAVE 30 TO 38 ACRES.

MAXIMUM HERE.

NOW WITH A CHANGE IN THE REVISED PLAN, THE PLAN INCLUDED 4.5 ACRES.

THEY REVISED A SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALIGN WITH NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.

DENSITY UNIT OF THE 10 TO 20 DENSITY UNITS PER ACRE SO NOW WE HAVE 45 TO 90 UNITS PER ACRE.

SO GETTING TO MAY 27, 2020, A CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.

WE PROVIDED PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS, MAILINGS, DESERT SUN AND E-MAIL A LIST THAT THE CITY CLERK PROVIDED OF INTERESTING PARTIES.

WE ALSO NOTIFIED THE H.O.A.

MANAGEMENT FOR DESERT RIVER ESTATES.

ALSO PUBLISHED IN OUR CITY WEBSITE.

HERE WE RECEIVED PUBLIC TESTIMONY.

ONE WRITTEN AND TWO INDIVIDUALS.

WE ALSO RECEIVED ONE WRITTEN LETTER OF SUPPORT IN THE STAFF REPORT FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE EAST.

SO WE HAD REPRESENTATIVE DESERT RIVER ESTA HOMEOWNER COMMITTEE WHICH EXPRESSED WRITTEN AND ORAL OPPOSITION OF THE SPEC PLAN.

WE ALSO HAD ONE RESIDENT THAT LIVED IN TH WHICH EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT.

THIS MEETING WAS WAS VIRTUAL, WAS A VIRT MEETING.

PLANNING COMMISSION WITH MUCH DELIBERATI THE SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL IN A MOTION OF 5-0.

THERE WAS A LIST OF 60 AMENDMENTS THAT WERE, THAT ARE TO BE CONSIDERED TODAY.

IF APPROVED THEN THE SPECIFIC PLAN WILL REVISED TO INCLUDE THE REVISION OF THE 60 AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

HERE ARE THE KEY AMENDMENTS THAT PLANNING C RECOMMENDED.

THERE IS A LIST OF 60.

I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM.

I WILL GO THROUGH THE ONES THAT ARE KEY TO PROJECT.

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO PROHIBI HOTEL OR MOTEL LAND USES IN THE ENTIRETY OF THE PLAN.

ALSO MAXIMIZE 90 UNIT OF THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

LIMITING IT TO PLANNING AREA TWO.

THE DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS, LIMITING IT TO PLANNING AREA 1 ONLY.

LET'S SEE.

MAXIMUM -- INCORPORATION OF DRIVE-THRU PORTIONS OF RESTAURANTS IN THE BUILDING DESIGN.

SO, BASICALLY HERE IS LOOKING AT DRIVE-THRU AND MAKING SURE THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL INCORPORATE THE DRIVE-THRU.

SO, IT IS A CONCEPT OF HIDING THE DRIVE-THRU.

THROUGH ARCHITECTURE.

MAXIMUM OF NINE PUMP FOR THE FUELING STATION.

AND LIMITING IT ONLY TO PLANNING AREA ONE.

REQUIRING PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION FROM JEFFE STREET AND REQUIRING OUTDOOR SEATING FOR ALL RESTAURANTS AND ONE PUBLIC GATHERIN SPACE FOR EACH PLANNING AREA.

LIMITING SIGNAGE TO ONE IDENTIFICATION SIGN.

ONE MONUMENT SIGN.

AND ONE FUELING STATION IDENTIFICATION SIGN.

REQUIRING REAR AND SIDE SETBACK TO CHANGE FOLLOWING.

MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES THE SIDE AND THE REAR SETBACK TO BE 50 FEET.

FOR THE COMMERCIAL LAND USES SIDE AND REAR SETBACK TO BE 100 FEET.

TO BERM JEFFERSON STREET AND IT TO BE COMP PLANNING AREA ONE.

[01:25:06]

WHEN IT COMES FORWARD FOR THE DEVINE REV COMPLETE -- DESIGN REVIEW TO COMPLETE ENTIRETY OF JEFFERSON STREET.

LAND SKATE IMPROVEMENTS -- LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS FOR JEFFERSON STREET.

AND THE LANDSCAPE AREAS THAT ARE THE VACANT PADS.

SO IF THERE ARE PORTION OF THE PROJECT THAT ARE VACANT, THE APPLICANT IS TO PROVIDE DROUGHT LANDSCAPING.

DECOMPOSED GRANITE, SOME SORT OF COVERAGE O PARCEL.

LIGHTING 18 FEET WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PROJECT TO THE SOUTH.

WE RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THIS SPECIFIC P AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.

I DO HAVE ONE ITEM THAT I NEED TO CORRECT.

WE HAVE ONE AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER 12.

IT READS IN PLANNING AREA TWO COMMERCIAL WILL BE SET BACK TO NORTH AND EAST BY 100 FEET.

RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS SHOULD BE SETBACK FROM THE NORTH.

IT DROPS OFF.

BUT IT SHOULD CONTINUE ON TO READ AND EAST PROPERTY LINES BY 50 FEET.

SO THAT IS A CORRECTION WE SUBMITTED IN A MEMO.

AND FOR THE RECORD.

THAT CONCLUDES MY STAFF REPORT.

THE APPLICANT IS HERE WITH A TEAM OF FOLKS.

THEY HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR YOU AS WELL.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU FOR YOUR DETAILED REPORT.

ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR ANYTHING BEFORE I OPEN PUBLIC HEARING TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND ANY OTHER RESIDENTS?

>> I HAVE QUESTIONS.

I CAN'T SEE YOU, THOUGH.

>> MAYOR MILLER: GO AHEAD.

>> I CAN'T SEE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SORRY.

CAN YOU SEE US?

>> NOW I CAN SEE YOU.

SO ROSY, I THINK YOU PAINTED A VERY ROSY PICTURE OF WHAT WE HOPE THIS PROJECT WOULD BECOME.

BUT WHEN I READ THE SPECIFIC PLAN IT IS IN FAR CONTRAST FROM THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU JUST GAVE US.

I FEEL THAT YOU CHERRY PICKED THE 14 POI ACCORDING TO THE GENERAL PLAN THAT THIS MAY BE CONSISTENT WITH.

AND MISSED THE SPIRIT OF WHAT OUR GENERA INTENT WAS.

SO I'D RATHER ADDRESS MY QUESTIONS TO MR. SNYDER IF HE IS IN THE ROOM.

BECAUSE THESE ARE MORE GENERAL PLAN RELAT THEY ARE PROJECT SPECIFIC.

>> OKAY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MR. SNYDER IS HERE.

GO AHEAD.

>> MR. SNYDER, AND I DID HAVE A CONVERSATI YESTERDAY.

HE DID NOT SHARE WITH ME ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WAS NOT SHARED TONIGHT.

MOSTLY HE JUST HEARD MY COMMENTS WITH RESPE PROJECT.

I THINK THE FIRST QUESTION I HAVE IS THIS ANRY CAN'T THE SAME OWN -- APPLICANT OF THE SAME OWNER OF THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY OF THE E CITRUS PLAZA?

>> THE APPLICANT IS A PARTIAL OWNER.

HE OWNS MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY.

HOWEVER, RALPH DOES OWN THE BUILDING AND THE PROPERTY UPON WHICH RALPH SPANS SO HE IS AN OWNERSHIP, HE HAS OWNERSHIP EXCEPT F PROPERTY.

>> OKAY.

SO IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE PROJECT, COULD IT BE A CONDITION THEY REMOVE THE WALL BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES?

>> COUNCIL, IF YOU HAVE A ONE OR MORE CONDI AMENDMENTS TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN, IT'S A BETTER ACTUALLY, BECAUSE THIS IS A SPECIFIC PLAN.

I'LL USE THE TERM "AMENDMENT" COUNCILMEMB BECAUSE IT'S CONDITIONS IS DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL.

IF YOU WANT TO ADD AN AMENDMENT OR MODIFY THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS AND RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSION YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SO.

THIS IS LEGISLATIVE ACTION.

IF YOU WANT TO AMEND THE SPECIFIC PLAN YOU COULD DO TO REQUIRE THAT CONNECTION.

SHORT ANSWER IS YES.

>> THANK YOU FOR THE ANSWER.

THAT IS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS I WOULD MOVE FORWARD.

MY FIRST QUESTION, I ONLY HEARD ROSY MENTION IT ONE.

ONE LETTER OF SUPPORT WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE PROJECT.

BUT YET WE RECEIVED 75 OR 85 SIGNATURES AGAINST THE PROJECT.

IS THAT THE TRUE RESPONSE WE RECEIVED?

>> AND MS. LUA CAN CORRECT ME IF I STATE TH BUT AT THE FEBRUARY 26 MEETING WE RECEIVED OF SUPPORT FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE NORTH.

WE HAD 15 INDIVIDUALS THAT SPOKE AT THAT MEETING.

YOU DO HAVE DOCUMENTATION THAT WAS PRESENT TO YOU THIS EVENING.

PART OF THAT DOCUMENTATION IS ALSO DOCUM SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY THAT INCLUDES A PETITION HOMEOWNERS, APPROXIMATELY 70

[01:30:06]

HOMEOWNERS THAT -- AND THAT PETITION IS FROM THE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS CONSIDERING IT.

AND THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT CONCERN ABOUT THE HOTEL.

AT THE MAY 27 PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNI COMMISSION HEARD FROM ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO SPOKE IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT.

THAT SAME INDIVIDUAL SUBMITTED WRITTEN CO AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARD FROM AN INDIVIDUAL WHO SPOKE IN SUPPORT PROJECT.

DID I GET THAT CORRECT?

>> THEY WERE OPPOSED TO THE GASOLINE STATION AND THE DRIVE-THRUS.

I AM TRYING TO DETERMINE IT'S 75 PEOPLE AGAI OR TWO PEOPLE IN SUPPORT? IS THERE MORE PEOPLE IN SUPPORT?

>> NO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ANYTHING ELSE?

>> ARE YOU GOING TO ANSWER THAT? IS THERE ANY MORE THAN ONE OR TWO PEOPLE APOLOGIZE.

I DID SAY NO.

I WILL REPEAT THAT.

NO, THERE IS NOT ANY MORE.

>> OKAY, SO WE ESTABLISHED THERE IS OVER 75 OPPOSED AND MAYBE TWO IN SUPPORT.

NOW THE TABLE ONE -- >> I CAN MAKE ONE COMMENT.

HOLD ON A SECOND.

GO AHEAD, MR. SCOTT.

>> UNLESS I'M READING THE PETITION WRONG, THE PETITION IS FROM THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING.

>> CORRECT.

>> BUT THE ISSUES -- >> HOLD ON.

HOLD ON.

HOLD ON.

I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE YOU A FACTUAL ANSWER.

>> RIGHT, BUT THE ISSUE -- >> I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY OF THE PEOPLE TODAY SITTING HERE WOULD SAY THEY ARE FOR OR AGAINST.

>> BUT THE ISSUES REMAIN THE SAME.

SO THE ASSUMPTION -- >> YOU ARE NOT LETTING HIM ANSWER.

>> LET ME FINISH, PLEASE.

I'M JUST TRYING -- YOU WANT THE RECORD STRAIGHT.

I'M MAKING THE RECORD STRAIGHT.

>> RIGHT.

THE PETITION IS FOR THE FIRST HEARING.

I'M STATING THAT THE ISSUES REMAIN THE SAME.

HOW CAN PETITION -- >> I'M TRYING TO CORRECT THE RECORD, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

>> MAYOR MILLER: LUPE, LET HIM FINISH, PLEASE.

IS THAT IT, MR. SCOTT?

>> YES.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: SO THE SPECIFIC PLAN TABLE ONE.

THAT IS THE DEVELOPER'S WISH LIST FOR ALLOWABLE USES.

DID STAFF CONSIDER IF SPIRIT OF THE GENERA COUNCIL DIRECTION WHEN REVIEWING THIS TABLE?

>> YES, WE DID.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: SO WHEN THE COUNCIL GAVE DIRECTION TO THE STAFF WE WANTED THE PROJECTS TO BE MIXED USE, MIXING RESIDENTI COMMERCIAL USES AND BEING MORE PEDESTRIAN WHY WOULD YOU ACCEPT NOT ALLOWABLE APARTMENTS, CONDOMINIUMS OR SENIOR HOUSING IN PA 1?

>> THE GOAL OF THE STAFF ANALYSIS WAS LOOKING AT THE BALANCE OF THE LAND USES.

IN A MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT AS WE POINTED OUT EARLIER.

THIS IS A HORIZONTAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.

WE DID RECOMMEND IN THE PLANNING COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION COMMERCIAL USES BE CLOSER TO THE TO PROVIDE FOR MORE PRONOUNCED AND ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY.

TO BALANCE NEARBY RESIDENTS TO THE NORTH AND POTENTIALLY TO THE EAST IN THE FUTURE.

WE FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO BALANCE TH RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE NORTH AND POTENTIALLY TO THE EAST.

>> THAT IS NOT MIXED USE.

THAT IS SEGREGATING USES AGAIN BACK TO TH PLAN.

MIXED USE IS MIXED USE.

YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL WITH THE WORK PLACE ENVIRONMENTS.

>> IF I MIGHT CLARIFY ONE THING, COUNCILMEMBER.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER -- ACTUALLY THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY'S ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN RECOGNIZES THAT MIXED USE IS VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL.

I DO COMMEND THE CITY FOR DOING THAT BECAUS SOMETHING THAT A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE FOCUS VERTICAL ONLY.

BUT IT IS A BALANCING OF VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: ALL RIGHT.

IF THE PROJECT IS TO MOVE FORWARD I SUGGEST TABLE ONE INCLUDE APARTMENT, CONDOMINIUM HOUSING TO CREATE A TRUE MIXED USE COMMUNITY.

NOW I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORN PLANNING DIRECTOR AS WELL.

DO WE HAVE TO ALLOW CHURCHES? ARE WE FORCED TO DO THAT?

>> YOU ARE NOT FORCED TO ALLOW CHURCHES I SPECIFIC PLAN.

I THINK I MEAN WE HAVE CHURCHES IN OTHER AREAS.

SO, CERTAINLY I THINK FROM A FIRST AMENDMENT PERSPECTIVE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CHURCHES

[01:35:02]

THAT ARE PERMITTED.

YOU ARE SETTING THE ZONING HERE SO YOU HAV DISCRETION.

>> I WOULD CHANGE PLACES OF WORSHIP TO NOT ALLOW IT IN PLANNING ONE OR PLANNING TWO.

SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THERE IS A CHURCH BEI JUST 500 FEET AWAY.

I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO HAVE IT PROPOSED IN THIS.

I ACTUALLY HAVE A MAJORITY OF THE USES THAT I WANT TO CHANGE.

I FEEL IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO MAKE THESE COMMENTS BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO THAT EVERYONE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND.

YOU'VE GOT TO TELL ME DIFFERENT, CITY ATTORNEY.

>> I'M FINE.

>> CERTAINLY IF WE CAN KEEP IT TO I GUESS YOUR COMMENTS.

MAYBE PERHAPS IT MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIAT MAYOR JUST OPENS THE PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT WAY AT LEAST ALL OF THE REVISION YOU HAVE CAN BE THEN DEBATED IF THEY NEED TO BY APPLICANT WHEN HE SPEAKS.

>> SO YOU WANT ME TO HOLD OFF ON MY CHANGES THINK IF THE MAYOR ALLOWS ME TO INTERRUPTED.

THE FLOW IS GOING FINE.

SO JUST OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND JUST A MS. AMITH TO CONTINUE ON.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I STILL HAVE A COU QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: GO AHEAD.

CONTINUE.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: SO, I'M CONCERNED WITH SOMETHING I READ IN THE STAFF REPORT.

MS. LUA HIGHLIGHTED IT IN HER REPORT.

THAT AFTER THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTED THE DEVELOPER TO WORK WITH THE RESIDENTS, THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS.

BUT YET I READ IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT STATES THAT THE DEVELOPER MADE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO CONDUCT A NEIGHBOR OUTREACH.

AND THAT SATISFIED THE PLANNINGS COMMISSION REQUEST.

CONDUCTING A NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH AND MEETING WITH THE RESIDENTS TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS ARE VERY TWO DIFFERENT DIRECTTIVES.

I'M REALLY HIGHLIGHTING THIS BECAUSE AFTER THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING THERE WAS A DISENCHANTMENT WHEN THE RESIDENT WERE NOT ADDRESSED BY THE DEVELOPER.

AND THE PETITION EVEN THOUGH HE REMOVED THE HOTEL, THERE ARE STILL MAJOR ITEMS OF CONTENTION THAT WERE NOT ADDRESSED BY THE DEVELOPER.

SO I'M ASKING MR. SNYDER WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTS A DEVELOPER AND STAFF TO WORK RESIDENTS TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS, HOW CAN THAT MEAN OH, JUST MEETING WITH THEM.

THAT SATISFIED THE DIRECTIVE.

THAT IS NOT THE SAME SPIRIT.

>> I FELT THEY MADE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

THE APPLICANT REPORTED THEY FELT THE HOMEOW ASSOCIATION HAD -- THIS IS MY TERM, NOT THE DRAWN THE PROVERBIAL LINE IN THE SAND.

THEY HAD HAD THEM GO BACK TO HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW THE REVISIONS THEY SUGGESTED TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THAT.

THEY HAD DONE OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY BUT A CERTAIN POINT IT'S MORE APPROPRIATE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSI AS THE TECHNICAL REVIEW BODY TO CONSIDER THE CHANGES AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU AS THE CITY COUNCIL FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

>> THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED THIS ON THE SECOND ROUND BASED ON THE FACT THEY BELIEVED THAT THE DEVELOPER HAD ADDRESSED THE CONCERNS.

THAT IS NOT THE FACTS.

I WOULD HOPE IF PLANNING COMMISSION DEVELOPER TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE IT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT REASON.

NOT JUST A GOOD FAITH EFFORT.

FOR GET WHAT YOU CARE ABOUT OR WHAT YOU WANT.

NUMBER FOUR IS A RHETORICAL QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL OR THE CITY MANAGER.

I HAVE CONCERNS WITH -- THIS IS A PROPOSED SO I HAVE TO MAKE SURE I RAISED THE QUESTION OR THE ISSUE NOW.

STAFF IS PROPOSING THAT THERE MAY BE SOM CURB CUTS ON JEFFERSON STREET FOR THIS PROJECT.

I FEEL THAT IS EXCESSIVE.

COMMON SENSE TO ME IS IF YOU HAVE ONE COMMERCIAL PROJECT ON THE WEST SIDE, THEN IT CONNECTS WITH THE COMMERCIAL PROJECT ON THE LEFT SIDE.

END OF STORY.

EAST AND WEST.

COMMERCIAL.

[01:40:01]

THAT IS IT.

NO MORE CURB CUTS OR WE'LL END UP LIKE HIGHWAY 11 WITH CURB CUTS EVERY 50 TO 100 FEET.

IF THIS MOVES FORWARD I ELIMINATE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY AND STAY WITH THE TWO EXISTING.

THAT IS COMMON SENSE.

IT'S RHETORICAL.

AT THIS POINT I WILL HOLD MY COMMENTS.

AND MY, ESPECIALLY MY COMMENTS ON THE TAB UNTIL AFTER PUBLIC HEARING.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE I O PUBLIC HEARING OF STAFF? ANYONE? MR. SCOTT? NO.

OKAY.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MS. AMITH, CONTINUE YOUR CONVERSATION.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THERE IS NOBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM.

>> MAYOR MILLER: NOT YET.

YOU MIGHT AS WELL FINISH UP.

WHAT YOU SAY WILL HAVE A BEARING ON WHAT WE DO.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THE 75 TO 85 RESIDEN DESERT RIVER SUBMITTED WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

EACH COULD BE DID RECEIVE A COPY OF THAT.

THEIR SUGGESTION IS THAT THIS ITEM BE TAKEN BACK.

THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO CREATE A COMMITTEE THIS BACK FOR COUNCILMEMBER AND THE RESIDENTS DESERT RIVER TO WORK THROUGH THE CONCERNS THAT DESERT RIVER HAS.

SO AT THIS POINT I WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH AND PROPOSE WHAT I THINK ARE ACCEPTABLE CHANGES.

AUTOMOBILE FUELING FACILITIES WOULD NOT PERMITTED IN P.A.

OR P2.

AUTOMOTIVE OR VEHICLE FACILES NOT IN P.A.

1 OR 2.

CLUBS, HALLS WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN P.A.

1 OR 2.

DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS FACILITIES WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN P.A.

1 OR 2.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND GROCERY STORES UNDER 58,000 SQUARE FEET OR THE CONVENIENCE MARKETS NOT BEING PERMITTED IN P.A.

1 WHEN WE ARE LOOKING FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMEN WOULD CHANGE IT TO PERMITTED.

HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCE REPAIR WOULD NOT BE INC P.A.

2.

LANDSCAPE NURSERIES WOULD NOT BE IN P.A.

2.

MEDICAL OFFICES ARE DEFINITELY NOT INCLUD EITHER P.A.S BECAUSE WE WANT ALL MEDICAL SERVICES TO BE IN OUR MEDICAL CORRIDOR.

MORTUARY WOULD NOT BE PER MUTTED IN P.A.

-- PERMITTED IN P.A.

2.

PAWNBROKER NOT PERMITTED IN P.A.

2.

PLACES OF WORSHIP NOT PERMITTED IN EITHER P.A.

PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS WOULD NOT BE PER P.A.

2.

SMALL COLLECTIONS RECYCLING FACILITIES, THOSE UGLY THINGS IN THE PARKING LOT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN EITHER P.A.

1 OR P.A.

2.

VEHICLE DRIVE THREW AND THE DRIVEUP WINDOWS WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN P.A.

1 OR 2.

VETERINARY HOSPITALS WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN EITHER P.A.

1 OR P.A.

2.

THOSE ARE MY RECOMMENDED CHANGES.

I STILL WOULD RECOMMEND IT WOULD GO TO A COM WORK WITH THE RESIDENTS.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

WITH THAT BEFORE WE GET IN TO A LITTLE BIT ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND LET THE APPLICANT.

WE HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENT.

LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK FIRST BECAUSE IT A BEARING ON WHAT THE -- >> SO WE HAD NO PUBLIC COMMENTS? I THOUGHT WE HAD NO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SHE JUST TOLD ME WE HAVE ONE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: GO.

>> IS THE APPLICANT HERE? CAN HE HEAR US?

>> WE'LL FIND HIM.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I'M SURE HE IS THERE.

IT'S A ZOOM MEETING.

YOU KNOW HOW THEY ARE SOMETIMES.

>> I BELIEVE WE ARE ALL HERE BUT MAYBE WE AR TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY.

CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> MAYOR MILLER: WE CAN HEAR YOU.

CAN YOU HEAR US?

>> I CAN HEAR YOU FINE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: IF YOU COULD SPEAK UP L WOULD BE GREAT.

>> SURE.

I BELIEVE NICOLE CHRIST IS GOING TO PRESENT.

HOPEFULLY SHE IS FIGURING OUT THE SYSTEM HERE.

>> IS I -- I AM HERE.

I'M NICOLE WITH TERA NOVA PLANNING.

BOB LICHTER SHOULD ALSO BE ON.

>> MAYOR MILLER: IS THERE ANY WAY TO BRING THEM UP? ARE YOU ON VIDEO OR NO? IS THERE ANY WAY TO BRING THEM UP?

>> THEY ARE SHARING THE SCREEN.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SORRY.

GO AHEAD.

SOMETIMES I LIKE TO SEE WHO I'M TALKING TO.

BUT THAT IS FINE.

THERE YOU ARE.

THANK YOU.

>> OKAY.

CAN ANYBODY HEAR ME?

>> MAYOR MILLER: YES, WE CAN.

[01:45:01]

>> OKAY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE, MA'AM.

>> SORRY.

>> BOB IS GOING TO START US OFF.

I WILL BE MAKING MORE OF A TECHNICAL PRESENTATION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

>> WELL, GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR.

AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

I'M BOB.

I LIVE AT LA QUINTA.

I'M THE OWNER OF CITRUS PLAZA.

I BOUGHT IT IN 2012 WITH AN IDEA I WANTED A SHOPPING CENTER THAT ALONG WITH SOME OTHER ONES OWN THAT I COULD MAINTAIN AND PROVIDE A GOOD SHOPPING EXPERIENCE FOR THE COMMUNITY.

AS YOU KNOW TWO YEARS AGO I CAME TO THE CITY.

AND AT THAT TIME I MET WITH YOUR PREVIOUS P DEPARTMENT AND DIRECTOR.

SINCE THAT TIME I HAVE HAD THE LUXURY -- "LUXURY." THAT SOUNDS POMPOUS.

BUT THE FACT IS I HAVE HAD A GOOD EXPERIENCE WITH NOT ONLY MARK SCOTT, YOUR CITY MANAGER, BUT KEVIN AND ROSY AND THEIR PLANNING EVERYBODY ELSE THAT HAS BEEN INVOLVED HAS BEEN REALLY VERY, VERY HELPFUL.

IT HASN'T BEEN EASY.

THEY HAVE BEEN UNDER PRESSURE AND WE HAV AGREED ON A LOT OF THINGS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO BORE YOU.

IT'S A LONG MEETING AND I KNOW YOU WILL HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS BUT LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THE FACTS ARE.

WHEN I BOUGHT CITRUS PLAZA IT WAS AND STILL IS, IT WAS ANCHORED BY RALPH'S.

THEY OWN THE LAND CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXPANSION.

THEY HAVE SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS OVER WHETHER OR NOT THE TWO PROPERTIES WOULD EVER CONNECT.

WHEN THE PROMPT BECAME AVAILABLE, FOR SALE TWO YEARS AGO, I IMMEDIATELY WENT IN ESCROW AND IT WAS SUBJECT TO ME HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH RALPH'S.

THE REASON RALPH'S IS SO IMPORTANT IS THAT ACROSS THE STREET THE LUNDEN PEOPLE FOR YEARS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET RALPH'S TO MOVE OUT OF INTO INGO TO LA QUINTA.

THE PROMISE IS THEY COULD HAVE A FUEL STATI STORE.

I WAS AWARE OF THAT.

IT'S ON THE MINDS OF MANY PEOPLE BUT IT CON BECAUSE CITRUS PLAZA IS A GREAT CENTER.

IT WORKS FOR THE PEOPLE.

IT HAS A LOT OF THINGS GOING FOR IT.

IT ISN'T THAT FANCY BUT IT WORKS AND IT WORK NEIGHBORHOOD.

I WAS CONCERNED THAT CITRUS PLAZA WOULD LOSE RALPH'S.

I WASN'T MAKING THAT UP.

BECAUSE WHEN I MET WITH THEM, THEY OF CO ADMITTED THEY HAD BEEN APPROACHED BY THE PEOPLE ACROSS THE STREET.

RALPH SAID THEY DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE.

THEY NEEDED A FUEL STATION.

I SAID FINE.

GREAT.

I HAD HOPED THEY ALSO WANTED TO EXPAND THEIR STORE.

THAT IS BY THE WAY STILL A POSSIBILITY.

I DON'T WANT TO DANGLE ANY CARROTS HERE.

BUT THE KEY FOR THEM IS THAT THEY OPERATE CONTIGUOUSLY WITH THE FUEL STATION.

IT'S PROFITABLE FOR THEM.

THE FURTHER WE GOT IN THAT DISCUSSION IT BECAME CLEAR NOT ONLY WOULD THE FUEL STATION BE ESSENTIAL BUT WE BOTH KNEW OUR PARKING BECAUSE IT'S A SUCCESSFUL RALPH'S STORE IN IT NEEDS MORE PARKING.

WE LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF THE WAYS OF DOING IT.

BUT WHEN I FIRST MET WITH THE CITY I SAID WE WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON THE FUEL STATION.

I HAD THE HEAD OF RALPH'S REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT WITH ME.

THE CITY ENCOURAGED US TO DO A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE WOULD DO ON THE ENTIRE NINE ACRES.

THAT WAS A LITTLE PREMATURE BUT WE JUMPED AWAY.

I MIGHT ADD THAT AND I DON'T WANT TO GET PEOPLE THAT ARE NO LONGER THERE IN ANY HOT WATER.

BUT WE NEVER CAME UP WITH THE IDEA FOR A HOTEL.

IT WAS THE CITY.

SO IT WAS A SUGGESTION.

IT WASN'T A MANDATE.

BUT THE IDEA WAS THAT WHY NOT PUT A HOTEL THE ALL THINGS GOING ON.

SO WE STARTED PLANNING THE ENTIRETY OF THE SITE.

THE CONCEPT WAS TO GO WITH THE SPECIFIC PLAN BECAUSE OF ALL THE USES.

SO THAT WAS THEN.

THIS IS NOW.

TWO YEARS HAVE GONE BY.

WE HAVE TRIED TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO THIS SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY GOING TO WORK FOR EVERYBODY.

WE WENT TO THE NEIGHBORS.

WE HAVE DONE ALL THE THINGS YOU HEARD.

THE FACT WE SUPPOSEDLY MET WITH THEM ONCE, IT TOOK US A LONG TIME AFTER THE PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTED US TO HAVE THE MEETING TO GET THEM TO COME AND MEET WITH US.

[01:50:02]

WE FINALLY DID MEET WITH THEM.

BY THE WAY, I WANT TO ROLL BACK JUST ONE TH VERY CRITICAL.

THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING TH AN ENTIRE AUDIENCE FROM DESERT RIVER ESTATES.

THEY WERE VERY, VERY VOCAL.

IT WAS ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY -- I AM SURE THE RECORD MIGHT SHOW IF YOU LISTEN TO IT THAT IT WAS, WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A HOTEL LOOKING DOWN AT DESERT RIVER ESTATES.

I HEARD THEM AND I STOOD UP AND I SAID EXC EVERYBODY.

LET'S MAKE THE MEETING EASY.

I HEREBY SWEAR TO YOU THERE WILL BE NO HOTEL BACK THERE.

SUDDENLY EVERYTHING CALMED DOWN.

SO THAT WAS THE PRIMARY GIST OF WHAT THEIR WAS.

AND I BELIEVE -- I DON'T WANT TO MISCHARACT -- BUT THE PETITION OF THE 75 SOME ODD PEOPLE WAS THE OPPOSITION TO THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT.

I DO NOT CLAIM THAT THEY ARE IN FAVOR OF WHAT I AM TRYING TO DO.

BUT I BELIEVE THAT I ACTED AS GOOD AS FAITH AS I COULD IN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN IN THE HEARINGS.

WE HAD MEETINGS WITH THEIR PEOPLE.

WE THOUGHT WE MADE PROGRESS.

THEY CAME BACK AND SAID NO, TO BASICALLY EVERYTHING.

NOT JUST SOME THINGS BUT BASICALLY EVERYTHING.

SO, WE KEPT GOING.

WE DID GET AN APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION IN MAY.

FROM THERE, WE HAVE CONTINUED TO REDESIGN A TRY TO MAKE THIS THING WHAT WE WANT.

IF YOU LOOK, I THINK I HAVE TALKED THROUGH MY VIDEO HERE.

BUT SINCE YOU HAVE BEEN WATCHING IT GO ON L TELL YOU WHAT THIS IS, IS TAKING A SITE THAT RAW PIECE OF DIRT.

TURNING IT IN TO A LIFESTYLE THAT WILL REALLY, REALLY BE BEAUTIFUL.

WE ARE NOT JUST PUTTING A BUNCH OF THE BUI BACKING UP THE JEFFERSON AND HOPING THAT A BUNCH OF THE RETAIL TENANTS WILL TAKE VACANT SPACES.

WE COME IN ON A PROMENADE.

AS YOU ARE HEADING NORTH YOU GO IN THE PROMENADE.

YOU WILL SEE ONLY TWO LITTLE DRIVE-THRU BUILDINGS.

I WILL COME BACK TO THAT.

FUEL STATION ON YOUR RIGHT.

YOU GO RIGHT IN TO THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT.

ROUNDABOUT AND THE PROMENADE NOWS IN THE NEW BUILDINGS ON THE LEFT, WHICH WILL BE SIT DOWN RESTAURANTS WITH OUTDOOR SEATING.

WE WILL COME THROUGH AS YOU SEE RIGHT NOW.

YOU WILL TURN LEFT.

THIS IS GOING NORTH AGAIN.

YOU ARE GOING TO TURN LEFT IN TO, BACK IN THE PROJECT.

YOU WILL SEE WE WILL HAVE BEAUTIFUL WATER FEATURES, SIT DOWN AREAS, EATING AREAS OUTSIDE.

AND IT IS ALL INTENDED TO FLOW JUST EXACTLY LIKE WHAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE ASKED TO US DO.

CORRECTION TO THE RECORD FROM THE PRIOR DISCUSSION.

THE NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET, I MEAN REN CITRUS, EVERY ONE OF THE COMMUNITIES EXPRESSED OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FOR WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO.

THE ONLY LACK OF SUPPORT WE'VE GOTTEN IS NEIGHBORS WHICH ARE LITERALLY A THOUSAND AWAY FROM WHAT WE ARE DOING.

SO, WE HAVE TRIED.

BUT WHAT WE ARE ALSO TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SOMETHING THAT IS FUN AND BEAUTIFUL.

IT'S NOT JUST INTENDED TO BE TWO KENTUCKY F SITTING OUT ON THE STREET.

AND A FUEL STATION SLINGING GAS.

EVERYTHING THAT WE ARE DOING IS GOING TO BE BEAUTIFUL.

I AM GOING TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR SAYING THAT IN PUBLIC.

BUT WE REALLY ACTUALLY HAVE DESIGNED IT ALREADY.

MOST CONSISTENTLY FOR THE LAST MONTHS WE SHOWING REALLY WHAT WE WANT TO BUILD.

I OWN ONE PARCEL.

THE PIECE OF LAND.

I OWN THE BALANCE OF CITRUS PLAZA.

THE ISSUE OF WHETHER IT CAN BE MANDATED T PROJECTS WORK TOGETHER, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE THE FUEL STATION IS APPROVED.

BECAUSE I DON'T, I CAN'T CONTROL WHAT RALPH TO.

THEY CERTAINLY WOULDN'T AGREE TO A CONNECTI BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES IF THEY WEREN'T GOING INTEGRATED.

THE OTHER ESSENTIAL ISSUE HERE IS THAT I HAVE PROMISED RALPH'S, AS YOU WILL SEE, THERE IS A VERY LARGE COMMON PARKING TO THE EAST OF WHERE THE FUEL STATION IS THAT WILL ACCOMMODATE NOT ONLY THE CITRUS PLAZA PARKING BUT ALSO THE REST OF THE SITE.

THE OTHER THING THAT I REALLY WANT TO EMP YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, WE ARE SURROUNDED NORTH BY THE DOCTOR THAT OWNS THAT LAND.

HE IS 100% IN FAVOR OF US.

WE ARE ALMOST ENTIRELY TO THE EAST SURROUNDED BY THE CROSSINGS PROJECT.

WHICH IS ENTIRELY IN FAVOR OF WHAT WE ARE DOING.

WE INTEND TO INTEGRATE FLOW WITH PEDESTRIAN CARTS, BICYCLES BETWEEN ALL OF THE PROJECTS.

IT'S ONLY ABOUT 50 FEET THAT IS EVEN CONNEC CONTIGUOUS POINT WITH THE DESERT RIVER ESTATES PEOPLE.

[01:55:01]

THEN EVERYTHING TO THE, IF YOU WILL TO THE WEST ARE ALL THE NEIGHBORS I JUST MENTIONED.

CITRUS AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE.

I KNOW INDIO WOULD LIKE TO KEEP RALPH'S THERE.

I WANT TO KEEP THEM THERE.

I'M NOT THREATENING THEY WILL LEAVE BECA BELIEVE THEY WILL.

BUT I DO BELIEVE WE GOT TO THIS POINT BECA HAD COMMON INTERESTS.

THE CITY DID.

CERTAINLY RALPH'S WANTS TO SEE, THEY WANT TO SEE A FUEL STATION.

WE HAVE TONED, WE ARCHITECTURALLY DESIGNED THAT FUEL STATION SO IT'S PLEASING.

WE GOT RID OF A LOT OF SIGNAGE.

THE OTHER THING THAT IS IMPORTANT HERE THAT THERE WERE THE PLANS OF THE REAR OF THE PARCEL.

WE DON'T KNOW YET WHAT IS GOING TO GO THERE.

WE ARE GOING TO BUILD IN ITS ENTIRETY PHASE ONE.

I PROMISE WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT.

AND WE WILL.

MOST PEOPLE DON'T SAY THEY ARE GOING TO DO THAT.

I'M GOING TO START AS SOON AS THIS MEETING IS COMPLETED AND IF WE GET A POSITIVE, WE ARE ALREADY GOING TO DESIGN REVIEW.

I'VE GOT MY ENGINEERS READY TO SUBMIT GRADING.

MY HOPE IS WE WILL BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION FROM A GRADING STANDPOINT AS EARLY AS OCTOBER.

THIS ISN'T JUST IDLE PROMISE.

I EXPECT TO DO THAT.

I HAVE CERTAINLY TALKED TO PLANNING ABOUT THIS.

THEY KNOW THAT I HAVE BEEN WILLING TO GO AT RISK WITH MY DESIGNS, ET CETERA.

SO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT MORE I CAN SAY EXCEPT TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE COMMUNITY.

IT KIND OF HAS TO FLOW TOGETHER.

THERE IS LOGIC TO IT.

EMPHASIS ON THE CONNECTION BETWEEN CITRUS PLAZA AND WHAT WE ARE DOING IS IT WILL BE A VILLAGE.

THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE DRIVE IN FRONT OF RALPHS WILL GO THROUGH THE EXPANSION AREA.

ALL THE WAY CONNECTING BACK OUT TO JEFFERSON.

IT MAKES SENSE FROM A LAND PLANNING STANDPOINT.

BUT FROM PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO COME AND GO AND WALK AND GO GET ICE CREAM AND GO TO AN ITALIAN RESTAURANT AND THE FRENCH RESTAURA WHICH WE ARE HOPING TO DO, IT IS JUST GOING TO BE FUN.

THAT IS ALL I ASK YOU TO CONSIDER.

I KNOW THERE CAN BE A LOT OF CRITICISM OF A DEVELOPER BUT I'M REALLY TRYING.

I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND THE INVEST COMMUNITY FROM BEFORE AND WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING HOW THE COUNCIL GOES ON THIS ONE.

MA'AM, ARE YOU NEXT? ARE YOU GOING TO ADD ON TO THIS?

>> MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY.

I WILL GO QUICKLY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: TAKE YOUR TIME.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.

>> SO THIS GIVES YOU AN AERIAL PERSPECTIVE PROJECT.

THE BOUNDARIES ARE CLEAR.

THE PLANNING AREAS ARE LITERALLY HALF AND H THE PROPERTY.

ON OUR NINE ACRES.

WE HAVE A SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE.

YOU WILL SEE THAT THE PROPERTY EXTENDS A L BIT FURTHER EAST THAN THE RALPH'S.

THAT AREA IS GOING TO BE OUR RETENSION AREA.

AND IT WILL BE AN OPEN SPACE.

SO, THE FRONTAGE THAT ABUTS, THAT ABUTS DESERT RIVER IS ALMOST ALL GOING TO BE IN OPEN SPACE OR RETENTION.

THE BALANCE OF THE SITE WHICH IS THE CROSSI THE TOP OF THE PAGE.

AND THE DOCTOR'S PROPERTY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PAGE.

BOTH OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE IN SUPPORT.

I WILL NOT GO THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE APPLICATION BECAUSE ROSY HAS GONE IN TO THAT AT GREAT LENGTHS BUT I DO WANT TO FOCUS CIRCULATION PLAN.

AND THE TWO OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE IN THE PLAN.

WE HAVE AS BOB MENTIONED, WE HAVE A MAIN ENTRY DRIVE.

PROMENADE THAT WILL TAKE YOU IN TO THE CENTER.

IT IS BUILT SO THAT ALL OF THIS, THE AUTOMO CIRCULATION IS BUILT TO THAT THERE IS PLENTY OF FOR OPEN SPACES FOR CUSTOMERS.

SO THERE ARE OPTIONS FOR DINING OUT AT EAC NODES OF DEVELOPMENT.

THE SECOND OPTION THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED POTENTIAL FOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS.

AND I REALIZE THAT THIS SITE PLAN SAYS APARTMENTS BUT WE DON'T KNOW IF IT IS GOING TO BE APARTMENTS OR CONDOMINIUMS OR TOWN HOMES.

BOB HAS BEEN FOCUSING ON DEVELOPING THE PHASE ONE.

AND IS ALMOST DONE WITH HIS DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION.

[02:00:02]

SO, THAT, THE BACK HALF WILL DEVELOP SECOND AFTER THE FRONT HALF.

AND THIS AREA HERE AS I POINT WITH MY MO PARKING FOR RALPH'S THAT BOB HAS MENTIONED TO YOU.

THE INTENT IS TO BUILD OUT ALL OF PHASE ONE AS YOU SEE HERE.

THAT WILL PROVIDE TWO CONNECTIONS.

ONE ON THE EAST END OF PHASE ONE, WHICH WILL ALIGN WITH THE MAIN DRIVE IN FRONT OF RALPH'S.

AND ONE THAT WILL ALIGN WITH THE BACK CORNE MARIO'S BUILDING.

SINCE I'M SURE ALL OF US HAVE EATEN AT MARIO'S AT ONE POINT.

YOU WILL SEE THAT THESE ARE THE TWO OPTION PROVIDED IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

WE HAVE ALSO BEEN LOOKING BECAUSE OF THE VERY STRONG SUPPORT THAT HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE FOLKS WHO ARE WORKING ON THE C TO OUR EAST, WE HAVE DEVELOPED A CONCEPT YOU NOTICE HERE THAT ALLOWS FOR A CONNECTION SO THAT WE CAN HAVE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN AND GOLF CART ACCESS T CROSSINGS FOLKS.

SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO GET IN TO THEIR CAR TO COME TO THE STORE OR TO COME TO HAVE DINNER.

IF THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED WITH COMMERCIAL AREA TWO, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT A THIRD ACCESS.

FOR BOTH PRIVACY AND SECURITY IF THE PROJEC DEVELOPS WITH RESIDENTIAL IN PLANNING AREA THERE WOULD BE, THERE WOULD NOT BE THE THIRD POINT OF ACCESS.

THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION WOULD REMAIN MOR THAT WAY.

AS BOB AS TOUCHED ON AND THE VIDEO SHOWED YOU, WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD.

AND OUR ARCHITECT IS HERE WITH US.

BILL SHARON IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OF HIM.

WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO UPGRADE THE ARCHITECTURE, TO PROVIDE REALLY VARIED FACADES AND INTERESTING MATERIALS AND TO KEEP IT A SCALE THAT ENCOURAGED PEOPLE, THAT PEOPLE TO STAY AND PLAY.

SO THIS IS NOT WHERE YOU COME IN AND GET DR AND GO HOME.

THE RESIDENTIAL IS LIMITED TO TWO STORIES.

IT COULD BE TOWNHOME OR CONDOMINIU INTEGRATE IN THE STYLE OF THE CENTER WITH CONTEMPORARY LOOK.

WE ALSO WORKED HARD ON THE FRONTAGE O STREET.

THE BERM THAT IS PROVIDED AS A REQUIREMEN AMENDMENTS DESIGNED IN TO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.

WE HAVE ALSO PROVIDED CONNECTIONS DIRECTLY FROM JEFFERSON STREET SO THE FOLKS CAN WALK OR BIKE IN TO THE PROJECT WITHOUT HAVING TO WALK OR BIKE DOWN THE DRIVEWAYS.

BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT THROUGHOUT THIS PROJECT THAT PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS AND BICYCLE CONNECTIONS BE SAFE.

AND BE SEPARATED FROM THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC.

THIS SHOWS THE AREA WHERE WE HAVE CIRCULATION.

THE MAIN DRIVEWAY PROVIDES 50-FOOT ROADWAY THAT WILL BE AMPLE AS GRAND PROMENADE IN THE PROJECT.

THE NORTH ENTRANCE HERE IS 30 FEET WIDE.

WHICH IS WIDER THAN THE CITY'S MINIMUM FO COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS.

THEN WE ALSO CREATED IN THIS AREA HERE, AN ABILITY FOR CARS TO COME THROUGH THE DRIVE-THRU OR HAVE OUTDOOR DINING ON EITHER SIDE.

RATHER THAN PARKING ON EITHER SIDE THAT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR MOST OF THE COMMERCIAL CENTERS SO THAT THOSE FACILITIES HAVE THE ABILITY TO CREATE AN ATMOSPHERE A PLACE WHERE THE FOLKS CAN STAY.

WE HAVE ONE REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LANGUAGE IN THE AMENDMENTS TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

THAT IS ITEM NUMBER 6.

AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN THAT THE SECOND SENTENCE REQUIRES THAT TRASH ENCLOSURE AREAS

[02:05:08]

NOT FACE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH/NORTHEAST AND EAST.

WE READ THAT TO SAY THAT A BUILDING L EXAMPLE, A BUILDING LOCATED HERE COULD NOT HAVE A TRASH ENCLOSURE ON THIS SIDE OR THAT SIDE.

WE BELIEVE THAT THE INTENT WAS TO NOT HAV ENCLOSURES ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL.

ALTHOUGH I DO NOT WISH TO PUT WORDS IN T MOUTH.

BUT TO US, IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE THAT ENCLOSURES BE LIMITED ON THE NORTH AND THE ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

AND SO WE WOULD REQUEST IF THE COUNCIL WI THAT THE SECOND SENTENCE BE MODIFIED TO READ ANY TRASH ENCLOSURE AREAS WITHIN 5 FEET OF THE NORTH AND EAST PROPERTY LINES SHALL NOT FACE NORTH OR EAST.

THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.

WE ARE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

AND WE WOULD ASK IF THE COUNCIL IS WILLING HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT PUBLIC TESTIMONY IF THE MAYOR SO WISHES.

AND I WILL RELINQUISH THE SCREEN UNLESS THE WOULD LIKE ME TO KEEP THE PRESENTATION ON THE SCREEN.

>> MAYOR MILLER: PLEASE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SPEAKING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY REAL QUICK.

ABSOLUTELY.

WE'D LIKE TO TAKE -- WE HAVE A PERSON THA PHONE THAT WANTS TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT.

I WOULD LIKE TO GET THAT DONE.

AND THEN BECAUSE WE'LL LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

I HAVE A DISTINCT FEELING WE WILL HAVE A DEBATE BACK AND FORTH.

LET US DO THAT.

THE CITY CLERK, CAN YOU TRY TO GET THE INDIVIDUAL ON?

IS IT SOMEONE WE HAVE TO -- >> I DO HAVE BILL SANCHEZ ON ZOOM.

GO AHEAD, BILL.

>> HI.

GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND HONORABLE COUNCILMEMBERS.

ANY NAME IS BILL SANCHEZ.

I AM A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF INDIO.

I LIVE IN ONE OF THE GATED COMMUNITIES ON AVENUE 49.

NOT THE DESERT RIVER ESTATES.

THIS RALPH'S SHOPPING CENTER IS MY SHOPPIN WELL.

IT'S A SHOPPING CENTER THAT MY WIFE AND I FREQUENT AT LEAST TWICE A WEEK TO GO GET OUR GROCERIES OR WHATEVER WE NEED.

PRIOR TO THIS COVID PANDEMIC, WE FREQUENTED RESTAURANTS THERE.

ON WEEKENDS WE RIDE OUR BICYCLES WITH OUR KIDS.

OR WALK TO THE CENTER.

IT IS A CENTER THAT IS SHARED BY THE COMMUN INDIO.

NOT JUST DESERT RIVER ESTATES.

SO, I AM THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS BEEN CALLING IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT.

I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING IT THROUGH.

I HAVE SEEN THE PROJECT PROGRESS BASED ON S THE COMMENTS THAT SOME OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS MENTIONED.

I THINK THE DEVELOPER IS DOING A GREAT JOB.

I GOT, I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON ONE OF THAT THE COUNCILWOMAN MENTIONED.

RESPECTFULLY I DISAGREE THAT DRIVE-THRU SHOULD BE REMOVED OR WALK-UP WINDOWS.

I THINK DURING THE TIME OF THE PANDEMIC, LEARNED HOW VALUABLE DRIVE-THRU WINDOWS ARE OUTDOOR SEATINGS ARE.

IF YOU GO AHEAD AND YOU ELIMINATE THOSE FEATURES FROM THE RESTAURANTS OR THE BUSINESSES, THEY WILL START OFF WITH A HANDICAP.

I HOPE YOU CONSIDER KEEPING DRIVE-THRU WINDOWS AT THE CENTER.

THERE WAS ANOTHER MENTION ABOUT FORMING A COMMITTEE.

TO GO BACK AND MEET WITH SOME OF THE COMMUNITY.

AND HAVE SOME STAFF MEMBERS IN THERE.

WELL, IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO THAT, I WOULD REQ YOU OPEN IT UP TO THE COMMUNITY.

NOT JUST AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

I THINK THAT IS IT.

I URGE YOU TO TRUST YOUR STAFF.

THEY HAVE DONE THEIR HOMEWORK.

THEY ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

I HOPE THAT YOU TRUST THEM AND VOTE FOR A THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MR. SANCHEZ.

CITY CLERK, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT IS ON THAT WANTS TO BE READ IN RECORD OR ANYTHING?

>> NO MORE COMMENTS.

[02:10:01]

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN.

THERE IS STILL TIME.

OKAY.

WE HAVE HEARD MS. AMITH.

WE STILL HAVE THE REST OF YOU.

ANY KIND OF COMMENTS?

>> I HAVE QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: LET'S DEAL WITH MR. FERMON FIRST.

>> MR. FERMON: FIRST AND FOREMOST, THANK YOU, ROSY FOR THE EXTENSIVE PRESENTATION.

WELL DETAILED.

MR. SNYDER, THANK YOU FOR YOU AND YOUR STAFF.

THANK THE PROPERTY OWNER.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

MAYBE MR. SNYDER CAN ANSWER MY FIRST QUESTION.

IN RESPECT TO THE PETITION, WHEN WAS THE PE AUTHORED?

>> THE PETITION WAS SUBMITTED AT THE FEBRUAR 26, 2020.

I CAN'T GIVE YOU THE AUTHOR DATE -- >> MR. FERMON: IT WAS FEBRUARY -- >> IT CAME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MR. FERMON: OKAY.

SUBMITTED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

BUT THE ONE WE RECEIVED TODAY SAYS RECEI FROM THE CLERK'S OFFICE.

SO THE PETITION IS PRIOR TO THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE.

>> YES, COUNCILMEMBER.

YOU RECEIVED DOCUMENTATION FROM REPRESENTA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION THAT WAS A LETTER DATED TODAY ALONG WITH THE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE PRIOR MEETING THAT INCLUDED THE PETITION.

>> MR. FERMON: OKAY.

I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE -- >> CAN I ADD ONE THING?

>> MR. FERMON: SURE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR ON THE RECORD WHEN LUPE WAS SPEAKING AND HERE, TOO.

>> IT VERY WELL MAY BE THAT A NUMBER OF THE PEOPLE ON THAT PETITION WOULD STILL HAVE OBJECTIONS.

I'M NOT TRYING TO SUGGEST THAT THEY GOT RESOLVED.

I WAS JUST TRYING TO PUT IT IN TO CONTEXT CAME IN.

>> MR. FERMON: I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I DID CONTACT SOME OF THE RESIDENTS THERE.

AND FROM WHAT I HEARD, CONSENSUS WITH THE F THAT I SPOKE -- AND I DIDN'T SPEAK TO ALL OF THEM -- THAT THE MAIN ISSUE WAS THE HOTEL.

AND THE FAST FOOD DRIVE-THRU.

WHICH WAS SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER.

THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE A MAJOR FAST FOOD PER SE ON THE ROADWAY.

THESE ARE GOING TO BE HIDDEN DRIVE-UP WINDOWS.

CORRECT?

>> YES, COUNCILMEMBER.

SO AS PART OF THE AMENDMENTS FROM THE P COMMISSION, AND THE RECOMMENDATION TO YOU, ARE RECOMMENDING THAT ANY DRIVE-THRU IF ALLOWED WOULD HAVE INTEGRATED ARCHITECTURE FOR THE DRIVE-TH COMPONENTS SO THE INTENT IS TO USE THE ARCHITECTURE TO SCREEN AND SHIELD T DRIVE-THRU FUNCTIONS OF THAT BUILDING.

>> MR. FERMON: OKAY.

THE FOLKS I SPOKE WITH, THAT WAS A CONSENSUS.

THAT MOST OF THEIR CONCERNS WERE MET WITH C THAT WERE MADE TO THE PLAN.

SO, MOVING ON TO MY NEXT QUESTION I HAVE.

THERE WAS, IT WAS SPOKE ABOUT THAT THERE OUTREACH IN MEETINGS WITH THE RESIDENTS.

WAS THAT WITH JUST RESIDENTS? WAS THAT ALSO WITH THE H.O.A., HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF THE DESERT RIVER ESTATES?

>> SO THE APPLICANT VOLUNTARILY NOT REQUIR THE CITY CODE OR CITY STANDARDS HELD A COMMUNITY MEETING ON FEBRUARY 3.

AND DID THEIR OWN NOTICING.

YOU CAN CERTAINLY ASK THE APPLICANT IF YOU REQUIRE DETAIL HOW THEY NOTICED.

STAFF ATTENDED TO BE A REFERENCE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR THE CITIZENS OR THE ATTENDEES.

THE APPLICANT.

I THINK APPROXIMATELY, DON'T HOLD ME TO THIS BUT AROUND 40 PERSONS ATTENDED.

SUBSEQUENTLY WE WENT TO PUBLIC HEARING, N HEARING, FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION WHEN IT CONTINUED THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID REQUEST THAT THE APPLICANT MEET WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF DESERT RIVER ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WHICH THEY DID AND WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER.

>> MR. FERMON: OKAY.

COULD I ASK THE APPLICANT HOW THE PROPER ABSOLUTELY.

>> MR. FERMON: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT HOW IT WAS ANNOUNCED?

>> THE FEBRUARY 3 MEETING?

>> YES.

>> MAYOR MILLER: GO AHEAD, SIR.

>> YEAH.

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T QUITE HEAR.

WITH THE MASKS ON IT'S MUFFLED.

>> MR. FERMON: SORRY ABOUT THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO GET CLARIFICAT RESIDENTS AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS NOT DESERT RIVER ESTATES BUT THE SURROUNDING AREAS WERE NOTIFIED OF A MEETING WITH APPLICANT.

>> OKAY.

WELL, FIRST OFF WE OBVIOUSLY COMPLIED WITH EVERYTHING THAT WAS LEGALLY REQUIRED.

I GUESS THAT IS WHATEVER THE NUMBERS.

500 FEET.

ALL OF THAT.

BUT WE DECIDED TO MAKE SURE THAT BECAUSE CITRUS PLAZA IS A CENTER IS ACTIVE.

THE PEOPLE SHOP THERE ARE FROM THE ENTIRE AREA.

WE KNOW THAT.

BECAUSE OF RALPH'S.

THEY KNOW WHO THE CUSTOMERS ARE.

SO, WE INVITED THEM ALL TO THE MEETING.

WHICH WE HAD AT CITRUS PLAZA.

I BELIEVE IT WAS ON FEBRUARY 3.

[02:15:03]

WE WERE EXPECTING ABOUT 15-20 PEOPLE.

I TURNED OUT THAT THERE WERE 70.

MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE WERE NOT OUT THE DE ESTATE PEOPLE.

I THINK WE HAD FIVE OR SIX.

I DON'T WANT TO BE INCORRECT ABOUT THAT.

LET'S SAY TEN PEOPLE.

BUT THE REST OF THEM WERE FROM ALL OF THE ADJACENT COMMUNITIES.

THEY WERE EXTRAORDINARILY SUPPORTIVE BECAUSE THEY KIND OF SEE THAT THIS IS WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO SHOP.

AND HAVE SOME FUN.

WE DID, WE TRIED TO DO AN OUTREACH AS FAR AS WE COULD.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?

>> MR. FERMON: YES.

GO AHEAD.

>> COUNCILMAN, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TECHNICAL A YOUR QUESTION.

WE MAILED TO EVERY RESIDENT AT DESERT RIVER.

WE MAILED TO EVERYONE WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PROPERTY.

WE MAILED TO EVERYONE AT RENAISSANCE.

>> MR. FERMON: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

ONE LAST MAYBE A COMMENT.

WITH THE TWO PROPERTIES NEXT TO EACH OTHER.

I MEAN, I LIKE TO SEE IF THIS PASSES THA WOULDN'T BE A BRICK WALL THERE SEPARATING THE PROPERTIES.

THAT HAS BEEN SPOKE ABOUT ALREADY.

THAT IS SOMETHING I DON'T THINK WOULD GO W AREA.

>> IF I MAY ANSWER THAT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SURE.

YES, SIR.

>> I COMMENTED BEFORE.

OBVIOUSLY RALPH'S OWNS THE CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY.

BY THE WAY, THEY ARE ONLINE AT LEAST MONI THING BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED IN THE HEARING.

BUT WE KNOW THAT THIS WILL NOT WORK FOR EITHER ONE OF US IF WE DON'T TAKE DOWN THE BULK OF THAT WALL.

AS A MATTER OF FACT PART OF OUR GRADING PLAN WILL SMOOTH THE ELEVATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.

SO, CLEARLY AT A MINIMUM THE BIG DRIVE AREA IN FRONT OF RALPH'S WHICH BECOMES OUR MAIN NORTH/SOUTH CORRIDOR IS OF COURSE GOING TO BE OPENED UP.

WE WILL OPEN IT UP WHERE NEAR MARIO'S CONNECTION.

WHETHER THE REST OF THE WALL PARTS OF IT STAY UP IS A FUNCTION OF WHAT WE BUILD IN THE SECOND PHASE.

IF YOU HAD APARTMENTS THERE YOU WOULD PROBABLE WANT TO KEEP OR RESIDENTIAL OF SOME SORT YOU WOULD WANT TO KEEP A COMPONENT OF THAT FROM A SECURITY STANDPOINT.

BUT THAT IS THE BACK PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

BUT WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF LEAVING THE WALL UP.

OUR PLAN IS TO INTEGRATE THE TWO PROJECTS I APPROVAL FOR OBVIOUSLY SPECIFIC PLAN.

BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE RALPH'S CONSENT, WHICH IS THE FUEL STATION IN ORDER FOR US TO HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHTS TO EVEN COMBINE THE TWO.

>> MR. FERMON: THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANSWER.

THAT IS IT, MR. MAYOR.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MR. FERMON.

MR. ORTIZ, QUESTIONS, SIR?

ORSEILLE GO AHEAD AND LET LUPE -- >> MR. ORTIZ: I'LL TO GO AHEAD AND ASK LUPE ASK HER QUESTION.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T HAVE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS OVER PLANNING AREA "B." AND THAT PRIMARY INTEREST IS IN A FUELING STATION.

AND THAT RENAISSANCE IS ALL UP IN ARMS ABOUT YES, YES, YES, THEY WANT THIS PROJECT BUT YET RENAISSANCE HOMEOWNERS ON THE LA QUINTA SIDE ARE THE ONE THAT MADE SURE THAT THE SHOPPING CENTER ACROSS THE STREET DOES NOT HAVE A FUELING CENTER.

SO HE SAYS HE DOESN'T WANT TO THROW ANY THREATS BUT WE ALREADY KNOW LA QUINTA IS NOT GOING TO FUELING CENTER.

RENAISSANCE MADE SURE OF THAT.

WE ARE LOOKING TO GET THE CITY OF INDIO TO TAKE ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD THOUGH WE RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL BENEFIT.

SO BASICALLY THIS DEVELOPER IS JUST INTERESTED IN TWO DRIVE-THRUS, ENVIRONMENTALLY UNDESIRABLE FUELING STATION AND TWO STRIP MALLS BECAUSE HE DOESN'T CONTROL THE PLANNING AREA TWO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> THAT IS NOT TRUE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: HOLD ON, SIR.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: YOU JUST SAID YOU DIDN'T.

YOU JUST SAID YOU DIDN'T.

>> I OWN THE PROPERTY.

I HAVE -- >> MS. RAMOS AMITH: PLANNING AREA TWO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: THE QUESTION IS WHY CAN'T WE TAKE DOWN THE WALL IF HE DOESN'T HAVE PLANNING AREA TWO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ASK A QUESTION AND LET HIM ANSWER.

WE'LL HAVE A CIVILIZED CONVERSATION.

ARE YOU ABLE TO ANSWER HER QUESTION?

>> YES.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: CAN I CLARIFY -- >> MAYOR MILLER: WHICHEVER ONE OF YOU WANT TO CLARIFY.

>> IF I COULD, I'M GOING TO BRING UP THE POWER POINT SO THAT I CAN SHOW THE SITE PLAN.

[02:20:05]

THE PROJECT DEVELOPER OWNS ALL NINE ACRES.

AS HE STATED, RALPH'S OWNS THEIR PAD.

AND THEY ALSO OWN THE STRIP OF LAND WHICH DRIVEWAY.

ALL THE WAY TO JEFFERSON STREET.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THAT IS THE ONE THAT G MARIO'S THAT GOES OUT THROUGH THE SIDE TURN-IN, RIGHT?

>> IT GOES BEHIND MARIO'S AND ABUTS THE THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: WE KNOW WHERE IT IS.

THANK YOU.

>> THAT IS THE OWNERSHIP BREAKDOWN.

THAT IS ALL I WANTED TO SHARE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

MS. AMITH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS? I NEED TO GET TO OSCAR AND ELAINE AND WE CAN WRAP IT UP.

THEY MIGHT HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS.

ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO PUT OUT THERE?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS.

I HAVE A COMMENT FOR NICOLE AND I WILL HAV ARGUMENT.

NICOLE, WHOEVER PREPARED YOUR SITE PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN DID YOU A GREAT INJUSTICE.

THE PICTURE YOU HAVE PAINT AND THE PICTURE ROSY PAINTED ABOUT PLAZA AND PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND MIXED USE IS NOT WHAT WE ARE LOOKING IN THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN RENDINGS.

I KNOW THEY ARE CONCEPTUAL BUT THAT IS ALL WE HAVE TO GO OFF OF.

YOUR ARCHITECT DID A GREAT DISSERVICE RENDERING.

FOR THAT I WILL RECESS UNTIL I HAVE MY CLOSING ARGUMENTS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

ARCHITECT IS ON SO IF WE NEED TO ASK QUESTI WE CAN.

MR. ORTIZ, CAN YOU WEIGH IN ON THIS NOW, SIR?

>> MR. ORTIZ: YES.

SO, I HAVE TALKED TO SOME OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND THEY LIKE THE DESIGN.

THEY THINK IT GOES TOWARD OUR GOAL OF HA WALKABLE SHOPPING SPACES.

I THINK IT WOULD INTEGRATE WELL WITH THE P DOOR TO IT.

YEAH.

I MEAN OUR PLANNING COMMISSION IS SAYING T AHEAD.

OUR CITY STAFF IS SAYING TO GO AHEAD.

I THINK IT IS LOOKING LIKE A GOOD PROJECT SO FAR.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ANY DIRECT QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS?

>> MR. ORTIZ: NO.

I THINK EVERYBODY HAS GOTTEN THE QUESTIONS THINKING ALREADY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

THANK YOU, MR. ORTIZ.

MAYOR PRO TEM HOLMES?

>> MS. HOLMES: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

FIRST OF ALL, THIS PRESENTATION HAS BEEN A MONUMENTAL EFFORT AS HAS THE ENTIRE PROJECT.

SO, THANK YOU TO THOSE INVOLVED.

RALPH'S HAS BEEN OUR SHOPPING CENTER OF C SINCE WE MOVED HERE ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO.

THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE QUALITY AN INCREASING QUALITY OF THE BUSINESSES THERE.

SO I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THIS LEVEL WILL CONTINUE ON IN THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT.

HAVING SAID ALL OF THAT, LET'S START WITH PART ABOUT THE HOTELS.

WHEN THIS CAME OUT BACK IN THE FIRST EARLY PART OF THE YEAR THAT WAS A RED FLAG FOR ME.

WITH RESPECT TO A FOUR-STORY HOTEL.

I WOULDN'T WANT A FOUR-STORY HOTEL BREATHING DOWN MY HOME.

BUT THAT WAS MITIGATED.

THAT WAS MANAGED.

THAT HOTEL CONCEPT HAS BEEN TOSSED.

SO THAT WHOLE PLANNING AREA TWO HAS EVOLVED AND CHANGED.

EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS GO COME OUT OF THE GROUND IN THE NEAR FUTURE IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE IN PLAN TO ALLOW FOR CONDOS, APARTMENT OR TOWNHOME.

THE KEY IS NO MORE THAN TWO STORIES HIGH.

I SUPPORT THE DRIVE-THRU.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT.

I HAVE BEEN AROUND THIS COMMUNITY AND OTHERS.

AND OFTEN THE DRIVE-THRUS, THE NICER DRIVE-THRU.

CHIPOTLE, THE ONE IN NORTH INDIO, THAT NOT JUST SURVIVE BUT SUCCEED.

WHERE THE MAJORITY OR MANY FOLKS ARE ABLE TO PARTAKE.

TO BE ABLE TO SIT OUTSIDE, GRAB SOMETHING, OR SIT OUTSIDE OR EAT INSIDE.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM.

I HAVE NO ISSUE.

I SEE HOW THESE THINGS ARE DESIGNED.

AND SO A QUESTION I HAVE OF STAFF IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TALK ABOUT THE BERM, WE SEE THE PLANTINGS.

HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT SHOULD THIS PROJE FORWARD THAT THE WAY THINGS ARE DESIGNED AND PLANTED AND SO ON AND SO FORTH THEY ARE MAINTAINED? I HAVE NO REASON BECAUSE OF HOW THE ORIGIN PLAZA MAINTAINED BEAUTIFULLY TO THINK IT WON'T BE.

BUT DO WE HAVE CHECKS AND THE BALANCES IN PLACE?

[02:25:01]

BECAUSE THE DESIGN, THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN AND THAT BERM INTEGRAL TO CREATE FACADE TO JEFFERSON.

HOW DO WE ENSURE IT STAYS AT THAT HIGH LEVEL OF QUALITY?

>> SO, NUMBER ONE YOU POINTED OUT, THE P OWNER SHOULD HAVE A VESTED INTEREST.

THE CITY COUNCIL COULD IF YOU SO WISH ADD A TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN REQUIRING THE SUBMITTAL OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENA FOR THE PROPERTY.

THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE AND SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.

THAT WOULD BE A BASIS ON WHICH FUTURE COD ENFORCEMENT ACTION COULD BE DONE.

THAT IS AN OPTION.

WE ALSO RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS BECAUSE WE HAVE THE CERTAINTY HOW THE PROPERTY WILL DEVELOP.

WE MENTIONED THE CONDITION OF HAVING VACANT PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY LANDSCAPED.

IF IT GOES BEHIND A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.

THAT IS RECOGNITION THE BUILDOUT OF THE PRO UNCERTAIN AND THERE MAY BE PORTIONS THAT ARE UNDEVELOPED FOR A WHILE SO MINIMAL LANDSCAPE PRESERVE WITH AESTHETICS AND DUST CONTROL AND THINGS L THAT.

>> MS. HOLMES: THAT IS SOMETHING SUPPORT AND HOPE OTHERS SUPPORT AS WELL.

IN TERMS OF THE FUELING STATION.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE FUELING STA WAY IT HAS BEEN DESIGNED.

I DO NOT WANT AS I LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC PL THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE CONCERNED.

FOR INSTANCE, AUTOMOTIVE OR VEHICLE REPAIR FACILITIES AS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

THAT SHOULD BE NOT PERMITTED.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT SHOULD MOVE FROM CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO NOT PERMITTED.

LIKE PLACES OF WORSHIP AND MORTUARIES AND PAWNBROKER SHOPS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.

I THINK COUNCILMEMBER RAMOS AMITH POINTED SOME OF THOSE OUT.

BUT AS I SAID, I DO NOT HAVE A CONCERN OVER THE FUELING STATION.

OR THE FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS.

I SEE WHAT CITRUS 1 EVOLVED INTO, WHIC SUCCESSFUL AND A HIGH QUALITY OF BUSINESSES.

I LIKE THE VILLAGE CONCEPT.

I LIKE THE PEDESTRIAN FLOW.

CONCERN ABOUT THE NORTH CURB CUT.

I THINK TWO CURB CUTS IS EXCESSIVE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ONE CURB CUT.

AS THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD, PRESUMABLY PRESENTED WITH THE FUELING STATION.

AND THE DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANTS THAT WALL, THAT CONNECTIVITY, THE WALL BE REMOVED AND THE CONNECTIVITY ENHANCED.

QUESTIONS COME UP.

IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

IT HAS BEEN ANSWERED.

I AM WEIGHING IN ON LIKE EVERYONE ELSE DESIRE TO ENSURE THAT THAT HAPPENS SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

I THINK THAT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT.

THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT FOR THE CITY AND F PARTICULAR AREA.

THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON THE SETBACKS.

I KNOW SOME OF THEM WERE LIKE TEN FEET.

SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF WE HAVE GOING ON.

WHAT WOULD MAKE THE SETTINGS IN PLACE BASED BUILDING OF IT THAT WOULD BE AGAINST AWAY FROM SETBACKS ON WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT APARTMENTS.

IF IT WAS ME I'D RATHER HAVE A HOTEL IN TERMS OF IF I WAS A RESIDENT OF DESERT RIVER MYSELF BECAUSE IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT OPEN 24/7.

IT IS IN TERMS OF EXTENT BUT IN THE SUMMER IT'S NOT AS BUSY.

WHERE YOU HAVE APARTMENTS YOU HAVE PEOPLE THERE DAILY.

BUT IT IS GOOD FOR BUSINESS BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING FOR APARTMENTS AND OTHER STUFF.

WHERE IS THE SETBACKS? IS IT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE NOW AT RALPH'S? I WORRY ABOUT THE BUFFER BETWEEN DESERT RIV WE HAVE IT NOW.

TO MAKE SURE THAT IT LOOKS FLOW GOES TOGETHER.

WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY GOT SET DOWN BESIDE IT.

>> IF YOU WOULD INDULGE ME, I'D LIKE SLIDE THE SETBACKS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> WHILE SHE IS DOING THAT I WILL SAY TH CONVERSATION, WE TYPICALLY MEASURE THEM FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE BUILDING.

THE SPACE IN BETWEEN TYPICALLY YOU MIGHT LANDSCAPING OR STORM WATER RETENSION FACILITIES PARKING.

IT'S TYPICALLY FROM THE PARKING LINE TO TH EDGE.

IN THIS INSTANCE THERE WAS A LOT OF CONVERSATION AROUND THE SETBACKS; PARTICULARLY, IN THE NORTHEAST CONCERN ADJOINING THE DESERT R ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD.

STAFF AND THE APPLICANT DISAGREED ABOUT WHAT IT SHOULD FEEL.

WE FELT IT SHOULD BE BIGGER SETBACK.

APPLICANT PROPOSED MODERATE SETBACK.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION WENT WITH THE A RECOMMENDATION.

I'M GOING TO ASK MS. LUA TO BRIEFLY SU SETBACKS.

[02:30:05]

>> SO THE SETBACKS FOR THE AREA -- I WISH I COULD HAVE A SITE PLAN THAT INDICATES THIS.

BUT I'LL TRY TO DESCRIBE IT AS MUCH AS I CAN.

SO THE AREA IN THE REAR AND THE SIDE SETBAC THE NORTH AND THEN THE EAST BACK WHERE THE PROPERTY IS WOULD BE 50 FEET IF THERE IS MULTIFAMILY.

AND 100 FEET SIDE AND REAR FOR COMMERCIAL USES.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN TO SHOW YOU.

SO THIS IS THE COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN CONCEPTUAL.

WE WOULD HAVE A 100-FOOT SETBACK.

REAR, SIDE.

COMMERCIAL.

50-FOOT SETBACK, RESIDENTIAL.

THAT IS WHAT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: BASED ON WHAT IS PUT IN PLACE.

IS IT FROM DOOR TO WALL?

>> IT IS FROM PROPERTY LINE TO BUILDING EDGE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: PROPERTY LINE TO BUILDING EDGE.

>> PROPERTY LINE.

TO WALL.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I WANT TO MAKE SURE.

MAKE SURE.

WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS.

THAT IS ONE.

THE SECOND THING IS LIKE I SAID, I AGREE WITH EVERYBODY THAT WE WANT TO OPEN THIS AND THE WALL TO COME DOWN AS MUCH AS WE CAN.

PARTNER AND RALPH'S AND I SHOPPED THERE MANY TIMES.

I USED TO LIVE OFF 49.

IT'S A GREAT DEVELOPMENT.

BUT I WANT IT TO LOOK AND MATCH.

WITH THE LANDSCAPE, AGREE WITH MAYOR PRO THEY WILL HAVE TO ENHANCE SOME OF THE OTHER.

LIKE ANYTHING ELSE.

I DID LANDSCAPE FOR MANY YEARS WHEN I WAS WELLS AND I DID THE OTHER STUFF THAT WAS THERE.

YOU WOULD TAKE OUT THE ONE PLANTS AND MAKE THE OTHER ONES THAT LOOK NOT SO BAD WORSE.

ARE THEY GOING TO NEED TO BLEND IT IN OR I TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE TWO SEPARATE OPERATIONS?

>> I THINK IT'S A COMBINATION OF BOTH, MAYOR.

THEY ARE LOOKING TO CREATE SOME LEVEL OF S IN THE BUILDING ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE TREATMENT BUT RECOGNIZ MODERNIZING THE COMMERCIAL CENTER.

I THINK YOUR ARCHITECTURAL WOULD L BE A LIT MODERN -- WILL BE A LITTLE MORE MODERN.

WE AGREE IT SHOULD BE DESERT APPROPRIATE AND DESERT FRIENDLY.

>> I AGREE.

>> SO YOU MAY NOT SEE THINGS SUCH AS TURF.

WE AGREE TURF SHOULD NOT BE INSTALLED AND IT SHOULD BE DESERT APPROPRIATE, DESERT FRIENDLY AND WATER CONSERVING.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

BACK ON THE AREAS, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM DRIVE-THRU.

IF THEY ARE CREATIVE.

LIKE A STARBUCKS.

THERE ARE WAYS AS LONG AS THE NOISE AND THE ELEMENTS ARE DONE AND DONE RIGHT.

I DON'T WANT TO HANDICAP THIS FACILITY.

THIS IS ONE AREA IN INDIO WE CAN POACH.

I HATE TO SAY THE WORD FROM LA QUINTA AND OTHER AREAS.

A GREAT CENTER.

THERE WILL BE COMPETITION ACROSS THE STREET GET IT IN.

THERE IS NO GAS STATION OUT THERE.

THERE ARE AMENITIES AND IF IT'S DONE RIGHT IT COULD BE A QUALITY PROJECT IN TERMS OF IT'S JUST DEPENDS ON HOW IT IS DESIGNED WHEN IT THROUGH.

THAT IS OBVIOUSLY WITH THEY WILL DO IS COME FORWARD.

BUT THERE ARE SOME USES I AGREE SHOULDN'T EITHER.

MORTUARY.

THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THEM.

I DON'T WANT TO GO ONE BY ONE BUT A COUPL SEEM APPROPRIATE TO ME, EVEN WITH A C.P.

IN THEM TO HAVE THAT ON PROPERTY.

HOUSE OF WORSHIP.

I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE.

I'M A CHURCH PERSON.

I AGREE WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE THERE BUT I DON'T THINK WITH THE PARKING AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO PUT THAT KIND OF FACILITY THERE IN A SHO CENTER THAT IS HAVING THE QUALITY IT IS.

IF THEY WANT TO KEEP IT TO THE QUALITY IT NEEDS TO BE THE QUALITY THEY WANT IT TO BE.

THAT IS HIGH END.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH A CHURCH.

BUT IF YOU THAT, THERE IS A DIFFERENT FEEL TO IT.

I'M NOT AGAINST IT.

IF THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS THAT SOMETHING TO DISCUSS.

THAT IS ONE EXAMPLE.

THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS TO BLEND IN AND FIT TO MAKE AT IT QUALITY PROJECT.

I HATE TO HANDICAP THEM ON ANY WAY, ACTUALLY.

BUT THERE SHOULD BE STUFF THERE.

WHAT IS IMPORTANT TODAY WE SEE THE DRIVE- NOT BE IMPORTANT NEXT WEEK OR VICE VERSA.

SO WHATEVER THEY CAN DO TO MAKE SURE IT IS FACILITY TO CONTINUED TO BE FULL AND CONTINUES TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE TENA THEY WANT WHERE THE TENANTS ENHANCE EACH OTHER TO SURE IT'S A ONE STOP SHOP AS MUCH AS IT CAN BE AND THE QUALITY OF THE SERVICES THERE MEET THAT NEED AND GOAL.

WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE DRIVING ANY FURTHER REALLY.

NOT JUST BECAUSE OF INDIO.

TRAFFIC AND THE OTHER STUFF.

THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME.

YOU WILL HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO ME HOW IT DOES.

I KNOW THE PLANNING COMMISSION SPENT A LOT TIME ON THIS.

IT WAS 5-0.

THEY MUST HAVE AGREED TO A LOT OF THE STUFF.

I'LL GO WITH THEM.

THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAVE, YOU CAN ANSWER THAT IN A SECOND BUT I WANT TO ASK THIS.

I KNOW THEY DON'T WANT ANOTHER CURB CUT.

[02:35:02]

WHY IF YOU WERE GOING TO PUT APARTMENTS IN THE BACK WOULD YOU WANT THEM TO GO THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE SHOPPING CENTER? WHY WOULDN'T YOU PUT IT ON THE ONE SIDE SO THE REGULAR RESIDENTS AREN'T DRIVING THROUGH WHERE WE HAVE TRAFFIC AND PEOPLE CRISSCROSSING WHEN THEY ARE LITERALLY GOING TO THEIR HOUSE? WHY WOULDN'T YOU KEEP THE ONE ON THE NORTH S USE THAT FOR THE PEDESTRIANS THAT ARE LIVING FULL-TIME? THEY CAN WALK OUT.

BUT WHY TAKE THEM THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF T CENTER WHEN THEY ARE JUST GOING HOME? WHY BLOG IT UP AND EVERYTHING ELSE? THAT IS MY CONCERN.

>> WELL, I CERTAINLY THINK WHEN COUNCIL GE DELIBERATIVE STAGE IF THERE ARE ANY SUGGESTED THE SPECIFIC PLANS IN TERMS OF THE AMENDMENTS STAFF CAN ASSIST YOU.

I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN SOME NOTES.

IN TERMS OF THE CURB CUT, MAYOR.

CERTAINLY THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK TO WHY THEY FEEL THEY NEED IT.

IT DOES MEET THE CITY STANDARDS FOR DRIVEW SPACING.

IN TERMS OF THE ENGINEERING STANDARDS REVIEWED BY THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THE CITY ENGINEER SO IT MEETS THE STANDARDS.

IF YOU WANT AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WHY THEY WOULD WANT IT AND THE BENEFIT OF HAVING THAT NORTHERN CURB CUT I WOULD DEFER TO THE APPLICANT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

YES, MA'AM, GO AHEAD.

>> MR. MAYOR, IF THIS PROJECT IS -- WELL REASONS FOR THE NORTH DRIVEWAY.

BUT IF THIS PROJECT IS STANDALONE, WE WILL NEED A SECOND POINT OF ACCESS FOR FIRE.

>> TRUE.

>> AND THIS WAS DESIGNED SO THAT THERE IS A THE EDGE.

THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE INTERIOR.

SO THAT WE TRIED TO KEEP, WE TRIED TO K CIRCULATION, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE MAIN DRIVEWAY WHERE IT IS.

IT IS OPPOSITE DEREK ALLEN.

WE TRIED TO KEEP SECONDARY ACCESS IN A LOCATION THAT WOULD BOTH HELP WITH THE SETBACKS, PHYSICAL SETBACKS.

AND THAT WOULD CREATE THE PERIMETER.

SO THAT WE CAN KEEP PEDESTRIAN AND THE NON-CIRCULATION ACCESS ON THE INTERIOR.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I CONCUR.

>> CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE TURN ON THE VIDEO SO I CAN SPEAK THE SPEAKER.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> I TURN MY CAMERA ON.

I'M SORRY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: WE CAN SEE YOU.

>> NOW I CAN.

I WASN'T ABLE TO -- >> MAYOR MILLER: WE HAVE A SCREEN ON THE ZOOM.

CAN YOU SEE?

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: NOW I CAN.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SO WE HAVE THAT.

ELAINE, MISS HOLMES YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.

I AM COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT I HAVE SAID.

I THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE STA DONE AN AMAZING JOB TO LOOK AT THIS AND GET EVERYBODY'S CONCERNS.

>> MS. HOLMES: I CONQUER.

I CONQUER.

I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE THE CURB CUT TOO MUCH.

I WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE ONE BUT I WANT TO C WOULD YOU GO TO THE CENTER TO GET TO THE BACK.

BECAUSE IF YOU ARE GOING THROUGH THE CENTER STOP AND GRAB A BITE TO EAT OR STOP AT THE SHOP THERE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IT INCREASES THE TRAFFIC FLOW THROUGH TH BUSINESSES.

WHERE A CERTAIN AMOUNT MIGHT STOP.

SIMPLY A COMMENT AND NOTHING MORE.

I THINK THIS IS AN OUTSTANDING PROJECT TH IT IS PRESENTED WITH A COUPLE OF TWEAKS.

JUST A COMMENT.

THAT IS ALL.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SO UNLESS -- I KNOW PEO MAKE THE FINAL.

STAYMENTS.

LUPE YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE? I WANT THE APPLICANT TO REBUT SOME OF IT.

GO AHEAD.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: LET HIM REBUT ALL HE WANTS.

THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SIR, YOU HEARD COMMENTS AND THE CONCERNS.

YOU OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVES GO AHEAD AND THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

THEN WE WILL GO FROM THERE.

>> HI.

THANK YOU.

I'LL GIVE A COUPLE OF SHORT ANSWERS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALL HAVE TO UNDERSTAND IS WE HAVE WORKED TOGETHER ON THIS.

I NEVER SUGGESTED HOW THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO FLOW ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ENGINEERING AND THE TRAFFIC PEOPLE.

THEY CAME UP WITH THE WAYS TO GO.

BUT NICOLE MADE IT FAIRLY CLEAR.

IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE NORTH INGRESS/EG DEPARTMENT WILL NOT APPROVE THE PROJECT.

AS FAR AS I CAN TELL.

I COULD BE WRONG.

IT WASN'T OUR IDEA TO DESIGN IT THAT WAY B LOGICAL.

THERE IS SOME OTHER THINGS I WANT TO MA UNDERSTAND.

A LOT OF THOSE USES THAT YOU SEE THERE WERE THE EXISTING USES.

IT JUST SAID THEY WERE THERE AND LET'S LEAVE THEM THERE.

WE NEVER -- WE ARE NOT GOING TO BUILD A CHURCH.

I'M VERY RELIGIOUS, FRANKLY.

THAT IS NOT GOING TO WORK IN A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO BUILD A PORCH WARE.

IF -- MORTUARY.

IT WAS ALREADY THERE.

STAFF WORKED AND WE TRIED TO MAKE IT SO YOU COULD HAVE A COMPARISON OF WHAT WAS

[02:40:02]

ALLOWED VERSUS WHAT ISN'T.

WE DIDN'T FIGHT FOR A MORTUARY.

I THINK YOU CAN SEE IF I'M GOING TO HAVE A CENTER I DON'T WANT DEATHSTYLE CENTER.

IT IS GOING TO BE VIBRANT.

THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO.

I HOPE I CAN ANSWER OTHER QUESTIONS.

YOU KNOW, IT MAKES SENSE TO DO WHAT WE ARE DOING.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO PUT IN SOME CROSS USE WHETHER IT IS A SWIMMING POOL WITH CATFISH.

IT'S NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.

WHAT IS THERE EITHER FROM A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OR ANOTHER EXPANSION OF THE COMMERCIAL IS DESIGNED TO WORK.

LAST AND MAYOR, YOU BROUGHT THIS UP, KEVIN AND ROSY HAVE KNOWN THIS FROM THE BEGINNING.

IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, CONCERNS WAS ARE WE TOO ARCHITECTURALLY DIFFERENT ON THE EXPANSION AREA OPPOSED TO THE CURRENT CITRUS PLAZA? CITRUS PLAZA WAS BUILT SOME TIME AGO AS YOU KNOW.

IT'S A GREAT CENTER.

WHEN IT WAS BUILT UNTIL A FEW YEARS AGO OUTDOOR SEATING AND IT WAS NOT ALLOWED.

WE HAVE SINCE LEARNED THAT -- I DON'T WANT THANKS TO COVID.

CITRUS PLAZA WILL HAVE OUTDOOR SEATING IN AREAS.

ONCE WE GET THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME BUIL AND APPROVED BY YOU ALL, OUR GOAL IS TO THEN BECAUSE IS LOGICAL TO GO BACK AND INTEGRATE CITRUS PLAZA.

I TALKED TO RALPH'S ABOUT DOING MODERNIZATION OF THEIR BUILDING.

WE WILL GO THROUGH BECAUSE ALL THE REST O BUILDINGS ARE OURS.

WE WILL COME UP WITH SOME WAY TO MAKE THEM N LITTLE BIT MORE COME PETTABLE ARCHITECTURALLY BUT TO INTEGRATE SOME OF PEDESTRIAN THINGS LIKE A LITTLE BIT BETTER LANDSCAPING AND OTHER THINGS.

WE HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE.

WE CAN'T COPY CITRUS PLAZA BECAUSE THAT IS KIND OF OBSOLETE.

I HOPE IT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: IT DOES.

I WAS MAKING A COMMENT TO MAKE SURE -- ESP IT IS INTEGRATED TOGETHER.

I LIKE IT'S NEXT TO EACH OTHER AND HAVING ACCESS.

WE ARE TRYING TO GET MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY.

WE ARE TRYING TO GET MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED W GOLF CARTS AND THE OTHER STUFF SO THEY AREN'T ON ROAD TO MAKE IT AS ACCESSIBLE AS POSSIBLE.

WE APPRECIATE THAT.

I HAVE SHOPPED IN THE CENTER MANY TIMES.

I ENJOY THE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCT THAT IS THERE.

I ENJOY THE LANDSCAPING AND HOW YOU MAINTAIN IT.

YOU HAVE ONE OF THE GUYS THAT DOES A GOO CONTINUING TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY.

THE LAST QUESTION I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU REAL QUICK.

WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THIS AND WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT A LITTLE BIT OF THE TIME FRAME.

I KNOW YOU SAID IN BACK AS WE START TO DEVELOP THIS, OBVIOUSLY YOU WILL GO PHASE ONE.

PHASE TWO IS DEPENDENT ON THE OPPORTUNITIES.

IF SO, IS THERE A PLAN YOU HAVE IN THERE W PARTNERSHIP OR IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'D DO YOURSELF?

>> IF I MAY, I GAVE YOU THE HISTORY.

RALPH'S KNOWS THIS.

I'M HOLDING OFF TO SEE HOW PHASE ONE KIND OF WORKS.

IF I HAD MY DRUTHERS I WOULD LOVE RALPH'S TO EXPAND.

THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY IF YOU LOOK NORTH BUILDING TO PUT IN ANOTHER 15,000 TO 20,000 FEET.

WERE THAT TO HAPPEN THEN I CAN PRETTY WELL ASSURE YOU IT WOULD BE PROBABLE IT WOULD BE EITHER AND PHASE TWO OR COMBINATION OF SOME HOUSING AND SOME OF THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

I WANT TO EMPHASIZE AGAIN, I KNOW I GO ON AND ON AND ON.

THE WORLD HAS CHANGED JUST IN TWO YEARS S STARTED PLANNING THIS.

BOTH IN OUR NEGOTIATIONS WITH WHAT WE CAL DRIVE-THRUS, NOT FAST FOODS.

ALL THE EMPHASIS IS NOW ON OUTDOOR SEATING.

TAKEOUT, AND ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS.

SO AS THIS EVOLVED, WE HAVE TO BE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT WHAT I DIDN'T KNOW A YEAR AGO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I'LL KNOW NEXT YEAR.

MY TENANTS AT CITRUS WERE WORKING DAY AND NIGHT WITH THEM TO KEEP THEM ALL ALIVE.

BECAUSE IT IS TOUGH.

SO, MY GOAL IS TO DO -- IT'S NOT JUST TO BUILD PHASE ONE AND STOP.

BECAUSE WE REALLY HAVE TO INTEGRATE OUR ACCESS TO THE CROSSING AND MAKE IT COMBATABLE.

THAT IS OUR GOAL.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

ONE COMMENT ABOUT WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE BUSINESSES THERE.

THE REASON WE DO THAT BECAUSE YOU OWN IT OR SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO DO IT, THEY DON'T EVEN COME TO US IF THERE ISN'T AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT IT IN INSTEAD OF US DOING A C.U.P.

AND TRY TO DENY IT AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

IT'S EASIER FOR US IF WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO HAVE IT.

SO WHEN SOMEONE COMES TO US IT'S NOT ALLOWED.

[02:45:02]

IT WILL KEEP INTEGRITY OF THE PROPERTY WHERE IT SHOULD BE.

WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO TIME GOES ON AND CHANGES AND THAT IS JUST THAT OPPORTUNITY.

SO, THAT IS KIND OF THE IDEA BEHIND IT.

WHEN IT A USE THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IT TO US.

OUR IDEA IS TO MAKE SURE WE CONTINUE THE INTEGRITY OF IT.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE ARE STRUCTURED BY LAW IF WE HAD TO APPROVE IT WE MIGHT HAVE TO APPROVE IT.

EVEN THOUGH WE MIGHT NOT WANT IT THERE.

THAT IS THE IDEA BEHIND IT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT OF OUR COMMUNITY.

I KNOW THE REST OF THE COUNCIL HERE.

WE HAVE SOME IDEAS.

MS. AMITH WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.

EVERYBODY ELSE CAN FINISH UP IF YOU WANT TO.

IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? ANYBODY ELSE ON THE CITY CLERK? ANYBODY ELSE NEED TO BE READ IN? ANYBODY ELSE? IS THERE ANY MORE COMMENTS OR DO WE CLOSE IT? OKAY.

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MS. AMITH, PLEASE.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I WANT TO MAKE SURE BACK AND FORTH ANYMORE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: NO.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I THINK WE HAVE GONE BACK AND FORTH PLENTY.

YOU KNOW, THE LAST LETTER WE RECEIVED BY THE DESERT RIVER RESIDENTS -- AND I AM SENSITIVE TO THE FACT THIS IS A COMMUNITY PROJECT THE COMMUNITY RELIES ON THE EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER WILL RELY ON THE EXPANSION.

BUT EVERYONE OUTSIDE DESERT RIVER WILL NOT HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE LIGHT, THE NOISE AND THE TRAFFIC THAT IS GOING TO COME FROM THE PROJECT.

SO I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THEY BE PAR SOLUTION.

AT THIS POINT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN.

THEIR LETTER TO US TODAY STATES IT'S NOT T INTENTION OF THE RESIDENTS TO STOP THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

HOWEVER THE RESIDENTS ARE OPPOSED TO THE HIGH INTENSE USES OF THE TWO DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS AND THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.

AND THE FUELING STATION.

RENAISSANCE OF COURSE IS ALL IN SUPPORT OF THIS, LIKE I MENTIONED BEFORE.

THEY KILLED THE PROJECT ACROSS THE STREET THEY DIDN'T WANT TO LIGHT, NOISE AND THE TRAFFIC NEXT TO THEIR RESIDENT PROJECT.

AND THE CITY OF LA QUINTA COUNCIL LISTEN TOLD THEIR RESIDENTS AND DENIED THEIR PROJECT.

HERE WE ARE AS A CITY COUNCIL NOT TAKING CONSIDERATION WHAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE ASKING US DO.

THEY ARE ASKING US TO SUBMIT THIS TO A COMMITTEE OF TWO COUNCILMEMBERS AND RESIDENTS THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT.

TO COME UP WITH SOME MUTUAL POINT WHERE WE CAN MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT ULTIMATELY THE COMMERCIAL PROJECT IS A BENEFIT NOT ONLY TO THE RESIDENTS OF DESERT RIVER BUT THE CITY OF INDIO AS WHOLE.

THIS PROJECT IS VERY AUTOCENTRIC.

ALL I HAVE TO GO BY IS THE DESIGN SUBMITTED IN THE PLAN.

I KNOW IT'S CONCEPTUAL.

BUT CONCEPTUAL IN THE CITY OF INDIO ENDS UP BEING WHAT WE GET.

WHY? BECAUSE WE NEVER FIGHT FOR WHAT IS BETTER.

NOW IS TIME TO STAND UP AND FIGHT FOR WHAT IS BETTER.

WE SPENT EIGHT YEARS ON A GENERAL PLAN.

WE SPENT THE LAST YEAR TALKING ABOUT HOW ALL FUTURE PROJECTS TO BE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND MIXED USE.

THIS PROJECT IS FAR FROM IT.

I HEARD CONCERNS FROM OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS THEY, TOO, DISAGREE WITH SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT ARE ENLISTED IN TABLE ONE OF THE S PLAN.

ALL THE MORE REASON TO LISTEN TO THE DESERT RESIDENTS AND SEND IT TO A COUNCIL COMMITTEE RESIDENTS TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON WHAT IS SATISFACTORY TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MOST IMPACTED BY THIS PROJECT.

IF THIS TRULY WERE A LIFESTYLE CENTER, PED FRIENDLY CENTER, ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL WOULD BE PUSHED IN TO PLANNING AREA ONE.

AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTS AND LEAVE PLANNING -- I MEAN PLANNING AREA TWO AND LEAVE THE PLANNING AREA AS THE PARKING LOT WITH THE LEVEL LIGHTING.

THAT WOULD CREATE A LIFESTYLE CENTER.

BUT THAT IS NOT PROPOSED.

WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS THE SAME OLD STUFF THAT THE CITY OF INDIO HAS BEEN SWALLOWING AGAINST OUR WILL SINCE 1980.

NOBODY SAID NO.

IT WOULDN'T APPROVED IN LA QUNTA OR PALM DESERT.

IT WOULDN'T BE APPROVED IN ANY OTHER CITY BUT HERE WE ARE IN THE CITY OF INDIO.

YEAH, YEAH, WE WANT THE SALES TAX RETAIL.

[02:50:06]

WE DON'T GET BENEFIT OF ONE PENNY FROM THE GAS STATION.

ALL GAS SALES TAX IS DISTRIBUTED ACCORDING T POPULATION.

THIS GAS STATION COULD BE IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND WE WOULD RECEIVE THE SAME BENEFIT IF IT'S IN THE CITY OF INDIA.

BUT GUESS WHO HAS THE NEGATIVE ENVIRONMEN IMPACTS? THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE CLOSEST TO THE PRO WHICH CASE TODAY ARE THE DESERT RIVER RESIDENTS.

I'M ASKING THE COUNCIL COTO SEND IT BACK TO COMMITTEE TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER AND COME WORKABLE PLAN OR IF, TOO, IF THEY FEEL THEY HAVE TO MOVE IT FORWARD BECAUSE THEY ARE SO HUNGRY F MONEY, MONEY, MONEY -- PUSH THE COMMERCIAL PROJECT TO PLANNING AREA ONE THE PLANNING AREA TWO STRICTLY A PARKING LOT.

THAT IS MY COMMENTS FOR TONIGHT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MS. AMITH.

MR. ORTIZ, FINAL COMMENTS OR ANY SUGGESTS?

>> MR. ORTIZ: NO, I'M GOOD.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

MR. FERMON? NO? MS. HOLMES?

>> MS. HOLMES: THE ONLY COMMENT I HAVE AND IT HAS TO BE PART OF WHOEVER MAKES THE MOTION WITH RESPECT TO SUBMITTAL OF THE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PLAN AND THE CHANGES IN THIS AS YOU DISCUSSED THE LAND USE PLANNING AREA ONE AND TWO DOCUMENTATION TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THIS PLAZA.

OTHERWISE, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ALL OF YOU.

CITY ATTORNEY, IF WE ARE INTERESTED IN WORRYING ABOUT, FIRST WE HAVEN'T HAD CONCURRENCE SOMEBODY MAKES A MOTION ON MS. AMITH'S CONCERNS.

AND WHAT HAPPENS IF WE WANT TO TAKE SOME OUT? IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DO? DO WE GO ONE BY ONE? I WOULD LEAVE IT UP TO STAFF.

THEY HAVE THE IDEA OF WHAT WE ARE DOING.

MY COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE DIFFERENT THOUGHT.

>> IT WOULD BE BETTER TO BE SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF THE USES.

SO I KNOW I TOOK NOTES.

MR. SNYDER TOOK NOTES.

MAYBE WHAT WE CAN DO TOGETHER IS I CAN JUST YOU A LIST OF WHAT I HEARD COLLECTIVELY FROM COUNCILMEMBERS.

YOU CAN SAY YEA OR NAY.

WE CAN HELP YOU CRAFT IT AS PART OF THE MOTION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> MR. MAYOR IF I COULD ADD?

>> MAYOR MILLER: SURE.

>> I HAVE ADDITIONAL ITEMS WRITTEN DOWN THE COUNCIL EXPRESSED INTEREST IN.

SO IN ADDITION WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE AS WELL.

IT COULD GIVE COUNCIL FULL PLAIT OF CONSIDERATION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OBVIOUSLY WE WILL HAVE A FULL GAMUT OF THINGS THAT WILL GO FORWARD.

IT WILL BE A DIFFICULT MOTION.

SO THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL HAVE TO DO IT I TO GO FORWARD WITH THE IDEA AND THE THOUGHTS BEHIND IT.

SO WE DON'T GO BACK AND FORTH, IS THERE A GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS? SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AND WE CAN DRAFT THE MOTION UP? AND BASICALLY IS THERE -- IS THERE A CONSENSUS?

>> I'D LIKE TO MOVE THE MOTION THAT WE TA COMMITTEE TO WORK THROUGH THE TABLE.

BASED ON THE COUNCIL COMMENTS.

AND BRING FORWARD REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN.

>> MAYOR MILLER: DO WE HAVE A SECOND? OKAY.

THAT MOTION DIES.

DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS TO MOVE FORWARD I WOULD TAKE IT WITH COUNCIL TO GET MR. SNYDER AND MS. DIAZ TO COME UP SOME OF THE STUFF WE OR BRING UP SOME OF THE COMMENTS SO WE CAN WE NEED TO VOTE FOR THIS OR NOT? WHOEVER WANTS TO TAKE IT.

WHAT IS THE GENERAL CONSENSUS OF WHAT THEY FROM US.

GO AHEAD.

>> SO, I'LL GO AHEAD AND START.

WHAT I HEARD WAS -- WHAT I AM REFERRING POINT PRESENTATION.

THAT IS WHERE I TOOK MY NOTES.

PROBABLE THE EASIEST ONE -- PROBABLY THE EASIEST ONE FOR THE AUTOMOBILE -- EXCUSE ME.

AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE FACILITIES BUSINESS.

IT IS CURRENTLY CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED I BOTH PLANNING AREAS SO IT WOULD NOT BE NOT PERMITTED.

THE NEXT ONE WAS HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCE REPAIR.

I HEARD IT IS CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED IN THE PLANNING AREA TWO.

THESE ARE COLLECTED FROM ALL THE COUNCILMEMBERS.

THAT WOULD BE NOT PERMITTED.

MEDICAL OFFICES, CLINICS, URGENT CARE NOT P BOTH PLANNING AREAS.

MORTUARY NOT PERMITTED.

PAWNBROKER SHOPS NOT PERMITTED IN BOTH PL AREAS.

PLACES OF WORSHIP.

NOT PERMITTED IN BOTH PLANNING AREAS.

[02:55:04]

PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS OR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS NOT PERMITTED IN BOTH PLANNING AREAS.

SMALL COLLECTION RECYCLING FACILITIES NOT PERMITTED IN BOTH PLANNING AREAS.

VETERINARIAN HOSPITALS ARE CURRENTLY BOTH PERMITTED BUT NOT PERMITTED.

I THINK DIFFERENCE OF THE OPINION BETWEEN SOME OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD BE VEHICLE DRIVE-THRU AND THE DRIVEUP WINDOWS.

MS. AMITH ASK IT NOT BE PERMITTED.

THEN ALSO THE GROCERY STORES TO CHANGE THAT TO THE P.A.

1 TO PERMITTED.

I WANT TO NOTE THE TWO LAST ONES.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I THINK THE FIRST ONE DRIVE-THRU I THINK -- >> I KNOW.

>> MAYOR MILLER: CON CURRENT IN THE SECOND ONE.

>> THE SECOND ONE WAS TO ADD THE GROCERY STORES ALSO IN TO THE PLANNING AREA 1.

I DON'T BELIEVE -- >> MAYOR MILLER: COULD IT BE THE EXPANSION OF.

>> I'M NOT SURE HOW IT -- >> NO.

I THINK AS I UNDERSTOOD COUNCILMEMBER AMITH SHE WAS SUGGESTING RIGHT NOW AS PROPOSED IN TABLE WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN PLANN AREA 1 AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE GROCERY STORES UNDER 15,000 SQUARE FEET OR THE CONVENIENCE MARKET PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREA ONE TWO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I'M FINE WITH THAT.

I PERSONALLY AM.

ANYBODY ELSE? GOOD WITH THAT.

ALL RIGHT.

WE SEEM TO HAVE THAT IF YOU WANT TO HELP US MOTION.

>> I THINK MR. SNYDER HAD A COUPLE THINGS.

>> THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS.

THERE WAS A SUGGESTION OR I OFFERED THE SUGGESTION RESPONSE TO MAYOR PRO TEM HOLMES COMMENTS COUNCIL COULD REQUIRE AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PLAN BE PROVIDED FOR ENTIRETY OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

AND SO WHAT I WROTE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR ENTIRETY OF THE CITRUS PLAZA II AND FOR THE FIRST CERTIFICATE OF THE OCCUPANCY IN PLANNING AREA ONE.

GET ET EARLY ON AND IT WILL COVER THE ENTIRETY OF THE SITE.

>> IT SHOULD BE APPROVED -- >> LET KEVIN FINISH.

>> APPROVED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

>> THANK YOU.

I HADN'T GOTTEN TO THAT.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: IS THAT IT?

>> ONE OTHER -- THIS GOES BACK.

THIS IS SOMETHING THE COUNCIL MAY WANT T DELIBERATE ON.

CROSS CIRCULATION OF THE EXISTING P SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

POSSIBLE AMENDMENT MINIMUM OF ONE CROSS PROPERTY ACCESS POINT WITH VEHICULAR AND THE PEDESTRIAN FEATURES PROVIDED BETWEEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ADJOINING PROPERTY TO THE IMMEDIATE SOUTH INSTALLED NO LATER TH ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST CERTIFICATE OF THE FOR THE PLANNING AREA ONE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: IS THAT REQUIREMENT THAT YOU ARE TALKING -- >> IT COULD BE AN AMENDMENT COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER.

CONSIDERATION.

THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE COUNCIL'S CONCERN OR LEAST DISCUSSION AROUND HAVING OPPORTUNITY FOR CROSS CIRCULATION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I THINK IT SHOULD BE A COUPLE.

THAT IS MY PERSONAL OPINION.

ALSO THE APPLICANT ASKED TO CHANGE AMENDMENT SIX, TOO.

IS THAT PART OF THIS, TOO? THEY ASKED ON THAT.

>> CORRECT.

>> APPLICANT REQUEST WAS TO IN ESSENCE CH REQUIREMENT.

FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE.

FROM THE NORTH/SOUTH FOR WHEN THEY ARE N PROXIMITY TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: YOU FEEL THAT IS APPROPRIATE?

>> I THINK THAT IS ACCEPTABLE.

YES.

>> THEN THE AMENDMENT TO NUMBER 12 AS WELL.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> THAT ACTUALLY WAS -- IT ACTUALLY, CORRECTION.

NOT AN AMENDMENT.

>> EXCUSE ME.

CORRECTION.

>> I WANT TO NOTE THAT.

IT WAS, WE LEFT PART OF THE WORDING OUT.

THAT IS WHY WE SUBMITTED MEMO CORRECTING THAT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MS. AMITH? YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.

YES.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I WANT TO BE CLEAR O SUGGESTION BASED ON THE COUNCIL DISCUSSION.

I AGREE THAT THE NORTH INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THE FIRE.

BUT I BELIEVE THAT SECONDARY ENTRANCE N COMBINED WITH THE ONE THAT WILL CONNECT SHOPPING CENTERS.

IS THAT WHAT HE IS PROPOSING? WE DON'T NEED THAT MANY CURB CUTS IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

ELIMINATE THE EXISTING ENTRY THEY HAVE.

SHIFT THE FUELING STATION TOWARD YOUR UGLY AND CREATE A WIDER -- >> MAYOR MILLER: YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT ELIMINATE THE MIDDLE ONE NEXT TO THE, THAT IS OWNED BY RALPH'S THAT GOES NEXT TO, BEHI MARIO'S?

>> IT'S NOT OWNED BY RALPH'S.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ARE YOU TALKING THE ONE THAT THE SIGN IS?

>> IT'S NOT OWNED BY RALPH'S BECAUSE THE ENTIRE SHOPPING CENTER HAS THAT.

>> WIDEN BOTH FOR BOTH PROJECTS.

>> SO IT CONNECTS TO THE SHOPPING CENTER.

[03:00:03]

>> COULD I CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD?

>> WHEN I WAS SUGGESTING THE LAND WANG REGARDING THE CROSS CIRCULATION I WAS TALKING ABOUT BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.

>> WE CAN'T HAVE FOUR CURB CUTS.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE NORTH FOR FIRE.

THE ONLY ONE TO GET RID OF IS THE CENTER.

>> WHAT YOU SUGGEST HAS TO DO WITH THE WALL.

IT'S A CONCERN AROUND THE WALL BARRIER.

THIS IS A BREAK IN THE WALL.

MINIMUM OF THE ONE BREAK PERHAPS MORE, BUT ONE.

ON THE NORTH-SOUTH ORIENTATION.

MINIMUM OF ONE TO ADDRESS COUNCIL CONCERN OF THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE TWO PROJECTS.

>> IT IS NOT TO PLACE A CURB CUT.

IT WOULD BE TO ELIMINATE THE WALL.

CROSS CIRCULATION.

>> AT LEAST ONE ACCESS POINT.

THE ISSUE OF THE DRIVEWAY CURB CUTS IS ANO SEPARATE FROM WHAT I AM SUGGESTING.

I RECOMMEND IF THE COUNCIL IS SERIOUS YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER THE INPUT OF THE CITY ENGINEER.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> THE CITY ENGINEER IS JUST GOING TO GIVE HIS OPINION.

HE DOESN'T USE HIS COMMON SENSE.

YOU WANT TWO COMMERCIAL PROJECTS TO CONNECT.

PERIOD.

END OF STORY.

YOU DON'T NEED ANY MORE CURB CUTS OTHER THAN FOR FIRE ACCESS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: DO YOU WANT TO TRY TO HELP WITH US A MOTION TO SEE IF WE CAN MOVE IT FORWARD?

>> I'M NOT DONE YET.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I'M SORRY.

>> MS. RAMOS AMITH: I ALSO MENTIONED THAT IF WE TRULY WANT A MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT THAT MEANS YOU HAVE TO ALLOW APARTMENTS, CONDOMINIUMS AND SENIOR HOUSING IN PLANNING AREA ONE.

RIGHT NOW THEY ARE NOT PERMITTED ON THIS DUM TABLE.

THAT NEEDS TO BE RECONSIDERED.

>> MAYOR MILLER: IS THERE CONSENSUS WITH THE COUNCIL TO DO THAT? YES OR NO.

IT'S THE VERY FRONT AREA.

INSTEAD OF AREA TWO.

ARIZONA TWO IS IN THE BACK.

OTHER WORDS THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THE HOUSIN WHERE THE OTHER STUFF IS.

THEY HAVE THE RETAIL AND THE SHOPS THERE.

THEY WOULD MOVE HOUSING TO THE BACK.

CONSENSUS?

>> MR. SNYDER -- >> TO CLARIFY.

YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AMENDING TABLE ONE.

>> RIGHT.

>> THE P.A.

AS IT READS COPPED MIN NUMBERS AND THE -- CONDOMINIUMS IS NOT ALLOWED AND THE COUNCILMEMBER I CHANGE TO ALLOW ALL THREE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I'M TRYING TO SEE IF THERE IS CONSENSUS FOR HOUSING OR WOULD YOU SEPARATE THE TWO AND HAVE IT IN ONE AREA.

>> I DON'T MIND ADDING THAT OR CHANGING THAT FROM A NOT PERMITTED TO A PERMITTED.

BUT I AM NOT AT THIS POINT INTERESTED IN CHANGING WHAT THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

>> THAT EXISTS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MR. FERMON, ANYTHING?

[INAUDIBLE] >> MAYOR MIL HE LIKES IT THE WAY IT IS.

MR. ORTIZ, ANY COMMENTS?

>> MR. ORTIZ: I THINK I WOULD BE OKAY WI PERMITTED FOR THOSE THREE.

BUT ANY OTHER THING WITH CHANGING THE ROAD OR THE DESIGN I'M NOT OKAY WITH AT THIS POINT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

SO WE HAVE THAT.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM REPERMITTED.

IT'S GIVING IT OPPORTUNITY TO PUT IT UP FRONT TO DO IT.

IS SOMETHING DONE BY YOU TO MAKE SURE IT FITS AND GUIDES AND OBLIGATION.

I'M NOT CONCERNED.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN DO THAT.

I CAN ADD IT IN.

>> IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE LIMITATION OF THE 90 UNITS, I BELIEVE.

>> NO.

WELL, THE SHORT ANSWER IS THEY WOULD HAVE EITHER PLANNING AREA ONE OR PLANNING AREA TWO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THAT IS WHAT WE ARE GIV OPTION.

>> RIGHT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SO IF WE CAN GO AHEAD T MOTION.

CITY ATTORNEY, HELP US WITH THIS.

WE CAN SEE IF WE HAVE, SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE IT.

>> SURE.

IF MAYBE, SO WITH THE MOTION WOULD BE - SECOND.

>> DO YOU WANT ME TO READ IT?

>> I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SHE HAS TO DO SOME STUFF.

>> IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO MAKE A MOTION TO PROJECT TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION NUMBER APPROVING THE MIDGAITED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM T RESOLUTION 10170 ADOPTING THE CITRUS PLAZA II SPECIFIC PLAN.

WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS.

IT WOULD BE TO ADD THE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANC REQUIREMENT AS STATED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

FOR SUBMITTAL.

AND APPROVAL.

IT WOULD BE TO ADD THE REQUIREMEN CIRCULATION ON THAT SOUTHERN BOUNDARY.

TO PROVIDE THE INTERCONNECTIVENESS BETWEEN THE TWO SHOPPING CENTERS.

AS STATED.

WE WILL GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE MINUTES, A THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

IT WOULD BE TO ADOPT A REVISION TO ITEM NUMBER SIX.

WHICH IS ATTACHMENT "E" TO THE REPORT.

BUT IS ALSO IN EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION 10170.

WITH THE LANGUAGE STATED BY THE DEVELOPER WITH RESPECT TO ANY TRASH ENCLOSURE AREAS WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE NORTH AND THE EAST PROPERTY SHALL NOT FACE THE NORTH OR THE EAST PROPERTIES.

TO DELETE THAT LAST SENTENCE OF THE ORIGIN CLARIFICATION ON ITEM NUMBER 12, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS GIVEN TO YOU WITH RESPECT THE 50 FEET LANGUAGE.

IT WOULD BE TO CHANGE TABLE ONE.

TO AMEND THE SPECIFIC PLAN ACCORDINGLY TO CHANGE THE FOLLOWING USES.

[03:05:02]

FOR APARTMENTS CONDOMINIUMS AND SENIOR HOUSING TO CHANGE P.A.

1 TO PERMITTED.

TO AUTOMOBILE VEHICLE REPAIR BUSINESS TO CHANGE IT TO NOT PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREA ONE AND PLANNING AREA TWO.

TO HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCE REPAIR INCLUDING REFRIGERATORS, WASHER, DRYER, RADIO, TELEVISION NOT PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREA TWO.

MEDICAL OFFICE CLINICS URGENT CARE NOT P PLANNING AREA ONE AND TWO.

MORTUARIES NOT PERMITTED IN THE PLANNING AREA TWO.

PALM BROKER SHOP NOT PERMITTED IN THE PLA AREA TWO.

PLACES OF WORSHIP NOT PERMITTED IN PLANNIN ONE AND PLANNING AREA TWO.

PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS OR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS NOT PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREA TWO.

SMALL COLLECTION AND RECYCLING FACILITIES PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREA ONE OR TWO.

FOR VETERINARIAN HOSPITALS NOT PERMITTED AREA ONE OR TWO.

LET'S SEE.

I DID NOT HEAR ANY CONSENSUS ON GROCERY ST 15,000 SQUARE FEET OR THE CONVENIENCE MARKETS TO ALLOW THEM.

AND PLANNING AREA ONE.

IT IS NOT PERMITTED CURRENTLY.

SO YOU NEED TO TELL ME -- >> I WOULD SAY NO.

>> ELAINE SAYS NO.

I THINK MR. MILLER SAYS NO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: IT DOESN'T HURT RALPH'S.

>> WE WILL LEAVE THAT ON THE DAIS CONSENSUS NOT TO ALLOW IT.

THREE OF YOU HERE.

THAT WOULD BE IT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MY ONLY CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT ANY OF THOSE USES IN ONE OR TWO.

>> CORRECT.

I ONLY MENTIONED IT, IF I ONLY MENTION PL ONE OR TWO IS BECAUSE THE OTHER ONE ALREADY NOT PERMITTED.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I DON'T WANT THEM IN AN THEM.

WE HAVE OTHER PLACES TO PUT THE STUFF.

>> TO DIRECT STAFF, THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO MAKE CHANGES IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN.

ADD THEM TO THE EXHIBIT "B," WHICH WILL INCORPORATE ALL OF THE CHANGES.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SO WE HAVE SUPPORT FR ATTORNEY ON THIS MOTION.

IN OTHER WORDS -- >> WE HAVE STATED THE MOTION.

IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO SAY TO MAKE THE MOTION REFERENCE, IN THE FORM AND THE LANGUAGE THAT THE ATTORNEY STATED THAT PROPERTY WOULD WORK.

>> I WILL TRY TO DO THAT.

I DO SUPPORT THIS.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION AS STATED ATTORNEY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY.

FIRST.

SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> SECOND.

CAN WE HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE?

>> COUNCILMEMBER AMITH?

>> NO.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD REFLECTS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS JUST THROWN OUT THE GENERAL PLAN THAT WE HAVE WORKED OUT ON F YEARS.

ABSOLUTELY NO.

>> COUNCILMEMBER FERMON?

>> MR. FERMON: AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER ORTIZ?

>> MR. ORTIZ: AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM HOLMES?

>> MS. HOLMES: AYE.

>> MAYOR MILLER?

>> MAYOR MILLER: AYE.

PASSES 4-1.

THANK YOU FOR THE INGESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY.

WITH THAT WE HAVE -- INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY.

NO MORE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

SO WE ADJOURNED TO AUGUST 19, 2020.

BE SAFE.

CONTINUE TO UTILIZE THE GUIDELINES TO CONTINUE TO STOP THE COVID-19.

KEEP ALL OF THOSE IN OUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS FOR EVERYBODY INDIVIDUAL THAT IS OUT THERE THAT THIS IS AFFECTING INCLUDIN BUSINESS, RESIDENTS AND THE GUESTS.

GOD BLESS AND GOOD NIGHT.



* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.