Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-07-16MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 16, 1975 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. CALL TO ORDER The special meeting of the Palm Desert City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on July 16, 1975, by Mayor Pro-Tem Noel Brush at the Palm Desert City Hall Council Chambers. PLEDGE INVOCATION ROLL CALL Present: Councilman CHUCK ASTON, Councilman JIM McPHERSON, and Mayor Pro-Tem NOEL BRUSH Others Present: Harvey L. Hurlburt, City Manager Dave Erwin, City Attorney Paul Williams, Director of Environmental Services V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Mr. Hurlburt advised the Council that it had come to his attention that in transcribing the minutes of June 26, 1975, which was a second meeting on the subject of the Redevelopment Plan, the statement by the Mayor declaring the hearing closed had inad- vertently been omitted. He further indicated that the tape of the meeting had been played and that this declaration was in fact on the tape. There were people in attendance of the third meeting on July loth who wished to speak and were not allowed to do so in that the public hearing had been closed. Mrs. Val Litchfield, President of Concerned Citizens Committee, was one of these indi- viduals and she had submitted a letter appealing the conduct of the July loth meeting. Mr. Hurlburt reported that the tape had been played for Mrs. Litchfield and that she had been given a copy of the correction to the minutes. In view of the afore- mentioned, there was no legal basis for her letter. Councilman Aston moved and Councilman McPherson seconded that the June 26, 1975 minutes be corrected as follows: Top of Page 6 to Section XIV: "Paul Williams advised that should the City lose the election, it will take a year to develop a new and sub- stantially different plan. The Referendum Committee is asking for minor changes, but they are not substantial, so could not be approved. Mr. Hardy asked Council if the General Plan must be reviewed once a year, if it could be revised, and how long it would take. Paul Williams advised that it would require two public hearings and publication. Mr. Hardy then asked why an extension of time would not be possible, and Mr. Hurlburt advised him that it would require the County Assessor to change the County -wide date for closing of the tax rolls and this cannot be done" Mayor Clark declared the hearing closed. July 16, 1975 Page 1 Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Brush seconded that the Joint Meeting be continued to July 10; carried unanimously. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:00 P.M. MAYOR CLARK CALLED A TEN MINUTE RECESS MEETING RECONVENED TO REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 10:10 P.M." The motion to adopt the above corrected minutes was carried unanimously. B. Councilman Aston moved and Councilman McPherson seconded that the minutes of the July 10, 1975, meeting be approved as submitted; carried unanimously. VI. ORDINANCES For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO. 80 - APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE CITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROJECT AREA NO. 1. Mr. Hurlburt indicated that this ordinance had gone through a first reading with extensive explanation and unless there were questions from Council, he would recommend adoption. Mayor Pro-Tem Brush referred to Section 5 and Section 4g where reference is made to relocation of displaced occu- pants from the Redevelopment Project Area. He indicated that he felt there was confusion in many cases as to what plans are being made for this area that might involve the displacement of residents. Mr. Hurlburt indicated that this provision was "boiler plate and required by State law. There are absolutely no plans for major relocation or construction of housing facilities in the project area. However, in the event the City needs to take some property for a parking lot entrance or drainage right of way, the City would be responsible for finding comparable housing for any displaced person. The City would not be responsible for constructing replacement facilities. Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Aston seconded that ORDINANCE No. 80 be adopted; carried unanimously. Mr. Hurlburt referred again to the letter received from Mrs. Val Litchfield, President of the Concerned Citizens Committee, questioning the way the public hearing was conducted, specifically referring to the fact that she had no opportunity to speak at a time she thought was to be an open hearing. Mr. Hurlburt indi- cated that he had checked with the attorney for the Redevelopment Agency, Mr. Bob Joehncks, as well as with the City Attorney, and there was no legal basis for this letter. Mr. Hurlburt recommended that Council take action on this letter by receiving it and filing it. that the 1975, be VII. Councilman Aston moved and Councilman McPherson seconded letter from the Concerned Citizens Committee dated July 11, received and filed; carried unanimously. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS MRS. VAL LITCHFIELD, 43-155 Portola Avenue, Palm Desert, California, President of the Concerned Citizens Committee, addressed the Council with regard to the homes being built by Mission Bell. There are 19 of these new homes under construction and she would like the record to show a letter of April 9, 1975, to Pacifica Western from Jim Hill of the Palm Desert Building Department, indicating that as specified by Ordinance No. 64 - Section 302 (d) July 16, 1975 Page 2 of the Uniform Building Code, 1973 edition, suspension or abandonment of work for a period of 120 days shall expire your permits by limitation. Mrs. Litchfield further indicated that the subject permits should have, under these circumstances, expired on April 13. • A second letter was referred to wherein Mr. Hurlburt advised that representatives of the Wells Fargo Bank had indicated that in the event the contractor did not complete the homes, the lending institution would com- plete them and that they are anxious to complete the homes as soon as possible. On May 14, 1975, Mr. Paul Williams responded to a letter of May 9th which indicated that representatives from Mission Bell Homes stated they planned to complete these homes beginning the following Monday and that they should be totally completed within 6 weeks. By virtue of these facts, the work should have been com- pleted on June 25th. Mrs. Litchfie]d reported that she had visited the con- struction sites of these homes, and although the outside of the houses has been painted and seems in good condition, the actual lots are disgraceful. She saw no indication of water lines, sewer lines, septic tanks, etc. However, her prime concern was over the condition of the lots. There are tumbleweeds as tall as she, construction debris, gar- bage, etc. strewn all over. This does not enhance the appearance of the neighborhood, but even more important, it depreciates the value of the land around it. Mr. Hurlburt reported that Mr. Williams had tried to reach the lending institution on several occasions since Monday, but they had not returned his calls. He stated that the City is fully aware of these problems and is taking all immediate and necessary action to have them corrected expeditiously. He further stated that the building permits were extended by 120 days since the contractor did begin construction again, and they are now starting to expire the middle of August. On July 14, 1975, Mr. Frank Allen, Code Enforcement Officer, had written a letter to Pacifica Western giving them 10 days notice to have these lots cleaned and advising them that if this was not done, the City would have the lots abated which would include a 25% administrative fee and amount to a higher cost than that which the contractor could have it done for. MRS. NAN WORTH, 44-809 Portola Avenue, Palm Desert, California, addressed Council inquiring as to the possibility of the City checking the vacant lot next to her home for clean-up work. Mayor Brush advised her to contact Mr. Frank Allen in the morning with the specific address, and the City would be happy to correct the situation. Mrs. Worth further asked if the City staff could be specific as to which trees on Portola were to be removed for the construction of the sidewalk. Mr. Williams indicated that only 6 trees, 4 of which are already dead, were scheduled to be removed and that the sidewalk was to be below standard width for this very reason -- to save the existing trees. Mr. Hurlburt asked her to contact Mr. Williams in the morning to schedule an appointment for an in-depth discussion on what is planned for her property. July 16, 1975 Page 3 VIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. City Manager None B. City Attorney None C. Mayor and City Council Mayor Pro-Tem Brush indicated that we are all aware of the difficulties and controversy involved with the expansion of the Desert Hospital and Eisenhower Medical Center relative to the addition of patient beds. Resolution No. 75-65 was prepared for submission to the Comprehensive Health Planning Agency and the State Department of Health indicating Palm Desert City Council's support of the proposed expansion. Councilman Aston moved and Councilman McPherson seconded that RESOLUTION NO. 75-65, supporting the efforts of the Desert Hospital and Eisenhower Medical Center to Increase Their "Bed" Allocation, be adopted; carried unanimously. Mayor Pro-Tem Brush stated that if we are going to have a Redevelopment Agency that is going to accomplish anything, we are going to have to do everything possible to develop as much trust and consideration with everyone possible. He asked anyone who had questions or were just confused to come to City Hall for the members of the staff to sit down and explain the plan to them. If for some reason staff fails to communicate, he asked that people feel free to contact him or any other council member. IX. ADJOURNMENT Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Aston seconded that the meeting be adjourned to July 24, 1975, at 7:00 p.m; carried unanimously. ATTEST: K#644112!jt HA VEY L RLBU , City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California July 16, 1975 NOEL ;y 7USH, Mayor Pro-Tem Page 4