Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-10-14MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1976 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Brush called the City Council meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. II. PLEDGE - Councilman Jim McPherson III. INVOCATION - Mayor Pro-Tempore Ed Mullins IV. ROLL CALL Present: Councilman McPherson Councilman Mullins Councilman Newbrander Councilman Seidler Mayor Brush Also Present: Martin J. Bouman, Acting City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Paul A. Williams, Director of Environmental Services Paul E. Byers, Acting Director of Management Services Hunter T. Cook, City Engineer V. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS A. Mayor Brush read for the benefit of the audience a Resolu- tion of Commendation to the Coachella Valley CB'ers for their efforts during the September 10, 1976, flood. He indicated Council's strong appreciation to this group, stating that this resolution would be presented an an annual meeting of the CB'ers to be held in mid November. B. Mayor Brush read for the benefit of the audience a Resolu- tion of Appreciation from the City Council to Shelley Burton & Associates for their public relations services to the City. Mayor Brush pointed out that this firm's letter of resigna- tion appeared on the Consent Calendar later in the agenda. C. Mr. Joe Benes, President of the Palm Desert Rotary, presented Council with a rendering of the pavilion Rotary is proposing to donate to the Palm Desert Community Park. He stated that materials and labor are being donated and that upon completion, the building will be worth approximately $12,000. Mr. Benes presented the Mayor with tickets to the Monte Carlo night being held by the Rotarians to raise money for the pavilion. He pointed out that the Mayor is a member of Rotary and that in presenting these tickets to him, he in turn would be expected to sell them VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. LETTER from Desert Beautiful Regarding Suggestions for Lot Cleanup from Flood Damage in Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and refer to Staff for study. October 14, 1976 Page 1 B. MINUTES of the September 29, 1976, Adjourned City Council Meeting. Rec: Approve as presented. C. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Demand Nos. 9-3, 9-4, 9-5, and 10-1. Rec: Approve as presented. D. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Special Demand Nos. 9-2, 9-3, and 10-1. Rec: Approve as presented. E. MEMORANDUM from County of Riverside Advising of the Rewriting of the Map and Legal Description of Annexation No. 3 to the City of Palm Desert (LAFC #76-30-4). Rec: Receive and refer to staff. F. LETTER from the City of Patterson, California, Requesting Support from the City of Palm Desert in Legislation Con- trolling Strikes in the Agricultural Crop Processing Indus- try at Harvest Season. Rec: Receive and file. G. PETITION Received by City Council at Their Meeting of September 29, 1976, from the Palm Desert Committee Requesting Certain Actions by City Council. Rec: Receive and refer to City Manager & City Attorney. H. LETTER OF RESIGNATION from Shelley Burton and Associates, City of Palm Desert's Public Relations Firm. Rec: Receive and file. I. NOTICES OF CLAIM FROM ELMER LOW PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, Suite 314, Security Pacific Building, 234 East Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, California 91101, Representing the Following Claimants: Belle and Julius Yarchever; Margaret A. Bush; Jack and Paula McCreadie; and Edith Eddy Ward. Rec: Receive and refer to the City Attorney J. LETTER from Silver Spur Ranchers Association, Inc., P. 0. Box 680, Palm Desert, California 92260, Thanking the Council and City Staff for Their Efforts During the Flood. Rec: Receive and file. K. LETTER from Silver Spur Ranchers Association, Inc., P. 0. Box 680, Palm Desert, California 92260, Requesting a Joint City -Resident Endeavor to Obtain Federal Grant Money for Flood Control. Rec: Receive and refer to the City Attorney L. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING from the Public Utilities Commis- sion for Review of Various Cases Before the Commission. Rec: Receive and file. Councilman Seidler asked if the recommendation for Item "I" was proper in that he had noticed neighboring cities had denied these claims. Dave Erwin advised that Council could either accept this recommendation and he would report at the next meeting, or, if so desired, he could give a recommendation tonight. Councilman Seidler requested that Item "I" be held over to Section X, Consent Items Held Over. October 14, 1976 Page 2 Councilman Mullins moved that the Consent Calendar be approved as presented with the exception of Item "I". Councilman Newbrander seconded the motion; carried unanimously. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CASE NO. TT 8237, FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TT 8237, U. S. LIFE SAVINGS AND LOAN, APPLICANT: Review of the Final EIR for a New Subdivision Located on 54 Acres of Land, South of Magnesia Falls Drive, Between Portola Avenue and Deep Canyon Road. Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing open. Mr. Williams reviewed the Environmental Impact Report for Council indicating that the Planning Commission had found the report to be complete and in compliance with all City standards. He stated that it was Staff's recommendation for approval of the EIR and offered to answer any questions Council might have. Mayor Brush asked for input from the audience - either for or against the report. None was offered. Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing Closed. Councilman Newbrander moved to certify the final EIR as com- plete by adoption of Resolution No.76-129. Councilman Mullins seconded the motion; carried unanimously. B. CASE NO. TT 8237, NEW SUBDIVISION, U. S. LIFE SAVINGS & LOAN, APPLICANT. Review of a Proposed 182 Lot Subdivision on 54 Acres of Land Located on the North Side of Magnesia Falls Drive, Between Portola Avenue and Deep Canyon Road. Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing open. Mr. Williams outlined the proposed subdivision indicating the major areas of concern by the Planning Commission and their subsequent action. He pointed out that there were various alternatives for Council to select and explained them. He offered to answer any questions Council might have. Mayor Brush asked if there were any proponents of the project present to speak. MR. FRANK GOODMAN, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, addressed Council stating first that his firm was going to build medium price range homes and that there was a great need for this in Palm Desert. He continued asking that Council not require sidewalks throughout the project in that it was not consistent with the rest of the area. He preferred Alternative "C" or providing sidewalks on the east side of Rutledge Way and on A & F Streets in the project. Secondly, he requested that Council uphold the findings of the Planning Commission by agreeing to allow the dedication of 1.94 acres to the Community Park with the balance in a donation of money to equal the monetary difference. He indicated that Palm Desert was in need of more community parks and stated that this money should be put in a fund along with others to build for future parks. He suggested that with those two minor changes, they would consider the proposed subdivision acceptance agreeable. Mayor Brush asked if there were any opponents present who wished to speak. October 14, 1976 Page 3 MR. RICHARD KITE, 48-643 Stoney Creek Lane, Palm Desert, addressed Council as the area representative for the Coachella Valley Parks & Recreation District. He stated that he felt Council should accept only the 2.74 acres of land for park dedication rather than the 1.94 and fees. He continued that the City was always in need or more parks and land for them. MR. VIC CLARK, 74-280 Erin Street, Palm Desert, spoke in favor or the 2.74 acre park dedication indicating that the City needed land for parks. He also stated that he dis- agreed with the developer in that there were numerous streets in the area adjacent to the proposed subdivision that did have sidewalks. He pointed out the many children in that area and urged that Council require sidewalks throughout the project. Mayor Brush asked if there was any rebuttal from the audience. MR. RICHARD OLIPHANT, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, stated that he felt the agreement for dedication of 1.94 acres with the balance in fees was very fair. He also stated his support of the construction of sidewalks in specified areas rather than throughout indicating that in Indian Wells, which he felt was a lovely City, they had no sidewalks. With no further input offered, Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing closed. Council discussed the various alternatives involved. Councilman Seidler asked what amount of money was involved in the proposed donation of fees and Mr. Williams responded approximately $2,500. Councilman Seidler indicated that this was not a substantial amount insofar as parks were concerned. Sidewalks and street lighting were discussed at great length and it was agreed by Council that the area in which the proposed subdivision was located did have many children, with only the promise of more with the new houses. Councilman McPherson stated that if for no other reason, for the benefit of the children, sidewalks should be required. He also expressed concern over the walls that would be visible from the street and asked whether or not some type of home- owners association could be established to maintain the appearance of these walls from the street. Councilman Mullins stated that he did not see where the dedication of the remainder of the park area would benefit the park that much. Further discussion ensued. Councilman Seidler moved that by Resolution No. 76-126, City Council approve TT 8237, subject to compliance with the attached con- ditions amended as follows: Condition #5: Add: No sidewalks to be required on the west side of Rutledge Way adjacent to the proposed park site. Condition #11: Replace With: In compliance with Article 26.15 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance, an area in the amount of 2.7 acres shall be provided westerly of Rutledge Way (Avenue) as an offer for dedication to the City for neighborhood and community October 14, 1976 Page 4 park facilities as a part of the approval of the final map. To accomplish this requirement, the lot pattern shall be revised to provide for the relocation of Rutledge Way (Avenue) subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Add Condition #16: Street lights of a design and location acceptable to the City Engineer shall be installed throughout the proposed subdivision as a part of the public improvements. Councilman McPherson seconded the motion. The following votes were cast: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: McPherson, Seidler, and Brush Newbrander and Mullins None None The motion carried on a 3/2 vote. C. CASE NO. VARIANCE 03-75, F. S & L. INDUSTRIES, APPLICANT. Review of an Appeal of a Planning Commission Denial of a Request to Build Two, Two -Story Structures in the R-3 S. P. Zone District, Located at the Southwest Corner of Portola Avenue and Flagstone Lane. Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing open. Mr. Williams presented the Staff report indicating that the Planning Commission had been concerned that the granting of this variance would be precedent setting. He concluded by stating that it was Staff's recommendation for denial of this variance and offered to answer any questions. Mayor Brush asked for input from any proponents present. MR. AL KURI, 79-080 Montego Bay, Bermuda Dunes, addressed Council stating that this variance differed in that it was a request to complete the last phase of an existing project. He stated that the neighbors in the area had, completely on their own, signed a petition in favor of his project. He also stated that the new buildings had been redesigned and would be an asset to the community. If he were forced to build one-story units, he stated that there would have to be more of them, thus crowding the property. He did not feel it was precedent setting in that the other units were already there and very attractive. The new project would provide curbs and gutters which would help in draining during rain. He urged Council's approval of the variance. MR. W. J. Macfadyen, 73-070 Shadow Mountain, Palm Desert, addressed Council indicating his support of the project. Mayor Brush asked for input from any opponents and there were none. Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing closed. Councilman Newbrander stated that she could not see any reason to allow a second mistake, just because the first one had been made She further indicated that Council should not let the affects of the disaster allow them to make concessions that they would be sorry for later. Discussion followed regarding curb and gutter, the require- ment of sidewalks and whose responsibility it was, roof top equipment, etc. Councilman McPherson stated that he felt the Planning Com- mission had made the right decision in denying this request in that it was a Council policy and part of the General Plan to disallow 2-story buildings. However, he did not feel that this would be precedent setting. Variances were for the purpose of granting something out of the ordinary that would be of benefit or an asset to the community, and all October 14, 1976 Page 5 variances were granted on an individual basis on their own merits. Councilman McPherson moved to approve a resolution upholding the request for a variance subject to Conditions 1 through 11 and 12 and 13. Councilman Seidler seconded the motion and the following vote was cast: AYES: McPherson, Mullins, Seidler & Brush NOES: Newbrander ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 4/1 vote. Staff was directed to prepare a resolution of approval for presentation at the October 28, 1976 meeting. D. CONTINUED CASE NO. ZOA 02-76, SIGN ORDINANCE: Review of a New Sign Ordinance for the City of Palm Desert, California. (Continued from the City Council Meeting of September 9, 1976.) Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing open. Mr. Williams advised that this hearing had been continued a month ago to allow Council to sit down and review the sign ordinance and evaluate it as proposed by the Planning Commission. Since then, Council had reviewed it twice in Study Session, and while they had found it to be what they needed to a large degree, it did need additional work. It was Staff's recommendation to refer the ordinance to the Planning Commission for new hearings to review new elements of concern so that Council could then receive an ordinance that has been worked out to the satisfaction of the Commission. Mayor Brush asked if there was any input either for or against the ordinance from the audience. MR. CHRIS BLAISDEL, 73-350 El Paseo, Palm Desert, addressed Council as Attorney for the Palm Desert Property Owners Association, reading a letter from their secretary, Mr. Charles E. Shelton, expressing some changes their associa- tion felt might be needed and extending their support. No one spoke against the ordinance. Mayor Brush declared the Public Hearing closed. Councilman Seidler moved that the ordinance be sent back to the Planning Commission for review of specific items and any other items applicable with specific concentration on Item #3. Councilman Mullins seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Brush declared a 15 minute recess at 9:30 p.m. and recon- vened the meeting at 10:45 p.m. VIII. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 76-125 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL TO SIGN PROJECT APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR THE CITY -RELATED DISASTER. Mr. Bouman pointed out that this was a request from Federal, State a,nd County disaster officials and would involve our signing claims for grants and other monetary assistance from those agencies when our facts and figures are know. He stated that by adoption of this resolution either the City Manager, the City Engineer, or the Director of Manage- ment Services could sign the claims. Councilman Seidler moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 76-125 and Councilman McPherson seconded the motion; carried unanimously. October 14, 1976 Page 6 B. RESOLUTION NO. 76-126 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ENFORCE- MENT OF THE STATE VEHICLE CODE ON BUCKBOARD TRAIL AND BIRDIE WAY. Mr. Bouman stated that this request was the result of resi- dents along these streets asking for enforcement. These streets are in Tract 2521 which has a separate homeowners' association. The streets are somewhat different from those in the rest of Silver Spur in that they most nearly conform to City standard. Mr. Bouman pointed out that the vehicle code can only be enforced on public streets or as otherwise directed by Council and that the Sheriff's Department had no objection to taking over enforcement here. Staff's recommen- dation was to adopt this resolution although a precedent may be set as far as the balance of the streets in Silver Spur were concerned. Councilman Seidler stated that although he could sympathize with the existing problem, he would prefer to see Staff con- tact the other association to see if the City could not take over the enforcement of all of them at the same time. Mr. Bouman agreed that this might be the best approach but advised Council that there was a problem with some of the streets in the Silver Spur Ranchers Association in that they had traffic control speed bumps in them and the Sheriff's Department would not enforce the vehicle code on streets that had these. Dave Erwin stated that he would advise considera- tion of all the streets at one time to prevent setting a prece- dent. Councilman McPherson moved that this matter be referred again to Staff with instruction to them to contact the other Silver Spur association to determine and negotiate whatever steps are necessary to enforce speed controls in the whole area. Councilman Mullins seconded the motion; carried unanimously. Mayor Brush noted that if terms could not be mutually agreed upon with both associations, then Council would consider these two streets again. C. RESOLUTION NO. 76-128 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976-77. Mr. Bouman outlined the major points of the proposed budget indicating that total extimated revenues were $1,722,660 with a total proposed expenditure of $2,116,639. He stated that for the first time, the City would be operating at a deficit mostly due to the expenses incurred as a result of the September loth flood. These extra monies would be taken from the Reserve account with an estimated Total Ending Balance for fiscal 1976/77 of $500,237. He further stated that the budget represented many hours of Staff and Council time explaining the delay was due to the change in City Managers as well as the flood. Councilman McPherson pointed out that had it not been for Mayor Henry Clark's careful watch on spending and his building up of a large reserve, the City would have been in great trouble because of the cost of the flood. The City was fortunate to have the substantial reserve to dip into. Councilman Newbrander moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 76-128 and Councilman Mullins seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. October 14, 1976 Page 7 D. RESOLUTION NO. 76-131 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 76-121, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SPECIAL FUND TO ACCOUNT FOR FLOOD EMERGENCY EXPENSES, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY ADVANCES TO SAID FUND OF EXTRAORDINARY EXPENSES INCURRED FOR FLOOD CONTROL AND DAMAGES. Mr. Bouman explained that in Resolution No. 76-121, Council had authorized the transfer of $200,000 to cover the costs associated with the flood. Recent totals indicate that these costs will be closer to $300,000 and this resolution increased the previous amount of $200,000 to $300,000. Councilman Mullins moved and Councilman McPherson seconded to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 76-131. Motion carried unanimously. IX. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: None X. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER I. NOTICES OF CLAIM FROM ELMER LOW PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, Suite 314, Security Pacific Building, 234 East Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, California 91101. Mr. Erwin advised that these claims were from this firm who represented Belle and Julius Yarchever at 73-466 GOldflower Street, Palm Desert;Margaret A. Bush of 77085 Indiana, Palm Desert; Jack and Paul McCreadie of 73-408 Little Bend Trail, Palm Desert; and Edith Eddy Ward of 76469 Fairway Drive, Indian Wells. Mr. Erwin stated that Council should either permit or deny these claims within 30 days and so notify the claimants. These four claims are identical, all arising from the flood and claiming damages against several other agencies listed along with the City of Palm Desert. Mr. Erwin recommended denial of all of the claims and that the claimants be so notified. Councilman McPherson moved that all 4 claims be denied and that all 4 claimants be so notified. Councilman Mullins seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The City Clerk was instructed to so notify the subject claimants or their authorized representative with copies to the City's insurance carrier. XI. CONTINUING BUSINESS None XII. NEW BUSINESS None XIII. OLD BUSINESS A. REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY Concerning His Review of the Flood Legal Situation and Protection of the City's Interests. Mr. Erwin stated that his report was sketchy and incomplete and would be until about the first of December, at which time he would give a complete report to Council. He indica- ted that Council could anticipate a further law suit from the four claims denied tonight. At the present time, Mr Erwin felt that all of the allegations in the claims were October 14, 1976 Page 8 of a general nature stating negligence in design and main- tenance of flood control and that the City was unlikely to be involved. In summary, he did not anticipate any liability on the part of the City for any of the damage. XIV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None XV. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. City Manager 1. Mr. Bouman reported that Staff was in the process of pre- paring a Disaster Plan for the City and with the assis- tance of the County Disaster Office, this plan would be finalized and in the form of a manual in the near future. He stated that it was imperative that the City proceed with this and complete it for implementation. The school district has already been contacted in con- junction with a similar type of plan, and it would be Staff's recommendation that a Disaster Committee be approved with members appointed by Council in the future. This committee could help in the finalization of the plan and be on call in the event of any future disaster. 2. Mr. Bouman reported that the City was at present without a taxicab service. Ask For Palm Desert Cab Company had temporarily lost their insurance leaving them inoperative, and Caravan Cab had been called in to fill in for them. Councilman Newbrander asked whether or not this was in violation of Ask For Palm Desert Cab Company's franchise, and Mr. Erwin advised that it quite possibly was. Mr. Erwin was asked to investigate and report to Council at the next meeting. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 76-132 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLU- TION NO. 76-84, A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT, SPECIAL SALARY ADJUSTMENTS, RECLASSI- FICATIONS, TITLE CHANGES, BENEFITS, TABLE OF CLASSIFIED POSITIONS, SALARY RANGE ASSIGNMENTS, AND CAR ALLOWANCES FOR CITY EMPLOYEES. Mr. Bouman stated that this was an addition to the Staff of a Public Works Inspector, at Salary Range #73, with a car allowance of $125/mo. This position is greatly needed now and has the possibility of becoming Assistant to the City Engineer. The position has been anticipated, and now it is crucial that the City fill it. It was budgeted for even prior to the disaster. Councilman Seidler moved and Councilman McPherson seconded to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 76-132. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Mr. Bouman reported that in previous Council actions, Staff had been directed to find consultants for the study of City drainage and flood control problems. This study project was included in the budget for $50,000. With that, he turned the discussion over to Mr. Cook, City Engineer. Mr. Cook stated that Staff had been negotiating with Wildan Housely Co. to provide services to assist the City with not only the preparation of the application to the Federal Government for $5,000,000 for construc- of flood control facilities but also the design of said facilities. A verbal proposal had been received today. Mr. Cook indicated that it was a good contract with very good terms as far as fees go. A formal con- tract would be presented to Council in the near future. October 14, 1976 Page 9 Mr. Cook recommended that Council authorize Staff to prepare a purchase order for $1,000 with Wildan Housely for the preparation of the flood controlproject application. He further recommended that Council authorize $15,000 for the start of the design of the flood control project. This would be beneficial to the City whether we received Federal funds or not. Councilman Mullins indicated that he felt it was impera- tive to move ahead with this project. Councilman Newbrander moved to authorize a purchase order in the amount of $1,000 with Wildan Housely for the preparation of the appli- cation for the City and to authorize the amount of $15,000 for the start of design for flood control facilities. Councilman Mullins seconded the motion; carried unanimously. B. City Attorney None C. Mayor and Members of the City Council 1. Councilman Seidler stated that there would be a bus tour with the City Council, the Planning Commission, and the Design Review Board members touring the City to see past progress and areas for improvement. He stated that the press was invited to attend on Saturday, October 16, 1976, at 9:00 a.m. with all meeting at City Hall. 2. Councilman McPherson.brought up the terrible fly, mosquito, and gnat problem in the area. He suggested that Staff, possibly the Administrative Assistant, should contact the Mosquito Abatement Department as well as our representative, Dr. Rottschaeffer, to see what could be done about the problem. Staff was so directed. 3. Councilman McPherson asked about the street signal at Deep Canyon and Highway 111. It had been budgeted for and the deadline for installation was supposed to have been September of 1976. Mr. Cook advised that the contract had been awarded, but partly because of the flood and partly because of the inability to get parts for the signal, the installation had been delayed. Mr. Cook stated that he would report at the next meeting as to when installation could be expected. 4. Councilman Seidler asked where the City stood on the Catalina Way flood control program. Mr. Cook responded that it was undergoing some design review revisions XVI. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Brush adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m. to Executive Session to immediately following the Redevelopment Agency meeting. Mayor Brush reconvened the eeting at 11:55 p.m. fro xecutiv Session and immediately adjourned the meeting. ATTEST: NOEL.% BR/U�H , MAYOR SHEILA R. GILL GAN, Acing City Clerk October 14, 1976 Page 10 RECEIVED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 1976, RELATIVE TO CASE NO. ZOA 02-76, DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. PALM DESERT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION 73-833 EL PASEO PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TE:.zPsairs (714) 346-2804 A Non -Profit C. 13 October 1976 To the City of Palm Desert Palm Desert, California Dear Cite Council Members: At the Sentember 21, 1976 meeting of the Board of Directors of the Palm Desert Property Owners Association, the Board agreed unanimously to have our attorney, Christopher Blaisdell, attend your October 114th meeting concerning the establishment of com- mercial and residential sign ordinances. `_'tee PDPDA Declaration of Protective Restrictions, recorded with the Count: of Riverside as a deed restriction on all lots, commercial or residential, -.within the boundaries of the Property Owners ^.ssociation, states in Article VII, "TO REGULATE SIGNS" To reculate or prohibit the erection, posting, or displaying unon any of said property of billboards or signs of any character, and to remove or destroy all signs placed, erected or maintained upon said property without the authority of ... the Association." It has consistently been the Association's position that any signs be limited to one per lot, and that the size of the sign be kent to the minimum, consistent with the prevailing; law or laws. The Association supports the City's efforts to put reasonable controls on signs and billboards throughout the City of Palm Desert. Sincerely, / Charles E. Shelton, Secretary - • Attachment "A"